1-01 - The Round Robin Absalom Initiation (Inactive)

Game Master Tyranius

My AC should by 19 because of lay on hands from last round.
It is all written in the attack roll.
You were still grabbed (end of monster's next turn), so flat-footed.
17+2-2=17 (unless I am forgetting something else)

The creature has a +14 to hit or better?
There is a level bump, but even with that accounted for, no, the creature does not have a +14 to hit.

Did it apply the multi-attack penalty? Cause otherwise it needed a +9 after the penalty on the second roll to meet the AC of 17 with an 8 meaning it has a +14 or +13 with agile.

Yes, it is Agile!
(+12 & +1 from the bump)

Does it have Grab or Improved Grab? Because if it only has Grab, that takes an action, and it wouldn't have time to raise its shield.

I am aware that Grab takes an action, yes.
Anyhow, it did not Grab in round 2.

In the meantime, its big arm goes for Ilmyrn's head--

Raging AC 17 +2 Ogren & Grabbed = 17?: 1d20 ⇒ 6
--and hits--
Bludgeoning: 1d10 ⇒ 8 (15 damage)
--hard!
But Ogren's mystical intervention blocks all damage!
no damage taken
The creature then lets go of its grab, and tries to ram the tentacles back at Ilmyrn--

Sorry. I was confused by the bolded parts, then.

Sorry...
The Grab was Round 1. But it lasts till the end of the monster's next turn so the Grabbed condition was still in play in round 2.
Then good old Stitches did not go for a re-Grab...

Nice combo, Alaric-- but the dice gods blocked that for his round!

All good :) It is bound to happen quite often with spells.

With the bump the construct had 55 hp and 20 AC, and the 5 player adjustment gave it 2 random abilities, which is what gave it the shield (22 AC when raised)-- and the Grab (plus Reach) on the tentacles.

If the boat ride takes half an hour back to the harbor, we can fully heal with Ogren if he just prays-lay on hands, prays-lay on hands, prays-lay on hands.

I also found out recently that leaf druids can do that too
If you mean Goodberry, you do need ripe berries to cast the spell upon.
So you can easily be unable to ever cast the spell.

1 S ; 2 I: 1d2 ⇒ 2
Putting one extra Hero point up for Ilmryn.

I also found out recently that leaf druids can do that too

If you mean Goodberry, you do need ripe berries to cast the spell upon.
So you can easily be unable to ever cast the spell.

There's no rules for gathering berries, nor prices for buying them. Given how small things like this are handwaved (such as material components for spells if you have the pouch), how berries can be found in all seasons and most biomes,* finding them in the wild shouldn't be hard and buying them in town shouldn't cost more than a copper or three, I'd argue it'd be hard to never have access to them. PFS has also historically been lenient on allowing class abilities like this in the past, from the Medium in PF1 to being looser about Anathema in PF2. Unless there was no conceivable way to get ripe berries (4+ weeks at open sea without a leshy on board, traveling on the plane of fire [again leshy-less] etc.), I'd argue for allowing the ability if the Player could explain how they got them.

*Admittedly a good number of the berries that are ripe in winter/more inhospitable biomes are poisonous/inedible, but given you're already magically enhancing it to go from nutritious to filling and healing, it could probably also make it non-toxic or edible.

Kyra' wrote:

I also found out recently that leaf druids can do that too

If you mean Goodberry, you do need ripe berries to cast the spell upon.
So you can easily be unable to ever cast the spell.

There's no rules for gathering berries, nor prices for buying them. Given how small things like this are handwaved (such as material components for spells if you have the pouch), how berries can be found in all seasons and most biomes,* finding them in the wild shouldn't be hard and buying them in town shouldn't cost more than a copper or three, I'd argue it'd be hard to never have access to them. PFS has also historically been lenient on allowing class abilities like this in the past, from the Medium in PF1 to being looser about Anathema in PF2. Unless there was no conceivable way to get ripe berries (4+ weeks at open sea without a leshy on board, traveling on the plane of fire [again leshy-less] etc.), I'd argue for allowing the ability if the Player could explain how they got them.

