Painlord's What to Expect at a PFS Table


Pathfinder Society

51 to 100 of 233 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
2/5

Jiggy wrote:
As for details, I confess I do not yet have a magic weapon. 2k gold is a lot, especially given that the only immediate benefit (aside from a potential DR bypass) is a single point of extra damage. My gold so far has been going toward armor, mostly. I have a MW melee weapon (300-ish gp), a +1 buckler (1,162 gp), freshly-acquired +1 full plate (2,650 gp), a Cloak of Resistance +1 (1,000 gp if memory serves). That's about 5,000 gp after six sessions.

I actually agree with Painlord's guide, for martial types I consider a magical weapon the most important first item (well, actually, MW weapons are the first item you buy, if you don't have heirloom). It's only a 2000g upgrade.

A magic weapon is more important than the buckler, the full plate (it's a close call but I usually spend 2 PA to get MW Half Plate), and definitely the cloak. The problem is, once you're in subtier 3-4, you get incorporeal opponents. And if you don't have a magic weapon, you're screwed. There is even the odd subtier 1-2 scenario that has incorporeal enemies (to everyone's chagrin). And there is always magic DR as well.

So magic weapons are really important and you can't count on someone having a scroll of magic weapon, you have to bring it yourself (and hope someone in the group can use it).

The Exchange

For the record, I agree with Jason S agreeing with me.

However, I think it's just fine to build a thoughtful and well designed defensive frontliner (like you are doing Jiggy) wherein the majority of your monies goes to upping AC and defenses. I love those kinds of builds.

However, if you wanted to be prepared, you'll add in a cheap scroll of Magic Weapon and an oil of Magic Weapon as well.

Every character has the potential to be enormously flexible in handling all the different encounter types that the evil PFS scenario writers throw at us.

Painlordism might be defined as the idea that a balanced, flexible build is a better fit for the PFS metagame and that one should freely spend PA and gold (about 10%) for ample consumables to ensure that flexibility.


Painlord wrote:


Every character has the potential to be enormously flexible in handling all the different encounter types that the evil PFS scenario writers throw at us.

Painlordism might be defined as the idea that a balanced, flexible build is a better fit for the PFS metagame and that one should freely spend PA and gold (about 10%) for ample consumables to ensure that flexibility.

Managing consumables is something that most gamers should learn to be able to do... but its easy to fall off that path.

-James

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Jason S wrote:
It's only a 2000g upgrade.

Which equates to four adventures (about 500gp each). So aside from about 25-35 extra gp per adventure (which you're likely to spend on the aforementioned consumables), you're telling me I shouldn't buy any equipment between creating my character and finishing my fourth or fifth scenario?* (Unless, as in my case, you're lucky enough to play up a couple of times without dying.)

Quote:
The problem is, once you're in subtier 3-4, you get incorporeal opponents. And if you don't have a magic weapon, you're screwed.

So far, I haven't actually encountered this myself, though admittedly I've only played a handful of subtier 3-4 scenarios. But it's not like they're everywhere or anything.

Quote:
So magic weapons are really important and you can't count on someone having a scroll of magic weapon, you have to bring it yourself (and hope someone in the group can use it).

Then perhaps it would be more reasonable to say (as others have more-or-less said) that you should get a magic weapon as soon as is reasonably practical, and have a scroll/oil of bless weapon handy in the meantime.

*Fourth if you get enough extra to buy your 300-ish gold MW weapon, fifth - one shy of level 3 - if the spare change totals don't add up to 300 or if you buy any consumables at all.


Painlord wrote:


Painlordism might be defined as the idea that a balanced, flexible build is a better fit for the PFS metagame and that one should freely spend PA and gold (about 10%) for ample consumables to ensure that flexibility.

You're not really trying to supplant Jenksism here, are you?

-Matt

The Exchange

Mattastrophic wrote:
You're not really trying to supplant Jenksism here, are you?-Matt

Oh hecks no.

I'm not sure what you think Jenkism is, but the original post is here (about midway down is the best I could find), and is gladly referenced by me.

