|
| 16 people marked this as a favorite. |
Me: It's kind of frustrating though. There just aren't any options for "holy barbarian" types and we don't have those celestial totems yet.
Jade Regent GM: What about taking Spirit Totems and having it deal holy damage instead of negative energy and flavoring the wisps specifically for your concept?
Me: Dude.
**************
Me: I was wondering, would the Redeemer archetype be available for tieflings here?
Wrath of the Righteous GM: Absolutely!
Wrath of the Righteous GM: It literally makes all of the sense for it to be.
**************
Aasimar Paladin Player: Been looking at that aasimar wings feat...
Tiefling Cleric Player: Ugh.
Tiefling Cleric Player: Want.
Tiefling Cleric Player: But cannot have.
Aasimar Paladin Player: Yeah, it's pretty arbitrary. :( And it would be awesome if they could take it at the same time. Maybe there's another option that can be worked out like Eldritch Heritage or something.
Wrath of the Righteous GM: Eh, let's just make it legal for both. It's simpler and there's no real reason for it not to be available to both races.
Tiefling Cleric Player: :D
*****************
Wrath of the Righteous GM: So this campaign is going to get crazy fast and I just remembered a spell both of you might want to look at. :) Bladed Dash.
Aasimar Paladin Player: ?
Me: OH GOD. The anime/videogame-style dash-and-slash move!
Aasimar Paladin Player: Just looked it up. Wow, that's what it is.
Me: With the afterimage and everything
WotR GM: Yes. :)
Me: I never realized how much I needed this before now.
Aasimar Paladin Player: Wait, no go for us. It's only for bards and maguses. Magi.
Me: dammat
Aasimar Paladin Player: Mageese.
WotR GM: Pff. It's a paladin spell now because it's awesome.
WotR GM: I want to be able to see you guys doing intersecting charges with that thing. :)
**************
Thank you GM's. :)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
WotR GM: I want to be able to see you guys doing intersecting charges with that thing. :)
All I can see is Crono-Frog X-SLASH. Of which I totally approve.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
WotR GM: I want to be able to see you guys doing intersecting charges with that thing. :)All I can see is Crono-Frog X-SLASH. Of which I totally approve.
Tis going to happen.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't have much to contribute here personally because I'm so much more often GM than player, but these are the kinds of things I strive to do for my players on a regular basis so... yeah =) All in favor of this kind of thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I probably sound inappropriate for mentioning myself, but yeah, I will always argue for "the rule of cool" in a game, that benefits the players. Really, in our home games, there's no official Paizonian referee on hand to stop us from changing the rules, so if a player wants to do something cool that makes sense, we do it.
Also, props to my current DM for allowing me to use Incarnum resources in our PF game, despite not really understanding it, nor wanting 3e materials in the game. I've been playing the same character for the past year, and so far things have been pretty good. Nothing broken or confusing. Although, with the way Pathfinder consolidated skills, a lot of Soulmelds got really powerful.
Oh I have a really good one sadly it is RRRNSFW.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Shout-out to my mate Anthony for allowing my Primal Companion Hunter to have a large-sized bear companion. I'll be playing a Viking lass charging into battle with a scythe, riding a horned, winged polar bear and that's about the coolest thing I'll have ever done.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In my wife's Curse of the Crimson Throne campaign, my friend had rolled a half-orc fighter with EWP Bastard Sword and Two-Weapon Fighting. He had also rolled well and put his 18s in Str and Dex.
So he asked if he could use two bastard swords at once, and she decided it was fair to consider them light weapons for him, and only apply the -2 penalty instead of -4 for using two one-handed weapons.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I try to be this way whenever it works to make the game more fun for everyone at my table.
I try to be this way whenever it works to make the game more fun for everyone at my table.
Same here.
One of the games I am currently playing in is set in a Eastern Style Setting. We are using a lot of variant rules so as we aren't walking around wearing heavy armour all the time and can easily get eastern weapons for most classes.
One of my fellow players was playing a Magus/Fighter built around Bladed Dash. Well he was given permission to cast it on others. Our party is built with Gestalt Rules. I am a Samurai/Fighter, we have a Paladin/Cleric, a Ninja/Wizard, and a Bard/Witch.
I prefer GMs who allow cool things after actually doing a bit of checking and research
Implying we don't do that around here...
In my wife's Curse of the Crimson Throne campaign, my friend had rolled a half-orc fighter with EWP Bastard Sword and Two-Weapon Fighting. He had also rolled well and put his 18s in Str and Dex.
So he asked if he could use two bastard swords at once, and she decided it was fair to consider them light weapons for him, and only apply the -2 penalty instead of -4 for using two one-handed weapons.
