|
I've tried out several gaming groups since moving to a new area, trying to find a group whose style matches my own but I'm having a great deal of trouble.
I've found that very few people are interested in following the rules as written in the Pathfinder Core book. I'm always the one who interjects something like (a recent example) "You can't drink an infusion and attack in the same turn", despite the DM and other player not being aware of the rule breaking.
Our last meeting, the DM wasnt looking up DCs for various skill checks, he'd just let it succeed if the result was particularly high. An example being one character's attempt at using an Acrobatics check when moving through an enemy occupied square. His result was an 18 and the DM deemed it a success despite neither of them checking what the target DC should be.
I only want a level playing field for everyone by following the rules. I'll look a rule up even if its not to our party's benefit. I'm unsure of how everyone else in the group feels about my actions but I don't think I want to play with a group that doesnt look up and follow the rules.
I understand that DMs make up DCs or rules on the fly (I've done it as a DM) and by doing so, the game doesn't get bogged down with constant rule consulting. Also, we all are new to Pathfinder and are still learning the changes, but it seems like I'm the only one concerned with this.
I'm the only person that has a set of books at the game. The DM relies on his laptop for PDFs of the books, but doesn't consult it very often.
Any advice of how to handle this? This seems to be very common lately.
Of course I could just DM my own game, but I've always preferred to play as a PC.
Honestly, as a fellow who's done the same thing before, just accept it or quit playing. If you can't find a group that fits your style you'll just have to either play with someone else's style or you can run your own game.
I've tried out several gaming groups since moving to a new area, trying to find a group whose style matches my own but I'm having a great deal of trouble.
I've found that very few people are interested in following the rules as written in the Pathfinder Core book. I'm always the one who interjects something like (a recent example) "You can't drink an infusion and attack in the same turn", despite the DM and other player not being aware of the rule breaking.
Our last meeting, the DM wasnt looking up DCs for various skill checks, he'd just let it succeed if the result was particularly high. An example being one character's attempt at using an Acrobatics check when moving through an enemy occupied square. His result was an 18 and the DM deemed it a success despite neither of them checking what the target DC should be.
I only want a level playing field for everyone by following the rules. I'll look a rule up even if its not to our party's benefit. I'm unsure of how everyone else in the group feels about my actions but I don't think I want to play with a group that doesnt look up and follow the rules.
I understand that DMs make up DCs or rules on the fly (I've done it as a DM) and by doing so, the game doesn't get bogged down with constant rule consulting. Also, we all are new to Pathfinder and are still learning the changes, but it seems like I'm the only one concerned with this.
I'm the only person that has a set of books at the game. The DM relies on his laptop for PDFs of the books, but doesn't consult it very often.
Any advice of how to handle this? This seems to be very common lately.
Of course I could just DM my own game, but I've always preferred to play as a PC.
I think it is a difference in playing style. You could try to influence them or ask why they do things the way they do, but you should be looking for another group also, in case they just dont care about the rules as much as you do.
I've tried out several gaming groups since moving to a new area, trying to find a group whose style matches my own but I'm having a great deal of trouble.
...
Any advice of how to handle this? This seems to be very common lately.
Of course I could just DM my own game, but I've always preferred to play as a PC.
Some of the best games I have ever been in played this way ... so have some of the worst.
Actually, DMing a game for them is not a bad idea. Doesn't have to be for long for you to establish how the rules work. Their problem is, I think, that they do not know the rules that well and looking them up takes too much time and trouble. If you make the effort to be the rules-lawyer for the group by running a game, you will (a) allow them time to learn the rules as written in your game as you look up everything, and (b) establish yourself as the group's 'Rules Guru' so they ask you when they have a question.
Something you could try, although it may sting a bit, is to simply make sure that you're compliant with the rules all the time (even when it's to your disadvantage), and if they ask you why it matters so much to you explain that it's the best way to ensure a level playing field.
The reason I say it may sting is that other people may be "getting away with" so many things that you feel you're losing out.
FWIW, I generally agree that the RAW should be stuck to, but not at the expense of slowing down the game. You might volunteer to be "the guy who knows" for rules questions, so the GM doesn't have to. Let him handle the running of the game, and you act as a consultant.
I know that when I'm running the game, having somebody else able to quickly find the appropriate DC or whatever is very handy, but there are plenty of GMs who don't want to feel like they're releasing any control. So YMMV.
-The Gneech
|
As a side note regarding the 18 Acrobatics. If that was the final result, he won't be doing much unless the enemy in question was a spell-caster, and even that would be questionable thanks to that +5. Still, a result or a roll of 18 is a vast difference. I'm getting the the modified result, not the roll, was an 18, which shouldn't make it in most cases. Gnome spell-caster, maybe, but not much else.
