|
Ah, I do roll behind the screen for rolls that I feel would lend to too much meta knowledge. Also, I often roll the d20 without showing modifiers online (at the table, players never know the modifiers...but if an enemy rolls a 20, they know they're in trouble either way). I also roll certain player checks behing the screen, including some perecption checks, exactly for that reason you say.
|
|
I was going to post this in gameplay using OOC...but I really should be a good boy and keep this kind of silly stuff in discussion...
With that Rhydderch rises and surveys the scene before speaking with to his companions. "This day has been taxing my friends, and I fear I have called upon Sarenrae too often today. I must rest now and thank the goddess for the help she has given us so that she may continue to bless us tomorrow. I fear I will be of little use unless I am able to do so."
Teeheehee.
In all seriousness, wouldn't Rhydderch finish dealing with the baddies they caught, and helping the group decide what comes next (whether that's before or after rest)? Or is he the type of character that when he's done, he's done? Just curious. I remember Kyle specifically calling to treat the lady with non lethal because he might want to question her. No one has done a heal check on her to see her condition just yet. The color sprayed dude would be conscious in a matter of a minute or so, as well.
|
To be honest, I was giving Rhydderch a story line out in case we weren't allowed to rest. Regardless Rhydderch has already secured the unconscious fellow, stabilized and healed Harboth and, technically, hasn't left the boat yet. Although he clearly intends to do so.
Now that the scenario has reached a natural pause point, combined with the fact that we're heading into the weekend and thus find ourselves with a more relaxed posting schedule, I think we need to have an honest discussion about what is working and what isn't working with the house rules.
First and foremost...if the posting schedule (which is currently more strict insofar as when updates are expected) doesn't work for one member of this group, then it doesn't work for me. If we know that Rachele can't post during the school day then why not change the afternoon posting time to 4pm EST and in turn the early evening post to 8pm EST...giving everyone a fair shot at getting their actions in before the iron gate comes crashing down.
Or...given the fact that there are probably one or two encounters remaining...move to a morning/evening update schedule; which will at worst only add a day or two to our total game time? (Quite frankly, I'm not sure why we're in such a hurry anyway to finish anyway.)
Yes I know that the scenario was written for 4 PCs...but 6 PCs signed up to play; and all 6 should have the opportunity to do so. Thus far every character who has been rendered unconscious has been the direct result of one or more players not getting their actions in under the wire; its unfair for the player who gets knocked out (and suddenly is no longer able to play for a while), nor is it fair to those who must expend their resources to revive said player..especially knowing that the most difficult battle is typically the last.
As it would turn out I'm not thrilled with the lack of initiative order and all of the issues it creates; and my feelings are the same on the inability to use tactics due to a lack of maps or grids. It sounded like an interesting experiment but its not working for me. However its something I'm willing to live with for the next week or two.
But the one thing I won't budge on is playing on a team where everyone doesn't get an opportunity to play.
|
|
I'm all about honest discussions :)
Earlier, I made it clear that the expectations of these rules were stated ahead of time, and clarified them further. Finally, in the spirit of compromise and team work, I changed how I ran the table. I do not advance the combat unless the vast majority of players have their turns in.
All players have the opportunity to play, Rhydderch, within the context of the rules given. That includes ways to post moves ahead of time when a player knows that he/she cannot be available. I do not feel the newer format is more strict. From the beginning I've said 3 times/day and I gave general time periods when those will happen. I've simply put concise times so people know exactly what deadlines we're working with, since 'morning' can mean anything.
As I mentioned before, since the beginning, however, using a map/grid and/or having a slower one to two times/day posting schedule doesn't work for me, personally. As you can tell, I'm a very active poster, and I would like to actually do a little faster, if anything else. If there are players who can only post 1-2 times / day, it does not mean they are bad people...or they are not dedicated...it just means that my style of running a Pbp table isn't a good fit for them. Again, this has been stated since the first day.
I am thankful that you were willing to try something like this, being that it's a bit 'outside the box.' I'm sorry that many of the elements do not work for you. I know that the way I run tables (including locally and via skype) is not a 'one size fits all.'