*Admittedly a good number of the berries that are ripe in winter/more inhospitable biomes are poisonous/inedible, but given you're already magically enhancing it to go from nutritious to filling and healing, it could probably also make it non-toxic or edible.

Still, I might rule that if you are in the tundra-filled arctic or in the underdark you can't just chance upon some ripe berries.

There's no rules
Exactly.

So, I would check w. the GM before playing stuff w. no rules.
(ie. I played a leshy leaf druid here, in "Plaguestone", but it was not 'berry season', so no spell use).

Still, I might rule that if you are in the tundra-filled arctic or in the underdark you can't just chance upon some ripe berries.

Yeah but those situations should be the exception and not the rule (i.e. see the ship and Plane of Fire examples.) If you are playing in a long campaign set there, then playing a leaf druid might not be the best idea to begin with.

There's no rules

Exactly.

So, I would check w. the GM before playing stuff w. no rules.
(ie. I played a leshy leaf druid here, in "Plaguestone", but it was not 'berry season', so no spell use).

But that's hard to impossible with PFS, and, seriously, berries ripen throughout the year.

We are free to move on to stop the ritual whenever

A reminder that allies begin combat with +3 initiative (scout, call to arms) and Isurus begins combat with +1 initiative (scout). Allies also begin combat with 1 temporary HP.

Still downstairs, Isurus wonders what people are talking about...

No. That is not OK.

Quote:

Still downstairs, Isurus wonders what people are talking about...

No. That is not OK.

I have a sneaking suspicion that was a prod/joke about you not having your icon on the second floor map yet. I can put it up there if you aren't in a position to do that yourself right now.

@Isurus: yes, either move your mini, or ask for it to be placed somewhere, or tell us where you are going or something, so I have an idea of where you are, what you are seeing etc..

@Isurus: yes, either move your mini, or ask for it to be placed somewhere, or tell us where you are going or something, so I have an idea of where you are, what you are seeing etc..

Even if that was the reason for narrating my character as so incompetent as to stand around doing nothing while his companions headed into potential danger rather than moving with the group, that still is not OK. That's reason for an OOC request to place my token on the map. Furthermore, Samna did not receive the same treatment. Samna's token is not on the map, and they received a room's worth of information to an OOC question.

People lament that secret roles take away player agency; GMs narrating player's characters as fools is taking away player agency.

I appreciate whoever added Isurus to the map, though his token was already on the map.

I will bow out, and let you choose a competent GM.
Have fun, all.

WHOA Guys, slow down, slow down here. Full stop the train. Let's' sit down and talk about this instead of yelling at each other.

First off: Isurus-I'm like, 90% sure that was intended as a joke prod. Should our GM have added an ooc tag at the end of their thing saying that you had yet to add your token to the map? Yeah, probably. But we've all made mistakes on play by posts, its the nature of not being able to edit an hour after posting. As for not including Samna in the post? See above. I agree, having GMs narrate your actions isn't fun but it happens sometimes, ESPECIALLY during play by posts. Technically we didn't agree to go upstairs with the janitor, but the GM put us up there without our consent because they were trying to keep the story going and that is OKAY (it would have been an unnecessary waste of time to have to have us all agree to go to the second floor). Did they go a bit too far? Maybe, but that line is different for different people. All you had to say was "Oh, I didn't notice I forgot to put my token up there, please assume I followed everyone up." put your token up there, and then the GM could have ret-conned the whole 'not there' thing or said you were the last one up or whatever. Please just realize that he made a mistake or two, let him know how you feel, and help him become a better GM so he doesn't do it in the future.

Eric: Listen, things happen. You try to tell a joke and it doesn't go across the internet well at all. I get it, happens to me all the time. Don't let one poor interaction ruin GMing for you, especially for this long haul of scenarios. Listen, you made a small mistake, and honestly, I might have made the same mistake too. But instead of bowing out, just own it. All you have to do is say "Hey man, I was trying to prod you and make a joke at the same time. I'm sorry the joke didn't come across very well, and honestly I didn't think it would be a big deal because it wouldn't be a big deal to me." Communicate with Blake's Tiger, work through your issue, and then continue on. Treat this as a learning experience and a way to become a better GM. Blake's Tiger is angry that agency was taken away from their character and mad. Instead of escalating, de-escalate. Apologize, learn from the experience, and move on.

