Basically we have a group of 6 people or so, 4 of whom are currently GMing, and we alternate between campaigns. We more or less all follow these rules, although much of it is merely implicitly accepted.
1. Our group plays with probably something like a 42 point buy.
2. Our group can sell loot at market price.
3. Our group can craft items at half price without making any craft checks nor does it take any amount of in game time, all so long as you have the feat.
(And no, rule 2 and rule 3 combined don't mean infinite wealth. It's sort of implied that crafted items can't be sold.)
4. We allow re-rolls fairly often. We actually typed up rules for re-rolling for HP. (Re-roll 1's and 2's, if you have a d6 HD, etc.)
5. We don't really track living expenses.
6. We have a 10 gp, 10 lb item called "Adventurer's Kit" and assume you have most whatever you want when it comes to mundane stuff.
7. Our characters don't die. Ever. Unless you wanted to switch characters; then we occasionally kill off characters. (Like Spud the cleric who was torn apart by a kraken, may he rest in peace.)
8. Half the players don't role play. (In character 10% of the time, on a good day)
9. We allow leaderhip.
10. Our group often has 2 or 3 encounters each day and then we get to rest back to health and new spells.
11. There's no weather but sun. There's no terrain except for the one you can charge across unfettered.
...and probably more...
Having read a lot about how other people play, I was curious what people thought; is there a wrong way to play? As a GM, should I try to break free of some of these generally accepted, yet rarely discussed rules in our group? Is there something to be gained by abandoning them?
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
Are you and your group having fun? if the answer is yes, then you're playing the right way.
There is no wrong way to play.
Just don't expect me to play your way, and I won't expect you to play mine. Especially when your way is far different from the expected norm of the game, in either direction ("nitty gritty realism heroes are cannon fodder" style play, or your own Beyond Epic Fantasy way of playing).
As for the second part. Should you try to break away from these rules? If you want to try something different, yes. If not, keep on keepin' on.
There is something to be gained by changing, yes. A bit more of a sense of danger could be had simply by removing the "no deaths", "no weather", and "no terrain" clauses.
But you would lose something in return, which'd be your character's contractual immortality, which can be both good and bad (sad, epic deaths good IMO, boring, unlucky, ignoble deaths bad IMO).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is no "wrong way to play". There are "wrong ways to play for the current group". If everyone around the table is having fun, then go nuts.
Are you and your group having fun? if the answer is yes, then you're playing the right way.
That's our general policy. And hellz yeah, we have a good time.
Even so, I'm curious if I as a GM decided to eliminate just one of these rules, which one it should be and what benefits might derive from that decision. I think we're all open to playing in new ways.
Are you and your group having fun? if the answer is yes, then you're playing the right way.That's our general policy. And hellz yeah, we have a good time.
Even so, I'm curious if I as a GM decided to eliminate just one of these rules, which one it should be and what benefits might derive from that decision. I think we're all open to playing in new ways.
Well if you decide to lose some of those house rules i think you'll have to figure out what type of campaign you want to run, then look over the rules to see which ones don't fit in and cut them out. Then sit down with your players and discuss any changes you want to make.
I don't know if there is a "wrong" way to play, but it is possible for a player's "style" to be so obnoxious, so selfish, so sadistic and disruptive that nobody I know would want to play with him.
In fact, he's been kicked out of our group at least three times.
I suppose it's possible there is some group, somewhere that would enjoy inflicting this "style" upon themselves. If they could truly tolerate one-another, then his "style" would also be a "right" way to play.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In fact, he's been kicked out of our group at least three times.
Did you not learn the first two times?
In fact, he's been kicked out of our group at least three times.Did you not learn the first two times?
LOL! You'd think, right?
When you've known somebody most of your life, and so have the other players, you all become like family. And as you probably know, familial relationships are fraught with politics of a most weird and confusing sort.
I have no other explanation for it. It's just one of those things.
In fact, he's been kicked out of our group at least three times.Did you not learn the first two times?LOL! You'd think, right?
When you've known somebody most of your life, and so have the other players, you all become like family. And as you probably know, familial relationships are fraught with politics of a most weird and confusing sort.
