|
I was recently presented with a case I hadn't before encountered. I am interested in how, as GM/organizers, you would rule...
A GM did an audit on a character for a player with whom she had never played with before. In the history of the chronicles (quite a few back), the character had died and was raised. However, in reviewing the method of the raise, it was discovered that the group had pooled their Prestige to pay for the raise. This is not permitted by the rules.
Of course the player denied knowing that it was a violation. (Let's not speculate as to the truthfulness of the claim and just assume that he was being honest). In fact, the GM had encouraged them to do it. The player stated, at the time, there was not enough gold, even with the rewards from the scenario to raise the dead character. All they had available was pooled prestige, and even then, barely enough.
What would you do? Technically the character is illegal. Would you give the player a "pass" since it was a GM ruling? Would you require that the player immediately sacrifice enough prestige to pay for what the others had contributed? How about gold? Or would you just say the character is illegal and no longer eligible to play?
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would inform the player and the GM that a mistake was done and they should not do it again. That's it.
Otherwise the next question discussed here will be: my character died due to a GM error. If an illigal raise is afterwards altered then surely we need to alter an illigal death as well.
Errors happen - and if they are not done on purpose I would say - once the chronicle is signed it is a done deal.
The above should not apply if someone tries to game the system. But you open a huge can of worms otherwise.
Yes - the very first character I killed as GM was a GM error and he never got resurrected. It was a combination of me adding 2 zombies instead of 1 (wrong tier) and bad dice rolling for the character (he wouldn't have died if he made his save).
And I'm sure similar has happened with other GMs.
GMs do mistakes. At least I do.
Edit: Another issue is to get the input of the GM. The above is my very personal opinion. I accept if other GMs and VCs handle it different. But if a VC overules me afterwards I would expect at least he consults me before doing so. Otherwise there would be a strain developing. I would get over it - but it would be bad style in my opinion.
|
If I find an error that was done by mistake and not on purpose I allow them to correct the error, If they fully can't correct the error at that time I allow them to work towards that correction.
Edit: This is just a personal opinion, but I don't allow them to keep the error because I worry about people taking advantage of that in the future.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I would inform the player and the GM that a mistake was done and they should not do it again. That's it.
Otherwise the next question discussed here will be: my character died due to a GM error. If an illigal raise is afterwards altered then surely we need to alter an illigal death as well.
Errors happen - and if they are not done on purpose I would say - once the chronicle is signed it is a done deal.
Is this a sign of the end times? Thod and I agree on something ;-)
|
|
Is this a sign of the end times? Thod and I agree on something ;-)I would inform the player and the GM that a mistake was done and they should not do it again. That's it.
Otherwise the next question discussed here will be: my character died due to a GM error. If an illigal raise is afterwards altered then surely we need to alter an illigal death as well.
Errors happen - and if they are not done on purpose I would say - once the chronicle is signed it is a done deal.
I agree with the above. Once that session is reported, it's a done deal. An error was made, and should not be repeated. Trying to get the horse back into the stable is a complicated process that will only bring ill-will.
Obviously, if it seems someone is trying to game the system in some way by profiting from errors, misleading GMs, or so on, then the hammer should be brought down on that player.
But honest mistakes get made, and I don't think it's fair to try and later undo them, especially if it potentially removers a character from play many months after the error through no fault of their own.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I never audit chronicles as I consider it to be disrespectful to the player. It's a bit like accusing him of cheating even though I have no evidence unless I go fishing for it. So long as the character is on a par with my expectations for their wealth and level thats good enough for me. So long as everyone has fun at the table I'm happy.
|
I think the answer to this interesting question is fairly situational.
I much prefere to assume that the player is being honest. So I would rarely do an audit of a player's character sheet or chronicle sheets.
If i did one and i stumbled upon a descrepency, namely that a death was indicated in the condition's gained but there is no corresponding debit of 5420 gold pieces, or 16 prestige points, i would ask the player to explained what happened with his character's death.
If he explains that his character had died and was raised. If he explained that the GM encouraged them to pool their Prestige to pay for the raise dead, because the group collectively didn't have enough cash nor did the character have enough prestige and if I think the player is being honest, then i would let it slide. I would explain to him that the previous GM had erred, and in the future, these are the rules for spending prestige and the raising of the dead.
if on the other hand, i have been warned by another GM, or coordinator to watch out for a player, and if through playing with and or GMing for i find out that a particular player is a weasel then, i would be much more inclined to do an audit of his character sheet and chronicle sheets.
