Applying GM Credit


GM Discussion

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

So there's that other thread, that's turned toxic. I'm not talking about the main issue there.

But Mike commented that pre-gen credit for modules would work like GM credit for scenarios currently works: when you GM, you immediately assign the credit to a character, who receives the credit as soon as possible. Sometimes that's immediately, and at other times it happens when the character reaches the bottom of the scenario's tier.

Okay, but is that how people are using GM credit?

At Origins, I had a fellow sit down at my "Dalsine Affair" table with a 6th-level PC, with a 4th-level and four 1st-level colleagues. I suggested that he didn't want to play a character so high that it would force the new guys to play up. So he took 9 scenarios worth of GM credit and whipped up a 4th-level PC witch. Nobody at the table thought that the least bit odd.

At Stuffed COWS last month, I was playing in a 5-9 scenario, and one of the players had a 7th-level character that didn't fit well with the party, and a 4th-level Witch (11 XP). He decided to take out one of his GM-credit sheets, apply it to the witch, and join us as a 5th-level character. Nobody raised an objection.

According to the rules, I should have forbidden the first gentleman from assembling a PC out of loose GM Credit, and my GM should not have allowed the player at the table to play his witch.

Yes?

Grand Lodge 5/5

That is such a tough call on that one. If a player has "loose" GM chronicle sheets that he/she has not applied credit for as of yet then I would be ok with him applying credit on the fly to one of his characters.. but on the same token any GM is I think well with in their rights to say no to that type of move too, especially if a player brings up an objection.

The example at Origins, again I would allow as long as it did not slow the scenario down at all.. nor any of the players objected. But again this is a gray area and while it can be objectionable, should be allowed as the GM had run a lot of scenario's and just had not applied credit for a character on those sheets yet. I WOULD as a GM make sure he IS applying credit to that one character though by filling the sheet out completely.

In the above if someone objected in the slightest as a GM and it being a gray area then yes I would as a GM of that table say no to him doing it that way.

Good luck on getting the answer you are looking for.


Sounds like a good use of credit to me. Any reasons against making that clearly legal?

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

I will only comment on one aspect of this topic. Regardless of what is legal, the character in question must be complete and ready to play (or be audited) by the start of the session. No changes being worked on during the VC into box text or as the scenario progresses.

4/5

Chris Mortika wrote:

So there's that other thread, that's turned toxic. I'm not talking about the main issue there.

But Mike commented that pre-gen credit for modules would work like GM credit for scenarios currently works: when you GM, you immediately assign the credit to a character, who receives the credit as soon as possible. Sometimes that's immediately, and at other times it happens when the character reaches the bottom of the scenario's tier.

Okay, but is that how people are using GM credit?

At Origins, I had a fellow sit down at my "Dalsine Affair" table with a 6th-level PC, with a 4th-level and four 1st-level colleagues. I suggested that he didn't want to play a character so high that it would force the new guys to play up. So he took 9 scenarios worth of GM credit and whipped up a 4th-level PC witch. Nobody at the table thought that the least bit odd.

At Stuffed COWS last month, I was playing in a 5-9 scenario, and one of the players had a 7th-level character that didn't fit well with the party, and a 4th-level Witch (11 XP). He decided to take out one of his GM-credit sheets, apply it to the witch, and join us as a 5th-level character. Nobody raised an objection.

According to the rules, I should have forbidden the first gentleman from assembling a PC out of loose GM Credit, and my GM should not have allowed the player at the table to play his witch.

Yes?

I see nothing here that was done wrong. We should not be looking for ways to punish cooperative players.

The Exchange 3/5

Chris Mortika wrote:

But Mike commented that pre-gen credit for modules would work like GM credit for scenarios currently works: when you GM, you immediately assign the credit to a character, who receives the credit as soon as possible. Sometimes that's immediately, and at other times it happens when the character reaches the bottom of the scenario's tier.

Okay, but is that how people are using GM credit?

Yeah, at some future time I had hoped to bring this issue up as well...but it is less important than others.

I agree with you, Chris Mortika, that GM credits are not being handled and promoted in the best way possible and hope to expand upon that at a future time.

In short, I have a large folder of all my unassigned GM credits that I keep and probably will never use.

I *strongly* prefer to play my best characters...so the concept of adding credit to most of them seems silly to me.

I have dreams of 'retiring' a character having never played them: just tearing up 33 unassigned judge rewards. I never report the character assignments for my judge credits so they never existed in the first place.

At a certain point when (usually around your 2nd star), you realize the pointlessness of having a lot of judge credits.

