|
I agree it is not an Ideal way to introduce them, but It does happen a lot because there is no other choice.
Please define a lot. Last year in Atlanta, we reported more than 500 tables played. I don't know of one instance where someone had to play a pre-gen to help make a table legal or where they could not find a game that was being run that fit the tier criteria for their character. I'm sure Kyle and Nani can correct me if I am wrong.
Does this happen a lot in Texas?
A good percentage of high Tier tables at Gen Con sits a table with at least one player sitting playing it for the first time with a Pre-Gen.
And there are times the coordinator will never know because since the player did not get credit they where not put on the reporting sheet.
Every "Large" convention I have been to I have seen this, and I have gotten the same from other people I talked outside my area.
There has been a few cases here locally but it is much easier to control this at a local level and organize it with out this happening then it is at a large convention.
This is in large a convention issue less then a Local game issue.
|
I wonder sometimes even with this ruling if people really realise what PFS gives you now compared to what it was like in the old days.
In the days of Network Campaigns yore we had a term... it was called "eating a module." It was when you GMed a module before you had the chance to play it, a choice that people would make so that tables would go off, or judges would be prepped in slot zeroes. And they did this knowing that the only reward they'd get might be the thanks from the campaign coordinator, no XP, no gold, no treasure to apply, no opportunity to play, just a thanks and that was it.
Despite that... a lot of people did so anyway. They ate modules, so that tables, conventions could go off and people could play. All of you who play PFS today are doing so on the shoulders of the folks who made network gaming work all the years prior.
Just a bit of perspective.
It was that way originally with PFS. Those who judged it before playing never got a chance to play, while those that played and never judged could do so with 5 different characters.
|
Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
I wonder sometimes even with this ruling if people really realise what PFS gives you now compared to what it was like in the old days.
In the days of Network Campaigns yore we had a term... it was called "eating a module." It was when you GMed a module before you had the chance to play it, a choice that people would make so that tables would go off, or judges would be prepped in slot zeroes. And they did this knowing that the only reward they'd get might be the thanks from the campaign coordinator, no XP, no gold, no treasure to apply, no opportunity to play, just a thanks and that was it.
Despite that... a lot of people did so anyway. They ate modules, so that tables, conventions could go off and people could play. All of you who play PFS today are doing so on the shoulders of the folks who made network gaming work all the years prior.
Just a bit of perspective.
I ate a few LG mods myself. Even sat that looney master level GM test! In fact I am only slowly coming to terms with the idea of replay at all. I can see the benefits and given what is allowed I don't see replay as an issue as long as there is only ever one player credit.
W
|
|
stuffWell. At least we are clear on this. Though we clearly disagree :-)
For me the very idea that someone would waste 5 10 15 20 hours of their life to give them a head start on a single 5 hour module seems outlandish. If there was anyone who would consider it I fear they would just read the scenario. With all of that they end up no better off than a GM who has run it.
Penalising good intentioned people out of fear that some fella might replay a scenario sans credit as prep for the real thing...... I was going to say that it's like banning cars because some ppl will drink and drive but it's not that it's like banning cars because some ppl might try to drive them from the backseat with stilts on their feet and a pool cue in each hand.
W
In any good discussion two parties must agree on some points, but eventually agree to disagree on other points.
To me to spend that amount of time farming scenarios to see how to play them is a waste of time as well... zomg we agree again
I tend to eat a lot of scenarios because I don't like to play them after I've run them simply because I know what is going to happen, albeit, it can be interesting to see how another judge runs it, I'd rather watch someone else judge a scenario than play it. As a fairly new judge I can pick up hints and tips for making my own judging better
|
|
stuff replying to Blaze
that is actual much different then what Blaze was talking about.
What Mike is talking about are people actual cheating and getting a chronicle for playing a 4th or 7th level Pre-Gen. Which is Cheating.
What Blazej is talking about is he can't imagine people wasting their time to "Cheat" and play a Pre-Gen and not get credit, just so they know the scenario when they play with a legal PC, or to avoid playing with their legal PC in a group they think might go bad.
|
A good percentage of high Tier tables at Gen Con sits a table with at least one player sitting playing it for the first time with a Pre-Gen.
And there are times the coordinator will never know because since the player did not get credit they where not put on the reporting sheet.
Every "Large" convention I have been to I have seen this, and I have gotten the same from other people I talked outside my area.
There has been a few cases here locally but it is much easier to control this at a local level and organize it with out this happening then it is at a large convention.
This is in large a convention issue less then a Local game issue.
I'm not asking about Gencon or large conventions. That will change at Gencon next year as a lot more lower tier games will be offered. If large conventions are not offering enough low tier games for new players to play, that is another problem entirely and one I dealt with as a con organizer for four large cons in the Atlanta area over the past year. And, of the 400+ tables we ran at those four cons, I can only think of three times where some one had to play a pre-gen to sit at a table. Three people over 400 tables does not seem like a big issue to me.
I GMed 8 tables at Gencon myself. I had a table full of pre-gens sit down for Wrath of the Accursed, a Tier 7-11, and none of them had ever played PFS before. I cleared it with Mark, since he was organizing PFS at Gencon, to change Wrath to First Steps, Part 1, as I didn't want these 6 players first experience to amount to a TPK in Wrath.
What I'm asking for is local game days, one shot game days on a Saturday or Sunday, or something similar. This is where the largest amount of PFS play happens.
|
Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
Sorry. Just had to point Blazej in the direction of this post:
There is a problem I am seeing that people are playing a pre-gen character at 4th or 7th level, and chose not to play it with a character of their own making. They are playing the pre-gen because they don't want to risk their character dying or burning up resources. They would rather play with the pre-gen, receive the Chronicle, and then apply it to their own character of the appropriate level.
I know it happens because over the past 6 days, I have played at two stores here in the Seattle area. No one knew who I was. I watched what was happening at my table, and the other tables that were running. I saw it happen twice.
I would say that's a pretty definitive representation of exactly what I pointed out. If those guys didn't get reported as having played it, they can take that knowledge to a future table, play the same module with their "real" character, and sail through the adventure without actual risk.
And, yes, I know GMs can currently do that as much as they like. Another shade of grey that could be exploited, and usually is not. I realize that.
[Edit] Sorry I didn't leave you the last word, Heretic. I can't resist when people poke at me, though. I'll try harder, this time.
