The "Behind the Curtain" thread got me to thinking about dirty tricks GMs can pull. Last session of my game, I inadvertently led the players on a 10 minute tangent by using the phrase "appears to be normal" in regards to a query pertaining to a statue they saw from a distance. It was pretty funny to witness the ensuing investigation, poking, prodding, ranged attacks, and mumbling of possible command words. What words, tricks, etc. do or have you used in your games to keep things interesting? As a player, do you consider something like this to be below the belt, or aboveboard?
If someone looks for traps and fails, I tell them it looks clear. If there is no trap, I say the same thing. I also use "as far as you can tell".
Doesn't strike me as "subterfuge" or an attempt to "keep things interesting" at all. I'm just telling them what they see and if they don't see anything out of the ordinary, then "it appears to be normal". I rarely, if ever, describe things like that in absolute terms, although, if the system has some kind of perception rolls and the player rolls extremely well (or extremely poorly...), I'll also mention that they're highly confident in their assessment ("you're pretty sure that it's just a normal statue").
Our Wednesday night GM always puts it as, "To the best of your knowledge and ability it appears to be..."
I'm fine with that.
When I run games I try hard not to imply/suggest/lead... 'Just the facts, ma'am.'
"Appears to be normal" is a simple statement that invites further investigation should it be desired. It isn't sneaky or underhanded. The phrase can be uttered in such a way as to be more leading, " The statue APPEARS to be normal". That is one way to try and draw interest to the statue but still isn't underhanded.
Some players will just latch on to something like that and refuse to let go. It's probably because another DM pixel-bitched the shit out of them.
Same as the "you don't hear or see anything" response when the players are anticipating ambush. I just cant see telling them "there's nothing there" although at times it woukd save a lot of grief.
Quote from: Harlock;913934The "Behind the Curtain" thread got me to thinking about dirty tricks GMs can pull. Last session of my game, I inadvertently led the players on a 10 minute tangent by using the phrase "appears to be normal" in regards to a query pertaining to a statue they saw from a distance. It was pretty funny to witness the ensuing investigation, poking, prodding, ranged attacks, and mumbling of possible command words. What words, tricks, etc. do or have you used in your games to keep things interesting? As a player, do you consider something like this to be below the belt, or aboveboard?
Laugh!
I remember early on when my players started reacting to:
GM: "Ok you march another day up the road to Feebtown." (rolls dice) "You're walking along when..."
Player: "I ready my crossbow!"
Which soon developed into:
GM: "... uh, ok, you ready your crossbow when you hadn't noticed anything."
or
GM: "You hadn't noticed anything yet. Do you want to always have a loaded crossbow ready all day every day when you travel?"
I have run entire sessions where I just let the players' own paranoia and appetite for mischief generate play. I have just described the situation, laid it out on a map with figures, and handed out notes, and they start generating mystery, magical investigations and deceptions, theft, seduction & love triangles, mysteries, contests, duels, etc. All I have had to do is give them the details that their PCs can see and hear or already know about, and withhold what they don't know for sure without them investigating, and often all sorts of things happen, especially if one or two PCs are being sneaky or just yanking each others' chains.
All that has led to a GM style where I am very deliberately filtering in-character from OOC information. Causally muddy clues in the way the GM describes things can lead to all sorts of meta-game (dis)information otherwise. Some of it is practically unavoidable, but I think it's worthwhile to develop one's awareness of it.
I like to try to maintain a game state where the world seems to be full of all sorts of detail and stuff to discover, but players can choose what to investigate, and need to go look to get information (they can't just randomly question the GM except about what their PC already thinks they know).
So I try to make sure they get plenty of "you pass a gem shop and a greengrocer" or "a man in leather armor with a slung throwing axe passes you" or "you notice a man in a cloak watching you" or "the shopkeeper wears a wolfshead brooch" that is just mundane people & things, so that it's not just the fact that the GM mentions something means that they are supposed to investigate (or acquire or fight) it.
Quote from: yosemitemike;913972It's probably because another DM pixel-bitched the shit out of them.
Is 'pixel-bitched' a slang term?
