How strict are you?


Pathfinder Society

1 to 50 of 66 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court 4/5

A discussion rose on a local messageboard, mainly regarding items, encumbrance, and clothing. This got me thinking about how much things are hand-waved by GMs and players alike.

The question is "How strict are you?". Essentially in organized play everyone should be playing by the same rules, yet there are multiple rules that are either forgotten, neglected, or downright ignored. While I understand why encumbrance in particular has been hand-waved, it shouldn't, as some players do take it into account, and might use actions to remove their backpacks just to get to light load. How often have you seen someone remove their backpacks before a battle ensues?

Clothing is another issue. In D&D 3.5 starting clothes were free and didn't weigh a thing. In PFRPG, however, the clothes do weigh. This could be of great importance to characters with very low strength. The whole clothing issue has been revisited numerous times, and often I see questions regarding it on the Rules section, yet never there's a definite answer. Thus we must go by what we're given; starting clothes are free, but they have weight.

As a GM I do check characters' stats, equipment, and all that. Despite this I've often forgot to check if clothes are present. I wish to ask other GMs have they paid attention to this at all, or just hand-waved it?

Lastly I come to the issue of items altogether. Do characters carry tents, bedrolls, blankets, trail rations etc? If the journey consists of a week's travel, is the whole ordeal of eating and sleeping hand-waved? If a character doesn't possess any food, water, or sleeping equipment, shouldn't he/she receive hefty penalties for malnutrition and such? Or is it just hand-waved?

I ponder this as some players do take all this into account and struggle with heavy equipment and use actions to lower a backpack and all that. Is it fair to them for other players just roam Golarion with nothing more than an armor, weapon, and a bunch of magic items?

How strict are you in following these less used rules? Would you, as a GM, enforce these and apply appropriate circumstance penalties and bonuses? I know item weights can be the most boring aspects of the character sheet, but they are still there. And rarely do you have to calculate them more than once, at character creation.


I check the small rules rather thoroughly, but I'm not strict. If it can be assumed that they get food from somewhere, I let them have it and not start telling the players that their characters are starving. Hell, having a Ranger in the group while traveling in, say, the Stolen Land, means he could just hunt something to eat on the free time while the group walks around or sets up a camp.

So, I might be strict with the numbers (such as encumberance), but in all other ways I'm a rather laid-back DM. If not that, I'm at least far more open-minded than most, especially when it comes to Third Party Material and Homebrew races.

Sovereign Court 4/5

Icyshadow wrote:
If not that, I'm at least far more open-minded than most, especially when it comes to Third Party Material and Homebrew races.

Not in the Pathfinder Society circles, I assume? Third party material and such aren't something the campaign rules allow, after all.


I have no interest in playing PFS, to be honest. Partly BECAUSE any race idea I'd have would fly out the window because it's not included in the books. And I can live without Third Party stuff myself if I were a player, the classes in those books usually aren't that interesting. Then again, we were talking about how we'd run the game as DMs, not as players, correct?

Sovereign Court 4/5

Both ways, actually. How strict GMs are enforcing the rules, and how players themselves construct the characters and how obediently they follow the rules to the letter.

I posted this on the Pathfinder Society section on purpose (with all the organized play and "sessions must be equal" stuff), but I understand that this issue does encompass more than just the organized play. These are the times I wish I could make a thread on multiple sections on the boards.

Grand Lodge 1/5

The few times I have been GMing in PFS I haven't made a big deal of it, as I am playing with seasons adventures I kinda expect them (who know the rules 10 times better than I do) to uphold their end of the bargain. The Table are suppose to be fun and making equal rules for everyone, so if I realize one or more left home without food or in theory cant even walk because their min/maxing char have 5 in strength then I would do something about it. But it have not come up as a big issue.

However clothes, armours and so forth weight people down and should do so - after all that's one of the strengths with playing Dwarf. Neglecting that is the same as removing part of the dwarven abilities which just aren't fair.

How strict am I : On a scale 1-10 I would say a 2 until I realize someone are not keeping within the rules (on purpose) then I goes to the other end of the scale.

5/5

Deussu wrote:
... "How strict are you?"...

Very!

Sovereign Court 4/5

Diego Winterborg wrote:
Deussu wrote:
... "How strict are you?"...
Very!

This isn't about parenting skills, pa!

