Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Witch Rules for Soceity


Pathfinder Society® General Discussion

1 to 50 of 106 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Cheliax

Iv looked everywhere so iv decided to ask on here. Fromn what i understand alot of the witch abilities such as cook humanoid and smell children are illigel, and now the archtype gravewalker is illegal, i need to know what all patrons and hexes and such can not be used in society play?


This page here tells you everything that is or is not legal, the page should be getting updated within the next week or so.

Grand Lodge *

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber

Assuming you mean Pathfinder Society, this is posted in the wrong place. The Cauldron hex is illegal because there is no item creation in PFS, not because of cook humanoid (as far as I know). Other than that, gravewalker was just banned. To the best of my knowledge, this is all the restrictions. However, you should look at the PFS additional resources document as well as the PFS guide to ensure you have the correct information.

Cheliax

Yes, when i said Society i ment Pathfinder's Society. Anyway i read that page and find pretty much nothing on witches.

Cheliax

NVM i found it thank you

Osirion **

Just be aware with you witch that some GMs take exception to your hexes - I have had two GMs ask me not to use my slumber hex - because it takes away the fun of other players . Considering how squishy my witch is I can not afford heightened targeting by monsters I have complied.

I have also heard negatives about evil eye - but I did not take that until much later level

Shadow Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Washington—Eastern Washington aka WalterGM

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Dhjika wrote:

Just be aware with you witch that some GMs take exception to your hexes - I have had two GMs ask me not to use my slumber hex - because it takes away the fun of other players . Considering how squishy my witch is I can not afford heightened targeting by monsters I have complied.

I have also heard negatives about evil eye - but I did not take that until much later level

Whoa now. If you think what your character does inhibits the fun of others, then perhaps curb their actions (I do this occasionally when I play).

A GM should never bully you into not using your abilities. That is just wrong. I'm actually a bit sickened that a GM would actually threaten you with "heightened targeting by monsters" because your PC elects to use their class ability. Maybe after they've seen it in full effect, but never on sight, which is what this sounds like.

Bottom line for the OP - play what you want to play, but be courteous and mindful of other players and your GM. But don't let either tell you what abilities to get or what to do during your turn.

Osirion **

Walter Sheppard wrote:
Dhjika wrote:

Just be aware with you witch that some GMs take exception to your hexes - I have had two GMs ask me not to use my slumber hex - because it takes away the fun of other players . Considering how squishy my witch is I can not afford heightened targeting by monsters I have complied.

I have also heard negatives about evil eye - but I did not take that until much later level

Whoa now. If you think what your character does inhibits the fun of others, then perhaps curb their actions (I do this occasionally when I play).

A GM should never bully you into not using your abilities. That is just wrong. I'm actually a bit sickened that a GM would actually threaten you with "heightened targeting by monsters" because your PC elects to use their class ability. Maybe after they've seen it in full effect, but never on sight, which is what this sounds like.

Bottom line for the OP - play what you want to play, but be courteous and mindful of other players and your GM. But don't let either tell you what abilities to get or what to do during your turn.

I think an occasional use of a mind effecting 30 ft range power is not unbalancing compared to a lot of builds that wipe encounters quickly like fey sorcerer or the weird words bard.

I never said the gm overtly said don't or you are targeted. However if a gm told you not to do something and you did it - is the easy tool to wield - the one set of chilling words was it makes the game not fun for others (regardless to others at table denial that it does) and the game could be less fun for me.

One of the two GMs is otherwise a great judge - but I don't use my slumber power when he is there lest I use it in an non approved manner. That makes it a wasted feat for the level. The other judge I onlylyed with once.

Shadow Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Washington—Eastern Washington aka WalterGM

Without knowing the situation further then, I redact a bit of what I said earlier.

However, if a GM ever threatens your PC with "if you cast slumber, all the NPCs are going to attack you." I'd agree that it's probably not the best time to argue, but know that you've done nothing wrong.

Andoran ****

Ive lost many a solo boss to the dreaded slumber hex but just one of those things you have to deal with. If that boss is anything human and has weak will savesthe end fight will be over so fast you'll probably have time to get a meal before the next game starts.

