RPG Superstar 2008 Top 16. Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber. Pathfinder Society GM. 1,155 posts (1,185 including aliases). 2 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 5 Pathfinder Society characters. 2 aliases.
Exploring the ruined fortress of Bone Hill, the party came upon an area behind the castle where the stone curtain wall had been rent asunder. Venturing inside, they stumbled into a savage ambush. A fireball blasted them as burly humanoids attacked from all sides. Magical fear unmanned the party's most puissant warrior, Ateneken the Vengeful. He turned and fled, leaving his allies to fall, one by one.
When the magic faded, Atenaken returned to the keep. Finding the stripped corpses of his friends, he howled an oath of vengeance to his god, Horus the Avenging Son (... and rolled "00" on the percentile dice for divine intervention). His wounds magically healed, and newfound vigor suddenly flowed through his limbs.
Stalking through the fortress, he hunted the evil wizard responsible for his allies' doom. The mage sent dozens of his minions against the vengeful warrior, each one inflicting some petty wounds before falling. By the time he finally ran his foe to ground, the battered avenger's armor was red with blood, both his own and that of his defeated enemies (8 hp left...). Kicking open the door to the final tower, Atenaken beheld a terrifying sight: The wizard (his magic largely depleted) stood behind nearly a dozen of the walking dead. Decaying ghoulstirges fluttered through the lofty heights of the tower. It was a battle no lone warrior could hope to win, let alone one who already staggered with fatigue and blood loss.
Atenaken had one untouched resource left to him: A satchel filled with to overflowing with ceramic flasks, each holding inflammable spirits of naptha. Dropping his torch on the floor, the warrior ripped open the satchel, scattering a dozen of the fragile flasks across the tower's flagstones. Raising his sword aloft, he filled the tower's narrow doorway as the torch's flames caught the naptha, transforming the narrow tower into an inferno. Black smoke and bright flame filled the chamber, and nothing escaped.
On a good note - I've got her to agree to try her cleric again tonight (local game day, and most of the group will be friends that she knows well). In fact, she's thinking about taking her Stat Points for 4th and 8th level in DEX, which would mean her PC would "give birth" after making 8th (where she would loose her Dex penility. She said something like "How long does pregnacy in PF last? about 8 levels...).
Of course, she could get herself knocked up again...
When I submitted the souldrinker's ewer, I thought that I might get away with a bit of backstory. Predictably, as soon as I had submitted the darned thing, I noticed Clark's comments about adding backstory ("None of the wondrous items in the Pathfinder rulebook have backstory") and realized that I was probably dead in the water.
Now that I've confessed my sins... What was the word on it?
I've found that consumables can help you keep up with the big boys when you're the party's junior member.
Your fighter could use a potion of fly, potion of enlarge person, oil of magic weapon (as mentioned above), and oil of bless weapon. I'd carry a scroll of freedom of movement or make sure that one of the casters has it prepared: Getting grappled out-of-tier can be painful.
I'd have the bow enchanted to +1: Even if it's not your optimum choice, bows are often a good way to get past DR.
Before running Blood at Dralkard Manor, take a look at the discussion about the scenario in the Pathfinder Society section of the site. That one has a couple of weak spots you'll want to guard against (e.g.: Give the PCs a reason not to employ arson)
Giving more concrete and specific information as the challenge plays out makes the skill challenges more interesting and gives the players the chance to overcome poor die rolls through roleplaying and creativity. Such details don't always come up on the fly: It's best for GMs to brainstorm up some possible ideas ahead of time.
The Tucson Unified School District has stated that it did NOT ban any books: The texts in question have not been removed from the school libraries. They were removed from classrooms and placed in storage because Mexican-American Studies (the course that used them) is not currently being taught.