If i then discovered this discrepency, that he had died, and there is no corresponding debit of 5420 gold pieces, or 16 prestige points, and he told me the GM encouraged people to pool their prestige, well it would depend on if i believed him or not.
If i did not believe him, and i think he was trying to pull a fast one, then i would probably require him to spend the 5420 gold pieces, or 16 prestige points to cover the cost of a raise dead.
SO i guess the answer depends. If i think the player is honest, and this is an honest mistake, then i would let it slide. If i thought the player is lying to me and is pulling a fast one, then I would require him to pay.
|
|
In general, if an honest mistake has happened either by a GM or a player, and it hurts the player, we don't retcon it. So I think it would be bad form to retcon it if the player was helped.
That being said, asking them to spend PP or Gold to rectify the mistake would be acceptable in my book. If they didn't have enough immediately, then I'd probably allow them to do so in installments.
This does set a bit of a bad precedence in my opinion, though, because then people will start asking about installment plans, which are not allowed.
Sticky wicket no matter how you look at it. I'd probably err on the side of the player though, as a one time unique situation.
This is part of why I carry a laptop with me to game. If I see that, and I think that the player is trying to game the system, I can have them pull up the reporting of that session right here on Paizo's website. If it's an honest mistake made by the GM, then it should be easy fairly and they shouldn't put up the fuss. If it's a GM error, don't penalize the player. If it shows up on the site that "character died", then unfortunately you know the player is trying to game the system.
If I find an error that was done by mistake and not on purpose I allow them to correct the error, If they fully can't correct the error at that time I allow them to work towards that correction.
Edit: This is just a personal opinion, but I don't allow them to keep the error because I worry about people taking advantage of that in the future.
+1
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
I think it's safe to assume that the mistake was honest. After all, if they (the table or the player or the GM) were cheating, they just wouldn't report the death. That's a far easier cheat to pull of, because who (other than the players at the table, all of whom are complicit in any cheat we are discussing) would know otherwise?
That said, it's a pretty easy call: "In the future, you can't pool PA." Move along.
Just like in sports. "Oh, that puck crossed the line and was actually a goal? That's too bad, seeing as the game was yesterday and the other team won by a point." Move along.
Now, if it had been the last session, maybe this discussion is different.
[Edit]Another sign of the end times: I agree with Dragnmoon.
I would encourage them to either correct the error or work toward correcting it.
|
|
Let's not kid ourselves here - PFS runs mostly on the honour system. People could cheat the system easily if they were so inclined. I'm very happy that I've never encountered anyone I've suspected of cheating at my tables, and I think that the trust the system puts in its players is generally rewarded with honesty. As such, I think honest mistakes should be left to lie, and I would generally think that most character errors really are just honest mistakes.
|
Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau
|
Let's not kid ourselves here - PFS runs mostly on the honour system. People could cheat the system easily if they were so inclined. I'm very happy that I've never encountered anyone I've suspected of cheating at my tables, and I think that the trust the system puts in its players is generally rewarded with honesty. As such, I think honest mistakes should be left to lie, and I would generally think that most character errors really are just honest mistakes.
I have seen quite a few honest mistakes. Sadly, I have also seen times when players cheat the system. Most times, when caught and and called out on it (though never publicly!), they do not return, instead finding a place where they can get away with it (other host store, home game, etc.) You can usually tell whether a mistake was honest or just cheating based on that; if they come back, it was probably an honest mistake. If they take offense and never return, Organized Play is probably not for them.
|
|
Let's not kid ourselves here - PFS runs mostly on the honour system. People could cheat the system easily if they were so inclined. I'm very happy that I've never encountered anyone I've suspected of cheating at my tables, and I think that the trust the system puts in its players is generally rewarded with honesty. As such, I think honest mistakes should be left to lie, and I would generally think that most character errors really are just honest mistakes.I have seen quite a few honest mistakes. Sadly, I have also seen times when players cheat the system. Most times, when caught and and called out on it (though never publicly!), they do not return, instead finding a place where they can get away with it (other host store, home game, etc.) You can usually tell whether a mistake was honest or just cheating based on that; if they come back, it was probably an honest mistake. If they take offense and never return, Organized Play is probably not for them.