* * *

I wouldn't think twice if one of my GMs assigned a judge credit to a character right in front of me. I'd smile and thank them for being such a committed judge and giving back to the community.

Yeah, another 'rule' that I would allow to be broken in front of me. However, the system needs to be revamped...at a later time. There are more important things to happen first.

-Pain

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Chris Mortika wrote:

So there's that other thread, that's turned toxic. I'm not talking about the main issue there.

But Mike commented that pre-gen credit for modules would work like GM credit for scenarios currently works: when you GM, you immediately assign the credit to a character, who receives the credit as soon as possible. Sometimes that's immediately, and at other times it happens when the character reaches the bottom of the scenario's tier.

Okay, but is that how people are using GM credit?

Yes that is how I am using them, and one of the reasons I have 6 PCs and about to make a 7th.

But that should not be a Surprise from me since I am known for being a Hardass when it comes to sticking to rules.. ;)

That said I would not have any issue if the "Offical" rules for GM credit changed.

Grand Lodge 5/5

Based on the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play version 4.0 and how the online reporting system works, the assumption is that if a GM chooses to take a Chronicle sheet for running a scenario (or sanctioned module), the GM must choose a PC for the Chronicle sheet when the tracking sheet is filled out. If the GM is the person reporting the session online, then the decision can be put off until the session is reported. Since sessions are expected to be reported in a timely fashion, this precludes a GM from holding off on reporting a session until they have decided which PC to give the Chronicle sheet to.

In other words, a GM should pick the character that will get the Chronicle sheet by the time the session is completed. Like a pregen, the PC does not have to be the correct level for the Chronicle sheet. In that case, the sheet is held for that PC until they reach the first sub-tier of the scenario. But the sheet must be assigned to one particular PC when the session is run.

Below is supporting text from the Guide.

Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play 4.0 page 29 Game Master Rewards wrote:

any Game Master who runs a scenario gets full credit for that scenario applied to one of his own characters, as detailed under

Replaying Scenarios on page 16. ... The subtier for which a GM’s character receives credit depends on the character’s level. ... If the GM with a low-level character runs any higher tier scenarios that don’t include a subtier for her 1st-level rogue, she takes the lowest subtier Chronicle sheet from that scenario and holds it for her PC. Then, once her PC achieves the appropriate level for that Chronicle sheet, it is immediately applied. For example, if a GM with a 1st-level rogue runs a Tier 5–9 scenario, she would take a Subtier 5–6 Chronicle sheet (the lowest subtier for that tier) for running the scenario and set it aside. Once her rogue reaches 5th level, she can immediately apply the Chronicle sheet to her character. ... Should a GM receive a Chronicle sheet that indicates her character is between subtiers ... she must always play down, taking a Chronicle sheet for the lower subtier.
Guide 4.0 page 16 wrote:
When you GM a scenario, you receive a Chronicle that you may apply to any character within the scenario’s tier that does not already have a Chronicle for the same scenario. ... No player can receive more than 1 player Chronicle and 1 GM Chronicle for the same scenario, regardless of how many times you GM or play the scenario.
Guide 4.0 page 23 Your Duties as Game Master wrote:
When acting as both the Game Master and coordinator for an event, you are expected to report the results of your scenario on paizo.com/pathfindersociety in a timely fashion. Failing to do so can have dire consequences for Pathfinder Society as a whole (see the sidebar on page 28).
Guide 4.0 page 28 (sidebar) wrote:
As a GM (and sometimes as the coordinator of a convention), one of your most important (maybe sacred) duties is to report the results of your scenarios online at paizo.com/pathfindersociety.
Guide 4.0 page 28 under Reporting Scenario Results wrote:
As soon as possible after the session ends, go to paizo.com/pathfindersociety, and click “Report My Event.” Follow the instructions carefully, and enter the information from this tracking sheet into the form on the website.

And since the online reporting system tracks which PC the GM gives credit to (when the GM takes credit), this implies the GM must pick a PC when the session is reported.

So while it is not explicitly mentioned in the rules, the assumption is that if a GM takes credit, they must pick a PC when the tracking sheet is filled out and reported.

The Exchange 5/5

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

raise you're hand if you consistently track which character you're applying your credit to when you report your games, or realize there's a spot for that?

I know its there, i'm just curious if its used.
as long as the game gets reported, that's the critical information paizo seems to want, so they know how big their player base is, and who's playing what.