I doubt this would be a dirty trick but here the neatest trick I ever pulled off. This was from an Majestic Wilderlands OD&D Campaign.
One players was a half-Viridian (a demon race) who hated his father for a number of very good reason, one of which was abandoning them when he was young. Because of this one of the themes of the campaign was the party tracking down and killing the last of the full Viridians still alive. A decade the empire was liberated from them and the authorities gladly pay for the head of any of the survivors.
They got a lead on the player's father, this lead up to the opening of X2 Castle Amber. When I run campaigns, I often re-purpose published modules to keep up with the prep. In this case, I substituted the Amber family with a similar family only they were Viridians. The character went through the adventure which involved travel back to an earlier time period.
The highlight of the adventures was the liberation of "Stephen Amber" which turned out to be the character's father! The party learned that the who reason that for the character for being born was so that he could grow up. Then go back into time and free his father from the curse in the module. To say that that the player's jaw hit the floor was an understatement. The rest of the players spent a couple of minutes trying to wrap their head around how the whole chain of event and time travel played out.
Quote from: estar;914035I doubt this would be a dirty trick but here the neatest trick I ever pulled off. This was from an Majestic Wilderlands OD&D Campaign.
One players was a half-Viridian (a demon race) who hated his father for a number of very good reason, one of which was abandoning them when he was young. Because of this one of the themes of the campaign was the party tracking down and killing the last of the full Viridians still alive. A decade the empire was liberated from them and the authorities gladly pay for the head of any of the survivors.
They got a lead on the player's father, this lead up to the opening of X2 Castle Amber. When I run campaigns, I often re-purpose published modules to keep up with the prep. In this case, I substituted the Amber family with a similar family only they were Viridians. The character went through the adventure which involved travel back to an earlier time period.
The highlight of the adventures was the liberation of "Stephen Amber" which turned out to be the character's father! The party learned that the who reason that for the character for being born was so that he could grow up. Then go back into time and free his father from the curse in the module. To say that that the player's jaw hit the floor was an understatement. The rest of the players spent a couple of minutes trying to wrap their head around how the whole chain of event and time travel played out.
Sounds like a good twist. Also, Castle Amber is one of the all time greatest of TSR modules. Nothing like a keep full of inbred and insane nobles to keep players on their toes!
Quote from: estar;914035I doubt this would be a dirty trick but here the neatest trick I ever pulled off. This was from an Majestic Wilderlands OD&D Campaign.
One players was a half-Viridian (a demon race) who hated his father for a number of very good reason, one of which was abandoning them when he was young. Because of this one of the themes of the campaign was the party tracking down and killing the last of the full Viridians still alive. A decade the empire was liberated from them and the authorities gladly pay for the head of any of the survivors.
They got a lead on the player's father, this lead up to the opening of X2 Castle Amber. When I run campaigns, I often re-purpose published modules to keep up with the prep. In this case, I substituted the Amber family with a similar family only they were Viridians. The character went through the adventure which involved travel back to an earlier time period.
The highlight of the adventures was the liberation of "Stephen Amber" which turned out to be the character's father! The party learned that the who reason that for the character for being born was so that he could grow up. Then go back into time and free his father from the curse in the module. To say that that the player's jaw hit the floor was an understatement. The rest of the players spent a couple of minutes trying to wrap their head around how the whole chain of event and time travel played out.
That's a really good one! This was exactly the type of twists that a close friend of mine used to pull in his campaign.
Shemek.
Quote from: estar;914029Is 'pixel-bitched' a slang term?
Derived from the old Sierra adventure games (hence the "pixel"), it refers to GMs who have one specific (usually fairly obscure) solution to the problem at hand. And, therefore, everything the PCs attempt will arbitrarily fail until they've done the specific thing the GM has in mind (i.e., clicked on the specific pixel they're supposed to click on).
...and the original use of the term "pixel-bitch" as applied to gaming is pretty apt for what it describes - the GM has one solution that must be followed exactly, and if the players do not do that exact thing, then they get nowhere.
