Dual-Cursed Oracle's Misfortune (Ex) and showing GM's dice rolls.


Pathfinder Society

1 to 50 of 303 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Lantern Lodge

So one of players played a Dual-Cursed Oracle, which has a Misfortune (Ex) Revelation.

Dual-Cursed Oracle wrote:
Misfortune (Ex): At 1st level, as an immediate action, you can force a creature within 30 feet to reroll any one d20 roll that it has just made before the results of the roll are revealed. The creature must take the result of the reroll, even if it’s worse than the original roll. Once a creature has suffered from your misfortune, it cannot be the target of this revelation again for 1 day.

The player insisted that I, as the GM, MUST show him ALL my rolls that involves monsters or NPCs.

For the session, I ruled that am not going to show all my rolls, but will reveal any roll that may be of concern to him.

For example, not showing him a stealth rolls by a creature, but showing him the attack rolls made by that creature.

So my question is... as the GM do I HAVE to show him ALL my rolls? (concerning any creature within 30 feet.)

My immediate instincts say no, as it feels to me like a player is forcing the GM to run the game in a certain way.
Aka, a player is controlling/influencing the GM, to run things his way.

Any advice on this matter?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You do not have to reveal your rolls unless you want to.

The core rules do not require it. In fact, they suggest the opposite.

The PFS does not require it. I have pictures of PFS tables where the GM is using a screen.

His demanding to see your die rolls is telling though. I would move him to my immediate right and watch his dice like a hawk.


Secane wrote:


Dual-Cursed Oracle wrote:
Misfortune (Ex): At 1st level, as an immediate action, you can force a creature within 30 feet to reroll any one d20 roll that it has just made before the results of the roll are revealed. The creature must take the result of the reroll, even if it’s worse than the original roll. Once a creature has suffered from your misfortune, it cannot be the target of this revelation again for 1 day.
Any advice on this matter?

My advice is that the bolded part is really the relevant piece here. It depends at what point the result of the roll occurs. Your player is arguing that it is after all modifiers to the roll (ie BAB, STR mod, Power Attack penalty, etc.) have been added and compared to AC, for attack rolls. I don't think he can make a strong enough counter argument that the result of the roll is from the point of the die coming to rest on a specific number. If it were me and I was in the habit of rolling behind a screen (which I'm not, but I don't see anything wrong with either way), I would inform him that he does not get to dictate how I run the game as long as I'm not cheating and that I feel the wording of the power to mean that before the player knows anything about the die roll. I would just ensure that when a creature within 30 ft of the player makes a d20 roll, I would indicate that to the player by obviously holding up a d20 for all to see, then rolling either behind or in the open as I normally would. The player is then permitted to make the call as to whether they wish to activate the power or not. Really, the time that misfortune really gets silly IMO is when the character starts using it on their allies poor saving throw results.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Weslocke wrote:

You do not have to reveal your rolls unless you want to.

The core rules do not require it. In fact, they suggest the opposite.

The PFS does not require it. I have pictures of PFS tables where the GM is using a screen.

His demanding to see your die rolls is telling though. I would move him to my immediate right and watch his dice like a hawk.

Wow, that's really jumping the gun. The misfortune ability, for all its frustration to GMs everywhere requires that the player know the numeric results of rolls before you as the GM call out the results. Asking to see those rolls absolutely does not make that player a suspected cheater. It also though pretty much requires that you show any roll which the player would have the opportunity to Misfortune (stealth rolls where the player is unaware of the bad guy, perception checks by the bad guy (again where the player is unaware) or anything else like that you could very easily justify keeping hidden.

That being said, there is no rule that you are required to show your die rolls, but a lot of us GMs do (with a couple of notable exceptions why we might not).

Shadow Lodge

Show him the die roll, at least while you're in initiative. As long as he can see the target, he should be able to see your die rolls. The in-game equivalent is he sees the baddie swinging his sword right at his friend's neck, he can try to afflict him with misfortune to make him lose his grip. If you hide all your die rolls, you are arbitrarily gimping his ability simply because you don't like showing your rolls.

