|
The fact that we don't see very many out of State or "region" showing up to our largest convention of the year (Con of the North), leads me to believe that having some regional exclusive is not going to change that a whole bunch.
If Con of the North were able to routinely host a scenario/event that I couldn't attend elsewhere, I'd work harder to try to make it (it's unfortunate that it conflicts this year with my favorite vacation of the year).
The fact that we don't see very many out of State or "region" showing up to our largest convention of the year (Con of the North), leads me to believe that having some regional exclusive is not going to change that a whole bunch.
I'm sure plenty of people would love it if they could whether there was a heavy handed incentive or not. Traveling cost time and money though, and there are 101 reasons you just can't do that. Maybe once we invent cloning devices and/or teleportation.
The fact that we don't see very many out of State or "region" showing up to our largest convention of the year (Con of the North), leads me to believe that having some regional exclusive is not going to change that a whole bunch.If Con of the North were able to routinely host a scenario/event that I couldn't attend elsewhere, I'd work harder to try to make it (it's unfortunate that it conflicts this year with my favorite vacation of the year).
Something to remember is that making it only available at that convention keeps you from playing it anywhere else. Its a fake sort of special.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lets say for Eastern Wisconsin/Chicago/Indianapolis region, Kyle Baird could be the regional author (for free as Paizo doesn't have the budget to pay him), and he'd head up whatever regional special they get. They could be Irissen.
Minnesota/Iowa/Dakotas could be another region. I have experience running Living Dragonstar as both an author and developer. Chris Mortika is also pretty savvy when it comes to organizing writing. Of course I'm sure we'd both be willing to do this for free. We'd take Land of the Linorm Kings.
I'm sure Doug Miles up in Michigan would be willing to do this for free for Michigan/Ohio region. They'd get Realm of the Mammoth Lords.
I'm sure Brent Jans would be willing to do this for free for his region. Although not sure what would really happen on the Crown of the World.
So now we have a bunch of free scenarios to offer folks that are exclusive to our regions. And I'm sure all the PFS V-O's who already volunteer their limitless time to organize game days and conventions have the time to vet, write, develop all these scenarios.
And I'm sure in their free time, Mike Brock and John Compton have the time and willingness to coordinate all these free scenarios to make sure they don't overlap what they already have in the hopper for the campaign wide story arcs.
So I'm sure we'd all be willing to do all this stuff for free, and still give it all the energy and motivation it takes to make it fantastic.
/sarcasm
I remember the Living Greyhawk regional stuff. It really wasn't all that polished or well-written in many cases.
I am not in favor of this plan. Unless it is part of a wider plan that is included in the PFS budget for 12 more scenarios a year (one each month) where each region gets one of the 12 for a year and then its publicly released.
But Mike and John have already stated many times, that Paizo doesn't have it in their budget to produce more scenarios than they already do. And it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with John or Mark Moreland. But rather their already overtaxed editing and layout crews that are about a month behind on the campaign and companion lines.
So it isn't just about hiring another developer for PFS. Its about hiring probably 2 to 3 more folks for both the layout and editing teams as well.
We don't know what Paizo's bottom line looks like, and it would be just blind guessing to say they could easily afford to hire 7 new experienced people that they can just throw into the job without training and growing pains.
|
|
Something to remember is that making it only available at that convention keeps you from playing it anywhere else. Its a fake sort of special.The fact that we don't see very many out of State or "region" showing up to our largest convention of the year (Con of the North), leads me to believe that having some regional exclusive is not going to change that a whole bunch.If Con of the North were able to routinely host a scenario/event that I couldn't attend elsewhere, I'd work harder to try to make it (it's unfortunate that it conflicts this year with my favorite vacation of the year).
The difference here is that if I still continued to go somewhere else that weekend and missed out on that special, I wouldn't cry about elitism and exclusivity being a problem. (not calling anyone out specifically...)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The difference here is that if I still continued to go somewhere else that weekend and missed out on that special, I wouldn't cry about elitism and exclusivity being a problem. (not calling anyone out specifically...)
Consider someone who lives in Australia though and cannot just choose another weekend to travel to a different region. Or even someone in the USA without the time or resources to travel. While they would not necessarily complain about exclusivity they would just not care very much about the regional content until it was released generally and they could experience it.
I draw this scenario from my own experience of playing PFS while living in China before the creation of online events with con support. I did not even know that Bonekeep existed as a draw to cons and even if I had it would not factor into my decision making because I would have jumped at the exceedingly rare chance to attend any event at all. So from my anecdotal experience this sort of exclusive content would not encourage me to go to cons any more than I already wanted to and would really not factor into my PFS experience at all.
|
Andrew, there are a few issues in your criticism:
-Nobody is saying the RS line will be free.
-We're not asking Paizo contributors to edit for free.
-It isn't yet clear on whether Ohio suddenly becomes Realm of the Mammoth Lords or whether Ohio's community just gets to produce a self-contained regional special. Why do these need to be tied to a region in Golarion?
