|
To take it to the literal extreme, I believe a combat Blue Whale might be legal. You can carry it around with carry companion or the like and toss it down onto the land to attack all within reach, even if it can't really move. Sure, it' extremely expensive, but the stun DC on that thing is ungodly.
You can only buy critters up to large, and I'm pretty sure unless there's a baby beluga somewhere whales are bigger than that.
|
|
Animals: all animal companions on pages 28–29 are legal for purchase. Animals on pages 14–15 are legal for purchase except dinosaurs and megafauna (unless already allowed in this document in Bestiary 1, Bestiary 2, Bestiary 3, or Ultimate Equipment) and dire animals. Additionally, only creatures of the animal type of size Large and smaller may be purchased.
- So if someone shows up with shamoo and a receipt return to sender.
|
|
Animals: all animal companions on pages 28–29 are legal for purchase. Animals on pages 14–15 are legal for purchase except dinosaurs and megafauna (unless already allowed in this document in Bestiary 1, Bestiary 2, Bestiary 3, or Ultimate Equipment) and dire animals. Additionally, only creatures of the animal type of size Large and smaller may be purchased.
- So if someone shows up with shamoo and a receipt return to sender.
What if they lost their receipt?
|
"I know you are doing something legal and approved, but I don't like it so I am going to screw everyone over so I can get my way!"While generally I agree with you, a GM has the choice to remove himself from the table, and then nobody gets to play.
This.
Or, "Please, consider the fun of everyone here, including me, before you bring your Beef of Death on this 1-2 adventure."
"No?"
"Hey everybody else, I'm gonna make a private game at my house, right now, you all care invited."
Or
You grin and bear it for one session and then disinvite the player for future game days.
Yes, store coordinators and VOs can disinvite problem players from public game days.
I have never used this option, but would if the health of my game day and retention of other players demanded it.
Wanna ride the line of ridiculousness, do it somewhere else please.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This.
While generally I agree with you, a GM has the choice to remove himself from the table, and then nobody gets to play.
Yes, a GM has the option of leaving a table if they don't like what's going to be played at it. But if the GM is pitching a fit over a totally legal option that they simply don't like, that GM is being a jerk.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, a GM has the option of leaving a table if they don't like what's going to be played at it. But if the GM is pitching a fit over a totally legal option that they simply don't like, that GM is being a jerk.This.
While generally I agree with you, a GM has the choice to remove himself from the table, and then nobody gets to play.
As a last resort. If I have some yahoo ruining the fun of other players and myself. And then wanted to throw RAW in my face. I'd walk. Then quietly invite the others to my house for a private game day.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This.
While generally I agree with you, a GM has the choice to remove himself from the table, and then nobody gets to play.
Seriously? I am glad your not my VL/VC. That doesn't end well no matter what. Either (a) The player falls to peer pressure and feels ostracized by the party and the GM, (b)gets turned away from a public game they should be playing at, or (c) you ditch a public game at the last minute and leave players stranded.
If you can't handle players playing whatever legal choices they want then you shouldn't run public games.
|
|
Hey I was tempted to leave a public game before. There are times.
I was Dming a game specifically for a friend of mine that plays every game and missed one. So I told him I would do it just for him. A few "wolves" joined us. being prepared I brought an extra copy of the scenario and I even copied my hand drawn maps. 9 people showed up to play. 2 were new people that never played before. The people I call the wolves were perfectly capable of DMing a second table. Instead they shamed the 2 brand new people to leave so they would get to play while I was helping another new person. When my friend told me that after. I would have grabbed my stuff and left had it not been for him eagerly waiting to play that scenario.
At that moment I felt ashamed of PFS. Now when I DM a table and there is extra people I make sure I decide who plays and who does not.
If a DM does not want to play with anything that is fine. They are volunteering to DM. They get nothing for it. If you encounter someone that will wreck other peoples time including your own you have the right to veto your time for that game.