I would argue that if they like to cheat, that rpg's in general, as well as any competitive game (board, sports, et. al.) are not for them. Cheating cheapens the game for everyone involved and is really (par) cheesy.
|
|
A few things,
I don't see correcting a Mistake as a Punishment, I see it as correcting a Mistake that is all. I am not sure how it is punishing someone to fix something that should have been done in the first place..
Now the Rest..
What I stated in my Prior post about how I would deal with it was for My Local game and a Player who came there, if I was at another organizers game I would ask him/her what he wants done and provide my advice.
If I was at convention It could go either way depending of the Convention.
It is much harder to fix issues like this when you have the Chaos of the convention around you.
|
|
Would you also be sure to track down the other players in the original game and refund the PP that they'd pooled?
If I could, I would contact the Organizer to tell him they should get a refund.
Or, if it had been one of the other players from the game with the death and illegal raising that was audited and it was found that PP had been pooled and spent for the raise dead. Would you refund those PP, since they shouldn't have been spent in the first place?
Yes
A few things,
I don't see correcting a Mistake as a Punishment, I see it as correcting a Mistake that is all. I am not sure how it is punishing someone to fix something that should have been done in the first place..
Now the Rest..
What I stated in my Prior post about how I would deal with it was for My Local game and a Player who came there, if I was at another organizers game I would ask him/her what he wants done and provide my advice.
If I was at convention It could go either way depending of the Convention.
It is much harder to fix issues like this when you have the Chaos of the convention around you.
I differ with you on this. I do see, in this situation, as punishment. You are telling a player that he can't play a character that he's worked with since that session that he can't play him no more because of a GM's mistake, not a mistake that he made. That discourages the player from playing.
We need to try and be accommodate all players, and not alienate them because their GM messed something up.
|
|
I differ with you on this. I do see, in this situation, as punishment. You are telling a player that he can't play a character that he's worked with since that session that he can't play him no more because of a GM's mistake, not a mistake that he made. That discourages the player from playing.We need to try and be accommodate all players, and not alienate them because their GM messed something up.
Where did I say he can't play it anymore? I said He needs to correct it, or work towards that correction.
Edit: The way I am seeing it I am being Nice, If the OP example the player would not been able to afford the Raise dead when he first dies but because of the mistake he was able to continue playing it, since he should have been dead and I am allowing for him to correct that mistake after the fact or work towards that correction now I am being nice instead of telling him since his PC should have been dead he is now dead.
I differ with you on this. I do see, in this situation, as punishment. You are telling a player that he can't play a character that he's worked with since that session that he can't play him no more because of a GM's mistake, not a mistake that he made. That discourages the player from playing.We need to try and be accommodate all players, and not alienate them because their GM messed something up.
Where did I say he can't play it anymore? I said He needs to correct it, or work towards that correction.
Edit: The way I am seeing it I am being Nice, If the OP example the player would not been able to afford the Raise dead when he first dies but because of the mistake he was able to continue playing it, since he should have been dead and I am allowing for him to correct that mistake after the fact or work towards that correction now I am being nice instead of telling him since his PC should have been dead he is now dead.
If the player still doesn't have enough PP to take care of the error, then you are telling him that the character is dead. If the player hasn't played 8 scenarios by the time the audit happens, then he can't honestly pay for Raise Dead. with PP. Or, maybe he had used PP for other things, and just doesn't have the 16 points to be raised at the time of the audit. Either way...he'd be unable to continue.
That's where it would be punishing the player for the GM's mistake.
|
|
If the player still doesn't have enough PP to take care of the error, then you are telling him that the character is dead. If the player hasn't played 8 scenarios by the time the audit happens, then he can't honestly pay for Raise Dead. with PP. Or, maybe he had used PP for other things, and just doesn't have the 16 points to be raised at the time of the audit. Either way...he'd be unable to continue.
That's where it would be punishing the player for the GM's mistake.
If you are going to argue with me, read my posts..
I said I would have him Correct the error or Work towards Correcting the error. Please stop putting words in my mouth, I never once said i would have the PC be dead.
Working towards mean he would either pay either partial gold or Prestige now and pay the rest when he gets it.
|
|
Edit: The way I am seeing it I am being Nice, If the OP example the player would not been able to afford the Raise dead when he first dies but because of the mistake he was able to continue playing it, since he should have been dead and I am allowing for him to correct that mistake after the fact or work towards that correction now I am being nice instead of telling him since his PC should have been dead he is now dead.