If his character can see your character, he should see you die rolls.

Lantern Lodge

@Weslocke,

I too use a screen.

I feel the player may have been playing under other GMs that are willing to entertain their "request" and thought that ALL GMs will have open rolls, thanks to Misfortune.

Thanks for pointing out that in no where in the rules or in Misfortune's description did it say that the GM must REVEAL his/her rolls.

Drogos wrote:
Secane wrote:


Dual-Cursed Oracle wrote:
Misfortune (Ex): At 1st level, as an immediate action, you can force a creature within 30 feet to reroll any one d20 roll that it has just made before the results of the roll are revealed. The creature must take the result of the reroll, even if it’s worse than the original roll. Once a creature has suffered from your misfortune, it cannot be the target of this revelation again for 1 day.
Any advice on this matter?
My advice is that the bolded part is really the relevant piece here. It depends at what point the result of the roll occurs. Your player is arguing that it is after all modifiers to the roll (ie BAB, STR mod, Power Attack penalty, etc.) have been added and compared to AC, for attack rolls. I don't think he can make a strong enough counter argument that the result of the roll is from the point of the die coming to rest on a specific number. If it were me and I was in the habit of rolling behind a screen (which I'm not, but I don't see anything wrong with either way), I would inform him that he does not get to dictate how I run the game as long as I'm not cheating and that I feel the wording of the power to mean that before the player knows anything about the die roll. I would just ensure that when a creature within 30 ft of the player makes a d20 roll, I would indicate that to the player by obviously holding up a d20 for all to see, then rolling either behind or in the open as I normally would. The player is then permitted to make the call as to whether they wish to activate the power or not. Really, the time that misfortune really gets silly IMO is when the character starts using it on their allies poor saving throw results.

Humm... I think I get it.

As long as I roll something, he can always ask me to re-roll, but I am not required to show him the roll. Only tell him the results from the roll or the re-roll.
(Oh course, I won't be cheating on the dice. Just giving the players the results.)

So lets say I roll an attack roll and got a 20... the moment I say crit! I have already revealed the results... so by all rights... he can't get a re-roll... (Thought in such a case, I may just warn of the crit and let him re-roll it... )


I'd probably inform him of potential crits against him and friends, just so that he can get the most use of the ability. Afterall, the PCs are generally supposed to overcome the obstacles before them so they can move to the next challenge. But I don't see anything wrong with him not knowing what every roll made at the table is. I also think that it is appropriate that Misfortune be a fickle thing that sometimes happens to help the target.

Lantern Lodge

MisterSlanky wrote:
Weslocke wrote:

You do not have to reveal your rolls unless you want to.

The core rules do not require it. In fact, they suggest the opposite.

The PFS does not require it. I have pictures of PFS tables where the GM is using a screen.

His demanding to see your die rolls is telling though. I would move him to my immediate right and watch his dice like a hawk.

Wow, that's really jumping the gun. The misfortune ability, for all its frustration to GMs everywhere requires that the player know the numeric results of rolls before you as the GM call out the results. Asking to see those rolls absolutely does not make that player a suspected cheater. It also though pretty much requires that you show any roll which the player would have the opportunity to Misfortune (stealth rolls where the player is unaware of the bad guy, perception checks by the bad guy (again where the player is unaware) or anything else like that you could very easily justify keeping hidden.

That being said, there is no rule that you are required to show your die rolls, but a lot of us GMs do (with a couple of notable exceptions why we might not).

I am totally ok with open combat rolls. It is the more sneaky rolls, like stealth checks, or monster perception checks that I am concern about.

My BIGGEST gripe is how the player informed me about him using Misfortune.
He told me that I "MUST" show him my rolls... that is the part I am not too happy about. It smacks of GM piloting.

Sesharan wrote:

Show him the die roll, at least while you're in initiative. As long as he can see the target, he should be able to see your die rolls. The in-game equivalent is he sees the baddie swinging his sword right at his friend's neck, he can try to afflict him with misfortune to make him lose his grip. If you hide all your die rolls, you are arbitrarily gimping his ability simply because you don't like showing your rolls.

