|
I have a question for the community before I jump in and make a minor "adjustment" to a season 2 module.
I was wondering if anyone saw anything wrong with writing five new versions of the existing faction missions for those players who have chosen to represent the new factions. For example, (and forgive me if I'm getting the pair-up wrong, I don't have the Guide handy) I take the faction mission for Andoran, and rewrite the text so that it's delivered in the same voice as Silver Crusade missions from season 3 while keeping the mission the same. Then I give the "new" mission to Silver Crusade members so they still feel like they're completing a mission for their actual faction.
It's a paper-thin solution to the "problem," of course, and it requires a bit of suspension of disbelief on the part of the player, but it may add a bit more flavour to the game for them. It doesn't change anything about the module at all.
Does anyone see a problem with this? And if not, should I add something to the end of the mission like, "It may be worth your while to collaborate with any Andoran representatives you encounter; their leaders may be interested in the same results as we are."
Thoughts?
|
I was wondering if anyone saw anything wrong with writing five new versions of the existing faction missions for those players who have chosen to represent the new factions.
Nice idea - some of the pair-ups are a bit odd in certain modules. Having then re-written so at least it is coming from your faction leader helps ease the problem. Make sure the mission itself is as clear as it is in the original, though!
I routinely transcribe the faction missions so they're on letter-sized paper, using similar fonts and inserting the signatures and faction symbols as images. This gives a bigger sheet for the player to make notes on, and adds a bit to the feeling that it's a letter they're received and not just a scrap of paper.
|
|
There may be problems with some of the faction missions when they ask for a specific macguffin. Now you've got two separate factions wanting the same item. Not an insurmountable problem but something to watch out for.
All in all seems like its probably more trouble than it's worth but don't let my opinion stop you from doing something you think will enhance your player's experience.
|
I agree with Rob. It's a nice idea, but I don't think it will add much to your players' experience. On second thought, if you write the missions in a more legible font the players will likely appreciate it. Also, you could adjust/clarify the missions since there are plenty of them that have created a lot of room for confusion. So my answer is go ahead, but for different reasons ;) As long as you enjoy the process then by all means do it, but don't think that players expect it.
|
|
Here's what I've learned from posting on the messageboards. You have 100+ people reading your posts, of course *someone* is going to disagree or find fault with what you're doing. It's human nature.
I'd say go ahead and make changes that make the game and story better, especially if it's just a "fluff" change (the mechanics are the same, the cosmetics are different).
Regarding the faction missions, it's a good idea but it's extra work (that I don't want to do), and the season 1/2 faction missions look so nice when printed out properly. (I'm planning on playing more season 3, since my home game is all Shadow Lodge).
Having said that, if you re-write the fluff of the faction missions, please post them in the relevant scenario thread.
|
|
Here's what I've learned from posting on the messageboards. You have 100+ people reading your posts, of course *someone* is going to disagree or find fault with what you're doing. It's human nature.
Oh, I'm aware of that. (Thanks for looking out for me all the same!) It's more a matter of, "If I do this, will I be breaking anything in the scenario, or breaking the rules?" I couldn't see it as a problem, but being relatively new to PFS, it's possible that it would be a problem anyway.
As to the appearance of the printouts, I agree the originals look good. I have some graphic designer friends who may be able to help me with that. :) If I succeed and get them nicely formatted, I will save them as a PDF file and post a link in each scenario's thread as I get them done.
|
|
One question that has come up in the process of me working on this.
I'm currently working on 2-15: Shades of Ice 1, and adapting the mission for Osirion.
The Osirion faction mission states:
Now, to accomplish this mission
"The first requires a DC 10 Knowledge (nature) check, and the second requires two checks: a DC 20 Diplomacy (gather information) or Knowledge (local) check in order to find the Linnorm Spine, and then a DC 15 Diplomacy or Intimidate check to encourage the merchant to part with the rare tome. A bribe of 20 gp or more grants Osirion faction PCs a +2 circumstance bonus on these checks."
Can I adapt the "mission" for a different faction by
|
One question that has come up in the process of me working on this.
I'm currently working on 2-15: Shades of Ice 1, and adapting the mission for Osirion.
