| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ummm, Assuming you aren't PFS......
A GM has the right to make any changes, and, if he knows that people have played a product before, he is almost derelict in his duties if he doesn't switch things up to keep things less predictable..
Do I need to mention just how bad you will look if you complain that the GM changed what you know should have been there?
1) The GM can make any changes he wants. I would really change up a campaign if one of my players played through semi-recently.
2) Is this the bandit level? The bandits carry two poisons, but I think they are Dex and Str damage. I know for a fact there are two poisons.
Echo Woods Outlaws (CR 1) have Small centipede poison, dex damage.
Echo Woods Scouts (CR 1/2) have Greenblood oil, which is in fact con damage.
Jaris Pheongian (CR 2) has Medium Spider Venom, Str damage. Jaris is with an Iron Cobra that does Con damage.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
"...don't want to scrap a character that didn't actually die."
But the character DID die.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This sort of thing is why I don't like to run published adventures, since any player can just get their own copy and read it not only to get a leg up on the adventure, but might create in themselves the impression that they were dealt an injustice when it was just "I changed something."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Rules knowledge is one thing, but that sort of information is intended for you to discover via the various Knowledge skills, not by using player knowledge. You don't need that kind of leg up--the game is already stacked in your favor. Get into the mindset of your character and forget what you think you know.
Do the GM and your fellow players know you've read the module? Do they know that you're reading it during or between game sessions while playing said module? If not, can you see why that might be considered bad etiquette or how it might damage the experience for you, your fellow players, and the GM?
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This sort of thing is why I don't like to run published adventures, since any player can just get their own copy and read it not only to get a leg up on the adventure, but might create in themselves the impression that they were dealt an injustice when it was just "I changed something."I didn't read it for a leg up. I'm actually leading in character deaths lol. I think moreso being an experienced player gives you legs up. Such as knowing what certain immunities are conferred by monsters of a certain type, or knowing Oozes have garbage AC but usually DR or tons of health.
Um... that doesn't make you an experienced player, that makes you a metagamer.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
GM changes scenario because *reasons* possibly because players have played/read/GM'd said scenario. Either way it wan't a 'My GM messed up a rule', the GM reasonably changed something, it wasn't/might not be an error.
Player 'complains' about this after double checking the 'error'.
My advice. Leave it well alone, and stop reading/checking the scenario.
IMO, it is extremely poor form.
He runs things by the book for the most part and uses the PFS prep sheets. I want to ask him about it because I think he honestly made a mistake. If it was intended, I'm totally fine with that. FWIW, I don't recall it until several days after. We had a combat with another Serpentfolk that also did Str DMG.
I agree that changing things up is a good idea but obviously if I was using prior knowledge to metagame, I would have brought anti-toxin.
I also understand GM fiat, however changing energy/damage types doesn't affect the effective CR. A STR poison nerfs damage of melee and can knock you unconscious but doesn't kill a character outright. That's like saying changing a wizard enemy from having heavy burst damage/CC spell list to one populated by death/ negative level effects. I'd argue it differs from the spirit of what was written for the combat.
Lets be clear. You want to "ask" (or confront) them about it is because you're attached to your character and don't want them to die.
|
|
I'm currently playing in an amazing Emerald Spire game with my friends. I ran ES as far as floor 3 as recently as a year and a a half ago, so I've read the whole module already. In the past session my character died (and another was a 2 or lower roll on a Lesser Restoration cast away from dying) due a Con sapping poison. I didn't remember this particular mob having a Con poison and in my mourning/curiosity I converted my PDF to text and Ctrl F-fu'd the boss. Turns out it was a Str poison. We haven't done anything past that combat. I have new characters in mind but don't want to scrap a character that didn't actually die. What should I do and how should I bring it up to the GM?
I wouldn't have read it in the first place (ignorance is sometimes bliss) but I can understand wanting to check if you liked the character and the death was really down to the wire.
If you feel the need to bring it up rather than accepting it as a change (mistaken or otherwise) I certainly wouldn't complain, I'd just honestly explain what you've done and then ask the GM without rancour if it was a mistake or a change they made.
If it was a mistake, I think a reasonable GM would then make allowances for that mistake, especially if you liked your character and didn't want them to die like that.
If they say it was an intentional change, then I'd accept it and move on. Even if I didn't believe them or didn't agree with the rationale behind the change, if I was enjoying the game enough to keep playing I'd just move on and make a new character.
Perhaps making a mental note that the GM is changing the module and thus checking things like this would be fruitless in future until I'm convinced it's a rules error.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If as a GM one of my players told me I had made a mistake because he had read the scenario and I had done something different. He would be out of that game immediately, or I would cease running that game. The degree of poor behavior this is on the behalf of the player is unbelievable to me, I have not come across such poor behavior in 30 years of gaming.
