|
Completely agree with Ryzoken on this.
Yes, we're telling a story, not just trying to kill PCs, but sometimes characters die in stories. The fact that we're playing a game, not just having a storytelling session, means that the dice get to decide if this is one of those times.
And for the record, I'm considered "soft" as a GM, because I will usually rule in the players' favor and let them get away with borderline stuff, especially when it's life or death. When I roll out in the open, and somebody dies, everyone knows I was completely fair about it. But I've also only killed 2 PCs in 70ish sessions of GMing PFS.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And for the record, I'm considered "soft" as a GM, because I will usually rule in the players' favor and let them get away with borderline stuff, especially when it's life or death. When I roll out in the open, and somebody dies, everyone knows I was completely fair about it. But I've also only killed 2 PCs in 70ish sessions of GMing PFS.Fascinating... I have the opposite reputation. Characters die in my games fairly regularly, despite my running things as fair as I can figure. I don't unilaterally rule on the side of the players, but I do try to make rulings fairly and consistently. I've nearly TPKed a table or two, and have permadeaded a low level character or five (Thornkeep and Emerald Spire are harsh mistresses) in addition to a swath of 'temporary' kills. It's significant enough a trend that I've taken to warning players that my tables can be bloody as part of my opening spiel, which doesn't always help...
I think part of my being an easy GM is just that I'm lazy about what I'll GM. I tend to prep an adventure and then run it 3 or 4 times, so I can be lazy about prepping more adventures. And the adventures I happen to have run the most are easier, early season stuff.
Adventures I've run the most times include First Steps 1 (one of my kills was a crit from Ledford), First Steps 3 (before it was retired), Assault on the Kingdom of the Impossible, The Disappeared, Frozen Fingers of Midnight, Black Waters, and The Icebound Outpost. Not exactly the most killer scenarios ever published.
|
|
No, I've never GMed Prince of Augustina. Isn't that season 0? I try to avoid GMing season 0, so I don't have to worry about conversions from 3.5, though I've ended up GMing 2 or 3 of them anyway.
IIRC, that one was NOT an easy early seasons scenario. I believe my party almost got TPKed when I played it with a bunch of under-prepared level 1s.
|
|
Adventures I've run the most times include First Steps 1 (one of my kills was a crit from Ledford), First Steps 3 (before it was retired), Assault on the Kingdom of the Impossible, The Disappeared, Frozen Fingers of Midnight, Black Waters, and The Icebound Outpost. Not exactly the most killer scenarios ever published.
lol, First PFS game I ever played was:
And then of as some icing on the cake, the GM did not follow tactics (as I learnt later when I GMed it) and used the stone to mud spell to bottleneck the entrance of his room so only one of us could fight the tiger at a time.
To say the least, it was a great introduction scenario to PFS where I learnt quickly that the scenario does not care if you are prepared for certain encounter types or not.
|
|
Question been reading about Session Zero what exactly is that?
Each year is considered a season in Pathfinder Society. The original PFS adventures were written for 3.5 D&D, before Pathfinder was spawned as its own game. Those adventures are now known as season 0, with the first year of PFS scenarios written for Pathfinder rules being season 1. We're currently in the middle of season 7. The divide between seasons is GenCon every year, which is a huge convention in late July or early August.
Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne
|
I think part of my being an easy GM is just that I'm lazy about what I'll GM. I tend to prep an adventure and then run it 3 or 4 times, so I can be lazy about prepping more adventures. And the adventures I happen to have run the most are easier, early season stuff.
Adventures I've run the most times include First Steps 1 (one of my kills was a crit from Ledford), First Steps 3 (before it was retired), Assault on the Kingdom of the Impossible, The Disappeared, Frozen Fingers of Midnight, Black Waters, and The Icebound Outpost. Not exactly the most killer scenarios ever published.
Ouch! I've killed 4 PCs running 3 of those adventures
First Steps 1: 2 deaths due to Crits from Ledford
Assault on the Kingdom of the Impossible: The Tiger pounced the Paladin and hit with all 5 attacks, one was a crit.
The Disappeared: The party did not have enough silver or heavy damage dealers to efficiently deal with the Bearded Devils. The fact they were fighting them in an enclosed space while the devils had reach didn't help any. They killed one and brought the other one down to 5 HP, but just couldn't finish it off. If Amara Li had not been just down the hallway and in communication with the party via a Message spell, this would have been a TPK. However, I ruled she showed up and rescued the unconscious PCs but one of them had already bled out by that point.