5/5

Deussu wrote:
Diego Winterborg wrote:
Deussu wrote:
... "How strict are you?"...
Very!
This isn't about parenting skills, pa!

Are all role-players not just old children?

1/5

I try not to be supper strict. However, If I have the time to scan sheets before play I do look to see whether they keep track of weight and what their encumbrance is. Like you said, a lot rides on gear weight. Your AC, CMD, speed, skill checks are all effected by it. That and I love to punish low str casters. It also prevents people from bringing or carrying back home everything and the kitchen sink.

I tend to handwave gold weight and play as if the character had letters of credit or such. This is because even the most weight conscious character is going to have enough gold to throw them into Med encumbrance.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I usually don't ask players about their encumbrance. Most carried gear tends to be potions and other lightweight consumables, so most weight usually comes with armor, and in practice you usually have a higher STR the heavier your armor is.

Generally, I trust players on "background" mechanics until I have a reason to be suspicious. When I'm a player, I make sure my characters are following the rules (I always stay well within light load, for instance), but at the same time it'd be tiresome if I had to be audited on carrying capacity over and over again.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It depends on the players. If they're making relatively standard characters, I'm fairly light at the helm. But if they're cornering the rules and pushing the envelope on stats, such as making arcanists with a 5 STR and Low Con, I watch encumbrance like a hawk. I also remind players that the death threshold isn't -10 any more but -CON, which is another reason to really reconsider putting a single digit CON score on a character.

And I'm VERY strict on magic. Almost every game where I've magic gone out of control it was because the GM let it get that way.

Sczarni 4/5

I have about same attitude as Jiggy, until something becomes fishy I don't bother my players much.

Most of the stuff can really be dismissed as scenario's last short time, usually within 1-2 days game time so rations aren't really much of issue. Encumbrance should however be calculated , -3 armor check penalty, slower movement, Max Dex bonus aren't small stuff, but they hit harder on higher level PCs probably.

I admit I never calculated the cloths, never thought about it :0

"Lastly I come to the issue of items altogether. Do characters carry tents, bedrolls, blankets, trail rations etc?" --> make a note here that some low strength cloth user can't even carry all of it.

1 rule which came to my mind recently also that you can't take item from backpack so swiftly as using move action for example, it would take take entire full round action to search it. It's not really big stuff but Handy Haversack seems kinda useless at some point then.

In short , there is tons of minor rules always.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Malag wrote:
1 rule which came to my mind recently also that you can't take item from backpack so swiftly as using move action for example, it would take take entire full round action to search it.

I must have overlooked that one. Can you point me in the right direction?

On a related note, if most of what you carry is weapons and small items like potions, you don't even need the backpack. The "explorer's outfit" (one of the options for your starting clothes) says it has plenty of pockets all over it. If your non-weapon gear is pocket-sized, then the only reason to have a backpack is in case you need to carry something you find (or in case you sit with one of those "anything I never noticed before must be cheese" type of GMs).

Sczarni 4/5

Jiggy wrote:
Malag wrote:
1 rule which came to my mind recently also that you can't take item from backpack so swiftly as using move action for example, it would take take entire full round action to search it.

I must have overlooked that one. Can you point me in the right direction?

On a related note, if most of what you carry is weapons and small items like potions, you don't even need the backpack. The "explorer's outfit" (one of the options for your starting clothes) says it has plenty of pockets all over it. If your non-weapon gear is pocket-sized, then the only reason to have a backpack is in case you need to carry something you find (or in case you sit with one of those "anything I never noticed before must be cheese" type of GMs).

I can't really pin point you since I don't really know but there are some things which maybe "point out at it".

Muleback Coords gives you around 5x times ( I wont bother to calculate it exactly at the moment ) more capacity to carry items and costs 1000g.

Handy Haversack has 1 big + 2 small pockets for totaly of 120 lb weight to carry in it and costs 2000g, but, it also has the ability to grab any item you need at every moment out of it.

Usually backpack has few pockets ( 2-3 maybe? ) in which you can store some emergency potions or anything else.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malag wrote:
I can't really pin point you since I don't really know

Retrieve a stored item: Move Action - Attack of Opportunity: Yes.

Malag wrote:
Muleback Coords gives you around 5x times ( I wont bother to calculate it exactly at the moment ) more capacity to carry items and costs 1000g.

Muleback Cords: "The wearer treats his Strength score as 8 higher than normal when determining his carrying capacity."

