Well, obviously. You going to pay for plane tickets all the time?

Well, live as in live online, a la OpenRPG or chat program.

Who wants to play an OpenRPG game of DND? I installed it, and it looks good to me... I don't particularly wanna play a forum game, because forums dont seem so good for a live-type game... for reasons that are fairly obvious.

Who's in/whos dming?

Me, me, me!

I really want to play. I was going to play with a group where I used to live, and I'd even written up the character/gotten it approved. Then I moved again. It made me very sad.

So I've never officially played, but I've read at least 7 of the more basic handbooks (PH, and a bunch of the Completes). No judging. I work in a bookstore.

Now I have the urge to find a somewhere to play a Chaos Mage. Bah. Damn this thread to Hades!

I'll definetly play. I have only played once and dpn't remember a bit from it. but I'll play

Right now, we have Requiem, Othero, Wesmin, Vix, Sylphas, Maelvin, Tenqual, Dag, Noola, and myself who have all expressed interest. Depending on who could dm/who we could get to dm, we could split this up into games? yeah yeah? 4 Person parties = ideal, IMHO, but i'm open to anything other than absurdly big parties.

So, calling all DMs? Tenqual, you said you would be willing to give it another shot?

Why not I'll join, right now I am in an active table top game , I use alchemy from FMA as a Dragrphon. Basicly damage mage, with a limit to spells as I use circles to cast. I think by now everyone knows that I am most likely to choose the mage class but if something else is needed than a magi I will be willing to switch.

I'd play if I had any of the books : (more than happy to play as a mage from nWoD though)

I'd be willing to GM if no one else wants to do it, but that means i have to get the books again, stupid HD's failing.

I'd prefer to GM over a chat program then OpenRPG mainly since I have no clue at all how to use openRPG.

Metagaming in D&D is fun!

I've always been tempted to put together a class that uses Tarot like IRE does. Probably tweak the hell out of a Wizard, have him inscribe cards instead of study his spellbook or something. Hmm.

I've never really seen the point of metagaming in D&D though. It's one thing in cRPGs where you can game the mechanics, but in a tabletop game, the DM should handle things so that whatever you play, it's decently fun. If your characters are crazy powerful, you'd just have great wyrms instead of young dragons trying eat you.

I dunno, I think, honestly, that metagaming in D&D can lead to fun in some situations, so long as you have a good DM aand you have good playing skills to backup the character you've created.

Like the rogue I made who had insane Bluff and Diplomacy skills.. when it came to ordinary rogue stuff, he was horrid. He could talk the group out of almost any situation, but that opens up a whole bunch of possibilities for the DM to play with. When you have an ordinary group, you're sort of limited, in my opinion. By the time an ordinary rogue is high enough level to con someone really well, the warriors and wizards are strong enough to level a city anyway, so there really isn't much point to negotiations.

Metagaming towards the 'interesting' end of the spectrum is almost always fun, whereas metagaming towards the "omg, I never miss and do +50 damage at level 1!" can be easily neutralized by a DM.

So, really, i'm all for metagaming, so long as its done in a direction that can lead to fun encounters.

I've never played D&D but I sort of know some of the basics as a side-effect of playing NWN. I'd give it a shot if someone started a game.

Metagaming is sort of what they call "min/maxing", I guess.

In 1st and 2nd edition, Min/Maxing was discouraged. In fact, I think the 2nd Edition said that people shouldn't min/max somewhere in the DMG. Then 3e game and they said "it's okay to want to be a powergamer". Some have derided that viewpoint.

I see nothing wrong with min/maxing so long as it doesn't totally take over the game.

Same here.

The problems with it are going to be a group with half insane power characters, and the other half relatively weak characters. Would be much harder to balance things so that half your players aren't getting rolled all the time.

From the amount of people that have said they'd be interested, it looks like we're probably best with two games, one with the relatively new players and one with all the older and know what they're doing players, the second game would probably be better off with a DM that's not me.

What Shamarah said.