|
And if it is a diplomacy check they are trying to make that isn’t dictated in the scenario?
Just because a Scenario doesn’t indicate you can negotiate with an NPC, doesn’t mean as GM I can’t allow it. “Sorry, you can’t negotiate with this guy, he’s a computer mob with no soul or personality, he just regurgitates the information the scenario needs him to.”
Alright, you really need to knock that off.
I do not want a computer game.
I have not advocated a computer game, MMO, or some other strawman of a heartless, soulless, locked onto the tracks choose your own adventure book. I have not hinted at it. I have not implied it. I have not suggested it, so your repeated attempts to cast that as the ultimate goal or even result of anything I'm saying are completely disingenuous fabrications on your part.
On both sides of the screen i LOVE out of the box solutions. I like cutting goridans knot by hacking through diplomacy situations and I have most of my characters treat the dungeon inhabitants like real people. My druid blew 50 gold getting someone to babysit a rabid dog because he was in the middle of the adventure and routinely holds an action to cast stabalize on any dropped foes.
So as a GM, I would prefer to actually roleplay the encounter. You know, interact with each other based on our characters personalities, traits, and stats?
You're not doing that. For all your vaunted and allegedly superior role play you're breaking it down into a more simplistic numbers game than even you're accusing me of. The name of your game is "whats your charisma score".
But if as a player you are very eloquent, but your character rarely washes and picks his nose in public,
Then you're punishing people for at least describing their low charisma, which is more steps than some people take.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Dude?
Ignoring the snark and extra-gaming nature of the "Your Charisma sucks, I'll tack a minus 5 on it because I think you're a min-maxing twink" for the moment, there *is* a rule (at least IIRC).
"Circumstance bonus" You can apply a bonus or a penalty for trying. If I'm running a table and the character acts 'in character' I can apply a bonus, or if the player comes up with a 'clever plan' I can apply a bonus, though I keep it to +/-2 max.
Positive bonus: "I am impressed by your loyalty. When I write my report to the baron, I will tell him how reluctant you are to leave your post. Now go, and know your loyalty will be rewarded."
Neutral (no bonus/penalty): "You need to come quickly, there is a fight breaking out! Guards, do something!"
Negative penalty: "I don't know, I'll make up some kind of lie."
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I must have missed Curaigh's post the first time, but I dont think he was meaning that is a penalty he applies (I'm basing that line of thought on the fact that he doesnt have any stars, meaning even if he is GMing, it isnt much), just a thought on how it could be handled.
Could be. Hence my fervent plea for clarification a ways upthread. ;)
As for Alexander's, I was taking that to mean that is who the NPC begins speaking to first.
No, he said that person is "tackling the diplomacy" and that other people can only assist.
The NPC isnt going to automatically know who is the most diplomatic and go straight for them. They'll go to whoever it closest, the most physically attractive to them (gender based, not Cha based), most impressive looking, etc. I think it was supposed to be a starting point.
Maybe (again, I did ask for clarification), but it really doesn't sound that way from what he actually said.
|
I’m fair though. If I notice as a player you aren’t very eloquent, but you are playing a Bard, I’ll let you roll and take that result, describing it as you wooing him wonderously. But if as a player you are very eloquent, but your character rarely washes and picks his nose in public, then I will likely just let the diplomacy fail without a roll, because as a player you are being disingenuous with me.Your example is the antithesis of how the DM should behave. I would also not call it fair. If the CHA dumped character wants to make a diplomacy roll, they get to, and might succeed even if the chance of that is vanishingly small. It is not appropriate to make up reasons to make them autofail because you don't like their build. That is just my philosophy of DMing. Yours is obviously different.
I give bonuses and penalties based on roleplay all the time. There is precedent for this being allowed in PFS, because many scenarios allow the GM to apply subjective penalties or bonuses based on table roleplay.
For example (and this actually happened):
Gross and Ugly roleplays Gross and Ugly, but gives a heartfelt, albeit rude, speech and request.
