|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Besides, when was the last time you saw a GM ask before the session started, "Does anyone here have splash weapons?" to make sure they were prepared for swarms before it was too late?Maybe that's what needs fixing?
With a table of new or inexperienced players, I'd have no problem with the Venture Captain (at the end of the mission briefing) saying something like:
"Alright Pathfinders, you know what you need to do. You have some time. Get into town and buy whatever you think you might need for this mission. You know. Splash weapons, weapon blanches... what's that? What are splash weapons?! Seriously? What are we teaching the new recruits these days?! Swarms! How are you going to deal with swarms? And what about ghosts and such? Your normal blades will slash right through them with hardly a scratch! You need to be prepared..."|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
twice now I have seen it brought up in this thread about putting new players directly behind the wheel of level 7 pregens in a pfs session
why is that happening
that is a prime way to make someone (omg quotes) "new" or "casual" or "interchangeable terms that are not actually interchangeable yet are used that way" feel dumb and terrible while also making a self-fulfilling prophecy of predicting that they will make dumb moves and terrible decisions while methaphorically getting their faces beaten in just the most absolutely brutal ways
|
Besides, when was the last time you saw a GM ask before the session started, "Does anyone here have splash weapons?" to make sure they were prepared for swarms before it was too late?Maybe that's what needs fixing?
The scenario that made me think of that was actually from season 0. I played a level 1 PC in that older scenario a month or so ago, with a 7 player table of almost all level 1s, and there were not just swarms, but tough swarms. Half the table were newbies who didn't know about splash weapons, and I don't think the sorcerer had Burning Hands. I think I had 2 or 3 splash weapons (acid and alch fire, probably, but I don't remember exactly), and I ran out, along with a couple from other people, and the swarms were still alive. Luckily, my cleric was able to channel negative energy once (charisma 7) and rolled high on my 1d6 damage, which was enough to finally finish them off.
Like I said, there are some tier 1-2 scenarios that I just won't run with a party of level 1 newbies, and not just from season 4. This is why I'm upset that 2/3 of the First Steps scenarios are being retired before the replacements come out. I'm going to have to finally read and prepare to run Master of the Fallen Fortress alongside First Steps 1 as my "go to" adventures for level 1 newbies. Or just start bringing Frostfur Captives to every game day. :D
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
Besides, when was the last time you saw a GM ask before the session started, "Does anyone here have splash weapons?" to make sure they were prepared for swarms before it was too late?Maybe that's what needs fixing?
I actually did that this last weekend, when I was running "The Halls of Dwarven Lore" for my local group. It was the first time they had played anything other than 1-X tier, so I ran through the list of dangers they should watch out for: swarms, darkness, invisible opponents, water hazards, flying, and DR.
Still, after my advice, all they did was pick up a single scroll of glitterdust for the magus (although the two veteran players had potions of water breathing left over from another scenario).
|
|
twice now I have seen it brought up in this thread about putting new players directly behind the wheel of level 7 pregens in a pfs session
why is that happening
In the instances mentioned in this thread, it was due to the quirks of our local convention scheduling. The local PFS lodge had little control over who signed-up for which scenarios; it was all handled by the convention staff. New players either had to play the level 7 pregens or sit out the slot for which they had been given a ticket.
|
twice now I have seen it brought up in this thread about putting new players directly behind the wheel of level 7 pregens in a pfs session
why is that happening
that is a prime way to make someone (omg quotes) "new" or "casual" or "interchangeable terms that are not actually interchangeable yet are used that way" feel dumb and terrible while also making a self-fulfilling prophecy of predicting that they will make dumb moves and terrible decisions while methaphorically getting their faces beaten in just the most absolutely brutal ways
I try to make sure this happens as little as possible. But sometimes, you have a game day all set up, and somebody new wants to play. There is a seat available. You explain to them the ramifications of them playing a high level pregen. You also explain that you have a game day 5 minutes away, the same day, same time, that will easily accommodate their level 1 character. They insist on playing at your game day, at that table for the 7-11. So instead of turning them away, you let them play.
Conventions, however, are the largest culprit of the high level pregen play for newbies. Someone new shows up to play at your Last Slot of the Con, with a generic, and the only table going off is 4 people eager to play the 7-11 they’d waited all con to play, and the GM has that scenario prepped… so you give those folks the level 7 pregens and hope that the GM has learned how to turn off ‘hard mode’ for newbies.
It isn’t ideal, and we try to avoid it when possible. But in the name of letting folks play, sometimes it is a necessary evil.
|
|
I may be out of place, but I had an interesting experience in this area just last night. I am probably somewhere between a "casual" and "very serious" player.
