As a GM I don't care what players bring to the table. It shouldn't have any influence how you run the game, IMO. If players have their PCs fail during an adventure it should be because of their choices NOT because of the GMs.
EDIT: I may be wrong but reading between the lines it looks like some rules have been used by the players before the GM has become fully familiar with them. I only allow books, etc. after I have read and fully understand what I am letting into the game.
Have you considered going bard instead of sorcerer? You still have arcane spells, cha is still your primary stat, plus the benefits of being a bard. I've never played a DD before, so I'm not saying this is the better option, but from what I've seen in terms of abilities, it just seems to me to have a better mechanical advantage over the sorcerer. Plus, bards automatically ignore arcane spell failure for light armor (I think). Anyway, just a suggestion.
I prefer Summoner over Bard.Had great fun with a Tiefling (Pit Born) Paladin4/Summoner1/DD
Iomedae follower for Righteous Smite (extra smite evil)
GM ease of play. N/A Player
Synthesis of the story. 5/10 Book One was great but everything else seemed very rail-roady
Role-play friendly. 3/10 Okay but no matter what you did as a player everyone seemed to know what was going on. Seemed pointless as a player to try and do anything to derail the other factions as no matter what they'd still be there. As a player I was really annoyed that despite the death of the PF Gnome, hiding all notes etc leading to the city, etc we had six groups following.
Combat design.5/10 A few interesting combats but nothing outstanding.
Fun factor. 3/10 Bored with hack and slay Book 3, its the only AP I dropped out of. The other factions always being on your tail despite any precautions put in place made me feel that this was a GM V Player scenario (despite I am sure that wasn't the intent). If it stopped at Book 1 it would have got 10/10.
On the whole I was frustrated by the fact no matter what we did as a group everyone knew where to go. I felt railroaded and that our actions didn't matter. So we killed off a few NPCs in Book One, didn't let anyone near the secret cave, hid all notes that we made and EVERYONE still knows about where we are going and why? And then we end up in a city filled with random hack and slash... Not for me.
I'm trying to find in the SRD where it says having a low INT score means anything other than lack of skill points and penalties on INT checks.
If it doesn't anything beyond that is a houserule.
Trying to extrapolate IQ or anything else from that number is pointless, leads to arguments and wastes time.
I couldn't care less if people dump stats. There are rules in the CRB which tell you what happens (mechanically) in the game if you do, no point in making up gack houserules to "punish" people who do.
Action economy is priceless in this game.
As a GM and player I prefer the old style missions.
Cons: Often seemed tacked on.
From what I have seen the issues with the old style missions are as much as how they were constructed and not with the concept. They needed more thought involved, IMO, to make them work. And more GMs needed to keep table sizes down to a manageable size.
My players in my homegame PFS campaign loved the old style missions. I still use them but for fun only. Prestige, etc gained is from the new updated way you should run 'em. We all play CoC so a handouts are always welcome!
As a player and GM the biggest fault (IMO) was the occasional "We have found a tomb that no one has been in for a billion years but we know there is a McGuffin hidden behind this carving of a nymph..." mission.
I would like a return to them but have more thought put in rather than the tacked on after feel a lot had.
It irks me a tad when Pazio prints this and in another product (Bastards of Golarion I think) spend time explaining why there are NO half-dwarf races... Internal consistency! *shakes fist* damn you!!!
Not from me...I don't allow anything 3PP or PF until I have read a hardcopy in my own time to understand it.
And looking stuff up on the net at the table is just unacceptable.
Summoners aren't for beginners as they are rules heavy.
David Montgomery wrote:
Roll opposed skill checks. If RP gives a person a lot of time alone (probably not, since people don't like to split the party), then just give it to them.
Thanks, pretty much what I have been doing.For my home games I gave my players the option of dropping the faction missions...They voted to keep them and were amazed that that idea had been dropped from official play. Apart from the occasional "Find the Mc Guffin which we know about despite the tomb being sealed for a million years..." we collectively thought they added to the game.
I am running a home PFS campaign, many of the older scenario's missions are "Map *whatever* without anyone noticing" or "Pass this *whatever* to "whoever" without other factions noticing".
Meh...using Sleight to grab 330 loose coins wouldn't happen at my table. Using it to grab a percentage depending on the success/failure of the roll against the other PC's Perception is absolutely fine.
And its a chaotic trait to steal from the group, certainly not evil. Unless the PC has Lawful anywhere in its alignment go for it. That said be prepared for fall out if the other PCs catch on.
This weekend my group just left behind a PC because he pulled a dick move. No more 4th level fighter.
How a PC behaves has nothing to do with the GM.
EDIT: They are not your PCs, they are the player's.
Roleplay your stats however you want at my table.
NB: I'd change the title of the thread.
Please note that the OP says the GM will eventually use environmental rules to make things harder. As far as I can tell the GM actually hasn't done anything.
And if the GM is using the wind rules in the environmental section of the CRB when they should be used then there isn't an issue.
If the GM is houseruling wing beats or every single day the weather conditions are hurricane force winds, even underground, then there is a problem.
So with misfire and having to but expensive ammo to reload as a free action isn't it just better to use a now and be a fighter or ranger?
Because I can't be Porthos otherwise?Flavour means more to me, as a player, than mechanics?
Because its cool?
An Allan Quatermain based character would look stupid with a bow.
From my experience the Summoner isn't the/a problem.
"Not long afterwards, Fritz began to realize how to use his ability to create darkness to ease the pain of brightness, discovering he could make other things easy to see, highlighted by a dim "faerie fire" light, and the ability to see easily at night"
Looks like he's got Darkvision and a couple of spell like abilities...
Would the world end if you allowed it?
EDIT: Its okay for a person to alter the fabric of reality with a few words but not for someone using a Travellers Any Tool as a set of MW Thieves tools. I just don;t understand this way of thinking. Its not going to kill the game, I'd allow it in a second.
To be honest if you started to tell me how I should play my PC in a game I'd have walked too.Perhaps it would have been better for him/her to come to their own conclusion.
If I have an uber set what happens? Either the PC roflstomps everything and I get bored or the GM raises the level to make it a challenge.
Point Buy eliminates that.
I get a PC stats that fits to my concept of the PC instead of what Fate hands me.
I can't understand why people have a downer on PB. Do people just like rolling dice?
My S&S Inquisitor (Infiltrator Archetype) is played as a recruiting/trade unionist. Ensuring all pirates are sticking to the Pirate's Code as set by Besmara, pirates get the right rum ration, food isn't too weevil filled, etc.
Personally for Carrion Crown a Pharasma Inquisitor is just ripe for RP opportunities. The AP is practically built for it.
I'd recommend the Infiltrator Archetype...