How are you playing the game "wrong"?

[PossibleCabbage]

Scàthach Ulster wrote:

Dropping a zombie with a headshot relies on those zombies being created via a disease (Zombie Survival Guide Zombies) and not magic (Most tabletop zombies).

I do allow crits against vampires with Vorpal weapons and wooden piercing weapons. This is the exception and not the rule.

But if you shatter the pelvis of the animate skeleton with your mace, it's much less threatening now.

Critical hits on things like undead and constructs are more about "structural weak points" than "vital organs."

[Vidmaster7]

Yeah I think they changed it to make the rogues sneak attack work better. I would say that maybe only certain undead should be immune to crits. This is kind of off-topic however. Maybe start another thread?

[Bjørn Røyrvik]

Bob_Loblaw wrote:

Some of the house rules are considered to be playing wrong. Special Critical Hits and Fumbles are a good example. Not rolling for social encounters is another.

These are entirely different things from what I was talking about. Mere mechanics and choice of whether to use dice or not is not the same as more fundamental issues like the ones I mentioned.

[Terquem]

See, this only comes up in threads that are created wrong

[Odraude]

Well if we are just focusing on what's considered wrong, then for me, I run without balancing encounters. I do combat encounters that make a bit more sense rather than keeping to what is balanced. So if you charge recklessly into a castle of 40 goblins, I'm not going to split them up piecemeal with CR appropriate groups of goblins in each room. They will fight with whatever advantage they get. CR is simply a gauge to me, and I feel free to ignore it when it makes sense.

That said, this is mitigated by a number of factors. I rarely have creatures that fight to the death. Most will run away or surrender and plea for mercy when things look bad for them. I also through a variety of encounters at the players. Not every combat is a fight for survival. I will sometimes put combat that is easy, with lots of minions that the players can mow through. Because that's fun, and having the same non-stop battle to the death every combat gets to be old after awhile.

But most importantly, I also communicate these things to my players. They will know that a fight isn't going their way, or that a creature is simply too strong for them. And I also tell them upfront, before the game even starts, all of this. And I allow for weird and cool player ideas for defeating an obstacle beyond combat and rolls. So in the end, while my encounters can seem more lethal, they really aren't once players start doing wild and risky maneuvers to overcome problems.

And sometimes I just through easy encounters because it really can be fun to just have a mindless win.

[Calybos1]

Our group rerolls initiative

Every
Single
Round!

[TriOmegaZero]

I played in a game like that. By the end, I was just delaying to the end of the round, as taking two full attacks between turns was just too much.

[Odraude]

Calybos1 wrote:

Our group rerolls initiative

Every
Single
Round!

I ran ACKS which does that. While it certainly makes battles much more chaotic, it also kind of slows things down a bit, since we have to roll after each round. Though since the game is simpler, it's not too bad. I probably wouldn't do that in Pathfinder.

I've actually considered doing 'popcorn' initiative, where the players choose who is next. It worked out pretty well in Marvel Heroic, though I suppose the main issue would be spells that last till the end of a player's round being too short, or metagaming to make it too long.

[Calybos1]

It's basically a leftover from playing other games, but the rationale is that a higher initiative bonus means you should go first "more often" than the slower ones. Whereas a single roll applying to the entire combat just establishes an endless loop.

I agree that it slows things down... which is, ironically, my group's chief complaint about Pathfinder combat!

[Bjørn Røyrvik]

Calybos1 wrote:

Our group rerolls initiative

Every
Single
Round!

Welcome to 2e. At least the version of the rules we chose to use.

[kyrt-ryder]

Quadratic, mythological 'anime' warriors.

[stormcrow27]

I don't use soft cover rules for PCs. I don't use point buy. I allow monster classes and races in various forms. I like guns. I like mechs with guns against and used by PCs. I also use tactics, which makes players angry.

[GM DarkLightHitomi]

I aspire to Tucker's Kobalds level of deviousness for all intelligent foes.

I also use a wide selection of CRs, lots of weaker ones, but still with a variety even including those well above the party's level.

Oh wait, that is only wrong in the mmo era.
:)

[Grognardy Dangerfield]

You tell em darklighthitomi; you tell em!

[dysartes]

Vidmaster7 wrote:

Yeah I think they changed it to make the rogues sneak attack work better. I would say that maybe only certain undead should be immune to crits. This is kind of off-topic however. Maybe start another thread?

Indeed - having played through the first module of The Witchfire Trilogy under 3.5 rules, not being able to use Sneak Attack as a Rogue on Undead is crippling if you intend to contribute much in combat.

[Ikos]

We've been PF off-roading for a number of years now. With a substantial number of people at the table (7-8 players), these have been successful. Understandably though, they will not be everyone's cup o' tea. The inspiration for most of their origins should be fairly obvious.

-Passive perception/ sense motive
-Each PC gets no less than 4 skill points/ level
-Combat maneuvers do not provoke
-Subdual coup de grace
-Moving invisibly through threatened/occupied squares:

Situation--------------------------------Stealth vs. Perception
Move through a threatened area---------Opponent’s Perception check
Move through an enemy’s space------------5 + Opponent’s Perception check

1 This DC is used to avoid an attack of opportunity due to movement.
This penalty increases by +2 for each additional opponent avoided in one round.
2 Enemies who have already noticed the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check gain +5 to their Perception checks for the purposes of moving through squares they occupy
Object interaction

-Tactical Mobility: When a character declares a full attack with a melee or ranged weapon, she can also move before and after attacking, up to a maximum of her movement speed. For every 5 feet she moves before an attack, she takes a -1 cumulative penalty for the purposes of determining attack rolls beyond the first. A PC can attempt an Acrobatics check to negate this penalty. The DC of this check is 5 per every 5 foot moved. Movement in this manner still provokes.

-Maintaining a Spell: Spells with durations measured in "rounds/ level" require swift actions to maintain beyond the first round of casting. The caster must use a swift action at the beginning of the round that the caster maintains these spell. No concentration check is required to maintain this type of spell. No more than one spell with a duration of "rounds/ level" can be maintained by a caster in this fashion. While by no means an exhaustive list, the following commonly used spells fall into this category: Black Tentacles, Blessing of Fervor, Blink, Confusion, Displacement, Flaming Sphere, Glitterdust, Haste, Hideous Laughter, Hold Person, Spiritual Weapon, Stinking Cloud, and Summon Monster I-IX

[quibblemuch]

Ikos--those all seem like great ways to streamline a large table! Thanks for sharing!

[Dire Elf]

The GM of our Star Wars campaign (Green Ronin - Saga Edition) has decided to omit Attacks of Opportunity from his game. I find that I don't miss them at all.