|
Not being there or the reasons behind why it was done I can't answer your questions, but...
If you think the GM made a mistake you should bring it up with him/her first.
If the response is not satisfactory then bring it up with your local organizer.
If it is still not satisfactory then bring it up with your VC. If your VC is your local organizer see above step.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The concern is does this violate the PFS rule "run as written" or is this just table variation?
Since Table variation could mean lots of things that I can not be privy to since I or no one here you are asking was there so we can't answer your question.
I have no idea what lead to your GM changing the location, therefore it could be table variation or it could not be.
Your best bet is to ask your GM.
If the GM gives you a reasonable excuse telling you that PC actions lead to the change then it could be table variation, if the GM says she just wanted it to make it more exciting then it is against the "run as written" rule.
|
What Dragnmoon said is still the best course of action. First, talk to the GM about it. Then go up from there if he won't/can't be reasoned with.
As an aside, did people lose characters over it? Was anyone put through an undue amount of punishment? Did anyone walk away from the table mad?
If so, talk to the GM then work your way up from there.
If no, then still talk to him and help him understand why scenarios are designed to run a certain way, but no need to bring down the sky on someone that might be new or inexperienced at running.
|
The concern is does this violate the PFS rule "run as written" or is this just table variation?Since Table variation could mean lots of things that I can not be privy to since I or no one here you are asking was there so we can't answer your question.
I have no idea what lead to your GM changing the location, therefore it could be table variation or it could not be.
Your best bet is to ask your GM.
If the GM gives you a reasonable excuse telling you that PC actions lead to the change then it could be table variation, if the GM says she just wanted it to make it more exciting then it is against the "run as written" rule.
This was pretty much my thought as well, though I didn't express it well. (Or even talk about the part about talking to the GM)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Same answer but different steps.
If the game has been reported I would suggest the following. Look under your player sessions for that game. You will see the GM with a link to their profile. Check to see if they are a regular poster on the boards. If they are send them a PM telling them your concerns. If they are not a regular poster see below.
If the game has not been reported wait until it is.
If they are not a regular poster contact the organizer of the Convention with your concerns since it is unlikely they will reply to a PM.
If the answer is not to your satisfaction then talk to the VC, if the VC is the convention organizer see step above.
You should always try everything you possibly can to talk to the GM first even if it seems like a lot of work instead of going to their "boss" with the possible accusation of "cheating".
Edit: Now accusations of a lot worse of a GM that which are obviously not something you want to talk about with that GM *Sexism, racism, etc.* then go to his boss.
|
If someone was replaying you can change locations.
Having this, well I read the mod blah blah. Well, step up and run if you dislike how others do it.
I recently played a core night march, and the dm ran the 4 of us up, with 6 player adjustment. I certainly didnot like it, but he was new and stuff happens. So I dealt with it. Ymmv.
|
|
If he changed it for the following reasons (probably not exhaustive list) to make the encounter more challenging, he was unprepared, he thought it was more interesting, in your opinion you'd be well within your rights (and maybe even responsibilities) to bring it up to either your VC/VL/GM. In most cases the GM would be the best option, as this was a con the VO is probably a more reasonable one. That said, I would expect a similar outcome to that discussion as with a number of the responses on the board, with that VO also having a talk directly with that GM. (It is less an unwillingness to criticize as an openness to differences happening and an understanding that sometimes s*** happens. As a general rule I will give the benefit of the doubt to the GM over the player (even one who knows the scenario) for a number of reasons)
If he changed it for the following reasons; a player did something that invalidated the tactics/encounter, he misread something, he had a brain fart and mixed up encounters. Then personally I'd leave it alone, no one died, etc. On a side note, Cons are stressful, I've made mistakes with scenarios I've run more than once at cons. Did the scenario work? Did you have fun?
That said, there is a reason a lot of us are hesitant to criticize other GMs beyond what I stated above, number 1 is we would also like the benefit of the doubt if in this situation occurred and we were the GM.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
If someone was replaying you can change locations.I am not sure where you got this idea from, though I have seen GMs change things when there is someone at the table who knows a lot about the scenario, that does not mean they were allowed to.
I think he is confusing it with a certain repeatable which (I have been told) has language moving one of the encounters, to keep it fresh if people are replaying it.
|
|
I don't want to accuse the GM of anything. I don't want to report the GM. I just want to bring up the issue without naming names to VC at the GM workshop, and him explain how this issue should be handle.I am asking the opinion of PFS forum to see if it is worth the time to even bring it up.
If you´re going to tell the situation without names, I´ll say go directly to your VC, then he could tell you all what to do if/when the situation arises.
