| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The previous threads were here and here.
As has been stated upthread, the Pathfinder Society Organized Play campaign is one in which we hope that players are not reading ahead (either adventures or Chronicle sheets) in order to cherry-pick adventures based on a checklist of monsters they'd like to encounter or equipment they'd like to receive. As such, we consider discussion of such spoilers to be against the spirit of the game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was curious about that too.
Along with the reference to being a PFS GM when that isn't associated to their (ambiguous singular/plural) accounts.
Sort of disturbing when officially sanctioned PFS GMs/event organizers are promoting cheating, on Paizo's own site no less.
Is running multiple/sockpuppet accounts against the TOS?
But hey, while we're at it: "We want fairness. There is no fairness if you do not let us cheat."
Venture-Lieutenant, West Virginia—Charleston
|
Well, whether or not you like it, there is an excellent reason behind not allowing people to know the contents of chronicles ahead of time. First, generally speaking, there isn't much on a chronicle that you can't purchase with fame. Get your character to enough fame and they can purchase any of that stuff on their own, chronicle or not. Second, we don't want item choice to start driving scenario selection. It leads to a whole lot of discussions that make the game more unrealistic. Pathfinders don't get the opportunity to look at possible missions for one which might have the wand that they are looking for - they are assigned. Finally, if you start doing this, it is quickly going to become a massive headache for you as an event organizer, because you are NOT going to be able to accommodate everybody's request every week. It's just not going to happen. I hope that helps you understand the reasons behind the rule, even if you disagree with it.
So he is posting to let everyone know he will not post anymore?
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Most pointless post ever.
That said...
Being a module subscriber, I *do* grab the chronicle sheets when they come out, and they can influence my GMing/Gaming choices. I want to GM/play Broken Chains for example, because of the chronicle sheet.* There are certain, amusing, possibilites on it. I was sad that when I played <redacted> I couldn't get the familiar option on the character I played, and promptly wanted to GM it to put in on a character who can use it.
On the other hand the <redacted> series GM credit is on a blob of GM credit that will never use an animal companion and the play credit likewise will end up on a PC who doens't use animal companions.
*
Nobody forgets a dramatic exit. Until they forget all about it.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
That having been said, I have experienced sanctimonious attitudes from a GM that I'm not supposed to know what items are available because I'm sure when he applies the GM credit he doesn't consider what character would benefit most from any available boons.
Players are not supposed to know what items are available for the same reason they're not supposed to know what monsters or traps are waiting for them. It's hard to avoid meta-gaming. (For an example, take a look at the boon from "Golden Serpent". When I played that, there was somebody else in the party that knew that spoiler. He tried not to meta-game that, but it was hard and we all realized that the item in question was suspicious immediately.)
The one counter argument I've heard is that info would be OOC. Yeah..whatever. If people feel that knowing the item list spoils some sense of surprise for them, they don't have to read it.
Except that it ruins the scenario for more than just you. You don't have to call out "Be careful, guys; there's a trap somewhere up ahead that uses CON-damaging poison" for us to notice that you're much more careful opening doors and chests than normal.
The only other argument I can think of is that the present system is more likely to compel players to GM a scenario so that they can apply it to the character they want. Recently, I ran Sanos Abduction with a GM and when I saw the boon and her character list, I figured out why she ran it.
There are reasonable situations in qhich people know what's going on in a scenario. Having run it as a GM is one of them. But even in those cases, the player is supposed to notify the GM that the scenario is spoiled for her, and the GM has the right to ask her to leave the table if he suspects she's using that information.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are reasonable situations in qhich people know what's going on in a scenario. Having run it as a GM is one of them. But even in those cases, the player is supposed to notify the GM that the scenario is spoiled for her, and the GM has the right to ask her to leave the table if he suspects she's using that information.