I freely admit that mine is based off his, however is different and applied to PFS.

Now, how will things change with Season 3? We shall see, but I can never imagine anything supplanting a Wand of CLW as the first purchase with 2PA.

I love that the Wand of CLW is available because it lays all the "who's going to play a cleric/healer" stuff to rest.

I don't see slow tracking changing things too much. I think I will only be slow-tracking at higher levels (if at all...I have a lot of character ideas that I want to play) where the 'cost' of what PA can buy me is much less than at early levels.

Maybe my expectations will change.

-Pain


Painlord wrote:

We shall see, but I can never imagine anything supplanting a Wand of CLW as the first purchase with 2PA.

Maybe my expectations will change.

-Pain

Honestly the next level is considering possible coordination.

I see nothing wrong for a PC choosing a wand of enlarge person first if either they greatly benefit from it (and thus hand it out), or they figure that they will be able to use it each combat on the beefy fighter-type (say for example a master summoner summoner with an eidolon with a +15UMD score).

Likewise I can see a Monk PC electing a wand of mage armor first (especially if they have a rank in UMD should the party be bereft of anyone that could use it) as something that would let him tank (should the party find themselves without that beefy fighter-type and need the little monk to be up front).

But that's just nit-picking blanket statements.

I really like that the message of handling consumables is getting out there, as the amount that they can add to a PC when properly managed is amazing.

The general message is be prepared, be responsible, and contribute to the group and you can't really fault that.

-James


Painlord wrote:
We shall see, but I can never imagine anything supplanting a Wand of CLW as the first purchase with 2PA.

Certainly. What's of importance is that Wands of Cure Light Wounds may start costing something in terms of other desirable things. I give an illustration on the unbalanced groups thread.

-Matt

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Changing all these great expectations to mere recommendations would down the tone of the message. While having a backup weapon and an alchemist's fire is a good thing to have, you can't really count on that.

I too played Living Greyhawk when it was hot (well, from year 4 till the end). I learned how nice all these seemingly useless little items, such as alchemical splash weapons, really are. Once you achieve a mindset knowing you are heading to an ancient tomb without anyone coming to rescue you should you fall, you start to stock up a lot more generally useful items and bandages.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

james maissen wrote:
The general message is be prepared, be responsible, and contribute to the group and you can't really fault that.

Here here! (Or is it "hear hear"?)

Grand Lodge 4/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

My advice is to try and maximize your purchasing power at level 1-2 where every gp has a higher relative value.

In most cases, it's a good idea to invest in a 2PA wand of CLW as soon as possible. You never know who will be in your party. Later, Wands of Enlarge Person, potions, etc. are an excellent choices.

i think you should outfit yourself with alchemist fire, antitoxin, and other mundane items right away. They become increasingly less important as you level, but are a must-have in sub tier 1-2 and sometimes in 3-4.

After that, if you are a warrior-type, upgrade your primary weapon to masterwork to get the atk bonus. The dmg bonus, IMO, is not worth the extra 2000gp right away. Keep an oil of magic weapon (or two) around just in case of an incorporeal opponent or one with DR/magic.

You can get a big bang for your buck with a Cloak of Resistance (1000gp), and armor/shield enhancements (1000gp each)...then add the +1 to your weapon. Besides, you may want to get a special material weapon and don't want to loose more buying power by selling a +1 weapon for 1/2 to get the same one just constructed of mithril/cold iron/adamantine


Bob Jonquet wrote:
Later, Wands of Enlarge Person, potions, etc. are an excellent choices.

Point of order: Wands of Enlarge Person suck since they still take 1 round to cast the spell out of them. Stick with paying 2x the cost for the potion which is a standard action.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Alaska—Anchorage aka Dragnmoon

Kyle Baird wrote:
Stick with paying 2x the cost for the potion which is a standard action.

Depends where the Potion is.

Edit: Yes Drinking the potion is a Standard action, but getting the potion could be a move action.

