|
This was brought up on another thread and I was asked to move it. So here it is.
... where the 2 PA adventures you are only supposed to get both PA on some occasions (thus requiring a decent roll on a skill you may not have).
Begin mini rant/frustration...(This is a frustration in my local group and I am unsure as to how others outside of our group feel about it.)
My group has taken exception to this. We understand making one of the PA harder to achieve, but when they become impossible it just upsets and infuriates my players.
For example...
In the scenario where you go through the maze under Absalom, you need a DC 20 Knowledge (geography) check to map the maze for Cheliax. Or if you are Osirion or Qadira (not sure which), you need a DC 20 Disable Device to get sand from the hourglass.
Now no one, not a single player, had an issue with the high DC. However, just because they happened to be playing a character that didn't, and never would, have the appropriate skill, they were unable to receive the second PA of the scenario. They felt cheated out of a chance to receive the PA. As the rules state, no one can achieve that high of a DC without being trained in those skills. Their comments were that it felt more like it was all based on luck, whether or not you had the right skill available. Now in the previously mentioned scenario, they didn't even have another character in the party who had taken any of the skills, so they couldn't even have someone from another faction try it for them.
Now before I get stomped on, I understand that the second PA is supposed to be hard to achieve. But there still exists a suggestive nature that there is a chance to get it, when that is definitely not the case.
As to what was mentioned above in the example...
The player who was to map the maze, went out of his way to acquire the proper tools and equipment, even spending gold on a masterwork tool kit for cartography. Then when he said he was going to begin mapping, I asked for a roll. He said that he didn't have the appropriate skill. At which point I told him that he could map it, but it doesn't appear to be a good enough representation and won't work. Said player was ready to throw a fit. Thankfully, he is a reasonable adult and simply played on, even continuing to roleplay and map, though he wasn't going to get the PA. I thank him for that. But in lesser minds it would have been quite a scene at the table.
I believe where this gets really frustrating is when you have played several scenario's in row with a character and are unable to get that extra PA just because you don't have the prerequisite skill/ability to get it. Is there an estimate as to how many 2nd PA's a character should be getting? 1 out of 5, 1 out of 10? It is also frustrating when a character from another faction gets their extra PA as a result of a NPC dying instead of capturing alive or vice-versa, something any PC can accomplish.
I would like to suggest that skills that can be used untrained, should be used instead of trained skills. Make the DC high, that's not the issue.
If the writers or Josh could give me a reasonable explanation that I can take to my players, I would greatly appreciate it. And please, don't just say "its supposed to be harder to get." I guess I'm looking for a reason as to why they are set up the way they are, not as to why they are harder.
Again, I understand the desire to make the "extra" PA difficult to obtain. Our group has just become frustrated with it.
Rant/frustration over.
Thanks for reading.
|
I do not have a problem with having the second PA require specific skills, abilities, and rolls to gain. Furthermore, the system has been designed to assume that you'll get some, and you won't get others, so the total character PA the game has been based on is not equal to the full PA possible for your level. If this means that the "hard" PA comes from a quest which requires a 20 disable device (and there's nobody trained at the table) then that's the way it is. Next time the check may be a 20 Knowledge (Arcana) which your wizard will beat handily.
What bothers me is when BOTH PA are difficult to get (as in our last session, which happens to be the same exact scenario you're talking about).
I really am fine with only getting one PA for the adventure, although you can tell it pisses off the players (especially when said player accidentally poisons himself with a roll of a "1" like in that one scenario). What frustrates me is when the easy faction missions for some groups require them to do things they were planning on doing anyway (killing the BBEG or the BBEG's brother, looting the desk for a key, etc.) vs. those that require difficult to make skill checks on esoteric skills on both attempts to gain the PA.
|
This was brought up on another thread and I was asked to move it. So here it is.
... where the 2 PA adventures you are only supposed to get both PA on some occasions (thus requiring a decent roll on a skill you may not have).
Begin mini rant/frustration...(This is a frustration in my local group and I am unsure as to how others outside of our group feel about it.)