That's something I'm adamant about when I play something I've ran/read. I'll help in the parts I don't remember well, but when we hit the parts I know, I'll stand in the back and let the other players take the lead.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Also, to be fair, there is a distinction between a GM asking and a player asking. If Eairmon weren't so transparently the same guy who was asking for himself hours before, I'd be more inclined to help out.
I run a weekly in-store game, with a bunch of regular players. I also run a PFS-legal home campaign. There have been several occasions where I've chosen to run a particular adventure because I know that one or another player will appreciate some element of it: a ranger's favored enemy to fight, a particular wand at a higher caster level than usual...
But the player doesn't know about them ahead of time.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just a thought:
When you post a thread and all you get is negative comments it's probably because its a bad idea. When PFS campaign staff locks that thread, telling you the same thing, that is definitely not the point in which I think to create a new account, re-post my thread, get that thread locked, and tell everyone on the forums to shove off.
|
I don't see the problem Eairmon. I cherry picked a number of scenerios and modules I ran for my home group that had items or interesting extras I knew their characters would synergy well with. Did I cherry pick every single one? No. But I did for several. I suppose the only difference is they didn't know what was coming for them?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The surprise of what you find is as fun as the surprise of what challenges your characters face. If there's a specific boon that you want for a specific character, then volunteer to run that at the next convention or local game store PFS day. You can apply the boons to whomever you like.
I think it's a great tool to get players to try out the GM side of the screen. "Oooo, I wanted to get that special boon on my other character!" Ok, then GM it in a few weeks and apply the credit.
A perfect example of player reward knowledge ruining a boon is a certain special animal companion you can get. When the party saw that companion, one of the players said to not kill it because it would ruin the boon. Because of this the party went out of their way to avoid killing the creature and almost lost a few PCs because of it. If they weren't spoiled, they would have won the fight much more easily and still gotten the boon.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I don't see the problem Eairmon. I cherry picked a number of scenerios and modules I ran for my home group that had items or interesting extras I knew their characters would synergy well with. Did I cherry pick every single one? No. But I did for several. I suppose the only difference is they didn't know what was coming for them?
Two big differences, Lormyr.
1) "I ran for my home group" I assume you don't mean for PFS where those Home gorup characters might end up sitting down alongside a part of non 'cherry picked' characters.
2) "the only difference is they didn't know what was coming for them." Big difference. As an example, I am assuming that <redacted> from Nightmarch can be repaird, due to the specifically specific denial. My GM credit is on Ksenia, and my player credit is on Kroaten, both are arcane casters and can't directly benefit from <redacted>. Now if I was playing a fighter who was proficient in <redacted> and knew there was going to be a season five where <redacted> is fixed, then I'd be cherry picking. My GM wouldn't, but I would.
Something similar.
Now recently I got a boon that would interact with various Hao Jin scenarios in a beneficial fashion, as the VC mentioned. Yes, I want to play that/those scenarios with everyone's favourite witch. Am I going to read every sheet so I can find that scenario? No.
|
|
Since we are in the GM forums I will give another example of player foreknowledge altering player choice.
I saw a table just getting to the end of [scenario name redacted]. They had the choice of keeping a certain item or returning it. 3 of the five players were for the idea of keeping it as t was a pretty cool item and they may get rewarded for taking it back to the pathfinder lodge. 1 of the five was for returning it to the clan. The last player then jumped in and said they should all return it so they could get the boon. They had heard about the boon from a friend who played. All of a sudden everyone was for returning it.
Foreknowledge of items/boons on the Chronicles changes how player react to situations.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Put another way, if I'm running a (non-PFS) home game, and running a module, and it seems clear that one of the players has read through the module, my natural inclination is to change up the encounters so that the fore-knowledge is either useless or actually a trap.
A PFS GM shouldn't do that.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Labrat, more recently.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As far as I could tell in the other thread everyone was very polite in their answers. No they weren't going to tell the him or her where they could find the wand. It's not how PFS worked for them. The OP lashed out at everyone.
