a matter of trust... some reflections.


Pathfinder Society

201 to 250 of 313 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge *

Interesting, from what I read I am concluding that the GM generally trusts his players but more than a few players don't trust the GM.

**** Venture-Lieutenant, Tennessee—Memphis aka Mulgar

As a GM when I sit at a table I start of with a few ground rules.

1) If you tell me you miss then you did, next player....

2) Not every body will make you, but assists are called and rolled BEFORE the main roll.

3) And most importantly, I'm going to trust you with most everything. If you feel the need to cheat in a role playing game, you got bigger problems.....

***** ⦵⦵⦵

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Some people ascribe to the idea that a PFS is a sola raw game. the exact words as they're written, there is one interpretation. The raw one.

I do not trust these people. They are not capable of providing an entertaining game, nor ironically, of getting the rules correct or ending the table variation their "Raw" rulings are supposed to eliminate.

The Exchange *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.

At the last CON I was at, I ran a game for a Tier 1-2 table in the Special.

teaching moments:
I really like running for low level games, and often having Teaching moments at the table.

Like to a beginner Druid player, after explaining how Tricks work: "You really have to have a list of the Tricks your Companion knows - here let's start one while we play. You just had him Attack an undead, so that's the first two trick...etc."

But it is always amazing some of the things the players have been "taught" by judges.

The latest one to shock me was about rounding... It was explained to me that "you always round in favor of the Monsters - or against the PCs." This one really kind of bothered me. These players (and there were 6 at my table) had been taught that when the judge did 2.5 damage, it equaled 3 HP, but when they got a 2.5 it rounded to 2 HP. And they explained that it worked that way for EVERYTHING. Wow. Think about what this is teaching the Players... at a fundamental level, this is teaching them that the rules work DIFFERENT for the Judge/monsters. It's back to casting the game as Players vs. Judge.

****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

We've had some interesting cheats in the past - folks who blatantly ignored rules of classes (i.e. used the occultist's mental focus without assigning any to implements), ignored certain combat mechanics (TWF penalty on attacks), etc. They get sniffed out pretty quickly. These folks tend to have a really big stake in personally winning - it doesn't matter how well the party does, only how well they did - and so it's easy to identify the pattern when every attack roll seems to miraculously hit, no attacks ever hit back, and they always have an answer to every problem no matter how poorly built the character. These folks typically go ballistic when anything goes "wrong."

I have a personal policy against tiny dice. I usually don't have a reason to distrust the die roll results they're giving me, but I get creeped out by people rolling and immediately picking up the die to read the number on it. This seems most prevalent on tiny d20s. My rule is simply that, unless the die rolled really far away, you have to be able to read it on the table. I carry enough dice that I can loan out some if needed.

Generally, I have a decent grasp of most basic classes and a lot of the archetypes, but I ask the player to explain their understanding of a mechanic if I'm not 100% sure on it. If the table seems cool with it (i.e. nobody pipes up with a contradiction and it sounds plausible), I run with it. I may read up on it before or after the table if I think it will have a particularly significant impact on the table at hand or future tables. It's rare that this has resulted in any issues.

The Exchange ***** Venture-Agent, Kentucky—Lexington

3 people marked this as a favorite.
nosig wrote:
I just got back from a CON where this issue popped up twice.

I trust all players to know their character and how it works except in these cases:

  • They use a known bogus RAW rules interpretation frequently discussed here.
  • Use dice I can't read from 5 ft away.
  • Hide, move, or pick up when reading.
  • Roll constantly but stop and wait until a roll is needed so their last natural 20 roll can be used.
  • Use d20pfsrd as a resource for rules.

I trust a GM until:

  • They waste 20 minutes looking at chronicles before players say or do anything.
  • Often those that do the mandatory audits don't know the rules so they also have funny interpretations of them.
  • A GM that makes me roll a Perception for every 5 ft square out of combat instead of allowing a take 10 on the room and recording the number of rounds expended.
  • A GM that seems to be out to kill us or thinking of it as them vs US.

Most other tables are fine. I've got 260+ played and 160+ GM. 99.9% of sessions at Cons are great. 3-5 bad apples can leave lasting impressions.