If you did not mean to come across as a dick you failed because you are acting as one and frankly you are lucky you can find anyone willing to GM for you.
The module has been in print for years and the op said he had run parts of it before and the DM knows he has read the module before. It's not like the op read ahead to get an advantage. I would either, invite the DM to look at this thread or just ask him if it was a mistake or intentional change...and then be fine with whatever he says or does.
If as a GM one of my players told me I had made a mistake because he had read the scenario and I had done something different. He would be out of that game immediately, or I would cease running that game. The degree of poor behavior this is on the behalf of the player is unbelievable to me, I have not come across such poor behavior in 30 years of gaming.
If you did not mean to come across as a dick you failed because you are acting as one and frankly you are lucky you can find anyone willing to GM for you.
I was going to post something similar but decided to the original poster the benefit of the doubt, but after reading his response I just wanted to say that I would do the same thing if one of my players pulled this on me. I agree with what you said 100%.
Good lord some of you take this way too seriously. Asking if the poison really should've been con based isn't a big deal, seeing as they lost a character because of it and came close to losing another. Just be polite about it and don't push the point if the GM says that it was intended as such.
Going as far as to say that you'd throw people out just for questioning a thing that cost them their character is what I'd call being overly controlling; you're GMs, not old greek gods.
If he had questioned it at the time it happened that would be one thing, but looking up the information in a module and assuming the GM made a mistake is a different matter entirely. If the situation was too powerful then why did he not bring it up at the time? Did anything change between the time the encounter took place and he looked it up? I have absolutely no problem with a player questioning my decisions, but when they start looking thing up in an adventure I am running that is plain straight out cheating. One a player starts doing this I have to question what else he has looked up. His mistake was not questioning the GM, but rather going back and rereading the module.
A player should be able to question a GM about how he runs the game. That is not the issue, what is the issue is the player looking up things out of the module. This is also one reason I never bother with published adventures.
Didn't you read the rest of OPs posts? GM and other players know that OP has read the module since they've ran it before. And one of the reasons they thought there might've been a mistake was because another enemy of that sort had STR damage poison, which I'd say would give reason for doubt. Some things you don't want to interrupt an ongoing game for but it can leave a sour taste that one addresses only later, but they haven't played since so what does it matter if he brings it up now? It likely won't mess up a long spanning timeline.
If you don't trust your players then that's your problem. I'm willing to give OP the benefit of the doubt that they searched up only that particular tidbit of information.
OP, if you are playing in a game, you owe the GM a basic level of respect.
As the self-acknowledged rules lawyer you are already a bit iffy on that.
Second guessing the GM in any situation is at best presumptuous.
Do you honestly believe you have been cheated because you lost a character because the encounter did not go off exactly like you read it should have?
Even if the GM did not deliberately change the scenario,
As a GM, I rarely use canned adventures, and when I do, I always customize them. I have had some players who read up on the module for that little edge. When, not if, I catch on to this, I make a point to use that cheating against the player in question. If the player does not get the point, he is out of the game. Since he likely does not limit his foibles to inappropriate "research" he probably won't be missed overmuch.
I once had a player that actually complained that I had changed the scenario on him. The other players laughed him out of that session, and flipped him stuff about it until we booted him for even more Innapropriate behavior.
Didn't you read the rest of OPs posts? GM and other players know that OP has read the module since they've ran it before. And one of the reasons they thought there might've been a mistake was because another enemy of that sort had STR damage poison, which I'd say would give reason for doubt. Some things you don't want to interrupt an ongoing game for but it can leave a sour taste that one addresses only later, but they haven't played since so what does it matter if he brings it up now? It likely won't mess up a long spanning timeline.
If you don't trust your players then that's your problem. I'm willing to give OP the benefit of the doubt that they searched up only that particular tidbit of information.
Again the problem is not questioning the GM; the problem is looking thing up. Just because you have ran something before does not mean you are going to remember everything. The fact that the OP posted this post only proves the point. Once the GM decided to run the adventure the OP should have not touched the source material. It seems the OP is looking for justification after the fact and wants a do over. If he felt something was wrong he should have brought it up with the GM instead of looking it up.
This is exactly the type of thing that should be brought up during the game instead of waiting. If the character did not actually die it would have had a major effect on the course of the combat. His actions if he lived will probably dramatically affect the entire adventure. If the GM made a mistake how is he supposed to fix it now? Does he rerun the entire combat from the point where he made the mistake? Or does he accept obvious paradoxes in the story line? How would the combat have been affected by changing the poison damage? Would it have weakened the party enough that maybe they did not beat the BBEG? No waiting until after the game is over creates too many problems, things like this should be addressed at the time they happen. If it takes too long to deal with the GM can make a temporary ruling to get the game back on track, but then at least everyone is aware of the situation.
