Sanctioning Adventure Paths for Pathfinder Society

Yay, more options for players, including above 12th level!

This is basically the exact method that I predicted would be the mechanics, though I remain skeptical of the story cohesiveness of moving in and out of AP play into normal PFS scenarios.

That said: this is pretty awesome, I know James Jacobs has been on about this for years. Congrats on yet another bullet point of awesome.

I am especially happy about the mechanism of using the traditional 15-point-buy-style campaign-oriented group as pregen-play for PFS as the best compromise of traditional or ongoing play and campaign rules.

Also happy-making is the Section 1 as Tier 1-2 play mechanism.

It's a good thing my home group hasn't got to Thistletop yet!

Awesome! I am glad this is finally out of the bag (officially)!

I agree that story cohesion would suffer. It doesn't lend itself to playing a path entirely from start to finish. But I especially like the higher level options!

A section well introduced by the GM should at least offset the lack of story development.

Awesome. Been waiting since the start of PFS for this to happen. Now I need to find a group that hasn't played any APs. All I've played was books 1-2 of Kingmaker but I have all the APs.

Woot! Very awesome news. Some of us have been waiting to start Shattered Star in order to see where this was going. going to have to read some chronicle sheets to see how they mesh though.

Does this sentence "Pathfinder Society characters and characters from an ongoing Adventure Path campaign may not play in the same adventure." just means that you can't have some characters built with PFS rules and some built with home game rules? Just to clarify.

Yay.

Yeah, I could definitely see running Parts 3, 5 and 6 as a VC given mission. (or a mission given by the 10)
That being said, this definitely means that when I get around to running a home game, I'm going to be running Rise of the Runelords. I don't think I'll be using PFS characters, but having the option of getting chronicles from it to apply to PFS chars is pretty awesome.

Very nice. Now, I understand that this can't give retroactive credit (Blast!), but my players are in the middle of Foxglove Manor and will complete it at our next game session (which may be tonight).

So, do they get a chronicle (as if they played a pregen) for this module? Or does it only apply when you're starting the specified areas after this announcement?

Either way, we don't get credit for Burnt Offerings, correct?

Hey Mike.. I am confused by this part..

Alternatively, if you are participating in a Pathfinder Adventure Path with an ongoing home group undertaking the entire campaign, you may receive credit for playing the sanctioned portions of the adventure as if you had played a pregenerated character. In this case, GMs running the Adventure Path are not bound to the rules of the Pathfinder Society Organized Play campaign when running the campaign or the sanctioned portion of the adventure. Pathfinder Society characters and characters from an ongoing Adventure Path campaign may not play in the same adventure.

So is this part saying I can run an Adventure Path using the Normal Core Rules and EXP + Home rules and players and GMs can get credit for a PFS character not being played in the AP, similar to the old Module Rules?

Also you can use PFS rules throughout the entire campaign?

And I don't understand the bolded line at all... What exactly are you trying to say there...

Also so characters can play any part of the AP that has a chronicle for it in any order as long as the meet the level requirement?

And Thanks for this!

I'm confused about the experience. It looks like there's only one chronicle per book, even though each book has multiple sanctioned sections. So the example above:

The solution we've landed on is treating one section of a Pathfinder Adventure Path volume like a module. It would generally be played over one to three sessions, and grant 3 XP, 4 PP, and a level-dependent amount of gp. An example you will find on the first Chronicle sheet is from the first installment of Rise of the Runelords, Burnt Offerings. When you play through areas C1 through E10 of Thistletop, your GM may assign you the Chronicle sheet for Burnt Offerings.

That would seem to imply that the character only gains one level, even if they do the whole book. Is that accurate?

This is quite simple; each book = a sanctioned module.

However, from the looks of it, 3XP per book is not enough, as the APs assume the PCs gain way more than one level per book. Are there going to be multiple Chronicles per sanctioned book? Is there something else I'm missing?

-Matt

This is quite simple; each book = a sanctioned module.

However, from the looks of it, 3XP per book is not enough, as the APs assume the PCs gain way more than one level per book. Are there going to be multiple Chronicles per sanctioned book? Is there something else I'm missing?

-Matt

Only certain sections count for each book, so it's not the entire book that gives you the XP, it's a certain part.

Nice blog

... Does this sentence "Pathfinder Society characters and characters from an ongoing Adventure Path campaign may not play in the same adventure." just means that you can't have some characters built with PFS rules and some built with home game rules? Just to clarify.