-It doesn't have to be the VOs who write the RS line, it'd just be good if they could read it over with their VO-sense to get their valuable feedback and directions. We're not telling Venture Captains to write a scenario, but it's the VOs who hunger for something extra to draw the crowds to the cons they organize.
-We're living in 2013. We don't need the Paizo layout team to do the RS layout directly if the layout team produces an easy, blank template that we can drop the content into.
-We would need a wait-list. Chunks of five RS in development at a time. Opening it up to the world simultaneously is madness. While regions are waiting to send their RS to the gatekeeper in the wait-list, they have extra time to polish it up and play-test.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm scratching my head on this one. Seems like we're trying to fix a problem that's not all that broken.
First, as a player I'm not going to go coast to coast or out of the country to play an exclusive scenario. The closest I might come to doing that is paizo con for the initial release of a special, and I haven't even attended that yet. The only thing that introducing a region specific scenario would do is irritate me because I'll never get to play it.
Second, while I could afford attending a few extra Cons a year, I'd much rather sink that money into buying more GM materials like map packs and face card decks. Paizo would actually be REDUCING their revenue by supporting this.
Third, the number of Cons I'm attending per year is increasing without the exclusive scenarios, so I don't see a problem in the first place. I'm quite looking forward to playing Siege of the Diamond City at MarsCon this year.
Fourth, or more of an addendum to Third, Paizo already supports Cons. They have Specials. And Mike already gets flak from posters who feel alienated because they can't/won't go to Cons.
More importantly, the Cons I've been to have plenty of stuff to draw interested folks in. I love to game, but gaming nonstop for 3 days straight is exhausting. If there isn't something else at a Con to catch my interest during the sessions I sit out to take a break, I am unlikely to come back the following year. To me, it's the stuff outside gaming that makes a Con worth it. Otherwise I'd just be scheduling weekend gaming binges at a local store (or at my place).
Having said that, there's an entirely valid gaming reason for attending a Con- the chance to play with other people. My local folks are great, but going to Cons means experiencing playing styles and tactics a lot different than mine. That's pretty cool all on its own.
|
|
Andrew, there are a few issues in your criticism:
-Nobody is saying the RS line will be free.
-We're not asking Paizo contributors to edit for free.
-It isn't yet clear on whether Ohio suddenly becomes Realm of the Mammoth Lords or whether Ohio's community just gets to produce a self-contained regional special. Why do these need to be tied to a region in Golarion?
-It doesn't have to be the VOs who write the RS line, it'd just be good if they could read it over with their VO-sense to get their valuable feedback and directions. We're not telling Venture Captains to write a scenario, but it's the VOs who hunger for something extra to draw the crowds to the cons they organize.
-We're living in 2013. We don't need the Paizo layout team to do the RS layout directly if the layout team produces an easy, blank template that we can drop the content into.
-We would need a wait-list. Chunks of five RS in development at a time. Opening it up to the world simultaneously is madness. While regions are waiting to send their RS to the gatekeeper in the wait-list, they have extra time to polish it up and play-test.
The point of my criticism: where is all the extra time and money coming from?
Its easy to declare how easy it is, and completely another to come up with a comprehensive plan that meets two criteria that at the moment seem mutually exclusive.
Needs to go through Paizos development editing and layout teams. This is not negotiable based on everything Mike and John are saying (and what Mark Moreland has said). Can I develope and write? Sure. I've done it before. But that doesn't mean I am suddenly qualified for doing all this work. And when you take the control out of Paizos hands, you don't really know what you'll get from region to region. I might have more energy, motivation, and experience in the full process than Kyle. And kyle may be a better author than me. So you might get a great plot but a lazy development from kyle, while I'd provide great development but meh story and execution.
Mike has also stated that it can't come out of the budget and a kick starter isn't happening.
So rather than rehashing ideas that have been rejected. New ideas that meet the free and not crowd sourced need to be considered.
|
|
These boards are quite the equalizer, it seems. Every voice has a chance to be heard, no matter how remote it may be.
Here in Utah, PFS seems to be doing pretty well. We have TableCon next month (where PFS makes up over 90% of the pre-registrants so far). We then get SaltCon and CONduit, with talk of adding PFS games to ComicCON (which was a SMASH in its first year in SLC).
Now I've never gone to these events. I have two small kids and a full-time job, plus only one income in my family right now. I am going to TableCon next month for a day. $12, 45-minute drive, great deal!
Why do I say this? Because I couldn't care less about Con boons, exclusives, specials, etc. I've waited 15 years just to game AT ALL. I'm just so glad there is such a thing as PFS that I kind of look at all this extra stuff as gravy.
I have no problem keeping you core folks happy. How many of our 60,000+ players were at GenCon last year? How many have attended more than once? - This is a serious question. If Mike or John could answer it I'd be extremely interested.
How much do Cons really drive the gaming economy? I really don't think anecdotal comments would be useful here. Hard numbers, please. I'm an accountant and I'm darn sure Paizo has accountants who know exactly what % of their sales are tied to Cons. It could be huge, I really have no idea. But I'd love to know. I don't expect confidential financial data, so if it's not kosher to share on a public forum I understand.
