|
Okay, in a group. Love the group and the DM. Very fun.
That said, DM has some styles which prevent enjoyment of certain class builds, or make certain skills wasteful.
Examples:
-Does not require animal companions to ever make any checks via handle animal.
-Does not allow companion/familars to have their own intiative step.
-just gives us listed value for items, not allowed to even attempt appraise to increase value in trade.
-Impossible to use stealth skills as DM doesn't use terrain from the pre-generated adventures, just uses blank rooms...
-Effectively gives casters the eschew materials feat for free, also permits gold exchange for material costs.
-Considers role playing characters to be derailing the group sessions. This isn't just the DM, many of the players have this attitude.
-no random encounters, no attempt to increase CR (or loot) if number of players exceeds the recommended number for a pregenerated adventure.
The list goes on.
I'm having difficulty adjusting to our DM's style of gaming. I enjoy the group and it is a nice DM, so I'm not looking to switch.
Still, have others had similar situations where the DM's approach to the game makes certain aspects of pathfinder impossible to enjoy/persue?
Not all GM's can be all things to all people.
How long have they GM'd? Are they still learning the system?
I was a long time AD&D DM, and then off to other systems before a 15-year hiatus with no gaming group. My current group has all been Pathfinder-based, and so I dove into it without really knowing what I was getting into. Some players love all the rules and micro-detail that the PF system has. Others - and myself included - find it a bit too much, and so I tend to gloss over a lot of details because: a) they don't interest me; and b) they slow things down. I do allow opportunities for my players to RP quite a bit, which is what it sounds like you're NOT getting with you current group.
Honestly, from what you've written, it sounds like this group really isn't the right group for you. They don't RP as much as you'd like; doesn't detail rooms; doesn't haggle; etc. Rather than try to make the GM and the other players adapt to you, you need to adapt to them or find a different group.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All GMs have certain things they like or dislike. I've always tried to find where their interests meshed well with mine, which sometimes means the first character didn't work so well.
Given what you've said, classes using animal companions are generally better off and sneaky characters are at a serious disadvantage. I'm not sure how much interaction there is. Since there is little terrain, archer characters should also find it much easier.
So you've told us what they did that you didn't like, how about a little about what they do which you do like? If you can't come up with anything, you will want to find a different group.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You should just talk to your GM about these rules outside of the session and see if he'd be willing to bring them into play.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It certainly sounds like it might be worth chatting to the GM. S/he may simply have forgotten/not thought about the aspects of the rules that you mention.
I know I rarely bother with Handle Animal checks for animal companions as I assume the ranger/druid knows how to deal with his own pet. However, if said ranger/druid hadn't bothered to actually put any skill ranks into Handle Animal, I would probably make the pet do unexpected things.
Not adjusting CR or loot may be an experience thing. I certainly shied away from that when I was just starting out. I now try adjust encounters to suit the group, though I often end up making things a *tad* too difficult (generally resulting in at least one death)... still, I wouldn't have learned anything if I'd never tried ;)
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Examples:
-Does not require animal companions to ever make any checks via handle animal.
-Does not allow companion/familars to have their own intiative step.
-just gives us listed value for items, not allowed to even attempt appraise to increase value in trade.
-Impossible to use stealth skills as DM doesn't use terrain from the pre-generated adventures, just uses blank rooms...
-Effectively gives casters the eschew materials feat for free, also permits gold exchange for material costs.
-Considers role playing characters to be derailing the group sessions. This isn't just the DM, many of the players have this attitude.
-no random encounters, no attempt to increase CR (or loot) if number of players exceeds the recommended number for a pregenerated adventure.
As a GM, I'm guilty of a number of these things and I'm rather unapologetic about it. There are rules I ignore and rules I outright break in order to 1) cut down on the hassle factor, and 2) keep the game moving forward. Every group's style is a little different and that's perfectly acceptable. If your personal style doesn't mesh well with the GM or rest of the group, talk to your GM about it.
-Skeld
|
|
-Does not require animal companions to ever make any checks via handle animal.
-Does not allow companion/familars to have their own intiative step.
-just gives us listed value for items, not allowed to even attempt appraise to increase value in trade.
-Impossible to use stealth skills as DM doesn't use terrain from the pre-generated adventures, just uses blank rooms...
-Effectively gives casters the eschew materials feat for free, also permits gold exchange for material costs.
-Considers role playing characters to be derailing the group sessions. This isn't just the DM, many of the players have this attitude.
-no random encounters, no attempt to increase CR (or loot) if number of players exceeds the recommended number for a pregenerated adventure.
Some GMs do things differently in order to keep the game running smoothly, a few of these seem to fall into that category.
"Does not require animal companions to ever make any checks via handle animal." - To streamline the game, I don't require checks for tricks the Animal Companion has "learned". Every so often when a player has their pet use a tactic never used before, I double check that they have the trick "learned" and I remind them during downtime phases that they can use Handle Animal to teach new tricks.
"Does not allow companion/familars to have their own intiative step." - Initiatives can take a long time to organize to begin with, and druid/hunter/summoner turns take long enough without butting in a few steps later with "And NOW it's time for the rest of my action economy". Sure, it makes improved initiative incredibly valuable for buddy-classes while not needing it for the companion, but improved initiative was already incredibly valuable for everybody.
