|
I'm sorry if this has been covered but my Search-fu is lacking. Is there anywhere where if allows a GM to ignore active threats to KILL an unconscious character. Weather is it a Coup da grace or just pounding on the guy while unconscious, it is wrong for a GM to simply kill a character. I think this falls under the "Don't be a Dick" rule but does that apply to the GM?
We have had the same GM in 2 back to back games where he has had creatures ignore Summoned creatures, ignore characters next to them (and provoke to move round) to kill another character when they were out of the fight for at least another 4 rounds (healer was out of the fight for 5 rounds the character went down the next round).
|
I have a personal rule of not trying to kill a pc unless the player really asks for it. This is especially so for pfs play. I can say that I have never killed a pc but I have come close a few times due to dice rolls. But, if I see two people again, at a scenario I gm, I will be killing a pc.
But in terms of your question, if a gm seems to always be trigger happy on killing a downed or unconscious pc, I would advise avoided him/her. There may be bad guys who are written to try and kill or target downed PCs but only if they are nearby and not on the other side of the party. If this is a one time instance, let it be (might be scenario tactics). If it continues, seek out the VL or VC for help. If this person is the head person for the area, avoid as best you can and take it up the pfs ladder if it gets worse.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I find this behavior usually stems from a personal grudge. In my case, this happens when the gm's girlfriend bickers with him... To any character but his girlfriend's..
|
|
Undone Can you link a post to that ruling?
I play my creatures like their intelligence. IE if a ghoul is next to a down person and no one is threatening he chows down. but if someone would be able to attack him he goes for the threat. That just makes sense to me. I have only killed characters for either doing something REALLY stupid or happen to have hot dice (I try not to kill characters before 5th level so they should have the PP for a res).
|
That is incorrect.Undone Can you link a post to that ruling?Mark and I discussed this. The scenarios are to be GMed as written. This isn't a grey area. I'm more concerned with a GM who thinks he can adequately adjust a scenario to better challenge the party and then kills PCs because extra creatures were added, or harder DCs were assigned to traps, or a coup de grace not written in the tactics, or any number of other circumstances a GM could change. There also is the added consideration that if a GM increases the difficulty of a scenario, you are also burning up more resources of the PCs that other players didn't have to, thus causing the PCs at your adjusted scenario table to spend more gold than they should have had to. It opens a Pandora's Box that just doesn't need to be opened. GM the scenarios as written please.This is in direct response to asking if you could CDG.
You cannot CDG unless it's in the tactics.
Still, that should not justify an NPC moving past at least one PC, to get at a stunned/helpless PC, unless there are really, really special circumstances.
|
|
GM's aren't forbidden to use CDG, they are discouraged to use it. In 95% of cases it makes sense not to do it. If NPC or monster is facing several other threats, he should probably respond to those threats. Unconscious bleeding character is not a threat. Some specific monsters might however kill of bleeding character and there is several scenario's that include those.
While I can understand your concern as a player Alecak, it's best to discuss this with your VC and make a talk with this GM in proper manner. Sometimes, simple conversation solves everything.
I hope you can talk this out,
Adam
|
|
We have had the same GM in 2 back to back games where he has had creatures ignore Summoned creatures, ignore characters next to them (and provoke to move round) to kill another character when they were out of the fight for at least another 4 rounds (healer was out of the fight for 5 rounds the character went down the next round).
As others have already said, its hard to judge the GM when we werent there to see what was going on at the table. Situations like this sound bad at first glance, but there could be many other things that could be going on. By 'kill', I assume here you mean 'attack'.
Examples:
Perhaps the PCs adjacent to the bad guy werent a significant threat to it?
Perhaps the PC the bad guy went after was doing the most damage?
Perhaps it had favored enemy?
Perhaps it went after that PC for a story based reason?
Perhaps it was in the tactics to go after someone who fit that PCs description?
Im not saying the GM wasnt in the wrong at your table, nor am I searching for answers (these are mostly hypothetical questions), Im just offering up why/how its difficult to judge the actions of someone at a table you had no part in.
|
|
As others have already said, its hard to judge the GM when we werent there to see what was going on at the table. Situations like this sound bad at first glance, but there could be many other things that could be going on. By 'kill', I assume here you mean 'attack'.
