|
I just saw this come up the other day. I'm playing in a game where we hit a chase scene (the one that uses a special map with DC's of various checks you need to beat to try to catch up to your target). One of the players says they'll cast Fly spell and overcome all the barriers to catch the target. The GM says "No". I support the GM on this one since it basically breaks the encounter and I think it's his prerogative, but he noted that he couldn't find any specific rules to disallow such a tactic.
As a new GM, I probably would have allowed it since I'm "green" enough to try to adhere to the RAW and if there was nothing to disallow it outright, I'd be hard-pressed to not allow the character to do it. It would basically shorten the encounter greatly (which could be a good thing if the scenario was already running long). I'm actually a little surprised the scenario writers didn't think of this possibility and write up some type of rule to handle this.
What would you do? What's legal?
I would let fly beat a couple of the challenges, then have the person being chased adapt by running into a closed off area, sewer, warrens, dense forest, cave, etc.
Then the obstacles just get translated to something in the new environment. I would also give the PC with fly +1 or +2 on all his checks in the closed environment.
It makes the PC feel like they got an advantage and were smart for figuring this out, the NPC seem realistic for adapting, and the GM can still use the bulk of the encounter as planned.
Generally a win all around.
Unless of course you wanted to shorten the encounter then just roll with it.
PCs will always come up with something you don't expect. If it's a major problem for you session, don't be afraid to say, "guys let's take a snack break" and use the time to figure out a way to agree with them while making your encounter still happen just in a cooler way, with the PCs having an advantage or penalty.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Close. It is a +16 bonus. You get a +2 bonus for every 10 ft. by which your speed exceeds 30 ft., and an additional +10 for enhanced mobility (such as flight).
The narrative should be that the flying creature is avoiding buildings, bridges, clotheslines, flagpoles, statues, trees, flocks of birds, etc. while engaged in the chase.
In many cases, the GM should be asking for Fly checks in lieu of the other skill checks (such as Diplomacy to convince guards to allow passage).
In some cases, the GM is free to rule that flying is no help, such as an Escape Artist check to squeeze into a tight space.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First off, thank you for posting this. I'm getting ready to run a scenario with a chase, so it's always good to review these rules.
I agree with The Fox on this one. It's always going to be based on what kind of challenge the PCs are facing. I'm going to use the example chase map that is included in the chase rules from the PRD. This is all matter of opinion on how I'd run this chase map.
Assuming you're getting the +16 from fly, you could auto pass the cluttered rooftop check (acrobatics dc 10) and use fly to fly over the secret handholds (perception dc25)
The only ones I see that would be a problem to overtake with fly would be "Gap in the Wall", "Hidden Shortcut" and "Narrow Hole in the Wall". For those three, it all depends on how the area is described. If it's a wall that leads into a building, the flying PC isn't going to just fly to overtake, he's going to need to enter the building. If it's just a crack in a wall that he could climb over (such as Gap in the Wall combined with Clothesline Tightrope), then I'd let him use fly to get over that one as well.
|
|
I don't believe it's unreasonable for a GM to adapt the descriptions of the obstacles to suit the methods of mobility the PCs are using. The chase rules are, by nature, an abstraction after all.
I remember this situation coming up for me about a year ago, with one of the PCs using geniekind for ridiculous mobility. I adapted the chase by having the fleeing NPC move to the undercity, where the enhanced mobility did not help. The nature of a chase implies that the fleeing character will take the best route he can find to evade his hunters, after all.
It's also worth noting that there's nothing wrong with dropping out of the action to inform the player that his fly spell will trivialize the whole chase, and that maybe an action which preserves the flavor and tension of the scene is available.
-Matt
|
|
This is basically exactly what occurred for our game which is why I stated before that I sympathized with the GM on that point. That said, based on what I've learned here, as long as it makes sense for the scenario, I would probably allow it with the proper bonuses as dictated by the Chase Rules.
It's also worth noting that there's nothing wrong with dropping out of the action to inform the player that his fly spell will trivialize the whole chase, and that maybe an action which preserves the flavor and tension of the scene is available.
-Matt
|
|
If it's a character that just happens to have high modifiers in all of the relevant skills for the chase would you also tell them they should do something different to preserve the flavor and tension of the scene?
Depends. Am I building a scene for the party from scratch, or are we talking about PF-run-as-written-S?
-Matt
|
|
I would say we're talking about PFS as this is on the PFS forums.
Doh. Should have seen the stars.
So, if I'm building a chase scene from scratch, I'd be a poor GM if I built a scene with the intention of creating flavor and tension... yet neglected to include any flavor or tension due to the party's fully-known capabilities.
If it's PFS, there is nothing wrong with dropping out of the action and informing a player that his character Just Wins the scene, and that if he were to take actions and use descriptions that maintain the flavor and tension of the scene, it would be much appreciated. This applies to combat scenes as well.
On the other hand, there is something to be said for taking the opportunity to let the high-skill/low-combat character have the full spotlight, especially when other characters have been doing their best to blow through other sections of the module and have not been sharing. Note that giving the figurative high-skill/low-combat character the spotlight and just letting the figurative high-combat character chug a potion and Just Win Yet Again are two different things. A good GM (and a good player) works to make sure that everyone has a good time, and if chugging a potion works against that objective, there is nothing wrong with adapting the chase-tactics of the fleeing NPC.
-Matt
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would say you only get +16 from fly when flight is a "significant advantage". Upon entering a building or a dungeon or sewer, I would say fly gives you only +6 to account for the speed difference, but you don't get the +10 because you are forced into a level playing field with all kinds of twists and turns and low ceiling...
