|
| 9 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Andrew,
I don't own a copy of Ultimate Equipment. Do those new rules apply to PFS? How am I supposed to know about them?
The exchange between Chris Mortika and Andrew Christian in the thread quoted above has me wondering about something similar:
How should material from a non-Core Assumption source that changes game mechanics be handled at the table (if such material even exists)?As an example:
It's my understanding that "Animal Archive" has new rules related to mounts, familiars and animal companions (I don't own that source myself, so I could be mistaken about its specific content). If that is true, in regards to my main question above, as a GM, am I expected to run the NPC mounts, familiars and animal companions per the rules in the Core Assumption material or per the rules in "Animal Archive"? Does this create the potential for NPC mounts, familiars and animal companions to be run differently at a table than PC-controlled mounts, familiars and animal companions at that same table?
|
Non-Core Assumption material should, in my opinion, be handled just like a post on these messageboards by Mike, a rules clarification by SKR/JB, or something put into the FAQ: You dont have to worry about how it needs to be run until you see it. Once you are aware something has changed, you should follow the new rule.
For example, not everyone owns Animal Archive, but those that do know there is a new Trick, called Bombard, in there. Now that I am aware of this trick, I will stop my players from trying to have their AC drop stuff onto the bad guys unless they have this trick (there are probably exceptions, Im just being general here).
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another example: can a character drink a potion under water? Answer: no, not without a potion sponge. Source: Advanced Race Guide, under Gillmen.
As a GM who's aware of the rule, I guess I'm supposed to follow it. Which will be a rude surprise to players trying to drink a potion of water breathing with a clam grasping their ankle.
--+--
These aren't issues of people trying to figure out a vague rule:
- How do light and darkness spells combine?
- Does including someone in the area for channel positive energy stop him from taking continuous damage from bleed effects?
Rather, these are situations for which everybody at the table thinks they know the rules.
If a character starts drowning because he can't drink his potion of water breathing, what should the table discussion sound like?
Player: I didn't realize I needed a 20-gp item. Can I buy a potion sponge retroactively?
GM: Nope. It's your responsibility to know the rules for your own equipment. (Besides, you'd have to own a copy of the Advanced Race Guide for your PC to purchase anything from the book.)
Player: The potion is from the Core Rulebook. I have read all the relevant rules there. As a matter of fact, I have read all the rules in the Players Core Assumption.
GM: If you need to use a potion, you need more than the core assumption.
Player: Do I need more than the core assumption to do anything else in my list?
GM: That's for the venture officers to know, and for us to find out.
|
|
If you want you can enfore RAW and say that if anybody wants to utilize anything from additional resources they must print out the relevent pages from a physical copy of the book or from a pdf. I am not aware that this rule has changed so if it has, my mistake.
That's what the OP is trying to clear up. Should people be forced to follow rules they dont know about, cause it came out in a book that is on the Additional Resources list. My answer was 'once they are aware of it, then yes'.
*runs off to buy potion sponge*
|
|
Perhaps a rephrasing of my original question:
If a PFS-legal rule from an Additional Resource is more restrictive than the rule it appears to replace or supersede in the Core Assumption's rules set, which rule should be enforced at the table? What if the GM is the only one who has that Additional Resource at the table and wishes to enforce the more restrictive ruling? Can something from an Additional Resource be "forced" upon a player who does not own or have legal access to said resource?
|
|
That's what the OP is trying to clear up. Should people be forced to follow rules they dont know about, cause it came out in a book that is on the Additional Resources list. My answer was 'once they are aware of it, then yes'.
*runs off to buy potion sponge*
Yes, Seth. That's exactly what I'm trying to understand.
You bring up another interesting scenario: Now that I'm aware of this potion sponge, am I permitted to buy and use them without owning or being able to produce at the table the Additional Resource in which it is found?
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
Can non-Undines even purchase that, though?Yes. So long as the item doesnt require a specific race to use, all races have access to it. For example only halflings can buy the halfling pipeweed.
