Lormyr |
And, see, I wouldn't consider a 19th-level PC to be "a PFS wizard". That character has left the Society a long time ago.
That's not an unreasonable view. You are definitely outside of the main PFS body and plotlines at that point. We kept the Pathfinder theme as closely as possible when running the higher level stuff, but obviously the modules and such are not created with that element specifically in mind, generally speaking.
It would be really slick to have some more high level Pathfinder Society centric material printed, but I digress on that point as it's already been pretty heavily discussed for the time being.
More realistically, I think that the kinds of attitudes that a GM would want a player to demonstrate, to role-play a character with low mental stats, are exactly those not covered by the stats.
I can see that.
I personally try to let each player mechanically build and then role-play their characters in whatever manner is fun for them. It's a game after all. If that means a Int dumped barbarian who plays like a thickheaded moron, awesome. If it means an Int dumped barbarian who is surprisingly coherent, ok.
I will be the first to admit that I find some combinations more palatable than others, as I am only human. But what I will not do is invent obstacles for or pass overly critical judgement on players at my table for gaming the way they enjoy gaming. I understand that others will not necessarily share my view, however.
Bigdaddyjug |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The sad truth is that the only thing different between a -6 and 14 is 4 points. if the DC is 15, than one needs a 17 and other a 13. But looking at those numbers it seems like there should be a lot more, besides skills points not gained. really hoping to see some new spells like "Ray of Enfeeblement" that instead works on mental stats. Would see alot fewer 5 Int paladins out there.BTW this is one of the few times I see it RPed, so the paladin dosnt have to make tough calls.
I have a 5 Int paladin that I roleplay as having 5 Int. I am constantly asking my party members to tell me things I've been told numerous times before, I frequently misunderstand seemingly simple concepts and instructions, and I have been known to charge head first at a CR 15 demon as a level 7 paladin. She's my most fun character.
Avatar-1 |
You can think of abilities more like "luck" scores.
How likely is a high or low charisma character to successfully bluff or intimidate someone? More or less likely, respectively.
Despite a low charisma, they might specialise in bluffing, but they'll never do quite as well as someone who's got a high charisma and has specialised.
That kind of thinking gives a lot of leeway to roleplaying these events, making them seem more charismatic despite what the number says. Something about them, be it voice, tone, appearance, or what they're actually saying is doing them (or not doing them) favours, and it's not always readily apparent.
Rudy2 |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have a 5 Int paladin that I roleplay as having 5 Int. I am constantly asking my party members to tell me things I've been told numerous times before, I frequently misunderstand seemingly simple concepts and instructions, and I have been known to charge head first at a CR 15 demon as a level 7 paladin. She's my most fun character.
I want you at my table. You mind switching out with the int-dumped bard who somehow knows more than anyone because he took Pageant of the Peacock? :/
Chris O'Reilly |
I don't think you should withhold information from players with lower scores but I will be much less generous prompting or giving hints as a GM if the players all have ridiculous scores. It's not really up the the PFS GM to decide the penalties for something are not severe enough and so to invent their own.
I personally think more mental based things should involve multiple mental attributes. You are only as strong as your weakest link and all. Alternatively the DCs could be different for the mental attributes.
Peet |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since you can hardly expect anyone at your table to actually be able to play a character with an 18 INT, WIS, or CHA, it isn't really fair to penalize them for not properly playing a character who has an INT, WIS, or CHA of 5.
The stats are there for the purpose of game mechanics. As such they should be used to inform you about how good your character is at things that are covered by the rules.
For INT the relevant skills are almost all knowledge related, meaning that a high INT character has a good memory for things, especially things that are learned outside an actual game session. He also learns things more quickly, as the increase in skill ranks shows.
I personally would play a low-INT character as having a very poor memory. But this wouldn't mean I couldn't come up with cunning things to do in combat.
Fromper |
Do people dump int a lot? That's the one mental stat I dump the least, because I like skill points. I dropped it to 8 on my barbarian, but he's human, so still got 4 skill ranks every level. I don't think I've ever dumped int on any other PFS PC.
I only dump wisdom on a class with good Will saves and other ways to compensate.
For that matter, I've only ever dumped charisma on fighters. But my other martial characters are frequently charisma based on the side (battle oracle, paladin, bards, etc).
Come to think of it, strength is my most common dump stat, because I keep dumping it on my totally non-martial casters. I'm pretty sure I've never had a single digit dex or con on any of my 16 PFS PCs.
