Venture-Lieutenant, West Virginia—Charleston
|
That must be a seriously out of whack session.Have you played 4-02?Ah, I wish. Unfortunately I haven't wanted to kill my PCs yet.
Edit: Oh, I thought you meant Severing Ties. Yes, I have ran In Wrath's Shadow for them. No deaths even!
Slightly off-topic, but Severing Ties isn't nearly as lethal as it's made out to be. It's rough, but not impossible, if the party uses good tactics.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
Fudging so the bad guys can hit the high AC character robs the player of the benefit of the that expensive full plate he purchased, and the Dodge and Shield Focus feats he took.
Fudging so that the BBEG makes his save against the wizard's Color Spray is robbing the player of the benefit of his high Intelligence, his Spell Focus, and his spell selection.
Fudging so that the bad guy's spell DCs are high enough that the players fail their saves robs the cleric of the benefit of his high Wisdom and Iron Will.
Fudging so that the enemies won't kill the PCs robs them of the consequences of their mistakes.
Fudging so that the enemies won't abush-one-shot a newbie robs him of what, precisely? The newbie didn't arrive at that situation due to any mistake, whether by the newbie, or his party.
Fudging is something that needs to be done with the utmost caution, if at all. I would say that not fudging is the better default policy, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done, ever.
Hah! See, Matthew Morris? I was right. It did come back around.
And now that I've been vindicated, I believe I hear Ozzy singing something in the background, so I'm off...
|
|
Ok, if a DM cheats at all. It has a good chance of upsetting anyone at the table.
But no rational person should become upset at a GM for playing the game honestly.
I guess if you are DMing and everyone is cool with you cheating it is not bad, but when you bend the rules you are taking a serious risk of wrecking the game.
As a DM or player any cheating takes me out of the game, and no longer even want to roleplay because the cheater will make the decision.Not me or any dice.
Now when you have one player not interested anymore because of you cheating it effects everyone.
|
|
Character is a level 1 newb: +10 points
PLAYER is a level 1 newb: +10 points
Player needs the character to keep up with their friends or keep their schedule for the convention: +5 points
Character can afford a resurrection -10 points
Character SHOULD be able to afford a resurrection but can't -15 points.... (i kid..... -20)
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Hah! See, Matthew Morris? I was right. It did come back around.
And now that I've been vindicated, I believe I hear Ozzy singing something in the background, so I'm off...
Drogon,
It didn't address the point of my post though. What is the difference between fudging the die roll so that the BBEG misses the lowly rogue scouting alone, and handing the BBEG an extra large Idiot Ball so that he suddenly goes completely sub-optimal. Not 'average', but plain stupid.
|
Rolling Dice: Some GMs prefer to roll all of their dice in
front of the players, letting the results fall where they may.
Others prefer to make all rolls behind a screen, hiding
the results from the PCs so that, if they need to, they can
fudge the dice results to make the game do what they want.
Neither way is the “correct” way; choose whichever you
wish, or even mix and match as feels right for you.
To add to SCP Red Mage's quote...
The Core Rules almost expect that some GM fudging will be going on.
I have not fudged any rolls for players, only some mechanics when the players act in a way not defined in the scenario.
When is a correct time to fudge a roll and how often should it be done? Does anyone have an example of when the GM fudged a roll for them or when they fudged a roll as the GM?
My GM sometimes lets player's close roles to be rolled again if we are on a bad luck streak. Funny thing lately the rerolls have been worse! It lightens the mood in the room and makes failing, dare I say, fun.
I know our GM has balanced out a few of our encounters. He has hinted that future mistakes will be more 'permanent.' By carefully telling the group about a few fudges he is preparing us accept the roll of dice good or bad.
|
|
I believe page 34-36 makes it clear that fudging of the rolls should never happen except in pretty specific circumstances. There's a little wiggle room there, but not much.