+1 to the above

Yes, let's not let this escalate any further. We are all here to play a game and communication can certainly be misread and very miscommunicated when it comes to Play-by-post.

Yes, let's not let this escalate any further.

Dramatic irony.

For the record, all communication from me to Eric has been here, public.

No dramatic irony about it. We needed to take a step back as it escalated to the point that it caused the GM to quit.

@Kyra and Isurus can we talk about this or are you done?

The dramatic irony is that Eric chose to escalate it in PMs before you guys tried to cool it down. I'm willing to talk about it. My current concerns are difficult to talk about without the appearance of escalating it myself.

So, I shot a PM off to Eric earlier today asking him to come back at least to the discussion so we can try to sort this out. IF we don't hear from him in a few days I volunteer to take over GMing (I'm the logical choice, having already GMed my scenario, I won't interfere with the plan of who is to GM next). We MIGHT also look for another player, but that's up to everyone else.

Oof this was a bit of a mess. I hope we can talk things over and get things sorted out.

Thank-you Vamp for mediating.

Also I am quite literally running a different group of players through this exact scenario, so I could readily add this game on with little trouble, if people would prefer.

The following advice is for everyone else except Eric--the conversation that Eric and I need to have is different.

When a Player says to a GM in regards to a behavior/interaction (not a dice result or a rules misunderstanding), "That is not OK."

The response should not be, "Yes it is. It was just a joke," or "Yes it is. He's the GM."

I understand that some of you appear to have read what was in my mind a firm but even tone as me standing up, flipping the table, and shouting. I also understand that none of you may understand how or why Eric's narration (and subsequent actions) make me uncomfortable, but that's a conversation better had with Eric present (or at least with confirmation that he is not returning). However, the response to, "That is not OK," is still not, "Yes it is."

The following advice is for everyone else except Eric--the conversation that Eric and I need to have is different.

When a Player says to a GM in regards to a behavior/interaction (not a dice result or a rules misunderstanding), "That is not OK."

The response should not be, "Yes it is. It was just a joke," or "Yes it is. He's the GM."

I understand that some of you appear to have read what was in my mind a firm but even tone as me standing up, flipping the table, and shouting. I also understand that none of you may understand how or why Eric's narration (and subsequent actions) make me uncomfortable, but that's a conversation better had with Eric present (or at least with confirmation that he is not returning). However, the response to, "That is not OK," is still not, "Yes it is."

I have issues with this post and was most of the way through a long post on it, but I realized I was not communicating my feelings well and I may not have a good understanding of your feelings nor the whole issue, so I won't post it. But I would say one thing, please talk WITH us, not AT us.

The following advice is for everyone else except Eric--the conversation that Eric and I need to have is different.

When a Player says to a GM in regards to a behavior/interaction (not a dice result or a rules misunderstanding), "That is not OK."

The response should not be, "Yes it is. It was just a joke," or "Yes it is. He's the GM."

I understand that some of you appear to have read what was in my mind a firm but even tone as me standing up, flipping the table, and shouting. I also understand that none of you may understand how or why Eric's narration (and subsequent actions) make me uncomfortable, but that's a conversation better had with Eric present (or at least with confirmation that he is not returning). However, the response to, "That is not OK," is still not, "Yes it is."

+

I have issues with this post and was most of the way through a long post on it, but I realized I was not communicating my feelings well and I may not have a good understanding of your feelings nor the whole issue, so I won't post it. But I would say one thing, please talk WITH us, not AT us.

I feel like at this point we are just talking in circles. We should probably agree to all treat this as a learning experience (taking whatever away from it we can), and move on. If Eric doesn't respond by the end of the day, either Ogren or I can take over GMing duties, whichever the group wants.

But I would say one thing, please talk WITH us, not AT us.

I will try. That is a problems that I am currently feeling: multiple people talking at me.

