|
What's interesting is that you think it's your decision to make, and it isn't. The decision has already been made by the Campaign staff. Illegal PCs are ILLEGAL. They can't be played in PFS. Period. Why is this even a question? (Arguably, a table with an illegal PC is not a PFS table at all.)
---
The real discussion should be, how much inconvenience are we willing to put up with to follow the rules? Some people say, "none", and just let the illegal PC play, or just make them play a pre-gen. There's room in the middle, though.
If someone was new, had an illegal character, and was insistent on not playing a pre-gen, one could pause the game and quickly "legalize" their PC, or (better option) get someone else to help them do it. Yes, it "punishes" everyone at the table. So does an illegal PC, or a pre-gen, or a playing leaving. It's also the best solution, since it works to retain a new player, and still enforces the rules.
If a player will only play their illegal PC, or will walk - then Organized Play is not for them. If a GM will allow an illegal PC to play because they don't want to bother with the several other options presented in this thread, then Organized Play might not be for them, either. There are ways to follow the rules, and still have fun. Really.
|
Keep in mind that not everyone wants to play a Pregen, either. For a new player, someone who might really want to roleplay the character they brought, possibly because of that very scenario, telling them to play what is essentially someone else's character could potentially be a huge turnoff. I've dealt with enough newbies at Conventions to recognize this. We shouldn't assume that a Pregen is always a viable option.
Frankly, it doesn't matter whether they want to play a pregen or not. Seriously.
A pregen is always a viable option. It may not always be the best option. But it is always a viable option.
The best option really should not be allowing someone to play an illegal character.
|
What's interesting is that you think it's your decision to make, and it isn't. The decision has already been made by the Campaign staff. Illegal PCs are ILLEGAL. They can't be played in PFS. Period. Why is this even a question? (Arguably, a table with an illegal PC is not a PFS table at all.)
Ok, So flutter bought a mammoth goad for her trip into "Where mammoths dare not tread. Found out later that item is illegal. Do we cancel the session for everyone, tear up the chronicle sheets, track down the dm and take it off their record! (she now has a legal +2 handle animal masterwork item tied onto a 10 foot pole with legal string. Only works on animals with an itch and the head of the osirion faction) Of course not.
Rules get broken all the time. There's driving 5 miles over the limit illegal and there's driving 50 miles over the limit doing kegstands with your legs out the moonroof illegal. Nudging A holy gun paladin 3 to a Paladin 2 gunslinger 1 as you go, at the first pizza break or even after the session seems like something in the 10 miles over the limit range. Whoops, you made a mistake, no big deal.
If someone was new, had an illegal character, and was insistent on not playing a pre-gen, one could pause the game and quickly "legalize" their PC, or (better option) get someone else to help them do it.
I think "how illegal" is something to ask there. If someone has rolled stats instead of point buy are they something you could get with a 19 point buy or a 250 point buy demigod?
I don't think people get just how much of this game is about playing your own character, someone who's build and personality you made.
|
|
There is a huge difference to having something that's illegal when you don't realize that it is. Nobody is suggesting tearing up chronicle sheets and invalidating the table.
Those are teachable moments. You learn from the mistake, and hopefully don't make it again. And you take the time to correct things immediately.
But noticing someone has an illegal character prior to the start of play, you do something to correct the situation as best you can at the moment. There are many options to correct things.
"Ok, well for now you can't use that item. We can look at the rules and see if we can help you find an item to replace it with after the session."
If its an item that is integral to a character, like they made their weapon +2 at 22 Fame instead of 27 (an easy mistake to make) you just have them erase a +1 from their to hit and damage for the duration of the session.
"Ok, well you don't have that archetype for now, assume you are playing a standard Bard until after the session and then we can go over your character and get it legal."
"Ok, well you can't play a Gnoll. How quick do you think you could change it to Human or Half-Orc for now, and then after the session we will work to help you create a character that fits your concept and is legal."
If the fix will take more than 5 minutes and time is tight, then you can have someone help them make changes as game play progresses. If its too complicated and difficult and/or the scenario is too complicated for that player to be distracted, then you offer a pregen.
