JeremyK's page

I have the re-release of CotCT. I assumed it took place during 4708 as the original print of the book was 2008. That's Paizo's typical method of dating a game.

I came across section on page 88 where it suggests that characters could research the Direption and learn that it was owned by a man who frequented Korvosa from 4703-4711 and later died in 4713. Unless this research uncovers and almanac from the future, the math doesnt add up. Can anyone help me out here?

Thanks.

Ugh. I'm having a reaction to this. It seems like your DM wants to play your character for you. In my mind, this is a game about coming together to tell a story. You should get to contribute in a way that feels fun to you.

Now I will admit-- I almost always tell my PCs that "the camera only follows the good guys." Now, a good guy can be good or neutral. I do this mostly because I want to avoid party discord created by evil-aligned folks. I also generally disallow chaotic neutral unless there is a VERY compelling reason for the alignment. I find folks often use it as an excuse to play an evil character with no repercussions. I want the game to maximize player fun through collaborative story telling... but, its a story of a group and its on the players to find a narrative that creates cohesion. I digress.

I think you called it at the end of your post. If I were you, I would talk with the DM. I don't think negotiating about what "good means" is the way to go. I think he has a rigid and narrow view in which he wants to place you. I would share with him that it feels as if he is taking control of your character or punishing you for playing what feels fun to you. If your character is not ruining the other players' fun, what's the problem? I know if a player came to me and suggested that some of my expectations felt controlling and they were not enjoying the campaign as designed, I'd listen.

At the end of the day, the game is just not fun if my players aren't having fun. I'd hope your DM feels the same. If not, then he is playing the wrong game... there are plenty of RPG video games out there where you get to control the whole party.

Hey Cal,

It sounds like a really difficult space to be in. To find that you're approaching retirement age and feeling as though one of your favorite past-times is going to be hard to come by. Mostly, I just want to say I appreciate the complexity of your dilemma. There's certainly not an easy answer.

Now, nowhere in your post did you specify that you were looking for advice. If mostly you just wanted to vent, and sometimes that's all we need, I get it. That said, if you're open to advice, read my next paragraphs. If not, please just skip it and take my response strictly as a point of empathy and appreciation for your sharing.

Anxiety is miserable. It's crippling. It turns one of our greatest and most wonderful strengths, the ability to think, create, imagine, and language, against us. We come up with lots of creative ways of minimizing the impact anxiety (or any unwanted feeling for that matter)has on us. Most of the time, these ways of coping somehow entail avoidance. As far as I'm concerned, there is absolutely nothing wrong with avoidance... until it starts to cut you off from the things that matter to you. It sounds like gaming matters to you.

If you can find the willingness, I would encourage you to consider (if you have not already) finding a therapist with which you really click. Know that therapy is only beneficial if you have a good, trusting relationship with the therapist and you are open to and invested in exploring how you might start to show up in your life in more satisfying ways. It's some of the hardest work that someone can do, but so long as its in the service of what matters to you, I would argue it is totally worth the discomfort.

Best of luck sorting this all out. I hope you (and I!) get to keep on gaming well into your twilight years.

DM says: I'd prefer it if you don't play a chaotic neutral character.
DM means: Don't do it. I don't want players justifying their clearly evil, sociopathic character's actions by saying, "he's chaotic neutral, they're totally unpredictable!"

JeremyK wrote:

Malag wrote:

JeremyK wrote:

The GM played fast and loose with the rules, avoided drawing encounter maps, and structured battles to disadvantage our group of players.

While I don't defend the GM in question and I myself wouldn't really ever TPK lv1 group since those levels are hardest by my opinion do note that avoiding to draw maps can lead to improved experience and often isn't even necessary sometimes.

Not drawing maps can significantly speed up gameplay and remove the complicated mechanics of game often. I have one old timer GM who uses that approach and people love it. GMs do have often a time limit to finish scenario also.

That on side, it can't justify a lv1 TPK, altho we can't see through his eyes.

I agree that the absence of drawing every map can be more immersive. However, in this situation, it felt as though it was witholding information. This absence of information led to a bottle-necked encounter in a space that was not actually a part of the temple in which the encounter occured. If you're going to avoid drawing maps, you have to be highly descriptive, and accurate, in my opinion.

Heya Jeremy. I was your GM. I think you got the wrong idea from what I told you after the adventure. It's not that I moved the encounter. It's that the encounter did not have a set location. I'm placing the below spoiler to avoid spoiling the scenario for others.

** spoiler omitted **...

Rogue,

I'm really glad you stumbled across this thread. I don't want to hijack this thread and make it about my personal experience, but while I have your ear I do want to clarify a few things.