It seems that Mike intimated that developing con specials would add nothing to Paizo's bottom line. Anyway, I'm just trying to make sense of all this. I've only been part of the PFS community since May, but I like to get informed and do better.
|
I do like this idea. Perhaps three scenarios that take place in the same location at the same time. They could be released as specials for 5 star GMs in various locations around the world. Release them a few months apart but in different orders depending on where the GM is located. That would be cool.
|
|
I realize I am one voice, but if Regional Specials became a thing I would probably walk. I travel to Con of the North every year. I would love to travel to other cons every year. Money says it ain't happening. I have other things that take priority, like paying bills.
If not being able to regularly travel to other regions means I can't access special content, then I have little interest in continuing with the organization. I realize that at this point they are not likely, but I feel the need to voice my thoughts.
|
I realize I am one voice, but if Regional Specials became a thing I would probably walk. I travel to Con of the North every year. I would love to travel to other cons every year. Money says it ain't happening. I have other things that take priority, like paying bills.
If not being able to regularly travel to other regions means I can't access special content, then I have little interest in continuing with the organization. I realize that at this point they are not likely, but I feel the need to voice my thoughts.
This is part of the reason I suggest smaller "regions" which repeat across the globe. It will make it easier for people to actually make it to different regions. Sadly, this will probably be the people who can already go to cons and need no more motivation to do so. Honestly, depending on how they split up the cons, I would only be able to go to one or two regions, maybe three if I make it to Paizo Con or Gen Con ever again.
But to mandate people to go to other countries to experience these new things, I don't think graywulfe here will be the only one not travelling (or possibly playing) at all. Rather counter-intuitive, wouldn't you say?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At the end of all of this, while this has been a very good and informative discussion about expanding the campaign, we come back to the main root of all our evils here.
We just want more scenarios. Special or not special, regionally based or not, we just want more things to play.
I am not against this. Heck, I admit to being one of those people, who demands more things. But there is only so much we can currently do.
The better question we should be asking as an organization, is what can we do as an organization to bring more options and opportunities of gameplay to the masses of PFS? We have discussed that we would need more editors, developers, and writers and freelancers, but all of this costs $$.. Let's be honest, we all wish we could do it for free, but we all have bills and responsibilities that trump our game life every time.
So here is a challenged issued: What do we need to do as an organization, to get more things published for us to play in PFS?
I issue this challenge to Master Brock & Master Compton and anyone in the Paizo Staff who is willing to share with us what is needed. Whether that be more developers, writers, or even more of a profit margin (I.E: Raising the cost of Scenarios) from PFS for there to be more investment on a corporate level.. I know Paizo does a lot and I am grateful. But if we are having issues with Paizo thinking we're not worth any more than the bare minimum, then what can we do to get the staff thinking about supporting us on the same level as they do everything else they promote?
Keeping things honest here: Without Organized Play, Pathfinder would not be on the level it is today. OP spread the infection that is Pathfinder to the world on a grand scale. We buy the books, we feed the supplement addictions through maps, dice, chase decks, buff decks, player companion books, adventure path books, etc. We also buy the cards games (and dice games) that have nothing to do with OP, cause we see it at our game days. We are guaranteed cash because of OP and the way it is currently structured thanks to Additional Resources as our way of expanding our character building options.
Also when you can fit 40 tables (150+ at Gen-Con) of Pathfinder into one ballroom and they be full for three days playing nothing else by Organized Play games... Not to be an egotistical dick or anything.. But that should solidify that we're kind of a big deal to Paizo's success. Just saying.
/soapbox
|
I'm not reading through all the comments but my thoughts on the topic are thus;
Not only no, but Hell No.
Some of us have a busy enough schedule that attending a convention to enjoy a special scenario is difficult enough. Add to this the *gross* expense of travel these days (I'm sorry, $4+ per gallon gas isn't something to scoff at), I can't help but wonder if the OP is either grossly wealthy in liquid assets and time or throwing out pie in the sky ideas without considering the logistics of such a thing.
|
We just want more scenarios. Special or not special, regionally based or not, we just want more things to play.
The problem is that the group of people clamouring for more scenarios is a self-selecting sample of the people who play the most. The most recent published stats show that the vast majority of PFS players aren't keeping pace with the scenarios being released at the current rate, even before you take modules, APs and the likely backlog of material from previous seasons into account.
|
We just want more scenarios. Special or not special, regionally based or not, we just want more things to play.
I am not against this. Heck, I admit to being one of those people, who demands more things. But there is only so much we can currently do.
To this end I think that the AP legalization they are working on is a great thing. The chronicle sheets are being completed and released at a steady pace by John, and so far everything has been presented well in my opinion. My group has played through Rise of the Runelords and Shattered Star in their PFS incarnations in their entirety, and are presently working through Skull and Shackles.