I'm curious, if I'm a bad guy and I observe a PC order a bison to trample, on my turn can I give the bison the same order and turn it against the party? Perhaps an opposed check would be called for? Providing I am trained in Handle Animal, this could break a lot of players from abusing this campaign feature down the road.
I am sure that is against the spirit of the rule. Now if the same player tries to handle animal a bad guy's summons and you would allow it then go ahead.
The player will just move on to finding something new to abuse, which wont really help...
Maybe convincing Mike Brock to put a level limit on certain animals is a better solution.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"I know you are doing something legal and approved, but I don't like it so I am going to screw everyone over so I can get my way!"While generally I agree with you, a GM has the choice to remove himself from the table, and then nobody gets to play.
This.
Legal does not equal approved. Campaign management has not, nor could they ever, check every possible build option to ensure that it is fair and equitable.
So if you show up to play a Tier 1-2 with your combat-trained Bison, or your level 3 Mystic Theurge, or whatever, it is disingenuous to imply that it has been specifically blessed by the hand of Michael Brock just because a combination of additional resources and FAQs has rendered it technically legal.
All of this could be solved 90% of the time by a simple, civil conversation at the beginning of the scenario.
Player: "So, I have a combat-trained Bison. It's legal, here's the Additional Resources page, and here's my copy of the source material. That said, I know it can be overpowering, so I wanted to run it by you first."
GM: "What? Really? Wow. Um...this is Season 0, its minimum damage is going to kill nearly everything in the scenario. And we have 6 players. I'd like everyone to get a chance to act before each encounter is over. Could you maybe table it for this?"
Player: "Well, I just bought it and I was really hoping to use it. What if I hold back and don't use it till the 2nd round of combat? Or only use it if the party's really in danger."
GM: "That would be fine. Thanks for checking with me first."
Is that really so hard?
Because if, as a player, you are unwilling or unable to have that conversation, you may want to reconsider whether you're there to play Pathfinder with a group of people, or win Pathfinder by yourself.
And if you can't have the conversation as a GM, you should probably readjust your settings from "Opponent" to "Neutral Adjudicator of Rules and Table Ombudsman."
While generally I agree with you, a GM has the choice to remove himself from the table, and then nobody gets to play.Andrei as a PFS GM you disallow anything that PFS allows. I don't even know if you can legally refuse someone a seat at your table, assuming you have room. I would suggest you petition Mike Brock if you think he made an error. I am not saying this tactic should be allowed. I am only saying that by the rules, it is allowed.
PS:That bolded area, and my lack of control in certain areas is one reason why I have not tried to GM PFS. I understand why the lack of control is there..<stops long winded speech>
I see no problem with that. Maybe when you walk away the offending player will change his ways, and that is a lot better than breaking the rules because if I see a VL breaking a rule as a PFS GM I dont ever want to see him telling me what I can't do. It would just set a bad precedent.
PS:Peer pressure put on the player to "act right" might also set him straight, or send him to someone else.
|
|
This.
While generally I agree with you, a GM has the choice to remove himself from the table, and then nobody gets to play.Seriously? I am glad your not my VL/VC. That doesn't end well no matter what. Either (a) The player falls to peer pressure and feels ostracized by the party and the GM, (b)gets turned away from a public game they should be playing at, or (c) you ditch a public game at the last minute and leave players stranded.
If you can't handle players playing whatever legal choices they want then you shouldn't run public games.
You do realize we are talking extreme situations where one player isn't just irritating me as a GM, but hindering the health of the game day and/ or retention of other players.
Not just a situation where a build choice is irritating.
And keep in mind that players that could earn a disinvite have more issues than a Bison.
Further, it is a Venture Officers job to ensure the health of their community. Not just put on game days. And if they are unwilling to make the hard decisions then that can hurt the community.
Now don't get me wrong. A Bison showing up is not the issue. But largely we've seen those who choose to buy these high CR pets at much lower sub-tiers don't care about anyone but themselves.