What GM character the credit was applied to seems like superfluous data to me. Its an inferred assumption on the part of some GMs, and not a hard and fast rule. So its okay the way things are being done. At present its within society guidelines. And the way its being used makes it feel like it should be: A reward for GMing. Its the benefit the GMs get for being the backbone of pathfinder society.

The Exchange 5/5

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

sorry for any snark that may be present. i'm getting a headache from dealing with servers at work.

And since you can go back in and edit previous games that you've reported. I go back in once i've applied the credit, to select which character i'm applying it to. At conventions I try and plan/list it with the slot so they can report it since i don't have access to report those myself.


Chris Mortika wrote:

According to the rules, I should have forbidden the first gentleman from assembling a PC out of loose GM Credit, and my GM should not have allowed the player at the table to play his witch.

Yes?

Well... according to the rules, you have to assign each GM chronicle to a PFS character number when you hand out the player's chronicles (or at least before you report the session). So if the guy had 9 GM chronicles that had already been dated and signed with each event code, all applied to the character he through stats together for, then yes.

From the sound of it, he fabricated a new character and applied 9 signed but unassigned chronicles to the character outside the reporting of all the sessions. So technically no. But then this fall under the "Don't be a jerk to the nice people that run games for us" virtual rule. So most people would overlook how GMs handle their paperwork.

Grand Lodge 5/5

*raises hand*

If Paizo doesn't consider important which PC a GM gives credit to, why did they pay their IT staff to add these fields to the online tracking system?


Vincent Colon-Roine wrote:
raise you're hand if you consistently track which character you're applying your credit to when you report your games, or realize there's a spot for that?

I do. But then I'm just recently started GMing Society. I figure my motives make me a special case since I already had the two characters made that I wished to 'GM cred' through the early levels of a slow multi-class build. I run for the fun of the players, of course, but I always have the GM cert ready with adventure when I run. Makes apply to a character easy.

The Exchange 5/5

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Generally I don't have my character numbers with me when I'm running a game as if I'm traveling any distance, I'm going specifically to Judge.

I have applied credit after the fact when I'm home with my characters, my spreadsheet of who has played what and what I have and haven't taken credit for.

Being forced to report which character has GM credit applied immediately will mean that as a Judge I just will never take credit and therefore essentially lose out on that.

I'm sorry, I don't think it's fair to people that donate their playing time for Judging and have to already bring maps, books, dice, minis, the scenario and other paraphernalia to also now start requiring them to bring character information because one or two people think that one or two people are getting some sort of special advantage.

In my opnion enough is enough. Honestly I'm really super tired of all the nitpicking that seems to happening lately. It's a game .. let it be a game

The Exchange 3/5

Vincent Colon-Roine wrote:
What GM character the credit was applied to seems like superfluous data to me. Its an inferred assumption on the part of some GMs, and not a hard and fast rule. So its okay the way things are being done. At present its within society guidelines. And the way its being used makes it feel like it should be: A reward for GMing. Its the benefit the GMs get for being the backbone of pathfinder society.

Yar. Thankfully, most GMs (a very small portion of GMs read/post on the PFS forums) don't know the rule from the Guide, so they can happily apply their credit as needed...and as is rewarding to them.

Vincent Colon-Roine wrote:
sorry for any snark that may be present. i'm getting a headache from dealing with servers at work.

This is why I switched to an all animated-construct waitstaff at the salt mines. Much less annoying sass-mouth than dealing with gnomes or halflings...and much less 'missing' silverware.

Try Servertron ("Automated Constructs for Tyrants") for all your server needs. "The Best Loyalty You Can Animate."

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Vincent Colon-Roine wrote:
raise you're hand if you consistently track which character you're applying your credit to when you report your games, or realize there's a spot for that?

*raises hand* Me! Me! Me!... do I get a Prize for that?..;)


Thea Peters wrote:

Generally I don't have my character numbers with me when I'm running a game as if I'm traveling any distance, I'm going specifically to Judge.

I have applied credit after the fact when I'm home with my characters, my spreadsheet of who has played what and what I have and haven't taken credit for.

Being forced to report which character has GM credit applied immediately will mean that as a Judge I just will never take credit and therefore essentially lose out on that.

I'm sorry, I don't think it's fair to people that donate their playing time for Judging and have to already bring maps, books, dice, minis, the scenario and other paraphernalia to also now start requiring them to bring character information because one or two people think that one or two people are getting some sort of special advantage.