Thank you not hitting me with a wall of text. I do appreciate that. In order to address your request, it will necessitate my own wall of text. Attempts to keep things succinct have failed. I feel that the subsequent discussion of my feelings is probably best conducted in small parts. Honestly, the best response that I could hope for would be for people to say, "I hear how you feel. Let's try to get Eric back here for you two to talk."

I also recognize and appreciate that everyone who has communicated with me since Eric left are doing so in the spirit of helpfulness. If I did not recognize that, my response would probably be to exit. However, it still feels to me like I am being ganged up upon. And it does not feel good, and it is requiring effort on my part to keep in mind that this is not people's intention.

Before I begin, I want to be very clear that all of my communication with Eric has been here in this thread.

For my part, in case Eric rejoins the conversation: Eric, I am sorry that I made you feel like you had to leave the table. My sole intention was to point out a behavior that made me uncomfortable with the goal of you not doing it again. I did not intend malice, and I am sorry that I offended you. For that, I apologize, if I can make amends, let me know how I can do so.

I also preemptively apologize, Eric, because the act of explaining my feelings as requested may paint unfairly. These are my feelings and perception, and those do not necessarily reflect Eric's intent.

I have been bullied as a youth, as many who classify themselves as nerds often unfortunately are, and in my professional life, which you might find hard to believe, but sadly bullying is ubiquitous. Many of us encounter bullies even in our own hobby, where you'd hope for more sympathy.

A GM narrating my character as a fool is one way to assert power over me. Other people may not feel the same way about the same behavior. It was also apparent to me that this was specifically directed at me, since I was not the only player with their token off the board. I expressed that I was not OK with this behavior, placed my token on the map, and was prepared to move forward. And, yes, in retrospect, I could have been more explicit expressing my feelings as feelings and explicit with the reason. I do have that introspection and self-reflection. I could have ignored it. I think there are some here who wish I had ignored it--I wish I had ignored it, were it not for what happened later. But is that how we should respond when we feel bullied? Ignore it?

Please, don't get distracted here. I'm not accusing Eric of this: A GM narrating a person's character as foolish or self-destructive is a step away from the GM disproportionately targeting that character and a step away from all the attack rolls behind the screen being critical hits. This is behavior that I have witnessed and experienced. Sometimes all it takes is playing a class that the GM doesn't like.

Following my expression that I was not OK with that behavior, Ilmryn said, "It was probably just a joke." That felt like the bully knocked the books out of my arms in the hall at school, and a person who is friends with both of us had just told me, "Don't worry; he's just joking around." That's how it felt. I didn't respond. My instinct was to explain why I that wasn't OK after that, but Ilmryn wasn't the one who did it to me. Again, my token was on the board, and I was prepared to continue onwards.

Then Eric posted in a manner that, to me, I felt like he was saying it was my fault. Here I have the bully telling me, "You asked for it." In response, I described why I did not think it was OK, and why I felt singled out and specifically attacked. Again, my token was already on the board before Eric's comment.

From my perspective, I did not make--nor intended to imply--any criticism Eric's ability as a GM or value as a person. I was critiquing the behavior that made me uncomfortable. I was also prepared to move past and forward. I had given my feedback, and it would be heard or not. I promptly then pushed my characters actions forward to be contemporary with the current timeline. I did not intend to drive anyone from the table, and, honestly, I did not expect that to drive anyone from the table.

The next thing that happened to me was that Eric sent me a sarcastic private message congratulating on being the single-handed savior and winning the scenario. It felt to me like the bully caught me in the hall between classes when nobody was around and shoved me into the lockers. But even then I deleted the message, chose to ignore the bait, and prepared to move forward. However, 12 minutes later, Eric posts here that he is leaving the table. That post felt like the bully coming back to class while I dust myself off in the hallway and telling everyone, "Blake was so mean to me that I have to go home."

Eric, if you come back and read this, I don't claim to know what your motivations were. The group has asked me for my feelings, and my attempts to wait until you were clearly back to discuss have those feelings in a measured back-and-forth conversation have only appeared to upset others, at least Ogren appears upset.

