|
I find it interesting that so many people have posted in this thread and yet so few have responded to the original topic.
In any case, the system as it stands encourages players to choose their gaming experiences carefully, Mark has made this pretty clear. You cannot decline a chronicle (even one for full PA and full gold) in the interest of playing a character more and you cannot play a module for credit once you have played it with a pregen. Keep these things in mind when playing with strangers, a new judge, or picking up a pregen to make a table happen.
It seems like a step backwards that PFS has no 'play for zero credit' option for retired characters. LG had such a rule (even though it rarely got used since most people would prefer to delay retirement by getting killed/raised).
If a character cannot decline a chronicle would it be out of the question to allow a character that has completed his/her 33rd chronicle to instead continue playing as an 11th level but receive no further gold/xp/PA/etc?
|
|
Please, Mark: either allow everybody to replay a scenario for a chronicle if he first plays through with a pre-gen, or else allow nobody.
Actually I think the rule is "nobody." Just some GM's and/or coordinators ignore it because the person was trying to help out the table or just wanted to play but otherwise would have had to go home, etc.
Hey everyone,
We're all reading this and will be discussing it tomorrow in the office. Time to take a deep breath and wait until we get a chance to get some sleep, shower, and get ready for a new day. :)
Hyrum.
|
Obviously this whole situation has sparked a nerve for you.
But yes, colored through the lenses I wore when I ran a living campaign, I feel you are being overly dramatic and a bit of a chicken little. PFS isn't going to dramatically decrease its membership because of these rule clarifications (they aren't new rules, because the rules always were there, just interpreted incorrectly).
If its constantly growing despite losing all these people you are talking about... I just get the feeling that your "worry for the game" is a bit disingenuous.
First of all, "constantly growing" is a bit of a misnomer. It's been reported that PFS has 14,000 players, but that counts anyone who's ever been assigned a number. How many of those players no longer play?
The only other way to prove that the Society is growing is to look at the amount of tables that have been reported in the past compared with those that have been reported recently. The problem is that in the past failing to report mods was a bit of an epidemic, so that proves nothing either. You have absolutely no way to know whether the society is really growing or not.
All of this is a moot point anyway. Why do we turn a blind eye to the people leaving regardless of our growth? I realize that no system can ever make everyone happy, but we can still attempt to try. I've constantly said that it's about risk vs. reward. Every time a rule is changed the question needs to be asked: how many people will we risk vs. how many people feel this rule is necessary.
The play, play, play rule is the only single change that's happened since Josh left that's even debatable as to whether it was good for the game in the risk vs. reward model. I don't personally agree with the ruling, but at least enough people do that it might actually be a good decision. There isn't any other rule that's changed the game so much for the better that it was worth the amount of people who left because they were fed up with the constant rules changes.
We have absolutely no way to rebuild our characters in this Society, so when characters get nerfed people get frustrated. Obviously not all, but many frustrated people leave for greener pastures (4e, home campaigns, etc.). That's not a falling sky, that's just the truth of how people treat their hobbies. If they're no longer having fun they stop ramming their heads into the wall.
Also, this particular topic didn't really strike a nerve with me. It's a trend of bad decisions that has been trickling away at my groups. Unfortunately I really like PFS, or at least I used to. Now I'm a bit closer to taking it or leaving it, and that bothers me.
If your colored lenses are clouding your vision so much you should probably get them cleaned. Try taking them off and looking at this game from the perspective of a player. You'll see that it's fast becoming an ugly picture. Hopefully those of us that love this game and want to see it succeed can help get it back on track while it's still worth the effort.
And you know I wasn't saying that someone would join the campaign because some obscure rule was newly clarified....
No, but people ARE leaving the game because some obscure rule was newly clarified, and for what? That's kind of my entire point here.
|
I know that people will say that I'm playing with semantics here, but this is not a rules change. Credit was not given to 7th-level pre-gens under the previous system either.
What has changed is that under the old PPP rules, you could then replay the adventure with another character.
If a player could now get credit for re-playing, counter to the 1 and 1, that would be a change. If people wish to lobby for that change, I understand, but I think that it is unfair to accuse Mark of springing something on us that is the way it was originally run.
Demoyn, I agree that we should try to avoid driving people away, and appreciate your concerns. However, you need to realize that your experience is not necessarily what others are seeing. Many of the recent changes have addressed problems that people were having in their games. And I get that you don't like the gunslinger, but many people do, and are playing them (I have yet to see one in action, probably Canadian gun laws ;) ). I think that many people are in favour of many of the changes beyond 1 and 1, and that many more don't care and just want to sit down and play.
I also think people have to realize that while Paizo is very good about listening to feedback, at the end of the day decisions have to be made that are not going to please everyone.
