RPG Superstar 2013 Top 8
|
Make the roll and find out if you pass. If you pass then fine, if you don't pass start looking for the situational modifiers.
Alternatively, call out your roll with a few common mods (e.g. if you are a dwarf you can give your final result and say "+2 if it is a spell, spel–like ability, or poison").
|
|
I say something like, "My roll is at least X, and possibly more depending on situational modifiers" and then see if the GM wants me to start going through the situational modifiers.
I also - using Hero Lab - have most situational modifiers listed for the particular thing they affect, so that I can quickly see a list of all the possible modifiers that might apply to any particular roll.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Regular posters in these Forums know I have a personal disdain for HeroLab. In my subjective experience, I have witnessed it contribute to the "rules atrophy" of several of my fellow players. In addition to that, it is my personal belief that it can make turns last longer as users click the various boxes to add their various circumstance modifiers to a roll.
None of that happens when I use a Character Sheet, therefore I view using Character Sheets as "fastest/best".
|
My personal solution? Being lazy and forgetting about them.
Were I to put in the work? A seperate notecard (or full sheet of paper) with a bullet list of situational bonuses, tagged with the number of the chronicle they come from as well. It would also include a note on limited number of uses if it's one of those kinds of boons.
|
|
my question was mostly in regards to how to monopolize as little time as possible when determining which of many situational bonuses apply.
Ask your GM what descriptors the Save has attached to it, such as [Evil], [Compulsion], [Poison], and so on. That should cover the majority of your circumstances.
If your GM then exclaims, "Haha, you DIE!", you could be like, "Would that be a Death Effect? In that case I have another +2".
|
|
These responses are neither helpful nor respectful, and you know it. Why did you even bother replying to this thread?
It is incredibly helpful. So if you want to make up some imaginary disrespect in the statement, that's entirely on you.
Don't take 6 minutes trying to find all your mods before every single roll you make. Most d20 rolls are pass/fail, so if you roll a 20 you passed and don't bother looking and if you roll a 3 you probably failed don't bother looking.
|
|
If you've just got one, announce both totals:
"Fort 17, 20 vs poison"
If it's more complicated:
"Perception 24, 26 assuming this is still underground terrain, can see in magical darkness and have see invisibility up, with a big bonus against orcs, and small bonuses vs stonework, traps and being surprised"
|
|
If you've just got one, announce both totals:
"Fort 17, 20 vs poison"
If it's more complicated:
"Perception 24, 26 assuming this is still underground terrain, can see in magical darkness and have see invisibility up, with a big bonus against orcs, and small bonuses vs stonework, traps and being surprised"
... the sheer number of possible situational modifiers is why i've just taken to announcing whats coming for you. Unless someone is waiting with a held action to non magical missile counter spell i don't see any reason NOT to tell people.
|
Regular posters in these Forums know I have a personal disdain for HeroLab. In my subjective experience, I have witnessed it contribute to the "rules atrophy" of several of my fellow players. In addition to that, it is my personal belief that it can make turns last longer as users click the various boxes to add their various circumstance modifiers to a roll.
None of that happens when I use a Character Sheet, therefore I view using Character Sheets as "fastest/best".
Well, if one only uses Hero Lab, and never bothers to learn the rules, then I can understand this point of view. But many people, myself included, use HL to manage my character sheet/data, but I still know the rules. I sometimes use HL on my iPad at the table, but not often - I typically play from a printed character sheet. I just prefer to store the character digitally - it can do the math for me, but I always double-check it.
It's like never learning people's phone numbers and just relying on tapping their name in your contacts list to call them. If something happens to your contacts list, you're hosed. And that's true of HL - if you don't know the rules and something happens to HL, you're stuck.
Nefreet's point is a good one for those who rely only on HL and don't bother learning the rules. HL isn't a substitute for that. But if you learn the rules, it can be a great tool to help you.
I am in anti-HL camp, I find simply the act of writing and adding up your own character sheet helps one retain understanding of it's mechanics. I write down situational modifiers adjacent to whatever statistic they effect, e.g. Saves, Attacks, HP, AC/CMD. If an ability affects multiple unrelated mechanics (e.g. Favored Enemy to Attacks/Skills), the relevant effects will be mentioned in those mechanics, not one place.
Alot of times I will know when they apply, e.g. PCs will recognize when a spell is being cast even if they can't Spellcraft ID it. Otherwise, I either ask or make provisional statement e.g. "I got a 25, +2 if they're Evil etc" depending what seems plausible to apply. I am a fan of giving GM a copy of character sheet, and highlighter pen is good for stuff like situational mods, which lets them take things into account without even informing me directly. If some extraneous situational modifier slips through the cracks of all of those... oh well I guess, I don't let it bother me.
