|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So I have been doing PFS now for a bit over a year and have GM'ed and played my fair share of scenarios. One thing that I am groaning more and more at is the seeming constant fighting. While I know combat is an integral part of a game, I feel tired of constantly bashing the locals over their heads to take their sweet sweet loot.
We have seen a scenario without any combat do well, Library of the Lion. Definitely one of my favorite scenarios out currently because it really felt like you were learning something, or puzzling your way through. It was a great change of pace!
My first character came into PFS with the thought that Knowledge would be an important skill, to learn the secrets of what we find, the first couple levels as a cavalier I dumped a good amount of skill points into Knowledge that I have yet to really use at all. We get the customary Knowledge Local/History/sometimes Geography, and then the game goes on. Even in scenarios that return to the same place, the knowledge are often cut and past, if you make a 25, you know everything that you could, no matter how many time you return.
Honestly, I find the Exploring and Reporting aspect lacking...it should probably be Talk, Perceptify, Incapacitate as opposed to Explore, Report, and Cooperate. I want more research and learning, as opposed to bashing locals on the head. The only difference I see between the Aspis and the Society is the fact that we don't sell what we find.
When I GM'ed I would often add on the spot knowledge checks for geography, or history of an area, mostly because I and my fiancee have a HUGE knowledge of Golarions cultures, histories, and geography, but for alot of GM's this is not the case, so the idea of "Well GM's can just add that!" really does not help them, as it puts the burden of all of the knowledge on them.
This is just my two cents.
|
|
I don't see a reduction in combat as an exclusion to Organized play. The example I used was Library of the lion which could be done without any combat and seemed very popular in my area. I am not endorsing the elimination of combat from all scenarios, just the addition of more scenarios that could focus on exploration more than combat. There are some political scenarios that seem to have combat tacked on just to appeal to those who enjoy combat, namely Blackros Matrimony is what comes to mind for me.
You can have a scenario that has broad appeal that can be finished in under 4 hours without combat.
|
Here's a secret: many PFS characters would never complete basic training in the in-game Society, because they don't have skills in anything except murder-hobo 101. You have discovered the dichotomy between the in-game PFS and the real-life PFS Organized Play campaign. PFS makes all PCs be members of the Pathfinder Society, but many players just want to play Pathfinder and not have that background forced upon their characters. Neither way is better, it's just different.
I personally agree with you that being a member of the Society should guide our character choices, but a lot of folks don't. But there's hope for us yet!
A big part of what you are looking for can be brought out by an awesome GM, but a lot is also in the player's control. "Explore, Report, Cooperate" should drive your decision-making, on actions, on what gear you buy, what classes/skills you take, etc. It should suggest non-lethal combat when that is appropriate, and suggest what you do in the various locations.
This has the side-effect of reducing the PC's effectiveness slightly (although not much) and making the game less of a cakewalk.
Another thing to consider: If your character isn't being asked to do enough Pathfinder-y things, do them as a player. My PCs all have journals, and I tell the GM when I'm making notes, drawing maps, etc. I also try to keep some in-character notes. None of that relates to the success conditions in any except a single scenario, but it adds to my enjoyment of the game immensely.
Some of this stuff may also be tracked in the A/B/C/D success conditions reported after the game, so if most players (for example) just kill the guards and don't record the temple inscriptions, the story changes down the road.
One way to address TetsujinOni's concerns would be to provide some "XP" for doing Pathfinder-y stuff like collecting non-magical items of significance in scenario design, but that is a lot harder than putting in CR-appropriate bad guys without making the scenario harder for a mixed party.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also note, there are several scenarios that are archaeology-oriented, but some of them include some of the nastier combats around.
I believe there is one scenario where you get stuck into a bad situation, risking an important NPC's life versus taking out a baddie, or letting them walk with some of the things you have been sent to discover; another includes a rather nasty undead to deal with along the route to historical information of some interest, and another gang after the same things you are.
We won't even go into the visit to the Worldwound before Season 5 in search of ancient writings...
|
I dunno about most folks, but I do consider things like this when I make my characters.. for example...
