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

RPG Superstar 2015

Lesser trials encourage antisocial behavior


Player Feedback


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Pathfinder is a corporative game. You play with other people and are generally rewarded for good teamwork. The issue with lesser trials is that many of them encourage doing things that hurt the party for personal gain.

Having people cast from scrolls with a failure chance and bait out attacks of opportunity isn't good multiplayer design. Its going to reward players who take selfish risks.


johnlocke90 wrote:

Pathfinder is a corporative game. You play with other people and are generally rewarded for good teamwork. The issue with lesser trials is that many of them encourage doing things that hurt the party for personal gain.

Having people cast from scrolls with a failure chance and bait out attacks of opportunity isn't good multiplayer design. Its going to reward players who take selfish risks.

This is where the melding with good GM storytelling comes in. These are the types of scenarios that emerge out of acts of desperation or harsh necessity, and shouldn't be players actively hindering the party in order to achieve a mythic moment.

Paizo Employee Lead Designer

This is a valid point and one that has weighed heavily on me during the design phase. I am interested in seeing playtest feedback on these trials in action before I cast to heavy a judgement.

The GM also has a big role to play in how these are adjudicated. As others have pointed out, there are a variety of easy outs to get them simply, but that is not very mythic, nor would be screwing over your friends just to accomplish a trial (of course.. that might depend on your character concept, but such a character would not exactly work well with others).

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing


TheWarriorPoet519 wrote:
johnlocke90 wrote:

Pathfinder is a corporative game. You play with other people and are generally rewarded for good teamwork. The issue with lesser trials is that many of them encourage doing things that hurt the party for personal gain.

Having people cast from scrolls with a failure chance and bait out attacks of opportunity isn't good multiplayer design. Its going to reward players who take selfish risks.

This is where the melding with good GM storytelling comes in. These are the types of scenarios that emerge out of acts of desperation or harsh necessity, and shouldn't be players actively hindering the party in order to achieve a mythic moment.

Then it sounds like the lesser trials should be labeled as "suggestions" for the GM. If the players know what trials they have to complete, then there is always going to be that incentive to complete their trial over helping the team.


johnlocke90 wrote:
TheWarriorPoet519 wrote:
johnlocke90 wrote:

Pathfinder is a corporative game. You play with other people and are generally rewarded for good teamwork. The issue with lesser trials is that many of them encourage doing things that hurt the party for personal gain.

Having people cast from scrolls with a failure chance and bait out attacks of opportunity isn't good multiplayer design. Its going to reward players who take selfish risks.

This is where the melding with good GM storytelling comes in. These are the types of scenarios that emerge out of acts of desperation or harsh necessity, and shouldn't be players actively hindering the party in order to achieve a mythic moment.
Then it sounds like the lesser trials should be labeled as "suggestions" for the GM. If the players know what trials they have to complete, then there is always going to be that incentive to complete their trial over helping the team.

"The following list of lesser trials is just a sample of what a character might try to accomplish. The GM is free to use the following list as inspiration and a guideline, when determining additional trials." ~The playtest PDF (emphasis mine)

Seems like Suggestions and Examples is exactly what they are. I don't see any note saying "These are the set in stone Lesser Trials."


However, the player does have to declare the trial before he attempts it in order for it to count for Mythic progression.

So the point remains. Players still know what trials they have to complete, so that incentive to be selfish over working as a team is still there.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Honestly, I'm not sure that even having lesser and greater trials is even worth it. I think there needs to be a system of progression, but at the same time I think that how Mythic tiers progress needs to be something that the GMs track for themselves and not something that the players can ever point to one rule in a book and say, "There. That is my trial."

What I would like to see is a GameMasters only chapter in a book that offered several, multiple systems for advancing your mythic tier. Jason, you and your team list several different ways creatures can ascend to mythic power, such as by defeating a powerful foe, finding a powerful artifact, or simply from your heritage. What if each "suggestion" had its own suggested way for gaining mythic power? For example, I believe someone said that the Mythic rules was going to have a system for having your weapons improve with you similar to Weapons of Legacy. What if there was one system where you gained tiers based on your item's "level," and then another system based on if you are the child of a god, and then another system for if you gain your power for killing mythic monsters?

