|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The proper term is GM as DM is a D&D trademark.
There is already a built-in reward to GMs for running adventures more than once.
They only have to buy the adventure once, so every time after the first that they run an adventure, they are spreading that initial cash outlay over more hours of gameplay. Also, as you mention, it gets easier to run the adventure and there is less prep time the more you run it, so you can "have fun" with the adventure more than you did the first time.
|
You also still get credit towards your GM stars every time you run it, which eventually gets you rewards like running the Exclusive scenario first.
As you said, you also get better at running the scenario, getting to play it at both subtiers and/or along different paths. I just ran Feast of Sigils for the fourth time last night, and the players took me on a journey I've never had before due to their choices and the "table of four" changes I had to make when 2 players had to cancel. Was one of my favorite experiences, that I wouldn't have had if I just wanted to stick GM credits on PCs and ran something different every week.
Finally - if you're going to run something more than once, it's easier to justify making cool props, terrain, etc. which can really improve the game experience for your players.
Of course, I prefer to GM, and we have a pretty big player base, so I can choose to run something multiple times and not run out of players or upset other GMs who want to run that one as well. Perhaps for some folks the Chronicle credit is more important.
|
Another idea - allow some great flexibility with chronicle sheets - one idea would be to allow DM's to apply a chronicle sheet once per TIER (so you could apply the chronicle sheet for a 1-5 to a 1-3 char once and to a 4-5 character once). Scenarios with a wider range of tiers (say earlier ones that were tier 1-7 would offer more opportunities to apply those chronicle sheets). This would still mean that many DMs would run scenarios they don't get any in-game reward for running (since many people run things more that twice) but it would give DMs at least some tangible reward for that first time they rerun a scenario.And it would be relatively easy to retroactively grant these chronicle sheets based on reporting data...
I like this idea, but I wouldn't make it retroactive. There would be WAY too much involved in going back and changing every single session where someone ran something for the second time to give them the second chronicle sheet. But as a way to encourage people to GM more, letting them get a GM chronicle sheet for a second character at a different subtier seems like a reasonable non-game breaking idea.
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The proper term is GM as DM is a D&D trademark.
"Dungeon Master" is a Wizards of the Coast trademark. "DM" is two letters put together. Use them however you want. (-:
I know you referenced this in the original post, Rycaut, but I'm going to link to the thread so people can see what has been discussed. And, yes, the idea has been brought up, before, though not in that thread (along with all the arguments being made here, already). Still a good discussion to have.
|
|
I like the idea of tapping +1 prestige/fame onto a character that has failed some faction missions or played some modules. My Thornkeep character is currently highly unpopular within his faction and can't find anyone willing to sell him anything worth over 10k value. Poor guy.
They have already done this with the Fangwood boon. So there's a precedent.
Of course there'd need to be a fame cap that follows normal play.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
...
No.
...
No.
Actually,
yes. Just yes.
DA-da-da-da, wah-wah-WAH...
Then please give me a PFS-relevant official citation for the term being used? It's not used that way in the Guide to Organized Play. Also, while I don't remember the source of this quote, I do recall hearing a podcast with Mike on it in which he explained that the person at the table is the GM, and he is the campaign organizer. The term judge implies a mechanical administration of the rules rather than the interpretation that GMs are called upon to do.
However, ironically enough, even the use of the term doesn't imply what people who use it think that it means. An actual judge is permitted to rely on intent, common practice, their own experience and their own interpretation in dealing with the law. If they feel that laws are in conflict, they can strike them down or modify them. This is not really what PFS GMs do.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Judge was a term used in the Living Arcanis campaign and often thrown about in the Living Greyhawk circles as well. When we started PFS up in the Detroit area the first group founded was known as the "Judges' Table". That was before GMs got ANY REWARD for GMing. In fact if you GMed a scenario you were ineligible to ever play it and you didn't receive a Chronicle either. Considering how many of us shouldered that responsibility without complaint, it should lend some insight into the resistance toward expanding the already-generous rewards that GMs now reap. And as I write this I sense the futility of trying to explain the values of merit and service...
|
|
Judge was a term used in the Living Arcanis campaign and often thrown about in the Living Greyhawk circles as well. When we started PFS up in the Detroit area the first group founded was known as the "Judges' Table". That was before GMs got ANY REWARD for GMing. In fact if you GMed a scenario you were ineligible to ever play it and you didn't receive a Chronicle either. Considering how many of us shouldered that responsibility without complaint, it should lend some insight into the resistance toward expanding the already-generous rewards that GMs now reap. And as I write this I sense the futility of trying to explain the values of merit and service...
