| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Third recommendation. Nothing good will come from a public posting of this.
|
Authors idea
Authors description
The DMs subjective evaluation of tone of the encounter from the authors description
Ham fisted attempts by non actors to convey said tone
6 Players (often completely different) interpretation of the dms ham fisted portrayal based on their subjective evaluation of the module written with a tone in mind by the author.
I know not getting all the PP sucks, but there there is WAY too much room to add anything definitive there. It's entirely possible that the thing is supposed to look scary, or the dm thought it was supposed to look scary, or it made for a better story if you were jumpy, or he just accidentally did it wrong, or he was aiming for a little jumpy and the party got paranoid.
Short of "the scenario will provide all descriptions, which will be read in the voice of ben stein" can you see any way to avoid situations like this?
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
I recommend deleting this thread ASAP (since taking this public does more harm than good) and getting in touch with your RVC.
Could just be a GM getting too caught up in running the scenario.
There are certainly similarities between the enemies and the NPC, but in this case the actions of the NPC are pretty set (and if he had the picture to show you, I have no idea why he didn't show you immediately).
Stil, the others are correct, without having heard his side of the story, there really is nothing we can do. Talk to your VC again and if that doesn't solve the issue talk to your RVC.
It might be too late/too unclear to fix this situation, so letting this one go... might just be the smart play here.
|
|
and if he had the picture to show you, I have no idea why he didn't show you immediately).
Usually I just have the one tablet , so i can either read boxt text or show pretty pic, not do both at the same time
One of my dms has a trick where he cuts them out and puts them on popsickle sticks. Should do that more often. Or bring the second tablet.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would go to the VC. Trying to blast a GM in public tends to cause problems, more than it solves them.
The VC also knows the GM really did some shifty nonsense here but instead of doing anything about it (since we are all friends) he just says to keep quiet about it and bribes me with stuff and other things.
If true, this would seem to be very, very wrong to me. But I don't play PFS so maybe I just don't understand how the system works.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you attack first without full information, that's on you. Knowledge skills are out there for a reason. There are multiple scenarios out there where the appropriate response for full PP is to talk to something that looks scary.
Except in the scenario the leshy is clearly aware of the bad guys and is telegraphed really easily that they aren't evil. I'm pretty sure that it's box text material.
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
It might be a case of a GM trying to make the adventure more fun by piling on, but accidentally messing it up. Good intentions, bad results.
I'm just looking into the adventure, there isn't any box text for that scene.
Overall the adventure is on the easy side; in the GM thread a lot of people advocated really focusing on mood and description because mechanically it was a bit thin.
We had no Paladin, or we could have tried detect evil but the GM's description sold it for us because you know... it screamed evil, powerful and was a lot like the enemies which attacked the town. Unable to take any chances because we were unsure if it was the BBEG or something, we surprise round nova'd it to death.
I guess there's some lessons for you.
Paladin's Detect Evil is far from foolproof. Evil creatures with less than 5HD don't radiate evil unless they're clerics/undead/outsiders. And several evil creatures in scenarios use alignment-hiding spells.
Also, not all enemies are evil, and not all evil things should always be fought. There are multiple scenarios built around the trope of "cooperate with the unlikely ally". And in others you get penalized for murderising people for "walking on the street while radiating evil".
We lost out on the scenario's boon and 1 PP by the way (which was the thing which pisses me off most since we all know those matter in the end) and the boon would have been very useful in the next scenario I played with another GM on this very same PC.
Honestly, PP isn't all that important. It's nice to get 2PP so you can quickly buy a wand, but it really isn't that crucial to get full prestige every time.
Think of it as a tuition fee, to teach you not to be too hasty to attack.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm going to disagree with most everyone above. Since you're not naming names or even providing hints or clues as to who is at fault, I think it actually helps the community to expose bad practices, so other GMs know not to attempt these stunts.
This community refusing to publicly acknowledge and discuss bad GMing is to its detriment. Sometimes GMs don't know what their doing is inappropriate and reading about it can help them improve.
The community spends plenty of time discussing "bad GMing". This, however, isn't a discussion: it's a one-sided story we're hearing. When I get a GM who doesn't just say, "you encounter monster #67 with template #3, roll initiative", I am thrilled. YMMV, of course.
Better to remove dice rolls, and have everyone just take 10 on everything, than to remove the drama and storytelling ability of the GM. That way, everyone can calculate the most efficient formula to earn full prestige, and not have to waste so much time at the table with plot or story or character.[/sarcasm]
It sounds like the OP's group needs more GMs, if they have to keep one they don't like in circulation through bribery of players. There's a very clear option here: step up and be a better GM.