Drogon
While I can believe you and Michael might be of the same mind on this matter, his statement is not dealing with the same matter as you describe. In his version they ARE getting chronicles. Which I certainly want stamped out. In your scenario they want to play the mod but given that the rest of the party for example all turned out to be bards played by clearly drunk players. The loose moralled one then lies and says they have played before but could they hang on to play with a pregen. On reflection actually surely the answer is no! They either replay with ther own PC without credit but with full risk or don't play at all.
W
|
|
What I'm asking for is local game days, one shot game days on a Saturday or Sunday, or something similar. This is where the largest amount of PFS play happens.
For local games you will see less the New player problem but more the filling a Legal table problem.
For me specifically it happens enough that I am against this.
Though I feel I can speak to conventions since I talk about it a lot with the coordinators at every convention I go to that spread wide, I can't speak to Local issue other then my own.
Though Another complaint specifically I had for this Years Gen Con was not enough Low tier games, that said they had more Low-Tier scenarios at Gen Con 2010 and Gen Con 2009 and new players playing 4th and 7th level pre-gens was still an issue.
PFS specifically at Gen Con attracts a lot of new players.
|
|
For local games you will see less the New player problem but more the filling a Legal table problem.
How many times do only two players show up with a legal character and a third player has to play a pre-gen to make the table legal? I'm not being snarky and it will "sound" like that, but don't let the internet add snarkiness to the tone of my post. I'm truly trying to understand how many times GMs really have to add that 3rd player to a table with a pregen, outside of a level of one of his own characters, because only two regular characters are available.
For me specifically it happens enough that I am against this.
How many? Once or twice a week, a month, or something else. Can you please be clearer than "happens enough." It will really, really help make my job easier.
Though I feel I can speak to conventions since I talk about it a lot with the coordinators at every convention I go to that spread wide, I can't speak to Local issue other then my own.
Fair enough
Though Another complaint specifically I had for this Years Gen Con was not enough Low tier games, that said they had more Low-Tier scenarios at Gen Con 2010 and Gen Con 2009 and new players playing 4th and 7th level pre-gens was still an issue.
PFS specifically at Gen Con attracts a lot of new players.
Specifically why I am going to crunch numbers later this year, but my initial thought is to have 65% low tier games (Tier 1-5), 25% mid tier games (Tier 3-7 and 5-9), and 10% high tier games (Tier 7-11). That isn't concrete by any means as I still need to run some reports and look at the numbers, but I think it is a good starting point.
|
|
So, Loose Morals Man could be aware of that and make sure to point out that he doesn't want to have "wasted the gas" without getting to play. Then he'd get his way.Your definition of "loose morals" is ridiculous.
Your so called "Loose Morals Guy" can leave the game if he really wants. No one can stop him. He can spend those four to five hours doing something other than helping out a party for no credit. This isn't what a person with loose morals does. Ridiculous.
Considering how expensive gas and convention/lodging fees are these days, you don't have to drive very far for your morals to loosen up.
Choice A: "I can play a pregen for no cred at a con where I don't know anybody."
Choice B: "I can play three or four 'pick-up' Eurogames in five hours. Agricola, Seven Wonders, Tobago, Hmm...."
|
|
How many? Once or twice a week, a month, or something else. Can you please be clearer than "happens enough." It will really, really help make my job easier.
to give you an idea how much we play, currently we play on average twice a month, every other Saturday. We try to sit 4 tables total, 2 in the morning 2 in the afternoon.
The vast majority of pre-Gen play I see are first level pre-gens, which is not an issue.
In total I probably have seen locally 10 times playing a scenario a first time and not getting credit for it *different reasons for that happening*. we have been playing for a year. Also that number locally will most likely soon rise much quicker because I am running out of low level tiers that I can have enough players play, but I have a Lot of High Level ones *Most of them*, but not enough high level players to play them.
That said, that number could be 1 or 50, I would still think taken away the ability to get your 1 player chronicle a bad idea.
A rule like this should not be based on how often it happens.
That said, I am all for making it happen less.
Edit: the reason I bring up convention play a lot, because over 90% of games I ran or Mustered that did not have a tier 1-2 in it, I had at least 1 player sitting there the first time playing it with a 4th or 7th level Pre-Gen. Every time it was un-avoidable for 1 reason or another.
|
Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
To clarify my thoughts as much as anything.
Pros for the status quo:
1) Stops people practising modules with pregens before trying for real.
2) Stops people who, seeing that they have drawn the short straw in terms of other players and don't want to risk their own P.C. but still fancy playing the mod with a pre gen suddenly claiming they have suddenly played it already. Thus getting player knowledge when they play for real.
I would say that for 1) only a tiny number of ppl would play practice runs sans credit to increase their chances of getting credit. For 2) if someone has a legit PC of the right level but has sat down at a table then they either withdraw or replay for credit. No using a pregen.
Cons for the status quo
1)It discourages ppl to play a pre gen to make up a legal or better still a 4 PC table. Thus making getting tables the right size rather harder.
2)Penalises players who are just starting PFS saying We hipe you enjoyed playing is mod sans credit cause if we let you do it later for credit other ppl will exploit that rule.
3)It is punishing those of good intent to control the bas behaviour of a very small and odd minority.
Obviously if replay is seen as necessary evil for GMs and making tables legal there is a point of view to restrict it under other circumstances whenever possible.
Just my opinion obviously
W
|
I also agree with Dragnmoon on this.
Giving a new player a chronicle is an incentive to play more PFS. Telling a player he wasted his time and can never play that scenario again (whether or not that has any real impact on life) is depressing and tends to demotivate.
As long as the chronicle you give out uses a "new player" ID (that you hand out), I don't see the problem with it. It's not like they can then turn around and use it on their current character. And I'm going to assume someone isn't psychotic enough to lie about it and then play the scenario with their "real" character, but I guess that's why we have the official rule (and why I don't have a problem with it).
I'd personally allowed 2 players to play pregens more than once for credit. Players have busy lives and sometimes it's hard for a new player to create a new PC, and you don't always have the time to help them either. As expected, they both made real PCs once they got to level 2. The player still has an ID # and I'd mark him dead if he died. No foul no harm as far as I'm concerned.
Having said that, I have no problems with the official rules because it keeps rules abusers away. Having said, I'll continue to make exceptions, especially for new players, because it's the right thing to do.
At the moment, I don't have enough of my marbles in one bag to gather my thoughts together. But i do think what Jason S has to say seems very reasonable. In short, i guess i agree what he has to say.
|
|
To clarify my thoughts as much as anything.
Pros for the status quo:
1) Stops people practising modules with pregens before trying for real.
