Scenarios cause Gameplay and class railroading?


Pathfinder Society

51 to 100 of 164 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge 4/5 *** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento

Jared Thaler wrote:
Paul Jackson wrote:
Fromper wrote:
Jeff Hazuka wrote:
Blackbot wrote:
Sure, not every character get Min-Maxed to hell, but as long as you don't turn up with a Wizard 1/Fighter 1/Cleric 1/Ranger 1 equipped with a dagger and nothing else you should be fine.
Challenge Accepted.
I'm not sure if there's a way to get a viable PC like that. Now, if you were allowed 2 daggers, then you'd be on to something.
I'm pretty sure that you also need a spell component pouch, holy symbol AND loin cloth :-)

Eschew Materials, Holy Symbol Birthmark Trait.

Can't help you on the loin cloth.

Follower of Iomedae. Taking self dependency to the next level.

If you throw in monk, you won't even need the dagger.


Jared Thaler wrote:

...

Eschew Materials, Holy Symbol Birthmark Trait.

Can't help you on the loin cloth.

Disguise Self?

I don't see why it is necessary, though. The shame of fighting ultra-commando style is nothing compared to the shame of playing a 4 way multiclass at level 4.

5/5 5/55/55/5

You didn't mention we had a wheel barrel...

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5 **

Snowblind wrote:
Jared Thaler wrote:

...

Eschew Materials, Holy Symbol Birthmark Trait.

Can't help you on the loin cloth.

Disguise Self?

I don't see why it is necessary, though. The shame of fighting ultra-commando style is nothing compared to the shame of playing a 4 way multiclass at level 4.

Depends on the scenario, but some GMs (like me) would be a "bit" mean and nasty if the character showed up nude.

Blakros Matrimony, Hellknights Feast, etc etc etc.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Jared Thaler wrote:
Jared Thaler wrote:
Paul Jackson wrote:
Fromper wrote:
Jeff Hazuka wrote:
Blackbot wrote:
Sure, not every character get Min-Maxed to hell, but as long as you don't turn up with a Wizard 1/Fighter 1/Cleric 1/Ranger 1 equipped with a dagger and nothing else you should be fine.
Challenge Accepted.
I'm not sure if there's a way to get a viable PC like that. Now, if you were allowed 2 daggers, then you'd be on to something.
I'm pretty sure that you also need a spell component pouch, holy symbol AND loin cloth :-)

Eschew Materials, Holy Symbol Birthmark Trait.

Can't help you on the loin cloth.

Follower of Iomedae. Taking self dependency to the next level.

If you throw in monk, you won't even need the dagger.

I'm thinking an undead hating deific obedience cleric of Pharasma, with weapon finesse and slashing grace

Dark Archive 1/5

What are you guys telling me, Jim the townsperson is un-optimised. Just because he has 10's in most stats, and is currently a lv 4, true neutral, Paladin, Alchemist, Barbarian, Ranger, doesn't mean he isn't useful. I'll have you know he once crit for 8 damage against a zombie by throwing his pitchfork at the zombie attacking the party. So yes, he immediately then ran and hid, due to being weaponless, but he tried guys!

Lantern Lodge 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The real problem is the levels are poorly ordered. Wizard, then Fighter, then Cleric, then Ranger is about the worst permutation on the first four levels.

I went with the Pharasma route. It sort of came together nicely. Arcane Strike, Riving Strike, Weapon Finesse, Deific Obedience, Repose Domain, Freebooter's Bane all sort of stack sometimes.

Took Birthmark and Shrouded Casting (Conjuration) as traits so that I wouldn't need to have a holy symbol or spell comp pouch. Literally, just a dagger. At least it's masterwork. Thanks, arcane bond.

Scarab Sages

ChaosTicket wrote:

Those are some general tips, but many of them are not related to the Pathfinder Society Campaign. The limitations are major. You cannot sleep to regain spells/special abilities(by choice), run away from encounters, use diplomacy to avoid fights or acquire loot permanenetly.

Thats why its railroading.

Which GMs do you have?

We can sleep whenever we want in PFS. The party just has to insist to the GM. Yeah, missions taking place over an 8 hour period will probably fail, but we can sleep if we really want to. Lots of the Adventures either have no real time limit, or actually include special notes regarding what happens when the party decides to take longer. Yeah, some scenarios do have a time limit, though a non-PFS game could also include a time limit in situations where it mattered.

Most PFS encounters, yes, you can flee from them. You can even prematurely leave the scenario itself by withdrawing from the entire mission. Now, granted, if you flee, and in doing so, enable your enemies to complete their task, or flee themselves, you may miss your chance to defeat them, and subsequently lose any scenario objectives related to that. But that would be the same issue in a non-PFS game.

As for diplomacy, again, you can totally use diplomacy to avoid combat. Granted, it doesn't always work out and sometimes the issue just isn't one that can be talked out, but you can certainly try and with good enough role playing, probably succeed. This does require the players to actually have social skills and a shared language, and even there, have real social enough to attempt a convincing arguement to the NPCs, but PFS doesn't prevent players from peacefully solving combat situations.

And regarding loot, again, your actions reflect the loot gained in the chronicle sheet.

Example:

Spoiler:
Totally spoiler, but you seem to really need to understand these things. Confirmation is a great 1st level scenario for all of these:

First, the written scenario does account for players sleeping once during the adventure. They don't have to, but they can and it does adjust the encounter a bit. Lighting level for time of day, plus certain encounters resolve differently.

Second, party "usually" discovers a smelly cloak. They can keep it, but if they give it to the Gillman in the next area, he becomes much easier to talk to. If the party doesn't find the cloak, or gives it away, the GM is supposed to cross it off the chronicle sheet. I could be wrong, but I also think this cloak being crossed off results in less gold acquired per party member at the end of the encounter.

Third, party can attack this guy. He's totally got stats, but every party I've been in does it with diplomacy. The adventure includes an assortment of other NPC monsters, most of which can bypassed with the approtate skills/feats/class abilites/spells. For example, one random encounter can be an Ooze. A PC with wild empathy could take the Ooze Whiserer feat to allow wild empathy on Oozes. This in turn, with good rolling and high CHA, could resolve this without combat.

