Run as written insanity


Pathfinder Society

1 to 50 of 54 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

I am at a game right now where the DM insists that run as written with a map that is drawn in 10 foot squares means that the fight takes place in ten foot squares. Which to him means no five foot steps and no more than one character per 10 foot square. He insists that this is run as written and is required by PFS. Anyone have a good post I can point him to in order to show him the error of his ways. He is also running adjacency based on 10 foot squares.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Walk.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jiggy wrote:
Walk.

I disagree.....

run...

Grand Lodge 4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Quick, take the Withdraw action.

In all seriousness, the only reason maps ever use a size other than 5' squares (which the rules are based on) is something called "getting the darn thing to fit on one page."


We're trudging through but my goodness he has some odd adjudications. I am torn between just letting him run as a GM and giving him a piece if my mind. Most the players are very experienced and we all keep looking back and forth for what comes next. Thus far he has rebuked our attempts at reason with phrases like "It's a PFS rule" and "I am required to run as written".

Grand Lodge 4/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Let your local venture officer know about this problem. They should be able to talk to him and explain his error.

Scarab Sages

Tell your local VO, if there isn't one, then the coordinator.


We have one, we'll let him know. Latest adjudication has to do with a missed alchemists bomb affecting 9 ten foot squares.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

*eyetwitch*

Scarab Sages

This GM has no idea what he's doing...Is he brand new?


I just moved to the area, so not to sure. I'll ask... Aparantly not a new GM.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Beyond the advice you are already been given, unless the table is already aware, it is considered rude to be posting complaints on the forums in the middle of a game by many players.

It is better to deal with it locally before bringing it to the public. Bringing it to the public for advice should be done as a last ditch effort for advice only after all other means of solutions have been addressed and then only after the game is complete.


I may have gotten carried away. The original point was to solicit any posts that may be helpful in showing the DM that this is not what is meant by as written.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

22 people marked this as a favorite.

Your GM is wrong. As Jeff said above, "the only reason maps ever use a size other than 5' squares (which the rules are based on) is something called "getting the darn thing to fit on one page."

All other rules about movement and the like still apply. We just couldn't fit the entire map onto a page if it was drawn in 5 foot squares.

On a side note, I generally get 1-3 emails detailing these types of situations on average on a weekly basis. This is an example of the reason I haven't opened up GMing with more creative liberties. Feel free to point to this thread the next time someone asks why they can't do whatever they want as a GM in PFS OP.


Thank you Mike, on the timely response. I am generally in the more creative liscense crowd but this was just unreasonable.

Sovereign Court 2/5

The only way this could be a case of "run as written" is if there were rules about no five foot steps or such on 10ftx10ft squares. There are of course no such rules. This is really a case of the opposite.

If something of a similar magnitude happens again, you might ask the GM to cite the rules they are using or explain their logic. Though, you should not over play that card because it causes a lot of friction.

5/5

Hey Michael, I hope you've resolved the dispute amicably by now, and please email me (Zak) and/or our VC if there are any further issues.


We're just going to talk about it afterwards. Don't anticipate any issues, if any arrise I'll let yah know.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

That is awesome Mike.

Best way to handle situations like this is to work at it locally first.


Went well, we talked it out. It did help to have a Mike Brock post.

Grand Lodge 4/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Glory to the Overlord.

5/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
MichaelCullen wrote:
Went well, we talked it out. It did help to have a Mike Brock post.

Bravo for keeping it civil - the hysteria of "Run/Rules As Written!" has some odd consequences (and to be clear I mean the forum hysteria, not the policy in general).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
MichaelCullen wrote:
I am at a game right now where the DM insists that run as written with a map that is drawn in 10 foot squares means that the fight takes place in ten foot squares. Which to him means no five foot steps and no more than one character per 10 foot square. He insists that this is run as written and is required by PFS. Anyone have a good post I can point him to in order to show him the error of his ways. He is also running adjacency based on 10 foot squares.

A 10 foot square is essentially 4 5 foot squares. the map should be blown up or drawn to reflect that. if it's blown up then alll that needs to be mandated is that you need to keep to a corner.

Grand Lodge 5/5

But my amp goes up to 11...

I dont buy the "we cant fit the map on a page at 5' squares" argument. Just decrease the size of the squares by 1/2 on a side. Map takes up the same amount of space. Nothing else has to change. If furniture, etc was at the right scale before, its still at the right scale with 5' squares.