My group has taken exception to this. We understand making one of the PA harder to achieve, but when they become impossible it just upsets and infuriates my players.
For example...
** spoiler omitted **Now no one, not a single player, had an issue with the high DC. However, just because they happened to be playing a character that didn't, and never would, have the appropriate skill, they were unable to receive the second PA of the scenario. They felt cheated out of a chance to receive the PA. As the rules state, no one can achieve that high of a DC without being trained in those skills. Their comments were that it felt more like it was all based on luck, whether or not you had the right skill available. Now in the previously mentioned scenario, they didn't even have another character in the party who had taken any of the skills, so they couldn't even have someone from another faction try it for them.
Now before I get stomped on, I understand that the second PA is supposed to be hard to achieve. But there still exists a suggestive nature that there is a chance to get it, when that is definitely not the case.
As to what was mentioned above in the example...
** spoiler omitted **...
Looking at the core rulebook, it says that if the character has knowledge to an extensive library, the DC 10 limit on using knowledge skills is removed.
This seems like it could have been the perfect opportunity for the DM to rule that the character who went out of their way do purchase cartographic equipment in order to accomplish the mission did indeed have access to a library (in the form of the instruction book for the MW tools, or whatever hand waving might occur to the DM) and that the DC 20 limit could thus be waived. Given adequate time, the player could then take a 20 on the check, and with a MW tool have a roll of 22, (plus or minus their INT modifier). At which point, the only way they could fail that check would be to have an INT of less than 8.
Even with a recalcitrant DM, the party might have _someone_ who had knowledge as a class feature (a bard). He could quietly, discreetly ask him to do the mapping, given that he really would "like to explore at later dates" or "write an article for the society journal" or something, and his own skills were not up to the task.
Barring even this, prior to setting out on the adventure, one could inquire as to the DM of what specific skill was to be required of the character, and that character could purchase the services of a hireling, specifically trained in the appropriate knowledge skill. That hireling would then need to be kept safe from harm (either through hand waving on the part of the DM, or on careful planning on the part of the player. ) And then the hireling could make the appropriate check (again, taking 20 given enough time).
I'm just thinking about how, in real life, if I were assigned a job (mission) by my employer (boss) that I had zero skills for but which I was highly motivated to accomplish, how I might get that job done.
The best answer I have for is this:
All of the math running in the background that tracks roughly where a character should be gear-wise does not run on an assumption that you will get 2 PA each time you run a scenario. If you occasionally only get 1 PA (or even sometimes 0) that's not going to break the progression of your character.
Just curious: Is there any effort made to balance the difficulty of the faction missions between adventures? (E.g. "one of the Qadiran missions in adventure #357 was super-easy, so we'll put a hard one in #358")
|
|
I apologize if my first post reads harsh or mad. Not intended to be, but is a frustration with my local group. I'm just having fun playing PFS, and if I can roleplay my 8 charisma character as someone who is unable to convince anyone to sell him items, I'll use it. But my players have shown frustration, so I'm just trying to get a feel/idea of how this works and why. Thanks.
The best answer I have for is this:
All of the math running in the background that tracks roughly where a character should be gear-wise does not run on an assumption that you will get 2 PA each time you run a scenario. If you occasionally only get 1 PA (or even sometimes 0) that's not going to break the progression of your character.
Is it at least set up so that a character should average 1 PA a scenario? Because at the current rate my cleric is going I won't be able to buy a headband +2 (10,000gp item) until 10th level despite having the cash for it at 5th. :-P He has a little difficulty getting that second PA, and sometimes the first. lol
I am curious though, what are your expectations as for how often a character should be getting that 2nd PA? If I take all my characters into account, I sit at about 1 in 4 if my character is the only one of their faction at the table. This number drastically changes for the better if there is another player at the table with a character in the same faction as mine. Almost a 1:1 ratio, not quite.
|
|
The best answer I have for is this:
All of the math running in the background that tracks roughly where a character should be gear-wise does not run on an assumption that you will get 2 PA each time you run a scenario. If you occasionally only get 1 PA (or even sometimes 0) that's not going to break the progression of your character.