I gave you a free and open chance to leave the sceario if you wished to, with no stings attached, and that's still open to you or anyone. However, I am not making further changes to how I've run the scenario thus far. I feel that I've been fair and compromising.
At the end of the scenario, I invite all players to provide feedback (either on the board or through PM) on how this has worked out for him/her and any suggestions they have to improve it. Based on that feedback, my own observations, and my gaming style/needs, I will probably do another one. Those who do enjoy this faster style of play will be welcome to play.
|
|
I want to expand just a little more on the "Why" I push for timed postings and/or postings per day...and why I'm willing to skip player's turns if necessary.
At a game table, the pace of combat is important. If combat moves too slow, players get bored, and may even leave a campaign. Plenty of players (and GMs) refuse to play higher level combat because it's a slower pace. As a result, different GM's have different approaches.
Some GM's put a time limit on players to make combat decisions at the table...if they fail to do so, their PC is delayed or may even skip a turn (This is actually advice given to GM's in the Gamemastery Guide, I believe). The GM does not do this to punish players....far from it. He does it to keep the experience fast and fun for the other players...to keep it from slowing down too much.
On the other side, some GMs allow players to take as much time as they need. This works best for new groups and more patient players.
Which way is "better"? That depends on the GM and the group. Sometimes a GM feels a group out and adjusts his approach rules accordingly. Othertimes, a GM sets up the campaign with those expectations clearly laid out ahead of time so that players can decide whether or not it is a good fit for them before committing.
I push for specific posting times, and I'm even willing to skip a turn or two because I care more about keeping others interested (and at the risk of sounding selfish, that includes myself). I'm not looking to 'punish' people or take away actions they are 'entitled' to. Rather, I seek to preserve the experience and keep it moving smoothly for the group as a whole. Again, the way I run Pbp is specifically for posters who are more active and more available than average.
|
|
...and how odd that the player who is one of the most active posters is the one who is having the most difficulty.
As players we were flexible when you were on the road for a week...and we've been flexible when you've had late meetings and the update was delayed by an hour or more. The fact that you can't be flexible enough to change one update time to accommodate one of your players who is in school at the time of the update astounds me.
Clearly I am the only one with the problem...or the only one willing to speak up. So I will need to think long and hard this weekend about whether or not I wish to continue. My incentive for doing so has decreased considerably as I have completed both of my faction missions and survived 4 encounters; which entitles me to a Chronicle Sheet with full XP and PP credit. I'll miss out on some gold and I'll have to deal with whatever disease the rat gave me in the first encounter at the start of my next scenario; but my character will at least live to fight another day.
|
|
Why are you so concerned when 1) the player in question is not expressing direct concern and 2) She has the option to post her moves ahead of time if she so desires?
I am not aware that completing 4 encounters out of the total number entitled a player to the XP and chronicle sheet. I know there's a rule that allows a player who died and is raised by the end to receive XP if they were at least alive for that many encounters...but as far as leaving the table before an adventure is complete, I know of no such concession. If you decide to leave early, which you are welcome to do, please find me that post/rule/etc. As long as you are entitled to it, by printed rules, Paizo FAQ, etc, I will make sure I get the sheet filled out for you.
|
|
1. I am concerned because when everyone doesn't contribute it can have a negative impact on the entire party.
2. "A PC may only receive XP if he survives the scenario or is raised from the dead by the scenario's conclusion and completed at least three encounters over the course of the adventure." (I am alive, and I have completed at least three encounters.")
|
|
That rule that you quoted specifically deals with a character who dies and sits out of a number of combats because of death and is later revived. There is no indication anywhere in the context of that paragraph that it covers players who willingly leave a table in progress.
And since you seem intent on painting me as an inflexable dictator, let me take this one step further.
My rules clearly state....
Players must be able to post in the early morning, lunch and late afternoon of each weekday, and once on weekend days. Players need access to a printer and a scanner.
It seems like Rachele is in school during the lunch posting period.
If I was doing a table where I advertised that a game met every Wednesday, Friday and Saturday, and a player joined...but then started missing every Friday, I would be well within my rights as GM to ask that player to leave the table. Again, they aren't a bad person...but they joined a game even though they were unable to meet the meeting times the day requires.
