So, a problem I noticed with GMing for the Investigator.
I sometimes like making hidden checks for my players, like rolling perception checks for hidden clues and such when I don't want to get a hint that there's something here.
I don't feel comfortable doing that with the investigator because I am denying them the choice to use their ability.
Additionally I like adding in extra rolls from time to time, like perception checks when nothing is around, to help keep the players on their toes. I don't want to make the investigator waste their inspiration points on extra checks I have them make when nothing is around...
So inspiration is a little problematic for me.
CRB on Cheating & Fudging:
Cheating and Fudging: We all know that cheating is bad. But sometimes, as a GM, you might find yourself in a situation where cheating might improve the game. We prefer to call this “fudging” rather than cheating, and while you should try to avoid it when you can, you are the law in your world, and you shouldn’t feel bound by the dice. A GM should be impartial and fair, and in theory, that’s what random dice results help support.
Some players have trouble putting trust in their GM, but dice offer something that’s irrefutable and truly non-partisan (as long as the dice aren’t doctored or loaded, of course).
Still, it’s no good if a single roll of the dice would result in a premature end to your campaign, or a character’s death when they did everything right.
Even if you don't mean it to be offensive. Calling somebody a cheater has very strong negative implications for many of us. We had a discussion about this awhile ago with Mike Brock on the forums and there's apparently some regional difference in its use. In the interest of a civilized discussion I would appreciate it if you not throw it around so easily. This is not an issue of silencing your voice or making you change your definition, it is an issue of using terms that don't offend people in furtherance of civilized discussion.
Even if you don't see it as a problem, many find it strong enough a word that it makes further discussion more difficult.
Note that PFS is not normally tier 1-4 but is instead tier 1-5 with the subtiers being 1-2 and 4-5.
Additionally adventures are assumed to be for 6 players and typically feature an adjustment for 4 players.
You appear to have 3 encounters, also I don't see any level adjustment for the final encounter, although it might be hiding in there somewhere.
As for treasure PFS quests feature no treasure.
Also you may want to look at http://paizo.com/products/btpy8ttq?Pathfinder-Society-Quest-Ambush-in-Absal om to get a better idea regarding the formatting expectations.
Hope this helps.
My post did have professional artwork for 2 of my characters though. Drawn by Paizo's very own Liz Courts.
There is of course Farak, the Most Powerful Mage in All Absalom! (Who is most definitely not a wizard or sorcerer)
I really like characters who are not defined by their class.
My first PFS character is a siege engineer and vaguely Han-Solo-y mercenary type.
I've got Chun Hei a Nagaji "Paladin" of Yaezhing. (LE god of bloody murder and excessive punishment)
Kuraishimo, a frosty half-bearded devil.
On a different note I'm really excited to see the Monday PFS blog return.
Without knowing more about your character here are some things I considered for my 6th level melee oracle (some are still buffs but have longer durations):
Magic Circle is a medium/long duration strong buff.
Searing Light to give you a ranged option that doesn't require juggling weapons.
Summon Monster III has some nice options.
Resist Energy, Communal is a nice defensive option.
Dispel Magic can be handy to have in some circumstances.
Something to remember from Vic Wertz stats is that only a very small number of PFS players ~1% IIRC play 24+ scenarios a year. (I know we've largely been talking about ease of coordination in this thread rather than pure running out of scenarios but I thought this point was worth noting)
One of the neat thing about publishing adventures is that if twice as many people play you don't need twice as many adventures. The number of players that run short on things of course grows. Of course if we've got 100,000 players that 1% that is playing everything is 10,000.
That said Erik Mona said they were looking to up the number of PFS adventures published but that it takes forever to turn the Paizo ship.
At the moment we're just at/under 30 a year. I wonder if we'll do better this season with things like the return of quests and maybe a new seeker arc. Or the release of the Goblin Attack mini game with PFS chronicles.
As another note both the length and quality of adventures has increased dramatically since season 0. IF PFS scenarios need to increase in price from $4 -> $5 to make it happen, make it so.
At the moment replaying is only allowed with level 1 characters, even with 1-2 modules.
At the moment level 1 is special.
You get to retrain any part of your character you don't like, you get to play repeatable scenarios. I'm not sure bleeding these rules into level 2 is a good idea.
Asking them to not only have their own subpar experience by replaying but giving the new players a subpar experience by adding replayers to their table is not the solution.
On the rare occasion I have had a problem with a Venture Officer that I did not feel comfortable talking to them about (once in about 300 sessions) I found Mike Brock very responsive to private message.
So throw in another vote for contact Mike Brock privately if you have an issue with a VO.
Andrew Christian wrote:
I'd like to point out that remove disease doesn't auto cure the disease, it also involves a roll.
Rolling dice is for when the outcome is in doubt. If the disease is non-fatal, (most commonly being a disease that only does non-CON stat damage) there is no doubt to the outcome. Even without remove disease they will eventually get better and eventually recover from the stat damage.
