|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Re: Venting:
It sounds like what happened is that your players fully expected to get a total success, slay the dragon, rescue the princess, and be handed the platinum trophy, and that they somehow "lost" because they didn't reach 100% completion. And they expected to get a flawless victory with merely a +4 to Diplomacy between them.
This isn't an issue with the skill system at all, but an issue of misaligned player expectations.
-Matt
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If only people made PCs that fit the campaign background, this would not be an issue. How does a barely-literate murder hobo make it through Pathfinder training in the first place without spending some of their skill points on Knowledge or Diplomacy? "Explore-Report-Cooperate" is the motto. In the past, many scenarios coulde "won" through combat alone. Now, if all you can do is kill stuff, sometimes you will fail. Welcome to the Pathfinder Society. Luckily, you can always take "refreshed training" when you level.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My goodness gracious, by all means let's blame this on the entitled players. Forsooth, every Pathfinder must have ranks in Diplomacy! But then what happens when we have the scenario where the entire mechanic for success is based on Stealth and everyone made Diplomacy based characters? Blame the entitled players! They should have taken both. But then what happens when we have the scenario where the entire mechanic for success is based on Appraise and everyone has Stealthy Diplomats with Knowledge: Arcana and UMD?
My character has ten skill points a level. For ROLE-PLAYING reasons, I'm not the face of the party, because not every player has to be. I deal with traps, stealth, knowledges, and magic stuff. To say that every character needs Diplomacy or they are nothing but an entitled combat monster is frankly insulting and misses the point of making decisions for character reasons.
But let's avoid that conversation. You make your characters, and I'll make mine. You've had your say and I've had mine. Fine.
Unfortunately, it was a sad confluence of characters who didn't have Diplomacy in a scenario where Diplomacy ended up being the only means of seeing all the content in the game. Surely some Knowledge: Local or Nobility would have brought some important insight I could have used to gain favor? Maybe some Sense Motive to determine why our fearless guide was so fearful?
Even more frustratingly, my faction leader wanted me to gain more secret information from our guide. Why would I argue with him constantly? The chosen mechanic was Diplomacy, yet again. And since we'd already seen our bonuses were abysmally low, I hoped that my toadying up would gain me at least some small bonus. So I didn't even get close to finding out about his PTSD. I was trying to be his ally.
Here's the worst part: I REALLY like this scenario. The spores were lots of fun. The combats were interesting. I love the idea of a central NPC who needs redemption through a group of PCs. But our actions didn't have any effect on our guide's redemption. Making the decision to save the villagers isn't worth an Empathy point? Only making a Diplomacy check again and again? That's just an unfortunate design choice, and no different than a combat monster having to make an attack roll again and again.
Anyway, my quick review as a player:
Plot = Excellent.
Mechanics = Blah.
Thread chatter that any character who can't make a Diplomacy check should be tossed out of the Pathfinders and subjected to public humiliation = Superblah.
|
To be honest, I was embarrassed about my venting spoiler some time after posting it. I had something that I wanted to express, a frustration, an itch, a question, something... It felt important at the time to give it some voice, but without understanding what was bothering me I wish I had just kept it to myself.
I think there is some legitimacy to what everyone has said here. In the end, as long as we are immersed in a fun atmosphere, that's what really matters. But that's what made this mechanic difficult for our table: it was less fun for everyone. I'll keep contemplating why.
@Arkos,
Did you do any knowledge local about the wardstones? or about Sir Ilivan?
Both of those checks could have revealed some of the information that you needed.
As you don't have diplomacy, do you have bluff? If so, you could have used bluff to pretend that you cared to have the same effect as diplomacy.
IF the group only had low diplomacy skills, did anyone aid another to give yourselves a better chance of succeeding? If not, why not?
Have you obtained a copy of the scenario as you have now played it can GM it? If so, I suspect that some of the issues that you have raised may reside in table variation rather than how the scenario was written.
On another note, starting a post with a lot of snark has a good chance of having a lot of folks to skip over your response, not wanting to wade through the snark to get to any nuggets in the post. YMMV.