Well, rulings like this one risk making overpowered characters. Should you give a player something like that right away? Wait to see how the character performs without it? Make it a special feat?
Still, probably not too bad, given that fighters are lackluster in so many other areas.|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All I can see is Crono-Frog X-SLASH. Of which I totally approve.
Just so's you know,
Aasimar(Travern) eventually convinced my tiefling(Liath) to take Frog on account of him being the more chivalrous and honorable of the two. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You mean who gets to be Frog and who has to be the spiky haired git, yes? I'd take +20 to Jump and dark backstory over mute and "dies as part of the plot" any day.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
To me, this is why we even have GMs in the first place. To cover all the things the writers of the rulebook didn't think of or have room for. Otherwise you could just all be players and run a dungeon crawl with dice or cards to decide what comes up in the next room (not that I have anything against that kind of game either, <3 Advanced Heroquest :) .)
"The GM overrules the rulebook" isn't always a bad thing. If you have a decent GM, they'll do what's right for the table as a whole rather than just use it to their advantage. When you have to rely on the rulebook to bash the GM over the head with, that's not a fault in the game, it's a fault with who you choose to play with. A good GM *always* tries to facilitate rather than dictate.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You mean who gets to be Frog and who has to be the spiky haired git, yes? I'd take +20 to Jump and dark backstory over mute and "dies as part of the plot" any day.
*snerk* Meanwhile I'll just sit over here trying to decide if I want to play the barbarian, the pyro-technomancer, or the eldritch knight/magus who's allowed to use two-handed weapons.
You then have THIS player :
Thankfully no I don't =)
I will admit, I am one of the GM's that struggle with this. I agree with the concept of allowing things just cause they are kool. But most of the time when asked all I can see is 'This will suddenly make him more powerful than all the other PC's in the group. So I'm going to have to give something else to each of the others. But then one of those will be more powerful than expected, so I will have to give the others something else... ad nauseum.'
Now several of those that Mikaze mentioned I would have allowed. If a tiefling player had asked about taking similar feats to get demonic bat wings instead of angelic bird wings, I would have allowed it since there is an associated cost of taking the feats, has symmetry, and fits the concept. No problem. (The closest I have seen is "It's stupid that I have to take feats to get wings, everything demonic or angelic should just get the wings for free.")
I probably would allow the celestial spirit totems doing positive energy damage if it wasn't a necromancy campaign where it would vastly disrupt things.
I would allow the redeemer archtype if the player was going to actually play it, not just not cherry pick it for specific power abilities (not actually familiar with the archtype to know if that is likely).
Not sure about Bladed Dash. That does seem pretty arcane rather than divine. But I might allow it as a special dispensation depending upon which god they took.
|
|
Well, rulings like this one risk making overpowered characters. Should you give a player something like that right away? Wait to see how the character performs without it? Make it a special feat?
Still, probably not too bad, given that fighters are lackluster in so many other areas.
Honestly, he ended up using his Improved Unarmed Strike and Improved Grapple feats more.
I will admit, I am one of the GM's that struggle with this. I agree with the concept of allowing things just cause they are kool. But most of the time when asked all I can see is 'This will suddenly make him more powerful than all the other PC's in the group. So I'm going to have to give something else to each of the others. But then one of those will be more powerful than expected, so I will have to give the others something else... ad nauseum.'
Now several of those that Mikaze mentioned I would have allowed. If a tiefling player had asked about taking similar feats to get demonic bat wings instead of angelic bird wings, I would have allowed it since there is an associated cost of taking the feats, has symmetry, and fits the concept. No problem. (The closest I have seen is "It's stupid that I have to take feats to get wings, everything demonic or angelic should just get the wings for free.")
I probably would allow the celestial spirit totems doing positive energy damage if it wasn't a necromancy campaign where it would vastly disrupt things.
I would allow the redeemer archtype if the player was going to actually play it, not just not cherry pick it for specific power abilities (not actually familiar with the archtype to know if that is likely).
Not sure about Bladed Dash. That does seem pretty arcane rather than divine. But I might allow it as a special dispensation depending upon which god they took.
I completely agree with you. The 'Rule of Cool' I more often than not see it quickly become the 'Rule of Showboating'. Generally the people I play with are okay...but there is always that one guy in every group.
I don't see anything wrong with what Mikaze GM allowed...but except for these most I hear when the 'Rule of Cool' is invoked are horror stories.
|
The idea of the game is to have fun. The PCs are supposed to be heroes, not everyday folk. The idea of bending the rules for them is written into practically every work of fiction, ever!
