interesting perspective but from my point of view it is different:
The Balrog was already there, it was not thrown against Gandalf and the others just because they were the team that they were. Any other group could have also met it there and then. It wouldn't have been replaced by an assassin or pixie if others would have gone there. Also, I wouldn't allow the preset main characters like Frodo or Aragorn be played, they would either be replaced by new characters or would be NPC-s.
When I tell a story it is a story of an event or a series of events, in which yes, the player characters are more often than not the protagonists, but I am no Varric Tethras to tell their tale larger than life. I don't move/teleport locations around to force the characters to an important place either, that is too railroaded for my tastes.
Anyway, regarding railroads, i think we derailed a bit from the reason for this thread.
"Your players are telling you, by their build choices, what kind of game they want to play. "
I never got any complains, and I always thought the players tell me by their build choices what kind of characters they want to play, not what kind of game. Ah yes, and also they are usually direct and tell me what they want to be and how they want to play it.
"Fine. I have no problem with that. But when the OP asked for suggestions in dealing with "Scenario A", I assumed he would want a variety of suggestions, not the same one repeated twenty times... "
You asked why you got some "hostile" replies and strange reactions after you offered advice, I gave you a possible answer. This was nothing more than that.
edit: btw, I don't even like Golarion, I play a few games in it but huge majority is in homebrew or other settings, I also use different settings when I GM. I meant "messing up" in a different way. As in: I do not rewrite a book depending on who I tell the story written in it to. That's all.
It really is easy: You create a concept, then a setting, then a story in it. Only after that will you have to place the PC-s and their background into this surrounding.
Imagine it as if you run a game in WW2, the world is there, the war is there, historical people already exist in it, and then you place the player group into it, where they will try to survive and influence the events going on.
The very idea of "tailoring" an adventure to the existing party is against my tastes, and I believe also to majority of people here.
Wow...just...wow. I guess I'm truly the odd man out then. Like I said, "narratavist" here, not "simulationist" or "gamist".
To me, the whole idea of not tailoring an adventure to fit the players is utter anathema.
I mean, seriously, how do you do it? How do you sit down and create an adventure without taking the party's likes, dislikes, strenghts, weaknesses, backgrounds, loves, hates, rivals, friends and adventuring history into account?
I think you mean narrativist.
I also consider myself that, but to be a narrator you have to have a story to tell, that story is set up on a world built upon simulation, and most of the time I make campaigns and adventures/side quests way before I even go and tell the group "Hey, time for a new party, look up what characters you would like to make, and what classes they would be."
Then I narrate the story on how these player characters join the story and live through it. I also fit the character backgrounds into it but I won't make the whole game depending on the party setup. I also often make character specific side quests in addition to already existing, planned ones, but never mess up the world to make it easier for the team.
There is a war in the neighboring kingdom, it already has a royal family, scheming in the background goes with full power, and opportunists take their chances. This will not suddenly change due to what team there appears.
A group of a barbarian, rogue, druid, wizard would find the very same situation and characters there as a group of a paladin, bard, ranger, and monk. The two groups would most likely deal with the events differently, but the events would not be different themselves. Nor traps and enemies (unless they drag new ones into the mess).
Reading the thread, I assume most people here play and GM the same way.
Well, yes. *looks round* Of course you would. No fighter or melee fighter in the group suggests either a magic-heavy game or a roleplay heavy game. Either way, you'd have far fewer combat encounters.
I would have thought that was a no-brainer, actually...
Actually no, why would it suggest anything than just that the group happens not to have a warrior in it?
The world won't suddenly be more RP or magic heavy because there is no warrior, nor should it. Bandits and enemy warriors won't start to avoid the group saying "Meh they have no warrior, lets go the other way".
Same with a no-rogue group, just because there is no one capable of properly disabling traps, it should not remove traps and such from the world as reaction.
The very idea of "tailoring" an adventure to the existing party is against my tastes, and I believe also to majority of people here. I never tailored a story to a group unless it happened to be attached to the background of one of the characters or be the very core of the campaign, but even then I only considered that one character what is involved, not what "firepower" it brings with itself.
If I GM, I prepare a world event, a scene what the players may or may not stumble into, not a theater play that fits the tastes of the players. Just because the group doesn't have a rogue or anything else, it won't mean they won't stumble into traps. In my opinion not having some role filled (as rogue or warrior) makes it more fun to find methods to avoid or overcome obstacles usually that role/class has to deal with.
If they find a great bow but there are no archers or rangers in the group, bad luck, that is life, trading and bartering is also part of life, maybe they get lucky and find something for equal price to swap for at a shop or market even so.
My thoughts on this race were that they would be Fey that are native to Golarian, kind of like Gnomes but more closely tied to the First World, although not of it directly. They don't use the charisma-based magic of the First-world-native Fey as much, and rely more on their brains and skills to fly.
A poor maneuverability gives a -4 to Fly. Tiny size gives a +4, so that balances out. +2 racial bonus plus class skill means if they take one rank, they will have a +6 which is equivalent to the bonus a good maneuverability gives.
don't know how flying works in Pathfinder, but isn't hovering working only from good maneuverability?
I don't see why you have to "balance" Fly out anyway, in this case that feels as if you say that cutting the leg off of a dancer gives -4 to Dance, but no worries because if the Dancer places 1 rank in Perform (Dance) then that balances out too...
fey in my opinion, especially pixie/Disney-like ones should always have bonus to Charisma, similar to how elves should always have bonus to Dexterity, or dwarves to Constitution. This has nothing to do with optimization or what kind of magic they use
a flight speed of 60 will allow her to outpace everything. A double move would be 120 feet. I don't think that would be a good idea on a race that would be totally set up to use a bow and kite things to death. 30 feet of move is consistent with most other races, I don't think she'll spend a lot of time on the ground.
then it should stay 40 as it was planned, but with a cheetah-like ability to speed up now and then
Goth Guru wrote:
As a nature oriented creature she should be able to fly through an entangle spell without slowing.