Grand Lodge 4/5

CireJack wrote:

But my amp goes up to 11...

I dont buy the "we cant fit the map on a page at 5' squares" argument. Just decrease the size of the squares by 1/2 on a side. Map takes up the same amount of space. Nothing else has to change. If furniture, etc was at the right scale before, its still at the right scale with 5' squares.

At that point the grid starts really messing with what the map looks like. What's the point of paying for art if you're going to cover up half of it?

Grand Lodge 5/5

You buy it for the "pictures?" I buy it for the articles. :)

Grand Lodge 4/5

CireJack wrote:
You buy it for the "pictures?" I buy it for the articles. :)

I'm going to ignore the joke you just dug out of the ground and answer this post as if it were serious.

I meant Paizo paying artists for the maps.

Grand Lodge 4/5 ** Venture-Agent, Colorado—Denver

Wow. I remember the 'Good ol' days' of early D&D when all maps in modules were drawn in 10' squares. The 12" move of a PC always confused me when the maps were drawn to scale on a 1" = 5' battlemat, so we just winged it. Thankfully later editions fixed the issue.

Grand Lodge 4/5

roll4initiative wrote:

Wow. I remember the 'Good ol' days' of early D&D when all maps in modules were drawn in 10' squares. The 12" move of a PC always confused me when the maps were drawn to scale on a 1" = 5' battlemat, so we just winged it. Thankfully later editions fixed the issue.

The "Good ol' days" also had your base movement inside and outside measured differently. I'm glad that's gone.

Dark Archive 4/5

Actually they seem to have improved significantly with sizing maps recently, the Recent books of the Mummy's Mask AP have 5 foot squares (even for a map that when printed takes up 81 A4 pages), and it still looks amazing on a single page.

Dataphiles 5/5 5/55/5 Venture-Agent, Virginia—Hampton Roads

Glad to hear it all work out Mike. We are going to miss you here in Virginia.


I'll be back, its looking good for MARSCON.

5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Blame the author.

Silver Crusade 4/5

I'm reminded of the time I GMed a scenario and didn't notice that there were 10 foot squares. I thought the building was just half it's actual size, because I thought they were the standard 5 foot squares.

I think it was pointed out to me in the GM prep thread here before I actually ran the adventure. At that point, I realized that the GM I'd played it with previously made the exact same mistake.

Scarab Sages

Blame the Fun Sponge, always soaking up all the fun....

Silver Crusade 4/5

Advanced PFS TIP: So here is how you deal with 1=10ft or more squares.

GM's: Tell them, that they must *verbally declare* that their character is taking a five-foot step BEFORE they take any other action. Otherwise standard rules apply in combat in relation to attacks of opportunity and so on.

Because players HATE this and I always seem to pick up the adventures that have insanely difficult terrain, I put this rule on the table every time so that players are REQUIRED to say it. They can't take backsies if they don't say it.

Bonus lesson for players: It teaches players declare their intentions as they act so that they know what they are doing and manage their action economy better.

YMMV, but I hope that helps

Silver Crusade 3/5

Lady Ophelia wrote:

Advanced PFS TIP: So here is how you deal with 1=10ft or more squares.

GM's: Tell them, that they must *verbally declare* that their character is taking a five-foot step BEFORE they take any other action. Otherwise standard rules apply in combat in relation to attacks of opportunity and so on.

Because players HATE this and I always seem to pick up the adventures that have insanely difficult terrain, I put this rule on the table every time so that players are REQUIRED to say it. They can't take backsies if they don't say it.

Bonus lesson for players: It teaches players declare their intentions as they act so that they know what they are doing and manage their action economy better.

YMMV, but I hope that helps

I think maybe I don't understand what you are saying here.

Are you suggesting that a player must decide at the start of their turn whether they will be taking a 5-foot step on that turn?

Sovereign Court 2/5

Am I understanding that you draw the map directly but then treat each square on the grid as 10'? I'm interested in how you manage that because it seems like it would be incredibly complicated. I'm sorry if I'm misunderstanding.

I usually just draw the relevant parts of the giant map and rescale it to 5' squares specifically to not confuse the players. The downside to that is it takes a bit longer because I have to redraw a lot more, but it's substantially easier for me to deal with. I'm a very visual person, so it's hard for me to keep track of positions if I don't scale it appropriately. Am I not supposed to do this?

Grand Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
The Fox wrote:
Are you suggesting that a player must decide at the start of their turn whether they will be taking a 5-foot step on that turn?