2) Stops people who, seeing that they have drawn the short straw in terms of other players and don't want to risk their own P.C. but still fancy playing the mod with a pre gen suddenly claiming they have suddenly played it already. Thus getting player knowledge when they play for real.I would say that for 1) only a tiny number of ppl would play practice runs sans credit to increase their chances of getting credit. For 2) if someone has a legit PC of the right level but has sat down at a table then they either withdraw or replay for credit. No using a pregen.
Cons for the status quo
1)It discourages ppl to play a pre gen to make up a legal or better still a 4 PC table. Thus making getting tables the right size rather harder.
2)Penalises players who are just starting PFS saying We hipe you enjoyed playing is mod sans credit cause if we let you do it later for credit other ppl will exploit that rule.
3)It is punishing those of good intent to control the bas behaviour of a very small and odd minority.Obviously if replay is seen as necessary evil for GMs and making tables legal there is a point of view to restrict it under other circumstances whenever possible.
I agree with Heretic (oh my, that sounds more chaotic than I am)
Let's review.Guy plays at table with pregen at high level:
1. "Eating a module" to help or to just have spot to play.
2. Hiding behind pregen to hinder others or avoid danger to real PC.
3. To earn chronicle for PC. (as observed by Michael firsthand.)
1. It doesn't seem there are enough modules to be eating any. "Oh, I can't play that one, I ate it," seems wrong on all counts. Maybe that's because there's not much PFS around me and a player missing a chance to level up with his friends in their new module...it's sad.
Addressing these players in a positive way is addressing your good players and your new or less connected players. Most recommended.
2. "Loose morals man" cannot be stopped by the new rule, only redirected. If the offender is known, a pattern of behavior can be established. If an unknown player, he could (edited so as not to seed ideas...) Anyway, there are ways around the rule to still hinder others or circumvent the module's dangers. Anybody of this mindset should be detected and monitored, yes, but this ruling would only be a stopgap.
Addressing these offenders in a negative way is addressing them and those good players whose fun is hindered by them (any out there?) and the integrity of PFS.
Also recommended. (Uh-oh...will reconcile soon)
3. The rules already prohibited this. That's a judge/GM/VC issue.
1&2 could both be addressed by one tactic:
Reporting pregen play of modules.
If an issue arises, PFS would have a record. "Oh, he has played that module often." or "That guy who ruined it for everybody did have a legitimate PC he could have played."
A second option would be to limit pregen play to once/module or you do lose player-chronicle rights. Playing after PC goes through still okay for zero credit.
So, in an emergency, somebody could step into a game/not lose chronicle, but it'd be known "One time, only for exceptional cases" (Much like 7 people tables, which make a module a cakewalk too, is frowned upon.)
Just saying, I think supporting the players in the hobby (esp. new ones/those with fewer play options) is more important than filtering out the jerks in the hobby (who will hopefully be filtered out through other means.)
JMK
As a relative newbie, I don't have much I can add to this other than a newbie's perspective. The folks I play with have always worked under the assumption that, other than brand new players at 1st level, if you don't have a character of the appropriate level... you can't play that scenario. We didn't even know there were pregens for scenarios over 1st level.
You can't miss what you never knew. lol
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
I won't blabber. Dragnmoon is right. Punishing helpful players is never a good thing. If you have 4 players signed for a game yet only two of them show up and some random person can come fill in with a pregen.
Also adding complications and exceptions isn't nice. KISS.
But...adding complications and exceptions is what people are proposing.
This...
As a relative newbie, I don't have much I can add to this other than a newbie's perspective. The folks I play with have always worked under the assumption that, other than brand new players at 1st level, if you don't have a character of the appropriate level... you can't play that scenario.
...is as simple as it gets. kensai13 has always interpreted it the way that Michael Brock is now clarifying:
You may play each scenario once, and you will get a chronicle when you do so. You can only play it if you have a character that meets the level requirements, and you must play that character to get the chronicle. If you replay any scenario for any reason, you must use a pre-generated character, and can only do so if your presence is necessary to make a legal table. Furthermore, you will not get a chronicle for replaying any scenario.
How is that not simple?
I feel like this all hearkens back to the Play, Play, Play debates, and that we will never escape the acrimony those generated...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You may play each scenario once, and you will get a chronicle when you do so. You can only play it if you have a character that meets the level requirements, and you must play that character to get the chronicle. If you replay any scenario for any reason, you must use a pre-generated character, and can only do so if your presence is necessary to make a legal table. Furthermore, you will not get a chronicle for replaying any scenario.
So you're saying you can't play a (non-1st level) pregen until you've played a real PC through the same module? (Even if the pregen option is the only one you have due to extenuating circumstances?)
And you're saying you can't play a pregen for fun with your buddies even for no credit? (Sorry, you have four, so I'll watch from the side guys...)
I'm thinking you get to play a whole lot more PFS than I do...if you excluded me for either reason, I'd mark your games/conferences as a 'possible waste of time' and plan/avoid accordingly. You do this to a newbie and you may just lose a PF player/PFS member.
You may think it's sensible (your XP being different), but I think it's lame, and hinders the game's growth.
Fun and inclusion first. Rules and limits on play second.
(Hmmm, I wonder if this is a matter of Chaotic Good vs. Lawful Good? Everybody wants good for everybody, but such different takes...)
So you're saying you can't play a (non-1st level) pregen until you've played a real PC through the same module? (Even if the pregen option is the only one you have due to extenuating circumstances?)And you're saying you can't play a pregen for fun with your buddies even for no credit? (Sorry, you have four, so I'll watch from the side guys...)
The rules are that if you have a level-appropriate character and you have not previously played through the scenario being offered, then you cannot use a pregen and must use your character if you want to play. If you are playing a scenario where you do not have a level-appropriate character, then your only choice to play is to use a pregen. If you have already played through the scenario and you are replaying for whatever reason, you have the choice of using either a level-appropriate character or a pregen.
|
|
I’ll go ahead and throw some of my cents into the discussion. I for one am in agreement with Mike’s ruling.
The main complaints against Mike’s ruling seem to have been over a few of issues. 1. Players will not get credit for playing a scenario. 2. The inability for GMs to create legal tables. And 3. Not being able to sit players who came to a game day. I think there are a number of ways to address and minimize these problems, and create an environment where it is less likely pregens will be needed in non-1st level situations...