Maybe the systems could even be inter-changeable; for example I might have earned my first mythic tier because I'm born of the Dawnflower Goddess and while I could gain mythic tiers for performing deeds in her name, instead I decide to go beat the poo out of mythic monsters and steal their mythic powers for myself until I find a legendary item that further augments my mythic-ness. All the while all three mythic methods have their own way to gain tiers.

That's much cooler than a set-in-stone trials system.


Alexander Augunas wrote:

Honestly, I'm not sure that even having lesser and greater trials is even worth it. I think there needs to be a system of progression, but at the same time I think that how Mythic tiers progress needs to be something that the GMs track for themselves and not something that the players can ever point to one rule in a book and say, "There. That is my trial."

What I would like to see is a GameMasters only chapter in a book that offered several, multiple systems for advancing your mythic tier.

The problem is that there really aren't any "GM only" books anymore. Nothing prevents players from getting hold of those books and reading them - and if there is any kind of a "system" printed there, then players (many, but not all, perhaps not even most, though certainly at least one who I game with) will consider those "the rules" and will calibrate their expectations accordingly.


princeimrahil wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:

Honestly, I'm not sure that even having lesser and greater trials is even worth it. I think there needs to be a system of progression, but at the same time I think that how Mythic tiers progress needs to be something that the GMs track for themselves and not something that the players can ever point to one rule in a book and say, "There. That is my trial."

What I would like to see is a GameMasters only chapter in a book that offered several, multiple systems for advancing your mythic tier.

The problem is that there really aren't any "GM only" books anymore. Nothing prevents players from getting hold of those books and reading them - and if there is any kind of a "system" printed there, then players (many, but not all, perhaps not even most, though certainly at least one who I game with) will consider those "the rules" and will calibrate their expectations accordingly.

I disagree my group has the advanced race guide (each of us), and anything in that book is at the DM's approval only that includes the race builder. My group is completyely ok with this. Not all players think the way you seem to think they do.


Realmwalker wrote:


Not all players think the way you seem to think they do.

Let me direct you to the relevant part of my post that you overlooked:

Quote:
players (many, but not all, perhaps not even most, though certainly at least one who I game with)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In a related note, I think a lot of them would result in toying with enemies over actually fighting so you can keep up the round requirments.

I also dislike how you have to "choose" trials before hand. Heroes rarely plan minor details lesser trials are said to be LONG in advance. It also makes the above note even more prominent.

I'd replace it with a system where a character can "boast" about completing a trial ahead of time and regain mythic power if he succeeds in his goal, but take a penalty for some time (or until he manages to pull it off) if he fails.

Actually, keeping minor trials exclusivity to such a system or droping them entirely could work. Minor trials have a problem of making the party's power level uneven with no benefit aside from (questionable) fluff, which doesn't seem like a good idea.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Put me in the camp of "wary about Lesser Trials". I'll wait to make full judgement until I also see them in action. However, picking your trials in advance will encourage situations where player's are actively trying to set these situations up, not for Tier gain (why worry about your Lesser Trials until you've got your Greater Trials locked down) but just for Mythic Power replenishment.

Greater Trials: I love these and attaching more story and roleplay-based mechanics to the system is what Mythic should be all about.

Lesser Trials: Since these don't need story context (for many of them any combat will do) they feel more like encouraging non-story related "achievements". Achievement mentality is fine, don't get me wrong, but since they don't tie into the story they feel a little artificial.

Looking at both types as game Achievements, Greater Trials are like the achievements you get when you beat a story chapter or find that hidden level in the game. Lesser Trials are the "kill 5 guys with one grenade" or "get 10 headshots in a row" achievements.

The other issue with Lesser Trials that concerns me is the potential headache of massive bookkeeping (this was brought up by someone else on the boards as well). Mythic is supposed to make the game easier, in its own way, and flow more smoothly. This layer of bookkeeping is antithetical to that. On any given adventuring day, the Gm needs to keep track (on average) of 4 players worth of Lesser Trials to see when they qualify. That might get messy at the higher Tiers.