Rhea, my tower shield specialist, is a linguist (@ 9th level she speaks 14 languages). Typically I put her forward as the 'bodyguard' of the face (usually by translating if needed, and aiding with her measly social skills). The way I see her coming into the society is by 'field commission' after helping a pathfinder who helped her flee Korvosa (she was a Gray Maiden draftee)
It's mostly color sure..but it's how I build my characters..even the closest thing I have to a 'murder hobo' is Simon my Warpriest.. who, after doing Assault on the Wound, got drafted for a 'refresher' course in Trail by Machine. :D
It's kinda fun to think up back stories for me. I know a few guys in my lodge do similar things. a few items and a little roleplay and even a 'murderhobo' can be helpful on a dig.
Big strong guy? Bodyguard, and/or porter.
Sneak killer? 'Recon/Forward scout'
Toss in a few things like an empty journal, a few tools or a couple pathfinder chronicles and even an 7 Int thug can be helpful on a dig site. :D
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here's a secret: many PFS characters would never complete basic training in the in-game Society, because they don't have skills in anything except murder-hobo 101.
Which is why you see so many player characters with
Huh? Background? Whats that?
Wait training? What kinda bonus does that give?
Or Field commissions.
The three years of training/hazing was de emphasized to the point that i'm not sure a lot of players even know it exists.
You have discovered the dichotomy between the in-game PFS and the real-life PFS Organized Play campaign. PFS makes all PCs be members of the Pathfinder Society, but many players just want to play Pathfinder and not have that background forced upon their characters. Neither way is better, it's just different.
The society certainly runs into enough things that need to be decapitated to justify keeping people on staff who have no other purpose. The in game organization doesn't need the vast percentage that the out of game society seems to have, but then again the players are advanced field teams: presumably once everything is deadified they send in less combative specialists to clean up. (or they send those in first to die horribly and thats what gets the pcs called in)
Another thing to consider: If your character isn't being asked to do enough Pathfinder-y things, do them as a player.
That is a pretty sweet piece of advice.
One trick i keep meaning to do for meatspace games is to hand out the chronicle sheets ahead of time, under a peice of construction paper with the non spoilery parts cut out, so players can write notes on it.
|
|
Huh, I don't remember if I gave library of the lion one star or two... but suffice to say I thought it was a terrible scenario.
There are many different people employed by the pathfinder society, player characters only represent one subset of pfs employees: field agents. They also employ librarians, scribes, archaeologists, etc. These are the majority of the society's employees. They do the day to day stuff, like look up information in a library. Field agents aren't used for those types of jobs. Field agents are trained killers, used to enforce society interests through might. Field agents are sent in to the ruins first to murderhobo all the inhabitants, once they've cleared the area of hostiles, then the non combatant normal folk come in and do their digging up old relics cataloging them and all those normal archaeological things. While the society appreciates their warriors having some basic knowledge so they don't go damaging their finds, they'll settle for brute killers. Its standard division of labor, the field agents do the crazy work of disarming traps and killing monsters that all the normal sane employees want no part of.
|
|
And to follow up, I also think that the practice of listing mundane items on a chronicle sheet should be eliminated entirely except for special items and boons that are tied to achieving the primary success condition.
What do you consider a mundane item?
Other than some older chronicles, from early season stuff, most newer chronicles only list magic or limited access stuff.
And remember that, thanks to a few rules, it is possible for even a 7-11 chronicle to wind up, active, with the gold reduced appropriately, on a 1st level PC.
Add to that, especially at lower levels, access to some staples is limited to what is on a chronicle sheet. A Cloak of Resistance +1 takes having 9 Fame. A Handy Haversack is at 18 Fame, IIRC.
Where do you draw the line? At the point of "At this sub-tier, the average PC would have this much Fame"? What about the lower level PC playing up? What about the PC who never gets the second PP, except in rare circumstances?
|
|
Stressing the fame for access mechanic is pointless. By the time you have the gold, you probably have the fame anyway.
Not always, in my experience.
Even with "good" Fame, I have PCs with the gold for an item that don't have the Fame for it, yet.
You can, easily, have the gold for a Cloak of Resistance +1 or Muleback Cords before you finish 1st level. You won't have the Fame for either one, though, until you are halfway through 2nd level, at the earliest.
My 4th level Oracle has somewhere north of the 5K+ GP needed for a magical staff, but not the Fame needed to allow that big a purchase.
