|
Looking at the rules for organized play, I don't see where the GM actually does have any input on the decision. It says "the players may choose". It does't say the GM has a magic veto power.
I'm sure you're right, though I'd say the GM should try to advise without giving away the plot.
That said, I've had a GM just run a scenario as if we were playing up, despite the APL putting us clearly in the lower (and it hadn't been discussed, since we weren't in the middle ground). We got the lower tier rewards too.
|
When it comes to playing up or down, I would definitely prefer a table consensus... and to this point, I have always seen that happen at tables I have been at.
However, as a GM, I may advise that playing up would be VERY difficult at times, saying "You'd better bring your 'A' game if you wanna play up", or even suggesting against it. I will abide by the table consensus, but this consensus cannot take an hour (or even 30 minutes) to come about. If they cannot come to a consensus quickly (and without what looks like bullying to me), I would probably err on the side of playing down. Rumor has it that this will be less of a cost to the higher tier players in season 5.
So, if you do play up... expect that you will be challenged.
|
When it comes to playing up or down, I would definitely prefer a table consensus... and to this point, I have always seen that happen at tables I have been at.
However, as a GM, I may advise that playing up would be VERY difficult at times, saying "You'd better bring your 'A' game if you wanna play up", or even suggesting against it. I will abide by the table consensus, but this consensus cannot take an hour (or even 30 minutes) to come about. If they cannot come to a consensus quickly (and without what looks like bullying to me), I would probably err on the side of playing down. Rumor has it that this will be less of a cost to the higher tier players in season 5.
So, if you do play up... expect that you will be challenged.
Yeah, absolutely, there is nothing wrong with fair warnings. On both sides of this, PC and GM, I usually advise on playing down. I have been lucky and this issue has almost always been settled in 5 minutes.
|
|
Who in the hell do you play with? That list is absurd. I've never seen players try to force actions out of other players.David, relax. Really.
And I've seen every one of the actions redward mentions, at PFS table. More than once. really.
** spoiler omitted **...
It's much less problematic in a group of players with whom you're used to playing. But I've seen it happen at conventions with disturbing regularity, and even at public game days more than occasionally.
Usually it's a more experienced player trying to help out a less experienced one (that is to say, it's a genuine attempt to help). But sometimes it's someone telling another player what to do, or worse, grabbing the player's character sheet outright and saying "use this!"
But this has drifted off-topic (and I've certainly contributed to that).
|
No, I am saying you should get an UNANIMOUS (seriously folks?!? You all don't know what this word means if you want to keep insisting it means majority?) vote one way or the other before proceeding. That means there will almost certainly be a discussion about it and you as the GM should butt out of that discussion other then to keep it civil.
It sounds to me like people are advocating making players play up because the majority rules, and I'm sorry but that just isn't how I run my tables.
I mean right now we've only said if one person wants to play down, but what about if two people want to play down should the majority still rule at that point?That sounds a lot to me like the other players should get a chance to "convince" the other player to play up.
Not everyone wants to be convinced.
In fact, that describes approximately 100% of the people who post on these forums.
It is the GM's job to enforce the rules of the PFRPG and the OP campaign:
Bullying can mean different things to different people. It doesn't just mean "play up or we'll take your lunch money." It can also mean "play up or we're all going to complain and roll our eyes and stare daggers at you every time we roll through an encounter."
If you're coercing the person to do something they don't want to do, you're bullying. If they cautiously and begrudgingly agree to play up and spend the entire scenario avoiding combat because they're convinced they're going to die, you bullied them into it.
If they cheerfully say "okay, let's play up!" after you explain the Season 0 difficulty curve, the 4-person balance, and the optimization of everyone else, then sure. But even then, if that character dies, I'm willing to bet the player's going to feel pretty burned.
so...now discussion is bullying?!? okay if you feel this way then I'm not sure PFS or ANY social event is for you...
|
|
If they cheerfully say "okay, let's play up!" after you explain the Season 0 difficulty curve, the 4-person balance, and the optimization of everyone else, then sure. But even then, if that character dies, I'm willing to bet the player's going to feel pretty burned.so...now discussion is bullying?!? okay if you feel this way then I'm not sure PFS or ANY social event is for you...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel burned from time to time in PFS. I still play it. Games are more rewarding with the kiddie gloves *off*.