The exact prd wording is "Significant mobility advantages over the baseline speed type (such as flight) grant an additional +10 bonus on checks made to avoid obstacles, simulating the character's use of enhanced movement to bypass obstacles entirely. "
(bold emphasis mine)
|
|
And now the advice: The PC is using an ability which they have paid for to overcome obstacles.
For PFS: Those obstacles should therefore be overcome to the extent that they can no longer fail to move past an obstacle a movement enhancement could let them bypass. Do not change the route of a planned chase, as the route is frequently not 'escape' but 'get to'. Use random cards when random cards are called out. If the skill check is social/social, proceed to make them slow down if they're on that card as they have to interact with a person to get the information.
In short.... it's not cheating somehow to fly. It's choosing to have mobility as an obstacle your character is less blocked by. It could just as easily have been a darkness or a fireball.
Chases stop being interesting story past a certain tier because of things like this, and teleportation, and telekinetic charge, and status - monk-sprint - dimension door catchup tricks, and...
Thank you for stating exactly what I was thinking.
|
|
Looking at the scenario, here's my take on this chase with fly.
Of course, that's just my opinion on each one. I'm sure you could argue on whether fly would give you a bonus or not, but for the squares where you have to slow down or be stealthy, I'd put a penalty on fly.
|
|
Chases stop being interesting story past a certain tier because of things like this, and teleportation, and telekinetic charge, and status - monk-sprint - dimension door catchup tricks, and...
I would not say that chases stop being interesting past a certain tier. Instead, I would say that, just as with every other type of scene in the game, chases designed within a low-level framework stop being interesting past a certain tier.
Just like with adventure and combat design, chase design needs to be adapted to the capabilities of the PCs. The products we have seen from Paizo (I have not seen the second Chase Deck yet, though) have only included chases with low-level components, so it's pretty much up to us to adapt our chase ideas to higher levels.
-Matt
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do not see a way to structure a card-based range-related chase which is both compelling and has any potential for entertainment past APL 7.
Off the top of my head, I'd say:
-Is there a reason why ranges can't be abstracted?
-Is there a reason why chases have to be conducted in six-second rounds?
-Why do the obstacles need to be ones which, as you say, don't stand up to ability scaling?
The chase scenes we have seen from Paizo have been low-level chases. That does not mean that adaptation past 4th level is impossible.
But that's for another day, and for scenario authors to consider, not so much for the GM running an existing chase.
-Matt
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If it's PFS, there is nothing wrong with dropping out of the action and informing a player that his character Just Wins the scene, and that if he were to take actions and use descriptions that maintain the flavor and tension of the scene, it would be much appreciated.
If I was a fellow player, and one of my tablemates—who I know to have access to flight—was choosing not to use it when it's the obvious thing any real Pathfinder would do, in my eyes the "flavor and tension of the scene" would NOT be preserved.
To me, flavor is preserved when players react to challenges according to what a real person in their characters' shoes would do, not when they do really stupid things in order to enforce a certain end result. The latter are some of the least fun games for me.
|
|
To me, flavor is preserved when players react to challenges according to what a real person in their characters' shoes would do, not when they do really stupid things in order to enforce a certain end result. The latter are some of the least fun games for me.
Keep in mind that we are talking about a very subjective topic, the exact kind which is very hard to meaningfully discuss on a forum.
But, one could say the same about powergaming to the point of smashing the campaign's challenges. By your logic, Jiggy, "real Pathfinders" would push themselves to what we know as the bleeding edge of optimization. They're serious about surviving, right? Games which have had these sorts of Pathfinders have been the least fun games for me.
You've actually highlighted a fundamental problem of optimization. When a PC is perfectly-suited for just winning at a task, a problem occurs. Does he blow through the challenge and hurt the fun of others, or does he hold back and risk seeming patronizing to his fellow players?
In the case of the flight ability in a chase scene where flight is a win button, a good player is one who is able to avoid using his win button, while diverting attention away from the fact that he has a win button.
Or the players and GM could all be on-board with making every scene as fun and interesting as possible, and be in agreement about not using win buttons. There's that solution, too.
-Matt
|
|
could the PCs have overcome the challanges as a team? making the checks as a group - "making checks to track down the safehouse in the city"... together?
Keep in mind that it's been about eighteen months since I did this...
I think I had two "tracks" the PCs could give chase down, one involving hitting the streets and the other involving... agh, I don't remember right now. I think I constructed the scene such that the PCs split up to cover the city faster, but could regroup if they wanted to follow a certain thread.
What that meant in game terms was that the PCs each had their own mini on the index cards (splitting up), but could spend their turn to catch up to a fellow party member (regrouping).
-Matt
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
By your logic, Jiggy, a "real Pathfinder" would push themselves to what we know as the bleeding edge of optimization.
Um, no. Nothing I said leads to that. There are plenty of aspects of character building that have nothing to do with in-character decisions. A player can choose to build a PC with less than optimal ability scores (for example) without it representing stupidity on the character's part.
Now if the PC had 7 WIS and an adrenaline fetish (or fear of heights?), I could totally see them not using flight to catch the bad guy. But in most cases, the character wants to catch the bad guy, and will do the things that someone who wants to catch a person would do.
EDIT: But a bit more on-topic, you are right that the preferred chase experience is indeed a very subjective thing. Thus, the responsible thing to do is to run the chase fairly (i.e., according to the chase mechanics), because anything else is favoring one person's subjective preference over another's.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are rules for handling flight in chases. If players prepped flight or other significant advantages to trivialise the chase, so be it. The players win, and get to feel clever. Just like if the party shows up with a Paladin, Cleric, Necromancer and Undead slaying Ranger and reduces some crazy undead encounter to basically nothing.
Don't negate your PCs, give them the bonuses to their checks and if they win then congratulate then on a job well done. That's one less fly spell they can use in a later encounter.