I can't find it. I can't even find the section saying you can't modify monsters, but I am sure it exist. That should have been in the "Table Variation" section IMHO, but I did not see it there.I check the PFS guide. There is no restriction on being held to the tactics in the book. It does not affect me right now, but it might later on.I don't have it in front of me to quote from, but it says something like you're not allowed to alter/ignore any written, published document relating to the campaign (such as the scenario itself). Also, Mike Brock and Mark Moreland (the ones in charge) have repeatedly stated in no uncertain terms that scenarios are to be run as written.
But again, the written tactics generally aren't very restrictive, and are often what you'd do anyway.
Found it: Table Variation, page 26:
As a Pathfinder Society GM, you have the right and
responsibility to make whatever calls you feel are
necessary at your table to ensure that everyone has
a fair and fun experience. This does not mean you
can contradict rules or restrictions outlined in this
document, a published Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
source, errata document, or official FAQ on paizo.com,
but only you can judge what is right at your table for cases
not covered in these sources.So basically, you're not allowed to contradict anything that's written, but outside of outright contradictions, you have total freedom to do what's necessary for a great game.
I saw that and it says nothing about not modifying a scenario. In a game as technical as this one, not modifying a scenario should be directly stated. I don't consider a scenario to be a "a published Pathfinder Roleplaying Game source".
I am now aware that Paizo might include scenarios in that category. If I were in PFS I would probably start a thread to ask where it was pointed out, just to make it clear.
Anyone else hoping that this guy frequents these boards? Problem is he is probably oblivious that he is the topic.
Yeah, I think it is the responcibility of the DM to make sure that everyone has a fun gaming experience. Do not cater to a player who is being a jerk at everyone's expense. I understand giving him the benefit of the doubt, having a conversation with him pre-game and trying him out. However, beyond that, with so many people having a negative experience with him it is time to start the bannings.
Oh, also... Ashiel:
Your BBEG's underling can't spring attack and cast a touch spell in the same turn.
Does he judge? Contribute in some way?
-Pain
Not that I remember. I think I've only seen him play in games, though I could be wrong about that.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I saw that and it says nothing about not modifying a scenario. In a game as technical as this one, not modifying a scenario should be directly stated. I don't consider a scenario to be a "a published Pathfinder Roleplaying Game source".
That's an... interesting stance to take.
I am now aware that Paizo might include scenarios in that category. If I were in PFS I would probably start a thread to ask where it was pointed out, just to make it clear.
Mark and I discussed this. The scenarios are to be GMed as written. This isn't a grey area. I'm more concerned with a GM who thinks he can adequately adjust a scenario to better challenge the party and then kills PCs because extra creatures were added, or harder DCs were assigned to traps, or a coup de grace not written in the tactics, or any number of other circumstances a GM could change. There also is the added consideration that if a GM increases the difficulty of a scenario, you are also burning up more resources of the PCs that other players didn't have to, thus causing the PCs at your adjusted scenario table to spend more gold than they should have had to. It opens a Pandora's Box that just doesn't need to be opened. GM the scenarios as written please.
To focus it down a bit:
The scenarios are to be GMed as written. This isn't a grey area.
Dominate person.
"trip the rest of your party"
Yeeees master....
My DM just did this with a NPC the other night. Pain in the neck.
Anyway, AC sucks. There are a ton of ways to bypass it.
Magic Missile and Swarms have already been mentioned as completely unavoidable, and I'm sure there's nothing he can do about Swarms that aren't affected by weapon damage.
If he has a low Touch AC (Probably not if he's a monk) then hit him up with Ray spells - or Guns if you're using them. If his touch AC is too high, then hit him with Ray Spells from an invisible target. Close range touch attacks like Calcific touch also apply.
Besides that you can find out what his weak saving throw is, because there are a lot of spells that can really mess him up and even do damage that target something other than Reflex.
|
Dominate person.
"trip the rest of your party"
Yeeees master....
My DM just did this with a NPC the other night. Pain in the neck.
