|
As a player, I have found myself distracted from play when someone else offered me a 'look-see' at an item on their tablet. It was useful, pertinent, and they were asking for advice on whether to use that ability or a different one.
I do not feel comfortable *at all* handling other people's electronic devices, any moreso than I'd handle their dice or their character sheets (as a player).
If it becomes required that I as a GM *have* to handle someone else's electronic equipment, I will have to reconsider GMing. I can't afford to pay for someone's 700$ device because I ate a greasy burger at lunch and smudged the screen or got gunk in a port while trying to read it.
I've stated previously, I've seen folks who it has literally made the difference between being able to play and not being able to play, so in the efforts of encouraging play, I'm on board with folks using devices, but I want that 'paperwork insurance' so when a player says they pull out the at a convention/game day I can ask what chronicle that is found on and where they purchased it.
Which is where I believe the 'common sense' is applying here, unless I'm mistaken?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I accept the reasons for having a paper sheet, and I am perfectly okay with this. While I've ben all-digital since before Pathfinder existed, for organized play I'm willing to find a printer and kill some trees.
I understand that some people's use of electronics is disruptive, and people can be tossed out for those disruptive behaviors. Nefreet's post shows many ways that people can be disruptive with their electronics.
I do not accept that people should be tossed out for using electronics non-disruptively. I've seen it many times, and others have as well.
GM's who will not allow electronics under any situations are prejudiced. They are judging people by the sins of others. PFS should not allow prejudice in any form. This is simply wrong.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Really... I've never know I could do that o_OI don't own a printer, I'm all digital.take back some soda cans and head to kinkos.
Or borrow some two ply and a pen.
I actually go to kinkos (fed ex, now, I think) and print my sheets. It's like 12 cents per page in black and white. Most character sheets are 3 pages, tops. With a PFS game weekly, even if I change my character weekly, that's 36 cents per week, and $1.44 per 4-week month. That's hardly a cost.
I just don't do enough other printing to justify having the printer.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Things that seem clear to me.
1) Players MUST have a physical character sheet and chronicles that they can produce if a GM needs to check it for whatever reason. This is not unreasonable, it serves to protect GM's from having to worry about being liable for someone else's shiny electronic device.
2) Some people like to use HL for a variety of reasons.
3) Some people very much dislike HL.
4) We should work to be reasonable and accomodating, on both sides of the screen.
My stance: I use HL for my characters, but I also have physical copies of all of my characters just in case. If somebody asked me not to use HL at the table I would ask for a reason, and would most likely just use a paper sheet one night to work with the GM. I don't really have a problem with GM's disallowing HL at local gamedays where people know each other and know what quirks a person might have. I do have a problem with a GM disallowing it at a major convention like Gencon, where people are spending a lot in time and/or money to attend, especially now that LWD and Paizo are officially in cahoots. I don't disallow HL at my table, but there are some people that really shouldn't use it for various reasons.
At a local convention, someone attempted to use HeroLab as their source material for a spell that the GM was unfamiliar with, and got the 'truncated version' that the program uses, not the 'full' version that is actually in the book.
You don't want the truncated version on Herolab, I'll gladly pull up the watermarked PDF on my ipad.
It may take 5-10 minutes. Looking through PDFs on my ipad tends to be a very slow process and my paper copy may not have source material references annotated.
|
|
To play devil's advocate here. How can I be certain as a GM that your digital sheet is the same as your paper sheet? Forcing someone to play off the paper sheet would be the only way to ensure that the PC is playing the exact same character stats you looked at without having to cross reference everything they do with the physical copy on hand.
How can you be sure my paper sheet is the same as my paper sheet?
Its funny that your character is the most important thing in PFS but its the thing with the least amount of tracking on it. People usually start with a new paper chracter sheet after a few levels when there's more eraser holes than paper left and I've had more than one character sheet wander off to be replaced with "close enough for state work" replacement.
Rules arguments this persnickity give PFS a really bad reputation.
Heck, even if someone is using a brand new, pristine paper copy, how do you know they're not cheating on the details? Even if the GM did audit their character, when someone rolls a 12 on the dice, and says "That's a 21 to hit", does the GM remember every detail of the audit to know where the +9 came from? Or do they just take the player's word for it?
Yes, we occasionally check players' math or understanding of the rules to make sure no mistakes are being made, but there has to be some level of trust to play the game. All this arguing about making sure things are perfect has nothing to do with what actually happens at the table.