On a side note, I haven't run The Icebound Outpost yet, but I have seen it kill at least 4 PCs.
|
|
I think part of my being an easy GM is just that I'm lazy about what I'll GM. I tend to prep an adventure and then run it 3 or 4 times, so I can be lazy about prepping more adventures. And the adventures I happen to have run the most are easier, early season stuff.
Adventures I've run the most times include First Steps 1 (one of my kills was a crit from Ledford), First Steps 3 (before it was retired), Assault on the Kingdom of the Impossible, The Disappeared, Frozen Fingers of Midnight, Black Waters, and The Icebound Outpost. Not exactly the most killer scenarios ever published.
Ouch! I've killed 4 PCs running 3 of those adventures
I supposed death can happen anywhere, but those aren't exactly killer scenarios.
I could see that higher tier fight you mentioned in The Disappeared being tough at that level. It is a season 4, after all. I think in playing it once and GMing that one 4 or 5 times, I've always done the lower tier, which is easier. It's just a great adventure for low level play.
If you can kill someone GMing The Prince of Augustana you are truly accomplished.
As I said, it was very nearly a TPK when I played it. Actually, it's not that we almost all died. We probably could have run away and most of us survived, with just a failed mission.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
How a flask of alchemist's fire indirectly saved a party in Voice in the Void.
I was running a session of Voice in the Void in CORE mode. The party was playing in the 3-4 Tier. They had no AOE damage dealers and only 3 splash weapons between all of them. They used one earlier in the adventure against the Brown Mold which, much to their chagrin, only made it larger. When they encountered the swarm in the chest in the next to last area, they failed to kill it with their 2 remaining splash weapons. They moved on to the final encounter with the swarm in pursuit and fought the battle with the swarm plaguing them the whole time (though it did help take down 2 zombies). They rescued the NPC spellcaster girl only to find out she didn't have AOEs either. So the PCs with the most hit points left took turns distracting the swarm while the rest climbed back up the rope to the previous level then hauled the remaining PCs up, only to find out the swarm had a climb speed. With everyone near death from the swarm they tried to run away. Without the PCs realizing it, the path they took went right past the now enlarged Brown Mold. Part of the swarm entered the now expanded cold zone of the Brown Mold while in pursuit of the party and the cold damage was enough to disperse it. So the flask of alchemist's fire the party had thought they wasted much earlier in the adventure saved them in the end.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne
|
As I said, it was very nearly a TPK when I played it. Actually, it's not that we almost all died. We probably could have run away and most of us survived, with just a failed mission.
Every time I have run this encounter someone uses fire against the swarm, setting off the gas pocket that then damages the party and kills the swarm. To me, this encounter is more of a trap than a swarm combat.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Session zero (as opposed to season zero which Nosig explained above) is usually for a campaign where players get to discuss character ideas with one another and the dm before the campaign starts.This doesnt happen except in the abbreviated five minutes of
Player A "I can bring a healer or a control wizard"
Player B "I can bring a grapple monk or a Diplomancer Bard"
Player C "I have a core Rogue"
Player D "I'd better play Amri the pregen Barbarian and why not unchained rogue?"
Also there is Slot zero where GMs play a new scenario to test out the mechanics and get a good grip of how it plays before a con or game store event
|
|
** spoiler omitted **
As I said, it was very nearly a TPK when I played it. Actually, it's not that we almost all died. We probably could have run away and most of us survived, with just a failed mission.
I don't remember that aspect of that encounter. But I also only played it once, probably 2-3 years ago. We may have only had acid flasks, or maybe the GM messed up when we used an alchemist's fire and didn't have that trigger. Or maybe it did happen, and I just don't remember.
|
Player C "I have a core Rogue"
Player D "I'd better play Amri the pregen Barbarian and why not unchained rogue?"Also there is Slot zero where GMs play a new scenario to test out the mechanics and get a good grip of how it plays before a con or game store event
I can think of two reasons for player C's core rogue. One, they may not own Unchained. Thus they can't make an unchained rogue for PFS.