If his character can see your character, he should see you die rolls.

That does make sense.

Hummm... I think go with your suggestion. Open rolls for things he can see, but not for things he does not notice. (Basically as long as a re-roll makes sense in the situation.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Hmm, this could be amusing at my table, since I often ask for rolls for no reason*, grab fists full of dice for damage, and other immersion tricks. I also make funny faces.

It would be funny if I rolled a one, made a pained look, and the player misread it and used misfortune. Then I roll a crit...

(Aside, I do think I'd announce the threat before I roll for confirming the crit.)

*

Spoiler:
ME: "Ok, I need you to make a will save."
Player: "Alright." *rolls* "Crap, I rolled a 2. Ok, burning resolve," *rolls again* "Much better, a 17, what happened?"
Me: You successfully learned the GM will ask for saving throws for no reason except paranoia.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

**I summon Yiroep!**

Seriously though, there is a big thread or two about this in the rules/advice forum in the Paizo boards.

1. You are not required to show him all your rolls (see below)
2. Misfortune cannot affect secret rolls. The oracle must be aware of what is happening, and it must be used on an action. So you could not force a reroll on stuff like Sense Motive rolls.
3. It is an immediate action, so Oracles cannot use this while flatfooted, meaning usually they can't in the surprise round and the first round of combat as most oracles have low initiatives.

I have a fiend with more than one dual-cursed oracle. His take (and mine) on a GM that rolls behind the screen is to tell him ahead of time what your threshold is.

"If you roll a 20 on a die on an ally to attack, I'd like to reroll it. If they are attacking with a scimitar, a 18-20 would do. If a party member rolls a 1 or 2 on a saving throw, I'd like to as well."

and so on.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

6 people marked this as a favorite.

You are required to let PCs use whatever legal abilities they have, and run them as-written.
You are required to rule with common sense and provide a fair and fun experience to the best of your ability.

If you can think of a way to keep your rolls hidden while still running misfortune both as written and in a way that provides a fair and fun experience for the player, knock yourself out.

That's really all it comes down to.

Lantern Lodge

Jiggy wrote:

You are required to let PCs use whatever legal abilities they have, and run them as-written.

You are required to rule with common sense and provide a fair and fun experience to the best of your ability.

If you can think of a way to keep your rolls hidden while still running misfortune both as written and in a way that provides a fair and fun experience for the player, knock yourself out.

That's really all it comes down to.

Jiggy stole the words right out of my mouth. ;)

While it seems the manner in which he asked you wasn't the most respectful, I am of the mindset that all rolls made during play (both GM and PC) should be in plain view. Particularly with this ability and those like it, not doing so for rolls your PC is able to affect really displaces the ability.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber

I realize that this is going to be a controversial stance for some of you. For PFS, I really believe you need to take your what reads like GM entitlement attitudes about "increasing paranoia" with random-saves-for-non-effects and check them at the door, please.

I would CERTAINLY refund a use of 'resolve' if there was no actual effect to be saved against, and would tend to view not doing so as shady GMing, in spite of the desired effect of "immersion".

Your "roll a will save" would probably be met by a "if you can't tell me why, no."

There are a multitude of class features, feats, traits, and spells which interact with all manner of saves. Some of these are even passive.

Adjusting to rolling in the open as the GM is just simpler.

The assertion that the player was engaged in "GM Piloting" for trying to use the class feature of his character in the most obvious reading (I get to see the numeric result of the die and decide if i'm going to expend my once per NPC revelation before you announce results if my PC could take an immediate action) seems... pretty anti-player.


Bottom line that PC has a really annoying class power. No one can deny that.

He then amped up how annoying it is by trying to control your side of the screen.

I also do no think its reasonable for you to tell him every roll. There are some rolls where its simply not important enough for him to be told. Before the game starts find out where the common ground is. He'll probably agree that if someone rolls above a 15 on an attack roll that he'd never change that.

Also remember there are limits to his power. Enforce the range and times per round limits.