If a person was in one of my PFS tables, and left every 3 rounds for about 5 minutes (one round of combat) to, let's say, take care of her child or answer a cell phone, I would be totally in my rights to ask her to leave.
However, I have not asked anyone to leave.
Even though some people (and it isn't just Rachelle) have missed entire swaths of posting times, I have not asked anyone to leave. I have not called anyone out. I have simple moved to the next round if enough people had posted....just like I would at the table. If one out five players stepped out to talk on his cell phone, guess what? We continue combat and skip his turn.
I have not only exercised my right to ask them to leave, I have given them an opportunity to post their moves ahead of time...which I don't have to do.
In other words, Rhydderch, I am working with people so that everyone can participate and have fun. And, the only problem I see as far as you are concerned, is that I'm not answering your concern in the exact way you have asked me to do it. My earlier compromise simply is not good enough for you.
I'm sorry, sir. But, at the end of the day, this is *my* table. I have been compromising and fair. I have explained myself to you several times. You are welcome to play out the rest of the scenario to get your official credit and chronicle sheet or leave (at which point, I will only give you credit if you can forward me either the rule or something official from Paizo regarding partially completed scenarios due to player leaving the table). It's your call.
|
|
Im sorry if my inability to post during the day bothers you Rhydderch, but there is nothing I can do about it. I will be able to get on early and post my actions in advance.
Rachele,
I do not blame you and I have tried to make that clear...you have responsibilities that take precedence over the game and I understand that. All that I have been trying to do is ask for flexibility to make it easier for you to contribute; because when you do it benefits everyone. You were pivotal to our surviving the most recent encounter with both your Color Spray and your well-timed Magic Missile....and I believe I promised you a cookie.
(Hmm..actually I think I promised everyone a cookie.)
When this game started it was still summer and I imagine a lunchtime posting was easier for you to manage since school hadn't started yet. (Believe me I know...I'm an educator and enjoy my summer vacations as well!)
I don't know why I've chosen to take the mantle of the freedom fighter in this game (seriously take a gander at my profile and read through my other PbP games...I'm not a disagreeable person by nature.) If I'm overreacting I would appreciate feedback from my fellow players and will happily tone it down if told to do so. I have no intention of leaving you in the lurch mid-scenario...and I apologize if my reaction to what I have perceived as injustice has made anyone uncomfortable.
|
|
It's made me uncomfortable...but since I'm the 'bad guy,' maybe that doesn't mean much?
Look, Rhydderch, this isn't my first game (though it is my first Pbp) and it won't be my last. I appreciate your concern. However, you are taking this way to far. Threatening to leave a table if the GM doesn't rule on another player's actions the exact way you want, especially on decisions that 1) are in the written recruitment rules and 2) the player themselves have not expressed concern, does come across as going a bit too far. It comes across as an attempt to control and dominate the table.
I would also point out that you agreed to the "skip" rule.
"If you don’t post your intentions by the time the next time slot begins, your character will skip his round in combat if you haven’t listed a contingency plan."
This rule has been in place since recruitment. You had access to that list of rules. Did you not read them? If you did not, then you have no right to so vehemently oppose their implementation after the scenario began. If you did read them, and you had a concern with the concept, then you should have expressed it before we started, and decided, based on my response, whether my style of GM'ing was a good fit for you.
And to clarify on my end, I'm not upset either, Rachele. I have asked players to leave tables before when life commitments made it impossible for them to regularly meet up at the regular time (including a really good friend who got a job he really needed...but kept him out of the game every other session). I, personally do not feel that is called for here. While you (and a few others) have missed a few postings, IMHO, things are working out, overall. I do appreciate the concern Rhydderch brought up originally regarding this issue, and I, personally, feel the move to the 5/6 requirement has been quite beneficial and, thus far, has only resulted in one lost posting time.
|
|
Im sorry if my inability to post during the day bothers you Rhydderch, but there is nothing I can do about it. I will be able to get on early and post my actions in advance.Rachele,
I do not blame you and I have tried to make that clear...you have responsibilities that take precedence over the game and I understand that. All that I have been trying to do is ask for flexibility to make it easier for you to contribute; because when you do it benefits everyone. You were pivotal to our surviving the most recent encounter with both your Color Spray and your well-timed Magic Missile....and I believe I promised you a cookie.