According to the AZCentral news website (Quoting a statement from TUSD spokeswoman Cara Rene):
Rene said the seven books removed from the classrooms were: "Critical Race Theory" by Richard Delgado; "500 Years of Chicano History in Pictures" edited by Elizabeth Martinez; "Message to AZTLAN" by Rodolfo Corky Gonzales; "Chicano! The History of the Mexican Civil Rights Movement" by Arturo Rosales; "Occupied America: A History of Chicanos" by Rodolfo Acuña; "Pedagogy of the Oppressed" by Paulo Freire; and "Rethinking Columbus: The Next 500 Years" by Bill Bigelow.
Shakespeare's play, The Tempest, was not banned either.
I don't know anything about books being taken from school libraries or "banned", but I haven't followed the issue as closely as I might have. If everything happened as the reports present, I agree that's a bad precedent.
My media sources are local newspaper articles (Some of which favored the students'/teachers' viewpoint), local radio discussion (which generally opposed the program), and a "Por La Raza" radio show on local public radio (which was hosted by an alumnus of the program, supported the program, and alarmed me with its wild anti-American rhetoric).
Equating the court's decision against Tucson's Hispanic Studies program to Fascism is a gross misrepresentation of what has been going on in Tucson.
To quote a local newspaper:
The ethnic studies law, which took effect Jan.1, 2011, bans classes that promote the overthrow of the U.S. government, encourage resentment toward a race or class of people, are designed solely for students of a certain ethnic background and advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of students as individuals.
Instead of that, Tucson had teachers claiming that...
* The Southwest was "stolen" from Mexico. "Aztlan" (the Southwest)is "occupied territory" that should be reclaimed by Mexico.
* Mexico's people suffer from poverty and injustice because the US steals their resources.
* Mexicans are right to illegally cross the border for work, education, or medical care: It's a means of addressing historical injustices.
* America is a land of vast racial injustice, so additional steps are needed to ensure Hispanics get a fair deal in the future.
* Suitable heroes for Hispanics include such men as Pancho Villa, Che Guevara, and Fidel Castro.
When interviewed, the program's teachers denied teaching any of these ideas, but students from their classes have appeared in local media (radio and TV) demonstrating otherwise. The books used in class have endorsed all the ideas expressed above.
They had a year to give their curriculum a wider focus, but failed to do so. They instead chose to fight the state over the issue.
Now if what the GM told me is correct, and it looks so from what I read, if you die from that fight, your character is permanently dead unless they are Osirion faction. Was this the intent?
It wasn't my desire to "permakill" those unfortunates who find themselves in the Devourer's clutches! I would hope that GMs will encourage survivors to come up with ways to fix up "brain-deprived" PCs: I'm fond of make whole, but someone skilled at Healing might be able to put everything back in the correct place once the brain is recovered from the Devourer's stomach. (Fortunately, the Devourer bolts its food.)
I actually gave it that feat because I thought it was really creepy that the villain could eat your brain, then pry into your innermost secrets. I didn't expect that he'd often get the chance to actually use the ability.
Sir! If you are judging for me at the table, feel free to make the Perception rolls for me anytime... oh, and I would ask to T10 as often as I can, so just T10 on most of them. Sorry, forgot to ask. Do you allow T10 on perception rolls? If I'm running my Trapsmith, he has Trapspotter which (normally) gives a Passive Perception roll at 10 feet - That one I would ALWAYS want you to roll in secret (before the game starts would be fine!). The Trapspotter roll is in addition to any Active Perception rolls, so often that PC will get two rolls for Traps (T10 on the Active, and a roll by the Judge for the Passive Perception).
Sounds reasonable...
I also often step back from binary answers for skills like Perception. Someone who almost succeeded might still gain a clue ("You detect a faint scent of tobacco smoke from ahead..."), while someone who only barely succeeded might only receive vague information ("You glimpsed a tall, robed figure darting across the corridor and into the archway. You didn't catch any additional details, but you can still hear it running into the darkness.")
Stand still a round and use Perception - if you get a high enought number you get 1) the Trap in front of you, 2) the secret door across the room, 3) the paper under the dust on the table, 4) the invisible assassin above the door. Each DC is adjusted by distance (per 10').