I agree with all the previous responses of trying to talk with the GM previous to report him, but what I´m understanding is you don´t want nothing for that GM, but to learn what to do if that happens again. And your VC will give you better advice than us, if only because he nows more about your area, GMs and players than us.
|
It might be logical choice of action to change the location of a encounter if there is a valid reason to do it. For example, PCs fight the BBEG in the last encounter, but decide to withdraw from combat and rest. BBEG instead chooses to pursue PCs which changes the location of encounter. This is of course heavily dependent on Intelligence and reason of BBEG. Some BBEGs might choose to stay in the room no matter what. So in the end, it's heavily dependent on NPC's motivations and intelligence but it's possible for NPCs and monsters to change locations if PCs force that change. At least, this is my opinion on the subject.
Adam
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It could of been just an honest mistake and he misplaced the final encounter.
I would change an encounter location if players actions have dramatically changed it. (i.e. if the encounter occurred in a tavern and the BBG was going to show up, but the PC's burned it to the ground so the bad guy shows up in the street instead) The only time it would be an issue is if there were environmental factors built into the encounter and even then you could replicate most things elsewhere.
|
|
I should note having run that scenario that I can come up with some reasons (though at least one of them involves a slight mistake) the GM could have changed the location, while the ones I've thought of probably would not get me to change the location it is a slim possibility (IMO). More likely, to me at least, is it was an honest mistake something like forgetting when/where it happened while being worried about the time (for the slot), paperwork, faction stuff, noise level, etc. and he remembered when the situation had changed so he did his best to salvage the situation (at least this is my hope). That said, tactically his change could make for a much harder and more interesting combat, though if he changed it for that reason it would be a problem.
|
|
I'm with the majority here. Talk to the GM first, if you think something went wrong. It's probably too late now, though. I would have tried immediately after the game.
You just can't know the whole story until that happens. I've moved final encounters before, and modified enemy tactics. Sometimes players' actions demand it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The why is we don't know the details and are giving the gm the benefit of the doubt rather than jumping on them based on one side of a story.
^^^101% this
|
|
The concern is does this violate the PFS rule "run as written" or is this just table variation?Since Table variation could mean lots of things that I can not be privy to since I or no one here you are asking was there so we can't answer your question.
I have no idea what lead to your GM changing the location, therefore it could be table variation or it could not be.
Your best bet is to ask your GM.
If the GM gives you a reasonable excuse telling you that PC actions lead to the change then it could be table variation, if the GM says she just wanted it to make it more exciting then it is against the "run as written" rule.
The scenario specially states that the last encounters takes place in a certain area no matter what the PCs decision are. The scenario has a subset of rules to handle how the scenario will change based on choices by the PCs, none which effect the location of the final encounter.
To me the GM clearly changed the location only for tactical reasons(making the encounter more challenging) or was severly unprepared. If he was severly unprepared than when he asked if I like to run it and him play then he should explain this.
Unfortunaly I can't bring up to the GM, because I don't game with him at all. The Con was only time I ever met him. I see the Venture Captain on the regular, and I want him to do a GM workshop for our regular group. I was wondering if I should bring this issue up or let it slide as table variation.
You are kinda going in circles here. We understand what you've said. We also understand how player choices can completely change things, and as a GM you can't force characters and players to make certain decisions just because it changes the script.
But in that round, its possible for the characters to move into the hallway or streets, and thus the final encounter would be somewhere in area B. And depending on how far into the city they got, it might make sense for both waves to happen at once.
I find it unlikely they could get to A in one round. But maybe the GM forgot about the encounter and rather than retcon and break emmersion, he chose just to do it where the characters were. If time were running short, it may make sense to combine the two encounters for reporting purposes.
Lots of reasons why, some good, some not as good.
But none necessarily nefarious or egregious. Although it could be he was just changing things for his own edification, which he shouldn't do.
|
|
@Oykiv Yes. As relatively new GM for PFS, I want to know how properly handle situations that come up.
@all other commentors
As a Pathfinder Society GM, you have the right and
responsibility to make whatever judgements, within the
rules, that you feel are necessary at your table to ensure
everyone has a fair and fun experience. This does not
mean you can contradict rules or restrictions outlined in
this document, a published Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
source, errata document, or official FAQ on paizo.com.
What it does mean is that only you can judge what is right
for your table during cases not covered in these sources.
Scenarios are meant to be run as written, with no addition
or subtraction to number of monsters (unless indicated
in the scenario), or changes to armor, feats, items, skills,
spells, stats, traits, or weapons. However, if the actions
of the PCs before or during an encounter invalidate the
provided tactics or starting locations, the GM should
consider whether changing these would provide a more
enjoyable play experience.Under this scenario the GM didn't just change the starting locations on the map, but changed the entire area of where the encounters was to take place. Doing this also removed a sub rule set which was the theme of the scenario, and changed the feel of the entire scenario.