Bolding the part replying to:
FOR YOU. YOU find games more rewarding this way.
Not everyone enjoys the game that way. Some players wish for a more laid back experience, rather than a grim struggling slugfest to get progress or success.
I like a challenge, but I also realize what I enjoy is not the deciding factor when there is a table full of other players, each with their own determination as to what is rewarding or fun.
|
|
I feel burned from time to time in PFS. I still play it. Games are more rewarding with the kiddie gloves *off*.Bolding the part replying to:
FOR YOU. YOU find games more rewarding this way.
Not everyone enjoys the game that way. Some players wish for a more laid back experience, rather than a grim struggling slugfest to get progress or success.
I like a challenge, but I also realize what I enjoy is not the deciding factor when there is a table full of other players, each with their own determination as to what is rewarding or fun.
Your point? The discussion at every table that is eligible to choose their sub-tier is going to be different. If a given group of players want to choose to play down every time, that's cool, too! It shouldn't be the GM forcing them to do so.
|
|
Who in the hell do you play with? That list is absurd. I've never seen players try to force actions out of other players.Sadly I have. Often enough to recognize it early in a slot and put a stop to it.
Wow. That's..... really bad. I don't know what's worse: the players that do it or the players that are so passive that the GM has to step in.
|
|
Wow. That's..... really bad. I don't know what's worse: the players that do it or the players that are so passive that the GM has to step in.Who in the hell do you play with? That list is absurd. I've never seen players try to force actions out of other players.Sadly I have. Often enough to recognize it early in a slot and put a stop to it.
The players that do it.
|
|
Wow. That's..... really bad. I don't know what's worse: the players that do it or the players that are so passive that the GM has to step in.Who in the hell do you play with? That list is absurd. I've never seen players try to force actions out of other players.Sadly I have. Often enough to recognize it early in a slot and put a stop to it.are you putting it off on the victim? Really?
having been pushed around at the table more than once, and seen it even more, I find this comment to be a little thoughtless.
One person's "putting it off on the victim" is another's "I can't believe someone didn't tell the bully player to go $%^^&^ off". Maybe I shouldn't have phrased it exactly like that, but people really should stand up for themselves. Having the GM step in like that doesn't really fix the underlying problem.
Also, don't forget that I've not really seen this and I'm having a hard time imagining one player grabbing another's character sheet like that.
|
|
One person's "putting it off on the victim" is another's "I can't believe someone didn't tell the bully player to go $%^^&^ off". Maybe I shouldn't have phrased it exactly like that, but people really should stand up for themselves. Having the GM step in like that doesn't really fix the underlying problem.Wow. That's..... really bad. I don't know what's worse: the players that do it or the players that are so passive that the GM has to step in.Who in the hell do you play with? That list is absurd. I've never seen players try to force actions out of other players.Sadly I have. Often enough to recognize it early in a slot and put a stop to it.are you putting it off on the victim? Really?
having been pushed around at the table more than once, and seen it even more, I find this comment to be a little thoughtless.
Gaming of any stripe is full of people who aren't necessarily the most social adept individuals. Gaming is a form of escapism, and at least when I go to escape and have a good time, I have no desire to get involved in an argument with another at the table. The GM is there to try and set a tone for the game and overall session. Reigning in out of bounds players is part of what they're there for.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Key word being should. Some people are too timid, or believe that because they're new they don't really have a right to say anything, and some people just don't want to hold things up with arguing. When the GM steps in, it shows that, yes, the player in question does have a right to assert himself. Use it to set an example.One person's "putting it off on the victim" is another's "I can't believe someone didn't tell the bully player to go $%^^&^ off". Maybe I shouldn't have phrased it exactly like that, but people really should stand up for themselves. Having the GM step in like that doesn't really fix the underlying problem.Wow. That's..... really bad. I don't know what's worse: the players that do it or the players that are so passive that the GM has to step in.Who in the hell do you play with? That list is absurd. I've never seen players try to force actions out of other players.Sadly I have. Often enough to recognize it early in a slot and put a stop to it.are you putting it off on the victim? Really?
having been pushed around at the table more than once, and seen it even more, I find this comment to be a little thoughtless.