Suggestions:

There are two mechanics found in certain White Wolf games that I think might prove useful here. I'm not advocating you borrow these suggested systems (see below) wholesale but I know you guys are creative and brilliant enough to take a concept and make it your own. To that end, there are two systems which strike a little closer to what I think Lesser Trials could be and tie in better with storytelling and context. So without further ado. . .

Nature and Willpower (or Vices and Virtues in NWoD): A system whereby the character regains Willpower points by achieving goals that reinforce the character's personality. Greater Trials are already about completing Mythic Deeds so why not make Lesser Trials be about reinforcing a character's Mythic Personality. Some Mythic Weaknesses already tie into enforcing personality traits (Cayden obviously had the Mythic Weakness of Dependency: Alcohol prior to Godhood). So why not come up with a system whereby personality traits also govern how you get back Mythic Points and gain Tiers. Rather than make the "Lesser" system be about combat (unless that's part of your character's bloodthirsty personality) make it be about the characters themselves.

Stunting mechanics (see Scion or Exalted): On the other hand, if you want to maintain the Lesser Trials' focus on combat then maybe take a cue from these systems. It would at least help reduce the bookkeeping. This system is a little more in-depth so I won't go into greater detail (unless requested to) but basically, players are encouraged to try outrageous combat maneuvers that incorporate the local scenery of the combat arena and encourage creative thinking. Rather than just saying "I hit him again" the player could say "As the pillar begins to topple I run forward and slide under the falling column, as I slide past the enemy I slice at his hamstring". See, it doesn't even have to be that fancy. Granted that would be a very minor stunt and a character may have to achieve a lot of them to qualify for the next Tier but it would at least reduce the bookkeeping of worrying about specific "Lesser" goals/achievements that are declared at the beginning of each day,

With the Stunting system (call it Mythic Deeds or some such) you could say the character needs 10 Mythic Deed points to qualify for the next Tier. Minor Deeds are worth 1, Major Deeds are worth 2. A player may opt to take the point(s) to refresh his Mythic Points pool or may choose to put them towards his total Mythic Deeds count. This way rather than Lesser Trials being about "the numbers" (killing so many enemies in one hit, or dealing x amount of damage in one hit), they could be about just doing something "cool" that entertains everyone at the table.

Just my thoughts. Cheers.

Star Voter 2013

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
The GM also has a big role to play in how these are adjudicated. As others have pointed out, there are a variety of easy outs to get them simply, but that is not very mythic, nor would be screwing over your friends just to accomplish a trial (of course.. that might depend on your character concept, but such a character would not exactly work well with others).

Jason...I think you've answered your own concerns right here. You're not confident in the Lesser Trials, and people's first reactions on seeing them is that they're either metagamey, antisocial, or work against the grain of the rest of the system through bookkeeping requirements.

You're right to want to wait for feedback to see if the idea is salvagable, but right now I already know that I've dropped them from my playtesting effort. None of my players will even touch the idea with a ten foot pole. We're working out what we want to try to use to replenish Mythic Power instead, at least for playtesting purposes.


princeimrahil wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:

Honestly, I'm not sure that even having lesser and greater trials is even worth it. I think there needs to be a system of progression, but at the same time I think that how Mythic tiers progress needs to be something that the GMs track for themselves and not something that the players can ever point to one rule in a book and say, "There. That is my trial."

What I would like to see is a GameMasters only chapter in a book that offered several, multiple systems for advancing your mythic tier.

The problem is that there really aren't any "GM only" books anymore. Nothing prevents players from getting hold of those books and reading them - and if there is any kind of a "system" printed there, then players (many, but not all, perhaps not even most, though certainly at least one who I game with) will consider those "the rules" and will calibrate their expectations accordingly.

I don't think its a bad thing if players are literate on game systems, and you'll note that I mentioned a GameMasters only chapter; not entire book. Perhaps what I think of as "GameMasters only" is different than what you think it is, but to me a GM Only book or chapter is anything that doesn't directly add to player power in some way, shape, or form.

A player can look at an experience chart all he or she wishes, and while earning experience to qualify for new levels certainly increases his or her power, the XP system itself doesn't inherently increase the player's power and is therefore a "GM section" of Chapter Two. However, we all appreciate when a player knows how the experience and leveling systems work.