In my experience players Hate to run pregens. Especially at higher level games. Where in my experience from events like Gen Con, pregens just got chewed up and spit out by higher tier scenarios. They want to play their own PCs and see running a pregen as a last resort option to play. Generally for players who do not have a PC at the correct level or for entirely new players. I honestly do not think players get a fulfilling and complete experience if they are running an expendable pregen, and players with PCs who have earned their way to higher level games are not exactly thrilled to have those pregens at their table for a variety of reasons. Namely there are players who are reckless with their expendable pregens.
As a serious question, I am also curious how often other GMs need players running pregens in order to have a legal table? In my own experience it has not been anything like a significant problem. If this is a frequent and repeated problem, then I think there might be scheduling and/or registration issues in that store/region. Granted, there are many factors and variants that could go into this. But if this is a consistent problem then I think some issues need to be considered.
If a GM is consistently finding themselves running 7-11 scenarios and only having 1-3 players show up, and desperately need players running pregens to flesh out the party, then there is a scenario scheduling problem. A player base and their PCs need to be developed over time. It takes 18 scenarios to get your first PC to level 7 (or four and a half months if you are playing a PC four times a month), and that’s assuming something bad does not happen to the PC in question during those first 18 scenarios. A VC/Store Liason/GM needs to gauge what their player base looks like level wise. If there is not that base of 7-11 PCs in the store/region, then that GM should probably not run 7-11 scenarios. At the store I run in the Atlanta region I have consistently had to run lower tier scenarios because the player base has simply not been there at the store for 7-11 scenarios to be run successfully.
The 1-3 players who have 7-11 character might be a bit disappointed to learn that they may not be able to play their higher level characters and get to those juicy scenarios. A GM may very well need to sit down with those players and explain that there is little point in scheduling higher tier games if the player base is not there. That more players need to be brought up to that level, and that they can still have fun with lower tier scenarios. It can also be prudent to try and convince players to become GMs to help expand the variety and number of scenarios being ran, and possibly expand on the player base.
Something I think is vital for any store/region to set up a registration system for game days. This has been a major deal in the Atlanta region where we have a great website where GMs can schedule game days, GMs can coordinate with each other, and players can sign up for games. This can really help you gauge where your player base is, and where you need GMs to run scenarios. If players are consistently posting/messaging that they do not have enough levels to run the scenarios you are running, then that is a good indicator that a GM needs to run some more lower tier scenarios or recruit another GM to help run some games for those players being left out in the cold, and would otherwise have to run pregens.
Something I highly recommend to every GM in PFS. Try and recruit, train, prepare, and have on hand backup GMs for your game days if at all possible! Backup GMs are your friends! One of the main strengths we have in the Atlanta region is that we have a solid pool of GMs to draw upon when we have more players then we originally planned for. I do not want to sound like I am bragging, but having this great pool of GMs on hand to help out where need has allowed us to expand and explode over the last year. In my experience we have had virtually no trouble with players having to run pregens for higher tier scenarios in our stores because we do have a good scheduling, registration, and GM system set up. I have only had to seat a pregen for a 5-9 scenario once in the last year, and that was a last minute walk in player who just happened to come upon us playing and wanted to join. All other pregens I have had to deal with outside of convention settings have been completely new players who needed a pregen because they did not have a character yet. I have never once had to use the 7-11 pregens I have printed out.
To address the one issue some have had with GMs still being able to get credit for a scenario even if they do not have a character at the right level. Paizo is purposely trying to encourage more GMs to run PFS games. This only makes sense. GMs make the skeleton of PFS and without GMs the whole system would not even work. The people at Paizo, the Venture-Captains, and others GMs should always work to encourage new GMs to steps up and run a few scenarios where needed. Remember, you can never have too many GMs on hand. Because GMs can always be players. But players are not always GMs. That is why I think that GMs being able to earn experience even if they do not have a character in the right tier should stay as it is. Yea, it favors GMs in comparison to players. But GMs are essential to running and expanding PFS, and letting players play in the first place.
Another thing that might help is to always tell your players that when their PC is reaching level 5 they need to start planning for their next 1st level characters right away. I always do this where I run scenarios. It is good to explain to players, especially new ones, that when their PCs reaches level 6 it is not going to be able to continue playing the lower tier scenarios, and you don’t want them to get into a situation where they do not have a character ready for the 1-5, 1-7 tier scenarios. What I try to do and advise my players to do is to try and have a PC in each of the major tier ranges. Namely 1-5, 5-9, and 7-11 if and when possible. That way they can play in nearly any scenario they have not already played that comes up.
I can sympathize with those GMs who do not want to disappoint players because they will not be able to earn experience because they are running a pregen. Unfortunately there are those who do abuse the system if given the opportunity. Even those who are responsible face temptations to do things to maximizes their chances success. I know when I am playing in a scenario I have already GMed I am tempted to do things to keep the scenario on the rails when I see players about to go off the rails, and it can be hard not to pick out spells that are favorable towards the nature of the scenario.
I think a GM should at least try and explain why the 1:1/4 and 7 pregen rule is the way it is. Even if it is disappointing to the player that they will not be able to earn experience for it. I do think trying to explain the situation, especially if they are a walk in player, and tell them that you will try and make arrangements for them in the future goes a long way. You want to try and engender a long term loyalty to PFS, and try and build a good relationship with the player. So it is a good thing to try and stress that scenarios they can earn experience with are available, and in the future you can arrange it so that those scenarios are available (assuming such arrangements can be made). Especially if s/he registers for scheduled game days, and a GM can make plans for such players.
To address the convention issue, I can see where more problems might develop. There are simply more variables, and ones individual GMs cannot easily address. As has been pointed out, there are a Ton of new players at conventions like Gen Con. And A Lot of them ended up at tier 5-9 and 7-11 tables with their pregens. In large part because that was all they could sign up for. I do not think any GM at Gen Con enjoyed running mostly or all pregens through the 5-9 and 7-11 scenarios. It typically just resulted in horrific meat grinders. Which is NOT the impression we should give to new players about PFS! I think it is safe to say we want player’s PCs to stand a good chance of surviving their first couple of scenarios in PFS.
But I think there are perfectly good ways to deal with this problem. As Mike has already noted, he is planning on running significantly more lower tier scenarios at Gen Con. Making the available scenarios lean towards lower level play will do a lot to deal with the new and inexperienced player issue we had at Gen Con in my opinion. A couple ideas I would like to throw into the hat is to perhaps have a couple of GMs on hand to just run First Steps for new players who show up and have no experience with PFS. We now have a great resource in the First Step series for introducing new players. Also if a significant pool of new players show up for a slot needing 4th and 7th level pregens we can advice and direct them to join the much more new player friendly First Steps tables verse going to tables with scenarios like Wrath of the Accursed or You Only Die Twice. Or perhaps have some other lower level scenarios ready in the event the players do have some experience, and want to play something they can run their characters in.