(Hmm..actually I think I promised everyone a cookie.)
When this game started it was still summer and I imagine a lunchtime posting was easier for you to manage since school hadn't started yet. (Believe me I know...I'm an educator and enjoy my summer vacations as well!)
I don't know why I've chosen to take the mantle of the freedom fighter in this game (seriously take a gander at my profile and read through my other PbP games...I'm not a disagreeable person by nature.) If I'm overreacting I would appreciate feedback from my fellow players and will happily tone it down if told to do so. I have no intention of leaving you in the lurch mid-scenario...and I apologize if my reaction to what I have perceived as injustice has made anyone uncomfortable.
Yeah, it was no problem when I was on break, and it wont be a problem during the weekends. But I wasnt aware my school put a massive firewall on the school wifi, if it werent for that i could post at 12 during my lunch period
|
|
I hear ya, Rachelle. And, hey, I totally believe you. I know you're not purposely trying to miss anything. I'll just expand on what I've already said (and you've confirmed) earlier....
The best thing to do, given your change of circumstances, is simply for you to make sure you read all posts completely in the morning....and do a post before school. If its a combat situation, post two rounds worth of moves (You can even get fancy and say, "If one of our guys go down, cast Magic Missle (dice roll here) otherwise, shoot my cross bow (attack roll/damage here). If it's a non combat situation, and feel its called for, feel free to do a diplomacy and perception roll (as those are used in a lot of RP type encounters) and any other rolls you think would be relevant. That will insure minimal interruption due to your change at school.
If you miss a morning post, your team mates will certainly feel your absence. After all, you'll not be missing one but two rounds of combat. So, be aware. If you're like me, and don't have a lot of time because you like to sleep a little too late, you can just do it late at night before bed time...as the round officially 'begins' at around 7pm EST.
|
|
...and it was also stated that the rules were "a work in progress." I interpreted that as everyone being allowed some input. But no, you are not the bad guy; nor are you a dictator. But my perception is that, at times, you are inflexible. Perhaps I'm being inflexible as well and that's why we're butting heads.
There are those out there who believe that RPGs are a competitive game between the players and GMs. My perspective has always been a bit different....RPGs are a cooperative game where GMs and players work together to accomplish particular objectives. (rescuing the princess, killing the dragon, retrieving the artifact, restoring balance to a world enslaved by chaos...etc.) When I run a game and one of my players loses a character...I consider it a personal failure on my part. (unless that player is a first level thief who attempts to charge a 20th level elder dragon while armed with nothing but a safety pin...but that's only common sense.)
If I've learned anything from this experience its that the Core Rules are written the way that they are for a reason...and that being the "disgruntled player" does not suit me at all.
|
|
Yeah, it was no problem when I was on break, and it wont be a problem during the weekends. But I wasnt aware my school put a massive firewall on the school wifi, if it werent for that i could post at 12 during my lunch period
Your school must have installed the same firewall that mine did. I have to sneak out one of the side doors to leach off the wifi at the public library...which luckily is right next door. Of course since I'm a faculty member I'm allowed to sneak out doors..you probably shouldn't do that!
|
|
How can you say I'm inflexible when I've changed my 4/6 guideline to 5/6? Is that not compromise and flexibility? Or do you only define "flexible" only as the way you see it? How can you imply that I don't "allow some input" when I've made not one but two changes based on your input alone. Rhydderch, in all seriousness, I feel you're being very, very unfair to me.
|
|
I know what you mean about players vs. GM and death. I used to feel very guilty of a player died. They put hours in that character, and rezzing could be expensive. If a player was going to die, I wrestled with how to rule it. Was it really the player's fault, or did I not do something right as GM? If it was just bad luck, should I just call it different? What about the rules? Maybe I called something wrong... or didn't set the encounter up properly.
However, in discussing my concerns and feelings with dozens of players, I learned that most players hated it when I pulled punches and changed rolls. Some of them even looked forward to rolling new characters. Others understood that bad things happen, and they pay the cost to res (or, better yet, the whole group chips in). It's even been a very RP, party bonding moment at times.