In my opnion enough is enough. Honestly I'm really super tired of all the nitpicking that seems to happening lately. It's a game .. let it be a game

I completely agree with everything you said. I figured I'd be an exception having this decision made ahead of time. I wouldn't expect others to as well. Then again, I also know of GMs that take months to report the session, soooo. Plenty of time there for thinking.

I'm not sure why there is so much nitpicking. I mean, I'm trying for the "Rules Lawyer" forum title, so I know why I'm doing it. What's everyone else's excuse?

The Exchange 5/5

Nickademus42 wrote:


I'm not sure why there is so much nitpicking. I mean, I'm trying for the "Rules Lawyer" forum title, so I know why I'm doing it. What's everyone else's excuse?

Have to be honest, I haven't paid that close of attention to yours -- or a lot of the forum rules lawyers posts in a long time.

My opinion is that after the 2nd page it's just the same information repeated again and again... the horse is dead move on.

The Exchange 5/5

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

the fields are there, and can be edited anytime after the game has been reported. thus corrections can be made, and GMs who later apply credit for a game they've judged can go back and assign it.

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Fair enough, and thanks to everyone that voiced an opinion.

I was surprised yesterday when Mike explained that we are expected to assign GM credit to a character, and if that PC were to die before reaching the Tier of the module, that credit would be lost.

I've assigned GM credit to my characters when I report -- I figured that was for the Shadow War faction competition -- but I've later gone back and changed the character to which I'd assigned specific credit, to meet particular needs.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

Vincent Colon-Roine wrote:
the fields are there, and can be edited anytime after the game has been reported. thus corrections can be made, and GMs who later apply credit for a game they've judged can go back and assign it.

That only works if the GM is the organizer. Not all GM's have the access to go back in and edit their sessions.

The Exchange 5/5

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

yeah, i was disappointed with the death ruling.
seems like a waste of credit. they can't play that mod, and they'll never get credit for it. i would think that will take away any incentive from playing a pregen.

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Vincent, it's not for playing a pre-gen. It's for GMing a scenario.

The rules as they stand:

You GM "Wrath of the Accursed", a Tier 7-11 scenario, for the first time, and earn GM credit. You don't want to assign it to any of your PCs who are currently 7th- to 11th-level, so you assign it to your 3rd-level oracle. If all goes well, the credit will apply as soon as your oracle gets his 18th experience point.

But the oracle dies at 6th level. So the GM credit is lost. You can't reassign it to another PC. Put simply, there is no "unassigned GM credit." I don't see how this has anything to do with playing the scenario for credit. You're certainly allowed to play Wrath of the Accused with an appropriate PC.

My question was: is anybody following the rules as they stand?


I do try. I don't agree with some of them, but I don't see the big picture like M&M do. So I try to trust them and do as I'm asked. Then again, I'm strongly lawful aligned. I doubt all GM will say that so, YMMV.

4/5

Thea Peters wrote:

Generally I don't have my character numbers with me when I'm running a game as if I'm traveling any distance, I'm going specifically to Judge.

I have applied credit after the fact when I'm home with my characters, my spreadsheet of who has played what and what I have and haven't taken credit for.

Being forced to report which character has GM credit applied immediately will mean that as a Judge I just will never take credit and therefore essentially lose out on that.

I'm sorry, I don't think it's fair to people that donate their playing time for Judging and have to already bring maps, books, dice, minis, the scenario and other paraphernalia to also now start requiring them to bring character information because one or two people think that one or two people are getting some sort of special advantage.

In my opnion enough is enough. Honestly I'm really super tired of all the nitpicking that seems to happening lately. It's a game .. let it be a game

+1

This is my issue as well. I have 7 characters and sometimes will get confused as to who gets what. I've made mistakes when letting organizers know so they can report right away.

4/5 ****

I always apply my GM credits immediately. Mostly it doesn't bother me that much when other people don't follow the rules as stringently as I do.

I get some of my enjoyment from building powerful characters inside the rules system. Breaking the rules, even in small ways, I try hard not to do, because as soon as I do my character isn't built within the rules, and it's easy to build a powerful character if you don't follow the rules.


In all the time I have been reading and posting here, since the start of Season One, I have seen this issue brought up many times in the forums, with people giving conflicting answers each time. Whoever the head of the Society was at the time of the post would generally post and say you should assign the credit when the scenario is reported, even to the point that if you earned a chronicle where all your characters were to high of a level and you did not want to give it to a 1st level character, that you lost that chronicle forever. Of course, this hard-line stance never made it into the Guide, nor did the wording that a GM MUST assign the chronicle to a character at the same time the scenario was reported.