I allowed a Diplomacy roll, and allowed others to assist. They straight up rolled a Nat 20, so I didn’t’ even consider what the actual numbers were. I gave it to him.
NPC responded by talking to the other characters, “Your friend here is disgusting, but he makes a good case, I’ll help you.”
I f you are genuine with me, I’ll be accommodating.
If you are disingenuous, then I will take appropriate action there too.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
ANdrew CHristian: ok, so you're banhammering someone for the disparity between their characters low charisma and how they're playing it , not the low charisma itself?
Bingo. I was actually just about to chime in and say I think you're misunderstanding each other.
|
Or where Alexander_Damocles says he won't even let them decide who does the talking, rolling randomly to force a PC to take the lead even if they would know better.
As for Alexander's, I was taking that to mean that is who the NPC begins speaking to first. The NPC isnt going to automatically know who is the most diplomatic and go straight for them. They'll go to whoever it closest, the most physically attractive to them (gender based, not Cha based), most impressive looking, etc. I think it was supposed to be a starting point.
Exactly. If the party face wants to jump in, that is fine and can take over *after* the person first approached handles it.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Exactly. If the party face wants to jump in, that is fine and can take over *after* the person first approached handles it.Or where Alexander_Damocles says he won't even let them decide who does the talking, rolling randomly to force a PC to take the lead even if they would know better.
As for Alexander's, I was taking that to mean that is who the NPC begins speaking to first. The NPC isnt going to automatically know who is the most diplomatic and go straight for them. They'll go to whoever it closest, the most physically attractive to them (gender based, not Cha based), most impressive looking, etc. I think it was supposed to be a starting point.
Does stepping backwards and pointing at Dashing Bard as he steps up count as "handling it"? Or do you force the randomly-determined first PC to make a diplomacy check first?
Also, what if it's the PCs doing the approaching? Surely you don't make the decision for the PCs of who knocks on the NPC's door, do you?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Exactly. If the party face wants to jump in, that is fine and can take over *after* the person first approached handles it.Or where Alexander_Damocles says he won't even let them decide who does the talking, rolling randomly to force a PC to take the lead even if they would know better.
As for Alexander's, I was taking that to mean that is who the NPC begins speaking to first. The NPC isnt going to automatically know who is the most diplomatic and go straight for them. They'll go to whoever it closest, the most physically attractive to them (gender based, not Cha based), most impressive looking, etc. I think it was supposed to be a starting point.
Does stepping backwards and pointing at Dashing Bard as he steps up count as "handling it"? Or do you force the randomly-determined first PC to make a diplomacy check first?
Also, what if it's the PCs doing the approaching? Surely you don't make the decision for the PCs of who knocks on the NPC's door, do you?
I try to be flexible, but I also try to see diplomatic encounters as important and uncontrolled as combat.
In combat, the fighter with heavy armor and a load of hitpoints might really really want the enemy to come hit him, but they might not. The barbarian might want the enemy to make a charge lane for him, but they might not.
In diplomatic events, the bard might want the NPC to talk to him, but he might not.
|
|
ANdrew CHristian: ok, so you're banhammering someone for the disparity between their characters low charisma and how they're playing it , not the low charisma itself?yup
Ok, and what if they have a low charisma but a reasonable to high diplomacy score? A dwarf cleric with a 5 cha and one rank in diplomacy has the same diplomacy score as a handsome fighter with a charisma of 12 and no ranks.
Someone that specializes in public speaking might be able to play the difference between training and talent, but i can't, nor can most people.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I try to be flexible, but I also try to see diplomatic encounters as important and uncontrolled as combat.
In combat, the fighter with heavy armor and a load of hitpoints might really really want the enemy to come hit him, but they might not. The barbarian might want the enemy to make a charge lane for him, but they might not.
In diplomatic events, the bard might want the NPC to talk to him, but he might not.