"just gives us listed value for items, not allowed to even attempt appraise to increase value in trade." - Spending loads of time to identify and appraise items also slows down a game. It can be assumed that when you end up actually trying to sell something, you spend the time to identify it, equivalent to taking 20.
"Impossible to use stealth skills as DM doesn't use terrain from the pre-generated adventures, just uses blank rooms..." A little more work, but there is tedium that exists here as well, filling in bookshelves, armchairs and columns in the room puts more time in laying out the map if it's being drawn during game-time. Furthermore a lot of the arrangements can be quite silly, and then there is the infernal question of "Can I move here?" that grinds out turns into an practiced exercise of of saintly patience that some people won't pass.
"Effectively gives casters the eschew materials feat for free, also permits gold exchange for material costs." - Another downtime saver. You're not expected to track how much bat guano is in your pouch, which just leaves the costly components, which are obscure and tedious to look up ahead of time when deciding your purchases.
"Considers role playing characters to be derailing the group sessions. This isn't just the DM, many of the players have this attitude." - And this is where we can see the central issue. You're a Role-player amidst Roll-Players. They want to bust down the door and feel like heroes without getting bogged down in the rules, while you want to be able to explore the characters and their relationships with one another.
"no random encounters, no attempt to increase CR (or loot) if number of players exceeds the recommended number for a pregenerated adventure." - Talk to the guys, they may not be champing at the bit to get to the next encounter done if they're fighting CR appropriate enemies. This is probably the best route for slowing down the game so you can get some role-playing on. There are no conversations quite like the ones had when one is reapplying a bandage to a partner's chest wound.
...
Examples:
-Does not require animal companions to ever make any checks via handle animal.
-Does not allow companion/familars to have their own intiative step.
-just gives us listed value for items, not allowed to even attempt appraise to increase value in trade.
-Impossible to use stealth skills as DM doesn't use terrain from the pre-generated adventures, just uses blank rooms...
-Effectively gives casters the eschew materials feat for free, also permits gold exchange for material costs.
-Considers role playing characters to be derailing the group sessions. This isn't just the DM, many of the players have this attitude.
-no random encounters, no attempt to increase CR (or loot) if number of players exceeds the recommended number for a pregenerated adventure.
...
Most of this seems like a fairly inexperienced group and/or a very casual game. Some people just don't like to take the fiddly bits seriously.
Some of these I do a lot of the time as well.Unless there is a significant reason to do otherwise, I generally keep a pets action on the same initiative step as the PC.
I will generally assume the player knows what is possible with his animal companion and not hassle him about it. So I generally don't require handle animal checks either. But when a weird situation occurs. Trying to keep the cheetah quiet while hiding under the sink that is in use. Ok, you're making a check for that. Or if the player tries to have the animal do something it obviously can't. "No your giant stag beetle can not tell you the total of archers and swordsmen or where they are stationed." Beetles can't count or read a map.
I don't go into bargaining on most items. It is just a time sink that few people enjoy. If I know someone has a really high diplomacy or related profession skill, I might give them a 5% better price. If I know no one in the group has a positive modifier, I might give them a 5% worse price.
The exception might be something weird. Ok they managed to get the wall sized jade mosaic out in one piece. To really get a good price they have to sell it to a collector. So we might play through finding and bargaining with the collector for that single item. But I'm not doing it for everything they find or buy.
Not keeping track of material components is pretty common. A lot of GM's do that.
I do like the group to engage in role playing their characters and I allow stealth plenty of opportunities to succeed.
... Still, have others had similar situations where the DM's approach to the game makes certain aspects of pathfinder impossible to enjoy/persue?
Really, all of the. Every single GM has a style that will not mesh well with some players. It will make some things less enjoyable for some character types or player preferences and more enjoyable for others.
I have played with groups and GM's where everything is rush. Info gathering is nonexistent and doesn't give much reliable detail if you try. You never know what you are heading into or what you will encounter. Playing a prepared caster (especially wizard) in those groups is an exercise in frustration. You will almost always find that most of the spells you took are useless OR you always take a default list of generally useful spells and you might as well have been a sorcerer (or oracle).
Other groups and GM's have been exactly the opposite. Then a wizard (or cleric) almost guarantees a victory since you will almost always have the perfect spell ready for every situation. In those groups the sorcerer seems like the low powered rogue equivalent.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's not enough info in the OP to determine the experience level of the GM/group, so saying things like "it's sounds like an inexperienced GM" is unfair. For example, I do many of these and I've been GM'ing since 3e came out (and long before that with previous editions, too). My group and I have arrived at what we think are the things worth spending time on and the things that aren't (like haggling; none of us want to spend the entire session, or even a significant portion of it, shopping).
Many of the items on this list strike me as time savers, instead of laziness or inexperience. For another example, I don't use random encounters because I've come to consider them filler encounters that don't drive the story forward, but instead take away time for encounters that do drive story (I also don't like "random" encounters that span the range from "cakewalk" to "TPK bait"). As I've told my players before, every encounter is a relevant to the campaign's overall.
There are a couple things on the list I can't get behind, namely lack of roleplaying and failure to adjust for larger parties. Again, there may be a reason why the GM/group doesn't do this. The best way to address any of this is to talk to the GM.
-Skeld
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
-Does not require animal companions to ever make any checks via handle animal.