Now, as for what that player at Origins did in assigning their chronicle sheets, what I have seen posted in regard to that is the chronicles have to be applied at the appropriate level for the character and in the order earned. And while you did not give any specifics, it is possible that the player just happened to have nine unique tier 1 or sub-tier 1-2 chronicles just sitting around that could be properly combined to make that character, but it feels unlikely to me that he did it in a legal way. You also did not say if the GM audited the newly created the character to make sure it was legal.

And like many others here and at the con, what the player did at Stuffed COWS, while perhaps breaking some ruling from the forums, was doing something that I would not disagree with, so long at the chronicle applied fit the level the character was before the application.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 *** Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau

*Raises Hand*

I have always applied my GM Credit immediately (when I take GM Credit!) by adding my character to the roster of PFS numbers that get reported, regardless of whether I am the event reporter or not. And I encourage my GMs who run for me to do the same. I was unaware that a GM could do otherwise!

To do otherwise would be (IMO) a way for a PFS GM to "game the system"... something which destroys the trust the players have in a GM.

Grand Lodge 3/5

One of the things which may affect people's perspective on this issue is when they started GMing for PFS.
The GM credit rules have changed a few times.
At first, there was no Chronicle for GMing.
Then, you could get credit, but only if you "ate" the scenario.
Then, you got credit, but only once - while a player could get up to 5 Chronicles for the same scenario.
Then the "1 & 1" rule came in partway thru Season 2.

The rules as written are relatively new (I believe all of the Guide text quoted above is unique to version 4.0). Some of us may not have immediately applied Chronicles because we initially did not get them, then the rules changed a few times. The changes also created some weird cases where some GMs could get a Chronicle for a Scenario while others could not, using some people's interpretation.

Spoiler:
If you assume that you can only get a Chronicle immediately after running a scenario, and only for your first running: I could never get a Chronicle for "Frozen Fingers of Midnight" because I first ran it at Gen Con 2008 - even though I did not get a Chronicle for it then (or ever), and have run it 5 or 6 times since.

Honestly, as long as a GM is applying Chronicles in the proper order, to legal characters, I don't know why there has to be a timer placed on them.

Edit: I agree that at this point, ideally, the Chronicle should be immediately applied. However, I don't think it is as cut & dried as some point out. And there is a varying history.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 *** Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau

K Neil Shackleton wrote:
A lot of good stuff

All true. As a Season 0 starter GM, I have seen the rules change as well. I have always looked at the GM Credit as a Reward, one that was not present in the Pilot Season.


Hey Neil,

Sometime shortly after the rules changed to GMs getting full credit for running a scenario the first time, it was posted here in the forums by Joshua Frost that if a GM had originally run a scenario for no credit under the original reward rules, that they could run it again and receive full credit to apply to a character. I do not think this made it into any version of the Guide, and I think it was long forgotten about by the time the FAQ was started, but the official word on this is out there somewhere.


Every time I GM, I go in knowing what character I'm going to be putting my credit towards. That's just how I roll. That's how I always rolled. Now, if I had someone come to my table during a session that hasn't done their leveling because they had "unused GM credits", I'm sorry, but that would, and pardon my french, piss me off. Because taking all of those credits and doing your leveling takes away from the time that other players can be playing as well, pushes back the start of the scenario, and puts me as a GM in a tough spot.

Also, there is no excuse for a GM not to know their character numbers, if not by heart, then have them on a sheet of paper.

Thea mentioned that it isn't fair that those of us that donate our time shouldn't be required to bring our character information with us as we have to bring so much other stuff, how hard is it to bring a piece of paper with character numbers on it? Hell, I've had people laugh because of the amount of stuff I bring to a session, whether I'm GMing or not.

Grand Lodge 5/5 ****

I have to agree with Painlord

Somewhere between first and second star GM credit became non-important for me. This is when I started slipping assigning them in time. I hardly assign them at all now. As such I sit on a list of games I will hardly ever assign at all.

But if I'm faced with an issue like - we need someone next tier - do you have a character. And all I have is one missing an XP - then I will assign one of the sheets to help out.

Yes - with the new upcoming Module rules this might happen occasionally to ensure I have a character on the right level.

Still - assigning 9 chronicles at once seems a little bit much. I do this a) well ahead of the table start and b) try to minimize chronicles applied.

A while ago I felt I should clean up everything and assign them all - but it just seemed too much work. I rather prepare a new scenario or hand out here and waste my time that way.

