1) That sounds reasonable and I had similar ideas about.
It would probably cause a religion conflict to a degree. Depends what players are playing. Currently, I would imagine local communities still harboring religion and magics of old time. They might even try to protect their local herbwoman who has been known to help when needed in times of troubles.
In regards to split, I would probably keep them slightly away from it. In the part of country where they are, it's all all pretty much Catholic Church.
They simply wouldn't work unless they wish to actively hide their faith. Catholicism would probably be the only choice or other pagan faiths. To a degree, players might receive protection from the fact that they are wondering mercenaries. People will often turn a blind eye against someone, as long as they help them.
2) E6 won't work as some players wish to play higher level game. lv12 will probably be cap. Rest of advancement can be gained through feats.
I haven't touched on magical items, but I am thinking of simply having it all built in character features.
3) These are valid questions in regards to races, but I didn't go this far, nor do I probably have to for the next 10 sessions or so. It's a good longterm question, but I do not have enough time to tackle on everything just yet.
Magic is pretty much seen as heretical if coming from anyone else, other then a priest of Church, but it would depend from region to region. Yes, in general, witches would be outcast, sorcerers would have problems with heritages, etc., but a lot of people would turn a blind eye to it. I do not have really exact answer for this and I don't think that there is a good solution for it.
4) It's either gonna work or it won't. The medieval period campaign would be easier to lead in general then the current one, in spite of all the potential issues.
The truth is that I am probably running out of fumes as a GM, but players don't get it. I don't want to disappoint them on other side, but the boulder on my back became to big. That's another story though.
it's been a long time since a posted on the forum so I thought I might as well do so for a change of pace.
I'v been thinking of setting up a new setting for my players and myself since I feel that current one isn't resonating well with them. To be honest, I am having issues with re-living it in my head, so I'v decided to put players on a short 1-3 session quest which will push them into a new setting and give them the opportunity to experience it. If they like it, they can continue through it, if not, they can turn back to old one.
The new setting would be - Fantasy-based medieval Europe.
Idea: Reshape the medieval Europe (High Middle Ages Medieval Period) softly by changing races (England-humans, French-elves, Irish-dwarves, etc.). The general idea is that on the outside, the world should be as similar as to the lore of medieval Europe, but on the cultural and supernatural lore level, it's completely off. The end idea is to emerge players into something which is familiar to them, but yet it's not completely same as it would be in real world.
Goods and Bads: As a GM, I have to do little to explain the world as players already know how it probably looks like. I feel it would encourage more positivity in even re-reading old history books about medieval ages, simpler character ideas, better immersion and better setting then current one. The bad is that it's gonna require some general idea how to change the world subtly, so I am already struggling with some ideas. Without too much text, here is a few questions:
1) How to incorporate religion such as Christianity and current Pathfinder dietific ideas? I wish to keep the Christianity being main religion for example. Perhaps characters could worship different aspects of religion? This is the most puzzling question currently.
Those are all questions currently,
Thanks upfront for any answers,
- Fish for natural 20s. Have a horde of low level monsters. Some will hit eventually. It's what I and my GM buddy always do. No AC is too high.
- Use Army or Swarm templates for large amounts of enemies. They ignore AC.
- Fish for natural 1s. Damage is never received through AC alone. Get rid of this thinking. A low level bad of goblins could cause an small rock slide for example (DC 15 Reflex Save to avoid 3d6 dmg). Set 20x of these small bands for below average encounter and someone will roll natural 1.
- 20x bodaks in ambush solve most of problems.
- Have 9x low level NPCs gank up on paladin and Aid Another to the big brute.
- Hazard + average type of fight can guarantee the dmg done. Fire Elementals in hot environment for example.
- 50x Harpy archers.
- Go insane. Add a monster beyond any PF charts that ignores all damage received until certain condition is met inside combat. For example, lich has 5x magical pillars which provide him immunity to everything. Pillars need to be destroyed first.
Long story short. Conventional ideas probably wouldn't work on High Level Mythic. You have to brutal, above brutal. Insane above insane. At least, I suspect so. I haven't luckily played or GMed Mythic.
Could you specify points of interest. I am kind of trying to avoid to many walls of texts and hoping that player doesn't accidently check on this topic.
They aren't really bad players, just mistakes happen and as I am often lenient GM, it tends to backfire sometimes. In the last quest for example, which lasted many, many sessions, most of the encounters were thougher. One of the reasons was that they kept constantly going "nova" on a single encounter and then resting. The second reason was that the encounters in general were expected to be harder which supported the first reason.