To be honest, I was embarrassed about my venting spoiler some time after posting it. I had something that I wanted to express, a frustration, an itch, a question, something... It felt important at the time to give it some voice, but without understanding what was bothering me I wish I had just kept it to myself.
I think there is some legitimacy to what everyone has said here. In the end, as long as we are immersed in a fun atmosphere, that's what really matters. But that's what made this mechanic difficult for our table: it was less fun for everyone. I'll keep contemplating why.
Some of the similar questions that I had for Arkos.
Did any of the players do knowledge checks before they started out? If not, it may be an idea to encourage that, as this is something that a lot of players forget to do (or do not know that they can do so).
This can be fleshed out a wee bit based on their rolls. Example: he was tight with his troops, they looked after each other, and he was devastated when while possessed he killed several of them. No one blames him except for himself.
A fair number of players forget aid another can be used for diplomacy, bluff, etc.. In this case, where the characters have time to talk to each other, I would even allow them to do so on Sense Motive (did you see the way he twitched when xx said? No I didn't but did you notice that when we saw xxx he became distant, etc...)
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
@Arkos, On another note, starting a post with a lot of snark has a good chance of having a lot of folks to skip over your response, not wanting to wade through the snark to get to any nuggets in the post. YMMV.
That's just because people I respect came out and called me a bad role player for not having a high enough bonus in a very particular skill. I'm sure I'll regret the snark in a few hours.
As to the bluff, I've rarely seen a character not take bluff without also taking diplomacy. I assume they exist, but we didn't have that option. The table was split in how they viewed Sir Ilivan, so Aid Another actions were weak as well. Our basic successes just weren't enough to change the outcome.
It was just an unfortunate situation all around.
|
|
Did any of the players do knowledge checks before they started out? If not, it may be an idea to encourage that, as this is something that a lot of players forget to do (or do not know that they can do so).
I had the players roll for all checks. Knowledge roll outcomes granted all information but the top difficulty in each category. Some of these details were important to direct a player's in-game actions.
With this situation, I think its hard for players to piece together exactly what is happening with the NPC given the unique nature of this scenario. And despite getting all of the rewards, even this isn't enough in comparison to feeling like the game (PFS) pulled a bait-and-switch. Many players will have no idea that they are playing a Diplomacy mini-game simply because most NPCs cannot be interacted with on this level. This combined with the fact that with 6-players sitting at a table there is often enough difference for each character to be able to fill a niche. At this table, a rather important skill was not strongly represented. Some players felt they lost without actually losing.
In future scenarios I think that it might be good to write in more explicit hints as to the expectations of the mechanic. As a GM, I'll be offering more hints buried in roleplaying dialogue when I run this again, without being overt. I do think the players should understand that they are traveling with a fragile NPC. What their characters choose from there is up to them.
|
I played this scenario last night, and I had quite the blast. This was indeed one well-written scenario, and I want to thank both whoever wrote this, as well as our GM for roleplaying Sir Ilivan.
I was lucky when rolling on my Knowledge: Local checks regarding Sir Ilivan's background (2 natural 20s IIRC). I only made one snarky comment ("Come on, what's the hurry? It's not like we're possessed or something."), which did get me a glare from the GM (probably roleplaying Sir Ilivan).
I guess that bit of info paid off, because my character did her best to try to console him, while we camped. I think it worked, 'cause in the end he rode off to fight the demons with their Gnome, er I mean, Glabrezu leader (inside joke, so don't be ashamed if you don't get it). No one at the table really said anything, but I know I felt rather melancholic about it. I remember my character saying "I hope he can find peace in death that eluded him in life.".
And, since my Monk saw that the dretch was coup-de-gras-ing the Crusaders, ran up to him and grappled it. So, we even got the extra PP.
All in all, a fantastic scenario. Kudos!
EDIT: After reading some of the comments on this scenario, it seems like it really depends on how the GM lays everything out, and how the players react to the situation. And it all boils down to the moods of the GM/Players at the time of running/playing it. And that could lead to vastly different outcomes...
|
|
Arassuil, I'm pleased that you had a good time! Your post was thoughtful and I'm happy that you shared your experience. It sounds like you were rather proactive. I wonder how your table would have been had your character not been there and so fortunate with rolls.
