|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If inspecting the Inventory Tracking Sheet were a "jerk move", then why would it exist in the first place?
1) I don't think that anyone has said that inspecting the ITS is a jerk move
2) I am on record as thinking that the ITS is unnecessary paperwork and doesn't solve the problem that it is claimed to solve.3) I am in record as thinking that inflexibly enforcing all rules all the time is a jerk move.
So, there is nothing at all inconsistent in my thinking that sometimes enforcing the ITS is a jerk move.
|
If inspecting the Inventory Tracking Sheet were a "jerk move", then why would it exist in the first place?1) I don't think that anyone has said that inspecting the ITS is a jerk move
Re-check the name of the thread.
As far as spellcasters remembering to buy and carry foci for spells, it is a pretty big ask to make every spellcaster remember to buy and carry their focus component for every spell they have in advance. They have to remember that the spell has a focus component to begin with before they prepare it - making them have to check every spell on their list just to make sure they have the focus components they need - or else when the time comes, you're threatening them to say they can't cast it, because it's in the rules.
Most people will handwave this, so long as the player pays the cost when they cast it and so long as they have a spell component pouch (which they generally always have), and everyone's happier for it. Even if the player forgets, it's not a stretch to say the character knows he needs the focus to cast the spell and wouldn't prepare it if he'd have known he needed a focus he didn't have.
The alternative is to leave a player disappointed at the table, and likely not at themselves for forgetting to check every spell for a focus component.
|
Either you purchased the shovel or you didn't.
...
It is very nice and generous of you to allow retroactive purchases. But you being willing to do so does not make everyone else a jerk for not being willing to do so.
So, despite what you said up thread, you ARE comfortable with a TPK by starvation/thirst if the players forgot to buy food/water in a scenario where they can't logically acquire it later?
If you EVER allow an experienced player to take back an action because he got a rule wrong or made a mistake his character wouldn't have or EVER take back an action as an experienced GM because you made a mistake that the NPC would not have or because you got a rule wrong then you're inconsistently applying the rules and cannot really defend your actions with the "RAW trumps logic" mantra.
allowing mistakes to be rectified is a GOOD thing. Heck. I'd argue that is a NECESSARY thing.
This game is hideously complicated. EVERYBODY makes MULTIPLE mistakes EVERY SINGLE SESSION.
Stopping a character from throwing a spell they have memorized because the player made an essentially irrelevant mistake is, in my opinion, a jerk move. Legal, yes. But a jerk move.
Note, I am NOT calling anybody a jerk. Doing an occasional jerk move (especially hypothetically in a message board thread :-)) doesn't make one a jerk.
You are putting a lot of words into my mouth without actually reading what I wrote.
|
Contributor
|
As far as spellcasters remembering to buy and carry foci for spells, it is a pretty big ask to make every spellcaster remember to buy and carry their focus component for every spell they have in advance.
Wow, I don't think so at all.
Speaking to the thread in general, to my way of thinking, it's a much bigger "jerk move" to attempt to talk your way out of a clearly-spelled-out requirement than to, well, expect folks to follow the rules.
Some in this thread have mentioned the complexity of this game as if that's a bug and not a feature, as if that's not, in fact, a reason many of us play it in the first place.
The "bookkeeping" involved in organized play is not particularly onerous and is in fact part of a social contract designed to diminish as far as possible the chances that people are either making egregious mistakes or simply cheating.
Now I'm off to see how many first level spells actually have components or focuses not included in spell component pouches.
|
|
You are putting a lot of words into my mouth without actually reading what I wrote.
...Stopping a character from throwing a spell they have memorized because the player made an essentially irrelevant mistake is, in my opinion, a jerk move. Legal, yes. But a jerk move.
I have read everything that you have written in this thread and I am most definitely not deliberately putting words into your mouth.
Perhaps I am misunderstanding you. My understanding is that you would not allow a "veteran player, who's been playing that character fairly consistently" to rectify the mistake of failing to put a miniature shovel on his character sheet and would deny him the ability to throw the spell Create Pit.
It is also my understanding that your justification for that refusal is that you think it violates the RAW.
I extrapolated from that devotion to RAW that you would also not allow a character to retroactively buy food and water. That seems a logical conclusion to me and so I pointed out that I find your position logically inconsistent.
Since apparently I have misinterpreted you perhaps you'd be good enough to explain which of the points above are not your position.