I have played 7 PFS scenarios, although I'm in six others on the boards here. I've GM'd a hadnful of tbales on the boards. I expect myself to know the rules, and for my players ot help me when I don't.
I spend too much time on gaming, but only a small percentage of it on system mastery (more on building characters, playing the game, running games).
so last night I took my newly-level 3 ranger into The Blakros Matrimony. we got to the final fight and I did nothing valuable becuase of low die rolls. I missed both shots I took (foolishly thinking that with bless and inspire courage in place I'd hit with Rapid Shot at a +7). Then I rolled a 1 on a will save and ran away.
I was the only player with a cold iron weapon, and I was the lowest level player there. Our 5th level dwarf fighter with +1 weapon, +1 armor, and +1 shield didn't even have a 30 GP cold iron longsword to deal with a demon. He's played by a guy who does PFS twice per week and had RP'd since 1985.
I hate feeling trivialized at the table, especially when the only thing making the other players shine is better rolls or more GP. No, my ranger isn't optimized, but it's a darn sight from a broken build.
Does this make me a casual gamer? Or hardcore?
|
Alright, I'll brave these waters!
I think trying to define what a casual gamer is, is a waste of time. It comes down to the driving/speeder analogy, anyone going slower than you is a grandma and anyone going faster than you is a lunatic.
What we have are issues that are interconnected; GMs adjusting difficulty based on table composition, communication, character optimization level, player experience, and tactical acumen. We need to teach people, in a way that does not belittle them or lord our knowledge over them, how to work better as a group. Not everyone is a PFS Patton or Munchkin 30str/con Barbarian/magus, or is prepared for every situation. As a group we go out to handle the missions... This is a team game.
My two cents.
Full disclosure: I am what some would call a power gamer.
|
|
I may be out of place, but I had an interesting experience in this area just last night. I am probably somewhere between a "casual" and "very serious" player.
I have played 7 PFS scenarios, although I'm in six others on the boards here. I've GM'd a hadnful of tbales on the boards. I expect myself to know the rules, and for my players ot help me when I don't.
I spend too much time on gaming, but only a small percentage of it on system mastery (more on building characters, playing the game, running games).
so last night I took my newly-level 3 ranger into The Blakros Matrimony. we got to the final fight and I did nothing valuable becuase of low die rolls. I missed both shots I took (foolishly thinking that with bless and inspire courage in place I'd hit with Rapid Shot at a +7). Then I rolled a 1 on a will save and ran away.
I was the only player with a cold iron weapon, and I was the lowest level player there. Our 5th level dwarf fighter with +1 weapon, +1 armor, and +1 shield didn't even have a 30 GP cold iron longsword to deal with a demon. He's played by a guy who does PFS twice per week and had RP'd since 1985.
I hate feeling trivialized at the table, especially when the only thing making the other players shine is better rolls or more GP. No, my ranger isn't optimized, but it's a darn sight from a broken build.
Does this make me a casual gamer? Or hardcore?
That's a good question.
I guess each of us can only really answer that for ourselves. We only really have the right to define ourselves anyways.
And that as long as we each do our best to respect the other players, be helpful in the name of teamwork as respectfully as we can, and let others play the way they want to play (short of allowing them to be disrespectful), then it should all work out.
If we approach the game in the name of teamwork, then newer players and those with less inclination to learn all the rules and options, can be educated in a friendly, non-confrontational way. Rather than telling them how their build and choices are all sub-optimal, when everyone is discussing what they have that can help with the perceived challenges (after the V-C briefing) and purchasing anything else they think might help, potential options can be made clear to these newer players. Why is cold iron good when going into a scenario named Fey Among Us? Could be a red herring, but on the off chance its foreshadowing, having at least a cold iron dagger would be prudent. A newer player may not know that. So you let them know the option, and then let them make the choice to spend the gold or not. Without derision should they choose no.
If we approach the game in the name of teamwork and friendship, then non-judgmental tactical suggestions during combat can be welcomed. If they appear to be making a sub-optimal choice or are struggling with what to do, rather than get upset and yell at them or whatever, tell them what some good options might be. Then let them make their choice. As a GM, I do this quite often, telling them what options they have, and what possible repercussions of said actions could be. Then I let them make their choice. Most often, they carry that advice into the next scenario.
The main issue is, some rude players expecting newer players to just do whatever they say, instead of letting them learn and experience the game. You know the whole give a man a fish or teach him to fish thing. So as ambassadors to the game, we really need to shut down the rudeness when we see it (sometimes bluntly is the only way to do it).
