PFS & Knowledge (unsolicited suggestion for Organized Play)


Organized Play General Discussion

51 to 63 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
5/5 5/55/55/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:

Boy, people are really missing the mark today.

You're referencing "it" as something in some other thread said by someone. You're putting cover and concealment over the target.

(bluntness generates grarg but also clarity...)

If you're fighting a skeleton and the newbie takes out a dagger, "get a club.. use a femur if you have to..." is a reasonable in or out of character thing to say. If you believe that skeletons and their weakness to bludgeoning are well known it would also be something you might say to the person who's decided to use the dagger because they think knowing it's bludgeoning is metagaming.

If it could use some polish to avoid being pushy I think thats a slightly different question.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
If you're fighting a skeleton and the newbie takes out a dagger, "get a club.. use a femur if you have to..."

I disagree. Telling the GM you are grabbing your club to use because you guess it might be more effective is one thing. Telling another player what to do or how to act unsolicited is something else. That's the crux of what some people upthread are saying. The former is perfectly find, the latter, not so much. Its all in the presentation.

If you succeed at a knowledge check and know definitively that bludgeoning weapons are more effective, by all means, share that info. Something like, "hey guys, I have studied these types of creatures and I know they are resistant to many types of damage, but bludgeoning is effective." As opposed to, "put your sword away. Its not very good against this creature. Grab your club and bash it." Perhaps a subtle difference, but wen playing with people who may not be your friends or you may not know at all, it is better to err on the conservative side and not give the appearance that you are stealing their agency.

5/5 5/55/55/5

TwilightKnight wrote:


I disagree. Telling the GM you are grabbing your club to use because you guess it might be more effective is one thing. Telling another player what to do or how to act unsolicited is something else. That's the crux of what some people upthread are saying. The former is perfectly find, the latter, not so much. Its all in the presentation.

You're disagreeing with more than the presentation there. You're disagreeing with the action based on the source of information: either a knowledge check by the rules or the shadowy area of common sense experience and basic adventuring 101. You're treating them differently. I don't see why someone would. Someone saying "Forget the cutlery, grab a club!" could be completely IC or completely OOC. People do give advice or orders in the middle of combat or other emergency situations. It's not "excuse me would you be so kind as to hand me the number four forceps" its hand out "NUMBER FOURRRR!!!"

It's such a minor difference I can't see why you should get angry with other people for not following the rules or social conventions that are obvious to you. Other people are not mind readers, and that's not such a wildly held social convention that you could reasonably expect people to follow it. The difference was hard to explain with three attempts in a text conversation, much less expect people to know during a game.

You can't export your own very specific preferences onto other people and then get angry when they're not following them, and thats about as specific a circumstance as I've ever seen.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

Personally, I couldn't care less as I tend to ignore other player's "advice" as I find its either (1) not the best tactically, (2) not the best for my specific character and their own outlook/experience, or (3) just plain wrong. My point, which may not have been clear is that many people seem to feel that any unsolicited advice that is directed at them violates laws of social convention and player agency. So, I was only trying to provide a methodology where the information could be provided without directly encroaching on those players. If you disagree, fine. You (general) can do whatever you want. Ironically, its not my place to tell you how to address this issue given that you technically didn't ask for my advice. :-)

5/5 5/55/55/5

6 people marked this as a favorite.
TwilightKnight wrote:
Personally, I couldn't care less as I tend to ignore other player's "advice" as I find its either (1) not the best tactically, (2) not the best for my specific character and their own outlook/experience, or (3) just plain wrong. My point, which may not have been clear is that many people seem to feel that any unsolicited advice that is directed at them violates laws of social convention and player agency.

Unless you're playing tabletop games with Purple man the idea that advice violates agency is just silly. Just say no.

Advice might be overused, but its a necessary part of a group game. Sometimes THEIR character has a thing that needs some teamwork and coordination from you, they don't know if you're the new guy, new guy keeps mixing up that Energy resistance 5 sonic means they soak up sonic damage but DR 5 bludgeoning means they soak up slashing and piercing, or hell the advice might be part of the ability itself ( Get that one! for SF envoys get em!)

I know folks wish gamers hadn't dumped charisma IRL as well as in game to give the advice more politely/ better/ the one true way it can be done*, but I don't see any grand prohibition on advice for people to be violating by giving it.