Liberty's Edge *****

I use a GM screen. It makes me kind of sad that some players view using a GM screen as evidence of a not-community-oriented GM, or of an untrustworthy GM. Part of it is because I like to clip some scenario-relevant information to the players. But part of it is that I want to have lots of pawns set up hidden behind the screen so that the players won't necessarily know what's coming.

As a player, the games I've had the most fun in are the games where I didn't know what was coming. To me, it's not just a story-construction roleplaying game (and/or a wargame where eveything is on the table and the goal is to win). That's a legitimate play style, and some games (e.g. Baron Munchausen) are designed explicitly for that style. Yes, I can keep player and character knowledge separate... but the closer they are together, the happier I am. It helps my immersion, and makes the game more fun, if I as player don't know much more than I as character do. Solving the puzzles, the sense of revelation as the mystery is unravelled... that's part of the fun to me.

One thing I do as GM that almost no other GM I've seen does is roll Perception and Sense Motive checks for the players most of the time. This fits with my philosophy of trying to match player and character knowledge as much as possible. If the player doesn't know how good his Sense Motive roll is, then he's not metagaming if he's suspicious of what an NPC is saying even if the character doesn't have the skills to read the NPCs demeanor as the result of a low roll.

(Another thing I usually do is give players bits of information about monsters based on their monster knowledge rolls, rather than giving them questions. The "questions" approach seems to be standard in PFS, but that's not how I do it.)

*****

rknop wrote:
I use a GM screen. It makes me kind of sad that some players view using a GM screen as evidence of a not-community-oriented GM, or of an untrustworthy GM. Part of it is because I like to clip some scenario-relevant information to the players. But part of it is that I want to have lots of pawns set up hidden behind the screen so that the players won't necessarily know what's coming.

I don't run much face to face but when I do I don't use a screen. I don't see it as a trust issue, more an openness one, sort of the same thing but from a slightly different direction. I keep my mini's in a tub under the table and have a large batch there so it isn't clear what will actually be used.

Quote:
One thing I do as GM that almost no other GM I've seen does is roll Perception and Sense Motive checks for the players most of the time.

I do this a lot, it helps to reduce the metagaming.

Quote:
(Another thing I usually do is give players bits of information about monsters based on their monster knowledge rolls, rather than giving them questions. The "questions" approach seems to be standard in PFS, but that's not how I do it.)

I offer players a choice, they can ask questions and possibly get little useful information or I can give them useful stuff that would be of interest to them.

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I trust all of my players, even the ones who have proven unworthy of that trust.

The Exchange ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rambone wrote:
Interesting, from what I read I am concluding that the GM generally trusts his players but more than a few players don't trust the GM.

I would say that as a whole there's probably an equal amount of trust between players and GMs (barring previous experience with an individual). However there is more concern about the outcome of cheating on the part of the GM. The consequences to a GM if the player is cheating are minimal. A cheating GM can have dire consequences to the players.

A player who starts cheating right off the bat might be able to destroy an encounter or make his character nigh invulnerable, but a GM who is cheating can end the scenario with a TPK (or - alternatively - turn what should be a fun encounter into a boring cakewalk) or simply prevent the players from succeeding without actually dying.

It's also an asymmetric information situation. If something happens during play that seems off the GM can ask a player for clarification or explanation. And the player will have to publicly explain what happened with the GM and every other player able to check the legality. If the player thinks something is wrong she has to take the GMs word for it as the scenario-specific or creature-specific information is not public.

So even if the GM doesn't trust her players, there's no reason to worry about the cheating impacting her experience more than at the level of minor annoyance.

Sovereign Court **** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden aka Ascalaphus

I trust the good faith of all my players. I assume they're all trying to play fair.

But I don't immediately assume that good intentions mean they know how Additional Resources work. So if I see something fishy I ask for more information to check if all is in order. What with errata, FAQs, Clarifications, Herolab and d20pfsrd and out-of-date Archives of Nethys, it's easy to make a mistake in good faith or out of ignorance (new players who haven't digested the Guide completely).

I do sometimes run into people who complain that having to own books to use stuff from the books is "pay to win". Those can be uncomfortable moments.

I rarely use a GM screen mainly because it takes up space on the table and increases the distance between me and the map. I do use them if I have too many props/handouts or some point tracking system that needs hiding somewhere.