I think something like that should be more left to the class it has, plus I don't think it would fit the concept, especially as such fey tend to get stuck into things like spider webs. If the spell does only affect the ground though then the flying fey won't be affected anyway
so there, if he gets damage he still has to rest, or drink potions or use spells
...ah right, he is an alchemist, I am sure he can make heal potions for himself =)
Not sure if this was intentional by him or just a random extra to the concept, if its the first one then I like the guy due to how clever the concept is.
Lorth holds his position for a few moments as he assesses the risks, before subtly shifting his weight and roaring as he charges away from his pursuers.
for some reason i imagine THIS music in the background for it XD
you can add a bit of "patriotism/racism" to the situation
Sorry I have no better example, but I hope you know of the Dragon Age setting
in that, elves lost their power, became weak shadows of their former selves, there is not even an elven realm anymore, they are either nomadic or slaves or live in slums (or a mix of these), the living elves are also "tainted" with human blood, meaning it is likely none of them are pure-elves
Now, I took this example because: imagine the people you un-petrify, they meet with the "modern society", and the new cultures, "advanced" races, faiths, technology. Would they be awed by it? maybe fear it? be abhorred by it? Would they even consider the ones in the "new era" true [race/religion/culture], the old ones may love what they see or hate it, or some mix of these, they may also consider everything terrible and only worth to burn and destroy, to conquer and restore what once was
In the end the old revived ruler race/faith could love ice cream, pop music, and cars, and hate everything else
TCG: so, considering my question, would you say the cleric still has the spells granted by its god even if the god was gone meanwhile?
There were some Faerun books that this happened. Specifically Loth disaperared. Basically the clerics lost special abilities (domain powers) and the ability to regain spells, but they had any that they were previously imbued with.
It makes sense. Once the god gives you a spell it's no longer directly tied to the divine. It really depends on how divine metaphysics work in your world, but I like my interpretation. Naturally. ;-)
I have the personal opinion that gods exist as long they are worshiped, and their power level depends on amount of worshipers. This is basically something the Japanese culture also believes in RL, where hundreds of gods exist but if a local one is forgotten it dies.
This is why the question about a returning cleric for me is of special interest, I would say the cleric's faith would revive the divine entity, even if it is just a divine spark or as a demigod due to loss of power. This would happen due to regaining a priest/worshiper.
Of course in a setting where a god is gone = gone for good this makes no sense, but with my version of religious system for a world a lot of interesting options may occur. Like return of forgotten faith through revived petrified worshipers, or maybe a faith got so twisted through passing of time that the return of original worshipers would basically create a second entity and a religious split would happen :)
1. with 1) I have an interesting query: What if the god/dess of the cleric is gone?
Would that mean the cleric lost all power?
Would it mean the cleric now casts spells from its own might?
Would it mean it would have to pick something like the "Heir" of the original entity to be target of its worship?
Or would it mean that with the return of one priest of the god/dess, the entity also gets revived as it is no longer forgotten and has a worshiper once more?
I am sorry if you feel offended, I expressed my concerns exactly because it is at the very start of it, so you can avoid any such mentioned problems and not let players argue over it for days :)
You know that I still wish to play too, so clarification on the matters would also benefit me, and all other lurkers who may get in. XD
/casts Invisibility
This is definitely a "students go to the teachers" system. Many of the classes will have specialized equipment, etc.
I see, well this I wouldn't have known myself, as when I still went to school we only ever had to go to the Lab for Chem classes :)
Maybe you think I am poking at you or messing with you, but I only want to have things like this clarified as soon as possible because I experienced how these details can break apart a good game.
if it is like Japan and some other nations, there may be a requirement to join at least one club for activities
The setting is not Japan. It is not Anime. And will not be run as such.
I didn't say it is, but you already stated there are such activities.
The only question remaining is that if they are free to be joined, or if atleast one is required to be part of. As example, in my nation you are required to go to Homeroom, PE, Arts, History, and be part of one additional club or take an extra real study like Math.
In many other nations Homeroom is not even serious, is nothing like what there is in Hungary, and you can skip it. Maybe skipping isn't even a big deal while in other places you could get into serious trouble after 3 missed classes. Some nations also split PE so that girls and boys don't share classes or go to the same fields/do the same workouts.
In some nations you have to run around switching classes, while in others the teachers go to the classes of the students.
Harry Potter classes/story borrows a lot of how British school system works, anime obviously uses Japanese ones (most of the time, a few cases it represents German education), I assume you are an US citizen and thus will borrow from the US system.
What you assume as obvious on how a school should/would work may for the players be foreign and new. It may require clarification.
I was already in 3 other school-centered games, one normal, two magical. All three got later problems because things weren't clarified from the go. Things like how many classes per day there are, how dorms are handled, all these on first sight minor things can break the flow of the game.
So I made a whole long addition to the campaign info earlier and it got eaten by the internet. Poop. I'll have to re-write it as best I can. It was rather creative if I do say so myself.
I think a certain amount of camaraderie is lost if people live elsewhere though. :(
I don't think so, I was in a dorm for just half a year, always hated it.
When I was still at school I always went from home to class, you could still decide to work part-time at the Café though to make friends with Merlaine easier :)
I even did the classic anime trope of rushing to class with a toast in mouth due to being late (although at that time I didn't watch anime yet so I had no clue of the trope, plus it isn't that cute if a boy does it)