Further, I think we cannot fairly fully critique what Mark and Hyrum have planned until we see the total package in the new season.
|
Every time someone asks for clarification on any issue, should we be updating all the campaign documentation? I'm really curious about how to balance between answering people's questions and providing clarifications and being constantly criticized for changing the rules somewhere that people can't find them. In this instance, would Hyrum and I, as campaign coordinator and line developer, be better off not answering lest someone miss our clarification on the forums? How can we improve this process?
Please... answer people's questions. I think the vast majority of people would rather have you engage in dialog.
|
|
If a player could now get credit for re-playing, counter to the 1 and 1, that would be a change. If people wish to lobby for that change, I understand, but I think that it is unfair to accuse Mark of springing something on us that is the way it was originally run.
Pardon the snip, but it IS a rules change.
Old situation:
Playing a mod with a non-1st level pregen does NOT gain you a credit.
You could then, when you had a PC in the correct level band, play the mod for your 1 player credit for the mod with your PC.
New situation:
Playing a mod with a non-1st level pregen does NOT gain you a credit.
You cannot play the mod again for credit with a legal PC later.
Which, actually, is an exception to the 1&1 rule.
|
|
We're all reading this and will be discussing it tomorrow in the office. Time to take a deep breath and wait until we get a chance to get some sleep, shower, and get ready for a new day. :)
Please allow pre-gen characters to be awarded Chronicles for level 1, level 4 and level 7, which can be claimed by a non-pre-gen character when they reach the appropriate level.
This way for a level 1 pre-gen it's always Chronicle #1, level 4 it's always Chronicle #7 and level 7 it's always Chronicle #17. This prevents accumulation of Chronicles as if I earn 3 Chronicle #7s by playing a pre-gen all day I'd have to level up 3 different characters to 4th to claim them all.
This is a fair and respectful solution for everyone.
|
|
Demoyn, I agree that we should try to avoid driving people away, and appreciate your concerns. However, you need to realize that your experience is not necessarily what others are seeing. Many of the recent changes have addressed problems that people were having in their games. And I get that you don't like the gunslinger, but many people do, and are playing them (I have yet to see one in action, probably Canadian gun laws ;) ). I think that many people are in favour of many of the changes beyond 1 and 1, and that many more don't care and just want to sit down and play.
I understand and respect that, but I coordinate the largest gaming convention and the largest regularly scheduled gameday in the fifth largest city in the United States. That puts me in a pretty good position to get a feel for how the rules changes affect the Society as a whole.
This also isn't just about the gunslinger, it's about a disturbing trend of being overly-banal towards gamers in the Society. It's true that I'm going to leave this game the second gunslingers are non-playtest legal (and I currently leave any table where they're being played), but this doesn't really have anything to do with that. I still hold out hope that they become illegal and, barring that, I still want to see the game succeed even without me.
|
|
Please allow pre-gen characters to be awarded Chronicles for level 1, level 4 and level 7, which can be claimed by a non-pre-gen character when they reach the appropriate level.
I like this. It's my belief that this rule should always have existed.
This way for a level 1 pre-gen it's always Chronicle #1, level 4 it's always Chronicle #7 and level 7 it's always Chronicle #17. This prevents accumulation of Chronicles as if I earn 3 Chronicle #7s by playing a pre-gen all day I'd have to level up 3 different characters to 4th to claim them all.
This part concerns me a bit. It's fair to many, but with the release of so many multi-part scenarios I could see it taking some of the enjoyment away.
|
|
It's true that I'm going to leave this game the second gunslingers are non-playtest legal (and I currently leave any table where they're being played), but this doesn't really have anything to do with that. I still hold out hope that they become illegal and, barring that, I still want to see the game succeed even without me.
You know, I respect your decision to make a stand on something you believe strongly in.
I, however, feel that your strong belief is incredibly myopic and its kinda silly to quit a game you love simply because of one available class out of over 20.
|
|
I don't find it that silly. I'm taking a similar stance with the magus. I'm not quitting over it but I'd rather walk away from a table than play with one.
Why? What's wrong with the Magus?
For what's its worth, I probably would strongly consider walking away from a table that had a pole ape. Fortunately I don't have to consider that anymore, since it is now an illegal build.
Please allow pre-gen characters to be awarded Chronicles for level 1, level 4 and level 7, which can be claimed by a non-pre-gen character when they reach the appropriate level.
This way for a level 1 pre-gen it's always Chronicle #1, level 4 it's always Chronicle #7 and level 7 it's always Chronicle #17. This prevents accumulation of Chronicles as if I earn 3 Chronicle #7s by playing a pre-gen all day I'd have to level up 3 different characters to 4th to claim them all.
This is a fair and respectful solution for everyone.