Just remember when dealing with it that the witch has to be within 30ft and if there are mooks don't be afraid to burn one of thier standard actions to wake the victim up.

Shadow Lodge **

I believe the hexes that are banned for the following reasons:
child scent hex - to evil
poison steep hex - evil/crafting
cook people major hex - to evil
cauldron hex - crafting
witch’s brew major hex - crafting

For anyone who feels that their characters are being targeted by their GM because they're using abilities that their GM I would recommend talking to your VLs or VCs. I'd recommend doing it even if you see just GMs doing it and you're not the target. The don't bully others rule applies to GMs too.

Although be careful not to confuse the GM being spiteful and the GM playing the enemies to their INT score. At my tables enemies will notice when some one is being really effective and will try to take them down. Although this won't carry on from encounter to encounter of course unless some one sees you fight for a second time.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

If a GM tries to say you shouldn't use one of your PC's abilities, they're out of line. Politely address the issue with the GM after the game. If they're not willing to change their behavior, take it to your local VC or, failing that, to Mike Brock. A GM who makes players feel afraid or ashamed to use basic class feature is, quite simply, a bad GM.

Shadow Lodge **

I don't mean to be rude Jiggy, but I wouldn't bother to much with bringing it up with a GM in the first place, it'd be a waste of time. The fact that they're being spiteful about you using an ability generally means they won't really care when you bring it up with them, they'll probably just blow it all off and dismiss any issues you brought up.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think it's best to give someone a chance to correct their own behavior before taking it to someone else. Even if it's not likely to help, at least you know you gave them that chance.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Jiggy, you're a little over the line there.

There are conceivably times where an ability combination is going to be really weird to adjudicate, or interact in a really negative way with the scenario (killing someone's faction mission accidentally with a class feature is the kind of hypothetical I've got in mind here...)

I'd prefer that a GM be able to cover that on the fly, but sometimes it's a really busy combat and you just need either a chance to say "UHm.... hold on while i figure out what that's going to do...."

The presumption of jerkiness doesn't need to be there - they may be doing the best they can to deal with issues you're not aware of at the time.

*** RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Jiggy wrote:
If a GM tries to say you shouldn't use one of your PC's abilities, they're out of line. Politely address the issue with the GM after the game. If they're not willing to change their behavior, take it to your local VC or, failing that, to Mike Brock. A GM who makes players feel afraid or ashamed to use basic class feature is, quite simply, a bad GM.

Amen to that. Part of the caveat of GMing is a) you're likely going to 'lose' and b) you can't know everything. I'm not as familiar with witches as I should be, so the first time someone pulled out the sleep hex, I'd want to read it. I'd not encourage/discourage it.

It's like with handle animal. I leanred a lot from asking questions and knowing the die roll required is a big help. (It also helps for the couple playing druids to know if they need to roll or not for normal tricks). I'm not 'targeting' the animal any more than I'd 'target' the sleep hex witch (at least not more than any other spellcaster)

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

TetsujinOni wrote:

Jiggy, you're a little over the line there.

There are conceivably times where an ability combination is going to be really weird to adjudicate, or interact in a really negative way with the scenario (killing someone's faction mission accidentally with a class feature is the kind of hypothetical I've got in mind here...)

I'd prefer that a GM be able to cover that on the fly, but sometimes it's a really busy combat and you just need either a chance to say "UHm.... hold on while i figure out what that's going to do...."

The presumption of jerkiness doesn't need to be there - they may be doing the best they can to deal with issues you're not aware of at the time.

Please don't take my words out of context. You're completely right that sometimes things are weird and GMs need to adjudicate on the fly. But my post wasn't about that. It was about a player using a simple class ability in exactly the manner it's designed for, using a single book. No wonky rules combinations, no confusion, just "I use X ability". When the GM decides you shouldn't be doing that, there's a problem.

Don't apply my words to things I wasn't talking about and then judge me for it.