IMHO, people probably overlook situational modifiers deriving from some nuance of the core rules ten times more often than from a character-option-specific mechanic. So I don't see why character-option-specific mechanics are more problematic. If there is a playability problem with extreme profusion of situational modifiers that my normal means of dealing with aren't sufficient for, I would probably tend to avoid those mechanics, just as I would for other mechanics which present gameplay problems (e.g. extreme summoning spam).
|
|
I like and use HeroLab, but I also check its math. (I also notice math errors in published stat blocks, and share unofficial errata for them, so I'm hardly a typical user.)
To return to the topic, my main PFS character, a rogue, has situational modifiers to Perception from trapfinding and rogue talents. I frequently have to announce things like, "I got an X for Perception, or Y if it's to find hidden stuff."
I think my new nagaji sorcerer might have more situation modifiers to saves than any other character I've played. He has a racial bonus to saves vs. poison and mind-affecting effects, and a trait bonus vs. divine spells. I'd worry more about annoying the GMs with questions like "Is it a divine spell?" if I didn't know that the veterans were used to seeing weird boons, special defenses, and other situational bonuses and effects. (One local GM has even acquired the habit of saying, "I'm announcing an attack/spell/etc. Do you have anything to counter that? No? OK, I roll and get a ...")
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Please stop with the hate for HeroLab. It is a tool just like a character sheet or reference cards or anything else and is only as good as its user. I have found just as many errors in a hand written character sheet as do with HL.
Due to my usual role as an organizer moreso than a player or GM I find that my play opportunities are limited. As such I have a very large list of PCs in order to "fit" into just about any table level or character role. The downside is I only play a particular character a few times each season. This means I often have to grab a character I haven't played for months with little to no refresh time. That makes HeroLab an invaluable tool for me.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Echoing what Bob said, I'm also a fan of Hero Lab. It certainly has mistakes and it's no substitute for knowing the rules, but it's also super convenient to have, for example, all the details for any given spell right at your fingertips.
Another reason why I love it: it makes it super easy to look for feats/spells/items/archetypes as I'm character building. For example, if I'm trying to make a character who focusses on, say, sunder, I can quickly identify game elements that might be useful, whether or not they are pfs-legal, what sorts of prereqs they might have, etc. Without HL I would have to search through so many books (or rely on online sources that have lots of gaps and errors).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Please stop with the hate for HeroLab.
If you actually read the entire thread, Bob, you'll see that the chain of responses happened like this:
• request for subjective opinion ("what's best?")
• response with subjective opinion ("paper sheets")
• question why subjective opinion was given ("that's not helpful")
• response why subjective opinion was given (with emphasis on personal experience)
I am just as entitled to explain my reasoning as you are, thank you very much.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've got two issues with HeroLab. The first is the cost. I've got ~76 physical books--plus pdfs. They do not have a pricing plan that lets me buy what I want in an affordable way. If I want "everything", they don't even have a price plan for that.
My second issue is that it makes pathfinder too accessible without teaching anything--said simply, if a player makes a character with HeroLab, there's nothing that teaches them the mechanics for their character. Now there are lots of other ways to get here (i.e. ways outside of HL), but at least if someone builds their character themselves the old-fashioned way, chances are they're going to know how their character works and what their character does.
The first issue is merely my perspective and is literally just a matter of how much money you're willing to throw it. The second issue is exacerbated by HL, but in no way HL's fault. It can be a good tool, but in my observations, it too easily facilitates lack of knowledge vs other options.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've given this question some thought for the last few days... and I think I have at least one answer. One that seems to be working for me at least...
What is the "Most efficient way to handle situational bonuses"?
Play CORE.
This will remove most of the Jenga Tower PFS has become in the last 5 or 6 years. There is just TOO MUCH stacked on this thing for one person to keep track of. CORE is looking much better.
I played a CORE game last week for the first time in a long time - months in fact. It was quite refreshing to NOT have to reference electronic media to look up all the little fiddling bits that go into each and every action. Everything is in one REAL LIVE book. Wow. We got to do more "Play" and didn't have so much "Accounting"...
And you know what? Several of us at the table were excited enough to set up more CORE games. I've been looking forward to playing CORE again for a week now... Game day is tomorrow. And if my IPAD crashs? heck, I'll even have my book with me.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Please stop with the hate for HeroLab. It is a tool just like a character sheet or reference cards or anything else and is only as good as its user. I have found just as many errors in a hand written character sheet as do with HL.
Due to my usual role as an organizer moreso than a player or GM I find that my play opportunities are limited. As such I have a very large list of PCs in order to "fit" into just about any table level or character role. The downside is I only play a particular character a few times each season. This means I often have to grab a character I haven't played for months with little to no refresh time. That makes HeroLab an invaluable tool for me.