What are you attempting to do with Handle Animal? A Druid gets +4 on the roll with his companion, putting 1 rank gives +4 to the roll. That means that at 1st level with a 10 Charisma, it takes a 2 or better on the die to command his pet to do something it's trained for (DC10). That's barely worth the time it took to roll. And at 2nd level or with a 12+ charisma, it automatically succeeds. OK, after he's injured it goes up by 2, but still. By 5th level, there should never be a reason to fail that, ever.
-Does not allow companion/familars to have their own intiative step.
I was rolling separately with my druid a while, but ended up holding the higher init to wait for the lower. Eventually, the GM said "Just roll once and add the lower mod." I always give my players the option. Most of them opt for a single roll.
-just gives us listed value for items, not allowed to even attempt appraise to increase value in trade.
Sorry, I find this one kind of funny, as the previous two were complaining that he wasn't using RAW, and in this one you complain that he is.
-Effectively gives casters the eschew materials feat for free, also permits gold exchange for material costs.
Guilty. Keeping track of material components isn't really that fun. If someone wants to keep track, I'll certainly let them. Otherwise, I'll assume they loaded up on what they needed last time they were in town. Or scavenged what they needed along the way. I have never played with a GM who made us track material components. Since the 80s.
I'm having difficulty adjusting to our DM's style of gaming. I enjoy the group and it is a nice DM, so I'm not looking to switch.
Still, have others had similar situations where the DM's approach to the game makes certain aspects of pathfinder impossible to enjoy/persue?
I played in a Carrion Crown game a while back where the GM gave us really cool individualized magic items... and they were great, and original, and showed that he put in some thought to us. But they came too easy and made us too good too soon. The GM was running the game very well, but I felt that I couldn't fail, and that made it hard to enjoy. In another 3.5 game, a similarly generous DM gave out really great items, but then realized he gave us too much and started to make the items fail or take them away completely. I'm not sure which was worse. Both GMs were really into running the game and wanted to make sure everyone was having a good time.
As a GM/DM, I've found that people who GM a lot are a lot more demanding as players. I try to just sit back and accept other GM's style, but often I find myself thinking "Well, the way I'd do it is..." I'm really learning to lighten up.
"Does not require animal companions to ever make any checks via handle animal."
I pretty much never do this unless they are trying something bizarre. Usually the check is so minimal that it is autopass even with few/no ranks and I think every PC I've ever run with an AC has either maxed or close to maxed handle animal anyway. No need to waste everyones time with an extra roll.
"Does not allow companion/familars to have their own intiative step. "
I always have players companions go on their initiative to streamline gameplay.
"just gives us listed value for items, not allowed to even attempt appraise to increase value in trade."
Generally speaking, neither I or the players are interested in extended bargaining games. If we wanted that we would visit a flea market rather than play pathfinder. For a special setting/encounter I make an exception and bargain away. Appraise is useful for special or weird treasure like art, but not for everything they pick up. Too time consuming.
"Impossible to use stealth skills as DM doesn't use terrain from the pre-generated adventures, just uses blank rooms... "
Not even sure what you are talking about here.
"Effectively gives casters the eschew materials feat for free, also permits gold exchange for material costs."
For non GP cost materials, a spell component pouch takes care of it. For expensive components I expect players to purchase the items ahead of time, although with a newer/inexperienced player I would allow them to recon having bought things they need. That said, I am sure their are a lot of times when both I and my players forget that some seldom used spells have a GP component cost.
"Considers role playing characters to be derailing the group sessions. This isn't just the DM, many of the players have this attitude."
Balance is key here, and a little goes along way. I don't want to spend half an hour of game time listening to you brood away on deep issues of your special snowflake character. Also 'that is what my character would do' excuse for being a jerk doesn't fly with me. If you make a character who would be a jerk, it is you who are choosing to be a jerk.
"no random encounters, no attempt to increase CR (or loot) if number of players exceeds the recommended number for a pregenerated adventure."
I do increase challenges and treasure, both for higher numbers of characters and higher than expected optimization of characters. This one seems out of place in your list though, as everything else is criticizing adapting for fun and not following everything exactly by the book, while here the GM is doing exactly that. Probably just goes to show that you can't please everyone no matter what you do.
Honestly, I think overall you have an unrealistic expectation of the game. My guess is you are borderline OCD (relatively common among gamers in my experience) and things not being exact really bugs you. Unfortunately, most people won't share that view and you will probably have to adapt to them rather than expect them to adapt to you if you want to enjoy this activity.
...
I played in a Carrion Crown game a while back where the GM gave us really cool individualized magic items... and they were great, and original, and showed that he put in some thought to us. But they came too easy and made us too good too soon. The GM was running the game very well, but I felt that I couldn't fail, and that made it hard to enjoy. In another 3.5 game, a similarly generous DM gave out really great items, but then realized he gave us too much and started to make the items fail or take them away completely. I'm not sure which was worse. Both GMs were really into running the game and wanted to make sure everyone was having a good time.
...
Do you happen to be in Ohio? This sounds so much like my experience that I just have to ask.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do you happen to be in Ohio? This sounds so much like my experience that I just have to ask....
