|
...
But that isn’t necessarily the case here. My PC is at the mercy of which ever table is open. Even if I go by the schedule and read the blurb on the scenario, there is still often only 1 going on in each tier. I am not so petty as to not play just because there was no specific reward for my sorcerer. However, it was mildly irritating that my 5th level sorcerer had not a single item on any of his faction sheets that was worth buying for him (or that couldn’t just be bought at his fame level) or boon that he could use. I knew it was luck of the draw but it was still an annoyance.
If it is on the chronicle sheet, you can buy it. There are no fame requirements. Just meet whatever it says on the sheet.
|
Also germane to the discussion:
...
Link to the thread: DON'T CHEAT
That link might be relevant, but the specific dot points he lists in that thread are pretty obvious rule-breaking (encouraging 8 player tables? changing the mechanics of a scenario?). This is about a grey area that some people frown upon and some people don't.
Ask yourself this: Would you comply with that request if Mike Brock was looking over your shoulder?
I see this happen a fair bit. Why start guilting Omnitricks and any other players who want to know about this, for the very good reasons already mentioned, by labelling them as cheaters? Omnitricks posted this in an open forum to begin with.
It teaches players that the correct behaviour to finding out this kind of thing is to go behind people's backs, to not post on the boards. It discourages feedback, it limits enjoyment of the game. How is Paizo meant to have any idea of whether this should be regarded if we're going to accuse people of being cheaters when they bring them up?
I know nobody said "you're a cheater" or "that's cheating", but you didn't have to. Everyone here can read between the lines. I'm not sure if that was your intention, but that's what it looks like.
Honestly, even with Mark's explanation, I think players who do this don't do it against the spirit of the game.Not as they see it, that is true. But, clearly, it is against the spirit of the game as Paizo sees it. Don't get upset with them when they ask you to play their game in their way; that's all I'm saying.
We're talking about making the way we play the game better. As far as I can tell, everyone at Paizo has always been open to feedback and they've been willing to reconsider decisions.
So I have to ask, why are we so keen to put the foot down for the sake of "That's The Rules", especially where that seems to be debatable, with little consideration given to improving them?
|
We're talking about making the way we play the game better. As far as I can tell, everyone at Paizo has always been open to feedback and they've been willing to reconsider decisions.
So I have to ask, why are we so keen to put the foot down for the sake of "That's The Rules",...
I thought I was done with this thread, but I guess I'll jump back in.
No one is saying "Don't question it, don't try to change anything, just shut up and play the game the way I tell you to!"
What we are saying is that the way the current rules of Pathfinder Society are implemented, making (or receiving) a list of boons by scenario so you can cherry pick the "good" ones for your character is considered cheating.
Paizo is very good about listening to feedback. If you can make a convincing argument why such a list should be available, Mike or John might decide to release such a list. As part of the discussion people (including me) have posted quotes from Paizo employees stating the reasons why they are against a list (especially ones from Mark - who spent several years as the developer in charge of PFS). Unless you can counter their arguments, nothing will change. Just saying "but I want it!" is not going to change minds. [Not intending to call anyone out with that statement, there have been plenty of threads where the only argument for playing a catfolk/starting at level 7/implementing crafting was that someone "REALLY wanted to do it."]
As for changes to the boon system:
-Starting in season 5, Paizo has released information on what factions might have a special interest in each scenario. That's a big step towards not playing with the "wrong" character. I've played the first three scenarios and haven't seen any boons that were "only good for one type of character."
-Season 4 did a better job (in my mind) of avoiding boons that were useless on some character classes. Even for those "supercool" boons that were spoilered very early in this thread, they were useful for almost any class.
-I give John a lot of credit for trying to make sure there are no "bad boons." I'm not going to spoiler it, but there's at least one scenario where you (might) get to choose a single use of a spell-like ability from a short list. The key word there is "choose." The choices mean ANY class is going to have a useful spell-like ability.
And what I'd like to see:
-Chronicles with parts that are assignable to a different character of the same player. Specifically "access chronicles" (special mounts and equipment). Flavor-wise, this could be treated as a group of characters with a common bond who share their experiences and relics very closely. If I receive a chronicle that let's me buy a celestial shield (currently not allowed) with my sorcerer instead of my Aasimar paladin, I'm a little annoyed. These situations could be handled with:
"You may assign access to this {mount, sword, etc.} to another character under your Pathfinder Society number. This character gains access to {it} and can purchase as normal, but the character to whom this Chronicle was originally awarded must cross off access for herself. You must include a copy of this Chronicle among the records of the other PC, though the PC gains access to no other boons, equipment, or wealth from this Chronicle.