Personally, I'm entirely put off of PFS by the rushed pacing, extra rules, and general paperwork. I can't stand that much bookkeeping. I have no idea where my old tracking sheets have gotten to, and if I ever return to PFS I'll probably have to ditch my old character regardless. Blegh. I get the appeal—it's nice to have a regular source of gaming—but it's definitely not for me.
With that said, the OP was fully in the right. You played nice and they failed to take advantage by buying the obviously relevant gear. And if they're gonna play, they should remember all that stuff instead of holding up games and semi-cheating.
|
Jerk move or not, in this scenario it is appropriate to check for cold weather gear. I would absolutely check if the scenario was written in a way to validate. Often times at PFS play we don't know a person at the table. Mind you, I wouldn't necessarily be auditing for skill points, stats, etc... I would let VC's handle that. It would only be for scenario appropriate game checks.
|
Contributor
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now I'm off to see how many first level spells actually have components or focuses not included in spell component pouches.
I checked all the zero level and 1st level spells (and there are many) in the Core Rulebook, the Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Magic, Ultimate Combat, and the Advanced Class Guide and found seven spells in total that aren't covered by either the spell component pouch or a divine focus.
Three of them hardly count: Warding Weapon, Alter Musical Instrument, and Memorize Page use as focus materials that circumstances dictate the characters have anyway (a weapon, a musical instrument, or a page, respectively).
Fabricate Bullets requires one pound of lead or another soft metal worth 2 gold pieces.
Stumble Gap is the first in the Pit series, more or less, and requires that much-discussed focus of a 10 gold piece miniature shovel.
That leaves Bless Water and Curse Water, the "big" ones in the group. They each take 5 pounds of powdered silver worth 25 gold pieces (the price of just buying holy water as it happens).
All of which is to say that, in my opinion, by the time players are playing characters with access to spells with significant focus or material component resources to be tracked, there's little legitimate reason they should not be tracking those resources.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
See, this is the thing - for some people, keeping up with all that minutiae is easy and habitual, and over-the-top for others.
I checked all the zero level and 1st level spells (and there are many) in the Core Rulebook, the Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Magic, Ultimate Combat, and the Advanced Class Guide and found seven spells in total that aren't covered by either the spell component pouch or a divine focus.
Surely anyone could tell me that it's easy to see how the average player might not be checking all those books, to check all those spells, to check if there's anything they missed, such as a focus component.
They could do it, sure, but to begin with - they have to remember the spells might have a focus component in the first place before they think to go looking for whether they do or not.
Is it really worth telling a player they have to do it or else they should be playing another class? Or that Pathfinder isn't for them?
Keeping the game fun is more important.
|
|
Now I'm off to see how many first level spells actually have components or focuses not included in spell component pouches.I checked all the zero level and 1st level spells (and there are many) in the Core Rulebook, the Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Magic, Ultimate Combat, and the Advanced Class Guide and found seven spells in total that aren't covered by either the spell component pouch or a divine focus.
Three of them hardly count: Warding Weapon, Alter Musical Instrument, and Memorize Page use as a focus materials that circumstances dictate the characters have anyway (a weapon, a musical instrument, or a page, respectively).
Fabricate Bullets requires one pound of lead or another soft metal worth 2 gold pieces.
Stumble Gap is the first in the Pit series, more or less, and requires that much-discussed focus of a 10 gold piece miniature shovel.
That leaves Bless Water and Curse Water, the "big" ones in the group. They each take 5 pounds of powdered silver worth 25 gold pieces (the price of just buying holy water as it happens).
All of which is to say that, in my opinion, by the time players are playing characters with access to spells with significant focus or material component resources to be tracked, there's little legitimate reason they should not be tracking those resources.
So if caster needs pounds of components, you can assume they are stored items, right? Does that mean that every spell caster needs to spend a move action getting components out of their backpack/haversack/whatever before they cast a spell?
|
Contributor
|
Surely anyone could tell me that it's easy to see how the average player might not be checking all those books, to check all those spells, to check if there's anything they missed, such as a focus component.
Thing is, though, they don't have to check all those spells. They just have to read the spell descriptions of the relative handful they know or use. They've presumably read the spell descriptions if they're casting the spells, yes? Or is that too much minutiae as well?
|
Contributor
|
So if caster needs pounds of components, you can assume they are stored items, right? Does that mean that every spell caster needs to spend a move action getting components out of their backpack/haversack/whatever before they cast a spell?
Preparing spell components to cast a spell is specifically listed as a free action which does not provoke attacks of opportunity on Table 8-2 of the Core Rulebook.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They've presumably read the spell descriptions if they're casting the spells, yes? Or is that too much minutiae as well?