With all of these, the GM isn't supposed to tell the party what to do. If the party doesn't ask about resting, the GM probably won't mention it. The GM certainly won't tell them what loot is important for their chronicle sheet, or which actions result in lost loot. And the GM certainly won't tell the party how they could have avoided that combat, or which NPCs have combat stats enough for the party to kill them.

Scenarios are designed to be played multiple times, often each time played a bit different. If you find that the scenarios all seem the same, perhaps the issue isn't the scenario. I'd compare GMs, players, and my own character builds. Some builds just don't have the options needed to resolve scenarios as I'd like to role play them

Dark Archive 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber
Fromper wrote:
Jeff Hazuka wrote:
Blackbot wrote:
Sure, not every character get Min-Maxed to hell, but as long as you don't turn up with a Wizard 1/Fighter 1/Cleric 1/Ranger 1 equipped with a dagger and nothing else you should be fine.
Challenge Accepted.
I'm not sure if there's a way to get a viable PC like that. Now, if you were allowed 2 daggers, then you'd be on to something.

Archetypes OK? I see a ton of potential in those four classes feeding into a ranged combatant/trapsmith out of Trapper (because who needs ranger spells on wands when you can have Clr and Wiz?)....

(Separatist) Cleric of Iomedae (venerates her dead former patron, through her)

Foresight Wizard?

Double dipping bonus feats from Fighter and Ranger is tasty...

Ranger the rest of the progression (if a combat feat is needed, dipping the second level of Fighter, obviously)? The first three levels might feel awkward as hell because of trying to get frontloaded class abilities online...

Thinking about it, this seems like a really strong arcane archery build start, that just won't get rolling as fast as PFS' 11-level normal character arcs want to trade in to shine.

3/5 Venture-Agent, Canada—Alberta—Grand Prairie

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd recommend speaking with whoever is scheduling your local games. Let them know that the scenario selection so far feels very hack/slash and that you would enjoy more variety.

If they are not sure what scenarios offer this selection, send them to this board and we can make a list of recommendation.

Lantern Lodge 5/5

TetsujinOni wrote:
Fromper wrote:
Jeff Hazuka wrote:
Blackbot wrote:
Sure, not every character get Min-Maxed to hell, but as long as you don't turn up with a Wizard 1/Fighter 1/Cleric 1/Ranger 1 equipped with a dagger and nothing else you should be fine.
Challenge Accepted.
I'm not sure if there's a way to get a viable PC like that. Now, if you were allowed 2 daggers, then you'd be on to something.

Archetypes OK? I see a ton of potential in those four classes feeding into a ranged combatant/trapsmith out of Trapper (because who needs ranger spells on wands when you can have Clr and Wiz?)....

(Separatist) Cleric of Iomedae (venerates her dead former patron, through her)

Foresight Wizard?

Double dipping bonus feats from Fighter and Ranger is tasty...

Ranger the rest of the progression (if a combat feat is needed, dipping the second level of Fighter, obviously)? The first three levels might feel awkward as hell because of trying to get frontloaded class abilities online...

Thinking about it, this seems like a really strong arcane archery build start, that just won't get rolling as fast as PFS' 11-level normal character arcs want to trade in to shine.

Here's what I came up with. No spent wealth (statblock includes Mage Armor, Deific Obedience performed, no other active effects). One dagger, no other equipment.

(multi) Classy Lady:
Classy Lady
Human (Mwangi) cleric (crusader) of Pharasma 1/fighter (lore warden) 1/ranger (freebooter, trapper) 1/wizard 1 (Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Pathfinder Society Field Guide, Pathfinder Player Companion: Pirates of the Inner Sea, Pathfinder RPG Ultimate Combat 40, Pathfinder RPG Ultimate Magic 65)
NG Medium humanoid (human)
Init +1; Senses Perception +9
Aura freebooter's bane (1 ft.)
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 15, touch 11, flat-footed 14 (+4 armor, +1 Dex)
hp 35 (4 HD; 1d6+1d8+2d10+12)
Fort +9, Ref +3, Will +9; +2 trait bonus vs. charm and compulson
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.; shift
Melee mwk dagger +7 (1d4-2/19-20) or
. . unarmed strike +3 (1d3-2 nonlethal)
Special Attacks channel positive energy 1/day (DC 8, 1d6)
Domain Spell-Like Abilities (CL 1st; concentration +6)
. . 8/day—gentle rest
Cleric (Crusader) Spells Prepared (CL 1st; concentration +6)
. . 1st—deathwatch[D], obscuring mist, protection from evil
. . 0 (at will)—light, stabilize
. . D Domain spell; Domain Repose
Wizard Spells Prepared (CL 1st; concentration +2)
. . 1st—mage armor, snowball (DC 13), snowball (DC 13)
. . 0 (at will)—acid splash, detect magic, read magic
. . Opposition Schools Enchantment, Illusion
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 7, Dex 13, Con 16, Int 12, Wis 20, Cha 7
Base Atk +2; CMB +0; CMD 11
Feats Arcane Strike, Deific Obedience, Riving Strike[ACG], Spell Focus (conjuration), Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (dagger)
Traits birthmark, shrouded casting
Skills Acrobatics +4, Diplomacy +2, Heal +9, Knowledge (arcana) +5, Knowledge (dungeoneering) +5, Knowledge (local) +5, Knowledge (planes) +5, Knowledge (religion) +8, Perception +9, Sense Motive +12, Spellcraft +8, Swim +2
Languages Common, Osiriani, Polyglot
SQ arcane bond (masterwork dagger), summoner's charm (1 round), track +1, trapfinding +1, wild empathy -1
Other Gear mwk dagger, wizard starting spellbook, 150 gp
--------------------
Tracked Resources
--------------------
Cleric Channel Positive Energy 1d6 (1/day, DC 8) (Su) - 0/1
Gentle Rest (8/day) (Sp) - 0/8
Masterwork dagger - 0/1
Shift (5 feet, 4/day) (Sp) - 0/4
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Arcane Strike As a swift action, add +1 damage, +1 per 5 caster levels and your weapons are treated as magic for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.
Cleric (Crusader) Domain (Repose) Granted Powers: You see death not as something to be feared, but as a final rest and reward for a life well spent. The taint of undeath is a mockery of what you hold dear.
Cleric Channel Positive Energy 1d6 (1/day, DC 8) (Su) Positive energy heals the living and harms the undead; negative has the reverse effect.
Deific Obedience Purify yourself daily to prove devotion to a deity and gain benefits.
Enchantment You must spend 2 slots to cast spells from the Enchantment school.
Freebooter's Bane +1 (Ex) +1 to hit & damage vs. chosen target.
Gentle Rest (8/day) (Sp) As a standard action, melee touch staggers living 1 rd (sleep if already staggered), longer duration vs. undead.
Illusion You must spend 2 slots to cast spells from the Illusion school.
Riving Strike When dmg creature with Arcane Strike, creature takes =2 saves vs. spells and SLA for 1 rd.
Shift (5 feet, 4/day) (Sp) Short-range teleport
Spell Focus (Conjuration) Spells from one school of magic have +1 to their save DC.
Summoner's Charm (+1 rds) (Su) Increase duration of summoning spells by 1/2 level (permanent at 20).
Teleportation Associated School: Conjuration
Track +1 Add the listed bonus to survival checks made to track.
Trapfinding +1 Gain a bonus to find or disable traps, including magical ones.
Wild Empathy -1 (Ex) Improve the attitude of an animal, as if using Diplomacy.