And if that chases off other players and GMs then for the health of your game day you at least need to talk to the player and express the problem.
If they remain the same. You must disinvite them for the health of your community.
|
|
Mystic Theurge with the new changes isn't doing anything out of line with what a single classed caster is capable of.
They're examples. Feel free to replace them with any other build that is legal but convoluted or balance-upsetting.
I also wouldn't call it a disingenuous option given the developers have explicitly come out and said that part of the intent is to allow earlier access to certain PrC's given they are generally poor options at the moment.
Developer does not equal campaign coordinator. There are plenty of legal and approved Pathfinder builds that aren't legal or approved for PFS.
|
|
*which ,btw, is a really awesome game.
First off this was an awesome post Mr Baird.
Secondly. There are sooo many legal way to build a game breaking build. Why fight over these obscure ones so much?
Every rational nerd here agrees. Don't be a jerk and hog the table spotlight. There is not a difference between a player getting a bison, or a heavens oracle colorspraying everything. i think we all agree to talk to them if they are beign a jerk. So the jerk issue is settled.
What I would do is ask strategies of how to challenge a player that has this within the mod. I am sure Mr baird has some. I bet bignorse wolf has some. I would be surprised if jiggy does not have some as well.
I would love a DM to stonewall my build with a proper and clever tactic. That would teach me and let me learn and grow.
|
|
So if you show up to play a Tier 1-2 with your combat-trained Bison, or your level 3 Mystic Theurge, or whatever, it is disingenuous to imply that it has been specifically blessed by the hand of Michael Brock just because a combination of additional resources and FAQs has rendered it technically legal.
If it is not specifically banned by the campaign, then it is approved, end of discussion.
If you feel that it should not be approved, then you can petition for it to be, which is fine!
Oh, I guess the discussion is over. Should probably lock the thread.
|
I'm curious, if I'm a bad guy and I observe a PC order a bison to trample, on my turn can I give the bison the same order and turn it against the party? Perhaps an opposed check would be called for? Providing I am trained in Handle Animal, this could break a lot of players from abusing this campaign feature down the road.You can, unless the bison has the exclusive trick from Animal Archive.
Does this now mean that druids and rangers with animal companions that dont have the exclusive trick can have their own companions turned against the party with a simple handle animal check by an enemy?
|
|
I'm curious, if I'm a bad guy and I observe a PC order a bison to trample, on my turn can I give the bison the same order and turn it against the party? Perhaps an opposed check would be called for? Providing I am trained in Handle Animal, this could break a lot of players from abusing this campaign feature down the road.You can, unless the bison has the exclusive trick from Animal Archive.Does this now mean that druids and rangers with animal companions that dont have the exclusive trick can have their own companions turned against the party with a simple handle animal check by an enemy?
Yes.
|
|
Yes.I'm curious, if I'm a bad guy and I observe a PC order a bison to trample, on my turn can I give the bison the same order and turn it against the party? Perhaps an opposed check would be called for? Providing I am trained in Handle Animal, this could break a lot of players from abusing this campaign feature down the road.You can, unless the bison has the exclusive trick from Animal Archive.Does this now mean that druids and rangers with animal companions that dont have the exclusive trick can have their own companions turned against the party with a simple handle animal check by an enemy?
Has this always been the case or is this something new since they introduced the new Exclusive trick?
|
|
The exclusive trick seems to hint that an animal needs to be friendly/helpful towards the Handle Animal user before it follows direction, as posted above.
2 carrots would handle that.
The raw checks would be
1) the bison is combat trained. Note that combat trained only includes 1 attack trick, not two. The thing will only attack humanoids, monstrous humanoids, giants, or other animals. If you tell it to attack undead oozes or outsiders you need to push it, and i don't think "screw you i'm out of here" is an inappropriate response to the poor thing being told to step on an ooze for you. It may in fact decide to trample in the other direction (just ask hanibal)
2) you are not getting that thing into the dungeon.