Is PFS roll-play, or role-play?


Pathfinder Society

51 to 100 of 203 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Scarab Sages 1/5

My experience is that PFS has no TIME for role-playing and no rewards for it, so role-playing only makes the run-as-written scenarios likely failures. Your basically snatching defeat from the jaws of victory when you role-play in PFS.

4/5 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Tampere

8 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh my gods, why did you have to necro this thread in specific.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 *

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

IT'S ALIVE!

But seriously, there is something here though.

Let me give an example using one of my PCs. He's a dwarven monk with a 5 Charisma.

To me, a 5 Charisma is not someone who just keeps to himself. That would probably be an average to slightly low Charisma (probably no lower than 8, IMO). No, a 5 Charisma is the type of person who is rude and obnoxious, saying the first thing that comes to his brain no matter how inappropriate. He is loud and boorish and probably has bad hygiene. He talks like he's constantly in an alehouse or whorehouse when he's in fact at a lavish banquet hobnobbing with the nobility. He is the guy that will tell a scandalous story about someone at their funeral in front of their family who had no clue.

IMO if I'm role-playing my 5 Charisma properly I'm blurting out something stupid and tripping over everyone else to be the first guy to roll a social check with my -3 modifier (probably worse when the GM asses a penalty because of what I've actually said). Not aiding mind you, but making a primary check.

But if I do that, I'm being a jerk. I'm not cooperating, and I'm possibly causing the group to fail. But my character IS a big jerk when it comes to saying socially inappropriate things. Having the society send him on these missions WOULD be a liability, not an asset. But it seems like actually role-playing that would be considered poor sportsmanship by the group.

What happens when I sign up to play a tier 7-11 scenario (he's currently my only PC in tier) and it turns out there is a big social scene where the secondary success condition (and the PP) is riding on it? If the society knew ahead of time that there was a social gathering happening, why did they call my PC to partake in the mission? (Sometimes this will not be obvious in the blurb, so knowing when I sign up isn't an option.)

There are a lot of other situations where inappropriate PC gets chosen for a mission and becomes a liability, but social missions are the most obvious when so many PCs might have Cha as a dump stat.

Dark Archive 1/5

It's why my level 1 rebuild after getting my third chronicle on Kahel switched things around and made Kahel a high charisma overwhelming soul. At the time we didn't really have a 'face'. The paladin in the group at the time wasn't very smart. Or wise. (that and the player tends to roll 5 or less quite regularly). So I used the rebuild to remain effective in combat, while becoming a social skill leveraging character.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

Cole Cummings wrote:
My experience is that PFS has no TIME for role-playing and no rewards for it, so role-playing only makes the run-as-written scenarios likely failures. Your basically snatching defeat from the jaws of victory when you role-play in PFS.

While it is true the timed environments of organized play can have a limiting effect on role-playing, I find you can still squeeze some in if you want to. Though the GM and group you are playing with can effect how much of it you can squeeze in. In some situations, role-playing can actually help you succeed in missions where either the author or the GM gives bonuses to your chance of success if you role-play out a situation well.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

Michael Hallet wrote:

IT'S ALIVE!

But seriously, there is something here though.

Let me give an example using one of my PCs. He's a dwarven monk with a 5 Charisma.

To me, a 5 Charisma is not someone who just keeps to himself. That would probably be an average to slightly low Charisma (probably no lower than 8, IMO). No, a 5 Charisma is the type of person who is rude and obnoxious, saying the first thing that comes to his brain no matter how inappropriate. He is loud and boorish and probably has bad hygiene. He talks like he's constantly in an alehouse or whorehouse when he's in fact at a lavish banquet hobnobbing with the nobility. He is the guy that will tell a scandalous story about someone at their funeral in front of their family who had no clue.

IMO if I'm role-playing my 5 Charisma properly I'm blurting out something stupid and tripping over everyone else to be the first guy to roll a social check with my -3 modifier (probably worse when the GM asses a penalty because of what I've actually said). Not aiding mind you, but making a primary check.