Two, you're sitting down to a Core table. In which case they'd better have a core rogue.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Tampere
|
Player C "I have a core Rogue"
Player D "I'd better play Amri the pregen Barbarian and why not unchained rogue?"Also there is Slot zero where GMs play a new scenario to test out the mechanics and get a good grip of how it plays before a con or game store event
I can think of two reasons for player C's core rogue. One, they may not own Unchained. Thus they can't make an unchained rogue for PFS.
Two, you're sitting down to a Core table. In which case they'd better have a core rogue.
Eh, core rogue is fine if you, say, have a Str-based rogue rather than a Dex-based one.
|
|
Not so much "badwrongfun" as I don't understand why some people consider an RPG something to "win" instead of a more structured way to tell a story. If "winning" is the most important thing to you (the general 'you'), then I may question your motivations for role playing. Winning fairly or dishonestly, if the "winning" part is what's important I personally think someone should reexamine their role playing priorities.
The GM's there to tell a story, not kill the players. Character death can, and at times often does occur. But as I said earlier, sometimes for the GM telling a story should trump the rules. Yes, I realize it's a double standard to say it's okay for the GM to fudge dice rolls while it's cheating for the player to do so. But consider the differing motivations.
When a player fudges dice rolls they're often doing so in order to 'win'. They don't like the low roll they made, so claim they rolled better then they did.
When most GMs fudge a dice roll on the other hand winning isn't even a consideration. Instead it's the GM deciding to tone things down for a story reason. Or maybe to not alienate that brand new roleplayer who's character should be dying in their first game session according to the dice roll.
There's this great foreword I've seen on the first page of a rpg book. "These rules are written on paper, not carved in stone." When you sit down at the table, the GM is well within their rights if they decide not to accept that critical hit they just rolled on a player. If the story being told for some reason needs a specific NPC alive, why are you complaining if the GM decides that instead of being insta-killed they are almost dead, and stabilized?
Now, if the GM is getting confirmed crits on every attack then there may be an issue. But the GM occasionally fudging things to not be too cruel to the players or something that improves the story's narrative, how is this a problem?
For PFS play I'm unlikely to fudge as a GM. But if the players do something incredibly clever, or outrageously weird I may have to. Especially if what the players are doing is so far out of the box that I'm literally having to make it up as I go.
When you play PFS. you do individualized missions. Your chronicles are a compendium of your missions. Missions can be succeeded or failed. In a home game it can be completely different. Where a DM plans you to the fail the whole time or where success matters little. PFS not so much. Why do you think people complaim about people bringing characters that do not add to the success of the mission?
DMs fudging dice for the stpy in a home game is cool. PFS not so much. PFS is again missioned based. I want to earn what I get. If I lose that prestige because I was not good enough to earn it, cool! If you give it to me because you are a softball GM. I no longer want it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
wait, I've been trailin' along 'hind ya Cap'n, and I can say you got some no'ceable booty there! LOL!AARRRRR! Ya scallywag! If not fer me pdfs, I'd have no booty at all!
/joking
Tis true, Katisha, Yasco and I have been amassing quite a horde lately at Ratcard (previously Dralcard) Manor. And our crew be growing nicely. But I were tryin to prove a point!
(Kristen and I have a pair of rats. This is mine. Hers is a Rogue. We're piRATes. We've been applying as many of the 'follower' boons to them as possible, and giving each GM we play under one of the boons to create us a person for our crew. Sometimes it's someone from the scenario, sometimes they make something up. But it makes them more interesting then just a "Personal Fixer' or whatever.
At some point Im gonna have to type up a list of all these people for easy reference lol)
|
|
Oh, because there's a different thread that's tangential to this by the most tenuous of connections that could arguably also come down to a matter of trust that I started.
To go back to the original post, I think 'at a first glance' I'll trust my fellow players, even if one of their character sheets is more 'Post-It Note' construction than an actual PFS character sheet (seen that twice).
If things start 'going south' there's a visceral reaction to wonder about the other characters at the table as well as my own build.
Yes, I actually doubt myself more than my fellow players when I see them all cracking out 'amazing' numbers and my stuff is... 'mediocre at best'.
|
|
At the start of games, I usually ask the players what their PC is and what do they do that is cool. This allows me to ask questions about feats, traits, class features and what have you before the game starts. This will likely catch any mistake made by the player before the game starts. Occasionally, I will ask a question with a purposefully wrong leading answer. This lets me know if the player understands how their PC works or not. This opening round allows me to ask what source "that" is from and if I could please see it.