I normally consider each of these as a separate roll. You may roll high for the paper under the rug, low for the orc in the closet, and medium for the secret door. To save time (and reduce metagaming), I ask for rolls when they're not relevant (such as a roll in an empty stretch of corridor), then apply them when they next could apply (when they reach something noteworthy).
While you may have an original concept, make sure your item's abilities are clearly described: If it needs too much explanation to fit into 300 words, it may not be the ideal item to submit.
Copyright laws have changed drastically in just the last 20 years. They've gone from requiring creators to take steps protecting their product to assuming that product should be protected long after the creator's death. A whole new class of protected material has been created, "orphan copyrights": Works whose creators (or their heirs) can't be found.
To make fights move faster, you can use "old school" party initiative instead of individual initiative and don't use minis. Sketch the scene with approximate locations, then keep the players oriented through constant feedback about everyone's location and status.
You want to railroad them, but keep the rails hidden. Hmmm...
I'd send the road through a clearing, but describe the area as blighted, deriving my description from Lovecraft's The Colour Out Of Space. Give the party skill checks such as Knowledge (nature) or Survival to realize that a powerful, malignant force lies along the road ahead. Should they forge forward, I'd let them run into some unusually brutal encounters: They would have the chance to clear out this cyst of evil, but would face foes that would leave them battered and reeling.
If they take on the foes ahead, the Old Man of the Forest is impressed and contacts them. If they dodge the Cyst of Evil, they stumble upon the Old Man. If they're forced to retreat by the horrors they encounter, the Old Man offers them shelter and aid.
Guy, the point of the anecdote is that it's fun to be the kid who impresses others with his hiding skill, but you don't want to be so elusive that the other kids don't want to play with you or don't even bother looking for you. Shine, don't overwhelm.
Guys, don't forget that messageboards can be a clumsy way to communicate. Someone who meant to be slightly sarcastic/cynical can come across as a jerk when they meant to be humorous. Someone trying to clarify his view can come across as stubbornly belabouring his point.
The OP's first concern seemed to be that many weapons in the APG had the "brace" feature, which had previously been characteristic of thrusting weapons such as spears or tridents. My interpretation of this was that the weapons are not primarily used in that manner, but often have spikes or projections that made them capable of such use.
The OP's second concern was that essentially similar weapons were being given separate statistics and differing properties. This seemed arbitrary. While I appreciate his concern, I'm willing to consider such related weapons to represent the different extremes of the relevant weapon forms.
To further discuss an example cited earlier, some people were surprised when earlier releases didn't make the halberd a reach weapon. In Earth's history, halberds ranged between 5 ft. and almost 8 ft. in length. The halberd could be considered a reach weapon or one suited for close combat.
My wife's rangers and my daughter (who favors rogues) both regularly use riding dogs as pack animals to help carry their equipment. In the ranger's case, this is because she prefers to have enough equipment for a lengthy expedition. The rogue finds the animal handy as a "flank buddy".
There are advantages to bringing a riding dog instead of horse or mule: medium-sized creatures, they can go nearly everywhere a PC can go and aren't too big for a burly character to haul up a cliff if needed. With appropriate training, attributes such as scent or the ability to trip foes can come in handy.
To prevent the character from being too dependent on the dog, the rogue usually carries some gear in a satchel, which is dropped or handed off when combat appears imminent. The dog carries bulky items and spares of some items. The dog is also equipped with masterwork studded leather barding, boosting its AC without penalizing it in combat.
It's very difficult to build an organized play scenario that can't be steamrolled by extreme builds. Creatures able to hit an AC 35 PC will crush more normal builds. Monsters able to survive a PC who dishes out 120 hp/round will outlast the resources of more typical builds. Without the ability to customize challenges to the party, Organized Play GMs may be unable to give everyone an entertaining challenge.