I used to be afraid about players thinking that my style and decisions would make it seem like Player vs GM...but I learned that isn't what most players who play with me think at all. Furthermore, it seems the players like knowing that the game is real, and that bad choices and even "good choices with bad luck" does have real consequences. Victory has more meaning for most players when they know that death in the heat of combat is a very real possibility.
Honestly, as GM, I try to run tables in a way that make everyone have a good time (including myself...I mentioned that I have a bit of selfishness here...that's why I volunteer to GM, cuz I love the game). I won't say that I take every player leaving as a failure (as I do learn that hey, sometimes we just different game styles or personalities), but I do ask myself hard questions when someone is unhappy... and I do solicit and listen to feedback. My playstyle and GM style are an evolution resulting from those experiences. I have learned, however, that I cannot make everyone happy all of the time. Sometimes I have to draw a line in the sand, and even be a mean person, if only to keep my sanity if nothing else. (If you try to be everything to everyone, that's what happens).
|
|
Saying that you are, at times, inflexible implies that at other times you are not. But fixing one problem does not prevent others from occurring. Regardless I have attempted to provide constructive criticism as opposed to personal insults. Clearly I have failed and for that I apologize.
It is Friday night (or perhaps nearly Friday night in your time zone). We should be relaxing and enjoying ourselves...I intend to begin doing so after submitting this post.
My weekend post is in...barring someone else posting something I can play off of I'll see everyone on Monday morning.
|
|
Well, we can certainly agree to disagree on the points here Rhydderch....It's just, when you follow up your point with saying you might leave (implication: if it isn't fixed the way you see best), it creates drama. And, again, I do feel you're being unfair to me in your approach.
I believe that pushing combat forward and regular intrevals even at the cost of the occasional turn keeps combat fast paced and, in turn, provide more fun for everyone. Your point is that we should wait for everyone to post and in everyone getting a turn, THAT is more fun for everyone.
All we have here is a basic difference of opinion. I conceded a change in an attempt to see things from your point of view and in the spirit of compromise, and you do not feel that the change is enough.
That's the bottom line, and you know what? It's OK. It's quite all right to agree to disagree, Rhydderch. Like I said, your "I won't budge" approach today struck me as an attempt to strong arm me to your point of view, and I don't feel that's fair, much less respectful of my role as GM or considerate of my feelings as a person.
|
|
Yeah, it was no problem when I was on break, and it wont be a problem during the weekends. But I wasnt aware my school put a massive firewall on the school wifi, if it werent for that i could post at 12 during my lunch periodYour school must have installed the same firewall that mine did. I have to sneak out one of the side doors to leach off the wifi at the public library...which luckily is right next door. Of course since I'm a faculty member I'm allowed to sneak out doors..you probably shouldn't do that!
Yeah, I wish there was something like that near my school.
|
|
I hear ya, Rachelle. And, hey, I totally believe you. I know you're not purposely trying to miss anything. I'll just expand on what I've already said (and you've confirmed) earlier....
The best thing to do, given your change of circumstances, is simply for you to make sure you read all posts completely in the morning....and do a post before school. If its a combat situation, post two rounds worth of moves (You can even get fancy and say, "If one of our guys go down, cast Magic Missle (dice roll here) otherwise, shoot my cross bow (attack roll/damage here). If it's a non combat situation, and feel its called for, feel free to do a diplomacy and perception roll (as those are used in a lot of RP type encounters) and any other rolls you think would be relevant. That will insure minimal interruption due to your change at school.
If you miss a morning post, your team mates will certainly feel your absence. After all, you'll not be missing one but two rounds of combat. So, be aware. If you're like me, and don't have a lot of time because you like to sleep a little too late, you can just do it late at night before bed time...as the round officially 'begins' at around 7pm EST.
I can do that, thats no problem. Just dont go off assuming I want to blow all my spells right away
|
|
Salutations.
Normally, for the last few years, I have been sent out of town about 3 times/year by my company to do field work. For the most part, I know about these well ahead of time, and can plan accordingly. However, on Saturday, I received an email from my corporate office that I need to fly out today, Monday, to assist with an acquisition.