Heck, my 7th level Rogue, because of the way he got there, had a bunch of money, and not enough Fame for some of the items that he would have found appropriate...
|
|
Not everyone who plays PFS defines field agents this way. I don't see why your definition should take precedence over other people's view of a field agent.
The campaign that you make field agents for helps to define field agents. The fact is that your character is going to spend a large part of their screen time dealing with things that have big sharp pointy teeth trying to eat them. While gnoams may be overstating it a bit, a huge part of your job as a field agent is to stop things with big sharp pointy teeth from trying to eat you and your party. Its not another player defining the role of a field agent its the campaign environment, in no small part because the game system its using makes a much better orc killer simulator than it does a dinner party simulator.
|
|
You can, easily, have the gold for a Cloak of Resistance +1 or Muleback Cords before you finish 1st level. You won't have the Fame for either one, though, until you are halfway through 2nd level, at the earliest.
Ok, but are you really going to make the cloak or cords your first purchase? You're not going to buy anything else first? No masterwork weapon, masterwork armor, scrolls, wands etc?
My 4th level Oracle has somewhere north of the 5K+ GP needed for a magical staff, but not the Fame needed to allow that big a purchase.
Heck, my 7th level Rogue, because of the way he got there, had a bunch of money, and not enough Fame for some of the items that he would have found appropriate...
Buy something already. The economy depends on it. Gnome children are drowning in the puddles because they can't afford snorkles because of the inflation you're causing! :)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Orc killing simulator is not reality. Its largely about killing fantasy things, and there are lots of fun ways to do that. The fact is that the game has tables upon tables of weapon descriptions, thousands of spells, hundreds of feats, and chapters of combat for describing how you can stab, shoot, freeze, fry, decapitate and defenestrate that orc.
The game has one table, at best, for trying to convince that orc to try not being evil. And worse, its just a roll and a modifier. There's no strategy, there's no positioning, there's no maneuvering, no tactics, and very little build for it. The game only has one die roll and some addition to handle that sort of thing , and thats not very engaging.
People playing the game expect to, at some point, get to use all of that fun stuff to turn the orc into flash cooked freeze dried diced sausage. Sometimes talking to the orc is fun, but very few people want
to do that all the time. You also have the problem where there are no, and really CAN"T be any rules for player creativity in solving the problem: it really does take the reasoning of a human(ish) dm and they're already empowered to let you solve the situation non violently. The rules, such as they are, are already in place for creative solutions.
Now mind you, I have characters that run the spectrum to "It moved. Kill it" to "Awwww what an adorable ooze!" "Please walk around the puddle so we don't distrurb this rare and beautiful creature in its natural habitat as we enjoy its wonder" and tend towards the latter, so I know what you mean.
|
|
The problem is not in the rules but in the way scenarios are designed.
The problem is that they're designed at all. That gives an impetuous to do things this way. Its not an insurmountable one but its there.
My view is to design a scenario where all of these possibilities might succeed depending on the actions and potentially the rolls of the characters. And failure to succeed in one path may force another path, or...
Thats already there.The DM has to fly by the seat of their pants if something like this happens, but you cant possibly fit every single posibility into a reasonably sized adventure.
|
|
You can, easily, have the gold for a Cloak of Resistance +1 or Muleback Cords before you finish 1st level. You won't have the Fame for either one, though, until you are halfway through 2nd level, at the earliest.Ok, but are you really going to make the cloak or cords your first purchase? You're not going to buy anything else first? No masterwork weapon, masterwork armor, scrolls, wands etc?
Buy something already. The economy depends on it. Gnome children are drowning in the puddles because they can't afford snorkles because of the inflation you're causing! :)My 4th level Oracle has somewhere north of the 5K+ GP needed for a magical staff, but not the Fame needed to allow that big a purchase.
Heck, my 7th level Rogue, because of the way he got there, had a bunch of money, and not enough Fame for some of the items that he would have found appropriate...
Actually, on one of my PCs, yes, muleback cords were one of his highest priorities. He used Prestige to buy the wand(s) he wanted, in the meantime.
And my Rogue bought stuff, just not always the items he wanted to purchase.
