Clarifying some rules from Psionics Unleashed/PF Core

[Tovec]

That's a very curious statement. The implication is that owning and memorizing books translates to running good games? I don't buy it. I've had awesome games with completely inexperienced DMs.

No, it translates to understanding the rules of the game, aka, the issue you have been having NOT understand the rules of the game. In many cases (with us) if the person with the greatest imagination/intent on running a game isn't rules savvy they will have a PC be half-DM and help them when they need a ruling. When no one knows the rules EXCEPT one person and you want to use a certain rule-set, it helps if that person DMs to teach the others how it works.

I would take it so far to say that I've found a slight inverse correlation between a player's knowledge of the game and their ability to create memorable scenarios and characters. The players that read through the books and say "Dude, if I take this feat I can expand my crit range from 16-20" just seem incapable of making interesting/memorable characters or DMing. Just my experience.

I've found no correlation at all. As Mad Hamish said. Having a great imagination has little to do with understanding of rules. Having knowledge of rules doesn't push something else out. Having a good understanding of the rules and a good imagination only enhances the game for everyone. It allows you to quickly understand when something should or should not be allowed. It comes in handy when needing to make houserules to improve play. It makes it so everyone is on the same footing with their characters.

Why does everyone frown upon running a less rules-intensive game? No one else in the group owns a PF Core book, Sir Poofs-a-Lot can't run circles around me with rules, people in the group can't seem to remember what their feats do anyway, there's less potential for munchkining out and having huge power spreads between the gamers, and I know no one else will be reading the combat chapter of the base game anyway. I don't think any of my other players even know what a prestige class is anyway.

You aren't running a less rules-intensive game. You are running a regular game without knowledge of the rules. When one person abuses that lack of knowledge then an issue is created. If you want to play PF then the one person with the Core rulebook being the DM is a good idea. If they are unable to perform the task of DM then that's fine.

As for ''there's less potential for munchkining'' then I disagree as one of your players IS doing it. Without full knowledge for EVERYONE then I may agree but that would only be if they understand the rules enough to play and don't understand them enough to break it. Not understanding something and accidentally abusing it can be equally bad.

Not knowing what a prestige class is has very little to do with this issue or why I suggested the person with the Core run the game. If the guy with the Core would lend you the manual to read over and understand the rules that would be ideal in your case.

 

[GregoryOatmeal]

I've found no correlation at all. As Mad Hamish said. Having a great imagination has little to do with understanding of rules. Having knowledge of rules doesn't push something else out. Having a good understanding of the rules and a good imagination only enhances the game for everyone

Yes, technically rules knowledge has no correlation to imagination. What I was saying is that rules lawyers and munchkins tend to lose sight of character development in favor of an emphasis on power gaming. Their conversations tend to be about why it's a good idea for the barbarian to take a level as a rogue in order to have all of the sneak attack/rage combo benefits of a "stealth barbarian". And ultimately that's what I tend to remember about their character, over any roleplaying. And generally these types roleplay awfully.

That's not to say all rules-savvy players are power gamers. But all power gamers are rules-savvy.

Lastly rules comprehension enhances gameplay if everyone is on the same page - otherwise it creates huge power imbalances that hinder gameplay. In the case of this player he is effectively as powerful as my other three players because:
1) He can use all of the rules to his advantage
2) He owns all of the player materials so he can pick and choose the best race/class combinations
3) He liberally interprets obscure rules to his benefit

You aren't running a less rules-intensive game. You are running a regular game without knowledge of the rules. When one person abuses that lack of knowledge then an issue is created. If you want to play PF then the one person with the Core rulebook being the DM is a good idea. If they are unable to perform the task of DM then that's fine.

As for ''there's less potential for munchkining'' then I disagree as one of your players IS doing it.

That was all in reference to switching to Castles and Crusades. That was the less rules-intensive game people were frowning at.


Really though, I have a fairly good idea of what I'm doing, what the rogue is capable of, what's challenging and balanced, etc. I'm easily the second most well-versed gamer in the group and I know my 3.5 well-enough. So things tend to get resolved. But honestly:

If he's moving stuff with his mind, then the power he's using must be Telekinetic Force, which is also a 3rd-level power. That allows him to move an object weighing up to 250 pounds, not 250 pounds per level. And if he uses it to move a creature, the creature gets a Will save and Power Resistance against it.

This is the problem. How am I supposed to memorize the details of a third party supplement that he conveniently ignores? This isn't a question of the DM being ignorant of the core rules. With the exception of the glaive thing every single instance I listed refers to specific aspects of psionics buried deep in a third party book. And the glaive thing actually wasn't in the core book anyway, so none of the concerns I brought up are in the core book. But anyway, it's impossible for me to rely on anything short of the honor system to resolve such conflicts over the very obscure details of psionics.

