Lanith's page

Splash weapons are what they are, and accidents happen. Having a player who throws first and looks for friends later is being rude, but I won't say anything to the player about it until the other players at the table speak up.

I've actually told an alchemist, if you throw another bomb into melee after you've been asked multiple times to stop, I'll have to ask you to leave the table. She was not happy and frumped in the corner for the rest of the scenario. My job is not to dictate to the players how they act, it is to do my best to let them have fun.

The fun of the many out weight the fun of the one.

A thread on "GM tools" sparked an idea. I should get a few cheap pairs of Groucho Marx glasses and make paladins wear them when using detect evil, and casters wear the eyeball on spring glasses for detect magic.

Too many players seems to think these spells are completely invisible to the observer.

I like this discussion. Players don't seem to understand why NPC's get annoyed that Paladin's break out detect evil on every sentient creature, or when wizards are using detect magic like a junkie looking for a fix.

If I knew there was magic in the world and I could not understand what someone was doing, I would keep a supply of small throwing objects with me at all times. You cast a spell near me, and I don't trust you, you get hit in the face with my beer.

I'm very interested to see a blog post about this.

Nani and Kyle, I want to thank both of you for a wonderful experience at DragonCon 2013. Thanks for all of your hard work.

Welcome to all of the new VO's in the Atlanta area.

I would say no.

Just because I get a new job with a company my personal laptop is not suddenly associated with that company. The character joins The Pathfinder Society, the familiar is just a bonus. Unless you want your familiar to be send on it's own missions, per Majuba's suggestion.

Personally, drop the free for all races back to normal. All special races should be boon only, but make the race boons more common.
A suggestion would be send out 1 or 2 a year to VC's to hand out to their local players.

For Jiggy, I'm 39.

I only know of one intelligent item, from a scenario, in Society play and it acts as an independent personality. It won't make itself know unless the players do certain things, and will act in a (GM decided) appropriate way to the players actions. As for how your item(s) acts is entirely up to the GM, it is after all just another NPC.

Mechanically, intelligent items won't change how the game is played. Some GM's may use them as Deus Ex Machina to "suggest" solutions to players, or give exposition tales of daring-do to the players, but I find that weak storytelling. (Telling someone else's story is never as fun as letting the players make their own.)

Your Mileage May Vary

I pray for the day the BBEG of a scenario uses a build like this.

Neat, you're a human who's tall (with no extra reach) and heavy (with no mechanical changes). Why would anyone have any problem with this?

Why would GM's get upset about "color" surrounding a character? As long as there are no mechanical changes, the character could be the worlds tallest dwarf, or fattest halfling, or the elf lord with the pointiest ears.

Following Step also allows you to take an additional 5' step on your next turn. Step Up, stops you from taking a 5' step on your next turn. But, it is a bit of a feat tax before Step up and Strike.

Lanith wrote:

Having a table of smiling people enjoying themselves. That's it.

So you don't get that when you play?

All those smiling faces aren't looking to me for the fun, I enjoy the feeling that I'm the cause of those smiles.

Having a table of smiling people enjoying themselves. That's it.

What are you confused about Lucky7? Most of us are here to be helpful.

As a player of a Pathfinder Society scenario no one player "gets" an item. Each player is given a share of the value of the found items, with which they can purchase any items found.

Just because you used an item during the adventure, you don't get to keep it forever after that.

In answer to your question, OP, yes it can be done. As TOZ stated, only to make 4 characters at a table, in Society play. (Home games, go crazy)

I had to play a pregen tonight to finish out a table. Please, I beg of you, don't make me do that again. Having to run the scenario and then switch to a helpful NPC was difficult, as I didn't want to spoil anything, but still be helpful. (I honestly think I was a horrible addition to the party.)

As a GM the scenario gives the players plenty of choice, each more or less useful than they seem.

I found a few of the choices difficult to deal with. Sorry in advance for all the spoiler tags.

I unno, I got all these ideas and they'll probably fall flat -.- -sighs and shrugs-

Having ideas is great. We all do, but Pathfinder Society scenarios is not the place for "ideas". PFS pushes hard for "Run the scenario as written", and some of the situations are handled badly for a reason.

Now, having detailed knowledge of the characters in a home game, is completely manageable. Limiting the number of players (not a random set of 6 from a group of 50-60, with multiple characters each), and limiting the situations they will be in (lots of undead and outsiders) will completely make your life easier.

Pathfinder Society scenarios are pre-written, defined in advance and you as the GM are expected to run them as written. I don't want to say having your own ideas on how things should go is discouraged, but Society aims for an enjoyable experience for everyone, not just the few players/characters a GM can remember.

