Myron Paul wrote:
Sounds like 85% of watching a baseball game unfold! (well, except for that damage stuff)
As DM, if there is a puzzle for the players to solve or some certain sorta way they need to do certain things in order to achieve a result, if they come up with a plausible method for achieving said result...even if I set it up to where there was only ONE way a puzzle could be solved and they tackle it in another way entirely... I try to act pleasantly surprised and respond with "yes, that's exactly it! You hear the clinking and churning of gears as the massive stone doors slowly slide open...."
Think of it as though Indiana Jones had come up with another way of locating the Well of Souls other than using the headpiece of the Staff of Ra in the map room. If that were one of my players, and their method was innovative, inventive and entertaining enough, not only would I have granted success, but led them to believe that that was the proper course for the task all along. This is also true of interactions with NPCs and the like, as well as the players' long-term and short-term plan-making abilities. Bend to their will and ideas if they're clever...give a little, but make it look like they've cleverly guessed your intended solutions.
I throw a lot of Alundra/Zelda-type puzzles at my players. If they acquire powerful magics or artifacts in the course of the campaign, so be it...have fun with that, guys (sincerely)... but don't think you can get away with ALWAYS relying on your shiny new toys to traverse the traps and puzzles or influence the proper NPCs to get the ball rolling in the right direction.
But in the end it's absolutely a cooperative thing going on. To me, it HAS to be. If they're not having fun, why are they going to show back up? If I'm not having fun, why even bother at all?
I think the GM can do whatever he or she pleases in the campaign world, and, to a degree, the rules. However, i think there is a blurb about houserules in the introductory chapter of the core rule book...something about GM and players being on the same page with any changes to cut down on confusion and arguments? GM fiat has been a longstanding rock to hide behind for GMs making questionable or iffy decisions about rules and campaign development alike. If a GM wants to abuse that, then I guess he's going to abuse it. Now, that having been said, whether or not that GM will have regular players for any length of time is another matter entirely.
No, I don't think you're being the asshat. I understand the need to cut up and try stupid ideas and fudge some dice rolls every now and again for the sake of occasional comic relief, but if you're not going to take the game at least a little seriously ("you" meaning them, not YOU, nullvoid), why even bother to DM or play in the first place? Why wouldn't they just trash-talk around a video game console?
I have played this with a group of 4 that have just completed session #4. It is very character/background driven.... There is alot built into character creation dealing with parents and their professions, mentors and their influences and the like... Alot of CC is about "answer these questions to see what kind of choices we can point you toward" followed by questions about how you would react to your friends being attacked, whether you like to pack-rat items or not, and whether you value and respect authority. There is also a heavy slant toward professions and callings, with plenty of opportunities for things such as mapping, brewing, foraging, and weather-sniffing. It really is a unique and very pleasant experience... a wonderful change of pace!
I will third Savage Worlds, but also, take a look at Wayfarers.
The guys who designed this thing did so as a labor of love, and it really shows. The book is amazing (newer mechanics but with an old-school look using the same font, "Futura", that Gygax used in 1stEd). It basically takes the d20 OGL concept and turns it into a heavily skill-driven system in which your character gets to pick and choose his combat and/or magic capabilities. Essentially, what these guys have done is picked apart all the nifty class features and feats and skills and put them on a buffet for the player so that he/she can pick and choose them like building blocks in a point-buy system... BUT, their take on magic and spells is really unique, intriguing, and just plain fun!
Pathfinder 2e?? Good lord! I'm still just looking forward to the Advanced Race Guide and getting my hands on the Inner Sea book at this point!
Sure, when 5e comes out, and I mean actually COMES OUT where I can flip through it on a store shelf (and it is still only in the playtest stage at this point, so that's probably over a year away), I will take a look at it... maybe even shell out $40 for a PHB just so I can flip through it with time and the comforts of home, but will any of that stop PF from being awesome and suiting my group's needs with utter satisfaction? Nope...... Nope.
Hello all! What methods do you guys use to handle the errata of the various rulebooks?
I have been torn the past few days on whether or not to switch to PDF and take advantage of the loooooow $9.99 prices of the hardbacks' PDFs, and thereby ALWAYS have the most current "printings" at my disposal.
That having been said, I don't know if I am ready to give up the aesthetic/tactile feel of hefting an actual tome in my hand and being able to flip through the pages of a physical copy. Plus, I don't have hundreds of dollars to invest in a tablet to make the PDFs truly portable (nor do I wish to have to hunt for an electrical outlet to plug my "books" into if I should take my big 'ol laptop to a session).
So, how to best handle errata? One idea I had was to take and fold a printout of the most recent errata for a given book and make a small pencil mark next to each page number of the relevant pages in my hardback, so that when I get to that page in my reading, I know to pull the folded print-out I've tucked into the front cover for referencing.
I guess I was just wondering if anyone else used such a method or if there were any other ideas? I read somewhere on the Savage Worlds forums about a guy who used some sort of SUPER-fine-tipped marker or pen and actually wrote-in the corrections where they would go. Two problems with this, however: I have no idea what pen or marker would be the best for the type of semi-gloss paper Paizo uses, and... some of the errata from the printouts would require penning an entire paragraph or more!
Advice? Suggestions? Practicalities? Thanks in advance!
Thanks guys, I sincerely appreciate the help. Yes, I get that you add the number to your attack roll. I guess I was justgetting confused because a single-class character doesn't stack his bonuses (just takes the new level's bonus) while multi-classing characters get to stack any new bonuses... still a little confusing but I guess it'll all work itself out.
Thanks again for taking the time to help a total 3.5 rookie.
EDIT to say: Ya know what? Now that I read all the posts, it seems like nothing could be simpler. Thanks to all! I'm a little bit embarrassed now... the simple little word "add" in the multiclassing section threw my mind into a needless tizzy.
Franz Lunzer wrote:
Well, again my confusion stems from the fact that they are telling me to ADD these bonuses, throwing me off in regards to how it applies to progression in general, not just multiclassing. If you add the bonuses, wouldn't the 2nd level fighter (just a fighter, no other classes) have a B.A.B. of +3 instead of +2? Do you add for multiclassing ONLY and not for same-class progression? I'm sorry, I'm so confused.
Hi guys, I’m a complete newbie at 3.5 and have a question about multiclassing which I hope hasn’t been asked a dozen times already. In the new hardcover core rulebook, the multiclassing section of the “Classes” chapter states:
“He adds all of the hit points, base attack bonuses, and saving throw bonuses from a 1st-level wizard on top of those gained from being a 5th-level fighter.”
My confusion is this: I assumed, from looking at the class advancement charts, that base attack bonuses and saving throws were set at the specific level and did not “add”. For example, looking at the fighter, it says that the 1st level base attack bonus is +1 and the 2nd level B.A.B. is +2. I just assumed that this meant that the B.A.B. becomes +2 at 2nd level, NOT that you add the +2 to the +1 for a 2nd level B.A.B. of +3.
Am I reading the progression charts wrong? According to the multiclassing rules, you add these bonuses together from level to level.