I roll attacks in plain sight and gently chide people with overly decorative (hard to read at a distance) dice. I think everyone should be able to share excitement/dismay at criticals just by looking at dice

Opposed "information" rolls like Perception and Sense Motive I'll roll some of them in secret to avoid giving things away.

The Exchange *****

When I'm a Player:
I use a table tent for each of my PCs. It has a PC Picture, character name, my name and a short discription of my PC (sometimes a "tag line" I often use in character). Under the picture, the PCs Perception & Sense Motive bonus is listed (large enough to read across the table) - and though I will normally say "I'm taking 10 whenever I can so just add 10 to the listed number, no need to even roll". But I'm ok if the judge feels that Taking 10 "is not a fun way to play" and feels that it has to be rolled - I will often ask the judge to just roll those numbers without asking me... I list the bonus clearly in the hope that the judge doesn't ever have to delay the game to ask me for a roll - they can tell at a glance what my PC has for his Perception/Sense Motive checks. I have recently his Fame total... for Kn. Local rolls ("Does your PC know anything about mine? Well - here's how famous I am").

When I'm a judge:
... here's what I get from the players (on a small card which I use to track Initative)).
PC name, Player Name, 4 Init rolls and Init bonus Sense Motive bonus, Perception bonus, 6 random d20 rolls (for the random checks like S.M. or Perc. they'll need, but I don't want to tell them they are taking) - this way they roll the hidden rolls. I also say that I might use the random rolls for selecting a target - so the guy who always rolls 16+ might get shot at more often (highest roll is the target).

what I don't need as a judge:
...and that's it. I don't need thier AC, HP, Con, I figure they can keep better track of that then I can. I'll say I what AC I hit, they tell me if I hit, and I tell them damage. That way, if the AC changes, they track it, I don't need to.
.

Liberty's Edge ***** Venture-Captain, Missouri—St. Louis aka Joshua N Hancock

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
I trust all of my players, even the ones who have proven unworthy of that trust.

This is my guiding philosophy as well. Generally, people bring up questionable circumstances to me and I talk to the person in question. That clears it up 99% of the time. I also do the "how did you do that?" when someone does something that seems like it might be too amazing. I roll in the open, which once led to an unfortunate greataxe crit at tier 1-2, but has otherwise served me well.

I may not get as worked up about cheating as I should, but I always address it when it comes up.

The Exchange ***** RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:


There's also mention that tengu dye their feathers so the mammals can tell them apart, so thats another possibility. Corvus dyes himself blue for the fancy andoran meetings

Hi. I'm the GM who originally posted about the yellow tengu.

Player announced that he was playing a yellow tengu. I said, "Cool. How does that work?" Player got a little defensive.

Another player at the table offered exactly this explanation: character dyes his feathers.

Nope. "It's natural. No dyes." Someone else suggested simple magic. Nope.

So, I came to these boards and asked what people would do in that case. Got the usual chorus of folks accusing me of ruining other people's fun.

---

To nosig: I used to trust players a lot when I mostly GMed. Then I moved to a new area and sat as a player at a few tables, and I saw things like: the player with two versions of the same character, deciding which version of the PC to play depending on what he thought this particular GM would catch; another player with two versions of the same character, one with teamwork feats when he was playing with his friend.

And there was the less egregious stuff, like wands that never ran out of charges, character stats that the player rolled, and miscalling dice.

I can honestly say that during that six months, I never sat at a table with a party of honest players.

So no, I don't trust players any more.

The Exchange ****

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Having met Chris, and saw the enjoyment he had when GMing, ^^^^ that is perhaps the saddest thing I have heard in awhile.

The Exchange ****

I have only one player that i know cheats if can with his dice, most others i think it is just not knowing the rule of something. Or as i sometimes think, they are just being lazy in not checking on there characters stuff. Or they get taught wrongly and never look it up themselves. Like a 9th level alchemist doing spellcraft on items found. In truth, i was so tired by than, it was half way through the game before i caught it.
I get forgetting things cause you havnt played the character in 2 years, so you forget how some combos work. But to never look up if things have changed.

The Exchange ***** RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Jeff Morse wrote:
I get forgetting things cause you haven't played the character in 2 years, so you forget how some combos work. But to never look up if things have changed.

Absolutely. That's perfectly understandable. There are indeed a lot of honest mistakes, and part of the reason PFS exists is to teach people the game.

