The Free Kingdoms

[Anastasia]

I'm thinking of playing a Kobold Dread Necromancer (I know the class is non-core, but this is probably my last chance at playing a 3rd ed character before 4th ed comes out, and I like the look of the class). I mention it briefly in the 'Soulriders Wizard' post in the Roleplaying Codex, and I can hook you up with the book it comes from (it's easily found on rapidsearch, anyway).

The impression I get from the setting is that certain classes demand certain races, and since this is a sorcerer-a-like I'm not sure if it'd be allowed for anything except a Goblin, so I thought I'd throw this out at the outset.

I don't want to come off as raining on anyone's parade here, but this does raise a question. What's the status and perception of undead in the game world? If Eb's making a Dread Necromancer and I'm making a cleric, would there be a conflict? Further, what party alignment range are we going for here?

[Ebiris]

Messing with undead is taboo in most settings, and I'm happy if it is in this one. I'll just have to focus on the 'negative energy kills you' aspects for the most part while making use of undead on the sly, which could be fun to play with.

edit: As for alignment, I'll probably be either Lawful Evil, Lawful Neutral, or True Neutral.

[Anastasia]

Messing with undead is taboo in most settings, and I'm happy if it is in this one. I'll just have to focus on the 'negative energy kills you' aspects for the most part while making use of undead on the sly, which could be fun to play with.

Aaaah.

I  want to avoid a situation of 'Ebiris raises a zombie!' 'Bjorn PMs you saying that the necromancer has commited an evil act in front of you and a heresy. Kill.'.  Whatever works beyond that.

[Anastasia]

Also tossed the old dice.

> Ah, the hell with it. Don't fail me now, Hatbot, or I kill you. Hard.
> !rollchar
<Hatbot>  [4d6=5, 6, 6, 5] -> 17
<Hatbot>  [4d6=5, 2, 1, 5] -> 12
<Hatbot>  [4d6=1, 6, 5, 2] -> 13
<Hatbot>  [4d6=4, 5, 2, 6] -> 15
<Hatbot>  [4d6=2, 6, 5, 1] -> 13
<Hatbot>  [4d6=3, 3, 5, 4] -> 12
<Hatbot> Infinite_Ko_Loop: 17, 15, 13, 13, 12, 12
<Alicia> Nice.

[Dracos]

admit, I have slight hesitations about the whole Imperial China invading Europe thing.

How so?  The Empire Under Heaven is only loosely Chinese.  Mostly I'm stealing the idea of a bureaucratic-with-examinations government and the idea of parallel earthly and celestial governments.  The trappings are likely to be much more Roman than otherwise.  Also, it's probably worth pointing out that both the hobgoblins and the Empire are Lawful Neutral in this setting.  The Empire isn't evil (though it does have a certain tendency towards inflexibility and systemic racism that some might find offensive), it simply has a divine mandate to bring law and government to the entire world.

Just to be clear, this setting is not intended to be political allegory of any sort.  It started off as a combination of "races always fill the same roles, boring" and "wouldn't there be more storytelling potential in a situation where the PCs are automatically underdogs?" and went from there.  I'm stealing real-world culture to save effort. ;)

Cool. :)

Still, I like the rest of what you did enough to more than offset that.  I'm interested in a Brindian character offhand, maybe a cleric. Speaking of, can you elaborate on religions more at some point? You have some on the wiki, but it feels incomplete.

If the Church of St Turin is as catholic inspired as I think, playing an Italian Cleric should be fun. >_>

The Church is very Catholic in feel, with a byzantine array of prayers, rituals, and so on and so forth.  One fundamental difference is that the Turinists never worship the Creator directly, but only ever the saints.  While the religion as a whole is named for St. Turin, he is just first among equals, rather than having any special divine status. He's actually not even one of the most frequently worshipped saints -- his order devotes their time to maintaining the lists of saints and determining the validity of new claims to sainthood. This means the Church has much more diversity than the Catholic Church, being more a collection of 2700 different religions with a shared history, culture, and fundamental principle, rather than a true single Church.  Politically, this is why the Church of St. Turin isn't a very powerful force in the Free Kingdoms.  In game terms, it gives the players leeway to make up their own saint with his own religion, rituals, etc.  The various orders can cover a lot of territory.  I don't have much detail on saints and their orders made up at this point, and have been just filling in the details as I need them.  I'd actually prefer it if you made up your own saint and order to suit yourself, but if you want me to sit down and make up example saints and orders I can put this on my "sooner rather than later" list.