There's nothing wrong with playing such an uber-optimized PC in and of itself. It's just a bad idea for someone to regularly deny the other player characters in his party have a moment to shine. If you're a brutal fighter, take "rear guard" once or twice so the other melee combatants have a chance to contribute. If you're optimzed for spellcasting, don't immediately charm every humanoid you meet: Let the other PCs have a chance to set the tone.
Take a page from fantasy art and wear a skimpy loincloth with your leather armor. Since Strength 8 gives you 26 lbs. as your maximum unencumbered weight, you could try the following:
1 lb. skimpy loincloth
15 lbs. leather armor
Instead of a backpack:
Riding Dog
Pack Saddle
All your non-combat stuff
On your person:
½ lb. Belt pouch
0 lbs. Flint and steel
1 lb. torch
Once in a while, you’ll run into a scenario where one PC is just destined to lead the others. It might be a courtly intrigue scenario (“Time to step up. Mr. Party Face…”), a grueling mass battle scenario (“Paging Ms. Blaster Sorceress…”), or a mystery (“Your job, Mssr. Skill Monkey”), but such situations aren’t uncommon.
There’s nothing wrong with that, as long as it doesn’t happen over and over. If a character outshines the rest every time, that’s a problem.
This makes me feel like the Knowledge skills need tweaking. Like maybe if you make a check under duress and fail, then it might be that you just can't think of it even if you know it (after all, you're under duress). But if you take 10 and fail, then you never knew in the first place.
I allow Knowledge skill checks to be checked again if the characters' circumstances significantly imporove. Sooner or later, he'll calm down and have the chance to collect his thoughts.
Perhaps if we all think of whatever skills give us pause on the Take 10 issue, look up those skills, and figure out how invested a character would have to be in order to pass those checks on a Take 10, some of the hesitancy would go away?
I agree about basic knowledge, and frequently don't even call for a check in those situations. OF COURSE the cleric of Erastil knows his own sect's holy symbol and recognizes their vestments. (Doubtlessly, they have buckskin fringes...)
Part of my hesitation comes from dealing with the occasional optimized metagamer, who would argue that his carefully-calculated "take 10" result must have been successful. If I can keep them wondering what a skill check's DC really comes to, I can keep some mystery and suspense in the plot. Otherwise, the situation devolves to "I have a high Diplomacy/Knowledge/Perception, so I win."
With all due respect, this is wrong. You do not get to go through the Core Rules and decide how you personally would flavor it, and then disallow any use of a rule that doesn't match your flavor preference. The only grounds for disallowing Take 10 are if a rule forbids it (Day Job, UMD, etc) or if the situation qualifies as threatened/distracted in your judgment.
Reviewing the comments here (and a few other places) has convinced me to give your view more credence. My view was that taking 10 represented the character following a routine, standard approach to routine, standard tasks. In the future, I'll try to keep in mind that the rule allows broader application than that.
My issue with the rules as written is that I'm using the skill check to simulate a bit of dumb luck. Let's take 'Dorkus', our novice camel wrangler. He has a Dex 14, -1 armor penalty, and no ranks in ride. Even with a hefty penalty for his unfamiliarity with camels and how they are trained or ridden, by taking ten, Dorkus will still never fail during routine riding tasks. This is reasonable: What mistakes he makes aren't dramatically significant. He may have some problems, but he'll eventually get where he's going.
Now put him under some pressure: Dorkus has to show the al'Kazam tribesmen that he's worthy to ride their chief's favorite camel, Sandbiscuit. He must competently saddle and ride the ill-tempered beast to convince the skeptical nomads to let him have the camel.
If he's allowed to take 10, there's no real chance of failure. There's no drama. If I arbitrarily penalized the rolls (Perhaps it's a meaner beast than supposed), the player would want to know why the roll was so high. He'd be convinced that there was little chance to succeed.
There are many tasks at which a hero should not fail (e.g.: It's dumb to suppose that the masterful rider falls off his horse during routine rides. The skilled rogue shouldn't fall 20% of the time he ascends a rugged cliff).