How many groups have you gone through in attempting to find one that fits you? Have you tried using the Gamer Connection here to find or to put together a group in your area? Have you tried approaching the GM separately and talking to him about more closely following the rules to level the playing field?
I'll admit I've been guilty of certain fudging of DCs as a GM. More often than not, though, I'll do it because holding strictly to the DC would result in the lack of fun for everybody or would result in unnecessary character death. That said, what area are you in? I'm down for putting together a group that runs on by-the-book Pathfinder.
I feel your pain brother.
I typically GM, running 2 groups at the moment. I love to play as a PC though, so in those rare situations where someone else wants to run the game I jump on it. At the same time, since I GM so much, I am more intimately aware of the rules than most of the others (a personal "flaw" but I cannot stand to claim something works a certain way only to find out that it was wrong, so I try to be accurate as much as possible). This is a good trait for a GM, as you say it keeps everything the playing field even and also eliminates potential (unconscious) bias.
As a player, though, I don't think it is appropriate to hold the game group to that standard. Of course I try to play the RAW (edited by house-rules as appropriate) as much as I can as a player. But I don't go out of my way to point out when things are being done wrong. I just sit there and grind my teeth and put a smile on my face. If asked about a rule, I always phrase it something like, "Well I took the rules to mean *X*, but hey if *GM* wants to run it like *Y* that is fine with me." It is not my role as a player to dicate game policy, but I will be honest when asked if I think a rule works a certain way or not.
Even as GM, you sometime have to pick your battles. I had a new joiner to one of my game groups. After pooh-poohing one of his errors (he was trying to say he was attacking his foes touch AC, when it was really the flat-footed AC, big difference in a lot of cases), I decide to let another error slide (he was confusing ethereal with incorporeal, 3.5 rules) because I didn't want to scare him off by thinking I was the game-nazi. In the end it didn't really matter because he ended having to quit for work reasons, so the issue ultimately solved itself.
So in short, if you want to play, bite your tongue and hold yourself to the standards you want but don't push your standards on the other players. Be happy to discuss rules when asked, just don't force yourself into the discussion unbidden.
This could be a play style issue, or it could be an experience issue. Some GMs prefer to play fairly fast and loose---why disrupt the flow of the game to check on a skill DC when 18 sounds about right? Different players and GMs prioritize the importance of sticking to the letter of the rule than others. And sometimes double checking every rule can be disruptive.
Still you have a legitimate concern---sometimes "handwaving" a rule can come back to bite GM in the ass. Your concern about a character drinking an infusion and attacking in the same turn is a good one---two standard actions are being performed by a character in one turn, and allowing stuff like that to happen can seriously break things down the line--especially if someone else who knows the rules as well as you decides to exploit that later.
The first thing to do is sit down with your GM and chat with him/her about this. Politely, nicely, etc. Just say, I noticed you've made some calls that are different from what the rules say and I want to make sure we're on the same page. Asking for GM consistency is a good thing to do. Ask the GM about his play style--maybe he is a "fast and loose" player and is interested more in cinematics than the letter of the law. If you learn that, you may have to accept that some rules "breaches" are just going to be part of that particular game. At the same time, point out some of the deeper problems, like allowing two standard actions in a turn.
If he's a new GM, having a knowledgeable player help point out the rules can be a really great help--BUT MAKE SURE THAT IS OKAY WITH YOUR GM BEFORE YOU START IT. I've been running Pathfinder since it came out, and now I'm a player in a newish game with a new-to-Pathfinder GM---and he has even SAID, "Please, let me know if I have this right," but I STILL try to check with him from time to time so I'm not overriding his authority and his preferences as a GM.
And I gotta say, while I would want a player to point out if I was allowing too many standard actions in combat or something, I seldom actually look up skill DCs unless it's really, really important. BUT I also run a high level game where most skill DCs actually listed are easily made by the players, and for the higher difficulties, I have to make it up anyway (and learning to do that well is a good skill for a GM to learn). What I would say is---if it is a serious tactical issue or something that may cause real problems in the game, point it out politely, and if it's not, then don't make a big deal of it--as long as whatever rules call the GM makes sense.
Yeah, it's a playstyle thing. As long as you're having fun, you're going to have to let it slide. Frankly, there's almost always some compromise that you make when playing with a group, whether it be related to rules, RP, or something outside of the issue.
