| 16 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I'd waited until I knew all or most of the rules, I still wouldn't be GMing.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I usually say run as you see fit, then look it up after and do it right from then on.
If a characters life is at risk? Might be worth looking up now. An unfair death is one of the worst things that can happen to a player.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Every GM is free to change/interpret the rules however they wish. I tend to operate a three step pattern for dealing with uncertainty.
1) If you can't prove me wrong in under five minutes, then the rule doesn't exist and I get to decide.
2) If I make a ruling, it is absolute even if it's not in my favour and will not change for the rest of the session.
3) If you can prove I was wrong and I agree or I find reasons to do so, then I may change my mind at the start of the next session otherwise it remains true at my table for as long as anyone of us remembers it.
A player should take responsibility for learning how their own character works. This includes complicated things like Wild Shape.
I'd let the character survive. Or give back the hero points. Or give the replacement character hero points as an apology
I usually say run as you see fit, then look it up after and do it right from then on.
If a characters life is at risk? Might be worth looking up now. An unfair death is one of the worst things that can happen to a player.
Yes. The game is about having fun. Not about being 100% right by the rules... unless of course that's what your idea of fun is.
Just make a quick ruling based on similar mechanics and move on. Look up the actual rule after the game, when you're home.
When in doubt, rule however it would be more favorable (or less harmful) to the player. It's much better to give them a small boost than unknowingly cheat against them.
There a certain element of "a GM should know the relevant rules well enough to run an encounter" in the agreement to play together, but there's also a very hefty "if the GM isn't sure, make it up" aspect to the game. Better, in general, to keep the game moving rather than get obsessed with the precise detail of the rules, but when character death is on the cards, most people want things run "right".
In this sort of situation, you're best off saying "sorry, guys, need a five minute break to refresh some rules for this encounter - I have a tactic in mind and want to make sure it's viable".
As a DM I would say you are free to ascribe additional powers to any NPCs or adversaries you use. Perhaps that goblin had been practicing with his snake shape for years explaining why he was able to take the form of larger snakes. You aren't playing a board game where it is you vs the players you are trying to provide interesting and balanced encounters and if you felt the goblin turning into a snake was the way to do it okay.
This doesn't sound so much of a rules question as it is the player being unhappy dying because of being grappled that makes the encounter too hard. Encounter difficulty is such a thorny topic that I've been DMing and playing for twenty five years and still haven't made my mind up about it.
Don't beat yourself up. If you made an encounter too hard and a character died, move on and learn from the experience.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If it was 3 whole levels ago, honestly I think they're overreacting. If it was in the last session or two, I could see being a bit bugged that it was a GM monster that was the problem. 3 levels back? Anything past "Wow, I shouldn't have died, that sucks." it overreacting in my opinion, unless it was past level 6 or so when they've invested time into their characters.
I will say, though, that you had them look it up and it sounds like you all agreed on the course of action for how it worked. If they agreed, they instantly take some of the fault if it was wrong. Being the GM doesn't mean you're immediately responsible for anything and everything, especially when it's discussed with the group.
Challenge him to a duel!!
Puts things in perspective every time.
I don't like when the game stops for a rules discussion. Here is generally what we do... (though we don't play PFS)
There may be a quick discussion (like <30 seconds) just in case someone else remembers the rule and can clarify, and then the GM makes a spot ruling. That player can look up the rule while waiting for their next turn (they should have known before their turn anyway), but it doesn't affect the outcome of their previous turn.
The GM may still choose to use their own rule, depending on what kind of ruling we are talking about.
The game is not fun when everyone is sitting around being a rules lawyer.
There is a huge difference between "rules lawyer-ing" and a GM not knowing how a core class feature works.
There are two questions here it seems to me.
1./ Should the GM look up every questioned rule?
The answer seems to be no, not if it slows the game down. However you should be sensitive if a character is about to die as it can be an awkward situation. If you are a new DM, look them up as often as you need to in order to keep the game moving and the action flowi.
2./ Should I be able to have my NPC goblin Druid turn into a snake?
For me it is a resounding yes, provided you are doing it to make the encounter more interesting/challenging/fun (the last word being the optimal one). The idea sounds pretty cool to me! However with that power be careful you don't over egg it.
It sounds like the whole party didn't know you couldn't do that until 3 levels later. The appropriate response is you can do it... You're the DM.
The problem is that encounter is already known for being a player killer without giving him abilities that he shouldn't have.
Now that I think about it though, did you actually do something you weren't supposed to?
At level 4 a druid could certainly turn into a medium sized snake that could grapple a character.
What is it that you/they think you did wrong?
I think that is my essential point. If the encounter is too difficult that is a fair criticism. That is something that DMs get a feel for over time. Let's be clear when you say 'shouldn't have' you mean 'wasn't written into the adventure path'. I think the writers would be the first to say that no DM should feel bad for changing an ability in a published adventure.
Did you make the snake larger or something Tumatam44?
The GM shouldn't have to know how every class works nor every rule in the game. That is ridiculous. Being a GM is not a profession, and it is only going to be worse with more books.