There are many other ways you can handle things to make sure they are presently legal and that you ensure they will get a character they are happy with before the next session.
If the player is completely unwilling to do any modification or play a pregen and insists on playing their illegal character. Then I won't just let them walk away, I'll tell them to go.
There are mistakes, and there are willful actions. Mistakes are usually just that, mistakes. They are honest, and not malicious. People make them. We have to make allowances for that. Divvox I feel made a mistake. And that's ok. He made a mistake. He hopefully learned from it and hopefully won't repeat it.
Is he a horrible person? No.
But what I think is completely irresponsible is people posting on these boards about how its ok to allow illegal options to happen during play, when they know that those illegal options are happening.
And if you accuse me of a slippery slope argument... well I'm looking at the bottom of a slippery slope. Because Nefreet was allowed an exception by his GM, and now he is supporting similar type decisions that allow illegal options during play. The slippery slope has happened.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You're misstating my position again.
No slippery slope has been had. I am just as much in favor of enforcing legality as you are. Where we differ is on presentation, timing, and consideration.
My GM all those years ago eventually did tell me my character was illegal, helped me with ideas on how to make it legal, and was sure to tell me I'd have to have her legal before her next session. I wasn't given a free pass to create one-time illegal characters, and I wasn't allowed to continue using illegal options.
His actions ultimately benefitted Paizo and PFS. He gave me the time to revamp her into something still desirable, rather than forcing me to: a) make split-second decisions about a build that I may regret later, b) play a Pregen in a scenario where I may have preferred to bring my character, and c) potentially force me to walk.
There are myriad factors to consider when making such a decision. Is it their race that's illegal? Is it their Class? Archetype? Feat? Some are going to be definitely rejected (such as my Strix example earlier). You're right, Campaign Leadership has made their stance very clear: it's your table, you run it. I have the power as a GM to create an enjoyable experience for my players as I see fit, within a framework of rules as I interpret them, and not be forced to act as a binary robot when making decisions.
|
Indeed. I didn't throw a tantrum, and my experience wasn't a "my way or the highway" sort of deal. We went around the table doing character introductions and the GM noticed then that my character was illegal. He also realized how much thought and background I'd put into the character. Realizing that my 3xp character was not game breaking, didn't upset anyone else at the table, and that I was relatively new to PFS, he decided it better to address the issue after the game rather than create a negative situation right at the beginning.
I'd just like to point out, that if there were a negative situation to come from your GM going the opposite direction, you, not them would have been at fault for causing it.
People have mentioned speeding as an analogy in this thread. If you are going 66 mph in a 65 mph zone, and you get pulled over, you, not law enforcement is at fault for the situation.
I'm not trying to call out Nefreet, because I respect their past posting behavior (I don't know them in person, just by their posting history). In general, I'm just trying to say, intentional or not, if you create an illegal character, you are at fault causing the incident. Now, how the GM chooses to handle the situation may or may not escalate the situation to where you feel like you are 'forced' into certain, but that is still your choice.
Again, I think we are all discussing corner cases here. In most cases, I think there is ample time to make quick fixes to the character before game play occurs to make it a legal character. Only rarely would there be no time to make any fixes (Bonekeep comes to mind) and I would hope that everyone at the table would be mature enough to handle those types of situations in a manner that doesn't harm the image of PFS.
In terms of GM interpretation of the rules, there are some you can't really interpret your way into breaking, IMHO. Playing an illegal character is one of them.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
People have mentioned speeding as an analogy in this thread. If you are going 66 mph in a 65 mph zone, and you get pulled over, you, not law enforcement is at fault for the situation.
If they pull you over for 66 in a 65 yes. Yes they are at fault for being a twit for expecting an unreasonable level of pernickitness.
|
|
If they pull you over for 66 in a 65 yes. Yes they are at fault for being a twit for expecting an unreasonable level of pernickitness.
People have mentioned speeding as an analogy in this thread. If you are going 66 mph in a 65 mph zone, and you get pulled over, you, not law enforcement is at fault for the situation.