Edit Edit: Though a Potion will go into effect as soon as you drink it, where the wand won't until the start of your next turn, though the effectively could take the same amount of "time".

Liberty's Edge

Well as both a veteran PFS GM and player this is what I expect regardless of level. Most of this applies to both.
1. Know your character and what their capabilities are. Thus don't spend your turn digging through a book to look up stuff that you should know.
2. Be ready when your turn comes(this kinda goes back to #1). Have your numbers ready for whatever you are doing. Don't come back to me latter and say "Oh I forgot to add this". TOUGH
3. Know the rules for things like movement, grapple, range and such.
4. Be honest... this is paramount, if I catch you cheating be prepared.
5. Pay ATTENTION and BE INVOLVED!!! I have had many players that don't answer when I ask for a perception check or don't tell me their roll and then get mad whei skip them during the suprise round. If you are texting during the game and miss something I will not repate myself. I have been known to do a ten count on initiative and then put you in delay. Also don't assume there is nothing you can do, remeber you can aid the fighter with flank or threaten the spell caster, be creative more often than not if it's cool and doesn't break the rules I will allow it.
6. Don't whine, as a GM I don't ever intentionally target PC's or try to kill them, but I play the opponents intelligently(unless they have none or it is very low). Bad things happen, being a pathfinder is a dangerous job. Also remmeber many PC's have optimised characters, you tend to be hard to kill.
7. Don't tell me how to play my character or others when I am GMing, young players learn by experience, as a GM I may give them advice, but other players should not KIBITZ!!!
8. Have fun... Always and let others have fun. As a GM your enjoyment is my top goal and even if a chronicle is not I try very hard to make it enjoyable.


Kyle Baird wrote:
Bob Jonquet wrote:
Later, Wands of Enlarge Person, potions, etc. are an excellent choices.
Point of order: Wands of Enlarge Person suck since they still take 1 round to cast the spell out of them. Stick with paying 2x the cost for the potion which is a standard action.

You are right up to a point..

It's a question of WHO is taking these actions.

I'd rather have say a Master Summoner's useless Eidolon taking a full round action to enlarge the party's fighter and the party's fighter be able to freely act than having the party's fighter have to have a hand free to draw and drink a potion.

What really sucks are wands of lesser restoration! It takes 3 rounds for them!! Man up and drink it down...

-James


james maissen wrote:
You are right up to a point..

At which point exactly am I not right? Even a potion in the hands of the Eidolon is better because he can "pour it down" the fighter's throat as a full-round action, whereas the wand is a 1 round casting which doesn't go into effect until the start of the Eidolon's next turn.

And Dragnmoon, are you saying that you don't also have to draw the wand?

edit: So what if the Eidolon has to knock the fighter unconscious first...? ;-)

PRD: A character can carefully administer a potion to an unconscious creature as a full-round action, trickling the liquid down the creature's throat.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Alaska—Anchorage aka Dragnmoon

Kyle Baird wrote:


And Dragnmoon, are you saying that you don't also have to draw the wand?

Was going to say I usually overlook that, but then realized I shouldn't because I don't with drawing a weapon, though I would allow someone to have it sticking in their belt and being able draw it in combination of a regular move if they wished.

The Adventures sash was supposed to do the same for Potions but that was cut out... grrrr, though I add it back for my home game.


Kyle Baird wrote:
james maissen wrote:
You are right up to a point..

At which point exactly am I not right? Even a potion in the hands of the Eidolon is better because he can "pour it down" the fighter's throat as a full-round action, whereas the wand is a 1 round casting which doesn't go into effect until the start of the Eidolon's next turn.

I wouldn't let another creature pour a potion down an active creature's throat as a DM. I don't think there are many that would, and really there are none that should.

But if they do then unseen servant again becomes even more useful a spell than it was before!

Kyle Baird wrote:


edit: So what if the Eidolon has to knock the fighter unconscious first...? ;-)

PRD: A character can carefully administer a potion to an unconscious creature as a full-round action, trickling the liquid down the creature's throat.

Exactly.