Uh... In combat, the enemy wants to go and deal with the PC least capable of engaging them. They're looking for weak links. If that's your rationale for having an NPC walk past the diplomat to the thug, then you're doing the same thing: trying to play to the PCs' weaknesses. Doesn't that seem kind of inappropriate? (Unless the NPC has a reason to do so, of course.) It seems a bit too "GM versus Players" to force the PCs to try to "corner" an NPC into talking to Dashing Bard.
Are the PCs all standing still while an NPC approaches and decides whom to engage? Why couldn't Dashing walk forward to meet the NPC in the middle while everyone else stayed put? Did the NPC ambush them or something?
I'm having trouble understanding how your methods are believeable rather than metagamey. Clarification would be appreciated.
|
|
I try to be flexible, but I also try to see diplomatic encounters as important and uncontrolled as combat.
In combat, the fighter with heavy armor and a load of hitpoints might really really want the enemy to come hit him, but they might not. The barbarian might want the enemy to make a charge lane for him, but they might not.
In diplomatic events, the bard might want the NPC to talk to him, but he might not.
Uh... In combat, the enemy wants to go and deal with the PC least capable of engaging them. They're looking for weak links. If that's your rationale for having an NPC walk past the diplomat to the thug, then you're doing the same thing: trying to play to the PCs' weaknesses. Doesn't that seem kind of inappropriate? (Unless the NPC has a reason to do so, of course.) It seems a bit too "GM versus Players" to force the PCs to try to "corner" an NPC into talking to Dashing Bard.
Are the PCs all standing still while an NPC approaches and decides whom to engage? Why couldn't Dashing walk forward to meet the NPC in the middle while everyone else stayed put? Did the NPC ambush them or something?
I'm having trouble understanding how your methods are believeable rather than metagamey. Clarification would be appreciated.
It is a bit random, I admit. But it tends to get people other than the party face involved in diplomacy, instead of having the rest of the table nod off. Sometimes, I'll roll a d6 and ask that player if they would like to assist. I don't make them do so, but it tries to keep the rest of the table engaged. And in my experience, if a character is the party face, the player often has a good backstory already. If someone dumped charisma, they often don't have one. Suddenly having an NPC ask them a question can make them start to grow their character's personality.
All this aside, often the party face *is* the one to handle things, they just might not have been the one to start the conversation.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
ANdrew CHristian: ok, so you're banhammering someone for the disparity between their characters low charisma and how they're playing it , not the low charisma itself?yupOk, and what if they have a low charisma but a reasonable to high diplomacy score? A dwarf cleric with a 5 cha and one rank in diplomacy has the same diplomacy score as a handsome fighter with a charisma of 12 and no ranks.
Someone that specializes in public speaking might be able to play the difference between training and talent, but i can't, nor can most people.
At the risk of speaking for Andy, I believe people in this thread are using "guy with 7 CHA" as shorthand for "stereotypical guy with 7 CHA and no investment in social skills such that his final net mod to diplomacy is -2".
|
|
ANdrew CHristian: ok, so you're banhammering someone for the disparity between their characters low charisma and how they're playing it , not the low charisma itself?yupOk, and what if they have a low charisma but a reasonable to high diplomacy score? A dwarf cleric with a 5 cha and one rank in diplomacy has the same diplomacy score as a handsome fighter with a charisma of 12 and no ranks.
Someone that specializes in public speaking might be able to play the difference between training and talent, but i can't, nor can most people.
Every circumstance is its own animal, and I try to deal with things as they are in the moment. I can’t make a generalization for every possible consideration.
All I know is, that I enjoy roleplaying, I think my players enjoy my roleplaying, and often, I will make rulings strictly off the roleplaying.
Three NEVERS:
1) I never dock a faction mission based on roleplay alone (although sometimes roleplaying may enhance or detract from the roll depending on what the player chooses to do).
2) I never allow an entire mission to fail based on roleplay alone.