You have the option of going back to that setup at any time by not taking credit, and by refusing to play scenarios you've already GMed. That setup being good enough for you doesn't mean the rest of us need to suffer. It also doesn't mean that we're bad people for not wanting to do exactly the same thing you did.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That was before GMs got ANY REWARD for GMing. In fact if you GMed a scenario you were ineligible to ever play it and you didn't receive a Chronicle either. Considering how many of us shouldered that responsibility without complaint, it should lend some insight into the resistance toward expanding the already-generous rewards that GMs now reap. And as I write this I sense the futility of trying to explain the values of merit and service...
Okay, these same arguments keep popping up, so I feel the need to address them. Please understand that no offense is meant here. It's just that I've yet to see a compelling, logically sound argument for why GMs shouldn't be compensated. It's always appeals to the past or warnings of dire implications.
This is the logical fallacy of [url-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition]appealing to tradition[/url]. Just because it was done that way doesn't mean it was right, or that it couldn't be done better. Sorry you had to suffer through it. Doesn't mean the newcomers should be punished. Although I suspect you didn't feel like it was suffering, because...
This is the one that really stymies me. I guess it's really a No True Scotsman: "No true GM requires a reward to run a game. GMing is the reward in and of itself."
If you don't want the chronicle sheet for GMing, you don't have to take it. If you don't want any further rewards, you don't have to take them either. But why begrudge someone else compensation for the effort they put into expanding the community?
"But you should want to do it without compensation." Tough. I don't. Not everyone GMs for the same reasons. You can't regulate intent, and it's folly to attempt it. As long as the GM is doing a good job, I don't care why they're doing it.
Doug didn't voice this in his post, but it comes up a lot, too. And it's a Slippery Slope fallacy. Hypotheticals don't address the issue, which is "should a GM be compensated for their time and effort, each time and every time?" And if not, then why?
And since I'm just as likely to be committing logical fallacies in my arguments, please feel free to use them against me.
|
...
No.
...
No.
Actually,
yes. Just yes.
DA-da-da-da, wah-wah-WAH...
Then please give me a PFS-relevant official citation for the term being used? It's not used that way in the Guide to Organized Play. Also, while I don't remember the source of this quote, I do recall hearing a podcast with Mike on it in which he explained that the person at the table is the GM, and he is the campaign organizer. The term judge implies a mechanical administration of the rules rather than the interpretation that GMs are called upon to do.
However, ironically enough, even the use of the term doesn't imply what people who use it think that it means. An actual judge is permitted to rely on intent, common practice, their own experience and their own interpretation in dealing with the law. If they feel that laws are in conflict, they can strike them down or modify them. This is not really what PFS GMs do.
Someone needs to cut back on their dosage of [Serious Pills] ...
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
Nosig: I'm not upset, I just think that the term is an inapt one coined by someone who doesn't understand what a judge does. Actual judges are given immense discretionary power. PFS GMs, not so much. Also, I don't use Warhorn.
Doug: I understand and appreciate the value of service. I hope that you also appreciate that if I only took chronicles when playing rather than GMming, that I would have only one character around level 5 and an second around level 2. I would be effectively preventing myself from every playing the high tier tables. I also do not see the scads of people who shouldn't be GMming that you do. If that becomes a problem, then the local event coordinator should step in and tell the GM to fix the problem or stop GMming. Will there sometimes be bad GMs? Yes, and the question of whether or not they are compensated has not been shown to correlate to the number of bad GMs.
Finally, I am always very, very frustrated when people say "X bad thing happened to me, therefore everybody else should have to go through that!" Really? That attitude prevents progress and causes the perpetration of inequal policies. Should we all have not adopted the automobile because our great-great-grandparents had to walk everywhere, and that built character? Should we just forget Pathfinder and go back to 1st edition, because Gary Gygax's players had to play it and it was good enough for them?
I am reminded of an XKCD comic strip, #1227 - https://www.xkcd.com/1227/
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
Someone needs to cut back on their dosage of [Serious Pills] ......
No.
...
No.
Actually,
yes. Just yes.
DA-da-da-da, wah-wah-WAH...
Then please give me a PFS-relevant official citation for the term being used? It's not used that way in the Guide to Organized Play. Also, while I don't remember the source of this quote, I do recall hearing a podcast with Mike on it in which he explained that the person at the table is the GM, and he is the campaign organizer. The term judge implies a mechanical administration of the rules rather than the interpretation that GMs are called upon to do.