I played in a Carrion Crown game a while back where the GM gave us really cool individualized magic items... and they were great, and original, and showed that he put in some thought to us. But they came too easy and made us too good too soon. The GM was running the game very well, but I felt that I couldn't fail, and that made it hard to enjoy. In another 3.5 game, a similarly generous DM gave out really great items, but then realized he gave us too much and started to make the items fail or take them away completely. I'm not sure which was worse. Both GMs were really into running the game and wanted to make sure everyone was having a good time.
...
Only at Origins time. These games were both in Maryland.
|
-Does not require animal companions to ever make any checks via handle animal.
-Does not allow companion/familars to have their own intiative step.
I think that a lot of GMs do not require handle animal checks for companions. Until Paizo released Animal ARchive, there really was not much official information on how animal companions 'should' be run. The thing is that usually by 4th or 5th level, the Ranger/Druid's Handle Animal bonus will be high enough to automatically direct their animals for the tricks that they know...the breakdown is that they still need to make rolls for the tricks the animal companions do not know.
As far as having a separate initiative for characters and companions, I do think that most GMs do keep them on the same initiative count. The ease of doing it this way just outweighs any gain from keeping it separate.
-just gives us listed value for items, not allowed to even attempt appraise to increase value in trade.
I don't think that this is a big deal. Haggling does not add much fun value for an adventure game except as a RPG opportunity.
-Impossible to use stealth skills as DM doesn't use terrain from the pre-generated adventures, just uses blank rooms...
When I first started GMing, one of the things I wanted to make a point of doing was to give players the opportunity to use EVERY skill on the list, especially stealth. In many of the PFs games I have played, there are very few opportunities for stealth. Interestingly enough, the one player who played a ranger seldom used stealth...ah well.
-Effectively gives casters the eschew materials feat for free, also permits gold exchange for material costs.
I think that wizards should also get Eschew Materials from the start. Tracking low cost components (other than a focus) does not add fun in my mind, but I do think that tracking more costly components is important enough for game balance.
Converting gold for necessary components on the fly (if that is what you meant) is very odd though. I would also find this to be annoying.
-Considers role playing characters to be derailing the group sessions. This isn't just the GM, many of the players have this attitude.
Some groups end up leaning more towards RP and other more towards the action. RPing is not for everyone, so if you really like RP, this GM may not be the one for you.
-no random encounters, no attempt to increase CR (or loot) if number of players exceeds the recommended number for a pregenerated adventure.
Setting up random encounters and modifying encounters can take quite a bit of time. Do not fault him if he does not want to take that time.
As a GM, I would often spend hours and hours during the week to customize certain areas of the adventure for the upcoming session. And then when game day would come, the players would go off in some unexpected direction and my time would feel like a waste (though I could usually use the ideas elsewhere). The other thing is that while the GM may spend a ton of time prepping, most players spend very little time on their characters between sessions even if they do have 'homework'. Don't beat up your GM over this.
You did not mention whether you have GM'ed before, but until you have done so for an extended period of time, try to be less critical. Look for the things in the game that you can enjoy...and if the annoying bits overshadow the enjoyable bits, then you should either find a new group or start your own game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...
-Considers role playing characters to be derailing the group sessions. This isn't just the DM, many of the players have this attitude.
...
This could be very dependent on your definition of role playing the characters.
I have been with some groups that tried to role play everything to ridiculous extremes. One group spent 45 minutes to go through paying the bridge toll. There was nothing special about it. It was just a few copper pieces per person on foot. They were not trying to get away with not paying.
But they went through the conversations they had while standing in line, introducing themselves to the officer, flirting with the person behind them in line, arguing with each other over who's turn to pay the toll, detailed motions they were using to hide where their money was kept, etc... It was ponderous.
In another group a person decided his bard would always speak in rhyme. So we had to keep waiting on him while he would try to think of a way to rhyme what he wanted to say.
Another guy wanted to make up, on the spot, a Tolken-esque ode to each and every fallen comrade.
Trying to speak with bad accents, yoda-like syntax, or other forms of method acting is not fun for me. I do consider it to get in the way.
On the other hand, I do enjoy what I personally consider to be the essentials of role play. My characters have attitudes and personalities. They some times do things differently because of that.
The rest of the group had to ditch my undead hunter so they could make a truce with some vampires that I wanted to blast. Then they paid some very high level clerics to all geas me at the same time (to make sure I'd fail the save vs one of them) to abide by the terms of the truce. I eventually found a way around the geas and started a new undead re-killing jihad. We're winning by the way.
But most of the time he is a treasured member of the team and puts his fellows welfare above his own. He only gets difficult when someone tries to stop him from destroying undead.
I have a Nagaji that complains about the smelly mammals surrounding him. He also points out their mistakes and the reasons why a clever reptile would not have done that.
But a little of that stuff goes a long way. It usually happens while the GM is otherwise occupied. Like updating the map or checking on a spell he doesn't remember.
I half-agree and half-disagree with this.
I agree that keeping track of material components is a pain, but with Eschew Materials being a feat, I think that casters who essentially get it for free (unless, as with Sorcerers and Bloodragers, it's part of the class) ought to give up something for it. Maybe charge them 10 gp/spell level for any spell with a material component that they aren't forced to provide (if they lack the feat this is)
Wow, that's a lot of money!
My honest opinion? Most of the things you list seem pretty common -- either intentional or just lazy.
Your requirements for the GM seem much more stringent than most.
You're going to need to accept that you are NOT fit for "beer and pretzels" style of play, and that actually puts you in the minority as far as gamers.