3) I never allow a character to die based on roleplay alone.
|
|
I’m fair though. If I notice as a player you aren’t very eloquent, but you are playing a Bard, I’ll let you roll and take that result, describing it as you wooing him wonderously. But if as a player you are very eloquent, but your character rarely washes and picks his nose in public, then I will likely just let the diplomacy fail without a roll, because as a player you are being disingenuous with me.
So, I have a Cha 7 PC, but, between ranks, traits, items, boons and feats, he still has a high Diplo skill, you will still force him to automatically fail at something he could easily succeed on with a Take 10?
Remember, Charisma has NOTHING to do with looks, manners or appearance, it is your ability to project leadership.
Wallflower over there might still wind up as the most intimidating person you have ever met, because, in addition to the -3 from his 5 Charisma, he gets to add his +5 from his 20 Strength to his Intimidation skill. Not counting things like ranks, class bonus, traits, etc.
Let me play my character, you play your NPCs.
|
|
Does stepping backwards and pointing at Dashing Bard as he steps up count as "handling it"? Or do you force the randomly-determined first PC to make a diplomacy check first?
This, mixed with Alexander's 'random person approached' thing just gave me a new perspective on Diplomacy in the game, I think.
I think in the bit you listed above, the guy who points should be making an Aid Another roll.
Example:
NPC walks into an office and approaches the front desk.
Mr. Low-Cha Front Desk Watcher is rude/smells funny/has wrinkley clothes/doesnt say anything but just points/*insert other trope about low Cha people*, but signs NPC in.
Dashing guy meets with NPC who is amazed by *nat 20 Diplomacy*, but when he leaves is still isnt happy about their interaction with Mr. Low Cha, which gives a -2 to the whole experience.
So really, I'm not seeing what Alex was talking about as much different than how real life works.
As far as the whole 'what about if the PCs are the one approaching', I would assume in a non-combat situation the Face would have no reason to be hiding behind Mr. Low Cha Fighter, so it's probably just whoever opens the door/talks first/is in front.
I'm not necessarily saying I would do this in a game, but I wouldnt call it out of line either.
|
|
I’m fair though. If I notice as a player you aren’t very eloquent, but you are playing a Bard, I’ll let you roll and take that result, describing it as you wooing him wonderously. But if as a player you are very eloquent, but your character rarely washes and picks his nose in public, then I will likely just let the diplomacy fail without a roll, because as a player you are being disingenuous with me.So, I have a Cha 7 PC, but, between ranks, traits, items, boons and feats, he still has a high Diplo skill, you will still force him to automatically fail at something he could easily succeed on with a Take 10?
Remember, Charisma has NOTHING to do with looks, manners or appearance, it is your ability to project leadership.
Wallflower over there might still wind up as the most intimidating person you have ever met, because, in addition to the -3 from his 5 Charisma, he gets to add his +5 from his 20 Strength to his Intimidation skill. Not counting things like ranks, class bonus, traits, etc.
Let me play my character, you play your NPCs.
Maybe you should read the other responses to his post, as this has already been brought up...
|
|
So, I have a Cha 7 PC, but, between ranks, traits, items, boons and feats, he still has a high Diplo skill, you will still force him to automatically fail at something he could easily succeed on with a Take 10?
I think all of those additions would effectively disqualify your Cha 7 PC from being one who "rarely washes and picks his nose in public". And, from what Andrew's already said, I don't think the character you just described is the kind of character Andrew (or, for that matter, any of the rest of us) is talking about.
You may have "dumped" CHA, but you did other things and spent resources to make sure that the character can be eloquent and well-spoken. Fine. You're not the player who dumped CHA, put nothing into interpersonal skills (and, thus, is still sitting at a -2 overall Diplomacy modifier), but then plays that character as chatty, well-spoken, and diplomatic.
|
|
So, I have a Cha 7 PC, but, between ranks, traits, items, boons and feats, he still has a high Diplo skill, you will still force him to automatically fail at something he could easily succeed on with a Take 10?
