RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Re Rogue Eidolon's spoiler
When I played it, we were four characters. It got to a point where the gunslinger was down, the Inquisitor and the Ninja were hurting, and Ksenia was out of undead affecting spells and had already braved the fates by making two successful "Casting while deafened" checks. I started retreating, since it's my (player's) understanding that if one person survives the scenario, you don't need to pay the 'retrieval team' cost.
GM: "You're running?"
Me: Last time Ksenia tried to save the day, she got abused by her teammates. SHe's Explored. She's co-operated. She's now going to go report.
|
|
And I can understand what you mean by not having that high knowledge skill, or even the required knowledge skill at all. There was one time I was not able to get a PA (for my faction) since I did not have Knowledge: Engineering. It was the only skill I could use to make the roll. I wasn’t too happy about that.
I must concurr - some of the random checks needed to pass faction missions are odd. There was one mission in our group (two of them had it) where they needed to pass Perform (oratory) check. I mean - really?
Fortunately, I was playing my bard who's main skill is Perform (oratory). I hit it with ease - but they kinda lucked out. Even if you have a bard in your group - all of the other PFS bards I've seen have taken Perform (sing) as their main. (admittedly - I haven't seen all that many)
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
And I can understand what you mean by not having that high knowledge skill, or even the required knowledge skill at all. There was one time I was not able to get a PA (for my faction) since I did not have Knowledge: Engineering. It was the only skill I could use to make the roll. I wasn’t too happy about that.
I must concurr - some of the random checks needed to pass faction missions are odd. There was one mission in our group (two of them had it) where they needed to pass Perform (oratory) check. I mean - really?
Fortunately, I was playing my bard who's main skill is Perform (oratory). I hit it with ease - but they kinda lucked out. Even if you have a bard in your group - all of the other PFS bards I've seen have taken Perform (sing) as their main. (admittedly - I haven't seen all that many)
I think this is where GM lattitude is a fine line. Ksenia is going to fail a fair amount of missions, as is Enuk, because they're skill light PCs in skill heavy factions. (Taldor and Osiron) In <redacted> the Taldor mission was to lead the tavern in song. (Perform skill) Ksenia took the Andoran approach, and paid a bard to play the song. GM gave me the point.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
QUOTE="Hobbun"] I think one of the biggest reasons he was more lenient that one time was because the only person left standing was a 9 yr old boy and pretty inexperienced.
[This scenario, imo, is not appropriate for inexperienced players. As a GM, I would not allow a 9 year old to play this scenario on account of it's gruesome content.
Good point, NN 959. I concur.
I think one of the biggest reasons he was more lenient that one time was because the only person left standing was a 9 yr old boy and pretty inexperienced.This scenario, imo, is not appropriate for inexperienced players. As a GM, I would not allow a 9 year old to play this scenario on account of it's gruesome content.
But what are you going to do? The GM is not his father, and the boy’s brother was playing as well (I believe he was 12).
Are there even rules in place for that? I can understand if a player was being a problem and asking them to leave, I know that is outlined in the book. But he was a nice kid and was certainly not a problem player in any sense.
Can a GM refuse a game to a player because he/she feels it is inappropriate for them (barring being their parent/guardian)?
|
I agree, rules should be interpreted through the lens of common sense. So, let me give you a situation. You have a new player at the table who has never played RPGs before. That being said, they are really getting into their character and are thoroughly enjoying voice acting them, reacting to game world events, etc. You are rolling behind a screen. A magus rolls an 18 on the die, while invisible, which makes the opponent flatfooted. A successful crit will kill the PC by dealing about 30-50 damage. You have three options: 1) Confirm the crit [and a die roll of anything higher than about 5 will confirm],...
Being 100% completely genuine with you, I personally place fudging into two categories.
In the 1st, a GM in some way reduces the effect of something one of his NPC's does as some form of "mercy" to a player character.
In the 2nd, a GM alters a die roll in order to have one of his NPC's "successfully" save against an PC effect or to "successfully" affect a PC in some manner.
I am empathetic to the first category, and would not take poorly to this happening every once in a while, especially with new players and players who aren't really min-maxers and just love their character. I am a ferocious min-maxer, so for me personally, give me exactly what I got coming to me. I am a big boy, I can take it.
I have less than zero empathy for the second category, and am likely to get very vocally outspoken if a GM repeatedly hit my 65 AC + crane wing monk and/or routinely saved against my wizard's DC 30+ and persisted spells from behind a screen.