Wendice may consider them a jerk for being that anal, but ultimately you wouldn't have given them the opportunity to pull you over if you hadn't been breaking the law. I've been pulled over for 74 in a 70 before. And yeah, I got a ticket.
But if I'd set my cruise control to 70, I'd have been fine. In this analogy, though, an illegal character is at whatever speed you'd expect to get pulled over for.
|
|
If they pull you over for 66 in a 65 yes. Yes they are at fault for being a twit for expecting an unreasonable level of pernickitness.
People have mentioned speeding as an analogy in this thread. If you are going 66 mph in a 65 mph zone, and you get pulled over, you, not law enforcement is at fault for the situation.
That may be your opinion, but it doesn't jive with the law, my friend :P
|
|
That may be your opinion, but it doesn't jive with the law, my friend :PIf they pull you over for 66 in a 65 yes. Yes they are at fault for being a twit for expecting an unreasonable level of pernickitness.
People have mentioned speeding as an analogy in this thread. If you are going 66 mph in a 65 mph zone, and you get pulled over, you, not law enforcement is at fault for the situation.
It jives with laws, expectations, and actual practices for how things really work than it does in theory. In theory 66 is over the limit. In practice the realities and imperfections both maintaing a speed and measuring a cars speed as both the driver and the officer in question place a 1 mile per hour difference outside of the margin of error The officer is more likely to get a reprimand from the judge than the slowpoke is.
|
I've been pulled over for 1 mile over so the theory is reality.Would you voluntarily spend time with that police officer in a social setting or did you call him the sort of things that involve anatomical impossibilities?
The laws the law. Only breaking it a little bit is still breaking it. It might not be commonly enforced, but it thems the breaks. And if it were me in that position, I'd be annoyed, but I'm not going to fault the guy for doing his job. And you know what, if he saw me wearing a Pathfinder shirt and he mentioned sharing the hobby, I'd be inclined to tell him about our local PFS gamedays. As it turns out, lots of people are quite different on the job and off the job.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've been pulled over for 1 mile over so the theory is reality.
Obviously we are drifting away from the thread and into somewhat unrelated territory, and yes, 1 mile over the limit is technically illegal, but when last I checked which was admittedly quite a few years ago, the typical radar detectors installed in law enforcement vehicles were not accurate to +/- 1 mile per hour. Thus pulling someone over for 1 over the limit was not a good idea since it was very possible the reading was in error. There are a number of environmental factors that can impact the physics of detecting speed. Also, depending on the age of the technology being used, could be considered primitive by electro-engineering standards. Not to mention that like any measuring device a radar detector has to be periodically calibrated. From what I've been told by numerous officials in the past, that does not typically happen as often as the manufacturer recommends. All of this leads to a bandwidth of error and one of the contributing factors why most agencies do not encourage their officers to enforce the speed limits too strictly.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Saying that 66mph is illegal misses the point.
The point is that none of us follow the rules 100% of the time. We all consider the repercussions of our actions and move on with whatever decision we deem to be most beneficial.
Same thing with this topic. The people that speed, but declare in this thread that they follow the rules 100% of the time, are being hypocrites.
|
|
like any measuring device a radar detector has to be periodically calibrated. From what I've been told by numerous officials in the past, that does not typically happen as often as the manufacturer recommends.
One quick off-topic note on this, since a close friend of mine is a highway patrol officer, is that radar detectors are calibrated daily as part of the officer's vehicle and equipment check. I've been in his car while he's getting ready and watched him. It actually involves wiggling different tuning forks in front of the device and adjusting it accordingly, and the test has to be recorded daily.
Also, if you were pulled over for going anything less than 10 mph over the speed limit, it wasn't radar that was used to catch you. Officers are allowed to use their judgment and "guess" how fast you were going compared to other vehicles at that point. Also, you were probably pulled over for a different reason, or a suspicion, and when that didn't check out then the officer resorted back to "You were going 70 in a 65".
Crafty GMs, them.