The author is Alex Greenshields, Venture Captain of Portland, Oregon. We Portlanders are lucky to have him :)
|
I will say that a paladin in this scenario can often lock up the 'good ending' single-handed. When I played it I saw the best charity case redemption story ever, which just appealed so much to my paladin. Then I GM'd it for a party who had three dumped charisma scores and a cleric with minimal Diplomacy, and of course they had the 'bad ending'.
I would say that both endings are good in their own way. It should be a good lesson that sometimes you're not fast enough to save the captives. The PCs still had a hand in bringing in an unstable crusader who legitimately needed help (they chose to take him alive).
Having Sir Ilivan spend many years in meditation and atonement is a good ending to the scenario. It's not as sexy as dying facing the demon horde, but it's the ending that needed to happen for PCs that couldn't redeem him.
Developer
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Many people have said many things, so please excuse my compiling several of the larger ideas into several paraphrased quotes.
Lack of Diplomacy shouldn't punish players. The mechanics helping Sir Ilivan were bad.
When I sit down to outline or develop a scenario, I actively try to make sure that reaching the end of the scenario is not dependent on any one skill or class. Instead I try to include skill check options as a way of providing multiple solutions to a problem or encounter. Sometimes the skill check, ability, etc. simply makes the scenario easier (as occurs in at least three of the five Season 5 scenarios, if memory serves). The actions that explicitly improve Sir Ilivan's outlook probably could have been broader—this is knowledge that I'm keeping in mind when creating thematically similar scenes in other scenarios—yet Pathfinder Society Organized Play as a whole aims to reward creative solutions; as a GM I have the capacity to observe a player's unique approach, compare it to what the scenario tells me about the situation/NPC, and adjudicate an appropriate response.
Does a Pathfinder need to have ranks in Diplomacy? No, but I find that Diplomacy is often the Perception of the social skills family; it tends to see a lot of use. I can think of one scenario (in Season 3) that requires a Diplomacy check to succeed at the main mission, and the vast majority (I hesitate to say "all") of other scenarios have similarly skill-less success conditions.
From a design perspective, I find it's more rewarding to allow certain skills a chance to shine and actually mean something in a given scenario, and what those skills are changes from adventure to adventure. Lack of that skill shouldn't mean failure. Rather, having that skill should provide some extra depth or options that might not otherwise be accessible.
In future scenarios I think that it might be good to write in more explicit hints as to the expectations of the mechanic. As a GM, I'll be offering more hints buried in roleplaying dialogue when I run this again, without being overt. I do think the players should understand that they are traveling with a fragile NPC. What their characters choose from there is up to them.
I agree. This is something that I've already been trying to do with some of our upcoming NPCs, as I understand that those in #5–01 and #5–02 were a little hard to relate to as they were presented.
The faction letters needed to be more visible to the player base. How can we accomplish the mission(s) if we don't know what they are?
When we sent out the April faction head letters, players received anywhere between one and ten emails each, depending on how many characters they had. This not only burdened the Paizo server but apparently triggered some big spam warnings. When we sent out the faction head letters for the start of Season 5, we instead sent out a single email that linked directly to the letters in the faction talk forum. I understand that many people did not receive these emails, which is perhaps a product of email filters or a result of de-selecting certain "Paizo can email me about XYZ" options on one's account; I personally don't have a perfect understanding of all of the possible hiccups in that process. That's part of the reason I've tried to encourage those who know to spread the word to those who don't.
Including the faction head letters with the Guide to Organized Play is a...possibility, but it is one that would mean having to update the Guide with considerably more frequency. Maybe it could just be a different free download, as that way anyone with that file in their downloads page would receive an email update whenever it was updated.
The Cheliax mission in this scenario does not correspond to the season-long faction goal in the Guide to Organized Play.
