Merquetio's page

alternatively, let the GM kill you all in the gimped ship, and then say "well, what'd you expect when you wouldn't let us upgrade it, and you knew the CRs of the ships we'd be facing. Good game though, wanna do a retcon and say we've been upgrading our ship the whole time and do it again?" (not really a good idea, but with his complaining, I think it'd at least be a good idea to broach the subject now and explain that you all WILL die in future space fights if things don't change)

But seriously though, I think the adventure REALLY should have spelled out more on "while the PCs are doing X, this is a good time to have their ship upgraded to lvl Y which they'll be once they're done exploring", considering this is a new adventure for a new system, there should have been slightly more hand holding imo in this department. I kept looking for good "downtime" options for ship retrofitting in the books, and finding none. So that's why I adopted the off-screen upgrades while the PCs are exploring. Not 100% sure how I'll be working it now that they're out in the expanse...

Rook, it also sounds like the GM in question is using a classic "n00b" GM technique: Deus Ex Machina. IOW, the GM is using their NPCs as "PCs" and "saving the day" and not allowing their players to make their own decisions and dealing with the consequences.

TBH, I despise this, both as a player and as a GM. It means the GM is being lazy and not putting in the effort and dedication to make the game enjoyable. The GM is basically saying "Look at MY characters! They're stronger, better, luckier, blah blah blah...that YOUR characters. Only THEY can save you, NOT yourselves."
If the campaign "seemingly" derails because of what the PLAYERS choose to do, then it's the GMs job to bring it back, i.e. exercise some creativity...you know, use their brain and THINK of something even better than what the AP says to do. That way, the campaign is made your own, not rubber stamped. I can't tell you how many campaigns I've played from "premade" adventures from the publisher and we, the players, did something so totally off the wall, the GM was almost apoplectic. BUT, our good GMs rolled with it, changed it up (also defeating the players who also had the premade and cheated knowing what was coming up), and bam! We players had a blast, the GM was well rewarded for their ingenuity and creativity and the campaign was a success.... because we all had fun. And that's the point....the ONLY point of gaming. It should be fun. If it's not (even for one player out of 4 to 8) then the GM isn't doing it right.

I've run into a possible problem in the game I am running. Basically, the party leader, a paladin, and his wife (another party member) are having a child. Unfortunately, due to magical interference and other problems, the baby is to be born deformed.

Now I'm using the The Complete Guide to Unlawful Carnal Knowledge from old 2E, updated for Pathfinder. I rolled on the table, and the worst thing happened: the baby is slated to be born a demon.

So I have to ask this question: is the paladin, the father, bound by the paladin's code to slay his own son upon birth as a demon? Would the other paladin in the party be obligated to do so? Is there wiggle room in the paladin's code that would make it possible to attempt to raise the child to be good (and possibly succeed)? Does either way mean a fall?

DGL,

This is my first post here, so please be gentle with me ::smirk:: Imo, the "Unfortunately, due to magical interference and other problems" is what the problem is. I've been gaming since 1976 and even used the Chainmail rules for about 6 months (yeah, where are those btw?) so "appealing to my own authority" is a bit cheesy, but here goes.
By definition, a paladin is a being somewhat special to a god/goddess, don't you agree? They are proponents to the aforesaid god/goddess's plans, instruments, if you will. That implies a good amount of humility on the pally's part towards their deity. It also implies a quid pro quo on both parts. The pally and their deity are basically using each other for a symbiotic gain.
Now, that being said, the "Unfortunately, due to..." is what the pally has to deal with. Pally's are all about conflict and resolution. Bringing things to a head, quickly and concisely, imo. Being a diplomat COULD be part of a pally's duties but, a cleric could do that; a pally uses their patron deity's weapon for a reason (or a sword, w/e). Pally sees the problem, bonk it with the appropriate "tool", problem solved, people cheer the pally, pally goes home for brews and wild orgy with their significant other (pally's tenants allowing ::grins:: )
So, the real question is: Are the "Unfortunate...blah blah blah" a result of a screw up on the pally's (s') part? If so, then this is a "causal" effect, and the pally(s) has(have) to do penance. In your case, MAJOR penance; not necessarily a fall, per se. This could be an entire campaign to seek out where the baby (due to no fault of it's own) could go to some type of reliquary or holy site (deep in the bowels of some forgotten destroyed-by-the-patron-deity's-archenemy temple), have a wish or major prayer (entire party, perhaps even NATION, in on the prayer session) Huzzah! problem solved, perhaps?
Keep in mind, a pally's major purpose (imo) is for SHARP conflict and it's resolution, not for dilly-dallying around with diplomatic couriers, boring dinners, lousy food/wine, and empty platitudes. Pally's are about "Okay, draw my sword, kick in my buffs, direct allies for most beneficial effects, and LAY THE F*** into mine enemies! Huzzah!"
Sound like a plan? Hope so! and most of all, enjoy the GAME, because that's what it is, a game. :D