But if I do that, I'm being a jerk. I'm not cooperating, and I'm possibly causing the group to fail. But my character IS a big jerk when it comes to saying socially inappropriate things. Having the society send him on these missions WOULD be a liability, not an asset. But it seems like actually role-playing that would be considered poor sportsmanship by the group.

What happens when I sign up to play a tier 7-11 scenario (he's currently my only PC in tier) and it turns out there is a big social scene where the secondary success condition (and the PP) is riding on it? If the society knew ahead of time that there was a social gathering happening, why did they call my PC to partake in the mission? (Sometimes this will not be obvious in the blurb, so knowing when I sign up isn't an option.)

There are a lot of other situations where inappropriate PC gets chosen for a mission and becomes a liability, but social missions are the most obvious when so many PCs...

This sounds a lot like my Dwarf Barbarian. I find the key to playing him is to limit role-playing him to either encounters where his obnoxiousness won't cause the party to fail, or when playing with people who enjoy the 'challenge' of dealing with his obnoxiousness and frequently find humor in it, i.e. I have to read the audience. One might argue that a good role-player would role-play their character all the time, regardless of whether it is detrimental to the party or not, but what makes a good role-player is not always the same thing as what makes a good PFS player.

Grand Lodge 4/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento

trollbill wrote:
Cole Cummings wrote:
My experience is that PFS has no TIME for role-playing and no rewards for it, so role-playing only makes the run-as-written scenarios likely failures. Your basically snatching defeat from the jaws of victory when you role-play in PFS.
While it is true the timed environments of organized play can have a limiting effect on role-playing, I find you can still squeeze some in if you want to. Though the GM and group you are playing with can effect how much of it you can squeeze in. In some situations, role-playing can actually help you succeed in missions where either the author or the GM gives bonuses to your chance of success if you role-play out a situation well.

Also roleplay can help you avoid some fights, and long fights are what eats the most time. So good roleplay can save time.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jared Thaler wrote:
trollbill wrote:
Cole Cummings wrote:
My experience is that PFS has no TIME for role-playing and no rewards for it, so role-playing only makes the run-as-written scenarios likely failures. Your basically snatching defeat from the jaws of victory when you role-play in PFS.
While it is true the timed environments of organized play can have a limiting effect on role-playing, I find you can still squeeze some in if you want to. Though the GM and group you are playing with can effect how much of it you can squeeze in. In some situations, role-playing can actually help you succeed in missions where either the author or the GM gives bonuses to your chance of success if you role-play out a situation well.
Also roleplay can help you avoid some fights, and long fights are what eats the most time. So good roleplay can save time.

To be technical, those types of encounters are not actually resolved using role-playing but rather by using your character's social skills. Role-playing can often be easily incorporated into those encounters and, depending on the GM/author, may aid in those skill checks. But ultimately, resolving those encounters without combat usually boils down to how well you do on a Diplomacy/Bluff/Intimidate check.

I will say such encounters do make for a good excuse to role-play, though.

Dark Archive 1/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If the roleplay is good enough, I sometimes forego the skill check. The player already used the skill after all :)

And sometimes even if you're VERY convincing (got a 35 on your diplomacy check), when I ask what you actually said... Well, very convincingly saying "I'm not robbing this grave, I am merely taking the dead man's wayfinder from around his neck" is still probably going to cause that guard investigating suspected tomb robbers to become hostile. :)

1/5 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

True story, in one of this Season's scenarios there was a situation where 'Don't Talk Man' attempted to talk with a group of people we were attempting to schmooze, and did *so* horribly at it that my pregen (who would normally have significant modifiers because of certain background issues on both sides of the fence) was able to get a *positive* modifier -- the NPCs in question would much rather hear my character talk than the sewer that was erupting from 'Don't Talk For the Love of God, Man!'.

The fact that we were roleplaying it out and working with how horrible the guy was socially was actually one of the consideration factors the GM took into account.