The creature was stationary plant, a giant flytrap (downgraded by applying opposite of advanced template, giving it sickened debuff and reducing acid damage dealt). It was hard for it "run away" per se. I also made a mistake with player's Perception check. He rolled high, which should have noticed the plant, but I requested the check for a illusion in the vicinity of plant (the BBEG was leading PCs into the trap). The player was recompensatetd by going first in the surprise round. He attacked the plant solo, 50 ft. away from party. Horrible tactical deicision coupled with horrible dice rolls and outrageous dice rolls from my side. It ended bloody really.
I tend to always think out-of-box sprinkled with a dose of realism which often keeps players on their toes. No tactic is dirty enough, especially in this "evil-ish" setting that they are in. That on the side, I try to be fair always. My encounters tend to be story based a lot. I don't often think what might be too strong or too weak, but I take CR into account always and love interesting fights. It kinda often boils down to combat though as players seem slightly bored without it.
I have slight problem in expectations of gameplay with a single player in a group. He is a friendly individual, joker, highly experienced PF player and GM, and overall a good friend. I like him really as a player, but his ego occasionally gets the best of him. When situation in combat seems to favor the bad guys, or he feels that players are treated unfairly, he will object, which is by normal standards just fine, except when it isn't. So what exactly is a problem? I'll try to make it brief and general.
I'v GMed PF for almost 4-5 years consistently. I know most of the edges, corner cases, grey areas and rules of the system. I'v made a moderate mistake of putting a CR 8 encounter against APL 5 party. I realized too late that it felt as a "deus ex machina" for his character (he was revived via Hero Points) and this combat made him slowly doubt my GMing skills. Further on, he complains against certain things that GM might use, such as Rust Monsters, Item loss or destruction and most recently that "GM wouldn't be such a dick to take away our hard earned money" when he suspected that an opposition group might be coming after them. Mind you, I strongly believe that not every encounter should be solved via brute force and anything lost can be restored later on. The players underwent a quest which was by all regards horribly difficult (I made sure to emphasize this at the quest start), but rewards heavily for 5th level characters. It just feels that nobody took it seriously and now, the blame is slightly on my back. Luckily, the quest is happily ending and so far it's all fine and dandy, but I feel that trouble might be brewing in the future against my gameplay as a GM.
So what can I do to prevent potential out of game conflicts? How to handle socially situations when player feels that he is treated unfairly? I am trying to find middle ground most of the time, and it barely worked so far, but my GMing authority is being slightly pushed through the topic of what is fair, and what isn't fair.
Thanks upfront for any responses,
So, if you are in a room with no windows, and you shift it 5 feet below the ground, the terrain becomes underground even though nothing changed from the perspective of character? Sewers are listed as urban for example as terrain, yet they are commonly underground. Do they qualify as underground terrain also?
I went into minor discussion with a friend today about the underground terrain during a session. Fortunately, it wasn't that important, but I am at a big dilemma on how to handle it. He is playing svirfneblin, which receives +2 additional Stealth underground.
But what qualifies as underground?
I am sure that many will mention underground terrain (caves and dungeons) per ranger rules for favored terrain as an example, but this is what brings dilemma. "Dungeons" is a term which can be interpreted for pretty much anything. When people mention "dungeons" in Pathfinder in DnD, they mean on a big place with a lot of rooms full of monsters and treasure. But in my view, "dungeon" is a prison-complex.
Does anyone see this minor dilemma here? It's not that big of a deal really, but I am curious to find out the answer. The players are currently in a underground worked complex made of stone, so...
Thanks for answers,
Thanks for the entire explanation of the situation. I didn't know what what exactly happened, but most of my advice still stands.
Do not go into large debates with this type of player. If what you said is true, he has no concept of story or reality. It seems that he merely wishes to "do what he wants" without any consequences at all which is against the spirit of the game.
As others noticed, he is a problem player. A fact that he is playing CE character in party of good-aligned characters is already Red Light on it's own. You probably did well to remove him, but the player needs to talk with someone in order to realize his mistakes if possible. He might be horrible player now, but is still a human being. And everyone makes mistakes. Perhaps, he can realize them at least.
so instead of deciding on consequences, you or the GM in question, decided to talk with player about what kind of consequences the character should receive? That's just bad approach because the game is turning into out-of-game philosophical debate and potential fight.
My personal opinion of deities? They wouldn't care that much for a single desecration. It might warrant a small curse with somewhat harder Will Save to resist, but nothing major as CR 10+ foes. If the person is however massively ruining it's plans, heavily desecrating shrines and rampaging on it's faith, the deity might intervene then. Even then, if deity intervenes, it does so in subtle ways.