I have no other explanation for it. It's just one of those things.
I know exactly what you mean, I have a friend who is probably exactly the type of person you're describing
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is relevant to this discussion.
Agree with consensus. The only rule in this regard is fun. If the group is having fun, rock on.
Your groups' style wouldn't be my favorite, but who cares? I'm not there.
That said, it doesn't to try something different occasionally. You might find a different style you like even more. Just so everyone is cool with the experiement and it is clear you can go back to the old comfort zone if it doesn't work.
And, of course, in counterpoint to myself, you can also take the tack of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
Yes, there is a wrong way to play. It's the one where people aren't having fun. Which style that is depends on the group.
Personally the style described by the OP wouldn't be my thing, but if everybody is happy with it and is having fun, you're doing it right. If someone is not happy or would like to try something different, it might be worthwhile to mix it up a bit with different kinds of games.
I think the biggest universal error in roleplaying is lack of communication. Communication on expectations, social contract, what you enjoyed, what you didn't enjoy, etc. Feedback is very important in any social endeavor, and roleplaying is no different.
And of course it is possible that tastes and styles within the group aren't compatible. Maybe one player is ruining it for everybody else, or maybe someone doesn't enjoy what everybody else loves. Always communicate first. Maybe some minor changes will fix the problem. Maybe you can compromise or alternate between different styles. Maybe it's better to go your separate ways. The only way to find out is to talk about it.
Out of curiosity, what happens to a character in your campaign when they get brutalized into deep, deep negative hit points or they fail a save or die?
Are you and your group having fun? if the answer is yes, then you're playing the right way.That's our general policy. And hellz yeah, we have a good time.
Even so, I'm curious if I as a GM decided to eliminate just one of these rules, which one it should be and what benefits might derive from that decision. I think we're all open to playing in new ways.
Try this, go completely opposite see what happens.
Out of curiosity, what happens to a character in your campaign when they get brutalized into deep, deep negative hit points or they fail a save or die?
That doesn't really happen / it hasn't gotten to that point in 5 years in all our campaigns? Maybe the monsters are just too easy, but sometimes an encounter does drop a couple characters, but the moment that happens, the monsters switch targets to the still conscious PCs. Maybe it's because of our 42 point buy that we've luckily/strangely never hit -16 hp or whatever. And we haven't played often enough in high levels for save or dies to be ubiquitous. There's also generally a cleric or something similar in our party, so that's helped.
Finally, GMs are known to fudge the rules, so I think a critical hit has turned into a normal attack, a spell did min damage when it should have done more, etc.
Like others have said, if everyone is having fun gm included, keep doing what your doing. The only thing i might be worried about is balancing encounters, but if you homebrew it shouldnt be too troublesom, it just limits the usefulness of published material.
OK, so like everyone is saying if you are all in agreement and having fun then everything is fine. I have one other concern though, that I will phrase in the form of another question. Given that you know (or believe) you can not die, is it still interesting/challenging for you? Is boredom what leads to intentionally killing off or retireing characters?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'll chime in with the rest of the group. If you're playing Monopoly and calling it Pathfinder, that's fine so long as you're all having fun.
I'll chime in with the rest of the group. If you're playing Monopoly and calling it Pathfinder, that's fine so long as you're all having fun.
HAHAHAHA have to remember that one XD
Every one else has said "If you're having fun, you're doing it right." So just to be different, I'm going to say that you're doing it wrong.
I mean, not really "wrong" (since you're having fun) but there's always the possibility that you could be having even MORE fun if you tried something a little different. So one great thing you can do is to TRY IT OUT.
For one session (or perhaps 2, but not more) let somebody GM a very different sort of game: one where the players are in fear for their lives and have geninue possibilities of either success or failure. Don't spring this on them, say beforehand "You'll all get to start with 5th level characters, but the dungeon you are entering is incredibly perilous: the odds are, you won't even make it out alive, and it would take a miracle to actually rescue the princess." (Exaggerate the challenge level since this is new to the group.)