Find a group that takes things as seriously as you do, but maybe also train yourself to relax a bit. It's just a game. A lot of people count themselves fortunate to have a GM at all -- they'd gladly take one with a relatively minor list of deviations like this.
Since this is starting to sound like a cop out, I'll go point by point:
-Does not require animal companions to ever make any checks via handle animal.
A lot of people don't. The fact is, there are lot of things you just need a certain amount of ranks to do and many training rolls can and should happen off-screen.
-Does not allow companion/familars to have their own intiative step.
Totally fine with me. I hate waiting for all the pet classes to have their turn. I'd give it some consideration if initiative was an obvious selling point off the companion (like, a roll that's considerably better than the PC's, or an ability like Sneak Attack in play). Otherwise, initiative just doesn't matter that much for a brute attacker.
-just gives us listed value for items, not allowed to even attempt appraise to increase value in trade.
While I wouldn't disallow attempts to haggle, I can understand not wanting to get bogged down with math and GP lookups. There are worse things, honestly. At least you're getting a fair price, and you're allowed to buy and sell things. A lot of players aren't.
-Impossible to use stealth skills as DM doesn't use terrain from the pre-generated adventures, just uses blank rooms...
This sounds difficult. I would actually ask the GM under what circumstances would he allow stealth to operate to an advantage. Get an answer and hold him to it. Stealth is problematic with anything other than an indulgent GM anyway, so I'm not surprised it's causing issues with this guy.
-Effectively gives casters the eschew materials feat for free, also permits gold exchange for material costs.
The first is virtually a non-issue, since the very inexpensive component pouch does effectively do this anyway. It's really a change in presentation only. The second one is fine, basically -- gold is gold. It makes things a little easier on high level casters, but even without this allowance people would be trading in for diamonds as soon as they can anyway. If the game has reached the levels where this is a problem, then your GM can't be all that bad -- at least he's sticking to it.
-Considers role playing characters to be derailing the group sessions. This isn't just the DM, many of the players have this attitude.
This is a style of play thing. I'm generally all for roleplaying, but with certain campaigns I get frustrated if things don't move forward fast enough -- with an AP for instance, some RP is great, but if we stop to explore every shopkeep and peasant, we won't reach the end until we're all in retirement homes.
-no random encounters, no attempt to increase CR (or loot) if number of players exceeds the recommended number for a pregenerated adventure.
Random encounters are not actually RAW. Even if they were, dropping them is so common as to be THE most common house rule.
Not altering the CR is a valid technique. If you run a party of 6 with XP through a book adventure, it should eventually reach equilibrium because the party advances more slowly with a smaller share of XP going to each player. After several sessions, things should balance out, and because you'll be taking on higher-CR threats at that point, the GP awards will also be higher. It's not the most common approach, but given the math behind XP, it's not a totally groundless approach either.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that these seem like relatively minor issues compared to some of the most dysfunctional groups we hear about on these forums. It seems that you have a very serious need for control and compliance that isn't being met. The solution is honestly to learn to let it slide. Even a slightly flawed game is better than no game at all, and it seems like your GM has got the hardest part down: showing up.
Many of your complaints seem to focus on the concessions he's made to other players. You'd do well to recognize that for what it is, you feel like he's playing favorites. But he seems like a pretty indulgent guy, so you should just ask for some special privileges of your your own. Stealth seems like a good candidate. Just ask him how he thinks it ought to work, and use it like he says.
It's all too easy to feel overshadowed in a game that's about power fantasy but also about teams. You have to constantly communicate with the other players and GM in order to make sure everyone is getting what they want out of the experience.
I agree that keeping track of material components is a pain, but with Eschew Materials being a feat, I think that casters who essentially get it for free (unless, as with Sorcerers and Bloodragers, it's part of the class) ought to give up something for it. Maybe charge them 10 gp/spell level for any spell with a material component that they aren't forced to provide (if they lack the feat this is)...and if you do that, then you also might as well just let them pay in gold 120% of the cost of any material component of value they don't have. (If they have Eschew Materials, it's only 100%, and on occasion the difference won't be trivial).
Eschew Materials is only worth 5 GP as a one time cost. It's called a Spell Component Pouch. Although if you are paranoid like me that ends up being a whole 25 GP for 5 of them...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Eschew Materials is only worth 5 GP as a one time cost. It's called a Spell Component Pouch. Although if you are paranoid like me that ends up being a whole 25 GP for 5 of them...
My understanding is that the spell component pouch is empty and you have to fill it with things and keep track of what's in it. Yeah, it isn't eschew materials. It is just a pouch to keep those weather sensitive materials in for easy access while casting. If you've been doing this, your cheating (or your DM doesn't mind given eschew materials for 5gp).
|
Eschew Materials is only worth 5 GP as a one time cost. It's called a Spell Component Pouch. Although if you are paranoid like me that ends up being a whole 25 GP for 5 of them...My understanding is that the spell component pouch is empty and you have to fill it with things and keep track of what's in it. Yeah, it isn't eschew materials. It is just a pouch to keep those weather sensitive materials in for easy access while casting. If you've been doing this, your cheating (or your DM doesn't mind given eschew materials for 5gp).
