|
@shallowsoul - I think we're agreeing but I'm not sure. The GM set the framework but the player decided to perform the action. That action has consequences. It's then up to the player to decide how to deal with the fallout of those consequences.
Where I disagreed with you was the GM having to tell the player what happened and what is going to happen and then giving the player the option to change character. What happened should be self explanatory at a high level. Taking scenario 1 - you p*ssed off a God enough that they took time out of running their part of the multiverse to personally alter reality so that you've got a different bloodline. Taking scenario 2. You've picked up the Axe and now have an overwhelming urge to keep it [Will save DC999 or whatever to drop].
What is going to happen is also up to the player. With scenario 1, they could decide to keep it, find out why they got cursed, go on a quest to restore themselves, two or three of the above or anything else - it's up to the player. With example 2, they could go - cool I've got an uber-axe, what is it I should find a sage, or go on a quest to get it removed. All player choices, not GM ones. All th GM knows is that everytime the axe is used, or after x period of time something happens.
The problem is the player thinking that the DM isn't going to pay attention to the "Lords will be watching part" which is an assumption on the player's part. That player should have told the DM what he was going to do because I'm sure the DM would have told him what the consequences of his actions would have been which the player would then need to decide if he wants to roll with it or change characters.
News Flash! Not all concepts are going to work and I hope players realize this. You can't roll up into a campaign and always expect your concept to work and or be accepted.
|
|
That's right, so if you decide to go down that road with fate and alignment then you have to accept the consequences. You don't get to decide what happens, well you get to decide the road you want to go down and if it conflicts with something in the DM's world then he decides what the final outcome is.There is no inbuilt game mechanic for what you suggested. At all. Nothing anywhere that says "if you're not good you can lose the celestial bloodline."
Like I said, he can make up whatever he wants. Quit pretending its a paladins code. Its not. As per raw or RAI, what you're suggesting is not possible. Quit pretending it is.
GM can do whatever he wants. This is a dick move that blindsides players.
The game does "NOT" run solely on game mechanics.
You learn something new everyday.
<snip>The problem is the player thinking that the DM isn't going to pay attention to the "Lords will be watching part" which is an assumption on the player's part. That player should have told the DM what he was going to do because I'm sure the DM would have told him what the consequences of his actions would have been which the player would then need to decide if he wants to roll with it or change characters.
News Flash! Not all concepts are going to work and I hope players realize this. You can't roll up into a campaign and always expect your concept to work and or be accepted.
Ah I see where you're coming from and we have different starting assumptions. I read the initial scenario as the GM was happy with the player's PC and then the GM changed the bloodline based solely on the character's background and fluff. This is not cool. But changing it as a result of the player's actions in the game is valid.
I agree ground rules with my players for what is/isn't acceptable as character concepts so that there is a harmonious party that suits the adventure. This is genuinely collaborative and requires me to adapt the adventure framework to the group as it does the individuals to each other.
The problem is the player thinking that the DM isn't going to pay attention to the "Lords will be watching part" which is an assumption on the player's part. That player should have told the DM what he was going to do because I'm sure the DM would have told him what the consequences of his actions would have been which the player would then need to decide if he wants to roll with it or change characters.
Watching is NOT cursing. You're the one making assumptions here. Also, the player couldn't possibly have an evil celestial bloodline sorcerer
What's more, I honestly don't see "being watched, tracked, or even possibly hunted by the occasional celestial agents" as being a consequence. Why? Because the player obviously chose it as being part of her character, every bit as much as she chose the Flyby Attack feat. Ideally, this is something that the player and GM would have discussed, and agreed to, during character creation.
The problems arise when the GM takes control of the character out of the blue and throws down a curse AFTER character creation POST discussion. That's blindsiding the player and is nothing more than a malicious act from a bully on a power trip.
...the GM sets the framework but the players control the action. The GM can't know what's going to happen (other than privately consider some possible outcomes) because the player hasn't decided on their course of action.
The GM can't know that celestial agents might hunt down the evil villain who stole power from the heavens? How could the GM NOT know something like that? He's the one who decides whether something like that will ever happen!
This is hilarious.
Your aren't even using examples that are remotely close.