Anyway, AC sucks. There are a ton of ways to bypass it.
Magic Missile and Swarms have already been mentioned as completely unavoidable, and I'm sure there's nothing he can do about Swarms that aren't affected by weapon damage.
If he has a low Touch AC (Probably not if he's a monk) then hit him up with Ray spells - or Guns if you're using them. If his touch AC is too high, then hit him with Ray Spells from an invisible target. Close range touch attacks like Calcific touch also apply.
Besides that you can find out what his weak saving throw is, because there are a lot of spells that can really mess him up and even do damage that target something other than Reflex.
GM would have to look through every PF scenario (which costs 3.99 each), to look for each of these and then present to this one player?
As I said before, this is a GM issue that requires them to speak with the player and hope there is positive dialogue. The player cannot and should not be dealt with in game. This is an out of game issue.
There was a post on this board not so long ago that offered a suggestion for handling a problem player. It involved passing out a number of cards, with colors on them. While I forget the exact details, a player could raise the card if they were not having fun.
That is, if this problem player was pushing the spotlight, another player could raise their card. The DM then intervenes and asks, "Okay. Why are you not having fun?"
"Because Player A interrupts constantly."
"Player A, your interrupting constantly is interfering with the enjoyment of the game for everyone else. You're not to do that."
This may or may not suit the needs of the game.
We had a player once who was of a similar mindset. She tried to find every exploit she could. Come to think of it, we have two of them. They do the same sorts of interruptions, and have an attitude that "we know more than you." It's disrespectful of the DMs, and they've been asked to stop.
We've required one of these players to leave because after a year's worth of effort, it could not be resolved any other way. So far, the second has quieted down, but given their history, I'm a little more watchful than I otherwise would be, if only out of a sense of protection of the other players.
The "I know more than the DM, and I will prove it" attitude is harmful to the the social aspect of the game, which in my own thoughts, is the most important aspect. When we enter into a game, we enter into an unspoken, social contract with other players at the table. This contract states:
- I am here for the enjoyment of the game
- I will not be a jerk
- I will respect the decisions of the DM
Rules-lawyering can be a fun pasttime. I'm going to propose a different word though, when it becomes a method of being disrespectful of the DM, of that social contract.
Let's call it "being a jerk."
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks again, folks. Those of you suggesting it's an out-of-game problem are correct. I will have a private chat with the player at our weekly Monday game before things start.
I appreciate you all hashing this out from your various viewpoints - it's great to have a community of devil's advocates to give me a reality check before I take an undoable action.
Lamplighter, I know it is kinda silly to live vicariously through the people we have given advice to but I am interested as to how it turns out. Would one of you mind posting to let us know?
|
|
The player will probably take it badly, but he needs to be informed. He's going look at this as people ganging up on him and piling on, but unfortunately, it seems like the vast majority is against him.
My advise for you to give him is to build really difficult to pull off builds or bad builds to mediocre level. Try to have him help players with their builds, if they want advise. It's important to try and channel his ability into something that helps and not hinder.
Or if you don't think he'll be agreeable to that, then take the harsh/soft position depending on if you think that will help him realize his situation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm still not sure why the GM should be the one to talk to him instead of the unhappy players in question.
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Update: he cancelled last night, so I can talk to him this week.
His spidey-senses are good...
I'm still not sure why the GM should be the one to talk to him instead of the unhappy players in question.
Most likely for the simple reason that Lamplighter is the only one willing to be confrontational in this regard. Everyone else will simply "suffer" by cancelling any table they see they share with him, voicing their opinions in a very passive aggressive way, instead (and without actually having to tell the guy he's a jerk). That, of course, will hurt Lamplighter's events in different (and far broader) ways. Thus, Lamplighter is willing to step in and actually deal with it. Which makes sense.
|
|
It's not a good situation regardless.
If there's a group confronting him, it becomes mob mentality and intimidation.
If just one person confronting him, it's denial of problem and lack of evidence of problem.