Qadira *** Venture-Captain, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Thorkull

@Tetsujin the issue isn't a GM saying, "give me a moment to figure it out." The reported issue, as it appears without being at the actual games, is that the GM is saying, "I think that ability is too powerful, don't use it at my table."

The former is perfectly fine. The second is outside the purview of a Pathfinder Society table GM.

Cheliax ***** Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Matthew Morris wrote:
Part of the caveat of GMing is a) you're likely going to 'lose'

Wait, what? I'm supposed to lose? No WONDER I've spent the last 30 years getting my teeth kicked in while I play this game. It all makes sense, now...

All epiphanies aside, I think too many of us forget this little tidbit. It's an important one, too.

Qadira ****

TetsujinOni wrote:

Jiggy, you're a little over the line there.

There are conceivably times where an ability combination is going to be really weird to adjudicate, or interact in a really negative way with the scenario (killing someone's faction mission accidentally with a class feature is the kind of hypothetical I've got in mind here...)

I'd prefer that a GM be able to cover that on the fly, but sometimes it's a really busy combat and you just need either a chance to say "UHm.... hold on while i figure out what that's going to do...."

The presumption of jerkiness doesn't need to be there - they may be doing the best they can to deal with issues you're not aware of at the time.

I understand your point here, but if I consistently have a GM who doesn't let me use a class feature, especially if I took extra hex to get it, I would be upset. I can't change my character, but my local GM basically banned my feat post acquisition, despite having no right to do so. i'd be upset, and my VL/VC should know about it.

Grand Lodge ****

Ryan Koetsveld wrote:
I don't mean to be rude Jiggy, but I wouldn't bother to much with bringing it up with a GM in the first place, it'd be a waste of time. The fact that they're being spiteful about you using an ability generally means they won't really care when you bring it up with them, they'll probably just blow it all off and dismiss any issues you brought up.

If you have a problem with someone's actions and you want them to change your solution is to not to talk to them because they won't ever change their actions?

**

Drogon wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
Part of the caveat of GMing is a) you're likely going to 'lose'

Wait, what? I'm supposed to lose? No WONDER I've spent the last 30 years getting my teeth kicked in while I play this game. It all makes sense, now...

All epiphanies aside, I think too many of us forget this little tidbit. It's an important one, too.

Yeah, I know DMs who hate to lose....when that is sort of the point of being the Dm. It always amazes me when DMs forget that.

*** RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Furious Kender wrote:
Drogon wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
Part of the caveat of GMing is a) you're likely going to 'lose'

Wait, what? I'm supposed to lose? No WONDER I've spent the last 30 years getting my teeth kicked in while I play this game. It all makes sense, now...

All epiphanies aside, I think too many of us forget this little tidbit. It's an important one, too.

Yeah, I know DMs who hate to lose....when that is sort of the point of being the Dm. It always amazes me when DMs forget that.

Heck, for me GMing, half the fun is 'losing.' Whether it be enjoying the look on the players' faces when they finally beat the bad guy. Chewing the scenery in their speeches or even cultural non-sequetors that fit the rule of funny.* If everyone (including me) has a good time, then I've 'won' Even if I 'lose'. If I see player 1 is slaughtering things because he's super-optimized it's only an issue if players 2-6 aren't having fun. In that case I'll a) mention it to them afterwards and b) find scenarios that don't play to his strengths, to give others a chance to shine.**

*

Spoiler:
Party slaughters the last giant rat. Me: You skewer the rat, as it is dying on your blade it gasps out, "I... Just wanted... to be... a chef!" 3 hp mite takes 16 points from a crit. "The mite explodes into a fine red mist. Nope, you just hit it that hard."

**

Spoiler:
I always ask if everyone had fun afterwards when I GM. I also love my bards/magi/inquisitors etc because they can be so diverse. Saturday as a player I took a lot of hits, but was able to contribute with a) timed healing b) timed buffing c) some actual combat d) and some skill use. But I was able to have fun, and not overshine anyone.

Shadow Lodge **

There's a difference between loosing and having he witch or other save or die caster Roflcopter the big bad.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

BigNorseWolf wrote:
There's a difference between loosing and having he witch or other save or die caster Roflcopter the big bad.