Fun times.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 *

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


True story, in one of this Season's scenarios there was a situation where 'Don't Talk Man' attempted to talk with a group of people we were attempting to schmooze, and did *so* horribly at it that my pregen (who would normally have significant modifiers because of certain background issues on both sides of the fence) was able to get a *positive* modifier -- the NPCs in question would much rather hear my character talk than the sewer that was erupting from 'Don't Talk For the Love of God, Man!'.

The fact that we were roleplaying it out and working with how horrible the guy was socially was actually one of the consideration factors the GM took into account.

Fun times.

The problem is the number of scenarios with social scenes that have something like "retries are possible, but each failure increases the DC by 2 (or 5)."

To run as written means that the 'Don't Talk Man' made the diplomats job more difficult.

1/5 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Michael Hallet wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


True story, in one of this Season's scenarios there was a situation where 'Don't Talk Man' attempted to talk with a group of people we were attempting to schmooze, and did *so* horribly at it that my pregen (who would normally have significant modifiers because of certain background issues on both sides of the fence) was able to get a *positive* modifier -- the NPCs in question would much rather hear my character talk than the sewer that was erupting from 'Don't Talk For the Love of God, Man!'.

The fact that we were roleplaying it out and working with how horrible the guy was socially was actually one of the consideration factors the GM took into account.

Fun times.

The problem is the number of scenarios with social scenes that have something like "retries are possible, but each failure increases the DC by 2 (or 5)."

To run as written means that the 'Don't Talk Man' made the diplomats job more difficult.

We made it exceedingly clear that he wasn't in our party for the talking (and made the increased DC after the first instance, so they treated him kind of like our 'court jester', for lack of a better term)

3/5

We've had this argument many times before, neither side is wrong, the stormwind fallacy is just that, a fallacy, and this topic generally brings a lot of heated argument that goes no where good. I don't see good things for this thread.

The Exchange 3/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.

This thread is from 2013. It IS the same argument from before.

4/5

My TL;DR response to this is:

1. It's GM dependent.
2. It's scenario dependent.
3. There's no clear answer.

Off Topic:
Lots of mega-threads showing up on the boards lately.


Benrislove wrote:
It depends on your group and your GM.

It can also depend on the venue. Conventions tend to limit you to 4 hour slots and some scenarios generally pack 5 hours or more worth of material to cover.

But largely... the answer is up to the players.

3/5

Kahel Stormbender wrote:

If the roleplay is good enough, I sometimes forego the skill check. The player already used the skill after all :)

And sometimes even if you're VERY convincing (got a 35 on your diplomacy check), when I ask what you actually said... Well, very convincingly saying "I'm not robbing this grave, I am merely taking the dead man's wayfinder from around his neck" is still probably going to cause that guard investigating suspected tomb robbers to become hostile. :)

I'm not convinced here. I might give a bonus or penalty (but not one so drastic that would necessarily pre-determine an outcome) for good or bad diplo speeches, but I can't justify giving it to a PC or not by their own personal charm (or lack theirof) since they are playing a character. They themselves, in the context of the game, are not actually there.

By your same logic Kahel, when combat breaks out, I should be able to pummel the players to a bloody inch of their lives and then declare a TPK.

The Exchange 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

heck, I'm just going to repeat what I said on this thread 3 years ago...

ok... sounds like time to trot out one of my wife stories again...

My wife is a bit shy. She enjoys playing, and for the right group she can really come out of her shell. When she does, everyone at the table enjoys her PC and her gaming.

Sometimes she plays a Diplomat. Yeah, a shy Diplomat.

My wife is a good player. Both role player and roll player (and yes, I know you can be both). But it doesn't come naturally for her. She is a shy person... some times, with strangers this hits her pretty hard. With the right group though, in a welcoming group, she comes out of her shell and can really add to the fun of the table.

She has practiced the speach "My character is much more diplomatic than I am. I would like her to convense (insert NPC here) to (insert what we need to know here)." She has this speech printed on the back of the table tent for her "Diplomat", where she can read it when she needs to, when she finds herself overcome with shyness.