I'm not crazy about that idea. As Chris Mortika noted, playing a pregen takes all the risk out of the process. So if I hear rumours that an adventure is particularly deadly, it's kind of lame if I play it with a (suicidal) pregen and get full credit for it, without the need to pay for Raise Dead/Restoration/Resurrection, etc. that I might have needed if I played it with my "real" character.
|
|
I think that the distinction that Mark is attempting to make here is a bad idea. It promotes wrong behavior, it penalizes people trying to do what's right, it's extremely capricious, and it's almost impossible to enforce.
+1
I mean, I'll run whatever I want to keep my players happy and no one will ever know the difference. Yeah, that's "chaotic good" you alignment freaks. :)
Making rulings on things you have no chance on enforcing is silly. The "lawful" people will feel constrained by "the rules" and the chaotic people will just ignore it. See what I did here? lol
|
|
My humble opinion, do not allow a person to play and decline a character sheet.
The problem, so two people show up for a higher level table and another player joins but cant gain credit plaing an pregen. So the 3rd player feels good to help have a game progress but bad for no credit. Does this push people away from society or give them a bad feel for society?
So a weird quick idea.
If a person plays a pregen, allow a chronicle sheet for 2 PA 0 gold 0 boons but tiered items, to be applied to a character of their choice at the end of the scenario. A character gets credit, the player will not get gold for playing "up". For this idea it likely hurts the player looking for gold but gives him PA for magic items later. Reasonable, a player trying to get in with with a lower level character may add the credit to a fresh 1st level character. If they later replayed the scenario their could be a clause that a GM, reissuses a chonicle sheet. For gold,boon or loss of pa.
Hyrum, I think the society organizers and Paizo staff as a whole does a great job with customer feedback. As far as some people not wanting to see a specific class being played, I am for all classes, but at some point it could be a good warning sign for players views.
It's true that I'm going to leave this game the second gunslingers are non-playtest legal....
On August 4th, the first day Ultimate Combat is available for sale, the gunslinger, ninja and samuari, and most of the other content in the book will be 100% legal for play. This isn't going to change, we're not going to reverse course, and we feel that the book is a valuable addition to Pathfinder and PFS. If any of these classes are dealbreakers for you I'm sorry. You've been a part of PFS for awhile now and have contributed a lot. However, these classes are coming, there's no changing that. I hope you decide to stay but ultimately that choice is yours.
Hyrum.
The only other way to prove that the Society is growing is to look at the amount of tables that have been reported in the past compared with those that have been reported recently. The problem is that in the past failing to report mods was a bit of an epidemic, so that proves nothing either. You have absolutely no way to know whether the society is really growing or not.
Aren't you forgetting that they also can track the number of PFS scenarios purchased at the webstore, and how many times the PFS guide is downloaded per month?
Yes, it is really hard to nail down exact numbers. But if you use all the numbers Paizo has available, it is easy to see which way the trend is going.
|
|
The only other way to prove that the Society is growing is to look at the amount of tables that have been reported in the past compared with those that have been reported recently. The problem is that in the past failing to report mods was a bit of an epidemic, so that proves nothing either. You have absolutely no way to know whether the society is really growing or not.Aren't you forgetting that they also can track the number of PFS scenarios purchased at the webstore, and how many times the PFS guide is downloaded per month?
Yes, it is really hard to nail down exact numbers. But if you use all the numbers Paizo has available, it is easy to see which way the trend is going.
Sessions reported is one of a ton of metrics they can use, sessions reported, number of new PFS numbers issued and the increase or decrease in the rate they are issued, scenarios downloaded, etc.
I know what the local trends are, shops that had no PFS now have a table, shops that had two tables have three or even four, PFS tables at cons are packed and there are more than last year.
Maybe it's only a regional thing but the Bay Area PFS is big and growing fast.
|
|
Every time someone asks for clarification on any issue, should we be updating all the campaign documentation? I'm really curious about how to balance between answering people's questions and providing clarifications and being constantly criticized for changing the rules somewhere that people can't find them. In this instance, would Hyrum and I, as campaign coordinator and line developer, be better off not answering lest someone miss our clarification on the forums? How can we improve this process?
Mark,
Part of the problem may be that the official responses are often hidden within lengthy threads. While there will be a reluctance by some to quickly adopt newly implemented or changed rules, being able to quickly find them could not hurt. I do not know if this means near constant updating of the campaign doc (I certainly hope it doesn't), but I would appreciate it if a posting of the last two weeks official rules changes and/or clarifications were at least posted to the boards.For my part, I cannot think of a single rules change or clarification that has affected my play or enjoyment of PFS to date.
|
|
If the coordinator of cons and/or events/gamedays is souring on the OP or PFS in general, and his attitude can be seen by those who play in his/her events, then it can certainly cause the general base of players in that area to sour on it as well.
I’m not saying that anyone is badmouthing or anything like that. But a bad attitude, no matter how craftily masked, is still a bad attitude, and will be noticed and reacted to.