On the greater point (and not in specific response to you Lady Ophelia), while I kind of like the concept of regional specials, the problems with logistics that Mike and others have brought up is quite legitimate. I'll be interested to see if any workable ideas are presented.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Forgive my asking, but there's an attitude here that I'm not understanding. I'd appreciate someone taking the time to explain it to me.
Background: There was a Grand Convocation at PaizoCon 2012. I didn't make it to that convention, and didn't get to experience a lot of that content. That's a shame in several ways, but I didn't have the money, and I had other commitments. That's life. (I also didn't get to PaizoCon UK.)
Some years before that, there was a similar gala at PaizoCon. Lots of gaudy boons were handed out, like Taldan noble titles and all. That happened; I wasn't there.
I don't understand people like MrRetsej, or greywulfe, who say that if there's content offered, and they can't access it, that they would quit the campaign. Do you feel the same way about Race to the Runecarved Key, Part Two? (Not the Goblin race boon for the winners, but for the entire second half of the adventure?) That's content that you won't ever get to access, legally for Pathfinder Society. Obviously, you haven't quit the campaign, and I'm glad of that. But what's the distinction? Why is a rare convention-only scenario so much more precious, that being denied it -- because of time, money, other commitments -- would spoil the 26 scenarios and assorted other play opportunities for you?
If someone's location or finances didn't allow her to get to a convention that offered Bonekeep, or Siege of the Diamond City, would you counsel her to quit the campaign?
And, if we follow Dragnmoon's sage advice, you would get access to the convention-exclusive scenarios, when they receive a more general release a year later.
I ask because there's a whole thread just next door, where people are brainstorming about what we can do to make convention experiences better. But it sounds like any attempt to improve conventions will alienate and turn away envious players whose circumstances keep them from those events.
And I don't understand that attitude. I see it as jealousy, and so I'm probably mischaracterizing it. Does anybody who feels that way want to explain it to me?
|
|
Chris,
I pretty much agree with everything you said. A lot of the events and specials you mentioned were before my time with PFS. While I would have loved a chance to participate in them (and still would), I am certainly not bitter about missing them. I think they were cool implementations I'd love to see happen again, or opened up once more with broader access.
About the only thing that would give me grief would be boons on specials that apply gross advantage to those who received them. I'm not even talking about not so minor things like +1 to an ability score, or +2 to this or that skill. While such things are quite strong, they are not horrifyingly unfair (in my opinion). It would take something like a permanent free template or +2 to all spell DCs to ruffle my feathers.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Forgive my asking, but there's an attitude here that I'm not understanding. I'd appreciate someone taking the time to explain it to me.
Background: There was a Grand Convocation at PaizoCon 2012. I didn't make it to that convention, and didn't get to experience a lot of that content. That's a shame in several ways, but I didn't have the money, and I had other commitments. That's life. (I also didn't get to PaizoCon UK.)
Some years before that, there was a similar gala at PaizoCon. Lots of gaudy boons were handed out, like Taldan noble titles and all. That happened; I wasn't there.
Okay, I should be clear, I am okay with the current level of special events. I am okay with an event that only occurs at PaizoCon. That is cool and understandable. Does it suck that I can't make it? Yes, but that is Paizo's convention. It only makes sense that there is something really special there.
I don't understand people like MrRetsej, or greywulfe, who say that if there's content offered, and they can't access it, that they would quit the campaign. Do you feel the same way about Race to the Runecarved Key, Part Two? (Not the Goblin race boon for the winners, but for the entire second half of the adventure?) That's content that you won't ever get to access, legally for Pathfinder Society. Obviously, you haven't quit the campaign, and I'm glad of that. But what's the distinction? Why is a rare convention-only scenario so much more precious, that being denied it -- because of time, money, other commitments -- would spoil the 26 scenarios and assorted other play opportunities for you?
Chris, Please do not put words in my mouth. Convention specials are not what I was talking about. I specifically said Regional specials. The only thing stopping me from running a con special is the effort to organize 15 tables across 3 days, or whatever the requirement is. That is massively different from having to be in Washington DC to run the special. I live in WI, I can only imagine how frustrating it would be for someone in California, or Europe to get more extreme.
If someone's location or finances didn't allow her to get to a convention that offered Bonekeep, or Siege of the Diamond City, would you counsel her to quit the campaign?
I am going to try to remain call here, but where the hell did I suggest I would counsel anyone under any circumstances to quit PFS, WHERE? This one really pisses me off.
And, if we follow Dragnmoon's sage advice, you would get access to the convention-exclusive scenarios, when they receive a more general release a year later.I ask because there's a whole thread just next door, where people are brainstorming about what we can do to make convention experiences better. But it sounds like any attempt to improve conventions will alienate and turn away envious players whose circumstances keep them from those events.
And I don't understand that attitude. I see it as jealousy, and so I'm probably mischaracterizing it. Does anybody who feels that way want to explain it to me?
I can't really answer your question because you seem to have completely missed my point as I was not talking about Convention specials, I was talking about Regional specials.