I've also heard a lot about GM's fudging rolls often to save players or TPK's from happening. They're worried that players are going to pack up their toys and leave if that happens. While I can totally see that happening with completely new players who may get frustrated easily with an early TPK (and that's talked about in the PFS Guide), in my experience more mature players appreciate honesty and non-interference on the part of the GM.
In fact, here's a very recent story that relates to this.
I had two new players (from living Greyhawk) sit down and try some PFS with two experienced players, and me running. Normally, unless I'm running First Steps with new players, I roll completely in the open. However, I didn't think to change that strategy even with the new players.
In the second fight, the party made some subpar decisions, and my rolls were on fire. In 30+ tables of PFS gaming, I backed up into a TPK situation before i knew it.
Now, the one place I would agree to fudge and the such would be with new players. The book says as much. But, by the time I rolled, the numbers were there, and I couldn't do anything about it. (A 32 hp Fireball...out of a max of 36...and EVERYONE failed the save). 3 out of 4 characters died. The other ran away.
The two new players got up to leave as I, stunned, tried to work with the two long time players to figure out how we were going to resolve the death and such.
A few minutes later, I got up, looked around, and saw the new players in front of the Pathfinder book section of the store. I approached them and explained to them (sharing the very concern that's listed in the book about killing new players) that normally PFS isn't that deadly and is generally a "positive experience." I told them that I hoped they would return.
To my surprise, The guy told me he was GLAD to see that PFS didn't pull punches. In playing previous games and living campaigns, he feels that its important to have a sense of real danger in order to have fun.
It was a pleasant surprise. (I simply don't read people well enough in one session to know how they will take a death or TPK). While I certainly won't change how I run a general "First Steps" experience with brand new players, it just reinforces what I believe. Run things as written, be honest with players, heck, even roll in front of them so they can see the lack of fudge, and you'll be surprised at just how well they react to what we would normally feel might be a negative situation.
|
Can I offer a potentially time-saving alternative, specifically for Perception? It's not my idea, merely one I've seen used to great effect at tables before. Specifically, asking players to roll Perception X number of times before the game and tell you the results. Alternatively, ask for their modifier and do the rolls yourself. You take these pre-rolled numbers and set them aside until needed... can even randomize the number they're applied in, to reduce further metagaming if you're concerned about that. You could even make sure that the number of rolls asked for (X) is greater than you'll actually be using. It also works for Initiative and similar rolls.
I do something similar when I feel it is warranted. Except I just ask for 40 d20 rolls then I roll to randomly determine which roll I start at. Then I use the rolls for perception, initiative, etc. It really does keep the metagaming down, cause when someone fails to find a trap and knows they rolled low, all of a sudden the whole party wants to look. If they fail and roll high, well, there's just no trap...
|
|
[
Then again, I also find myself arguing over whether or not you're allowed to take twenty when searching for traps, despite it being on the list of "common take twenty skills" in the CRB...
The way I do this is:
If you are standing and can perceive the trap through sight, and all you are doing is making a perception check of your environment, you can take 20 and be fine.
But if proximity or touch can trigger the trap, and the only way to find it is by being close to it, or touching it, then yeah, you can't take 20.
And how I make that determination depends on the wording of the trap, where its located, and what the description of the room its in is.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
But if proximity or touch can trigger the trap, and the only way to find it is by being close to it, or touching it, then yeah, you can't take 20.
I'm having trouble imagining a trap that can't be detected prior to setting it off. Did you encounter something like that in a scenario? If so, that would seem like kind of a dick move by the author.
EDIT: I just checked, and there isn't (at least in the PRD) any sort of "detect traps" spell, meaning the only method of overcoming a trap that's written into the rules is by making a successful Perception check (followed by disabling it, of course). So how can there be a trap that's triggered by searching for it? And how would you overcome it?
|
|
The way I do this is:If you are standing and can perceive the trap through sight, and all you are doing is making a perception check of your environment, you can take 20 and be fine.
But if proximity or touch can trigger the trap, and the only way to find it is by being close to it, or touching it, then yeah, you can't take 20.