Oh, I was under the impression all this time that you had to be the race in order to purchase the racial equipment. Shows what I know.
|
|
That's what the OP is trying to clear up. Should people be forced to follow rules they dont know about, cause it came out in a book that is on the Additional Resources list. My answer was 'once they are aware of it, then yes'.
*runs off to buy potion sponge*
Yes, Seth. That's exactly what I'm trying to understand.
You bring up another interesting scenario: Now that I'm aware of this potion sponge, am I permitted to buy and use them without owning or being able to produce at the table the Additional Resource in which it is found?
If your GM is aware of it and is ok with it then yes. If you are GMing and someone breaks out something from an additional resource you should not feel obligated to allow that player to use it if they cant provide the reference. I am prettt sure the additional resource rules state this as a requirement.
|
|
Oh, I was under the impression all this time that you had to be the race in order to purchase the racial equipment. Shows what I know.Can non-Undines even purchase that, though?Yes. So long as the item doesnt require a specific race to use, all races have access to it. For example only halflings can buy the halfling pipeweed.
Thats why if merfolk were legal, everybody and their mother would have an underwater crossbow.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
Robert: I think you have the situation backwards. GM knows about potion sponges. Player only has core. Player doesn't know that a potion sponge is required for underwater potions. Player tries to drink potion underwater. GM doesn't allow it because player doesn't have a potion sponge. Player's Potion of Waterbreathing doesn't work, player drowns.
|
|
I believe that the new rule must be enforced, regardless of whether or not it is part of the Core Assumption, as per this pair of posts from Mike and Mark from a couple of months ago.
ADDENDUM: This is likely to be a contentious issue, and the post above only talks about items and new item rules. I'd encourage you to continue your discussion for the more procedural rules, such as the drinking a potion underwater rule, and FAQ the original post in this thread to get a more complete, official ruling.
|
|
Robert: I think you have the situation backwards. GM knows about potion sponges. Player only has core. Player doesn't know that a potion sponge is required for underwater potions. Player tries to drink potion underwater. GM doesn't allow it because player doesn't have a potion sponge. Player's Potion of Waterbreathing doesn't work, player drowns.
Yes. This.
If a character starts drowning because he can't drink his potion of water breathing, what should the table discussion sound like?
Player: I didn't realize I needed a 20-gp item. Can I buy a potion sponge retroactively?
GM: Nope. It's your responsibility to know the rules for your own equipment. (Besides, you'd have to own a copy of the Advanced Race Guide for your PC to purchase anything from the book.)
Player: The potion is from the Core Rulebook. I have read all the relevant rules there. As a matter of fact, I have read all the rules in the Players Core Assumption.
GM: If you need to use a potion, you need more than the core assumption.
Player: Do I need more than the core assumption to do anything else in my list?
GM: That's for the venture officers to know, and for us to find out.
And that, too.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe that the new rule must be enforced, regardless of whether or not it is part of the Core Assumption, as per this pair of posts from Mike and Mark from a couple of months ago.
In that case, some sort of a collection of these changed rules needs to be made apart from the additional resource in which they are contained - it is unfair to hold players to the contents of non-core resources.
Wait i have to own a hard copy of books to use them in PFS?
|
|
I believe that the new rule must be enforced, regardless of whether or not it is part of the Core Assumption, as per this pair of posts from Mike and Mark from a couple of months ago.
ADDENDUM: This is likely to be a contentious issue, and the post above only talks about items and new item rules. I'd encourage you to continue your discussion for the more procedural rules, such as the drinking a potion underwater rule, and FAQ the original post in this thread to get a more complete, official ruling.
I'd started to post as you put up your ADDENDUM. I agree - there is a difference between a rewritten existing rule (that's essentially errata) and a new rule that covers a situation that was before left to GM discretion.