That's right. The Guide lists the faction's longer term goal—the one that will be more relevant for the majority of the season. The first faction mission for the Cheliax faction simply lays the groundwork for it. Likewise, three other factions start off the season one way (for story reasons) and have already changed directions slightly to match the overall season goal. As the factions evolve and develop over time, I anticipate there will be more faction letters sent out to inform players of updates.
|
That's right. The Guide lists the faction's longer term goal—the one that will be more relevant for the majority of the season. The first faction mission for the Cheliax faction simply lays the groundwork for it. Likewise, three other factions start off the season one way (for story reasons) and have already changed directions slightly to match the overall season goal. As the factions evolve and develop over time, I anticipate there will be more faction letters sent out to inform players of updates.
Thanks for listening!
IF everything works, this works while scenarios are coming out. You got an email last week saying "check the fortifications for weaknesses.. not that i need to sneak in and take over or anything" and this week you're playing the brand spanking new wardstone patrol and hey look a fortress! When the mission matches up with the scenario you have a reasonable chance of success.
But what if you're not doing the seasons 5 as they come out? You go to a con in say January and start playing. Pointyhead the Chelaxian tiefling signs up for three chelaxian scenarios. He doesn't know which email goes with which mission without cross referencing product release dates.
He's left with at least 5 directives
Secure important artifacts
Secure sources of power
Strengthen the faction’s power base.
Look for foibles in the defenders
Look for weaknesses in the defenses
Whatever more missives come out between now and then.
The chelaxian player now tries to
Steal/recover/claim the guys sword
Schmooze up to the base commander angling for a promotion
Find out about Sir Ilivans torubled past (and go most of the adventure thinking they've completed the faction mission)
Go on a panty raid.
Even doing the right mission you can
Ask Sir Ilivan, try knowledge engineering, sneak off from the group to make a map, go sewer diving, moat swimming, hit the bars, interrogate some of the demons to see if they know anything...
I know its going backwards, but the right letter/handout going with the mission is probably the best way to fix this.
I agree that the letters should be included in the scenario.
One main reason is that not everyone will play them in the near future and if/when the faction letters change, those changes will be directed at the upcoming scenarios - so those who play them later, will have trouble figuring out what their faction mission is.
|
Developer
|
I will say I had a big issue with how Knowledge checks with regards to monsters are handled in PFS. I really really really wish Paizo would address this. These soldiers have been fighting demons for how long and they can't come out and tell us exactly what we're up against? Nobody's ever seen a brimorak spit fire and ever told a single soul? Or a Dretch cast a stinking cloud?
Quick response to this point alone: Have you had a chance to read/play #5-04: The Stolen Heir? In this regard I refer to the mission briefing. If you'll pardon the passive voice, progress is being made.
|
|
Entilzha, I'm pleased that you had a good time! Your post was thoughtful and I'm happy that you shared your experience. It sounds like you were rather proactive. I wonder how your table would have been had your character not been there and so fortunate with rolls.
The author is Alex Greenshields, Venture Captain of Portland, Oregon. We Portlanders are lucky to have him :)
Well, to be fair, the Cleric/Gunslinger in the party, I think, would have done the same thing. I guess I just "rolled a higher initiative" and went first. :)
(Not to mention that the Cleric/Gunslinger had a higher Diplomacy, but there you have it).
So, please extend my thanks to your Venture Captain on a most excellent scenario. :)
|
|
I'm going to run this tomorrow, and I'm a bit confused by Ilivan's tactics.
if someone could explain these mechanics to me, even in a PM, that would be awesome!
|
I had a middle of the road experience running this. My observations
A) I got to do some funky things with the Worldwound. I tend to get a little uber descriptive when I describe combat or events. I had people seeing visions of loved ones .. getting horrible tortured, I had rain falling from a cloudless sky staining Sir Illvan's horse with drops of blood. Nothing mechnanical mind you just visual.
B) People thought Sir Illvan was nutty/ possibly a demon until the Rageweed incident. Then they just wrote him off effectively (although they managed to connect to him just to avoid battling him)
C) My player base came into this game with a very limited view of the Worldwound.