Perhaps for major conventions it would also be a good idea to make sure every GM has at least one of the First Step’s scenarios prepped and ready to go if need be. That way there is that pool of GMs ready and able to introduce new players to PFS in a way that will positive, friendly, and encourage them to come back again and again. I am willing to bet that by next Gen Con there will be a very good pool of GMs experienced at running First Steps, and ready to give more new players a great first taste of PFS play.
*Whew!* Hope these thoughts help some of you a bit!
|
Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
. Inter alia
I’ll go ahead and throw some of my cents into the discussion. I for one am in agreement with Mike’s ruling.
I can sympathize with those GMs who do not want to disappoint players because they will not be able to earn experience because they are running a pregen. Unfortunately there are those who do abuse the system if given the opportunity. Even those who are responsible face temptations to do things to maximizes their chances success. I know when I am playing in a scenario I have already GMed I am tempted to do things to keep the scenario on the rails when I see players about to go off the rails, and it can be hard not to pick out spells that are favorable towards the nature of the scenario.
I think a GM should at least try and explain why the 1:1/4 and 7 pregen rule is the way it is. Even if it is disappointing to the player that they will not be able to earn experience for it. I do think trying to explain the situation, especially if they are a walk in player, and tell them that you will try and make arrangements for them in enjoyed .
Nicholas. That was an interesting and well thought out piece. Much if not most of it deals with matters ancillary to the main bone of contention. All the things you say about managing the player base and generating good GM resources are sound. Sadly in the real world we will still have cases where the available resources mean that someone using a pregen for a mod they have not played before is the difference between a table being legal or not. It will also be the case that a newbie turns up for a game and the only seat is at a table with a lvl 4 PC. Im already juggling these problems and am about to start a regular gig at a local(ish) game shop where there will be enough ppl for 2 tables max and often just one. Into our 2nd year of PFS play we have only played above Teir 1-2 when doing sanctioned modules or flying to somewhere where a con was happening!
On the issue of banning a player from being able to get future credit for playing a mod that they already played sans credit with a pregen.... I don't see why singling out the good Samaritan or enthusiastic new player who can't be seated elsewhere for such harsh treatment is beneficial. Explaining to someone that they are eating the mod in case theyuse the player knowledge for the real run is not something I will be able to do with any sincerity. It leaves new players feeling shilled. For existing members we give GMs replay as we need GMs in order to play. Surely extending the same courtesy to players who agree to step in and be the player we need to play the session legal and thus playable is fair.
W
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
But...adding complications and exceptions is what people are proposing.
This...
actually it is the exact opposite.. What Mike is ruling is an exception and complication..
Again, the rule is 1 Playing chronicle per scenario, the ruling by Mike is an exception to that rule.
You: "It's to-may-to!"
Me: "It's to-mah-to!"
You: "Agh! Why can't you see it my way?!"
Me: "Hah! Why can't you see it my way?!"
You crack me up, Dragnmoon. Arguing language and interpretation can be fun, but really it's just semantics. We disagree on how to interpret what the rule was, used to be, or is. We should just leave it at that.
|
|
Just wanted to say that the interpretation from Mike is the same one I have heard from campaign orgs since the 1 and 1 rule was put in place.
Sorry, Dragnmoon. I think you are reading too much into the inclusion of the word "Chronicle". The intent has always been (even in the days of "Play, Play, Play") that a scenario should only be played once by a player. PPP just gave an exception for extreme circumstances.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
So you're saying you can't play a (non-1st level) pregen until you've played a real PC through the same module? (Even if the pregen option is the only one you have due to extenuating circumstances?)
You may play each scenario once, and you will get a chronicle when you do so. You can only play it if you have a character that meets the level requirements, and you must play that character to get the chronicle. If you replay any scenario for any reason, you must use a pre-generated character, and can only do so if your presence is necessary to make a legal table. Furthermore, you will not get a chronicle for replaying any scenario.
What extenuating circumstances? Why can't you play your character through the module rather than a pre-gen, if this is the first time you've ever played the module? Moreover, why create rules to deal with this extenuating circumstance when everyone is saying that doing this creates needless rules and limits when applied the other direction? Tomayto, tomahto...
And you're saying you can't play a pregen for fun with your buddies even for no credit? (Sorry, you have four, so I'll watch from the side guys...)
You can't do this, anyway; it is already disallowed. Unless, of course, you're playing the module for the first time. In which case, why are you not playing your own character? Refer to above for remaining arguments about this.
I'm thinking you get to play a whole lot more PFS than I do...if you excluded me for either reason, I'd mark your games/conferences as a 'possible waste of time' and plan/avoid accordingly. You do this to a newbie and you may just lose a PF player/PFS member.
You may think it's sensible (your XP being different), but I think it's lame, and hinders the game's growth.
Fun and inclusion first. Rules and limits on play second.
We have run over 200 tables at my store in the last two years. [EDIT]Yow. Bad math. We've run over 300 tables at Enchanted Grounds since beginning PFS Organized Play.[/EDIT] I have yet to turn anyone away for any reason. Well, once I had to say no to a couple people who showed up unannounced and we already had three full tables that had started 25 minutes prior to them showing up. But if you want to hold that against me, then I can't think of any situation where you'd want to play in my store's games.
(Hmmm, I wonder if this is a matter of Chaotic Good vs. Lawful Good? Everybody wants good for everybody, but such different takes...)
Heh. Tomayto, tomahto, my friend...
Have to say, after hearing the justification for this rule, I'm not against it anymore. Kind of unfortunate that a player may possibly lose out on one chronicle sheet... but then again, new mods are constantly being released. And, as it was pointed out at some point, people playing pregens all the time so that this would be a significant issue isn't really the best setup. If it ever became a real issue for me, I don't think it would kill me to eat one module. It is the fun of gaming that brought me to PFS, after all.
And, as my GM says, if you play through every single module and get locked up, you're probably playing too often.
|
|
Drogon:
Consider a small PFS group, running at a store, where they have to let new people join, using the store's web calendar for signups.
Consider, your few regular players have been playing enough that their primary PCs are, say, 6th level.
Consider, you are setting up a game for 5-9 at the store, that your regular players have already been informed about and look forward to, and a newbie signs up.
Consider, you are the only GM available, you barely get enough players to play a single table (even if the store had room for another table that wasn't already in use), and you get a walk-in who is new to Pathfinder RPG & PFS.