I say all this, because the general opinion so far is this is okay table variation. I now ask why?
That was not what I was getting from the general opinion. What I was getting is that it was probably wrong but if no one came out the worse for it, then it wasn't that big a deal, and if you feel it is then you should talk to the GM about it.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Second-guessing GMs is the worst thing that has become part of this game. Monday morning GMs are the biggest impediment to recruiting new GMs.
Yes, there are rules. Lots of them. Most of us follow most of them most of the time, and most of the reminder is accident, forgetfulness, and other human imperfections. Harping over and over on a minor issue for someone you don't even game with that seems to have had no effect on gameplay sounds like there is something else to this situation.
Relax and worry about your own run, not the vagaries of someone else's.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is no side of the story. Can you change the location of an encounter that is specifically written in the scenario or not?
This is not harping on the GM. This is finding out how PFS as whole sees these events in contrast to the material being put out. I am not concern why the GM did this, which I stated before. I am concern on a whole if it is legal to do so, and if so why.
I apologize if you feel I throwing the GM under the bus, and you feel a need to protect them, but those feelings are on you. Not me. Please don't accuse me of things I haven't done.
I'm pretty sure my last post answered yours quite directly.
But in no uncertain words.
It depends.
If the GM is doing it for their own reasons, to increase the challenge or make it more interesting, the answer is no. Run as written.
If the players make choices that make it impossible without forcing actions on them, then do the best you can to wing it while making sure you do your best to maintain a reasonable facsimile of the challenge of the original encounter.
I gave some scenario specific examples above on why this one might not take place in area C.
As pointed out upthread yes there could have been reasons this happened, maybe the players ran out of the room as soon as warned, maybe X other thing happened. The game is dynamic.
I cant imagine running a game like..
GM: Tells the players the kobolds warn them.
Player: "ok as you know i had expeditious retreat up so i run out to meet them, my speed is 70 and i double"
GM: "you cant, the adventure says the fight is in here"
In our game, right before the waves started some players were going to go out and free the statue person. that would have changed the location.
The point is that "It depends" IS the answer.
|
|
I responding personally to you because you comment is insulting. I am a new GM trying to learn how PFS handles conflicts of opinions on issues. To call me a "Monday Morning GM" because I don't have any stars, since I just started running shows me that you have a superior complex. I been GM/DM for over 15 years through 3.0 and 3.5, but Pathfinder is not 3.0 or 3.5 and PFS is not Pathfinder.I know for a fact if I didn't prepare to run this exact scenario then there be no issue. The FACT is I did prepare to run the scenario. The FACT is I know that the final encounter is suppose to take place in another area. The question is: Is it okay to change the location or not? My personal opinion it is against the rules, but I know clue have the community feels. This is why I am asking how does the community feel about this issue.
Please refrain from posting if you can't do so without being insulting.
I think Andrew covered this fairly clearly (and I know he's been through the scenario from both sides to see how it can play out - I was his GM once, of the three times I've run it) but let's try to break this particular one down:
First, you need to look at the player tactics. If the players' first impulse it to rush out of the temple (they do get an entire round to position/ready) then they can completely relocate the encounter. Not at my table, but at another one run locally, the players rushed out and pushed into the living spaces to fight with the doors and halls as chokepoints.
In this case, it's unreasonable to force them into the temple to fight the BBEG - he's coming to them either way. Here, you must adjust accordingly.
Second scenario - while one character is chatting away with the gargoyle, another might want to go and play with their new friend (he's adorable) or go and fix the arrow trap (cause they're friendly). Now, based on the timeline, they will be out of place as the Aspis attack.
In this case, you start them (the enemies) off at the stairs. They might sneak in some, they might catch the trap repairer out of place. Alone. This is another case where the players just didn't quite work with what was written. You can't force them to teleport to the temple, can't prevent them from leaving reasonably, so you have to adapt.
Third scenario - two of the times I've run this the PCs decided to chokepoint the door to the temple area. This makes the BBEGs tactic of sneaking in invisible VERY DIFFICULT. And it's good tactics by the PCs! Why wouldn't they use a chokepoint? I'm not going to punish them by having him magically end up behind them invisible - I'm going to adapt the tactics and change how he approaches.
These are all reasonable changes that you are expected to and will be forced to make. You cannot just pause the events until the PCs decide to be in the right place for you to press play on the attack. Part of being a GM is adapting to players which will - constantly - break the flow of the written adventure.
