Can GMs for PFS turn players away just because they feel like it?


Pathfinder Society

51 to 100 of 106 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
1/5

I've been a GM for a long time and found that for me, PFS scenarios aside, the comfort spot for managing a party is 5 players. I can handle more but it is hard to give consideration/listen to each player with so many.

Our local game days have chronically too few GM's so I almost always have 6 and at least once 7 players and I see player's really struggling to get a chance to do much of anything in those parties due to the design of the PFS scenarios, which is no knock on the authors it has to be very difficult to design encounters for PFS. I would much rather have a smaller table so that each player could more directly contribute to each encounter, combat or rp.

Silver Crusade 1/5

There are four situation I've faced regarding turning people away.

1. Not enough space
That's the easiest one. If you've signed up in Warhorn (or in the case of our more private games via email) you get a seat. If you show up unannounced and there is still space, cool, grab a seat and please sign up next time because if there are too few people signed up we won't play. If you show up unannounced and there are already 6 players at the table - sorry, please sign up next time and we might be able to run a second table.

2. Disruptive behaviour
It happened to me exactly once that after I GMed a game a player came up privatly to me and said "Look, I enjoy you GMing, but I probably won't be back when [other player] is playing." That is a problem, especially if other players say the same thing. There will be a private talk with [other player], but if the behaviour does not change, a turning-away might be in order in the future. This can be difficult if the player in question is a friend.

3. People I can't stand
Let's face it, there will be always this one person you don't like, or nobody from your "normal" pool of players likes, for whatever good (or bad) reason. Sometimes a person hears you talking about PFS and asks about the dates and you only think "Oh crap, not HIM..."
It happens.
In this case I probably won't turn them away, but I won't go out of my way to recruit them, either - if they sign up and arrive, fine, but I probably won't spend hours of my time helping them create a character and I won't run after them (and, thruth be told, probably hope they forget I ever mentioned PFS). It's still a hobby, after all, and people I can't stand in normal life can stay away from following me into my hobby please, thank you very much. If they follow me, fine, I won't send all the axe-wielding barbarians onto their character specifically, I won't rule against them specifically and I will still try and help them with the rules, but my tolerance level for bullshit will probably be much lower.
(So far the "Please make him forget about this" has always worked, so I didn't get to see whether I can stay neutral)

4. People who can't stand each other
A self-regulating problem, really. It CAN happen that player A says "If player B comes along, could you please turn him away? I really don't like him." but in my experience that problem is self-regulating via Warhorn. "Oh, my ex is already registered? I won't register then."

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

For about two years, before the Core Campaign, there were new GMs who felt uncomfortable running the wide variety of character options available to players.

The advice that many people gave them was, "Trust the players to understand their own PCs." Which works fine, when it works. And which becomes a major nightmare for a new GM, when it doesn't.

There were newbie GMs who would not run, because they'd had a bad run-in with someone running a powerful character, and they didn't feel they could properly adjudicate the rules. That was a case where I advocated GMs requesting that players not bring certain characters to their table. It had nothing to do with table size. It had to do with GMs who were still getting the hang of Attacks of Opportunity and Concentration checks, who weren't ready to judge an aasimar summoner / oracle.

4/5

I feel lucky then. My local area is growing and growing fast. I've been relegated to GMing more often that I'd like, but that's not a complaint. I'm happy to game either way. I think the only thing I regret because of it is not being able to maintain my focus with the Online Collective as much.

As for seating players and having to turn them away. I don't like it. Locally I've been running tables of seven lately mainly because my local scene has been growing so much. I admit, 5 players is my comfort zone. However, I don't force my VC to accommodate to my standards considering I am playing at a public venue. I want people to play. Besides, hosting 7 players is not too much for me to handle. I will still keep the same level of enthusiasm combined with my crappy, dry, sarcastic jokes regardless of how many are present locally.

Online, however, I keep to a more stringent standard. Six players is my max regardless of season. I usually don't deviate away from that. I don't think I've ever had to tell someone that they couldn't play at my tables. People that are not amendable to my style usually weed themselves out anyway.

I think that's what sort of gets me about this discussion. I get why people would choose to limit it and the reasons behind it. I just don't necessarily agree with it.