As far as in the scenario itself I think they venture captain would stare at Pathfinder who asked if they would find a certain item along the way. How would they know? Did Sheila Heidmarch get her best Diviners on the job?
"I am sending you to Qadira to retrieve the Maguffins we paid for. On the first day of your travel you will make love to a beautiful woman, but you will never see her again. On the second day you will arrive at a tavern that serves the perfect MLT. Where the mutton is nice and lean. On the third day you will be set upon by orc bandits. One will have a partially charged wand of lightning bolt that he got off a wizard he killed. He's just a fighter and has no idea how to use it."
It just doesn't work that way.
|
|
Two big differences, Lormyr.
1) "I ran for my home group" I assume you don't mean for PFS where those Home gorup characters might end up sitting down alongside a part of non 'cherry picked' characters.
2) "the only difference is they didn't know what was coming for them." Big difference. As an example, I am assuming that <redacted> from Nightmarch can be repaird, due to the specifically specific denial. My GM credit is on Ksenia, and my player credit is on Kroaten, both are arcane casters and can't directly benefit from <redacted>. Now if I was playing a fighter who was proficient in <redacted> and knew there was going to be a season five where <redacted> is fixed, then I'd be cherry picking. My GM wouldn't, but I would.
1a). I do in fact mean for PFS. We play 95% of our games privately, but we did attend Cinci Con this year to play Race for the Runecarved Key with the very awesome VL Brent Bowser. We would have attended Gen Con this year if finances allowed.
1b). We presently each have 2 characters, both of which are 16th level at the moment. So there is very little chance of them sitting down with other PFS players anyhow.
2). I agree it's a large difference. I have no problem selecting fun and/or nice "extras" scenerios for them, but I certainly wouldn't open up the door and just let them hand pick.
That aside, there was very little selection anyhow. Our first sect of characters were mostly modules with a few scenarios splattered in, eyes of the ten, and the high level modules. The second set is almost exclusively the shattered star and rise of the runelords adventure paths , along with city of golden death module triology, and a few season 4 scenarios. I just tried to implant scenerios that complimented their personalities, goals, and loot aspirations well.
Its not rules lawyering when it is a designated organization of the company, and said company frowns upon certain lvls of metagaming, we are not telling you we won't help with other aspects of the game. Its that this is pointedly an honor system aspect that can be manipulated and ruined for the rest. from what I can see, since record keeping is more on the Player anyways, there are many other ways that don't invoke the metagaming nitche. Hence the fame system was put into place.
Nobody is saying don't play the game and you can only play this way, we are saying that the aspect of cherry picking is metagaming to the extent that it might ruin it for other players. This is only for PFS Organized play. If your players want you to houserule different things for a home gain that doesn't get PFS credit, then go for it, but if its PFS that being played, then at least attempt to stay within the bounds of the guidelines.
we aren't saying that it is wrong/bad fun, and if you find that campaign and play it for your player, I just hope his excitement doesn't lead to spoilers that ruin it for others. I'm not saying its bad to play one for the boon, but make it a surprise to them. That way its a OH WOW LOOK WHAT i CAN DO NOW, instead of a (exasperation)"finally I have that item took it long enough."
|
|
Beyond any roleplay aspects, I can see two practical reasons why Paizo is not in favor of a list of the rewards in each Adventure:
1) As Matthew mentioned, this is a GM perk for running the adventure. Players are not entitled to this "perk" unless they buy the adventure.
2) Players (who do not GM) but who want to know what rewards are in an adventure must buy the adventure to find out.
A free reference list giving that information out would be a copyright infringement.
|
|
Second, we don't want item choice to start driving scenario selection. It leads to a whole lot of discussions that make the game more unrealistic. Pathfinders don't get the opportunity to look at possible missions for one which might have the wand that they are looking for - they are assigned
Well in stories how often does the hero "stumble" on exactly the thing they need in the hands of a dead enemy or in the hidden vault ?
|
|
I don't enjoy getting berated by rules lawyering GM's that forgot that this is supposed to be fun.