Character number receiving this access: _________–____ (GM Initials _____ )"
Yes, there is a precedent for that. No, I'm not going to spoil it.
|
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West
|
We're talking about making the way we play the game better. As far as I can tell, everyone at Paizo has always been open to feedback and they've been willing to reconsider decisions.
True. Arguing that a rule should be changed is fine. But going beyond that and suggesting that the rule just plain ought to be ignored because you happen to disagree with it is not.
Some things do not fall within the discretion of the GM. Argue about them on the forums as much as you like. But until the rules are changed, follow the rules, including the ones you disagree with.
|
If it is on the chronicle sheet, you can buy it. There are no fame requirements. Just meet whatever it says on the sheet....
But that isn’t necessarily the case here. My PC is at the mercy of which ever table is open. Even if I go by the schedule and read the blurb on the scenario, there is still often only 1 going on in each tier. I am not so petty as to not play just because there was no specific reward for my sorcerer. However, it was mildly irritating that my 5th level sorcerer had not a single item on any of his faction sheets that was worth buying for him (or that couldn’t just be bought at his fame level) or boon that he could use. I knew it was luck of the draw but it was still an annoyance.
True. My point was the only thing on my chronicle sheet that I would consider buying did not need to be on the chronicle sheet. At the level you can get the chronicle sheet you can already buy the item because you have to have a bit of fame just to be high enough level to play the scenario in that tier.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You are playing a fantasy character. If part of your fantasy character is riding a giant chocobo looking animal into combat, no one should frown on you for farming that.
As a DM I farm from adventures I have already played. I also farm for other people without letting them know. I am going to run the lisalla arc from season 4 for my area soon, just because the flavor of the boons are so awesome. I sepcifically ran an adventur for a wizard that wanted a fairy dragon, and he was sooo excited that the adventure rewarded that. I kept telling him unless you find some boon you cannot have it, and then bam he gets it.
The idea is to have fun with other people. People have fun in different ways, if someones means of fun is not your. Well do not play with them.
|
|
No offense to the writers but honestly, the fault is with them. This is similar to the same problems that existed with the faction mission. There's nothing quite like going somewhere that people haven't walked in 500 years and somehow the faction leader knows something very specific is there.
Here's an ingenious idea? How about making more general use boons? How about some choice or options based on class? I admit that getting people to run this scenario or that just based on the rewards is wrong. But giving someone a "no prize" at the end of a 4 or 5 scenario series is just plain stupid.
Boons should not be game breaking rewards. They should be things to help enhance how you play your character. You were in this one town and killed this guy and now all the thugs in town are scared of you. You rescued some families' child that was thought dead years ago, here's a bonus to dealing with nobles in this town. Not all scenarios have them, nor should they. But when you get a boon it should mean something. It's kinda like an ingame way of yelling "I (*&*ing did that!"
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd love to see more boons, specifically character option boons, that once you get them can just apply to any character you have or make in the future.
Boons like that I feel are what being a pathfinder is more about, discovering things that you can bring back that help the entire society, and not just your prticular character.
Venture-Lieutenant, West Virginia—Charleston
|
I'd love to see more boons, specifically character option boons, that once you get them can just apply to any character you have or make in the future.
** spoiler omitted **
Boons like that I feel are what being a pathfinder is more about, discovering things that you can bring back that help the entire society, and not just your prticular character.
I like this a lot, and would support it.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I like this a lot, and would support it.I'd love to see more boons, specifically character option boons, that once you get them can just apply to any character you have or make in the future.
** spoiler omitted **
Boons like that I feel are what being a pathfinder is more about, discovering things that you can bring back that help the entire society, and not just your prticular character.
+1
|
Ask yourself this: Would you comply with that request if Mike Brock was looking over your shoulder?Uhhhh, yeah? ...
and this:
If anyone actually would tell me what scenarios I can get the interesting, unique stuff like evil-evil tattoos, animal companions and the like they can just post it here and I'll check back or if they don't want to step on the toes of the people who don't like it, can just pm me.
I'm assuming this is okay, now, considering the conversation at this point?
Just checking.
Lol, so heard the tone "What Would Jesus Do?" in that -gigglefits-
|
|
+1I like this a lot, and would support it.I'd love to see more boons, specifically character option boons, that once you get them can just apply to any character you have or make in the future.
** spoiler omitted **
Boons like that I feel are what being a pathfinder is more about, discovering things that you can bring back that help the entire society, and not just your prticular character.
Infinity +1 ;P
|
|
OK, so a boon is on a chronicle that your PC can't use ... and this upsets you ... but someone else at the table can use said boon ...
How exactly is this different from playing a home game where the loot you find is appropriate to a PC other than yours? Does that situation upset you?
As to not being able to play the scenario again, not true ... just GM ten tables and, aside from getting credit to apply to a PC of your choosing from running the tables, you gain a star. That star will allow you to replay one scenario per star to get the McGuffin of Specific Class/Race/Whatever Awesomesauce for a PC that can use it.