If you want true consequences for player, just say to him that even low CR foes can be deadly. A CR 1/3 goblin, has for example naturally high stealth score. He simply has to sneak upon person while asleep and coup-de-grace him. The NPCs always play dirty.
I have a few quasi-questions since I am running this scenario in 2 days.
a) Scenario mentions that Singe initiates combat with "boiling blood" spell, but Singe has no such spell on his spell list. It's either replaced or missing.
b) Respect Score has weak effect on gameplay to be honest. It's insufficiently clarified in the boxed bar. The only negative side-effect of being "rude" after successfully passing a diplomatic encounter with Old Man Mountain seems to be that he won't rescue PCs from the volcano at end. It seems rather weak to me from a protective kami spirit. :/
Craft (alchemy) is almost too general skill to be used for all alchemical creations, so that's why Craft (poisons) skill exists in those feats as prerequisite. A good prerequisite if you ask me.
That on side, you can have many different versions of Craft skill, besides those listed in skill description. Craft (poison) can be used to create poisons in that retrospect. You could also use Craft (bombs), Craft (medicines), Craft (powders), etc., but all of that is already covered by Craft (alchemy) skill.
I would image that planet like Mars might have more unique monsters typical to it's ecosystem.
It reminds me of the Dune movie honestly. Large titanic worms that roam the planet, unique societies which all struggle for resources such as food, electrical energy and of course water. From monsters, I would imagine many sand and earth type beings being present throughout the planet such as earth elementals, insects of many kinds, plants that strive in low water environment, etc. But I would imagine that of greater danger would be planet hazards and not necessarily monsters themselves. When you are dehydrated, starved and taking a heat, even a few goblins might pose a serious threat to anyone.
I play my 5 Cha dwarf as a person that questions any acts against lawful institutions, laws and authorities, and acts towards such laws, but not at the expense of the party's total decision. I usually leave some space for party to either Bluff him successfully or divert his attention if they wish so. In general, he tends to be annoying as hell, but is still occasionally good speaker (he has good Diplomacy score despite bad Charisma).
I assume that you won't change CR Guidelines?
I suggest to keep PCs at regular level and with 20 pts buy instead and run encounters at CR -2 instead. Use a lot of weak enemies with low damage output and vary the combat scenes and types. That's pretty much recipe for good balance.
I suspect that they might, but it's hard to say completely. I haven't checked the monster stat-blocks yet. From players there are a: a witch with fairly optimized sleep hex, a cavalier dishing out 60-80 dmg per charge perhaps even more, an archer ranger with the same dmg output as cavalier and a summoner which might also be mega-optimized character but I don't remember exactly which player is playing it so it might not be. So that's 4 players, 2 pets and possible additional level 7-8 players if any. I suspect fights being over in 1-2 rounds unless dices really dislike them simply due to sheer dmg output.
Thanks on quick response!
I suspected that gold out-of-subtier gold is given at this point as you mentioned it. Currently singed characters are levels 9,9,9 and probably 10-11 (which equals to APL 9,25 - 9.5). There are no modifications in scenario for 4 man groups, so this is why scenario is confusing me. If several more lv7 or lv8 characters join in, APL will drop instead of grow. I probably won't get a solid 10-11 subtier as our community here is rather small and too spread out in character levels.
I need a fast answer for tomorrow's Special Event, The Sky Key Resolution Special. I am the only GM leading a higher tiers and there is a pretty big chance of getting APL ~9 of player character levels judging from signed up individuals, however, subtier 9 is missing in the entire scenario! There is only subtier 7-8 and subtier 10-11. I could technically modify easier version of subtier 10-11 for players, but that's out of my jurisdiction as PFS GM. What to do? Let APL 9 players play subtier 7-8? I haven't managed to read entire scenario yet, but so far, not a single clue about this.
Thanks upfront for answers,
It's a fact that people are imperfect beings. There will always be mistakes here and there in the long run. I do agree that there is many "gotcha" moments in scenarios. While story and foreshadowing the incoming story is important, I do feel that revealing 1 or 2 encounters in the scenario more clearly won't detract from the story line itself. High knowledge characters might feel rewarded actually for once.
Like I said before, tactics can be slightly changed in order to provide characters some decent chance to act sooner, but I have a feeling that some GMs might be against this as it might "remove the challenge" feeling. On the negative side, I rarely see GMs roleplaying those bad guys through their actions. Why not try sub-optimal dirty trick for example or Intimidate check? It's like, non-existent...