As long as it does not take away from what they offer to people right now, I don't care if they offer more convention specials. There is however the problem of resources, as in Paizo currently does not have the resources to do more PFS stuff without taking away from other things.
Also why do we think conventions need to be improved? I think conventions are fine as is, at least as far as content goes.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I ask because there's a whole thread just next door, where people are brainstorming about what we can do to make convention experiences better. But it sounds like any attempt to improve conventions will alienate and turn away envious players whose circumstances keep them from those events.
And I don't understand that attitude. I see it as jealousy, and so I'm probably mischaracterizing it. Does anybody who feels that way want to explain it to me?
Let me try to explain. In my case it is not a feeling of jealousy but rather one of apathy. There are things, like the grand covocaton and by extension much of the meta-plot that are just not part of my PFS experience. Thus my PFS experience as a person who lives overseas in a place with a minuscule PFS presence is very different from that of someone who lives within driving distance of Paizocon. And it is a massive credit to PFS that both me and the guy from Seattle remain enthusiastic members of the player-base.
I am perfectly happy with getting to play PFS online and at the few local cons here in Singapore, but it absolutely removes my interest in and knowledge of the season plots to miss the specials and grand convocation and so on and so forth. It also probably contributes to the fact that I see PFS primarily as a modular and flexible way to get my gaming fix and would not really think twice about jumping ship to a real campaign if I had the time in my life for that commitment.
I think that that is the root of the bafflement on both sides of the discussion here. The devoted con-goes don't understand why people who cannot attend events get riled up over the parts of PFS that they are missing and the people who cannot go to events don't understand why the con-goers need more exclusive things when there are already things like Bonekeep, specials and race boons. I think that this is a counterproductive topic and will not lead to anything good because Mike and the leadership have been doing such a great job to make PFS one unified community and talking about things like this only serves to highlight the divisions we have in the community.
Now, I would never counsel someone to quit PFS over this. However I would have absolutely no compunction about offering character choices such as races that that someone will never be able to get the boon for to poach someone away from PFS into a real campaign. I think that is a good thing though because PFS should help build communities that can then support home games to showcase the fullness of the game and not necessarily be an end unto itself. Again this is how I use PFS as someone in a location with a traditionally anemic gaming community far away from the main action.
|
A few questions I have. Things to consider.
1.) Is this needed? What will the potential gains be, and likewise what would the issues and downsides be? How is this going to be worth it?
2.) Were, (or would it at all), would online gaming fall in this?
3.) Has anyone actually done a sort of mockup breaking down the areas and associated regions? More importantly along those lines, what steps are being considered to prevent both playing favorites and the impression of playing favorites?
4.) How can it be managed to make sure that these scenarios are only released to specific regions, and therefore best keep people from just saying they played it in said region? Obviously, making these Con event only regional restricted would be a terrible idea. But if they are fully open to purchase, even with a note on the Chronicle sheet saying it can not be played outside of a region until ______, how is that going to stop people from playing in a home game and just saying they are in that region (or where when they played)?
5.) Will this actually encourage broadening player travel or will it actually restrict it more. I'm thinking the latter, as it will probably make more people unable to participate in scenarios for a period of time, much, much worse if the idea is to make them large event only scenarios, and essentially reduce the total amount of scenarios out there to play overall, something that a lot of people tend to have issue with as we get more and more new players, it gets harder and harder to find scenarios that most people can play. I'm not entirely sure just how common that is, but it is one I run into a lot, both in home/shop games as well as in Online Play.
|
|
But it sounds like any attempt to improve conventions will alienate and turn away envious players whose circumstances keep them from those events....
Also I really expected better of you than belittling people by calling names. Calling someone envious because they want fairness and equality does not bring them to your side. It only galvanizes people against you.
|
|
2.) Were, (or would it at all), would online gaming fall in this?
I think that the only responsible way to implement this would be to have online not be a region, but allow 4 and 5 star DMs to offer their own regional scenarios online much like they offer each season's exclusive scenario. That way it would encourage online players to seek out people from other places to play with which fulfills the most compelling reason to offer regionally exclusive content.
|
|
2.) Were, (or would it at all), would online gaming fall in this?I think that the only responsible way to implement this would be to have online not be a region, but allow 4 and 5 star DMs to offer their own regional scenarios online much like they offer each season's exclusive scenario. That way it would encourage online players to seek out people from other places to play with which fulfills one of the things that those who want regionally exclusive content think it would encourage.