The spell component pouch comes with all of the basic ingrediants inside of it already. Though you do need access to it. (Potential issues if you're in a web/grappled etc) In addition, it could be stolen or sundered. (Hence Anzyr being paranoid and having five scattered about his person.)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Eschew Materials is only worth 5 GP as a one time cost. It's called a Spell Component Pouch. Although if you are paranoid like me that ends up being a whole 25 GP for 5 of them...My understanding is that the spell component pouch is empty and you have to fill it with things and keep track of what's in it. Yeah, it isn't eschew materials. It is just a pouch to keep those weather sensitive materials in for easy access while casting. If you've been doing this, your cheating (or your DM doesn't mind given eschew materials for 5gp).
A spellcaster with a spell component pouch is assumed to have all the material components and focuses needed for spellcasting, except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn't fit in a pouch.
I'm sorry, but you are mistaken and have not been using Spell Component Pouches correctly. Just by having one you are assumed to have everything, except the listed exceptions. It is Eschew Materials. Not running the way it is written is a houserule and as written it *IS* Eschew Materials for 5 GP, aside from the fact that it can be lost/sundered/stolen/etc.
(Hence Anzyr being paranoid and having five scattered about his person.)
At these prices, you can't afford to *not* be paranoid!
"A spellcaster with a spell component pouch is assumed to have all the material components and focuses needed for spellcasting, except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn't fit in a pouch."
It is assumed that spellcasters constantly replenish all the cheap/free stuff. So your wizard is gathering spider webs, bat guano, etc. It is only expected that expensive components need to be tracked on a sheet.
Remember, spell component pouches ruin polymorphing casters' lives. Eschew materials saves you from the hassle of keeping one safe (not sundered/lost), keeping one near you at all times (do you sleep with it on? how you going to cast stripped naked and tied up?), and allows casting while polymorphed for anyone besides druids with Natural Spell.
Remember, spell component pouches ruin polymorphing casters' lives. Eschew materials saves you from the hassle of keeping one safe (not sundered/lost), keeping one near you at all times (do you sleep with it on? how you going to cast stripped naked and tied up?), and allows casting while polymorphed for anyone besides druids with Natural Spell.
First of all, you can't normally cast while polymorphed anyway, so no major loss. Second, if your tied and bound up, then you have bigger problems then a spell component pouch. Like say your spellbook. And honestly, anyone who actually uses "tie up" to try and restrain a mage is an idiot in the first place and deserves their impending dose of murderhobo.
Finally, instead of Eschew Materials just take False Focus and get a Holy Symbol (Tattoo). That covers up to 100 GP of spell use. Or better yet learn Blood Money for a 1st level spell that will cover 500 GP per point of STR damage.
Because there's lots of ways for a caster to cast spells in such a scenario. And it only takes one spell to instantly disappear and come back mad as all hell.
First of all, you can't normally cast while polymorphed anyway, so no major loss. Second, if your tied and bound up, then you have bigger problems then a spell component pouch. Like say your spellbook. And honestly, anyone who actually uses "tie up" to try and restrain a mage is an idiot in the first place and deserves their impending dose of murderhobo.
Finally, instead of Eschew Materials just take False Focus and get a Holy Symbol (Tattoo). That covers up to 100 GP of spell use. Or better yet learn Blood Money for a 1st level spell that will cover 500 GP per point of STR damage.
If you polymorph into a dragon or elemental, the good ones for casters, you're still able to cast as long as components aren't a problem. A sorcerer with Dimension Door and either the ability to speak or Silent Spell is a lot harder to lock down than a comparable wizard. Not saying that Eschew Materials is a top feat choice, just that it has uses and those uses are not cost-related. Players in "gritty" games might find it invaluable.
False Focus accomplishes a bit more but is non-core, and some GMs wouldn't like that combination if it didn't fit the flavor of your character. And you know better than to compare Eschew Materials with Blood Money. Different use cases than Eschew Materials and heralded as one of the most OP spells in the system.
Examples:
...As a GM, I'm guilty of a number of these things and I'm rather unapologetic about it. There are rules I ignore and rules I outright break in order to 1) cut down on the hassle factor, and 2) keep the game moving forward. Every group's style is a little different and that's perfectly acceptable. If your personal style doesn't mesh well with the GM or rest of the group, talk to your GM about it.
-Skeld
Same boat. A quote I remember when deciding what to spend time on is "no one finds inventory management fun." I try to focus my games on adventure, cool action, mystery, drama - fun stuff. Not accounting, tracking weight, debating how evil it is to kill goblin babies, ect.
While I very much aim for detailed terrain and role playing, in other aspects I go further than this GM. I allow them to pull many small, cheap, mundane items out of their magical bag of holding without bothering to explicitly buy/find them (and they'll always have a bag of holding fairly early). Their characters are adventurers, and can be assumed to have a crowbar/rope in their bag of holding, even if the players didn't think of it - and the cost isn't worth bringing up. I removed the alignment system since it never brought anything interesting and bogged down several sessions with 'but the alignment says X!'. In my next campaign, the PCs are going to be part of an organization, and I'm planning to remove gold/money from it and have them just donate to/borrow from the organization's supplies. Streamlining the game does a world of good in my experience.
I had a game like this, where every battle was in an open meadow. The acrobatic rogue found that half of his skills were useless, because there was nothing to climb, nothing to jump, etc.
Eventually, the player retired him, and created a new character to fit the campaign.