If this is what PFS really is, maybe getting into it was a mistake...
As others have said, these arguments don't actually happen at the table. In roughly 200 tables of playing/GMing PFS, I've seen a problem with someone using an electronic device exactly once. And I should note that I was the GM in that case. Here's how the conversation went:
Player sits down with laptop in front of him, not opened or turned on.
GM (me): Where's your character sheet?
Player: It's on my laptop, but I'm having problems with it right now, so I can't turn it on.
Me: Well then how are you going to use it during the game?
Player: It's ok, I remember all the details.
Me: Uhhh... no.
This was a player who already had a reputation locally for making up his own rules on the fly. And I'm not talking minor rules misunderstandings. I'm talking completely making stuff up that isn't even close to any sort of reality, like the time he claimed his character should have extra free potions because he was playing an elf. Needless to say, I made him play a pregen.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Things that seem clear to me.
1) Players MUST have a physical character sheet and chronicles that they can produce if a GM needs to check it for whatever reason. This is not unreasonable, it serves to protect GM's from having to worry about being liable for someone else's shiny electronic device.
2) Some people like to use HL for a variety of reasons.
3) Some people very much dislike HL.
4) We should work to be reasonable and accomodating, on both sides of the screen.
My stance: I use HL for my characters, but I also have physical copies of all of my characters just in case. If somebody asked me not to use HL at the table I would ask for a reason, and would most likely just use a paper sheet one night to work with the GM. I don't really have a problem with GM's disallowing HL at local gamedays where people know each other and know what quirks a person might have. I do have a problem with a GM disallowing it at a major convention like Gencon, where people are spending a lot in time and/or money to attend, especially now that LWD and Paizo are officially in cahoots. I don't disallow HL at my table, but there are some people that really shouldn't use it for various reasons.
If someone is actually being a disruption with HL, then treat it like any other type of disruptive activity. If I can use HL and not be disruptive, then I fail to see the issue.
|
|
At a local convention, someone attempted to use HeroLab as their source material for a spell that the GM was unfamiliar with, and got the 'truncated version' that the program uses, not the 'full' version that is actually in the book.
You don't want the truncated version on Herolab, I'll gladly pull up the watermarked PDF on my ipad.
It may take 5-10 minutes. Looking through PDFs on my ipad tends to be a very slow process and my paper copy may not have source material references annotated.
In this case, if you can't show me the source in a reasonable amount of time, then I would not let you use that spell. I would let you delay until you could show me, but if a player was taking 5-10 minutes to find a PDF then I would think they are being purposefully disruptive.
|
|
If someone is actually being a disruption with HL, then treat it like any other type of disruptive activity. If I can use HL and not be disruptive, then I fail to see the issue.Things that seem clear to me.
1) Players MUST have a physical character sheet and chronicles that they can produce if a GM needs to check it for whatever reason. This is not unreasonable, it serves to protect GM's from having to worry about being liable for someone else's shiny electronic device.
2) Some people like to use HL for a variety of reasons.
3) Some people very much dislike HL.
4) We should work to be reasonable and accomodating, on both sides of the screen.
My stance: I use HL for my characters, but I also have physical copies of all of my characters just in case. If somebody asked me not to use HL at the table I would ask for a reason, and would most likely just use a paper sheet one night to work with the GM. I don't really have a problem with GM's disallowing HL at local gamedays where people know each other and know what quirks a person might have. I do have a problem with a GM disallowing it at a major convention like Gencon, where people are spending a lot in time and/or money to attend, especially now that LWD and Paizo are officially in cahoots. I don't disallow HL at my table, but there are some people that really shouldn't use it for various reasons.
Same here. But if I encountered someone that had an issue, I would still try to work with them, even if I personally thought their reasons were dumb.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My, oh my, the claws are out today.
Get it all out now, spring is right around the corner. :-)
|
You do NOT! Have the right to turn someone away using Hero Labs.I do, I have, and I will continue to do so.
Well, this blew up over night. I'm at work and haven't read the 124 posts since I made this one, but I wanted to expand on it before the thread gets locked.
I don't work for HeroLab. I *volunteer* for Paizo. I have volunteered thousands of hours for them thus far. I have -zero- obligation to promote, endorse, or support -any- third party product, including HeroLab.