The Osirion faction mission states:
** spoiler omitted **
Now, to accomplish this mission
** spoiler omitted **
Can I adapt the "mission" for a different faction by
** spoiler omitted **
You can also put it so that the Grand Lodge PCs just have to make sure the Osirian PCs succeed, or if no Osirians succeed in their stead. It's reasonable to believe that the Grand Lodge would support this or that faction from time to time.
|
One question that has come up in the process of me working on this.
I'm currently working on 2-15: Shades of Ice 1, and adapting the mission for Osirion.
The Osirion faction mission states:
** spoiler omitted **
Now, to accomplish this mission
** spoiler omitted **
Can I adapt the "mission" for a different faction by
** spoiler omitted **
I would not change the location or type of the McGuffin, for a few reasons. One, a player could cry foul that theirs is harder, and two, it makes the module last longer for no extra benefit. I find faction missions to take too long and detract from the module, unless the GM can creatively link in faction objectives to the main quest. For example, in this case, ask the new faction to recover the book *or* make copies of some relevant sections to finding something that faction wants. Now both factions want the book, but if you have players from each, they won't quibble over who gets the book.
|
|
You can also put it so that the Grand Lodge PCs just have to make sure the Osirian PCs succeed, or if no Osirians succeed in their stead. It's reasonable to believe that the Grand Lodge would support this or that faction from time to time.
I'm reluctant to do this, if only because of the fact that many of the season 2 missions say, "Don't let other factions see you complete this mission." By extension, it seems that many of the players at the tables I see keep their factions secret from one another.
I suppose the simplest way is to keep the missions exactly the same but to add a line. Something like, "I have reached an understanding with Amenopheus, who I know is seeking the [blank] for his own purposes. If you find yourself at odds with one of his agents, then you may rest assured that we have agreed to share possession for a time."
|
|
You can also put it so that the Grand Lodge PCs just have to make sure the Osirian PCs succeed, or if no Osirians succeed in their stead. It's reasonable to believe that the Grand Lodge would support this or that faction from time to time.I'm reluctant to do this, if only because of the fact that many of the season 2 missions say, "Don't let other factions see you complete this mission." By extension, it seems that many of the players at the tables I see keep their factions secret from one another.
I suppose the simplest way is to keep the missions exactly the same but to add a line. Something like, "I have reached an understanding with Amenopheus, who I know is seeking the [blank] for his own purposes. If you find yourself at odds with one of his agents, then you may rest assured that we have agreed to share possession for a time."
There is a precedent. At least 1 or 2 mods say to do this explicitly. Is it a cheap answer? Probably. But it works.
|
You can also put it so that the Grand Lodge PCs just have to make sure the Osirian PCs succeed, or if no Osirians succeed in their stead. It's reasonable to believe that the Grand Lodge would support this or that faction from time to time.I'm reluctant to do this, if only because of the fact that many of the season 2 missions say, "Don't let other factions see you complete this mission." By extension, it seems that many of the players at the tables I see keep their factions secret from one another.
I suppose the simplest way is to keep the missions exactly the same but to add a line. Something like, "I have reached an understanding with Amenopheus, who I know is seeking the [blank] for his own purposes. If you find yourself at odds with one of his agents, then you may rest assured that we have agreed to share possession for a time."
I think I know what you are saying... That you are reluctant to have an Osirion Faction member who succeed also give completion to the Grand Lodge member in season 0, 1 and 2 scenarios.
If that is what you are saying, you don't really have a Choice in that since the Guide says it does.
If members of two factions both receive the same faction mission, members of both factions are considered to have succeeded if either of them accomplishes the mission presented.
|
|
I think I know what you are saying... That you are reluctant to have an Osirion Faction member who succeed also give completion to the Grand Lodge member in season 0, 1 and 2 scenarios.I'm reluctant to do this, if only because of the fact that many of the season 2 missions say, "Don't let other factions see you complete this mission." By extension, it seems that many of the players at the tables I see keep their factions secret from one another.
I suppose the simplest way is to keep the missions exactly the same but to add a line. Something like, "I have reached an understanding with Amenopheus, who I know is seeking the [blank] for his own purposes. If you find yourself at odds with one of his agents, then you may rest assured that we have agreed to share possession for a time."
Not at all. What I'm saying is that if I hand Grand Lodge PCs a mission that says, "Ensure that Osirion faction members complete their mission," they would have to interrogate the other characters in the scenario to find out who was with Osirion. People at my tables don't talk about what faction they are.