*one true way not valid at all locations.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Except all too often people are obnoxious about their advice. Too many players don't know the subtle difference between sharing their knowledge and telling someone what to do and how to do it. My girlfriend has had it up to [here] with male gamers who seem to think she is ignorant of how to play and have to explain even the most commonplace concepts like she is a child. It is especially bad when she is GMing. She neither asked for, nor requires their "assistance." If she asks for it, that is another story of course, but is rarely the case.

While not as frequently, I have also found myself the recipient of unsolicited "advice." Pathfinder is not a logic engine. Every decision does not have to be the most optimal mathematically to be GoodRightFun or the least BadWrongFun, nor does the outcome have to be the best for you to be the most appropriate for me.

5/5 5/55/55/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
TwilightKnight wrote:
Except all too often people are obnoxious about their advice.

Which amounts to don't be obnoxious about it. Maybe pause and consider an extra time or two if it's towards a female gamer. Not NEVER give it.

Quote:


Too many players don't know the subtle difference between sharing their knowledge and telling someone what to do and how to do it.

Like I said. Geeks dumped charisma. On the other hand reading intent and tone isn't objective either.

Quote:
While not as frequently, I have also found myself the recipient of unsolicited "advice." Pathfinder is not a logic engine. Every decision does not have to be the most optimal mathematically to be GoodRightFun or the least BadWrongFun, nor does the outcome have to be the best for you to be the most appropriate for me.

It's hard to judge when/how/why/whether someone should have been giving the advice for anything but a circumstance by circumstance basis.

Buffers in particular almost need to explain how their buffs work unless they know the other person knows what to do with their abilities

1/5 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
TwilightKnight wrote:

Except all too often people are obnoxious about their advice. Too many players don't know the subtle difference between sharing their knowledge and telling someone what to do and how to do it. My girlfriend has had it up to [here] with male gamers who seem to think she is ignorant of how to play and have to explain even the most commonplace concepts like she is a child. It is especially bad when she is GMing. She neither asked for, nor requires their "assistance." If she asks for it, that is another story of course, but is rarely the case.

While not as frequently, I have also found myself the recipient of unsolicited "advice." Pathfinder is not a logic engine. Every decision does not have to be the most optimal mathematically to be GoodRightFun or the least BadWrongFun, nor does the outcome have to be the best for you to be the most appropriate for me.

It hasn't been *as* horrible in OrgPlay, but being treated as 'SO life-partner' in three OTHER organizations drove me away from them -- and it took me nearly a decade and a half to recover from the mental damage I took from one of them.

The sliding scale of 'I'm not sure about this one thing' <-------------> 'I've never touched an RPG before' is something everyone should be aware of, but very few people are, and experience indicates that it's viewed less as a scale and more as a slope by those who do have experience.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Buffers in particular almost need to explain how their buffs work unless they know the other person knows what to do with their abilities

Apples and oranges. I’m not saying YOU cannot tell me how YOUR abilities work, ie buffs. I’m saying YOU should abstain from telling ME how MY abilities work or when to use them.

5/5 5/55/55/5

TwilightKnight wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Buffers in particular almost need to explain how their buffs work unless they know the other person knows what to do with their abilities
Apples and oranges. I’m not saying YOU cannot tell me how YOUR abilities work, ie buffs. I’m saying YOU should abstain from telling ME how MY abilities work or when to use them.

It's fruit salad with mixed nuts.(and the mixed nuts dumped charisma) One persons abilities affect how anothers work, or people doing different things get in the way of each other. You're acting as a party, that requires some degree of working togther or at least not working against each other. That requires communication. I don't think most people are going to say "hurt the one on the left so i cam move past the one on the right and threaten the boss" they're just going to say "clear me a path! wrecking ball coming through!" Especially if someone stays in character in combat.

You also get people being wrong about their own abilities, people you think are wrong about their abilities but they're right/its a gray area. There's probably a dozen other legitimate reasons for trying to get a party member to do something not to do something or doing it differently.

Even without those circumstances I don't think advice is verbotten is a social convention you can rely on or get upset at people for violating.
It just comes up as useful too many times legitimately to crack down on all uses. Why you need or want someone to do X takes a LOT longer than explaining x. You can always tell the other player "Nope, III have evil plans on my own. MUAHAHAHAHAHAHA..." or "I don't take orders I have a trust fund..." Online i'll usually just say nope and then type out an explanation why during the next players turn.