***

Jeff Morse wrote:
Like a 9th level alchemist doing spellcraft on items found. In truth, i was so tired by than, it was half way through the game before i caught it.

This is actually perfectly legal if you have the appropriate wayfinder vanity and rank(s) in the skill. Discerning, I believe it's called.

The Exchange ****

He didnt. He was using the skill spellcraft, only. I asked.

*** Venture-Agent, Canada—Alberta—Grand Prairie aka DM Livgin

1 person marked this as a favorite.

On that note, how do you decide how much teaching to do in a single session?

As a player I try to limit myself to one comment to session, so I don't annoy the GM and other players. As a GM I try to teach as much as the players have mental stamina for (not overwhelming them with rules).

The Exchange ***

As a GM I think whatever you have time for. Many store locations have a hard stop time so it really depends on what your scenario can accommodate.

**

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I trust my local PFS players to not cheat. I generally assume nobody is trying to cheat, but as a GM about to GM GenCon for the first time, I'm starting to wonder if I'm too trusting and what--if anything--I should do about that.

I trust my GMs implicitly. I have only ever been suspicious during a final combat where one GM never rolled lower than 17 on the die (behind a screen), but subsequent scenarios with that GM have been normal.

As a GM, I teach enough to get the action back on track. As a player, I'll teach a good bit if the new player is sitting next to me and I can do it quietly, otherwise I really do try to restrain myself because I think I interject too much at baseline.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Trust, but verify is how I've always heard it stated

Liberty's Edge *** Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Blake's Tiger wrote:

I trust my local PFS players to not cheat. I generally assume nobody is trying to cheat, but as a GM about to GM GenCon for the first time, I'm starting to wonder if I'm too trusting and what--if anything--I should do about that.

I trust my GMs implicitly. I have only ever been suspicious during a final combat where one GM never rolled lower than 17 on the die (behind a screen), but subsequent scenarios with that GM have been normal.

As a GM, I teach enough to get the action back on track. As a player, I'll teach a good bit if the new player is sitting next to me and I can do it quietly, otherwise I really do try to restrain myself because I think I interject too much at baseline.

My experience of GMing for the first time at GenCon last year was I didn't find anyone intentionally cheating. But I did find a higher number (then I was comfortable with) of players who didn't understand the whole process and GMs throwing chronicles at them without proper explanation of how to handle the them or even making sure the chronicles were properly filled out.

*

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

We had two situations this past weekend while playing Captives of Toil at a local convention.

At one point the Mesmerist produced a... significant amount of damage, so one of the other players asked straight out how they pulled it off, and the player walked us through it and it was... impressive.

At another point, a different character (also a Mesmerist) produced a signficant number on a Bluff check and the question came up, and we walked through it and again, it was... impressive.

This weekend's past experience aside from that was more 'people forgetting they could do more awesome than they were doing'.

Shadow Lodge *****

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Chris Mortika wrote:
Got the usual chorus of folks accusing me of ruining other people's fun.

Well, I mean, you DO.

Some people just have fun at other peoples expense, and it's proper to ruin that.

Dark Archive ***** ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Minnesota—Minneapolis aka Silbeg

DM Livgin wrote:

On that note, how do you decide how much teaching to do in a single session?

As a player I try to limit myself to one comment to session, so I don't annoy the GM and other players. As a GM I try to teach as much as the players have mental stamina for (not overwhelming them with rules).

I agree with you here. Now, depending on the tier, the method might be different... at low tier, with rookie players, I am much more accommodating, and try and gently guide them into the rules.

Example:
Me: "So, you're casting that spell while next to the critter who hasn't taken its attack of opportunity yet. Did you want to cast that spell on the defensive?"

At high tier...
Player: I cast spell [INSERT NAME HERE].
Me: (quietly reminds myself of concentration check DCs)
Player: Picks up dice, counts them, rolls.
Me: Ok, the [UBER NASTY BIG BAD] will take its attack of opportunity, as you did not cast that on the defensive. (roll attack, hits of course, deals damage)
Me: So, you take 23 hit points of damage. Since that is a 4th level spell, that will be a DC 10 + damage taken + Spell Level, so a DC37 Concentration check. Oh, your bonus is your caster level plus the bonus from your casting stat...

Players tend to remember to cast on the defensive after that!