Yes. Basically sanctioned APs can be run in two modes:

PFS mode - ALL characters are PFS legal characters.

Home Play mode - ALL characters are not PFS characters. Note: you could follow the PFS rules to build your character (if your GM allows), but it could not be registered as a PFS character on Paizo.com or have any Chronicle sheets assigned to it. You could then apply the Chronicle to a legal PFS character as specified above.

That seems right Patrick.

Which makes me wonder; what is going to happen when the new format of Modules comes out? Those are quite long, spanning multiple levels. I imagine, if they become PFS legal, that players would get more than 1 level. They'd have to, or level up during the scenario, or they'd all die...

Each AP part will be sectioned off as individual modules based on the expected level you are supposed to be by the end of the section, I expect.

So if by the end of the First AP you are supposed to be Level 3, there will be three chronicles for the AP part.

I am looking forward to seeing those Chronicle sheets... Will we see them today?

Very nice. Now, I understand that this can't give retroactive credit (Blast!), but my players are in the middle of Foxglove Manor and will complete it at our next game session (which may be tonight).

So, do they get a chronicle (as if they played a pregen) for this module? Or does it only apply when you're starting the specified areas after this announcement?

Yes, they receive a Chronicle for it. If you are in the midst of any part of a sanctioned area, then a Chronicle may be awarded to players upon completion.

Either way, we don't get credit for Burnt Offerings, correct?

That is correct. We toyed with the idea of retroactive credit, but we didn't want inconsistencies in our past rulings, such as when we sanctioned a ton of modules all at once.

Does this sentence "Pathfinder Society characters and characters from an ongoing Adventure Path campaign may not play in the same adventure." just means that you can't have some characters built with PFS rules and some built with home game rules? Just to clarify.

Correct

I am looking forward to seeing those Chronicle sheets... Will we see them today?

They're already linked in the store entry for the AP. Here's Runelords

I wish this was Facebook so I could Like this.

Each AP part will be sectioned off as individual modules based on the expected level you are supposed to be by the end of the section, I expect.

So if by the end of the First AP you are supposed to be Level 3, there will be three chronicles for the AP part.

That's not how I'm reading the original post--it specifically says that if you complete section C1-E10, you can get "the chronicle for Burnt Offerings," which implies there's only one.

I am looking forward to seeing those Chronicle sheets... Will we see them today?

Rise of the Runelords seems to be up. Shattered Star is not yet.

Rise from the Runelords ones are sweet. So many partially charged wands!

Yes, they receive a Chronicle for it. If you are in the midst of any part of a sanctioned area, then a Chronicle may be awarded to players upon completion.

Thanks. This will be a nice surprise for them.

Gwaihir Scout wrote:

Either way, we don't get credit for Burnt Offerings, correct?

That is correct. We toyed with the idea of retroactive credit, but we didn't want inconsistencies in our past rulings, such as when we sanctioned a ton of modules all at once.

That's unfortunate. I was really hoping to be able to register my run of CotCT from last year, once that got sanctioned.

Hey Mike.. I am confused by this part..

Quote:

Alternatively, if you are participating in a Pathfinder Adventure Path with an ongoing home group undertaking the entire campaign, you may receive credit for playing the sanctioned portions of the adventure as if you had played a pregenerated character. In this case, GMs running the Adventure Path are not bound to the rules of the Pathfinder Society Organized Play campaign when running the campaign or the sanctioned portion of the adventure. Pathfinder Society characters and characters from an ongoing Adventure Path campaign may not play in the same adventure.

So is this part saying I can run an Adventure Path using the Normal Core Rules and EXP + Home rules and players and GMs can get credit for a PFS character not being played in the AP, similar to the old Module Rules?

Correct. We couldn't find an elegant solution to allow players to port a PFS character into and out of an AP while playing a home game. So, for APs only, we elected to allow GMs the freedom to run their home group as they see fit, while offering up a solution to award PFS credit. We still encourage players to use their PFS characters to play through sanctioned content in APs, but understand if they do not want to play in a home game, and then turn around and play again with PFS characters. We leave that decision to the players to decide what is best for their play experience.

Also you can use PFS rules throughout the entire campaign?

If your GM wants to choose that option, it is their home campaign. I am doing something similar in my home Shattered Star group.

And I don't understand the bolded line at all... What exactly are you trying to say there...