That would be one of the beauties of having multiple systems in the book regarding how to earn mythic levels. If there were a bunch of options that simply stated, "You should aim for a progression system that works for you, but your GM has the final say on the matter" then I don't think you'd see that much complaint from your players, and it would certainly be harder for a player to "Game" then having one system that may or may not fit with the type of story you're trying to tell.


Chris Kenney wrote:


You're right to want to wait for feedback to see if the idea is salvagable, but right now I already know that I've dropped them from my playtesting effort. None of my players will even touch the idea with a ten foot pole. We're working out what we want to try to use to replenish Mythic Power instead, at least for playtesting purposes.

I'm considering replacing it with a Mythic "nature" or "vices and virtue" system. Similar to how White Wolf games allow a player to recover Willpower.

I'll probably call it the "Mythic Persona" and each player may select or customize their own to fit with their character's personality, deeds, and legend.

Don't get me wrong. I want to playtest the Lesser Trials. I really do. I just don't think my players will go for it, plus as Mort pointed out, the data points for this sort of playtesting really only works over a full campaign and we've got a little over two months. My group only plays Pathfinder every other week so I just don't think it's feasible for me. Still going to playtest the heck out of everything else though (as best I can).

Lantern Lodge

You could introduce trials around teamwork feats, like:

Defy Ambuscade: You and two other allies are able to act fully (Move, Std or Full Round Action) due to the benefits of the Lookout Feat.

Moment of Glory: Score a critical hit against a mythic foe when granted an attack of opportunity from the Seize the Moment Teamwork Feat.


Would it make more sense, mechanically, if the lesser trials did not need to be announced first? Instead of it being something to aspire to, it is instead a litmus of heroic deeds. Sort of like a Gunslinger's grit, they can be recuperated by say, killing an opponent. The Gunslinger doesn't need to announce that he is intending to recover grit with that killing blow.

I think that the lesser trials could be more like that; Mythic Accomplishments. Whereas the greater trials make up the bulk of the actual "trial" sense.

How does that sounds in comparison?

Star Voter 2013

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Lucent wrote:

Would it make more sense, mechanically, if the lesser trials did not need to be announced first? Instead of it being something to aspire to, it is instead a litmus of heroic deeds. Sort of like a Gunslinger's grit, they can be recuperated by say, killing an opponent. The Gunslinger doesn't need to announce that he is intending to recover grit with that killing blow.

I think that the lesser trials could be more like that; Mythic Accomplishments. Whereas the greater trials make up the bulk of the actual "trial" sense.

How does that sounds in comparison?

Honestly, it still doesn't address a lot of the key concerns You're still being pushed into arbitrary and artificial actions that just don't seem "mythic" or "epic" so much as "achievement earning." Even if you don't have to announce something in particular in advance, if you can choose from the menu (so to speak) it just means that instead of setting up very specific circumstances for combat encounters players will just trip over each other trying to be the one to get the mythic point when the right circumstances emerge.

Paizo Employee Lead Designer

A lot of the concerns I am seeing here are identical to those we have been having in the office. We like the concept of encouraging and rewarding players for "thinking mythic", but right now, the implementation feels off.

Once again.. this thread is full of theory and not playtesting results. It worked a bit smoother in play than it seems, but it still had issues. I am waiting to get some actual playtest results. I realize that this wont work for all groups, and that is certainly a problem, but I dont think I am ready to shift to drastically without more examples.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

Star Voter 2013

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I'm actually kind of sad that I won't be able to provide any feedback on this aspect of the system beyond "Players aren't willing to playtest." I do understand that it's less than helpful.

Quick question: Are you willing/able to listen to feedback on how alternative takes played out? Even just if they (might) make it in after tweaking as sidebar optional rules.


In my group, players have often achieved great deeds that they were not planning on doing -- luck just favored them. For example, our halfling paladin charged a major enemy and killed him in a single blow. Surely a deed like that should count for a lesser trial even if he did not have it on his daily list.

Lantern Lodge

I realize their was a call to avoid theory crafting, but here goes...

One of the things lesser trials have reintroduced is independent player XP. I know a lot of gamers work in a post XP world, or at least that it is becoming more common. Groups often level when the story makes it appropriate to level (our group plays fairly close to the AP advancement tracks, being the level it suggests at the time it is suggested. Advancing in level comes after the successful completion of, well a trial.