Malag wrote:
Handy Haversack has 1 big + 2 small pockets for totaly of 120 lb weight to carry in it and costs 2000g, but, it also has the ability to grab any item you need at every moment out of it.

Handy Haversack: "Retrieving any specific item from a haversack is a move action, but it does not provoke the attacks of opportunity that retrieving a stored item usually does."

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Malag wrote:


Muleback Coords gives you around 5x times ( I wont bother to calculate it exactly at the moment ) more capacity to carry items and costs 1000g.

What you're generally not going to be able to buy at 1st or 2nd level. And may not be able to buy on demand at all depending on the campaign.

Grand Lodge 5/5

I, too, sit about the same place as Jiggy. I'm going to assume they are following the rules unless they give me a reason to think they might not be.

Regarding the other question, yes, my characters carry other stuff than just 'combat gear', and I find it kinda annoying when i notice other people who don't with their characters. Not sure why, I just find it kinda munchkinny.

Sczarni 4/5

Thanks Grick!

Sovereign Court 4/5

Malag wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Malag wrote:
1 rule which came to my mind recently also that you can't take item from backpack so swiftly as using move action for example, it would take take entire full round action to search it.

I must have overlooked that one. Can you point me in the right direction?

On a related note, if most of what you carry is weapons and small items like potions, you don't even need the backpack. The "explorer's outfit" (one of the options for your starting clothes) says it has plenty of pockets all over it. If your non-weapon gear is pocket-sized, then the only reason to have a backpack is in case you need to carry something you find (or in case you sit with one of those "anything I never noticed before must be cheese" type of GMs).

I can't really pin point you since I don't really know but there are some things which maybe "point out at it".

You normally need to drop your backpack to be able to search it. One move action to do that, the other to retrieve the item = full round.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

LazarX wrote:
Malag wrote:


Muleback Coords gives you around 5x times ( I wont bother to calculate it exactly at the moment ) more capacity to carry items and costs 1000g.
What you're generally not going to be able to buy at 1st or 2nd level. And may not be able to buy on demand at all depending on the campaign.

Note that this thread is in the PFS section.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Deussu wrote:
You normally need to drop your backpack to be able to search it. One move action to do that, the other to retrieve the item = full round.

I'm not familiar with that rule either. Can you point me to it? Or get ninja'd by Grick? ;)

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

With our limited time frames and often not knowing the play style of your players, I am relatively lenient with encumbrance, etc. I just don't see a value-gain for evaluating all the rules/guidelines down to the minutia. If you are a few pounds over because you didn't figure your clothes or a couple extra days of rations, should I really care? Most of the time, the society covers your travel expenses, so its reasonable to assume that includes meals. If you are traveling without the assistance of the society, across great distances, or unforgiving environs like a desert, then I might ask about your provisioning. After level one, the cost becomes negligible so you're really doing is slowing down the game and taking time away from the fun parts.

For the most part, encumbrance is not an issue. IMO, volume is often a larger concern. Your 20 strength fighter might have the carrying capacity, but that does not mean he can equip himself with dozens of full-sized weapons. It just does not make any sense. At some point, movement and flexibility have to become impaired. If you decide to dump strength and still be able to carry a "normal" load of gear, we might have an issue. Players need to be responsible and accept the penalties for dump stat regardless of which one it is.

1/5

Bob Jonquet wrote:
If you decide to dump strength and still be able to carry a "normal" load of gear, we might have an issue. Players need to be responsible and accept the penalties for dump stat regardless of which one it is.

Glad that you mentioned dumping strength. Do realize, that anything below Str 14 is actully dump stat, if you want to carry normal gear(*), and to be on light load. At least, if you don't use mules, servants, or magic items to work around that.

(*) normal gear including clothes, armor, weapons, maybe a shield, backpack, bedroll, waterskin, rope, etc.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Samuli wrote:
Bob Jonquet wrote:
If you decide to dump strength and still be able to carry a "normal" load of gear, we might have an issue. Players need to be responsible and accept the penalties for dump stat regardless of which one it is.

Glad that you mentioned dumping strength. Do realize, that anything below Str 14 is actully dump stat, if you want to carry normal gear(*), and to be on light load. At least, if you don't use mules, servants, or magic items to work around that.

(*) normal gear including clothes, armor, weapons, maybe a shield, backpack, bedroll, waterskin, rope, etc.