Would James Bond be as cool if he didn't have the perks of being the hero? Would Conan be nearly as good if he didn't bend or break a few of the rules? Could you imagine Luke Skywalker or Han Solo if they were constrained by the laws of mundanity?
Let's face it; the game is about heroics and being larger-than-life, why not let your players appreciate the opportunity? I am always open to new ideas from my players. Admittedly, sometimes I have to say no, but there are plenty of examples where I have said "yes, certainly!"
- A very strong character wanted to wield twin battleaxes connected to his body by chains such that he could hurl them at opponents and then draw them back. I permitted it (with appropriate penalties, of course).
- Another strong character once grabbed an opponent by the foot in a bar fight, broke his ankle, and began using him as a flail.
- A character back in AD&D 2E had another wizard in the group polymorph him into a troll, knowing that he had the stats to retain his mental faculties.
- A character magic jarred a wererat and used its body for adventuring.
- A paladin killed an ettin mounted on a triceratops, then "broke" the beast and claimed it as his mount.
The idea of the game is to have fun. The PCs are supposed to be heroes, not everyday folk. The idea of bending the rules for them is written into practically every work of fiction, ever!
Would James Bond be as cool if he didn't have the perks of being the hero? Would Conan be nearly as good if he didn't bend or break a few of the rules? Could you imagine Luke Skywalker or Han Solo if they were constrained by the laws of mundanity?
Let's face it; the game is about heroics and being larger-than-life, why not let your players appreciate the opportunity? I am always open to new ideas from my players. Admittedly, sometimes I have to say no, but there are plenty of examples where I have said "yes, certainly!"
...
Agreed!
They are already getting the rules bent for them and are larger than life. They use a point buy that is 5, 10, or even 15 percent higher than mundanes get. They have the PC classes. They get the monster races. They get hero points (or action points), more wealth, and rerolls. They apparently get the direct attention of their deities. They can go to higher levels. They will almost certainly be more wealthy than emperors. Etc...
I get that. I approve of that. I even am willing to give them a bit more when it is kool, cinematic, thematic, or conceptual.
The problem is when one of them is James Bond but still expects the others to be Ms. Moneypenny.
I think most of the 'requests' I get are closer to the second than the first.
I promise, I will try to keep my general disgruntlement in check and keep an open mind about the special circumstance allowances.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The idea of the game is to have fun....
The idea of the game is for everyone to have fun, including the GM.
Every GM ever who let me play gestalt :D
I had a GM let me play gestalt AND ride a gold dragon. It was pretty awesome.
My RotrL GM, who approved of my designs to craft a crude oil-based flamethrower.
(Basically a pipe attached to a oil filled water skin with a torch at the end.)
With increased DC of course.
| 17 people marked this as a favorite. |
This may be a little self-congratulatory, but...
I just had a huge 8-player session that has been months in the making. After carefully delivering a plot hook/mission about a shrine of evil cultists:
Player: "So we should be looking for the cultist hideout somewhere near the lair of that minotaur that chased us off that one time."
Player: "Oh yeah. That minotaur probably has a ton of treasure..."
Player: "Yeah, there's eight of us now... screw the mission, let's go kill that minotaur and take his stuff."
GM (me) : "You are terrible players. You are telling me to throw out my lovingly crafted dungeon map so that you can arbitrarily do an entirely different adventure that has nothing to do with the plot hook."
Players: "But... you're not saying no?"
GM: "I knew you were going to do this, so I also prepped the minotaur labyrinth. *throws cultist shrine notes over shoulder revealing minotaur labyrinth notes* "PROCEED."
My Dark Heresy GM let my tech priest convert some mining drills into power weapons with the parts from four power swords and the help of some other tech priests. It's fantastic.
GM: "I knew you were going to do this, so I also prepped the minotaur labyrinth. *throws cultist shrine notes over shoulder revealing minotaur labyrinth notes* "PROCEED."
I could sure have used this insight a few weeks ago when my carefully planned adventure was thrown out the window by the players who wanted to do something completely different instead. I used to be able to wing adventures right and left, but no more. I managed to give them a decent game, but by gosh from now on I'm having a backup.
I love awesome GMs. In RotRL the cleric, out crafter, got a custom prestige class for cleric of Torag. And in the S&S campaign we are playing one PC is a princess, another is a secret agent elf (he as a whole custom organization and custom missions), and I have a pirate lord as a very good friend to start. And in this game we beat that. Not only did we avoid the plot but we handed it to the NPCs and we have gone dungeon diving. the look on his face was priceless. He said since we gave the plot to the NPCs he is cramming plot into the random dungeon. This is why you don't listen to 'that player'.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh wait we can congratulate ourselves?