-James


Dragnmoon wrote:


Was going to say I usually overlook that, but then realized I shouldn't because I don't with drawing a weapon, though I would allow someone to have it sticking in their belt and being able draw it in combination of a regular move if they wished.

I'm still annoyed that PF removed quickdrawing wands as a viable action/use of the feat.

-James

Grand Lodge 4/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

Point of order (as Kyle calls it ;-) )...A spring-loaded wrist sheath (Adventurer's Armory p.9) can hold a light weapon or a wand and draw it as an immediate action. Could help greatly with economy of actions with regards to the Wand. At only 5gp and 1 lb, must cheaper than a feat spend or requiring a move-draw tandem action.

Of course the preferred action would be to buy the wand and have the "squishies" use it on you so you can charge in the fray and not waste any actions (standard or full-round).


Bob Jonquet wrote:


Of course the preferred action would be to buy the wand and have the "squishies" use it on you so you can charge in the fray and not waste any actions (standard or full-round).

What a scary day it is when we agree upon things!

Is it dark outside because it's night-time or is the sun simply obscured in such an occurrence?

-James

Grand Lodge 4/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

It is a sign of the apocalypse...Repent your sins and prepare for the end!

Dark Archive 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Painlord wrote:


Maybe my expectations will change.

I'm pleased to see I meet the majority of your expectations, Painlord but I think my expectations are a little different:

I want you to roleplay your **** off. What I'm hoping for is someone who'll talk in character, to both the GM and the other players. Someone who's character has motivations and who'll weigh their character's motivations against 'the needs of the mission'. Someone who recognises it's possible to talk their way through an encounter (and that there are social skills other than Intimidate). Someone who's character's statline is apparent in the way they play, not merely an exercise in squeaking out bonuses.

I want to play with roleplayers, not strategists. I accept that Pathfinders are professionals and should played as such, but which would you rather play with: a well-oiled team of faceless 'adventure technicians', or a sub-optimal rogue's gallery of characters?

Liberty's Edge 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Alaska—Anchorage aka Dragnmoon

3 people marked this as a favorite.
theshoveller wrote:
but which would you rather play with: a well-oiled team of faceless 'adventure technicians', or a sub-optimal rogue's gallery of characters?

A Well-Oiled rogue gallery of characters, optimization/readiness does not mean lack of roleplaying.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
AZhobbit wrote:
4. Be honest... this is paramount, if I catch you cheating be prepared.

I do hope you realize that some "cheaters" are newbies that don't have all the numbers and rules as crackerjack as you might have.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dragnmoon wrote:
theshoveller wrote:
but which would you rather play with: a well-oiled team of faceless 'adventure technicians', or a sub-optimal rogue's gallery of characters?
A Well-Oiled rogue gallery of characters, optimization/readiness does not mean lack of roleplaying.

Yes, but if I want snide mentality I'd subject myself to a PUG in World of Warcraft. Yes and while optimization may not exclude roleplaying you'd be less than honest if you're not willing to admit that it can and often does lead to a tendency to push roleplaying aside.


theshoveller wrote:
but which would you rather play with: a well-oiled team of faceless 'adventure technicians', or a sub-optimal rogue's gallery of characters?

Huh. I didn't see the word "fun" in either of your choices, so I'll go with (c) None of the above.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Alaska—Anchorage aka Dragnmoon

1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
Yes and while optimization may not exclude roleplaying you'd be less than honest if you're not willing to admit that it can and often does lead to a tendency to push roleplaying aside.

I will never admit to that, I will hold to my death bed that this opinion is Bull.

A Non role-player is a Non role-player weather he optimizes/readies or makes sub-optimal characters.

One or the other does not a role-player make.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dragnmoon wrote:
theshoveller wrote:
but which would you rather play with: a well-oiled team of faceless 'adventure technicians', or a sub-optimal rogue's gallery of characters?
A Well-Oiled rogue gallery of characters, optimization/readiness does not mean lack of roleplaying.