Just ask your dm about it. Send him a text if you can or bring another character to your next session if you can't contact him beforehand. As much of this thread reads, you might want to phrase it carefully so he knows you aren't reading the module. He will give you a yes or no and tahdah question resolved.
I've run Jerimond's Orb some 5 times and played it 3, so I know every tiny bit. The last time I played, I made sure the GM knew and gave her both advice on 'how to', but also on ways to modify it to stop someone from 'pre-reading'.
She was irritated, but I played 'dumb' and she eventually realized I had no intention of ruining her running. She modified the bulk after that and I helped her cover gaps. She now has both the confidence to 'correct' the author's mistakes, and to fearlessly strike out on her own. She just finished 'Sunless Citadel' as a cave system for her 5-6 level players (Kobolds with levels in Rogue are scary!). some of her players played it long ago, but didn't catch on.
I am going of you have stated happened.
I'm currently playing in an amazing Emerald Spire game with my friends. I ran ES as far as floor 3 as recently as a year and a a half ago, so I've read the whole module already. In the past session my character died (and another was a 2 or lower roll on a Lesser Restoration cast away from dying) due a Con sapping poison. I didn't remember this particular mob having a Con poison and in my mourning/curiosity I converted my PDF to text and Ctrl F-fu'd the boss. Turns out it was a Str poison. We haven't done anything past that combat. I have new characters in mind but don't want to scrap a character that didn't actually die. What should I do and how should I bring it up to the GM?
You stated that you looked up the stat block of the boss. You also state you don’t want to scrap a character that did not actually die. The first instance you straight out state you looked up information from the adventure. In the second on you are asking for a do over. You just stated that you brought up your grievance with your GM. Considering your character died that would indicate your GM did not change his ruling at that point. Now you are asking for your GM to change it so you did not die. That is a do over.
You are asking for advice on how to handle a situation where the GM has already made a call. After he made the call you still do not accept it and are looking for ways to overturn it.
Whether I would accept something in my game is besides the point. This is a GM’s call and he made it. And for the record I have used a lot worse things against my players than simple CON poison.
|
I think alot of people here are being far too hard on him. His GM generally runs things by the book. His GM also knows he's ran this module before, so it doesn't really matter that he looked it up in this case, as he could have just as easily remembered it. As far as has been stated, his GM hasn't changed things up to this point.
Now, at this point his character has died because the GM changed something that probably significantly upped the CR of an encounter.
I can totally understand being a little upset by that.
But here's the thing, it's not an official PFS game. So the GM has all the authority in the world to change the module how they see fit. Just accept the character death and move on man. There's not a good way to confront the GM about this.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I make a mistake that causes a PC to die, I retcon that death. The OP is perfectly justified to ask the GM if things were changed, so long as it is done respectfully and the final decision is accepted without further drama. The GM is also within their rights to leave the death stand.
This is the problem about asking strangers for advice on this as well. We don't know your relationship with said DM and your guys play styles etc. I know what I would do in mine (we pretty much never retroactively fix a problem once the session is over and just remember it for next time.) This isn't good for everyone. Just have to bite the bullet and talk it out or let it go.
|
|
Knowing it and using it are two different things.Um... that doesn't make you an experienced player, that makes you a metagamer.This sort of thing is why I don't like to run published adventures, since any player can just get their own copy and read it not only to get a leg up on the adventure, but might create in themselves the impression that they were dealt an injustice when it was just "I changed something."I didn't read it for a leg up. I'm actually leading in character deaths lol. I think moreso being an experienced player gives you legs up. Such as knowing what certain immunities are conferred by monsters of a certain type, or knowing Oozes have garbage AC but usually DR or tons of health.
That is, of course, very true.
But he -did- state that it gives a 'leg up' ... I cannot see how that can be taken as anything other than using that knowledge.
I realize every one of us makes a mistake along those lines, from time to time. But I also know that none of the people I have played campaigns with on a regular bases would consider it a leg up. There would be a pause, an 'oops' followed by a sheepish look or three, and a quick change of actions, if it was still their turn when it was noticed.
Nothing to get upset over, but then again, not something someone is considering a 'leg up.'
Intentionally using that information (having a 'leg up')... is pretty much the definition of metagaming.
|
|
Pretending you're not using it is just lying to ones self. No one else would believe it.
Highly disagree with this. I've played in adventures I've run before and not used any knowledge of the scenario plenty of times.
Look, basically in order for you to not use knowledge you may have over the years of gaming, the GM HAS to make changes.
