Factions on the wane?


Pathfinder Society

51 to 100 of 180 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Chris Mortika wrote:
Tell me again how this is simpler.

They don't have to develop 8 different missions for every scenario.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:
Tell me again how this is simpler.
They don't have to develop 8 different missions for every scenario.

So it's simpler for the developers ;)

Shadow Lodge 4/5

He didn't specify 'simpler for whom'.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

Chris Mortika wrote:

My concern right now is with the new faction letters. Up until now, I've had copies of all 8 faction letters from Season 5, that I can hand to players at my table.

"You're an Andoran, and your friend's an agent of Qadira? Here are you overall faction missions for this season. Does this particular scenario advance either of your factions? Just keep your eye out. Something might come up, or maybe not." (The player might know; these things are public knowledge, or might not. It's not my business to tell them, and it's a better atmosphere for role-playing if the character doesn't know that, woot, we're in Mendev, goin' on demon-huntin' patrol; it's a perfect opportunity to dig up dirt on organized crime figures. Keep your eye out. Advance the cause; sometimes opportunities come when you wouldn't expect them.)

Now, I need two sets of faction letters, depending on whether the scenario is from the first half or the second half of the season. Starting in August, I suspect I'll need a third set, and so on. And at this point, it's no longer incumbent on the player to keep track of faction letters; that's my job, because the player shouldn't have to keep track of which half of which season a scenario falls.

So, instead of three pages in the back of a scenario, giving particular faction missions, I now have 16 letters to keep track of and hand out. In August, that'll be 24 pages.

Tell me again how this is simpler.

There is a reason we list which factions play a part in which scenario. The fact that you choose to provide all 8 factions their appropriate letter every scenario is not something you should be blaming on development. There hasn't been one season five scenario that has include more than 2-3 factions. The fact that you go above and beyond and provide every player with a copy of their faction letter is your choice. You blaming development for making things harder, when in fact, you only need to provide 2-3 max, and not 8, at every scenario you run is disappointing.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Michael Brock wrote:
The fact that you go above and beyond and provide every player with a copy of their faction letter is your choice. You blaming development for making things harder, when in fact, you only need to provide 2-3 max, and not 8, at every scenario you run is disappointing.

I believe he's under the impression that the start of season letter from the faction heads will be insufficient to keep up with the developing scenarios. So if you have the start of season letters, the mid season letters, and the end of season letters for three factions thats 9 letters.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
The fact that you go above and beyond and provide every player with a copy of their faction letter is your choice. You blaming development for making things harder, when in fact, you only need to provide 2-3 max, and not 8, at every scenario you run is disappointing.

I believe he's under the impression that the start of season letter from the faction heads will be insufficient to keep up with the developing scenarios. So if you have the start of season letters, the mid season letters, and the end of season letters for three factions thats 9 letters.

Even if that is the case, 9 letters is a far cry from the 16 or 24 that were claimed in the post.

Chris Mortika wrote:


So, instead of three pages in the back of a scenario, giving particular faction missions, I now have 16 letters to keep track of and hand out. In August, that'll be 24 pages.

Tell me again how this is simpler.

I'm still trying to understand how at worst, 9 letters (and most of the time it isn't that many since not every scenario involves more than 2 factions), is worse than 8 for every scenario. It is essentially the same amount of paperwork, but the GM only has to worry about 2-3 factions instead of 4-6 different ones EVERY scenario, and is better able to focus his attention.

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Mike, you've expressed before that bringing the mission letters, while not strictly necessary, is something you expect out of a good GM. And i concur.

To be clear, I keep the letters in my box of prep materials, behind the pre-gen characters and in front of the secondary success conditions. Because if I needed to remember which to bring to a convention, it would prove impossible.

The problem isn't 8 versus 2 or 3. The problem is Which Cheliax faction letter should we use?

This isn't much of an issue for me, honestly. I know the campaign very well; I know how the seasonal arcs run, and my prepwork is already somewhat organized. But look at this situation from the perspective of a green GM running for novice players, running in, say, April or May. At that point, the player (and the GM, too, if he's on top of things) prints out the new faction letters appropriate to her character. And then plays an early Season 5 scenario, where it doesn't fit.