But many players won't even think to do it.
If you catch them mid-game without it while they're trying to cast it, are you really going to say "you can't cast that because you forgot to buy the F component"?
The wizard with an Int of 20 is going to have the shovel, even if the overworked player with an Int of less than 20 forgot to spend several hours looking through all his spells.
Let the player make the purchase as they try to cast it like they should have in the beginning, and move on so everyone can continue their enjoyment of the game.
|
Contributor
|
They've presumably read the spell descriptions if they're casting the spells, yes? Or is that too much minutiae as well?But many players won't even think to do it.
I don't know, man. It seems analogous to an archer having not thought to buy arrows to me. Which is to say that ignoring it is tantamount to rewarding either an unlikely level of incompetence or—and frankly this seems more likely that that option—intentional malfeasance.
|
Contributor
|
Most archers don't have to deal with over a hundred different bows, half of which don't require a specific arrow purchase.
Fair enough. I stand corrected and agree that playing a spellcaster is not analogous to simply shooting arrows. I guess the point of contention is whether or not it should be simple.
Is it really so unaccountably difficult to read the spell descriptions of the spells one plans to cast during play?
|
|
It's always completely laughable to me when someone says they have trouble keeping track of where their characters' chronicle sheets and ITS have gone.
Is putting everything for PFS in a binder really that hard?
1) 1 binder isn't really doable anymore. Its straining 2 of them at this point.
2) the ITS sheet has to come out and be written on, so they tend to wander off a lot more than chronicle sheets that go back in the binder.
|
|
You are putting a lot of words into my mouth without actually reading what I wrote.
...Stopping a character from throwing a spell they have memorized because the player made an essentially irrelevant mistake is, in my opinion, a jerk move. Legal, yes. But a jerk move.
I have read everything that you have written in this thread and I am most definitely not deliberately putting words into your mouth.
Perhaps I am misunderstanding you. My understanding is that you would not allow a "veteran player, who's been playing that character fairly consistently" to rectify the mistake of failing to put a miniature shovel on his character sheet and would deny him the ability to throw the spell Create Pit.
It is also my understanding that your justification for that refusal is that you think it violates the RAW.
I extrapolated from that devotion to RAW that you would also not allow a character to retroactively buy food and water. That seems a logical conclusion to me and so I pointed out that I find your position logically inconsistent.
Since apparently I have misinterpreted you perhaps you'd be good enough to explain which of the points above are not your position.
Infer whatever you want. No matter what I say you have proven you are going to turn it around on me.
As for food and water, generally if the scenario doesn't mention it, I don't make the players purchase it. And if they don't, I don't throw an "I gotchya" at them later. If the scenario feels its important, or I deem it important based on what the scenario text says (per the Table Variation rules in the Guide to Organized Play) then I inform the players well ahead of time they need to buy food. If they choose not to after I've told them they need food and water, then the character's starvation or dehydration is their own fault.
So please, stop making me out to be an unreasonable ogre. You have no grounds to do so other than your own inferences based on a few message board comments that you don't like.
|
|
Now I'm off to see how many first level spells actually have components or focuses not included in spell component pouches.I checked all the zero level and 1st level spells (and there are many) in the Core Rulebook, the Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Magic, Ultimate Combat, and the Advanced Class Guide and found seven spells in total that aren't covered by either the spell component pouch or a divine focus.
Three of them hardly count: Warding Weapon, Alter Musical Instrument, and Memorize Page use as a focus materials that circumstances dictate the characters have anyway (a weapon, a musical instrument, or a page, respectively).
Fabricate Bullets requires one pound of lead or another soft metal worth 2 gold pieces.
Stumble Gap is the first in the Pit series, more or less, and requires that much-discussed focus of a 10 gold piece miniature shovel.
That leaves Bless Water and Curse Water, the "big" ones in the group. They each take 5 pounds of powdered silver worth 25 gold pieces (the price of just buying holy water as it happens).
All of which is to say that, in my opinion, by the time players are playing characters with access to spells with significant focus or material component resources to be tracked, there's little legitimate reason they should not be tracking those resources.
So if caster needs pounds of components, you can assume they are stored items, right? Does that mean that every spell caster needs to spend a move action getting components out of their backpack/haversack/whatever before they cast a spell?
If it isn't something that could fit in a spell component pouch, yes. 5 Pounds of Silver would likely not fit in the spell component pouch. That 5 pounds of silver will also affect your encumbrance.