So in other words you're okay with roleplaying as long as each member is roleplaying something that fits as part of an 'A Team'.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Alaska—Anchorage aka Dragnmoon

2 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:


So in other words you're okay with roleplaying as long as each member is roleplaying something that fits as part of an 'A Team'.

No I would rather role-play with role-players that are well prepared, then a role-player that "thinks" he need to make a crap PC to be able to Role-play.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dragnmoon wrote:
LazarX wrote:


So in other words you're okay with roleplaying as long as each member is roleplaying something that fits as part of an 'A Team'.
No I would rather role-play with role-players that are well prepared, then a role-player that "thinks" he need to make a crap PC to be able to Role-play.

And there's no middle ground between the two?

Liberty's Edge 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Alaska—Anchorage aka Dragnmoon

2 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:


And there's no middle ground between the two?

Sure there is, but we were not talking about a middle ground where we?

It is possible to make a PC that is not perfect but still useful *Actually a good chunk of my PCs*, I am just against those that feel that have to make a useless PC to be able to Role-Play, and those that make good pc don't know or don't role-play that falsity that I wish would leave our Hobby, because it is crap.

Anyway this Post was more about preparedness not PC optimization.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

LazarX wrote:
Dragnmoon wrote:
LazarX wrote:


So in other words you're okay with roleplaying as long as each member is roleplaying something that fits as part of an 'A Team'.
No I would rather role-play with role-players that are well prepared, then a role-player that "thinks" he need to make a crap PC to be able to Role-play.
And there's no middle ground between the two?

LazarX, I think what he's trying to say is not that he requires people to be hyper-efficient in addition to roleplaying, but merely point out that effectiveness and roleplaying are unrelated and you don't have to choose between one or the other. Relatedly, he seems upset with the idea of players thinking (as it seems you do, so if not, you might want to clarify) that they have to be mutually exclusive, and therefore thinking that making an inefficient character is a prerequisite to roleplaying.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jiggy wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Dragnmoon wrote:
LazarX wrote:


So in other words you're okay with roleplaying as long as each member is roleplaying something that fits as part of an 'A Team'.
No I would rather role-play with role-players that are well prepared, then a role-player that "thinks" he need to make a crap PC to be able to Role-play.
And there's no middle ground between the two?
LazarX, I think what he's trying to say is not that he requires people to be hyper-efficient in addition to roleplaying, but merely point out that effectiveness and roleplaying are unrelated and you don't have to choose between one or the other. Relatedly, he seems upset with the idea of players thinking (as it seems you do, so if not, you might want to clarify) that they have to be mutually exclusive, and therefore thinking that making an inefficient character is a prerequisite to roleplaying.

Here's what I HAVE seen in various games. I've seen players who have a 100 percent efficiency expectation rating at tables and online. I've seen players who've harangued others for choosing any option which did not contribute to a 100 percent rating, even if that option was for a roleplaying option. And the way many charopers come off of is the attitude that if you're not at 110 percent, you're at zero. Gamists at best tend to present themselves as condescending towards roleplayers and they do tend to have different priorities. His and your asssement of my priorities is as much as a Strawman as you seem to think my arguments were.

Save that I was not one who said that players had to suck gamewise to roleplay. The language and the tone of almsot every charoper seems to think that roleplayers use roleplaying as an excuse to suck.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:


Yes, but if I want snide mentality I'd subject myself to a PUG in World of Warcraft. Yes and while optimization may not exclude roleplaying you'd be less than honest if you're not willing to admit that it can and often does lead to a tendency to push roleplaying aside.

It sounds like you've had bad experiences and you are generalizing that to a class of people. In my experience that's a mistake.

Likewise a mistake is ascribing a tradeoff between roleplaying and optimization. Its a fallacy that's propagated around for far, far too long.

Think of Painlord's (and before him Jenk's) guide as something that your character, in character, would be considering. After all if your character finds that he almost died along with all of his friends because he didn't have this little item.. most assuredly he would be looking to pick one up at the earliest convenience.