Again, come August, if there's another set of faction letters, it's going to be harder and harder for players to find the right letter for older scenarios. The answer, I think, has to be that the campaign make it easier for players and GMs in 2015 or 2016 to find the right faction letter for, say, Scenario 5-19. And I respectfully recommend that the way to do that is to include the relevant letters in the scenario.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

Chris Mortika wrote:

Mike, you've expressed before that bringing the mission letters, while not strictly necessary, is something you expect out of a good GM. And i concur.

To be clear, I keep the letters in my box of prep materials, behind the pre-gen characters and in front of the secondary success conditions. Because if I needed to remember which to bring to a convention, it would prove impossible.

The problem isn't 8 versus 2 or 3. The problem is Which Cheliax faction letter should we use?

This isn't much of an issue for me, honestly. I know the campaign very well; I know how the seasonal arcs run, and my prepwork is already somewhat organized. But look at this situation from the perspective of a green GM running for novice players, running in, say, April or May. At that point, the player (and the GM, too, if he's on top of things) prints out the new faction letters appropriate to her character. And then plays an early Season 5 scenario, where it doesn't fit.

Again, come August, if there's another set of faction letters, it's going to be harder and harder for players to find the right letter for older scenarios. The answer, I think, has to be that the campaign make it easier for players and GMs in 2015 or 2016 to find the right faction letter for, say, Scenario 5-19. And I respectfully recommend that the way to do that is to include the relevant letters in the scenario.

Sure a good GM should have the faction letters. But since you know what scenario you are running, you don't need all 8 letters, or 16, or 24, for every scenario you run as you alluded to in your initial post. That is just untrue.

Also, if we (and probably when) we have faction letters for August, they will be aimed at Season 6, not season 5. One thing I will mention is that there are some big changes coming to factions in Season 6 that will be addressed later this year in a series of blogs.

As for including the relevant letters in the scenarios, I will chat with John and see what he thinks about it. But, as he and I look towards making the choices that are reported count and we can show actual changes to the storyline as affected by the player base (and we had one of those very meetings today about the choices made in 6-7 different scenario thus far and how that will affect the future storyline), the emphasis for players to make a significant difference on the story line is going to be in the current seasons scenarios, not in what a player chooses to do in a season 5 scenario in 2016. If your only concern is pointed towards Pcs receiving the PP from a season 5 scenario in 2016, then I understand that point, and we can address how we are going to handle it at the end of this season, and possibly include options not only in the scenarios, but also in the guide.

However, exaggerating that you are going to be required provide 16 or 24 letters for every season 5 scenario you are going to GM is a poor argument that doesn't help fix the situation.

Shadow Lodge 3/5

Michael Brock wrote:
One thing I will mention is that there are some big changes coming to factions in Season 6 that will be addressed later this year in a series of blogs.

This little sentence alone is blog post worthy!

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Chris Mortika wrote:
The problem isn't 8 versus 2 or 3. The problem is Which Cheliax faction letter should we use?

Allow me to answer that for you.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

presumably you use the same scenario printout for your first run of a scenario as you do for your 15th?

If so, you could clip the 3 faction letters in with that scenario, and file it wherever it is that you file your scenarios that you've already printed out.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My earlier jibe was an effort to lighten the themes of this thread, but I think it may have only succeeded in underselling them. Allow me to remind us of some stuff that happened not too long ago.

It was not even a year ago that we were all feeling the burden of faction missions.
The complaints were varied, but here are a few I remember.

  • They take time out of already rushed games in 4-5 hour time slots
  • They break the immersion, often having players asking the same question whenever they enter a room
  • They eat up paper, printing off unneeded sheets and lots of ink with their beautiful, but costly, calligraphy
  • They confuse new players, giving them multiple tasks that are sometimes at odds with their companions or overall goals

Etc, etc.

Not everyone shared these opinions, which has been said by some posters time and time again, but the majority felt that they were a hinderance to games. So the leadership listened, weighed some options, and responded by removing faction missions.