Although I doubt Bless Water has much use in combat either, but rather more use outside of combat creating the holy water before you actually get into combat.
|
|
I don't know, man. It seems analogous to an archer having not thought to buy arrows to me.Most archers don't have to deal with over a hundred different bows, half of which don't require a specific arrow purchase.
Huh... I guess all those archers who want to carry 50 of every arrow type don't exist then.
I mean adamantine, silver, blunt, cold iron, tanglefoot, normal...
I had one archer claim he was carrying 300 arrows and had access to all 300 in combat.
I'm like, uh no.
|
|
It's always completely laughable to me when someone says they have trouble keeping track of where their characters' chronicle sheets and ITS have gone.
Is putting everything for PFS in a binder really that hard?
1) 1 binder isn't really doable anymore. Its straining 2 of them at this point.
2) the ITS sheet has to come out and be written on, so they tend to wander off a lot more than chronicle sheets that go back in the binder.
This I don't get. I have 18 characters and each have their own 12 clear sleeves permanently attached. Each of my 18 characters, 5 of which are level 13+, fit nicely into each of those folders except for my Wizard, and the printed out spell book tends to take up more pages than I have.
If you put all your characters into a single binder, that's your own fault, not mine.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
Personally, I'm entirely put off of PFS by the rushed pacing, extra rules, and general paperwork. I can't stand that much bookkeeping. I have no idea where my old tracking sheets have gotten to, and if I ever return to PFS I'll probably have to ditch my old character regardless. Blegh. I get the appeal—it's nice to have a regular source of gaming—but it's definitely not for me.
With that said, the OP was fully in the right. You played nice and they failed to take advantage by buying the obviously relevant gear. And if they're gonna play, they should remember all that stuff instead of holding up games and semi-cheating.
After so much time, PFS to me is like any homebrew group you routinely play with. There are your:
- House rules (Guide to Organized Play). These include banned classes, feats, races, etc. They are present in 100% of homebrew games I have participated in.- Loot list (Inventory Tracking Sheet). This is a list of everything you've got hanging off your adventurer frame somewhere. Writing down what you have is a great thing to do in any RPG. Especially when you just happen to have the perfect answer to the current situation
-Journal Entries / Notes (Chronicle Sheets). You've got how much XP you got at that session, what NPCs you encountered and any boons they may provide, and any cool gear you came across. In PFS these just have better formatting.
Honestly, I think there's less paperwork in PFS than in your average AP. I have waaaaay more paperwork for my Kingmaker game alone then I have on all of my PFS characters combined. And I take notes at nearly every PFS table I sit at.
|
It's always completely laughable to me when someone says they have trouble keeping track of where their characters' chronicle sheets and ITS have gone.
Is putting everything for PFS in a binder really that hard?
1) 1 binder isn't really doable anymore. Its straining 2 of them at this point.
2) the ITS sheet has to come out and be written on, so they tend to wander off a lot more than chronicle sheets that go back in the binder.
This I don't get. I have 18 characters and each have their own 12 clear sleeves permanently attached. Each of my 18 characters, 5 of which are level 13+, fit nicely into each of those folders except for my Wizard, and the printed out spell book tends to take up more pages than I have.
If you put all your characters into a single binder, that's your own fault, not mine.
Yeah I'm not buying it either.
The ITS has to be written on so it wanders off? What?
At the start of the game you take out your Character Sheet and ITS from the binder. At the end of the game you put the character sheet, ITS, and new chronicle back in the binder. If that's too much to do then... I don't know man.
No sympathy at all for the "can't keep track of pieces of paper woe is me" crowd.
|
|
The ITS has to be written on so it wanders off? What?At the start of the game you take out your Character Sheet and ITS from the binder. At the end of the game you put the character sheet, ITS, and new chronicle back in the binder. If that's too much to do then... I don't know man.
Nope. I keep the character in the binder, in the plastic.
I also track purchases on the chronicle sheet, old school. If I'm heading to a convention and can't find the ITS i'll remake it.
No sympathy at all for the "can't keep track of pieces of paper woe is me" crowd.
I don't know about your tables, but at the end of mine it looks like a tornado came through. Finding one sheet of paper in all that isn;t a guarantee, even after i started using a 16 by 22 piece of graph paper as an ITS. I once accidentally added a 1 foot by three foot tupperware lid to my stuff and wandered off with it without realizing.
|
|
I guess our experiences are just different.
I've never been a plastic sheet guy. I prefer to 3 hole punch everything and use plastic dividers between characters. My wife, however, prefers the plastic sheet methodology.
I've never had a problem with hanging on to or keeping track of my papers and materials at the table.
