|
| 6 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of our local GMs, who happens to be our Venture Captain as well, is now saying that even when our weapon wielding party members are walking through dungeons, with our weapons in hand, we still have to use a move action to "Ready" them before attacking. His logic is that its this way because otherwise the Quickdraw feat is useless. I tried to tell him about the standard charge rules during surprise rounds, but he won't hear it. He says he'll do it this way until someone shows him an official ruling here on the forums, even though its completely counter-intuitive. My 25+ years of D&D and RPG experience means nothing to him, and even real world examples are falling on deaf ears. All he says beyond that is to take it up with the Venture Captain (Him).
So I need an "Official" Pathfinder Society ruling to get back the move actions for everyone who plays at his and his lieutenants' tables.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm speechless.
That GM is silly - Quick Draw still has plenty of uses: using multiple attacks with thrown weapons in one round, switching to a specialty weapon to battle something with DR or energy immunity/vulnerability, any time you want to be carrying something other than a weapon while adventuring (torches, dusts, scrolls, etc.) and then quickly draw something else in a fight, quick drawing rods or staffs (since they can be used as weapons), getting a new weapon if you're disarmed, making two-weapon fighting easier, being able to jump into battle faster when you are keeping a low profile by not drawing your weapons. I could probably think of a dozen other situations where it's good to have Quick Draw. It sounds like he is just frustrated and trying to apply penalties that have no basis in the RAW. I can't think of anything in the CRB that indicates you have to spend a move action to get ready a weapon that is already in your hand (have him check the actions section in the combat chapter and the examples of play in the beginning).
That being said, if the GM wants to homebrew the rules to make this the case it is his priority. It's too bad that it's being implemented at the expense of the party though.
Developer
|
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Speaking as "that new guy" that Kiinyan referenced, I believe your GM to be in error. Several posters above seem to have effectively addressed the "why." As this is a Pathfinder Society sanctioned game that you're referencing, it's important that the GM not issue house-rules beyond one-time adjudications based on the players going beyond the scope of the rules (e.g. deciding whether a PC could push a column over onto an enemy and how much damage it would do).
@Nefreet: I don't believe he's talking about readying an action. The implication I'm reading is that even if the character has a sword in-hand and unsheathed, before that character can make any attacks with it during his first round in the initiative order, he has to use a move action to ready (I think the appropriate term would be 'wield') the weapon. This means that on the first round of combat no one could take a full-attack action even if they had their weapons in hand, because they'd have to spend their first movement action to 'ready' them.
@OP: Nothing in the rules states what the GM is saying, nor does the argument that this somehow invalidates Quick Draw make any sense. Assuming that this is the whole story, I would post this on the PFS forums and then contact someone above the GM in the PFS hierarchy.
[edit]
I think I see where Nefreet's confusion comes in here. The OP references performing a charge action during a surprise round.
Even then, if you have your sword in hand and made the Perception check in order to be able to act in the surprise round, you can use the standard action during the surprise round and make a single attack with that sword.
Now if you did not have the sword drawn, then the GM would be correct - you're allowed either a move or a standard action, and without Quick Draw, that action would be taken up by drawing the sword.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ah, well if that is the case, all you need do is point out to the GM next time that a natural attacking Tengu (like yours truly) would certainly "caw" at the notion that he would have to spend a move action to draw each of his claws and beak before wading into melee.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm speechless.
Not much to add to this...
|
|
I can't speak for PFS specifically, but I am confused by what exactly you are looking for. You want a ruling that specifically contradicts the thing he made up about having to "ready" an already drawn weapon? Does he concede that the weapon is already drawn by the player character?
He says it doesn't matter that my Fighter is walking through the dungeon with my two handed weapon drawn, and am resting it on the paldron of my full plate, or the ranger has an arrow notched as we wind our way through the crypt. Drawn is drawn as far as I've ever known, but he wants that extra action burned.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Point out there is not action to "ready a weapon?" There is a Draw Weapon action, but your weapon is already drawn.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or point out John Compton's statement above.
|
|
He says it doesn't matter that my Fighter is walking through the dungeon with my two handed weapon drawn, and am resting it on the paldron of my full plate, or the ranger has an arrow notched as we wind our way through the crypt. Drawn is drawn as far as I've ever known, but he wants that extra action burned.
I am skeptical of the way you are phrasing this conversation.
No, you cannot have an arrow knocked and readied to shoot. You cannot ready actions outside of combat.
You likewise cannot have your weapon braced for a charge outside of combat.
I really hope the VC in question chimes in to give his version of the story.
|
No matter what we're saying here, we are using common sense as there aren't any "rules" covering a previously drawn weapon in the core book. However, if you look specifically at the paragraph covering Draw a Weapon, it states that such an action requires a move action. The GM is taking that rule literally without any interpretation based on the conditions of the combat.