Saying that the only way to remove the disease freely is to sit there and make the 400 rolls needed but then tell the player that you aren't willing to wait for them to do so and then instead charge them 150gp for remove disease seems ludicrous to me.
Matthew Pittard wrote:
He coupdegraced me in 10-11 hard mode. I made my save thus only needed a raise dead.
He ain't got nothing' on this pathfinder.
Both Thornkeep and Bonekeep have at least some encounters that as described there is no way to detect until triggered by certain conditions.
That said the high perception and taking 10 is likely causing you problems actually...
Not that I was here but here's the situation I imagine...
Even when a good judge prepares a scenario, and prepares it well, there are some things they will be better prepared for than others.
By coming in with a high perception and taking 10 and 20 everywhere you are saying "I don't want to participate in the finding things game, I just want to see all the things."
This rubs some GMs the wrong way, other just won't be prepared to deal with it, because they spent their prep time drawing awesome maps, or reading up on the feat chains, or practicing voices or painting minis or whatever instead of thinking about what happens when a player scouts ahead.
What is a gm to do? well in the case of perception an easy solution is just to ignore there. There's enough wiggle room in perception to declare things out of line of sight and thus not perceptible etc. This lets the GM run the game how they expect it to go without being confrontational or telling a player they aren't allowed to do something.
A perfect GM would make any scenario awesome no matter how much a player's abilities trivialized all the encounters.
A less perfect (read:Human) GM may be stuck with the choice of give the players chronicle sheets and send them home early after and voiding all the prep-work they did or bending/breaking the rules in an attempt to make things fun.
The OP guide says they have to go with what the rules say, but it's a hard choice for many.
I just wanted to give a quick shout out and big thanks to Andi Brandt and Dennis Baker for putting together an awesome table of Way of the Kirin for me.
Dennis Baker did an awesome job GMing, and as usual Andi Brandt put in the extra effort to make me feel welcome, and like it's worth the drive out there.
Also: extra special thanks to Char for not only sitting out so we wouldn't have 7 but also getting me food since I would have otherwise missed dinner due to traffic being particularly horrible. (74 miles took me just under 2.5 hours)
PS. The players were all amazing too. They were on the ball, they participated, paid attention and acted quickly.
I could not have asked for more.
Just because there are a few people on the message boards who think GMing should be a thankless task and that good GMs are only motivated by the desire to build community and any other impure motives negatively impact the quality of their GMing does not remotely mean PFS thinks that.
That said I'm really disappointed by the attitude that some posters have taken here, actively attacking those who claim they want rewards for GMs and telling them to get out. Sometimes we have to remember is that everybody is motivated by different things and that every play group is different, and just because somebody is doing things differently from the way you do things, doesn't mean they are doing them wrong.
Here's the thing, just because you think the toilet is dirty does not mean it's okay to poop in the sink.
The problem is different forums are for different purposes and just because you don't like the type of responses you get (some are pretty horrid) does not mean the best solution to to hijack a different forum.
My suggestion is to use the rules forum, make it clear you're talking about PFS and ignore the people who are obnoxious.
There is a greasemonky scrip out there for ignoring individual paizo.com forum members, that may be helpful in your quest for answers.
I tend to handle everything as 5ft cubes. You can attack a cube next to you. A 20ft tall room supports 4 5ft cubes of height.
A PC on the ground can reach the cube above him. The bad guy is another 2 5 ft cubes up. To reach him with a standard melee weapon you would need to clear 10 ft via a jump (DC 40 with a running start or 80 without). If you had a reach weapon you would only need to clear 5 ft (DC 20/40).
I would like some guidance, rather than specific tactics.
Demon X enjoys the suffering of death and will aggressively go after the weakest available target.
Demon Y is a sniveling coward and will try to isolate targets before attacking them, staying out of melee and dispelling buffs if possible.
Demon Z tries to string the party out with hit and run tactics, blasting with his spelllike abilities when possible.
Player: I've got a 24 diplomacy (25 if they might find me sexually attractive)
(assuming DC 25)
GM 1: They seem unaffected by your charm and decline your request.
GM 2: They seem hesitant at first, but your good looks seem to have won them over.
If the NPC is not clearly defined either answer seems both reasonable and appropriate. No need to further add rules or requirements.
Ezekiel 25:17 wrote:
Last year I played a new scenario as a person game, gm said Mike had encouraged them to run new scenarios as that's what people would be most interested in.
Mark Moreland wrote:
Cash & Challenge.
While it would make the chronicle sheets even more gamist and less simulationist (and cause some other minor issues) I think a system where a group plays at a subtier appropriate for them and players receive rewards appropriate to their level regardless of what level the adventure was played at could be better than the current situation.
Lady Ophelia wrote:
Sorry, Todd Morgan won't let me leave Iowa until I judge at least 2 more slots for him. I am attempting to complete my obligations at Gamicon, which is unfortunately the same weekend as Bookwyrm Con.
I am planning on sailing my pirate ship back to California in time for KublaCon at least.