Don't want to step up to GM? That's fine, but you cannot say there are no alternatives, nor can you say you have no means to replay a scenario.
EDIT: all that said, if a workable mechanic was intorduce to allow cross utilization of chronicle sheet boon between one's own PCs, I'd give it a go. However, I can foresee many issues with any of the obvious routes to this (for example, players having PCs who have tons of boon specific items on a single PC, but do not have copies of the original chronicles sheets with those PCs ... auditing nightmare).
|
|
If a boon shows up on a chronicle sheet that I can't use, but others can, that's fine. It looks like it's going to happen a lot this season with the faction boons, and has even happened to me already where I wished I ran a scenario with a different character because the one I ran it with was the "wrong" faction.
What people don't like is seeing a boon they could have used on another character, and then also no one at the table being able to use that boon, so it's literally a wasted boon. The party of cleric/wizard/fighter/rogue who runs Quest for Perfection part 3 is probably going to look at that chronicle and be disappointed in nine out of ten cases.
Additionally? The GM credit is great, but not everyone feels comfortable GMing. It can be daunting to newer players, and not to put anyone down, but some people get anxious over being, essentially, the center of attention. Like stage fright.
|
|
Point taken. But the counter point is if, in you are in a home game, and a similar situation occurs (an item or benefit is found that does not work for any of the PCs in the group), do folks get upset?
If the issue is an item for incompatible class, in a home game, either the item gets sold (which corresponds to the gold payout for a PFS scenario as items are typically not given to PCs), or a player takes a dip in the needed class (which is still an option in PFS).
If it is something other than an item that has a class issue, the dip in another class is still an option in both home games and PFS.
It is a rare occurrence for a boon to be truly wasted, unless a player is set on building their PC in a predetermined fashion (which is perfectly fine, please don't get me wrong on that front, I have a PFS PC who has a chronicle sheet boon that he will not be able to use because I ran this route), but it is the player's choice at that point.
So, in essence, there are numerous ways to take advantage of "wasted" boons, but they all come down to player choice. They can step up and run tables (even as a home game amongst folks they feel more comfortable playing with rather than a table of strangers) and ultimately gain a replay if they go this route, or they can modify their PC's career path, or they can accept the fact they have something they will not be able to use.
On the front of multiple scenarios being played by the same PC in order to get the boon, that can be more problematic (as a PC can level out of tier before they have a chance to finish a sequence), but it really still boils down to the same situation.
|
|
Point taken. But the counter point is if, in you are in a home game, and a similar situation occurs (an item or benefit is found that does not work for any of the PCs in the group), do folks get upset?
If the issue is an item for incompatible class, in a home game, either the item gets sold (which corresponds to the gold payout for a PFS scenario as items are typically not given to PCs), or a player takes a dip in the needed class (which is still an option in PFS).
The thing you seem to be missing here is that in a home campaign there is an expectation of interaction between world and characters that does not exist in PFS. In a long-running campaign when the party receives a reward with very narrow applicability then presumably it is at least semi-expected because that sort of thing ideally comes out of negotiation between the DM and player about the intended advancement of the character. Therefore if the party receives something that is useless to you it is first of all probably exactly what a fellow party menmber wants and secondly you can expect a similarly tailored reward in the future if the DM is any good.
The PFS analogue to this ability to plan character advancement and integration into the setting is the list of rewards that everyone is railing against in this thread. In PFS you do not have the expectation that you will get turn to revieve a tailored reward because the progression of the campaign from the viewpoint of any given character is essentially random; determined by the vagarities of game-day signup. This is another example of the basic social assumptions of the RAW game conflicting with the way that PFS changes the basic assumptions about the game.
I also find the suggestion to "just DM it" to be very inadequite as a solution to this problem and quite frankly more than a little bit condescending to players who care about planning the advancement of their characters, which as far as I am concerned is an integral part of the game.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can someone please spoiler the OP?
An actual title from the author would have been helpful also. Nondescript thread number 4132524123 ready for reading!
I do admit partial fault in opening it to read it despite my instinct telling me I probably wouldn't be interested. Will save failed on my part.
|
|
Continuing on what Saint Caleth is saying, to put it simply Dain, all of those solutions are weak ones. They make some sense in the context of what's possible, but they aren't likely to appease anyone.
A multiclass dip into your character can start to break characters if they try and do this. Most people who know what they're doing with their characters wouldn't risk this unless they were already planning on going that route without the boon.
This isn't a home game, it's PFS. For the scenario to come with a bonus, and to find out you don't get that bonus sucks. If you had 2 characters, one the right class and one the wrong class that you could've played in that scenario, and you chose the wrong one, it's a case of too-bad. In a home game, that doesn't happen.