Hero Lab and the Hero Lab logo are Registered Trademarks of LWD Technology, Inc. Free download at http://www.wolflair.com
Pathfinder® and associated marks and logos are trademarks of Paizo Inc.®, and are used under license.

Primary mode of combat is setting up FreeBooter's bane as soon as possible, then using Arcane/Riving strike or Gentle Rest to debuff as appropriate.

Later, the character may class into Evangelist, Exalted, Sentinel, or a combination of the three...

5/5 *** Venture-Agent, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East

As a note I've run into the occasional GM who's unfamiliar with the creative solutions section, or just through inexperience feels uncomfortable resolving encounters in any way not explicitly mentioned in the text.

These games have felt extremely railroarded but it's a feature of the GM, not the system.

Owner - October Country Comics, LLC.

Paul Jackson wrote:
Fromper wrote:
Jeff Hazuka wrote:
Blackbot wrote:
Sure, not every character get Min-Maxed to hell, but as long as you don't turn up with a Wizard 1/Fighter 1/Cleric 1/Ranger 1 equipped with a dagger and nothing else you should be fine.
Challenge Accepted.
I'm not sure if there's a way to get a viable PC like that. Now, if you were allowed 2 daggers, then you'd be on to something.
I'm pretty sure that you also need a spell component pouch, holy symbol AND loin cloth :-)

Loin cloth optional but be sure you're not playing at the PG table. Although i'd guess a strategic placement of said spell component pouch works just the same.


Fromper wrote:
Jeff Hazuka wrote:
Blackbot wrote:
Sure, not every character get Min-Maxed to hell, but as long as you don't turn up with a Wizard 1/Fighter 1/Cleric 1/Ranger 1 equipped with a dagger and nothing else you should be fine.
Challenge Accepted.
I'm not sure if there's a way to get a viable PC like that. Now, if you were allowed 2 daggers, then you'd be on to something.

"Why did you not list that among our assets?"

5/5

For a sorcerer at 1-3:
Color Spray: Wait a round for the monsters to cluster near the front line then hit 2- 3 at once

Daze: Remember sorcerers can swap spells at 4 and every 2 levels. Take Daze early on and use it each fight.

Bloodline power: Several bloodlines have 1st level powers that are about as good as a 1st level spell at low caster level.

All else fails 2 PP gets you a wand of magic missile. 2-5 reliable damage a round is quite handy at levels 1-3.


That is still too much about general advice not related specifically to the Pathfinder Society Campaign.

To restate the dilemma, most scenarios used by the Pathfinder Society seem to be combat heavy. This may be a GM choice to pick them as I dont know every scenario.

In a player perspective I havent forced any other players to go to sleep while I do so. I do suggest cautious such as not doing the suspicious rituals in "Temple of Empyreal Enlignment". I have outright been told that if I run away from fights I will be banned from playing at the table of at least one GM. I dont know if that counts as a "Toxic group".

A recent scenario chosen is Thornkeep. I havent played it because its combat heavy. So is it possible to avoid all encounters through alternative means? If I have to make and use combat heavy characters like a Barbarian then its railroading both by the GM and by the scenario.

I am sure someone would say platitude like "no risk, no reward" or "you can just remake you character".

5/5 *** Venture-Agent, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East

Note that Thornkeep is not a PFS scenario.It is not designed for PFS play. It is a Pathfinder Module with a very limited supply of conversion notes for pfs play.

5/5 5/55/55/5

ChaosTicket wrote:
I dont know where this went. Its still too much about general advice.

I cannot make my advice more specific because the problem you're trying to articulate is too general.

Quote:
To restate the dilemma, most scenarios used by the Pathfinder Society seem to be combat heavy.

Many of them are, especially in older seasons.

Why is that a problem for a bard or a sorcerer? Grease, glitterdust, and buffing can be great contributions to fights

Quote:
In a player perspective I havent forced any other players to go to sleep while I do so. I have outright been told that if I run away from fights I will be banned from playing at the table of at least one GM.

Really not allowed unless running away is just to screw over the party.

Quote:
A recent scenario chosen is Thornkeep. I havent played it because its combat heavy.

1) Thats a module, not a pfs scenario

2) For first level characters that is a meat grinder of a scenario: instant death on one hit, holy cow WTF were you thinking encounters, and who let this in there? Apparently you're supposed to play it, level up, and come back midway through but PFS mode really won't let you do that. So this is a bad fit for PFS and first level scenarios.

Quote:
So is it possible to avoid all encounters through alternative means?

No. Nor should it be.

You may want to diplomance through the dungeon, but other people around the table probably want to hit something at least once that night.

Quote:
If I have to make and use combat heavy characters like a Barbarian then its railroading both by the GM and by the scenarios.

Where are you getting this idea that bards and sorcerers can't be combat heavy?

4/5

As has been said in many other threads, the most successful characters in PFS are versatile. My most combat heavy character (dwarf ranger with axe, shield, and dwarven boulder helmet) also aids the party with dungeoneering, nature, and survival checks, and is quite stealthy for a front liner. My high knowledge, skill heavy character (1/2 elf empiricist investigator) fires a short bow with studied combat, studied strike, focused shot, and point blank shot to do respectable damage when things turn violent and can be a decent party face when needed. My healing and buffing paladin has a 20 diplomacy modifier, a polearm, and power attack. The idea is to pe prepared to aid the party in a variety of situations. (Though yes, the way the dwarf ranger is most likely to aid a diplomatic encounter is to buy the guy we're trying to influence a beer.)