And how I make that determination depends on the wording of the trap, where its located, and what the description of the room its in is.
Well couldn't they see a raise plate? Feel for a loose floor? Smell the grease/poison of the trap? Perception is more than just taking two minutes looking around.
|
|
I agree with Andrew. If it's a trap that's visible, you can look carefully. If it's completely concealed, then as nosig points out, you have to blow smoke, smell aromas' press plates, etc. But in getting a bit more 'down and dirty,' I believe an element of risk is involved. It's a LOT easier to accidentally trigger a trap before finding it once you start moving around, feeling things, getting close enough to smell, etc. I don't think Andrew is saying that a trap CAN'T be detected until it is set off (and neither am I), but maybe you can't take 20 to detect perfectly concealed traps since there's a chance you'll trip them as you engage non-sight based methods of detection.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's no such thing as a trap you can't see.
There's the perception dc. They roll it (or take 10, or take 20 for the Icosahedronophobes :) ), they see it, end of story.
Bypassing the resources people have put in to find traps by saying the trap sets off at a touch, oh and by the way, you need to touch it to find it, is just cheese. The PCs beat the encounter, the trapfinder felt useful, accept it and move on.
|
|
Take 20 does not change the method of detection. It is literally just 20 Perception checks. If rolling a single check wouldn't set it off, then neither does T20.
However, if the trap is defined as being part of a door knob, and the trap itself is that the door knob is electrified, you aren't going to be able to sense that from across the room. The only way you are going to be be able to figure it out, is by getting up and close with the trap itself and maybe actually touching it.
Or what if the trap is concealed or disguised in a mosaic and is literally part of the artwork. As such, you won't be able to figure it out without tactile senses.
Or what if the trap is triggered by an alarm spell. Alarm spells cannot be seen without detect magic. So the only other way to notice the trap, is to literally get up close to the door... wait, the alarm spell you just stepped across triggers it, and vaboom! trap!
Now will I spring this for a simple pit trap, or a pressure plate in the floor, or even maybe a needle trap in a locked chest?
Probably not.
But the chest that has firetrap on it cannot be perceived without Detect Magic. Literally, sensing the trap without the spell is triggering the trap.
|
|
However, if the trap is defined as being part of a door knob, and the trap itself is that the door knob is electrified, you aren't going to be able to sense that from across the room. The only way you are going to be be able to figure it out, is by getting up and close with the trap itself and maybe actually touching it.
At a dc 30 perception check you're noticing the smudge that used to be a fly on the handle that got zapped, a slight blackening of the wood around the handle from the last time the trap went off, the way the handle seems to attract more fine dust than the rest of the room, the tang of ozone around the handle, and feel the hairs on the back of your arm stand up from a few feet away.
And you can feel free to tell watson how you did it.
Or what if the trap is triggered by an alarm spell. Alarm spells cannot be seen without detect magic
This is incorrect. An alarm spell is the standard triggering mechanism for a magical track, and magical traps ARE detectable by anyone with a good set of eyes.
|
|
Indeed...but some of that gets awfully close to changing the rules and stuff. I will say, Nosig, when running PFS (which is what this convo is about), I absolutely allow take 20's and I use the DCs in the book because that's pretty much RAW given what we have there, and I'm not a big fan of changing DCs written in PFS.
However, since we've allowed this thread to de-rail somewhat (on traps instead of fudges), let me tell ya why I'm behind Andrew on this one. I've already explained the logic of why I'm not a fan of take 20 on certain types of traps like him. (I'm sorry, but there's just some traps you cannot detect without taking SOME risk of tripping in the process, so take 20 doesn't work since you can't take 20 when there's a risk involved).
But, more importantly, there's a gameplay balance issue.
The DCs of traps rarely, if ever, exceed 20+LV. Go ahead and look up the DCs of level appropriate traps. And if the players actually have a WIS bonus mod or perception bonus (class skill, item, etc), no non-magical trap stands even a tiny chance.