Like all terms, it gets misused. For example, on purple when someone says "pixel-bitch" you can usually insert "everything didn't turn out exactly the way I wanted it" and the sentence will parse correctly. Other times, it gets used when a frustrated PC forgets something. As a result, they don't mention it, so the GM doesn't assume they intend to do it. For example, one thread I remember on purple, PCs were bitching about finding something. They didn't say "We search the whole room". They went bit by bit through the room, but forgot one of the pieces of furniture. They gave up and then when the GM reminded them that they missed a piece from the description - Pixel-bitch GM.
If they said they search everything - no issue.
If, after they chose to search piecemeal, they had remembered what was actually in the room and searched it - no issue.
But how they chose to search the room and the fact that they failed to actually remember what was in it - complete GM fault.
So yeah, like any internet gaming term referring to GM misdeeds - actually exists 1% of the time it is invoked.
Pixel bitching also works in the reverse, where it can be used in Org Play to funnel down variance in overarching adventure seasons. Since Org Play is a meta-layer that can override GM judgment, it is not uncommon for Org Play adventure writers - and subsequently traveling competitive players - to invoke the pixel bitch to shut down alternate creative play solutions, by either other players or GMs. It's a form of meta-rules lawyering to cramp the GM into CPU server mode so a player's optimization is not fettered by human variance.
Quote from: Opaopajr;914180Pixel bitching also works in the reverse, where it can be used in Org Play to funnel down variance in overarching adventure seasons. Since Org Play is a meta-layer that can override GM judgment, it is not uncommon for Org Play adventure writers - and subsequently traveling competitive players - to invoke the pixel bitch to shut down alternate creative play solutions, by either other players or GMs. It's a form of meta-rules lawyering to cramp the GM into CPU server mode so a player's optimization is not fettered by human variance.
Can you give some concrete examples of what you are talking about?
But of course!
PFS is notorious now for not allowing theft of unlisted treasure to remain with you after a session adventure. That means nothing, including the water you scoop out of an unowned lake into your own barrel can remain with your character. It gets confiscated by your society faction for you to purchase waterskin refills later. So that also means any other such 'found objects' beyond one-session play do not persist until purchased. Therefore any creative uses for found ingredients (herbs, powders, chemicals, fluids, etc.), tools, weapons & armor, and so on must serve that session's use. Further "more competitive players" may invoke those actions to be deemed table griefing and delay of game, which then can shut down that GM support of that player's gathering efforts.
The D&D AL compromise to this is found weapon & armor from enemies are limited to current-session only, but GM discretion is allowed elsewhere.
Further the properties of an object not delineated can have players invoke unallowed deviation so there is cross-table persistence of story arc NPCs/Locales. So, (my current FLGS drama) you can have the organization say a GM cannot define an alcohol as flammable because the adventure and PHB does not define said adventure alcohol as such. Or, in further AL drama, you can have fire catch on several objects, but not catch the location it is in on fire - because it could interfere with the persistence of a location for future adventures.
Certain creative or indirect solutions go off the table when the GM cannot use situational judgment for contextual coherence. The logic is because either a) such contextual coherence conflicts with future narrative expectations. Or the logic is because b) such absence of explicit game mechanization leads to inconsistent strategy across tables. In both cases the desire is to minimize variance for the consumption of a consistent official play product.
Quote from: Opaopajr;914195Therefore any creative uses for found ingredients (herbs, powders, chemicals, fluids, etc.), tools, weapons & armor, and so on must serve that session's use. Further "more competitive players" may invoke those actions to be deemed table griefing and delay of game, which then can shut down that GM support of that player's gathering efforts.
I can see a GM cutting something short because of the time constraints of the format but I have never encountered a situation like you describe. The PFS guide does not use the term table griefing or at least the current one does not.
Quote from: Opaopajr;914195The D&D AL compromise to this is found weapon & armor from enemies are limited to current-session only, but GM discretion is allowed elsewhere.
My experience running DDAL is limited but I have never seen it there either.
