|
I don't know if anyone else has dealt with this, but I am hoping to get some help. How do you deal with a player that you are 99.9% certain is avoiding learning about rules to get away with playing illegal options? For example in Pathfinder Society you don't get any of the penalty or bonuses for playing a character that is venerable. Yet they will come to a table with a character with those penalty or bonuses. I explain it to them and they begrudgingly change the character. Then the next week they are playing a synthesist and I have to explain the rules again. It goes on like this for several sessions.
I can't prove it of course, because I can't see what they have and have not read. It just happens to often that I feel they must be avoiding reading things that don't allow them to play what they want. This way they have plausible deniability when someone points it out to them. I admit it is becoming tiresome.
Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator
|
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
Print a copy of the Additional Resources and the character creation chapter of the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play and request they read both documents to make sure their character is built legally before the next game day.
If they show up with an illegal character yet again, then you turn them away from that game day. They don't have an excuse since you provided both printed documents. You invite them to fix their character and come to the next game day with a legal character. If they show up at the next game day with another illegally made character intentionally, you turn them away again, request they fix their character, and invite the to the next game day.
This is under the presumption you presented that you think they are showing up with an intentionally illegally built character. If it is a honest mistake, the help the person correct those mistakes and game on.
|
Step three. Take the printed copies and roll them up tightly. If he keeps coming back smack him on the nose with it and say "Bad Pathfinder! No Chronical Sheet!" :-)
I know you're kidding, but I'd actually go with this suggestion. Rather than turn them away from the game day altogether, turn it into a joke this way. This will defuse any possible tension, and keep players from thinking of you as the jerk GM for actually enforcing the rules.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Actually I think it might be more jerkish to hit them in the nose.
Quietly enforce the rules, offer to adjust the character, but enforce the rules.
If they make a stink then politely tell them that the X people at the table who have read the rules and have legal characters came here to play a game in a 4 hour time slot, and we will now commence to do so. Then start playing.
|
|
I suggest no bop on the head. It may come off as condescending, and there are enough people out there who go bananas at the drop of a hat that you dont need to even potentially give them one, especially one they can try to exaggerate.
The point can be made without the tap to the head, so I recommend not doing it.
Regardless, Mike makes a very good suggestion.
|
|
I vote that you gouge out their eyes and drain their tear ducts.
I think I'll need to take some time to grow out my fingernails first.
Player showed up again, but this time with a master summoner. I handed over the additional resources and the character creation guide. There was some displeasure when I politely insisted we go over it before the game began. We'll see if the player comes back again. I am not so sure.
|
Player showed up again, but this time with a master summoner. I handed over the additional resources and the character creation guide. There was some displeasure when I politely insisted we go over it before the game began.
So how far out of wack was the summoner? Do you think he's finally getting the point that he needs to follow the rules? Did he have fun in the game?
|
|
Player showed up again, but this time with a master summoner. I handed over the additional resources and the character creation guide. There was some displeasure when I politely insisted we go over it before the game began.So how far out of wack was the summoner? Do you think he's finally getting the point that he needs to follow the rules? Did he have fun in the game?
It was just a first level character. So it didn't have the levels to be crazy. Master Summoners are not allowed in society play. It didn't take all that much to make it a regular summoner. The problem is repeatedly bringing builds that are not legal.
|
|
My guess is that it's not so much willful ignorance as seeing builds discussed on the boards, and then rolling them up for PFS without checking legality.
I know the other day, after reading something in the forums, I was all "I'm going to build a half-orc scarred witch doctor for PFS!" and then went to the Resources to look it up and said "oh :("
He just needs to develop the Resources habit!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems....questionable that all of his builds are illegal archetypes. I mean if he was just unaware wouldn't he accidently NOT hit a banned archetype?
honestly, the vast majority of things are legal it seems intentional...
Either way, i'm confident that will fix the problem. He'll either be fully aware that he can't "sneak one by" you or he's a statistical anomaly and just happens to be 3 for 3 with illegal archetypes. In which case he knows now.