The GM seems to require that official ruling.
|
|
@Nefreet He's not talking about a readied action. He's talking about a drawn melee weapon. And that the GM is having them burn a move action in order to draw it (again).
And I agree, you can't ready an attack outside combat rounds unless the GM says so. And having an arrow nocked won't matter vs. just having your bow out and in your hand.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sheesh, so much for lack of table variance. No offense to the brave folks that spend long hours coordinating and GMing, but things like this make me want to play a PFS game less and less. It sounds like having your cake and eating it too, only the opposite.
I am skeptical of the way you are phrasing this conversation.
No, you cannot have an arrow knocked and readied to shoot. You cannot ready actions outside of combat.
You likewise cannot have your weapon braced for a charge outside of combat.
I really hope the VC in question chimes in to give his version of the story.
I think it is really funny that the GM's ruling is so hilariously bad, you can't even conceive of it being true and assume the poster is twisting things.
Here is the situation in more plain language:
You are walking around a dungeon with a Greatsword in your hands. You turn a corner and end up face to face with a zombie. You win initiative. You say, "I full attack!" The GM informs you that you can't, because your weapon is not ready--you need to spend a move action to ready it. "But, I had it drawn--it was in my hands already." The GM says that no, it doesn't matter--it was drawn, but not ready to use. You were not carrying it in such a way as to be able to swing without first spending a move action. "But, it was drawn..." The GM insists that if you could just carry a weapon around out of combat and avoid the move action required to draw it once combat starts, Quickdraw would have no value, thus it can't be true. You sigh and change your action, "Ok, I spend a move to ready the Greatsword I'm already holding and make a single attack as a standard action."
This is the situation. Seriously. The GM is really that ridiculous.
|
|
I think it is really funny that the GM's ruling is so hilariously bad, you can't even conceive of it being true and assume the poster is twisting things.
This could indeed be the case. I lean towards the direction that this poster is new to the forums, and he's claiming a VC, who are usually fairly experienced people, made a terrible call, and further was unwilling to discuss it. That strikes me as odd, so I don't mind voicing the possibility that there might be another side to this coin.
My view is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Here is the situation in more plain language:
<example snipped>
I totally understand. It's just that, still, the OP hasn't put forth all the variables. He hasn't explained the encounter 100%. Why leave out details?
Did the party make their Perception checks?
Did they win initiative?
If they didn't, and the baddies charged them, they couldn't have braced, or fired, or done anything, despite "walking through the dungeon with weapons drawn".
It could be that I'm just a skeptical person. If Jiggy, or a 4 star GM, or someone else with thousands of forum posts made this thread, I'd be more open to accepting it. As it is now, I'd just like to hear the other side of the story.
But I'm open to the possibility that it was just a terrible call by a terrible GM.
|
|
I know a few great VOs. I know a lot of bad ones. Honestly I feel it is a postion that begs for the worst kinds of people. It is a power and for some reason D&D like game people what power over the ways others play it. Now I have made bad calls before, but to force a table to prove you wrong on something you thought up without rules backing you is as bad as it gets. I have seen it. I had a DM argue being dragged cause the dragee to draw AoOs only if they are players without any feats. Yes this was a VO, and he refused to look at the rules for drag which I instantly brought out. He also refused to look at the rule book and insisted total defense was a full round action instead of a standard witht he rule book right in front of him to the exact page.
Honestly it gets to the the point where you need to just walk away from the GM tables. You could report the VO, but I seen that do little. The first VC I have met was banned out of stores in his area. The first conversation he had with me was to infer I was stupid and should not play pathfinder because I enjoyed 4e. The sad fact is PFS needs some sort of VOs and it is difficult to get people that want it. So if you have no one pressing for the position from you, it takes a lot to lose th spot.
Venture-Agent, Australia—QLD—Brisbane
|
He hasn't explained the encounter 100%. Why leave out details?
Because the details aren't relevant?
The OP doesn't seem to be referring to any specific situation. He's talking about a general ruling. He seems to have provided all of the information, but of course the description could be colored one way or the other. Or he may have misunderstood the ruling, or the generalization of the situation.
Either way, I suspect there is very little more this forum post can achieve. If the guy really is pushing a houserule that you don't agree with, go to the head of the campaign to rule it for you.
Threads like this make me avoid PFS like the plague.
|
|
Threads like this make me avoid PFS like the plague.
Please don't judge all of PFS based on one GM who got something incorrect. Notice how John Compton posted a correction quite early. If the GM in question is a Venture Officer, a post from John should fix the problem without any further worries.
All GMs get things wrong at times. It's the fact that it's organized play that allows players to get the proper rulings rather than put up with a house rule like this.
|
|
Playing in a public forum wil have knobs.
I am sorry, but anytime you invtie anyone there is a chance you get someone that is not desirable.
BUT you also miss on all the awesome people that you would never have met.
Now you can decide if it is worth it on the chance you may meet a few jerks to find some trualy amazing people.