Thus, don't give me a reason to think you are cheating. If you do, expect me to start asking you to justify numbers rolled.
There is a much longer version of this post somewhere in my posting history.
Venture-Captain, Netherlands
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ive just re-read the whole thing, but the thing that keeps popping into my mind is that everyone must be really tiny if they cant see over their GM screen.... Or all the chairs are really low.I have never used a screen and never will. I make the vast majority of my rolls in public where everyone can see and expect my players to do the same.
On a more serious note:
I love using my screen. Its usually plastered with statblocks or cheat sheets for me. Having things printed in a large, easy to read font makes it so much easier on my dyslexia.
I make most of my rolls behind the screen. But if players bring out the save of die/suck spell, or its a really tense moment, I'll roll it out (In a nice long arc) for that 'edge of you seat' moment.
|
|
I make most of my rolls behind the screen. But if players bring out the save of die/suck spell, or its a really tense moment, I'll roll it out (In a nice long arc) for that 'edge of you seat' moment.
Some of the best moments I have had in PFS are on these big important rolls with everyone caught up in the moment. Then the shared victory celebrating or crushed hopes from the outcome. Like when someone needs the Nat 20 to stabilize or bleed out and die, and they make it.
|
Venture-Captain, Netherlands
|
I make most of my rolls behind the screen. But if players bring out the save of die/suck spell, or its a really tense moment, I'll roll it out (In a nice long arc) for that 'edge of you seat' moment.Some of the best moments I have had in PFS are on these big important rolls with everyone caught up in the moment. Then the shared victory celebrating or crushed hopes from the outcome. Like when someone needs the Nat 20 to stabilize or bleed out and die, and they make it.
I think those moments are really important. If they are on their last legs and their hope is on a ghoul touch that the BBEG can only fail on a 3, then hell yeah I'll roll that in the open and I'll cheer just as hard with them if a 2 comes up on the dice.
Even if they are doing fine, the tense moment of that one roll is one to cherish.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
After a year, I felt the need to float this to the top of the board again....Your sense of the necromantic is... interestingly timed.?? why?
I just got back from a CON where this issue popped up twice.
Once with one of the player being concerned with trusting the Judge, another with the judge (my) trusting the players (and maybe being taken advantage of...). So I was re-reading the thread and ... felt that it needed more input from current PFS gamers.
Yeah I had a issue at the same CON were someone was doing fuzzy math. Hiding his die rolls.
I usually try and roll my dice in the open because of all the 20's I Roll even at the Special Saturday Night the Bard put herself in harms way first attack 2 natural 20's then I confirmed both by rolling 19 and 17 thankfully one of the other players looked at her character sheet and said your HP's are lower then they should be she lived to fight on.
Also I feel when players cheat they cheat the other players at the table. Everyone should get a chance to shine and if one person is making sure they go first in every encounter by fudging die rolls then critical hits all the time I feel it lessens experience of all the players around.
To further my statement if you are going to cheat so your PC can just roll over a scenario with out the other PCS help it's extremely disrespectful to the GM who spent time and money to prepare a story for everyone to enjoy.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At the start of games, I usually ask the players what their PC is and what do they do that is cool. This allows me to ask questions about feats, traits, class features and what have you before the game starts. This will likely catch any mistake made by the player before the game starts. Occasionally, I will ask a question with a purposefully wrong leading answer. This lets me know if the player understands how their PC works or not. This opening round allows me to ask what source "that" is from and if I could please see it.
Thus, don't give me a reason to think you are cheating. If you do, expect me to start asking you to justify numbers rolled.
There is a much longer version of this post somewhere in my posting history.
While that works well for a GM, players often have no such recourse. There is nothing in the guide that gives me the right to demand an audit of the scenario during the game, even if I do suspect the GM is not being completely on the up and up.
Now after the scenario, I can and often do, read it with particular interest in those encounters that seemed fishy. Sometimes, it was just bad luck and the GM was a really good player. Sometimes it was just an incomplete or inaccurate reading of the scenario.
There are those rare occasions though where it becomes clear the GM was just outright cheating in order to make it harder than it was supposed to be.