For the situation in question, the GM who has an issue with it needs to save their gripes for the appropriate feedback thread, not direct it at the player at the table.

*** RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
There's a difference between loosing and having he witch or other save or die caster Roflcopter the big bad.

Having the BBEG fall every time would get old. But as a crowning moment?

[Buffy fires a crossbow at the Judge demon]
The Judge: Who dares?
Buffy: Think I got his attention.
The Judge: You're a fool. No weapon forged can stop me.
Buffy: That was then...
[pulls out a rocket launcher]
Buffy: ... this is now.
[Angelus & Drusilla run for cover]
The Judge: What's that do?

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Matthew Morris wrote:
Heck, for me GMing, half the fun is 'losing.'

This past weekend, I played under Chris Mortika for the first time. He occasionally congratulated players when they succeeded with an effective attack (or whatever) against the enemies. That's good GMing. :)

(That, and his good use of voices and general ability to paint a picture of the setting.)

**

BigNorseWolf wrote:
There's a difference between loosing and having he witch or other save or die caster Roflcopter the big bad.

So it's ok for the barb or fighter to kill the BBEG in 1 round, which I've seen multiple times? However, using save or dies/sucks is just bad playing?

Complaining about the player of a witch using their generic class features is no different than complaining that the barbarian has too high of strength when they rage.

Qadira ***** RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Jiggy wrote:
This past weekend, I played under Chris Mortika for the first time. He occasionally congratulated players when they succeeded with an effective attack (or whatever) against the enemies. That's good GMing.

I really wish I could remember the name of the woman who taught me that.

This was around 1990. There was a woman who came to Gen Con every year and ran a "Thieves' Challenge" caper adventure. We all played thieves of one stripe or another, and we were just given an assignment: "there's a castle; kidnap the prince within the next three nights." All the rest of the adventure was up to us.

And she was very good at encouraging her players. You'd come up with an idea, and she's nod her head and say "Very good!"

The same kind of adventure, from a DM who was smug or depricating, would have been miserable.

--+--

Take home lesson: the more you play under different GMs, and pay attention, the better a GM you can be.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I'm going to try to do the same, Chris, but adopting entire new behavioral patterns is a weak spot for me, so we'll see. :/

Shadow Lodge ***

Furious Kender wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
There's a difference between loosing and having he witch or other save or die caster Roflcopter the big bad.

So it's ok for the barb or fighter to kill the BBEG in 1 round, which I've seen multiple times? However, using save or dies/sucks is just bad playing?

Complaining about the player of a witch using their generic class features is no different than complaining that the barbarian has too high of strength when they rage.

To drive home the point, I had a faction mission in a Tier 1-5 where I needed one of the baddies taken alive. I knew the others wouldn't go along with it, so I didn't give them a chance. I raged, charged, power attacked, and took the -4 penalty to deal nonlethal. I did 22 points of non-lethal damage on a regular hit. I got my prisoner, and the GM sputtered something about that being ridiculous. The rules are the rules, even when they're ridiculous.

Shadow Lodge **

Jiggy wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
There's a difference between loosing and having he witch or other save or die caster Roflcopter the big bad.
For the situation in question, the GM who has an issue with it needs to save their gripes for the appropriate feedback thread, not direct it at the player at the table.

Oh definitely. Telling a player not to use X build is way over the line.

But I think the DM reserves the right to leave a dent in the table from the headdesk at the rather unepic ending.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Sounds dangerous. Especially if there are d4's on the table.

Andoran ***

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
There's a difference between loosing and having he witch or other save or die caster Roflcopter the big bad.
For the situation in question, the GM who has an issue with it needs to save their gripes for the appropriate feedback thread, not direct it at the player at the table.

Oh definitely. Telling a player not to use X build is way over the line.

But I think the DM reserves the right to leave a dent in the table from the headdesk at the rather unepic ending.

Sometimes it generates amusing threads, especially since one of my PCs was the subject of one such thread.