And with armor being the heaviest bit, it's sort of a self-correcting problem. The folks with armor typically have it so they can be in the front, which usually means they have some STR. Folks with low STR are usually either using lighter armor to accommodate a higher DEX or skipping armor for the sake of spellcasting.

Just watch out for those gnome clerics with 5 STR and a breastplate and heavy shield. ;)

1/5

Jiggy wrote:
The folks with armor typically have it so they can be in the front, which usually means they have some STR. Folks with low STR are usually either using lighter armor to accommodate a higher DEX or skipping armor for the sake of spellcasting.

Actually, that's not what I've witnessed. I agree, that most of the time it works like you described. But almost all the Rogues I've seen struggle with load limits, same for Str 10-12 Bards. Heck, I have a PFS-fighter (not Fighter the class) with Str 12, who has tremendeous problems to stay on light load with his leather armor.

Really, you can check how little gear a Str 12 character can carry (and stay on light load), if there's any doubt on that. It's not much.

Sovereign Court 2/5

Well, I’ll attack this question from both my stance as a GM and as a player.

I’ve become known in our local group as the “rules lawyer” (for better or worse) because I love tracking all of these little things. I always make sure I have the essential adventuring gear on all my characters and make decisions about my characters starting strength and whatnot just to accommodate load limitations. As someone that actually enjoys overly in-depth rules systems like Rolemaster, I like the added bit of realism because it feels like more of a living breathing character than just a tool with which to allow me to roll dice.

That being said, I’m acutely aware that for many players this is much more of an annoyance and really takes away from the fun more than adds to it. Because of this I’m not real strict on these sorts of issues in games that I’m running. I often double check character sheets to make sure that mechanical issues such as attack bonuses, saving throws, AC, and whatnot are all appropriately calculated. But if the player doesn’t happen to have a tent and rations when we take a weeklong trip into the wildness, I don’t start penalizing his character for it. I suppose I should, it would be within the rules of the system, but it is clearly not something that would add to the enjoyment of the player. I like to let my players enjoy the game for what they’d like it to be, I personally love diving into all the micromanagement because that’s part of what I love about it. If they do not enjoy that part, I don’t feel the need to really push the issue.

That’s my 2cp.


Deussu wrote:
You normally need to drop your backpack to be able to search it. One move action to do that, the other to retrieve the item = full round.

I can't find a rule either way about dropping backpacks.

Bag of Holding: "Retrieving a specific item from a bag of holding is a move action, unless the bag contains more than an ordinary backpack would hold, in which case retrieving a specific item is a full-round action."

This implies that removing an item from a regular backpack would not take a full-round action. No mention of wearing it, and it does not have an item slot. (Same with the Haversack)

Draw or Sheathe a Weapon: "If your weapon or weapon-like object is stored in a pack or otherwise out of easy reach, treat this action as retrieving a stored item."

Removing an object stored in a pack is the same action as Retrieving a stored item.

Manipulate an Item: "Moving or manipulating an item is usually a move action. This includes retrieving or putting away a stored item, picking up an item, moving a heavy object, and opening a door. Examples of this kind of action, along with whether they incur an attack of opportunity, are given in Table: Actions in Combat."

And, as above, Retrieving a stored item is a Move Action that provokes.

Also, by adding actions to remove a pack, you're effectively punishing players for having packs. There's no rule that says they need a pack to store their items, and many characters don't buy one. The only reason for a backpack is roleplay, just like a bedroll. Do you cause players who are awakened in the night to spend an extra action to get out of their bedroll, while the players that didn't buy and carry one don't?

5/5 5/55/55/5

Breaking out 6 excel spreadsheets and trying to figure out if someone is 3 pounds over the weight limit doesn't strike me as fun.

Shadow Lodge 2/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Players are expected to self enforce some of the rules of the game. I don't count how many spells someone has cast and I don't bother with other aspects of their characters because I trust players to be honest. If I do suspect something, I might say something to remind them of their obligation to follow the rules, but I've never done a full blow audit on anyone.

As for carrying capacity, sometimes it's fairly obvious a character ignored the weight rules and I have called players on that. Both times it's happened, it was with players who dumped strength. I just told them flat out that I expected them to follow the carrying capacity rules and let them figure out how to fix it. They did about 15 seconds of math and dropped a few items and it was done.

Just reminding players that the rules exist and giving them the chance to self police is usually enough.

* Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 4

0gre wrote:
Just reminding players that the rules exist and giving them the chance to self police is usually enough.

In my home AP campaigns this works for me. They're not dumb. Once they know the GM cares, it often self-corrects.

Silver Crusade 4/5

Yeah, when it comes to encumbrance, it's really only players with dumped str who have to worry about it. With my lower str characters, I've actually refrained from buying rope and grappling hooks when creating the characters because of the weight limitations, assuming someone else in any group would have that stuff. But I never bothered to figure out the weight of equipment for my barbarian who started with 19 str.

Although, ironically, his raging carrying capacity came up last weekend. The group was trapped in a deep cavern surrounded by rivers of lava, and we only had one fly potion we could use to get out. Raging, my strength is 25, so max carrying capacity would be 800 lbs - enough to carry the whole group (3 other PCs) and their gear while flying and raging. I actually did the math on how far I could carry that heavy a load if we rested to get all my rounds of rage back before heading out. As it turns out, there was a secret exit that we discovered, and my plan turned out to be unnecessary. But I still think it was funny to visualize such a plan.

Liberty's Edge 1/5

Unless I see something suspect, I generally trust the honor of the players.

A couple weeks ago, I felt a fellow player crossed the line playing a 'neutral' character who was, in reality, evil. And I've been thinking very hard about what I would do if I were the GM if such a character graced my table.

By this, I don't mean the wicked act that can be expected from neutral or even a good character. By this I mean massacring bystanders in a crowd so you have corpses for animate dead, rape, graphic torture etc; an act that wasn't toying with this line between neutral and evil, but the kind of act, that just by doing it, you couldn't be anything other than evil.

And yes, it bothers me, because no matter how I react, banning the character from the session, warning him, writing something on the character sheet, I may be perceived as the 'bad guy'.

Sovereign Court 4/5

How is one supposed to retrieve an item from a backpack, if the backpack is worn on one's back? To me it's only logical for one to first remove it from their backs and then search for the item. It's not like you store essential items on the bottom of you pack, right?

And I get the general consensus that people leave encumbrance rules to the players, which is good IMO. What I'm now interested is whether you care about what they are carrying. Especially the sleeping necessities like bedroll, (tent), maybe a blanket and such. Skip em or smack the player with extra hours of sleep or fatigue the next morning? This example, of course, is a bit exaggerated.

To me being specific about equipment adds to the realism and, to me, better depicts the character inside my head. A clearer image, if you will.

Grand Lodge 5/5 ****

My first character is a wizard, Str7. He has mobility from low level and high acrobatics to move in battle. Light Encumbrance is crucial. I took great care to stay low enough.
When I started in my very first game I had a backpack and a sack with items distributed.

The first action was to ask the fighter - can you carry this sack for me. So half my items would need at least two rounds and corporation to retrieve.

So as player I advocate self policing.

As GM I assume you are right unless I spot something problematic. I always reserve the right to enforce a rule.

Having said this - I think reading on another thread about a laughed at character - I just realize a rule I never enforced and for which I need to nudge players. I guess the majority of players around here playing clerics either bought a holy symbol at level one and forgot about it or don't have one.

Might be worthwhile checking and ensuring it gets rectified.

What I never do is as GM to spring this mid game and cripple a character.

Sovereign Court 4/5

Thod wrote:
Having said this - I think reading on another thread about a laughed at character - I just realize a rule I never enforced and for which I need to nudge players. I guess the majority of players around here playing clerics either bought a holy symbol at level one and forgot about it or don't have one.

Birthmark is an excellent trait for that particular reason. You can't forget to bring it along, it can't be disarmed, sundered, or lost.

Grand Lodge 5/5 ****

Deussu

You miss the point I tried to make. You started the thread about how strict we are enforcing uncommon/seldom used rules.

There is a rule that a) a cleric needs a holy symbol to cast and b) that he needs to use it while casting. But I haven't seen it enforced in games I played (or GMed) for a long time.

PS: just trying to find the exact wording but haven't yet found it under cleric nor holy symbol. And the description under holy symbol states that a paladin needs on as well.

PPS: just found it. Seems only necessary for channeling. It raises the question - which cleric or paladin with shield is sheeting his/her weapon in combat to channel. Might be one of these rules you might not always enforce.