Maybe it will be a bust and you'll all return to your normal games happy to get back to your usual fun approach to gaming. Or perhaps it will be great and you'll decide to up the challenge level in your normal games.
Or not... don't feel obligated to try this out: if you're having fun then you're doing fine. Game on!
Well, as somewhat of an explanation, our group originally started with one person who showed us the game (3.5 initially, Pathfinder soon after) and did all of the GMing for a few years. I started GMing two years ago, another 3 months ago, and our newest GM, last month.
We have known nothing but his play style all these years. I think he may have decided on a less lethal version of Pathfinder on behalf of two girls in our group who are heavily into roleplaying and invested a lot of time in developing their backstory and personality quirks and so on, and would likely be devastated if their character was killed. The rest of our characters are the unintended “beneficiaries” of his lenience.
Let me get this straight: I am still having fun. I love building characters, I love playing my characters, and more than anything, I love hanging out with my friends.
But I think this might be a good time to introduce a new challenge to my friends who have been living in such bovine prosperity. (“Playing Monopoly” as Adamantine Dragon ingeniously surmised)
I think a one or two session game, as mcherm suggested, would be a great way to reintroduce Pathfinder. Pathfinder: Hard Mode you could say. How to execute this exactly is something I’m still mulling over.
Y o u could try the most deadly dungeon ever created, by the mad scientist Gygax himself? ;)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I say there is a wrong way to play. If you are acting everything out and stabbing people, dressing children up as goblins and kobolds then killing them, etc. That is wrong and I don't care whose toes I step on. Anybody playing that way is having wrongbadfun!
I say there is a wrong way to play. If you are acting everything out and stabbing people, dressing children up as goblins and kobolds then killing them, etc. That is wrong and I don't care whose toes I step on. Anybody playing that way is having wrongbadfun!
There is nothing quite like the voice of experience. Thanks for the advice Durngrun Stonebreaker. :)
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I say there is a wrong way to play. If you are acting everything out and stabbing people, dressing children up as goblins and kobolds then killing them, etc. That is wrong and I don't care whose toes I step on. Anybody playing that way is having wrongbadfun!
DON'T JUDGE ME!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I think there ARE wrong ways to play but they all involve doing things that make you prick regardless of whether or not you're gaming. For instance, if you're character is hitting on another character and the only reason you're doing it is to somehow live a real world fantasy about another player ... yeah that gets annoying real fast. Stop that. You're having badwrongfun and I don't mind saying so.
Had a guy do this last night. He decided to have his fighter make passes (creepily) at the characters of the two female players, which made them feel very uncomfortable. He wouldn't quit so I kicked his ass out.
Short version: Yes, there is a wrong way to play. It's the way the makes you an ass hat.
First, there are a lot of wrong ways to play, most involving one person playing at the expense of everyone else, which doesn't appear to be the case for you.
As far as eliminating rules for the betterment of you game you have a number of options, but note that because you've already let your players become accustomed to easy access to magic they may not enjoy restrictions. If you did restrict magical items access, characters are more managable at higher levels, allowing you to keep groups going longer and easier.
Note i wrote restrict, not ban.
Lowering point totals for buys, and utilizing terrain rules make challenges. . . Challenging, but it has to play fun or it will just be a hassle to everyone.
Don't allow magic item buys or creationfeats, instead reward magical loot more thoughtfully, and make adventures out creating cool magical items.
However, if no one is up for the increased challenge, it probably won't be worth the effort.
Wrong way? Sure. When you don't enjoy your game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wanted to say there was a wrong way to play if your not having fun, but I'm apparently late to the party.
There are a lot of ways to play, but not all of them work for everyone. I once played with a GM who gave his girlfriend rerolls if she said please, and let her tell players how to play at the table. This was not so much fun for me. Was okay for them, was okay for a few of their friends, but I had to leave with some hurt feelings.
The right way to play is by RAW. But there are many people who don't have fun playing the right way. They have far more fun playing the wrong way (not in accordance with the rules). So if you have more fun doing so, go ahead and play the wrong way; there's nothing inherently bad about it.
The Most Important Rule (p. 9).