I agree it is an issue, but I'm not sure that helps too much either. It kind of swings it in the other direction, because a lot of people that play online do so only because they can not otherwise find a group. It's less that that is their choice (most of the time) and that they already can not travel or live in areas that there just are not other players. However, on the other hand, having Online be a region kind of defeats the proposed goal, as it is the one region that is universally open to all and 100% free. While it itself is perfectly fair, by comparison it has a huge "advantage" over all other regions.
|
|
I agree it is an issue, but I'm not sure that helps too much either. It kind of swings it in the other direction, because a lot of people that play online do so only because they can not otherwise find a group. It's less that that is their choice (most of the time) and that they already can not travel or live in areas that there just are not other players. However, on the other hand, having Online be a region kind of defeats the proposed goal, as it is the one region that is universally open to all and 100% free. While it itself is perfectly fair, by comparison it has a huge "advantage" over all other regions.2.) Were, (or would it at all), would online gaming fall in this?I think that the only responsible way to implement this would be to have online not be a region, but allow 4 and 5 star DMs to offer their own regional scenarios online much like they offer each season's exclusive scenario. That way it would encourage online players to seek out people from other places to play with which fulfills one of the things that those who want regionally exclusive content think it would encourage.
I disagree. Just because people can play online doesn't mean everyone does. It would be exactly what the proposal is for: getting people to interact with people from other regions. It's just the region that will see the most opportunity for use. It gives everyone a region they can visit without the cost or travel time of cons, so if anything it is more inclusive.
|
|
One thing to add to my previous point.
Why is a rare convention-only scenario so much more precious, that being denied it -- because of time, money, other commitments -- would spoil the 26 scenarios and assorted other play opportunities for you?
It would annoy me only because if Paizo were to go ahead with the kind of thing that you are suggesting it would directly work against their amazing efforts over the past year or so to democratize PFS and expand the player-base. Also it would be a waste Paizo's already over extended resources to make stuff that only a subset of the community will actually get to use.
LG was only able to have regionally split content because they relaxed their editorial standards to allow community written adventures. Also there was a diametrically opposed view of how an organized play community (or communities in the case of LG) should come together. I see Paizo as having moved forward significantly from both of these old organized play viewpoints.
I love that fact that PFS players at home, in stores, or at conventions are, for the most part, treated as equals. It is a valuable feature, not a problem that needs to be "fixed." I'm willing to make occasional (and temporary) exceptions for special occasions, but that's the size of it.
It seems from this that Paizo considers the relative lack of emphasis on centralized conventions to be a feature and not the bug that recent threads have been predicated on it being. This is a good thing for the campaign and PF as a whole.
|
|
I disagree. Just because people can play online doesn't mean everyone does. It would be exactly what the proposal is for: getting people to interact with people from other regions. It's just the region that will see the most opportunity for use. It gives everyone a region they can visit without the cost or travel time of cons, so if anything it is more inclusive.
But it would match the direction PFS needs to keep moving in better to have it be not just another region but a place where all the different PFS communities from various regions can come together into one PFS community.
|
|
We just want more scenarios. Special or not special, regionally based or not, we just want more things to play.The problem is that the group of people clamouring for more scenarios is a self-selecting sample of the people who play the most. The most recent published stats show that the vast majority of PFS players aren't keeping pace with the scenarios being released at the current rate, even before you take modules, APs and the likely backlog of material from previous seasons into account.
Remember though that you just don't need a scenario YOU haven't played yet, you need a scenario your group hasn't played yet. Finding what game to play with the online group has turned into geek soduku even with a spreadsheet.
|
|
Now let's think internationally.
Denmark, Croatia, Portugal, Germany, France, Canada, South Africa, Spain, and Finland only have 1 major convention a year. So, for players in those regions, they now have to travel internationally for more than
Well, to be fair, the cost of traveling country to country in Europe is comparable to state-to-state travel in the US (as long as you fly - gas is about $8-$9 per gallon US equivalent here). Still, not a lot of people are traveling to cons outside our region.
I love the global aspect of PFS, but I agree with Mike and others in that I don't think that exclusive scenarios are worth the resources needed to support them. Something smaller to reward playing outside your home region - say, a boon that needs to be signed by GMs in three different regions, with benefits comparable to a con boon - would be nice, though.
|
I was thinking something similar to what Jussi just proposed. Boons are an option to consider. Local conventions do need a draw. I don't attend them anymore because there isn't a reason for me to spend any money to play a scenario I can play at my FLGS. But I do understand others love conventions and seeing them dwindle and die is heartbreaking. There should be something special offered to draw in additional attendees, or rekindle the desire for those who stopped. But withholding scenarios for conventions to get them first is not the way to do it. Scenarios and players shouldn't be part of a hostage-like situation. Fracturing the player base into regions halfway through season 5 won't work.
I think the answer could lie in boons. At GenCon a person earns a token for each game played. Turn in two to roll a d20 that corresponds to a boon. To answer the resource cost issue, there are 20 boons that are already created. There wouldn't be a resource cost to create anything new. To answer making conventions unique and draw more attendees, perhaps allowing conventions to offer some of these boons could be enticing enough to attract additional attendees.
GenCon is an important event for Pathfinder Society so I would say don't release them all. But perhaps 5 - 10 of the 20 until the next GenCon when a new batch of boons are created for the next PFS year, and this proposed regional boon-convention season. Some may argue the boons aren't that great. But that's a matter of opinion. Some compliment an existing build while others are good for a new character build. If a VC or VL could work with the convention coordinator to pull 3-5 out of a pool Mike and developers want to release perhaps that could generate an increase in attendance.