Grand Lodge 5/5 *

Whenever I'm running a planned PFS session, I always know beforehand who I'm assigning that session to, and I report it as such. I know the PFS numbers for my characters by heart (I appreciate that isn't so hard for 7 characters, I know some people have a lot more!) and I know their approximate xp level - i.e., I always know what level each of my characters is, but not always how far through that level they are. (Plus I keep them up to date with current level etc in my profile, so anytime someone has an internet connection, I have access to my characters and can check their info.)

If I'm running an unplanned session, I flick through my characters in my head, see who can take the credit, and if I want to apply it to any of those characters. If I don't I just 'eat' the scenario. Plenty more fish in the sea.

I generally apply credit freely until a character is about 3rd level, then try to apply credit sparingly to a character after that point. (to be honest, I don't much like playing characters at 1st level - GM credit means I never have to! :D)

For me, GM credit serves three purposes - to never have to play level 1, to allow my characters to keep pace with the characters of my friends so I can play with them when possible, and to let me manage my characters so that I always have a character or two in each possible tier of play.

Now I have no objections to a more freeform, on-the-fly style of GM credit. But the current reporting tool doesn't really accomodate it.

The Exchange 5/5

John W Johnson wrote:
Thea mentioned that it isn't fair that those of us that donate our time shouldn't be required to bring our character information with us as we have to bring so much other stuff, how hard is it to bring a piece of paper with character numbers on it? Hell, I've had people laugh because of the amount of stuff I bring to a session, whether I'm GMing or not.

I don't generally apply my credit to a character until I'm making a new one to level it up past level 2 (the boring levels) So, no, I don't have that character number because it hasn't been created yet.

I'm sorry if you don't agree with that.

Kudos to you for being slightly more organized that someone who works full time, takes full-time online classes and spends what is left of her free-time prepping scenarios.

Silver Crusade 4/5

Looking at the last two posts, this definitely seems like something that could be different depending on how often you play or GM.

For those who are players first, and only GM occasionally, they're likely to know what PC they want to give the credit to each time they GM, because they're more aware of their characters and don't get that many GM credits. But for someone who is the GM 75% of the time, they will probably accumulate more GM credit than they know what to do with.

The Exchange 5/5

Fromper wrote:

Looking at the last two posts, this definitely seems like something that could be different depending on how often you play or GM.

For those who are players first, and only GM occasionally, they're likely to know what PC they want to give the credit to each time they GM, because they're more aware of their characters and don't get that many GM credits. But for someone who is the GM 75% of the time, they will probably accumulate more GM credit than they know what to do with.

+1

I generally judge more than I play .. if we want to use numbers I judge probably 98% of the time I'm at a pathfinder event. The last time I played was in September, anything I've done since this was as a Judge.

Grand Lodge 5/5 *

Fromper wrote:

Looking at the last two posts, this definitely seems like something that could be different depending on how often you play or GM.

For those who are players first, and only GM occasionally, they're likely to know what PC they want to give the credit to each time they GM, because they're more aware of their characters and don't get that many GM credits. But for someone who is the GM 75% of the time, they will probably accumulate more GM credit than they know what to do with.

I'm not sure that's entirely the case - I GM a hell of a lot more than I play. Since July, I have GMed 18 scenarios and 1 module, and played 6 scenarios. That's about the 75% figure you mention, but I always know which PC I want to credit it to, and so forth.

EDIT: Also, looking at the figures, July 2011 to present is the time period where I have the greatest number of scenarios played vs scenarios GMed. I managed to play 3 mods at the last con I was at, which is 2 more mods than my usual convention average.


Fromper wrote:

Looking at the last two posts, this definitely seems like something that could be different depending on how often you play or GM.

For those who are players first, and only GM occasionally, they're likely to know what PC they want to give the credit to each time they GM, because they're more aware of their characters and don't get that many GM credits. But for someone who is the GM 75% of the time, they will probably accumulate more GM credit than they know what to do with.

Since August (where I play, we run 1 to 2 sessions a week) I've played in maybe 5 sessions. Compare that to the 23 sessions I've GMed. Like Ninja, I go into every session knowing where I am going to apply the credit. When I'm the event coordinator of a session, I usually report before I leave where the session takes place, so I have to know what character the chronicle is going to be applied to.

Sczarni 4/5

I have credits applied to pcs I've never played. the second just reached second, so my low level scenarios will be going to a third.

Basicly I do what Chris' player did, as these characters don't have character sheets or names yet, and I try to keep one at each tier, so I can sub in with a character at any time if needed

Community / Forums / Organized Play / GM Discussion / Applying GM Credit All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in GM Discussion