I personally always roll in the wide open for that reason, wether as a PC or GM.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
It is an interesting question. I mean I tone down things with the Paracountess* for children in the room. If we're presenting an experience, we should take the audience into account. It's no different then say, if there was a Somali Christian playing at the table I'd tone down Ksenia's snarky pro-slavery comments.
*
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West
|
Fortunately, I was playing my bard who's main skill is Perform (oratory). I hit it with ease - but they kinda lucked out. Even if you have a bard in your group - all of the other PFS bards I've seen have taken Perform (sing) as their main. (admittedly - I haven't seen all that many)
My (PFS) Bard has Perform (Oratory) as his main skill; with Versatile Performance that gets him good scores in both Diplomacy and Sense Motive. He's also got levels in Perform (Comedy); next level he'll be able to use that for Bluff and Intimidate, at which point he'll start off with a basic +16 on two social skills (CHA 18 for a +4, 6 levels, +3 for a class skill, +2 from Prodigy, +1 from a trait) and +15 on two others.
I took Perform (Oratory) somewhat for RP reasons; I find it easier to think of myself declaiming speeches than doing a song-and-dance routine. But I probably will get myself a tambourine (or maybe a pigs bladder) for the comedy routines.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
But what are you going to do? The GM is not his father, and the boy’s brother was playing as well (I believe he was 12).Are there even rules in place for that? I can understand if a player was being a problem and asking them to leave, I know that is outlined in the book. But he was a nice kid and was certainly not a problem player in any sense.
Can a GM refuse a game to a player because he/she feels it is inappropriate for them (barring being their parent/guardian)?
I can and would.
An aside to the father: "I feel really bad about this, but I've got to warn you that this particular scenario has some serious adult content in it. It's gruesome, grotesque, and horrific. That's sort of the point. See that table of dudes over there? This scenario is designed to make them uncomfortable.
"Let's see if we can find you and your sons something more appropriate to their age."
If he decided it was all right, I probably would procede, but I would give him opportunities to back out.
If I were still an active classroom teacher, though, or dealt with real kids as part of my job, there's no way I would run 4-02 for anybody younger than 16, whether his dad was there or not. If the kid reacts badly, the parents will blame me. PFS, while fun, isn't worth my job.
Oh yes, if the parent was there, I can easily see doing that myself. But neither of the boys had their parents/guardian there as far as I could tell.
So that is why I feel it would be difficult turning away the player as you are making the decision for the parent in not letting them play.
But don't get me wrong, I do agree with you in it being inappropriate, it just makes it a sticky situation in general. Not just for at the time of the incident, but also for the store in possibly upsetting players (customers).
However, this discussion has veered way off course of the topic, so I think this will be my last say on the matter.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Oh, if the parent weren't there, there's no way I would let the kids sit that event. A 4th-grader? No way. Same aside, probably addressing the older brother, but as an explanation without any hint of choice on their part.
I'm not going to put myself, the guys mustering, Paizo, the con organizers, or anybody else in that hot seat.
|
As it is, the summoner's player will probably have to play Way of the Kirin and Rivalry's End with a pregen instead of her own character, unless we manage to sneak in a First Steps marathon.
Not to derail the thread, but something the summoner player should be aware of (spoiler'd, just in case):
|
|
As it is, the summoner's player will probably have to play Way of the Kirin and Rivalry's End with a pregen instead of her own character, unless we manage to sneak in a First Steps marathon.Not to derail the thread, but something the summoner player should be aware of (spoiler'd, just in case):
** spoiler omitted **
Yes. Sadly, we're well aware, and that's why I think it was a big example of the worst thing that could happen (since it's going to cause her to play a pregen and suffer that later penalty you mention).
|
I got spoiled on my Silver Crusade character in terms of ease of missions.
Oh, so this is a recurring thing? I've had a fair number of Silver Crusade missions where my character had to put in some notable work...
...And I've also had others that amounted to the Primary Forum Rule here: "Don't be a jerk." I actually had to speak to a GM on the side on one occasion. "Are you sure I got the right hand-out? Because this looks like flavor text more than orders; it basically amounts to 'Your character is probably Good alignment. Roleplay that.'" They confirmed it was the right one, I played a heroic and empathic character who cared about innocent bystanders, and the character earned their Faction Mission bonus.
That this was considered challenging enough to be a Faction Mission stunned me; is there something I should know about how most PCs/parties behave?
Back on the primary topic: The vast majority of the people I play with are competent at worst. So unless the encounters have simply been beyond the lower tier's ability to handle (e.g. they outright assume certain class features granted at level X will be present in the party) we've generally done okay. That said, the margin of 'doing okay' is starting to shrink so we might be doing this a bit less. One supposes that is largely the intent of the upcoming wealth rule changes though, so I'm not going to cry too hard about it.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I don't mind easy/hard faction missions. I do want more 'grey' faction missions.