I do tend to dump one stat on most characters for min/maxing, but it depends on the character concept. There are a couple with no single digit stats. And my idea of dumping isn't necessarily the lowest possible, either. Some of them are only down to 8 or 9. Or 6 or 7 in a stat that could drop as far as 5 for that race. I've never done a 5 stat on any PC, despite having obvious opportunities to do so - my tiefling fighter has 6 charisma.
For mental stats of 8 or 9, that's close enough to average that I don't feel the need to "play it up" in character. Once you're down to 7, then it should probably affect how the character interacts with others. And I do make a point of having fun with that, using it as an excuse to give my PCs fun quirks.
Fearspect |
I'm not sure I necessarily agree with this line of thinking, otherwise you would have to co-opt character actions at the other end of the spectrum:
High Cha Player: I tell the NPC X.
GM: No, your Cha is too high, instead you say the following, which is the 100% correct action to move the story forward successfully...
Penalties/rewards are already built into all the stats.
BigNorseWolf |
If you're a 2 skill point per level class, you're not making any skill checks anyway. If you're going to dump to 9, there's NO reason not to go whole hog and dump to 7 anyway. Skills are pretty cheap to make up for, and after diplomacy and perception there's some serious diminishing returns for skills to keep maxed.
I think my idiot diplomancing sorcerer with diplomacy through the roof has made more skill checks than my faux rogue druid with a good selection of exploring skills.
Fromper |
If you're a 2 skill point per level class, you're not making any skill checks anyway. If you're going to dump to 9, there's NO reason not to go whole hog and dump to 7 anyway.
Which is why I never have a single digit int for those classes. Like I said, my barbarian's the only PC I've ever made with single digit int, and he still got 4 ranks per level. My PFS clerics, fighters, sorcerers, etc are usually around 12 int. In fact, I have a fighter with 14 int.
nosig |
a friend of mine was handed a Barbarian PC to play during a game, one that had been drawn up by someone not at the game and not strongly reviewed by the players.
Getting into the character, she began "speaking like a barbarian" things like "Thog hit monster with big ax" or "Thog say - that best you got?"
This goes on for several hours into the game, everyone having fun and the story comes to an area where everyone needs to anounce their INT (I think there was an INT check for something) and she glances down and notices that this barbarian has a high INT... something like a 16. Everyone but her is speechless and takes a second to look at her. She just glances around at everyone looking at her and says..."W'ut? Thog not stupid, Thog just have speech im-ped-a-mint."
great line...
Tweedle-Dum |
I have a CHA of 7....
On my table tent I have the following note....
"always smeared in Vermin repelent - this partly explains his low Charisma. There is always a medicine smell around him.... and he talks too much, often in great detail about things no one else is interested in.... you get the idea..."
Fromper |
a friend of mine was handed a Barbarian PC to play during a game, one that had been drawn up by someone not at the game and not strongly reviewed by the players.
Getting into the character, she began "speaking like a barbarian" things like "Thog hit monster with big ax" or "Thog say - that best you got?"
This goes on for several hours into the game, everyone having fun and the story comes to an area where everyone needs to anounce their INT (I think there was an INT check for something) and she glances down and notices that this barbarian has a high INT... something like a 16. Everyone but her is speechless and takes a second to look at her. She just glances around at everyone looking at her and says..."W'ut? Thog not stupid, Thog just have speech im-ped-a-mint."
great line...
From my back story for my first PFS character, Mash the barbarian, who usually introduces himself with "Me Mash! Me like ta hit stuff!"
Mash truly enjoys fighting, and playing up the stereotype of the big, dumb barbarian, such as talking in short phrases and referring to himself as "me" instead of "I". But his intelligence and wisdom are only slightly below average, so he's not quite as stupid as he pretends to be. Years of not living up to his family's expectations taught him that it's better to be underestimated than overestimated.
Artanthos |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you asked the question you proposed, were you planning to also ask the wizard, "Besides boring numerical bonuses, tell me what effects your high Intelligence places on your character's behavior?"
Aside from a slight tendency to roll my eyes whenever anyone else says something stupid, I attempt to emulate my character having a much higher intelligence than I personally possess by selectively applying meta-game knowledge to my character's in-game decisions.
FLite Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Jiggy wrote:If you asked the question you proposed, were you planning to also ask the wizard, "Besides boring numerical bonuses, tell me what effects your high Intelligence places on your character's behavior?"Aside from a slight tendency to roll my eyes whenever anyone else says something stupid, I attempt to emulate my character having a much higher intelligence than I personally possess by selectively applying meta-game knowledge to my character's in-game decisions.