Because Im making pacifist characters? Sure, lets go with that. Really Im trying to make characters not murder-hobos.

4/5 **** Venture-Lieutenant, Maryland—Hagerstown

My life oracle, Zavita, by no means is a murder hobo. She is usually the face of the party, and would rather talk her way around combat, but that does not mean she can not deal damage. Hell she does not even carry a weapon, but that does not mean she can not aide in combat or unleash decent damage.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 ** Venture-Agent, California—Los Angeles (South Bay)

ChaosTicket wrote:

Because Im making pacifist characters? Sure, lets go with that. Im trying to make characters not murder-hobos.

You could focus on a character who has high diplomacy, bluff, and sense motive skills who can buff the party and has some useful weapons and tactics, as some creatures (undead, demons) are seldom reasonable. Pacifists or peace loving characters can work, and avoiding an encounter can be useful.


ChaosTicket wrote:

Because Im making pacifist characters? Thats the gist of it. Im trying to make characters not murder-hobos.

You know that you are playing a game where your character is routinely threatened with death by hostile sophonts, right? Why on earth Golarion did you decide that the right character for you is a pacifist with a superiority complex?

Have you considered retiring your (hypothetical?) pacifist and playing a character who isn't completely ill equipped to deal with the realities of adventuring? Because like it or not, some problems are only going to be solvable with the application of deadly force, and your comrades in arms are depending on you pulling your weight.


Hmm, a few months ago I was a rollplayer, now Im trying to roleplay and people are actually trying to talk me out of it. I would laugh at the irony, but its just frustrating.

1/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ChaosTicket wrote:

Because Im making pacifist characters? Sure, lets go with that. Really Im trying to make characters not murder-hobos.

So, in short you want to force entire tables to roleplay the way you prefer? Have you considered that the other players present might not like the idea of a night at the table with no fights?

Every class is quite capable of contributing. If you want to play a sorcerer or a bad play one. Just figure out how your character will contribute during each common type of scene. I just finished Eyes of the Ten, the retirement arc, with a multiclassed sorcerer who probably did more damage than any other PC in the party.

I'll be blunt, your complaints seem to be more about PFS not conforming to your play preference than about PFS scenarios being combat heavy or railroading players into certain classes. The majority of players do want combat in each scenario therefore there will be combats in each scenario.

5/5 5/55/55/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.
ChaosTicket wrote:
Hmm, a few months ago I was a rollplayer, now Im trying to roleplay and people are actually trying to talk me out of it. I would laugh at the irony, but its just frustrating.

A sorcerer specializing in Merciful spell, or any martial with golden lions stayed blade can cut down on the murderhoboing a fair bit.

I have a druid that can cuddle half the dungeon into submission. You can definitely make characters like that that are useful to the party when their schtick isn't working, but you have to realize that it won't always work. You also have to remember that there are other people at the table too and they're going to want to do THEIR thing.

Quote:
Hmm, a few months ago I was a rollplayer, now Im trying to roleplay and people are actually trying to talk me out of it. I would laugh at the irony, but its just frustrating.

You seem to be trying to go whole hog one or the other and that never works. Play them off of each other, integrate the mechanics and personality together.


Im just going to bring up the hypocrisy right there. So I should have to be like everyone else, but they dont have to compromise?

Where is the roleplaying?

Sovereign Court 3/5 **

Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Society Subscriber
ChaosTicket wrote:
Hmm, a few months ago I was a rollplayer, now Im trying to roleplay and people are actually trying to talk me out of it. I would laugh at the irony, but its just frustrating.

It doesn't sound like you are trying to roleplay. Maybe you should elaborate. Why would someone averse to danger or self-consciously useless in a fight join the Pathfinder Society? (A group notorious for getting themselves into sticky situations). What part of their background drives them to be so focused on avoiding conflict that they do not prepare themselves for the inevitable failure of negotiations?

Edited to add:

Quote:
Im just going to bring up the hypocrisy right there. So I should have to be like everyone else, but they dont have to compromise

Others are much more likely to compromise with you if you offer to compromise first.

Grand Lodge 4/5 *** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento

My wife's scroll scoundrel regularly hits high 30s on diplomacy, 40s if anyone bothers to aid another. She quite often talks the party through all the encounters but the final, meaning every one reaches the final encounter at full health, fully buffed, with full resources, and usually with advanced intelligence on what the bad guy can do. She has slowly gotten more useful in combat, but honestly, if all she did was sit back and file her fingernails in combat, she still would have saved the party more than her fair share of damage.

5/5 5/55/55/5

ChaosTicket wrote:
Im just going to bring up the hypocrisy right there. So I should have to be like everyone else, but they dont have to compromise?

They do. they should probably let you try your schtick with some of the more talky encounters.

Some.

Quote:
Where is the roleplaying?

Depends on the character. For a follower of Gorum running right into GLORIOUS BATTLE IS role playing. The swashbuckler may make cutting remarks with their tongue as well as their blade. One wizard may methodically debuff enemies while another buffs the party or another leaves craters in the battlefield. Roleplay and combat aren't mutually exclusive.

If you're looking for the more talky scenarios, you're looking for the newer ones mainly. Bid for alabastrine was almost all talking (and great fun)

Grand Lodge 4/5 *** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento

No one is saying you have to be like anyone else. You came in here saying "the scenario is forcing me to play in a very specific way, not like myself."

So we explained all the many different ways you can play.

Now you are saying "All the many different ways you are describing aren't what I want, so you are hypocrites who are forcing me to change."


Jared Thaler wrote:

No one is saying you have to be like anyone else. You came in here saying "the scenario is forcing me to play in a very specific way, not like myself."

So we explained all the many different ways you can play.

Now you are saying "All the many different ways you are describing aren't what I want, so you are hypocrites who are forcing me to change."

And that is being contradicted. I keep asking if combat heavy games can actually be avoided(ingame) so all enemies are avoided. Some people say yes.

Half the responses here are to ACCEPT the railroading and makes warrior characters to fit the scenario. I actually did that early on when I started the campaign but I got tired of using classes that fit the campaign, not myself. Later on I started thinking about all the experiences I had and made characters based on that. they came out cookies-cutter characters with a Skald, Magus, Hunter, Inquisitor, Warpriest are all very similar.