Players MUST know their character better than I do. I have a million and one evil goblins, a dozen traps to remember and a demon stuck in a bottle waiting to get out.

Unless I had 5 stars and a blessing from On High, I don't know if I could remember each players particular build or style at my FLGS. Being a GM and running a weekly scenario from the vast catalog of released scenarios only makes knowing everything, less likely. I can barely remember the 3 characters I actually play.

Expecting the GM to have intimate knowledge of a players character is foolishness. A cursory knowledge, maybe even one or two pieces of scenario specific information, is understandable.

I liked this scenario. The table I ran was low-tier and I think things went well.

The first wave was very easy for them, but the two max damage axe attacks made everyone nervous.
The alchemists were nasty, the explosives dropped a good portion of the party very low on health.
I was very excited about the BBEG, but was absolutely crushed in initiative and he nearly dropped in one round.

All in all, it was fun. The players seemed to need a bit of prodding to actually set up defenses, and luckily Cheliax was there to thin the herd a bit.

I've had players run the entire scenario without even knowing what Gamin was. No one bothered to look around the hut before they cut him free, I crossed Gamin off of the rewards sheet.

BNW, and others..
I don't think Gamin will ever be "fixed". As the history of the blade says "for two centuries Gamin passed from one dissatisfied holy warrior to the next..." I'm sure if it was possible, someone would have fixed him by now.

Great work Nathan. Thanks for all your hard work.
-Don

Kyle,

I'm pretty full up working for SciFi media, but I'm more than willing to run a session or two of First Steps. I'm more than willing to fill a bit of my luggage space with sock puppets and dice.

pathar,
I was not stating faction missions are "useless and annoying", that was the OP's words.

MrSin,
I was attempting to point out the OP's opposition between the words they used and the actions they were taking.
The OP states in multiple points how they feel faction missions detract from scenarios, yet the OP takes actions to make the resolution of a faction mission take even longer than needed. Hypocrisy!

As far as RAW, yes. You should be able to have your eidolon search with you.

My personal opinion is that you're using your eidolon the same way every other summoner does, as your main character and the "character" is the waste of flesh that stands in the back.

Every other player at the table would get one chance to complete the faction mission that they are given, but you want two chances because you're a summoner. It's a "Useless, annoying side-quest"; why do you care enough to want to use two skill rolls?

I've always been a bit bothered by 5ft steps in the middle of melee.

Casters stepping back to cast a spell, archers doing the same; sure makes total sense.

My issue comes in when melee characters make a 5' step from directly in front of an enemy to directly to the NPC's left/right side. I know it's so the players can get into flanking faster, but it seems strange to me.

Am I reading the rules correctly and this is legal, with no repercussions to the person taking the step?

So, here's a question for everyone. I've run this twice (just finishing up the second run-through). And neither party has wanted to go anywhere near the gnome.

The first set down always decides to hold down Kalkamedes until the others arrive on the lift (and they've succeeded). Koth'Vaul hollers, entices, begs, etc, but even when the entire party arrives, no one wants to go near the gnome. Instead, both parties have just gone straight towards the nearer alcove, and ended up fighting the dragon.

So, how have other GMs managed to get their players to go investigate the gnome? How do you pique their curiosity?

I've always done things the same way.

I must be confused then, it's a common thing.

I remember I did just make up a few maps on the spot. Luckily for me, we play on a table covered in grid paper and I can just toss out a map anytime I want.

The map I used is for the Lodge.

You could have him/her as a book-ish person who's uncomfortable with the living. All the stories and histories he/she has read have been about long dead people, so they decided to go dig up their bones and have a talk with their "hero".

Talking with your "hero" as a child is nice, but when that person turns out to just be a puppet who's strings you control, maybe he/she get a god complex and see everyone as puppets you can control. Once everyone is dead, so why not release the super powerful evil on the world to kill everyone...and now he/she is back to their comfortable place.

Yes, it's a bit convoluted but if you wanted typical there are a thousand standard "I hate everything" type of characters.

I think wraith's idea of a friend turned enemy is fantastic. No clues, no hints; one big reveal and your players will sacrifice anything to kill him/her.

Hey,

If a first level caster detected magic on the intelligent sword does he get knocked out?

Our GM for this game kept this boon and it came up, crafted by a caster level 5 but is it a minor artifact?

The scenario actually has it listed as "faint transmutation" if I'm not mistaken.