This will most certainly affect my postings....and I will strive to keep you all updated here.
Today... I should have no problem doing the lunch time posting. I will be in the airport at 6pm EST...and will post if I can get a connection there. Otherwise, it will be much later, and I will make sure to skip the morning post the next day since that wouldn't leave enough time for people to reply.
Tomorrow... I'll be available morning, but I'm unsure about after that as I will be on the road. I will update on here as soon as I have further informatoin.
I apologize for any inconvenience.
To answer a concern about why the game stops for GM and not another player who might be late... generally, again, if I'm missing a player for a few minutes (cell call) or the whole session (one didn't show up), we run the session without him, skip turn, etc so that the whole group isn't held up. However, when the GM is unavailble, the players cannot continue unless there's a co-GM (which I've done/had before). That's just a mechancial part of the game. And, in Pbp, I don't have the options (like the players do) to post moves ahead of time.
If a player is gone too often from one of my groups, we ask them to leave. If the GM is gone too often, the campaign falls apart. I realize that my involvement in games (and lack thereof) immediately impacts the entire group, and take this responsibility very seriously. I will do everything I can to post as frequently as possible. Thank you.
|
|
I generally check on all of my PbP games 10 to 15 times each day so chances are I won't miss very many updates no matter what time they are posted. (unless I'm sleeping...but that only puts me out of commission for 5 or 6 hours.)
Hopefully you've been sent somewhere pleasant...or at least with decent weather.
|
|
Hey...wanted to answer your question about Kyle spotting the trap over here just in case there were follow up questions.
In a question posted on the boards, James Jacobs, creative direction mentioned, "The Trap Spotter rogue talent is a good way to gain an auto-spot ability for traps in the game. Normally, you can't autospot traps like this. A player has to specifically state that they're looking for traps." (emphasis mine)
I could be wrong, but the above line of reasoning always made sense to me because, "Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus. Intentionally searching for stimulus is a move action."
If you're looking for something that's hidden (and therefore doesn't usually provide observable stimulus), you need to state what it is you're looking for when you make the perception check.
I would hate for you guys to totally miss the possible humor of the situation, however. I put this in spoilers since it's kinda meta knowledge.
|
|
I would also point out that searching for traps is a different practice than, let's say, searching for hidden loot. Since traps are easily set off, you tend to use different methods to search for traps than you would for other items. So that's a consideration as well. A party that simply 'searches a room' is more likely to set a trap off while turning everything over than anything else. Most of the time, however, most players just do perception checks to quickly notice fine details, hear quiet noises, smell faint smells, etc that may give them clues about what's around and in the next room. To be honest, I would like more clear rules on that (I would think, for example, that searching an area well for traps takes more than 3 seconds/a move action, but thems the RAW).
Moving from that topic to another... while I know this has been a rough experience for some and that my GM style does not fit everyone well, I have personally enjoyed this. I do plan to go ahead and run Part II, and I will be posting a new forum with recruitment soon.
Since you all have played this first part, you have first dibs on the next one. For the most part, the rules will remain the same. I know, again, these did not work for everyone, but they work for me and I'm simply unable to radically change the way I do things as far as battle maps and the such. At the same time, I still prefer this pace by a large margin than a Pbp that only runs once/day.
Those who 'play through' will have to be willing to post three times/day like we do now. Rachelle, I understand you are out for lunch posting, but if you can continue to post both your morning and lunch rolls/moves in the morning, I don't see why that can't continue to work. It's not optimal, but for the most part it does work just fine IMHO.
If you want to join me for Part II, post below and I'll 'reserve' your spot, as it were. If you don't post by Friday lunch time, I'll presume you're ready to move on to something else.
Within the next week, please email me any items you wish to buy and their gold value. I will add that to your sheet. If this is your first character (which means you started out with 150gp), you will still need to submit a list of items you bought at the beginning of the module. You may also sell items at half their value. I will be filling out the chronicle sheets, including your transactions and scanning it to you.
Thank you for your participation. It's been a lot of fun and I hope y'all stay on board for another round.
|
|
Yes please, I am enjoying this group very much and would love to continue on.