Also when someone is dual cursed, ask them what their curses are and then enforce those curses. They most likely chose two really cheesy curses since they are probably a badwrongfun power gamer. Make sure you enforce the CURSED aspect of Haunted-Legalistic dual cursed demi-god at your table.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TetsujinOni wrote:

Adjusting to rolling in the open as the GM is just simpler.

The assertion that the player was engaged in "GM Piloting" for trying to use the class feature of his character in the most obvious reading (I get to see the numeric result of the die and decide if i'm going to expend my once per NPC revelation before you announce results if my PC could take an immediate action) seems... pretty anti-player.

Serious question to the original poster: what good is the ability if they just make you roll the dice twice? Do you not think the ability exists to some extent to be able to occasionally avoid a poor outcome for the Oracle? How will they know if they are avoiding a bad effect or not if they do not know what the roll was?

Your desire to make all rolls behind a screen dilutes the power to "Make DM roll the dice twice", without any benefit to them.

Now, having the discretion to only let them actively use the power against things they know about, as opposed to things happening out side of their perception, that would be a separate issue.


Having 2 dual-cursed oracles, I've had one game where the GM all rolls behind the screen. Setting up a threshold is what I did. "If they roll a crit threat with that weapon, then they reroll it." (Whatever that is for them if I know it...if it's for a particular weapon and not a claw or something, I just specify the normal crit range for that weapon) The GM I had for that game was very accepting of that and it worked well. The revelation loses some power that way, but not a whole bunch.

The only problem, of course, is trust. When they reroll the crit threat, did they cheat? Did they reroll something that was a natural 1? Of course, you'll never know...and any GM that does that is shady and a cheater, and it doesn't matter if someone has misfortune or not at that point anyway cause the GM is basically doing what they want anyway.

Really, I think most GMs should open roll anyway (edit: I mean in PFS, of course) in most games even with players who don't have reroll abilities, with the exception of some secret stuff like bluff/sense motive. But I understand not everyone will agree with that.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber
Chalk Microbe wrote:
Bottom line that PC has a really annoying class power. No one can deny that.

Oh, and for the record: I deny that.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Chalk Microbe wrote:
Bottom line that PC has a really annoying class power. No one can deny that.

I have to disagree with that statement. Class powers aren't annoying, it is the person playing the character that can be annoying. If a player learns to share spotlight then it doesn't matter what type of build they are playing as a fun time can be had by all.


Yiroep wrote:

Having 2 dual-cursed oracles, I've had one game where the GM all rolls behind the screen. Setting up a threshold is what I did. "If they roll a crit threat with that weapon, then they reroll it." (Whatever that is for them if I know it...if it's for a particular weapon and not a claw or something, I just specify the normal crit range for that weapon) The GM I had for that game was very accepting of that and it worked well. The revelation loses some power that way, but not a whole bunch.

If the Dm doesn't roll in the open or I cannot see/read their dice, then I do the same thing with mine. I.e., I specify that the first per round that the DM rolls a 20 on the attack then they reroll it, or whatever I believe is the crit range of the weapon. The DM just lets me know which creatures have been effected and when they were effected. This has worked very well in the past.

Honestly, setting up these thresholds saved several party members from being crit, or even hit, in bonekeep, which probably means I save 2 or so from death.


Dual Cursed Oracle's Misfortune class power is annoying.

If you are denying that having to tell one player at a table every single roll you make with a d20 isn't annoying then that's your choice and I appreciate your standing up for what you feel isn't an annoying class power.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

There are several abilities in the game that do something like this i think.

As a GM, i roll unimportant rolls and such that PC´s can´t see or know of hidden or if possible just take ten.
Then more important stuff like in combat or in encounters are rolled open, everyone can see. After all it´s not my characters and it also raises thrill. There is no fudging then saving players or other stuff, but everyone can see it´s fair.


I just had a scary thought...

A full party of dual-cursed oracles. First of all, they'd look like a bunch of gimp people trying to adventure (with all their curses), but those poor, poor enemies with their rerolls....

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

2 people marked this as a favorite.