So, do you tell this new person, "No. You can't play."; do you tell them, "Oh, you can play, but all you'll take away from this is the 'joy' of playing a not terribly well-built pregen, and you'll never be able to play this scenario (part X of a Y scenario series) for credit for any of your characters later."; or would you like to tell him, "Sure, you can play a pregen. When you have a character of the appropriate level for this scenario, you'll still be able to play it for credit for him."
Now, the current issue, as reported by Mike Brock, is that he saw someone (two people, apparently) playing a pregen and receiving regular credit for a higher-tier scenario.
So, the real rule should be:
If you have a level appropriate character who has not been played through this scenario, you cannot play the scenario with a pregen, or, if you do, you sacrifice your one player chronicle for this scenario.
If you do not have a tier-appropriate character, and are playing a pregen to help make a legal table, you can still qualify for a player chronicle for this scenario when you do have a level appropriate character.
=========
Not much different than the current GM rules for gaining the GM chronicle, IIRC. No stockpiling chronicles for another PC if you have a level-appropriate PC without a player chronicle for the scenario you gained GM credit for.
|
Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
Drogon, I am pretty sure that you have read the debate here and so you surely know which extenuating circumstances that are being discussed?
It would be really great to have the resources to avoid the extenuating circumstances, which are ofc letting a newbie join a table to play a 4/7 lvl pregen rather then turn them away. Or asking an existing player to take a pregen to play a mod they had not played before but had no suitable PC so to make a legal table.
To prevent them replaying for credit for fear that it gives them an unfair advantage later and/or will encourage someone to (dishonestly) opt out of playing a mod for credit for fear that their party is substandard.... Still strikes me as punishing the innocent to ensure you catch every doers of even the most unlikely wrongs.
Also my reading of the 4.0 guide is that replay is at the GMs discretion. Can you show me where someone wanting to replay for kicks with a group of friends is actually prohibited? All I can see is that GM is encouraged to be flexible to allow for a legal table.
Neil. It is very disheartening that to hear that asking someone to play a pregen to make a table legal has always been on the basis they be rewarded by having to eat the mod. Let alone the impression it would leave me with if I was a new player!
It really seems that we are throwing babies out with the bath water here.
Callarek. That seems a very sensible tack to take.
W
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
Drogon:
Consider a small PFS group, running at a store, where they have to let new people join, using the store's web calendar for signups.Consider, your few regular players have been playing enough that their primary PCs are, say, 6th level.
Consider, you are setting up a game for 5-9 at the store, that your regular players have already been informed about and look forward to, and a newbie signs up.
Consider, you are the only GM available, you barely get enough players to play a single table (even if the store had room for another table that wasn't already in use), and you get a walk-in who is new to Pathfinder RPG & PFS.
So, do you tell this new person, "No. You can't play."; do you tell them, "Oh, you can play, but all you'll take away from this is the 'joy' of playing a not terribly well-built pregen, and you'll never be able to play this scenario (part X of a Y scenario series) for credit for any of your characters later..."
300 tables, and this has not happened. I cannot claim definitively, but I would like to say it is because of marketing, scheduling and communication. I think we avoid the situation by being completely upfront about how/where/when to join brand new tables. We offer them all the time, and always guide interested players toward them. They are very successful.
Now:
...or would you like to tell him, "Sure, you can play a pregen. When you have a character of the appropriate level for this scenario, you'll still be able to play it for credit for him."
You, sir, have hit on an excellent solution. As you said, this is what happens with GMs who get a chronicle for a module that they don't have a tier-appropriate character for, right?
I bow to your wisdom.
The real rule should be:
If you have a level appropriate character who has not been played through this scenario, you cannot play the scenario with a pregen, or, if you do, you sacrifice your one player chronicle for this scenario.
If you do not have a tier-appropriate character, and are playing a pregen to help make a legal table, you can still qualify for a player chronicle for this scenario when you do have a level appropriate character.
=========
Not much different than the current GM rules for gaining the GM chronicle, IIRC. No stockpiling chronicles for another PC if you have a level-appropriate PC without a player chronicle for the scenario you gained GM credit for.
What do you think, Dragnmoon? Heretic? Does Callarek win the debate?
[Edit]I didn't know heretics were ninjas...
Regarding your reading of the 4.0 Guide: it is, once again, a matter of how I read it versus how you read it.
Regarding the extenuating circumstances: mine have been routinely shot down as implausible. Why shouldn't I question others'?
Regardless, as I've said all along, I will merely follow the rules as they are given to me. Even if they are rules I don't agree with.
|
Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
Drogon: as Callarek's solution is pretty much what I have been calling for I am very glad to support it! As in fact I did in my last post ;-)
If it get's your thumbs up then perhaps it is a compromise that Michael will seriously consider.
While we're clarifying this area: If we adopt this do we also specify what characters must be used if someone replays for other reasons than table legality?
Hard to stop posting in a discussion like this and the iPad is really not the device I recommend to use BTW :-)
W
|
|
If it get's your thumbs up then perhaps it is a compromise that Michael will seriously consider.
While we're clarifying this area: If we adopt this do we also specify what characters must be used if someone replays for other reasons than table legality?
W
Hi all. I just wanted to stop in and let you know I have reconsidered. I have been working all day with the Venture-Captains on their forum, as well as several people not on that forum through phone calls and emails, to come to a compromise I think works best for the campaign as a whole. I still would like to have another day or two to make sure we work all the kinks out of it and get the wording right.
With that said, disregard my initial ruling. Play for the next day or two with what has been in place already.
Thanks for your patience.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
Drogon: as Callarek's solution is pretty much what I have been calling for I am very glad to support it! As in fact I did in my last post ;-)
:-p
While we're clarifying this area: If we adopt this do we also specify what characters must be used if someone replays for other reasons than table legality?
Not sure what you mean, so I will refrain from speculation until I'm led out of the dark.
Hard to stop posting in a discussion like this.
Yeah, that's why my pronouncements of "I'm staying away, now!" should be taken with a grain of salt...
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
With respect --
I think enforcing a distinction between "having a level-appropriate PC" or not would be a full-bore disaster.
Let's suppose we're going to play a Tier 5 - 9 scenario for the second session at a convention.
- Albert has a 5th-level alchemist, ready to play.
- Bernice has a 5th-level barbarian, but she left her Chronicle sheets at home. She lives 15 minutes away.
- Cadence's 5th-level bard just earned her 18th experience point. She is trying to decide what to do for her new level. She could have an eligible character, if she decided whether to become a Lion Blade right now.