And the way he got there, from 3rd to 7th in one easy chronicle application, was that he was my GM credit recipient for my Dragon's Demand chronicles. 12 XP, 16 PP, a bunch of gold, all at once.
|
|
Actually, on one of my PCs, yes, muleback cords were one of his highest priorities. He used Prestige to buy the wand(s) he wanted, in the meantime.
Ok, and even after that, which you have to admit isn't the usual course of events, you blow most of your gold on the cords and your purchase limit will rise higher than your purse. So you get one item you have to wait for, the rest is as I said. That's pretty much the definition of "probably".
on top of THAT, you need to get the exact item you're waiting for on your chronicle sheet loot, on that character, to make it relevant.
"It didn't happen that one time because of some really weird stuff" does not contradict the idea that in the normal course of events your fame is way over your spending cash.
|
Global Organized Play Coordinator
|
The rules permit "creative solutions", but as soon as a GM steps outside the tactics as written in the scenario, everyone is crying foul...
However, if the actions of the PCs before or during an encounter invalidate the provided tactics or starting locations, the GM should consider whether changing these would provide a more enjoyable play experience. Additionally, the GM may consider utilizing terrain and environmental conditions when those effects have been written into the flavor of a scenario but the mechanics that are normally associated with them by the Core Rulebook have not been added to the encounters.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is the very essence of a role playing game that there are few rules for doing the "soft" stuff...
Sounds like you haven't played many other rule sets. L5R, WOD, there are many other RPGs that emphasize non combat rules. Pathfinder separates combat abilities from non combat abilities, having large amounts of rules for the former, and one small "skills" section for the latter. Many other RPGs don't differentiate the skill of swinging a sword from the skill of riding a horse, but pathfinder has seperate mechanics for each. The pathfinder rules put a higher importance on combat. They are designed to emulate high fantasy of man vs giant monsters. The ruleset shines in combat facing down larger than life odds.
It's assumed that pfs players chose to play this game because of what it does well, thus combat is a central part of scenario design.|
|
The rules permit "creative solutions", but as soon as a GM steps outside the tactics as written in the scenario, everyone is crying foul...
However, if the actions of the PCs before or during an encounter invalidate the provided tactics or starting locations, the GM should consider whether changing these would provide a more enjoyable play experience. Additionally, the GM may consider utilizing terrain and environmental conditions when those effects have been written into the flavor of a scenario but the mechanics that are normally associated with them by the Core Rulebook have not been added to the encounters.
It's good in theory, and I try to usually accommodate those things, but a lot of GM's I've played with don't and throw creative solutions under the bus.
OP - There are lots of low(and at least one no) combat scenarios now. You just have to know which ones. Season 4-6 each has several scenarios that fit your bill.
The thing that bothers me is the lack of info on when your doing a mystery one. Blackros Matrimony pretty much tells you you want a social character, but many times your already into the mission briefing before you figure it out and many GM's are like oh well. Personally, I find it completely reasonable the society would attempt to pick the right party for the job and GM's should tell people up front.
Coming from per-season 4, there was very little emphasis on the non-combat side of things. Not saying there wasn't fun RP (there was) but all scenarios pretty much followed the typical 4 encounter adventuring day with some light breaks intermittently. So, I tended to build my characters accordingly. Season 4 comes along so I tailor a few PC's to the more social/exploratory side of the game to meet the new challenges. Those characters almost never get in the right scenarios though, so there in lies the problem.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't really think that the core of this problem is roleplay or social heavy scenarios vs. combat heavy scenaros. In my opinion, it has nothing to with how much of either is in a scenario but with how much more work it is for the GM to stick to one or the other.
I agree that at times it really feels like the rules for Pathfinder really encourage you to kill everything. For example it's a standard action to smack the down on his luck thief with your sword and kill him, but lets look at some no murdery ways to stop him
1.Deal non lethal damage(still basically combat tho) but that imposes a -4 penalty.