I do tend to be a little harsher at the high tiers, but if it is clear that the player does not understand the rule (and shame on their normal GMs), I try and make sure they know it now.

The Exchange ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


We had two situations this past weekend while playing Captives of Toil at a local convention.

At one point the Mesmerist produced a... significant amount of damage, so one of the other players asked straight out how they pulled it off, and the player walked us through it and it was... impressive.

At another point, a different character (also a Mesmerist) produced a signficant number on a Bluff check and the question came up, and we walked through it and again, it was... impressive.

The problem with euphemism is that when you lack vocal tone and personal context it's difficult to determine whether the speaker is "awestruck" or "dumbfounded."

Textual problems aside, this is exactly what I do. When something seems out of scale I ask the player to explain it. The majority of the time it ends with me saying "OK, that's impressive." Sometimes the player doesn't completely understand the rules (usually stacking) and on rare occasions they get upset that the rules don't actually allow them to do the over-the-top thing they wanted to do. Outright cheating (ignoring a rule even when you know how it works or lying about a result). . . I can probably count the number of times I've seen it on one hand.

Cheating is a disruptive action. But it's so vanishingly rare it's not worth worrying about until it happens.

Everyone makes mistakes:
I'm pretty experienced. Well, not too long ago I bought a mithral breastplate for one of my characters in the middle of an adventure. Happily grinning I marked up my AC and reduced the armor check penalty that I previously had with my plain chain shirt. After the adventure I was leveling my character and flipped open the book to make sure I accounted for everything. That's when I remembered... my archetype doesn't have medium armor proficiency! I should have been taking a -1 on all my attacks during that adventure.

Did I "cheat?" Not on purpose! I genuinely forgot that out of all my non-caster characters, this was the one that didn't get medium armor proficiency automatically. And that's what I tend to assume about everyone else. There's a lot going on in this game and you aren't going to get everything right all the time.

*** Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro aka MadScientistWorking

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


We had two situations this past weekend while playing Captives of Toil at a local convention.

At one point the Mesmerist produced a... significant amount of damage, so one of the other players asked straight out how they pulled it off, and the player walked us through it and it was... impressive.

At another point, a different character (also a Mesmerist) produced a signficant number on a Bluff check and the question came up, and we walked through it and again, it was... impressive.

This weekend's past experience aside from that was more 'people forgetting they could do more awesome than they were doing'.

Its less impressive and more that the first example is a mechanic of the Mesmerist that is rather lackluster compared to the spellcasting and the second is common to every single Mesmerist. Even I tend to forget I can deal damage off turn if someone hits the monster Im staring at.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Pennsylvania—Pittsburgh aka Terminalmancer

Jack Brown wrote:
I do tend to be a little harsher at the high tiers, but if it is clear that the player does not understand the rule (and shame on their normal GMs), I try and make sure they know it now.

It's not always the other GMs' fault. Some lessons take longer to sink in, and some players just don't grok certain rules the first... second... or fifth time someone explains it to them. For whatever reason. I mostly see it happen with people who are new to tabletop. It really doesn't take very long to get a PFS character up to high tiers; you can get surprisingly high level without understanding the game in any way.

"I cast a spell!"
"Okay, the bugbear takes his attack of opportunity...."
"Ack! Why? I didn't mean to get hit!"
"Remember what an attack of opportunity is? If you don't make sure to cast a spell carefully--defensively--you leave yourself open to getting hit... you remember last session, right?"
"No, not really! What do I need to do, again?"
(etc)

*** Venture-Agent, Canada—Alberta—Grand Prairie aka DM Livgin

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Jack Brown wrote:
Players tend to remember to cast on the defensive after that!

Yep I definitely think about this one a lot: how to walk the line between not being a 'gotchya!' GM and not reminding them that they probably want to cast defensively every single time.

*** Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro aka MadScientistWorking

Terminalmancer wrote:
Jack Brown wrote:
I do tend to be a little harsher at the high tiers, but if it is clear that the player does not understand the rule (and shame on their normal GMs), I try and make sure they know it now.

It's not always the other GMs' fault. Some lessons take longer to sink in, and some players just don't grok certain rules the first... second... or fifth time someone explains it to them. For whatever reason. I mostly see it happen with people who are new to tabletop. It really doesn't take very long to get a PFS character up to high tiers; you can get surprisingly high level without understanding the game in any way.