They instituted the new method of integrating factions, the one we're currently using. In reality, we're actually play testing this new way with the faction letters and overarching goals. Player and GM feedback is key to ensuring that this new method is a step in the right direction. I don't think it's something that's set in stone, as leadership (Mike, et. al) has shown--they respond to the community.

The one thing that hasn't worked in the past is complaining about stuff. I see the problem with having multiple letters... perhaps there's a way to structure the verbiage so that the latest letter is just a more refined version of the one before. Gradually going from general to specific, or something in that vein. In a way, the new faction letters already do this, which is a good thing. The downside is that such a format wouldn't allow for drastic change mid season within a faction that's choosing between option A or B, or something similar. So maybe more refinement is in order.

Regardless, I'm confident that this new system is going to build into one we all can appreciate. I miss the faction missions, as do a lot of my players, but we all appreciate the streamlined stories, deeper plots, and mysterious overarching goals. It's just a big change and one that's hard to weigh fairly if we spend our time focusing on the details. If we look at the big picture of how faction missions are now, and what they aim to accomplish, I think we'll all like what we see. And if we have comments and criticisms, I think it's best to offer them candidly, and check any rancor we might have at the door.

4/5

Walter Sheppard wrote:
The one thing that hasn't worked in the past is complaining about stuff.

How's that saying go?

"Do not seek to change the world. Invent a new model, one that obsoletes the old one."

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

MYTHIC TOZ wrote:
Walter Sheppard wrote:
The one thing that hasn't worked in the past is complaining about stuff.

How's that saying go?

"Do not seek to change the world. Invent a new model, one that obsoletes the old one."

Isn't that a Fuller quote? I'm sure I've read it on an engineer's desk somewhere...

Grand Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Walter Sheppard wrote:
Isn't that a Fuller quote? I'm sure I've read it on an engineer's desk somewhere...

Hell if I know. Saw it on Facebook.

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Andrew Christian wrote:
presumably you use the same scenario printout for your first run of a scenario as you do for your 15th? If so, you could clip the 3 faction letters in with that scenario, and file it wherever it is that you file your scenarios that you've already printed out.

Andrew, I'm not so concerned about myself. By necessity, I've figured out how to make certain elements of GMing PFS routine. More importantly, I was active during the first half of Season 5. I can keep track of material I have already printed out.

My concern is new GMs and players who will be playing Season 5 scenarios next year, when the correct faction letters will be much harder to find. James' website is cool, and I'm glad that we all know about the Philadelphia lodge's resource contained there. But I still advocate that the scenarios include all the non-PRD material that a GM needs.

Liberty's Edge

The key is that, in actuality, players have little or no influence upon the story arcs and/or the world of Golarion. Moreover, since the factions cannot be even remotely competitive in-game, factions are, to a large extent, meaningless and irrelevant fluff. Not to say that they can't be jolly fun for role-playing; but their usefulness and game effect is practically nil. In my opinion, these are the biggest failings of Pathfinder.

1/5

Man, I don't get this. I really don't. Do the majority of pfs players experience seasons in sequence, experiencing the narrative element as it unfolds while diligently seeking out the scenarios that highlight their faction?

I GM'd Library of the Lion two weeks ago and played in the Confirmation that same day right after. I played the first two floors of Thornkeep last weekend. This weekend I'm GM'ing Night March of Kalkamedes and playing Pallid Plague.

Is this uncommon? Am I doing it wrong? How does my faction even really come into play in this case?

Grand Lodge 4/5

Walter Sheppard wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:
Tell me again how this is simpler.
They don't have to develop 8 different missions for every scenario.
So it's simpler for the developers ;)

It's also simpler for the GM.

Now:
Primary PFS mission
Secondary PFS mission
Optional: Faction A mission
Optional: Faction B mission
Optional: Faction C mission

Then:
Primary PFS mission
Faction A mission
Faction B mission
Faction C mission
Faction D mission
Faction E mission
Faction F mission
Faction G mission
Faction H mission

Not to mention that, for some, "I do it for Taldor" is somehow great role play. For others, it is just beating a dead horse, especially when it is pulled out in every scenario, no matter what is going on.