And confront is even the wrong term to use when talking to X player, because it's implying a strong negative meeting.
Unfortunately, there isn't much you can do about the rules lawyering... even people that have admitted they don't play the game like to rules lawyer. If he's creating that much of a hostile atmosphere, talk to him and let hime know that you'd appreciate if he could keep the discussion about the miniscule rules til after the game, but that you appreciate when he speaks up regarding a major rule; but there have been complaints about the length of the game due to the constant interruptions. Then if he's still disruptfull you can kick him, but you've given him fair warningNo, there is plenty we can do with rules lawyers, FluffyKitty. Like you said above.
When I'm judge, here is exactly how I handle rules lawyers (PFS or not):
1) At the third instance of lawyering, I politely make it clear that I know what I'm doing and if I need assistance with the rules, I will ask for opinions.
2) At fourth instance (or first 'argument'), I invite the player *away* from the table for a private discussion about how I run things and what I consider to be proper etiquette at my tables. I keep things calm and friendly. It's *very* important to do this away from the table: it minimizes the drama and ego and loss of face for everyone.
3) At fifth instance, I invite him away from the table and ask him to leave the game. In PFS, I'll give him a chronicle regardless of where we are in the scenario (just because I don't want the jerk to ruin anyone else's fun playing the mod again).
4) I return to the table and run the mod, deflecting any questions about what happened to the end of the scenario.I wish PFS GMs and local coordinators would stop feeling so helpless when it comes to bad players. I wish they would realize that they are *NOT* powerless and only they can set good examples for good play.
As GMs, we can dismiss players from our tables.
I encourage and promote good team play.
I discourage and nullify bad play because I don't want my new players to...
Two questions:
do you act like this even if you are proven wrong?would you like a real judge in a real trial (or any other authority figure, such as a teacher) act like this with you?
|
Two questions:
do you act like this even if you are proven wrong?
would you like a real judge in a real trial (or any other authority figure, such as a teacher) act like this with you?
Can you clarify, gustavo?
1) Wrong about what?
2) I do expect people in authority to act appropriately (especially when it is their job) to protect the interests of the group.
-Pain
I agree with Painlord.
The old swedish roleplaying system Drakar & Demoner had the following to say on game-mastering (paraphrased):
"There are two important rules:
1: The game master is always right
2: If, by any chance, the game master is wrong, see rule 1"
Dominate person.
"trip the rest of your party"
Yeeees master....
My DM just did this with a NPC the other night. Pain in the neck.
Anyway, AC sucks. There are a ton of ways to bypass it.
Magic Missile and Swarms have already been mentioned as completely unavoidable, and I'm sure there's nothing he can do about Swarms that aren't affected by weapon damage.
If he has a low Touch AC (Probably not if he's a monk) then hit him up with Ray spells - or Guns if you're using them. If his touch AC is too high, then hit him with Ray Spells from an invisible target. Close range touch attacks like Calcific touch also apply.
Besides that you can find out what his weak saving throw is, because there are a lot of spells that can really mess him up and even do damage that target something other than Reflex.
GM would have to look through every PF scenario (which costs 3.99 each), to look for each of these and then present to this one player?
As I said before, this is a GM issue that requires them to speak with the player and hope there is positive dialogue. The player cannot and should not be dealt with in game. This is an out of game issue.
Not familiar with PFS rules.
But it sounds like I wouldn't want to be a DM in it.
I have a Summoner in my current game that is outdamaging the rest of the party and making some of the characters feel meaningless.
The solution: Attack the summoner, not the Eidolon.
It's at least made him a little scaredy cat now. Well, that and I've started using multiple mobs with damage reduction to make the overshadowed party members feel a little more relevant while he's still turning one or two of them into a puff of red smoke on his turn.
The fact is, it's impossible to power game yourself into invincibility... for the most part. If someone wants to overspecialize in a single aspect of the game, just show them that they have a weakness occasionally. Not necessarily kill them or steal their thunder, but make them realize they're part of a team once in a while.
