Hey there.
I'm currently in a pathfinder game with 5 other players. We got into a situation where our characters were all together within arms reach of each other. One of my Co-players decided to chase after an NPC to go bash it's head in. Once he announced his action, my other co-player asked the DM if he would be able to stop him based on his own alignment after about 30 seconds of checking the rule on this the original player said "it doesn't matter, I'm already down the street after the NPC. Your not near enough to stop me".
So my question is: while roleplaying, if a player spontaneously makes a decision to run off, do the other payers have a chance to take their time to react to the situation? Or if he says he's already down the street, he's actually already there and we can't take time to react to his decision? Also should there be a kind of "initiative" while making roleplaying decisions?
I agree that this isn't really a rules question.
Really, checking the rules shouldn't take any time in game. On the other hand, it can really slow down the feel if people are always checking rules.
Every group has to find their own balance on this sort of thing.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, the rules are not set to restrict, or dictate, roleplay.
This is entirely on purpose.
First, I must say "this is what my alignment would do" is one of the stupidest things I ever hear at a table. No one, should ever say this.
Ever.
A character's beliefs, and behavior, determine alignment, not the other way around.
Second, the DM decides the what happens with NPCs, and how roleplay effects the world around the PCs. If the DM decides an action happens before, or after another action(outside of combat), then that's what happens.
The player never dictates order of operations, actions of other players, or NPCs.
If a player says "No, this happens first, the NPC does this, and the other players do this" he/she is forcefully taking away the power, and role, of the DM, and other players.
That's what we call, a "dick move".
So, unless the group decides the dynamic has changed, and one player gets to decide what other players do, what NPCs do, and how the world works, then the player has broken the social contract, and is being a jerk.
So, this is where the DM says "You decide what your PC does, other players decide what their PCs do, and I decide everything else. Got it?"
Hey there.
I'm currently in a pathfinder game with 5 other players. We got into a situation where our characters were all together within arms reach of each other. One of my Co-players decided to chase after an NPC to go bash it's head in. Once he announced his action, my other co-player asked the DM if he would be able to stop him based on his own alignment after about 30 seconds of checking the rule on this the original player said "it doesn't matter, I'm already down the street after the NPC. Your not near enough to stop me".
So my question is: while roleplaying, if a player spontaneously makes a decision to run off, do the other payers have a chance to take their time to react to the situation? Or if he says he's already down the street, he's actually already there and we can't take time to react to his decision? Also should there be a kind of "initiative" while making roleplaying decisions?
Immediately after a player announces his intention, all parties involved roll initiative, including the NPC.
Resolve actions in order as normal. If the parties involved are already in initiative, then resolve as normal. In this instance your co-player only gets to start his move at his initative as normal. The players who are going to contest his actions, can make AOO's as normal if the player puts himself in a provocation position... i.e. by doing the Run move instead of withdrawing or crossing more than one threatened square as he's bolting.
Although in this situation, the first player may very well have a surprise round of actions to get a head start.
Depends on if his character said he was going to chase down the NPC and decided to do so, or if the player just said his character starts chasing.
Let's call them One (who wants to run off for some clubbing) and Two (who's not as interested).
One announces taking off. Two protests. I'd see it a few ways.
First, of course, Two can easily in-character yell 'What the hell?!' or something to that effect. Unless there's something distracting (like a bard showing off his 18 Cha and 16 Con without his shirt), they should definitely notice One's dash.
Second, if physical intervention's needed? Maybe use Perception or something ONLY TO DETERMINE IF THERE IS A SURPRISE ROUND, and initiative. Of course, sooner or later One should notice a lot of his own friends objecting.
At this point, if One insists on going off on his own? He might end up facing some results from his friends if and when he gets back. And all this assumes no other NPCs are involved ...
About the best I can say. (And keep an eye on just what One and Two here are getting into. That sort of comment you said doesn't sound quite as friendly as a party could be ... )
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So my question is: while roleplaying, if a player spontaneously makes a decision to run off, do the other payers have a chance to take their time to react to the situation? Or if he says he's already down the street, he's actually already there and we can't take time to react to his decision? Also should there be a kind of "initiative" while making roleplaying decisions?
