Someday I'm going to break down and allow a one-shot adventure complete with all the house-rules for auto-fail, hit location, really random encounters, fumbles - every rule that's ever made a statistician roll his eyes. It shall be called The Three Stooges Go To Golarion, and - not to spoil the ending or anything - it will end with the entire planet spontaneously ceasing to exist the first time somebody critically fails a Knowledge (geography) check. You don't wanna know what happens if it's a Knowledge (planes) check!
I'd be more interested in the results for the first critical failure on a Profession (Prostitution) check.
|
So how about some Pathfinder specific examples for your GM?
Profession: Barmaid - The waitress drops one out of every 20 glasses. If she starts with 20, she's out of glasses after serving 400 drinks.
Survival: two or three times a month a 10th level ranger (with full ranks) in his favored terrain will get lost. Meanwhile a level one wizard with negative wisdom moving at double speed in the dead of an overcast night will have a 5% chance to track a fine creature who hid his trail while walking across hard stone 24 hours ago (all of which were raining).
Profession: Sailor - One out of every 20 voyages ends in sinking (or being captured by slavers, or ending up in Tien Xa when you were just sailing beside the Arch of Aroden). Fortunately another one out of 20 results in an untrained person successfully navigating the Eye of Abendego.
Craft: Alchemy - stick with it for a bit and you get a 20. You just recreated the sun orchid elixir.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Someday I'm going to break down and allow a one-shot adventure complete with all the house-rules for auto-fail, hit location, really random encounters, fumbles - every rule that's ever made a statistician roll his eyes. It shall be called The Three Stooges Go To Golarion, and - not to spoil the ending or anything - it will end with the entire planet spontaneously ceasing to exist the first time somebody critically fails a Knowledge (geography) check. You don't wanna know what happens if it's a Knowledge (planes) check!I'd be more interested in the results for the first critical failure on a Profession (Prostitution) check.
I'm curious about what the effect of a critical success on a Profession (Prostitution) check would entail.
The best example we came up with was mounted cavalry: Every round, 5% of your cavalry falls off their horses. With an army in the hundreds, or even thousands, this becomes ludicrous so fast that most GMs accept a 1 cannot be an auto-fail.
If you don't mind a slight compromise, my house rule that a 1 gives you -5 to the roll (so you actually rolled a -4. Congratulations!), while a 20 gives you +5. It makes 1's and 20's dramatic without making them over-the-top stupid. (Most PCs have +10 or more in their chosen skills by level 5 or so, so even on a 1 they're still getting a DC 5 roll.)
Good luck!
I just want to say, that this post is a perfect example of how to approach it with a GM:
Step 1 - Here's the problem with the rule as-is
Step 2 - Here's a solution which avoids the said problem, while still keeping the intent of the rule.
Suggesting an alternative is almost always going to make it seem more reasonable than if you just flat-out say "That's stupid, here's why."
|
Okay, I have found out what is really going on, and it is way more devious than I ever imagined.
First, I am now being told that we have always been using this houserule.
Second, this apparent "always was" houserule has a "discretion clause".
This basically means that the DM is free to decide when a natural 1, or natural 20, counts as an auto success/failure, depending on mood, or story needs.
This is all news to me, but apparently I am being a fool for not remembering, and a dick for arguing against it.
I am here to tell you, this is not how it has always was.
What is happening, is rather clever though.
Basically, I have a fellow player using a fault in human memory, known as the Illusion-of-truth effect, to convince the group, that it has always been that way.
By repeating, over and over, lines like "We are still using the auto success skill houserule, right? Right? Right?!?", he has the group fooled.
In fact, the more evidence I show to the contrary now, the more they are convinced of it always being so, and that I am just being a dick.
I was really not prepared for this level of devious mind games, and don't think I am skilled enough to counter it.
If anyone has any advice on this, well, I would love to hear it.
|
Another way is to side-step the attempt to nerf your skill-monkey, by changing character to instead be a combat god that doesn't rely on skills, and kill everything in sight.
Make sure you have plenty of weapons and Quick Draw to counter the inevitable introduction of an 'auto-fumble on a 1, no confirmation needed' rule which has 'always been there even if we didn't use it before'.