Dark Archive 5/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber

Any spell with DF in the components requires the pressence of the holy symbol as well. It will replace most (but not all) F or M components in dual arcane/divine spells. Some spells (restoration chain, resurrection chain) have expensive material components, and require a DF.

Grand Lodge 1/5

Deussu wrote:

And I get the general consensus that people leave encumbrance rules to the players, which is good IMO. What I'm now interested is whether you care about what they are carrying. Especially the sleeping necessities like bedroll, (tent), maybe a blanket and such. Skip em or smack the player with extra hours of sleep or fatigue the next morning? This example, of course, is a bit exaggerated.

As a GM I don't want to worry about things like do they character have a bedroll or not - of course I should in game terms but it would take too much management and cost on the fluency of the game.

As a player however - I would never leave home without it. When I try to come up with a character its NOT the game functions that drives my shopping list. Its what do I feel that person would have. Everyone who has to sleep on the ground from time to time WOULD get some kind of bedroll (leaf bed what ever) otherwise they simply wouldn't last the week. Any homeless you see in the streets take care of that issue, any boy scout sleeping in the woods. Basically any sane person would be carrying a bedroll (or similiar) so do all of my character. Weight is a problem but rather have a crappy armour that sleep badly every night.

Sovereign Court 4/5

Thod wrote:

Deussu

You miss the point I tried to make. You started the thread about how strict we are enforcing uncommon/seldom used rules.

There is a rule that a) a cleric needs a holy symbol to cast and b) that he needs to use it while casting. But I haven't seen it enforced in games I played (or GMed) for a long time.

PS: just trying to find the exact wording but haven't yet found it under cleric nor holy symbol. And the description under holy symbol states that a paladin needs on as well.

PPS: just found it. Seems only necessary for channeling. It raises the question - which cleric or paladin with shield is sheeting his/her weapon in combat to channel. Might be one of these rules you might not always enforce.

I was merely mentioning the Birthmark trait in case you happen to look at a cleric's character sheet and don't spot a holy symbol. Birthmark is a holy symbol. I understood what you meant, and it's an excellent point.

You could count spell component pouch in the same bunch. No eschew materials or a spell component pouch and the spell requires material components? It's bad luck to be you!

Silver Crusade 4/5

Thod wrote:
It raises the question - which cleric or paladin with shield is sheeting his/her weapon in combat to channel. Might be one of these rules you might not always enforce.

This is why I wear a buckler on my arm instead of carrying a shield in my hand. I have my scimitar in my right hand, my buckler on my left arm, and my symbol of Sarenrae in my left hand at all times in battle. And a spare holy symbol on a chain around my neck, where I can grab it quickly, in case my main one is disarmed or sundered from me.

The Exchange 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

many people do it right (surely every one here - as I hurry to check my PCs), but often people forget. And just as often they are beginers and were never taught.

I can still remember my sisters first character. She was the very strong not so bright 1/2 orc and had saved enough money to by a Comp. Long Bow, for her high strength. We had told her how to cost in Master Work ...
SO, in the middle of her first game after buying her new bow, combat starts at range and she whips out her bow. Looks like it's going to be a long shooting match and someone asks if she has 2 quivers of arrows. Her expression was priceless..."you have to buy arrows too?!" So she doesn't miss a beat, draws her bastard sword and charges into combat. Now years later that line still brings smiles around her table...

2/5 *

Deussu wrote:
How strict are you in following these less used rules? Would you, as a GM, enforce these and apply appropriate circumstance penalties and bonuses?

With encumberance, it's all about noticing the problem, and the chance of that is super low at a convention, and higher for store and home play. If their Str is low (12 or less), I might look into it more if they have armor etc. Or an annoying amount of provisions.

I have to admit, I'm annoyed when someone pulls out a 10' pole when they haven't said they've been carrying it (in their hands) the entire time. Very annoyed. You'd be running into things and banging that thing around quite a bit, without a Haversack at least.

I sometimes track spells and Ki, because I find player conveniently "forget" these things. Yeah right, frickin cheaters. :) I'm not sure what a proper punishment is yet though for "forgetting".

I track consumables used, because players again never replenish o/w.

I track diseases and stat drains, but honestly it's sometimes hard to remember (even when written down) when wrapping up at the end of a session.

Another noticable mistake is that a lot of GMs allow PCs to fire missile weapons through squares occupied by PCs, without a cover penalty (+4 AC). You can't do that without the feat "Improved Precise Shot".

