|
What's everyone's thoughts on this?
If you're not sure what I'm talking about, some examples include;
Critical Fumble Charts/Decks
"Certs" or Item Certificates
Sanity Systems
Fridge Logic
I may have to explain this one.
Let's say you're playing the new Reign of Winter module. The book explains (have cold weather gear! duh!) but the GM explains (you're in a place of perpetual summer; why would anyone have cold weather gear for sale and why would you already have it if you're in a place where cold weather isn't expected?). Completely and soundly logical and that's not a problem. But if five minutes later you want to open a door and the GM has to ask you how you try to open it (whether you push or pull) only to have to make a reflex save to avoid face-planting into the door because you chose wrong...
All of these things are fine if your players are down with a good old fashioned shenanigan adventure. But if the characters are expected to behave as if they were in real danger, but consistently silly sh*t keeps happening around them; how can you take the game seriously or even begin to care? "Screw it" you think "I'm going to sneak attack the kindly old lady just see what the GM does to bring me in line".
Now, I'm a funny guy. I like funny stories and generally enjoy laughing like everyone else who's not a sociopath; but I'm in 4 pathfinder campaigns right now and only one them is actually taken fairly dramatic and seriously; of course, that's the game I'm currently running.
Anyone else have these problems, or is this just how roleplaying is done anymore where death is just a pratfall away?
The BBEG accidentally decapitating himself because he rolled a critical failure with his vorpal sword is a great way to end a campaign!
P.S. That's sarcasm.
From another thread:
This is probably my greatest peeve in all gaming. I have put up with a GM using a fumble deck once. I have veins that stand out on my forehead now.
NEVER AGAIN!
Next time someone springs this retarded $h*t on me I'm walking. After I explain how impossibly stupid it is. In crude language. While gesturing violently. I don't quite want them to call police, but I do want to brush up against that line.
I'm kidding of course, But really, you should feel bad if you use fumbles.
What are item certificates?
Critical fumbles are ok, but only if done right. Personally I don't think they're ever great, but I don't mind them if they avoid the pit traps.
The pit traps are, IMO:
If your fumbles only affect your first attack of the round, you have to confirm the miss and the penalties are all along the lines of dropping your weapon on your square, provoking an attack of opportunity from the target, losing your Dex to AC for a round or taking an initiative penalty, I don't see a problem.
Sanity systems are also fine in principle. They just have to suit the tone of the game. If you risk losing your mind whenever you see a corpse or a centaur, even though they're quite common and you're expected to be an ass-kicking hero, that sucks. If you're in a deadly serious horror game and the sanity system enforces wacky antics, that sucks too.
The door thing is a classic example of the GM being out to get the players. That's not ok, even if you have a silly tone. It's pedantic, childish and unrealistic at the same time and those three things don't mix. If I wanted that, I would play FATAL, or maybe hit my face on my door until I snapped out of it.
That kind of thing is cool in Paranoia, where the party are supposed to be inept and ordinary objects being dangerous is a big part of the setting, but it makes no sense in most games.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
When I saw the thread title, I got a mental image of the Expeditious Retreat spell having a magical side effect that "Yakety Sax" plays while the spell is in effect.
|
A lot of this is a matter of all the players (and GM) all being on the same page.
Really, a GM should talk to their players about how seriously they want to take a campaign. Don't "spring" a critical fumble deck on your players, talk to them about how they feel about using one and how severe a fumble should be. Do they want a Tolkienesque epic or a paperback genre comedy?
I think Pathfinder encourages a more light-hearted interpretation of the story than 3.5 did. Just look at Paizo's spin on goblins.