More commonly, i see this happen with social skills, which are either useless, or all powerful. But that's the fault of the game designers, combat gets several chapters, negotiation gets a paragraph.
Pretty bad design for a role playing game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A sorcerer with Dimension Door and either the ability to speak or Silent Spell is a lot harder to lock down than a comparable wizard.
Well, since dimension door only has a verbal component that isn't really true.
More commonly, i see this happen with social skills, which are either useless, or all powerful. But that's the fault of the game designers, combat gets several chapters, negotiation gets a paragraph.Pretty bad design for a role playing game.
I'm not sure I agree with this. If you are role playing negotiations you don't really need rules for it. If your social interactions are purely based on rules and die rolls, it is difficult to also role play those interactions.
The purest form of role playing is probably the childhood game 'lets pretend' entirely without concrete rules (although definitely it has unstated rules.)
I'm not advocating no rules role play, but I do think that their is a trade off, and I think some aspects of the game are better for being vague in regards to rules.
I certainly do agree though that it can at times go bad.
If you polymorph into a dragon or elemental, the good ones for casters, you're still able to cast as long as components aren't a problem. A sorcerer with Dimension Door and either the ability to speak or Silent Spell is a lot harder to lock down than a comparable wizard. Not saying that Eschew Materials is a top feat choice, just that it has uses and those uses are not cost-related. Players in "gritty" games might find it invaluable.False Focus accomplishes a bit more but is non-core, and some GMs wouldn't like that combination if it didn't fit the flavor of your character. And you know better than to compare Eschew Materials with Blood Money. Different use cases than Eschew Materials and heralded as one of the most OP spells in the system.
In the event you polymorph into one of those creatures you just leave a Spell Component Pouch off your immediate Person. I like to lend out my 2 of my spare component pouches out to party members just in case anyway. The ease with which a Wizard can cast Dimension Door while bound has already been addressed above, so I'll skip that.
|
|
A spellcaster with a spell component pouch is assumed to have all the material components and focuses needed for spellcasting, except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn't fit in a pouch.I'm sorry, but you are mistaken and have not been using Spell Component Pouches correctly. Just by having one you are assumed to have everything, except the listed exceptions. It is Eschew Materials. Not running the way it is written is a houserule and as written it *IS* Eschew Materials for 5 GP, aside from the fact that it can be lost/sundered/stolen/etc.
Wow. Yeah, completely missed that. 5 gp should not be a feat.
Well, since dimension door only has a verbal component that isn't really true.
Yes, sorry, that was very stream of consciousness of me. In my mind, not needing to rely on spellbooks to prepare spells is a similar advantage. Basically, my utility cannot be taken away from me because I have fewer requirements for casting, whether that be not needing spellbooks or ignoring components.
In the event you polymorph into one of those creatures you just leave a Spell Component Pouch off your immediate Person. I like to lend out my 2 of my spare component pouches out to party members just in case anyway.
And then you have the action cost of transferring the component pouch or an enemy closes on you and you have to provoke to pick it up or a craft enemy repositions it while it is unattended. The GM then argues that a pouch made for your tiny Medium hands cannot be manipulated by a Huge dragon or elemental. You could argue that these things are potentially unfair, but that's what this topic is about: GMs who change value of options by how they run their games.This typically low value option can become far more valuable for certain builds and game styles.
|
|
I'm planning to remove gold/money from it and have them just donate to/borrow from the organization's supplies. Streamlining the game does a world of good in my experience.
You might consider ball-parking the old d20 modern rules for this. It's a good system for systems where inventory management isn't as big of a things as it usually is in Pathfinder and keeps money things more abstract. Your Wealth DC isn't just cash, it's an abstract combination of all potential resources, from credit to favors owed.
All very common shortcuts. The Component Pouch is basically Eschew Material Components (unless you wake up naked in a cell).
Considers role playing characters to be derailing the group sessions. This isn't just the DM, many of the players have this attitude.
Now this might be an issue. For them it may seem (and it may be the case) that you're hogging the spotlight if you want to keep RPing when everyone else feels the encounter is finished and wants to move on.
I'm planning to remove gold/money from it and have them just donate to/borrow from the organization's supplies. Streamlining the game does a world of good in my experience.You might consider ball-parking the old d20 modern rules for this. It's a good system for systems where inventory management isn't as big of a things as it usually is in Pathfinder and keeps money things more abstract. Your Wealth DC isn't just cash, it's an abstract combination of all potential resources, from credit to favors owed.
I'll look into it, thank you.
EDIT: The requisition section looks quite relevant, as long as I can find a way to assign a purchase DC to things. log1.5(X) seems like a good approximation for now.
|
|
Now this might be an issue. For them it may seem (and it may be the case) that you're hogging the spotlight if you want to keep RPing when everyone else feels the encounter is finished and wants to move on.
Not just me. Got a few role players in our group. Also got a few that don't really care about RP and just want a quick paced hack and slash.
Also, by role playing, I'm talking about not just killing/ignoring every single NPC we encounter, but actively trying to engage them in conversation. The non-lethal take down isn't really an option with this party.
|
Wow. Yeah, completely missed that. 5 gp should not be a feat.A spellcaster with a spell component pouch is assumed to have all the material components and focuses needed for spellcasting, except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn't fit in a pouch.I'm sorry, but you are mistaken and have not been using Spell Component Pouches correctly. Just by having one you are assumed to have everything, except the listed exceptions. It is Eschew Materials. Not running the way it is written is a houserule and as written it *IS* Eschew Materials for 5 GP, aside from the fact that it can be lost/sundered/stolen/etc.