The secondary issue is, some GM’s don’t know when to turn things down a notch or two when running games for newer players. They go all out no matter who’s at the table. They are not helpful to newer players, and they try their hardest to kill the characters. I usually find this type of GM to be rare, thank goodness. But many GM’s don’t know that they have the right to turn things down a notch or that they are running all out. So that is also a teachable moment, letting them know where the gear shift is, and how to use it.
After this discussion, I don’t feel the issue is really about casual vs. non-casual players. But rather about a few bad, isolated situations that just happened to hit a particular player all in a row.
I feel Season 4 has some really brutal scenarios, but that those scenarios can be GM’d a notch or two below all out, and newer players can have fun at them. I also feel that Season 4 has some expectations of smart play, that was not necessary in earlier seasons so much. A lack of simple and cheap (Core Rulebook) preparation and a lack of simple, easy tactical decisions lead to more deaths in these scenarios than the actual difficulty of individual encounters. Don’t get me wrong, there are a few encounters that are just brutal. But then again, season 0 and season 2 and season 3 had a few of those as well. Season 4 might have a few more, but overall, I think Season 4 is not anti-casual player. It’s the players and hard-core GM’s who are creating an anti-casual atmosphere rather.
|
|
Alright, I'll brave these waters!
I think trying to define what a casual gamer is, is a waste of time. It comes down to the driving/speeder analogy, anyone going slower than you is a grandma and anyone going faster than you is a lunatic.
What we have are issues that are interconnected; GMs adjusting difficulty based on table composition, communication, character optimization level, player experience, and tactical acumen. We need to teach people, in a way that does not belittle them or lord our knowledge over them, how to work better as a group. Not everyone is a PFS Patton or Munchkin 30str/con Barbarian/magus, or is prepared for every situation. As a group we go out to handle the missions... This is a team game.
My two cents.
Full disclosure: I am what some would call a power gamer.
Well said. Mirrors my thoughts in my latest post.
|
|
Not everyone ... is prepared for every situation. As a group we go out to handle the missions... This is a team game.
Exactly.
Andy considers himself a casual gamer. It sounds as if the groups with which he played Season 4 scenarios were well-prepared for their missions.MisterSlanky considers himself a casual gamer. It sounds as if the groups with which he played Season 4 struggled.
Was Season 4 attractive to the casual gamer?
Will Season 5 be?
Yes.
And no, probably.
Was Season 4 attractive to the casual gamer?
To me it wasn't, and I've always considered myself casual by my own definition even if I optimize here and there. Yes and no!
|
|
... With a table of new or inexperienced players, I'd have no problem with the Venture Captain (at the end of the mission briefing) saying something like:
"Alright Pathfinders, you know what you need to do. You have some time. Get into town and buy whatever you think you might need for this mission. You know. Splash weapons, weapon blanches... what's that? What are splash weapons?! Seriously? What are we teaching the new recruits these days?! Swarms! How are you going to deal with swarms? And what about ghosts and such? Your normal blades will slash right through them with hardly a scratch! You need to be prepared..."
I really like this. I wish I saw/heard something like this happen more often.
|
|
I really like this. I wish I saw/heard something like this happen more often.... With a table of new or inexperienced players, I'd have no problem with the Venture Captain (at the end of the mission briefing) saying something like:
"Alright Pathfinders, you know what you need to do. You have some time. Get into town and buy whatever you think you might need for this mission. You know. Splash weapons, weapon blanches... what's that? What are splash weapons?! Seriously? What are we teaching the new recruits these days?! Swarms! How are you going to deal with swarms? And what about ghosts and such? Your normal blades will slash right through them with hardly a scratch! You need to be prepared..."
This makes total sense to me. Isn't part of the metaplot that you've just spent three years as a Pathfinder Trainee? And no one told you about DR and swarms? There's no need to be rude about it (depsite what it may have sounded like, I don't berate anyone unless they step into my archer's line of fire).
You know, depsite my friends making occasionally sub-optimal choices, they finished the BBEG off when a different party would not have. I like to be a team player, and I hate it when I don't pull my weight. But you know, that's going to happen. Dice happen (though I have a hard time with this). One time I'm one-shotting mooks, or finished the BBEG with a well-timed Greatxe hit, the next I'm useless. I'm still new to the game, but it's an idea I'm starting to get used to.
You are right Steven and Andrew - it's a team game, and I agree that we should do whatever we can to foster that attitude.
|
|
This makes total sense to me. Isn't part of the metaplot that you've just spent three years as a Pathfinder Trainee?