First, I really appreciated your use of the minimap. As we were exploring the temple I think it made perfect sense. My initial frustration was that when it came time to face the aforementioned encounter. However, as I began drafting this response, I caught a major error in my own understanding of the scenario. My understanding was that NO 5ft hallways existed in the scenario and that you had manufactured one as an impromptu encounter. However, after doing a little digging I found exactly where the encounter occured on the map.

I sincerely apologize for this mistake on my part. The one critique I have of the encounter was that I think the stinking cloud effect was used mistakenly. Stinking cloud lasts 1 round per level. A dretch is a caster level 2. That stinking cloud lasted an eternity causing our entire level one party to be unable to attack. At best we could stand in the hallway and soak damage without retaliating (or in the case of my Magus, stand in the corner and vomit.

Overall, the scenario did not make much sense to me. Why we fought the final encounter when I had virtually no idea who the guy was or why he was angry left us all a little baffled. My biggest frustrtation turns out to be an invalid one. I thought you had misrepresented the map and I now see that I was the one that was mistaken. Plus, as you pointed out, there were things that we could have done to more effectively navigate the encounter.

Thanks again for your willingness and openness here on the forums.

Best,
Jeremy

I think it's important that we not think of topics like this in terms of "good GMs" and "bad GMs". I'd wager most bad experiences are the result of a good GM getting something important wrong. One good GM has a bad habit of metagaming based on knowledge of the PCs' respective armor classes; another good GM is pretty shaky on rules for Topic X; yet another good GM is uncomfortable as a storyteller and reduces scenarios to strings of combat; another good GM tends to underprepare and spends a lot of time looking things up; and still another good GM fails to rein in his distaste for certain builds and guns for them.

I'm going to go out on a limb and posit the following:
There are no bad GMs, just good GMs with flaws and varying degrees of willingness to acknowledge and overcome them.

Hmm... I don't know. I feel like a lot of what you are describing are qualities that make up a poor GM. Now, I would agree that being a poor GM does not make you a bad person... but, having poor GMing qualities does, kind of, make you a poor GM. That's why I feel like they should hear that feedback so they can work to self-correct. I frequently elicit feedback from my players to improve. It requires a thick skin, but I feel like that, too, is indicative of a good GM.

I have a tremendous amount of empathy for Ill_Made_Knight. I feel like events like GenCon provide a major opportunity for PFS and Pathfinder in general to grow. I just finished reading a post that noted that something like 500 new PFS numbers were issued at the Con.

When a player has a really bad experience during their first expereince with PFS/Pathfidner, why would they give it another shot? I've had some fantastic DMs including Mark Garringer, Doug Miles, and James Engle to name only a few. At the same time I've had some DMs who were underprepared or took tremendous liberties with encounters.

I had a particularly negative experience when I was introducing 2 friends to the PFS at GenCon. We all created brand new level one characters. The GM played fast and loose with the rules, avoided drawing encounter maps, and structured battles to disadvantage our group of players. This included having us fight a creature in a five-foot wide hallway (that does not actually exist in the PFS scenario we were playing) that was filled with a stinking cloud that lasted longer than it should have. This encounter left us without resources and terribly injured (remember, no 2 prestige CLW wands for first-time characters). We were easily dispatched by the scenario's final encounter. A seven-person table comprised of brand-new characters and people new to society TPKd due to DM behavior. One of my friends said that if I had not been there to convince her that sometimes the game is fun, she would never play another game in the society.

All of that said, the DM was a really nice guy... he just lacked some valuable DMing qualities.

This is a long-winded way of saying that I am inclined to agree with the OP. Some system for tracking solid DMs and weak DMs would be great. Sure, some folks may get their feelings hurt, but maybe corrective feedback would encourage them to adopt alternative DMing styles that create a more enjoyable experience. The star system is nice, but I don't think the star system is indicative of good DMing until you reach the fifth star. After all, the aforementioned DM earned his 3rd star on our TPK.

Hey folks,

Just got a job at Georgia Southern University. My partner and I will be moving there late July/early August. We've been deprived of D&D for the past year and we would really like to find a group since we will be in GA for a while.

We generally prefer more mature groups. For instance, while I was in grad school we played with two other couples who all worked at the university (professors & staff). We tend to be pretty story driven and are put off by power gaming. Ultimately, we're in it to co-create a cool narrative.

I have a homebrew campaign that has been going on since high school... the world has been fundamentally shaped by each iteration of players to participate in it and I'd love to pick it back up.

Let me know if you're at all interested and feel like you'd fit the bill in terms of your gaming interests/style.

Best,
Jeremy