This has lead me to believe that the Hybrid classes are actually made to played in the Pathfinfder Society campaign. How many classes now have 15 BAB, light-medium armor,, simple-martial weapons, 4-6 skill points and some special features.

Just where are the options? Can i talk my way out of fighting the Boss or how about just sneaking past him/her/it? I just see fight after fight. Sometimes I see low combat scenarios and GASP those are actually fun as you can try different methods to complete objectives.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ChaosTicket wrote:

And that is being contradicted. I keep asking if combat heavy games can actually be avoided(ingame) so all enemies are avoided. Some people say yes.

Half the responses here are to ACCEPT the railroading and makes warrior characters to fit the scenario.
...
Just where are the options? Can i talk my way out of fighting the Boss or how about just sneaking past him/her/it?

You're getting (what seem to be) contradictory answers because there is no clear cut yes or no answer.

Some scenarios have alternate ways of dealing with encounters, some don't. Full stop.

I can think of plenty of encounters where you absolutely need to talk your way through with diplomacy, and can't fight/sneak by without failing the mission. I can also think of encounters where you need to fight the enemies, and have no inbuilt way to bypass it.

That's the nature of PFS. It's a middle of the road campaign, designed for middle of the road players. There's some talking to appeal to the diplomancer crowd, some fighting to appeal to the combat crowd, and some skills to appeal to the skill monkey crowd. No single approach is meant to be viable one-hundred percent of the time, which means, ultimately, you're best off with a little of everything.

If you never want to talk, then PFS isn't for you.
If you never want to fight, then PFS isn't for you.
If you never want to problem solve, then PFS isn't for you.

Scarab Sages 2/5

ChaosTicket wrote:

Because Im making pacifist characters? Sure, lets go with that. Really Im trying to make characters not murder-hobos.

Except combat-capable =/= murder hobo. nor does combat-capable mean combat heavy, combat focused, or must be a two handed raging barbarian.

Murder-hobo is a term that describes a subset of adventuring that you often come across, esp in organized play or old hack and slash style games, where the character is designed to murder, loot, and move on. In season 0-1 the scinarios were poorly designed and almost expected this. But you dont have to go full pacifist to avoid murder-hobo.

In fact, due to the fact that scorcerors and social characters are charisma-based and social skills aren't, generally, reduced by combat capability choices, you can broadly pick up skills to try diplomance your way through an encounter, and if you fail, still have skills that allow you to contribute.

You started out saying house rules (like level caps) were railroading you, but your complaints failed to isolate problems that were caused by the houserules. The only houserule-based problem ive read from you that actually is caused by the houserule and not your own hangups is about loot. and i fail to see how getting a pile of gold based on your results at the end of the adventure that you can spend on anything you want (barring Fame limitations) railroads your choices.

You started off complaining about how you couldnt get good combat options as a caster. Now you complain that you have to use combat options as a caster.

We aren't giving you PFS specific answers, because there arent any houserules to manipulate to generate better characters, and you haven't posed PFS specific questions. Any advice to improve your ability to contribute in a PFS game also improves your characters in most home games. What do you need, us to produce a stat array for you?
I am going to ask again - What Pathfinder house rule (in the OP you claimed your problems were with the houserules) prevents a Bard or Scorcerer from being playable? Not scenario/module design choices (a focus on combat in near universal in non pfs modules as well), not gm action (the problem there is the gm not any house rule), what pfs house rule? We are trying to help, but your arguements seem to be more about local culture and preconcieved notions about "winning" than anything that arises specificly from PFS

Ive built diplomatic, talk first characters out of those classes and still be combat capable through a PFS scinario. I mean if you sacrifice combat options for more diplomatic power, ueah it hurts you in combat. but not hyperspecializing in diplomacy still produces good results.

Heres my PFS-specific advice for you. It comes from that railroady buy whatever you want loot style. Plan. you know, that thing you supposedly cant do because you only have 12 levels? You have a limited, non replensishable amount of gold over that time. figure out, in broad terms what you are going to buy and when. remember to include a fund for consumables! Unlike a traditional home game you can't rely on/arent at the mercy of the GMs gear choices for you. And so you can benefit from knowing what you have availible. synergize your gear and ability selection to maximize your character goals. Its rare you have such free reign to do this.

Of course this doesnt help at level 1. at level one play the previously reccomended scenarios. Encourage your local organizers to run the repeatable, lower risk scenarios regularly, it helps get players into the game and the scociety.

Oh, and about being banned from one gms tale for running away? It depends on the specifics, but if you had a good reason to run away you might want to report the gm to the session organizer or the VL/VC of the area. In general absolutely banning someone from play for such a minor matter is gravely looked down upon by the campaign.

5/5 5/55/55/5

ChaosTicket wrote:


And that is being contradicted. I keep asking if combat heavy games can actually be avoided(ingame) so all enemies are avoided. Some people say yes.

How would avoiding ALL of the fights be rewarding for the other people at the table?

Quote:
Half the responses here are to ACCEPT the railroading and makes warrior characters to fit the scenario.

You keep equating fighting with just the martial classes. It doesnt' work like that, casters are great at fighting too.

Quote:
Just where are the options? Can i talk my way out of fighting the Boss

Generally no. Thats a rather anticlimactic and unsatisfying end for most people. There are a few where you can do this though.

Quote:

or how about just sneaking past him/her/it? I just see fight after fight. Sometimes I see low combat scenarios and GASP those are actually fun as you can try different methods to complete objectives.

Different people have different ideas of fun.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5 **

2 people marked this as a favorite.
ChaosTicket wrote:
Hmm, a few months ago I was a rollplayer, now Im trying to roleplay and people are actually trying to talk me out of it. I would laugh at the irony, but its just frustrating.

You are being very unclear as to what the problem is.

One can definitely create effective characters in PFS who try to defuse hostile encounters and who often succeed. That is part of what they bring to the table and is generally valued by most players

What you can NOT do (nor should you be able to) is to play a character who can defuse ALL hostile encounters. The vast majority of scenarios are set up so at least some of the combats are essentially unavoidable. This is a GOOD thing as a lot of players WANT to have combat.