Something that's a little passive aggressive, but possibly useful, is to keep track. It may present a better picture of whether it's a DM who's lax on rule enforcement (which, as Dabbler wrote, can be spectacular or can be terrible), or it may just be someone who doesn't have a deep a versing as necessary. If you can then non-confrontationally and outside of the context of the game itself bring up the list of "hey, here's what you missed."
There are a lot of rules out there. I admire what you're doing for your group here. But at the same time I somewhat feel sorry for you being the guy stuck with knowing all the rules.
You are going to catch some heat when you look up the "bad" rules. But stick with it, Quint. In the end, you'll come out on top.
I was in a similar situation with 3.5. Our normal GM didn't pay much attention to rules, and often would have things work however he wanted at the moment (sometimes even contradicting himself from previous times!). Or he would fall back on rules understandings from previous versions. Or he would ignore some aspects of the rules entirely.
examples:
1. believing that a nat 1 auto fails and a nat 20 auto succeeds on all skill checks.
2. using a horrible house rule where a nat 20 on an initiative role grants a free standard action. This directly caused the death of numerous PCs who never got a chance to react. (A group of enemies getting 2 full standard actions against a bunch of flat footed PCs can cause a lot of trouble).
3. completely ignoring rules for terrain and weather conditions. This would benefit some classes/creatures at the expense of others. Classes like rangers and druids can make excellant use of terrain features; taking away this edge costs them in relation to other classes.
4. disregarding many rules with regard to spot and listen checks, such as the enemy always succeeding on spot/listen checks to spot the PCs, not factoring in distance penalties and other modifiers on the checks, not giving checks when enemies are in an appropriate encounter distance for the terrain, not understanding the effects of darkness/concealment on spot checks and stealth, etc.
5. misunderstanding of how intiative is calculated in cases of ties. (going by who has the highest dex modifier, not who has the highest total initiative modifier)
6. natural 1 on an attack roll was an auto-fumble; no dex check or other confirmatino check was required...roll a 1 and you throw your weapon.
7. outdoors as nighttime was considered to be total darkness (i.e. blind)
What this would usually translate into (and often still does a lot of the time), is every encounter being an ambush against the PCs. The enemy know exactly where all the PCs are, and are always in perfect position to deal with them, even when encountering a random wandering monster. The enemies never have to make spot/listen checks to find the PCs, and are often pre-hidden. And enemies can often make stealth checks with no cover or concealment to get right up on the PC and gain a surprise attack from an adjacent square to initiate combat (and woe to the PCs if the enemy rolls a natural 20 on itiative....I've been in more than one combat where the enemies got a full 3 standard actions before the PCs could even react.) So on more occassions than I can remember these things would all combine to PC deaths occuring before a PC can even react to the situation. All because of a misunderstanding or a disregarding of the rules.
The way I dealt with this was to start to DM some of my own games. I would implement the terrain, light, and weather rules, showing how these add a significant tactical aspect to the game. This made the game far more interesting, especially when travelling; travel itself became a challenge rather than a boring wait for the next random encounter. And the group saw how these rules and others were used and how they would balance out aspects of a creature or character with others.
In time the group has eventually learned to follow the rules more closely, and to appreciate that the rules are there for a reason. Also, utilizing the weather, terrain, and light rules added a level of verisimilitude to the adventures that was missing before.
I guess my advice to you would be to try DMing a few games of your own, and pay attention to the rules that your group generally ignores. Don't make a huge deal out of it, but be firm in their application and when necessary explain how it is a good thing to use them. In other words, lead by example, and hopefully the others will learn from your example and gain a better understanding and appreciation of the rules.
I just want to add that I feel for your situation. I played in a "Pathfinder" game a while ago that turned out to be "Coin Flip: The Game" (i.e. roll high and something good happens, roll low and something bad happens). I love that kind of thing if I'm playing a game of "Toon" (say), but I found it to be a big turn-off for a Pathfinder game. Why have such a lovely thick tome of a rulebook if you're hardly going to use it? ;-)
I just want to add that I feel for your situation. I played in a "Pathfinder" game a while ago that turned into "Coin Flip: The Game" (i.e. roll high and something good happens, roll low and something bad happens). I love that kind of thing if I'm playing a game of "Toon" (say), but I found it to be a big turn-off for a Pathfinder game. Why have such a lovely thick tome of a rulebook if you're hardly going to use it? ;-)
Quint,
I've been in both of those situations (being the GM that isn't sure of certain rulings) and (still GMing) but finding that players aren't aware of changes or rules in general.
Just recently, in Kingmaker, during a kingdom building phase, a random monster encounter came up. It was against a wyvern. (I'm spoilering this, as it doesn't necessarily happen in Kingmaker).