If saw this happen, the GM wouldn't have to step in. I think admonishment probably more effective coming from other players anyway. Additionally, I'd inform this person that whomever acts this way can't be trusted to know their head from a hole in the ground and so I can't trust them to play up with anyway.
|
|
Actually, come to think of it, I think I've seen the beginnings of this at a couple of tables. However, when I'm in a group that has sub-tier options, I present an itemized list of things a group should have covered before this is considered. The newer people get to learn what to look for and the rude players get silenced by teh maths. Or, if they really want to press the subject, they can try to explain why I'm wrong.
Given that 16PP is on the line as well as frustration etc, I think subtier is certainly worth arguing over and I will encourage every new player I come across to be analytical in this respect.
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West
|
The trouble is that quite often it's the more experienced players (who are far more likely to be the ones with the high-subtier characters) that do the 'bullying'.
If you and your friends are there with your L3 or L4 characters, and the party contains a couple of L6 and L7 characters, it can be hard to resist the pressure. It's even worse if one of the loudest voices pushing for you to play up is the event coordinator.
I don't like bullying at the table. But it exists.
Come to that, disparaging other's play styles as being "PFS with the kiddie gloves on" isn't particularly cool, either.
|
|
"Come to that, disparaging other's play styles as being "PFS with the kiddie gloves on" isn't particularly cool, either."
That's not what I meant by that. I meant having the GM pick your sub-tier for the group. If a group plays up once and gets crushed, the players learn a lot more than if the GM is always there telling them they can't do it. The kiddie gloves refers to the GM making decisions for the table they shouldn't be making.
" If you and your friends are there with your L3 or L4 characters, and the party contains a couple of L6 and L7 characters, it can be hard to resist the pressure. It's even worse if one of the loudest voices pushing for you to play up is the event coordinator."
Event coordinator? Wow. No wonder people are so sensitive about this topic if we've got event coordinators doing it.
85% of the time, it's not worth it to try to push level 3-4 characters (plural) up into a 6-7. That's just a crazy risk for the people with the L6/L7 characters. Unless of course, they've got those kinds of characters built to take on the whole scenario themselves.
If the level 3-4 characters are martial with high "to hit" values, it starts looking better. But then there are several other things to factor in.
Seriously, if this is this big of an issue, I'm all for them revamping the gold reward system because its stupid to have people acting like this for some extra gold.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The important question is... But how do we fix this?
Here’s one thing you need to learn about relationships. You don’t fix people. You can try, but it won’t work.
While more action orientated players bother you, sloth orientated players might bother other people. Both are equally wrong.
The guy probably finds that it expedites things if he just does everything himself and other people can chime in if they want to join him. He probably also just assumes everything is OK with someone else, unless they speak up.
For example, player A asks Player B to cast Detect Magic (for traps or so that we don’t miss any magic items in a room). Pretty basic right? Sometimes the player can’t whether they want to do it or not. Or they fumble around. Or they don’t ask the GM themselves, so the GM never answers. So you sit there, doing nothing, until some other player does something stupid out of boredom. So the natural progression is to say “X detects magic, do they detect anything” instead of sitting there staring at each other. Or missing obvious traps or loot.
So although I don’t agree with it and it sounds terrible on the forums, I can completely understand why someone would do it. It’s extremely frustrating sitting there waiting for one of your teammates to perform their role while everyone glazes over and wastes time. Has anyone seen this before? I have.
We're way off topic, maybe a new thread should be created. This thread was supposed to be about success/non-success play up stories.
|
|
Maybe someone should take the time to explain to player B *why* the party wants them to cast detect magic? I find things go a lot easier if people know *why* its important that they do X, Y, or Z. Nearly every player I've played with wants to help, but they may or may not understand what is needed or why.
Yeah, it's off topic, but this seems like a pretty important topic.