In the end, PFS policy is clear. Run as written. But I still believe that GMs are responsible for their own games. Putting excuses on the scenario avoids the responsibility given to them as game masters, but I can understand why they are doing it.
Thanks a lot for correcting me. I wasn't sure about that part completely.
What would actually improve party's survival through the tougher encounters is a few steps which are easily adaptable for every PFS table (I am just throwing thoughts here):
1) Warn the players before the game that scenario is fairly difficult;
2) Provide players with information of what they are about to face (current information given through Knowledge skills before the scenario is often vague and requires too much logic to connect the dots);
3) Provide high level consumables for the party against higher level challenges (this is already being done through a degree);
4) Change the deadly monster tactics to provide some "breathing ground" for party to do so something (even if the monster is slightly of lower CR to accomodate the party of 4 players, their tactics are often unchanged);
That's a few ideas which might provide a more balanced challenge without affecting the current system's formula. It's not much, but bit by bit, it's possible to change the challenge degree.
If I remember right, a player has to choose a character if he has one for appropriate tier to play (not subtier). If he doesn't have one, he may choose to play a pregen. Even if he chooses to play a pregen, he has to assign the pregen to already created character or a new character. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong here.
So in the end, playing a pregen character to change APL isn't exactly a valid option. It's option for some players, not all of them.
I know that you didn't disagree with me, but you are threading carefully through the conversation in order to keep the "PFS policy" in place. I get that. Everyone does that here, because some comments can easily be interpreted to be done against the PFS policy.
On the point of the topic however, I still feel that teaching GMs some specific concepts can provide more fruitful and better experience in the scenarios. I sincerely doubt that current formula can be stretched further without harming smaller communities which thrive on level disbalance.
I really don't have much to say in that regard. I completely agree with most what you said. I generally follow tactics as long as they make sense, but that doesn't mean that I can't twist them in a way that I see fit.
Fortress of the Nail example:
In case of this specific scenario, I would double check the mentioned values in order to be apsolutely sure that there was no mistake on part from the scenario writer. Believe it or not, I'v seen it many times. Incorrect hp values, Saving throws, AC. It can happen. Once I made sure that the values are fine, I would follow the tactics as mentioned, but here is a few things that I am at liberty to "twist":
- Creature might provoke AoO or two while he charges at 3rd target
- Creature might choose to do CMB check on AoOs instead of doing damage
- Creature might put himself in a worse position
- Creature might avoid flanking
- Creature might avoid using Power Attack
Am I actually changing scenario by doing this? I am not.
Note: 16d6 overlaping cones doesn't sound right honestly, but I am unsure at which subtier level is this supposed to work. It's not unusual for writer to make a mistake like I said before.
For me, that's classical case when a GM doesn't know what to do and follows the listed tactics blindly. Don't get me wrong, if you followed tactics in scenario, you did fine, but the end result is most important, if the players had fun in the scenario or not.
I tend to forget how everyone here is salty on every text you make. When I said "assisting" I did mean coaching players, but about the game system in general. We often get new, but causal players, who don't know much about Pathfinder and I don't feel like explaining people outside the session for hours about how the system works. Instead, I teach them through the gameplay.
But even when I am not coaching new players, I generally want players to succeed on their tasks, and that's just it. I am not getting the same vibe from other GMs. They are way more opposed to the players then me. This creates resentment slightly in players and a small mistake like that tends to turn away our already small pool of players.
But I am starting to derail a bit now and I don't expect everyone to understand my attitude anyway. My apologies.
I know that I am in a minority when I am saying this probably, but isn't GM a game leader also? Isn't he supposed to somewhat assist party to manage through the scenario? I know that GM is a neutral judge and everything, but I am personally struggling to understand why are the PFS scenario writers at fault here. GMs can scale down encounters through tactical advantages or disadvantages. I'v done it million times without changing scenario in any way.
Edit: My lodge is small. I'v seen first hand what Wei Ji speaks and in most cases, it's not a big deal. Fights do tend to slow down since PCs are weaker against expected monsters, but it's more problematic to me when a GM with a big ego sits at a table and doesn't understand the problem at hand. Not long after that, a large sized monster devours PC in a single round and GM is puzzled as to how and why that happened. My personal problem is with GMs leading scenarios, not with writers.
You are scratching the waters of very old history where all sorts of things happened before. If I remember right, players had bigger liberty before of choosing which subtier they might play. The end result was that some players crossed the WBL boundary by obtaining too much gold. While this might not be the only reason of changes back then, I believe it was a primary one.