Hopefully he keeps playing :D
|
Wizard
It seems....questionable that all of his builds are illegal archetypes. I mean if he was just unaware wouldn't he accidently NOT hit a banned archetype?
Its entirely possible the advice he's getting is going something like this. Three times would be stretching credibility..
"Whats the most powerful thing i can do..."
This.
Woot! i'm playing this!
Its banned.
Well crap whats the next most broken thing i can play?
this.
thats banned.
If you can spare the time, you might offer to help him create the character he wants so that it is also in compliance with the rules.
|
Contributor
|
The willful ignorance I've had to deal with is of a slightly different flavor. We've got a guy who won't buy or read the books, but simply chooses options from HeroLab and doesn't understand what he's choosing.
Of course he plays a summoner, and among the things he's done (or tried to do) are: to cast each of his known spells a number of times per day equal to his spells per day; to dismiss his eidolon and then cast summon monster I in the same round; to summon monsters in the 1-9 tables in the CRB based on his caster level instead of the spell level (ie summoning an elemental as a 2nd level caster); to have his serpentine eidolon move 40 feet because it had a climb speed of 40; and other stuff.
He's just a classic example of not reading the manual, which is normally easily dealt with, but he maintains that purchasing the HeroLab modules "pays" Paizo so he shouldn't have to buy the .pdfs or books as well (this is in Society play).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The willful ignorance I've had to deal with is of a slightly different flavor. We've got a guy who won't buy or read the books, but simply chooses options from HeroLab and doesn't understand what he's choosing.
Of course he plays a summoner, and among the things he's done (or tried to do) are: to cast each of his known spells a number of times per day equal to his spells per day; to dismiss his eidolon and then cast summon monster I in the same round; to summon monsters in the 1-9 tables in the CRB based on his caster level instead of the spell level (ie summoning an elemental as a 2nd level caster); to have his serpentine eidolon move 40 feet because it had a climb speed of 40; and other stuff.
He's just a classic example of not reading the manual, which is normally easily dealt with, but he maintains that purchasing the HeroLab modules "pays" Paizo so he shouldn't have to buy the .pdfs or books as well (this is in Society play).
Dude, kick him off your table. If anyone complains tell them it's because he doesn't know the rules and refuses to learn them.
|
Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator
|
| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
He's just a classic example of not reading the manual, which is normally easily dealt with, but he maintains that purchasing the HeroLab modules "pays" Paizo so he shouldn't have to buy the .pdfs or books as well (this is in Society play).
Hero Labs is a tool to make playing Pathfinder and PF easier. It does not allow someone to forego having the book or PDF. If he has played more than 2 or 3 games, he should be turned away if he refuses to purchase one or the other.
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Hero Labs is a tool to make playing Pathfinder and PF easier. It does not allow someone to forego having the book or PDF. If he has played more than 2 or 3 games, he should be turned away if he refuses to purchase one or the other.
That's not the way I've interpreted "access" from the Core Assumption and Additional Resources. With this ruling, my wife, son, mother and two of my friends can no longer play until they each spend a lot of money on books despite having access to mine.
|
Dust Raven- What Mike is trying to illustrate is that people buy hero lab with all of the options and never spend a dime on the actual books. Hero lab does not count as having the pdf or actual book. The core assumption says that you own legal pdf's of the books or physical copies. Family members are of course covered so that an entire family does not need the books each. If you have more questions you can ask your local Venture Captain Jason Leonard or Mike could ultimately clarify this for you. In fact I think this exact topic you are mentioning is covered in the FAQ.
|
|
Hero Labs is a tool to make playing Pathfinder and PF easier. It does not allow someone to forego having the book or PDF. If he has played more than 2 or 3 games, he should be turned away if he refuses to purchase one or the other.That's not the way I've interpreted "access" from the Core Assumption and Additional Resources. With this ruling, my wife, son, mother and two of my friends can no longer play until they each spend a lot of money on books despite having access to mine.
It has been stated that a couple can share books. I assume this extends to children. By yes, according to recent clarifications, your mother and your friends should buy their own stuff.
|
|
Dust Raven
As GM you pick your fights. Is it worthwhile to check every single encumbrance - likely not. But someone moving 30 feet in heavy armour with half a kitchen sink on his back ...