Creating a character who refuses to participate in a combat for <reasons> is a bad idea in PFS. That means that there are significant parts of the game where you aren't contributing. In some relatively rare scenarios/modules you'll be doing next to nothing the entire scenario

As to roleplay, that is largely orthogonal to what your character does. Oh, the talky diplomat gets to speak in character more often but all players get to roleplay if they want to.

1/5

ChaosTicket wrote:

Half the responses here are to ACCEPT the railroading and makes warrior characters to fit the scenario. I actually did that early on when I started the campaign but I got tired of using classes that fit the campaign, not myself. Later on I started thinking about all the experiences I had and made characters based on that. they came out cookies-cutter characters with a Skald, Magus, Hunter, Inquisitor, Warpriest are all very similar.

Pick any legal class that you believe is not viable for PFS and there will be an effective build posted right here. Probably any legal archetype as well.

1/5 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
ChaosTicket wrote:
Jared Thaler wrote:

No one is saying you have to be like anyone else. You came in here saying "the scenario is forcing me to play in a very specific way, not like myself."

So we explained all the many different ways you can play.

Now you are saying "All the many different ways you are describing aren't what I want, so you are hypocrites who are forcing me to change."

And that is being contradicted. I keep asking if combat heavy games can actually be avoided(ingame) so all enemies are avoided. Some people say yes.

Half the responses here are to ACCEPT the railroading and makes warrior characters to fit the scenario. I actually did that early on when I started the campaign but I got tired of using classes that fit the campaign, not myself. Later on I started thinking about all the experiences I had and made characters based on that. they came out cookies-cutter characters with a Skald, Magus, Hunter, Inquisitor, Warpriest are all very similar.

This has lead me to believe that the Hybrid classes are actually made to played in the Pathfinfder Society campaign. How many classes now have 15 BAB, light-medium armor,, simple-martial weapons, 4-6 skill points and some special features.

Just where are the options? Can i talk my way out of fighting the Boss or how about just sneaking past him/her/it? I just see fight after fight. Sometimes I see low combat scenarios and GASP those are actually fun as you can try different methods to complete objectives.

Try out Play By Post.

Try out the various forms of online play, if you can.

It sounds like there is some dissonance with one's 'local group', so perhaps in the efforts of greater roleplay harmony, one may find what one seeks in such directions?

The options are always there.

It just requires a GM that is willing to explore them (within the time constraints of a given scenario slot) and players that wish to explore them as well.

There is a particular scenario that has a reputation for somewhat lethal tactics and approaches, for example, and my bard (with the cooperation and much-needed assistance of the rest of the party) managed to change the entire context and flavor of the scenario by doing the seemingly unthinkable.

Courtesy, dignity, respect are equally as important as explore, report, and cooperate.

If everyone holds to these and one should never need fear a truly rotten session in PFS play.

Scarab Sages 2/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ChaosTicket wrote:

Half the responses here are to ACCEPT the railroading and makes warrior characters to fit the scenario. I actually did that early on when I started the campaign but I got tired of using classes that fit the campaign, not myself. Later on I started thinking about all the experiences I had and made characters based on that. they came out cookies-cutter characters with a Skald, Magus, Hunter, Inquisitor, Warpriest are all very similar.

Just where are the options? Can i talk my way out of fighting the Boss or how about just sneaking past him/her/it? I just see fight after fight. Sometimes I see low combat scenarios and GASP those are actually fun as you can try different methods to complete objectives.

You are engagin in a lot of false dichoitmy here. WHat im hearing from you is "If I have any kind of warrior capabiltiy I have absolutely abandoned any desire not to fight" You are setting up a huge strawman in what we are saying.

You are lambasting us for not letting you roleplay, then tell me that a skald, magus and inquisitor are 'very similar' characters. WHen I play them they are different. Hell I played a Dwarf monk in my last game, and I am now playing a Dwarf Brawler. Both focus on unarmed strikes, they have reasonably similar health and BAB, but they are two absolutely different characters. THe monk was focused on defnese and protecting others. He didn't have the best damage output in combat, far from it, but he kept others from getting hurt. And he he had some skill in diplomacy, which came in handy a number of times. He was a leader. THe brawler? Sneak attack precision headbuts. Hes civil, but piss him off and he will headbutt you into the ground. Sickeningly optimistic but occationally pragmatic. Can't talk his way out of a paperbag. Not a good leader. Has zero fear, and gives zero f+&!s.

I guess what im trying to say if you can't make a sword mage, a divinely inspired cop driven to do what ever it takes and damn the rules, and a barbarian from the frozen wastes whose song induces a massive hard on for fighting in her allies feel like different characters, its not PFS or Pathfinder that are the problem.

Sovereign Court 5/5

There is some formulaic regularity to PFS scenarios, but it's inevitable as they all have to meet an identical time block.

There are 6 or 7 encounters per scenario, in some mix of combat, puzzle/trap, and social roleplay encounters. There's always a mix of the three... although some are indeed weighted more on one category. It's true that there are more combat-heavy scenarios than social encounter-heavy scenarios... but still even the combat heavy scenarios always have at least one or two non-combat encounters.

OTOH you actually can complete some scenarios without any combat at all. And some of those are intentionally that way...

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5 **

ChaosTicket wrote:


And that is being contradicted. I keep asking if combat heavy games can actually be avoided(ingame) so all enemies are avoided. Some people say yes.

In almost all scenarios not all combat can be avoided but some can. In a very small number of scenarios almost no combat can be avoided.

In PFS, building a character who can at least contribute to combat is strongly encouraged.

Quote:


Half the responses here are to ACCEPT the railroading and makes warrior characters to fit the scenario. I actually did that early on when I started the campaign but I got tired of using classes that fit the campaign, not myself. Later on I started thinking about all the experiences I had and made characters based on that. they came out cookies-cutter characters with a Skald, Magus, Hunter, Inquisitor, Warpriest are all very similar.

No, the advice has been to build a character who can contribute to combat. That contribution can come in many forms and most definitely is NOT restricted to dealing damage (which I'm guessing is what you mean by "warrior character"

Quote:


This has lead me to believe that the Hybrid classes are actually made to played in the Pathfinfder Society campaign. How many classes now have 15 BAB, light-medium armor,, simple-martial weapons, 4-6 skill points and some special features.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. There has been an increase in flexible characters, yes. Partly because the "do one thing" classes were already there, partly because many people WANT that flexibility. How is choice a bad thing?