@Tetsujin Oni,

I *did* 'refund' the resolve on it. I don't make players burn resources on misc rolls. Now if it's a 'legit' roll (like someone swinging a sword) and they 'misfortune' a 1 because they think it's a hit, that's their problem.

I do find the 'you must tell me why' argument funny.

"Make a perception check."
"Why?"
"Because I called for one."
"No"
"Ok." *rolls to hit* You take 23 points of damage from the sneak attacking rogue in the surprise round."
"I don't get to roll for perception?"
"I told you to, you chose not to."

@Yiroep, that seems like a good compromise. Question though, what if the 'crit range' doesn't hit normally? For example a keen scimitar crits on a 15-20, if the BBEG needs to roll a 17 or higher, would you expect the ability to 'go off' on a roll of 16? Since the mechanic reads 'before the result is known' I'd think that would mean it would go off as it meets the condition (I rolled a natural 15+) but that it didn't hit doesn't change that the power was used. If you say "I want to use my power when he gets hit" then (I beleive) you're breaking the intent of the power.

@CRobledo Can you find me the rule reference saying you can't take immediate actions while flat footed? I couldn't find it the other night and let the wizard take it. It was the difference between the emergency force bubble and skewered wizard.


Chalk Microbe wrote:

Bottom line that PC has a really annoying class power. No one can deny that.

He then amped up how annoying it is by trying to control your side of the screen.

I also do no think its reasonable for you to tell him every roll. There are some rolls where its simply not important enough for him to be told. Before the game starts find out where the common ground is. He'll probably agree that if someone rolls above a 15 on an attack roll that he'd never change that.

Also remember there are limits to his power. Enforce the range and times per round limits.

Also when someone is dual cursed, ask them what their curses are and then enforce those curses. They most likely chose two really cheesy curses since they are probably a badwrongfun power gamer. Make sure you enforce the CURSED aspect of Haunted-Legalistic dual cursed demi-god at your table.

For the record, believing that someone has an annoying power does not mean that they are a badwrongfun power gamer. This sort of attitude is a good way to ruin a decent table.

For example, I have gotten thanked, literally thanked by multiple players for saving their character's lives through this power. I strongly believe they would not have been thanking me if they thought my use of it was annoying.

Scarab Sages

This power isn't terrible annoying in itself. It just seems like some players might make it as such.

For example, I think Furious Kender is being very reasonable with his use of the ability. If the GM must roll everything behind a screen, then using the power like that is fair.

However, as some have stated, you do have to be aware of a creature, I believe, to use this ability. So keep rolling those stealth checks stealthily, they can't use it on that.

However, if a player is straight up saying, "You must roll in the open for everything!" then yes, he is annoying.

My 2cp.


Chalk Microbe wrote:

Dual Cursed Oracle's Misfortune class power is annoying.

If you are denying that having to tell one player at a table every single roll you make with a d20 isn't annoying then that's your choice and I appreciate your standing up for what you feel isn't an annoying class power.

Several people have pointed out that this isn't how the power needs to work. You can set up thresholds, like if you roll a 20 on an attack, and it adds virtually nothing to DM time or thought. You also don't need to declare your dice as a DM.


Matthew Morris wrote:
@CRobledo Can you find me the rule reference saying you can't take immediate actions while flat footed? I couldn't find it the other night and let the wizard take it. It was the difference between the emergency force bubble and skewered wizard.

Here you go: LINK

last sentence of that section. Does help defeat feather fall, emergency force sphere, misfortune, spellstoring items, etc...

PRD wrote:
Using an immediate action on your turn is the same as using a swift action and counts as your swift action for that turn. You cannot use another immediate action or a swift action until after your next turn if you have used an immediate action when it is not currently your turn (effectively, using an immediate action before your turn is equivalent to using your swift action for the coming turn). You also cannot use an immediate action if you are flat-footed.


Chalk Microbe wrote:

Dual Cursed Oracle's Misfortune class power is annoying.