Funny because the fluff here is contradictory or did you not read the section I posted?
YOUR FATE (AND ALIGNMENT) IS YOUR OWN TO DETERMINE.
I dare you to find one section in there, just one, that says that "if the deities judge you not to be good you lose your bloodline."
See what you're doing is using fluff (non rule related crap) to make junk up. Which is fine. But quit pretending that its RAW or even RAI. Its not. Its houserules. Play the way you want but its not even RAI.
YOUR FATE (AND ALIGNMENT) IS YOUR OWN TO DETERMINE.
And if you poke the Gods enough, your chosen fate will be bad. The things you do will have consequences.
Bloodline Powers: Your celestial heritage grants you a great many powers, but they come at a price. The lords of the higher planes are watching you and your actions closely.
You say that the text is fluff, I say it is RAW. My evidence is that the Devs actually included it in the rules. Your evidence is?
Watching you closely is hardly anything more than what the lords of higher planes likely do to anyone else...that is to say, nothing.
Anythign beyond that is at the discretion of the GM (hopefully with input from the player).
I ask all of you this: At what point did this stop being a cooperative game? The GM is supposed to work with his players, and vice versa, just as much as the players are supposed to work together themselves.
Watching you closely is hardly anything more than what the lords of higher planes likely do to anyone else...that is to say, nothing.
Anythign beyond that is at the discretion of the GM (hopefully with input from the player).
I ask all of you this: At what point did this stop being a cooperative game? The GM is supposed to work with his players, and vice versa, just as much as the players are supposed to work together themselves.
When the player (or GM) wants the advantages of something, without dealing with any consequences of having it or their actions.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The line that they are watching you closely means nothing without the necessary implication that they'll do something about if if you cross "The line".
Imagine as you leave detention the teacher says "I'll be watching you."
What're they saying?
that you have a nice butt and they'll be watching it?
that they like your clothes and hope to see them again?
Of course not. They are saying, "IF YOU SCREW UP WE'LL BE MEETING AGAIN".
They Will Be Watching.
It has an implication and its not "with popcorn because we're bored up here and think you'll make saturday night entertainment."
They'll be watching and if you are abusing their powers then action will be taken.
-S
That's a fair point, Selgard, though the whole "take action for abusing your powers" is still an assumption. It could just as readily be referring to evil forces hoping to capitalize on your wickedness/abuses.
It's ultimately up to the GM. I just hope that, since it was all decided upon during character creation, that the player got a heads up from the GM.
Even then, I would still say a class altering curse from the gods is bad/wrong. Why? Because the player (or his character) can't do a damn thing about it. If a few celestials scheme to bring about the downfall of the character, that's different, that's the kind of thing an adventurer faces anyways--and can possibly do something about (even if it's merely reactionary self-defense).
|
I think the GM has the right to define the boundaries of the game, for example Core rules only, no summoners, perhaps even not all races are available. Things that the setting or world have or don't have. But once the general scope of the game is defined then I think the GM shouldn't interfere with the players choices.
I disagree with the player argument that if its in print its in the game, these are the things the GM should ultimately have the say over - but in discussion with the players. Perhaps there might be a chance of a 'unique' class or race which helps the GM spin the yarn of daring-do.
But I think players should be willing to except, gracefully, if a GM says no to something. Again I NOT suggesting waiting until the players have made their PC's and then surprising them with a wall of NO's. But at the onset the GM may suggest that Elves don't exist AT ALL. Not rare, none, zero, zilch. This would be fair enough in my opinion if put to the players before the character generation began.
S.
Can a GM REALLY mess with a character build? Sure, but let the player know that bad things are on the horizon for them, and there are consequences for offending the gods. Play it up! Have fun with it, after all, what hero doesn't suffer their "darkest hour" right before finding their true strength and winning the day?
If you're going to do it, do it so that it makes sense in the context of the story as well, don't just mess with the rules to gimp the player in specific-rules terms.
If you're going to curse the PC, then make it a consequence, or a major plot-hook. Always give them an "out" as well (something down the road) but maybe with unintended consequences.
Watching you closely is hardly anything more than what the lords of higher planes likely do to anyone else...that is to say, nothing.
