|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You made a judgment call. Not all GMs are alike. We shouldn't try to be. At the end of the day, this is a game. It's your job to help them enjoy the game. If they don't enjoy the game, you are wasting your time. Sure, you can't please everyone all the time but in general if players are walking away from our tables feeling regret we should ask ourselves why we continue to GM.
What makes me curious is why you chose to come onto the boards and ask the question, 'was I right'? You won't find a consensus here; more like acrimony and dissension :( I have knocked some numbers off the damage dice myself, but my general rule is the dice kill the characters and I shouldn't try and help them.
|
|
I'm a merciful GM as well ... In my 150+ tables I have only killed 3 characters. I, personally, think that what you did falls within GM fiat. I've made similar decisions and have been ok with the outcome. My personal opinion is that such maneuvers are best left for low level characters, once they hit 5th level and sometimes 4th depending on the level of the player the gloves should come off, no mr/ms nice GM anymore
Venture-Captain, Germany—Hamburg
|
Your job as a GM is definitely not to kill the PCs, but to guide them through an exciting story. So if you feel you should be merciful instead of killing on the first encounter in order to create a fun experience for everyone, it's probably a good decision.
But try not to create the impression that characters will never die in your games. Playing without the threat of death isn't very entertaining, either.
The way you describe the situation at your table, I think you know where to draw the line between keeping the game enjoyable and making it too easy. ;)
As was already mentioned, high level characters can be handled with less care than newbies. Their player should already know how to act to avoid death, and in most cases, those characters have some backup PP or gold to get raised.
Also, they have enough HP to keep standing after one or two hits. (Unless they're running into Redcaps with an affinity for natural 20s on their attack rolls :P )
|
I Doubt I add anything new to what has been said up thread.
I think the situation you describe does fall within DM Fiat. As a GM it's your "job" to make a judgement call, which you did. Would I make the same judgement call you did? I'm not sure, I think I would, certainly for a 1st level character. I might for a 4th level character, but every situation is is unique, and that i where we as GMs well have to make our own judgement calls.
However as Mr. Miles mentioned you are going to get all sorts of answers to your question.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I usually try give a bit of flex and 'mojo' when it has been a case of good choices coming undone by bad rolls. If the players are being pretty slipshod or negligent and haven't done anything/much to try dig themselves out then I just let the dice have their way with them.
As PFCBG suggests, once they are robust enough (ie 4+) not to come undone by a single roll I tend to leave it to the dice gods, with only a little intervention.
GM'ing isn't always about black and white, our job is to navigate the sea of grey.
:)
|
|
For me, at levels one and two (with new players), I follow the tactics, but don't have the enemies fighting as ruthlessly as I can. If they *do* something new (ready to hit, cast a full round spell, fight defensively, rage), I make sure the players know what that action is and what usually follows. I also manage to fail a lot of crit confirmation rolls. Around level 3, I start to play the enemies to their strengths, though my dice rolls are still unlucky. At around 4-5th level, I play the NPCs to their tactics, giving them as much of a challenge as I can.
If its experienced players with new characters, its hardball from day one.
|
|
I knew when it was asked that the topic could be contentious. But I mostly wished to determine that I wasn't too far out of line by at least some estimation.
Thanks All.
Doesn't seem contentious to me. Everyone above seemed to, more or less, agree that you were okay with that course of action.
I run things slightly differently. I always make my rolls in the open; my players would know if I were fudging dice. Instead, I try to help the greener players by suggesting tactical options they might not be aware of (fighting defensively, aid another, ready, delay). I also let the new players use my character folio for a reroll. Additionally, even at higher levels and experienced players, I try to avoid concentrating attacks on any single PC too much if I can help it.
|
I believe that what you did is fine as long as you don't tell the player what you exactly did. When entire table knows that you just saved character from a death, they might either expect same thing for themselves or be disappointed because you are too merciful. It's hard to please all players on the table, so as a rule of thumb, never tell certain things to players. At least, that's how I believe it should be.
Regarding fudging also; it's easier to use worse tactical choices (demoralize, combat maneuvers, casting buffs in middle of combat, etc.) if you see that players are losing then to fudge the dices. This way, you keep the rules clean and minimize the fudging.
Adam
|
I'm a merciful GM as well ... In my 150+ tables I have only killed 3 characters. I, personally, think that what you did falls within GM fiat. I've made similar decisions and have been ok with the outcome. My personal opinion is that such maneuvers are best left for low level characters, once they hit 5th level and sometimes 4th depending on the level of the player the gloves should come off, no mr/ms nice GM anymore
I almost have decided to roll behind a GM screen - almost no one I've seen locally does it - but so all dice rolls are hidden so people won't know which ones are lessened.
I just turned an almost 2nd level cleric into an undead in two hits with extremely lucky rolls - and I still feel bad about it (I almost turned another character into a wight but we realized a cover bonus was missed).
A lot people want the sensation of fear of risk and I often push to the edge - but I don't like going over it.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
You are getting some real talk in here that I think a lot of GMs would not disclose in front of their players.