"I cast a spell!"
"Okay, the bugbear takes his attack of opportunity...."
"Ack! Why? I didn't mean to get hit!"
"Remember what an attack of opportunity is? If you don't make sure to cast a spell carefully--defensively--you leave yourself open to getting hit... you remember last session, right?"
"No, not really! What do I need to do, again?"
(etc)

It also doesn't help that at higher levels the game gets more absurd if you are new. I had a similar thing happen to me for hilarious effect because it was the first time I've ever used the Polymorph rules.

Dark Archive *

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


This weekend's past experience aside from that was more 'people forgetting they could do more awesome than they were doing'.

I have been guilty of forgetting abilities in my RoTR game so much now that my party mates tease me. After forgetting to debilitating injury like 30 times in row on one of the harder BBEG.

The Exchange ***** Venture-Agent, Kentucky—Lexington

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I kinda hate the whole "gotcha" on casting defensively. I'll frequently remind players about casting defensively if they look to be in a tight spot. In other words, if I think the hit could knock them out I'll point out the danger. I figure their character would know even if the player doesn't.

***** ⦵⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sometimes the battlemat is at a bad angle, or you can't really see from where you're sitting exactly which square a monster is.

I'm pretty sure the character is paying alot more attention to where the monsters sharp pointy teeth can reach though

Scarab Sages ***

3 people marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:
I kinda hate the whole "gotcha" on casting defensively. I'll frequently remind players about casting defensively if they look to be in a tight spot. In other words, if I think the hit could knock them out I'll point out the danger. I figure their character would know even if the player doesn't.

There's a distinction between "gotcha" and "I've literally reminded you to cast defensively every round for the last three hours, so this time you're getting the great axe to the face because you are dragging this entire table down with your refusal to learn."

*

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Duiker wrote:
James Risner wrote:
I kinda hate the whole "gotcha" on casting defensively. I'll frequently remind players about casting defensively if they look to be in a tight spot. In other words, if I think the hit could knock them out I'll point out the danger. I figure their character would know even if the player doesn't.
There's a distinction between "gotcha" and "I've literally reminded you to cast defensively every round for the last three hours, so this time you're getting the great axe to the face because you are dragging this entire table down with your refusal to learn."

I have played with fellow gamers that had a *very hard time* remembering more than five or ten minutes of play.

...I may have been that gamer a few times myself on bad days, either dealing with illness or stress or the like.

A different frustrating point is when you're pretty sure you've hit *all* the pertinent points of a given encounter, social usually, and then it feels like you're doing a slow circle around the drain waiting for yourself or one of the fellow players to say 'the magic words' in 'exactly the right order' and it's something that's actually a bit more vague... like "Why is *insert nation here* like that?' and the players instead keep asking "Well, could you tell us a little bit more about the place we're going to, so we have a better feel for it?"

And because it's not "Why is *insert nation here*..." the GM continues to stonewall and dance around the information or even outright withholds it, because it wasn't asked *exactly how the question was written*.

Almost been burnt by a couple of GMs and only by intuition managed to avoid that fate by grasping the 'subtext' and preventing calamity.

Sovereign Court ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

For some players, I would ask if they intend to always cast defensively when they know they are threatened. Then you just need to remind them to make the concentration check before you figure out what their spell did.

Sometimes it is hard to tell if a player's question is in the spirit of a particular question, but I've had evasive GMs as well. I try my best to take any opportunity to provide the relevant information.

*** Venture-Agent, Canada—Alberta—Grand Prairie aka DM Livgin

Sound like their is a strong vote for; have more empathy, they would have cast defensively if only they had more sleep; and have more empathy, even though you live for the minutia of the rules and the tactical play others are just here for the fun RP.

*

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

There are also times where folks will *risk* the AoO if the attacker has been dramatically missing them a lot.

A certain recent scenario comes to mind where a certain group of NPCs could not hit even the lowest AC in the party with a good roll (but not a 'nat 20').

Silver Crusade ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


We had two situations this past weekend while playing Captives of Toil at a local convention.

At one point the Mesmerist produced a... significant amount of damage, so one of the other players asked straight out how they pulled it off, and the player walked us through it and it was... impressive.

At another point, a different character (also a Mesmerist) produced a signficant number on a Bluff check and the question came up, and we walked through it and again, it was... impressive.