If that is your expectation, then you are also going to see a rise of "core only" games, especially from GMs who have lots of other things going on.
The player should fully understand how their own character works and the rules involved. The GM should have a very good understanding of the game mechanics and be familiar with the classes the players are playing.
the player should fully understand how their own character works and the rules involved
It wasn't a player's character that the mistake was made on, it was an enemy the players were fighting.
I assume you are just making this mistake because you didn't read the whole thread and are not actually arguing that a GM shouldn't know how a druid he is controlling should work.
You keep saying 'should' Fried Goblin Surprise. Is that your should or that DMs should.
Let's be clear when you say 'shouldn't have' you mean 'wasn't written into the adventure path'.
I mean changing/adding abilities that make for a significantly harder encounter when it isn't appropriate. Especially due to a mistake.
I have no problem making changes but they have to be smart changes. I changed a few things with the encounter in question myself, just in the last few weeks.
Not sure what you are asking me on the "should' thing.
Im pretty sure it was a med snake.
It is a relatively common mistake, from both new GMs and new players, to run a wildshaped druid according to the bestiary entry rather than the Beast Shape spells.
For example, as written, the druid in question could turn into a medium snake but wouldn't gain the "constrict" special attack.
In the end though it doesn't matter what happened. The fact of the matter is that mistakes are going to be made. Even veteran GMs flub a rule every now and then.
My advice is that you own up to any mistake made and do better next time. It sounds like that is what you are doing. If that isn't enough for your players then that is their problem.
If they are your friends then it is petty of them to hold any sort of grudge.
It is the responsibility of EVERY person at the table, GM and players alike, to know the rules.
Period.
Now, that said, nobody knows every rule in every book, so the simplified version is that each person is responsible to know the rules that he or she will be using that day. Want to make a wizard, then you better know how your spells, your familiar, and your other abilities work. Want to make a druid, then you better know how your spells and shapechange and animal companion work. Etc.
For the GM, it's a bit more complex because he's not running the same character each day, so every game day he has new rules he needs to make sure he knows - rules specific to the encounters he'll run that day.
To simplify this, it shouldn't be required that the GM also know every rule for every ability of every PC at the table. If the player is taking his responsibility for his rules seriously, then the GM can relax on those rules and focus on the rules he needs for the encounters.
Over time, we all pick up the rules, learn most of them (well, most of the commonly used ones), and don't worry about the rest.
But back to the OP's question, if I am GMing and end up killing a character when I think I am fuzzy on the rules in question, I will stop the game and look it up. It only takes a minute or two. Important events shouldn't be governed by flawed understanding of the rules.
But if I think I'm clear on the rules in question (even if I'm wrong), and no player pipes up to let me know that something is amiss, then I won't even know I need to stop and look anything up, then I might just end up with a dead PC and not even know that it happened due to misunderstood rules. I still put much of the blame for that on the player; it's his responsibility to know his character's rules (mine too, but more his).
the player should fully understand how their own character works and the rules involvedIt wasn't a player's character that the mistake was made on, it was an enemy the players were fighting.
I assume you are just making this mistake because you didn't read the whole thread and are not actually arguing that a GM shouldn't know how a druid he is controlling should work.
Yes, I am answering the questions posed by the OP in general, and not in the specific situation outlined. And, yes, I have been reading the whole thread. My response and whether I've read the thread are not mutually exclusive.
|
|
After a few years an RPG becomes quite vast. It becomes nearly impossible to avoid making mistakes.
I have been GMing since 1988. I have 99th. percentile I.Q. I spend about 10 hours preparing for a session. I still make mistakes. In your position, I could have made the same mistake. You are presumably a human and therefore not perfect.
Try this:
1. Prepare adequately to run a session.
2. Accept that you're going to make mistakes.
3. Try your best to learn from your mistakes.
4. Remember that any player demanding more from you is being unreasonable.
Don't worry bud. As is being pointed out already, it is a collaborative effort between Players and PC's. Take our advice in mind and you should be good going forward. If you do have a rules question, and it seems obscure enough, try looking online as well. If you can't find it in the book, it can save you some time in the long wrong if such an occurrence happens.
My advice for a novice GM:
The players will have the rules on-hand for anything they're going to handle so they should know all their spells, traits, feats, class abilities, etc., that they're going to use.
The GM will have on hand the rules for any creature, NPC, encounter, trap, etc., that the GM plans to use.
Everyone should all have a pretty good grasp on the basics of combat.
For the items which come up on occasion, if you can get it quickly (and the PFSRD is a great resource for this) then great. If not, just have the GM make a ruling and move on and look it up after the game.
If there's a disagreement, my general rule as a GM is to go with the player's position about 80% of the time and then look it up after. I'd rather keep the game moving forward than spend time arguing or looking things up.
Players need to understand their own powers. Much like PFS, I ask that players or someone at the table have a copy of the book/pdf that they are using at any given moment. I also provide the majority of the books everyone needs, so the players are usually responsible for very little.