Factions have been de-emphasized, in my experience. I cannot say how nice that is. Less time dealing, as a GM, with, "Is the macguffin here? How baout here? Maybe here?" Same from the player side, too.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

Lamontius wrote:
How does my faction even really come into play in this case?

It doesn't.

Sovereign Court 4/5

Lamontius wrote:

Man, I don't get this. I really don't. Do the majority of pfs players experience seasons in sequence, experiencing the narrative element as it unfolds while diligently seeking out the scenarios that highlight their faction?

I GM'd Library of the Lion two weeks ago and played in the Confirmation that same day right after. I played the first two floors of Thornkeep last weekend. This weekend I'm GM'ing Night March of Kalkamedes and playing Pallid Plague.

Is this uncommon? Am I doing it wrong? How does my faction even really come into play in this case?

While you may not be playing the scenarios in order, or real time, the story is progressing regardless, and it IS in real time. It's the "current events". The leadership has shown us that our actions may well be changing how things unfold. Sure, the overall events may still happen regardless, but how we play the current scenarios will nudge it along. (Do not underestimate the effect of little change. Even a small tugboat can alter the course of an ocean-liner.)

I personally choose to play newer scenarios as soon as I can so I can see what is happening, then play in older ones when convenient to get a bit of a history lesson. That way I can feel involved with the goings on, the ebb and flow of certain factions, and be on the front lines, so to speak. This is my view as it leads to the fewest complications and quibbles with how this is run.

I'm sure if Paizo wanted to, they could just retire all of seasons 0-3 instead of just changing how faction missions worked for them. But then they'd be little better than WotC and how they manage Magic events.

Mike, I'm truly excited to see what changes are in store. And I suggest everyone keep an open mind as things change with the direction of Pathfinder Society (i.e. murder-hobos-no-more!).

5/5

Of course factions are on the wane. Characters now have very few opportunities to actually serve their faction.

My Silver Crusade sorcerer, for instance, formerly had 52 faction missions available for him to perform, to get recognition for serving his faction, depending on which scenario he played. Now he has five. Assuming he's in tier.

My Osirion summoner had over 100 opportunities to get recognition for his efforts. Now he has three.

I am an avid supporter of the faction system. I feel that it gives less active players some spotlight time, and rewards players for roleplaying their faction.

I have tried to keep an open mind for what's happened in Season 5, but I when there are so few ways to get recognition for what you've done for your faction, it's easy to see why many players don't bother with it.

Personally, I'd like to see the secondary success conditions for seasons 0-4 removed, and a return to those faction missions. I can understand that creating eight new faction missions per scenario might be an issue for new scenarios, but a new player's not going to be playing season 5 exclusively, and there's no reason to deny them the opportunity for faction recognition.

It's unlikely that faction missions for seasons 0-4 would require much additional development time.

Grand Lodge 5/5 ****

Chris Mortika wrote:

.

So, instead of three pages in the back of a scenario, giving particular faction missions, I now have 16 letters to keep track of and hand out. In August, that'll be 24 pages.

Tell me again how this is simpler.

No - you only need 2 now and 3 in the future. Grand Lodge.

Sorry - couldn't resist.

On a more serious note - this is exactly the point I made now more than once. I'm now burdened to keep up with all the letters and I dislike that part a lot.

And yes - factions seem no longer to be important. Just be Grand Lodge and begone with it.

My group is not playing in order. They skip, jump, go backwards, forwards etc. the old faction missions tended to survive better over time (not all). The new missions seem moot come next year. Or do they only have a limited life span envisioned?

Edit: this was written before I noticed another page of comments. Don't like to add oil to the fire but don't like to delete it either.

Grand Lodge 5/5 ****

Michael Brock wrote:


Sure a good GM should have the faction letters. But since you know what scenario you are running, you don't need all 8 letters, or 16, or 24, for every scenario you run as you alluded to in your initial post. That is just untrue.

Mike

I think the issue Is that both you and Chris are right.