Another thing is when PCs drink potions or use other consumables, you need a free hand. This is a pain for TWF and shield users, because they have to drop something (or spend a move action sheathing). Clerics are also in a jam, since they often want a shield, their holy symbol, maybe spell component, and maybe a weapon.

So yes, details matter, but I wouldn't sweat about encumberance unless it's flagrant abuse.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Jason S wrote:
Another thing is when PCs drink potions or use other consumables, you need a free hand.

For that matter, I see a lot of GMs not say anything when a PC who was fighting a second ago says "Standard action, drink Potion X, then move action do XYZ".

Did you pay for a spring-loaded wrist sheath? No? Then you spend your move action bringing out that potion.

Grand Lodge 5/5

Jason S wrote:
I track consumables used, because players again never replenish o/w.

I do. ;)

Jason S wrote:


I track diseases and stat drains, but honestly it's sometimes hard to remember (even when written down) when wrapping up at the end of a session.

Agreed. I try to write it down, but still wind up forgetting sometimes.

Jason S wrote:


Clerics are also in a jam, since they often want a shield, their holy symbol, maybe spell component, and maybe a weapon.

How does PFS handle a character who wants the holy symbol mounted on the front of the shield, hanging around the neck, or on a helmet so that its always presented and doesnt need to be drawn. Simililarly, how would you(Not 'you', Jason S, 'you' in general) handle someone who wanted the holy symbol to be in the hilt of their weapon, like in Gamers: Dorkness Rising? Would that kind of stuff be considered reskinning?

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

As a table GM, I would be happy to have a cleric mount her holy symbol on her shield or the hilt of her weapon. That's a cleric who is proud to fight on behalf of her god, and who marches unashamed of her devotion everywhere she goes.

Even a cleric of Sarenrae, entering into Taldor.
Even a cleric entering into Rahadoum.
Even a priest visiting a cleric of an opposing faith, under a flag of truce and negotiation.
Even a cleric of Urgathoa into, well, most anywhere decent.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

godsDMit wrote:
How does PFS handle a character who wants the holy symbol mounted on the front of the shield, hanging around the neck, or on a helmet so that its always presented and doesnt need to be drawn. Simililarly, how would you(Not 'you', Jason S, 'you' in general) handle someone who wanted the holy symbol to be in the hilt of their weapon, like in Gamers: Dorkness Rising? Would that kind of stuff be considered reskinning?

I guess an argument could be made that attaching your holy symbol to your shield/helmet would be "crafting", but honestly, I'm satisfied as long as the player's holy symbol is out in the open.

Silver Crusade 5/5

Werent there rules that a favored weapon of your god was a "holy symbol" and you could engrave your symbol on your shield and channel through your shield? Or is this 3.0/5 memory slipping in?

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Dan Luckett wrote:
Werent there rules that a favored weapon of your god was a "holy symbol" and you could engrave your symbol on your shield and channel through your shield? Or is this 3.0/5 memory slipping in?

I've heard of no such rule.

3/5

A cleric is not as bad off in terms of needing to hold things as some people make it sound, since 90% of divine spells have no material component, only a divine focus. Or you could just use a light shield so that you can hold things in your hand. Also in 3.5 at least there were several ways to make your shield/weapon count as your holy symbol. Are there any PFS legal ways to do this, or is this a big oversight in the character options? If it is missing, it sounds like a great thing for Ultimate Equipment to fix...

I generally don't care about rules like encumbrance, or the myriad of other nitpicky, anal rules that people are mentioning. The only time that I have checked encumbrance rules in years is when a character wanted to lift up an unconscious NPC and expected to be able to run across a large courtyard. In PFS play, I know that I have to be more anal about enforcing things like this, but there are some things that you just have to trust the players about. I personally find it kind of condescending when DMs nitpick about these things that are the player's prerogative. I know that it is their job to a certain extent, and all of these things are rules in the game, but nitpicking still does remove from the fun of game, just marginally.

EDIT: It seems really silly if there is no way to have your holy symbol on your equipment, since most of the divine spellcasters pictured in Paizo products have lots of holy symbols on their equipment. Not to mention the fact that Iomedae's and Torag's holy symbols, for example, are weapons. Thirdly, the image of a cleric channeling with their sword or with their shield is cool and its kind of weird that it does not seem to be mechanically supported.

1 to 50 of 66 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / How strict are you? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.