We didn't want to cause disruptions with home games, where a player said, "I can't use my normal character for our home campaign in this part. I need to use a PFS character for it, so GM, find a way to bring in this PFS character just for rooms B1-E10."

Also so characters can play any part of the AP that has a chronicle for it in any order as long as the meet the level requirement?

That is correct.

That is correct regarding using home rules.

Dragnmoon wrote:

I am looking forward to seeing those Chronicle sheets... Will we see them today?

They're already linked in the store entry for the AP. Here's Runelords

Okay, it's confirmed then. There's one sanctioned section from each book. Which means you can't just play through this with PFS PCs, because they won't level fast enough (at least in the APs I've looked at). You have to run it as a home game and take the chronicles elsewhere.

What's the reasoning behind this, if I might ask? I believe that there is reasoning, because I know you guys have been talking about this for a while, but to me it seems weird to only go halfway with this.

The only part that concerns me somewhat in the current setup for sanctioned APs is that you could not play through them with PFS sanctioned characters uninterrupted.

After reading the rules you simply don't gain enough XP from the previous sanctioned portion of the module to meet many of the following sanctioned portions. I will use the Rise of the Runelords rules for an example:
The sanctioned part of "Burnt Offerings" is for levels 3-5 and will provide enough XP to gain one level. Let us say you hold off and play it at the highest level (5) and you are now level 6. You qualify for the sanctioned portion of "The Skinsaw Murders" which is level 4-6. Again, you are maximum level for that portion and gain 1 level, putting you at level 7. But wait.. the third part, coming from "The Hook Mountain Massacre" is for levels 8-10, so you have to gain a full level elsewhere first before you can even begin playing it. Depending on what level you play that portion at you may need to gain between 1 and 3 levels before you qualify to play the next part. And, unless you wait until level 14 to start it, there will continue to be gaps where you need to gain levels from other sanctioned scenarios or modules before you can continue with the next part of the Adventure Path.

I guess I'll be a voice for dissent. I do not like this idea and won't promote it in my store (I'm a store coordinator). Before you all get to hot and jump all over me, I won't block it either - it's a legitimate (apparently) way to play PFS so if my players ask for it I'll put it on the schedule.

The reason I don't like it is you cut out the role playing elements slap a few combat scenes together, and potentially ruin those elements of the AP for future use as an AP. It also gets away from a story arc in PFS - which needs to be reinforced not weakened.

It just feels like a hodgepodge way of squeezing a few more gaming sessions for PFS at the expense of quality.

That said, maybe I'm wrong. Time will tell and I look forward to the comments of folks who play through this new way of PFSing.

I'm confused about the experience. It looks like there's only one chronicle per book, even though each book has multiple sanctioned sections. So the example above:

Quote:

The solution we've landed on is treating one section of a Pathfinder Adventure Path volume like a module. It would generally be played over one to three sessions, and grant 3 XP, 4 PP, and a level-dependent amount of gp. An example you will find on the first Chronicle sheet is from the first installment of Rise of the Runelords, Burnt Offerings. When you play through areas C1 through E10 of Thistletop, your GM may assign you the Chronicle sheet for Burnt Offerings.

That would seem to imply that the character only gains one level, even if they do the whole book. Is that accurate?

There is only one Chronicle per book. We looked through each volume, looked at the number of encounters, and tried to round out a sanctioned section with as many encounters as you would normally find in a sanctioned module. These will vary slightly from volume to volume, but most will be fairly close to the same encounter numbers as a module.

For instance, with C1 through E10, there are 24 different encounters. In Murder's Mark, there are 16 encounters. In The Moonscar, there are 22 encounters.

So, we tried to balance sanctioned areas as closely to modules as we could.

And yes, each sanctioend volume, only grants one Chronicle sheet and what equates to one level.

I'm sure you've thought of this in your meetings but won't this just create a whole bunch of what is more commonly known as GM Credit Babies* for players?

Or is the statement "as if you had played a pregenerated character" disallow players from piling multiple AP chronicles onto one PC they haven't ever played?

*Defined here as when a GM stacks up a bunch of credit and then plops down an 8th level PC they've never played before and then has trouble figuring out how their actual PC works.

Awesome. Been waiting since the start of PFS for this to happen. Now I need to find a group that hasn't played any APs. All I've played was books 1-2 of Kingmaker but I have all the APs.

Rene,

Haven't played Rise of the Runelords yet....