And I have every right to speak out against it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You do NOT! Have the right to turn someone away using Hero Labs.I do, I have, and I will continue to do so.Well, this blew up over night. I'm at work and haven't read the 124 posts since I made this one, but I wanted to expand on it before the thread gets locked.
I don't work for HeroLab. I *volunteer* for Paizo. I have volunteered thousands of hours for them thus far. I have -zero- obligation to promote, endorse, or support -any- third party product, including HeroLab.
And I have every right to speak out against it.
But what gives you the right to refuse a player a seat based on their use of the program? I.e. what post or rule are you basing this on. If it's your personal preference than that goes against the spirit PFS in my opinion
|
|
You do NOT! Have the right to turn someone away using Hero Labs.I do, I have, and I will continue to do so.Well, this blew up over night. I'm at work and haven't read the 124 posts since I made this one, but I wanted to expand on it before the thread gets locked.
I don't work for HeroLab. I *volunteer* for Paizo. I have volunteered thousands of hours for them thus far. I have -zero- obligation to promote, endorse, or support -any- third party product, including HeroLab.
And I have every right to speak out against it.
I agree with you, with the exception of GM'ing at GenCon, where you are representing Paizo. And being compensated for it.
Venture-Lieutenant, Indiana—Indianapolis
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You do NOT! Have the right to turn someone away using Hero Labs.I do, I have, and I will continue to do so.Well, this blew up over night. I'm at work and haven't read the 124 posts since I made this one, but I wanted to expand on it before the thread gets locked.
I don't work for HeroLab. I *volunteer* for Paizo. I have volunteered thousands of hours for them thus far. I have -zero- obligation to promote, endorse, or support -any- third party product, including HeroLab.
And I have every right to speak out against it.
If you don't want to "promote, endorse, or support" Hero Lab, I have no problem with that. If you want to speak out against it, you have every right to do that. If you want to tell people at your table that you don't like it and that you would prefer them not to use it at the table, you can do that.
What you cannot do is deny someone the ability to use it at the table, provided they (a) meet the other requirements for having a paper copy of the character handy and (b) are not otherwise disruptive to the game or in violation of any of organized play's rules. Merely using HL at the table in and of itself is not disruptive.
That is where you and I disagree.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
My stance is a bit different and may take a few words to explain so bare with me. This is a volunteer activity and GMs are volunteers who are allowed to have fun just as much as players. Yes, I believe that the rules are to be followed, but I also think that a GMs ruling at a table should be given the respect it deserves. I am loathe to over-rule them and do so only under the most extreme of circumstances.
Yes, the rule says you MUST have a printed character sheet. It is what it is. If the GM asks for your printed character sheet and you fail to produce it, you are violating the rules. They are within their rights and responsibility to ask you to produce a printed copy, play a pregen, or leave the table. I also believe that the rules do not empower a GM to refuse to allow a player from using a digital device for no other reason than they don't like it. If it proves to be disruptive, fine, otherwise, they don't really have the authority to ban it. OTOH, I support the GMs right to refuse anything they want to. Don't like HeroLab, fine, don't allow it. Don't like gunslingers? Fine, don't allow it. Don't like fireball? Fine, don't allow it. Whatever. Remember, as I said this is a voluntary game and I don't feel the need to impose my will on the GM.
However, and this is a hugely important caveat, if you want to take a position like that (banning legal materials from your table), then please don't volunteer. You are being just as disruptive as a problem player. In fact, if you do something like that at an event I am organizing, I will do my best to move the player/s to an alternate table (if they wish) and I will most likely not ask, nor allow you to volunteer again. Remember, as an event organizer, I have the same rights of refusal that you do, so don't be surprised when I exercise them. This, of course assumes the players bring it to my attention. If they accept what the GMs says and are willing to play under those restrictions, then am I not going to interfere with that table.
I am a bit different from most in that I do not take the same approach with a GM disallowing something that is legal as I do with someone that is allowing something that is banned. I tend to blend the core rules with the PFS-specific ones. In general, RPG GMs can refuse whatever they want from their table. the reality is, if stick to their convictions, the players won't want to play with them. Besides, if we tell them they cannot make the decision they made, they can just walk from the table. Either way, we are left with a table that is not running. Reasonable people will see who the "jerk" is in most situations, so I'm not worried about it. As long as the GM and the players are having fun and not allowing any banned material, it is not my job to impose my will on them. Technically, there is nothing in the rules that says a group cannot choose to impose greater restrictions on themselves than the rules allow. We sort of did that with the CORE campaign. Its only when some of the players at the table refuse to choose that position that we have a problem.