In my Kingmaker game the King (A dwarven cavalier) has a sweet Pegasus companion, it was a horse at level 1, but eventually it grew wings.
Another character who died, came back to life as a Dhampyr thanks to the evil manipulations of Rhoswyn just because he missed playing the character.
In my Jade Regent game I let a player kill off a monster they were unprepared for that was attached to a ceiling by growing a feather token tree into it.
I let my players get away with an incredible amount if it generates a laugh or a good time.
GM: "I knew you were going to do this, so I also prepped the minotaur labyrinth. *throws cultist shrine notes over shoulder revealing minotaur labyrinth notes* "PROCEED."I could sure have used this insight a few weeks ago when my carefully planned adventure was thrown out the window by the players who wanted to do something completely different instead. I used to be able to wing adventures right and left, but no more. I managed to give them a decent game, but by gosh from now on I'm having a backup.
I really hate it when my players do that without warning.
Me, "So what are you going to do next?"
Players, "Ok so next time we'll make for the town that the fortune teller says needs saving. We probably ought to do some more investigating first to try and figure out what it needs saved from."
Players, "Lets enter the tournament at the arena then go hunt the fleeing slavers..."
Me, "... ok ... well since I prepared for what you said you were going to do last time, I guess we're pretty much done for today until I can prepare something for the arena and slavers ..."
Players, "Oh the arena will be simple. We can do that now."
Me, "I'm not good at adlibbing, but if all you want is something simple we'll give it a try."
Of course they were not happy with what I slapped up for the arena and got quickly bored to the point they started PvP'ing.
Players, "Well let's just go ahead and get started on the slavers."
Me, "You didn't like my off the cuff for something simple like an arena. You think an instant complex slaver adventure is going to be better?"
Players (disgruntled), "Ok we'll wait until next week."
Players, "Now that I think about it, I'm not sure hunting down someone that is fleeing and no longer a threat is really a paladin-ish kind of thing to do."
Me, "... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ..."
I really don't mind changing the way the plot is going, but tell me about it ahead of time and then please for all that you hold dear don't keep changing it every single freaking time we meet!
|
|
The PCs are supposed to be heroes, not everyday folk...
Let's face it; the game is about heroics and being larger-than-life...
Heroes yes, superheroes?? Well, that is a matter of taste and opinion that my "You kids get off my lawn!" grognard sensibilities do not care one-wit for.
I like the games I run to have characters that start out as "everyday folk" and later, become batman, as opposed to have the characters start out already as batman and morph into SUPERMAN!
This is part of the reason why I dropped Pathfinder and most other d20 derivative games and went back to playing 2nd edition AD&D, as those rules are more accommodating to my preferred play-style.
YMMV...
Kydeem, it sounds to me like you need to practice the valuable skill of hanging all your plot hooks from the same prepared game fishing rod.
Try to make it so the town, the slavers, the arena, etc all lead to your planned encounter.
Some call this railroading. I call it sanity preservation. Either way, it's only railroading if the players become aware of it.
Kydeem, it sounds to me like you need to practice the valuable skill of hanging all your plot hooks from the same prepared game fishing rod.
Try to make it so the town, the slavers, the arena, etc all lead to your planned encounter.
Some call this railroading. I call it sanity preservation. Either way, it's only railroading if the players become aware of it.
Yeah, that would have helped.
The arena wasn't even a plot hook. It was barely mentioned in the description of the capital city. Totally took me by surprise. They turned it into a plot hook then were unhappy with what I could come up with in 2 minutes time.
I didn't think the slavers were a plot hook any longer. They had already attacked the slaver camp/fort to free a specific person. About half of the slave camp (the above ground portion) survived. I thought that one was over. It was several in-game days later that they decided they needed to go hunt down the remainder of the fleeing slavers.
I suppose that if I had thought of it, I could have had the slavers flee through some random town under attack by undead and necromancers. Since they didn't know what the other down was in danger from they wouldn't have known I was repurposing that prep work.
Didn't get that far anyway, not long after that the PvP got so bad the campaign basically came to a screeching halt.
Anymore I pretty much just use published missions for that group. Anything else just became too much trouble. Yeah, the published stuff is usually kinda railroad. That seems to work better with these guys.
Well it sounds like you're learning from it, and that's what good GMs do.
Some groups definitely take to railroad/AP games better than others. Especially if the group doesn't resent that method, or even prefers it. Some of my groups are actually quite disciplined about explaining their way out of actions that might lead off-the-tracks... I occasionally have to talk them into doing things that are complicated but just damned cool.