Anyway, I gotta finish prep for tomorrow. It's one I haven't run yet so I'm excited to do it, even if I get a full seven tomorrow. ^_^

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Arcwin wrote:

I've read in the Guide to Organized Play about how to handle potential 7-player table situations or 3-player tables, but I've also seen something else a few times and wondered about it.

What I've seen is GMs who say "I won't run a 6 player table" or "I won't run for more than 4 people" etc. For one's own home game or whatever naturally its fine, but I was wondering if this is allowed for a PFS game?

If you want to be known as a Diva, or various other uncomplimentary names, and you're sponsoring the event yourself, providing the space, etc., sure.

The folks who are sponsoring your table and providing the space, however may have something to say on this. A Judge who pulls this at a Game Store's game day isn't doing the hosting store any favors and may well cause them to lose a customer.

If I'm recruiting Judges for a convention though, Judges with that kind of attitude, are ones I recruit only as a last resort. And quite frankly If I'm marshalling, I will tell them straight out, that I won't turn away players to accommodate a Diva attitude.

Grand Lodge 4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
Arcwin wrote:

I've read in the Guide to Organized Play about how to handle potential 7-player table situations or 3-player tables, but I've also seen something else a few times and wondered about it.

What I've seen is GMs who say "I won't run a 6 player table" or "I won't run for more than 4 people" etc. For one's own home game or whatever naturally its fine, but I was wondering if this is allowed for a PFS game?

If you want to be known as a Diva, or various other uncomplimentary names, and you're sponsoring the event yourself, providing the space, etc., sure.

The folks who are sponsoring your table and providing the space, however may have something to say on this. A Judge who pulls this at a Game Store's game day isn't doing the hosting store any favors and may well cause them to lose a customer.

If I'm recruiting Judges for a convention though, Judges with that kind of attitude, are ones I recruit only as a last resort. And quite frankly If I'm marshalling, I will tell them straight out, that I won't turn away players to accommodate a Diva attitude.

You are entitled to your opinion, however uninformed it may be.

However, as a favor to the rest of the world, I would request that you take a 10 count, and think about what you are saying, and how you are saying it, before you post.

If you are unwilling to accommodate your GMs' legitimate requests, or try to work with them on them, you won't have GMs. If you insist on insulting anyone who has a different opinion on how to provide a good game, you will find that you are stuck on your own, trying to GM multiple tables, because your attitude drives your potential GMs away.

For me, I try not to run 7 player tables, because they often lead to non-fun situations. Either someone doesn't get much face time, or some of the people get bored and stop paying attention, or, and it has happened in my experience, no one is helping out the new guy. The GM because they are busy trying to keep track of 7 PCs, who knows how many familiars, ACs, mounts, etc. And, of course, their own NPCs, the good, the bad, and the ugly.

Last time I ran a 7 player table, one of the PCs got killed during an encounter, partly because no one was able to do more than tell him that casting Sleep was a less than optimal idea, especially not where he had positioned himself, and then his unconscious body got into an AoE that I could not figure out a way to get him out of.

Spoiler:
Wizard moved into the baddies' room, started casting Sleep. One of the bad guys made his Spellcraft check, directed the melee minion to go after the Wizard. Wizard hit, knocked unconscious. Minion suffered enough damage to incapacitate him, which also caused said minion to explode. No way to get the minion far enough away form the downed Wizard to get him out of the explosion radius. High damage roll, failed Reflex save, damage went beyond negative Con. Low level, so no access to Breath of Life. Low level so insufficient PP to get a Raise Dead.

I had tried to warn him about the downsides to his attempt to cast Sleep, but had to continue running the game.

Result: Dead wizard, time for a new PC. Someday. Newish player (PC had 2 XP), have only seen him in passing playing board games, since.

So, I am allergic to running 7 player tables, because, overall, I am not going ot do as good a job of it, leading to a less enjoyable experience for both the players and the GM. What I call a lose-lose situation.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

Just try to remember that "diva" GM is volunteering to provide entertainment for no compensation other than having a good time themselves. If they make a request (that is entirely reasonable, in my opinion) and that request ensures they have fun too, and continue to volunteer to run games, then I'd do what I can to accommodate. Why wouldn't you? Are you such a "diva" coordinator that you only enjoy GMs who follow your idea of a good time?