I played LG and understand the argument why Pathfinder could be better if we created regions. The only reason I got back into gaming was LG and its regional-based model. I thought the concept was fantastic. But I realize that can't happen for the reasons given by Paizo staff and the fans who've replied here. The interruption and gear-up to such a model would break the system I feel is working very well - and improving every year with the leadership of Mike Brock and his VC's.
|
|
Greywulfe already noted it, but yeah, do not put words into my mouth Mortika.
Conventions are one thing. They are few and far enough between in the year and equally offer the same specials so its entirely conceivable to visit one that was, say, a state away if you *really* wanted to. But region specific specials? This does not benefit the PFS community as a whole.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Three notes, folks:
1) if there were regional adventures, you'd be in one of those regions. You'd have easy access to an adventure that people three states away wouldn't, and vice versa.
2) So far as I understand the Paizo system, and I might be very ignorant of it, it's not set up to give "every GM in these ZIP codes an Irrisen scenario, and every GM in these other ZIP codes a Jalmeray scenario..." Regional adventures would flow through Venture Officers, the same ay they request convention scenarios be dropped in to our accounts when we agree to help GM at conventions.
So I confess, I still don't understand "convention specials are fine, but not regional specials." Regional specials probably would be convention specials. If not, then you local Venture Officer is making your regional special even easier to play, by bringing it to game days.
3) I tried very hard to explain that I wanted to understand a point of view I find alien, that I knew I must be mischaracterizing that point of view. If you still think that I was "putting words in your mouth" or suggesting that you would do this or that terrible thing, that wasn't my intention.
But I still don't understand that attitude. It sounds like "I have all the scenarios I used to have, and a local regional one, besides. But I would probably walk away from the campaign -- greywulfe's words -- if the campaign management offered anybody else a regional scenario, too."
So, put it in simple words for me: if you don't mind things like the PaizoCon Grand Convocation, or the Gen Con specials that never get played anywhere else, or any other event that's a big deal and really cool, but really far away, why are regional specials so much worse?
|
|
I think that, in a perfect world, all scenarios (and even specials) would be available to all players. Some specials do not travel well; I don't know if this is the case with PFS specials, but other OP campaigns have had ones that either have an immediate effect on the story or directly affect a region.
Much like I don't like the notion of a player being able to spend his/her way to a better character, I am somewhat uncomfortable with the idea that scenario/special availability being tied to one's ability to travel (and at specific times).
|
|
Chris, I also agree with you, but I for one don't see a substantial benefit to creating regional specials. Unless this is what Paizo does to out-compete whatever OP campaign D&D 5th edition brings to the "table".
Again, I may not be exactly informed on this topic, but that's why I'm here. What percentage of reported PFS games take place at conventions of any size?
I am just wary of Paizo diverting its PFS resources to developing content that would be of interest and benefit to a limited group of players. Unless that limited group is what keeps PFS going.
I think most players wouldn't care that there were regional specials, or con specials, or other stuff. I think that most people just want cool stuff to play, which PFS has been doing a great job at giving us.
|
|
Forgive my asking, but there's an attitude here that I'm not understanding. I'd appreciate someone taking the time to explain it to me.
Background: There was a Grand Convocation at PaizoCon 2012. I didn't make it to that convention, and didn't get to experience a lot of that content. That's a shame in several ways, but I didn't have the money, and I had other commitments. That's life. (I also didn't get to PaizoCon UK.)
Some years before that, there was a similar gala at PaizoCon. Lots of gaudy boons were handed out, like Taldan noble titles and all. That happened; I wasn't there.
Okay, I should be clear, I am okay with the current level of special events. I am okay with an event that only occurs at PaizoCon. That is cool and understandable. Does it suck that I can't make it? Yes, but that is Paizo's convention. It only makes sense that there is something really special there.
Chris, Please do not put words in my mouth. Convention specials are not what I was talking about. I specifically said Regional specials. The only thing stopping me from running a con special is the effort to organize 15 tables across 3 days, or whatever the requirement is. That is massively different from having to be in Washington DC to run the...
I don't understand people like MrRetsej, or greywulfe, who say that if there's content offered, and they can't access it, that they would quit the campaign. Do you feel the same way about Race to the Runecarved Key, Part Two? (Not the Goblin race boon for the winners, but for the entire second half of the adventure?) That's content that you won't ever get to access, legally for Pathfinder Society. Obviously, you haven't quit the campaign, and I'm glad of that. But what's the distinction? Why is a rare convention-only scenario so much more precious, that being denied it -- because of time, money, other commitments -- would spoil the 26 scenarios and assorted other play opportunities for you?
Greywulfe,
I know that what Chris said may come across as harsh, however, knowing him personally I can tell you that he is not putting words in your mouth and he is not intentionally offending you. Instead, he's telling you (and admitted that he could be misinterpreting the written word); and asking you to clarify so that he can understand your view point.