There are other tasks that should involve some randomness. Who knows if the adventurers will find the right book in the Great Library of the God of Disorder? Will they succeed in finding information in Hostilvolkford? These things should not be foregone conclusions that they can evade with a quick "Take 10".
I could avoid this by randomly tweaking the DCs of various tasks to make things more random ("The people of Hostilvolkford need a 22 to convince them to accept strangers." "Sandbiscuit requires a DC 18 Ride check due to his ill-temper when his owner is away." "That cliff is surprisingly easy to climb: DC 8."), but I'd rather keep some randomness via the skill roll than secretly tweak the numbers.
I've always felt that "Taking 10" represented unhurried, organized, routine use of an ability. In my opinion, if a character didn't have a routine approach, they can't "take 10" on that ability.
A car salesman could take 10 when selling a car: He has an established routine to follow ("I'll need to talk to the manager to see if we can do anything to help you.") Someone who has never sold a car couldn't: He has no routine to fall back on.
A politican could take 10 when giving a speech: He plans that speech ahead of time and has a standard approach to adopt. If thrown into a debate with no prior idea what would be asked, he couldn't take ten, since there is no standard method to rely on.
An adventurer can take 10 when looting a room, since he has a system. He can't take ten when searching for information in an unfamiliar library, as he may not know the library.
A veteran horseman could take 10 when riding. Some guy on a borrowed camel couldn't: He doesn't yet know what he doesn't know.
"The Mark hath been placed, aye, and witness given. The brethren stand ready: As the moon dies this even, so shalt thy band's foes feel death's chill embrace. Together, our conjoined powers shalt strike down those arrogant dogs who dare defy us!"
Is it intended that the ghoul coup de gras paralysed/helpless players? Will he take attacks of opportunity to do so?
The Devourer of Reason is extremely cunning. While it may be eager to feast upon its foes' minds, it would hesitate to open itself to attack to accomplish this. I only see it courting an attack of opportunity when the reward is worth the risk. Reasons for such might include:
1.) The party's healer repeatedly brings downed foes back into the fray.
2.) The Devourer needs the Will save bonus the Brain Eater ability gives it.
3.) The fight is likely to take a while, giving foes the chance to recover from paralysis.
4.) The party's behavior makes the Devourer think it needs to know more about their abilities to defeat them.
5.) The Attack of Opportunity isn't very threatening (e.g.: A weak-looking or small PC with a light weapon while the Devourer is unwounded).
If you're trying to pass through a square occupied by an enemy, you "bounce back" to the last legal open square you passed through. If you're just passing by, you keep going.
The campaign rules do not allow for character rebuilds unless some aspect of the character inadvertently violated the rules or the rules changed to forbid part of a previously-legal character's build.
The campaign doesn't officially allow character rebuilds, as there are a few people out there who would abuse the privilege.
Despite this, as a GM, I'd rather get someone into the game and having fun than force them to nail down every detail of their character ahead of time. If your PC was just "roughed in", I think we can let some changes slide. At my tables, I'll allow some changes to the PC to prevent game delays or "buyer's remorse". Just try to keep the changes minimal: Giving a barbarian a different feat or weapon is a minor change, rebuilding him into an elf wizard is not.
Talk to whoever organizes your local games. "Now that I know how the campaign works, I wanted to make a few changes to the character I threw together for my first game." He may feel uncomfortable about that, but minor changes are seldom a problem.
He actually has a penalty of -14 to all attack rolls:
-9 for a +2 tower shield (+7 to AC with Shield Focus feat)
-5 for +2 full plate (+11 to AC)
He's also heavily encumbered, but that doesn't stack with the full plate penalty. It just means an additional -1 of skill checks (that -1 doesn't impact attack rolls).
He also wears an amulet of natural armor +1, a ring of protection +1, has a Dex bonus of +1, and the Dodge feat (each giving +1 to AC)
This gives him an AC of 32. IIRC, he has this pumped up a couple more points (to AC 34), but I don't remember how. Since he usually starts combat by casting sanctuary, hardly anything can touch him. He parks squarely in the way of large enemies, corking them up and healing the party as needed.