Worship of the Faceless Lady isn't an organized religion.  The Faceless Lady encourages the study of the world, self, and all forms of knowledge as a path to enlightenment.  Some people focus on the self, some others work on mastering a single path or craft, still others seek to learn as much about the world as possible.  The "holy text" is just a single story: an halfling tribesmen of antiquity looked up at the stars and said, "I wonder what they are?"  The Faceless Lady appeared in a vision and promised protection and occasional guidance so long as the halfling continued to seek answers.  Of course, the commentaries on the story, recordings of other visitations, and detailed analysis of the Faceless Lady's words and their implications can now fill an entire library.  The only explicit commandment the Faceless Lady has ever delivered is to pursue understanding.  It's generally held that the purpose of this pursuit is to lead to self-improvement, but there are several major schisms over the final goal of this process: either complete knowledge and understanding of all creation (the Full Way), an abolition of the need for conscious thought (the Empty Way), transcendence (the Starlit Way), or that there is no end to the process at all (the Neverending Way).  Then there are scores of theories on the paths to any of these goals, which do not necessarily line up with the differences between goals themselves.  The monks, for example, practice a regimen of physical self-discipline in pursuit of the Starlit or Empty Way, while wizards might be working towards any of the Ways but the Empty Way.  Clerics of the Faceless Lady (the sharadhin) might be working towards any of the Ways, but they believe that study of the Faceless Lady is a vital component of the task.  A long-accepted tenet is that one of the key tools of understanding the Faceless Lady is understanding how ordinary mortals relate to the Faceless Lady and her Commandment, and so sharadhin act as counsellors and arbiters in their community.  This is an unofficial role, arising from the respect people give them for their choice of path and their wisdom, and there are no professional sharadhin.

Until the fall of Maggydd, dwarven religion was building, maintaining, protecting, and governing their home, and clerics basically filled the role of municipal government (zoning, construction, planning, etc) -- or, more correctly, the dwarves who filled that role became clerics.  For clerics of Trymfyrd this is still true, but clerics of Maggydd are faced with the much more pressing challenge of reclaiming their home.  Dwarves aren't religious in the sense that most other races understand it.  They're just very passionate about their homes.

The Emperor Over Earth and the Celestial Court is just that -- another level of government over the Empire Under Heaven.  The hobgoblins don't seem to worship the Celestial Court, per se: they're just carrying out the Court's orders. There aren't many clerics of the Celestial Court, and it's just another bureaucratic post.  This isn't really an issue for anyone in the Free Kingdoms.

Is this the sort of information you were looking for?  If you have questions, just let me know and I'll flesh things out more.

How big a part does religion tend to play in the free kingdoms?  I don't mean politically but culturally?  You mentioned some interesting clothing tendancies of the followers of the faceless lady (somewhat muslim in origin it appears) but is that what you see from the conservatives or is it more widespread throughout the religion or even further: Almost a mainstay of halfling culture to keep the face hidden?

Also, hesitation, but if you're encouraging suggestions, I'll suggest the Skill Trick section of Complete Scoundrel (for sending on request) but mainly because I've never used skill tricks in any game and they interest me as a way of varying things up. :P  I still think sticking straight core is probably the best move.

I'm willing to look at it, but if no one else has experience with them I'm hesitant to include them.  On the other hand, if it's a mechanic that improves non-combat skills, I'm for it.  (I really need to look at Burning Wheel.)

I doubt anyone does.  I've never seen them in any game here.   Skills are the non-combat stuff mostly and there's only two non-core addressings of them I'm aware of offhand.  One is in Complete Adventurer, which expands descriptions of various skills, but it largely irrelevant because the expansion of them inevitably is only relevant to folks with 20+ in a skill (e.g. no one but high level rogues).  The other is skill tricks, almost irrelevant to non rogues, but not quite, several of them almost intended as such, but at 2 skill points per trick, they aren't exactly cheap to anyone who doesn't have skill points to spare.  About half of them are combat related though and their usage is "once per encounter' usually, implying the intent.  It covers such things from trick tumbles to bouncing off walls to specialized healing techniques and identify tricks.  I can fling to you it and PHB 2, which I should probably bring up as a suggestion for its retraining feats/skills/otherthings, something I've come to consider just a good idea: Basically a ruleset to allow folks to replace antiqued/obsolete ability choices from earlier levels down the road.