2. Diplomancy check, takes one minute...so basically 10 rounds, making it forever useless
3.Subdue him, well u better take the action to get out manacles or rope, grapple than pin him...that takes quite a few rounds
It is mechanically simpler for the GM to just make you kill him, and has a higher chance of success than any none psychotic action would. I played a few co,bat heavy scenarios and was begging for a heavy roleplay one, after playing Severing Ties I wish I never had. Its more work for a GM to fly by his pants and allow creative thinking, saying no just make a roll is easier. Heavy roleplay scenarios dont require you to role play at all, they just require you to have optimized skills, which is still rollplay. For example, in PFS say two players wish to use Diplomancy to convince an NPC of something. Player 1 gives a wonderful, flavorful speech and presents amazing arguments as to why NPC should, and rolls a 12, failure. Player 2 says "I roll di good, agree me with yes?" gets a 20, success. RP isn't supported in PFS. And yes I'm aware that maybe some GM's can be creative and make their tables amazing, but that is a maybe where as being really good at rolling(skills or combat) is going to be better at 100% of tables as its the rules.
|
|
I don't really think that the core of this problem is roleplay or social heavy scenarios vs. combat heavy scenaros. In my opinion, it has nothing to with how much of either is in a scenario but with how much more work it is for the GM to stick to one or the other.
I agree that at times it really feels like the rules for Pathfinder really encourage you to kill everything. For example it's a standard action to smack the down on his luck thief with your sword and kill him, but lets look at some no murdery ways to stop him
1.Deal non lethal damage(still basically combat tho) but that imposes a -4 penalty.
2. Diplomancy check, takes one minute...so basically 10 rounds, making it forever useless
3.Subdue him, well u better take the action to get out manacles or rope, grapple than pin him...that takes quite a few rounds
If you (not your character) walked out of your FLGS this afternoon and saw a thief stealing a laptop out of a parked car, how would you stop him? Beyond packing non-lethal weapons (stun gun in real life, Sap or Net in game), I think you'll find the in game options are as good or better than your real world options.
Oh, Intimidation is probably far more appropriate to use than Diplomacy, but it's probably just going to make the thief run away.
Of course, if your character is a spellcaster, you might have a great number of other in game options at your disposal (slumber hex / color spray / charm person / hold person / grease / daze / sleep / etc.)
|
For example, in PFS say two players wish to use Diplomancy to convince an NPC of something. Player 1 gives a wonderful, flavorful speech and presents amazing arguments as to why NPC should, and rolls a 12, failure. Player 2 says "I roll di good, agree me with yes?" gets a 20, success. RP isn't supported in PFS. And yes I'm aware that maybe some GM's can be creative and make their tables amazing, but that is a maybe where as being really good at rolling(skills or combat) is going to be better at 100% of tables as its the rules.
I would disagree with you somewhat in that regard.
Here's where I as a GM can add a bonus or penalty depending on the RP (or extreme lack thereof in the 2nd case), which is well within my perogative as GM.
GMs don't have to simply allow a player to say "yeah" and have them roll a d20 to aid on a diplomacy roll (or make that roll whatsoever). What are you adding to the conversation? What else can be said? At the very least the gist of what your adding or saying.
Many inexperienced GMs can have a difficult time with those out of the box thinkings. But no GM started as a good GM. It takes time to be able to learn to deal with that and improvise your way through social encounters. From a development perspective, RP encounters are much harder to write compared to combat encounters, simply due to the random nature of a normal conversation.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Addressing two points here:
First, I don't see field agents as being hired for their unique murdering skills. The organization that the Pathfinder Society is loosely based upon, the famed Royal Geographic Society, featured members with a wide variety of skills, only one of which was martial prowess. Another influence that I see is The A-Team, which featured characters which weren't just great on the battlefield, but had unique individual skills as well. Likewise, Pathfinder agents are expected to be extremely versatile. Off the top of my head, I can remember scenarios in which Pathfinder agents are called upon to:
- Cure a plague
- Eliminate a tribe of goblins
- Impress nobility
- Impersonate enemy agents
- Negotiate the purchase of land for the establishment of a new lodge
- De-haunt a haunted house
- Track down the location of stolen goods
- Steal goods
- Solve multiple murders
- Commit multiple murders
- Track down missing agents
- Politely excuse yourself from a tea party
- Escort goblins through witch country
- Infiltrate the embassy of a major world power
- Critique a play
- Solve numerous ancient riddles
- Identify the properties of magical artifacts lost to time and space
- Create mechanical devices to solve physical problems
- Build fortifications
- Seduce the mistress of a brothel
- Negotiate a truce between warring factions
- Lead a bar in a rousing song
- Win a fight, and look good doing it
- Preach a sermon
- Convince a troll that you don't need to pay him
- Stage a coup amongst a tribe of kobolds
It takes a truly impressive individual to be able to do all of those things. I'm reminded of the poem "If", by Rudyard Kipling. If you can keep your head about you, use your wits and can still wield a sword when you need to, then you are a field agent. Ignoring any of those aspects would be folly.