Not anymore. One of the devs--I think it was Mark--said that they were moving away from that, which is why that while Seekers of Secrets talked about it a lot, the Field Guide did not.
(I'm sure someone with more search-fu than I have could dig up the actual link to the actual quote from the actual dev. I'm way too lazy.)
|
|
I can't claim to have a strong opinion on casual gamer vs. hardcore gamer; I personally don't find such labels especially helpful or productive, but to each his or her own.
This little line, however, got me upset:
I've also gotten GM eyerolls at those same PCs of mine.
Wow. I really hope that GM was someone with whom you're well acquainted. Cos, if not, I find that a huge breach of the implied trust players and GMs bring to a table. (And, frankly, even if it was, to an extent.)
It's not the GM's character, it's the player's. I don't see how a GM's perspective on any PC whose player isn't a) disrupting the game and/or b) ruining the rest of the table's fun should matter.
When I GM, I want my players to know what their PCs can do and how to do it within the ruleset. Full stop.
It's not my job to determine if she made the most optimal choice or not.
It's not my job to criticize his battlefield tactics during the game.
It's not my job to tell them they're having badwrongfun by building the PC they want to play that way.
It's certainly not my job to give a player at my table an eyeroll — or any equivalent gesture — over what a player has a PC built to do.
It's my job to give those players as enjoyable an experience as I can during the time they're at my table. If after, they want to ask, or I want to suggest something, there's nothing wrong with that. But that's after, not during.
Jiggy, I'm sorry you've had to deal with that sort of reaction from GMs.
|
|
This makes total sense to me. Isn't part of the metaplot that you've just spent three years as a Pathfinder Trainee?Not anymore. One of the devs--I think it was Mark--said that they were moving away from that, which is why that while Seekers of Secrets talked about it a lot, the Field Guide did not.
(I'm sure someone with more search-fu than I have could dig up the actual link to the actual quote from the actual dev. I'm way too lazy.)
|
|
This post in this thread, maybe?This makes total sense to me. Isn't part of the metaplot that you've just spent three years as a Pathfinder Trainee?Not anymore. One of the devs--I think it was Mark--said that they were moving away from that, which is why that while Seekers of Secrets talked about it a lot, the Field Guide did not.
(I'm sure someone with more search-fu than I have could dig up the actual link to the actual quote from the actual dev. I'm way too lazy.)
Nope. It was quite a while ago. (I know, it's pretty vague. ;p)
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mister Slanky considers himself a casual player. He's GM'd more than I have, was the V-C of my region for awhile, and so on and so forth.
Please do not label me something I never labeled myself. Please do not make definitions I did not make. Please do not make threads in my name misrepresenting the issue.
I am not a casual player. I am not a new player. That said, as VC I learned to champion their causes and I do have vested interest in watching them have fun.
That's all. I'm not even reading this thread.
|
I'm going to add my 2cp from the viewpoint of a decent power-gamer. I haven't made too many broken builds, but I make sure my characters are effective (though my two couple year old rogue characters are mediocre at best). I never had a character death until season 4, one from a bad table comp (3 5s, 2 6s in a 6-7 slot season 4), and the other simply because the designed fight was too hard (more on this later).
There seems to have been quite a few expectations made of what a character should be prepared for at each level. I think there are definitely casual players , who have character concepts prioritized far above effectiveness, who do not know of, or prepare for these expectations. The problem is there are definitely scenarios in the low tier range who punish players, and kill them, for not knowing these. There should always be supplied some way to handle these encounters supplied in the scenario. It might not be the most effective way, but it should be supplied. Finding some alchemist fires for swarms, some king of magic weapon for incorporeals, etc. (yes, I have encountered incorporeal creatures and negative level creatures in tier 1-2 scenarios/modules. I'm lucky good tactics and a scroll of magic weapon I bought saved the day) This supplying of items is what should teach players, not throwing them in and hoping they have it until higher levels.
|
|
With the faq rulings, you're going to see more darkness related deaths and TPKs. Especially at tables where the GMs know the rules for lighting and the PCs don't. Regular darkness is bad enough for tier 1-2, much less deeper darkness.
The incorporeal critter is bad as well.
Can't they just throw in some power attack and cleave at low levels and call it a scenario? I feel these schemes like darkness that authors put in are substitutes for tactically challenging encounters where the NPCs have decent ACs, combat feats, and damage outputs.
|
Another anecdote about the evolution of a player, and how it can be done right.
This specific player was playing his cleric at a table with me, Day of the Demon, with Andy Christian GMing, in fact. This player was still pretty new to Pathfinder in general, not to mention PFS. In fact, I helped him build the character when he first played it! That being said, he was getting a LOT of "friendly advice" throughout his career, up this point (I believe he was level 4 at this time).
