M. Laakso's page

b) Allow the use of a buckler or dagger in the off-hand. This will allow a Swashbuckler utilize two weapon fighting or improve their already weaker AC. If you need to restrict the Precise Strike to the main hand, that's ok.

This. I don't see why swashbucklers would get buckler proficiency if using it denies them such a crucial source of damage.

Two nights ago I played My Enemy's Enemy. Around an hour after we started (but before the first combat), a sixth player who had apparently reserved a spot at the table showed up and joined us as a second-level monk. As you may know, the tier for this scenario is 3-7. Even though it had no impact on me personally, I objected to letting him play because his character's level was too low. This led to a heated argument between myself and another player at the table about whether it was actually against the rules (and if so, whether the GM can override it). Eventually the player in question agreed to run a fourth-level pregen and the game resumed.

While there didn't seem to be any hard feelings after the fact, the aforementioned other player told me that he felt I was focusing too much on the letter of the law while ignoring the spirit. If this were a home game I wouldn't be as opposed to bending the rules (since the ultimate goal is to make sure everyone has fun), but in an organized setting like PFS I can't help but feel that the rules are there for a reason and should be followed to the letter. Am I in the right here, or do I need to calm down?

Last night I ran Assault on the Kingdom of the Impossible. It went fairly well, but the last encounter gave me some trouble. For those who aren't familiar with the scenario, the players have the option of convincing the boss (a druid) to turn himself in to the Society rather than fighting. Though they succeeded in winning him over, the fighter in the group (whose alignment was NG as I recall) insisted on killing the boss's animal companion anyway. I thought this was pointless and potentially evil since the boss had already surrendered, so I talked him out of it.

Another problem arose when the lone Qadira faction member had to work out a deal with the boss. The notes for this faction mission say that the player must give a good roleplaying reason for the boss to comply, but the player simply threatened to kill him. I again objected for similar reasons. He relented and went for a more diplomatic approach.

I'm still a fairly new GM, so I want to ask if I handled the situation appropriately. Was I railroading too much by not letting the players do as they please? Should I have just started the fight and made the party face the consequences? If I had let the fighter kill the animal companion, would that warrant an alignment infraction? The players all seemed happy when I ended the scenario and handed out chronicle sheets, but I don't feel too good about my actions as a GM.