 

[Mad Hamish]

Yes, technically rules knowledge has no correlation to imagination. What I was saying is that rules lawyers and munchkins tend to lose sight of character development in favor of an emphasis on power gaming. Their conversations tend to be about why it's a good idea for the barbarian to take a level as a rogue in order to have all of the sneak attack/rage combo benefits of a "stealth barbarian". And ultimately that's what I tend to remember about their character, over any roleplaying. And generally these types roleplay awfully.

There's a huge difference between knowing the rules, being a rules lawyer, being a power gamer and being a munchkin.
Grouping them all together doesn't help much.

Some of the best roleplayers I've seen were largely power gamers as well.
I can be a bit of a rules lawyer (but I also point things out when it works against me)
Munchkins are a different story but they largely grow out of it given time, just keep them under control until then.

That's not to say all rules-savvy players are power gamers. But all power gamers are rules-savvy.

Lastly rules comprehension enhances gameplay if everyone is on the same page - otherwise it creates huge power imbalances that hinder gameplay. In the case of this player he is effectively as powerful as my other three players because:
1) He can use all of the rules to his advantage
2) He owns all of the player materials so he can pick and choose the best race/class combinations
3) He liberally interprets obscure rules to his benefit

As the GM you can decide what books you allow in, you can vet characters and you can say "we're not using that rule"
As to "best race/class combinations" that's not overly tough in pathfinder. About the only thing that really adds to it is the optional favored class options in the Advanced Players Guide (you can disallow them) there might be a few racial feats I guess.

Apart from that the synergies between class and race are reasonably apparent just from reading the race and class descriptions.

Nor are there any race class combinations that are unplayable (a halfling or gnome melee based character won't be optimal but is still playable)

That was all in reference to switching to Castles and Crusades. That was the less rules-intensive game people were frowning at.


Really though, I have a fairly good idea of what I'm doing, what the rogue is capable of, what's challenging and balanced, etc. I'm easily the second most well-versed gamer in the group and I know my 3.5 well-enough. So things tend to get resolved. But honestly:

This is the problem. How am I supposed to memorize the details of a third party supplement that he conveniently ignores? This isn't a question of the DM being ignorant of the core rules. With the exception of the glaive thing every single instance I listed refers to specific aspects of psionics buried deep in a third party book. And the glaive thing actually wasn't in the core book anyway,

the rules on attacks of opportunity are in the core book under the combat system.
Because you didn't understand the rules on attacks of opportunity you didn't know what he was talking about.

If you choose to let third party products into a game without checking them don't be surprised if they don't work. Generally 3rd party products have a much wider range of power levels than the original publishers do (although some of them are hugely cool, Midnight, Dawnforge, DragonStar... were great d20 games)
but then there were 3.x class books that were hugely unbalanced power ups

so none of the concerns I brought up are in the core book. But anyway, it's impossible for me to rely on anything short of the honor system to resolve such conflicts over the very obscure details of psionics.

When characters level up you read the description of the powers and feats that they choose. Then if you think they're using them wrong you can ask the player how the character is doing what they're doing.

Also note that it appears that the player is either incapable of reading the books and understanding them or is blatantly cheating to power his character up.

If you aren't willing to spend maybe 10 minutes each time that the characters level to get a handle on what the characters can do then you probably aren't really cut out to be a GM, especially if you know you've got a suspect player.

Note that the details from the supplement seem to be available at
Psionics Unleashed - Pathfinder_OGC

 

[tylermalan]

How am I supposed to memorize the details of...

This is an interesting question. I DM a lot (way more than I play), and I am of the opinion that the DM should understand how something works before allowing it into the game. It isn't a matter of memorizing the details of anything - it is a matter of understanding the framework of the rules system (usually found within the core rules) well enough to know whether or not something is going to cause a problem. If you don't understand it, don't have the time to learn it, or otherwise can't understand it for some reason, then the general idea is that you should not allow it in the game.

I share the opinion of other posters that the DM should be the person who knows the most about the rule system. If this person is inherently not creative, then you could share the DMing responsibilities with another person who is. One person creates the content, while the person who knows the rules adjudicates the actual play of the game. Over time, the creative person will learn the rules to the point where he doesn't need assistance, and can DM by himself.

The only exception to this that I can think of is if the DM can TOTALLY trust ALL of his players, including those that know the rules better than he does. I would say that, in the situation you put forth, this is not the case.

But what I mentioned above about one DM adjudicating the game really highlights my thoughts on this topic. One of the DM's responsibilities is that of judge. Essentially, you cannot impartially adjudicate using the rules if you don't know them.

 

[Tovec]

[MENTION=6667661]GregoryOatmeal[/MENTION] maybe WotC felt the same way you did and that's the reason they came up with a "roleplaying free" form for 4th edition.

Understanding the rules (any rules) allows you to use them more effectively that is all. They in no way mean you can't ignore, bend, stretch, disallow or adhere to them whenever it is creative to do so.
It does mean as a DM that you should know more than the other players or at least AS MUCH as them to avoid cheating and abusing of the system.

Also, because it is a third party system you could have been perfectly within your rights as DM to say "This class isn't working out." or to houserule the teleknesis thing. Coming to the Pathfinder boards for help means we give advice on the Pathfinder aspect of your issue.

