Solstice Scar GM Thread (Inactive)

Game Master Granta

I am helping parents relocate but will work on 1-2 this weekend.

Me too.

-Posted with Wayfinder

So . . . when you open the file, please look for text highlighted in yellow. Those are the parts which need to be completed now. I ask that each GM work on the file for their subtier, and that the backups help with subtiers 7-8 & 10-11. And remember to remove the yellow highlighting once you fill in the information.

I went in to take a look and would like to clarify something. I figured that what is needed is to provide some basic info for each of the the monster lore spoilers. However, I've encountered two different interpretations of monster lore checks depending on the GMs I play with.

A successful check allows you to remember a bit of useful information about that monster.

Some GMs interpret this as that a successful check reveals what the creature is, including its type (and subtype, if any). That's it. Others would reveal these, and include one additional info. The crux is whether what the monster is (and its type) is deemed "useful information" or not.

Since we are doing this collectively, we would need some consistency across all of us?

Since we are doing this collectively, we would need some consistency across all of us?

So far I've only run into one GM who uses the stricter definition, and he isn't here.

Creature, type, and subtype is all I've ever given or been given. For some that's very useful, more useful than for others. An inquisitor's bane is one example.

I've never been in a game where you get more than that unless you exceed the DC by 5 or more.

Where I've seen variation, is some GM's provide info they think should be recalled, usually mindful of the PC who made the successful skill check and the situation as the encounter unfolds. I've begun to do more of that recently. That method would seem to help keep a faster pace in PbP. It's also pretty useful when dealing with new players less familiar with the sorts of questions that can make a critical difference in an encounter.

Other GMs award the player one or more questions, based on the amount by which the PC exceeded the check. A slower method, probably making PbP even more of a daily drip-drip. Can sometimes come across as a stump-the-chump approach, especially for newer players.

I usually brief the PCs at the beginning of play that I will reveal information I feel most appropriate when a knowledge skill check is rolled, but also offer to instead let the PC ask a specific question when he or she makes the roll. Seems a fair balance in my experience.

Creature, type, and subtype is all I've ever given or been given.

And yet you gave everything for perceiving a trap :-P

That was a call made by the scenario's author in the GM Discussion thread re A3. I think it makes sense in that case, or the encounter has the potential to be a slloooowww head-banging exercise in frustration.

Like listening to Moby.

(Moby fans, please don't hate me.)

Interesting, I'll have to give it a closer look.

It looks like email will be the best way to pass tokens to GMs at RPGgeek. Does anybody know how to link to email on here, instead of to a webpage?

I think the best you can do for an email link on the paizo forums is to link to their person page.

So a link to make it easy to send me mail would be
http://paizo.com/people/GMAerondor

Or do you mean to the rpggeek email?

I guess the same idea would work..

https://rpggeek.com/user/aerondor

Or you could even try
https://rpggeek.com/login?lasturl=%2Fgeekmail%2Fcompose%3Ftouser%3Daerondor

That seems to take you right to the email page, so even easier.

Usually I've seen GMs give the name, type, and subtype, and the descriptor text from the monster entry. Not more than that though. This is what I was planning to put in my entries:

Look good?

I've worked on some of the creature spoilers, but now I have a question. What is the group consensus on the knowledge local rolls for the orcs and humans? Do we want to give a hint as to their classes/roles (to distinguish them a bit) or just the straight up racial characteristics.

In the draft text descriptions, I indicated their arms, armor, and other visible gear that should provide clues about their martial or caster roles. Their actions and speech will provide further clues. But exceeding the initial Knowledge (local) DC would reveal only information associated with their race, not their class skills and abilities.

You'll be in the best position make spot judgment calls based on the situation at your table.

Could somebody please double check the links on slide two here?

The links all worked for me, and seem to point to the correct threads.

The email links didn't do anything for me - just opened a blank browser window, but that could be my local settings or something too. It was easy enough to pick the email address out, though.

Not sure if the timeline is open for discussion or not, but you have an event triggering on labor day (US holiday). I would expect a slowdown around that time from the US folk. Obviously the game must move forward but I would expect to have a few bot requests on that weekend if the last couple specials are any indication.

I myself will be at a convention that weekend, although I will most definitely be keeping up with my thread at least twice a day, so no need to call in the backups on my behalf.

Ack. Missed Labor Day in my planning. I think we just move forward, but maybe more slowly around the holiday.

I was just thinking it may be better to push the transition one day so people who requested to be botted on the holiday can have a day to personally post and tie up loose ends before the background suddenly changes on them.

As one of the backup GMs, I entirely agree with not having any major transitions on that holiday weekend. As of right now, I will be camping that weekend and will probably not be able to help out other GMs much.

Once GenCon is over, we'll figure out how best to deal with Labor Day. For now, is there any other information that should be posted to the Gameplay thread for easy access?

From Knowledge skill descriptions wrote:

A successful check allows you to remember a bit of useful information about that monster.

Some GMs interpret this as that a successful check reveals what the creature is, including its type (and subtype, if any). That's it. Others would reveal these, and include one additional info. The crux is whether what the monster is (and its type) is deemed "useful information" or not.

Since we are doing this collectively, we would need some consistency across all of us?

This topic has been the subject of many debates. I don't recall ever seeing anything official from Paizo or PFS on it.

If a PC makes the DC, I provide basic information and one piece of special information that will be "useful" to the party. That requires that I, as GM, have an understanding of what information might or might not benefit the group. I will also often include HD and stats that might be knowable, like STR/DEX.