IMO, I think Nefreet and TrollBill are wrong in their interpretation that the rules give the GM the authority to ban electronic devices, but I support the core rules that give the GM the right to ban whatever they want at their table. I would just prefer they not volunteer if they are going to take said action.
Anyway, if the GM asked me to use my paper character sheet, I would set it out on the table, and then use the tablet anyway. As I said, I do not think the GM has the power to deny me my digital device. If he wants me removed from his table, he is welcome to get the event organizer and have them either tell the GM that they cannot deny my the use of the device (and the GM can respond as they wish), or can relocate me to another table running the same scenario since that is what I signed up for. If neither of those things occur, we can discuss further options, but since my right includes using a digital device and that is my preferred materials, I will stand by it.
Of course, I will take note of the GM for future reference. I would consider him/her to be unreasonable and neither sit at a gaming table with them, nor allow them to volunteer at any event I organized.
It is also of note that I will not hand my electronic device to anyone else at the table. I do not want to deal with the possibility of something happening to it accidentally or otherwise. So whether or not I can use it for my character sheet, I will use it for my ownership documentation and if you want to see the source book, you'll have to come to me to see it. Personally, I find most cases of a GM asking for "proof" of ownership to be borderline jerkish behavior. Not the act of asking, but the method they use and the attitude portrayed. While I may have to by rule provide it, I do not have to facilitate a GM who just wants to exercise their power over the players.
YMMV
EDIT--with regards to HeroLab, remember that Paizo has granted them a license to publish the materials. That is not necessarily an endorsement of them as the "official" PFS digital program of choice. In fact the denial of using it as a rules source seems to indicate they (Paizo) do not 100% endorse it or at least that it does not support the marketing purpose of PFS. I think the official stance would be somewhere along the line of "it is a legal player's choice and you are encouraged to use it over other digital programs."
|
|
And I have every right to speak out against it.
You're right - and I also think the grievances you expressed against it were valid, and very well thought out.
That said, like most zero tolerance strategies, yours feels too heavy handed to me. We've talked in the past about making decisions at the table that promote inclusiveness and a positive atmosphere; I think laying down a zero tolerance rule against a popular application is contrary to that philosophy.
I think it's fine to have umbrage against the use of tablet applications at the gaming table and I understand it; but extending that umbrage to a iron clad ban is the wrong way to go. As has been talked about with other gaming issues - consider going on a case-by-case basis with this one. Consider reconsidering your ban.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If was, after all, Nefreet's refusal that forced the ruling in the first place.
Just wanted to point out that this isn't true. I didn't even participate in the thread that resulted in that ruling. The crowd that feels uncomfortable handling electronic devices actually prompted it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Agreed. But I've had several instances of people with just paper who forget to not apply no longer available bonuses. That mistake is not inherent to Hero Labs. To be fair though, I've had at least the times as many times where paper people have trouble remembering to add a bonus.I have no problem with using hero lab, as long as you use it correctly. I am sure that all of us that use it have forgotten to turn a bonus off, or other adjustment.
That being said I always have an up to date physical copy of my character with me, per the rules. While we cannot kick someone off, technically, for using just for using Hero Lab (other situations not withstanding), the player still has to have an up to date printed copy! And should still always be able to explain his or her bonuses.
Players not adding bonuses is the most common problem at my tables, and it is the thing that slows down combat the most.
Most rounds go something like this:
1) Player A rolls the die, goes through the math, and announces the total. I say "You missed," and then everyone at the table asks if they remembered the current bonuses. Player A determines whether he forgot any of the bonuses, redoes the math, and announces the new total. If I say "You hit," Player A rolls the damage, goes through the math, and announces the total. Different players who are offering damage buffs will ask if Player A remembered to include their bonus, too, and Player A goes through the math again.
2) Player B rolls the die, goes through the math, and announces the total. If I say "You miss," we repeat the same cycle we just went through with Player A, even though all of those bonuses were just announced 10 seconds ago.
2a) If I say "You still miss," about 30% of the time, someone at the table remembers another bonus, or they call out a bonus that doesn't currently apply or ask about a bonus that doesn't stack with another one (and sometimes they will argue for it and we have to stop and adjudicate that). If there was an additional bonus for attack or damage, sometimes Player A will say, "Oh, I forgot that, too--would that have made me hit?" or "Oh, buff Z is up, too? Add 1 more damage to my hit."