I do feel that players are often forced to play certain subtier with current rules, but I didn't have any bad experiences with it. It seems generally as correct as it can be.
You should not undervalue yourself so much before this individual. I personally realize how much can gaming, as a social activity mean to a person like you, but if a person cannot be reasoned with, give him the final warning and boot him if necessary. Stay cool when giving this warning. Be polite. Play a fair game. If your other friends cannot understand this, they don't deserve to game with you. You are better then this.
Also, some people are awesome in general, but horrible as players due to many reasons. Don't be stressed so much about it.
I'v led a campaign once, Rise of the Runelords up to lv20. From levels 15-20 campaign was simply a massacre. Such high levels require different mindset of gameplay as a GM, a mindset which you can obtain only through trial and error. My own mistake was that I blindly thought that party can be challenged by these encounters, but it couldn't. I beefed them up with CR+5 templates even, it didn't do much besides prolonging ever so long combat. I wasn't too happy leading that AP anymore really, but at least I learned few things...
1) Think out of the box. What would NPC do in given circumstances? Think realistically. Even a lv1 rogue can kill lv20 wizard while he is asleep, so there must be a way for NPC to counter or temporarily negate PC as a threat.
2) Read the combat section. Read it again. Read it 3rd time. Good. Now, you can use additional tactical knowledge to increase or decrease challenge of any encounter in the game. You wish to softball encounter? Let NPC use demoralize or untrained CMB check. You wish to increase the challenge? Set up NPCs on elevated ground, add difficult terrain or cover. It all piles up eventually.
3) A personal advice. PF tends to be too mechanical and combat focused game. Step away from combat sometimes, storytell a bit, add a investigation/mystery quest where common spells might not work (GM's prerogative). It will refresh you from too much blood on the battle mat.
Those are a few thoughts, though not exactly solutions to your problem.
I am all for doing something fun, but it's generally hard to work with an improper tool as well as with improper idea. It's not that I don't want these ideas to work, it's more like they are unfinished. They aren't a true plan overall.
I can't say that I have met those kinds of players that you mention, but I did meet the ones who refuse to learn the game rules properly. I mean, how hard can it be to know when to roll d20 and when not?
I wouldn't call my players or GMs idiots. They are all good people really, but have their own issues like everyone. But here is few recent silly examples from my players. Again, they aren't idiots, their ideas were partially good, but unfinished and ill suited for the occasion.
They are currently on a generally simple quest to eliminate several corrupted elemental monsters in the nearby polluted lake. The druid would after threat's elimination cleanse the lake. They explored and knew every monster's weakness, had the geography of the terrain, but couldn't come up with any logical tactical plan in how to set an ambush.
P1: "I know! Let's buy bunch of oil and soak the ground with it!"
P2: "I know what we are going to do!"
They kinda went with the bear trap plan at end because nobody could figure out anything better then that. Turns out that all the oil they bought didn't serve any purpose at all besides lightning the arrows with it.
This is a pool of most likely minded gamers that I can find and I have met a lot of gamers. I even introduced a Luck Point rule which allows them to quite literally write the game story, but in a small way. I introduced it in order to improve the chance of success for their ideas and plans.
I tend to remind players of certain potential problems that they haven't resolved yet, often several times before they come up with a plan. I usually can't remain completely neutral in these discussions mostly because they stretch for long time and test my nerves sometimes. Perhaps I should just stay silent completely? Hm.
Well, lack of interest or too much interest, stubbornness or passive attitude, non-teamwork or teamwork attitude, you can all kind of wrap up in a player's gaming style I guess and is probably part of the truth, but this "problem" seems more intellectual to me.
Let's say that it is a matter of play style difference. How would you attempt to solve it considering a fact that a problem isn't big, but is sufficient enough to disrupt a game?
I'v been curious about several social "problems" (they aren't exactly problems per se, but more of a social pattern) which seems to be ongoing in every game that I play and I am searching for a way to go behind it, solve it, well, you name it.
The "problem" is simply put, bad player ideas, but in a longer version, around 50-75% of players that I have met seem to use bad logic, bad common sense, bad interpretation of NPC social behavior (what NPC might or might not do in a certain situation) which in turn forms bad ideas and plans. These ideas and plans typically get discouraged by me (as player or GM) or GM currently leading the game. This "bad idea behavior" then gets repeated, and repeated, and repeated, and... Well you get the idea. It seems almost that some people are dummies and lack imagination, but then again I have prolonged experience with gaming systems.