Robert: I think you have the situation backwards. GM knows about potion sponges. Player only has core. Player doesn't know that a potion sponge is required for underwater potions. Player tries to drink potion underwater. GM doesn't allow it because player doesn't have a potion sponge. Player's Potion of Waterbreathing doesn't work, player drowns.
I think that 'player' there would be rightfully aggrieved.
|
Perhaps a rephrasing of my original question:
If a PFS-legal rule from an Additional Resource is more restrictive than the rule it appears to replace or supersede in the Core Assumption's rules set, which rule should be enforced at the table? What if the GM is the only one who has that Additional Resource at the table and wishes to enforce the more restrictive ruling? Can something from an Additional Resource be "forced" upon a player who does not own or have legal access to said resource?
The only time the new updated rule shouldn't be used, is when both the GM and Player are not aware of the rule, or neither owns the book with the new rule in it for reference.
And more specifically, the rule should be more often used if the GM is aware of it, rather than the player.
If only the player is aware of the new rule, and they wait to spring it on the GM in the middle of combat, the GM has every right to use the rule he's familiar with and then discuss the change after the session.
|
If additional resources were changing core rules without an errata to the core rules I would be most upset.
Actually: I am already upset. The animal companion went too far to be held over PFS players heads without a web-based update bringing players without that book up to speed on changes to certain core rules assumptions.
For this reason, I have not and will not purchase the animal companion. I don't run animal companions and I have no desire to be aware of the new rules while running a game for a group of players who most likely won't own a copy.
|
|
If only the player is aware of the new rule, and they wait to spring it on the GM in the middle of combat, the GM has every right to use the rule he's familiar with and then discuss the change after the session.
As a GM, I'm more concerned with the opposite. I don't want to wait until the middle of combat to spring something on my players that could result in character death(s); I'm just trying to understand if the rules of PFS play require me to do so.
|
|
If only the player is aware of the new rule, and they wait to spring it on the GM in the middle of combat, the GM has every right to use the rule he's familiar with and then discuss the change after the session.As a GM, I'm more concerned with the opposite. I don't want to wait until the middle of combat to spring something on my players that could result in character death(s); I'm just trying to understand if the rules of PFS play require me to do so.
Technically, yes, it requires it, bu there is nothing stopping you from allowing creative means to get around a situation like the ones given if the players have interesting ideas on how to do things.
|
|
If additional resources were changing core rules without an errata to the core rules I would be most upset.
Actually: I am already upset. The animal companion went too far to be held over PFS players heads without a web-based update bringing players without that book up to speed on changes to certain core rules assumptions.
For this reason, I have not and will not purchase the animal companion. I don't run animal companions and I have no desire to be aware of the new rules while running a game for a group of players who most likely won't own a copy.
What new rules? Magic item slots? The new tricks? I dont see what scares you about that book?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd suggest if the GM is the only one aware of the rule, and the player doesn't own the non-core assumption book with the new rule in it, that for that session the GM be lenient on the player.
"This session we will use the rule you are familiar with. After the session, I'll explain how the new rule works, and where you can find it. So in the future, you won't be caught unawares."
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Graypark, as a GM, I can remind players:
Player; We climb down the cliffs and swim to the wreckage.
GM: Absolutely. Just checking, do you have potion sponges?
Player: No. Nor do I have octopus jelly or shield urchins, nor anything else I've never heard of.
GM: It'sa cheap item you'll need if you want to drink potions under water.
Player: Ah! Then I should like to buy them.
GM: You can't. Not without a legal copy of the Advanced Race Guide.
--+--
To be fair to the Paizo development team, this sounds like an author, and a developer, who have some unwritten assumptions about how they play Pathfinder. This is obvious; nobody would even think to design such an item, unless they understood that normally, you can't drink potions underwater. They thought they'd come up with a nice little solution, to a problem not everybody had.
I am a little concerned about Ultimate Campaign, which I think is going to include a bucketload of the designers' campaign homerules and assumptions suddenly turned into official Pathfinder rules that will surprise players just like the rules in Animal Archive, Ultimate Equipment, and Advanced Race Guide.
|
|
Graypark, as a GM, I can remind players:
Player; We climb down the cliffs and swim to the wreckage.