- Technically, Dwight still has his 6th-level cavalier with all the negative levels, but he doesn't like to play the character any more.
- Edie has a 7th-level cleric (20 XP), but she was expecting to play "Rules of the Swift" with that character, and if she plays this scenario, the character will be 8th Level. If she plays this scenario, the only way she'll ever be allowed to play "Rules of the Swift" is if she GMs the first three "Devil We Know" modules first.
- Bernice's brother Forrest says he forgot to bring his 6th-level druid, too, but we all think he's lying.
- Gertie has an underpowered 5th-level fighter who (due to a string of misfortune) is underequipped. Everybody else has a 8th- or 9th-level martial character. There's a 7th-level cleric pre-gen, and the GM knows that the party is going to desperately need someone who can use those wands of cure light wounds in this module.
- Hastur has a 7th-level gunslinger, but the only person with a copy of Ultimate Combat -- which he would need to bring to the table -- doesn't want to stay another 4 - 5 hours.
- Ipheginea has a 5th-level inquisitor of Norgerber, but the GM has stated he hates inquisitors of evil gods; she's had much less pleasant experiences playing that character, with that GM, than she would if she were allowed to play a pre-gen.
No. That way lies madness.
If a dude comes up to your table and says he wants to play a scenario but needs a pre-gen, get him a pre-gen and a chair. Don't make decisions about credit and chronicles and replay based on whether he has a a PC back home, or in the car, or whatever.
I understand that there's a difference between people trying to scam the system, and people stuck in a less-than-ideal situation. I wish I could stand with others who would like to keep the abuse low while allowing everybody in an awkward situation to have everything they want. But I don't want to see a mess of special cases. Everybody with a pre-gen should get reported, or not. Everybody should get a chronicle, or else nobody should. If anyone should be eligible for replaying with a real PC for credit, then everyone should.
|
Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
The ipad is a funny beast to use for this especially for quoting and or editing all but the shortest quotes. That being said not being a denizen of other forums (fora?) I am not sure of what ninja means here but if I have posted in what is considered an inappropriate order pls accept my apology.
Questioning the validity of someone's position is surely not the same as pleading ignorance of it's existence, surely?
On page 16 on bullet point four it specifies the procedure for replay. Even if we pronounce tomato, potato, sasperilla & pyjamas differently I really can't see how you read it as a blanket ban. It specifies many GMs won't allow replay and then says that the player would have to leave and find one who does. it even makes it clear that allow replay for credit is still up to the GM even for table legality.
Oh and kudos for running so many tables and supporting PFS. We are a long way behind that total in these parts but one day......
W
EDIT
In light of Michaels post I guess it is worth waiting to see the new terms of reference
So in Louis Armstrong's immortal words......let's call the whole thing off, until the new rules appear :-)
Oh and what I meant was do we specify what character can be used if some one wants to replay for e.g. Kicks rather than their presence being needed form making up a legal table.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
The ipad is a funny beast to use for this especially for quoting and or editing all but the shortest quotes. That being said not being a denizen of other forums (fora?) I am not sure of what ninja means here but if I have posted in what is considered an inappropriate order pls accept my apology.
"Ninja" means you slipped into the thread, unseen, and posted on the very subject someone else was about to post, making the exact point they were about to post, then slipped out before they hit "submit," therefore getting onto the thread before they did. They won't see you until they see their post appear, immediately below yours.
It's a compliment, and not meant to be disparaging.
In light of Michaels post I guess it is worth waiting to see the new terms of reference
So in Louis Armstrong's immortal words......let's call the whole thing off, until the new rules appear :-)
Agreed.
Beyond that, I'm at a friend's for dinner, right now, so will reply to your other stuff some time tomorrow. I just wanted to be sure you knew I wasn't calling you dirty words with the "ninja" comment.
|
|
300 tables, and this has not happened. I cannot claim definitively, but I would like to say it is because of marketing, scheduling and communication. I think we avoid the situation by being completely upfront about how/where/when to join brand new tables. We offer them all the time, and always guide interested players toward them. They are very successful.
Which is why I pointed out my background in this as a PFS GM. I have done about 20 or so tables at one of our local FLGSes, but it was a single table at a time, with me as coordinator and sole GM, for the most part.
We have had to draft (fortunately interested) Magic players to reach a 3 player table, at times.
Other times, like my last session, where we had 6 players at the table.
And I have, for the nonce, pretty much given up the idea of running anything higher than a Tier 1-5 module.
Which pretty much leaves higher level play for the monthly Game Day, or pick-up private games.
Indeed, after a very successful run of First Steps; I decided that I might as well run it again, which is what I am doing for October, with an extra session to fit it all into a single month.
And that is partly because one of my normal game days is going to be covered by the local convention, and also in hopes that there will be more viable 2nd level PCs at the con.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The existing player who is going to cheat, as referenced by Mike, is going to cheat no matter what the rule says. So the only people who are going to get screwed are the new players who are forced to play a pre-gen due to the convention or game day schedule.
There is no reason to have a rule which hurts honest players while not impeding cheaters in the slightest.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Upon a few minutes' reflection:
I don't think this rule, or any rule, is trying to catch people who cross the line. (There are procedures designed to catch cheating...) Rather, I understand the rule to be for folks who want to know where the line is to be drawn.
"Can I read through the adventure before playing it?" "no." That rule won't stop people who really want to cheat. But it does stop people who want to get the greatest honest advantage, but not a dishonest one.
Likewise, "Can I play through the adventure with a pre-gen and then later play it for credit?" If the campaign coordinator says yes, there will be people who regularly do just that, to make sure the adventure is defused and the surprises spoiled before they risk their PC.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
Upon a few minutes' reflection:
I don't think this rule, or any rule, is trying to catch people who cross the line. (There are procedures designed to catch cheating...) Rather, I understand the rule to be for folks who want to know where the line is to be drawn.
"Can I read through the adventure before playing it?" "no." That rule won't stop people who really want to cheat. But it does stop people who want to get the greatest honest advantage, but not a dishonest one.
Likewise, "Can I play through the adventure with a pre-gen and then later play it for credit?" If the campaign coordinator says yes, there will be people who regularly do just that, to make sure the adventure is defused and the surprises spoiled before they risk their PC.
Yay!
Thank you for articulating what I could not get across even to myself, for some reason.