I'm really just trying to understand. I've never been in a situation where I had to turn away a player from a public game. If they weren't a good fit for the table, Mike was always able to find them a spot at another table. I've had to turn someone away from a private game at our local shop, but I made sure to let them know when the regular PFS crew played.

1/5 **

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Um, any player can stand up and walk out at any time for any reason. If that player is the GM, either someone else steps up, or there is no game.

Or are we proposing that people be compelled to GM against their will? Actually, that might help solve the problem of not enough GMs for gamedays... :P

5/5 5/55/55/5

Mystic Lemur wrote:

Just try to remember that "diva" GM is volunteering to provide entertainment for no compensation other than having a good time themselves. If they make a request (that is entirely reasonable, in my opinion) and that request ensures they have fun too, and continue to volunteer to run games, then I'd do what I can to accommodate. Why wouldn't you? Are you such a "diva" coordinator that you only enjoy GMs who follow your idea of a good time?

Mystic, how big are the game days where you DM usually? In a really big game day the dm booting you means you play a different scenario. In a reasonably size group it probably means you have to play in another tier. In a smaller group it could mean you have to go home. (or well, you don't have to go home but you can't stay here)

Shadow Lodge 4/5

Aaron Motta wrote:
Or are we proposing that people be compelled to GM against their will? Actually, that might help solve the problem of not enough GMs for gamedays... :P

Mandatory fun is the best kind of fun. Mandatory fun for everyone!

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Mystic, how big are the game days where you DM usually? In a really big game day the dm booting you means you play a different scenario. In a reasonably size group it probably means you have to play in another tier. In a smaller group it could mean you have to go home. (or well, you don't have to go home but you can't stay here)

Bigger than I thought, I guess. It's been a while since I was involved, and I wasn't the coordinator, but there were usually three or four tables going. I usually got the new players and the low level tables, but we always seemed to be able to find room for everyone who showed up. If work would relent a little, I'd like to get something going again a little closer to where I live. Honestly, I'm worried about having enough players, not having to turn them away.

I understand, at least on some level, that having a "picky" or "diva" GM who doesn't enjoy running for some combination of players could make coordinating harder, but not as much as not having that GM willing to volunteer at all.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Define "Just because they feel like it." I can think of an individual or two I would not be willing to GM for as they have seriously and intentionally caused harm to those who matter to me, and RL trumps game.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Comment about running cold....

We look for players who have recently played a scenario and give them a good 20-30 minutes to leave the table and read the scenario in peace. Then we set expectations that there will be a few breaks between "acts." Most adventures are only 15-20 pages and some are easier to run than others. One other thing, I try to always bring 2-4 green (level 1-2 repayable) scenarios with me at all times. Many of or GMs have run these multiple times but don't think to bring a copy. That way there is always an option.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aaron Motta wrote:

Um, any player can stand up and walk out at any time for any reason. If that player is the GM, either someone else steps up, or there is no game.

Or are we proposing that people be compelled to GM against their will? Actually, that might help solve the problem of not enough GMs for gamedays... :P

I'm proposing that if you make a commitment to GM, you live up to it. Or if you're going to pull an "I absolutely won't GM more than four people", you let me know so that I can find someone else to run the table.

If I volounteer to do a game day with another GM. I'm going to be really pissed off if 14 people come into play and 3 of them walk home for no other reason than I suddenly find out that my co-GM isn't willing to deal with a greater than 4 man group.

4/5 5/5

LazarX wrote:
I'm proposing that if you make a commitment to GM, you live up to it. Or if you're going to pull an "I absolutely won't GM more than four people", you let me know so that I can find someone else to run the table.

If I made an commitment to GM for four people I will live up to that commitment. If you as an organizer agreed to that you also better live up to it. The social contract goes both ways.

A good organizer asks beforehand what the boundaries of each GM are while a good GM tells the organizer beforehand without being asked.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So in short the answer is yes, but it's a douchebag move to pull that personal restriction without preamble.