Since you clarified that there was no reason to change it - no, it shouldn't have been changed. GMs are to run things as close to written as possible, make changes only as needed. Bypassing an entire subsystem that the scenario is based on is not acceptable if he understood it and the players did not act in a way to prevent it.
There are plenty of possibilities - he didn't understand the scenario or the subsystem, he didn't get a chance to properly prep it (which is also frustrating, as I watched two people die and nearly lost a precious character to a GM not understanding recently), or he decided to change things because he thought it was easier. None are ideal, some are wrong, all are worth talking to him about, just to get an understanding.
(And of course ninja'd as I typed)
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is no side of the story. Can you change the location of an encounter that is specifically written in the scenario or not?
This is not harping on the GM. This is finding out how PFS as whole sees these events in contrast to the material being put out. I am not concern why the GM did this, which I stated before. I am concern on a whole if it is legal to do so, and if so why.
I apologize if you feel I throwing the GM under the bus, and you feel a need to protect them, but those feelings are on you. Not me. Please don't accuse me of things I haven't done.
Jtaylor73003 -- I think I get exactly where you are coming from. You are trying to use this case to inform the way that you run things in the future so that you know if what you are doing is in compliance with the rules.
To answer your question, in PFS the GM is supposed to run things as close to written as possible. But they are empowered to make changes on the fly if the circumstances on the ground make those changes a better option than running strictly as written.
If that seems like a vague answer...it is. The PFS rules are intentionally written with some wiggle room so that the organizers don't have to predict and enumerate all possible cases.
Some of the other posters have given very good examples of the kind of decision-tree that a GM is supposed to use when considering changing something up. I won't rehash them, but they are things you should keep in mind.
Since you mention that this is at a con, I'll bring up one that is the most common reason I see for changing things -- time constraints. If the GM was worried about the slot running over, he may well have decided to run the encounter on a map that was already drawn, rather than taking the time to draw the new area, if he thought the encounter would turn out roughly the same in both places.
I know that during my first year of running PFS I *agonized* over every "mistake" I made in running scenarios, despite having a few decades of GM experience and being very confident in my ability to run a table outside of PFS. As I have done more PFS GMing I have learned to let a lot of that go. No one runs a scenario exactly the way it is in the book -- not even the scenario's author. (As you can see if you do much reading in the "GM Discussion" section.) You just do the best you can, try to make sure that any differences don't adversely affect the players, hope that everyone has fun, and move on.
It's not impolite to debrief with a GM after the session, as long as you do it politely and approach it from the direction of curiosity. As for asking the VC, since you seem to be coming at this more from the direction of "is this ok?" rather than being upset, I think it's fine to ask the VC about this, but maybe without tying it to the specific scenario, so that it's more of a discussion about general GMing practice then about "this thing that happened one time".
Is that helpful? Apologies if I misunderstood your intent.
|
|
There is no side of the story. Can you change the location of an encounter that is specifically written in the scenario or not?
This is not harping on the GM. This is finding out how PFS as whole sees these events in contrast to the material being put out. I am not concern why the GM did this, which I stated before. I am concern on a whole if it is legal to do so, and if so why.
I apologize if you feel I throwing the GM under the bus, and you feel a need to protect them, but those feelings are on you. Not me. Please don't accuse me of things I haven't done.
I'm pretty sure my last post answered yours quite directly.
But in no uncertain words.
It depends.
If the GM is doing it for their own reasons, to increase the challenge or make it more interesting, the answer is no. Run as written.
If the players make choices that make it impossible without forcing actions on them, then do the best you can to wing it while making sure you do your best to maintain a reasonable facsimile of the challenge of the original encounter.
I gave some scenario specific examples above on why this one might not take place in area C.
I apologize. I failed to read you spoiler since it said part 2 and I am speaking of part 3.
Your example shows how the players might change the location, and I understand that. I said the GM changed the location, because none of the parties decision effected why he changed it. The GM literally decided to have it take place in one area over another area. Nothing the players did would caused this change during our game, hence the common thread of the player decisions changing location does not reflect on what I am asking. Is it okay to change the location or not?
Read the entire post you just responded to, and you'll have your answer.
|
|
Is it okay to change the final encounter of a scenario without any influence from the players, the same as changing tactics to make it more challenging which some players find more fun, or is it against the rules to do so, which could invalidate all players playing that session?
Under those circumstances, yes, I believe it is against the rules. I am not sure what you mean by 'invalidate all players playing that session.' If you mean, would the player be justified in asking a VO to overturn a PC death, then the answer would be, 'yes.' But tables don't get invalidated normally just because the GM made a mistake.