Anythign beyond that is at the discretion of the GM (hopefully with input from the player).
I ask all of you this: At what point did this stop being a cooperative game? The GM is supposed to work with his players, and vice versa, just as much as the players are supposed to work together themselves.
I can't tell if you intentionally meant to hit a Bee's nest or not but I swear you're trolling your own thread. :P
Why would anyone steal divine powers if there is a curse involved? They wouldn't. They'd go steal some other powers without baggage.
Some might risk the anger of celestial beings, however. Once you have power, they can be dealt with.
Trying to figure out exactly how this thread brings anything to the table not already exhaustively explored on dozens of "paladin falls" threads.
Smartass response: Because it's a sorcerer falling, not a paladin.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You can disagree all you want but it doesn't change anything. The DM controls the universe that you play in so if you do something that causes the ball to start rolling then you don't always get to decide where it's going to go.
This reminds me of last week. I had to tell a player that he was taking Power Attack as his level 3 feat. He didn't like the idea, said it didn't match his "concept". I couldn't let him gimp his character like that. Pretty much everyone on the boards agrees that Power Attack is too good not to take. So, I told him I wouldn't let him risk all of the advantages, opportunities, and work I'd put into his character, and it was my game my rules. "But I'm a sorcerer" he says. "Look, we both know that magic is precious and special, so you can't go using it every fight" I answered.
Player entitlement really has gotten bad.
(This was satire, I really hope I didn't need this disclaimer)
So why aren't the evil gods cursing every paladin they find so his bonded weapon becomes a club or his mount a pony?
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
There is no inbuilt game mechanic for what you suggested. At all. Nothing anywhere that says "if you're not good you can lose the celestial bloodline."Like I said, he can make up whatever he wants. Quit pretending its a paladins code. Its not. As per raw or RAI, what you're suggesting is not possible. Quit pretending it is.
GM can do whatever he wants. This is a dick move that blindsides players.
I don't feel it is a "dick move" at all. I think it is very lenient, I would have expected an archon strike team. However, a GM usually should avoid removing assets from players arbitrarily. That is just bad form and many players react strongly.
In this case, the player asked for it. He invited punishment in much the same way any of the dime a dozen renegade warlocks do. If the backstory had been more of the "born hthis way" variety, the pc would IMC get away with it.
The GM should stay away from the PC. If a GM made a "mechanical" change to my PC like that I would, at the least, just play something else. I might even allow him to find someone to take my place at the table.Gotta live with your actions.
Would you allow a player to have a mechanical advantage due to his background story?
When the player (or GM) wants the advantages of something, without dealing with any consequences of having it or their actions.Watching you closely is hardly anything more than what the lords of higher planes likely do to anyone else...that is to say, nothing.
Anythign beyond that is at the discretion of the GM (hopefully with input from the player).
I ask all of you this: At what point did this stop being a cooperative game? The GM is supposed to work with his players, and vice versa, just as much as the players are supposed to work together themselves.
Every bloodline comes with a flavor/fluff description. THEN they list the mechanics(actual rules).
The format is:
flavor
bonus class skill
bonus spells
bonus feats.
Are YOU saying that you NEVER noticed that? O_o
depends on how strong an advantage, party makeup, players, balancing, etc.
an overwhelming advantage, probably not.
a large advantage, maybe if i thought them a little underpowered compared to the others (taking into account noncombat too)
a minor advantage, if the bg was strong enough sure.
edit: 2{ i would strive to find other ways to handle a problem than just nixxing an item/advantage.
For the people that argue the mechanics are everything, you are forgetting about Rule Zero.
You are missing the point. We know flavor matters, but flavor text and rules text are not the same. Otherwise they would not have different names, and different purposes. They both work to enhance the game, but in different ways. If a GM is going to start using one for the other, he should let the player know in advance.
When the player (or GM) wants the advantages of something, without dealing with any consequences of having it or their actions.Watching you closely is hardly anything more than what the lords of higher planes likely do to anyone else...that is to say, nothing.
Anythign beyond that is at the discretion of the GM (hopefully with input from the player).
I ask all of you this: At what point did this stop being a cooperative game? The GM is supposed to work with his players, and vice versa, just as much as the players are supposed to work together themselves.