Anything else I can say on this subject would just be piling on what the last two have said. I just wanted to leave my two cents because I was quoted.

 

[Anguish]

Just ban psionics.

What a weird way of "solving" this problem. By "this problem" I mean: the DM doesn't know what his players' PCs are and are not allowed to do. I guarantee I could thrash this game with any core class.

I'm sorry, but (one) correct solution to this is that the DM gets a copy of every character sheet. Any time the DM has a little voice in his head saying "that doesn't sound right", he can ask the player what ability is being used. The DM can happily look up that rule - online, for free - on his own time.

I don't personally like the idea of a DM who doesn't know the majority of the rules running a game, but it can be done. The DM simply has to be prepared to look up the rules that come into play. Reach weapon? Read a paragraph. Astral travel? Read a paragraph.

It's not hard to understand your players' abilities - and catch the "mistakes" - if you insist on a copy of the character sheet.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I don't personally like the idea of a DM who doesn't know the majority of the rules running a game, but it can be done. The DM simply has to be prepared to look up the rules that come into play. Reach weapon? Read a paragraph. Astral travel? Read a paragraph.

It also helps if you have players that know the rules and can help you out as the DM. As opposed players who may or may not* know the rules themselves making up rules that suit them and just in general being turds.

Of course, intenet wisdom demands that "rules lawyers" are a no good force of evil, scum that must be purged from a gaming group because god forbid you have decent people around that happen to know the rules well.


*Knowledge of the rules is not required to bs a bunch of nonexistent "rules"

 

[paradox42]

This is the problem. How am I supposed to memorize the details of a third party supplement that he conveniently ignores? This isn't a question of the DM being ignorant of the core rules. With the exception of the glaive thing every single instance I listed refers to specific aspects of psionics buried deep in a third party book. And the glaive thing actually wasn't in the core book anyway, so none of the concerns I brought up are in the core book. But anyway, it's impossible for me to rely on anything short of the honor system to resolve such conflicts over the very obscure details of psionics.

These aren't obscure details, they're basics of the psionics rules. It's like spellcasters: would you let a Wizard PC in your party cast Fireball and claim it was really dealing 15d6 damage for some reason? And Wizards have school specialty powers too; in fact the Teleportation Subschool specialist introduced in the APG can teleport starting at 1st level (he has limited uses per day and a lower range limit but it's otherwise pretty much the same). So if you had a player who was a Teleportation specialist, and tried to use this at 5th level to poof 30 feet away every round, would you know why that's incorrect and put a stop to it?

The lesson here is not to ban psionics; it's to just plain disallow rules sets for which you don't have a handy reference you can use to look things up in play. You don't have to memorize things at all; I don't know anybody who does. I myself have an eidetic memory, and I don't bother memorizing word-for-word descriptions- just a general gist so I know where to go to look things up. Just keep books handy for reference purposes, or a convenient internet-capable device with which you can link to a site like d20pfsrd.com. And I never allow players to use books in my games which I do not personally own a copy of, in some form or another.

Another problem here, which is clearly showing in your responses, is a play style clash. The munchkin player (and yes, by the description it's definitely a munchkin rather than a power-gamer or a rules-lawyer- I've dealt with all three kinds in my games and know the difference) is playing the game as a game, whereas you and the other players are playing it as a story. Playing a RPG for story reasons is perfectly valid; lots of people do it. But if you have a "gamist" in a group of "storyists" then there comes a point where the "gamist" focuses on numbers and powers and ends up dominating the game-rule aspects of play, regardless of what it does to the story the others were constructing.

Recognize the difference, and have a talk with all of your players to find out what sort of game they really want. If Sir Poofs-A-Lot is raining on the fun of the other players, then it's time to discuss measures like forcing him to switch characters or just plain finding another gaming group. This sort of clash of styles invariably causes troubles if it's not dealt with openly and honestly by all concerned.

 

[GregoryOatmeal]

@GregoryOatmeal maybe WotC felt the same way you did and that's the reason they came up with a "roleplaying free" form for 4th edition.

I don't quite follow what you there. Are you saying it's possible to not RP in 4E? Because it seems like you can RP as much as you like in that game just like any other tabletop RPG...

It does mean as a DM that you should know more than the other players or at least AS MUCH as them to avoid cheating and abusing of the system

If you want to cheat in D&D you can (although I don't understand why one would). I just don't feel it's the responsibility of the DM to police the actions of the players. But yeah...I'm boning up on the rules because apparently this is sort of naive and idealistic...

 

[GregoryOatmeal]

I guarantee I could thrash this game with any core class.

You could, but why would you want to? What does that prove?

It's not hard to understand your players' abilities - and catch the "mistakes" - if you insist on a copy of the character sheet.

Usually my approach is to ask the players to look up the rules if they appear unusual or unbalanced. I'm a fairly trusting DM and like to keep the game moving quickly. I guess it comes down to identifying the players that are and aren't trustworthy.