Examples:
Perhaps the PCs adjacent to the bad guy werent a significant threat to it?
Perhaps the PC the bad guy went after was doing the most damage?
Perhaps it had favored enemy?
Perhaps it went after that PC for a story based reason?
Perhaps it was in the tactics to go after someone who fit that PCs description?
Right. When I GM, I rarely CdG, but it's an option. Sometimes CdG is called for in the tactics. Sometimes the tactics don't list it, but the monster's entry in the Bestiary mentions it. Sometimes the actual words 'CdG' don't appear, but that's clearly what is happening.
In addition to the examples Seth posted, I'll add another:
In a
Now, technically, it isn't a CdG, but it may as well be- the final outcome is the same. Personally, I'd say having my PC eaten alive in front of me is worse than receiving a CdG. But YMMV.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pounding unconscious PCs came up with an NPC with many, many attacks (flurry) and were down to the swings where the to hit was too poor to hit active PCs. The PCs had displayed healing, so the NPC made sure the down one wasn't getting back up.
I find that there are so many easy encounters in PFS that a few deaths are really necessary to keep PCs feeling threatened.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, the only time I can ever see an NPC actively going out of his way to attack downed PCs while being threatened by the other PCs, is if the NPC is arrogant and supremely confident in his abilities, dismissive of the PCs, or both.
Someone who is in a situation with PCs that are actively attacking him is not going to continue to attack a downed PC. He's going to face the immediate threat. Even moreso if the NPC can't seem to hit the active PCs - at that point most folks would start getting desperate and considering fleeing or surrendering, not "making sure this one's dead".
Ignoring active threats to kill a non-threat just smacks of "It's an expendable NPC, so I don't care if it dies, so I'll just be as vindictive as possible." meta-game thinking.
-j
|
|
In this case, the NPC made a very solid attack against a paladin, rolling an "18" and still missing, so they decided to use the next attack at a further -5 to jack someone they know they could actually damage. The NPC was able to connect with their best attacks against the paladin, so there was no reason to flee. It was the case of an NPC having a bunch of low-quality attack on the tail of a full attack action. Taking an enemy out of the picture is a superior tactical choice to praying for "20"s. There was nothing vindictive about this, just tactics.
I did end up wiping this group in the next encounter, but that's another story.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The fact that you have to run everything as written makes me question a DM's role.
Couldn't the players just read the book at that rate, and play against the book?
(This statement is, of course, an exaggeration. It's just that DM'ing in PFS seems a little pointless to me.)
Nonetheless, any dm, PFS or not, that goes out of his way to CDG a downed player without a dang good reason is Probobly a bad GM.
Course, I never play PFS, so that part doesn't really matter, neh?
Even so, DM's should only really CDG if it's a valid tactical decision, not just to be a jerk and kill a player.
That's almost as bad as sundering a magic weapon, witch can cost more to fix then the PC themselves.
|
|
The fact that you have to run everything as written makes me question a DM's role.
Couldn't the players just read the book at that rate, and play against the book?
(This statement is, of course, an exaggeration. It's just that DM'ing in PFS seems a little pointless to me.)
Nonetheless, any dm, PFS or not, that goes out of his way to CDG a downed player without a dang good reason is Probobly a bad GM.
Think of it as more refereeing and not GMing. I don't consider myself a GM, as I didn't write the material, and can't make changes as I see it. That being said, I like refereeing, so it's all good.
Personally, I don't see any reason necessary other than "this NPC is an a$$hole." However, I abide by the PFS ruling on this matter. It's much more action efficient to just use regular attacks, anyway. Particularly for someone with flurry.
"This NPC wants to live" is usually a good reason.
It's rare that hitting the dead-ish guy is a better idea then hitting the live-ish guy.|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Course, I never play PFS, so that part doesn't really matter, neh?
Even so, DM's should only really CDG if it's a valid tactical decision, not just to be a jerk and kill a player.
That's almost as bad as sundering a magic weapon, witch can cost more to fix then the PC themselves.
Oh I am totally all about sundering. Too bad PFS writers never give me any good NPCs with adamantine two handers. Basically whatever dirty trick the PCs come up with will be used against them in my games.
|
|
Personally, I don't see any reason necessary other than "this NPC is an a$$hole." However, I abide by the PFS ruling on this matter. It's much more action efficient to just use regular attacks, anyway. Particularly for someone with flurry."This NPC wants to live" is usually a good reason.