Not "some kind of initiative", just normal initiative. When things are happening quickly and it's important to know who goes before who, roll initiative every time.
Competing strength checks.
One runs off ahead (possibly declaring his intentions in character).
Two possibly follows One immediately (depends on it in character reasons to immediately follow).
One doesn't get to say he's out of reach of Two. Or that he's already attacked the NPC.
Resolve everything as if this were a normal combat.
I allow an initiative roll between PCs for this sort of thing if one of them announces his actions. If no one announces what he or she is about to do and takes off, I sometimes use my homebrew chase rules to see if someone can catch and stop them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As most people here already said, as soon as the player announces his intention to attack an NPC, "roleplaying rules" are suspended and "combat rules" come into play.
"I take off down the street after NPC X."
"OK, roll initiative."
The rest of the party can choose to intervene (on either side), or they can just stand back and watch.
Side note: if this player decides to pull this kind of stunt on a regular basis, Improved Grapple, Improved Trip, or just trip with a reach weapon might be some options for the rest of the party to consider.
(There should be an "Improved Smack Upside the Head" combat maneuver...)
Hey there.
I'm currently in a pathfinder game with 5 other players. We got into a situation where our characters were all together within arms reach of each other. One of my Co-players decided to chase after an NPC to go bash it's head in. Once he announced his action, my other co-player asked the DM if he would be able to stop him based on his own alignment after about 30 seconds of checking the rule on this the original player said "it doesn't matter, I'm already down the street after the NPC. Your not near enough to stop me".
So my question is: while roleplaying, if a player spontaneously makes a decision to run off, do the other payers have a chance to take their time to react to the situation? Or if he says he's already down the street, he's actually already there and we can't take time to react to his decision? Also should there be a kind of "initiative" while making roleplaying decisions?
In a case like this, where one PC wants to actively interfere with the actions of another, a standard initiative roll is a perfect solution. Done it more than once, works fine.
1) Sense Motive to realize murderous intent (probably at a low, set DC since I don't get any impression the pursuer was trying to Bluff about his plans);2) Followed by an initiative roll, same as usual.
Using Bluff vs Sense Motive in this is way (well sort of the way you describe, noit exactly) is a perfect example of how a GM can use a skill other than Perception to determine who acts in a surprise round.
|
Just to throw a bit of a wrench in things... are you sure you want to stop him? It's possible that it would be a more interesting story if PC 1 does kill that NPC despite PC 2's wishes, or at least if PC 1 gets a good swing in before PC 2 is able to intervene (causing a more dramatic confrontation and potential complications).
Of course, this could get out of hand if PC 1 is constantly killing things when the rest of the party wants to use diplomacy or if the player is intentionally trying to mess with the plot. But you don't always have to stop another PC from doing something just because your PC wouldn't like it.
A PC in my current group made a very ill-advised (but in-character) deal with a LE entity, and while the rest of the party chewed him out over it none of us stopped him. It's moved the story in an interesting direction, and though we expect it'll lead to some unpleasant consequences I trust the GM not to punish the players for it.
The biggest mistake I ever made at a gaming table was worrying too much about another PC doing something my PC didn't like, and not trusting the GM to turn it into a good story.
Check out this article for more.
(There should be an "Improved Smack Upside the Head" combat maneuver...)
Sounds like a good old fashioned unarmed strike.
...if a player spontaneously makes a decision to run off, do the other payers have a chance to take their time to react to the situation?
Absolutely. They have the exact same chance to do so as the person who said they are running off and for the same reasons.
In these situations it is best if the referee has everyone roll initiative and use the game system to resolve the conflict. That is after all what both are there for and is supposed to be the path taken when the intent to start combat is known. I would take "chase after an NPC to go bash it's head in" to be a pretty clear call as to starting a combat.
And generally it is the game masters authority to tell how the other players get to react to a players actions, the player cannot tell you that your too far back to react. He does not run the world or your characters. That is the GM's job.
This is not supposed to be a game of 'it' with 'no tagbacks'.