Hero-Lab is a great tool for the expert player. It is often a detriment to new players who fail to understand the underlying mechanics, and never bother to learn them as long as they have Hero-Lab as a crutch.
@Abadari: My problem with Core is the disparity in how it impacts different classes.
For me, I would be OK with a "Core Unchained" allowing just the minimum expansions to make Core more balanced:
Unchained Barb/Monk/Rogue and all Rogue Archetypes and Talents as well.
Fighter Advanced Weapon/Armor Training and Mastery/Bravery Feats. Spontaneous Caster Spells Known Items/Feats.
Perhaps less necessary, but I'd include Ranger/Paladin Archetypes and Weapon Styles/Mercies. Maybe Cleric SubDomains?
|
|
I've given this question some thought for the last few days... and I think I have at least one answer. One that seems to be working for me at least...
What is the "Most efficient way to handle situational bonuses"?
Play CORE.
This will remove most of the Jenga Tower PFS has become in the last 5 or 6 years. There is just TOO MUCH stacked on this thing for one person to keep track of. CORE is looking much better.
I played a CORE game last week for the first time in a long time - months in fact. It was quite refreshing to NOT have to reference electronic media to look up all the little fiddling bits that go into each and every action. Everything is in one REAL LIVE book. Wow. We got to do more "Play" and didn't have so much "Accounting"...
And you know what? Several of us at the table were excited enough to set up more CORE games. I've been looking forward to playing CORE again for a week now... Game day is tomorrow. And if my IPAD crashs? heck, I'll even have my book with me.
I think this gets to the heart of why I haven't yet tried GMing for PFS. I've played and GMed Pathfinder pretty regularly for the past 4 years (and v.3.5 for a decade before that), and I started playing PFS about a year ago. I consider myself pretty expert on the core rules, plus a few additional essential like APG and ARG. But there was a metric ton of content already out when I started Pathfinder, and it continues to accumulate far faster than I can ever hope to afford or assimilate it. For example, even though I scored some cheap used copies of Advanced Class Guide, Ultimate Combat, and Ultimate Magic last fall, and have read them through at least once, I have only very recently started using any of that material in either my home game or PFS. (My one and only hybrid class PFS PC earned his second XP just last night!)
And I know that the first response to what I've just said is going to be, "So GM Core." But from what I've gathered from the store owner and other regulars over this past year, there is essentially zero interest in Core in our area. [ETA: And I know that as a GM, I'd still have to deal with non-core material if it's in the scenario.]
|
|
I'm ready to play Core. 2 more levels until I have a Core Arcane Trickster. But most of what is played in my area is noncore and I'm not really interested in online play.I've given this question some thought for the last few days... and I think I have at least one answer. One that seems to be working for me at least...
What is the "Most efficient way to handle situational bonuses"?
Play CORE.
This will remove most of the Jenga Tower PFS has become in the last 5 or 6 years. There is just TOO MUCH stacked on this thing for one person to keep track of. CORE is looking much better.
I played a CORE game last week for the first time in a long time - months in fact. It was quite refreshing to NOT have to reference electronic media to look up all the little fiddling bits that go into each and every action. Everything is in one REAL LIVE book. Wow. We got to do more "Play" and didn't have so much "Accounting"...
And you know what? Several of us at the table were excited enough to set up more CORE games. I've been looking forward to playing CORE again for a week now... Game day is tomorrow. And if my IPAD crashs? heck, I'll even have my book with me.
I can really relate to this... CORE is very thin in my area, but I pushed to get a game of it up and now maybe we'll see some more (second game tomorrow). Wish me luck!
|
Venture-Captain, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
I've given this question some thought for the last few days... and I think I have at least one answer. One that seems to be working for me at least...
What is the "Most efficient way to handle situational bonuses"?
Play CORE.
This will remove most of the Jenga Tower PFS has become in the last 5 or 6 years. There is just TOO MUCH stacked on this thing for one person to keep track of. CORE is looking much better.
I played a CORE game last week for the first time in a long time - months in fact. It was quite refreshing to NOT have to reference electronic media to look up all the little fiddling bits that go into each and every action. Everything is in one REAL LIVE book. Wow. We got to do more "Play" and didn't have so much "Accounting"...
And you know what? Several of us at the table were excited enough to set up more CORE games. I've been looking forward to playing CORE again for a week now... Game day is tomorrow. And if my IPAD crashs? heck, I'll even have my book with me.
There is probably a ridiculously good chance that you aren't playing core correct either because its still ridiculously fiddly. Hell, Im not even sure if Core actually contains the correct rules which would be good to know.
|
|
I've given this question some thought for the last few days... and I think I have at least one answer. One that seems to be working for me at least...