Etc. I want missions that have reprecussions for the characters. Basically "How much do you want the faction point?" type things.
Decline of Glory spoiler
The Taldor faction, for example, is basically designed to screw over the Pathfinder society. Now since I was playing Ksenia, it didn't matter, she kind of thinks of the Society as her 'backpacking through Europe' phase. But for Mayim, who is loyal to the Society, and just seens Taldor as a way to pay back Qadiria, it would cause a conflict.
|
I have a habit of playing down. I don't know what it is (maybe a memory remnant of my Living Arcanis days) but If given the choice of playing in my tier or beyond it, I will always pick in Tier.
So far in my gming of PFS, I havnt had the need to ask about tiers because they have always been well set by pc levels.
|
|
My Enemy's Enemy: Party APL 5, I had a level 4 melee monk, played up to subtier 6-7. We destroyed the scenario, especially the final encounter. Hardly any damage of consequence was taken.
Rivalry's End: Party APL 5 again (7 players), I had a level 4 melee monk, played up to subtier 6-7. I took no damage this scenario, but the outcome was close and could have gone either way.
|
|
I've had plenty of close calls; as a player who always plays up. But only one actual death, at the hands of one of the toughest GMs formally of our area.
As a GM, my advice is always to not play up; I do this so my players feel warned in case I do run a TPK one day (I have never done so, but know a lot of GMs have, so want to be on record as saying I said not to).
The reality is it can be tough; we did Midnight Mauler with 3 3s a 4 and a 5 (with the year 2 6 players make it "choice"), and we chose to go up. We had one nasty encounter that almost resulted in a death, but still held well and won the day. The difference in gold is astonishing; 2000 GP for playing 6-7 instead of 3-4. You can understand why I (and many others) always push for the play up option.
I do like the "one player veto" rule though; but in fairness, usually nobody will stop if 2-3 want to play up, as the play down crew are usually newer to the game. This is why it may be for the best if they implement "wealth by level" to eliminate the boons from playing up.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
My Enemy's Enemy: Party APL 5, I had a level 4 melee monk, played up to subtier 6-7. We destroyed the scenario, especially the final encounter. Hardly any damage of consequence was taken.
So funny - my players had the exact opposite experience.
I had all 6-7s with a party of 6 get destroyed in that game. I was one PC death shy of a TPK. But their gunslinger had to drink his potion of invisibility, saunter up to the remaining baddie, and critically hit with his musket
And all I could say was, "clever girl".
|
|
So weird I've never had this problem.?? what problem would that be?
Haha. I'm sick and doped up on a ton of medicine. I was thinking this thread was one about bullying and pressuring about playing up. I've never really had table disagreement about this. Having or not having a dedicated healer is usually a pretty easy sell.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Last weekend, I had a party playing through Sanos, just at the boundary APL 5. I asked people to indicate on 3-by-5 cards whether they wanted to play up or down. One player, a first-time fellow with a 4th-level pre-gen, wanted to play down. I announced that "at least one player wants to play down, so we'll be playing down."
The player on my left asked "Do you think that's fair? You're thwarting the will of the majority."
"I didn't say how many people wanted to play down. At least 1 did."
"But that cheats all the rest of us out of our gold. Does that strike you as right?"
I shrugged. "I'm sorry, but I'm not going to have somebody play above tier against his will."
That player quit the table, as was his right, and found a place in the Tier 5-9 adventure at the other table. I went on to run Sanos at subtier 3-4, and hand the party its head. Nobody died, but it was a tight thing.
|
|
Playing up in season 4 with pre-gens is a recipe for disaster. Did this group have a dedicated healer?
When I run a table, I leave such a decision purely up to the players. Ie, I make them come to a consensus. I will give them my view of their chance based off generalities, but nothing more. I don't ever announce what they'll be doing. I don't see that as my place as the GM.
|
|
...snipping to where I have my question....
Third time: GM softballed and we barely won. Should have wiped, really, as the boss was doing 30-50 points a round from range (tier 4-5), had 3 levels on us, height and terrain (entangle cast before party go to move) advantage, surprise, and defenses we could barely touch. And the only healer was me (wand CLW). And NOBODY in the party (save yours truly) had the 'adventurer's survival kit of necessary consumeables.'