Yeah, Brother Elias completely missed getting any PA one session. (Said, "I'll do a detailed search later..." and before he could search, the entire dungeon collapsed.
The Paracountess was quite cold to him after that...
Am I missing something about the Season 0 scenarios? I thought that just completing and surviving a scenario was an automatic 1 PA and the second PA, if there was one to earn, came from the faction missions.
But for the average PA bit, I thought I saw posted elsewhere that average PA earned going from level 1 to 12 (33 scenarios) was 17 or 18, or 1.5 per scenario. In other words, getting 2 PA every other scenario and 1 PA from the alternating ones.
Am I missing something about the Season 0 scenarios? I thought that just completing and surviving a scenario was an automatic 1 PA and the second PA, if there was one to earn, came from the faction missions.
In Season 0 scenarios, there is always one faction mission (that is usually trivial to accomplish), and there may be a second faction mission as well.
|
Characters are allowed to get help from other factions, but it makes more sense if they aren't opposed to one another, such as taldans getting the andoran's antidote recipe (pallid plague).
I actually don't want to share the average assumed PA-gained per scenario. I'll stick to what I said above.
I'm still curious whether the "softball" missions are deliberately spread around between factions or whether it's the luck of the draw. One of the few season 1 adventures I've played is Shipyard Rats, and I've played it twice:
The other time was with the Qadira faction and a (DC 20?) Perception check was required to find a hidden drawer; that's fairly simple compared to the Diplomacy check, since you can "take 20" with Perception, but not with Diplomacy.
|
I believe where this gets really frustrating is when you have played several scenario's in row with a character and are unable to get that extra PA just because you don't have the prerequisite skill/ability to get it. Is there an estimate as to how many 2nd PA's a character should be getting? 1 out of 5, 1 out of 10? It is also frustrating when a character from another faction gets their extra PA as a result of a NPC dying instead of capturing alive or vice-versa, something any PC can accomplish.
Generally, I haven't noticed that there is a common situation where, while other factions get high DC trained-only skill requirement, a faction has an automatic victory.
I generally feel cruddy whenever a player has no real chance of succeeding on a skill check. However, overall, I believe that making the trained only skill checks mostly helps with the co-operative nature of the PFS. Another person can help when you are having trouble mapping something and need that knowledge (geography) check and you can help them when they can't properly complete an arcane sealing ritual with knowledge (arcana). At least, it feels better than if all the PCs are being lone wolves about everything, refusing to ask for or give aid for non-combat situations.
It also makes it somewhat clear that characters with these skills are appreciated by factions. The knowledge skills, linguistics, and handle animal all get minimal use in the combat portion, by making them be used for faction missions, that means there is a good reason to actually put ranks in them rather than perception, acrobatics, and such.
Now, there are situations where you alone need to accomplish the hard skill check (and they do irritate me), but those are not the norm.
What bothers me is when BOTH PA are difficult to get (as in our last session, which happens to be the same exact scenario you're talking about).
He was actually referring to a different scenario I believe, the name of the thread isn't talking about that specific encounter.
|
|
I actually don't want to share the average assumed PA-gained per scenario. I'll stick to what I said above.
As events manager and Paizo employee I respect your right and privilege to not share this information.
I will say, that my cleric is definitely behind my theoretical curve and would have to get 2PA in a bunch of scenario's to catch up.
|
Shieldknight
I absolutely understand the frustration. The last game I was a GM had an obscure knowledge check that my own third level wizard hadn't learned yet despite int 20 and 8 skill points per level.
No chance therefore that any of the first or second level characters would have that skill. It did concern me as GM as I don't want to frustrate my players.
In the end the players solved the problem by taking the item they needed information on to a library. The game was in Absalom and the skill check was actually pansy. So provided you ask the right person it shouldn't have been a problem.