To have to burn a GM replayable star on it because of that is a corner case for using that replayable. Most people will choose to eiher replay or re-GM a scenario because they liked it, not because the scenario's mechanics were unfair the first time you saw it. What happens if you run out of stars to do this with? New players get screwed here too, unless you think they should GM without rule familiarity for the sake of replaying for boon qualification.
At the end of the game, you want to feel rewarded, not cheated.
|
|
The main issues I have with posting a list of items are that:
1. It gives a glimpse into what the PCs could be facing over the course of the scenario. I have never played a home game where the GM has said "hey folks, you're going to be finding items X, Y and Z in the adventure". It kinda kills the reveal of the story to do so.
2. It will potentially lead to folks wanting to only play predetermined scenarios for the final drop. Which can lead to a similar experience Drogon mentioned earlier in the thread with folks wanting to play "4 the lootz" rather than the story.
Both of these are significant reasons to not do item reveals.
That said, I do like the faction indications that are being given for season 5. I could see that potentially expanded to include class and racial indications as well, but such a step should be taken carefully (or you could have parties of all one class running through a scenario and that poses issues of its own).
As to balanced item distribution, there are times where it just won't happen in a home game (loads of giant sized magic weapons in part of RotR for example). Personally, I find fully customized items crafted to the party to be found over a home campaign to be cliche in nature. Part of the fun from my point of view is to see what the players do with what they find. Bur then again I also allow item crafting and the potential for item sale and purchase over the course of a campaign as well. YMMV and neither way is correct or incorrect as far as running a campaign goes.
As far as the "GM it" option sounding condescending, I'm not sure where you are getting that SC. It is the only current means to accomplish what folks are wanting. If they do not want to do it that is their choice, and as such they need to accept the result of the choice they make. If a change comes about to allow a different mechanism to accomplish it, great. But currently the options are what they are. I personally feel making a list of items by scenario would be far more condescending in that it makes the assumption that one cannot enjoy a game without knowing the reward beforehand.
|
|
Continuing on what Saint Caleth is saying, to put it simply Dain, all of those solutions are weak ones. They make some sense in the context of what's possible, but they aren't likely to appease anyone.
A multiclass dip into your character can start to break characters if they try and do this. Most people who know what they're doing with their characters wouldn't risk this unless they were already planning on going that route without the boon.
This isn't a home game, it's PFS. For the scenario to come with a bonus, and to find out you don't get that bonus sucks. If you had 2 characters, one the right class and one the wrong class that you could've played in that scenario, and you chose the wrong one, it's a case of too-bad. In a home game, that doesn't happen.
To have to burn a GM replayable star on it because of that is a corner case for using that replayable. Most people will choose to eiher replay or re-GM a scenario because they liked it, not because the scenario's mechanics were unfair the first time you saw it. What happens if you run out of stars to do this with? New players get screwed here too, unless you think they should GM without rule familiarity for the sake of replaying for boon qualification.
At the end of the game, you want to feel rewarded, not cheated.
I agree with you on the class dip being less than ideal, but it does not make it an invalid option. As I said before I do have a PC with a boon he won't use because I don't want to take the dip with that character. That is my choice and I get to live with it. And yes, I could have played a different PC on that scenario to be able to use the boon but played the other.
Was it frustrating? Sure, a little. But I still had a blast playing that one.
As to not getting a bonus in a home game, yep I've experienced that as well, do to wrong alignment, wrong class, etc. it can happen in any game, not just PFS.
The ultimate point I am trying to make is this: if you don't get a boon, it's not the end of the world. There is a means to acquire it if you really want it bad enough. And it is possible other avenues may open. Currently though, the choices you have are it and they are yours to make.
|
|
The QFP boon is also an extreme bad exaple for this, or maybe extreme good example of why boons should be a bit more aplicable to multiple characters. The extra special boon from the QFP line, if I recall right, actualy requires you to have 3 seperate chronicles to get this one boon, so it's not even really feasible for most people to burn GM stars on.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 8
|
The party of cleric/wizard/fighter/rogue who runs Quest for Perfection part 3 is probably going to look at that chronicle and be disappointed in nine out of ten cases.
Honestly the monk player is going to be the most upset at getting access to an item that could have been so cool to have, but conflicts with a standard and nearly required magic item for an unarmed fighter.
|
|
It was likely not intended as such, but the braid is still excellent for an armed monk. A temple sword user will enjoy the 2 levels higher on fast movement, can eschew an amulet of natural armour with the barkskin qinggong power, and doesn't have to worry about an amulet of mighty fists because he can pour all his enhancements into his temple sword. Three times per day he gets 1.5x his strength on a flurry? Not bad for the price.