|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The classic example is when the player openly breaks the law. The GM is allowed to have the character be arrested (by fiat or by dice rolling).
Leaving ones body unprotected in the wilderness seems to me to fall into the same category.
Expect table variation, naturally.
|
Expect table variation, naturally.The classic example is when the player openly breaks the law. The GM is allowed to have the character be arrested (by fiat or by dice rolling).
Leaving ones body unprotected in the wilderness seems to me to fall into the same category.
Certainly that. Circumstances always help dictate choices. I like to think I'm a better person than to allow my personal feelings towards a player inform how I would make a ruling in game. But I'd be lying if I didn't have retaliatory thoughts when players are really testing my patience. I'm glad I haven't acted on such thoughts to date.
|
Except by pulling a direct quote from the person in question, you did actually make his identity public. It took me maybe five seconds to plug some keywords from his post into a search and come up with his post. Please be checking yourself.
Except you still don't know who he is by real name or character name, and even if he posts, he's not a even a rare PFS section poster. So there's that. And there's the fact that you chose to go looking for personally identifying information; I did not hand it to you. There's that too. So before you complain about my actions trying to educate, you might also want to look in the mirror. I didn't hold a gun to your head and say, "what's his name!"
I get why some felt that the information was removed, but in this particular case I am in full disagreement. Players should see what happens when this kind of situation arises. They should know the actions one can take to "figure out the puzzle" behind this kind of issue. They should feel empowered to say and do something rather than feel that this all "goes on behind closed doors." But I also believe in transparency vs. trying to make it all quiet. I do not appreciate being told to be quiet about this.
So I'm out. Discuss to you heart's content or don't, but no, I'd rather this thread stand as an example of what you can do to stop a player that's ruining game days for others with a full set of information behind it.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Players should see what happens when this kind of situation arises. They should know the actions one can take to "figure out the puzzle" behind this kind of issue. They should feel empowered to say and do something rather than feel that this all "goes on behind closed doors." But I also believe in transparency vs. trying to make it all quiet. I do not appreciate being told to be quiet about this.
...
You're not being told you keep quiet. You're being told not to post personal information, which could lead to the player in-question being harassed. People can still see the process that's gone on, and how this issue has progressed. Heck, this thread is going to be my go-to reference next time one of my GMs asks how to deal with a problematic player.
Dealing with an issue and educating other GMs is a noble goal, and exactly what should be going on.
Public shaming is not.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dealing with an issue and educating other GMs is a noble goal, and exactly what should be going on.
Public shaming is not.
In fairness, local people can probably identify the culprit from the Original Post and the rest of us don't know the person and probably don't care who it is (I know that I don't :-)).
Its often going to be pretty much impossible to both post enough information to get an informed response AND to keep the identity of the person hidden from his local peers.
|
|
The scenario has a memory loss by text box kind of thing.
So I would allow him to have his skin and pet run around the dungeon together. He is just safe at the top of the stairs with the same memory loss.
If he fought me on the issue I would not budge, and we could agree to not play together that is fine too.
I am not a fan of XYZ by text box but for the story and things to work it has to be.
I am not sure on the skinsend spell. If he is traveling in a backpack of the pet, well then area of effect hitting the pet would hit him. The scary part is the big bad knows the party tactics and knows where is hiding, and has a ton of area of effect things. I would target him since the DM is meant to party knowledge for the fight. This is not me trying to punish the guy, just playing a very smart monster with the knowledge and tactics he has correctly.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
Yes, it limits having a homunculus as a familiar to only those with the feat Improved Familiar. But this homunculus is not a familiar and thus that line does not apply. The FAQ explains how to get a homunculus despite not having access to the construction feats. That part actually does apply to the archetype and means the archetype is not the constructor of their companion. What could apply though is the legalization of the homunculus construction...Note the language in that FAQ that explicitly calls out the improved familiar feat. That is not how the promethean alchemist gets their homonculus.
Ah, yes, celestial servant would not be a valid feat for the Homunculus Companion class feature as it is not an animal companion nor a familiar.But, I can see how easy it would be to believe that the Homunculus Companion could be advanced using the homunculus crafting rules(which, again, are legal). In fact, it is a tiny bit of a gray area. The Homunculus Companion is a homunculus... but I think RAI would be that the two are seperate as the Homunculus Companion is a unique style of homunculus. Especially since the rules for the two do not match well.
"Can a character have a homunculus created as a familiar?
A character must have the Improved Familiar feat to select a homunculus as a familiar. Since crafting is not allowed in Pathfinder Society, the character must hire an NPC to craft the homunculus on her behalf. Usually, an NPC can not craft a custom item for a PC but this is an exception to the rule.Per the homunculus entry in the Pathfinder RPG Bestiary, a baseline homunculus costs 2,050 gp. If a PC wishes to purchase a homunculus with more than 2 Hit Dice, each additional Hit Dice adds 4,000 gp to the total price. Consider, however, that there is little need to advance a homunculus familiar in this manner, since the familiar's hit points and abilities are based on the character's stats rather than its own Hit Dice."
That FAQ doesn't legalize the rules. I don't remember the exact rational as to why but I do remember John Compton made a ruling specifically that homunculi familiars can use those mechanics while Prometheans can't.
I didn't think anyone else played a Promethean Alchemist. I was confused as to why it appeared to be broken since mine is pretty underpowered and just for fun. But the whole audit stuff made sense.
That said, I didn't realize there was a grey area on the Alchemy Manual use for the Homonculus, so this has been informative. I'll have to ask around with local GMs before looking to use any of that, because I had wanted to give mine the ability to spit.
I tend to underplay that class because its not a particularly well written archetype and you can do really strange stuff if you want to cheese the weird nature of spells. Like technically speaking and it is doable on undead and the like you can get DR 5/-(??) long before you gain access to Stoneskin. Also, just to elaborate you can't use the Alchemy Material stuff for the Homunculus. I specifically asked John Compton and he said no.