Quote from: Opaopajr;914195Further the properties of an object not delineated can have players invoke unallowed deviation so there is cross-table persistence of story arc NPCs/Locales. So, (my current FLGS drama) you can have the organization say a GM cannot define an alcohol as flammable because the adventure and PHB does not define said adventure alcohol as such. Or, in further AL drama, you can have fire catch on several objects, but not catch the location it is in on fire - because it could interfere with the persistence of a location for future adventures.
I have run several PFS scenarios that take place in common locations including the entire series of Blackros Museun scenarios. None have any restriction like you describe. There is no prohibition on altering the location in any of them. There is nothing in any of them preventing a GM from saying that alcohol is flammable or anything of the kind either. That's not coming from the PFS rules at all.
Quote from: Opaopajr;914195Certain creative or indirect solutions go off the table when the GM cannot use situational judgment for contextual coherence. The logic is because either a) such contextual coherence conflicts with future narrative expectations. Or the logic is because b) such absence of explicit game mechanization leads to inconsistent strategy across tables. In both cases the desire is to minimize variance for the consumption of a consistent official play product.
Nothing in PFS prevents a GM from doing this. Scenarios are self-contained with little to no narrative expectation beyond the scenario itself. The second one is there but it's simply to make the experience and rewards more uniform though there is always a ton of table variation and the rules account for and allow that.
"While the goal of the Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild is to provide an even, balanced experience to all players, doing so would require all PCs to be exactly the same and all GMs to be restricted to a stiflingly oppressive script. We understand that sometimes a Game Master has to make rules adjudications on the fly, deal with unexpected player choices, or even cope with extremely unlucky (or lucky) dice on both sides of the screen. Scenarios are meant to be run as written, with no addition or subtraction to the number of monsters (unless indicated in the scenario), or changes to armor, feats, items, skills, spells, statistics, traits, or weapons.However, if the actions of the PCs before or during an encounter invalidate the provided tactics or starting locations, the GM should consider whether changing these would provide a more enjoyable play experience. As a Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild GM, you have the right and responsibility to make whatever judgments, within the rules, that you feel are necessary at your table to ensure everyone has a fair and fun experience. This does not mean you can contradict rules or restrictions outlined in this document, a published Pathfinder RPG source, errata document, or official FAQ on paizo.com. What it does mean is that only you can judge what is right for your table during cases not covered in these sources. Additionally, the GM may consider utilizing terrain and environmental conditions when those effects have been written into the flavor of a scenario but the mechanics that are normally associated with them by the Core Rulebook have not been added to the encounters."
It explicitly encourages allowing the use of terrain features and conditions as you describe and allows for creative solutions.
And everything you've said completely contradicts what I've seen and heard from friends who had played and ran PFS and AL in my presence. I myself stopped GMing AL because of the poor adventure design. We must then just have better munchkin rules lawyer GMs than you do, as they have received complaints from competitive Org Play players unhappy with them enjoying a party deviating with creative solutions, and then just turn around and rules crush the table utterly. Still know people that retired from pressganged convention GMing because player-side metagame pixel bitching wouldn't let them GM beyond strict rules service. They're very good at what they do, but were sick of being seen as a CPU server than a GM with judgment.
I know what I've seen and heard. Had to fine tooth comb AL rules in my time before I quit. Most players are great, but Org Play brings its own type of player-side control freak that meta-vetoes play. And yes, it can and does shut down tables.
Quote from: Opaopajr;914258We must then just have better munchkin rules lawyer GMs than you do, as they have received complaints from competitive Org Play players unhappy with them enjoying a party deviating with creative solutions, and then just turn around and rules crush the table utterly.
That's almost certainly the case but my point is that the PFS rules don't encourage or even support that behavior. They explicitly allow for GM judgement.
Quote from: Opaopajr;914195Further the properties of an object not delineated can have players invoke unallowed deviation so there is cross-table persistence of story arc NPCs/Locales. So, (my current FLGS drama) you can have the organization say a GM cannot define an alcohol as flammable because the adventure and PHB does not define said adventure alcohol as such.
Question. How does the bitching player know what the adventure does or does not define?
That all sounds super complicated - is PFS the most popular way to play Pathfinder (I'm assuming that's what PFS stands for).