To the second point regarding diplomacy rolls and RP, I generally am liberal with letting people assist and giving circumstance bonuses to ensure that good RP wins the day. I also tend to penalize people who present unconvincing (or nonexistent) arguments. If someone is shy but has a good diplomacy roll, I will often allow others to cover for the shy individual. Trust me, if you sit down at one of my tables and don't want to RP, the scenario is going to be much, much harder than if you sit down wanting to work with the characters.
|
|
The pathfinder society also employs lots of people who are not field agents. We call them NPCs. Many of these people have no combat training they are scholars, librarians, archaeologists, in short normal people. Field agents are extraordinary people. The society has lots of ordinary people working for them, but not so many extraordinary ones. So they don't tend to waste their field agents' talents doing missions that their ordinary employees could do. If the pathfinder society was an army, the PCs would be the special forces. They get sent on the special missions, the extra hard missions, the critical to the success of the society missions.
|
|
The complaints about unconventional scenarios like Assault on the Wound and Library of the Lion is evidence of the hazards involved in writing adventures that deviate from what's come to be expected as the vanilla recipe for a PFS scenario.
Personally, I think lots of players don't like being outside their comfort zones. Since we generally can't replay adventures anyway, I do appreciate the off-the-wall scenarios now and again. There are certainly those who disagree, whether they are a majority or merely vocal (or both).
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Several points to make:
1. Are Pathfinder Society field agents supposed to be good at killing things? Definitely, yes. Regardless of the rules structure (I happen to think that fewer rules works better on the "soft" stuff than more rules), the Field Guide is literally teeming with advice on how to kill things. However...
2. It is more accurate to say that the Field Guide is full of advice on how to Not Get Killed, and this usually involves killing the other guy before he kills you. Rarely does the Society go completely out of its way looking for things to murder. The Society is NOT an army, even if field agents are its martial arm. There is always some ulterior motive for fighting -- obtaining a lost artifact, evading customs agents, promoting peace on the Inner Sea to facilitate exploration, etc. Even participation in the 5th Mendevian crusade was motivated by the possibility of exploring Jormurdun. If there weren't ulterior motives and the Society ran around killing (mostly) evil things just because, then the Silver Crusade faction wouldn't exist. So...
3. Are field agents supposed to be explorer-archaeologists? Definitely, yes. The purpose of field agents is to acquire knowledge that is difficult to acquire, and that can mean A LOT of different things.
4. Netopalis is absolutely right that a major inspiration for the Society is the historical Geographic Societies of various European powers during the 19th and early 20th centuries. Go read Tournament of Shadows and you'll see exactly what I mean. (Fair warning: to someone like me with a modicum of historiographical training, it's a terrible work.) Another inspiration (in my mind, at least) is Indiana Jones, who has killed A LOT of Nazis in his day but is primarily an explorer and adventurer.
5. The Society has plenty of other employees, yes, but the division of labor is not THAT specific. Field agents aren't soldiers, otherwise we'd spend way more time on guard duty at various lodges. Boy, wouldn't that be fun? Field agents are supposed to be versatile, supposed to be talented survivalists, and yes, supposed to be explorers, archaeologists, diplomats, adventurers. Pigeon-holing = bad.
6. In my book, yes please more archaeology.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
The pathfinder society also employs lots of people who are not field agents. We call them NPCs. Many of these people have no combat training they are scholars, librarians, archaeologists, in short normal people. Field agents are extraordinary people. The society has lots of ordinary people working for them, but not so many extraordinary ones. So they don't tend to waste their field agents' talents doing missions that their ordinary employees could do. If the pathfinder society was an army, the PCs would be the special forces. They get sent on the special missions, the extra hard missions, the critical to the success of the society missions.