Not so much 'passive-aggressive' as 'aggressive-aggressive'.
|
|
This is not an argument for or against, but to be perfectly honest I never realized that autosuccess/autofailure is a house rule. My friends and I just assumed it carried over from 3.5.
Oh well.
It was attack rolls and saving throws only in 3.5 as well.
Never skills.
Correct.
Auto-success/failure is for attack rolls and saving throws, and never for any skill or attribute check, or any other d20 roll.
This is the case in PF, and was also true in 3.0 and 3.5.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
Okay, I have found out what is really going on, and it is way more devious than I ever imagined.
First, I am now being told that we have always been using this houserule.
Second, this apparent "always was" houserule has a "discretion clause".
This basically means that the DM is free to decide when a natural 1, or natural 20, counts as an auto success/failure, depending on mood, or story needs.This is all news to me, but apparently I am being a fool for not remembering, and a dick for arguing against it.
I am here to tell you, this is not how it has always was.
What is happening, is rather clever though.
Basically, I have a fellow player using a fault in human memory, known as the Illusion-of-truth effect, to convince the group, that it has always been that way.
By repeating, over and over, lines like "We are still using the auto success skill houserule, right? Right? Right?!?", he has the group fooled.
In fact, the more evidence I show to the contrary now, the more they are convinced of it always being so, and that I am just being a dick.
I was really not prepared for this level of devious mind games, and don't think I am skilled enough to counter it.
If anyone has any advice on this, well, I would love to hear it.
Does this player happen to be an actor whose character was pick axed to the face while sleeping? Also known to have guest GMed and tried to get back at the assassin of his character by imposing a back story rule? One who was the topic of at least three discussions here on the boards?
Is the GM by himself reasonable? Could you talk to him alone? Explain that you made a skill-monkey character under RAW guidelines. And you honestly do not remember this houserule ever being in effect.
Emphasize that *you honestly recall it differently,* not that anyone's wrong. Cuz then they'll get defensive and entrenched.
Politely request that the rule be *changed* to the -10 on a 1/+10 on a 20 OR the opportunity to rebuild your character with the new to you houserule in mind.
Then play something that gives you a zillion rerolls like a luck domain, or an archaelogist.
|
|
Does this player happen to be an actor whose character was pick axed to the face while sleeping? Also known to have guest GMed and tried to get back at the assassin of his character by imposing a back story rule? One who was the topic of at least three discussions here on the boards?
Unfortunately, yes.
It seems just as we come to more friendly, and civil, these shenanigans are pulled, and I find myself in another situation.
More, and more shocking, is the nearly unbelievable way people around him ignore, and "misremember" every one of these actions.
Truly, I can find no amount, or proper, words to describe how dumbfounded I am at this.
I am actually bit impressed.
|
|
You could just be passive-aggressive about it, and declare that you'll jump up to the top of the 3-story building by rolling until you get a 20 on Acrobatics. Or make Diplomacy checks with merchants until you get a natural 20 to convince them to hand over their entire merchandise. And so on.
Passive-Aggressive is always a good way to get the point across. It's my favorite :)
does he have access to "Confuse" or "Memory Lapse" in real life?
I hate auto-success and auto-failure. I don't even like it on saving throws or attack rolls.
|
|
Passive Aggressive is pretty much never on my list of options, as it usually accomplishes nothing but hurt feelings.
I have also tried the direct approach with this player.
I was literally laughed at, and told I was just confused, and seeing things that were not there.
I swear there was a subtle flash of an evil grin, but if there wasn't, it was implied.
That's the thing.
I never know when the Natural 1 is an auto failure, or when a Natural 20 is an auto success, due to the "discretion clause".
I went from bad, to worse, and the more I fight it, the worse it gets.
Bail out, Maverick.
This is nothing more than arbitrary BS DMing. And since you were literally laughed that, that means they don't respect you at all. He's full of crap, and you have better things to do with your time than deal with this guy (like getting a root canal).
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
Does this player happen to be an actor whose character was pick axed to the face while sleeping? Also known to have guest GMed and tried to get back at the assassin of his character by imposing a back story rule? One who was the topic of at least three discussions here on the boards?