What kind of starting resources might we be  looking at?  Standard level 4 (5400 gp, pg 135 DMG for ease) or something else?  and equally how do you tend to feel about treasure/level advancement?

Standard level 4 is good, I think.  I don't have strong opinions about treasure/level advancement at the moment, other than "it should suit the story being told."  If you guys end up being too strong, I'll bump the difficulty of the game up.  If you're not strong enough for the story we're running, then I'll bump you up.  Again, I don't have any experience with 3.5 directly, so you're going to have to bear with me while I feel this out.

Agreed.  Actually, while I (and I think most here) both enjoy lots of treasure (and some, particularly in dune and ebs games) are very used to extraordinary treasure amounts, for beginning GMs, its actually a really good idea to stick fairly closely to the treasure amounts given (at least for static treasure).  Getting too far above or below average (in either treasure or ability scores) often results in the game balance  (fragile as always) getting pretty atroticiously fragile.  Most recent experience resulted in a pretty ridiculous damage per turn arms race.  I find it useful to just keep a general eye on the static value of a character's resources and keep that in mind with treasure in 3rd.  The average treasure values include a bit more in the assumption the players will be spending some of it on consumables, but as long as their non-consumables are pretty near their expected per level treasure, usually the CR system is reasonable good for eyeballing difficulty of an encounter.

What's kobold stats? :P  I'm either thinking of halfling, kobold, or human roguey. :P  Probably an arabic halfling with a smart mouth and a deep pain for a lost homeland.  Or something. 

I think I was just going to go with the basic MM kobold, but I'll look it over this evening. 

cool, mind flinging it up on wiki when you do for easy reference?  Anyhow, if ebs playing one, I won't go for it (unless everyone is).  No need to step on other  people's shticks. :)

We're settingwise career mercenaries?  Also any regional things we should try and story in (e.g. is there a place we're kind of around or are we a roaming mercenary band from the getgo)

I'm flexible here.  For my starting plan, all I need is that all the PCs be in Brindisi and members of the same Free Company.  Ideally, at least one of you would have been in the Free Company for some time, while others can (if they want) be more recent hires.  If you all want to be recent hires, then I can create NPCs for the head of the Company and possibly some veterans, but I imagine we'd all be happier if I can avoid this.

Your stats look fine to me, by the way.

Thanks.  And understood, well, I think the next step towards that is for folks to voice what they're interested  in playing and for us as a party to talk it over so we have a shared team concept to work off of when writing our histories/characters.  I'll be around tonight if folks want to do that in #SL.

I'm interested, but it depends on what you're expecting out of posting rate.

Dungeon crawl rates.  1-2 per day, more in the (unlikely) chance we're all around at the same time and interested in a posting rush.

Just a note, while I'm good with this obviously, usually a slow post rate  should aim for between .5 and 1 post per player per day, e.g. if we have 4-5 players going at one post a day is very long for any conversation, whereas going at 5 posts a day isn't too bad at all.  Mainly just suggesting we aim for folks checking and posting at least every other day and preferrably every day.   We have 3 (2 and gm) in dungeon crawl, so usually in days we play at all, it tends to be at least 3 posts, myself, merc, and kotono.  Mainly semantics.  ^^;

At this point, I've got expressions of interest from Drac, Ana, Eb, Merc, and Brian, which is pretty much all I'm willing to take on for players.  If anyone else is interested, feel free to post in case someone else drops out, but waiting list only now.

Cool.  I'd be willing to play with any of the crew we got. :)  I'd love to talk about party org with the group as a whole if we could. ^^  Even just everyone tossing out their thoughts for first choice of classes is good (I know Dune is thinking Cleric/Paladin, and eb is thinking a wizardry type and I'm thinking a rogue type).