Actually, you aren't. Especially if, in the wash, it comes out that the character should never have died at all, or that the death was at least partly to blame from GM error.
I have a fairly recent death on one of my PCs that was the result, at least in part, to a GM's misunderstanding of how a monster's ability worked. That misunderstanding seriously, majorly, affected how that encounter was handled, and was, indeed, a strong contributing factor to my charcater's death.
Now, how do you handle that? Do I get a refund of the PP and/or GP I spent for that GM error death?
In all seriousness, you need to have the rule work the same for BOTH sides. If youwant to correct any GM error like this, you also have to correct any other GM errors, as well.
Not to mention that, for the original issue, you need to get in touch with the other 3-6 players, along with the GM, and let them all know. And then YOU, as the GM "correcting" the issue, also need to get them a special Chronicle showing the PP refunded, so that they don't get, out of apparent thin air, 2-4 (approximate) mystery PP that would cause the next GM who audits THEM to cry foul.
Cascading events, all down the line.
Not to mention that it is entuirely possible that one or more of the PCs involved may have irrevocably died in the interim, or had other things happen that the missing PP might have affected.
You are heading squarely into the land of the Law of Unintended Consequences, because this could cascade into all sorts of places you might not want to go.
Easiest? Explain it to the player, see if you can find & update the GM involved on the issue, and call it time to game.
BTW, one of the posters on here kept posting an incorrect sum for the cost of a Raise Dead, showing, repeatedly, 5420 gp instead of the correct 5450 gp. A bit amusing, really.
|
|
Stuff
So we are making up Hypothetical Chain reactions to a hypothetical question?
Keep it simple.. Character Died, should have paid the correct payment, can be fixed so therefor should be fixed. Let’s leave the hypothetical chain reaction that destroys whole gaming groups out of it.
Edit: In my mind if you find a mistake you should fix it, not fixing it or working towards fixing once you find it it is equivalent to cheating.
Edit Edit: actually I as the GM should not even have to ask the player to fix the issue, the player should do it once the realize the mistake without GM intervention other then how it should be handled.
|
|
StuffSo we are making up Hypothetical Chain reactions to a hypothetical question?
Keep it simple.. Character Died, should have paid the correct payment, can be fixed so therefor should be fixed. Let’s leave the hypothetical chain reaction that destroys whole gaming groups out of it.
Edit: In my mind if you find a mistake you should fix it, not fixing it or working towards fixing once you find it it is equivalent to cheating.
Edit Edit: actually I as the GM should not even have to ask the player to fix the issue, the player should do it once the realize the mistake without GM intervention other then how it should be handled.
What hypothetical chain reaction?
The initial question's answer, at least your version of the answer, IS going to generate a chain reaction.
Everyone who contributed PP to the originally cited character's Raise Dead will need to be contacted to let them know they get that X PP back for their character X.
In order to prevent potential future GMs of the 3-6 PCs, besides the raised PC involved, from seeing a sudden influx of unexplained PP, and therefore think the player is cheating, you or someone needs to give them some sort of written annotation of the refunded PP. That is a possible chain reaction from doing the entire correction correctly.
Of course, this presupposes that there was no other GM error involved, that may have removed the PC's death to begin with.
I then gave a high level example of a case where GM error may have caused a PC's death.
So, instead of having to use up 3 uses per turn to reduce the damage of my character's attacks, he was soaking half the first attack, and totally neutralizing the other two attacks completely.
There would have been a significant difference in rthe outcome of that combat, if my character's damage had been properly applied, and the NPC run correctly. Instead, I had to go through the whoile Raise Dead routine because of GM error.
Yes, I think you need to make sure that if you correct the kind of error listed in the OP, you also need to make sure you correct the other kind of error, like this one, as well.
Dragon, the problem with your arguments is that you don't completely figure in everything that could happen. Call's "Hypothetical" chain of events is just the tip of the iceberg. I'm going to give you another one. Say the player that had this happen to them, the reason that they hadn't played with that GM before was because either they just came to the area, or that they were visiting from another area.
Not all that impossible. Is the GM going to try and find out who the current venture captain for that area is, contact them to find out who the GM for that session might have been in order to make those corrections? I'll tell you right now, I sure as hell won't. I will do what the GM that time did, talk to his Venture Captain and see what they say to do after the scenario.
Refunding PP will add a whole hell of a lot of work for something that could have been an honest mistake from a GM. Trying to work with the player to rectify that mistake may not be something that is easy to do.