I'm very light on recommending someone to buy a book. They normally will do so eventually. But this would be a case where I agree with Mike to get it enforced. His not-owning the books is disrupting the table and the game as it prevents him from racing up his own character choice - and that is the true no-go for me.
And I'm also going to conventions with the whole family. There are now 3 CRBs in the family but I won't buy other books in multiple. BUT I would insist anyone from my family building a character to spend the time reading the class and learning it if it isn't in the CRB.
|
|
Dust Raven- I suggest you calm down and take a step back. The point Mike was making is that a player was willfully disobeying a known rule. You are making something out of nothing here. The rule is there so that a GM is not expected to own every book that players could be using. I myself have a large collection of books that both my Fiance and I use and it would be unfair for someone to bring something to the table that the gm has never heard of.
|
|
The only case where not being able to present a book at the table has disrupted anything is when a player is using an Additional Resource he hasn't brought to the table. In this case, I'm not talking about additional resources, and talking about the CRB and the Field Guide, with apparently must be purchased despite being the core assumption and never needing to be presented by a player ever. The contents of the CRB are even available for free.
I understand the need for a company to sell its product, but demanding/requiring all players of a group to purchase their own copy instead of sharing is taking it too far.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
It's been stated several times, in several places, that family members can share books between themselves. If you look through other threads about core assumption or additional resource books, you'll find that's been said as far back as Josh Frost.
|
|
I would like a clarification from Mike, as it is he who chose to use the word "purchase" instead of "have access to" a book or pdf. The general idea is that all of a sudden PFS has a membership fee of sorts and I'm expected to turn away players who haven't paid it.
I seriously doubt this is going to happen. It would be nice for Mike to do, but to make an official clarification on this issue for you (regarding your spouse and children specifically) just opens up room for every single other instance (aunt, uncle, cousin, grandparent, fiancee, bf, gf, roommate, etc) to need a clarification for it to be allowed.
Chris is right. You, for your immediate family, are fine with just the one copy of each, at least as long as you are all playing together. In the same room, probably still fine. In a different venue, maybe a bit mroe complicated if something needs to be referenced.
I understand the need for a company to sell its product, but demanding/requiring all players of a group to purchase their own copy instead of sharing is taking it too far.
I assume that here you are meaning your immediate family when you say 'group'. If that is the case, then yes, I agree. If you mean any 4-7 random people who dont know each other, then I disagree. It is very much not going too far for them to expect each player to buy their own copy of the rules.
|
|
Dust Raven
There have been posts by Mike in the past that spelled out that you don't need to have individual copies for wife/children. I paraphrase this as there might have been some caveats like you have access to it, etc.
He also has written in the past that he doesn't see GMs to have the role to policing this rule.
Having said all this - there is still a need for that rule as the alternative produces cases like the one above. Take a step back - nobody asked you to buy additional copies. You are probably too far lawfully aligned to interpret what Mike wrote to your own situation.
|
Contributor
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I understand the need for a company to sell its product, but demanding/requiring all players of a group to purchase their own copy instead of sharing is taking it too far.
I respectfully disagree. We're not talking about a group of friends who get together every other Sunday afternoon. We're talking about a world-wide campaign of tens of thousands of strangers, all of whom might potentially play with one another. Organized play only works because everyone involved agrees to play by the same rules, and owning the rules is the best way (I think, and clearly others do as well) to signal agreement with that.
This has spilled out over two threads now, and I hope nobody is getting upset and being overly literal. It's been pointed out that household copies of books for multi-player households are deemed perfectly reasonable. It's been pointed out that the financial investment in meeting the Core Assumption constitutes a certain amount of US dollars that most working adults would probably find reasonable. I've pointed out elsewhere that there's also the option of gift giving--if someone really can't afford the .pdfs, then someone else at the table who really wants that person seated probably can.