---------------


And yeah, I'd be interest most in hearing what bjorn is thinking for a general party alignment goal.  Sure, we can play anything in that setup, but I tend to find what the GM enjoys gming tends to be more fun.  For all alignments, a rogue is pretty easy fair, but sticking a lawful good and a lawful evil together usually results in awkwardness.

Knowing bjorn though, I think the worries along that line are likely unfounded.  That type of play is easily visible ahead of time and having player versus player usually kills a party real quick.

Looking over rogue with a touch of wizardry, a low level wizard-rogue doesn't look like it'd be very effective.  I'll probably go either  archer-halfling or human-flanker.  Depending on how good we seem to look in a flanking setup.  Admittingly, if we all are decently ranged, it might result in a fair subversion of the normal party where the goal of closing and staying near the enemy is  needed for at least one character into a very hit and run shadow troop thing.

[Bjorn]

The issue is that it gets more spells known, but from a very restricted list - it's a pure necromancer, that means you can't get any of the usual arcane staples like Fly, Teleport, or even Magic Missile.

I like it since it's super thematic, and the spells it does know are still sufficient to hold its own in most situations. I can link you with a rapidshare of the book when I get home from work in a few hours so you can look over it properly.

Found the class and looked at it.  Basically, it's a sorcerer who knows more spells, has better HD and light armour proficiency, and a whole extra whack of extra abilities.  The improved armour and HD is, presumably, to balance the fact that most of its direct-damage spells are touch, which is understandable.  But... someone who was playing a sorcerer or wizard and was roleplaying it as a necromancer, it seems to me, would end up with pretty much that spell list, but the dread necromancer gets lots of very impressive special abilities (DR, touch attacks, saving throw bonuses) that others don't.  It seems like a lot of advantage for what is essentially just an role-playing limitation.  

The only balancing factor relative to sorcerers is the limited spell-list, and I'm not convinced that it's all that limiting.  On the other hand, the fact you're going to go with a kobold is a balancing factor in itself. ;)  Unless other players have contributions, what I'd like to propose is that it's okay for you to go with Dread Necromancer, with the understanding that if balance issues do become apparent, I'll ask you to switch to sorcerer (re-speccing as necessary).  Comments from anyone?

Role of undead: basically, undead are unknown at this point.  Fars Ian wizards are aware of necromancy to some extent, but it was a minor and mostly disregarded field until the Wasting War's magical fall-out suddenly made it a big issue.  Undead are either complete myths to people, or the worst of the dangers in the Waste to the experienced.  So no religious commandments against them, but you'd want to keep necromancy on the sly.

Brian: you is in.

No real restrictions on party alignment, but let's try to avoid "by design our characters must kill each other."

I'll probably get around to responding to Drac's stuff tomorrow.  Sorry, it'll be a busy week for me.

[Ebiris]

Being a Kobold becomes even more unbalancing when you have stats like this...

[21:31] <Ebiris> !rollchar
[21:31] <Hatbot>  [4d6=1, 4, 6, 4] -> 14
[21:31] <Hatbot>  [4d6=2, 3, 4, 4] -> 11
[21:31] <Hatbot>  [4d6=6, 3, 1, 3] -> 12
[21:31] <Hatbot>  [4d6=5, 4, 5, 6] -> 16
[21:31] <Hatbot>  [4d6=2, 3, 1, 1] -> 6
[21:31] <Hatbot>  [4d6=4, 4, 2, 3] -> 11
[21:31] <Hatbot> Ebiris: 16, 14, 12, 11, 11, 6

Anyway, I still maintain that the lack of staple spells like fly, dimension door, polymorph, haste, time stop, and so on more than balances the class compared with the normal spellcasters. Even if you want to play a creepy necromancer dude, you're not going to pass up most of them unless you're deliberately gimping yourself - especially if you were a wizard and hence had no actual limit on the number of spells known. I guess we'll see how it plays.

[Bjorn]

Being a Kobold becomes even more unbalancing when you have stats like this...

That's nasty, and a bit below what others have rolled.  Feel free to roll again if you want.

As for the necromancer -- like you say, we'll see how it works.  I want it to work, because it is a nifty concept.

[Ebiris]

New stats rolled with gusto.