Do you need all 16/24 - no.

Is it more efficient to have all 16/24 - possible and depending on style of organisation. In my case surely it is.

I sometimes decide last minute which scenario to play. Scenarios are all downloaded on my iPad and a copy on a memory stick. Sure I can do the same for the letters. Copy them, make documents out of them, store them. But that is only efficient if I do so for all of them at once - back to the 16 needed right now. Actually I did such a compilation just 2 weeks ago. And I will update it. I will then laminate it and have it ready.
Long term it might even save me time. But you forced me to change the way to prepare. And even if this is in 'my benefit' - some people don't like it.

Look at the Windows 8 discussions as an analogue. There is a big camp that say it is better and people just should adapt. And possibly they are right.

But there are people who adapted to the issues. I was in the process to get a complete set of early season season laminated faction missions for future use. I got half way with it and missions disappeared.
Now I'm was working on faction compilations for a convention and two weeks later I need to revisit that work as well.

You are in the difficult position to make the best ruling / way forward for the majority. And I accept this. And it means in most cases I'm part of the majority and changes are in my favour. But there are times when I don't like them.

Do I need all 16 letters (or likely 24 coming August) - untrue
Is it most efficient for my style of organisation o have them all - true

Peace

Thod

3/5

My frustration is trying to line up characters of appropriate level with the right factions. I care little for the boons, but I hate that I often cannot further the goals of a faction in a scenario because none of my characters with the right faction are in level range for the scenario. Some of the mid season letters we're VERY discouraging.

I wish I had a good idea as an alternative.

Grand Lodge

Tamago wrote:
..and the GM/other players say, "Eh, it doesn't really matter that much. Just pick Grand Lodge unless you have a specific concept in mind."

Heard that exact instruction offered by a GM to four new PFS players a couple weeks back.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/5

I'm not too concerned about:
- Whether it is players or GMs should take responsibility for being aware of the faction letters
- Whether all faction letters should be handed out, or only those for the factions relevant to the scenario

What I am unsure of is which letter to make sure the players are aware of. For an early season 5 scenario, should the players be looking at the letter from the start of the season (i.e. the one that was current when the scenario was released), or the latest one from half-way through the season?

5/5 5/55/55/5

Lamontius wrote:


Is this uncommon? Am I doing it wrong? How does my faction even really come into play in this case?

Same way we do it so... yeah, you're probably doing it wrong :)

5/5

Walter Sheppard wrote:
The one thing that hasn't worked in the past is complaining about stuff.

There is, perhaps, some evidence to the contrary.

Edit: I originally said "IMO" but I'm not actually the only person to think that. So "in my opinion and that of the people who brought that to my attention, and that of several people I've discussed it with since" might be more accurate. But as disclaimers go, it's pretty unwieldy. :P

Grand Lodge 5/5

Michael Brock wrote:
Sure a good GM should have the faction letters. But since you know what scenario you are running, you don't need all 8 letters, or 16, or 24, for every scenario you run as you alluded to in your initial post. That is just untrue.

Disregarding your hints about season 6, since that doesnt really affect what Chris is asking about in the here and now, I think what he means is he needs to bring them all because he doesnt want to be giving away which factions have missions in the individual scenarios if the player doesnt already know. So if he shows up to GM a table that has 7 different factions represented by people who have no idea what is going on, he wants to be able to hand out the faction goals to all of them so they'll know what to be looking for, and not just for the players at the table who it might actually affect for that game.

Now, on to the Season 6 faction changes: Im not entirely surprised that there will be changes, though I do anxiously await the reveal of what they are. :P

Verdant Wheel 4/5

Here in Brazil, i must translate all faction letters to portuguese, as most players are not proficient in non-rule english, post on a blog so all GMs don't need to translate themselves, and them print. But i only show them to players that ask to see them. Earning the faction boons is for players interested in the factions backstory, they should sweat a little.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Seth Gibson wrote:
since that doesnt really affect what Chris is asking about in the here and now, I think what he means is he needs to bring them all because he doesnt want to be giving away which factions have missions in the individual scenarios if the player doesnt already know

That seems odd to me. Since its on the scenario blurb this is something that should be shouted from the rooftops.