Therefore my main question is - are there aleternatives. Collaboration has already been mentined. My wizard did fullfill someone elses mission without even knowing through good roleplay.
If there are none than the players rightly could be frustrated.
Thod
|
|
This was brought up on another thread and I was asked to move it. So here it is.
... where the 2 PA adventures you are only supposed to get both PA on some occasions (thus requiring a decent roll on a skill you may not have).
Begin mini rant/frustration...(This is a frustration in my local group and I am unsure as to how others outside of our group feel about it.)
My group has taken exception to this. We understand making one of the PA harder to achieve, but when they become impossible it just upsets and infuriates my players.
For example...
** spoiler omitted **Now no one, not a single player, had an issue with the high DC. However, just because they happened to be playing a character that didn't, and never would, have the appropriate skill, they were unable to receive the second PA of the scenario. They felt cheated out of a chance to receive the PA. As the rules state, no one can achieve that high of a DC without being trained in those skills. Their comments were that it felt more like it was all based on luck, whether or not you had the right skill available. Now in the previously mentioned scenario, they didn't even have another character in the party who had taken any of the skills, so they couldn't even have someone from another faction try it for them.
Now before I get stomped on, I understand that the second PA is supposed to be hard to achieve. But there still exists a suggestive nature that there is a chance to get it, when that is definitely not the case.
As to what was mentioned above in the example...
** spoiler omitted **...
Ha! I was just about to post on this same exact situation. I was one of the players who lost a PA last night to this same issue. What is even funnier was that another faction had to draw a map as well, but all they had to do was "draw the map". No skill check. Its the breaks of the game, I guess.
My recomendation, though, would be for the game to allow other skills, but at a more difficult DC.
|
I know which scenario Sheildknight is talking about and agree with him. I don't mind high DCs. I HATE when they decide to use trained only skills that only 1 or 2 classes may have, AND a high DC.
Not to mention, sometimes the skills make no sense.
instead of Handle Animal it should have been either a straight Dex check or Sleight of Hand. (again a trained only which I ranted about above.) It did not even allow the use of Mage Hand or anything like that.
EDIT: And the skill that should have been used was Knowledge: Nature
|
|
Doesn't the hard PA have something to do with the favored classes of each of the factions and the skills of those classes? Taldor bards may have an easier time with their faction mission than say, a Taldor druid.
It does sometimes and I play one of each. And the bard will - usually - have more luck with completing PA missions, than an optimized fighter. Do yourself a favor when playing OP for PA missions: Get a decent int-score (that will help the PAs along), don't minmax - make a balanced character, have several characters to chose from to make a diverse party (all fighter groups will smack down the monsters, but fail their PA missions)
|
|
Doesn't the hard PA have something to do with the favored classes of each of the factions and the skills of those classes? Taldor bards may have an easier time with their faction mission than say, a Taldor druid.It does sometimes and I play one of each. And the bard will - usually - have more luck with completing PA missions, than an optimized fighter. Do yourself a favor when playing OP for PA missions: Get a decent int-score (that will help the PAs along), don't minmax - make a balanced character, have several characters to chose from to make a diverse party (all fighter groups will smack down the monsters, but fail their PA missions)
I've seen what some folks consider an "optimized" fighter and folks who do that don't get much sympathy from me with regards to missing PA.
I can say my players don't really want to play 0 season stuff because they can only get 1 PA from them. We haven't had a lot of missed PA yet, one missed when the a character had dumped charisma and couldn't make a DC 20 diplomacy check but that was about it so far. In general seems like maxing out perception is the best way to ensure PA from the games I've GMed or played.
|
|
Is it at least set up so that a character should average 1 PA a scenario? Because at the current rate my cleric is going I won't be able to buy a headband +2 (10,000gp item) until 10th level despite having the cash for it at 5th. :-P He has a little difficulty getting that second PA, and sometimes the first.
Just to actually mention something. That's not far from what it SHOULD be. The total character wealth by the core rulebook for 9th level is 46,000 gp. PFRPG, as well as 3.5, assumes that you shouldn't have a single item worth more than 25% of your total wealth. At least this is the basic assumption, although most DMs move that around. Meaning that it's around 9th level that you should be able to buy it.