Moreover, hearing tales of the like from others he would have to be a very stupid, foolish and unprofessional pathfinder to not look to be prepared when going on missions with such survival options.

In the real world every so often you hear of idiotic hikers that have gone out with none of the basic preparations and have to get rescued. Inside the game the people who would be SENT to rescue such unprepared morons would be pathfinders.

In my mind a player that doesn't recognize that his character is a professional pathfinder is not likely roleplaying his character. And that's really as strong a definitive statement as I'll ever make when it comes to blanket roleplaying statements. It is far more likely that the player is simply playing as a quick hobby and is not too immersed into his/her character.

Now that's fine to an extent, just like it's fine not to be that great a roleplayer or that great an optimizer. After all to each their own game.

But I find it ludicrous to say that having your character looking to be prepared for their chosen profession is not roleplaying a professional pathfinder! Heck even more ludicrous than this propagated myth that roleplaying erodes optimization and vice versa.

-James

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
james maissen wrote:


In my mind a player that doesn't recognize that his character is a professional pathfinder is not likely roleplaying his character. And that's really as strong a definitive statement as I'll ever make when it comes to blanket roleplaying statements. It is far more likely that the player is simply playing as a quick hobby and is not too immersed into his/her character.

Now that's fine to an extent, just like it's fine not to be that great a roleplayer or that great an optimizer. After all to each their own game.

But I find it ludicrous to say that having your character looking to be prepared for their chosen profession is not roleplaying a professional pathfinder! Heck even more...

I'm not sure that it's that cut and dried as to what the characters actually ARE in Pathfinder Society. I'm not sure that all the pathfinders are Harrison Jones types some, especially Taldoran characters may very well be dilletantes. Most players will have much of what Pain's expected "kit" as a matter of course, just about everyone who depends on weapons will sock for a magic one when they can get it.

Although I'm actually rather surprised that he did not include on his shopping list the one signature item for a Pathfinder... the very handy Wayfinder.

BTW it's not been just one experience. I've seen this in a lot of venues, both paper and dice and in online games as well.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

LazarX wrote:

Here's what I HAVE seen in various games. I've seen players who have a 100 percent efficiency expectation rating at tables and online. I've seen players who've harangued others for choosing any option which did not contribute to a 100 percent rating, even if that option was for a roleplaying option. And the way many charopers come off of is the attitude that if you're not at 110 percent, you're at zero. Gamists at best tend to present themselves as condescending towards roleplayers and they do tend to have different priorities. His and your asssement of my priorities is as much as a Strawman as you seem to think my arguments were.

Save that I was not one who said that players had to suck gamewise to roleplay. The language and the tone of almsot every charoper seems to think that roleplayers use roleplaying as an excuse to suck.

Why are you yelling at me? :(

I wasn't trying to argue one side or the other, I was just trying to assist in communication because it looked like you two might have been misunderstanding each other. Why are you suddenly jumping down my throat? You don't even know where I stand on the topic.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Jiggy wrote:
LazarX wrote:

Here's what I HAVE seen in various games. I've seen players who have a 100 percent efficiency expectation rating at tables and online. I've seen players who've harangued others for choosing any option which did not contribute to a 100 percent rating, even if that option was for a roleplaying option. And the way many charopers come off of is the attitude that if you're not at 110 percent, you're at zero. Gamists at best tend to present themselves as condescending towards roleplayers and they do tend to have different priorities. His and your asssement of my priorities is as much as a Strawman as you seem to think my arguments were.

Save that I was not one who said that players had to suck gamewise to roleplay. The language and the tone of almsot every charoper seems to think that roleplayers use roleplaying as an excuse to suck.

Why are you yelling at me? :(

I wasn't trying to argue one side or the other, I was just trying to assist in communication because it looked like you two might have been misunderstanding each other. Why are you suddenly jumping down my throat? You don't even know where I stand on the topic.

Didn't see any yelling, maybe some frustration.

This is yelling

LOUD NOISES!

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

cblome59 wrote:

Didn't see any yelling, maybe some frustration.