However, ironically enough, even the use of the term doesn't imply what people who use it think that it means. An actual judge is permitted to rely on intent, common practice, their own experience and their own interpretation in dealing with the law. If they feel that laws are in conflict, they can strike them down or modify them. This is not really what PFS GMs do.
I get annoyed when people use terminology as a bludgeon, what can I say?
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
When I say "using terminology as a bludgeon", I say it because many times people who use the term "judge" do it because they believe that the role of the PFS GM should be a very, very limited one, extending only to being an arbiter of the rules. To me, that is anathema. A GM is so much more than the sum of the rules. A GM is an artist, a storyteller, an actor and an interpreter of rules. The people who use the term judge often mean that the GM's job should be to merely stick to what's in the scenario. However, we are told to reward creative solutions and to deviate when necessary (without adding monsters) in order to make the game enjoyable and make sense. Given the choice of playing under a judge who merely makes sure that all the rules are being followed and a GM who practices an art, I would rather play under the GM.
|
|
Using "Judge" in place of DM or GM has been around since the beginning of roleplaying games. I believe the term grew into its own when it was used to designate a DM for a tournament event where tables and players would compete against each other to move on to additional rounds until an ultimate winner was declared.
I do not believe there is an official distinction between Judge and GM in Pathfinder Society play. Although, GM seems to be the term used more often.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Using "Judge" in place of DM or GM has been around since the beginning of roleplaying games. I believe the term grew into its own when it was used to designate a DM for a tournament event where tables and players would compete against each other to move on to additional rounds until an ultimate winner was declared.
I do not believe there is an official distinction between Judge and GM in Pathfinder Society play. Although, GM seems to be the term used more often.
I guess it just bugs me. It feels like an insult - like calling a famous chef a cook. It implies that, in PFS, we GMs have a less important, less worthy function than that of other GMs. I don't feel that it's the case. Indeed, I think that it's quite laudable that someone can run a PFS-legal table and still inject their own creativity and make it enjoyable for the group.
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West
|
Unfortunately the choice is between upsetting folks who understand their role but are unhappy about not getting the title they crave, and giving folks who don't understand their responsibilities a licence to 'improve' the scenario in any way they choose (because, you know, the GM is the final arbiter of what is best for the table, not somebody who isn't even there!).
It's not meant as an insult; if you're taking it that way you're reading more into it than anyone intends.
(If anyone ever makes the oft-discussed "Mike Brock is my GM" T-shirt, I'll happily buy one)
|
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West
|
Using "Judge" in place of DM or GM has been around since the beginning of roleplaying games.
The first adventure I ever ran was put out by a company called "Judge's Guild" (The Thieves of Fortress Badabaskor, released in 1978). Amongst other of their publications both Tegel Manor (1977) and Dark Tower (1979) stand out as having given my players many hours of enjoyment.
Don may be amused to know that these games were hosted a couple of miles away from where PFS is now played in Nashua.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
Unfortunately the choice is between upsetting folks who understand their role but are unhappy about not getting the title they crave, and giving folks who don't understand their responsibilities a licence to 'improve' the scenario in any way they choose (because, you know, the GM is the final arbiter of what is best for the table, not somebody who isn't even there!).It's not meant as an insult; if you're taking it that way you're reading more into it than anyone intends.
(If anyone ever makes the oft-discussed "Mike Brock is my GM" T-shirt, I'll happily buy one)
I don't think I really am reading it as more than it's intended. To me, it seems always to be intended as a "Get back in your corner, you're just a judge, not a shiny GM." The above post, while not taking such a harsh tone, does have that general theme.
|
|
Using "Judge" in place of DM or GM has been around since the beginning of roleplaying games.The first adventure I ever ran was put out by a company called "Judge's Guild" (The Thieves of Fortress Badabaskor, released in 1978). Amongst other of their publications both Tegel Manor (1977) and Dark Tower (1979) stand out as having given my players many hours of enjoyment.
Don may be amused to know that these games were hosted a couple of miles away from where PFS is now played in Nashua.
I grew up 1 hour south of Boston in the 70's. In addition to many 1E AD&D modules, my brother and I bought a few Judge's Guild products. I almost mentioned the company in my earlier post.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Judge was a term used in the Living Arcanis campaign and often thrown about in the Living Greyhawk circles as well. When we started PFS up in the Detroit area the first group founded was known as the "Judges' Table". That was before GMs got ANY REWARD for GMing. In fact if you GMed a scenario you were ineligible to ever play it and you didn't receive a Chronicle either. Considering how many of us shouldered that responsibility without complaint, it should lend some insight into the resistance toward expanding the already-generous rewards that GMs now reap. And as I write this I sense the futility of trying to explain the values of merit and service...