In addition, I also reveal the armor class after a few rounds of combat. My reason for this is the following:

1. Players should be encouraged to invest in Knowledge skill beyond the background checks. In many famous/epic battles in this genre, knowledge about the enemy often proves crucial. PF should emulate that experience.

2. In a home campaign, GM and players would acknowledge retained information from PCs having faced different enemies. That doesn't really work in PFS, so players with K skills kind of get screwed over in often being required to keep having to make checks and never benefiting from actual PC experience.

3. There's a ton of information a PC would have based on interacting with a creature, that is simply not conveyed through skill checks. This is why I always roll in the open (unless the rules specifically say not to) and I let players see modifiers. If someone hits you with a bat, you're going to know if some is doing more damage because of raw Strength vs Skill.

4. I do not provide class levels or abilities, but I do allow players to know when feats have been used e.g. Power Attack. I did see some post that this is now requires a feat in some book, but I haven't seen it.

For the record, I am not a fan of the hide-the-ball attitude a lot of GMs have about knowledge checks. Screwing players over on K. checks or intentionally giving them worthless information does nothing to improve player experience, in my opinion.

Have all players reported to their games? If anybody is still missing tomorrow, please grab a replacement off the waitlist.

All mine have reported.

All in

Same here.

I know we do not start officially until 25 Aug, but can we start mustering in our gameplay thread? Normally, I would just go ahead to get the players warmed up just for rp purposes, but for this scenario, right at the start, they choose the skill to get the +1 bonus, which crosses into game mechanics, so I'm hesitating.

I got them started on that as a bit of an ice breaker. Gets them dotted into gameplay too which is helpful.

I was going to start by describing days 1-3, since the scenario starts on the fourth and final day, just to ease them in and get everyone to make introductions.

I also started on the feast RP. They are mustered and i want them easing into it - also gets them a chance to show they are active prior to the official start of the special since i mustered them prior to GenCon.

I have one player who hasn't reported, but our table is having an identity crisis. It's a 3-4 table with two of the five already level 5, one is level 6, and the fifth is willing to play up from level 4.

Need GM Hmm and GM Granta to let me know if I should switch it to a 5-6 tier and let the 4 play up or force the two level 5's and one level 6 to play down?

We said, switch away!

Hmm

NN959: I have one spot available at my tier 3-4 table, so you can also move the lvl4 to my table if you want. You can then pick two new lvl 5-6s from the waitinglist.

If the player prefers to stay at your table that is also fine, just let me know.

Link to discussion page

I just want to give a shout out to the pre-game mustering description that GM Red wrote up.

That's an awesome description, Red!

Hmm

I have 1 pax still unaccounted for. PM sent with link; just waiting to see if they bite.

NN959: I have one spot available at my tier 3-4 table, so you can also move the lvl4 to my table if you want. You can then pick two new lvl 5-6s from the waitinglist.

If the player prefers to stay at your table that is also fine, just let me know.

Link to discussion page

I've now got seven players, so I'll try and send one your way

Aerondor, Aram Zey, Kuey, nightdeath, Qwerty, and Woodenman will start with the aid tokens.

For the skill boost from the Torchbearing, the wording states "PCs", so I assume that excludes eidolons, familiars, or animal companions from benefiting.

I remember something rather generic in the forums that might contradict that. Anyone?

Question about the aid tokens...

These are "untyped" generally are they? So anyone with an aid token can use it for the basic "offensive, healing, inspiration" effects. However if you you have specifically boosted a token then if it is used for the thing it is boosted to do, then it gives the specific ability.

E.g. If I have a token boosted with a neutralise poison, I could use it to cast that, or use it for a (non boosted) allied offensive. Then then we pass it onto the next table, we can choose how we want to try and boost it (with a skill check, attack roll, or using a healing/inspire/spellcasting resource).

Half correct. Yes, you may activate a token without using a boost on it. But your players must choose to activate or boost, not both.

If a table receives an Aid Token and doesn't need its benefits, they're encouraged to boost its potency . . .

Right so when you pass it on, if you used it you cannot boost it. Gotcha.

Question. If my table has used an aid token already in this encounter then pass it on, then before the end of the encounter they receive another, can they (1) use it again in this encounter, or (2) they can only use it at the next one? I read it as #2 but want to verify. Thanks.

A separate question to put in separate post so easier to track. Was wondering whether we want to use this space also for GMs to also make request for aid tokens, e.g. party urgently needs healing, etc? Otherwise, those of us who have it might not end up passing it to those who most need it at that time.

I would need à gm backup for today. Gayel nord.

-Posted with Wayfinder

I got ya.

Question. If my table has used an aid token already in this encounter then pass it on, then before the end of the encounter they receive another, can they (1) use it again in this encounter, or (2) they can only use it at the next one? I read it as #2 but want to verify. Thanks.

The scenario does say, "A table can only benefit from one token per encounter."

A separate question to put in separate post so easier to track. Was wondering whether we want to use this space also for GMs to also make request for aid tokens, e.g. party urgently needs healing, etc? Otherwise, those of us who have it might not end up passing it to those who most need it at that time.

That's what the recruitment thread is for.

Congratulations to Dungeon Master S for reporting the first success, and to Aerondor for passing the first aid token.

Please, PLEASE remember to pass the tokens quickly. The faster we pass them, the more times they get used.

To Dungeon Master S? What about that team of magnificent pathfinders? ;-)

They were amazing, I just reported. (The rolls were really good)

-Posted with Wayfinder

My table has one of the swarms down, shouldn't take too long for them to drop the second. They've got enough skilled characters in the party to average 5 successes in a round.

Mine finished the garden this morning...was on the run, so just reporting it now.