Unfortunately, yes.
It seems just as we come to more friendly, and civil, these shenanigans are pulled, and I find myself in another situation.
More, and more shocking, is the nearly unbelievable way people around him ignore, and "misremember" every one of these actions.
Truly, I can find no amount, or proper, words to describe how dumbfounded I am at this.
I am actually bit impressed.
Unfortunate that you don't seem to have the option to stop gaming with him. He seems to keep causing you grief.
My advice is attempt to talk to the GM alone. Explain your feelings and history with this player and what you think he has been doing to manipulate the game. You won't have any traction trying to change things at the table, especially because he has already turned the group to his favor. At the very least, you will have made your feelings known. This will help in the future when something else pops up. Best case scenario is that you are able to help the GM see what is going on and he is able to put a stop to it.
If the house rule doesn't go away, play with it and even take advantage of it. Take every opportunity to play up how a nat 20 on a skill check you just rolled should become an automatic success, all the while never rolling for skill checks you can automatically succeed at unless you are asked to. Doing this is within the spirit of this house rule.
[sarcasm] My other piece of advice is to spread this man's name and picture across the internet so that everyone knows that if they play with him they should expect him to be a pain. [/sarcasm.]
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In that case you don't ask for them to be written down. You inform them that you are going to write them down so that you don't forget them. ("I am going to forget this unless I write it down. Hold on, let me get my pen and notebook. Okay, can you repeat that?") This is a trick I learned long ago. In a way you are making it appear as if the problem is your own and not theirs. They almost always feel okay with it, or at least allow it, and don't think twice about why you are doing it.
As house rules are added, you make an obvious show of writing them down ("Hold on guys, I need to write that down. Can you repeat that? Sorry, repeat it slower than that. Uh-huh... Sorry, what was that last part? Got it.") and even pull out your notes when a house rule is used. (Wait, is that one of the house rules? Ah, yes I wrote that down. No, you didn't do that right. According to this we were supposed to do that differently.")
Later, when your jerk player asks, "We house ruled this right?" you pull out your notes and tell him no. If it was, you would have written it down. If he says that they agreed on it during that game you were absent for, you argue that adding a rule and then not telling you for weeks or months is an unfair jerk move. So much so that the rule should be revoked and any future changes happen when everyone is present and willing to agree on the matter.
|
|
Well, BBT, I'm not American, but isn't this what the Second Amendement is for?
The right to keep and arm bears is an inalienable right, isn't it?
I think a heavily-armed bear is just what you need to affect your...erm...'attitude adjustment'!
The "unalienable" rights specifically listed in the Declaration are "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" however they are clearly not all of them.
RKBA isn't granted by the 2A simply reconfirmed by it.
What grants the Right to Keep and Arm Bears?
What grants the Right to Keep and Arm Bears?Well, BBT, I'm not American, but isn't this what the Second Amendement is for?
The right to keep and arm bears is an inalienable right, isn't it?
I think a heavily-armed bear is just what you need to affect your...erm...'attitude adjustment'!
The "unalienable" rights specifically listed in the Declaration are "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" however they are clearly not all of them.
RKBA isn't granted by the 2A simply reconfirmed by it.
. The Rule of Cool. Likewise with Sharks With Frikkin' Laser Beams and anything involving dinosaurs.
|
|
. The Rule of Cool. Likewise with Sharks With Frikkin' Laser Beams and anything involving dinosaurs.What grants the Right to Keep and Arm Bears?Well, BBT, I'm not American, but isn't this what the Second Amendement is for?
The right to keep and arm bears is an inalienable right, isn't it?
I think a heavily-armed bear is just what you need to affect your...erm...'attitude adjustment'!
The "unalienable" rights specifically listed in the Declaration are "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" however they are clearly not all of them.
RKBA isn't granted by the 2A simply reconfirmed by it.
In the Marvel game I'm playing right now, a guy had two concepts for his hero. One concept was for a superhero whose power was to summon dinosaurs. Not dismiss dinosaurs. Not control dinosaurs. Just summon them.
I'm glad he chose the other concept. : )