Quote:


Just where are the options? Can i talk my way out of fighting the Boss or how about just sneaking past him/her/it? I just see fight after fight. Sometimes I see low combat scenarios and GASP those are actually fun as you can try different methods to complete objectives.

Different people have different ideas of fun. The game isn't about pleasing one player.

But as somebody who loves to play talky skill monkey characters you can certainly build one, still contribute to combat, AND have a good time most of the time.

Scarab Sages 5/5 5/55/55/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Oozes can be a social encounter...

Scarab Sages 2/5

ChaosTicket wrote:

Just where are the options? Can i talk my way out of fighting the Boss or how about just sneaking past him/her/it? I just see fight after fight. Sometimes I see low combat scenarios and GASP those are actually fun as you can try different methods to complete objectives.

I ran one group through a particular scenario whose name i forgot. Its was a rescue mission.

Spoiler:
the expected solution is to rally the town, storm the place, and fight the town's leader who imprisoned the pathfinders you were sent to look for. But it states that the party could instead negotiate for their release, even though it doesnt clarify how certain encouters go if they try that route. the party decided to try negotiation, and succeeded at negotiating away the final encounter, and left town with i think no combat. they were done in like an hour. Due to other factors in the scenario they couldnt go back and overthrow her like they wanted to, and every one got disappointed that so little happened.

Cause driving an hour to play in a one hour scenario is fun, right?

I mean, they had somefun. But diplomacy is a primarily one person solution. Not everyone got to contribute. And the players were generally dissatisfied with the result.

1/5 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
burkoJames wrote:
ChaosTicket wrote:

Just where are the options? Can i talk my way out of fighting the Boss or how about just sneaking past him/her/it? I just see fight after fight. Sometimes I see low combat scenarios and GASP those are actually fun as you can try different methods to complete objectives.

I ran one group through a particular scenario whose name i forgot. Its was a rescue mission.

** spoiler omitted **

Cause driving an hour to play in a one hour scenario is fun, right?

I mean, they had somefun. But diplomacy is a primarily one person solution. Not everyone got to contribute. And the players were generally dissatisfied with the result.

Ah, that one!

We went the 'diplomatic' route with the 'big stick' on 'standby'.

And then one of the folks in our party (the designated a-hole for the negotiation, by design in advance) took a perfect opportunity during a loophole in the negotiations to really rip up the person in charge socially and then things got... interestingly fun.

Paizo Employee 4/5 Pathfinder Society Lead Developer

16 people marked this as a favorite.

Pathfinder Society scenarios—really almost all Pathfinder adventures—aim to serve a wide variety of characters and play styles. One way we do this is by presenting flexibilty in encounters such that several approaches might work. What is outwardly a combat might also be written with a likely social bypass condition, or what might be a social obstacle could have a viable yet violent resolution for which the adventure provides statistics that it hopes the GM doesn't need (but sure appreciates having). Even when it's not written in, a GM is empowered in the organized play program to make fair rulings on the fly to reward creative ideas, so sometimes even a "mandatory" combat encounter might be one you can trick your way past. I have some delightful stories from Pathfinder Society scenarios that assumed combat but turned into creative solution territory because of what my diplomat bard (who incidentally also contributes to combat in an almost 100% nonviolent way) did in turning NPCs against one another.

Regarding encounter flexibility:
If you'll excuse a moment of my patting myself on the back for perceived victories, I feel that enhancing adventures' flexibilty in accommodating different strategies—especially trickery, diplomacy, and even a bit of PCs being able to exploit backdoors—is one of the more enjoyable improvements that I've been able to bring to Pathfinder Society scenarios. Tabletop RPGs are so delightful to me because players can devise weird solutions.

The second (and even more common) approach involves presenting a variety of encounters, such as a handful of combats, a trap/haunt or two, some social challenges, and maybe a puzzle or overland exploration obstacle. There is no formula for exactly how many of each we incorporate, much less dictate to the author. Instead, the idea is that by providing a well-balanced diet of challenges, every character will have a chance to shine. When combat breaks out, everyone gets to participate, though some characters (and players) are going to be especially excited because that's either what their character is best at doing or because that's what the player really craves in that moment—after a tough day at work, letting off some steam with a critical hit or two leveled against some goblins can be sweet and healthy stress relief. When a puzzle crops up or an obstacle blocks the way, some especially creative thinkers might lean forward and dig in because they long for that five minutes in which they pull out just the right tool, devise the perfect strategy to shift a boulder, or show off that they have the ideal spell to turn a dire challenge into a mere footnote. And then there are social scenes where the talkative and stylish get to strut their stuff. Even then, the less diplomatic get to participate by coming up with arguments, playing an asocial (yet delightful) foil to the negotiators, or any number of other fun ways to make the most of a scene that doesn't play heavily to their PCs' strengths.

Just as we take turns during the combat simulation aspect of Pathfinder, we must endeavor also to take turns in sharing the spotlight. Allison, Bob, Calvin, and Dorothy should all get roughly equal amounts of time in the spotlight during an ideal game, and while some scenarios might be more combat heavy and others super social, the players can all rest easy in knowing that they'll get their chance to shine—sometimes even by making an opportunity to let someone shine even if the adventure wasn't going to (e.g. players letting a diplomat take a crack at talking down a villain, even though it's a longshot; or the team defaulting to combat because they want to see what the barbarian PC can do when she gets to crack some skulls together). A good GM watches for which players are dominating the table—either because that scneario favors their skill set or because those players are just more assertive—and reaches out to the others to ensure they, too, get a fair share of the spotlight. I'd hazard that one sign of a great player is that they watch for the same thing and help to build each other up and have a great time at the table.

Remember that diplomat bard I mentioned? I love him dearly as a character, and I love having my chance to talk down an encounter per scenario. Once I've gotten my social solution fix, though, I sit back and make sure other players get to call the shots because it's important that they share in the agency of how we succeed as a group. If they want to call on the bard's monstrous skill modifiers again, great, but that's a group decision shaped by the adventure's context (there might not even be a great place to use social skills in the adventure, but I can still have a blast roleplaying even when not throwing dice to quantify the fun things that bard says).

Basically, I know that left to my own devices, I can dominate a table, so I set some soft guidelines for myself because I know that everyone will have more fun that way.

So here are my takeaways.