Well, as fate would have it, we were struggling mightily against the "optional" encounter, and everyone at the table was giving him advice. Finally, he just said, "I am doing [x]!" I cannot recall exactly what "X" was (probably casting a cure spell on the pregen Samurai that had been hit over an over again, rather than channeling once more). As I recall, it was not what I was advocating (admittedly because my rogue had been hit very hard earlier in the fight by an AOO due to a botched Acrobatics roll...)
Even though it was not what I was advocating, I was proud of him at that moment... it was the first time that I saw him take a stand and play his character. He was able to gauge the situation, and make a choice; and we survived that encounter (if only just)!
So, there are a couple of lessons, here. First, teach and help when you can. Learn to back off "giving advice"... not everybody wants it all the time. Finally, appreciate it when a player starts maturing!
|
|
This makes total sense to me. Isn't part of the metaplot that you've just spent three years as a Pathfinder Trainee?Not anymore. One of the devs--I think it was Mark--said that they were moving away from that, which is why that while Seekers of Secrets talked about it a lot, the Field Guide did not.
(I'm sure someone with more search-fu than I have could dig up the actual link to the actual quote from the actual dev. I'm way too lazy.)
|
|
Thanks for the link! Still, I feel like it wouldn't break the game for the GM to use the VC's to hand out helpful advice now and then. Maybe that's against the rules about running scenarios as written? As a PFS GM I'd like to know what's right.
Often its a matter of knowledge: local or geography or nature that the characters are supposed to have.
Objections like that are part of the point of the shadow lodge.. hey, you're teleporting me to a mountain, WHY didn't you mention it STARTS at 8 thousand feet!?!?
|
with nobody willing/able to teach them?Where's the GM?
I have had too many GMs who appear to believe the game is a competition between themselves and the players.
With certain notable exceptions, most GMs I don't believe consider themselves player instructors - that might be telling people how to play their characters. Certainly that was not a role I considered as I start to GM.
|
|
This is just me personally.
As a GM.
When I GM, I usually feel like I am too busy running the scenario and keeping track of all the NPC's to really give a player all that much in the way of advice.
Yes, if it jumps out at me that an inexperienced player is about to make a really bad choice I will try to coach them as to some of the other possibilities. If a player is sitting there with a really blank look on his face and has no clue what his possibilites are, I will give him some suggestions.
There are 3-5 other players at the table who have a lot more spare time than the GM.
Also, I don't know what is on all their character sheets or the details of their builds (unless of course it is the pregen).
If it was a table of complete noobs, things would be different. obviously I would have to help them a lot more (and I would hope it was one of the simple scenarios). But that has never happened to me personally. Every table has had at least half the players fairly experienced.
As a GM I am perfectly willing to help, I just don't think I am in the best position to help very much without really detracting from the entire session. I am also more than happy to work with someone either before or after the session.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As player.
I have much more time and opportunity to help people out with advice or suggestions.
However unless someone asks for help, says they are new, or is obviously floundering, I tend to give very little advice.
Un-solicited advice seems to have about a 50% chance to gain an offended "I'll play my character so don't tell me what to do!" type of response.
I have helped several new people and carry around some sample PC's with build advice that they can take if they are interested.
I have seen some players with absolutely horrible builds, purchases, tactics, etc... But any suggestion is a nearly mortal insult.
A few months ago, one of the players was complaining about the problems with being a heavy armor fighter. Really loud, can't keep up, can't swimb or climb, etc... I said, "Well you could get your next armor enhancement as the shadow enhancement, buy some levitate potions or scrolls, and a wand of long strider. Those would at least help with most of that stuff." The response was a very huffy, "I already have my purchases planned!" The guy actually won't sit at a table that I am at now just because of that little advice.
|
|
I may try to put together a guide in the spirit of the class guides for PFS players.
I am probably not the optimal choice for this for a variety of reasons. But everyone seems to feel like more info is needed for inexperienced players. So I will give it a go.
I won’t have the time to begin for a few weeks. I will certainly start a thread to solicit piles-o-help. So if you folks want to start compiling things you think should be included, do so.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
Oh yeah, I didn't realize that. I bought them on the advice of the gm to deal with the deeper darkness from the scenario I mentioned.
Well now I just have to wait until next level to switch out one of my spells for daylight. Man I hate everything. Wait, how would you use oil of daylight either if you can't find where it is in your pack?
A seasoned adventurer should know what pocket it's in, and be able to find it by touch.