Popular leaders have a tendency to take their constituency with them, whether that be for or against something.
So it could be that someone who is exuberant, excited, and loving PFS in all its color, is leading an expanding base, because their excitement bleeds off on others.
And conversely, a declining base can be a direct cause of the lack of energy of the popular leader.
|
|
And conversely, a declining base can be a direct cause of the lack of energy of the popular leader.
That can't have much to do with our situation. I'm far from popular. ;)
Actually, Houston's player base is growing also, it just has a relatively high turnover rate compared to past Living Campaigns I've participated in.
I appreciate the stance and timeline, Hyrum. At least now I can make arrangements to transfer coordination of our local group so that I don't interfere with everyone else's enjoyment on August 5th.
|
|
Mark,
Part of the problem may be that the official responses are often hidden within lengthy threads. While there will be a reluctance by some to quickly adopt newly implemented or changed rules, being able to quickly find them could not hurt. I do not know if this means near constant updating of the campaign doc (I certainly hope it doesn't), but I would appreciate it if a posting of the last two weeks official rules changes and/or clarifications were at least posted to the boards.
For my part, I cannot think of a single rules change or clarification that has affected my play or enjoyment of PFS to date.
I think you are mixed up. Mark/ Hyrum KNOW that the vast majority of players and most GMs don't see this stuff and don't expect them to.
If something is hidden in an obscure thread then the PFS team isn't too worried about that information getting dispersed. Someone asked "How should I treat XXX and Mark answered them with how he things they should treat that. If you've read the thread then you should respect that. If you haven't read the thread then it's obviously not a big deal. If you are reading the forums and have a similar question you can use this post as a resource for knowing how the PFS team feels about it.
That's all, it's not that tricky. If the PFS team felt it was an important change/ clarification that needed to be dispersed they would post it prominently, clearly they don't feel that's the case here.
|
Every time someone asks for clarification on any issue, should we be updating all the campaign documentation? I'm really curious about how to balance between answering people's questions and providing clarifications and being constantly criticized for changing the rules somewhere that people can't find them. In this instance, would Hyrum and I, as campaign coordinator and line developer, be better off not answering lest someone miss our clarification on the forums? How can we improve this process?
We know that an FAQ is coming, but with the ramp up for PaizoCon, GenCon, etc this time of year, we do not expect to see it in the next few months.
However, in the interim, you can use the forums to clarify rules while keeping them readily available. Simply create a temporary sticky thread covering rule change/clarification, but, and this is important, lock it to prevent comments. The thread should contain only posts from Mark/Hyrum that update/clarify existing rules.
That thread where the clarifications exist can be linked to ongoing thread discussions. It's a win-win. The changes will exist in a single, easy to locate thread, and posters can still discuss the topics in separate threads.
Once the official FAQ launches, all the material in the clarification thread can be transferred. Since we will be used to checking the sticky thread for info, a final post can be added with the link to the FAQ. Then after a few months, the sticky thread can be deleted.
And, as has been recently noted, any/all changes/clarifications that occur in the forums, are open for GM caveat until they appear in The Guide when they become official.
|
|
I think all these ideas become difficult to track/enforce and adding more layers to The Guide makes it more difficult to read and remember all the exceptions to the "norm."
I will follow the rules as stated, but IMO...
I prefer the simple rule (and how I've interpreted it since the start), you only receive a chronicle when playing with a registered character. The ONLY exception is for playing a level one pregen, which can then become the player's character. At that time, they receive a fully-filled out chronicle indicating their PFS#, character #, and faction so it can be reported. Player credit taken.
Other than 1st level, if you play a pregen, you do not receive a chronicle and therefore cannot apply it to another character, period.
Finally, if you use a pregen, you have not received credit for playing the mod. Thus you can play it for credit with a registered character at a future date.
This is not much different than GM'ing a mod prior to playing it for credit. Sure someone could "game" the system by pre-playing every mod with a pregen and then replaying for credit, but isn't it easier to just pre-read the mod before playing? I have had my suspicions that has happened much more often than replaying to avoid the dangers of the unknown. YMMV
|
We know that an FAQ is coming, but with the ramp up for PaizoCon, GenCon, etc this time of year, we do not expect to see it in the next few months.However, in the interim, you can use the forums to clarify rules while keeping them readily available. Simply create a temporary sticky thread covering rule change/clarification, but, and this is important, lock it to prevent comments. The thread should contain only posts from Mark/Hyrum that update/clarify existing rules.
One thought: why don't you make a paizo list of your posts every time you make a PFS clarification, that way someone can browse the list to see if an answer has been given before.
Note: this doesn't have to be Yoda or evil space monkey doing this, anyone can do it.... I just don't have the time to keep this list up to date