Anyway, what ended up happening was the barbarian died from being poisoned and failing his saves (a lot) and I was rolling a few 4's on my d4 (as well as a 3). Zero Con. for Aragar the barbarian. Died Kuthona 18 4710 A.R.
The player of the halfling alchemist informs me that (in reading up on poisons for his character) he learned that poisons act differently with multiple hits... it adds to the DC (+2) and increases the length of time, but it's not a new "round" of poison saves, as I thought it was. (The barbarian had gotten stung twice, but made the save for the first attack, the next round he made his second save (against the first poisoning) and thus was safe. Since I was in error and it caused a PC death (unfairly) I've decided that the player can keep the character and doesn't need to bring in a new character.
And now, regarding a player not knowing certain rules, in my second game (high level) a wizard failed a Will save (rolled a 1) and he said he casts foresight and then he re-rolls the save and succeeds. I usually trust him to know what his spells do, so I didn't question it. I learned on my own (reading the foresight spell description) that the spell says nothing about getting to re-roll a failed save. So, right now I'm going to rule that we need to revisit the last session from the point the wizard failed that Will save, because it is important to the overall outcome of the encounter/adventure.
Just wanted to chime in, that I understand where you are coming from, and that no one is infallible. (Which I realize you weren't saying that).
Dean (TMW)
The other night, one of the players brought in a new character since his had died during the previous meeting. When asked by the DM: "What traits do you have?", he had no idea what he was referring to.
Well when we swapped over to Pathfinder I must say I found character generation a convoluted process. Simply put, it's not user friendly for the base novice (well the Beta wasn't) and it took awhile to get it right.
I came from 2nd Ed to PF, so had no 3.5 confusions.What helped was finding an early excell based character creator, as those things work wonders in tracking all your bits and bobs.
Perhaps you SHOULD have them hand over their sheets, bt even better, have them EMAIL you a completed spreadsheet ala Eriyan 7's excellent work.
I have often become the guy that knows the rules. I am not perfect, but I know most of the game. In my most recent stint as a regular player (two different campaigns, same DM), that was my role :) It worked great, too. Our DM was able to focus on the *game* and I was there to quick answer/lookup specifics on rules. All the players could play and my ADHD was focused :D
Never criticize another Player's PC. You can be a mentor, but not a critic! For example, we had a group where one of the girls had a bow-wielding elven rogue. it drove me nuts because I thought she was wasting her potential damage output. However, it was not my character, and she was having a blast. I never said a word against it. When she asked "What would be a good choice...?" I gave her some options and why they may work for her.
And an 18 Tumble check past 4th level is not gunna get *through* most enemies space :)
GNOME
|
I have often become the guy that knows the rules. I am not perfect, but I know most of the game. In my most recent stint as a regular player (two different campaigns, same DM), that was my role :) It worked great, too. Our DM was able to focus on the *game* and I was there to quick answer/lookup specifics on rules. All the players could play and my ADHD was focused :D
Never criticize another Player's PC. You can be a mentor, but not a critic! For example, we had a group where one of the girls had a bow-wielding elven rogue. it drove me nuts because I thought she was wasting her potential damage output. However, it was not my character, and she was having a blast. I never said a word against it. When she asked "What would be a good choice...?" I gave her some options and why they may work for her.
And an 18 Tumble check past 4th level is not gunna get *through* most enemies space :)
GNOME
I always have a friendly "rules guy" when I'm running as well. Makes my life easier. And the players seem to take it better when one of their own puts the kibosh on something.
|
|
I recommend looking for a Pathfinder Society game. They are short and sweet and best of all allow you to scout for gamers you would like to have at your table.
Another alternative is meetup groups. I ran a series of one shots for about 6 months to meet new gamers. Little did they know these one shots were trials for a long term campaign. I have had a stable and fun game for over a year now. There was a lot of headaches before I came around to this method.
Its almost as if he didn't read the Core book and just made up a character from online resources, thinking that the rules were generally the same as 3.5.
Does he even own a Pathfinder Core book? Something I've noticed in the past few years is people show up to play in a campaign without even owning (or reading) a Core rulebook. I can understand if someone's showing up because they've never played Pathfinder and want to give it a shot, but if you're showing up to be part of a 6 part Adventure Path, you should own and have read the Core Rulebook.
Any advice of how to handle this? This seems to be very common lately.
Of course I could just DM my own game, but I've always preferred to play as a PC.
Play Pathfinder Society.
Far more so than other games I've played, PFS players adhere to the letter of the rules. Whether this is good or bad for game play is a matter of personal taste, but it sounds like you would like the more by-the-book environment of organized play.