The two reasons for this is the book keeping on XP is tedious, and it actually creates a bit of social tension on if it is fair to penalize a player with no XP when they have RL commitments for not attending. I suppose we are bit of a socialist group of gamers, but we are all middle aged, with kids and commitments, we game for fun, and it is more fun when your not the one held back a level because last week you had to work.

To balance this we use systems like the Hero Point system to reward great RP or non-rp but heroic character action. So basically a minor in game effect for doing something that increases the fun for all the players, and the player who gets the reward is in turn able to use it to further the objectives of the party. Its win-win the game is more fun, and no one feels left out.

With trials, it is clear that the greater trials are literally supposed to mesh with story objectives, perhaps seeing PC's reach T3-4 in the average AP. So the lesser trials return us to the day of individual character advancement, where it needs to be tracked and measured, and can introduce a great amount of spread in the party. No one wants to be the T1 char in a group of T5 players because he hasn't met his lesser. What works well for fantasy literature, Hercules and Hylas, heck Batman and Robin, just doesn't work in a cooperative game.

On the other hand I like the idea of trials as a way to encourage people to act mythically. What could work is if you replace trials as a XP mechanism, and instead use it to recharge your mythic/uses per day?

Star Voter 2014

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah... the list of examples here is really just making me think, "Oh hello again Achievement Feats!" They pretty much all reward either playing stupidly (I realize the intention is "pulling off desperate maneuvers in dire situations" but I'd rather tie the progression to facing dire situations than lucking your way through), or they're just purely a matter of luck (which is bad in and of itself, and encourages more bad behavior to game the system- constantly doing things just for the sake of making die rolls so there's more chances to luck out).

I realize it seems boring and against the spirit of things, but the best fix that comes to my mind is to complete the parallel with classes and levels, and introduce the concept of "Mythic Experience." Reward it only for situations involving the mythic rules (i.e. defeating mythic monsters), or similar challenges (victory in encounters far above an appropriate CR, through any means). It counts towards tiers, but not towards levels. Including a note about optionally rewarding MXP "when characters exhibit such luck or skill they must be destined for greatness" would cover the intentions of pretty much every example here.

The upside to this:
- No videogamey achievements to game.
- In practice, it still brings about the generally epic feeling. 5th level characters sneaking past an adult red dragon or taking down a tier 5 warlord makes for an impressive accomplishment.
- You can mirror the differing XP progression rates easily, for people who want a really epic campaign, or want to keep things low key.
- You can much more easily plan around it. I don't really see how, say, an AP with Mythic content would possibly work with the crapshoot of lesser trials (especially since you can't bank a surplus of greaters for when you catch up), but planning enough mythic encounters to reward X amount of MXP is easy.

Greater trials are pretty much fine as is... although honestly I could see either throwing lesser trials out the window and advancing tiers solely through greater trials, and if you did go with the MXP notion, greater trials could easily be replaced with massive ad hoc MXP bonuses, so there's only one number that needs tracking.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I love the greater trials, but I do have to admit when I read over the lesser trials I thought what many above have posted already. They definitely don't seem to encourage team work and to a degree dissuade it to ensure you are meeting your lesser trials. Really wishing I had a good suggestion on how to improve them to that end.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

A lot of the concerns I am seeing here are identical to those we have been having in the office. We like the concept of encouraging and rewarding players for "thinking mythic", but right now, the implementation feels off.

Once again.. this thread is full of theory and not playtesting results. It worked a bit smoother in play than it seems, but it still had issues. I am waiting to get some actual playtest results. I realize that this wont work for all groups, and that is certainly a problem, but I dont think I am ready to shift to drastically without more examples.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

Maybe the answer isn't so much shifting but perhaps including a section that's more in the spirit of expanding from the GameMastery Guide.

I'm firmly convinced that inserting these rules into a standard campaign and trying to DM that campaign the exact same way is going to lead to the majority of the problems that were the minefields that Epic ran aground for many groups in the 3.X days.

I believe that the book should not only give us new crunch but should actively give us new perspectives in running a campaign. Mythic is in some ways D20 getting a brush sideswipe with Amber Diceless, or at least kind of making ordinary d20 type characters into characters with a growing streak of Amberite.