GM: Absolutely. Just checking, do you have potion sponges?
Player: No. Nor do I have octopus jelly or shield urchins, nor anything else I've never heard of.
GM: It'sa cheap item you'll need if you want to drink potions under water.
Player: Ah! Then I should like to buy them.
GM: You can't. Not without a legal copy of the Advanced Race Guide.--+--
To be fair to the Paizo development team, this sounds like an author, and a developer, who have some unwritten assumptions about how they play Pathfinder. This is obvious; nobody would even think to design such an item, unless they understood that normally, you can't drink potions underwater. They thought they'd come up with a nice little solution, to a problem not everybody had.
I am a little concerned about Ultimate Campaign, which I think is going to include a bucketload of the designers' campaign homerules and assumptions suddenly turned into official Pathfinder rules that will surprise players just like the rules in Animal Archive, Ultimate Equipment, and Advanced Race Guide.
I share your concern Chris.
All we can do is let Mike, Mark, and John know our concerns as it pertains to beholding the campaign to rules that are not part of the core assumption.
There are a couple of weapons that changed in Ultimate Equipment (I forget which ones) and both are in the PRD. If you look at the Core Rule Book version of the PRD, you get one rule, and if you look at the Ultimate Equipment version of the PRD, you get a different rule.
But the stuff in Animal Archive and Ultimate Equipment are game changing rules sets. We don't want to make more books part of the core assumption, but at the same time, these new rules sets, by-and-large, clarify how certain rules sub-sets are to be used.
So they can't be ignored.
This is something that PFS hasn't come across before. So how to handle it the issue is not 100% clear.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Marthkus, if you want to access a source outside the core assumption (Core Rulebook, traits document, Guide to Pathfinder Society, Pathfinder Society Field Guide) you need to bring a legal copy of the text in question: the physical book, a pdf on a laptop or e-reader, or a physical print out of the relevant pages from the pdf. As CWheezy notes, if your friend has a legal copy and is sitting next to you, you can share that copy. (If the legal owner isn't at the convention, though, no.)
Wait i have to own a hard copy of books to use them in PFS?No you don't, you just need access to a legal copy. If your friend prints out a pdf and shares with you, you are good to go
Does the html paizo rule page not count? The one that is only rules and no campaign or adventure paths.
|
|
Does the html paizo rule page not count? The one that is only rules and no campaign or adventure paths.Wait i have to own a hard copy of books to use them in PFS?No you don't, you just need access to a legal copy. If your friend prints out a pdf and shares with you, you are good to go
Not for players, no. For that matter, neither do HeroLab licenses of books.
Not for players, no. For that matter, neither do HeroLab licenses of books.Does the html paizo rule page not count? The one that is only rules and no campaign or adventure paths.Wait i have to own a hard copy of books to use them in PFS?No you don't, you just need access to a legal copy. If your friend prints out a pdf and shares with you, you are good to go
So my character build can be legal at one table and illegal at the next depending on who I play with? No to mention my choice of equipment. And core rules would be the CRB.
Alrighty then...
|
|
Markthus,
GM's allowing you to use books from other folks at the table are actually being lenient. I probably would be lenient to a point as well.
Technically, though, you have to bring the source to the table.
And there won't be table variation on whether your character is legal if you actually do own all the sources.
Or, you know...
only use stuff from sources you own.
So by all that logic, if a non-CRB book changed rules in the CRB then it would be illegal for those rule changes to apply to a player without them since he cannot use those rules. The potion sponge means that potions can't be used underwater. The CRB doesn't clearly say that but that is what was intended in the original writting. Furthurmore wouldn't erratta not apply to a player who owns a non-erratta copy. They can't use the erratta since they do not own the errata.