That being said, at the rate you are going you are a little behind on the curve, but my suggestion, if you are having problems... is to DM some Season 1 scenarios. You get full PA and gold, which would let you "catch up" to the curve. Also you may want to look into putting a point or two in random skills. I know that my Cleric has a few knowledges with 1 rank, even if they aren't a class skill! It at least gives you the chance to roll and get that second PA. That being said, I think you might also be hitting a bad streak of luck with the missions because I tend to notice quite a few that don't require rolls whatsoever. In fact I generally see 1 per scenario for the newer ones. You just have to read it and be aware the entire scenario.
|
|
PFRPG, as well as 3.5, assumes that you shouldn't have a single item worth more than 25% of your total wealth.Really?
All I recall is something along the lines of nothing more than 50% total wealth when making up higher level characters.
Where is this located?
-James
What Alizor is quoting is the balanced rule, not the rule right above it that says a player character should have no more than 50% of their gold invested in one item.
From Pathfinder Core Rulebook, pg 400, first column, second full paragraph...
"Characters should spend no more than half their total wealth on any single item. For a balanced approach, PCs that are built after 1st level should spend no more than 25% of their wealth on weapons, 25% on armor and
protective devices, 25% on other magic items, 15% on disposable items like potions, scrolls, and wands, and 10% on ordinary gear and coins."
Emphasis mine. This does not mean you can't spend all your gold on one item. Quite frankly, for my cleric, saving up for a Headband of Mental Prowess is a necessity, and I will be spending more than 50% to get it. Of course by the time I have enough PA to get it, I may have already spent that much in other items. :)
|
|
Really?
All I recall is something along the lines of nothing more than 50% total wealth when making up higher level characters.
Where is this located?
-James
Page 400.
Table 12–4 can also be used to budget gear for characters starting above 1st level, such as a new character created to replace a dead one. Characters should spend no more than half their total wealth on any single item. For a balanced approach, PCs that are built after 1st level should spend no more than 25% of their wealth on weapons, 25% on armor and protective devices, 25% on other magic items, 15% on disposable items like potions, scrolls, and wands, and 10% on ordinary gear and coins. Different character types might spend their wealth differently than these percentages suggest; for example, arcane casters might spend very little on weapons but a great deal more on other magic items and disposable items.
You can spend up to 50% of your wealth on an item, but the game assumes you'll spend more than 25% on any one category (weapons, protective items, etc.).
Edit: Ninjaed by 4 seconds...damn.
PFRPG, as well as 3.5, assumes that you shouldn't have a single item worth more than 25% of your total wealth.
I'm not sure of the chart. But I assume that, by it, (if you can only afford 1 +2 item by 9th) that *legally* a PC should *never* be able to afford a +6 stat item or *most* Staves or +5 equivalent weapons etc? This is whether the PC cap is at 12th or 20th level.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but; This seems a bit off unless the curve becomes a lot greater in the teens, that is.
I'm not sure of the chart. But I assume that, by it, (if you can only afford 1 +2 item by 9th) that *legally* a PC should *never* be able to afford a +6 stat item or *most* Staves or +5 equivalent weapons etc? This is whether the PC cap is at 12th or 20th level.
It's just a suggested rule of thumb, not a "legal" restriction.
|
|
I should've been more clear, but I wasn't saying that it was a hard rule, just that the assumptions for characters is around this. Also if I remember correctly, around the time of the conversion from 3.5 to PFRPG, Josh mentioned that this was a determining factor in the PA system. That's all I'm saying in this.