It's pretty impressive for a 4th level PFS character. I long for the day when I can have a rat or housecat grapple with him and pin him...
The Shield Focus feat requires Shield Proficiency as a prerequisite. I have a guy whose cleric isn't proficient with a tower shield using the feat to bump up his AC. I feel that the feat can only be used with a shield someone is proficient to use.
What do you guys think?
(BTW: He is sucking up a mighty -10 penalty on his attack rolls. He's a caster who doesn't care)
It's not intended as an offensicve spell and it's not balanced as an offensive spell. I'd rule that the stone takes a few seconds to assume its new shape, so cannot be used offensively except against helpless opponents.
If you move out of a threatened square (such as a rogue moving past the enemy to flank), you suffer an attack of opportunity. There are several ways to avoid this:
1.) Most creatures start out their combats "flat-footed" until their first turn. If the rogue moves first, he can move past his foe before the foe is able to make attacks of opportunity.
2.) Most creatures can only make one Attack of Opportunity per turn: If they use theirs up, they can't make another until their next turn. If your fighter moves past and the orc swings at him, the rogue can move wherever he wants.
3.) The rogue can Tumble past (by beating his foe's Combat Maneuver Defense [CMD] using the Acrobatics skill). This prevents an Attack of Opportunity.
4.) By using the Bluff skill(as his standard action), a rogue can "Feint" to make his foe flat-footed against his next attack. I would allow the rogue to instead make a move action while the opponent is flat-footed. This is not specifically permitted in the rules, but your GM may allow this as a reasonable rule extrapolation.
Buring through that many consumables for every adventure seems like it would make it difficult to save up for big ticket items. But I guess if it's the same boat for everyone that is ok.
Ideally, you'll only need these consumables once in a while. They're more a matter of preparation than routine. You only want a potion of remove blindness once in a blue moon, but hoo boy do you really want it then. Most people avoid casual use of consumables more expensive than a 1st level spell effect.
A really pissed opponent might determine where foes are likely to teleport to on their way OUT of his lair, sending out a group of powerful minions (a large fire elemental might be nice) to trash the destination beyond recognition after the raiders arrive in his lair.
Even nastier, he could redecorate his prison/deathtrap to precisely resemble their destination, making it the best "similar location" Bwahahaha...
If I were the target, I'd also place a couple of nasty cursed items in the area most likely to be hit. Let the raiders try to deal with a headband of prettydarnedsmart that incidentally pops a feeblemind onto its wearer when he enters battle, an effect kept in check by regularly washing it in unholy water. A magic aura spell can block that little wrinkle from the thief...
A simpler magic item might be a cursed scroll (supposedly teleport) that drops its reader into your prison without their equipment.
How could a wizard defend its (lets say extensive) lair vs. a party of greedy adventurers that teleport in, kill a bunch of his minions, take some of his stuff, teleport out again, repeat.
The wizard has access to lvl 7 but not lvl 8 spells, so dimensional lock is out of the question (it covers a pretty small area, anyway).
Even a mental warning would be nice. The alarm spell comes to mind, but I guess covering his lair with two dozen alarm spells is not really helping - he would want to know WHERE the adventurers have teleported in.
As a tactic, "scry and fry" has several vulnerabilities.
First, teleport requires that the teleporting caster be familiar with the destination. Savvy foes will redecorate regularly and block some areas against scrying to prevent their enemies from updating their knowledge of the area. Cruel foes will make sure the enemy becomes familiar with one room, then set that area up as a trap, with grappling minions, alchemists' fire, memnonic crystals, and silence spells handy to shut down the arrogant caster.
The complex's owner may spy on the enemy to determine when the next attack will come. While high-level adventurers are hard to spy on, their servants and animals aren't. A quick charm person makes the wizard's cook a trusted friend...