I think all of those additions would effectively disqualify your Cha 7 PC from being one who "rarely washes and picks his nose in public". And, from what Andrew's already said, I don't think the character you just described is the kind of character Andrew (or, for that matter, any of the rest of us) is talking about.
You may have "dumped" CHA, but you did other things and spent resources to make sure that the character can be eloquent and well-spoken. Fine. You're not the player who dumped CHA, put nothing into interpersonal skills (and, thus, is still sitting at a -2 overall Diplomacy modifier), but then plays that character as chatty, well-spoken, and diplomatic.
He was forced into it. Damn Andoran diplomatic missions. :( Oh, well, I remember, back in his early days, before he had done much, if any, training in Diplo, he only managed to make a mission because I rolled a 20, and had also healed the people I was trying to diplomacize.
"Big, ugly archer hurt us, but then heal us, and ask us, more-or-less politely, to deliver a letter? Weird."
|
|
I’m fair though. If I notice as a player you aren’t very eloquent, but you are playing a Bard, I’ll let you roll and take that result, describing it as you wooing him wonderously. But if as a player you are very eloquent, but your character rarely washes and picks his nose in public, then I will likely just let the diplomacy fail without a roll, because as a player you are being disingenuous with me.So, I have a Cha 7 PC, but, between ranks, traits, items, boons and feats, he still has a high Diplo skill, you will still force him to automatically fail at something he could easily succeed on with a Take 10?
Remember, Charisma has NOTHING to do with looks, manners or appearance, it is your ability to project leadership.
Wallflower over there might still wind up as the most intimidating person you have ever met, because, in addition to the -3 from his 5 Charisma, he gets to add his +5 from his 20 Strength to his Intimidation skill. Not counting things like ranks, class bonus, traits, etc.
Let me play my character, you play your NPCs.
Wow, you guys are obviously not reading what I am writing. You are taking a simple comment out of context and assuming I’m going to screw over your special circumstances.
Please stop that.
|
|
Wow, you guys are obviously not reading what I am writing. You are taking a simple comment out of context and assuming I’m going to screw over your special circumstances.
If you're giving multiple people the exact same impression you should consider the possibility that you're not making your point as clearly as you think.
|
Sorry to start such a blow up.
I was asking if there are suggestions for this. But not because someone might have a low stat.
The questions is less about charisma and more about the characters. Or rather the difference is an NPC. NPCharacter. A character with history, perception, motives, stats, etc.
GM: a portcullis blocks the hall
Player 1: I have a good strength I will try and lift it.
Player 2-5: I will stand back.
Portcullis: ...
GM: the plant has red berries and pointy leaves.
Player 1: I have a knowledge nature, I will look at it.
Player 2-5: I will stand back.
Plant: ...
GM: The carvings on the obelisk look ancient.
Player 1: I understand many old languages, I will examine them.
Player 2: and my dwarven upbringing taught me much about carved stones I will help.
Players 3-5: I will stand back.
Obelisk: ...
GM: the merchant looks up as you enter the store.
Player 1: I have a practiced smile, I will negotiate.
Player 2-5: I will stand back.
Merchant: [Perception 10] notices the greatswords, three loaded crossbow, maces, and other metal accessories.
Merchant: [after being tossed out of his mother's forest village is unfriendly to elves]
Merchant: [cleanliness trait] sees five people from the road trampling on his recently polished floor]
Merchant: May I help you uhhh... gentlemen?
In other words, the NPC (as opposed to an obelisk, plant, portcullis) makes perception checks, makes a knowledge checks, sense motive checks, etc. and has a sense of what is before him. Most people react differently to a single person than to a group.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
@Curaigh: I think the main thing is, don't overdo it. Lots of players have been burned by GMs who hate hate HATE dump stats. I kid you not, I have heard GMs say that if you have 6 CHA, farmers will attack you on sight because you have the CHA of a troll and so they'll think you're a troll yourself and respond accordingly. Not even kidding (thankfully, this wasn't in PFS, but still).
