Angel Hunter D |
So I've volunteered to GM a pathfinder campaign for some friends of mine recently, and I've had an idea that could either be excellent or the worst ever. First off, for some background on my GM abilities, I've been GMing FFG's Dark Heresy for several years now, and I've been playing PF Society for a couple months now.
The idea: Super Narrative Mode
- Describe your character in purely RP terms, GM determines the best class to go with that.
-GM holds all the character sheets and rolls all the dice, players do everything as normal, except they can only know the gear they're wearing/holding (and whatever they've memorized). To look at their inventory/purse they need to be in a safe spot or use the 'retrieve item' action to see the sheet and interact with stuff in there.
-at level up they describe how they want to advance, and GM determines whether they multi-class or not, and what feats/skillpoints are chosen.
I think this could be incredibly fun in a campaign with a lot of roleplaying and sparse fights, but too lethal for a dungeon crawl. I want to know what you guys think about this, I haven't suggested it yet so i can rework or drop it if need be.
Good idea or Bad idea?
ElMustacho |
Godmode+ enabled...
I mean, that's a good idea, but I suggest you to limit yourself to just have a copy of the characters. There's no reason for the GM to choose how players grow up. Also, people is supposed to know what thy are carrying!
Storing money at the bank? GM takes the bank and makes his decisions.
Storing money in the pocket? GM has no story.
LuxuriantOak |
while I understand the idea behind this I have to ask; do you know how much extra work you're making for yourself? Will it make the game better?
imagine all the gm-stuff you usually do, then add all the things the characters have on the sheet.
imagine the sequence of events when for example in combat: each player describes, then wait while you consult stats and roll dice before giving them feedback on the result, then it's the next player, also the monsters. In short: you will be stressed and keeping too many balls in the air, they will be bored while waiting for you.
if you want more storytelling then maybe look at systems like fate?
In my game I've done the opposite: I delegate away things like keeping track of initiative and remembering details of npc and locations. I've also made others responsible for drawing maps or taking notes of dungeons (I still draw the grid when combat happens) they visit.
Tinkergoth |
I've played in a game like this... kind of. Not the whole "can't see their inventory" bit, that'd just tick me off.
But we played a GURPS Supers game where the GM built characters based on a discussion with us, and asked for ideas about where we'd like to develop characters to, then took those and worked them into the advancement of them. So I started with a time travelling samurai with some pretty standard abilities (sword sharp enough to cut through a tank, ability to deflect bullets etc) as well as a few other touches (could run on thin air, minor temporal manipulation). As his storyline developed, I added stuff about him studying magic in an attempt to get home, so next time we played he had a set of magical tattoos that summoned elemental beasts to help him (a horse made of air that was extremely fast and "skipped" portions of distance to be traveled, i.e. teleportation; a fire fox that chased down enemies; a snake made of water that slowed foes; and an earthen bear that erupted out of the ground and held targets in place). It worked really well for that game.
Pathfinder though... Eh, I can't see it working so well with this. Part of the reason he did it for GURPS was that he was the one who really knew the rules for it, most of the rest of us just showed up to play. But a big part of Pathfinder is planning out your build, because unlike a point buy system where you can upgrade as you earn experience on a gradual basis, Pathfinder needs a bit more planning regarding a build, and you have to make specific decisions at certain points. I'd be hesitant to take that away from the players.
Orthos |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would consider it immensely not-fun. One of the best parts of Pathfinder for me is the ability to make those choices, to design my character the way I want to, to put things together so they work how I desired. I can't guarantee the GM would have the same thought processes I would in building the character, picking feats, picking spells, picking skills... there's just too much I'd want that I couldn't ensure the GM would choose, and choose in the way I envisioned.
No. This would be an immediate dealbreaker for me. I'd sit this campaign out, without a second thought.
Orthos |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Orthos wrote:I'm with Orthos in all respects on this one. I'm willing to try out a lot of things, but this isn't my cup of coffee ( I don't drink tea :P ).
No. This would be an immediate dealbreaker for me. I'd sit this campaign out, without a second thought.
You can have mine, I've never been a coffee fan =)
Zolanoteph |
Personally, I don't think I would choose to play a campaign like this. Or if I did, it would be a real casual thing and I'd be gone the second a "real" campaign became available. Here's why:
For me a large part of the charm of D&D is the control (even as a player). I can make an extremely concise character concept and flesh it out in extremely specific ways, right down to what weapon he uses and how he uses it. I can decide how smart I want to be, how strong I want to be, how attractive I want to be. The list goes on. If I want to describe myself as an "ugly, no nonsense type of guy with a keen intellect and a predilection for pushing people into holes or off cliffs", I can do just that, with plenty of support from the mechanics. (Low charisma, improved bull rush, etc.).
If my conceptual freedom is gone I might as well play 4th edition D&D or World of Warcraft.
Angel Hunter D |
Those are all valid points, I can see now how it might not be very fun. This was my attempt at putting some real world flair into the system ie. i know i'm strong, but not really how strong unless i take the time to figure it out, and even then i might forget at some point.
I've mostly been a GM, so the loss of control aspect hadn't occurred to me, but i get how that could be a dealbreaker.
as to the "why use pathfinder" question, it's because i wouldn't have to learn a new system, and my group wants fantasy.
I think i'll let this idea die, thanks for stopping a train-wreck guys.
Kaisoku |
I just wanted to put in that if everything was behind the scenes, or DM screen so to speak, then you could simplify a lot of the rules down, maybe make a rules-lite version of pathfinder instead of detailing every little nitty-gritty aspect.
However, you would want to bill this experience from the beginning this way. Tell them from the start that you want to DM a different kind of game, and find out who's in for a new experience kind of deal.
Also, nothing kicks up the fright-factor like lack of knowledge. Not knowing every little aspect of the game or especially yourself just gets you on edge, so this would be perfect type of gameplay for a horror game.
That, or a Jason Bourne/amnesia type of game, learning about yourself as you go along (giving a point to being in the dark about your own character sheets).
However, to spring this on folks who thought they were joining up for regular Pathfinder might give them a sour feeling of the concept. Probably best to have the discussion when nearing the end of a campaign and finding out who wants to DM what next, etc.
Bacon666 |
It could work with the right group...
The players should not be familiar with pathfinder... Preferably not even d20. OR. be ok with not being able to get a specific class ability they want to try...
The group should have a sheet with their inventory
The group must not be the types who prefers roll play
The players should know they don't need to bring dice
--- you as a gm must:
Spend much time preparing...
Be aware that players can have different wishes for their char than you see/hear
Decide who takes care of spell lists...
Goth Guru |
Every morning, gametime, the GM would have to list to the caster what they can memorize, and they would have to choose. For spontaneous casters, the GM would have to stop the action, and read them all the spells they could cast, right now. It would be a shorter list with the ones who already memorized their spells.
Now it will degenerate into the answer to a word problem.
Only the Wizard can read the spell book.
Only the Cleric can channel energy through the holy symbol.
Only the Rogue can pick locks with the lockpicks.
Only the Fighter can lift the sword or walk in the armor.