This is yelling

LOUD NOISES!

lol

Thanks for the clarification. :P

The Exchange

theshoveller wrote:

I'm pleased to see I meet the majority of your expectations, Painlord but I think my expectations are a little different:

I want you to roleplay your **** off. What I'm hoping for is someone who'll talk in character, to both the GM and the other players. Someone who's character has motivations and who'll weigh their character's motivations against 'the needs of the mission'. Someone who recognises it's possible to talk their way through an encounter (and that there are social skills other than Intimidate). Someone who's character's statline is apparent in the way they play, not merely an exercise in squeaking out bonuses.

Lol. I think you and I agree, friend. LINK.

Roleplaying to is the 2nd most important thing you can bring to the table.

-Pain

Sovereign Court

Painlord wrote:
Roleplaying to is the 2nd most important thing you can bring to the table.

1st thing is yourself?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deussu wrote:
Painlord wrote:
Roleplaying to is the 2nd most important thing you can bring to the table.
1st thing is yourself?

No. Pizza for the group.

Liberty's Edge

Here is an example of the worst you can see. Played a sactioned mod this weekend and had a player actually get up and leave after he was about to be ganked by a bad guy. Granted this was a three rounder that our great GM had spent allot of time preping and the five other players gave up most of their weekend to play. I have never seen anyone just pack up and leave, especially since this mod allowed you to bring in a new PC. All of us where very suprised by this and our GM handled it really well, just explained that his actions would result in him not being welcome at the gameday anymore. So FYI to players character death happens deal with it. PFS has some of the best rules for raise dead and such, If you make it to 12th without dying kudos to you.

Dark Archive 3/5

Painlord wrote:


Lol. I think you and I agree, friend. LINK.

Roleplaying to is the 2nd most important thing you can bring to the table.

:)

I also approve of pizza.

5/5

AZhobbit wrote:
Here is an example of the worst you can see. Played a sactioned mod this weekend and had a player actually get up and leave after he was about to be ganked by a bad guy. Granted this was a three rounder that our great GM had spent allot of time preping and the five other players gave up most of their weekend to play. I have never seen anyone just pack up and leave, especially since this mod allowed you to bring in a new PC. All of us where very suprised by this and our GM handled it really well, just explained that his actions would result in him not being welcome at the gameday anymore. So FYI to players character death happens deal with it. PFS has some of the best rules for raise dead and such, If you make it to 12th without dying kudos to you.

[derail]That's really sad. Especially, since unless you were playing your own retired level 12 character, in one of their two modules, death does not carry past the playing of the module. He would have to spend nothing to play normally in the next PFS scenario. He just wouldn't have been able to finish that module with that character...What a way to really show how poor of a sport one can be. =/ [/derail]

Sovereign Court

Painlord wrote:


Roleplaying to is the 2nd most important thing you can bring to the table.

-Pain

On the topic of roleplaying Society characters, I think it's an important caveat to let people know that if they don't tell us what their character looks like, acts like, interacts with others like, I will play the entire session imagining the players character resembling the player exactly, except in dirty leather/metal armour or a robe with furs. Leads to me giggling a lot in combat. It's the default position.

Worse yet are people who clone the iconics and give them a different names, imho.

Silver Crusade

Ugh this is enough to make me run screaming from any PFS table. It's akin to the rumblings on the World of Warcraft boards. Thinking ahead a bit (in character) is fine, but expecting every player to wield CLW wands and alchemist's fire regardless of characterfulness just to "succeed" in a module, is IMO borderline rude.

Playing to the best of your abilities should be enough, and if the module expects more than that, it's poorly written, or at least written to expect huge out of character leaps.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Winter_Born wrote:

Ugh this is enough to make me run screaming from any PFS table. It's akin to the rumblings on the World of Warcraft boards. Thinking ahead a bit (in character) is fine, but expecting every player to wield CLW wands and alchemist's fire regardless of characterfulness just to "succeed" in a module, is IMO borderline rude.

Playing to the best of your abilities should be enough, and if the module expects more than that, it's poorly written, or at least written to expect huge out of character leaps.