Nathan

This is quite simple; each book = a sanctioned module.

However, from the looks of it, 3XP per book is not enough, as the APs assume the PCs gain way more than one level per book. Are there going to be multiple Chronicles per sanctioned book? Is there something else I'm missing?

-Matt

No, you aren't missing anything. We will only have one Chronicle per volume, and we will most likely not be sanctioning entire volumes, just parts of them. In Burnt Offerings, we only sanctioned Thisteltop. We did not sanction the Swallowtail Festival, Local Heroes, or Glass and Wrath.

That's not how I'm reading the original post--it specifically says that if you complete section C1-E10, you can get "the chronicle for Burnt Offerings," which implies there's only one.

Well that is interesting, I just looked at the Chronicle and you are correct... you only get 1 Chronicle Sheet per AP Part and for only a section of it...

Mike was there a problem with the idea of offering multiple Chronicle sheets per AP so you can play with one PFS character using PFS rules for the entire Campaign? I am sure the idea came up, what am I missing? Seems like a much better solution than the one you have already, off the top of my head without any time to think why it is not a good idea...;)

I understand the reasoning for not giving retroactive credit, but it still rubs me the wrong way. Gamers that have been playing and supporting the Adventure Path line for possibly years already, in addition to participating in PFS, get put out in the cold.

A group that has already played Rise of the Runelords to completion is not going to want to go back and replay sections of it for PFS credit.

Like I said, I know you're trying to be consistent, but its doing a disservice to those that have been supporting Paizo's flagship product for years.

For those of you playing with a GM who does not have a PFS ID number, this is a good reason to talk them into getting one. To sign Chronicles for your PFS PC they will need to have a PFS ID.

Michael Brock wrote:

Gwaihir Scout wrote:

Either way, we don't get credit for Burnt Offerings, correct?

That is correct. We toyed with the idea of retroactive credit, but we didn't want inconsistencies in our past rulings, such as when we sanctioned a ton of modules all at once.

That's unfortunate. I was really hoping to be able to register my run of CotCT from last year, once that got sanctioned.

I ran a three year long, Legacy of Fire campaign, and a year long RotRL campaign. Trust me, I completely understand wanting to receive GM and player PFS credit for it. However, offering retroactive credit is a slippery slope I just didn't want to go down.

Gwaihir Scout wrote:

Dragnmoon wrote:

I am looking forward to seeing those Chronicle sheets... Will we see them today?

They're already linked in the store entry for the AP. Here's Runelords

Okay, it's confirmed then. There's one sanctioned section from each book. Which means you can't just play through this with PFS PCs, because they won't level fast enough (at least in the APs I've looked at). You have to run it as a home game and take the chronicles elsewhere.

What's the reasoning behind this, if I might ask? I believe that there is reasoning, because I know you guys have been talking about this for a while, but to me it seems weird to only go halfway with this.

We tried to come up with a way that someone could play their PFS character in both scenarios and APs and the sanctioning of entire books didn't allow for that. It meant that a PC could get several levels worth of experience from a scenario in between AP sessions and then be too high level for the next part in the ongoing story.

There are two extremes in the spectrum of how to sanction this content—PCs are tied to an AP and can't leave to do other adventuring, but follow all PFS campaign rules, leveling, etc. during the game; or PCs can move freely in and out of Pathfinder Society events and AP content as though the APs are just really big multi-part scenarios that can be played out of order.

Well, the latter isn't actually true. APs are more than just individual linked adventures; they're part of one large campaign, and breaking them up just didn't work logistically or creatively. And the former extreme seemed super restrictive for people running what's essentially a parallel campaign to the Pathfinder Society Organized Play campaign. If we forbade item crafting in the Rise of the Runelords AP, for example, no one could complete the 5th installment of the campaign.

Instead, we decided the best course of action was to treat portions of each AP installment as Pathfinder Modules, and allow PCs who primarily play PFS scenarios to run through those dungeons or encounter areas independent of the AP's overall story and get credit. So as not to ostracize players participating in a Pathfinder Adventure Path on an ongoing basis, they could get credit for completing these dungeons and other sanctioned portions of the larger campaign and apply them to a different PC who isn't restricted to play in this one campaign.

This seemed the best compromise between the two extremes, and allows folks who want to run through APs casually as part of their overall Pathfinder Society experience to do so and receive credit, and permits folks who would rather experience an AP as a cohesive whole from start to finish with the same party to receive credit for the time they're putting into playing the campaign without imposing on the individual GM running that campaign's style.