Check out the old thread about trip builds in Society. GM was unhappy with my PoleArm Master trip fighter, and was seriously unhappy about the idea of him taking Fury's Fall. I don't think, in retrospect, that he was happy with the less cheesy path I took that PC, though. Greater Trip and Greater Disarm are ugly on a build with 8 AoOs per round...

Spoiler:
That same GM just called the end of Perils of the Pirate Pact when we had it down to the party vs the cleric, and my PC had tripped the cleric. Something about just being down to Channel Negative as the cleric's only combat option....

I think we played it around level 5 or so, so only improved trip & improved disarm, not the greater option for either one.

This PC just turned 9th level, and burned a feat for Weapon Finesse (already had Agile Maneuvers) and bought a +1 Agile rapier, so I can actually have a chance to do something in combat against those opponents where trip and disarm won't work. Nagas, giant spiders, etc.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

@kinevon:

About your spoiler:
Um, that scenario doesn't have a cleric in it. The BBEG is a sorcerer (I think multiclassed with rogue).

Andoran ***

Jiggy wrote:

@kinevon:

** spoiler omitted **

Spoiler:
I could easily be misremembering, or it could just be a sign that that GM should never have gotten behind a shield to begin with for PFS.

I used to play in a 3.5 home game with him, and it was fine. For PFS, he has misread and misunderstood rules, and, indeed, managed to get hiimself removed from a VC position...

Grand Lodge *

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber
Benrislove wrote:
I understand your point here, but if I consistently have a GM who doesn't let me use a class feature, especially if I took extra hex to get it, I would be upset. I can't change my character, but my local GM basically banned my feat post acquisition, despite having no right to do so. i'd be upset, and my VL/VC should know about it.

Do you GM? Are you prepared to lose a GM if you take your complaint to the VC/VL? The GM isn't purchasing, printing and prepping modules just to pick up stars. He/She is there to enjoy the game.

I'm not saying that it's right, but make sure you look at things from both points of view.

**

sieylianna wrote:


Do you GM? Are you prepared to lose a GM if you take your complaint to the VC/VL? The GM isn't purchasing, printing and prepping modules just to pick up stars. He/She is there to enjoy the game.

I'm not saying that it's right, but make sure you look at things from both points of view.

So the DM's point of view that we need to consider is what exactly? The dm can ruin the fun of someone who plays a witch if it will preserve his or her fun? That the Dm can judge how pathfinder devs should have written core class abilities even in cases where the RAW is perfectly clear?

If these are valid, please let me know because I would love to eliminate heavy armor from the game when I DM PFS. ;)

Qadira ****

Furious Kender wrote:
sieylianna wrote:


Do you GM? Are you prepared to lose a GM if you take your complaint to the VC/VL? The GM isn't purchasing, printing and prepping modules just to pick up stars. He/She is there to enjoy the game.

I'm not saying that it's right, but make sure you look at things from both points of view.

So the DM's point of view that we need to consider is what exactly? The dm can ruin the fun of someone who plays a witch if it will preserve his or her fun? That the Dm can judge how pathfinder devs should have written core class abilities even in cases where the RAW is perfectly clear?

If these are valid, please let me know because I would love to eliminate heavy armor from the game when I DM PFS. ;)

I'm with kender on this. I do GM, in fact I GM more than I play in general, part of why I play PFS is because it allows me to play with a reasonably defined set of rules replacing DM fiat.

Also, don't misunderstand me; I don't think the GM in question should be banned from GMing or ostracized in any way; I think someone not involved directly in the situation should be involved, to keep the situation from being a personal argument, and simply keep it a discussion about how things should be handled in PFS.

The most likely outcome is that GM will simply be sad if his BBEG fails a will save, and have a better understanding of the PFS assumptions.

Silver Crusade ****

kinevon wrote:


Oh definitely. Telling a player not to use X build is way over the line.

I think that there are a few occassions where the GM actually IS justified in requesting that a player not use some class feature.