If my GM had told me "grab a Pregen", I likely would have walked. Would that have been worth the disruption that a level 2 character could have caused?
If you're that unwilling to follow the rules that early in your PFS career, is network play a right fit for you? I keep a stack of pregens handy every time I run an open event. If a player does not have a legal character on hand, he or she is free to take one of those sheets and play and I'll assist in getting that game credited to a legal PFS character number.
|
|
If you're that unwilling to follow the rules that early in your PFS career, is network play a right fit for you?If my GM had told me "grab a Pregen", I likely would have walked. Would that have been worth the disruption that a level 2 character could have caused?
Seriously?
I'm happy to pull rank here and say that my years of involvement and dedication to the campaign speak for more than your 12 days of posting here in the forums (besides the fact that you don't even do Society play).
There is quite a bit of context in that little statement that you're missing as well.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you're that unwilling to follow the rules that early in your PFS career, is network play a right fit for you? I keep a stack of pregens handy every time I run an open event. If a player does not have a legal character on hand, he or she is free to take one of those sheets and play and I'll assist in getting that game credited to a legal PFS character number.
A number of reasons:
1) You don't understand how much people hate pregens, either for not being their own character that they made or just not working. If your first introduction to PFS is harsk hitting for 1d10+2 - 5 to 10 points of damage reduction from half the dungeon at level 7 you might get the wrong idea about the game.
2) Society play is actually VERY open and willing to allow legal options. But if your first character is illegal it looks like it doesn't allow half the game. Its bad luck giving a bad impression.
3) There ARE often legal solutions but they take an experienced person to walk through them all sometimes. The guide is for the rules persnickity experienced players to follow and help people through, not for beginners to pick up and run with. "yes but not that way" works better than "No"
4) There are degrees of breaking the rules. If your first experience with PFS is the equivalent of getting ticket for going 1 mile over the limit you're probably going to assume its a group with a nasty combination of prickly and persnickity. If someone looks at the sheet and says.. "well, we can get that legal later, close enough for state work" it seems like a group more interested in fun.
5) And i think most importantly, rules aren't being followed cause new guy is new guy. New guy gets some slack , time to figure out how this works and hammer things in to shape. He expects slack as new guy buy realizes that its a short term solution. This is why pencils have erasers.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I recommend letting this go. Everyone is entrenched in their respective positions, and no one is yielding any ground.To paraphrase Some Jerk With A Camera, "You do know which Internet this is, right?" ^_^
Yes. :)
But I also know that the major players in the current discussion all recognize that the other major players have all dedicated a lot of time and energy toward making the PFS OP campaign great. We may all disagree on this issue, but we all have the best interest of the campaign at heart. Let's remember that.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Minneapolis
|
How about talking more about the best way to handle an illegal character?
I had a father/son pair come in with characters they had put together. The scenario for low level characters was a 3-7 that day. They thought they could just make a character of appropriate level and gear, then play those. Since I was aware that they were new to society play I knew they couldn't have third level characters yet. I explained that they couldn't do that and offered pre-gens to play that day. The son had made a witch so the lack of a pre-gen Witch was a big disappointment.
Neither of them made a fuss, accepting the pre-generated characters, but I don't think either of them has returned for another game day.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
How about talking more about the best way to handle an illegal character?
I think that once you've established that they can't play the character they brought, the options are already known:
1) Make the character legal (if applicable and possible).
2) Make a new character (for games that a level 1 could play in).
3) Offer a Pregen.
4) Offer a different scenario (like if they were just out of the level range of the scenario they signed up for)
5) Sign them up for a future slot.
|
|
How about talking more about the best way to handle an illegal character?I think that once you've established that they can't play the character they brought, the options are already known:
1) Make the character legal (if applicable and possible).
2) Make a new character (for games that a level 1 could play in).
3) Offer a Pregen.
4) Offer a different scenario (like if they were just out of the level range of the scenario they signed up for)
5) Sign them up for a future slot.
4 is actually preferable. I'd rather run something I've run before than jam someone up with a pregen.