Lamonita,

You shouldn't feel bad for having a player die after rolling into melee combat alone. (Riding an animal companion doesn't count.) Stepping toe to toe with a devil is a dangerous thing. When you have half the health of a front line fighter, it becomes downright suicidal.

I've been lucky and haven't killed a player yet, but I run low tier (1-5) scenarios. Some day I may roll well and make some poor player cry, but I won't feel bad if they run into a situation unprepared and alone.

Both Shadow Lodge members I've had at my tables have put the screws to Sheila before she can even finish asking the players to help Kalkamedes.

It just paints Shadow Lodge as uncaring jerks, IMO. No desire to help someone, only point fingers and call names.

If I remember correctly, touch attacks provide threaten just as weapons do.

A hand of glowing energy and a sword are the same in game terms.

I don't see this thread going in a good direction.

Initially, I wanted to read the OP's adventure, but now I'm less inclined to. Not from what anyone has said, but from the responses to criticism. Hopefully, everyone can step back and gather some perspective.

Miss Chance should be changed from % to d20 roll.

I would go the opposite of this. Drop miss chance completely, change this to a flat penalty to all attacks. Less rolling of dice makes everything faster.

As a GM, both in Society play and a home game, I have two very separate opinions. In my home game, if you bring me a few "16 ounce insurance policies"; I promise I won't make the challenges any harder for you than anyone else.

In Society play, I'm just a story-teller. I have no favorites, and I do my best to treat all my players the same.

I understand that if I show favoritism or give special attention to one, or a few, players then the others may feel slighted. My responsibility is to tell a fun story and adjudicate the rules, both to the best of my ability.

CrazyGab,
It sounds like you used the possibility of bribery to get out of a bad situation, while someone else used it to get ahead. I'm sorry you feel you got the shorter end of that stick.
My suggestion is talk with your GM and discuss removing the option of bribery from the game. It's all about fun, not about who can spend the most money stroking his ego (or stomach).

I use the local Venture Lieutenant for that. ;) (He seems to be the one who keeps track of them.)

... and this is where the feat Step Up becomes even more amazing.

First Steps, with the provision that you get them done FAST. Parts 2 and 3 aren't going to be legal for Society play soon.

MotFF is nice, but can feel a bit like your players are boarding a railroad to Doomtown.

Interestingly I just looked up the readied action rules for someone else's questions. I think this is the relevant rule:

"Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action."

My interpretation of this, as it does not say exactly is that if they can't do what they were going to do then they can do something else. They do not loose the action.

So the archer could pick up with bow and shoot still.

I read that exactly opposite of you Seriphim.

You can't begin deciding other actions (such as picking up the bow), until after the "Archer attempts to fire" is resolved.

I've seen the same distaste for generalist characters. Both in Pathfinder society games and in my home games.

One possible explanation is the lack of big numbers. Hitting more often in combat and doing more damage makes combats faster, and some players are only interested in getting *out* of combat as quickly as possible. (I won't even get into if they roleplay during the remainder of the game.)

Most RPG games have a system in place for combat, and mastering that system and increasing the apparent efficiency of a character appeals to some people.

Dealing with disparaging remarks and comments of "you're not effective" suck, if I hear them around my FLGS I do everything I can to squash that attitude, but as everyone says Your Mileage May Vary.

Play a generalist, play that character to the best of your ability, give them some style and maybe you'll convince someone they don't have to be "efficient" all the time.

I wish you luck.

Doug Miles wrote:

People have trouble sticking with a concept. Alignment would be useful if it came with a clearly defined metric, but it doesn't. People like to argue and that's all alignment is good for: starting arguments. It would be nice if characters could voluntarily follow an ethos without the GM constantly asking "What's your class & alignment again?". The bottom line is that the alignment system as it exists is not fun, so it is largely ignored. As a GM I don't sweat it, it's not worth the stress. If the players want to act like they are in an amoral video game and they're having fun, I let them go nuts. In my area, no one cries over dead goblin babies. As long as one person's sense of fun doesn't hijack the game, I don't spend time splitting hairs. Some GMs like to argue with players, but it's not my bag.

In the past I have come down on two classes for ethos violations, but in hundreds of tables it was a rare exception to the rule.

Emphasis mine. Pathfinder is not a game of touchy-feely exploration of an individual's morals and descent from decency to depravity as World of Darkness can be. People who enjoy that will gravitate toward more psych-horror games than a descendant of D&D. Certain classes can be an exception (paladin!), but on the whole, that's not a focus feature of the system.

Why do you feel it's not a focus of the system? Just because it's a statistic listed for every single character and NPC in the game?