And seriously... AC sucks. It's one of FOUR defenses, and it can be bypassed so easily (by the DM) it's not funny.
|
I agree with Painlord.
The old swedish roleplaying system Drakar & Demoner had the following to say on game-mastering (paraphrased):
"There are two important rules:
1: The game master is always right
2: If, by any chance, the game master is wrong, see rule 1"
I don't always agree with Painlord, but in this case I think he's got it pretty much right. He tries very hard to work *with* the player, and persuade him to fit in at the table. But if that doesn't work, he (PL) doen't shirk his responsibility as a GM - he'll act in the interests of the table as a whole.
That's how authority figures *do* act. Teachers will send an unruly student out of the classroom. Judges have a wide discretion to impose penalties (up to and including imprisonment) for behaviour which, in their opinion can be viewed as contempt of court.
Update: he cancelled last night, so I can talk to him this week.
His spidey-senses are good...
Most likely for the simple reason that Lamplighter is the only one willing to be confrontational in this regard. Everyone else will simply "suffer" by cancelling any table they see they share with him, voicing their opinions in a very passive aggressive way, instead (and without actually having to tell the guy he's a jerk). That, of course, will hurt Lamplighter's events in different (and far broader) ways. Thus, Lamplighter is willing to step in and actually deal with it. Which makes sense.
I'm still not sure why the GM should be the one to talk to him instead of the unhappy players in question.
I have something to say about that. Even though I know about the PC in question, there was another who was just as bad. I thought to myself, "I can't badmouth the PC behind their back if I can't make him/her better. The problem with this player, among other things, was that he/she didn't know the rules, and kept on asking what can my character do. So I sat down with the PC and tried to help. It lasted all of one session before that person ignored me. I don't know what to do. I tried and I made sure that I didn't sound confrontational.
For me (and not necessarily referring to the player that the OP is talking about, but any disruptive/powergaming/non-contributing player), scenarios are too precious to allow to be ruined by bad players, bad builds, rule lawyers, or selfish players.
Selfishness. Painlord hit it on the head (of the nail). The player may be *great* at building characters but if they were confronted with their "enjoyment" costing all the other players at the table their enjoyment of the game and still think they are "in the right" or "doing nothing wrong" then you have a selfish player.
|
|
For me (and not necessarily referring to the player that the OP is talking about, but any disruptive/powergaming/non-contributing player), scenarios are too precious to allow to be ruined by bad players, bad builds, rule lawyers, or selfish players.Selfishness. Painlord hit it on the head (of the nail). The player may be *great* at building characters but if they were confronted with their "enjoyment" costing all the other players at the table their enjoyment of the game and still think they are "in the right" or "doing nothing wrong" then you have a selfish player.
Oh, thread resurrection. My favorite! We never did find out what happened to the OP, did we?
On this topic and going all the way back to the original post, I was talking to a quasi-local VC about community building at Kublacon. We were discussing why some regions have tons of judge support and some regions don't.
We were agreeing on some points when he said: "If you want your boat (i.e. your PFS community) to go, you gotta scrape off the barnacles."
I believe that to be truer now more than ever. There are some players who need to be asked to play someplace else than with your group. You do not have to cater to people who do nothing other than play and don't contribute back to the community. For the good of your community, you gotta scrape off the barnacles once in a while.
Is it bad that I read through the whole thread looking for that massive AC build? XD
Oh, on topic? I'm assuming you've worked it out. If not, just have a talk with the guy. srsly. Too often I see people jumping the gun and saying "Kick him out! Put him in his place! Crucify him!" (OK, not that last one) But I really believe that almost ALL of the problems that people bring up in regards to players or GMs can be fixed with a one on one talk, whether that be through email, phone, or just before or after the session.
One of the worst aspects of our (gaming) culture is how confrontational we tend to be. Add to that a stereotypical lack of social skills, and a lot of problems that would be easy fixes turn in to huge fights.