Oh god...
Now I'm visualizing the player that comes to the table:
"Hi, my character is Zoe the Omnicient. He has a wisdom of 22 and is a cleric of the god of foretelling. So to emulate his high wisdom, I read the scenario before I came to game."
Martin Kauffman 530 |
In Pathfinder organized play, low int, wis, and cha based skills are fairly easy to mechanically compensate for; and this a drawback in design that you just have to accept as part of the rules. In home games I DM, I do not set a minimum of one skill gained per level- thus a character with a 7 or a 5 stat could possibly have no or very few skills. Moreover, I make it clear that players with stats of 7 or less will have additional restrictions placed upon their characters which will increase as their stats decline even further below 7.As one example, a character with 7 intelligence is functionally illiterate and unable to learn any foreign language.
Finlanderboy |
In Pathfinder organized play, low int, wis, and cha based skills are fairly easy to mechanically compensate for; and this a drawback in design that you just have to accept as part of the rules. In home games I DM, I do not set a minimum of one skill gained per level- thus a character with a 7 or a 5 stat could possibly have no or very few skills. Moreover, I make it clear that players with stats of 7 or less will have additional restrictions placed upon their characters which will increase as their stats decline even further below 7.As one example, a character with 7 intelligence is functionally illiterate and unable to learn any foreign language.
I play my 7 int character as practicvally illiterate. When forced to read I sound out every word and mispronounce things. Usually when he gets a note he hands it to some one else with and says "Words..", Although when I found a map I held on to it and said "Pictures...".
Dhjika |
...
Come to think of it, strength is my most common dump stat, because I keep dumping it on my totally non-martial casters. I'm pretty sure I've never had a single digit dex or con on any of my 16 PFS PCs.
It only takes one encounter with a greater shadow to convince someone that a strength of 7 was a bad idea. And even when I do make a charater with an 8 strength, I usually put points in climb so I can take 10 and get a 10 (or at least to take 10 to get a 5). Generally the same with acrobatics, if I have the points enough to take 10 to get a 10 is very useful survival action.
I do have a 7 dex character who is also deaf (-6 initiative "bonus") but as one might guess his ac and reflex saves do not suffer for it (and his AC is happiest she and her master go on different initiative counts)
I have GMed for more than one person with a Con of 10, and somewhere out there are people who tell newbies that Con is not needed because they are not getting in melee so there are the elven wizards with Con of 8. The time I created a rear of party character with Con of 12 I was nervous. I have seen too many people in the 5+ level range go from a couple hit points above zero to dead because of 10 and 12 cons.
Int is probably not uncommon for me to have low - a 9 or 5 int makes no difference for skill points in a 2 point per level class. And one rarely has points or trained skills for knowledges anyway.
Dhjika |
Greater shadow pops out of wall. Hits you (it can't miss). Wins init, hits you twice.
No real difference between a 5 strength and a 10 strength you're still toast.
And actually if the greater shadow pops out of a wall - it can most certainly miss - I believe you have total concealment from it.
I once saw a Greater Shadow critically hit a paladin's bonded animal, boom 13 strength taken.
Charon's Little Helper |
BigNorseWolf wrote:Greater shadow pops out of wall. Hits you (it can't miss). Wins init, hits you twice.There are plenty of level appropriate characters a greater shadow would have a hell of a time trying to hit. Monks, Kensai, anyone who runs mage armor with uncanny dodge, the list goes on.
And anyone with access to mirror image.
mswbear |
in PFS there isn't anything you can do about role playing mental stats except for strongly encouraging players to do so. (however, remember that PCs are in all ways better than NPCS. My few characters with 8 or 9 intelligence are average intelligence and not intellectually disabled.)
In a home game you can have people make an intelligence check if they want to do something too complex. That way you aren't directly stealing the thunder of a player.
BigNorseWolf |
BigNorseWolf wrote:And actually if the greater shadow pops out of a wall - it can most certainly miss - I believe you have total concealment from it.Greater shadow pops out of wall. Hits you (it can't miss). Wins init, hits you twice.
No real difference between a 5 strength and a 10 strength you're still toast.
It can 5 foot float out of the wall and then attack. How i usually see it work is
Auto surprise round 5 foot step. Attack once
Its turn, full attack. 5 foot step back into the wall
5 foot step out of wall, full attack.
Counter tactics, like most tactics, tend to rely on an ability to act that simply doesn't exist in a turn based game, especially with surprise happy DMs and scenarios.