EDIT: Oh and thanks very much for all of your efforts and commitment to the game. I don't have any real problems with your approach or style. Rather, all the games that I have started that have died have done so because the GM went MIA - so thanks again for keeping things going - the pace and regiment may actually help continuity.
BTW - I find it funny that GMs who put players through such a rigorous qualification process so often become the ones that flake out and disappear, leaving the players stranded.
|
|
So...some possible bad news...
It would appear that a user has found issue with how I run this Pbp. He has posted about changing PFS/PF rules for Pbp in generally, and used a number of my guidelines as specific examples. Mike responds later on that changing any PF rules for the sole purpose of facilitating Pbp is not permissable.
This means that this entire session (as far as earning a credit) may be in jeopardy, and would certainly seem to suggest that future scenarios done this way are out of the question.
I have replied on that thread to find out whether or not this session is valid, as well as any future ones.
If either turns up to be true, I profusely apologize to everyone. When I reserached Pbp a few months back, I saw people making clear changes/exceptions to core PF rules in order to facilitate gameplay. My understanding of the core rulebook was also that playing without a battlegrid and the such was a valid way to experience PF play. In conjunction with the Play, Play, Play motto of PFS, I honestly felt that it would be fine. It would seem that I was wrong.
I will await Mike's answer...however, in the mean time, I'd like to ask the group a question. As I have said in the past, I simply cannot do a battlemat layout with traditional initiative order in combat in a play by post. If Mike says that my method of Pbp is not eligable for PFS play, would any of you be interested in playing something non-PFS related.... either a homebrew, Adventure Path or Paizo modules? And, while we may not be able to do PFS in this vein on the boards, what would be y'alls thoughts about playing a PFS once/month via Skype and Maptools? I run two campaigns with these tools and those groups and they have a ton of fun.
Please let me know. And, again, if it turns out we aren't eligable for PFS credit for this scenario, I profusely apologize to everyone here. Regardless of the outcome, I know I have had a lot of fun with this.
|
|
I read the thread, and it looks like we might not get credit for this, from what I read :(
If you dont mind a suggestion, I have an idea. Are there grid maps to scan in? Label the axis of the grids, so we can say,
I move to D5 and hit the Guy in D6 or cast sleep centered on E7
Initiative, you as the GM roll everyone's init at the start of the battle, and everyone act in turn, being Npc'd by you if we dont get our action posted quickly
Just my 2cp. I run a pbp here too, and thats what im trying right now, and it seems to work out alright.
And I would gladly continue gaming with all of you after this
|
|
Yeah, Rachele...I've looked into them. I know they're all do-able (espcially if one is at a full time computer), but not really for me. Often I'm posting on my phone or other portable which either doesn't have access for those extra tools or (more likely) just moves too slow to use those things effectively. As you can tell (and most of you seem to like), frequent and regular posts are important to me. Keeping the flow of the game moving quick in any RPG game helps to keep players and GMs 'in the game' so to speak. I know others do it, I just don't have the resources or time to run a game like that.
With that being said, if we can no longer play for PFS credit because of this, would you be interested in any of the other thigns I mentioned above? (Pbp non-PFS modules, maybe monthly skype based PFS action, etc)
|
|
A map I made for my Kingmaker Pbp
This is what ive been trying for maps, fyi
Im playing in a SaS and RotRL. I havent played CotCT before, and I really want to play it. Just my suggestion
|
This is disappointing, but thanks for letting us know.
Unfortunately, I've already got one character in a non-PFS AP and am too busy to add another. This is my only PFS character at the moment, and if I do any other PBP I want it to be with her.
If this dies, it will be a bummer, but I will probably seek a real life PFS game in my area before doing online Skype/Maptools. But it's definitely something I'd consider.
|
|
Hey, Marisan...this is a long shot but...
I'm the newly appointed Venture Captain of Utah...if you're in that state, let me know. There are a number of local games in the state that I have contacts with as well as one I run myself.
Outside of that, the Skype/Maptools thing can be really fun. There are a few trade offs, but I would say 80% or more of the players that try it for a session or two really like it.
|
|
I have found one thing that my save our scenario and Pbp group yet.
In the core rule book (I knew I read something like this way back in the day!)