If you are denying that having to tell one player at a table every single roll you make with a d20 isn't annoying then that's your choice and I appreciate your standing up for what you feel isn't an annoying class power.

By the same token, I can say it's annoying if the GM wants to be paranoid about their dice rolls and not let the players ever see anything. Even more so when it completely shuts down the use of a character's ability.

The threshold idea (enemy rolls a crit threat on an attack, ally rolls a 1 or something on a saving throw) works well. If the GM just rolls in the open and lets the player decide if something warrants a reroll, that works well too.

The only thing Misfortune affects is the d20 roll. It's not like you need to reveal what all of the modifiers are and whether or not an attack is a success (hence the 'before the results are revealed' part), but if you're keeping dice rolls secret and making the player guess on whether they should use it, then you're completely negating the use of that ability, and I would personally think that's kind of an unfair way to handle things as a GM.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Furious Kender wrote:

For the record, believing that someone has an annoying power does not mean that they are a badwrongfun power gamer. This sort of attitude is a good way to ruin a decent table.

I agree I've posted about Sir-Trips-A-Lot and Sir-Grabs-A-Lot, they drive me crazy, but I'd not call them bad-wrong-fun, as an example.

(And I know of at least one local PFS member who hates stone call.

Contrawise though, it's not badwrongfun to enforce the downsides of a character. Whether it be an Oracle curse, or a dump stat. That's not wrong, it's fair.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Thank you CRobelo. I couldn't find it in the PRD at the table, and when I can't find it, I'll rule in the player's favor. :-)

Sczarni RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

I agree with some of the earlier posters here... the one time I ran a character with Misfortune, I told the GM that I would only use it in cases where an attack roll was a 20, or if I knew a spell needed a save and I really wanted it to work. Misfortune is crazy enough with its abilities to help your own side that it's worth your while to help out the GM when playing. Everyone has better things to do than double-checking with the Oracle about a reroll on every single throw of the dice.

On the other hand, an earlier comment says that rolling a 20 meant a crit, which means the results had already been given. In the same way, rolling a 1 is a miss, which is similarly self-identifying.

While I personally wouldn't as a GM, I can see a table ruling that a self-identifying roll couldn't be Misfortuned. As it stands, everyone knows that a 20 automatically hits. A 19 is a very different story that requires people to check stat blocks. Fate is fickle and all.

On the other hand, as a player with Misfortune, if I outlined my ability with the GM before play and the types of die rolls I wanted to look for in an attempt to be as helpful as possible with a sometimes annoying power, and the GM hid dice rolls and refused to help out when an 18 came along, I would be justifiably upset. If the ability is allowed under PFS play and GM's don't allow it, that GM has just started up a house rules game.

(I say this still regretting a time I GM-nerfed "Antagonize" on a BBEG.)

Lantern Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Arhhh.... I did said, "Open rolls for things he can see, but not for things he does not notice. (Basically as long as a re-roll makes sense in the situation."

I try my best to be fair, accommodating and fun in my games.
Never will I shortchange my players. Be they min-maxers, RPers or just players that want to have some fun.

@ Anyone who feels rolling in the open is better/simpler/easier/etc.

As a GM, I want to tell a story, an interactive story, but still a descriptive story, that feels like a it is alive.
This mean, I would often describe things that happen, in place of just noting down numbers and giving a result.

For example a combat move could be "Your blade, slashes into the owlbear's neck! It tries to give you a feeble last swipe... before collapsing onto the ground." Over "Ok, you did 10 points of damage, great! The Owlbear is dead... ."

I roll behind a screen, NOT because I want to ""conspire against my players"", but because there is no need for them to know at what number on the dice, would "The bandit strikes at you, avoiding your shield and cutting you in the shoulder. Leaving a deep wound."

And I NEVER cheat my players on dice rolls.... unless that roll will KILL them and they are like... lv 1, first game, first table-top RPG game... . Player death is the only time I will change numbers to AVOID killing the fun.

TetsujinOni wrote:
The assertion that the player was engaged in "GM Piloting" for trying to use the class feature of his character in the most obvious reading (I get to see the numeric result of the die and decide if i'm going to expend my once per NPC revelation before you announce results if my PC could take an immediate action) seems... pretty anti-player.