3) GM bangs her head on the table repeatedly while the store owner reminds them that he's closing in 15 minutes.
This happens almost every round, even when buffing players have table tents or buff cards. It also happens when the rolling player announces all the buffs and adds the bonuses before the roll.
So we currently have a person doing math in their head with multiple elements, then we discuss adding and subtracting elements, and then the person redoes the math in their head. That, to me, is just asking for errors. (There's a reason we invented adding machines, much less spreadsheets!) As a GM, I have no way of knowing whether the player did include the buff the first time and flat-out lied when they said they didn't, and I have no way of knowing whether the player did include the buff the first time and honestly got confused or forgot that they had.
With digital character managers, the round looks like this:
Player A asks what buffs are up, changes the settings, rolls the die and announces the total. If I say, "You miss," everyone asks if he remembered all the buffs, and Player A says, "Yes, I have it all turned on--I just checked." And on the next round, the settings are already there, and Player A just rolls the die.
And it's Player B's turn. About 70% of the time, Player B updated his settings while he was helping Player A remember the buffs, and sometimes he confirms any buffs he's not certain about, rolls the die, and announces the total. About 30% of the time, Player B was not paying attention, and we do another round of "did you remember Buff Z?" But again, on the following round, the settings are already there, so the "buff quiz" only lasts one round.
So I have many more problems with disruption caused by paper character sheets, just from this factor alone. That does not include people not knowing how to read their paper character sheets, flipping through page after page trying to find the listing for a particular piece of gear, trying to remember to mark off daily uses of a feature, marking off spells in multiple locations and forgetting to add them up, losing pages of character sheets, forgetting to erase a bonus when it goes away...
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne
|
If was, after all, Nefreet's refusal that forced the ruling in the first place.Just wanted to point out that this isn't true. I didn't even participate in the thread that resulted in that ruling. The crowd that feels uncomfortable handling electronic devices actually prompted it.
So you are saying that you do not believe Mike's ruling clarified your right to refuse electronic devices from the table?
If that is the case then I will cease arguing the point.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pre-emptive ruling on disruption is not supported by any text in the Guide I can find. (If it were, I'd be banning chaotic neutral PCs and gnomes, just for starters! ;)
And when you're GMing - please remember that you are the face of the campaign. When a new player is breaking a rule, you show them the rule and how to correct the behavior. When a new player is not breaking a rule, how do you explain you don't want them at your table? Based on past experience with other people? Sounds like profiling to me.
Finally, can we please not call each other names? Folks with initials after their names, especially, have a responsibility to set the tone of mutual respect that we n
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne
|
IMO, I think Nefreet and TrollBill are wrong in their interpretation that the rules give the GM the authority to ban electronic devices, but I support the core rules that give the GM the right to ban whatever they want at their table. I would just prefer they not volunteer if they are going to take said action.
Just for the record, my supporting of Nefreet's right has nothing to do with my desire to exercise that right myself. I have no such desire and am happy to allow electronic devices at my table, though I would prefer no electronic dice rollers.
|
|
All fair points. But I'm still convinced that it's fairly easy to calculate everything by hand, as long as you're methodical about it. I see lots of people keeping track on scrap paper, or even a notebook. Most bonuses apply all the time (not something like "+1 versus undead"), so it's a matter of organising and totaling your currently-running buffs. Takes a minute to jot down and you're good to go. Hell, I have a seperate line on my character sheet that lists damage output when Power Attack is on and off. No need to announce you're using it and then recalculating, just look at the sheet.
It's fairly easy for you. It's reasonably easy for me. It's ridiculously easy for my math-teacher husband. It's not easy for the people who never learned those organization techniques, nor is it easy for people with memory issues, math anxiety, performance anxiety, etc.
Okay, there's a player in our group who buffs everyone to the wazoo and you don't even know anymore what's coming from where, and how much it'll add, in that case I agree that a digital source is convenient.
My husband and I often run teamwork buffers. Several players in our area run debuffers. When we're at the table with one or more of the debuffers, it's hella complicated.
And yeah, I'll make an exception for people who can't do so otherwise. I know a girl who takes about five seconds to add three to 18. I don't know how she's passed high school, but she needs HL when things go into double digits.