It's like the reverse of Teddy Roosevelt's maxim to "speak softly and carry a big stick." Talk like you're a real killer GM and players will have a constant sense of risk. But be willing to dial it back a little, secretly, when needed.
Above a certain level, i.e., when a player has enough gp/PA to get raised, I'm less forgiving. There are also certain scenarios about which I will warn players that there will be no quarter (Waking Rune comes to mind). But especially for low level characters and newer players, sometimes it's better to let them live to play another day.
|
|
Fudging rolls is fudging rolls, but if you are going to do it, doing it for the players is better then against the players.
I tend to be lenient just because I play the intelligence and what a creature would actually know, not what the GM meta-gaming would know. Doing that leaves my record at 3 player deaths in 72 tables. Not once have i changed a die roll good or bad, if I'm unsure of a rule I always take the player lenient side, because the last thing I want is a player death due to shady or inaccurate ruling.
I don't think there is a right or wrong call that applies across the board. It just depends on the situation. I have yet to GM for PFS, but when I do, and I intend to, I don't see it(fudging) happening for anyone above level 3. It might not happen below level 3 if the players make terrible decisions such as stepping between two enemies and getting themselves flanked.*
*Yes that happened in a game I was playing in once. Both me and the GM looked at the player as if he had lost his mind.
|
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
The guide gives a bit of leeway to fudge the dicerolls. There is appropriate fudging -- when it impacts a low level or first time player (they aren't going to continue playing if you slaughter them). Then there is inappropriate fudging -- tons of side cases for that one.
I think the original poster made a fair judgement call based on the table he had in front of him.
To say that he should stop GMing and all of that because he failed to "teach the player a lesson" is kind of a travesty to me. PFS is all about being as inclusive as possible, to see that kind of attitude displayed and by another GM no less, as well as the negative comments towards people who put their own game time on hold to organize makes me sad.
Being a GM is a lot of making appropriate judgement calls based on tons of information that cannot be related in a forum post. We as the "listeners" will NEVER have all the information to say if he made the right decision or not. And in my opinion we shouldn't have that kind of say. We can tell him what we as GMs would do or have done, but we cannot tell him he made a wrong decision.
|
I just let the dice fall where they will. I've been insulted for it, demeaned and had barbs tossed my way for it. I have a personal belief to just run monsters or mics with their intelligence and tactics. Sometimes I miss read things but I'd like to think I'm generally a fair gm.
I just happen to kill character's. This by itself gets me a bad rap due to judges in my area that are absolutely incapable of threatening or harming characters. I'd much rather be neutral and fair than a softball thrower at the end of the day.
At the end of the day, I believe I provide a better pfs experience than the softball judges. Because golarion isn't safe or friendly and characters should die. To me no one wants to read about sir average who slayed the dragon that couldn't harm a fly with his party taking no damage. They want to read or live Sir Ass beater whose party didn't all come back in one piece in an epic confrontation. But ymmv.
Skip
|
I'll echo the sentiments to allow fudging in certain cases (and not just for tier 1-2 newbies), though obviously not all the time.
Dungeonginger - you said he was 4th level; do you know if he had the prestige for a raise dead? Usually by that point they are safe. 12-24 prestige.
Even if they did, it was probably still a reasonable decision. It can add more challenge and more fun to the encounter to have a PC a scratch away from death with little chance of self-stabilising rather than just an unexpected big swipe that leaves permanent scarring.
|
|
This actually came up in my part of the Rise of the Runelords that I am running for a table of 4 PFS Gms. (We take it in turns to run each part.. Im doing Hook Mountain)
The party had been eviscerating the competition in Fort Rannick and in the 'last' fight, the BBEG stabbed the Ninja character to death pretty quickly. THis player had already had a character move on ( a rogue who was arrested in the previous Scenario)
Now I could of been merciful and drop the character to staggered or such but generally I dislike softballing because you are robbing the encounter of its worth by doing so. (As it is they can easily spend loot for a Raise.. which I guess is the lucky thing about playing a AP with non Society characters).
So Perhaps I didnt feel as bad because the character was coming back.
I have killed 3 characters in my time running Pathfinder. Im currently at 29 scenarios run. 2 have been Paladins, One was a Cleric.
|
|
I have to chime in on the "I think you did right" bandwagon. There are tons of things that could gave been the reason for less damage. Maybe you were attacking with Power Attack, but seeing the situation you "forget" to add the PA damage (or other bonus damage). I also agree that having a man down but not dead gives additional RP choices. Does the cleric cast Stabilize, or attack? Has the bad critter taken damage? Etc.
Makes them think like "real people". In the real world, many times armies prefer wounded enemies over dead. More resources required, more risk to save 'em..
In 26 tables of credit I have killed 4, but four of 'me were in Thornkeep!
I too will chime in on the "I think you did right" bandwagon.
|
|
I regularly hear the "robbing the player's experience" thing, but if the threat of looming death is still there with a close call, do those players really still feel robbed when this happens?
