Post by cassusaevum on Feb 24, 2020 15:31:52 GMT -5
I'm trying to make my way through the nuance of the book, but I'll admit right up front that I'm not going to have the full system mastery for a while. My focus right now is more on adventure prep and conversion than it is on nuance. I'm trying to fill in the gaps with rules knowledge here and there, as time permits. I want to play "by the book" as much as possible, but not to the extent that the newness (to me, anyway) of the system brings the game to a screeching halt.
With that in mind, I'm going to rely on you guys to know what your characters can do and, to a certain extent, remind me of things that the NPCs can or can't do. Generally, if we're at the table and someone is confidant a thing works a particular way and no one else is certain it works a different way, I'd rather just go with it and find out the answer later (and adjust future rulings accordingly). I'd prefer not to get into lengthy rules discussions at the table if we can avoid it.
The exception, of course, is if something is a point of high peril for a character or if it is something that is just really character-concept important. Anytime death is on the line or a ruling would change the color or tenor of how you see your character, I want to make sure we get it 100% right.
There may also be times where I hand waive stuff in favor of expediency or drama. A good example of this would be something like a Diplomacy check. There might be instances of pass/fail rather than "increase disposition then ruling on what, exactly, friendly vs. helpful vs. indifferent means in this particular situation." Likewise, there will be times when we bypass such checks altogether in favor of pure RP.
All of this is (I think, anyway) fairly standard stuff, but given the detailed nature of Pathfinder 2, I wanted to make sure we were all on the same page.
With that in mind, I'm going to rely on you guys to know what your characters can do and, to a certain extent, remind me of things that the NPCs can or can't do. Generally, if we're at the table and someone is confidant a thing works a particular way and no one else is certain it works a different way, I'd rather just go with it and find out the answer later (and adjust future rulings accordingly). I'd prefer not to get into lengthy rules discussions at the table if we can avoid it.
The exception, of course, is if something is a point of high peril for a character or if it is something that is just really character-concept important. Anytime death is on the line or a ruling would change the color or tenor of how you see your character, I want to make sure we get it 100% right.
There may also be times where I hand waive stuff in favor of expediency or drama. A good example of this would be something like a Diplomacy check. There might be instances of pass/fail rather than "increase disposition then ruling on what, exactly, friendly vs. helpful vs. indifferent means in this particular situation." Likewise, there will be times when we bypass such checks altogether in favor of pure RP.
All of this is (I think, anyway) fairly standard stuff, but given the detailed nature of Pathfinder 2, I wanted to make sure we were all on the same page.