It's rare that hitting the dead-ish guy is a better idea then hitting the live-ish guy.
A) The PCs had shown healing
B) A superior attack had missed the only other target within reach on an "18".
The conclusion was that the best move was to make sure the archer guy was down. Frankly, NPCs should always be making sure archer types are dead, because archery is crazy good.
It's not being a "jerk" to make the NPCs realistic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And... In that station, it was one of the rare situations.
Of course, assuming your charecter knows how dice rolls work, no that he rolled high.
Oh I am totally all about sundering. Too bad PFS writers never give me any good NPCs with adamantine two handers. Basically whatever dirty trick the PCs come up with will be used against them in my games.Course, I never play PFS, so that part doesn't really matter, neh?
Even so, DM's should only really CDG if it's a valid tactical decision, not just to be a jerk and kill a player.
That's almost as bad as sundering a magic weapon, witch can cost more to fix then the PC themselves.
Most pc's won't use sunder, to my knowledge. They want the weath.
Considering one sunder check can cost twice as much, or more, then a PC's life, I think something is a little off.
But that's a different thread.
|
|
It's an abstraction. Rolling an "18" is equivalent to hitting almost as best as they can. A PC would certainly use that knowledge to their advantage, so I had the NPCs do the same.
There's nothing more annoying to smart NPCs who want to live than PCs who keep getting healed. Although I must say most of my PC kills are pure math. Some PC gets hit with one attack that knocks them down to single digits, but they don't go down, and then the next attack goes straight to CON death. The King of Storval Stairs is really bad for this. Hail to the King, baby.
|
|
When PC's invalidate the NPC's tactics, you can change them as long as the changes are appropriate, That's why NPC's will have equipment and/or spells ready that aren't neccessarily specified in tactics.The fact that you have to run everything as written makes me question a DM's role.
Although much of the time, it's too late by then. As in: "Hey, look, this Tetori just invalidated me. Too bad I'm grappled by a Tetori now."
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh I am totally all about sundering. Too bad PFS writers never give me any good NPCs with adamantine two handers. Basically whatever dirty trick the PCs come up with will be used against them in my games.Course, I never play PFS, so that part doesn't really matter, neh?
Even so, DM's should only really CDG if it's a valid tactical decision, not just to be a jerk and kill a player.
That's almost as bad as sundering a magic weapon, witch can cost more to fix then the PC themselves.
Most pc's won't use sunder, to my knowledge. They want the weath.
Considering one sunder check can cost twice as much, or more, then a PC's life, I think something is a little off.
But that's a different thread.
In PFS, you can sunder and still get the loot. At a minimum, hyper-lethal bows made of wood are premium sunder targets.
Ok. Well, if you can sunder and keep the loot, that's a bit different.
Do you lose your weapon if it's sundered?
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
** spoiler omitted **
Nah, you can get a mending or a make whole depending on how busted up it is. It's really only effective against PCs if they are out in the middle of the boonies with no access to spell casting services. But it can make some fights more interesting by neutering an archer for one fight.
Make whole only works If you're double the item's caster level.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yep and buying it as a spell casting service is always a minimum caster level so you need a PC of the appropriate level.Nah, you can get a mending or a make whole depending on how busted up it is. It's really only effective against PCs if they are out in the middle of the boonies with no access to spell casting services. But it can make some fights more interesting by neutering an archer for one fight.Make whole only works I've you're double the item's caster level.
Buying spell casting services through use of prestige is always minimum casting level.
If you pay gold, you can purchase the services at any level needed to repair an item, per Mike Brock.
Even then, a +5 item would require a level 20 Mage.
Anything higher is totally unfixable.
A belt of physical might or any other 2 stat boot item is always CL 12.
Always unfixable.
|
|
I'll have to reference the discussions about it again, I may be misremembering.
Ive been doing this the same way, but I cant argue with jiggy's logic about creating and failing to define a new term.
Edit: Especially considering just about every effect in the game that definitely does count goes out of its way to say "This is a X".
In my homebrews, I have artificer prestige class that counts their total level as triple for fixing items. Presumably those items are fixed by something similar in PFS by paying the money.
I don't think pfs allows any homebrew of any sort....