I always think that the best encounters are the ones where at least one player drops but doesn't end up dying due to clever/lucky recoveries.
I once played a game of
|
|
We've all been there.
A couple of weeks ago, a buddy ofmine was playing in Port Godless while I was GMing. An encounter went very quickly FTP. "They are using scimitars???" To "OMG!!! How are they hitting so well and so hard?"
So, one more critical later, his character would have been WAY dead. So, I offered him to use his folio reroll on the initial hit (to hopefully prevent the crit). He grumbled, but took it. This time, a less than sixteen was rolled. His Inquisitor was still hit, but not killed.
Happy birthday! I was going to feel really bad killing his character on his birthday; especially that early in the scenario. This was at subtier 8-9, and even at that tier I felt that allowing this would make for a far better game for all.
Was I being soft? Maybe a little, but it did mean his reroll was not available later. I think I did right, even at a high tier with a very experienced player. You just have to figure out what is best for your game, when it happens.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Dungeonginger,
Welcome this the experience of being a Pathfinder Society GM. Thank you for stepping up and doing well. It sounds like you want your players to have a good time. Rock on.
I agree with Doug, that this is a contentious issue, and we are a crusty lot. You have already gotten some negative feedback, and you're likely to get a little more. If you *had* let the dice fall where they may, you'd have likewise gotten some criticism and hostility.
I wasn't there, and I won't presume to judge how you did, how the atmosphere of the table was informing your choices, or anything like that. What I can do ins explain how I'd like to behave in that situation.
I'd like to believe that I'd try to get a sense early on as to how cut-throuat the players at the table want to be. Are they a bunch of game nerds who have taken some time to ("fine-tune" / "optimize" / "twink out") their PCs? Then I figure they're looking for a tactical challenge, and I GM accordingly. Are the PCs more casually put together? Do the players want more of a story-line? Or more opportunities to get into character? Then I'll play the combats less efficiently.
So, yes, I do not give every play group the same experience. I try to give them the experience they want.
There are ways to play the bad guys with efficient tactics. "Offensive Play #3-B" one of the NPCs will yell, and the guards call out "3-B sir!" and attempt flanking situations. Or "Sharnell, Garmon! Move back there and occupy that spellcaster," someone will say, pointing to the witch in the back of the party.
Or I can play them more casually, with more time devoted to giving them personalities even in combat.
And if the players are new, I'll try to teach them how to make good decisions.
- "Did you want to attack the druid right away? Or did you want to close on her and ready an action to attack her spell?"
- "That golem looks very hard to hit. Did you want to attack it yourself, or help Reginald hit it, Aiding Another to give him a +2 bonus to his attack?"
- "Looks like the giant wolf has tripped Valeros. Did you want to use Acrobatics to get around it, or did you want to to let it attack you, o monk with Mobility, and give Valeros a chance to stand up?"
So, I would probably have made a different call than you did. I'd like to think that, at my best, I would have given the NPCs weaker tactics and maybe made some off-hand recommendations to the players, but rolled the dice without bias. but I don't think you were wrong, either.
What I would suggest, however, is that you avoid turning this decision into a codified rule. Don't turn "I did it like that" into "I always do it like that; it's my style."
EDIT: I'll also note that, part of my style, is to cheer on the player characters during combat. Unless I'm very clearly speaking in the character of their opponents, I'll make sure that I cheer with them when they roll well, and sympathize when they roll badly. I'll compliment a smart decision, and admire a dangerous move that turns out well. I have indeed seen my fair share of PC deaths at the table, but there are techniques I try to remember to use, to take the sting out of it. I try to let PCs get in a last word or half-round action. I have been known to give the ret of the party a morale-based advantage for a couple of rounds, as they rally around their fallen colleague.
I make sure they know that, at the Grand Lodge, there is a weapons rack back out in the training yard, which Marcus Farabellus calls the Display of Honor. Pathfinder cadets are sometimes permitted to use those weapons in training, to bring home the penalty that careless or unlucky field agents sometimes pay. And today, a PC's weapon has earned its place in the Display.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of the reasons I enjoy GMing for higher tier tables is that I never feel as though I *need* to ever fudge a die roll. Have I at those levels? I'd never tell you lot. ;-). I love being able to run with an open roll where the dice may favor the players or condemn them to the boneyard. Besides there's plenty a GM can do with tactics to change the course of battle almost independently of the dice.
|
|
I apologize if my comment was rude in any way, but you did claim that we violate the rules on purpose. That's very serious accusation.
What do you call it when a player rolls a die then reports a different number? Fudging dice is cheating.
Also I see nothing in the OP to imply the players were new or inexperienced. Those are legitimate reasons to cheat in a players favor (as much as I dislike it). Not being willing to kill a player is not and that is the only excuse the OP provided.
|
|
Blah I can't read to ight. So the player was new (How does a new player have a fourth level character? Clearly a pregen). As such it's fine to cheat in this case.I do think its important to know and acknowledge that that is what you are doing and many players do not want the risk of death removed.
It does bring up the question of when a player stops being new. I probably judge it earlier than most.