As per your accusations that other people were calling you a cheater and mistreating you in the other threads...the only person who wasnt being polite was you, though I admit I did skim the longer thread after the first half dozen or so posts where you seemed to have taken a negative response to your question (negative here meaning it didnt get answered the way you wanted, not that the poster was being negative towards) as a personal attack.
As for the being berrated by rules lawyering GMs...this is an organized play campaign. There are rules in place that everyone must follow so the system holds up and is the same for every player, regardless of where they play, when they play, or who they play with. But most people who play in this campaign still find it fun, regardless of the rules-lawyeriness that can be in place at times.
Some people (perhaps you?) dont seem to enjoy the restrictions placed on players and GMs by a (or perhaps just this?) organized play campaign. If that is the case, I have a suggestion:
Since the restrictions of organized play seem to be something you dont enjoy dealing with, might I suggest you take a look at one of the Adventure Paths Paizo has released and you and your group could run/play through that instead? Many of them are quite interesting (I have participated/am participating in 4 of them so far). By not doing this AP as an organized play game, you wouldnt be subject to the rules and restrictions of the PFS organized play campaign and can feel free to run the game as rules-lawyery or as loosey-goosey as you want.
Edited to remove a part that I think I worded badly.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
To Chris, maybe is you actually took two seconds to ask a question instead of assuming things might have been different.
Oh, probably not.
I don't enjoy getting berated by rules lawyering GM's that forgot that this is supposed to be fun. @N N 959 at least one of you out there gets it. More fun equals more play. Simple logic, but ...
Hey! I like fun. But, as I've already written.
My perspective is that players enjoy encountering the scenario without a lot of metagame fore-knowledge. When somebody announces that this opponent has a given item, or that opponent is hiding in the secret alcove, or that we need to watch out for a particular type of trap, people don't like that.
Your list of all the loot in all the scenarios will spoil scenarios for players. It will result in a lot less fun, for them and for the rest of their companions. And probably for their GMs, too.
You've been asked by the campaign leadership to desist, that this kind of metagaming is something that Paizo doesn't want you to encourage. In response, you've decided to (a) try to break the campaign, and (b) announce that you're going to do it. Do you understand why people like Kyle are mocking that attitude as attention-seeking? Do you understand that you are behaving in a way we don't tolerate in 5-year-olds?
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OK, maybe the term Copyright Infringement is not the right one. But giving away information for free, that is sold by a company, must have some sort of restriction under the law.
Fair use is always a grey area.
That said, it may be legal, but it's not an ethical thing to do.
I at least know one fewer store I'll choose to patronize if I'm ever in Michigan.
Venture-Captain, Texas—Waco
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I missed the original thread, but this smacks of the MMO mentality creeping into PFS. In MMOs you can find out in advance what items drop from each boss in a dungeon or raid, and then you can keep replaying that same instance over and over until the item you want drops. BORING!
If that's the experience you want, play an MMO. Please don't bring this mentality here.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I missed the original thread, but this smacks of the MMO mentality creeping into PFS. In MMOs you can find out in advance what items drop from each boss in a dungeon or raid, and then you can keep replaying that same instance over and over until the item you want drops. BORING!
If that's the experience you want, play an MMO. Please don't bring this mentality here.
Saying "Practice X is discouraged/not allowed in PFS" is a statement of fact.
Saying "I don't share mindset X and/or don't find its main practices fun" is a statement of personal preference.
Saying a practice "smacks of" mindset X "creeping into" PFS and even assigning a bold-all-caps label to it? That's an assertion that X is inherently bad and that we in PFS are morally superior to those who prefer/enjoy X.
Despite everything that's gone on in this and other threads, let's be fair and remember the difference between describing our differences and attacking the different.
Thanks.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