  • Scenarios aren't designed so that everyone can always use the same tactic every time, though a strong tactic will often be applicable in a meaningful way.
  • Even when your prefered tactic doesn't work, that's a time for the rest of the group to shine.
  • Letting other members of the group shine is a blessing because those players are there for the same reason you are: to have fun.
  • Their brand of fun (hitting things) might differ from your way (talking things down), but by acknowledging and supporting their doing things their way some of the time, they are going to respect you and support you more when you want to do things your way.
  • By sharing the spotlight, you not only ensure everyone can have fun; you also tell a richer story that incorporates everyone's contributions. By contrast, playing a cooperative multiplayer game as though it is single player game often leads to being the only player.

    There is no one unifying answer to the balance between roleplaying and "rollplaying," which is why you are receiving a range of answers that all orbit around the concepts I wrote above. For all the diversity you see here—or hypocrisy as you might prefer to call it—these members of our community are fun folks to have at a table, and they're good at sharing that spotlight and making a great experience for everyone even when each of their characters wants to approach a challenge in a different way. That's the diversity that makes the community stronger and our discussions more productive.

    I hope you have a delightful time at your next hundred games of organized play, and I hope to that you can share that fun with others in your community.

  • Dark Archive 5/5

    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Flutter wrote:
    Oozes can be a social encounter...

    I'm especially fond of Deathtrap Oozes. So cuddly.


    There is a major difference between having multiple ways to get past every challenge and having one way on different challenges but having multiple people to do so.

    Every play Video Game RPGs? Fallout 1 and 2 has 3 general specialties in combat, stealth, and diplomacy. You could focus on any one. Dont want to fight the Final Boss? Sneak in and set the base to self-destruct. Or use Diplomacy to make a character do so for you, or even even talk the Final Boss into killing itself. Ever hear of Talking the Monster to Death trope?

    Its additionally frustrating in that some of the players tell me how they used outside-the-box solutions, but those are not available in Scenarios and/or the Pathfinder Society Campaign.

    So character creation is determined by either making a specialist that performs poorly in PFS or a generalist that would perform poorly in anything else. I can think of PFS builds that wouldnt survive elsewhere, and vice-versa.

    The level limitations enforce that. Whats the point of building a skill-based character if you dont roll skill checks, or what about designing a Cleric that can summon Angels but never reaches that point in PFS.

    I have more enjoyment in imagining situations I Could get into that what I am actually allowed within limitations. a Non-fantastic Fantasy game? I think that is the most Fatal Flaw you can have.

    Silver Crusade 1/5

    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    This thread is getting frustrating to a point where I'm not sure if there is trolling going on or an NSA scheme to flush out mind readers.

    ChaosTicket, you visit the thread from time to time, throw in a few lines with no context, people write whole essays and ask questions for you to gain some context only for you to completly ignore the questions and throw in another anecdote without context.

    ChaosTicket wrote:
    I have outright been told that if I run away from fights I will be banned from playing at the table of at least one GM. I dont know if that counts as a "Toxic group".

    No context given at all. Was it a losing fight? Did you just not want to fight? Did you feel like the fight was unneccessary? Did the other players force a fight that could've been avoided?

    No context given. Maybe they were toxic, maybe you were, maybe one party just misunderstood the other one.

    ChaosTicket wrote:
    Im just going to bring up the hypocrisy right there. So I should have to be like everyone else, but they dont have to compromise?

    Compromise on what? You are like a customer calling corporate, complaining that you "just feel like I shouldn't have to wear red, that's all" without giving anything for the agent to go by on what caused that idea.

    You gave us one example of a scenario you played recently after multiple people asked you what kind of scenarios you played. They wanted to identify whether the problem was with the chosen scenarios, the GM, the lodge or whatever. You gave one. Which wasn't even a PFS module, further making clear that the problem isn't actually a PFS specific problem.

    Hell, you repeatedly stated that the answers were too general. Guess what - your problem is too general. Every Pathfinder module, AP, scenario or whatever I've seen features combat from time to time. Almost every role playing game I ever played featured unavoidable combat at one point or another. Going into a role playing game which is about adventuring, killing monsters, defeating badguys and so expecting not having to fight is something you might be able to find a group for, but I know not a single group in my personal circle of friends that would do that. Sometimes the evil necromancer just have to meet a sword face first.

    Is there more unavoidable combat in PFS than in a "normal" Pathfinder game? Maybe, yes. (Though this could also steam from the fact that most "combat light" sections of "normal" Pathfinder consist of the party figuring out where they have to go. Once they are there combat density gets thicker...)

    Do you have to pick a martial class to be "useful" in combat? No, and without you telling us why you think that our advice will have to be "too general" for you.

    And again, I have screwed up more missions by not paying attention and not roleplaying than by losing a fight.

    EDIT: Please not I wrote this before ChaosTicket posted his last answer. Reading it and revising the post as we speak. ;)

    5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Tampere

    I'm honestly lost on what your point is by now. You want to be able to play 17th-level characters? You want to be able to use out-of-the-box solutions, the use of which is largely up to GM fiat and not the campaign itself? You want to be able to accomplish talking a BBEG into killing itself, a feat that doesn't reasonably seem possible using any skill or feat in the game (and also kind of strikes me as a morally dubious act, but that might just be me)?

    Fallout 1/2/3 offers those options because they're programmed into the game. If you come up with a way to solve things that isn't coded into the game, it's not going to be possible to resolve, because the game has no way of understanding what you're trying to do. Pathfinder RPG has its own "coding", PFS has its own "coding", and every GM has their own "coding". Sure, humans are way more flexible than computers in interpreting situations the system in use doesn't account for, but there's only so much you can do, especially in the context of organized play where there's supposed to be a level playing field for all participants.

    3/5 *** Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro

    ChaosTicket wrote:

    There is a major difference between having multiple ways to get past every challenge and having one way on different challenges but having multiple people to do so.

    Every play Video Game RPGs? Fallout 1 and 2 has 3 general specialties in combat, stealth, and diplomacy. You could focus on any one. Dont want to fight the Final Boss? Sneak in and set the base to self-destruct. Or use Diplomacy to make a character do so for you, or even even talk the Final Boss into killing itself. Ever hear of Talking the Monster to Death trope?

    Fallout 3 isn't helping your case. The game which railroaded you into one choice at the end even though from a storyline perspective you could do it without dying.

    51 to 100 of 164 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Scenarios cause Gameplay and class railroading? All Messageboards