What followed since have been posts and PMs all essentially telling me how I should have done things better. While I believe that everyone is doing so with good intentions, it feels very much like the teacher catching me at the door when I return from being shoved into the lockers and saying, "Shame on you Blake!"

I also feel like I am being pressured to justify my feelings to people who are essentially strangers so that they can decide if they're worthy, and that does not make me feel good, for what that's worth to anyone.

That is how I feel about the current situation. And I am still prepared to dust myself off and carry on.

That is more than enough wall of text.

I think we all get that. And I’m sorry if me saying it was a joke was dismissive. Remember, that line of what is a joke and what isn’t is going to be different for everyone. Your feelings are valid, I just don’t think Eric recognized what a response that would get from you.

To use your knocking books over metaphor. . . I’ve actually met people IRL who will do that to each other as playful pranks (and they expect to be pranked back in the same manner.). I don’t think it’s fun, but they do, and they are confused when other people take it seriously. I think that may have been what happened here: he thought it was a joke, and if another GM did it to him he would have taken it as a joke, and then things spiraled out of control when the joke wasn’t received. Mocking you in PMs is not okay, and I wish we could have just worked it all out, but I guess now we know for the future.

And I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to ‘gang up,’ on you, or even to do behavior that would imply as such.

And I’m sorry.

I appreciate that. Thank you.

Indeed, noone was trying to gang up on either side here. Communications obviously just escalated quickly and needed to be put on pause as we don't wish for anyone to feel uncomfortable in any situation. Thank you Blake's Tiger for willing to talk this all through and explain to us the background.

Thank you for explaining your thoughts and feelings, Isurus. I'm glad to have a better understanding of where you are coming from.

First, I should apologize for a few things. I didn't comment at first because I couldn't tell or understand what was going on and should have spoken up. To borrow from your bullying analogy, I was acting like the student who saw the bullying happening and didn't help. Which is tricky because it feels like I'm not at fault, but I am to a degree.

Also I'm sorry I made you feel pressured into sharing past trauma. It wasn't my intention. Please know that I would never try to judge the validity or worthiness of your feelings, they are valid. Period.

I'm not truly upset or angry. If I had been, I would have stepped away for a day or two. Mostly I didn't like the direction that the conversation seemed to be heading. I felt the unasked for advice that only stated something wasn't okay, didn't explain why, or suggest a better course of action, was accusatory. It however was an important point to make. Asking for clarification or more understanding is better than trying to fix what we perceive as a problem. I'll keep that in mind if I ever find myself in a situation like this.

Thank and I'm sorry. I hope we can enjoy the rest of this series of games together!

So, looks like we hit the end of the day and Eric seems to have not responded either by PM or here, so I guess we will have to move on without him. Any thoughts on who should GM moving forward?

I'm having a lot of fun playing Ilmryn, but I feel like he's probably the least essensial of the PCs. Can't block damage like Ogren, can't heal, he's just a big beatstick. Plus, since I've already GMed, my game is out of the way so there will be no confusion down the line. But if other people want Ogren or someone else to GM that is fine too.

I'm running a game of it for a different table but looking at the games I have starting next week, I really probably shouldn't pick up another GM table. Vamp why don't you take over?

I suppose my silence also didn't help things. Apologies to you, Blake. On these boards, you don't know when people are simply busy, have taken a break from the site, or when they are deliberately not responding. Eric, we seem to be able to discuss this if you are willing.

But if not, then thank you Vamp for taking this over.

Thank you, all, for listening. I'm willing and ready to move forward however we choose.

I could run it, too, but I am cutting it close on GM bandwidth once Gameday starts.

It’s okay everyone, I’m not GMing anything presently so it’s all good. Tuesday’s one of my heavier days when it comes to Work so I might not post anything ‘till tomorrow but I’ll try.

Out of courtesy, do we want to create a new Campaign to continue this, rather than continue to run off of Eric's Campaign board? We could leave a link to the new Campaign, in case he desires to reengage.

Sure, I can do that. Everyone else's thoughts?

Sure, we can do that.

Sure, easy enough and a nice courtesy to Eric.

Sounds okay to me.