2/5 5/5 *

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber

I'm pretty sure this is karma for me derailing the other thread...

I think the topic of how to convey advice--tactical as part of the immediate game in front of you or otherwise--is a worthwhile conversation to have, but I'll just point out that it doesn't directly pertain to whether OP can help define the "floor" of character knowledge within the game world and how that might manifest. So I would politely request a new threat be created on that subject (and I'd be interested in contributing and continuing that discussion).

Scarab Sages 4/5

I don’t know what the best solution is, but if there isn’t going to be an assumed level of information, because that would be too much to detail, then I’d look at using the lore skills system to represent common knowledge. The lore skill that you get from school training does an ok job of representing what you specialized in during your training, but it doesn’t cover the general knowledge. For a brief moment when the latest guide went live, I thought every school trained pathfinder was going to get Pathfinder Society Lore plus a school Lore, but that turned out to not be the case. I would look at adding two additional lores for each character:

Pathfinder Training Lore - A general Lore covering basic Pathfinder training. This could be used to do things like recall knowledge about general creature types, what different precious materials are generally good for, general world knowledge, etc. as a broad lore skill, this wouldn’t provide an easier dc for the recall, and if anything might have to make a roll at an increased dc the more specific the situation is. And alternative would be a lore skill for each School, as in Swords School Lore, Scrolls School Lore, Spells School Lore. The existing granted lore represents what you get from your school, though, and breaking down general knowledge by school might just lead to more table variation.

Home Region Lore - When you select a Home Region, you get a lore skill associated with that region. It might be broad, like Saga Lands Lore, or be for a specific nation, like Varisia Lore, or be more narrow and tied to a specific city, like Magnimar Lore. The player decides. If you pick up a second home region, then you get a new associated Lore.

I expect there would be hesitancy around this, because in 2E you generally have to give up something to get anything, and we’re already getting a lore from the schools, plus eventually a skill feat, plus consumables. However, I feel like these lore skills would help fill in some of the immersion breaking gaps that currently exist, where someone from a city might not be able to know anything about that city.

There’s also the question of what carries over to field commissioned agents. The Home Region Lore certainly should. I’m not sure what they would get in place if the Pathfinder Training Lore.

The other counter I can see is that anyone could just take those lores with their starting skills or additional lore (see 2E wanting you to give something up to get something). But PFS greatly encourages using your available skills/increases on the standard skills. Spending a starting skill on Lepistadt Lore or something like that, when you could take Arcana or Nature, or whatever just doesn’t seem practical. I’ve done something similar on a character, taking Fishing Lore in addition to the Sailing Lore from my background and Warfare Lore from my school, because the character is a Paladin of Ylimancha and one of his edicts is to teach sustainable fishing. I definitely feel the absence of an additional more common skill. I could have tried to find a different background that granted fishing, but then I’d feel like I’d need to take Sailing Lore.

Anyway, the desire is not to get something for nothing. It’s to better represent characters in-world, while also using the existing mechanics to give GMs a tool to use when questions around what a character should know come up, to to hopefully eliminate some table variation and more importantly some table conflict as a result.

2/5 5/5 *

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber

That's certainly an option that's better than nothing.

I still cringe at the idea that I'm from Nantambu and get Nantambu lore, but I've only got a 35%-55% chance of chance of not knowing any given detail that someone stuck behind a level-based DC.

The problem lies significantly with the greater design team from author to editor in what they stick in their knowledge checks. I still need to go through and post examples from the scenarios, but I can barely take time to write what I write. However, 1-00 is an example of generally good uses of the Recall Knowledge in a scenario: information gained is either hyperspecific and directly assists the characters in solving the mysteries and/or grants bonuses for knowing the information.

We have a ton of world lore that has been published. Sure, it is ostensibly for the GM, but we use it as players to build our characters, and it is really frustrating to have that yanked from your background by a random person deciding knowing some random factoid that doesn't even affect the plot needs to be behind a spoiler.

51 to 63 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / General Discussion / PFS & Knowledge (unsolicited suggestion for Organized Play) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.