So how to solve or reduce this problem? Because I am seeing it in my own private homebrew games (as a GM) and as a player in a second game which isn't Pathfinder anymore, but with same social patterns. They are literally a time drain and half of session is lost on them.
Is it player's fault here or GM's? How to reduce or remove the problem?
The only way of solving this problem so far has been for me as a GM to pre-plan potential tactics and quest ideas upfront and insert them into the game for players to use, but I am slightly burnt out perhaps from GMing in general as I have little will to plan these things anymore. I also try to sometimes working with those "bad ideas", but in most cases, they are failure.
I know that a topic might a bit messy question overall, but I think that it's somewhat clear what I am asking here.
Thanks for responses upfront,
I also believe that there is place for everyone really. 4-5 years ago, I would qualify myself as a stubborn brat, but I'v learned to be patient with people. I still think that people can get along fine as long as we don't step on each others toes. :)
I don't actually need or want so much danger in the game for there is too many already. It seems that I have a gift for making one anyway. In general, I have no problems with keeping up with danger according to Gamemastery Guidelines combined with the fact that I am fairly combat experienced. It's not a problem.
But this current new campaign is gonna be social, horror and slightly combat-punishing. I incorporated a lot of rules to make it so. The rule with tokens also seems like great way to trigger intriguing, but perhaps predictable problematic situations. It's kind of like playing chess with players. So I am still searching for a way to balance this rule out.
A player in my group suggested a few effects (from tokens) which seemed lovely ideas:
- fortuitous but plausible coincidence; For example, I might
These kind of fluffy ideas seem what I am looking for. The plot twist cards that Amanuensis suggested also seemed interesting idea.
I am kinda envious slightly. My players do use HPs for skill checks also, but the problem is that when trouble hits in, they tend to resort to combat. Unfortunately, I think it's my fault sometimes also. I tend to put too realistic situations and they often get either cocky or mess things up. It's hard to say. Perhaps I coddled them a bit also. I don't like to see their characters dead, but it's gonna be different a bit in this type of campaign (I am starting a new one). I am probably off-topic here now though.
Anyway, I believe that they wouldn't fly simply because if a player gets cocky and uses HPs too often for his own silly actions, others might get concerned that he is wasting them. One player already confirmed this concern, so I simply believe that it would be bad idea to do it. People like a degree of control when HPs are at stake.
I have no real answer about "Karma Type Rule" though. It simply seemed cool enough to try.
It seems cool, but also contradictory a bit to allow player some narrative power as you say. I guess there are some good and some bad sides to it, but I don't understand in what way do they actually help party when they are stuck or in executing idea? I personally have these kinds of problems with my group. Their ideas tend to be catastrophic or good, but poor in execution.
It sounds like it works good for your group, but I doubt it would with mine. Pooling HPs doesn't seem like good idea for me at the moment although I might mention it to players and see their stand on it.
Long time ago, I allowed other players to give HP to another player, but it pretty much ended in a game where characters couldn't die. This rule is similar, but in different manner.
How are you using "communal HPs"? Do you just pool them together?
I did use Villain Points also, but very very rarely. It seemed cool enough at the time.
Advantage/Disadvantage rules seem also cool, but I was kind of hoping to toy with the fact that GM could literally insert special events by paying 2-4 tokens (for example, undead dragon suddenly rushes and swipes every character in the party). I am hopeful that it would add much more dynamic into a turn-based system, but I am not sure if I am overstepping the line here.
Your concern about using HPs seem valid to me completely. How would you set these bonuses? I am also interested into plot these plot twist cards. What do they exactly do? Could you provide an example?
Thanks on responses!
I'v recently had a flash in memory of a single rule used in Star Wars RPG Threads of Destiny Boardgame System (at least I think that is the name of it) which I played at one gaming convention in our city.
The rule used 4-6 tokens (can't remember how many) and they were colored black on one side and white on other. Any player could flip white token in order to gain some special effect (we usually used it to increase damage dice in that system, but it could be used for everything). Black tokens can be flipped also, but by GM, who in that case adds some negative effect also.
The rule seemed really cool to me. It somehow incited roleplay and teamwork for a bit and I am considering if it would work in Pathfinder in the same way. The effect of coins would in this case be equal to Hero Points.
Here is few pros and cons so far:
+ The system is cool and adds dynamic into combat
- The system is extremely chaotic and it might be hard to predict or playtest
This what came into my head so far. I am curious how do other people think about this? Is it possible to insert this kind of rule? How would you modify it? How to make it work in less-chaotical manner?