Doug,
Did you walk uphill both ways in the snow, beating off wolves with your lunchbox to go GM?
Because that's what this really sounds like. "In my day we had ONE set of dice we passed around! And we maked them in with a CRAYON! And we LIKED IT!"
So I'm going to react accordingly. "Yeah. And, the point is?"
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My main beef is with the people who see a need for GMs in their community but will not step forward because there's 'nothing in it for them'. This game is about having fun, but we are also members of a community and I think the self-interest has gone far enough. I've seen how replay for credit went. It was tried and revoked because it was damaging the game. Mike Brock hasn't suggested that he's considering Rycaut's idea. Until he does, I'm spinning my wheels here. I said I didn't like the idea. A small number of people support it. I don't think it's going to change.
|
|
Judge was a term used in the Living Arcanis campaign and often thrown about in the Living Greyhawk circles as well. When we started PFS up in the Detroit area the first group founded was known as the "Judges' Table". That was before GMs got ANY REWARD for GMing. In fact if you GMed a scenario you were ineligible to ever play it and you didn't receive a Chronicle either. Considering how many of us shouldered that responsibility without complaint, it should lend some insight into the resistance toward expanding the already-generous rewards that GMs now reap. And as I write this I sense the futility of trying to explain the values of merit and service...Doug,
Did you walk uphill both ways in the snow, beating off wolves with your lunchbox to go GM?
Because that's what this really sounds like. "In my day we had ONE set of dice we passed around! And we maked them in with a CRAYON! And we LIKED IT!"
That is exactly what I was thinking. Thank you.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I find that a better phrasology than your previous post then Doug. I enjoy GMing. I GMed in season zero (before I went all Hermity again) back when there was no credit. I GM now. In both cases I do it for fun. The rewards are nice. Given a choice between a group with three GMS, two of which like to run their five favourite scenarios over and over for new players and one who likes new stuff, and a group that dies because the one GM is burning out, I'll take group one.
Some scenarios *do* entice GMs to run events for the goodies. I don't see this as a bad thing. Nightmarch, Sanos, Quest for Perfection, etc. are all scenarios that will scream "I have X on character Y where it's useless. If I run it, I can GM credit it to character Z, who *can* use it." For the 'classic' scenarios (which Nightmarch seems to be becoming) repeat play would allow other 'builds' with the specials on the sheet for the dedicated GM. Let a thousand Faerie Dragons Bloom!
Giving the GM credit for running the scenario also rewards the new GM for 'testing the waters'. If he runs the scenario, it goes poorly, no one had fun, and he sucks as a GM, he still gets the sheet as a 'reward' for trying.
Note, this doesn't address the 'repeat' issue, just the 'taking the first step' issue.
|
|
That is exactly what I was thinking. Thank you.Judge was a term used in the Living Arcanis campaign and often thrown about in the Living Greyhawk circles as well. When we started PFS up in the Detroit area the first group founded was known as the "Judges' Table". That was before GMs got ANY REWARD for GMing. In fact if you GMed a scenario you were ineligible to ever play it and you didn't receive a Chronicle either. Considering how many of us shouldered that responsibility without complaint, it should lend some insight into the resistance toward expanding the already-generous rewards that GMs now reap. And as I write this I sense the futility of trying to explain the values of merit and service...Doug,
Did you walk uphill both ways in the snow, beating off wolves with your lunchbox to go GM?
Because that's what this really sounds like. "In my day we had ONE set of dice we passed around! And we maked them in with a CRAYON! And we LIKED IT!"
wait... is it bad that I can remember when they introduced the dice with the crayon to mark them... and it was a "new fangled idea!" that several of us resisted?
My first RPG experience was with the red box that came with the dice and crayon. I'm not quite old enough to know what that replaced.
|
|
My first experience was in 8th grade in early 1979. A friend tried to run us through G2 The Glacial Rift of the Frost Giant Jarl. I thought it was the dumbest game I'd ever played. I mean, where was the game board? How come this guy was just telling us what happened (he didn't have any dice). What were the rules? How could you play without rules printed on the inside cover of the game box? Where was the game box for that matter?
That Summer I bought the Red box and was hooked.