Pathfinder Society Item Imbalance...

[zefig]

Mulgar wrote:

zefig wrote:

Mulgar wrote:

I am constantly amazed at all the gm's on here who constantly try to make the worst possible rulings for the players. Being a GM isn't about winning, it's about making sure all your players at the table enjoy themselves.

I see the "GM's job is to make the players happy" sentiment a lot and it rubs me the wrong way. GMs are playing the game too, and it's not worth their time if they aren't enjoying themselves. Have fun WITH the players, but not at the expense of the players. And vice versa for GMs. We're all in it together.

I never said make the players happy in the sense of caving to what they say or want. It is my job as a gm to give the players a good experience. I want them to come back, and maybe even gm for me once in a while.

That's not what I said either.

Just a reminder that it's important to make sure the GM is having a good time too, since that sometimes seems to get lost on both players and the GMs. Happy GMs run better games, and are more likely to KEEP running games!

[Drahliana Moonrunner]

The GM was correct. There's a simmilar situation that occurs in Confirmation.

Spoiler:

In the initial exploration, you might find a cloak of protection. Later on in the scenario you encounter a gillman oracle who recognises the cloak as one belonging to a companion that had been lost and killed. If you return the cloak to him, he becomes helpful in aiding you in puzzling out the secrets of the place, but the Judge is instructed to remove the cloak from the Chronicle list.

If you were playing the scenario in a home game, you don't get the item if you give it back to the NPC.

[BigNorseWolf]

you can tell a player it doesn't matter without telling them that the dm was right.

[Azothath]

The original poster noted that the event happened 2 years ago. He made his choice and stopped playing. I'm sorry that happened. He's back playing and we're all glad of that. You have to bounce back from the negative and not let it keep you down.

Mistakes both good and bad happen. That's life. GMs try to get it right. I'm not defending poor choices, but I think everyone has to exercise their social graces now and then. Probably why I didn't make a value judgement on what the GM did some years ago. A character didn't die, just lost access to an item. Was it fair? hmmm...

One of the strengths of PFS is you can avoid GMs whose style you disagree with or where there are personal issues, you're not stuck like you are in a home game where it's all or nothing. On the flip side, as I noted before, GMs in PFS really don't have much room for negotiation or for adjusting a game to fit their players.

sadly I think many come here with complaints. We really don't get to see the upside often. You see it more at the table when people overcome challenges, the rewards are just stuff you get <grin>.

[kinevon]

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:

The GM was correct. There's a simmilar situation that occurs in Confirmation.

** spoiler omitted **

If you were playing the scenario in a home game, you don't get the item if you give it back to the NPC.

We don't know if the GM was or was not correct, we know the decision rubbed at least one player at his table in the wrong way.

As to your spoiler:

No, it is not the cloak of a dead companion, it is his cloak, that he lost on the way in. The scenario explicitly says that the cloak matches the style of the NPC's clothing sitting nearby. And, to be honest, the chronicler sheet has been noted as being incorrect by the author, as there is an item that NPC gives you in exchange for the cloak, and that item is not listed on the chronicle at all. It should be, but we have not heard an official response allowing us to add it when needed.

And, in the home game, when the NPC gives you a reward, like the NPC you cited did, you get to keep the reward instead.

[TwilightKnight]

Confirmation:

Martin Weil wrote:

No, it is not the cloak of a dead companion, it is his cloak, that he lost on the way in.

The scenario text does not specifically say that. What is says is, "The bundle of cloth at the bottom of the pit is actually a cloak of resistance +1, the lost property of another pilgrim."

It also goes on to say, "If one of the PCs is wearing the cloak of resistance +1 recovered in area B1, any PC who succeeds at a DC 15 Sense Motive check can tell that Uori is eyeing the cloak with interest, and a PC who succeeds at a DC 15 Perception check can see the gillman’s own folded robe is of a similar style and color."
It could certainly be interpreted that it is his, or could just suggest it is from the same tailor, or a style favored by Uroi's tribe/clan. There are a number of reasonable explanations to why the cloak is similar to his robe.

[kinevon]

Confirmation:

Yeah, I tend to think it was his, since there are no bones or anything in the pit trap, in addition to the cloak.

Of course, I still don't know why Uori, or whomever, left it behind, instead of getting it out. Rope is a staple, and that makes it easy to manage...

I just wish that wand were on the chronicle....

[leonvios]

Martin Weil wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

I just wish that wand were on the chronicle....

There is good reason for it...

Spoiler:

the necromancer probably collected the body from the pit with the cloak remaining unrecovered.

[Mulgar]

Michael Hallet wrote:

Mulgar wrote:

Just because you think a person shouldn't or wouldn't buy the item doesn't justify you making up a rule that most responses have told you is the minority opinion.

Just because it's the minority opinion doesn't make it wrong. You're argument is a logical fallacy known as argumentum ad populum.

Feel better using big words?

My point is when the point of the campaign is a consistent player experience across different gm's, and you are making the minority argument then in light of the campaign coordinator not speaking up in sport of your argument you are wrong. And the logical fallacy does not apply.

[Michael Hallet]

No, PFS is not run by the consensus rulings of a small fraction of the total GMs that actually comment on these messageboards. It is run by the rulings of the campaign staff. Until they make a ruling, it is up to each individual GM to interpret the rules as they understand it for their table.