RealAlchemy wrote:
Define "Just because they feel like it." I can think of an individual or two I would not be willing to GM for as they have seriously and intentionally caused harm to those who matter to me, and RL trumps game.

It was expanded on in the first page of responses.

I would consider reasons (for not letting someone join a table) like "because he's always a rude ass to the other players/DM" or "the dude must never bathe, he smells like rancid meat" etc. to be decisions 'for cause' not 'just because they felt like it'

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/55/5 **** Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

LazarX wrote:
So in short the answer is yes, but it's a douchebag move to pull that personal restriction without preamble.

Mentioning your preferences, that you will not GM for 5+ player tables should be done wayyyy ahead of time, especially if it depends on the specific module/scenario.

Doing something like this, when you have to assign players at an event, is indeed quite rude.

That said, I will support any GM, who once being faced with a group that takes pains to literally destroy the adventure (group of Darkness using tieflings), just gives everybody their chronicle sheets and goes of somewhere to amuse himself - but to be honest, that is a different issue altogether.

Grand Lodge 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

There are many reasons to turn away players from your tables as a game master. There are no rules in the guide to organized play that say I can, but there are no rules in the guide to organized play that say I cannot. There are 2 people locally that I have informed my VO and event organizers that I will not run for, nor play at the same table, nor play under. This has been a fact for over 6 months. This will not change unless the guide (or another official source) changes to change my options. Then I will just not GM when they are present.

I like to ensure all players at my table have a fun time, contributing as a GM is part of that for me. But there are players whose personality I will not subject myself to.

Scarab Sages

In answer to the orginal question "Can GMs for PFS turn players away just because they feel like it?" In my experience the answer is yes.

We have a local game shop with games every Thursday night, and unless you are part of the GM's close circle of friends you can not be guarenteed a seat at a table. Signing up via warhorn does not matter. Preferance is given to roomates and friends before anyone else, even if they have not signed up for any table.

This has happend 4 out of 5 game nights to several players and has caused some of us not to attend anymore.

Since home games are by invitation only, that is not a problem in those situations.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

It sounds like, in your example, if there are "several of you", that you could break off any form a 2nd table, yes?

Grand Lodge 4/5

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

Not with only three, or if the 'several' is one or two each night.

Scarab Sages

Nefreet wrote:
It sounds like, in your example, if there are "several of you", that you could break off any form a 2nd table, yes?

Over the course of the different nights is has been 3-4 different players, not all on the same night.

One night though, we did a form a table for Confirmation..it beat driving back home.

Silver Crusade 3/5

@emontague: Have you discussed this with your organizer? That is a pretty legit concern.

Silver Crusade 3/5

Quintin Verassi wrote:
There are 2 people locally that I have informed my VO and event organizers that I will not run for, nor play at the same table, nor play under. This has been a fact for over 6 months.

That was the largest of several factors that has kept me away from that same location.

Shadow Lodge *

Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
The Fox wrote:
Quintin Verassi wrote:
There are 2 people locally that I have informed my VO and event organizers that I will not run for, nor play at the same table, nor play under. This has been a fact for over 6 months.
That was the largest of several factors that has kept me away from that same location.

Don't know if that location is in a store, but there's a point where store management should be brought in.

If there is someone who is actively causing them to lose *customers*, they will want to know about it so that they can take action that would be beyond the scope of what PFS is able/willing to do.

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

pH unbalanced wrote:
The Fox wrote:
Quintin Verassi wrote:
There are 2 people locally that I have informed my VO and event organizers that I will not run for, nor play at the same table, nor play under. This has been a fact for over 6 months.
That was the largest of several factors that has kept me away from that same location.

Don't know if that location is in a store, but there's a point where store management should be brought in.

If there is someone who is actively causing them to lose *customers*, they will want to know about it so that they can take action that would be beyond the scope of what PFS is able/willing to do.

Ditto!

Grand Lodge 2/5

emontague wrote:

In answer to the orginal question "Can GMs for PFS turn players away just because they feel like it?" In my experience the answer is yes.

We have a local game shop with games every Thursday night, and unless you are part of the GM's close circle of friends you can not be guarenteed a seat at a table. Signing up via warhorn does not matter. Preferance is given to roomates and friends before anyone else, even if they have not signed up for any table.

