Pathfinder has a lot of rules. Most of the time they're an asset, but sometimes they get in the way. What I'm really talking about here is the rule of cool (comic for illustrative purposes).
The classic example is swinging from chandeliers: Acrobatics to jump, Climb check / Str check to hang on, another Acrobatics check to miss landing directly on your enemy.... Sometimes it's appropriate to wave that all away and just say, "Dude, that's Awesome! Take your +1 to hit for the height advantage and swing away." The disadvantage of course is that you're moving away from clear RAW play.
My question is how often it's appropriate to invoke the "rule of cool." Do you find yourself doing so often, or do you feel it cheapens the game?
I use the RoC pretty often in my games. Sometimes the rules DO get in the way. An example was a bard diving out of the way of a crossbow bolt then firing a wand of magic missiles at the foe. I didn't make him roll for anything except UMD. Rolling for an Acrobatics check to dive out of the way, possibly taking damage from his fall and a concentration check would've slowed things down and taken away the "neato" factor.
I don't use the RoC constantly, but with just enough regularity to make things flow faster and to give the players more fun.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Almost never, at least in a rules heavy system like Pathfinder.
My problem with the 'rule of cool' is that something that is cool one time, and might be fine getting an advantage isn't cool if that becomes the go to tactic. Every character constantly looking to swing on a chandelier for a bonus isn't cool, it is a farce.
Also 'cool' is very subjective. Is what they are doing really cool or is it just that the player is good at telling a story? Do you want to give mechanical bonuses to characters just because their players are better at describing actions? How much of 'cool' is based on a GM's own personal feelings toward the player? Is the cool that the character doing really admiration for the player?
If a player wants to be able to do something that they think is cool and the mechanics won't cover it and it makes sense to me, I'll certainly try to come up with something. Hopefully this is in advance so I can think about houserules, when it comes up during the game and I can't think of an easy solution that I am sure is balanced I am more likely to just say 'we don't have any rules for that sort of thing, pick something else, but if you think this is something you are interested in we can try and come up with rules in the future' than I am to hand wave away the rules and hand out bonuses.
In other game systems that are a lot looser in structure it is quite different though. Some have systems almost built with 'rule of cool' type things in mind, others are just rules light enough that making it up as you go along is expected. I enjoy those type of games as well, but in a mechanically heavy simulationist game like Pathfinder, I don't think 'rule of cool' is very fair to the players.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Usually "rool of cool" comes in when the rules puts an arbitrary barrier simply because someone is combining actions. This is in part because the "Yes, and.." rule of improv.
The purpose is that shooting down someone's idea rather than working with it means that they are less likely to attempt ideas. What's more? That idea may end up causing a very memorable and entertaining scene (which is the point.) I'm still repairing people's willingness to try crazy things from when I was early in DMing and shot down things I couldn't figure out how to adjudicate.
___
Note; if I give some advantage "You gain +1d6 damage for falling on them" then I often reflect that as a disadvantage "and additionally you take 1d6 damage for falling" or w/e. "You get +2 to hit since he's unlikely to defend this attack; but because you're exposed as you fall you'll suffer -2 to AC until your next turn."
Yes, it's true that this is similar to Vicious or similar to Charging; but there you go! That means that under some set of conditions where they had a risk of failing in a bad way, you gave them a bonus that they could've gotten in the game some other way without breaking it.
It's also true it favors creativity and storytelling; but that's the whole point of the game. The point isn't to say "My guy killed a troll." It's to say "Remember that one time the troll was weak so I jammed an alchemist's fire down it's throat!"
And all you have to do for that is look at the rules for Water of Maddening and get an idea that maybe instead of Reflex the monster gets Fort, and gets a -4 to the save for injesting it. How to adjudicate? Grapple; make a successful improvised melee attack with the flask (or possibly some other maneuver.) And so instead of just doing a simple "throw the flask; yay I did 2 damage?" you get a flashy ending to a scene that someone gets to feel like a hero for; and will chat about over beers for years to come.
I'd rather be the guy who runs a table that people will chat about for years down the line because of the stories it created than just some guy willing to run a table.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
1. Default to "yes".
2. Fail forward.
Put them together: Let 'em try the cool thing, and even if it fails make sure it fails awesomely.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I let the characters do whatever they want, however they want, and I apply any advantages and/or disadvantages to their actions as I see fit, guiding by preexisting mechanics as able. They are not told "Dude, you got a +1 to hit!" or "You did an extra +1d6 damage!" They get 'silent' bonuses where I tack on what I feel is merited after they roll. They are told "Your actions seem to have surprised the opponent and you found an opening in their guard" or "You managed to nick something important by the unusual angle in which you managed to stab the opponent".
In short, I use the Rule of Cool in a manner that it is not obvious. Players should be rewarded for taking risks and trying new things, but they should not be made aware exactly what those rewards are.
I do all the time, but...
It's always some sort of check before they can attempt the cool thing. Maybe not the full series of multiple checks costing them three rounds of actions, but I always make them roll the dice first.
All the time: our group's house rules have been shaped by Rule of Cool changes, such as implementing many of the World is Square feat tax changes (and making a few more of our own), such as Power Attack being baseline, rolling Signature Skill into the +2 to two skill feats (Alertness, Athletic, etc), or utilizing the Pathfinder Unchained background skill system.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I never really make any changes when it comes to hand-waiving rolls, or allowing actions to defy the physical or magical boundaries of a character, despite how "cool" the PC thinks it would be to snowboard on the skull of a yeti then triple backflip into a fireball power- attack yada yada.
For example: "I wanna dropkick a tree, and knock it over onto the troll that is attacking my ally!!!