Effectively even when you're on the low end of the spectrum (Shieldknight) you aren't too far off balance. Also I would like to mention that the higher level you are, I've noticed the faction missions tend to get easier and easier, especially for 1-7 scenarios.
|
|
PFRPG, as well as 3.5, assumes that you shouldn't have a single item worth more than 25% of your total wealth.I'm not sure of the chart. But I assume that, by it, (if you can only afford 1 +2 item by 9th) that *legally* a PC should *never* be able to afford a +6 stat item or *most* Staves or +5 equivalent weapons etc? This is whether the PC cap is at 12th or 20th level.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but; This seems a bit off unless the curve becomes a lot greater in the teens, that is.
Also to note, he mentioned a +2 item for 10,000. I believe he meant the +2 to TWO stats item. Which does cost 10,000. If he was talking about a flat +2 item, which costs 4,000. You really should only be able to afford that at best around 5th-6th level.
Also to note, he mentioned a +2 item for 10,000. I believe he meant the +2 to TWO stats item. Which does cost 10,000. If he was talking about a flat +2 item, which costs 4,000. You really should only be able to afford that at best around 5th-6th level.PFRPG, as well as 3.5, assumes that you shouldn't have a single item worth more than 25% of your total wealth.I'm not sure of the chart. But I assume that, by it, (if you can only afford 1 +2 item by 9th) that *legally* a PC should *never* be able to afford a +6 stat item or *most* Staves or +5 equivalent weapons etc? This is whether the PC cap is at 12th or 20th level.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but; This seems a bit off unless the curve becomes a lot greater in the teens, that is.
...gotcha, that makes more sense, since the multiple-stat items weren't available in 3.5, under core rules anyhoo. Thanks!
What's a PA?
I have no idea of the meaning behind 90% of the abbreviatons people use.
Just some frinedly/helpful advice, abbreviations and acronyms are OK, but the first time you mention something, you should actually say what you are talking about.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Prestige Award.
In PFS ("Pathfinder Society") OP ("organized play") the PCs ("player characters") are part of OOFMFTTTOTCOA ("one of five mysterious organizations trying to take over the city of Absalom"). Each adventure gives the PCs a chance to complete "faction missions" and earn quantumized gratitutde from their secret masters.
Thanks for the clarification. I thought OP meant 'Original Poster'. ;)
|
|
What's a PA?
I have no idea of the meaning behind 90% of the abbreviatons people use.
Just some frinedly/helpful advice, abbreviations and acronyms are OK, but the first time you mention something, you should actually say what you are talking about.
PA is Prestige Award. It is a measure of how well you have shown your might within the five nations in the Pathfinder Society.
This is the forum for Pathfinder Society Organized Play (PFS or PFSOP for short). This uses the Pathfinder RPG rules system, and is set in the world of Golarion using the Pathfinder Campaign Setting. However it requires the use of the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play. This forums makes the assumption that you are well versed in those rules, and as such pretty much everyone uses the abbreviations in every post here, as these forums are for PFS only.
Hope this helps.
Edit: Ninjaed, of course. Just because I want to link to the guide.
Thanks for the clarification. I thought OP meant 'Original Poster'. ;)
Oh, it does. So in forums like these where OP has another meaning, it is easier to use TC, topic creator, instead.
I was being mischievous with that last post, hence the “wink”.
I could have also said:
Not to be confused with FPS (First Person Shooter), PFS (Progressive Fighting System), PC (Personal Computer), PC (Politically Correct), OG (Original Gangster), or OPP (you down with OPP?).
As for OOFMFTTTOTCOA…
Um…
"Only original food made from true Thai tea offers the complete oriental arrangement."
Man! I really had to reach to come up with something for that one. That was tough.
I was unclear on the original abbreviation, however, during my first post. Thanks.
As for OOFMFTTTOTCOA…
"Only original food made from true Thai tea offers the complete oriental arrangement."
That's weird. I could have sworn that stood for:
"Only Oregon fellows make false, totally tragic totals of time consuming otter armies."
As for OOFMFTTTOTCOA…
"Only original food made from true Thai tea offers the complete oriental arrangement."
That's weird. I could have sworn that stood for:
"Only Oregon fellows make false, totally tragic totals of time consuming otter armies."