Climb check: 1d20 + 3 ⇒ (20) + 3 = 23

Grand Lodge 5/5

BigNosedWolf wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:
since that doesnt really affect what Chris is asking about in the here and now, I think what he means is he needs to bring them all because he doesnt want to be giving away which factions have missions in the individual scenarios if the player doesnt already know

That seems odd to me. Since its on the scenario blurb this is something that should be shouted from the rooftops.

Climb check: 1d20 + 3 ⇒ (11) + 3 = 14

Meh. If the player bothers to look it up, thats fine with me. But its not my responsibility to make sure they know the blurb info before going in. Personally, I include that information on my group's Warhorn site, so if they want to make use of that info beign there, good for them.

Bullrush: 1d20 + 4 ⇒ (4) + 4 = 8

Oh poo. And I provoke, too. :(

Edit: Your roll is different on mine cause I messed up your text whe quoting it. :P

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Big Norse Wolf, let's take an example.

In early Season 5, the Paracountess sends a Cheliax mission letter asking its agents to analyze the weak spots of both the demonic forces and the crusaders.

In "The Stolen Heir", the party is sent to Andoran to get an army moving to the Worldwound, and there is concern about Andoran corruption. Whether there is a boon available or not, a player who values her status as a Chelaxian agent should be trying to poke around and find weaknesses in Andoran's military.

In "Elven Entanglement", the party is sent to review elven troops, and end up dealing with a lot of different demons. Wether there is a boon available or not, those should both be objects of keen interest to the Paracountess.

The player might (or might not) know that a particular scenario has a boon available for Cheliax. The character does not, and I would be disappointed in a player who remembers her PC's faction affiliation only when there's a reward for doing so.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Chris Mortika wrote:
The player might (or might not) know that a particular scenario has a boon available for Cheliax. The character does not, and I would be disappointed in a player who remembers her PC's faction affiliation only when there's a reward for doing so.

1) It can affect the players choice of character so you should tell the player.

2) While any chelaxian character is going to be dissecting/studying/ reporting on the demons they encounter, they should really only demand the dm's attention or role play if its for a faction mission or a really big part of the character. Half of the point of having fewer faction missions was to save time with everyone poking at everything in the scenario. You not only negate that but exacerbate that if you have every character tryinig to poke at ALL of their factions season goals during every adventure.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Chris Mortika wrote:

Big Norse Wolf, let's take an example.

In early Season 5, the Paracountess sends a Cheliax mission letter asking its agents to analyze the weak spots of both the demonic forces and the crusaders.

In "The Stolen Heir", the party is sent to Andoran to get an army moving to the Worldwound, and there is concern about Andoran corruption. Whether there is a boon available or not, a player who values her status as a Chelaxian agent should be trying to poke around and find weaknesses in Andoran's military.

In "Elven Entanglement", the party is sent to review elven troops, and end up dealing with a lot of different demons. Wether there is a boon available or not, those should both be objects of keen interest to the Paracountess.

The problem being that she specifically asked about the Worldwound demons and Mendevian crusaders.

The demons of the Tanglebriar and the forces of Andoran and Kyonin will not provide relevant answers.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

1 person marked this as a favorite.

In our region, the new games have been handled pretty simply. Everyone sits down, and someone asks the GMs which factions have Easter eggs in the scenario they'll be playing. Often times, another player answers (and failing that the GM), and people decide which characters to play thusly. Those who have forgotten their overall faction goals ask, and someone at the table clues them in, or directs them to the messageboards. The GM verbally confirms which factions are being played at the table, and notes which two or three are important. The game continues as normal from here.

This process takes about 3-5 minutes, and often happens while the GM is getting their things ready to start, thus taking up no actual time at all.

It's a lot less time than dealing with faction missions used to take. In addition, the faction missions are finally relevant to the metaplot of the current season. Why should we care if the Eagle Knights join our cause? Because without them, we might not be able to push back the demonic incursion that claimed Mendev. That alone makes this new way of distributing faction missions better, imo. We finally have missions with substantial weight assigned to them, where the decisions made shape the course of the adventure.