I've done this and then had to explain the soduku of trying to get to level 3 on pregens if your local group goes past you: you can't. The subjectice problems with pregens aside, if your group is running a spat of 3-7s and you have a level 2 you can't bridge the 3-7 gap on your own character, you get stuck in a rut with the pregen credit piling up at 4 (and then shooting you strait up to 5, 6 or possibly even higher). This is less likely to be a problem if you have multiple tables locally but can be a problem out in the boonies.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
There are usually two trains on thought when it comes to Fly: GMs that enforce the Fly rules, and GMs that don't.
It actually becomes a problem at Cons, IME. People may have played their entire careers with GMs that never enforced the rules while drinking their potions of Fly with an Armor Check Penalty of −6 (canceling out the bonus from the potion).
I'll always remember my interaction with the player of a 7th level Paladin who looked me dead in the eyes and asked, "Are you serious? Nobody does that."
Since I enforce the Fly rules, I make sure my flying characters have a +19 bonus ASAP. That way I'm safe no matter which GM I sit down with.
Nefreet, in this post, in another thread, you mention you enforce the skill checks involved with the fly skill even if the players aren't required to make them by their local GMs. Why don't you allow them to ignore the skill checks if they want?
Why is it important to enforce skill checks to fly, when you say it should be okay to ignore some campaign rules, some of the time, to ensure players are having fun? When the players can have as much fun playing by all the rules after the organizer/GM explains things to them.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why is it important to enforce skill checks to fly, when you say it should be okay to ignore some campaign rules, some of the time, to ensure players are having fun? When the players can have as much fun playing by all the rules after the organizer/GM explains things to them.
To always prioritize obeying the rules or to never care about the rules isn't a fair way to phrase a position. There are a lot of factors that go into any decision that need to be taken into account.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
My response to something like an illegal build varies depending on its severity. I have two examples I'll use to highlight what I believe would be two different acceptable reactions.
I'd played maybe half a dozen sessions with my first PFS character and wanted to try out another. I statted up a Holy Gun and brought it to three sessions, leveling up to 2nd. At my 4th game, my GM caught the error. At that point I was still unaware of the Additional Resources document. He told me at the start of the game that I had an illegal character, but that he'd be willing to help me out after the game. He did just that, and I feel I learned a valuable GMing skill because of it.
On the other hand, I had a player show up at a Con with a 7th level "pregenerated" character. It was a Strix, he admitted he'd rolled really well on his stats, and he'd spent what the CRB told him was the appropriate gold amount on a few pricey items that would have likely been above his Fame level had the character actually been legal. I told him up front, even though we were pressed for time, that he'd have to use one of the other official Pregens, but that I'd be willing to help him out after the session to create something legal.
Both examples have inexperienced players using illegal options with too little time at the beginning of the session to correct the issue. The difference was the severity. A level 2 PC with an illegal archetype isn't as disruptive to the game or other players as a level 7 PC with an illegal flying race with overpowered stats and items.
Sure, you could heavy handedly tell each player immediately "No!", or you could tell each player "Sure!", but I think it's better to take it all in context, and consider what's best for the group as well as the player, before coming to a decision.
The bolded portion says that you support the GM having the option to make a decision that best benefits the individual player or table. The problem is that to do so you support the GM's ability to choose to ignore campaign rules to enhance that table's experience.
When someone shows up with an illegal character. The GM should just explain what PFS is and why the person's own character can't be used. Then give them their options to participate. Then let them choose the option they wish to use. Even if it means they choose to walk away. A GM shouldn't ever resort to allowing an illegal character into a game, even if it's just a one time thing.
|
|
Oh, I dunno. I, for one, am finding this all very entertaining.
Here is one part I liked:
Nobody is suggesting tearing up chronicle sheets and invalidating the table.
While I know we are way off topic from the original topic of the thread there is one person who was suggesting something fairly close to that.
... that GM wind up reporting your character "dead".
Now, it is taken a bit out of context as he erroneously thought that I was purposefully trying to violate the reskinning rules while I was actually trying to find the bounds within I could legally describe something.