D) I planted down a Pawn of a Hezrou when Sir Illvan charged off and one players eyes just boggled almost out of their head. I got another out of the box (just my way of saying it was an unwinnable fight and then everyone started saying 'lets get out of here with the crusaders' (they save 4/8 and not 5)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having played this once and GMd it twice, I figured I might as well drop by and leave my nutshells.
The character I was playing was a recent convert from the Lantern Lodge to the Silver Crusade, and also recently shifted alignment from LN to LG. She's struggling a bit with figuring out when good outweighs law (she's an oracle considering becoming a paladin) and was really excited to spend time with a crusader, even when it turned out he wasn't exactly the knight in shining armor she was expecting. She ended up failing her faction mission at the first encounter when the rest of the party refused to help her save the villagers and she failed her Diplomacy check by 2. (After the scenario, three of the players present went "well my character totally would have helped her if she had just charged in!" Thanks, guys. Your characters could have told her that instead of just standing there mute. This bunch has a tendency to never RP ever if they can just play miniatures chess, but that's a complaint for another time and place.)
After that, my character was pretty much the only one talking to anyone, the only one suggesting plans of action, and the only one who bothered to talk with Sir Ilivan and find out more about him. Although she flat out told him at one point "I respect you because you have authority over me and for no other reason" she ended up caring a lot for him in the end, managed to succeed in getting the other two Empathy Points, and we got the "good ending". While getting there, half the party took Dex damage from the swarms before running away from it, which meant we arrived at the BBEG with my character with no second-level spells whatsoever after casting seven lesser restorations.
We failed to rescue enough crusaders (I think we rescued four) and the combat went a little pear-shaped due to none of us having any reasonable ranged weapons. At one point, my oracle ended up casting levitate just to get to the boss, which is one use of that spell I never expected to see... The loss of prestige and faction boon left a bit of a sour taste in my mouth even though we'd honestly failed at both, but in terms of character development for my character, this was a perfect scenario - she actually cried at the end when Ilivan was engulfed by the demons, and is going to consider his story carefully when making decisions in the future.
Oh boy. The party here consisted of four characters who had no social skills whatsoever between them - the Diplomacy scores ranged from +1 to -2 on all but one of the characters, and the player of the character who did have a few ranks (+8) is the kind of person who never interacts ingame, ever, unless prompted to. In general, I should have guessed just from the character and player makeup how this session was going to go.
The party immediately took a dislike to Sir Ilivan: they didn't find out enough about his background to learn he was shell-shocked, but rather just assumed he was some sort of conniving jerk and decided he wasn't someone to take seriously. This was fortified when he commanded them to leave the villagers alone, which they did, because all characters were fairly morally ambiguous and were perfectly happy to not have to fight something. Once they got to the fort, they agreed immediately to go help the crusaders: this is where they got their one Empathy Point. At the third point, they pretty much had ceased to give a damn about what happened to Ilivan and didn't ask him anything post-rageweed, and became even further aggravated with him during the swarm due to how his tactics are written.
Once Sir Ilivan attacked the party, the scenario was over in a few minutes: the ridiculous archer monk/ranger in the party shot Ilivan full of holes, while Ilivan spent his time trying to charge the party and failing, for the party had miraculously managed to arrange themselves just so that he couldn't charge them due to some horse's butt always being in the way. Sigh. He survived and was brought back to Nerosyan. Scenario ends, time elapsed 2 h 15 min, two players loudly announce the scenario left a very bad taste in their mouths and that they disliked everything about it. A third player announces that his character now considers Sir Ilivan his nemesis.
This party had a more proactive group of players, though the characters themselves were, again, a bit suspect - two misbehaving tieflings (samurai and witch), a gnome sorcerer/ninja who skirts the edges of evil at times, and a half-orc oracle (who of course got some nasty remarks out of Ilivan by revealing he was an oracle) who is sometimes gleefully unaware of everyone's moods and emotions. The group managed to find out about Ilivan's past, and immediately the tieflings started cracking nasty jokes: "Bet you three gold that guy gets possessed again or something and doesn't make it back alive." "You're on."