My use of the words GM Piloting may be too strong a word, but Anti-player is just harsh.

I have no issue with a player wanting to make the most of his character's abilities. Nor I ever will.

What I am uncomfortable about is the way the player conveyed his intent on using the power. The word used is "MUST", as in you MUST show me your dice rolls.

It was not given as a request, but issued like a command or ruling.

I can understand that the player feels that is the best way for him to use his power, but he could have been simply polite about it.

Furious Kender wrote:
Yiroep wrote:

Having 2 dual-cursed oracles, I've had one game where the GM all rolls behind the screen. Setting up a threshold is what I did. "If they roll a crit threat with that weapon, then they reroll it." (Whatever that is for them if I know it...if it's for a particular weapon and not a claw or something, I just specify the normal crit range for that weapon) The GM I had for that game was very accepting of that and it worked well. The revelation loses some power that way, but not a whole bunch.

If the Dm doesn't roll in the open or I cannot see/read their dice, then I do the same thing with mine. I.e., I specify that the first per round that the DM rolls a 20 on the attack then they reroll it, or whatever I believe is the crit range of the weapon. The DM just lets me know which creatures have been effected and when they were effected. This has worked very well in the past.

Honestly, setting up these thresholds saved several party members from being crit, or even hit, in bonekeep, which probably means I save 2 or so from death.

I really like your ideal Furious Kender, don't mind me borrowing it!

Setting such thresholds would really help the player using Misfortune to maximize that ability's effectiveness!

And from a GM point of view, I could easily weave the effect into words like... "The bear's claws come down straight at Dave's head, but! John muttered a curse and suddenly the bear slipped on the wet snow, it's claw strike the ground next to Dave."
(Aka, a crit turns into a miss.)

Brilliant! The best of both worlds. Thanks!

Scarab Sages

Jiggy wrote:

You are required to let PCs use whatever legal abilities they have, and run them as-written.

You are required to rule with common sense and provide a fair and fun experience to the best of your ability.

If you can think of a way to keep your rolls hidden while still running misfortune both as written and in a way that provides a fair and fun experience for the player, knock yourself out.

That's really all it comes down to.

/shrug

GM's are not required to show any die roll and the ability gives the option to force a reroll BEFORE results are known.

GM: "I'm attacking, looks like it might hit"
Player: "What did you roll"
GM: "It was not a 20, do you want me to reroll or announce the results?"

Note: GM's are not barred from fudging dice rolls, even in PFS. While discouraged, it is legal.

The problem I have experienced is players using misfortune to reroll every failed skill check.

Player 1: "I rolled a one on my faction mission"
Player 2: "Misfortune, reroll."

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Nothing you said contradicts anything in my post that you quoted.

Scarab Sages

Jiggy wrote:
Nothing you said contradicts anything in my post that you quoted.

I was not contradicting. I was expounding upon.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Ah, okay. It read like a refutation, at least to me. Nevermind, then. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Clearly Jiggy is just itching for a fight. ;)

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Drogos wrote:
Clearly Jiggy is just itching for a fight. ;)

Nuh-uh! *throatpunch*

Lantern Lodge

Jiggy wrote:
Drogos wrote:
Clearly Jiggy is just itching for a fight. ;)
Nuh-uh! *throatpunch*

Secane wanted to give a comment on Jiggy's actions...

... but decided not to... as he fears for his life. (and throat) :P


Artanthos wrote:
Note: GM's are not barred from fudging dice rolls, even in PFS. While discouraged, it is legal.
Guide p21 wrote:

Do Not Cheat

Do not falsify rolls

Lantern Lodge

Artanthos wrote:

/shrug

GM's are not required to show any die roll and the ability gives the option to force a reroll BEFORE results are known.

GM: "I'm attacking, looks like it might hit"
Player: "What did you roll"
GM: "It was not a 20, do you want me to reroll or announce the results?"

Note: GM's are not barred from fudging dice rolls, even in PFS. While discouraged, it is legal.