You said that you would work with them to fix the mistake. How? Deduct PP from their scenarios from that point forward until the 16 PP for Raise Dead is paid for? Problem is, that it may also be against the rules, because then another GM can go and say "Oh, well you died in this scenario, but didn't pay for Raise Dead until this scenario, you can't play."
I say let the person play, show them where the rule is in the Character Creation Guide, and don't worry about it. The most important thing about Pathfinder is that we as players and GMs have fun. Remember, Play, Play, Play.
This is why I made the very first suggestion on the topic that I made, and that's check out how the player was reported in the system.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
There's an old saying "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." I think that's a good guideline here.
@Dragonmoon, that's not a hypothetical question given above. A hypothetical would be. "What if X character died and couldn't be brought back because he didn't have enough PP after donating?" If you track down the GM, track down the player, and give the dead character back his PP, can he now 'get better'? If the pool raised PC used some of his prestige later to buy a wand of CLW, does that mean you track down every character healed by that wand and make them pay for a potion? Those are fun snowball questions.
It's a mistake, note it's a mistake and move on.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
First, Bob, I am downright giddy that a GM, somewhere, actually audited a character.
I've seen all sorts of weirdnesses when I've audited characters. People taking extra feats instead of traits. A fellow who'd played "Master of the Fallen Fortress" at 2nd level.
And I'm positive that I've made mistakes as a GM that would cause any other GM to shake their head in pity if they ever audited the sheets I've signed. (The times I wrote down that a PC has caught a disease, but never bothered to resolve it ...)
Those mistakes that can be fixed, fix. ("No, you need to drop two feats here. Your choice.") Those mistakes that cannot be fixed, explain. Move on, roll dice, have fun.
|
|
I dont remember who suggested this the last time, or what thread it was in, but I think this is another example of a thread which would be much more beneficial to all involved if people would knock off the 'This is why what you are suggesting is wrong' posts, and do more, 'This is what Im doing and why' posts.
Just a thought.
As for me, I agree with Thod.
|
|
First, Bob, I am downright giddy that a GM, somewhere, actually audited a character.
I have only required one audit in Kalamazoo, but I my players have frequently offered their characters up for audit of their own volition. They like getting back the email stating where there are mistakes and the page references to the rules in question. I like auditing like this because it gives me a broader understanding of the rules, since if I'm not familiar with a character design at my tables, I become familiar when auditing them.
My format:
1) Error
Page References: yada yada
Reccomended fix: blah blah
2) Rinse/repeat
My players get a kick out of some of the things I've caught. My funniest one, miss weighted crossbow bolts that were under weight, and a crossbow that was overweight. The player was cracked up, "You saved my two pounds weight by catching this!? LOL"
|
|
I dont remember who suggested this the last time, or what thread it was in, but I think this is another example of a thread which would be much more beneficial to all involved if people would knock off the 'This is why what you are suggesting is wrong' posts, and do more, 'This is what Im doing and why' posts.
Good point, I think my posts changed from that once I felt like I was being attacked and my reflexes kicked in.. ;)
|
|
Another interesting question has come up here - do you do character audits?
Here is what I do.
For my area - Sunrise Lodge UK - as far East Kent as you can get - I do semi-regular character update service. Most players here are not very experienced. You might also have read that I have a 'junior-league' of young players.
I try to keep copies of most players on my computer as Hero-Lab files. And I offer a level-up service. You come around - I give advice and level the character with you. And as free bonus you get a new printed copy. Just ensure you are ahead of time at my place at game day.
Yes - this is also an audit service. The players like it as 2/3 of errors I catch are in their disfavor. For example the 10 missing HP I 'found' for a dwarves fighter. Or the CMB of the monk that was one too low. Interestingly the player insisted for half an hour he was right ... (shake head).
Visiting players
Around once a quarter we have a gathering here and I like to invite players to come around. Spending a weekend gaming you have enough time discussing quirks. If I spot something that I don't understand or just seems too good I like to look it up. This is outside games. But you still have the players around (or their e-mails). This is less character audit as rules audit.
How do you use the rules. Can you do that - is this correct. Most visitors are GMs themselves and half the time I learn something myself that I wasn't aware. But if I feel someone is doing something wrong, then I let him know.
Conventions
I don't tend to do audits at conventions. I don't want to alienate a player ahead of a game and often there is limited time afterwards. After 4 hours as GM I like some short break before I GM the next table.