Googleshng wrote:
In my estimation, absolute brilliance.

Googleshng's ideas are spectacular in my opinion. A very thought-out way to approach the mythic system, that is easily integrate-able with little extra work.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Merkatz wrote:

However, the player does have to declare the trial before he attempts it in order for it to count for Mythic progression.

So the point remains. Players still know what trials they have to complete, so that incentive to be selfish over working as a team is still there.

Key thing to remember is that the Player declares the trial, not the character. So there's no reason that this decision can't be made with group harmony. That's more of a question of people to people skills than a gaming issue. Trusting your fellow players is a lot like trusting your GM. You really shouldn't be out to mess with each other in a healthy group.


LazarX wrote:
Merkatz wrote:

However, the player does have to declare the trial before he attempts it in order for it to count for Mythic progression.

So the point remains. Players still know what trials they have to complete, so that incentive to be selfish over working as a team is still there.

Key thing to remember is that the Player declares the trial, not the character. So there's no reason that this decision can't be made with group harmony. That's more of a question of people to people skills than a gaming issue. Trusting your fellow players is a lot like trusting your GM. You really shouldn't be out to mess with each other in a healthy group.

I completely agree LazarX, but I do want to point out that while a group might be completely harmonious, unless they are all looking to move down the same mystic path, it's very possible that what will help one character progress, will not also help another character progress, at least insofar as the lesser trials are varied by path. Sure their are universal lesser trials, but there are only five of those, and two of those are skill based. While some of the lesser trials could be used in conjunction with one another, i.e. it is possible that two characters could complete a lesser trial in the same encounter, my experience with the fickle dice tell me that the likelihood of every character in a group attaining a lesser trial from the same encounter are unlikely. This means that a GM that wants to keep a relatively close mythic progression would be forced to throw in "extra" encounters, that don't necessarily fit into the narrative, in order for the relative power level to remain constant. This also brings up the idea, that if a GM is specifically throwing in an encounter to get one character "caught up" with their lesser trials, and another character attains a lesser trial (one that furthers their progression, not just regains uses of their mythic power) a greater disparity of power level can result.

I do think that a group that is harmonious, productive, goal-focused, and story-centric, can accomplish everything necessary to make this work. However, and again this is just my experience, few groups work in such a "well-oiled machine" sort of a way, in their actuality.


Actually, I foresee far too many problems with trials the way they are now. With the difficulty they have, a character can't just go on with the game and catch an opportunity that comes; she must strive for achieving the trials in any single encounter, or otherwise her Mythic Tier could fall far behind her level (considering an average progression of 1 MT/2 levels). And despite efforts she might even be still unable to accomplish the task, due to bad luck, lack of resources, unfitting encounters and so on. Or in some cases she might even die trying to pass a trial, which is possibly the worst outcome.
The result? To say just one, you may have a Sorcerer wanting to go in the wild in search of Goblin camps to set aflame solely to achieve a trial, and that's not good for the game. (About that matter, I wanted to ask clarification: can each trial be achieved only once per tier, with those such as the Archmage's Mass Obliteration being an exception? If not, how does thos like Mass Obliteration work?)
Of course a GM could and maybe should work in favor of the characters and offer them a fair access to the achievement of trials, but aside the fact that we all know not all gaming groups work like that (meaning, among other things, a long list of player rants in the messageboards), it would mean that the GM has to provide encounters that are easier in some way or another to favor an achievement, or have the foes do actions they normally wouldn't, or other things like those.
In short, I agree that they encourage antisocial behavior and also think that they damage the game in too many other ways.

To be propositive, I'll throw in also some personal suggestion:
1) Make them less specific (for example, saying that the GM decides how many charges are required by Charging Hero and if one or more of them must be aimed at Mythic creatures or not, rather than writing a number that most GMs will take as a RAW to follow to letter or else the world will end).
This way, the trials are forced to be adapted to the campaign that is being played, rather than having a GM altering it on purpose or players taking crazy decisions because they have to search the accomplishment out of the natural course of the story.
2) Make them overall a little bit more random and less requiring of dedicated effort. I know that this is not exactly in line with the feeling of Mythic because a Mythic character is daring and all, and has more confidence in herself than in luck, but other than the fact that I doubt there aren't ways to do this without crippling that feeling, I also think it would benefit the game. Because a character who knows she just has to wait for an opportunity to achieve the trial rather than constantly trying to create one, cuts some of the problems discussed above.