I don't think the lore of PFS really supports this. When we see individuals who are specialists in some field they are still listed as agents, just like PCs are. The Society chooses people to send on missions based on their skills, but that doesn't change the fact that the Society expects at least minimal competency in multiple areas. The few times that other agents are introduced primarily as helping the Society for combat reasons, you generally find their bodies at some point during the scenario.
I always assumed that the PCs are expected to be the front line and troubleshooting arm of the Society, rather than the archaeologists themselves. They're the guys you send in first to make sure the location is relatively safe, and the ones you send after the bad stuff that has messed with what the real archaeologists have found. After all, they're not walking around with brushes and making rubbings - they're kicking in doors and killing stuff. An archaeology they do is mostly accidental, in my experience.
I have a running desire to stat up an investigator as an actual archaeologist, who's horrified to be running around with a bunch of murder-hobos. Just to make him useful to the rest of the party, I'm considering a halfling focused on aid another.
|
|
After all, they're not walking around with brushes and making rubbings - they're kicking in doors and killing stuff.
Maybe you're not, or at least not yet (your investigator sounds interesting!). But I know plenty of PCs who do, and I always try to reward that sort of thing in my games.
Remember, almost everybody who is a Pathfinder went through basic training, including those supposed-others "the archaeologists." Field commissions are supposed to be relatively rare. Granted, everyone has their specialty and the adventures we run tend to be with the troubleshooter specialists, but that's not where our jobs end. We're still archaeologists too.
To quote the Field Guide, p.2: "the Pathfinder Society [is] a loose-knit group of explorers, scholars, and adventurers who span the globe and band together in search of lost knowledge and ancient treasures."
And even the Society's martial arm's primary purpose isn't all that martial. To quote the Seeker of Secrets, p.10: "Marcos understands that his job as Master of Swords is not to turn Pathfinders into warriors, but rather to keep them alive while they do their true work of discovering and recording." Combat skills lie in service of exploration skills, not the other way around.
In short, it's 'Explore, Report, Cooperate,' not 'Maim, Murder, Kill.'
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wouldn't say that your experience has been atypical, hence this thread. There are a few that I can think of off the top of my head where the archaeology theme is much more pronounced, if not the primary objective:
The Confirmation
Before the Dawn series
The Citadel of Flame
The Rebel's Ransom
Most stuff in the Hao Jin Tapestry but especially The Temple of Empyreal Enlightenment
And hopefully more! As a more general note, though, I would say that almost all scenarios I've played or GM'd have involved some level of exploration, the acquisition of knowledge, the acquisition of an artifact, or something else that facilitated one or more of those things. While not 'archaeology' per se, the broader theme is still there, humming in the background.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Where's the archaeology?
A number of classes simply do not get the required skill points to learn anything about archaeology. Heck, even clerics suck at Knowledge: Religion. The only thing all the classes can contribute to is the combat system. Hence, bashing locals gets a great run in all scenarios.
To give you an idea of how the disparity in skills and work of Pathfinders goes, in a recent scenario the party is required to alter oil paintings. Because the author knows that not even the most intelligent Pathfinder bard has “Craft: Illustration” (even though this a zero photography world) the party is allowed to use Sleight of Hand to paint alterations. See also Linguistics getting a run in the Library as opposed to Knowledge: History.
There are some fantastic things that we could do as Pathfinders but we never, ever will because the skill system currently seems to work on a drought or flood basis. Authors that do want to work in something suitably Pathfindery need to insert strange skill parallels to avoid butt-hurt reviews by parties who can't think of a outside the box solution (or have a GM who won't allow it).
Just my two coppers.
Again, it seems that a lot of people have the idea that heavy RP means heavy skill. Is it a rule that you have to roll a di or you can't do anything that matters...This seems to be an issue more with the general mindset of most(not all just most) GMs than an issue with the system. Especially in combat, if we allowed more outside the box thinking in combat, I think that would lessen the need to be min/maxed. Players can have the mindset of "yea my strength isnt quite has high as I want but i can make up for it through creative smart play". This idea is shot down at almost every table(again almost not all).
It seems to me that if an action would solve a problem, or give a bonus numeric value to any roll or stat, you better have a skill or attack roll for that action. I get that it is meant to balance the game, but it has a tendency to turn Pathfinder in just a very complex game of chess once combat starts(which is always in a lot of scenarios)