I don't expect Pathfinder to be a game of deep moral dilemmas and soul searching, but having players kill, steal and abuse any being mentioned in a scenario is stupid.

With no penalties for their actions, either moral or physical, players likely will devolve into the internet. Players will have an infinite "audience" of NPC's to abuse, with no consequences.

I've had some of the most odd actions come from players recently, I warn the players that what they are proposing isn't a "good" action and get looks of confusion from across the table.

Now we all know the player doesn't have an alignment, or a clearly defined moral code for that matter, but trying to kill a subdued, unarmed, bound person is not "good"; no matter how you spin it.
Characters have an alignment listed on the sheet, and I'm even willing to give some leeway in situations. (The CG dwarf who wants to kill the tied up goblins. OK, chaotic nature and dwarven racism toward goblins.. sure kill em, but you'll feel bad later.)

Asking a beaten, shackled, mistreated person "What will you give me for freeing you?", is not a "neutral" thing to do. (How someone defines neutral is a discussion in and of itself)

Playing an evil character in Society isn't allowed, but having an occasional character who walks the line is fun. An entire table of self-centered, thieving, blackmailing, murdering thugs week after week gets ridiculous.

I have a character who follows the law and this has gotten me called a paladin multiple times, and that makes me laugh (but I would rather cry). Every character around my tables seem to be lightly medicated psychopaths desperately in need of some therapy and a nice fluffy teddy bear.

Or, how to make the game run smoothly.

1. If you're new to the system, don't make the most complicated monk/magus/oracle winter witch you possibly can.
1a. Don't make complicated characters for first time players. Heck, just don't make characters for other pepeople.

2. If you're rolling dice know where to look on your character to find your bonus (attack, skills, damage, etc)
2a. If everyone has to stop and watch you shake your dice...shake...shake...shake...you're doing things wrong.

3. Don't play someone else's character. Ever!

4. Talking among players is great. The GM is not here to pass messages from you to the rogue on your left; talk to them.

Do your part to help make things smooth and fun, cause no scenario goes as planned. GMs have all the players, NPCs, and story to take care of.

Lanith

Frenzy is also something you can use. Unthinking non-intelligent rage from a barbarian or even a juiced up alchemist.

I'm sure there are plenty of creatures in the bestiaries you can use that don't speak at all.

Ambushes are a great choice. All your honey'd words are for naught when the rain of arrows fall upon your heads.

At worst you can use the characters own tactic against them. Two bards having the "intimidate" fight out in the center of town; it reminds me of the Walk off in Zoolander.

Having a social character around can be a pain, but they can be just as easily controlled as the 100AC fighter. A fun and exciting game is the goal for everyone.

Since I can't seem to edit my previous post with updates. I'll just add them here.

Amara Li, everyone's favorite party host.
Colson Maldris, Eagle knight and all around stand up guy.
I'm still confused as to how to show Trade Prince Aaqir. I just use a plain puppet for him.

Lanith, just between the two of us, Karela is not a member of the Society, lt alone a Venture Captain.

That's good to know. Valsin gives that impression to me when he says "trust his word as you would mine".

Lanith wrote:

Part of me is happy I can retire, at least, two costumes for my sock puppets in the near future; but part of me is sad that these costumes won't see much more play time. Such is life.

I want so badly to believe that you have actual sock puppets you use for the faction heads.

I've finally gotten around to putting some pictures on Picasa, feel free to click the links if you wish. At this time I would like to apologize for the poor quality of these pictures.

Venture Captain Ambrus Valsin
Sczarni Venture Captain Guaril Karela with his dashing mustache.
Shining start of the Silver Crusade Olyystra Zadrian, yes I know she's not supposed to have a Swedish bonnet on, but I'm still experimenting with helmets.
Auntie Baltwin "Hello children"
Kreuvus looking as un-scary as possible.

Part of me is happy I can retire, at least, two costumes for my sock puppets in the near future; but part of me is sad that these costumes won't see much more play time. Such is life.

Personally, I've found that as a GM I normally see 2 or 3 factions, at the most, around a table. Certain factions speak to players better than others. (Silver Crusade gets your goodie goodies, Sczarni begs for rogues to join their ranks, Cheliax is just good "clean" fun for anyone.) Factions need a sense of style and I think the divide between Grand Lodge, Shadow Lodge and Lantern Lodge was too much with too little personal flavor; too many stepped on toes for groups that should all be running together.

I love running First Steps for players, and look forward to another "Welcome to Pathfinder" scenario(s)

Congratulations, anyone who has followed through on getting 5 stars is a tougher person than I am.