LOL
Silly me. Of course. OOFMFTTTOTCOA!
|
|
We had our first real frustrating encounter with the "impossible" PA last night.
I understand that one of the missions is supposed to be more difficult, heck I don't even mind the concept, but we had a situation where we had to suspend disbelief when we couldn't do the required task.
The adventure in question is:
Our faction mission required us to obtain, in secret, a macguffin during the adventure. The requirement of the module specified a DC 20 Sleight of Hand check. When we encountered the item in question a fight broke out in the room.
On the first round on combat our cleric ran across the room to tend to the unconscious carrier of said macguffin. He was 60 feet away from the next two nearest party members (also of the same faction) and a good 70 feet from the nearest non-faction party member. Line of sight was at least partially blocked by a web spell cast in the room. Even with this, somehow, the cleric was unable to take the item without being noticed because it required a skill check on a skill he couldn't use untrained. My character couldn't even do it while invisible because I couldn't use the skill untrained. Keep in mind during all of this a fight is going on and nobody is paying attention to the creature in question. We wound up succeeding anyway when the entire damn party goes over to examine the individual and our party's rogue (also of our faction) does in fact make the successful check...while everybody is watching.
It's things like this that make the difficult faction PA's frustrating. The only real fix I can think of is that it needs to be outright clarified that a good method of approaching each situation can bypass the skill check requirement, because as it stands right now, our invisible line-of-sight blocked person during combat can't do something that only a rogue can do in plain sight of everybody while being observed.
|
|
We had our first real frustrating encounter with the "impossible" PA last night.
I understand that one of the missions is supposed to be more difficult, heck I don't even mind the concept, but we had a situation where we had to suspend disbelief when we couldn't do the required task.
The adventure in question is:
** spoiler omitted **
Our faction mission required us to obtain, in secret, a macguffin during the adventure. The requirement of the module specified a DC 20 Sleight of Hand check. When we encountered the item in question a fight broke out in the room.
On the first round on combat our cleric ran across the room to tend to the unconscious carrier of said macguffin. He was 60 feet away from the next two nearest party members (also of the same faction) and a good 70 feet from the nearest non-faction party member. Line of sight was at least partially blocked by a web spell cast in the room. Even with this, somehow, the cleric was unable to take the item without being noticed because it required a skill check on a skill he couldn't use untrained. My character couldn't even do it while invisible because I couldn't use the skill untrained. Keep in mind during all of this a fight is going on and nobody is paying attention to the creature in question. We wound up succeeding anyway when the entire damn party goes over to examine the individual and our party's rogue (also of our faction) does in fact make the successful check...while everybody is watching.
It's things like this that make the difficult faction PA's frustrating. The only real fix I can think of is that it needs to be outright clarified that a good method of approaching each situation can bypass the skill check requirement, because as it stands right now, our invisible line-of-sight blocked person during combat can't do something that only a rogue can do in plain sight of everybody while being observed.
In situations like this I have always handwaved the Skill Check if there was no observing PC or NPC.
Given that the bearer of the macguffin was unconscious and that the cleric was a long way from the other PCs, I would not have expected you to force the cleric to make the roll. I would have expected a roll with the other PCs nearby or the bearer awake.
Also, from pages 26-27 of the Guide:
Reward Creative Solutions
Sometimes during the course of a scenario, your
players might surprise you with a creative solution to
an encounter (or the entire scenario) that you didn’t see
coming and that isn’t expressly covered in the scenario....rewarding the creative use of skills and roleplay
not only makes Society games that much more fun for the
players, but it gives you, the GM, a level of flexibility in
ensuring your players receive the rewards they are due.
|
|
Given that the bearer of the macguffin was unconscious and that the cleric was a long way from the other PCs, I would not have expected you to force the cleric to make the roll. I would have expected a roll with the other PCs nearby or the bearer awake.
Also, from pages 26-27 of the Guide:
Thanks Josh. That's the way I would have run it, but at our table we've agreed that the GM's call is the GM's call. We rotate duty so everybody has their own take, but this will help alleviate confusion in the future.