Every bloodline comes with a flavor/fluff description. THEN they list the mechanics(actual rules).
The format is:
flavor
bonus class skill
bonus spells
bonus feats.
Are YOU saying that you NEVER noticed that? O_o
Yep, and the line about being watched isn't in the "flavor" it is in the powers part.
CelestialYour bloodline is blessed by a celestial power, either from a celestial ancestor or through divine intervention. Although this power drives you along the path of good, your fate (and alignment) is your own to determine.
Class Skill: Heal.
Bonus Spells: bless (3rd), resist energy (5th), magic circle against evil (7th), remove curse (9th), flame strike (11th), greater dispel magic (13th), banishment (15th), sunburst (17th), gate (19th).
Bonus Feats: Dodge, Extend Spell, Iron Will, Mobility, Mounted Combat, Ride-By Attack, Skill Focus (Knowledge [religion]), Weapon Finesse.
Bloodline Arcana: Whenever you cast a spell of the summoning subschool, the creatures summoned gain DR/evil equal to 1/2 your sorcerer level (minimum 1). This does not stack with any DR the creature might have.
Bloodline Powers: Your celestial heritage grants you a great many powers, but they come at a price. The lords of the higher planes are watching you and your actions closely.
Heavenly Fire (Sp): Starting at 1st level, you can unleash a ray of heavenly fire as a standard action, targeting any foe within 30 feet as a ranged touch attack. Against evil creatures, this ray deals 1d4 points of damage + 1 for every two sorcerer levels you possess. This damage is divine and not subject to energy resistance or immunity. This ray heals good creatures of 1d4 points of damage + 1 for every two sorcerer levels you possess. A good creature cannot benefit from your heavenly fire more than once per day. Neutral creatures are neither harmed nor healed by this effect. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier.
Celestial Resistances (Ex): At 3rd level, you gain resist acid 5 and resist cold 5. At 9th level, your resistances increase to 10.
Wings of Heaven (Su): At 9th level, you can sprout feathery wings and fly for a number of minutes per day equal to your sorcerer level, with a speed of 60 feet and good maneuverability. This duration does not need to be consecutive, but it must be used in 1 minute increments.
Conviction (Su): At 15th level, you can reroll any one ability check, attack roll, skill check, or saving throw you just made. You must decide to use this ability after the die is rolled, but before the results are revealed by the GM. You must take the second result, even if it is worse. You can use this ability once per day.
Ascension (Su): At 20th level, you become infused with the power of the heavens. You gain immunity to acid, cold, and petrification. You also gain resist electricity 10, resist fire 10, and a +4 racial bonus on saves against poison. Finally, you gain unlimited use of the wings of heaven ability. Finally, you gain the ability to speak with any creature that has a language (as per the tongues spell).
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Responding to the OP only:
The GM on question should seek player approval before tampering with character options. As presented, it seems like a thinly veiled power trip. The GM is there to entertain the players, and while that sometimes calls for a little sadism, you are not allowed to completely ignore the most obvious cues the player gives you: the character options.
I'll not say this can never be done, but only superb and empathic GMs should ever attempt this kind of shenanigan. A GM's vision of setting and rule balance doesn't trump the basic assumptions of player agency vis a vis character options.
|
|
Every DM you come across can do something different but he is well with in his rights to invoke the powers of the lords that are watching. If you the player aren't reading everything or you're just ignoring certain parts then that's your problem.
You don't get to tell the DM that the powers that be aren't watching, that's the DM's job and whether they act accordingly.
Can a DM let you get away with this? Yes.
Will it make sense in retrospect of the entry in the powers section? No.
|
|
Responding to the OP only:
The GM on question should seek player approval before tampering with character options. As presented, it seems like a thinly veiled power trip. The GM is there to entertain the players, and while that sometimes calls for a little sadism, you are not allowed to completely ignore the most obvious cues the player gives you: the character options.
I'll not say this can never be done, but only superb and empathic GMs should ever attempt this kind of shenanigan. A GM's vision of setting and rule balance doesn't trump the basic assumptions of player agency vis a vis character options.
We aren't talking about a DM homebrew, we are talking about an entry in the powers section of the class.