I think only that they need to declare they are making a 5ft step before moving the mini, so there isn't any confusion about possible AoOs.

It is something I should be better about myself.

Silver Crusade 4/5

The Fox wrote:


I think maybe I don't understand what you are saying here.

Are you suggesting that a player must decide at the start of their turn whether they will be taking a 5-foot step on that turn?

Keeping it real with you: Yes. Steve has it correct, they need to declare they are making a 5ft step before moving the mini, so there isn't any confusion about possible AoOs. It's easy to for a GM to get confused. (I know I do from time to time.)

But if they say: "I take a 5 foot step back, and cast a spell" that clears them, even in a 10 foot space. It can also work in the opposite direction of "I hit them, and then I take a 5 foot step back" and then you don't have to move the mini unless you plan on moving 10 feet.

Quite honestly, it's the little things in this game. You *SHOULD* know if you are taking a five foot step on your turn or not. Otherwise, pay attention cause you are so not playing the game if you do not know what you are doing on your turn.

Silver Crusade 3/5

I disagree.

There are many turns where I know I might take a 5-foot step or I might not, depending on the outcome.

Example: My warpriest is fighting a ghoul. To her left is another ghoul being engaged with her rogue ally. Behind her is her barbarian ally who is chomping at the bit to charge one of the ghouls. The warpriest attacks her ghoul. If she kills it, she will stay where she is so that the barbarian can charge the one being engaged by the rogue. If not, she will 5-foot step to provide flanking for the rogue and allow the barbarian to charge the ghoul the warpriest missed. Would you allow this, or do I need to specify all of these contingencies beforehand?

There are many turns where opponents have used an immediate action or an attack of opportunity (often with Combat Reflexes) that makes me decide to take a 5-foot step that I hadn't anticipating needing earlier.

Example: My gunslinger with Quick Draw and several attacks goes to fire her pistol at an adjacent target who has already used an attack of opportunity this round. She didn't expect the target to have Combat Reflexes, but he does and disarms her with his AoO. She Quick Draws her backup pistol, and would like to 5-foot step back and fire off her second attack. Would you allow this?

Sovereign Court 2/5

The Fox wrote:
stuff

I also share this sentiment. But at the same time I'm having some trouble understanding how expecting the player to explicitly state they are taking a 5ft step is anything different than the standard operating procedure.

But it seems mitigated by rescaling the map for 5' squares.

Silver Crusade 3/5

Acedio wrote:
The Fox wrote:
stuff

I also share this sentiment. But at the same time I'm having some trouble understanding how expecting the player to explicitly state they are taking a 5ft step is anything different than the standard operating procedure.

But it seems mitigated by rescaling the map for 5' squares.

I really think that I must be misunderstanding Lady Ophelia. Maybe I need more coffee?

Edit to add:
As Acedio pointed out above, most of the maps that are drawn with a 10-foot square scale have combat encounters in only small portions of the map. Just draw tactical scale maps of those areas, and use the overview map to let the players tell you where they are exploring. There is no reason to draw out the whole dang thing.

Grand Lodge 2/5

The Fox wrote:
Acedio wrote:
The Fox wrote:
stuff

I also share this sentiment. But at the same time I'm having some trouble understanding how expecting the player to explicitly state they are taking a 5ft step is anything different than the standard operating procedure.

But it seems mitigated by rescaling the map for 5' squares.

I really think that I must be misunderstanding Lady Ophelia. Maybe I need more coffee?

Yeah, you're definitely misunderstanding. She's just saying you need to definitively declare what you're doing as you do it (or slightly before as in "I'm taking a 5' step" and then reach down and move your mini). She is in no way saying "state your whole turn in advance and then do what you said."

Silver Crusade 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
claudekennilol wrote:
The Fox wrote:
I really think that I must be misunderstanding Lady Ophelia. Maybe I need more coffee?
Yeah, you're definitely misunderstanding. She's just saying you need to definitively declare what you're doing as you do it (or slightly before as in "I'm taking a 5' step" and then reach down and move your mini). She is in no way saying "state your whole turn in advance and then do what you said."

Ah. Okay, I get it now. But how is that different than for 5-foot square grids? Shouldn't people be stating such things always anyway?

Silver Crusade 4/5

The Fox wrote:

I disagree.

There are many turns where I know I might take a 5-foot step or I might not, depending on the outcome.