I've seen judges "hold her to the task" and say "What EXACTLY does your PC say?" and watch helplessly while a fun game turned into a painful experience for her. Anyone else trying to help her (me, or any other player) was hushed by the judge ("you're character isn't there!") while he stares at her struggle to say anything. Holding her to every word that she utters, ever stutter. With her realizing that every miss step is being reflected in a penility to a roll that she has said she can handle for us, a role she is trying to play. Needless to say, we never played for that judge again.

This is a lady who can get up in church and sing solo in front of 200 people. The same lady that can brake an entire table up in laughter with a sly comment ("That's going to leave a mark" when the monster charges into the invisible door.) But, sometimes she is shy, and needs to just roll the dice. Sometimes we role play, sometimes we roll play. It's all part of the game.

...
Now for my part to add to the story.

If you are going to do Role Playing right, you need to roll the dice, figure out what your score is, and then match your performance to that roll. Roll poorly? Spit on the carpet and look guilty. Roll high? Polish up the complements and flirt with the target.

I have been RP for a long time. I can "smooze the judge" with the best of them. I've had a judge require me to "tell me what you say" and after a rousing performance that got the tables around us interested in our game... I said "I take 10 on the roll for a.." - Judge "you can't Take 10 on a Diplomacy roll, you might fail!" ...so I roll...
A "4". No problem, my friendly luck cleric gave me a re-roll, which I rolled... a "3". so I took my shirt re-roll and turned it into a "1". Boy did I give the wrong performance!

(I made the DC by the way - I looked it up later, and the judge was just yanking my chain. He knew I couldn't miss it.)

Edit: I forgot to add about Aid Another on a Diplomacy roll. "My PC stands behind the bard, like a body guard (or servant), thus adding credability to what he says. He is plainly a person of substance - a 'somebody' to have a large, well armed guard/servant such as myself."
(yeah, I did say I can smooze with the best of them).

3/5

The Fourth Horseman wrote:
By your same logic Kahel, when combat breaks out, I should be able to pummel the players to a bloody inch of their lives and then declare a TPK.

I can just imagine the news headlines...

And I agree, I like the idea of the circumstantial bonuses (+2 or +4 RAW) due to a rousing performance, or due to paying attention to plot items that can be used in dialog. But having the guard attack you due to roleplaying after a successful roll feels like saying: "You got a 25 to hit and that beats his armor class, now describe your attack .. 'Well I step forward and shove my dagger into his ribs' .. Oh no, he is wearing a breastplate. Your attack misses, now how much damage did you do to your dagger? Roll damage and apply hardness."

Dark Archive 1/5

In the case of the guard, my thought is that telling him "I'm not stealing it, I'm merely taking it from around his neck"

Well, you just told him you're stealing. But you did so nicely, so I'm moving him closer to aggressive hostile. Better talk fast to avoid a fight. But he hasn't actually drawn yet.

Conversely, first time I played Wounded Wisp we managed to convince the guard we were borrowing the wayfinder, and were going to return it soon. That I think got us a penalty on the DC, but we convinced him. And sure enough, we returned the wayfinder to the tomb once we were done with it.

1/5

not only a necro
but a terrible post as well to bring it back from the dead

Silver Crusade 5/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.
nosig wrote:

Stuff

nosig repeated a really old story again! Everybody drink!

Liberty's Edge 5/5

The major difference, in regards to role-play, in PFS vs a Home Game, is essentially that you don't really get to develop your character into the canon of the campaign world. In a home game, even if you are using a published campaign world, your GM can let you grow into the world. Your characters can become nobles, become movers and shakers, and have an impact on the history of the world itself. And once you get tired of playing those characters, and you start new ones for a new adventure arc, you might even hear information about your other characters, from the perspective of people across the world. Indeed, things your other characters did might have lasting impact that is the focus of the new campaign.