Thanks on responses,
People really tend to get trigger-happy with accusations if something is not up to their taste.
Play the game and if at the end of it you don't feel happy about it or you feel as you have been punished for nothing, talk with the GM about it. He is a human being, just like you. He makes mistakes also.
For now, I will choose to suffer the guests since I don't have alternative location. I did somewhat consider renting a small place somewhere, and seems like a good idea. I guess I could check our local library for it.
They do all that already. They aren't that bad. The problem is that after 1-2 years of playing at my home, the damage became slightly noticeable.
Jiggy, thanks for chipping in with thoughts and suggestions.
My players don't treat the space completely with disregard. They try to take care of garbage and everything, and are generally polite good mannered people. But this issue is getting more and more difficult. They did offer an unknown car garage with no toilet, heat or anything else and perhaps another unknown place which quickly became non-existent, but none of them actually bothered to prepare or organize anything. It was mostly in "yeah, there is a place over there, go check it" tone which seemed lazy and uninterested at best.
Coffee shops, restaurants, game stores all seem like a good alternatives to a degree and I did investigate some of them. The thing about those is that players like I said, became a bit too comfortable maybe. I don't know honestly. The general problem I believe is that, they dislike noise and my own house space probably seems too perfect to pass on, and they are too lazy to find something better, so I have to somehow.
The issue with gaming space isn't only my own though. A lot of people can't find a decent spot in my area, although it's a big city. I have seen more then few of those topics on fb before.
I wasn't sure where to set this topic, so I decided that this seems like a good spot. Here a few thoughts which have been bugging me for some time for which I simply can't find a happy ending.
The gaming space. It's simple, yet overall complicated issue. In order to play a tabletop game, whether it's Pathfinder or something else, you need some space for the players and GM. A perfect gaming space isn't hard to imagine; little outdoor noise, enough room for everyone, it's warm enough and lit well, a working toilet, and that's almost it. Fact is actually, that I have my personal space at home which is great. Great for "guests" that is. The "guests" which add a ton of dishes. "Guests" that leave the dropped hair, snacks and everything else. "Guests" that sometimes get too comfortable around your house. "Guests" that slowly but steadily ruin your furniture, table, chairs and everything else. Sigh. You see where I am going, right? Well, these are my poisonous thoughts infected by my none else, but my own mother who complains about it. Unfortunately, she is half-right. These "guests" rarely or ever offer another place to play at and this entire topic seems like a walking social minefield to ask for.
So, is there a happy ending for this? Is there some other idea that I haven't explored? What else can a guy like me, do to lessen the situation? Is there a way to think positive about this, because these poisonous thoughts have permanent frequency and pretty high DC.
It was a while before I made a new topic at this forum in regards to any problems. Perhaps that's a good thing? :) But, alas, some have occured yet again. Fortunately, I have some solutions for it, but I need some additional insight and perspective on the situation because I feel that I need one.
The last session left me mentally exhausted and the group went silent a bit. I feel that I have been playing with kid gloves for too long time and players started to act too selfishly, too uncooperative and too crazy. These decisions eventually led them to the current situation…
Story thus far...:
It would be too long to explain entire story, but here is the short version. After numerous troubles, characters decided to help out their friend Tyrax (a secretly shapeshifted CG copper dragon) who helped them out numerous times thus far. They decided to invade the facility which officially operated as a research center, institution for old and weak, and mentally unstable individuals. Nonofficially, this was human experiment laboratory and there was little good happening there.