I don't think it's more common but it is a good example of bad DMing. Bad DMs come and go just like bad players and min/maxers. It is sad when such players ruin something that is supposed to be fun.
I think I'd be pretty fed up with a GM that made me burn a move action every combat session.
It probably isn't more common than one would expect. PFS is more visible now than I remember, which means it's probably more popular, and being visible and popular tends to draw in a slightly higher percentage of incompetents and power-trippers. But since they're PFS representatives, folks like that make PFS look bad, and it makes people like me who are on the fence about playing in PFS extremely wary of it. I'm heading to Norwescon next April, and there will likely be some PF tables, but I honestly don't know whether to head for PFS or non-PFS. I like the idea of a persistent character being part of a larger world, even loosely, but it only takes one bad GM to ruin the whole thing for an entire group of players.
|
Venture-Agent, Australia—QLD—Brisbane
|
Threads like this make me avoid PFS like the plague.
I've seen just as many threads like this from home games. It is not exclusive to a shared campaign.
but it only takes one bad GM to ruin the whole thing for an entire group of players.
All of which is just as likely to happen in a non-shared as a shared campaign...and you have no real way of judging the players/GM prior to the game.
True, but there's arguably more at stake in the shared campaign, as you're risking a character that you take from table to table, one that you can't just up and resurrect off the books. For that matter, you're more likely to run into a bad GM in the shared campaign simply because you can end up with multiple GMs; this isn't really a problem in a home game, since either you only have one GM or you can just retcon the bad game out of existence and find a new GM.
True all of the above, and sorry to derail the thread. Looks like the OP got the ruling he required, in any case.
Clearly, it takes a move action to "put up your dukes".
|
I think I see where Nefreet's confusion comes in here. The OP references performing a charge action during a surprise round.
Even then, if you have your sword in hand and made the Perception check in order to be able to act in the surprise round, you can use the standard action during the surprise round and make a single attack with that sword.
You can charge during a surprise round if you have your weapon in hand:
If you are able to take only a standard action on your turn, you can still charge, but you are only allowed to move up to your speed (instead of up to double your speed) and you cannot draw a weapon unless you possess the Quick Draw feat. You can't use this option unless you are restricted to taking only a standard action on your turn.
During a surprise round you are limited to a standard action, so you can use the above cited action.
I am pretty sure you can't ready actions outside of combat.
I think the OP is out of luck.
Now, if the characters had weapons drawn, made their Perception checks to avoid being surprised, and won initiative, then they can perform their one standard action. Those details are missing from the OP.
??
That's like saying I can't cast <name your favorite damage spell> out of combat. It may not make much sense for the common use of readied actions to be out of combat, but the only difference between combat and non-combat really is that for combat we slow time down really really slow and take turns in six second increments. Anything you can do in combat you can do out of combat (well except attack someone since attacking someone is, by definition, in combat).
This is absolute bulls**t, i only imagine someone doing it if players are complete douchebags and saying something like "i always have my weapon drawn, when eat or to bathroom i use my left hand and have sword in my right hand"
If party go into dungeon, or even if they supposed to meet someone and noone ansewering the door all but most carefree adventurers will have their weapon drawn and ready.
The fact of being unprepared already governed by flat-footed rules and surprise round.
I totally understand. It's just that, still, the OP hasn't put forth all the variables. He hasn't explained the encounter 100%. Why leave out details?
Did the party make their Perception checks?
Did they win initiative?
If they didn't, and the baddies charged them, they couldn't have braced, or fired, or done anything, despite "walking through the dungeon with weapons drawn".
Because none of those things affect whether it takes a move action to "make ready" a weapon that is already drawn?
If I fail my Perception check, the enemy gets a surprise round but I don't have to take an action on my turn to "make ready" a weapon I am already holding.
If I lose initiative, the enemy acts before me but I don't have to take an action on my turn to "make ready" a weapon I am already holding.
If the enemy charges me, he gets his attack but I don't have to take an action on my turn to "make ready" a weapon I am already holding.
The OP stated his GM/VC is requiring a move action on the player's turn to "make ready" a weapon even if it was explicit the weapon was already in hand. That is the issue, which isn't impacted by anything else since it is a self contained problem regardless of the situation.
|
|
The classic "I will attack the first creature that pass through that door" is a ready action than can be done outside of combat. You must still pass your Perception check if the enemy is using stealth, but if he fail it should work perfectly.
I disagree...this really sounds like the person waiting should be rolling a stealth check, whoever enters should be rolling a perception check, and everyone should roll initiative. Surprise round may or may not occur, but I definitely would not give the person "readying" a free swing outside of initiative.
Opposed perception checks, one who enters probably with penalty.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
it's really sad when someone makes up a rule and then tries to make players show where in the rules it says his house rule is false.
I've been sort of informally tracking the more common types of pitfalls/errors in rules interpretation, and this is definitely one of the more common ones.