In PFS, your roleplay is limited on an episodic basis. So its more personality roleplaying and interacting with the individual encounters and NPCs presented in the scenario itself. This can be very rewarding, but its definitely different from a home campaign focused on roleplay rather than tactical battle. But I've had very satisfying experiences with roleplaying within PFS. Its just changing gears as to what exactly you are roleplaying and what your expectations of doing so are.

The Exchange 5/5

UndeadMitch wrote:
nosig wrote:

Stuff

nosig repeated a really old story again! Everybody drink!

Thank you thank you, I'll be here all week!

;)

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Fourth Horseman wrote:
I'm not convinced here...

Its true that the character is not the player and therefore the player's actions should not necessarily impact the character. However, there is a long-standing tradition of granting bonus/penalty based on the ability of the player to "role-"play their character. Originally, our toons were referred to as player-characters, meaning they were a sort of an amalgam of both the character and the player.

We're not talking about actually getting up from the table, walking over, and pummeling the GM during combat rather an animated player describing in detail the action of their character whether that be diplomancy'ing a guard, or bluffing the king, or swinging a sword, or using acrobatics to jump an obstacle, tumble around an enemy and impale the BBEG. Those are the things that make a good game, great and should be encouraged, perhaps even rewarded.

Think of the character as a semi-autonomic creature charmed by another (player). It has the ability to function independently performing tasks it is capable of (its own stat block) on its own, but it is also susceptible to the influence of their "handler" who can modify their actions with their own skills.

I dunno about anyone else, but I much prefer a game with a lot of passionate players all invested in the story, describing in detail their character's actions in high fantasy style over a drab game where descriptions are minimal and all actions are simply resolved with a mundane die roll left up to the whims of the [often fickle] dice gods.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've had amazingly deep RP sessions and grindy games that reminded me more of a calculus equation. Just depends on group, setting and scenario.

2/5

Sometimes you arent in the mood to go all out, or figure out a puzzle. In instances like this a 20 in either charisma character should be enough to say hey im just gonna roll it because my character is better at this than me.

The flip side sometimes is true as well. Sometimes you get really into it and say or figure out a puzzle much better or quicker than your character would a 3 shouldnt make you fail even though you were very articulate.

1/5

NWOrpheus wrote:

Did 'Way of the Kirin' the other day, and that had a lot of RP involved, as well. It was a really fun chronicle.

The place I did it actually had 2 tables running it, and the two GM's actually both took the part of different NPC's, giving it a really fun and interesting dynamic.

A lot of online games are going to be, for the sake of brevity, roll-play. But, I imagine PbP/PbF games to be more Role-play. In person sessions it's just going to depend on your group.

Yeah. PbP has A LOT more time to role play your character. We just started Academy of Secrets and role played the entire meeting of characters inside Cayden's Hall. Lot's of broken common was spounted in the name of mead.

The point being that in person tables tend to feel rushed because of the time slots. So the likely hood of a player starting up the RPing and making the rest of the table comfortable enough to join in is not great because you gotta start rolling and progressing through. In pbp I am only expected to post once a day so a lot of extra posts can be devoted to RP.

Dark Archive 1/5

That's true Lab. In PBP it's far easier to be eloquent or portray someone hyper smart. In large party because you can take your time to get the wording just right. And in combat you can RP further then "I rolled a 16" because you're expected to actually describe what you do.

5/5 5/55/55/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Havin four vs 7 people at the table can make a world of difference too

The Exchange 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Havin four vs 7 people at the table can make a world of difference too

I wish games were designed for 4 people again and could accommodate a 5th. It makes for a much more enjoyable game where everyone can have a chance to talk.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Ragoz wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Havin four vs 7 people at the table can make a world of difference too
I wish games were designed for 4 people again and could accommodate a 5th. It makes for a much more enjoyable game where everyone can have a chance to talk.