What is the "Most efficient way to handle situational bonuses"?
Play CORE.
This will remove most of the Jenga Tower PFS has become in the last 5 or 6 years. There is just TOO MUCH stacked on this thing for one person to keep track of. CORE is looking much better.
I played a CORE game last week for the first time in a long time - months in fact. It was quite refreshing to NOT have to reference electronic media to look up all the little fiddling bits that go into each and every action. Everything is in one REAL LIVE book. Wow. We got to do more "Play" and didn't have so much "Accounting"...
And you know what? Several of us at the table were excited enough to set up more CORE games. I've been looking forward to playing CORE again for a week now... Game day is tomorrow. And if my IPAD crashs? heck, I'll even have my book with me.
Core does not help with situational bonuses. Dwarves, gnomes, superstitious barbarians, many types of sorcerers, fighters, paladins, and rangers come built with situational modifiers. Add bardic performance and many spells, like bless or death ward, and situational modifiers abound.
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
You don't need to know what the players are doing as long as you can trust those players. Or at least trust them for a session and ask the boards about what they're doing afterwards.
This. Players make mistakes from time to time, but most are acting in good faith.
And most mistakes aren't critical, they won't ruin the game. (But fixing them will make it better, so keep an eye open for anything that looks weird.)
|
|
To answer the OP: it depends on the complexity of the character.
At low levels, with a straightforward character build, you won't have many situational modifiers to worry about.
At mid-high levels, and/or with a class that uses lots of buffs, things can get more tricky. I have a level 9 fighter/alchemist, and before any game with him I prepare a small buff chart on scratch paper so that I can easily tot up bonuses to saves, attacks and so forth.
For calculating situational saving throw modifiers I normally write commonly applicable mods on the relevant section of my paper character sheet (eg +2 vs compulsions) and I have 3 x 5 index cards for each character listing chronicle boons in abbreviated format, so I can see quite quickly if I have a modifier or if I want to expend a boon.
In all cases, I will normally roll the die and declare the "normal" result first, then check modifiers if the GM says it's a miss/fail. So I might say "I rolled a 12, that's a total of 17 before other modifiers." GM can then say if that's a pass, or might give me the total I need, then we can check descriptors.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is probably a ridiculously good chance that you aren't playing core correct either because its still ridiculously fiddly. Hell, Im not even sure if Core actually contains the correct rules which would be good to know.I've given this question some thought for the last few days... and I think I have at least one answer. One that seems to be working for me at least...
What is the "Most efficient way to handle situational bonuses"?
Play CORE.
This will remove most of the Jenga Tower PFS has become in the last 5 or 6 years. There is just TOO MUCH stacked on this thing for one person to keep track of. CORE is looking much better.
I played a CORE game last week for the first time in a long time - months in fact. It was quite refreshing to NOT have to reference electronic media to look up all the little fiddling bits that go into each and every action. Everything is in one REAL LIVE book. Wow. We got to do more "Play" and didn't have so much "Accounting"...
And you know what? Several of us at the table were excited enough to set up more CORE games. I've been looking forward to playing CORE again for a week now... Game day is tomorrow. And if my IPAD crashs? heck, I'll even have my book with me.
wow, it was more than 8 hours before someone posted that I was playing the game wrong. Sorry, "...aren't playing core correct...".
sigh.
The point I was making in my post you quoted was NOT that CORE doesn't have "ridiculously fiddly" rules - just that it doesn't have nearly as many "ridiculously fiddly" things added to it. Everything in CORE is in Standard. Plus a lot more. A lot. Core has (this is a guess on my part) less than 20% of the situational bonuses that are common in Standard.
so...What is the "Most efficient way to handle situational bonuses"?
I still say, "Play CORE". Even if you play it wrong. There will not be as many "situational bonuses" to keep track of.
These responses are neither helpful nor respectful, and you know it. Why did you even bother replying to this thread?It is incredibly helpful. So if you want to make up some imaginary disrespect in the statement, that's entirely on you.
Don't take 6 minutes trying to find all your mods before every single roll you make. Most d20 rolls are pass/fail, so if you roll a 20 you passed and don't bother looking and if you roll a 3 you probably failed don't bother looking.
I'm with Michael on this. The two responses he called out were pretty unhelpful given the context of his OP. If you meant the elaboration that I've quoted above, then you should have written that from the get-go and not have to be prodded into it. And even then, I'm not sure it helps much except by giving some guidelines when it's unnecessary to even care about situational modifiers. It's still no help for the main gist of his question - how to take an array of modifiers and get to the one you need efficiently.
Honestly, I think there are a lot of times people could be more helpful around here but are too tempted by the low-hanging zingers.