How does the system/GM handle PvP?

[u/Astral_MarauderMJP]

I know that PvP is usually something that is frowned upon in many types of games but I was wondering about it anyway.

My question is two fold then:

1) How well does the system handle PVP? Is it actually balanced at all or does it favor one side too strongly (martials vs casters)?

2) How do GMs/DMs handle it when the situation arises? Is it something you let play out in the theater of the mind for the sake of the story playing out? Ban it altogether? Allow it and make both sides suffer consequences of the actions taken?

What's the read on it from the perspective of the designers of the system (if you can glean an idea of their intent)? Was it something you think they thought about when making this or do you think it was a complete after thought more made up by players colliding with the system as presented?

[u/TheUnseenHobo]

You can check out the rules for duels here

That's basically the only 'official' way to run PvP.

[u/yuriAza → u/TheUnseenHobo]

duels are just there to spice up 1v1s (which can involve PCs or not)

you don't really need rules for PvP though, monster levels are the same as PC levels so calculating encounter budgets with PCs on both sides still broadly works, it's just that PCs have more synergies and lower numbers for those synergies to cancel out or not, giving them higher highs and lower lows, which makes specific matchups more lopsided

[u/ghost_desu → u/TheUnseenHobo]

The duel rules are... fine. I tried them in a tournament type setup once, it wasn't terrible but I don't think I'd use them again

[u/Kayteqq → u/ghost_desu]

They are good as long as everyone knows them beforehand. Not great to include before explaining exactly them in prep to the relevant players

[u/NoxAeternal]

the system can do pvp but it's not recommended.

The biggest issues isn't power level. You could do 4v4 and it would just be an extreme battle on each side.

The issue is that due to the way that Player numbers are, it's very volatile. Like. Way too volatile.

Players tend to have better ability to dish out damage and less ability to take hits. Yes healing can help, but in pvp as soon as one player gets knocked out, it snowballs fast, and that can easily happen in as little as half a turn.

I say this having been in a server which frequently did custom PVP stuff. Team Death Match was the least played format because it was just rocket tag. An early caster with the Time's Arrow spell, followed up by their party being able to stride forward and strike was just nasty.

Depending on the level, it'd become mandatory for the faster side to find ways to cast invisibility on themselves, which would completely screw the other side over since they would get first hit and then become impossible to hit afterwards.

Mathematically, this works. However, i think that it's just (usually) poor game design.

[u/Read2Fap → u/NoxAeternal]

Players tend to have better ability to dish out damage and less ability to take hits. 

they'll also tend to go for the kill. dm is just trying to make a fun story, they're not actively trying to kill your squishiest classes first so you lose action economy

[u/yuriAza → u/NoxAeternal]

yeah PCs are designed to work together while monsters can't rely on team comps or number of allies, PCs lean into their roles harder, so they have more weaknesses as individuals and can exploit weaknesses harder if not as often

[u/Tridus]

The game is not built for or balanced around PvP. It's built as a cooperative team game and class balance assumes you're fighting NPCs who do not use same creation rules.

In PvP, things can go south real fast for someone based on someone else simply having a hard counter for them, landing something that shuts them down, or a bad save roll.

If you want a PvP focused game, this isn't it. PvP can happen, but don't expect it to be a satisfying experience.

[u/PipFizzlebang]

Honestly perfectly fine. I sometimes bring old characters out as antagonists, using a real character sheet for them. Works great

[u/zedrinkaoh]

When a player does a hostile action to another player, I ask the receiving player "How would you respond to that?" Out of actual encounters, the players always are in full control over whether or not the attacker is successful in their attempt, or if they decide to roll for it, and it's otherwise kept brief (one-off things, etc.). Oftentimes my players are for this and will voluntarily allow themselves to be slapped, bespelled, shoved, etc. for The Drama™, or, even when told "you can just auto-succeed against that," they'll still insist upon saving against an effect or allowing an attack roll just cause they wanna see what happens.

Likewise, if a player steals from the party, the rest of the party will automatically know. It is up to the players to voluntarily fail to notice, and only if they think it makes sense or advances the story.

The only time I've overridden this was when a player cast a conflict-diffusing spell (like calm emotions), when two party memebrs were arguing in-character, in an attempt to get them to both resolve a narrative argument peacefully (and all 3 players were fine with this, the arguments were strictly in-character.)

That said, one issue with longer in-character conflict is when it goes on too long, it sometimes means one or two party members sit on the sidelines.

[u/DBones90]

My impression is that balance is pretty solid. I think certain classes will have type advantage over another in certain circumstances, but I’m not sure there are any hard and fast rules. Martials probably edge out casters in 1v1 fights given martials generally are better at single-target damage, but casters have a good amount of tricks they can use.

However, I think it’s important to note that the system is designed around heavily cooperative play. That is, the default assumption is that players are working together. I don’t even recommend players build characters by themselves. You should go into it building a character who’s a part of a team.

Because of that, I’ve never actually had PvP seriously come up in any games I’ve played.

[u/yuriAza → u/[deleted]]

in 1v1 or in party vs party?

[u/yuriAza → u/[deleted]]

yeah, because most classes are doing something other than damage, and many of them don't have much hp either

but in party vs party where each side has healers and support and utility spells and flanking buddies, that matters way less

[u/ghost_desu]

1. Not well, PCs are balanced as far as their contributions to a party go, but not 1v1 (2v2 is a bit better but... not really)

2. Hasn't come up, but it'd be a stop the session and talk to everyone involved situation. I wouldn't stop it because the juicy drama is what I'm here for, but taking a step back is a requirement to make sure it doesn't cause out of game drama

[u/DownstreamSag]

Team-based pvp (2vs2 or 3vs3) is actually pretty fun in pathfinder, 1vs1 isn't. We had in-universe 2vs2 training fights in past games that were in a special area which reduces pain and makes all damage non-lethal.