I once saw a Greater Shadow critically hit a paladin's bonded animal, boom 13 strength taken.
Right, but since you can't have 14's everywhere trying to prepare for every possibility of stat drain is kind of pointless.
Charon's Little Helper |
Dhjika wrote:BigNorseWolf wrote:And actually if the greater shadow pops out of a wall - it can most certainly miss - I believe you have total concealment from it.Greater shadow pops out of wall. Hits you (it can't miss). Wins init, hits you twice.
No real difference between a 5 strength and a 10 strength you're still toast.
It can 5 foot float out of the wall and then attack. How i usually see it work is
Auto surprise round 5 foot step.
Its turn, full attack. 5 foot step back into the wall
5 foot step out of wall, full attack.
Mean - but it does assume that the shadow wins initiative. And if the group isn't fighting anything else - when it pops back out of the wall, it's likely to take a bunch of readied actions to the face.
theshoveller Venture-Agent, United Kingdom—England—Sheffield |
Finlanderboy |
It can 5 foot float out of the wall and then attack. How i usually see it work isAuto surprise round 5 foot step. Attack once
Its turn, full attack. 5 foot step back into the wall
5 foot step out of wall, full attack.
Counter tactics, like most tactics, tend to rely on an ability to act that simply doesn't exist in a turn based game, especially with surprise happy DMs and scenarios.
Although I do not give auto surpise the perception check is sometimes very difficult.
I have done similar tactics with wraiths. Keep in mind the strategy added to the monster in my case they spread out their attacks.
Caderyn |
Greater shadow pops out of wall. Hits you (it can't miss). Wins init, hits you twice.
No real difference between a 5 strength and a 10 strength you're still toast.
Both Shadows and Greater Shadows have no way of seeing through walls, they lack Tremorsense, lifesense or any other ability that does not require vision, hence a Shadow hiding in a wall/floor would not actually know if a PC has moved past his area, it would be a perception check to notice people in the room (with a penalty due to the wall) and a much harder one to try and pinpoint squares for the PCs (+20 as per invisible).
After all of that it could get a surprise round but with only a +13 perception it has almost no chance of pinpointing PC's to a 5foot square without vision.
Jeff Merola |
Both Shadows and Greater Shadows have no way of seeing through walls, they lack Tremorsense, lifesense or any other ability that does not require vision, hence a Shadow hiding in a wall/floor would not actually know if a PC has moved past his area, it would be a perception check to notice people in the room (with a penalty due to the wall) and a much harder one to try and pinpoint squares for the PCs (+20 as per invisible).
After all of that it could get a surprise round but with only a +13 perception it has almost no chance of pinpointing PC's to a 5foot square without vision.
From the Incorporeal special ability:
It can sense the presence of creatures or objects within a square adjacent to its current location, but enemies have total concealment (50% miss chance) from an incorporeal creature that is inside an object.
Caderyn |
Still limits them to a 3 square threat area (9 if they are in the ground), which should make the encounter able to be bypassed (in most cases) unless for some reason the room is setup so there is no way to avoid the creature.
Plus the shadow would have no idea which creature is passing by the wall at a particular moment (it could be the fighter or it could be the wizard) and it would have to have a specific trigger (usually first creature to reach its trigger zone).
Diego Rossi |
Jeff Morse wrote:... really hoping to see some new spells like "Ray of Enfeeblement" that instead works on mental stats.You are in luck.
Actually it don't do (almost) anything if the target isn't a spellcaster. Sure it make the target more susceptible to spells that require will saves and lower his skill checks bonus, but in a fight that has very limited effects when you consider that it has a range of touch.
Unless he has minions casting this spell or it is part of a trap, the caster will be dead before the next round. Staying at range 0 of a enemy rarely is conductive to a long life.trollbill Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne |
I realize very well I don't have the right to force them to act a certain way, but I think that would serve the purpose in at least encouraging people to roleplay their mental stats a bit more.
The best way to 'encourage' people is to reward them for doing something the right way rather than punishing them for doing it the wrong way. PF gives mechanical penalties for low physical and mental stats, so there is a built in balancing factor. I am concerned you wish to add additional penalties for those who don't role-play their mental stats properly but no additional penalties for those who don't role-play their physical stats properly. What about the low Con character whose player doesn't huff and puff after his character exerts itself? What about the low Dex character whose player isn't constantly telling you he is bumping into things or dropping stuff? Your desire to encourage role-playing seems heavily biased in favor of caster types and against martial types.