And I guess I'll just have to accept that some people see these things as a burden.
|
|
I guess our experiences are just different.
I've never been a plastic sheet guy. I prefer to 3 hole punch everything and use plastic dividers between characters. My wife, however, prefers the plastic sheet methodology.
I've never had a problem with hanging on to or keeping track of my papers and materials at the table.
And I guess I'll just have to accept that some people see these things as a burden.
Heh. As a GM, I find that collecting up all my own stuff can get .. . hairy. Making sure I get back all my handouts, for running the same scenario again later, adds to the fun. Making sure I know where I put the sign-in sheet, so I can use it to fill out the chronicles, makes me search.
And, then, we won't even go into the scenarios with multiple chronicles. I know, off the top of my head, of one which has three, count them, three, chronicles that need to be filled out, one way or another, at the end of the game.
Wounded Wisp, the new evergreen, has 6 handouts, and one of them breaks into 10 pieces to track. Not counting multiple copies of any particular handout. Plus a flip-mat, 4 pieces from one of the map packs, and at least 2 hand-drawn (or printed from the scenario) maps.
My copies of all three levels for all 24 iconics. My copy of the Guide. My (outdated) copy of Additional Resources. A set of printouts for the basic purchasable critters.
For my PCs, replace some of the things I wind up with for GMing with things like printouts of any special rules or information for the PC, whether it is the Thassilonian Specialist material from ISWG, and any non-Core spells; or the information on Razmir and Razmiran for my Razmiran Priest PC, each PC has their own supply of "extra" paperwork.
My PCs range from 1st to 14th level. And, currently, my PCs run from -1 (12th level) to -32 (1st level, IIRC). For PCs with at least one chronicle, but not yet 5th level, I keep them in a two-pocket folder. Once they hit 5th level, or so, I move them into their own 1/2" binder. They move up to bigger binders, 1', 1-1/2", etc., as needed. And I try to make sure I have a reference sheet for tactics or attacks not printed on the regular character sheet, like my trip/disarm PCs, so that their "normal" CMB with each maneuver is quickly available, as long as what the source (and what the type is) for the bonuses to the attack, along with the normal conditional bonuses (+3 to readied and AoO attacks with his polearm, for example)
So, having one piece of paper wander off, on its own? Heh. I have found that what I thought was an error from my printer, missing a couple of pages form a document, turned out that I had used the pages to cover part of the flip-map to preserve at least a small feeling of Fog f War... The pages were from the town overview, rather than the module, so I forgot I grabbed them during setup to cover part of the map. I have also had pages in my printed scenarios get out of order. "See page 9 for the stats on this creature in this encounter, along with these two pages for the new monsters first seen here."
Add to that that while I have been playing RPGs since 1979, that I tend to gravitate towards martial types. I am using PFS to experiment with casters, but I don't always remember to check the multiple sources and multiple pages for things above and beyond whether the spell includes an M, F or DF notation. For some of the big ones, yeah, I remember. Stone Skin, Raise Dead, etc. But I don't always remember that True Strike uses a focus, instead of a material component, especially since it has no significant cost listed.
|
|
Here's a question for other GMs:
If you encounter a spellcaster who just records a 10-25 GP expenditure every once in a while on their chronicle sheets with an entry of "random" or "misc. mat. comp." would you be ok assuming that spellcaster had all the basic components and focal items they needed (even a 10 GP shovel)?
No, same as they didn't buy oil to burn the swarm, vermin repellant, block and tackle, hammer and pitons, and a myriad of other necessary items often forgotten.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Maryland—Hagerstown
|
I don't know, man. It seems analogous to an archer having not thought to buy arrows to me.Most archers don't have to deal with over a hundred different bows, half of which don't require a specific arrow purchase.Huh... I guess all those archers who want to carry 50 of every arrow type don't exist then.
I mean adamantine, silver, blunt, cold iron, tanglefoot, normal...
I had one archer claim he was carrying 300 arrows and had access to all 300 in combat.
I'm like, uh no.
Unless he had 5 effecient quivers. And spaced them all over his body.
Anyway. My archer ran into a scenario where, like a dweeb that I am sometime, forgot to restock arrows. I ran out mid combat. Did I expect the GM to take it easy on me for lack of my preparedness. No. I nutted up and pulled out a barbaric melee weapon and attempted to turn a ranged character to melee for the rest of the scenario.
So yes an Archer with making sure he has arrows and a spellcaster making sure he has the stuff needed to cast his spells are the same thing to me.