So, here's a different way to look at it:

Your character is NOT a typical fantasy hero who has decided to go on a quest with a balanced group of friends that he or she can rely upon.

Instead, your character is an agent / cleaner / troubleshooter for the Pathfinder society.

In order to join, your character had to travel to Absalom to apply. Your character was repeatedly interviewed, magically examined, and thoroughly investigated before being accepted. Your character was then trained for three years before graduating to field work.

Your character has been trained to expect the very worse. Avenues have been created to supply you with the goods to handle these situations.

Your character will be assigned to teams when given missions, but you have no idea who these teammates are and what they are capable of. So, prepare for the very worst.

It isn't bad scenario design necessarily to include a swarm and expect the party to deal with it. If that party happens to consist of three fighters, a monk, and a rogue and nobody brought a healing potion or a way to deal with swarms the game can go very badly.

At Neoncon, a table I ran Blood Under Absalom for consisted of a fighter, two wizards, and a sorcerer. This could have meant TPK, but the players were prepared and flexible enough to adjust in order to handle a very long series of fights.

Liberty's Edge 4/5

Winter_Born wrote:

Ugh this is enough to make me run screaming from any PFS table. It's akin to the rumblings on the World of Warcraft boards. Thinking ahead a bit (in character) is fine, but expecting every player to wield CLW wands and alchemist's fire regardless of characterfulness just to "succeed" in a module, is IMO borderline rude.

Playing to the best of your abilities should be enough, and if the module expects more than that, it's poorly written, or at least written to expect huge out of character leaps.

Sorry, organized play or not, if you DON'T have some form of healing you can contribute, expect yor party mates to be unhappy with you.

Again, unless you have some other method of dealing with swarms, you ain't gonna survive adventuring. Swarms are a very common opponent in scenarios, modules and sandbox play. Heck, even if there are no independent swarms, you will run into one or more opponents with spells that can summon swarms, of one sort or another, and then, if you don't have some way to deal with them, you are screwed.

Just like having some way of dealing with a ranged opponent who has worked his wiles in terrain beneficial for his needs, rather than the all-melee party he was hired to kill. If you don't, you might as well just roll up new characters.

And it isn't wield, but have available to lend to a caster-type who CAN wield it, so that YOU don't provide an unbalanced drain on THEIR resources, rather than your own.

Great, you tank, fine. But you should consider that, being the tank, you WILL get hurt, and should put some of your resources to repair, as well as prevention.

Or, you find and disable traps. Sometimes, no matter how good you are, you might miss seeing a trap, or screw up disabling it, and boom! you need some healing.

The same holds true for any class. At some point, you WILL get hurt. Now, thinking ahead, in a shared game world, with inconsistent adventuring partners, where you can't give each other money or give away items to each other, it makes sense to provide some of what you need to to provide healing for your self at YORU expense, not at someone else's.

You want to play greedy? Fine, do that in a home game, where the other players know you, and can come up with ways to deal with you. In an Organized Play environment, you need to take some of the responsibility yourself. THERE IS NO PARTY TREASURY. There is no Party fund to pay for Raise Dead. Usually, unless you play your PC as a jerk, the party of the moment will kick in to help get your PC Raised, but there is NO forced requirement that they do so. And, if you never kick in on regular healing, I can easily see the player(s), whose consumable items were used to keep YOU alive at THEIR expense, saying NO to getting your "independent" character Raised at additional cost to themselves.

Silver Crusade 3/5

It's about being responsible. A wand of CLW is the easiest thing in the world to get. By getting one you are basically saying to the group that you are taking responsibility for the needs of your own character.

For me I would not expect my co-pathfinders to have any of the items in this list (with the exception of CLW wands, that's a given) If they want to go unprepared then that's their choice. For my own part however I see it as a priority for my characters to have answers to invisibility, disease, poison, flying enemies etc. It makes life a lot simpler.

51 to 100 of 233 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Painlord's What to Expect at a PFS Table All Messageboards