One question: how do you know someone can't do so otherwise? Do you force them to not use their "crutch" and then determine whether their performance is acceptable? Who is authorized to do the evaluation? What if your version of acceptable is not the same as theirs?
As far as how the girl passed high school, I don't know--maybe when she was taking tests in high school, she didn't have 6 other people staring at her expectantly, waiting for her to do the math and potentially teasing her when she gets it wrong (even if your group never does that, if it happened in the past, the anxiety will likely remain)? This is just as likely to be shyness or "stage fright" as it is lack of math ability.
If you've ever taught someone with severe test anxiety, you can watch them know the material inside and out, even successfully tutor other students, and then watch them draw a complete blank the second they walk in the Testing Center.
And then there's those of who are getting older and watch our brains just flat out "skip a gear" as we stare at the die and try to remember what the hell we were doing...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
though I would prefer no electronic dice rollers.
We've had issues with a number of dice rolling programs locally and being not-at-all random. I've offered dice to players, as have some other local GMs. I've also requested that players go to random.org to handle rolls if they insist on digital rolling for some reason. I get really suspicious of players who insist on digital and won't let people see their screens, though.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just for the record, my supporting of Nefreet's right has nothing to do with my desire to exercise that right myself.
Understood. I was merely indicating that you seemed to be supporting Nefreet's assertion that the rules supported his right to ban electronic devices. I believe that to be incorrect. Where or not you actually did it or not, is a different issue. I am certainly glad you do not do so at your tables.
And I am also not a fan of digital dice rollers and yes, I do not allow those at my tables. I can see how that might be considered hypocritical by the most staunchest digital users, but it is what I do. Sorry, if you have a preference for digital dice over real dice. Its actually kind of funny considering most dice are in fact not random due to their inconsistent manufacture. I have encountered numerous dice over the years that are clearly "weighted" and using them, IMO, constituted "cheating," albeit not necessarily the intentional kind. But, an argument could be made that a player who knowingly uses dice that clearly roll a magnitude or better above the "norm" are cheating in a way. I have been known to take dice out of circulation in a home-game if I suspect they are weighted towards a specific number of set of numbers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't work for HeroLab. I *volunteer* for Paizo. I have volunteered thousands of hours for them thus far. I have -zero- obligation to promote, endorse, or support -any- third party product, including HeroLab.And I have every right to speak out against it.
No person here has asked you to endorse HeroLab. You not pre-emptively banning it is not endorsing it or supporting it.
Preemptive assumption of disruption is a very bad precedent to set. What's the difference between that and assuming that any class of people will be disruptive? Things like: "Tall people can look over a GM-screen." "Them right-handers roll their dice funny." and do forth.
Prejudice has no place in PFS. I suggest warning them when they pull out their device not to be disruptive, but banning it for the offenses of others is offensive.
Just for the record, my supporting of Nefreet's right has nothing to do with my desire to exercise that right myself. I have no such desire and am happy to allow electronic devices at my table, though I would prefer no electronic dice rollers.
I do see a point with dice rollers. HeroLab merely calculates things that can be calculated by hand. You can go back and check the math easily. A dice roller could be programmed poorly (or even maliciously) and there's no easy way to check that.
Of course the forum dice roller has been provided by Paizo and is therefore "official" for PBP games. Plus everybody is using the same roller.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As far as I know, there is no rule in the guide that allows GMs to ban specific items from the table.
Perhaps, but willingly accepting a more strict set of rules does not technically break the rules any more than a player who chooses to gimp their character vs. optimizing them. If a GM says, no digital devices and the players all agree, are they breaking the rules? What if a player says no digital devices and everyone including the GM agrees? Can a GM ban a gunslinger if all the players are okay with that? What if the players also hate gunslingers and don't want to play with them? While you cannot allow anything specifically banned by the rules, I posit that individual tables of players can ban whatever additional things they want, even if we don't like it. If a GM and five players say no gunslingers and a gunslinger sits at the table, we can talk to them about inclusiveness all we want, but in the end, they can just "cancel" the table and run it as scheduled on their own. Nothing really changes other than the organizer has to try and find a new table for the gunslinger. Its inconvenient as hell, and you might be inclined not to invite that GM to volunteer for you again, but sometimes its hard to say if the rules are technically being broken or people's personal preferences for what is "GoodRightFun" for them are being exercised.