For example, if there is a seven player table I have no problem at all if the GM requests that my Druids Animal Companion stay home. I don't even mind if he asks that I only Summon Natures Allies if I think the situation requires it (as opposed to being my first spell).

Shadow Lodge **

sveden wrote:
Ryan Koetsveld wrote:
I don't mean to be rude Jiggy, but I wouldn't bother to much with bringing it up with a GM in the first place, it'd be a waste of time. The fact that they're being spiteful about you using an ability generally means they won't really care when you bring it up with them, they'll probably just blow it all off and dismiss any issues you brought up.
If you have a problem with someone's actions and you want them to change your solution is to not to talk to them because they won't ever change their actions?

Perhaps you should not take my post out of context and read the previous post where I tell people to bring it up with their VCs/VLs.

Part of being a VC/VL is making sure things run smoothly, GMs trying to kill characters because they feel the character is over powered is a prime example of something not running smoothly.

I didn't say don't talk to them, just that I wouldn't bother. People that shamelessly meta game like that generally won't listen to the people feeling the wrath of their meta gaming.

sieylianna wrote:
Do you GM? Are you prepared to lose a GM if you take your complaint to the VC/VL?

I'd much rather lose a bad GM than have a bad GM make us lose players, and a GM going out of their way to kill characters is likely to cause exactly that.

Matthew Morris wrote:

Having the BBEG fall every time would get old. But as a crowning moment?

[Buffy fires a crossbow at the Judge demon]
The Judge: Who dares?
Buffy: Think I got his attention.
The Judge: You're a fool. No weapon forged can stop me.
Buffy: That was then...
[pulls out a rocket launcher]
Buffy: ... this is now.
[Angelus & Drusilla run for cover]
The Judge: What's that do?

I'm not sure if I should be feeling pride or shame for knowing that scene...

Sczarni **

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Having a 12th level Witch, it pains me to see people being bullied for using legitimate class features. Yes, the Slumber Hex can trivialize combat in anticlimactic (though often amusing) ways, but that's not appropriate grounds for a GM to ask you to stop using a class features. Even if they're not threatening to retaliate.

Asking a Witch to stop using their save-or-suck hexes is like asking a Gunslinger to stop targeting touch AC, or a Flowing Monk to stop tripping people and ki-throwing them off buildings. Yes, as a GM it's frustrating to have to put up with players handily dispatching your army of mooks, or even taking out a boss with a one-shot routine, but sometimes the dice just have it in for the enemies. Just like they sometimes have it in for the players.

*** RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Re: Dice

I have one set of dice I use when I GM (crystal caste 'd'oh' dice) they normally run hot. But only when I GM.

As to the sleep hex, throwing off buildings etc. That's when the rule of funny comes in.

Sleep Hex: He looks like he's going to say something, lets out a yawn, falls over and begins to snore, a litle bit of drool coming out of his mouth.

Throwing off buildings: As he goes flying off the building, his arms and legs windmill as if he's trying to fly. He remains in the air just long enough to get an 'aw crap' look on his face (or pull out a sign saying 'aw crap') and then falls.

If everyone gets a good laugh out of it, then no harm no foul.

**

Personally I have no problem in a homegame environment if the GM request x build or play style not to be a part of that game. In such an environment the people probably know each other and can guage what works and doesnt work within that group. So if you have a table full of RPers and here comes Munchkin McPowergamer and his latest Frankenstien creation... it probably will ruins some ones fun.

That said, in a open game at a FLGS or con, there really is no place for artificial restrictions placed on builds as playing PFS has the implicit agreement upon a set on rules established within the PFS Guides.

Grand Lodge ****

Ryan Koetsveld wrote:
sveden wrote:
Ryan Koetsveld wrote:
I don't mean to be rude Jiggy, but I wouldn't bother to much with bringing it up with a GM in the first place, it'd be a waste of time. The fact that they're being spiteful about you using an ability generally means they won't really care when you bring it up with them, they'll probably just blow it all off and dismiss any issues you brought up.
If you have a problem with someone's actions and you want them to change your solution is to not to talk to them because they won't ever change their actions?