Try asking one of your players to help be the Rules Lawyer when needed during the session. If something complicated comes up that needs to be reviewed, just ask your volunteer rules lawyer to thumb through the books to find the appropriate rule for you to review.
I do this at most sessions and it is very helpful in keeping the game moving and not taking so much of my time as GM by forcing me to continually look up rules.
GMs are human; they make mistakes. This is OK. You do the best you can without bogging the game down. I tell my players that if we make a mistake and catch it several rounds/moves/whatever later, then the mistake stands, but we'll try to remember to do it right the next time. If we catch it right away, we fix it right away.
In this case, with your players' help, you made a mistake and didn't catch it until some time later. Don't worry about it. PCs are cheap to make. Any players of your that are complaining should lighten up.
Obviously in a perfect world you would know all the rules and never make a mistake. In this case, that perfect world didn't happen.
It seems you have learned and are improving, which is the most anyone can expect from a merely human GM. Good job and that and keep it up. We all make mistakes, and hopefully some of the time we learn from them.
The real issue that seems to be dividing your group though is whose fault it was and how much responsibility someone should take. That seems like a pretty lame thing to be arguing about, but for what ever reason it seems like a big deal to some of your players, and their anger is a big deal to you.
I suggest you simply take responsibility. Admit that you screwed up, and say that you are sorry and that you are trying to do better. This won't cost you anything, will hopefully satisfy your players and you can get back to gaming instead of worrying about something that happened several levels before.
In a totally separate discussion you might want to have a discussion with your players on how much time you all think should be spent resolving an issue where the rules aren't clear to you versus making a call and getting on with the game, knowing that such a call might be incorrect. My group prefers to spend no more than a minute or two trying to figure something out before moving on, and we are willing to live with the consequences, but your groups feeling may differ. In any event, getting consensus might mitigate hurt feelings in the future when mistakes are made.
Players need to understand their own powers. Much like PFS, I ask that players or someone at the table have a copy of the book/pdf that they are using at any given moment. I also provide the majority of the books everyone needs, so the players are usually responsible for very little.
PFS requires people to buy the books because PFS is run by Paizo and Paizo is in the business of selling books. Considering that there are a number of really good online resources, I find that having books on the table is actually an impediment to looking up rules quickly instead of just checking the SRD.
As a GM you are taking a responsibility, part of that is to be fairly competent when it comes to the rules. As others have said, you might not be able to know all of them, but you absolutely should know all the regularly referenced rules. Be it skills, or combat or magic spells. You might be aiding the group to have fun, but that doesn't change the fact YOU are choosing to take that mantle upon yourself. Sure the PCs should know their abilities, but YOU are the one who is supposed to be able to tell them when they are wrong. You shouldn't have to stop the game to look it up, as you should already be aware of it.
That being said, you should absolutely look up all the classes your players are playing and be read up on what they are capable of. The majority of it is straightforward, a bunch of pluses and minuses to add to rolls. Some GMs require they have a current copy of the PCs characters so they can be aware of the items and abilities they have. You should also read ahead in the adventure to be aware of what they will run into and look up anything that might be "tricky" or that you don't feel 100% sure on.
As a GM, you are the only person who ends up having to do homework. You can't adjudicate the game if you don't know the rules. And consistency is key when running a game. I cannot stress that enough.
|
Generally, make a call and move on. Tell the player that the group can look it up after the game, so they don't take up limited session time on such things.
Obviously, if it will determine the removal of a character from the game, take the time to make sure things are correct according to the rules. Taking a player out of the game due to an erroneous rules call is never a good course of action.
Lastly, if it won't break up the flow of the session, or it is something that will benefit the entire table, go ahead and check the rules. It'll help everyone learn how the game is written, especially on rules that the players aren't likely to have a need to look up themselves.
Players need to understand their own powers. Much like PFS, I ask that players or someone at the table have a copy of the book/pdf that they are using at any given moment. I also provide the majority of the books everyone needs, so the players are usually responsible for very little.PFS requires people to buy the books because PFS is run by Paizo and Paizo is in the business of selling books. Considering that there are a number of really good online resources, I find that having books on the table is actually an impediment to looking up rules quickly instead of just checking the SRD.
Yes. And players that only use the SRD come in with powers they have no context for such as taking racial only spells or something to that effect. They don't make the effort to understand their abilities in context, so I require them to have a resource so it can be properly understood. If they don't like it, they don't have to play at my table.
Just for context, I allow a lot of third party materials. Trying to run those from the SRD alone is a recipe for disaster. Not to mention that I stated in my initial post that I provide the majority of the books already, so the effort on the part the player is very minimal and I remain inflexible about meeting me half way.
To be sure, don't confuse the PRD and the SRD. The PRD is official, but you still need the books it covers for PFS. The SRD usually refers to a third party site that often has to file the serial numbers off of rules elements.
I usually split the difference and use the archivesofnethys.com site. It's slower to update and less comprehensive, but doesn't drop as much flavor. I'm just pointing out that there is a free and official source out there, in the form of the PRD, but you still can't use it for Society.