I've also attacked zombies with a rapier and skeletons with a sword. Just because you can't help but metagame with your meta-knowledge doesn't make others incapable.
Bit of an attitude here. I actually played another section of Emerald Spire as a PFS event, where the GM misunderstood the poison rules. He had us taking hp damage when it should have been Str damage. By your standard, I shouldn't be playing in his game again because I intend to show him what he did wrong, because he's rather new to GMing. Rules get misremembered. If you're going to kick someone out when they come and talk to you about it like adults, you have no buisness as a GM. I understand if they come screaming at you, but that's not what's happening here.If as a GM one of my players told me I had made a mistake because he had read the scenario and I had done something different. He would be out of that game immediately, or I would cease running that game. The degree of poor behavior this is on the behalf of the player is unbelievable to me, I have not come across such poor behavior in 30 years of gaming.
If you did not mean to come across as a dick you failed because you are acting as one and frankly you are lucky you can find anyone willing to GM for you.
I should note that never have I kicked a player out of a game including running games at conventions and universities (I should have on one occasion because of his Sexist and Abusive behavior away from the table but I only found out about that a year later).
I have never had a problem with rules discussion so long as it does not take too long and start annoying other players. What I will not tolerate is being accused of 'cheating' by a player who has read a module I am using and thinks I have changed it or am running it wrong. But probably I have been lucky I see a lot pf discussion of behavior on Forums which I consider unacceptable I have just never had one of those sort of players.That is arrogant use of knowledge the player should not have and is rude beyond the point of acceptability and is not something I will ever tolerate in a game I am running
I think Bob Bob Bob pointed out something important about the whole situation. The OP is not only changing the goal post, but changing what happened. In the original post he states he looked it up, but later changes it to he had someone else look it up. He also responded to one of my post that he does not want a do over, but the very first post states that he does not think his character died. After the first few post start coming back negative he starts to change what happens and what he claims he wants.
At this point I think at this point his credibility on anything is questionable.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm currently playing in an amazing Emerald Spire game with my friends. I ran ES as far as floor 3 as recently as a year and a a half ago, so I've read the whole module already. In the past session, my character died (and another was a 2 or lower roll on a Lesser Restoration cast away from dying) due to a Con sapping poison. I didn't remember this particular mob having a Con poison and in my mourning/curiosity I converted my PDF to text and Ctrl F-fu'd the boss. Turns out it was a Str poison. We haven't done anything past that combat. I have new characters in mind but don't want to scrap a character that didn't actually die. What should I do and how should I bring it up to the GM?
To ease your mind, simply ask your DM when you have a moment. Take him aside and ask if he made the change on purpose or if it was a mistake. As you said, if he screwed up, see what can be done about it. Just don't do it in front of the group. Most DM's have no problem being caught in a mistake. I'll ret-con s+&! so my players get a fair shake. Any good DM would admit the mistake and do their best to rectify it.
I cheat on rules interpretations; I pass that job off to one of our 'rules' people. I'm too busy running the game world interactions to waste time on obscure points, so I pawn off the job ASAP. I sleep much better and have fewer people mad at me.
I think Bob Bob Bob pointed out something important about the whole situation. The OP is not only changing the goal post, but changing what happened. In the original post he states he looked it up, but later changes it to he had someone else look it up. He also responded to one of my post that he does not want a do over, but the very first post states that he does not think his character died. After the first few post start coming back negative he starts to change what happens and what he claims he wants.
At this point I think at this point his credibility on anything is questionable.
I did both. I had a friend check PFS prep sheet and I converted my PDF to text so that I could CtrL F without seeing other stuff (since said friend doesn't have the PDF). Pictures are worth 1000 words.
My goal wasn't to get my character rezzed. Just to ask DM what the sitch was.
I'm currently playing in an amazing Emerald Spire game with my friends. I ran ES as far as floor 3 as recently as a year and a a half ago, so I've read the whole module already. In the past session my character died (and another was a 2 or lower roll on a Lesser Restoration cast away from dying) due a Con sapping poison. I didn't remember this particular mob having a Con poison and in my mourning/curiosity I converted my PDF to text and Ctrl F-fu'd the boss. Turns out it was a Str poison. We haven't done anything past that combat. I have new characters in mind but don't want to scrap a character that didn't actually die. What should I do and how should I bring it up to the GM?
You twigged to Boss mob using the wrong poison after a year and a half, you remembered it well enough to be able to pull the information from raw text with a "find" word, yet you cannot remember that you wanted to keep playing your character because you didn't think it should have died............
As to the raw text dodge. I cannot get the thought out of my head that having the dungeon all done as raw text would make it a lot less obvious to be look stuff up during the game itself. No telltale pictures you know.
You may well be perfectly innocent in all this, but you have to admit that it looks bad.