More people would have to dm for that. The player to dm ratio being what it is is what made the jumpf rom 4 to 6 around season 4

The Exchange 3/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Ragoz wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Havin four vs 7 people at the table can make a world of difference too
I wish games were designed for 4 people again and could accommodate a 5th. It makes for a much more enjoyable game where everyone can have a chance to talk.
More people would have to dm for that. The player to dm ratio being what it is is what made the jump from 4 to 6 around season 4

Yeah.. I was dreading running the game this next week because it was looking to have 7. Might end up being 6 though. It's hard to get people to step up and GM. (not to mention this chronicle actually "punishes" you for GMing as opposed to playing)

4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ****

Just out of curiosity,what are you running?

Like a lot of people are saying, it depends on a number of variables.

Namely;
Players/GM
Scenario/Module
Venue
Time

Time seems to be the biggest influence. The greater the issue with time, the more the game becomes about the dice.

Venue can effect things, some people are less apt to roleplay in a crowded, loud, and/or new place. Or might be self-censuring to much in a mixed crowd.

The Exchange 3/5

Tempest_Knight wrote:

Just out of curiosity,what are you running?

#4–20: Words of the Ancients

Grand Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Keep in mind that the GM may take any boons on the chronicle. They are not required to do so.

The Exchange 3/5

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Keep in mind that the GM may take any boons on the chronicle. They are not required to do so.

This one isn't a boon. You don't get a choice.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Then I don't understand how you're being punished. But that's a discussion better suited to the GM forum.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Then I don't understand how you're being punished. But that's a discussion better suited to the GM forum.

Spoiler:
The GM PC would have to pay for the Brand, rather than be able to get it for free, like the players' PCs could.
The Exchange 3/5

kinevon wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Then I don't understand how you're being punished. But that's a discussion better suited to the GM forum.
** spoiler omitted **

Spoiler:
10k and 17.5k. It's pretty significant.
Dark Archive 1/5

Ragoz wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Keep in mind that the GM may take any boons on the chronicle. They are not required to do so.
This one isn't a boon. You don't get a choice.

The GM chronicle assumes best success conditions. That means if there's a penalty 'boon' that the players get if they screw something up, the GM doesn't get it even if the players do. And if the players fail to achieve the secondary success conditions, the GM still gets 2 prestige. Even if the players fail to find/save some of the loot on the chronicle, the GM still gets it.

So how is your GM chronicle going to be punishing you for being the game master? Only real penalty I can see is not getting a day job check. But depending on the level range of the adventure and what tier it was ran at, this may not be a big deal. I mean, whoo hoo, you can't get 5 to 20 extra gold for your level 3 character :)

The Exchange 3/5

Kahel Stormbender wrote:
Ragoz wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Keep in mind that the GM may take any boons on the chronicle. They are not required to do so.
This one isn't a boon. You don't get a choice.

The GM chronicle assumes best success conditions. That means if there's a penalty 'boon' that the players get if they screw something up, the GM doesn't get it even if the players do. And if the players fail to achieve the secondary success conditions, the GM still gets 2 prestige. Even if the players fail to find/save some of the loot on the chronicle, the GM still gets it.

So how is your GM chronicle going to be punishing you for being the game master? Only real penalty I can see is not getting a day job check. But depending on the level range of the adventure and what tier it was ran at, this may not be a big deal. I mean, whoo hoo, you can't get 5 to 20 extra gold for your level 3 character :)

Spoiler:
This specific chronicle made the 'boon' purchasable and as an unintended consequence you don't get it for free like the players do. It costs 17,500 gold instead.
4/5 5/55/55/5 *** Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Minneapolis

Spoiler:
It is not unintentional. That is the apex in a season long story that is very deadly. You have access to it, you just don't have the opportunity to get it for free.

The Exchange 3/5

BretI wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

Spoiler:
John Compton said "Because the tattoo doesn't appear as a boon, I infer that it is not available via GM credit, though that's an unintended result of making the tattoo purchasable."

So yeah it is unintentional.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I don't find that punishing the GM, but that's neither here nor there.

