|
I am going to use # 16 to scale the dragon as an example. You the GM have just finished explaining the mission, which is to “retrieve the corpse of a lost shaman so a speak with dead spell can be cast on it, and the Society can then secure a valuable piece of information before the forces of darkness close in” you have explained you must travel to the shamans burial cairn, dig up the corps, and bring it back with you.
Then a player at the table asks if he could speak with you. You step to one side to hear what the player’s concerns are. He explains that his character feels uncomfortable with the mission, and that he personally feels very uncomfortable with the thought of digging up a properly buried corps for the sole purpose of having a speak with dead spell cast on it. He then asks if it would be possible to change the “Magoffin” that perhaps instead of having to exhume a corpse, could they say, have to retrieve a Stele at the shaman’s grave site, or piece of rock with petro glyphs etched on it? This way none of the encounters need to be altered, and we still need to carry something heavy….”
As a GM what would you do?
I don’t particularly want to get into the fine line between “tomb raiding” ala Indiana Jones, (by digging up the past we are attempting to illuminate the present) and say well grave robbing.
I am curious to see how as a GM you would handle this or a similar question, where a player has expressed some discomfort over a mission or something like that.
What would you as a GM do?
|
I would not consider changing the mission to be something left to GM caveat.
If we're talking about a faction mission, then the PC just misses out on that PA. Not a huge issue.
If we are talking about an over-all scenario goal, then maybe the player needs to re-evaluate his role-playing options. After all, a major part of the society's activities is to recover lost artifacts/knowledge, either to secure it from "baddies" or to "enlighten."
On a more productive note, if you really need a loop-hole, perhaps the request came (indirectly?) from a priest of Pharasma. It would be within their power to grant access to burial mounds, bodies, etc. Provided, of course, that they are not being used nefariously. That could ease the player's concerns.
|
I would not consider changing the mission to be something left to GM caveat.
If we're talking about a faction mission, then the PC just misses out on that PA. Not a huge issue.
If we are talking about an over-all scenario goal, then maybe the player needs to re-evaluate his role-playing options. After all, a major part of the society's activities is to recover lost artifacts/knowledge, either to secure it from "baddies" or to "enlighten."
On a more productive note, if you really need a loop-hole, perhaps the request came (indirectly?) from a priest of Pharasma. It would be within their power to grant access to burial mounds, bodies, etc. Provided, of course, that they are not being used nefariously. That could ease the player's concerns.
I definatly agree with Bob's viewpoint. We, as GMs, cannot change the storyline so drastically as to alter the primary mission of the module.
I would suggest to the player that they may want to find a different table to play at if he feels that strongly, otherwise, he's more than welcome to sit at the table and play, but I'm not changing the primary mission of the module.
|
|
My solution, when presented with this situation, was to have the Venture-Captain ask that the PC in question accompany the exhumation crew for the sake of strength in numbers but not force him to 'sully' his hands with the actual excavation/exhumation.
Some thing that I considered which lead me to this solution:
1) Major alterations of the adventure are something of a no-no in Organized Play.
2) Several faction missions are contingent upon the exhumation - altering it to acquiring a gravemarker prevents those folks from accomplishing their faction quests.
3) Perhaps the Venture-Captain had more information than he was willing to give the PCs. Perhaps he had inside info that some other organization was headed after the same maguffin for the same reason. Far better to have it in the hands of the Society that to let the 'other folks' have it.
Ultimately, it comes down to this - any given mission is going to offend someone. Theft, assassination, grave robbing, transport of illicit goods, whatever. By playing in the OP environment, we give up some bits of personal control that we'd otherwise have in a home game environment. If the required action offends your PC's sensibilities, perhaps another PC would be better suited for the mission. If the required action offends your personal ethos, walking away might be the only, final solution.
|
|
[inject mildy related note]
In my home game, one of the players is a pathfinder. The crux to his storyline is that his religious order had sent him to find a religious holy site, and he found it, but died of his afflictions from the evil inhabitants upon returning home with his previous goal. So, hundred or so years later, the pathfinders find out that he the now dead guy knew or knows where this tomb is. The particular abbey he was at, the priests refused the pathfinders access to his body for a simple speak with dead, but they would allow them to raise him from the dead. He wakes up, joins pathfinders, and thus we have our in game pathfinder.
[End Threadjack]
|
|
Bob Jonquet, Thea Peters, Omega Man, and Thorn DLJ7, thank you all for your responses.
As you may have guessed I was the player. Around the end of May Last year, I ran To scale a dragon at Game Theory in Raleigh. From what I remember Omega Man was at my table. Of the players at the table, none of their characters had a faction mission that required the burial carin to be opened to complete. I simply changed the Mcguffin, and had them grab a large rock which was part of the burial cairn with petroglyphs all over it and toss that in their dog sled. I kept all the combat encounters the same, and I think, apart from a disruptive player, everyone had fun. I don’t think anyone had noticed anything had been changed.
Last fall I went to the Mace Convention in high point NC. Omega man ran To Scale the Dragon, and I had signed up for the table. I did bring up my concerns with Omega Man, and he handled things very well I think. My character was an inquisitor of Iomedae, and the whole business of digging up a corps, dragging it half way across Golaran, well a long distance, for the sole purpose of casting a speak with dead spell on it, both my character and I found disturbing. Omega Man mentioned that there were times when his Paladin would pull “guard “ duty “ when either his faction mission, or the Pathfinder mission required him to do something that would bother his conscience. Omega man had the venture captain suggest that my character go along to scout, and help keep the party safe and pull guard duty, while the others did the digging. He did mention that if he changed that objective he would be messing with another player’s character’s faction mission. To me this seemed fair and reasonable. So that is what my character did. He scouted ahead, and was pulling guard duty for the party.
I think it worked out all right.
We all had a good time I think at the table. Omega man did a good job Gming
|
|
I personally won't change the premise of any Pathfinder or faction mission. If you don't want to do it, you can walk or play another character imo.
Pathfinders are a neutral organization and what they do is going to sometimes going to chaffe on player concepts. Which is ok, Pathfinders aren't going to force you to do anything. So if you have a character concept that is easily offended, just make sure you bring a few characters.
Although the official answer is probably "don't alter the scenario", imo it's a matter of DM preference. We alter scenarios cosmetically all of the time, to accommodate children or to fix problems with them, so this is very similar imo.
But no, I personally wouldn't change any PF or faction mission to make the PC or player happy. Sorry. I might find a way to make it "ok", but I wouldn't change it.