[22:28] <Ebiris> !rollchar
[22:28] <Hatbot>  [4d6=1, 5, 3, 6] -> 14
[22:28] <Hatbot>  [4d6=6, 2, 5, 4] -> 15
[22:28] <Hatbot>  [4d6=6, 6, 2, 3] -> 15
[22:28] <Hatbot>  [4d6=2, 3, 4, 6] -> 13
[22:28] <Hatbot>  [4d6=3, 1, 4, 2] -> 9
[22:28] <Hatbot>  [4d6=2, 4, 5, 2] -> 11
[22:28] <Hatbot> Ebiris: 15, 15, 14, 13, 11, 9

[Dracos]

The issue is that it gets more spells known, but from a very restricted list - it's a pure necromancer, that means you can't get any of the usual arcane staples like Fly, Teleport, or even Magic Missile.

I like it since it's super thematic, and the spells it does know are still sufficient to hold its own in most situations. I can link you with a rapidshare of the book when I get home from work in a few hours so you can look over it properly.

Found the class and looked at it.  Basically, it's a sorcerer who knows more spells, has better HD and light armour proficiency, and a whole extra whack of extra abilities.  The improved armour and HD is, presumably, to balance the fact that most of its direct-damage spells are touch, which is understandable.  But... someone who was playing a sorcerer or wizard and was roleplaying it as a necromancer, it seems to me, would end up with pretty much that spell list, but the dread necromancer gets lots of very impressive special abilities (DR, touch attacks, saving throw bonuses) that others don't.  It seems like a lot of advantage for what is essentially just an role-playing limitation. 

The only balancing factor relative to sorcerers is the limited spell-list, and I'm not convinced that it's all that limiting.  On the other hand, the fact you're going to go with a kobold is a balancing factor in itself. ;)  Unless other players have contributions, what I'd like to propose is that it's okay for you to go with Dread Necromancer, with the understanding that if balance issues do become apparent, I'll ask you to switch to sorcerer (re-speccing as necessary).  Comments from anyone?

Role of undead: basically, undead are unknown at this point.  Fars Ian wizards are aware of necromancy to some extent, but it was a minor and mostly disregarded field until the Wasting War's magical fall-out suddenly made it a big issue.  Undead are either complete myths to people, or the worst of the dangers in the Waste to the experienced.  So no religious commandments against them, but you'd want to keep necromancy on the sly.

Brian: you is in.

No real restrictions on party alignment, but let's try to avoid "by design our characters must kill each other."

I'll probably get around to responding to Drac's stuff tomorrow.  Sorry, it'll be a busy week for me.

In fairness, a lot of that spell list is custom to that book and wouldn't appear in a core sorcerer's selection.

A lot of it, to my eyes, also isn't really very notably effective.  I mean, sure it seems to have a lot of survivability boosts compared to a normal sorcerer, but at the same time, when I take out 'summon undead' from the set, I see one 4d4 blast spell and two hinderence spells and almost nothing else that struck my eyes as combat relevant.  A sorcerer taking that list to be a necromancer would be half idiot to my mind in specializing so much there versus a little introduction of classical powerful spells (or at least something else on their list that can deal out some damage.  Eb's kobold would be almost totally gimped if it ever had to contribute there without even the basic magic missile in the repiotoire.   Yeah, there's some nice powerups in that selection, most notably a DR avaliable at a significantly lower level than anything else I'm aware of (barbarians, the technical DR kings don't get DR 2 until like level 9), but with a low strength and bab, it's going to have to work for those touch attacks to connect at all while staying in melee range.

Technically, I'd suggest to Eb to mix in a level of monk with that to remove AoOs (i think) and add a handy 1d4 extra damage to every touch attack he dishes out, but overall, I think that having almost  all of your abilities be melee only is going to be glass canon enough.  A standard sorcerer or wizard would never go for much of that, and clerics only do (rarely) from the fact they can be flouncing over there in platemail.

--------

btw, Bjorn, I need to know how you feel about SAs, coming from 2nd ed (I know when dune made his original transition he was exceedingly uncomfortable with SAs and AoOs).  Any good rogue build (in combat) is generally about maximizing both of those opportunities because it is how we do damage in combat.  If you're uncomfortable with that I can go work on a different build easily enough.