Perhaps you should not take my post out of context and read the previous post where I tell people to bring it up with their VCs/VLs.

Part of being a VC/VL is making sure things run smoothly, GMs trying to kill characters because they feel the character is over powered is a prime example of something not running smoothly.

I didn't say don't talk to them, just that I wouldn't bother. People that shamelessly meta game like that generally won't listen to the people feeling the wrath of their meta gaming.

I'm glad to see you've changed your mind about not talking to the GM. You have to at least try.

Secondly, can you explain how Meta-gaming came into this discussion? What example are you referring to where the GM is meta-gaming?

Qadira *** Venture-Captain, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Thorkull

Lass wrote:

That said, in a open game at a FLGS or con, there really is no place for artificial restrictions placed on builds as playing PFS has the implicit agreement upon a set on rules established within the PFS Guides.

Not to be a pedant but it's not implicit, it's explicit. If you GM or run Pathfinder Society, you must abide by the rules of he campaign whether you like them or not. There are certainly rules I don't like, but I accept them as they're not open for debate. I still enjoy playing the game.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

sveden wrote:
Secondly, can you explain how Meta-gaming came into this discussion? What example are you referring to where the GM is meta-gaming?

Linkety-link!

**

Jonathan Cary wrote:
Lass wrote:

That said, in a open game at a FLGS or con, there really is no place for artificial restrictions placed on builds as playing PFS has the implicit agreement upon a set on rules established within the PFS Guides.

Not to be a pedant but it's not implicit, it's explicit. If you GM or run Pathfinder Society, you must abide by the rules of he campaign whether you like them or not. There are certainly rules I don't like, but I accept them as they're not open for debate. I still enjoy playing the game.

When you come knocking on my door with your VC police badge I'll be sure not to answer ;-)

Andoran ***

sveden wrote:
Ryan Koetsveld wrote:
sveden wrote:
Ryan Koetsveld wrote:
I don't mean to be rude Jiggy, but I wouldn't bother to much with bringing it up with a GM in the first place, it'd be a waste of time. The fact that they're being spiteful about you using an ability generally means they won't really care when you bring it up with them, they'll probably just blow it all off and dismiss any issues you brought up.
If you have a problem with someone's actions and you want them to change your solution is to not to talk to them because they won't ever change their actions?

Perhaps you should not take my post out of context and read the previous post where I tell people to bring it up with their VCs/VLs.

Part of being a VC/VL is making sure things run smoothly, GMs trying to kill characters because they feel the character is over powered is a prime example of something not running smoothly.

I didn't say don't talk to them, just that I wouldn't bother. People that shamelessly meta game like that generally won't listen to the people feeling the wrath of their meta gaming.

I'm glad to see you've changed your mind about not talking to the GM. You have to at least try.

Secondly, can you explain how Meta-gaming came into this discussion? What example are you referring to where the GM is meta-gaming?

The example where it was mentioned that the GM would have all his NPCs start targeting the PC using something he doesn't approve of, even as of the start of combat, when the mooks shouldn't know about it yet.

***** Venture-Lieutenant, New York—New York City aka VLTRokktor

sieylianna wrote:
Benrislove wrote:
I understand your point here, but if I consistently have a GM who doesn't let me use a class feature, especially if I took extra hex to get it, I would be upset. I can't change my character, but my local GM basically banned my feat post acquisition, despite having no right to do so. i'd be upset, and my VL/VC should know about it.

Do you GM? Are you prepared to lose a GM if you take your complaint to the VC/VL? The GM isn't purchasing, printing and prepping modules just to pick up stars. He/She is there to enjoy the game.

I'm not saying that it's right, but make sure you look at things from both points of view.

No judge is going to lose GM prolegs because of a complaint. It is upto us to talk to te judge and see where the problem is. None of us are. Perfect after all. A problem judge may be asked to step dwn from judging, but he didn't step up to begin with without a drive. I have had several judges I have had to retrain over the years and, save for one who walked away, the rest are still judging with no problems

1 to 50 of 106 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder Society® / General Discussion / Witch Rules for Soceity All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.