This is awesome. Pure and simple. I like how it is spaced out, since it forces people to play other PFS scenarios. The higher level play and for this helps all the people who have done eyes of the Ten and have a character at 12th level unable to do anything.

APs are more than just individual linked adventures; they're part of one large campaign, and breaking them up just didn't work logistically or creatively. And the former extreme seemed super restrictive for people running what's essentially a parallel campaign to the Pathfinder Society Organized Play campaign. If we forbade item crafting in the Rise of the Runelords AP, for example, no one could complete the 5th installment of the campaign.

Instead, we decided the best course of action was to treat portions of each AP installment as Pathfinder Modules, and allow PCs who primarily play PFS scenarios to run through those dungeons or encounter areas independent of the AP's overall story and get credit. So as not to ostracize players participating in a Pathfinder Adventure Path on an ongoing basis, they could get credit for completing these dungeons and other sanctioned portions of the larger campaign and apply them to a different PC who isn't restricted to play in this one campaign.

Okay, that makes sense. Thanks for explaining. :)

Mike was there a problem with the idea of offering multiple Chronicle sheets per AP so you can play with one PFS character using PFS rules for the entire Campaign? I am sure the idea came up, what am I missing? Seems like a much better solution than the one you have already, off the top of my head without any time to think why it is not a good idea...;)

The main problem with that is resources. As it is, it took me almost an entire week of development to go through these two APs and create the 11 Chronicle sheets we released today. There are simply too many other priorities that require our time to try to force APs to be something they're not by creating 3 or 4 Chronicle sheets per volume. See my post above about the compromise the current system provides to get a better sense of why we decided just to sanction portions of each book.

I was able to download the rules for running the Shattered Star AP's under PFS, but I'm having problems downloading the AR's for the Shattered Star AP Chronicles. Are you aware of any issues with downloading these materials at this time?

I've been looking forward to how you would incorporate the APs for awhile now. Great job, Mike. Really looking forward to Kingmaker making it into the mix, as well.

Trust me, I completely understand wanting to receive GM and player PFS credit for it.

It's not just that, it's the idea that now I have to repeat all that if I want the chronicles. Which as a GM isn't the end of the world, but I know my players will be bored with that idea, so it's not going to happen. Plus, I've only managed to get a few of them into organized play; I was hoping that offering them credit for what they've already done might entice the others.

However, offering retroactive credit is a slippery slope I just didn't want to go down.

Could you say more about this? What repercussions do you envision?

I guess I'll be a voice for dissent. I do not like this idea and won't promote it in my store (I'm a store coordinator). Before you all get to hot and jump all over me, I won't block it either - it's a legitimate (apparently) way to play PFS so if my players ask for it I'll put it on the schedule.

The reason I don't like it is you cut out the role playing elements slap a few combat scenes together, and potentially ruin those elements of the AP for future use as an AP. It also gets away from a story arc in PFS - which needs to be reinforced not weakened.

It just feels like a hodgepodge way of squeezing a few more gaming sessions for PFS at the expense of quality.

That said, maybe I'm wrong. Time will tell and I look forward to the comments of folks who play through this new way of PFSing.

I am very aware of those concerns. However, I trust the players to decide if they want to play the sanctioned content APs or not, potentially ruining those elements of the AP for future play in a home game. We offer the choice of playing through these, but ultimately it is up to the player to decide what he wants to play. It is also the reason we offered a home play option for the APs.

Also, we have tightened and focused the storyline in Season 4 and will continue to do so. Does it dilute the storyline? I don't think so. The storyline is still very present in scenarios. This offers additional options for players who have played everything and want more. I think additional play options are needed.

I appreciate the feedback and the civil tone it was presented in. As you said, time will tell and I look forward to teh comments of folks who play through this new sanctioned material.

Michael Brock wrote:

Trust me, I completely understand wanting to receive GM and player PFS credit for it.

It's not just that, it's the idea that now I have to repeat all that if I want the chronicles. Which as a GM isn't the end of the world, but I know my players will be bored with that idea, so it's not going to happen. Plus, I've only managed to get a few of them into organized play; I was hoping that offering them credit for what they've already done might entice the others.

Luckily we release a new AP volume every month, so there shouldn't be a need to repeat anything, as there's always more unplayed content coming out :D