Sovereign Court

I've inverted the system and burried mythic challenges into some of the events. If the players queue up their abilities and meet the non power specific ones I've put out there then I check off how many they achieve.

The catch is much like party exp I might just have a 'group mythic' level and raise it as the PC's achieve a large enough pool of points over all.

Personally they add an optional CR rating on to an encounter.

We'll see how it works after this Friday's game.


One thing I'd suggest is that if the decision is made to go with the lesser trials, then come up with more mythic trials and not the current list of lesser trials which read like pre-requisites for achievement feats.

The kind of trials/deeds I'm suggesting is something more along the lines of the following (borrowed from the Deeds rules in The Noble Wild):

Calling the Zephyr.

Prerequisite: You must run with a storm, racing with it, for a full day.

Leading the Wind’s Herd.

Prerequisite: You must stand out in a dangerous storm (a gale, hurricane, or typhoon), not seeking shelter, for an entire day.

Bless the Ground.

Prerequisite: You must defend a sacred place against desecration.

Repairing Misfortune.

Prerequisite: You must have participated in the lifting of a curse that has been in place for at least 100 years.

The Getaway.

Prerequisite: You must successfully steal some valuable object from a demon, a devil, or a dragon, and then inform the item’s owner that you did so. You must then keep the item for at least 24 hours, foiling any attempts at recovery.

Basically, I'd suggest that the lesser trials have greater mythic import than what is currently listed.

That said, I'd also be happy with making the whole thing optional and just listing more mythic-like suggestions for the GM as to what they might want to use if they decide to use the system.

Sovereign Court

If there was just a better narrative way of giving clues to low tier events. Rather than having the player determine them. It would help a lot. Like a range of 'that's awesome' stunts.

Personally I take inspiraion from Exalted's Stunt system. Do the same old things over and over again. Meh. No points.

Get creative, POINTS! Bonus points!


Caedwyr wrote:

One thing I'd suggest is that if the decision is made to go with the lesser trials, then come up with more mythic trials and not the current list of lesser trials which read like pre-requisites for achievement feats.

The kind of trials/deeds I'm suggesting is something more along the lines of the following (borrowed from the Deeds rules in The Noble Wild):

Calling the Zephyr.

Prerequisite: You must run with a storm, racing with it, for a full day.

Leading the Wind’s Herd.

Prerequisite: You must stand out in a dangerous storm (a gale, hurricane, or typhoon), not seeking shelter, for an entire day.

Bless the Ground.

Prerequisite: You must defend a sacred place against desecration.

Repairing Misfortune.

Prerequisite: You must have participated in the lifting of a curse that has been in place for at least 100 years.

The Getaway.

Prerequisite: You must successfully steal some valuable object from a demon, a devil, or a dragon, and then inform the item’s owner that you did so. You must then keep the item for at least 24 hours, foiling any attempts at recovery.

Basically, I'd suggest that the lesser trials have greater mythic import than what is currently listed.

That said, I'd also be happy with making the whole thing optional and just listing more mythic-like suggestions for the GM as to what they might want to use if they decide to use the system.

Those sound more like Greater Trials to me. Certainly not something that (even Mythic) low level characters will be able to do multiple times in a tier.

Sovereign Court

The trick is to promote them using their mythic abilities while not letting them decend into 1 trick ponies. I'd give credit for doing cool things like taking an extra round in combat to pick a lock as a full round action, and then backstab someone if there was an opening.

Or cycling though 1 of each college in your spell list doing various mythic enhancements in useful ways though out the day.

Or specifcially pulling off hard tasts w/out tapping into your mythic powers in rare but cool moments.

The real catch is lower and higher tier achivements tend to stumble over each other. I'd rather let the DM make the call on what tier the achivement is based on how impactful the action is.

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Older Products / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Mythic Adventures Playtest / Player Feedback / Lesser trials encourage antisocial behavior All Messageboards
Recent threads in Player Feedback

©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.