My point in bringing it up is that perhaps many here do not see such extreme views as being common or consider their own views as being close minded or short sited. As an outside observer I can tell you that seems ironically humorous to me.
I think some of the views expressed here are extremely hard lined, close minded and short sighted. I can tell you that even from my limited PFS experience that there are groups of players, GMs, VLs and VCs that agree. I can also tell you which of the two points of view are the more welcoming to new players but I would think that would be obvious.
I didn't come here asking for a way to break rules any more than Nefreet's players were trying to do that. They were looking for a way to have a good time within the rules but were a bit let down by not being able to play what they had brought. No one walked away thinking they are allowed to break rules that their GM chooses not to enforce. Everyone knows what they have to do to play within the rules and that they are expected to do that.
Isn't that what is important? ...and nt alienating players who xan turn into excellent contributors.
|
|
And, as I stated up thread in reply to Andrew, that's a hypocritical hardline stance that I cannot endorse.It's not hypocritical to say 'we need to follow the PFS Guild rules'.
I guess I don't even know how to respond anymore. Seems the vocal majority is ok with breaking the rules as long as they don't have to have a potential confrontation. And that saddens me.
|
|
Nefreet does have a chaotic good point here, actually.
The application of alignments in describing various GM enforcement philosophies tickles me. It's very 'meta'.
I think he's more 'Neutral Good' (as am I). He supports the rules; however, if there is an occasion where a 'greater good' could be achieved if a rule was bent or even broken, then he'll consider it (as would I).
A 'Lawful Good' enforces the rules adamantly, absolutely, instantly, and without question. To them, the only good in the world is encapsulated within the context of the rules; good can never exist outside of the law (er, rules).
A 'Chaotic Good' would treat the rules as guidelines at best, and always do what they thought was right. I doubt 'Chaotic Good' gms last long in PFS.
!
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Seems the vocal majority is ok with breaking the rules as long as they don't have to have a potential confrontation
One has nothing to do with the other. Most of us are just trying to say that the infinite number of circumstances that can arise at a game event require you to have an open mind. Even the more hard-core rules-lawyers generally agree that there are times when bending, even breaking, the rules is warranted for the good of the community. The only real argument is where that line exists and how far someone is willing to step across.
|
|
For those who take a very hard line about enforcing the rules, I have a question. What, if anything, should PFS campaign authorities do in the case where GMs and players from a lodge are not strictly following the PFS rules?
If by authorities you mean Venture-Officers, it depends on the situation; frequency of issues, nature of the violations, etc. We have a network of support that can help work out the best way to address issues like this. If action is required, it can range from a little as a one-time private conversation, to as extreme as banning from the PFS campaign entirely. There is no one-size-fits-all process to employ or an official laundry list of Violation X = Punishment Y.
Generally speaking, players/GMs should notify their VA/VL/VC of any problems. If they fail to take appropriate action, escalate it to the RVC, and then to the OPC.
If you're that unwilling to follow the rules that early in your PFS career, is network play a right fit for you? I keep a stack of pregens handy every time I run an open event. If a player does not have a legal character on hand, he or she is free to take one of those sheets and play and I'll assist in getting that game credited to a legal PFS character number.If my GM had told me "grab a Pregen", I likely would have walked. Would that have been worth the disruption that a level 2 character could have caused?
No I don't play Society.... but whenever I've joined a home game it was with the implicit agreement of following the house rules. And if I couldn't deal with them, I'd either not have joined in the first place, or found a graceful way to leave. With all the complaining and putdown of Society play, I see here it may not be for me either.
|
|
For those people who take a very hard line about enforcing the rules, what would you want to do about that?
If the issue has been vetted all the way up to and including the OPC and no action is being taken (as far as you know), then apparently the issue is not considered one to warrant any action. If you don't like that resolution, you really only have two choices; deal with it and play despite the lack of rules enforcement you want, or don't play.
Either way, you are welcome to discuss the issue in the forums (like you did) and try to illicit a change in the rules. Also, you might want to consider that your expectations for "hard-line enforcement" may not be in the spirit of the campaign and may need to re-accessed.