Two orc warriors as guards (CR 1/3 each) = CR 1
(I'd add a CR 1 trap, like letting the orcs take cover behind a flipped-up table on the far side of a 20 ft. deep covered pit. I'd make it require Perception DC 18 to spot it. Total encounter = CR 3)
An ogre (CR 3), encountered bathing in the decaying blood of his fallen foes, but unarmored and without his weapons. This would lower the CR to 2, as the ogre would be forced to use a bench as an improvised club.
A lone 2nd level orc barbarian would be CR 1.
Three ravenous dire rats rifling through a littered chamber would be a CR 2 fight.
A 4th level orcish druid (and his ferocious animal companion) would be a CR 3 fight.
A nasty patch of poison oak they might blunder through is a CR 1 hazard.
A tomb filled with sarcophagi, in which rest five withered zombies is a brutal CR 6 encounter, but one the party might wisely avoid.
In the Chatroom of the Werecabbages there can often be found helpful spirits willing to advise you, including the wonderful Lilith, guardian of chat, and Daigle, master of monsters. Go to www.Werecabbages.com/chat .
To answer your questions: 1st level fights are a bit swingy, so err on the side of caution. They should be able to cut down several CR 1 threats without trouble. CR 2 foes may pose a bit of challenge, CR 3 will definitely worry them, and CR 4 opponents are likely to leave the survivors battered and looking for the exits. CR 5 opponents will likely clean the floor with them.
To determine the challenge posed by multiple opponents, the formula is normally 2 x CR A = CR A+2 (Two CR 1 foes = CR 3). The CR goes up by one for each one after that (Three CR 1 = CR 4). Below CR 1, the ranks descend by fractions: CR 1/2, CR 1/3, CR 1/4, CR 1/8. Treat each as if it were one CR lower.
Have a veteran GM check your planned encounters. Multiple foes aren't always as tough as the formula would make them appear. (As an example, a group of 6 1st-level orc warriors equals CR 5, but they would be a fair fight for a well-equipped 1st level party. Four 1st level orc barbarians would be CR 4, but would chew up the same well-equipped party.)
...but perception is reality, especially in this venue.
Cyxodus wrote:
I disagree. Facts are reality, everything else is what we choose to believe.
Bob's point is that people's perceptions ARE their reality. Their perception may not always be completely accurate, but as far as they are concerned, that's reality. Miscommunication and misunderstanding happens, but we all need to consider how our messages will be perceived by those who read them.
Have you ever met a jerk GM or played under one? I just ran into one a few days ago and he was to start grooming me to be a GM. I'm just glad that it wasn't at my usual gaming store.
I know I don't have to tell you guys this but it's an honor to GM for people and all GMs should be humble.
I've been thinking about this thread since it first came up. I wish that the discussion was more specific, providing the reminders some of us need to not be "that guy".
While there are jerk GMs and jerk players out there (along with jerk event organizers, jerk store managers, and jerk bystanders), there are dozens of reasons that someone might be a jerk. Some haven't had adequate time to prepare. Others are too quick to share their frustrations or become adversarial toward players. Many haven't rested or taken care of themselves properly and pay the price in fatigue or discomfort.
A few are just jerks, with no discernable reason.
What particular behavior made this GM a jerk? What did you do to tactfully help him do better in the future?
You state that GMs should be humble, honored to serve their players: I'm sure not that humble guy. It's not just the job of the GM to make the experience fun: The players should also encourage and entertain each other. I work very hard to do the best job I can as a GM and I hope that my players have a good time, but I'm only one guy.
I've tried to share Painlord's suggestions with local players and they noticably reduced the learning curve for players new to organized play.
I particularly appreciate Painlord's suggestions when I think of games where I have run tables of players whose characters just weren't ready for the challenges they faced. I remember the 6th-level renger whose regular longbow (NOT composite, masterwork, or magic) was his main mode of offense: He lacked any specialty arrows or unusual materials, but he was saving to eventually buy a better bow...
Posts