[Merc]

Well, if slot's still open, here's what hatbot rolled for me. Well, on his second roll to be honest (Drac convinced me you'd probably allow me to reroll since that first set of rolls had me with a total combined modifier of +1. Ewww):

[20:56] <Merc> !rollchar
[20:56] <Hatbot>  [4d6=4, 1, 6, 5] -> 15
[20:56] <Hatbot>  [4d6=5, 1, 2, 4] -> 11
[20:56] <Hatbot>  [4d6=5, 4, 6, 1] -> 15
[20:56] <Hatbot>  [4d6=4, 6, 1, 4] -> 14
[20:56] <Hatbot>  [4d6=4, 1, 2, 2] -> 8
[20:56] <Hatbot>  [4d6=5, 5, 2, 5] -> 15
[20:56] <Hatbot> Merc: 15, 15, 15, 14, 11, 8

Thinking on what to play, I'm kinda considering the hexblade from Complete Warrior, if that's acceptable, Bjorn.

[Dracos]

I can send you complete warrior if you need it Bjorn.

The hexblade is a class I haven't seen played before (Not surprising, most splat classes are never played).  It's basically a fighter/sorcerer with a wussy spell progression (emphasis on wussy) starting at level 6, almost no bonus feats, some decent magic protection, and primarily a hex that applies a -2 to to virtually everything for one hour on one foe (Getting a bit better with levels but not for a while).  It also has good will saves rather than fort saves.  Oh and they don't get to use medium or heavy armor.

I'm pretty sure a hexblade wouldn't be overpowered at all versus most of the core classes.  It would have trouble going toe to toe with fighter or barbarian on the front line, due to a vastly hampered flexibility or power (respectively) and lack of medium and heavy armor, but its still able to be a frontliner, if not a tank.  Its definitely different.  Oh, he also gets a wussy familiar, historically a vulnerability more than an asset in 3rd ed games.

from a balance perspective, it is anything but cheese, though it could be really annoying on solo boss types, especially with a group backing it.  But hey, if it doesn't get  a chance  to shine, that always  sucks too and that's really its big draw, screwin' someone with a nasty hex.

anyhow, there, a toss up to make deciding on merc's request easier.

[Bjorn]

I like that, and besides, the Catholics already worship sa-ack. Sorry, sorry. Bad joke. Anyway, I'll get to the point of this. I like it and I'll work something out with it easily enough. Does this freedom with saints include the ability to  make one with the domains I'd like to grab? Other than that, this was exactly what I was looking for, thanks.

Yup, your own domains are your own to choose.  Don't feel constrained, by the way.  St. Malific, for example, is the patron saint of cruelty, infamous for butchering a town of a thousand people in a single night.  Saints aren't always nice.

How big a part does religion tend to play in the free kingdoms?  I don't mean politically but culturally?  You mentioned some interesting clothing tendancies of the followers of the faceless lady (somewhat muslim in origin it appears) but is that what you see from the conservatives or is it more widespread throughout the religion or even further: Almost a mainstay of halfling culture to keep the face hidden?

Culturally, it's a fairly large thing, depending on the culture. ;)  Almost all halflings venerate the Faceless Lady, in large part because her worship is very undemanding.  Dwarves are profoundly religious.  The Church of St. Turin is a huge part of human life, but not in an obsessive sort of way.  People offer prayers to the appropriate saints at the right times, visit shrines of the order of their patron saint on relevant holy days.  The most devout might go to sermons every week, but that's uncommon rather than not.  Similar to the modern-day world, where people knows how to behave in Church, and know that life was better back when everyone went to Church, but hey, there's work around the house that I've been putting off, I'll make it next Sunday, okay?

Covering the face in public is pretty universally standard among followers of the Faceless Lady, and has become a halfling cultural standard, so that even halflings who don't follow the Lady tend to cover their face.  This isn't a "stone the heretical bare-faced bastard" sort of affair, though.

Just a note, while I'm good with this obviously, usually a slow post rate  should aim for between .5 and 1 post per player per day, e.g. if we have 4-5 players going at one post a day is very long for any conversation, whereas going at 5 posts a day isn't too bad at all.