If I do 3 tables as GM in a day then my motto is - sorry - I have to trust my players and their home GM unless something really seems wrong. Otherwise I just burn out at a Con.
So I think the best place is the home GM. He has most time and knows his players best. I also do more for inexperienced players. This is mote to protect them as anything else. But also that no errors slip out that I would feel ashamed not to have spotted.
Thod
|
|
To give you an idea on how I rule on things like this...
I had a player visiting from Austin, he had a 2nd level PC.
During the scenario I noticed irregularities with his Items, he just seemed to have access to Items he should not be able to afford at Level 2.
I audited his PC and found out that the GM back in Austin allowed him to play in a 6-7 sub-tier game and gave him the reward for the 6-7 Sub-tier. The rules do not allow a level 1-2 to play in a sub-tier 6-7 game. This allowed him to buy items he should not been able to buy otherwise, and made the scenario more than a cake walk then it should have been.
I could have gone 4 ways with this.
1. Ignore it move on
2. Call the prior game illegal and talk to his GM back home that he should never have gotten the Chronicle sheet.
3. Have him talk to his GM back home to have the reward for sub-tier 3-4 and have him sell back items he could no longer afford.
4. Have him talk to his GM back home to Have him put aside the chronicle sheet until he reaches a level legally able to play in sub-tier 6-7 (Level 4) have him sell back items he could no longer afford.
Being that I like sticking to the rules as close as possible but did not want to make his prior game a total waste I passed to him option 3 and 4. He decided he wanted option 4 and talked to his GM about it.
After a lot of back and forth with the GM disagreeing with me on the playing up rules and him throwing at least once out play, play, play! The rule was cleared up and they Picked option 4.
I can point to that situation my hatred for the lack of clarity of the playing up rules at the time and the play, play, play! rule.
|
|
Is it really punishing the player for GM error, if the player’s character would have died normally? If you come back and say, “I’m sorry, but your character should be dead, so they are dead.” Is that really punishing them? They may be disappointed, and maybe even angry. But I’m not sure it’s really punishing them.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
There's a flipside to this question as well. Simply letting something like this slide is a punishment to players who accepted their character's final death because they and their GM's abided by the rules.
Only in the sense that player A 'got away' with a mistake that killed player B's character.
(Warning! Work realted example!)*
When I audit, I grab calls at random. If I get a call from CSR-a and they made a mistake they lose points (and some to all of their bonus). If CSR-a made the mistake because they heard CSR-b do the same thing, CSR-b won't get points taken off unless that call is audited.
If Player A's character cheated death because of a GM error that has no effect on player B who never heard of player A.
Now in the example given, Player A benefitted because of GM Z's error. Players C,D,E and F all voluntarily gave up PP (Which, amusingly is similar to the argument about modules using scenario rules a couple of threads over) in error. The key is 'in error'. It was a mistake. As is said about inflamatory posts, 'flag it and move on.' Or if someone had (as I did!) played a module under the current rules and marked expendibles, paid for ressurrection etc, would you put those points back on?
*
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
This is one of those things where what I think should happen and what I would likely do differ by a good margin.
Honestly, the guy's character died and he's playing on borrowed time. If it was the prior session where the error was made you should probably tell him flat out his character is illegal to play. That would be a tough call though and I'm generally a non-confrontational person so not sure I would do it.
If he has multiple sessions on that character then it's more or less water under the bridge, he's already invested more time/ effort into a 'dead' character. Telling him he's illegal means you are not only invalidating his current efforts but previous efforts as well. Just explain where the screw up happened and move on.
|
First, Bob, I am downright giddy that a GM, somewhere, actually audited a character.
I've seen all sorts of weirdnesses when I've audited characters. People taking extra feats instead of traits. A fellow who'd played "Master of the Fallen Fortress" at 2nd level.
And I'm positive that I've made mistakes as a GM that would cause any other GM to shake their head in pity if they ever audited the sheets I've signed. (The times I wrote down that a PC has caught a disease, but never bothered to resolve it ...)
Those mistakes that can be fixed, fix. ("No, you need to drop two feats here. Your choice.") Those mistakes that cannot be fixed, explain. Move on, roll dice, have fun.