...snipping lots of good stuff.....
bolding above mine
If I recognize the scenario, there is a problem with casting the entangle spell... there is no plants in the area (or very few), and the entangle spell does not create them. It's written into the bad guys tactics... but shouldn't actually work.
If it is written in the tactics, it's pretty clear that the author/developer intended for there to be vegetation where the party starts, even if it ends up needing to be weeds.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Last weekend, I had a party playing through Sanos, just at the boundary APL 5. I asked people to indicate on 3-by-5 cards whether they wanted to play up or down. One player, a first-time fellow with a 4th-level pre-gen, wanted to play down. I announced that "at least one player wants to play down, so we'll be playing down."
The player on my left asked "Do you think that's fair? You're thwarting the will of the majority."
"I didn't say how many people wanted to play down. At least 1 did."
"But that cheats all the rest of us out of our gold. Does that strike you as right?"
I shrugged. "I'm sorry, but I'm not going to have somebody play above tier against his will."
That player quit the table, as was his right, and found a place in the Tier 5-9 adventure at the other table. I went on to run Sanos at subtier 3-4, and hand the party its head. Nobody died, but it was a tight thing.
If he was playing a pregen, he would have played a level 7 pregen in the 6-7 subtier. The level of pregen is based on the subtier, not the other way around.
|
|
If he was playing a pregen, he would have played a level 7 pregen in the 6-7 subtier. The level of pregen is based on the subtier, not the other way around.Last weekend, I had a party playing through Sanos, just at the boundary APL 5. I asked people to indicate on 3-by-5 cards whether they wanted to play up or down. One player, a first-time fellow with a 4th-level pre-gen, wanted to play down. I announced that "at least one player wants to play down, so we'll be playing down."
The player on my left asked "Do you think that's fair? You're thwarting the will of the majority."
"I didn't say how many people wanted to play down. At least 1 did."
"But that cheats all the rest of us out of our gold. Does that strike you as right?"
I shrugged. "I'm sorry, but I'm not going to have somebody play above tier against his will."
That player quit the table, as was his right, and found a place in the Tier 5-9 adventure at the other table. I went on to run Sanos at subtier 3-4, and hand the party its head. Nobody died, but it was a tight thing.
I still wouldn't risk season 4 even with a pregen of appropriate level. The pregens are just very meh.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
If he was playing a pregen, he would have played a level 7 pregen in the 6-7 subtier. The level of pregen is based on the subtier, not the other way around.Actually, all the Guide says is "level-appropriate", so that can EASILY be interpreted as needing to fall into the overall tier, not the subtier.
If he wants to play a level four pregen at a subtier 6-7 table, he totally can. But unless he REALLY wanted to hold the chronicle, and didn't want to wait all the way until level seven to apply it, he would have been MUCH better off just playing the level seven pregen.
I suppose you could interpret it that way, and game the system by playing up, but clearly that's not what the player was doing. Perhaps if he'd known he could use a higher-level pregen for the 6-7 subtier, he would have been open to playing up.
|
|
Last weekend, I had a party playing through Sanos, just at the boundary APL 5. I asked people to indicate on 3-by-5 cards whether they wanted to play up or down. One player, a first-time fellow with a 4th-level pre-gen, wanted to play down. I announced that "at least one player wants to play down, so we'll be playing down."
The player on my left asked "Do you think that's fair? You're thwarting the will of the majority."
"I didn't say how many people wanted to play down. At least 1 did."
"But that cheats all the rest of us out of our gold. Does that strike you as right?"
I shrugged. "I'm sorry, but I'm not going to have somebody play above tier against his will."
That player quit the table, as was his right, and found a place in the Tier 5-9 adventure at the other table. I went on to run Sanos at subtier 3-4, and hand the party its head. Nobody died, but it was a tight thing.
Out of curiosity how does a pregen with no risk involved get a vote?
I'd probably walk away too but giving a pregen a level vote (Unless I'm mistaken they can just play a different pregen) seems ABSURD to me. I disagree with the 1 player can hold a group back mentality (What if you do that and the entire rest of the table leaves causing no game to occur?) The majority should decide. It's one thing if the GM wants to say "If tied we'll play down." Or something like that but when it's 5v1 (especially if that 1 is a pregen) it seems radically unfair to the table. If the table was more split (Say 3v3) that would be different but letting 1 pregen hold a group back seems rather mean.
Tangential question if that was the only potential high level table occurring and there was a low level table would you tell the pregen player "I'm sorry, but I'm not going to have somebody play below tier against his will."?
This is why I require a consensus. With some coaching and explanation of basic threats in PFS scenarios, all the tables I've run have sorted it out easily.