So what if a player disarms an enemy with his hands to take a weapon he does not have the rules for? Is he sundenly incapable of using that weapon since he does not own the rules for it?
|
|
No, you personally must own the PDF, regardless of who else is present.Must have /= must own
Again with this.
Would you accept a watermarked PDF from someone who wasn't the watermarkee?
Also this: http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p8nl?Policing-the-Core-Assumption#43
|
|
So by all that logic, if a non-CRB book changed rules in the CRB then it would be illegal for those rule changes to apply to a player without them since he cannot use those rules. The potion sponge means that potions can't be used underwater. The CRB doesn't clearly say that but that is what was intended in the original writting. Furthurmore wouldn't erratta not apply to a player who owns a non-erratta copy. They can't use the erratta since they do not own the errata.
So what if a player disarms an enemy with his hands to take a weapon he does not have the rules for? Is he sundenly incapable of using that weapon since he does not own the rules for it?
Errata is available as a free download. You always have official errata available. So if one of the Core Assumption has official errata (i.e. rules errata that was changed from one printing of that particular book to the next), then as a player you are beholden to follow that errata.
Presumably, if a BBEG has a particular weapon in a scenario, then the GM has the rules for that weapon. So you should be fine to use that weapon in the scenario.
What new rules? Magic item slots? The new tricks? I dont see what scares you about that book?If additional resources were changing core rules without an errata to the core rules I would be most upset.
Actually: I am already upset. The animal companion went too far to be held over PFS players heads without a web-based update bringing players without that book up to speed on changes to certain core rules assumptions.
For this reason, I have not and will not purchase the animal companion. I don't run animal companions and I have no desire to be aware of the new rules while running a game for a group of players who most likely won't own a copy.
The new tricks are the major headache for existing players. The Flank trick, for example, incorporates an ability that more generous DMs might otherwise have assumed to be covered by the Attack trick.
For PFS play, the magic item slot rules are less of a problem, since the new rules are actually less restrictive than the old ones. Although -- I do wonder whether my serpentine eidolon's magic items would be legal in PFS play. The serpentine form is rather limited in terms of magic item slots, but my eidolon has always had the Limbs (Arms) evolution precisely so it can do all the things that a humanoid with hands can do (including wear rings and bracers).
Anyway, we definitely do need some sort of document that sets down the assumptions built into those new resources so that players without them can avoid those "gotcha" situations.
|
Markthus,
GM's allowing you to use books from other folks at the table are actually being lenient. I probably would be lenient to a point as well.
Technically, though, you have to bring the source to the table.
And there won't be table variation on whether your character is legal if you actually do own all the sources.
Or, you know...
only use stuff from sources you own.
One would hope the GM would use his judgment in these cases. Letting someone reference another person's book after their laptop full of pdf's goes epic fail sounds reasonable to me. :-)
So by all that logic, if a non-CRB book changed rules in the CRB then it would be illegal for those rule changes to apply to a player without them since he cannot use those rules. The potion sponge means that potions can't be used underwater. The CRB doesn't clearly say that but that is what was intended in the original writting. Furthurmore wouldn't erratta not apply to a player who owns a non-erratta copy. They can't use the erratta since they do not own the errata.
So what if a player disarms an enemy with his hands to take a weapon he does not have the rules for? Is he sundenly incapable of using that weapon since he does not own the rules for it?
Errata is available as a free download. You always have official errata available. So if one of the Core Assumption has official errata (i.e. rules errata that was changed from one printing of that particular book to the next), then as a player you are beholden to follow that errata.
Presumably, if a BBEG has a particular weapon in a scenario, then the GM has the rules for that weapon. So you should be fine to use that weapon in the scenario.
The rules are free online too from an official source and yet we can't use those, so why could we use errata.
The GM having the rules doesn't let the player use those rules. The player must own those rules to use them. If the GM had the weapon rules and could give those to a PC what is to stop him from doing that with other book or allowing the player to use rules that only the GM has access to (like the website with all the free official rules)
I'm not seeing a lot of consistency with what is or isn't allowed as far access to rules goes.