Yep, and the line about being watched isn't in the "flavor" it is in the powers part.
Actually that is the flavor part.
If you watch the formatting the part above the bonus skill is flavor text.
-------------------------
Celestial<--name of bloodline
Your bloodline is blessed by a celestial power, either from a celestial ancestor or through divine intervention. Although this power drives you along the path of good, your fate (and alignment) is your own to determine.<---flavor text
Class Skill: Heal.<--bonus skill
etc..
edit:It also matches my last post.
Another example:
Destined<--name of bloodline
Your family is destined for greatness in some way. Your birth could have been foretold in prophecy, or perhaps it occurred during an especially auspicious event, such as a solar eclipse. Regardless of your bloodline's origin, you have a great future ahead. <---flavor text
Class Skill: Knowledge (history).<--bonus skill
Would you allow a player to have a mechanical advantage due to his background story?The GM should stay away from the PC. If a GM made a "mechanical" change to my PC like that I would, at the least, just play something else. I might even allow him to find someone to take my place at the table.Gotta live with your actions.
bump
|
|
bumpWould you allow a player to have a mechanical advantage due to his background story?The GM should stay away from the PC. If a GM made a "mechanical" change to my PC like that I would, at the least, just play something else. I might even allow him to find someone to take my place at the table.Gotta live with your actions.
Why did you bump it?
It has nothing to do with what's going on. A player's background story has nothing to do with the entry in the powers column.
Your question has no relevance on the current situation.
bumpWould you allow a player to have a mechanical advantage due to his background story?The GM should stay away from the PC. If a GM made a "mechanical" change to my PC like that I would, at the least, just play something else. I might even allow him to find someone to take my place at the table.Gotta live with your actions.Why did you bump it?
It has nothing to do with what's going on. A player's background story has nothing to do with the entry in the powers column.
Your question has no relevance on the current situation.
Actually it does. You said it is ok to change the mechanics based on the background story in a negative manner. So now I am asking do you think it is ok to give a player more power based on his background.
Should I just assume you are a fair GM, and you will say yes to the power increase also?
I think that theres a certain amount of personal space for a person and his character. Different people have different boundaries, some people would take a terrible curse and change to their character as a great roleplaying opportunity, however others would feel really violated by having their character they brought to the table to play basically destroyed. If a character is going to be punished for having a particular backstory forewarning would be nice, preferably before its played out. They may have a very different opinion about consequences and fluff than you do. It really crosses a line if with no warning you just have your character you worked on and played with destroyed and are expected to play it out. If there were maybe some planning ahead, and talking out, and maybe nicely saying there was a quick way to fix it, it would probably be much more fun for the player, though it may never happen if the player is against it. Its about his fun too, and you certainly can't force him to play.
Without going into too much detail, I remember I had a character I created who centered around his daughter. I was really hoping for a casual campaign. After that character had to leave the party I was nicely informed he fully intended to kill off my daughter and the campaign was going to be a very dark one. I was more than a little horrified. That and a dozen other reasons led me to leave that group forever. Many bad feelings.
On another note, why would a GM give someone with feats and class features invested into greatswords a greataxe? From experience it just gets unused unless the situation absolutely demands it, and even then its sort of forgotten... My first thought would be "How much does this sell for? Wait! Can I trade it in for a shiney new sword instead? Wait, this thing gives me scales? EW! Remove curse please!"
So why aren't the evil gods cursing every paladin they find so his bonded weapon becomes a club or his mount a pony?Because they don't go after someone for just existing. Read the example again. The sorcerer is facing cosmic justice for being a pact breaker which can be quite a serious thing. A pact with a celestial being is not something to be done lightly and breaking it should have severe consequences. Said pact gave him the power by his own words so breaking it could take it away.
I'm sure an intelligent character capable of stealing power wouldn't do so unless he could also prevent them from being instantly whisked away as well.
Also, doesn't "cosmic justice" come in the form of damnation after death? Isn't that what this character would/should be facing?
I'm of the belief that the GM CAN'T revoke the sorcerer's powers in this particular instance, at least not after character creation in the manner oft described in this thread.