Couldn't have said it better. I think it's a mistake for a GM to not audit characters based on the honour system or because it's disrespectful - it's not. Auditing fixes honest mistakes that could potentially recur simply because people don't know any better, and that's following an ignorance is bliss system. It's worth a reasonable check of other people's sheets. The honour system shouldn't be an excuse for this.
And yes, for the sake of convenience, if it can be fixed, fix it. If not, explain and move on.
In this situation if the players were a regular group, it would be a relatively easy fix. Heals and whatnot that happened during the scenario don't come into it, only the raise dead cost. If the player can't afford it yet, they can pay for it when they can afford it, at which point the other players are refunded. In this exact situation, it's not too bad at all to stretch the rules to allow the pooled prestige (ie. it shouldn't have happened, but since you can't change history, do your best to clean up the mess).
|
|
I dont remember who suggested this the last time, or what thread it was in, but I think this is another example of a thread which would be much more beneficial to all involved if people would knock off the 'This is why what you are suggesting is wrong' posts, and do more, 'This is what Im doing and why' posts.Good point, I think my posts changed from that once I felt like I was being attacked and my reflexes kicked in.. ;)
Completely understandable.
Another interesting question has come up here - do you do character audits?
Ive wanted to do some for some time, just to look over some of the local players stuff, but never feel like I have enough time, or know what all I should check.
Suggestions for what to look for and what to check for someone who has never audited a character, and has no access to HeroLab?
|
|
Is it really punishing the player for GM error, if the player’s character would have died normally? If you come back and say, “I’m sorry, but your character should be dead, so they are dead.” Is that really punishing them? They may be disappointed, and maybe even angry. But I’m not sure it’s really punishing them.
Yes, it is punsihing them, unless you catch it at the very next session that the player is uing that PC at.
Otherwise, you are taking the honest effort the player has spent, playing several scenarios or modules, and invalidating it, as you are, basically, burning any and all Chronicles that that character received after the error happened.
It gets ugly.
Best case scenario for making the proper correction: You happen to be GMing for this PC on the scenario after he died, the other people at teh same table include all the same players & the GM for that game, and everything can be cleared up immediately.
Worst case scenario: This occurred 16-20 scenarios ago, the player has been spending the PC's PP fairly consistently since, and the game his character originally died in was at a one-off at a convention two or three years ago. Difficult to deal with, no?
Heck, I am stll missing the online credit for a game I played in in 2008 at a local convention that has, since, changed its emphasis, and, when I used the GM number to look up the GM, he doesn't have any weay to contact him on the boards other than by posting. Guess I will have to break down and do that sometime. At least it isn't a retired scenario...
|
|
Edit: The way I am seeing it I am being Nice, If the OP example the player would not been able to afford the Raise dead when he first dies but because of the mistake he was able to continue playing it, since he should have been dead and I am allowing for him to correct that mistake after the fact or work towards that correction now I am being nice instead of telling him since his PC should have been dead he is now dead.Actually, you aren't. Especially if, in the wash, it comes out that the character should never have died at all, or that the death was at least partly to blame from GM error.
I have a fairly recent death on one of my PCs that was the result, at least in part, to a GM's misunderstanding of how a monster's ability worked. That misunderstanding seriously, majorly, affected how that encounter was handled, and was, indeed, a strong contributing factor to my charcater's death.
Now, how do you handle that? Do I get a refund of the PP and/or GP I spent for that GM error death?
In all seriousness, you need to have the rule work the same for BOTH sides. If youwant to correct any GM error like this, you also have to correct any other GM errors, as well.
Not to mention that, for the original issue, you need to get in touch with the other 3-6 players, along with the GM, and let them all know. And then YOU, as the GM "correcting" the issue, also need to get them a special Chronicle showing the PP refunded, so that they don't get, out of apparent thin air, 2-4 (approximate) mystery PP that would cause the next GM who audits THEM to cry foul.
Cascading events, all down the line.
Not to mention that it is entuirely possible that one or more of the PCs involved may have irrevocably died in the interim, or had other things happen that the missing PP might have affected.
You are heading squarely into the land of the Law of Unintended Consequences, because this could cascade into all sorts of places you might not want to go.
Easiest? Explain it to the player, see if...
"BTW, one of the posters on here kept posting an incorrect sum for the cost of a Raise Dead, showing, repeatedly, 5420 gp instead of the correct 5450 gp. A bit amusing, really."
Heh heh, well Callarek, I guess that would be me! I must have confused my numbers a bit...Easily remedied. thank you.