So when a player with those kinds of experiences behind him sees a GM post something like "I'm going to make sure PCs' low CHA scores affect things", guess what they're picturing?
To flip it around, apparently many GMs have had experiences with players who dump CHA and then try to roleplay their way out of the consequences. They've had to work hard to keep the proper penalties from getting brushed aside.
So when a GM with those kinds of experiences behind him sees a player post something like "the GM shouldn't be imposing penalties on CHA-dumped PCs", guess what he thinks they mean?
Except (as this thread has demonstrated) both sides are wrong about what the other is saying. The GM who says he'll punish low CHA only means he's not going to let existing mechanics get sidestepped by dishonest roleplaying. The player who says you should be imposing penalties only means that he doesn't want extra penalties above and beyond what's already in the rules of the game.
Both sides are just saying "I'm not going to let you get away with what's been done to me before", and using the same terminology to mean opposite things.
So perhaps in the future when we (myself included) see someone post something (whether as a GM or player) that sounds illegitimate, we should ask ourselves two things: What are we assuming their chosen terms mean that they might not actually be saying? And what might I be assuming about my own terminology that might be better for me to be explicit about?
|
|
The GM who says he'll punish low CHA only means he's not going to let existing mechanics get sidestepped by dishonest roleplaying.
Nope. He's going to sidestep the mechanics as a punishment for that dishonest roleplaying: mechanically the character is entitled to a diplomacy roll (possibly at a -2 for trying pretentious words WAY out of their league) and needs to miss by 4 to get the kind of reaction they were talking about.
SO they were going to auto fail some people based on charisma, just not quite as large a pool of people as we thought.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
@Curaigh: I think the main thing is, don't overdo it. Lots of players have been burned by GMs who hate hate HATE dump stats. I kid you not, I have heard GMs say that if you have 6 CHA, farmers will attack you on sight because you have the CHA of a troll and so they'll think you're a troll yourself and respond accordingly. Not even kidding (thankfully, this wasn't in PFS, but still).
I think it's funny that a GM would do that. Charisma is not a measure of physical attraction (although that can be a part of it). Charisma is more about a persons ability to influence others, either with their looks or words or a combination of both.
So for a GM to say that farmers attack people with a charisma of 6 on sight is saying that they essentially are assaulting the socially awkward and perhaps mentally handicapped. It's a village of people with a sign that says "no fat chicks, nerds, or people that frequently get bullied" and boy, do they mean it. It's a hamlet of douches.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
So for a GM to say that farmers attack people with a charisma of 6 on sight is saying that they essentially are assaulting the socially awkward and perhaps mentally handicapped. It's a village of people with a sign that says "no fat chicks, nerds, or people that frequently get bullied" and boy, do they mean it. It's a hamlet of douches.
And that's what some players have encountered in the past, and therefore what they hear when a GM say they're going to punish CHA-dumping. Hence half the reason for the hundred-some-odd posts in this thread.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
I doubt that they think a GM is going to cause NPCs to attack them on sight for being so grotesque. At least a PFS GM. And if that truly is happening, then I hope those players would contact their local VL or VC.
I think that all the people discussing implementing penalties on players based off their stats were in response to comments about said players not playing their flaws.
If you make a character with the Intelligence of an average fifth grader, don't make him your point man for combat strategy.
If you make a character that picks up a backpack and is heavily encumbered, don't try to break open doors.
And if you make a character that gets bit by a mosquito and looses a quart of blood, don't expect to last long on the front lines.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I think that all the people discussing implementing penalties on players based off their stats were in response to comments about said players not playing their flaws.
...Or such was the assumption of one side of the "argument". The other side didn't have that assumption, and until I started poking people really hard, nobody (except AndrewChristian) was even bothering to mention the "based off their stats" part.
Both sides kept talking about "penalties for CHA-dumping", but one side meant "the penalties explicit in the CRB" and took any protests as being against exactly that; meanwhile the other side took "penalties for CHA-dumping" to mean "extra, made-up penalties to punish builds you don't like" and reacted accordingly to GMs' defenses.