It however protects you from having your component pouch stolen, destroyed, etc. Its one of the funniest things to do to troll casters, its specially funny to see a rogue beat an unaware wizard with a single sleight of hand check.
I'm not sure I agree with this. If you are role playing negotiations you don't really need rules for it. If your social interactions are purely based on rules and die rolls, it is difficult to also role play those interactions.
The purest form of role playing is probably the childhood game 'lets pretend' entirely without concrete rules (although definitely it has unstated rules.)
I'm not advocating no rules role play, but I do think that their is a trade off, and I think some aspects of the game are better for being vague in regards to rules.
I certainly do agree though that it can at times go bad.
Look what happens in the 'let's pretend' fight.
"Zap, I shot you""Nope, you missed"
"Nnuh-uh"
"Yeah-uh"...
Without rules, it's terrible, the mechanics make a cool idea fun for everyone involved. I can play the part of someone stronger, or faster than myself.
Wouldn't it be nice if I could also pretend to be someone more charismatic than myself?
Or, what if a player who wasn't good at roleplaying wanted to learn? Can't we have something better than "figure it out, buddy?"
I'll venture a guess that you've never even seen a game with a good non-combat interaction system. Not a system, a GOOD system, one that players enjoyed using.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...
I'll venture a guess that you've never even seen a game with a good non-combat interaction system. Not a system, a GOOD system, one that players enjoyed using.
I've never seen one. I won't say it isn't possible to have a good one, just that I haven't seen it. And most of the ones I've seen proposed have not looked like much of an improvement.
...
I can play the part of someone stronger, or faster than myself.Wouldn't it be nice if I could also pretend to be someone more charismatic than myself?
Or, what if a player who wasn't good at roleplaying wanted to learn? Can't we have something better than "figure it out, buddy?"
...
Absolutely agree!
But I actually get a lot of details when someone is fighting someone else. Full attack, charge attack, earth breaker, crossbow, trip, disarm, vital strike, sneak attack, mounted charge, spellcombat with shocking grasp, etc…
But on social interactions (from some players) I get nothing except:
I got 29 on diplomacy.
What are you trying to do?
Use diplomacy for help.
Are you flirting, bribing with 1000 pps, convincing of the logic in helping you, appeal to sense of duty, or asking for a favor?
I’m using diplomacy for help.
…
Does the player need to know the proper grip on a scorpion whip? No. But he should be able to tell me what weapon he is using and if it is full attack for damage or a trip attempt.
Does the player need to be the consummate politician? No. But he should be able to tell me the general type of approach he is taking.
Now I don’t require it, but I will say that the more detail a player can provide helps everyone’s enjoyment and immersion. So if you can actually handle the conversation of an appeal to the baron’s sense of duty, please do so. It makes everything better for everyone.
You need to venture pretty far from the d20 world. The now-cancelled Marvel Super Heroes had interesting ideas, as does Burning Wheel.
Even something like a 4e skill challenge would be an improvement over the current Diplomacy rules, however.
And the easiest patch that I've seen is Rich Burlew's Diplomacy fix, he's the Order of the Stick guy. The Alexandrian modified Rich's ideas still further, but I've never tested those out.
...
I can play the part of someone stronger, or faster than myself.Wouldn't it be nice if I could also pretend to be someone more charismatic than myself?
Or, what if a player who wasn't good at roleplaying wanted to learn? Can't we have something better than "figure it out, buddy?"
...Absolutely agree!
But I actually get a lot of details when someone is fighting someone else. Full attack, charge attack, earth breaker, crossbow, trip, disarm, vital strike, sneak attack, mounted charge, spellcombat with shocking grasp, etc…
But on social interactions (from some players) I get nothing except:
I got 29 on diplomacy.
What are you trying to do?
Use diplomacy for help.
Are you flirting, bribing with 1000 pps, convincing of the logic in helping you, appeal to sense of duty, or asking for a favor?
I’m using diplomacy for help.
…Does the player need to know the proper grip on a scorpion whip? No. But he should be able to tell me what weapon he is using and if it is full attack for damage or a trip attempt.
Does the player need to be the consummate politician? No. But he should be able to tell me the general type of approach he is taking.
Now I don’t require it, but I will say that the more detail a player can provide helps everyone’s enjoyment and immersion. So if you can actually handle the conversation of an appeal to the baron’s sense of duty, please do so. It makes everything better for everyone.
I see it a different way. The player has selected their weapon, it's Diplomacy. They've selected their goal, to get help (as opposed to getting improving their attitude, so it's a basic attack rather than a trip). Asking how they attempt to get help is more like asking if they swing the weapon overhand or from the side. The character, with a high diplomacy check, should realize what the best approach is (or at least identify several of the best ones, which you could inform the player of).
If the player is being general in the type of help he wants, he's probably unsure of what the best way the NPC can aid them is.
Usually NPCs that do agree to help will volunteer the options themselves. They're not going to be cryptic about it (unless the check isn't good enough for their aid, or their best aid).
"I could tell my people you're on the way, they'll make sure no one bothers you." or "I want to see your mission succeed, I can spare these holy waters for you."