Also, there is a potential for an inherent contradiction in some of those missions, if you want to play the RAW game. Andoran faction says "talk to so-and-so and don't let any other faction see you do it." Andoran recruits Silver Crusade to help him track down so-and-so. But then Silver Crusade knows that Andoran has done the talking, so Andoran fails - RAW. No one gets the Prestige. The only way for both the Silver Crusade and Andoran to get the prestige is for the Silver Crusade to stay the heck out of everything, sit back, and hope Andoran succeeds without interference.
Is this the intent of the adaptation rules? No. Is this how any rational GM would rule? Nope. But if you're following every rule as written, that's the right way to do it.
That's why I started this thread in the first place. The short way to do it is what most GMs would do - "You're Silver Crusade? Okay, for tonight you're actually Andoran.". I'm just trying to improve on that.
|
|
Stuff
The rules do not say Either way if you are to treat the factions as the same factions for the older Seasons, only that they get the same faction mission.
There is a Better way to do it IMO though then to potentially fabricate a problem that was not part of the original faction mission idea.
You can make it that the 2 Factions decided to work together on this so you don't accidentally fabricate the situation you mention above.
The situation you speak of above was not thought of in the faction system, by treating them as fully different you fabricate a problem that would have not been their normally and making it harder then it should be.
Either way, if The Grand Lodge member completes the Mission, the Osirion Member does not need to as well.
|
|
You're correct, of course, but at this point, you're largely repeating what I was told in the first reply in this thread: "This ain't broke, and it'll be a lot of work for little reward, so why bother?"
I bother because I'd like to, because *I* think it'll make a better experience for those players at my table. I just want to make sure that I don't actually break the spirit of any rules before I actually run a scenario this way.
|
|
You're correct, of course, but at this point, you're largely repeating what I was told in the first reply in this thread: "This ain't broke, and it'll be a lot of work for little reward, so why bother?"
I bother because I'd like to, because *I* think it'll make a better experience for those players at my table. I just want to make sure that I don't actually break the spirit of any rules before I actually run a scenario this way.
IMO you would be, a faction is meant to work together within the faction to finish that mission, by giving them the same mission but not allowing them to work together you would be putting them at odds against each other with the possibility of either not succeeding which was not taken into account when these missions where first made. You just make it more difficult for them.
Feel free to tailor the actual mission to show it is given by their faction, but make it known in the tailoring the factions are working together to achieve the same goal.
|
|
In terms of secrecy, the new factions are essentially the same faction as their counterpart. They're working together and I'd expect they'd know about each other.
If you really want (and you're not running the game at a convention), you can make up new and similar missions for the new factions, but we're really not supposed to this, and you're changing the difficulty level for accomplishing the mission.
Having said that, I don't see why season 0-2 faction missions have to be that much easier (because of overlap) than season 3 faction missions however. The biggest reason they don't go back and retroactively make new missions for the new factions is because it would be too much work.
|
In terms of secrecy, the new factions are essentially the same faction as their counterpart. They're working together and I'd expect they'd know about each other.
They are used mechanically, but they are not really the same nor working together. I doubt Cheliax really is working with the Shadow Lodge, unless it is to manipulate them.
Having said that, I don't see why season 0-2 faction missions have to be that much easier (because of overlap) than season 3 faction missions however. The biggest reason they don't go back and retroactively make new missions for the new factions is because it would be too much work.
The older faction missions did seem a bit easier, probably there was normaly 2 seperate ones and it was the only way to get PP back then. Now they want you to work for that extra
Venture-Captain, Michigan—Mt. Pleasant
|
What I've been doing is telling them that their faction owes a favor to the other faction head, and so they're "on loan" to the other faction, helping them complete their mission. They don't really feel it, but it makes the most sense to me without rewriting every mission for the new factions. Of course ours is a home game, so YMMV
|
|
They are used mechanically, but they are not really the same nor working together. I doubt Cheliax really is working with the Shadow Lodge, unless it is to manipulate them.
In terms of secrecy they are. For example, you have a mission that says "Destroy book X without anyone seeing." As long as it's Cheliax and Shadow Lodge only see that the book is destroyed, everything is ok.
Also, if one faction gets a returns an item, that's enough for both factions.
It's the only way that makes sense.