It looked like this group was headed for disaster as well: none of them even attempted to make an argument as to why they should go rescue the villagers, and the witch felt a need to constantly needle Ilivan about his faith in Iomedae with a nasty grin on his face (the character has some sort of antipathy against the goddess). Still, by the time they got to the fort, everything was holding up decently, despite the witch also telling the commander they were all morons for putting their trust in Iomedae's useless power. There was a long argument among the characters as to whether or not they should go help the crusaders - the witch was most vehemently against it, the oracle most for it, and the other two ended up siding with the oracle - and they succeeded in getting Ilivan to go with them. The witch flipped the bird at Sir Morgan when he sent them on their way with a "and the blessings of Iomedae to you". During the ride to find the captured crusaders, the oracle got to know Sir Ilivan a bit, and the three Sczarni at the table (everyone except the samurai, who was Cheliax) succeeded at their additional mission. After the rageweed, the oracle talked Ilivan's story out of him and ding, the ending was locked.
The combat with the brimorak felt a bit awkward: there isn't really a lot for it to do once it's exhausted its fireball and breath weapon and is waiting for the latter to recharge unless the party flies up to it (they didn't), so it ended up air walking out of reach and casting heat metal and produce flame, using both to attack the oracle - who, of course, had resist energy up, which the brimorak did not realize until it was too late and it had to teleport away. The two tieflings in the party ended up getting insulted by it a lot. Six of the captives were saved, and... the party returned to Nerosyan and pretty much shrugged off Ilivan's death other than a mention of "he died bravely" due to how cutscene-y his death was. Insert sad trombone. Still, the players said they enjoyed the scenario and that I ran it well, which can only be an improvement from the previous run.
The one thing that connects all these three tables? The disgusted reactions to the rain of teeth. It might be my favorite detail in a scenario ever.
I'm getting ready to run the scenario this weekend and have a quick question. Does the printed AC for the Vermleks already count the armor bonus for their Flesh Armor special ability? Just wanted to check because it lists +3 armor in their calculation and Flesh Armor also indicates that it gives them +3.
Yes, flesh is their armor.
I have a question about the Haste potion mentioned on the first page. Is it supposed to work on both the rider and the mount? I thought potions only targeted the imbiber.
It should affect only the mount.
The mount's speed will increase by 30'. I suspect that the speed increase the main reason for doing this, as it will make it challenging for the PCs to catch up to him, and with ride-by-attack, he can use his lance to potentially devastating attacks.
I thought as much, but I was confused by Alex Greenshields' post on page 1. Though now that I look he's a VC, I mistook his title for 'developer.'
Actually, he is the author of this scenario.
To my knowledge, potions only affect the creature drinking them, regardless of how many creatures could be affected if the spell were cast.
I think that he got it right when he drafted the scenario, but had a mental hiccup when he replied (based on the "I just realized...Duh" wording).
|
Ran this last night. Must say Sir Ilivan was a challenge to roleplay. It is a fine line between what is written and the players thinking he is a total douche for not doing anything and thus ignoring him, making fun of him, etc.
In the end it was really cool though. One of the players ended up 'bonding' a bit before Sir Ilivan took the demons head on. He spoke at his funeral, very, very, drunk.
I have to admit I was surprised as to how my players took care of the wasp swarms encounter. They... made their horses run away. Well that worked. :)
|
|
Got a question about the Demonic Windstorm that occurs if the PC's follow Sir Ilivan back to Nerosyan instead of rescuing the soldiers.
The scenario states that an easy DC12 Perception check is needed to find the cave and ignore the Windstorm effects, and even if the PC's don't see it, Sir Ilivan automatically notices the cave. It also states that it takes 3 whole rounds for the storm to take maximum effect.
So in essence, no party ever is going to fail to find the cave and get stuck out in the storm. So is there even any point for me as GM to prep for it? Seems like a pointless thing to add to the scenario....
Some parties may suspect there is something waiting in the suspiciously easy to find cave.