"Combat in the Pathfinder RPG can be resolved in one of two ways: you can describe the situation to the characters and allow them to interact based on the description you provide, or you can draw the situation on a piece of paper or a specially made battle mat and allow the characters to move their miniatures around to more accurately represent their position during the battle."
I am forwarding it to Mike Brock for consideration.
|
|
With that rule found in the Core Rulebook, I'm going to continue to run the rest of this scenario as we have been. I will tweak the guidelines of my Pbp to more closely resemble RAW, with the understanding that there is no battle mat and exact positioning, as clearly allowed by Page 8. I think this clears things up a bit. WOOT!
|
|
You try to set some standards beforehand to avoid any confusion of the logistics regarding combat by description and you've become a monster. I think you've only made the game more structured. I fail to see the problem. Maybe I need to see how all those other pbp work to understand. But if I'm already enjoying the game and company (all 6 of you), than why bother.
|
|
I will need to change a few things to be more RAW-centric going forward...but with this established, I feel that we are largely playing a legal game of Pathfinder. I've posted a thread to get some ideas. I believe that some things, such as my flanking and AoE guidelines are pretty ok. They are designed to best reflect the rules and their impact on the game and transitioning them to an inexact-science. Once we start our next scenario, I will tweak things based on y'alls suggestions.
I'm sure Mike and the powers that be at PFS understand that we're working hard to have fun with PFS using a non-conventional medium and an unorthodox (yet legal) method of resolving combat which requires us to go off the beaten track in how we handle a few aspects of the game. Whenever there is gray area that the "rules as written" do not specifically address, the GM is usually given liberty to improvise and be creative as long as she/he does their best to run the game "Rules as Intended." Because the core rule book does allows, but does not specifically tell us how to play without a battle grid, I believe some flexibility is called for.
|
|
As we close in on the end of this please use this weekend to figure out whatever purchase you want to make and send this to me. If you haven't done so already, you must send me your previous chroncial sheets via scan or I'm going to presum you're starting off at 0xp/fame/150gp (I think I have three players who I don't have sheets from. Kyle told me, however, that he IS new). After I get sheets received, resolved and sent out, we'll start Part II on a shiny new thread I am making soon.
|
|
Hopefully that provision you found in the CRB will help to save our PFS credit. I recognize that this was probably your plan anyway, but please do let us know once you have an official response.
In the event that the game does switch to non-PFS, I would be interested in bringing Harboth along (or even cooking up a new character, if appropriate/needed) and am fine with playing any of the APs (I have not played any of them yet) or a homebrew campaign.
On the other hand, my schedule makes even a skype/maptools game tough. Most of why I play a PbP game is so that I can play for a few minutes at a time, so if we went to another online format I'm afraid I would have to bow out.
Just my perspective. Now that I have adjusted to it, I think this system is working pretty well.
|
|
Thanks for the response, Harboth.
I've done more research, and I found that its extremely rare for any game to be declared that its ineligable for PFS. Obvious house ruling is a no-no. However, GM's everywhere ignore or minimize certain aspects of the game on a regular basis (such as travel cost, ration tracking, encumberance, small coin tracking, etc). I even found one game in PFS Pbp that did not track initiative.
These things have been question befored. My research showed that no one at Paizo condemed or stripped those games of PFS credit. Paizo has repeatedly said that gamers should play by the rules and not house rule...but at the same time, GMs have the responsibility of running their tables with the goal of having fun, and no table is run completely by RAW.
So, I believe we are fine. Any caveates we have made to RAW has been to accomodate a perfectly legal method of play in the interest of keeping things running smoothly give these limitations. (I can say that now that I found the rule that allows Combat by Description). I absolutely have a responsibility in playing PFS to continue to work for a RAW/RAI experience given the limitation of the systems we are using, and I'll work towards that end with y'alls help.
|
|
It seems worth pointing out to anyone who is questioning this approach that these are not preferred house rules so much as adjustments to make the gaming experience work within the confines of the medium of PbP (of course others may have other adjustments). And, importantly, from what I can tell, our players are neither systematically at an advantage or disadvantage based on these adjustments, relative to standard table-top play.