I do not share your interpretation of the word "results". I understand results as meaning success or failure, not the number that was rolled on the die. It would be a rather strange and unuseful ability if you could only hazard a re-roll just for the hell of it because you had zero indication of wether or not it was needed.

If it were me, I would say to my player "Dude rolled a 12 on the die. Will it stand, or re-roll?". I would not announce the total with modifiers, however.

Also, just for clarity sake, PFS are absolutely not allowed to fudge dice rolls. It calls this out specifically in the FAQ. Now stopping them from doing so is another matter entirely...

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
RtFM wrote:
Artanthos wrote:
Note: GM's are not barred from fudging dice rolls, even in PFS. While discouraged, it is legal.
Guide p21 wrote:

Do Not Cheat

Do not falsify rolls
Guide p35 wrote:
While we do not advocate fudging die rolls, consider the experience of the player when deciding whether to use especially lethal tactics or if a character is in extreme danger of death, especially when such a player is new to the game.

As GM I am responsible for ensuring a fun game. If that means altering the occasional die roll, so be it. This can be in the players favor or against it.

It is not something I've had to do in organized play to date, but the option is there if necessary.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Artanthos wrote:
As GM I am responsible for ensuring a fun game. If that means altering the occasional die roll, so be it. This can be in the players favor or against it.

Rather curious as to what types of situations might come up in which fudging dice against the player upholds your stated responsibility of "ensuring a fun game".

Lantern Lodge

Jiggy wrote:
Artanthos wrote:
As GM I am responsible for ensuring a fun game. If that means altering the occasional die roll, so be it. This can be in the players favor or against it.
Rather curious as to what types of situations might come up in which fudging dice against the player upholds your stated responsibility of "ensuring a fun game".

Truer words were never spoken, sir.

Dark Archive

Jiggy, I would argue that having the BBEG fall to a save or suck on the very first round before his initiative would be unfun for quite a few players. I will allow myself the possibility for fudging, depending on the situation.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adam Mogyorodi wrote:
Jiggy, I would argue that having the BBEG fall to a save or suck on the very first round before his initiative would be unfun for quite a few players. I will allow myself the possibility for fudging, depending on the situation.

That could be true for some players. I would hazard a guess that it would not be true for a player who chose to employ save or suck spells though, and at that point fudging to enhance the fun of the other players would certainly not be enhancing his/her fun.

So who gets priority? And what gives us the right to prioritize one persons fun over another's? This is why I personally let the dice fall as they may.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

As a player, this tells me that I shouldn't even bother trying to cast a save or suck spell on the BBEG for the first few rounds because it's going to 'fail' no matter what the dice roll is.

That's kind of discouraging. But I suppose it's better to know and switch to your backup plan than to spend a whole bunch of time and spell energy on actions that will be fudged to fail. So I guess I learned something positive today.

Edit: Rats! Ninja'd by about 30 seconds. ;)

Silver Crusade

I let whatever happens to the BBEG happen. It's the author's fault for making them so gimpy if they can't make a simple will save vs hold person. Should have brought that cloak of resistance, I guess.

I've accepted my role as punching bag when I run PFS scenarios. There's not cause to start bending rules and trying to make scenarios something they're not.

That being said, I don't fudge rolls in favor of players either. If they somehow get themselves in hot water in a PFS scenario, they kind of deserve it. Even season 4 is not *that* hard.


Lormyr wrote:
So who gets priority?

The GM.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adam Mogyorodi wrote:
Jiggy, I would argue that having the BBEG fall to a save or suck on the very first round before his initiative would be unfun for quite a few players. I will allow myself the possibility for fudging, depending on the situation.

Funnily enough, in the just under 2 years I've been playing, not once has a GM asked me (during the game or not) whether or not such a fudge would increase my fun. Makes it really hard to believe that a "make the BBEG not fall too fast" fudge has anything to do with making sure the players have fun.

1 to 50 of 303 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Dual-Cursed Oracle's Misfortune (Ex) and showing GM's dice rolls. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.