Here, I wouldn't just say "No you can't" but I might elaborate that "while there are many small shrubs and saplings, there aren't really any trees in the area large enough to accomplish this purpose", or better yet I'll explain that "there is one really large dead tree, 50 feet away, and it looks like if the base of the tree takes close to X damage it might collapse in a specific direction effecting X many squares and doing roughly X damage.
This can be achieved by having the PC's roll specific checks too (nature, engineering, etc.), with arbitrary DC's based on how difficult the activity would be.
This way, it not only allows the player's idea to shine, even if just by being possible, but it will also encourage the whole party to work together at damaging the tree and luring the troll to the right location if they wish.
I really encourage my players to know their characters and know the rules of the game. I don't encourage them to try to supersede the rules. But what I really really like is when they interact with their environment to accomplish something as a team.
I will however enact the "Rule of Story". If a decision or dice roll or something were to happen to cause a major disruption in the plot or spoil a great surprise for my players... then it simple just does not work.
All the time: our group's house rules have been shaped by Rule of Cool changes, such as implementing many of the World is Square feat tax changes (and making a few more of our own), such as Power Attack being baseline, rolling Signature Skill into the +2 to two skill feats (Alertness, Athletic, etc), or utilizing the Pathfinder Unchained background skill system.
Do you ever run into the kind of favoritism that Dave Justus references further up the thread? --> "Is the cool that the character doing really admiration for the player?" I think that's a common anxiety, and I sometimes have trouble reconciling that fear with the desire to make the kind of fun moments you describe at your table.
"Is the cool that the character doing really admiration for the player?" I think that's a common anxiety, and I sometimes have trouble reconciling that fear with the desire to make the kind of fun moments you describe at your table.
While I didn't mention it specifically previously, I think the reverse can be an even bigger problem. If there is a player in your game who isn't very cool (even if you like that person fine and appreciate other qualities) are they going to find it harder to benefit from 'rule of cool' decisions.
For example: "I wanna dropkick a tree, and knock it over onto the troll that is attacking my ally!!!
Yeah. There is the "Rule of Cool" and then there is simply being unrealistic. My response would be "You can give it a shot, if you really believe it will work, but I doubt anything with less than 50 STR and a few size categories larger than yourself is going to budge that thing." Unless they have the capability to deal enough damage to sunder the tree in one blow (which is probably better spent HITTING THE TROLL), that's not going to happen. Not at my table. If that flies at yours, have fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm on DeathlessOne's side on this one. There are limitations to the RoC just as there are to the RAW. Some things demand common sense be applied to a player's attempt at ultra-heroic acts.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I always allow Rule of Cool. It makes things random and fun, and easily-laughed at later :P
One time our rogue PC slipped a crushed-powder hallucinogenic mushroom into a drink, and then made a small purchase in a shop. Then he successfully bluffed the shopkeeper "In my country, when we seal a good deal, we drink a toast" and then bluffed the shopkeeper into drinking the hallucinogenic drink, then further bluffed him into believing that his normal GP coins were actually ancient coins that were 25% more valuable while the Bard of the group was outside the window casting illusions on the gold. The rogue gave the shopkeeper every piece of gold he had, which was about 8,000 GP and the shopkeeper gave him 10,000 GP.
It was so terribly funny and awesome that I couldn't say no. The whole table was in tears laughing for like 15 minutes while this was all going on, even me :P We still laugh about it :)
But after that one time, I told him I don't want to start a precedent with you running around poisoning and bluffing shopkeepers to make millions of gold for nothing :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For example: "I wanna dropkick a tree, and knock it over onto the troll that is attacking my ally!!!Yeah. There is the "Rule of Cool" and then there is simply being unrealistic. My response would be "You can give it a shot, if you really believe it will work, but I doubt anything with less than 50 STR and a few size categories larger than yourself is going to budge that thing." Unless they have the capability to deal enough damage to sunder the tree in one blow (which is probably better spent HITTING THE TROLL), that's not going to happen. Not at my table. If that flies at yours, have fun.
Whilst I understand the reason for the reaction this reaction gets under my skin so much. I’m sure you wouldn’t bat an eye at a dragon or the tarrasque up rooting a tree but then by your standards neither couldnas neither has 50 STR.
When level 12 mages are disintegrating large blocks of mater, teleporting across the world and summoning monsters but the barb can’t kick down a tree.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But after that one time, I told him I don't want to start a precedent with you running around poisoning and bluffing shopkeepers to make millions of gold for nothing :P
Interestingly, you don't need that restriction. The Bluff doesn't last forever; that shopkeeper will go to spend coins at some point, which are regular coins, and know he was ripped off 2k.
2k is a hefty bounty for a single target unless they are quite powerful, and a gang of vigilantes or mercenaries may well be hired in order to get the 2k back plus.. "expenses."
The fact that this could occur multiple times could result in a coalition/union of such shops bringing the hammer down; which makes for quite the plot hook.
Whilst I understand the reason for the reaction this reaction gets under my skin so much. I’m sure you wouldn’t bat an eye at a dragon or the tarrasque up rooting a tree but then by your standards neither couldnas neither has 50 STR.
You would have wagered wrongly, if that were true. While I am sure they COULD uproot the tree given a few rounds, I don't think either of them would be able to knock it down with a moments notice, not without some impressive feat of strength (or check). Given that they are LARGER, and have more MASS (for arguments sake), I'd be more inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt and leave that action within the realms of possible. ... You probably should not assume how people would react or make a determination based on such a small sample size. Just some advice
When level 12 mages are disintegrating large blocks of mater, teleporting across the world and summoning monsters but the barb can’t kick down a tree.
Magically enhance that Barbarian with spells specifically designed to accomplish a purpose and we are having a different discussion. This really isn't an issue we need to be arguing about. You aren't at my table. You don't know what kind of GM/DM I am. You aren't going to influence how I handle my games.