Like I said: one term, two opposite meanings. Argument ensues.
And if you make a character that gets bit by a mosquito and looses a quart of blood, don't expect to last long on the front lines.
Doesn't count if it's a medium creature, like the leech I encountered once. ;)
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
And if you make a character that gets bit by a mosquito and looses a quart of blood, don't expect to last long on the front lines.Doesn't count if it's a medium creature, like the leech I encountered once. ;)
It's from a long running joke my friends and I had. The minimum damage a creature can do on a melee attack is, so a mosquito does like (1d2-10) on a bite. A commoner has a d4 HD.
So we pictured a village of simple, hardworking folk, wiping the sweat from their brows as the sun started to set. One stands up and stretches, flexing his back and looking off into the orange glow coming from behind the forested hills. Peaceful, relaxing. A perfect moment.
Then a single scream breaks his calm.
He turns to see his loved ones embroiled in something horrific. Some are missing limbs, others are torn apart or drenched in blood. He stands perplexed as he watches in muted horror at the macabre parade of gore as the other villagers flee past him.
Then feels something land on his arm, something small. Eyes widen as he sees the insect stick its needle-like proboscis deep into the meat of his forearm. The pain is brief, obscured by the creature's numbing saliva. It takes a drink then buzzes off. Moments later, his arm explodes.
Because when you have 3 health, loosing 1 of it is a big problem.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Yeah, well, they also upped the commoners to a d6 and gave them 13/12/11/10/9/8 stats and gave humans a +2 instead of being a flat, post-racial 11/11/11/10/10/10.
So that commoner could now have as many as 5 hit points (or 8 if he takes Toughness!) and only take a point of nonlethal from a mosquito bite. And finally, they don't die until -CON instead of -10. Suddenly instead of losing limbs, they're merely knocked out after the fifth bite, and still have a long way to go before death.
Clearly, Pathfinder was designed by commoners. ;)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, well, they also upped the commoners to a d6 and gave them 13/12/11/10/9/8 stats and gave humans a +2 instead of being a flat, post-racial 11/11/11/10/10/10.
So that commoner could now have as many as 5 hit points (or 8 if he takes Toughness!) and only take a point of nonlethal from a mosquito bite. And finally, they don't die until -CON instead of -10. Suddenly instead of losing limbs, they're merely knocked out after the fifth bite, and still have a long way to go before death.
Clearly, Pathfinder was designed by commoners. ;)
Yes, because every human I know that goes on a hike or camping and gets bit by 5 mosquitos is immediately incapacitated. I then steal their soap.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Yes, because every human I know that goes on a hike or camping and gets bit by 5 mosquitos is immediately incapacitated. I then steal their soap.
Funny, if I was going to rob incapacitated hikers, I don't think soap is the first thing I'd go for. To each his own, I guess.
|
|
Yes, because every human I know that goes on a hike or camping and gets bit by 5 mosquitos is immediately incapacitated. I then steal their soap.Funny, if I was going to rob incapacitated hikers, I don't think soap is the first thing I'd go for. To each his own, I guess.
Soap is the currency of the realm up there in Minnesota. It's kinda hard to come by, so I hear.
|
|
Yes, because every human I know that goes on a hike or camping and gets bit by 5 mosquitos is immediately incapacitated. I then steal their soap.Yeah, well, they also upped the commoners to a d6 and gave them 13/12/11/10/9/8 stats and gave humans a +2 instead of being a flat, post-racial 11/11/11/10/10/10.
So that commoner could now have as many as 5 hit points (or 8 if he takes Toughness!) and only take a point of nonlethal from a mosquito bite. And finally, they don't die until -CON instead of -10. Suddenly instead of losing limbs, they're merely knocked out after the fifth bite, and still have a long way to go before death.
Clearly, Pathfinder was designed by commoners. ;)
LOL you sound like some the national guard folks i know. :)