This has happend 4 out of 5 game nights to several players and has caused some of us not to attend anymore.

Since home games are by invitation only, that is not a problem in those situations.

Did you not take that up with your VO/VL?

Dark Archive 2/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mulgar wrote:
In my opinion, if you can't handle a 6 person table, you aren't much of a gm. And if disagree with me that's fine.

Maybe your opinion isn't bad, but your delivery sure is.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

It looks to me like a lot of this is about expectation management. If you say in advance "I want to run a table of adventure X for 4 players", I don't think people will cry foul if you turn away a #5. If you just said "I'll run X", people will assume 6 players because that's the current PFS standard.

If you put up a table on Warhorn, I expect that signups there will trump people who just wander in, even if they're good friends. If they're such good friends, you could've tipped them off in advance and made sure they signed up on time.

If you prefer to run a certain level range, you could also announce that ahead of time.

A certain player you won't run for - that's the most awkward one I think. There can be solid reasons for that; some people you just can't get along with, or you had a bad breakup. Those people probably know that you don't want them there; if they try to get in anyway it's weird and awkward.

It could also be people considered notorious cheaters or disruptive. You could let them play but warn them that they're on a short leash. If it goes well you'll be more easygoing next time. But if it doesn't work then please don't come back to my table.

If you see someone sign up in advance that you don't want there, you could also just tell them in advance that you don't want them there. There's a difference in turning someone away before they travel to a gaming location, and doing it last minute.

---

Really, to a large degree this is just like any other social occasion; be mature, be considerate even towards people you don't like, and manage expectations.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/55/5 **** Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

One of the basic facts of the issue is that, everybody involved with the exclusion of Mike and John are doing this during their valuable free time.

The GMs usually invest quite a lot more of time in preparing the adventures, going to slot 0s to get the player perspective, printing drawing cards etc.

They should be free to state their comfort zone, and organizers can ignore it at their peril. In the vast majority of cases GMs will not send a new player away, if that means, that he won't find a game.

However I still think that it would be entirely reasonable not to seat a players who have repeatedly failed to register ahead of time like everybody else (if more people start doing this, GM prep becomes a nightmare).

Community Manager

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Removed some posts and their replies. Being dismissive of other people's game mastering skills is not cool: we all started somewhere and we all have our comfort zones, let's be respectful of varying skill levels, no matter if we're a GM or a player.

Grand Lodge 5/5

I am assuming you are talking about people you don't want to play with Fox?

Silver Crusade 3/5

Quintin Verassi wrote:
I am assuming you are talking about people you don't want to play with Fox?

Yep.

Grand Lodge 5/5

Sorry to hear that... I always enjoy running/playing with you.

Silver Crusade 3/5

Quintin Verassi wrote:
Sorry to hear that... I always enjoy running/playing with you.

Thanks dude! Likewise.

Scarab Sages 5/5

i would say that those 2 are a problem, and you should sit down with ur vo and event organizer and find a way to deal with the situation. public locations should be a friendly pace that people feel ok playing in.

Scarab Sages 5/5 5/5 *** Venture-Captain, Netherlands

Sebastian Hirsch wrote:


The GMs usually invest quite a lot more of time in preparing the adventures, going to slot 0s to get the player perspective, printing drawing cards etc.

Dont forget money. GMing isnt free. And it really irks me when people act like it is.

Dark Archive

Depending on your local support structure. FLGS here buys all the new scenarios and has a library that people who GM games in-store are permitted to use (the store collects $2/seat for games played to pay for this and the space). I feel that arrangement is great - the GMs get the benefit of playing for free, and the players are the ones that chip in.

5/5

The scenario is generally the tip of iceberg in terms of the expense for truly prepping it. Also, without getting the PDF myself, I would have to hand draw the map, which takes far longer than printing it out. It is cheaper monetarily, but not when you factor in what my time is worth to me.

Dark Archive

The store also keeps an archive of maps for some of the more complicated layouts, so that helps.

So for other expenses - I take it you mean things like having appropriate minis? Then there's the time investment of prepping. What other expenses go into it? Honest question, I'm looking at starting GMing soon and I want to be prepared.