Essentially, it means that as long as ONE player has taken 1 pt of perception each level, a trap NEVER takes them off guard unless they neglect to declare it. By simply standing around for 2 minutes ever 30 feet or so, they are never taken off guard (unless its a magical trap). Traps are neutered.
Now, I think most of us can probably agree that non magical traps outside of combat are rarely memorable as most of them just do some damage that's easily healed by the party. They're a lot more fun in combat, where take 20 doesn't fly. So I don't let this bother as much as it used to. Still, I think it's a problem overall.
|
|
At a dc 30 perception check you're noticing the smudge that used to be a fly on the handle that got zapped, a slight blackening of the wood around the handle from the last time the trap went off, the way the handle seems to attract more fine dust than the rest of the room, the tang of ozone around the handle, and feel the hairs on the back of your arm stand up from a few feet away.
And you can feel free to tell watson how you did it.
And if a player ROLLS a 20 (with +10 total perception), I'm willing to agree. But when a player just stands still and becomes Holmes EVERY time without fail? LOLz. That's my problem with the take 20 rule.
|
|
And if a player ROLLS a 20 (with +10 total perception), I'm willing to agree. But when a player just stands still and becomes Holmes EVERY time without fail? LOLz. That's my problem with the take 20 rule.
Welcome to the church of the holy polyhedron. Make sure to get the large pointy dice, we'll be throwing them at the heathens in the cult of take 10 later... :)
|
|
Hey, I'm cool with bowing to the gods of fate. You roll well, you SHOULD detect the traps in the room...especially if you put pts into it. But you just stand there for 1 minute (only takes 1 minute on take 20 perception) and POOF, Turn into the Holmes of traps every day? Pft. I run it that way in PFS. I house rule it outside, hahahahaah.
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West
|
And if a player ROLLS a 20 (with +10 total perception), I'm willing to agree. But when a player just stands still and becomes Holmes EVERY time without fail? LOLz. That's my problem with the take 20 rule.At a dc 30 perception check you're noticing the smudge that used to be a fly on the handle that got zapped, a slight blackening of the wood around the handle from the last time the trap went off, the way the handle seems to attract more fine dust than the rest of the room, the tang of ozone around the handle, and feel the hairs on the back of your arm stand up from a few feet away.
And you can feel free to tell watson how you did it.
What would you do if the player rolled the die (just once), and it came up a one? Would you zap them?
|
|
Take 20 is not free it takes 2 minutes. So every ten feet you take two minutes to look around?a 50 foot hallway would take you over an hour.
Not by RAW.
First, a perception check is a move action. You can do two move actions in a round. So, 20/2=10 rounds or one minute.
Next we're assuming traps can be detected by sight, smell, etc per our convo above. The perception rules say you can see, hear, smell things at distance. There's a modifier for every 10 feet (I wanna says +1 DC for every 10 Feet). Since most players easily beat the DC of level appropriate traps by 3-7, there's plenty of wiggle room for them to look only every room or so. A party going through a typical 10 room dungeons only need spend an extra 30 minutes or so to insure they are trap free.
The only REAL hindrance to them being totally immune to traps is the FAQ stating that players MUST state each and every time they wish to do so. Only the Rogue's trap spotter deal gives them an instant check when they come close to a trap. So, for a party not depending on that, their ability to deal with traps (outside of combat) is dependent on their patience and ability to remember to declare it every so many feet, rather than dice and high investment of feats and the such.
|
|
Only the Rogue's trap spotter deal gives them an instant check when they come close to a trap. So, for a party not depending on that, their ability to deal with traps (outside of combat) is dependent on their patience and ability to remember to declare it every so many feet, rather than dice and high investment of feats and the such.
That will last until the players find a spare bit of paper, a magic marker, and a make a sign to hold up saying "I'm looking for traps"
A more practical in character limitation is having to move at half speed while you have buffs going or the bad guys ritual is being performed