Clerics can have their powers revoked by their god, same with paladins. THE SORCERER CLASS HAS NO SUCH PROVISION.
Once a sorcerer has his power, its his for keeps. It is literally a part of him thereafter, whether he obtained it through a magical ritual, or through birth.
A god run by the GM can't take that away from him anymore than he could (or should) take the combat feats away from a fighter.
If you want to discuss rules versus flavor? Show me the rule that says the GM can arbitrarily strip a sorcerer of his powers.
Consequences, pft. The way some people describe them in this thread, it comes off as more like thinly veiled GM power tripping.
Rule zero. The GM can do anything he wants, but that doesn't mean he should. If the players (all of them) enjoyed this random changing of a characters abilities due to a deity being pissed, that's fine, but in this case, it seems the players are not having fun with it, so the GM shouldn't do it. This is a game about having fun, right?
If the GM uses this power, rather or not you agree such power exists, he shouldn't be surprised when he discovers no one shows up to his games.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Rule zero. The GM can do anything he wants, but that doesn't mean he should. If the players (all of them) enjoyed this random changing of a characters abilities due to a deity being pissed, that's fine, but in this case, it seems the players are not having fun with it, so the GM shouldn't do it. This is a game about having fun, right?
If the GM uses this power, rather or not you agree such power exists, he shouldn't be surprised when he discovers no one shows up to his games.
I agree with everything after the first comma. As you already seem to be implying, rule zero exists not to give the GM absolute cosmic powers, but to allow him to enhance the game to better match his particular group's tastes.
Deific interaction in Golarion proper is very scant. About ALL they do is grant their clerics, paladins et al powers. It is up to their followers to carry our their will. Now, you could easily have an inquisitor on your tail as a result of their god whispering in their ear but the gods themselves intentionally don't interfere with mortal life.
It sounds like what happened is essentially a custom archetype of sorcerer that's arcane but somehow derives power from another being. This is one reason I think the two are intentionally kept strictly separate in the system.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Rule zero. The GM can do anything he wants, but that doesn't mean he should. If the players (all of them) enjoyed this random changing of a characters abilities due to a deity being pissed, that's fine, but in this case, it seems the players are not having fun with it, so the GM shouldn't do it. This is a game about having fun, right?
If the GM uses this power, rather or not you agree such power exists, he shouldn't be surprised when he discovers no one shows up to his games.
Then the DM needs to tell the player that his concept will not work and he needs to choose something else.
Then the DM needs to tell the player that his concept will not work and he needs to choose something else.Rule zero. The GM can do anything he wants, but that doesn't mean he should. If the players (all of them) enjoyed this random changing of a characters abilities due to a deity being pissed, that's fine, but in this case, it seems the players are not having fun with it, so the GM shouldn't do it. This is a game about having fun, right?
If the GM uses this power, rather or not you agree such power exists, he shouldn't be surprised when he discovers no one shows up to his games.
That is certainly an option.
|
|
Deific interaction in Golarion proper is very scant. About ALL they do is grant their clerics, paladins et al powers. It is up to their followers to carry our their will. Now, you could easily have an inquisitor on your tail as a result of their god whispering in their ear but the gods themselves intentionally don't interfere with mortal life.
It sounds like what happened is essentially a custom archetype of sorcerer that's arcane but somehow derives power from another being. This is one reason I think the two are intentionally kept strictly separate in the system.
Well there are other powerful beings out there besides the gods.
Then the DM needs to tell the player that his concept will not work and he needs to choose something else.Rule zero. The GM can do anything he wants, but that doesn't mean he should. If the players (all of them) enjoyed this random changing of a characters abilities due to a deity being pissed, that's fine, but in this case, it seems the players are not having fun with it, so the GM shouldn't do it. This is a game about having fun, right?
If the GM uses this power, rather or not you agree such power exists, he shouldn't be surprised when he discovers no one shows up to his games.
Yes he does. This could have easily been cleared up before the game ever started.
It seems pretty clear to most of us that the GM was well within his rights, and well outside the bounds of commonly accepted GM behaviour, to do so. Mind, at least in my opinion, for what that is worth, the player messed up first. Going against type can be fun, but make darn sure that you're on the same page as the GM. That's the player's responsibility.