Grand Lodge 4/5

LazarX wrote:
So in short the answer is yes, but it's a douchebag move to pull that personal restriction without preamble.

Is that more or less of a douchebag move than switching a GM who had prepared, as he was informed in advance, for Scenario X with a 4 player table at low tier, to running, even the same scenario, for a high tier table of 7 at the table?

Those, in case you don't realize it, makes even the "same" scenario, vastly different. At that point you wind up with abilities and spells on the NPCs that you haven't prepared, and is only fractionally better than running cold.

And, if Scenario X is one of the Specials, that could be even more different, since they have sub-tiers from 1-2 to 10-11, or even beyond. If you were prepping 3-4, and then get tasked to run 7-8, those have serious and major differences in the NPCs.

Akari Sayuri "Tiger Lily" wrote:

The store also keeps an archive of maps for some of the more complicated layouts, so that helps.

So for other expenses - I take it you mean things like having appropriate minis? Then there's the time investment of prepping. What other expenses go into it? Honest question, I'm looking at starting GMing soon and I want to be prepared.

Not all stores do that. My local store, at one time, would do some printing for me, back when I was having printer issues. Haven't requested any printing of them in some time, though.

GM Prep:
Preferably, a printed copy of the scenario, so you can mark it up as appropriate (highlight skill DCs, etc.)
Dice (lots and lots of dice)
Minis (extras needed, in case of players without minis, or needing one on the fly for a summoned creature)
Paper for notes
Maps for the encounters
Some way to track initiative
Pencils/pens (and spares to loan out)
Chronicle sheets
Sign-in sheet
Printouts or something for monster stats not included in the scenario, including templated beasties.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

kinevon wrote:
Akari Sayuri "Tiger Lily" wrote:
What other expenses go into it? Honest question, I'm looking at starting GMing soon and I want to be prepared.
  • Preferably, a printed copy of the scenario, so you can mark it up as appropriate (highlight skill DCs, etc.)
  • Dice (lots and lots of dice)
  • Minis (extras needed, in case of players without minis, or needing one on the fly for a summoned creature)
  • Paper for notes
  • Maps for the encounters
  • Some way to track initiative
  • Pencils/pens (and spares to loan out)
  • Chronicle sheets
  • Sign-in sheet
  • Printouts or something for monster stats not included in the scenario, including templated beasties.
  • Reading the forum thread for that scenario.
  • Reading any product reviews.
  • Spending time comprehending tactics and "thinking ahead".
  • Printing/understanding any unfamiliar spells being used.
  • Printing player handouts.
  • Tracking sheets (I'm looking at you, Bonekeep!)
  • Studying any relevant lore outside of the scenario, for added effect.
  • Looking ahead to see what levels and classes are signed up.
(edited to make both comments in list form)

Scarab Sages 5/5 5/5 *** Venture-Captain, Netherlands

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:
kinevon wrote:
Akari Sayuri "Tiger Lily" wrote:
What other expenses go into it? Honest question, I'm looking at starting GMing soon and I want to be prepared.
  • Preferably, a printed copy of the scenario, so you can mark it up as appropriate (highlight skill DCs, etc.)
  • Dice (lots and lots of dice)
  • Minis (extras needed, in case of players without minis, or needing one on the fly for a summoned creature)
  • Paper for notes
  • Maps for the encounters
  • Some way to track initiative
  • Pencils/pens (and spares to loan out)
  • Chronicle sheets
  • Sign-in sheet
  • Printouts or something for monster stats not included in the scenario, including templated beasties.
  • Reading the forum thread for that scenario.
  • Reading any product reviews.
  • Spending time comprehending tactics and "thinking ahead".
  • Printing/understanding any unfamiliar spells being used.
  • Printing player handouts.
  • Tracking sheets (I'm looking at you, Bonekeep!)
  • Studying any relevant lore outside of the scenario, for added effect.
  • Looking ahead to see what levels and classes are signed up.
(edited to make both comments in list form)
  • Printing/understanding any unfamiliar feats (monster feats can get weird)
  • Print of pictures of monsters I dont have the apropriate minis/pawns for or are unique to the scenario.

  • 51 to 100 of 106 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Can GMs for PFS turn players away just because they feel like it? All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.