Yes, I meant 1-2 posts per player per day, not overall. 

tw, Bjorn, I need to know how you feel about SAs, coming from 2nd ed (I know when dune made his original transition he was exceedingly uncomfortable with SAs and AoOs).  Any good rogue build (in combat) is generally about maximizing both of those opportunities because it is how we do damage in combat.  If you're uncomfortable with that I can go work on a different build easily enough.

I think sneak attacks and AoOs are a great addition to D&D combat mechanics.  Bear with me in combat while I try and get the hang of all the details, but definitely feel free to build around them.

About the hexblade: I need to see the details, obviously. One thing, though: I'm not happy about classes that drag in new game mechanics.  I just noticed that the Dread Necromancer has some swift action abilities, and I don't know what they are or want to get into the slippery slope from core it would represent.  Eb, anything listed as a swift action I'm treating as a standard action.

Also: please, guys, try to stay away from splatbooks.  I know there's lots of cool stuff out there, but if I get overwhelmed with rules then the game isn't going to go well.  If there isn't good thematic reason to take the class as a base for your character, please consider taking a core class as base and then taking levels in your splatclass later, when the game has a good rhythm going.

[Bjorn]

And yeah, I'd be interest most in hearing what bjorn is thinking for a general party alignment goal.  Sure, we can play anything in that setup, but I tend to find what the GM enjoys gming tends to be more fun.  For all alignments, a rogue is pretty easy fair, but sticking a lawful good and a lawful evil together usually results in awkwardness.

There's two issues here, and both are important enough to deserve a separate post.  Alignment: I'm treating good as altruism, evil as selfishness; law as a belief in the importance of law and order, chaos as a wilful disregard of same.  All of this is held to the standard of an objective, informed outside observer.  So, for example, you can have a very complicated and rigorous set of morals and ethics, and still be CN if no one else knows or understands them.  I'm going to feel free to change your alignment if your character demands it; there will be no experience penalties or any such, but if you want to rely on "protection from evil" you'd better actually act good.  There are no alignment restrictions or requirements for any classes, including paladins.  Paladins instead must choose a deity and a suitable clearly-formulated cause with a defined (though not necessarily achievable) end condition: "Reclaim Maggydd", "retrieve the lost hand of St. Vecna."  A paladin that completes his cause can either choose to stop progressing as a paladin without losing his current abilities, or choose a new cause.  Paladins that work in violation of their cause, or don't pursue their cause aggressively, get treated as having violated their alignment used to work.

All of which to say is that alignment doesn't matter much. 

Party dynamics, though.... The core of the campaign is based on the idea of the world on a cusp.  You're a small band of adventurers who are going to find that a number of events are coming to a head, and your actions can dramatically change the course of events and the shape of history to come.  And there are a lot of events and plot hooks, that can result in any number of outcomes, and I don't really care which way you as a group want to take it.  What does matter, though, is that your characters need to be inclined towards being proactive.  No one's going to be having a lot of fun if your character's reaction to a big revelation is always, "eh, not my job, let's go get paid."  Have a mission, have a reason to work together, and try to arrange things so that any backstabbings happen at big dramatic moments.

So, as Drac suggested, I encourage all the players to talk and come up with common history.  Name your Free Company, explain how you all got into it, outline some past missions if you want -- I'll help with this sort of detail if you want.  And if you guys want to plan how you're going to use the other PCs to achieve your own secret nefarious aims, then hey, that's fun too.

[Ebiris]

Eb, anything listed as a swift action I'm treating as a standard action.

Swift actions kinda are core, in that they're in the SRD. It's basically a free action that you can only take on your turn and you only get one per round. To wit:

A swift action consumes a very small amount of time, but represents a larger expenditure of effort and energy than a free action. You can perform one swift action per turn without affecting your ability to perform other actions. In that regard, a swift action is like a free action. However, you can perform only a single swift action per turn, regardless of what other actions you take. You can take a swift action any time you would normally be allowed to take a free action. Swift actions usually involve spellcasting or the activation of magic items; many characters (especially those who don't cast spells) never have an opportunity to take a swift action.

Casting a quickened spell is a swift action. In addition, casting any spell with a casting time of 1 swift action is a swift action.

Casting a spell with a casting time of 1 swift action does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#swiftActions

Changing abilities from swift to standard actions represents a considerable nerf, but since you're leery of the dread necromancer already, I won't push if that's what you decide.