This weekend's past experience aside from that was more 'people forgetting they could do more awesome than they were doing'.

I GMed for a sorcerer like that yesterday. Level 1 PC with +18 bluff. I asked him for the math, and it was all legal - his PC was just totally built for it. And he made a point of declaring when he used his rakshasa bloodline power for the +5 (he only has +13 otherwise). All totally legal, but when the numbers get that high at such a low level, you kinda have to ask.

The Exchange *****

Fromper wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


We had two situations this past weekend while playing Captives of Toil at a local convention.

At one point the Mesmerist produced a... significant amount of damage, so one of the other players asked straight out how they pulled it off, and the player walked us through it and it was... impressive.

At another point, a different character (also a Mesmerist) produced a signficant number on a Bluff check and the question came up, and we walked through it and again, it was... impressive.

This weekend's past experience aside from that was more 'people forgetting they could do more awesome than they were doing'.

I GMed for a sorcerer like that yesterday. Level 1 PC with +18 bluff. I asked him for the math, and it was all legal - his PC was just totally built for it. And he made a point of declaring when he used his rakshasa bloodline power for the +5 (he only has +13 otherwise). All totally legal, but when the numbers get that high at such a low level, you kinda have to ask.

did you complement him on his build (and the use of the skill) or (as I have seen some judges do) castigate him for "playing wrong" - and "trying to win at Pathfinder"?

*****

DM Livgin wrote:
Jack Brown wrote:
Players tend to remember to cast on the defensive after that!
Yep I definitely think about this one a lot: how to walk the line between not being a 'gotchya!' GM and not reminding them that they probably want to cast defensively every single time.

I am more forgiving with this sort of thing at lower tiers and with newer players where I will often remind people. At higher tier or with more experienced players I tend to remind them once and then it is on them after that.

I had exactly this situation at a con recently where a highly experienced player, 5* GM and VC completely forgot to cast defensively while standing next to a horrible demon so it took off half his health with a single spear opportunity attack.

Grand Lodge ***** ⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Online—PbP aka Hmm

Chris Mortika wrote:

I can honestly say that during that six months, I never sat at a table with a party of honest players.

So no, I don't trust players any more.

This is a pretty devastating statement. I feel like my heart's just been ripped out.

:(

I believe in trust. Trust is a two way path. You cannot get it without giving it.

I have occasionally audited when I catch a mistake, or see something that really seems off, but most of the time it's just an honest mistake about one of the most absurdly complicated games around. Player / GM trust is precious. Some newcomers will just extend it... In other cases, it is a relationship that we build together slowly over time. Often when I've done audits, I've caught mistakes that were hurting their characters.

I want our players to trust that we will treat them fairly, cheer on their successes (and their wacky ridiculous builds) and still give them a good game. I want to trust them so that I can get trust in return. I want them to come to Bret and Lance and me with those, "Uh-oh, I messed up and just found out I picked an illegal option -- what do I do?" questions.

Every store has its own personality. The personality that has built up at Dreamers is a continual delight to me. Everyone is friendly. There are lots of people that build characters that are supportive team players. The regulars volunteer to GM at a really high rate. I love our culture and esprit du corps; It echoes with joy and laughter.

Could we have gotten there without mutual trust? I don't think so. Chris, as someone who loves you as a GM, a player and a friend, I hope you rediscover that trust somehow.

Hugs,

Hmm

The Exchange ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Depends on players in question. Some I'll take their word for it, but if I know the player has a history of trying to read rules to his benefit/mixes stuff up, I'll audit with a fine toothed comb.

Any rules violations will be handled by smacking with big sticks.

Grand Lodge ***** ⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Online—PbP aka Hmm

Ack! Not the stick, Mort!

Hmm

Shadow Lodge *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Worse.

It'd be the only reason I carry a CRB with me.

Grand Lodge ***** ⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Online—PbP aka Hmm

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, technically, I do carry a CRB with me at all times. It's a digital file in my Goodreader App. But I sure as heck am not whacking people with my iPad!

*

Better yet, a copy of Hero System. The book that can stop a black powder bullet.

***** ⦵⦵⦵

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I had a big stick at gencon. It was amazing how many people thought it was for rules lawyers....

201 to 250 of 313 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / a matter of trust... some reflections. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.