Chris is an extremely logical person and would no more intentionally offend someone than he would to kick a puppy. So please don't take umbrage or misinterpret what he is trying to do. He is merely trying to understand your point of view.
|
|
Greywulfe,
I know that what Chris said may come across as harsh, however, knowing him personally I can tell you that he is not putting words in your mouth and he is not intentionally offending you. Instead, he's telling you (and admitted that he could be misinterpreting the written word); and asking you to clarify so that he can understand your view point.
Chris is an extremely logical person and would no more intentionally offend someone than he would to kick a puppy. So please don't take umbrage or misinterpret what he is trying to do. He is merely trying to understand your point of view.
+1
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Allright. So, here's an idea. I don't know that it's a good idea, but what the hell?
I think that regional scenarios are unlikely on a universal level. They're too much work, for too little payback.
So: Divide the Society gaming population into, say,ten regions with approximately equal PFS activity, rather than equal geographical territory.
Then have a competition for three months. Whichever region has the greatest reported activity (home games, game days, conventions) gets a regional special.
For that to work, there would have to be some way for a home campaign to identify its location. Maybe there would be too much cheating? (I just ran 15 tables of 'Master of the Fallen Fortress' with the same group of players. And boy, are my legs tired.)
|
|
competition
BOOO! :P
Meh, this idea is alright. I still just dont see the appeal to releasing regional exclusives(even if its just exclusive for awhile) when we regularly have threads pop up about people saying they dont have enough stuff to play as is.
As soon as something is announced that it will be for Region B only until Date X (however long down the line) people will blow up about how its not fair and how theyve already played EVERYTHING in the entire campaign, and theyve only been playing for 6 months, so clearly Paizo is doing something wrong.
Id rather just avoid that altogether if need be.
|
|
Two things that pop to mind for this.
1.) seems like it would really only encourage people to avoid playing outside of their normal games, not to venture out to new places.
2.) seems like it would favor areas that have more Cons (or at least at the time), unless you consider Online to be a region of it's own, which I think would kind of autowin, (can't really cheat as far as where the game took place, so all Online games would count).
I guess I'm just still not seeing the point or benefit for doing something like this in the first place. It (the idea in general, not your specific idea), still kind of seems like pushing for a reward for those that would already be in a place to achieve it just for the sake of giving certain populations another special, limited exclusive reward. If you take that aspect out of the equation, does this really do anything good for PFS? What happens when the same region (or even 2 or 3) keep "winning" time after time? I don't see it, personally, but assuming there is some overall benefit, how does that compare to thinks like even more exclusivity in PFS, the other 9-12 regions feeling like the "losers", the lose a scenario in general (at least for a decent amount of time), etc. . .
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Beckett --
Good point about the regional competition thing discouraging "traitorous" attendance at distant conventions.
The goals, as I understand itare:
1) To encourage current PFS players to attend conventions that they might have otherwise passed on. The reasons for growing conventions has already been explained on another thread.
2) To get people who have come to a convention intending to play other games, to try out Pathfinder instead,and to get excited about the organized play campaign.
If we get lots of the first, that's helpful for getting the second.
|
|
Beckett --
Good point about the regional competition thing discouraging "traitorous" attendance at distant conventions.
The goals, as I understand it are:
1) To encourage current PFS players to attend conventions that they might have otherwise passed on. The reasons for growing conventions has already been explained on another thread.
2) To get people who have come to a convention intending to play other games, to try out Pathfinder instead,and to get excited about the organized play campaign.
If we get lots of the first, that's helpful for getting the second.
Going back to the original post, there is no mention of Cons, Game Days, or special events. I am not sure if that was a detail that was supposed to be hidden in the fine print to make the idea more palatable or was meant to be obvious and go without saying, but I was taking it at face value.
Purpose: To encourage PFS players to travel to new regions to play PFS.
Proposal: Starting at a point in the year where it would have least impact on non-exclusive regions do the following:
- Divide the world into 12 popular regions of Golarion based <on the> number of tables being reported (include 1 region for online play).
- Each month, the higher level scenario released is only released in one specific region (on an annual rotating basis).
- After three months, that scenario is released to the remaining 11 regions.
After two months time, every region would see two 'new' releases per month. At any given time, there would be two regions of the world that would have exclusive rights to offer a scenario that can not be played anywhere else.
Q: Why do we care if or want PFS players to have to travel to new areas to play PFS?
A: This is best discussed in another thread, but many players enjoy traveling to new areas to play with new people. Experiencing PFS with new players and GMs makes us all better and conventions increase the exposure of the campaign.
-
Q: How are the scenarios going to be restricted exactly?A: No idea. Perhaps it's as simple as including a note on the chronicle that it isn't valid outside of Region X until Date Y?
Ah, I missed that the first time. If this is intended to be Con only rewards, than I am pretty much against it. Con already have more than enough rewards for being Cons, I think. Now, if this idea where to focus on traveling to game with new groups and areas (and not about Cons), I think it held a bit of promise.