(And yeah... Knowledge skills. Not just for bards anymore.)
|
|
Unable to take any chances because we were unsure if it was the BBEG or something, we surprise round nova'd it to death.You were also unsure if it was a friendly NPC.
If it was the scenario in question I am thinking of, the description makes it pretty obvious of the scene *in the scenario* that the NPC in question is potentially an ally, based on what they are doing and how they are doing it, IMO.
There's a reason I try to prep all the pictures of key NPCs, aside from possible comprehension skills of players. It saves time and helps with character immersion, as well as prevents 'gotcha' kind of moments.
More jarring is the accusations of 'player bribery'.
And I've been wavering back and forth on this, because gut reaction is 'let the chain of command handle it' and 'this is clearly a problem (once bribery is mentioned) that won't be handled effectively by the chain of command'.
A better question for that last part might be "What is being considered 'bribery'?"
If un-earned scenario rewards are being given/Boons handed out/etc to silence folks who have concerns about local GM style, that is corrosive to the local community level.
If it is a free meal or the like, then the game has shifted from 'playing for fun' to 'playing for form of compensation', which is not necessarily a comfortable feeling?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the BBEG is hacking the peasants and their thatched-roofed cottages to bits with an adamantine battleaxe and everyone KNOWS this, and then the GM describes the NPC as wielding an adamantine battleaxe when in reality it is carrying a feather duster and the DM KNOWS this because he has a PICTURE of it then it's blatantly a set-up. He has a valid concern.
Even more disturbing is the prospect that the local VC is using bribes to cover it up. Both of these issues are completely worthy of discussion and not an immediate sweeping under the rug as many here have suggested. "Hear no evil" does nothing to fix problems like these.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
First things first, OP: hey, I’m sorry you found that whole thing so frustrating. It sounds like your GM either described the NPC badly or intentionally misled you, and in either case it was inappropriate (or at least rude and condescending) to scold all of you afterward for making a costly mistake based on his miscommunication. To answer your question directly: I would say that GM’s are not allowed to intentionally mislead players under PFS rules (since scenarios must be run as written), unless the NPC’s are specifically trying to mislead the characters. But note the difference: characters can mislead characters, but players should not be trying to mislead other players unless it’s through those characters.
I also have some advice if you’re interested in trying to correct the problem, rather than just venting about it. If you’re just looking to vent and get an answer to “is this allowed?” then that’s cool, just ignore the rest of this.
You say that you’re all friends, so I would first try to talk to this GM as a friend. I know it can be hard to talk to your friends about when they mess up and address their hurtful and frustrating behaviors. Just avoiding playing with this GM is certainly one solution, but if you’re still feeling frustrated about it or you enter a situation where the choice is playing with this GM or not playing at all, I think it’s worth trying to talk about it. First of all, this is a conversation to have away from the table. Maybe after the game or hanging out with them some other time. If you’re not comfortable addressing the issue one on one like that, maybe get some other friends to talk about it with y’all, or have a Venture Officer mediate if you feel like you need that mediation. But I wouldn't immediately suggest escalating to that level if you think you can talk as friends.
In any case, I would start with expressing your frustration - what the GM did specifically that frustrated you and proposing a solution (rather than just accusing them of shifty nonsense right off the bat). I'm not saying that they definitely weren't up to some shifty nonsense, but coming at them with accusations is going to put them on the defensive and they won't be very receptive. Something like, “Hey, I felt like the description you gave made didn’t match the picture you showed us later, and I’m frustrated because we were penalized for not understanding what you seemed to think was obvious. Do you think in the future we could work on making sure we’re all on the same page about what’s taking place in the fiction of the game so we can avoid what happened last time?”
If you have that conversation and frame it as an issue of your own frustration with a specific solution that everyone can work toward, then you’ve done what you can as far as I’m concerned. What the GM decides to do with that information then is on them, but I’m hoping that they’ll respect your issues as a friend and incorporate that criticism into becoming a better GM. If not, well, maybe it’ll be awkward and you’ll just continue avoiding them and not playing in their games. Best case scenario: they improve as a GM and you don't encounter any more "gotcha" situations. Worst case scenario: they still get really defensive, and claim they did nothing wrong, and dismiss you angrily. In the worst case scenario, you at least find out whether they can handle criticism or whether they actually care about how they made you feel; both are good pieces of information to know in determining whether you should really keep being friends with them.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