Example: My warpriest is fighting a ghoul. To her left is another ghoul being engaged with her rogue ally. Behind her is her barbarian ally who is chomping at the bit to charge one of the ghouls. The warpriest attacks her ghoul. If she kills it, she will stay where she is so that the barbarian can charge the one being engaged by the rogue. If not, she will 5-foot step to provide flanking for the rogue and allow the barbarian to charge the ghoul the warpriest missed. Would you allow this, or do I need to specify all of these contingencies beforehand?

There are many turns where opponents have used an immediate action or an attack of opportunity (often with Combat Reflexes) that makes me decide to take a 5-foot step that I hadn't anticipating needing earlier.

Example: My gunslinger with Quick Draw and several attacks goes to fire her pistol at an adjacent target who has already used an attack of opportunity this round. She didn't expect the target to have Combat Reflexes, but he does and disarms her with his AoO. She Quick Draws her backup pistol, and would like to 5-foot step back and fire off her second attack. Would you allow this?

So at this point we're getting into specifics, and that was not the whole point to my tip. My point, was to give an option to those players and GM's who don't like dealing with 10 foot squares a way to handle it. Declaring what you are doing at all times is the essential point. The rest really are details. But to please your ego, I'll go ahead and tell you what I think.

Example 1:

Ghoul doesn't die: you say to me "GM, I want to at the end of my turn take a five foot step to make room for my ally". Sure thing.

Ghoul dies: Nothing happens.

Example 2:

Here's how I would rule that: "Free Action: Quick Draw other pistol, Move action(So long as you didn't move already): 5-foot step back, Iterative Attack: Shoot em!

Additional rules note: Gunslingers should *always* have ten feet cause they are ranged weapons and always require at least 5 feet of space. There should be NO adjacencies unless they have "Step Up" along with that Combat Reflexes.

Silver Crusade 4/5

The Fox wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:
The Fox wrote:
I really think that I must be misunderstanding Lady Ophelia. Maybe I need more coffee?
Yeah, you're definitely misunderstanding. She's just saying you need to definitively declare what you're doing as you do it (or slightly before as in "I'm taking a 5' step" and then reach down and move your mini). She is in no way saying "state your whole turn in advance and then do what you said."
Ah. Okay, I get it now. But how is that different than for 5-foot square grids? Shouldn't people be stating such things always anyway?

You would be surprised how many people (especially new players) don't declare. They just start rolling dice. Bad move.

Sovereign Court 2/5

Eh, I don't think 10' maps are really a variable in people not declaring their actions. I think the 10' maps are mostly a pain because it makes things more difficult to draw as they don't fit on a single dry erase map unless you treat the squares as 10'. That introduces a bunch of other problems, too.

Silver Crusade 3/5

Lady Ophelia wrote:
Additional rules note: Gunslingers should *always* have ten feet cause they are ranged weapons and always require at least 5 feet of space.

Would you care to elaborate on this? I'm worried I may have been not following the rules of the game with one of my characters.

My gunslinger has shot numerous foes while adjacent to them. Sometimes it provoked and she took damage, sometimes it provoked and she was disarmed, sometimes it didn't provoke because they had already used all of their attacks of opportunity, and sometimes it didn't provoke because she had cover or total concealment from them.

Was I doing something wrong in some of those cases?

Shadow Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
The Fox wrote:
Lady Ophelia wrote:
Additional rules note: Gunslingers should *always* have ten feet cause they are ranged weapons and always require at least 5 feet of space.

Would you care to elaborate on this? I'm worried I may have been not following the rules of the game with one of my characters.

My gunslinger has shot numerous foes while adjacent to them. Sometimes it provoked and she took damage, sometimes it provoked and she was disarmed, sometimes it didn't provoke because they had already used all of their attacks of opportunity, and sometimes it didn't provoke because she had cover or total concealment from them.

Was I doing something wrong in some of those cases?

No. You're doing it perfectly.

Lady Ophelia, on the other hand, seems to be taking some extremely... creative liberties with how she chooses to run tables. Her phrasing isn't clear enough for me to know what exactly she's doing but it seems very strange to me.

I will never ever force my players to play on a ten-foot-square grid. For Thornkeep Level 1, for example, I drew the entire map out at double-size (over the course of six hours, the night before the con, in lieu of sleep). Accusations that I took unnecessarily long due to wanting to make the rooms in 3D with foamcore (which I did) are unfounded. :P

1 to 50 of 54 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Run as written insanity All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.