Some gamers are always looking for an edge. If a rule exists saying that you simply don't report pre-gen play, and that anyone can do it as much as they want, then there will be those people who see that as tacit permission to play scenarios in an effort to gain a little prescience. This way they don't have to actively cheat by buying the scenario and reading it or some other actually against the rules act.
I'm not worried about cheaters. As everyone has pointed out (correctly) hey will cheat if they can.
I am worried about Loose Morals Man being told, "Sure, that's legal." No one would be able to argue with him. He would simply be able to sit there smugly and continue to exercise his loose morals, all within the rules.
And before the pile-on of "that guy won't waste his time" starts: yes, they will. Just look at Living Forgotten Realms current replay rules, and you will see plenty of people doing just this. Strangely (yeah, that's sarcasm), LFR's attendance is down about 60% over last year.
And before the pile-on of "that's because of 4e" starts: no, it's not. 4e's sales have increased dramatically with the advent of Essentials, D&D Encounters, and now Lair Assault.
And before the pile-on of "that guy won't waste his time" starts: yes, they will. Just look at Living Forgotten Realms current replay rules, and you will see plenty of people doing just this. Strangely (yeah, that's sarcasm), LFR's attendance is down about 60% over last year.
And before the pile-on of "that's because of 4e" starts: no, it's not. 4e's sales have increased dramatically...
I like you. You do your research.
|
Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
Upon a few minutes' reflection:
I don't think this rule, or any rule, is trying to catch people who cross the line. (There are procedures designed to catch cheating...) Rather, I understand the rule to be for folks who want to know where the line is to be drawn.
"Can I read through the adventure before playing it?" "no." That rule won't stop people who really want to cheat. But it does stop people who want to get the greatest honest advantage, but not a dishonest one.
Likewise, "Can I play through the adventure with a pre-gen and then later play it for credit?" If the campaign coordinator says yes, there will be people who regularly do just that, to make sure the adventure is defused and the surprises spoiled before they risk their PC.
Not quite calling the whole thing off just yet.....
Essentially if we say that you can opt to choose which character to play i.e. using a pregen despite having a legal character of your own then there are issues. As in unsporting behavior vs outright cheating.
I'd like to make a distiction here. In the original scenario the loose moralled player was actually lieing that he had no legal PC. In this scenario the question isn't even being asked.
If the fear is that we are allowing ppl to "scout a mod" so to make the real thing easier, remember the idea is that you only use a pregen, if you declare you have no legal character and only then if you cannot be seated elsewhere and it is for making a table legal. If one choses to use a pregen in other situations then you can, if you can find a GM who will agree BUT there is no player credit available to you regardless.
I would personally also allow a GM or cordinator to allow a total newbie to play a pregen and be eligible for later credit if they felt it was likely to increase our numbers as otherwise it meant turning the newbie away.
I am not going to chain myself to a giant D20 in protest over it but getting new players is vital in my neck of the woods.
I am surprised to find out that there are mad LFR players who waste precious game time scouting mods by playing without credit. Maybe they have a different demographic to PFS? Certainly I think I could bet the mortgage that none of my players would even think about it! it is hard enough enough to get time to play for credit let alone without it!
W
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
I'd like to make a distiction here. In the original scenario the loose moralled player was actually lieing that he had no legal PC. In this scenario the question isn't even being asked.
A distinction which is important. But one I shouldn't have started out with. I was after what Chris wrote up. He just actually went through the thought process.
I would personally also allow a GM or cordinator to allow a total newbie to play a pregen and be eligible for later credit if they felt it was likely to increase our numbers as otherwise it meant turning the newbie away.
I am not going to chain myself to a giant D20 in protest over it but getting new players is vital in my neck of the woods.
This is what we're after, and you have my full support in trying to find a way to make this happen without creating Chris's scenario. Hopefully the new rules will address that.
I am surprised to find out that there are mad LFR players who waste precious game time scouting mods by playing without credit. Maybe they have a different demographic to PFS?
Hm. A little misrepresentation on my part. Sorry.
The replay rule in LFR is that you can replay any module you want as many times as you want, applying credit to a different character each time. This, ultimately, leads to what we're talking about. Lots of people replay, often they are scouting for characters they care more about, and often they are farming for items and story awards - again, to give to characters they care more about. This has led to the same players being seated at tables over and over, and new people get locked out because there is no space.
Moreover, DMs won't run modules because they don't enjoy being told, "Hey, we've done this. Do you mind skipping the role playing part and just going to the combats?" That attitude has also driven off players who are trying to just play each module once.
That explanation is a bit more concise. Same result; different tack.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
Since the rules allow a person to GM the mod and THEN play it for credit, I think all of this is just superfluous here isn't it?
That explanation is a bit more concise. Same result; different tack.
I don't think so. I honestly believe that GMs do what they do because they are selfless by nature. Look around these threads and see how many people GM precisely because they're trying to build a player base. Even with all the tables I run in my store, there are only a few who GM regularly, and almost all of them make an effort to play the module before they run it. Often, when someone ends up "eating" a module, they won't even play it later for credit. They just don't want to have the spoiler. Their approach to the game is its own policing mechanism.
Now if they wanted to change the rule that you can only get credit for a mod once.. either DM credit or player credit then you would have a basis upon which to stand.
And rehash those arguments again? Ugh. Please, no.
I'm interested to see what they come up with here.
-James
I am, too.
|
Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
That explanation is a bit more concise. Same result; different tack.
Since the rules allow a person to GM the mod and THEN play it for credit, I think all of this is just superfluous here isn't it?
Now if they wanted to change the rule that you can only get credit for a mod once.. either DM credit or player credit then you would have a basis upon which to stand.
However as it is, the notion that this is going to solve anything is ludicrous. If a person wishes 'to scout' a mod.. then they can download it and even run it for others! Since this is not being removed.. the idea that you would impact potential 'good' players AND not solve anything just seems inherently wrong to me.
I'm interested to see what they come up with here.
-James
James
I hope you won't mind me quoting you in full.I am of course broadly sympathetic to your position on this. I will even go so far as to say I don't feel all our positions are as far apart as they first seem.
The replay rules seem to stem from the idea that ideally there should be no replay (as was the case in all RPGs since year dot) but in order to keep the GMs engaged an exception is made the benefit is worth the cost. Equally if you are needed to make up a legal table then again an exception can be made if the GM agrees.
I also feel that the cost of penalising players eligibility for future credit because they stepped into the breach and made a table legal via a pregen or souring a new players experience is not worth the cost if the benefit is that it allows foiling a tiny minority's attempts scout out a mod.
I hope we all agree that replay should be the exception not the rule. The question where to draw the line.
W