In my experience, the best way to promote good role-playing is to lead by example. If you show how much fun RP can be you are going to get a much better response than making hard rules that punish people for not RPing.
Fromper |
In my experience, the best way to promote good role-playing is to lead by example. If you show how much fun RP can be you are going to get a much better response than making hard rules that punish people for not RPing.
Actually, the best method I've ever seen for encouraging role playing, which I really should use more often, is for the GM to go around the table at the start of the session and have everyone introduce their character. This part I always do (and I'm amazed at how often it's NOT done in PFS games).
But the part that really encourages RPing is to make them introduce themselves in character. This part I don't do, and probably should. Lots of people will say "I'm playing a dwarven fighter named ..." when you go around the table. But I saw one GM who insists on asking "What does your fighter sound like when he talks? Say something in your character's voice!"
If the player isn't comfortable with this sort of thing, they can just say, "Hi, I'm Rognar the Dwarf" or whatever when the GM asks in the beginning, and that'll be the end of it. They don't need to continue to RP in character later if they don't want. But I think it'll help bring the newbies and shy people out of their shells, and encourage them to give their character a unique voice and personality, if they hadn't thought about it before.
Stemboy |
I think part of this comes down to player comfort. It's much easier to play a low int/wis/cha fighter and have the glory of running round smite enemies than it is to play a high int/wis/cha and deal with all the intrigue/investigation/thinking that playing one of those characters can entail.
Personally I love playing high int and cha (hence my lvl 3 wizard who adds +15 to Diplomacy and Bluff) but sometimes I like to relax into an easy to play fighter.
I've met ALOT of people new to PFS and RPing in general in the past few months and without fail I see more fighters and barbarians than anything else. They are much easier and less daunting for a new player to pick up.
However, I've made a point of stressing the importance of being able to handle social encounters too and hopefully we'll see a few more socially/knowledge apt characters.
nosig |
I think part of this comes down to player comfort. It's much easier to play a low int/wis/cha fighter and have the glory of running round smite enemies than it is to play a high int/wis/cha and deal with all the intrigue/investigation/thinking that playing one of those characters can entail.
Personally I love playing high int and cha (hence my lvl 3 wizard who adds +15 to Diplomacy and Bluff) but sometimes I like to relax into an easy to play fighter.
I've met ALOT of people new to PFS and RPing in general in the past few months and without fail I see more fighters and barbarians than anything else. They are much easier and less daunting for a new player to pick up.
However, I've made a point of stressing the importance of being able to handle social encounters too and hopefully we'll see a few more socially/knowledge apt characters.
I just ran a low level game for some players last night - Master of the Fallen Fortress in fact... and in relating PC numbers with class (to get an example of who is playing more "mental" PCs) we get the following brake-down.
PC A) #-2 playing a Fighter (though he did play "in voice" and try to RP up his PC)
PC B) #-8 playing a Cleric (put together at the last minute - not much RP)
PC C) #-2 playing a Warpriest (lots of RP here)
PC D) #43 playing a Barbarian (yeah, that's the players 43rd PC)
PC E) #2 playing a Sorcerer
PC F) #1 playing an Oracle (maxed out Diplomacy skills, she was the party face)
not sure what this shows... maybe that the "newbie" players are going for the more mental PCs?
DrakeRoberts |
I am one of those who really like puzzles/riddles. I also enjoy tactics and such, but not all of my characters are particularly intelligent. If we are presented with a riddle/puzzle in a scenario in which I'm playing a not-so-bright character, I still enjoy being able to contribute as a player, rather than sitting there waiting (or surfing the web, or whatever) while others who'd rather not be solving the puzzles are forced to do so.
My solution to this is simple, and I think most GMs allow it (I know I would), although I think I've encountered a (rather-despised) 'no' before:
As a player, I give my OOC insights to the puzzle to the other players. I'm there to have fun, and so are they. Does it matter if my character is the one to solve the puzzle? Nope. And if they dumped Int or whatever, they shouldn't be the ones to solve it either. Let the wizard have the spotlight and glory IC, as long as I'm having fun and participating, what's it matter if my character is temporarily useless IC?
This same notion works for diplomacy scenarios, or investigations, or tactics... roleplaying is about telling a joint story, to rules, and having fun. Of course, it's ultimately up to the player of the character as to whether or not they want to have their character act on (or think of) a particular choice. But it lets me put my creativity to use at tables where I'm playing a character who's ill-suited for the challenges at hand.