Your life partner(s) and any children living with you and (to my way of thinking) any other members of your household should never be turned away from a PFS table so long as they have the household copy of the book or legal photocopies of it in the event you're not playing at the same table. But your adult friends and relatives who don't live with you who want to play but won't pay for the materials? They're not just refusing to invest in some books, they're refusing to invest in the community by playing by the rules.
|
|
Oh, by the way, just as an aside, last night our local willful ignorance guy called out a 17 when asked for a stealth check.
For his 1st level cleric wearing lamellar stone heavy armor and carrying a tower shield.
This is something I don't understand. If its the same person who uses HeroLab then he should be actually have an advantage in this spcific situation towards someone only having the books instead.HeroLab calculates it for him - unless he switched AC penalties off.
|
Owning the CRB does not mean understanding the rules, or even reading them at all.
Apparently the second case of willful ignorance we have here is based on the player not knowing the rules. Whether he owns the CRB or not is irrelevant.
What about a new player coming for the first time at a PFS table ? Do we require him to buy the CRB before he can play ?
|
|
I would like a clarification from Mike, as it is he who chose to use the word "purchase" instead of "have access to" a book or pdf. The general idea is that all of a sudden PFS has a membership fee of sorts and I'm expected to turn away players who haven't paid it.
Boom. See Todd's post, note that Mike indicates full agreement. The Core Assumption is officially clarified as something everyone is supposed to own.
I also thought there should be some exceptions, but I got yelled at for asking what they were. So you're on your own. My advice for you is that if you have a home game comprised of yourself, wife, child, mother, and friends, the "common sense" advocated by Mike in that post could mean it's not important for everyone to buy. If, on the other hand, your mother or friends are going to game days and expecting to use your books, that could become a problem, in that another GM might not agree. You dig?
|
|
What about a new player coming for the first time at a PFS table ? Do we require him to buy the CRB before he can play ?
I believe the stance on this is "no, he can play without a CRB" but if he likes the game and comes back a few more times, then yes, he should be encouraged to purchase his own and support the campaign.
|
|
I'll say I'm sorry to poking this bee hive.
I'm reviewing everything I've said in the last hour or so, and reviewed what I've been replying to, and it seems this thread was linked to in another and taken out of context.
Conclusions: Any given player need not own a resource he is using material from, but must provide that material at the GM's request. If they only means he has of proving it is to purchase it himself then obviously he must. If he and his buddy always play together, they may share resources.
Also, I'm having a bad day and overreact to things.
|
|
Owning the CRB does not mean understanding the rules, or even reading them at all.
Apparently the second case of willful ignorance we have here is based on the player not knowing the rules. Whether he owns the CRB or not is irrelevant.
What about a new player coming for the first time at a PFS table ? Do we require him to buy the CRB before he can play ?
No - otherwise you would never allow a spontaneous player who never has done Pathfinder before to sit down at a Con at your table.
This is a rule that sould never be interpreted RAW. There is enough RAI to glean from these boards - but Paizo is a company and copyright is something they can't ignore - so this rule won't disappear.
|
|
As a GM, the only time I ask for any kind of "proof" of ownership is when someone is using a resource that I do not have. Since I bring an APG, anyone can safely use anything in there without me questioning it. At no point have I ever felt like I has some responsibility to audit people's ownership. It only ever comes up if people try to use something that I don't have and they can't provide.
|
|
Proof of Ownership comes up in my games when I ask the player to provide rules for said "thing". Otherwise, I assume my players are playing by the rules. Yes, I've had to call players out for not having rules for something they were using, and didn't understand. No, it's not a constant problem.
Oddly enough it is a problem which at least seems constant for me. Seems every week I have at least one player announce in the middle of a game he uses some item, feat or ability I've never heard of and they can't even tell me the book they got it from let alone have a copy of it. This is more true of those new to PFS, but seems like there's always one.
|
|
The rule only comes up with news ayers and only to press the importance of owning the rules you use. They usually understand and have the materials next time we play. Sometimes it comes up because older players will influence the new guys or their friends to play the cool ninja, oor the broken class without mentioning they need Thea appropriate book. But usually after their first time, tey usually te at least the PDF ( my Suday games is composed of 7-14 players at least two third of them with their ablest out.