1/5 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kahel Stormbender wrote:


The GM chronicle assumes best success conditions. That means if there's a penalty 'boon' that the players get if they screw something up, the GM doesn't get it even if the players do. And if the players fail to achieve the secondary success conditions, the GM still gets 2 prestige. Even if the players fail to find/save some of the loot on the chronicle, the GM still gets it.

So how is your GM chronicle going to be punishing you for being the game master? Only real penalty I can see is not getting a day job check. But depending on the level range of the adventure and what tier it was ran at, this may not be a big deal. I mean, whoo hoo, you can't get 5 to 20 extra gold for your level 3 character :)

If you GM your first scenario, and it's The Confirmation, do you get *redacted* for free on your credit blob, or do you pay for it?

Also, to go back to the 'best success conditions' comment -- there were a LOT of judges surprised at GenCon when they got ambushed with a less than 'optimal' resolution to Sky Key Solution. Since the players didn't get the 2PP in that scenario, apparently the GMs didn't, either, from what I've heard, at least?

I mean, I could be mistaken?

The Exchange 3/5

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
I don't find that punishing the GM, but that's neither here nor there.

Air quotes it for a reason. It not so much punishing so much as not rewarding you even though it rewards the other players.

Silver Crusade 5/5

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
Kahel Stormbender wrote:


The GM chronicle assumes best success conditions. That means if there's a penalty 'boon' that the players get if they screw something up, the GM doesn't get it even if the players do. And if the players fail to achieve the secondary success conditions, the GM still gets 2 prestige. Even if the players fail to find/save some of the loot on the chronicle, the GM still gets it.

So how is your GM chronicle going to be punishing you for being the game master? Only real penalty I can see is not getting a day job check. But depending on the level range of the adventure and what tier it was ran at, this may not be a big deal. I mean, whoo hoo, you can't get 5 to 20 extra gold for your level 3 character :)

If you GM your first scenario, and it's The Confirmation, do you get *redacted* for free on your credit blob, or do you pay for it?

Also, to go back to the 'best success conditions' comment -- there were a LOT of judges surprised at GenCon when they got ambushed with a less than 'optimal' resolution to Sky Key Solution. Since the players didn't get the 2PP in that scenario, apparently the GMs didn't, either, from what I've heard, at least?

I mean, I could be mistaken?

Sky Key: GM"s would still get full marks on their chronicles, unless there is something I missed when I ran at Gencon.

3/5 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
Kahel Stormbender wrote:


The GM chronicle assumes best success conditions. That means if there's a penalty 'boon' that the players get if they screw something up, the GM doesn't get it even if the players do. And if the players fail to achieve the secondary success conditions, the GM still gets 2 prestige. Even if the players fail to find/save some of the loot on the chronicle, the GM still gets it.

So how is your GM chronicle going to be punishing you for being the game master? Only real penalty I can see is not getting a day job check. But depending on the level range of the adventure and what tier it was ran at, this may not be a big deal. I mean, whoo hoo, you can't get 5 to 20 extra gold for your level 3 character :)

If you GM your first scenario, and it's The Confirmation, do you get *redacted* for free on your credit blob, or do you pay for it?

That would depend on whether you have played it before.

The Confirmation Chronicle sheet wrote:
If this is the first time you have received this boon for any of your characters, you receive this REDACTED for free; otherwise, you may acquire it by spending 1 Prestige Point.

If you've never played or GMed it (for credit) before, you get it for free on the character to whom you apply the chronicle. If you have played or GMed it for credit before, you have to pay 1 PP.

Dark Archive 1/5

In regards to the OP's question, yesterday's PFS session that I GMed ran long. Actually, it ran so long that the store was already closed when we finished and had been for a while. Why? Because one potential combat encounter (that was very fun and amusing IMO) was heavy on the roleplay. And they were in initiative. So much RP in fact, that a couple people started to get sore throats by the time the session ended.

All told, it was a very awesome session. Had some unique mechanics too. It's great when the lodge consists of roleplayers who can rollplay, rather then rollplayers who try to roleplay only when forced to.

51 to 100 of 203 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Is PFS roll-play, or role-play? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.