They successfully entered the center through the forged papers which put them in the role of Empire Agents. The main researcher and other personel didn't question their actions or even threats simply because PCs had the papers and those papers meant more to him then a threat, lie or anything else. Simply put, they were too intimidate by the Empire, to even try to suspect. Eventually though, PCs rouse fell and their fellow Tyrax, who was ill-tempered, couldn't stand it anymore after scientist started to explain how they „extracted the ingredients from the little children“. Fight broke lose, players and Tyrax started killing everyone. Tyrax eventually made a hole in the roof in order to provide exit, because entire complex was under red alert (think modern-like age complexes) and there was a massive lock-down. Unfortunately for Tyrax, he rushed out through the roof, only to striken down by a blue dragon, his hated foe and archnemesis. Building collapsed above, blocking the roof exit and characters started to plan their escape. This was the turning point where bad decisions were taken and everyone started to act on their own. Long story short, characters were faced with 3 options unless they could provide some other option (sandbox game) and those were: a) face the blue dragon on roof, b) face the ruler of Empire who miraculously showed up infront of the complex and c) continue further down into the complex. Of course, all fights were obviously hard. A huge blue dragon or ruler of Empire (party was moderately exhausted and compromised of 5x level 8 characters). Of course, two players decided to (alone) test their luck and deceive the ruler, but they heavily underestimated her thinking that casual invisibility and disguise self would work. She simply had too high Perception score. And here we come into a problem further on…
Character Hekoko, a sorcerer, ended up as Lady's toy (rule of Empire) and she forced him to take the special mind and body altering test drug. The drug (I am not quite sure that „drug“ is the right name here), changes the body physically from inside, forsing the person to exhibit magical abilities. The side effect is that you have 50:50 to survive and have to continue using it for the rest of your life. Player used 2 Hero Points here, so he survived. That on side, he is unconscious, trapped under debry and has 198 or less doses left before he dies. In return, he received 2 sorcerer levels from the drug's effect. At least this is what I came up with on the fly after session. Better suggestions are welcome, but these effects will probably stay as they are.
Character Genzo tried to create a distraction in order to help his teammate Hekoko by tossing entire bag of gunpowder-bomb-type which was sufficiently large to blow everything. This was, I am not sure, but… Probably least honorable and samurai-like act from him ever, since he practically decided to blow up Hekoko as well, but the player didn't know what to do. After it, he ran from the complex after finally seeing a chance for escape while invisible, noticed a mage looking at him, shadow of a dragon hovering over him while he is running across the empty wide hill and before you know it, he was a dragon meat. I plan to leave him alive, make him a blue dragon's slave with Geas and Bestow Curse effects and change his Edicts to either Ronin or Order of the Black Daimyo because his actions were simply too wrong for a samurai. Better suggestions are welcome.
With all that in this small and complex story, I have to somehow miracously put these characters back with the group, otherwise they are gonna detract from the next session to much. I am just too tierd for allowing them more attention, becausing they received way too much at last session with their crazy ideas, so I am not sure how to get them together under these circumstances and need some ideas in order to do so. Currently, the rest of the party ran of deeper in the underground where I plan to provide an easy escape route through the sewer system and several ways to delay their attackers.
That on side, I need some advice in order how to improve player cohesion, because currently, they are way too random and chaotic. If they can't reach a conclusion after 30 minute debate, then I feel as if they are forcing my hand which some of them did this last session.
I hope that this wasn't too long, but I wanted to keep it well informed. Thanks upfront for any advice that anyone can offer.
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Please don't write "Incorrect." if it isn't incorrect. Read the property again and slow down those typing fingers.
A +3 dueling weapon (with Dueling enhancement from PFS Guide of course) provides the +3 bonus on attack rolls done via weapon and +6 luck bonus on specific CMB checks already mentioned in dueling property with a total net gain of +9 on specific CMB checks. The bonus that applies to attack rolls however doesn't apply to CMD because CMD isn't an attack roll, so you only receive +6 luck bonus on CMD against these same maneuvers, not a +9.
Keep in mind that these CMB checks are done via weapon exclusively. While you do get a significant boost, you still risk dropping the weapon via disarm per normal rules and some dirty trick maneuvers might not apply (expect table variation here). I am also unsure if this luck bonus applies to all stated CMB checks or a single CMB check chosen at the time of creation because a flat increase in of +3 (for +1 weapon) on all four stated CMB checks seems a bit high. Other then that, I can't see anything wrong with your interpretation. Just have a page from the PFS Guide printed out up-front so the GMs can see it, otherwise they might mix the two enchantments with the same name.
Edit: You receive 2x Ench bonus as luck and weapon Ench on CMB rolls, but same doesn't apply to CMD. You only receive fixed luck bonus on CMD, so essentially you would get +9 on CMB and +6 on CMD (in your example above).
About the new player
About your GMing
Pizza Lord is mixing -4 penalty for hitting in melee and +4 Soft Cover bonus from nearby target. These are seperate effects and penalties.
An illusion of nearby archer's ally provides -4 penalty for hitting target in melee via ranged attacks, considering that archer has a target that he doesn't wish to hit. This penalty can apply from illusionary target, however tricking archer that illusion is his ally is quite difficult task. You can't just create new ally and claim him to be so. It's too obvious.
The best way to evaluate this illusionary interaction would be similar to mirror image effect; if you miss the target's AC by 4 or more, you hit illusion and may attempt a Will Save to disbelieve it. This is up to GM's interpretation though and is slightly off-topic.