But... then there's the party I had last Sunday. See above anecdote.
I give a shout out to my current GM! He allowed me to play a Malefactor from TPK games which is AWESOME!!! Oha nd he loves Psionics! FINALLY!! My last few GMs HATED psionics and where the type that believed it was overpowered.
As a GM I love throwing things that are weird, bizarre and sometimes cool, just to see what the players will come up with. I also like puzzles that have pretty open ended answers, because it's sometimes more fun to see what the players will think of than it is to get them to give me a single answer. In a current Module I'm writing, one of the "rooms" upon entering has a wall of force spring up around it so no one can go out and then an apparition starts appearing and warns the party that only one thing in the room can stop him. The room is like a knick knack shop with one weird thing in it.. A huge block of ice with something red inside.
The PCs are supposed to be heroes, not everyday folk...
Let's face it; the game is about heroics and being larger-than-life...
Heroes yes, superheroes?? Well, that is a matter of taste and opinion that my "You kids get off my lawn!" grognard sensibilities do not care one-wit for.
I like the games I run to have characters that start out as "everyday folk" and later, become batman, as opposed to have the characters start out already as batman and morph into SUPERMAN! ...
I happen to agree with you, but I know many people do not.
To me having really high stats (or other extra abilities) is an advantage. It doesn't make one a hero. What is so heroic about the 5th level guy, with 30 point buy, and a +3 sword beating a couple of standard bugbears? He could have probably taken them even if he had been commoner class and buck naked. Expected to easily win is not heroic.
Some of my favorite games have been when our PC's started off as fairly normal guys. Ok, they may be the PC classes but they don't start at 5th level with double WBL gold and 30 point buy for abilities.
They were start at first level in a small town, ability scores were barely over Joe Commoner (significantly less than many opponents), and characters are dirt poor. Then still finding a way to overcome the evil overlord of tyranny (or whatever).
Expected to lose and still managing to win? To me that is heroic.
But that is not the way most of the groups I have encountered lately play. I constantly hear:
It is just plain impossible to make a viable character with less than 25 point buy.
First (and maybe second) level isn't survivable so we only want to start at 3rd minimum.
We give extra xp to advance quickly since most classes don't give any decent abilities until about 9th level.
There's so much gear you have to acquire just to survive that everyone needs double WBL so they can have something interesting.
Etc...
Then they crow about how they stomped all over the AP. Well duh.
Well, they're having fun and that is the important thing. But I find it boring to play and exceedingly tedious to GM. I'll play with them every once in a while if they ask, but I just can't GM for it. Our play style just does not match up very well at all.
...
It's a game. Where you start doesn't really matter, it just scales the threat up. ...
Many of them don't. They want the 'standard' monsters with themselves as superheroes at the very start of the campaign.
...
As for "expected to lose and still managing to win"? In game context that works out one of two ways: either the expectations were false and the challenge was still set up for you to win or you lose most of the time.If the GM is really setting up challenges that you're expected to lose, then you're actually going to lose to them.
Ok, I thought it was fairly obvious from context, but I guess not.
I do not mean the GM sets up a killer/suicidal campaign that he expects you to lose. Obviously the GM is capable of killing the PC's any time he/she wants.
I meant the GM sets up a very challenging situation that someone in that world would not think the PC's are capable of handling. The PC's get allies, procure gear, investigate for weaknesses, make plans, and do whatever it takes to beg/borrow/steal an edge so they can win. Even if it takes a few in-game years to build up that capability or set the stage properly to win against the odds.
Most of the groups I see in recent years don't want to do any of that. They want it to be pretty obvious at the start that they can do the mission right now. They want the perfect gear and they want it right now. They want all their abilities to be higher than nearly anyone else in existence except maybe the BBEG. They want to stomp through with every expectation of that working and it being pretty obvious from the outset that it will work.
"I'm a hero my abilities should be higher than everyone else's.
I'm a hero I should be able to get whatever gear I want, when I want it."
I'm not saying it is the wrong way to play. I also have fun with those types of games. It just isn't my preferred favorite play style.
But I'd rather the conversation strayed back over to the topic.
My old GM was going to allow me (my Level 14 3.5 Warlock) create a cloak of many things. Similar to the Robe of Many things, but reusable. In other words, I want to put that sword back on my cloak, so I can toss the cloak over it and it becomes a patch again. That would have been cool. But the party broke up before we got there. We did have an animated Caravansary wagon though.. Which was awesome. No more horses.
Oh, and it had a giant crossbow on the top of it too.