|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
As a GM I tend to not care. If a player wants to optimize himself out of a game the resulting disappointment is on him. If the other players are disappointed they can looked to their overly optimized comrade.
As a player I wouldn't mind something like the OP's suggestion even if it's wholly impracticle. These days I tend to heavily curate my games. If it looks like I'm going to be seated with a player/character that's likely to steamroll the scenario I'll just sit out. Opportunities to play are more plentiful than actual scenarios.
Scott Betts wrote:
There doesn't appear to be anything significant. A handful of people at the DNC had a favored candidate. Shock.
I agree the bulk of the leaked communications are fairly harmless but there's some fairly damning stuff in there.
"Let's get this around without attribution" in regards to a news article about Sander's supporters turning violent.
"It might may no difference but for KY and WVA can we get someone to ask his belief. Does he believe in a God. He had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist."
If that isn't a targeted attempt to ruin Sander's campaign I don't know what is.
I don't consider this Bernie selling out. It's unfortunate but I think he's just making the best of a terrible situation.
I wish he'd won the democratic nomination. His plans might have all been pipe dreams but he made me believe the system could be repaired. He made me want to vote. If my choices are status quo and slightly worse status quo, I'll just be abstaining from voting altogether.
I'm not sure what you're asking OP. You created a character to break the game and you broke the game. What was the expected result?
As others have suggested, dial down the optimization - like tenfold. The game at that level is already nigh unplayable, overly effective characters certainly don't help.
If playing anything that's less than 100% optimized isn't fun for you, maybe this campaign isn't a good fit for you and you should just take a break. It sounds like these guys are your friends. Souring a friendship over one campaign doesn't seem like a great idea.
That can be super tricky, because no player is going to sit down at a table and say "I don't do giant spiders, heights, or killing horses." We are all "surprised" by what is about to be laid before us, so when something that triggers a player at the table it can be really uncomfortable and awkward for everyone. Hopefully the GM and players are understanding. If it's a scripted scenario, there really might not be an easy way around the trigger, and every reasonable accommodations should be made whenever possible. If that isn't possible then...
I don't know if PFS GMs are allowed that kind of leeway as far as reflavoring but I see what you're saying. When the player in question mentions that harming animals is his trigger, the GM says 'Oh, they're not horses after all. The stables are full of forest drakes!'.
I have a question about etiquette and triggers based on my experience at this year's Paizocon.
At Paizocon I played in a PFS scenario that brought the party to a situation where we were considering killing some stabled horses in order to disrupt operations within the enemy base that we'd infiltrated. One of the players at the table immediately got upset and vetoed the idea. He didn't cite any real argument so we were confused - is your character opposed to this plan or are you as a player opposed? The player made it clear that harming animals was one of his triggers. We had a brief discussion, mostly based around the fact that in-character killing the animals would help with our mission but the triggered player's friend jumped in - you cannot violate someone's triggers without explicit consent.
The GM was puzzled. The rest of the players were puzzled. Not interested in forcing the issue we abandoned the plan and did other things. Fortunately, killing the hostile forces' horses wasn't necessary to achieve success in the scenario.
But what if it had been? What if the scenario specifically required us to kill those stabled horses to get our second prestige or unlock some boon? What's proper etiquette when the scenario's objectives directly conflict with a player's triggers? Are GMs in PFS scenarios empowered to reflavor things to avoid triggering players? Are they empowered to hand-wave scenario-crucial things that are offensive to people when it comes up?
It depends on how far you expect this campaign to go and how badly you want to optimize. Strength is probably better overall at low level but dexterity far overshadows it at middling to high levels. If you expect the campaign to go to the end and your DM is the sort to tailor his encounters to challenge the PCs, dexterity is probably the better choice.
If you expect the campaign will peter out halfway through or the DM is only going to run the encounters from the book, a dexterity-based magus is overkill and you'll end up trouncing the whole thing by yourself.
I saw it last night. I enjoyed it enough but there was definitely parts that felt slow and other parts that felt wholly unnecessary in what was already a very busy movie.
thing that bugged me the most at the end:
I understand Magneto switching sides turned the tide and allowed the heroes to save the world but he was still responsible for casualties (I'm guessing in the millions?). Is there really no accountability for that?
Special three-tiered kids program. Rules lite. PFS legal. Ages 6+.
Kids track transitional. Splash weapon lessons. Grappling lessons. At the end of transitions a character will be level 2.
Ratings system for scenarios to warn GMs to adjust for kids. Trigger warnings.
Premiering at Gencon.
Year of the Stolen Storm. Dealing with malevolent elemental forces.
Adventure Card Guild News.
New season based on comics. Season of the Goblin. New characters and old favorites. After that Season of the Mummy. This season will not match the AP story. Card Guild boons to match PFS boons - extra power at a cost.
Preview Time! I'm typing this on my phone so forgive the typos and formatting issues.
Corruption system. Bring the horror to characters by tempting them with power. Examples are monk with ghoul powers, Meresiel with hive insect powers, and Valeros with construct parts.
Expanded fear rules. Seven levels of fear to fill the gap between shaken and frightened.
Archetypes including archetypes for villains. Mythos hunter cleric, serial killer vigilante, mad scientist alchemist, gingerbread witch.
New feats. Story feats. New style feats. Monster feats.
New spells. Contact 'entity' for all your mi-go needs. Fleshwall. Decapitate. Specialized maze spells.
New subsystems. Curse system. Contagious curses. New diseases. New environmental rules and hazards. Fleshwarping. New haunts and haunt templates including cleric-immune haunts.
GMing section on how to run a horror themed game. Don't forget consent! Types of horror. Creating atmosphere. Tips on rules improvisation.
New magic items. The 'black heart' is a spotless item that you can squeeze to deal damage to enemies. Special holy symbols. New cursed items.
No new monsters. Monster templates. Implacable stalker can't be killed and teleports behind you. Waxwork monster. Simple vampire template.
I just got back from Thai place across the street. It's good every time!
Even though the character I brought is a poor fit for them (a paladin), I'm really enjoying all the intrigue-heavy scenarios. I'm looking forward to possibly getting a peek at what the theme for next season will be at the banquet.