That's awesome.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

Patrick Harris @ MU wrote:
Walter Sheppard wrote:
The one thing that hasn't worked in the past is complaining about stuff.

There is, perhaps, some evidence to the contrary.

Edit: I originally said "IMO" but I'm not actually the only person to think that. So "in my opinion and that of the people who brought that to my attention, and that of several people I've discussed it with since" might be more accurate. But as disclaimers go, it's pretty unwieldy. :P

Ravingdork's initial post is definitely not what I would label as complaining, although I'm probably just using the word too specifically. Perhaps a better word would have been "whining," or something similar. Usually, things change in PFS when the leadership is presented with some straightforward, even-handed responses and requests, rather than just whinging and moaning.

So I don't know how well whinging to Mike has ever gone.

Silver Crusade 2/5

I've never received a faction letter, nor do I know where to find them. Where are they?

Sovereign Court 4/5

David Bowles wrote:
I've never received a faction letter, nor do I know where to find them. Where are they?

In the Factions sections of these forums. They're stickied there.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Sior wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
I've never received a faction letter, nor do I know where to find them. Where are they?
In the Factions sections of these forums. They're stickied there.

per your icon:

Silver Crusade Season 5 start Faction Letter.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Chris Kenney wrote:

Also, for Taldor in particular, well. . .

** spoiler omitted **

They should be doing better. Its diplomacy checks this year, which is what most taldans are good at. The last few years worth of slight of hand checks... not so much.

Grand Lodge 1/5

TOZ wrote:
I look forward to Season 6 and the abolishment of all factions.

I feel like the factions were a great idea for the early seasons that may have run their course. And, to be honest, there's now a really good in-game rational for cutting them.

When PFS started, the world was still really new and undeveloped. So having factions as a part of game play was a really good way to introduce players to the prime movers of the Inner Sea region and their goals (which also, from a marketing standpoint, kept players engaged in the campaign world and encouraged them to buy more books). In every adventure you'd (in theory) be exploring/learning about up to three different aspects of the campaign world: The Pathfinder Society itself, the region where the adventure took place, and your faction.

It was extra work for everyone involved in creating the scenarios, and ate up some page count, but it worked. Adding additional factions added more work. Removing factions and streamlining it to the current system reduced work, but also de-emphasized the role of factions.

I think the natural progression now would be to do away with the faction mechanic, and the back to back Year of the Risen Rune/Year of the Demon have provided an excellent justification for that in-game.

Factions started as a five-way shadow war for political influence over Absalom, which worked in the context of the first couple seasons when nothing "bigger" was happening.

That ended with a...

Spoiler for people who haven't played the first few seasons:
rogue venture captain assassinating a few members of the Decemvirate

Then it turned into a a ten-way internal conflict for philosophical influence over the Society that was playing out, presumably, while...

Spoiler for people who haven't played the next couple seasons:

...the new replacement members of the Decemvirate were taking office, and the surviving older members were re-examining how things had gone so badly and authorizing new factions in order to keep the Shadow Lodge issue from spiraling further out of control during such an inopportune time.

Now there's an eight-way division of factions all moving in roughly the same direction thanks to...

Spoiler for the last couple seasons:
The threat of a Runelord

...and the final crusade against the demons of the Worldwound.

We've reached a point where the goals of individual factions have moved from "political influence for my country in the most important city in the world" to "philosophical influence for my faction inside the Pathfinder Society" to "Er .. guys, we really need to stop those demons."

Two straight years of factions working together, and a leadership that is probably motivated to get its house in order, opens up a very nice door for doing away with individual factions. Existing faction leaders could be promoted or moved to new duties, or otherwise moved into situations where they can no longer really lead an internal faction. Some of the busier faction leaders could simply dissolve their factions, a la the Lantern Lodge, because they now have better things to do with their time.

It wouldn't mean the faction plot lines would stop completely. The faction leaders would still be associated with the Pathfinder Society, and would still be sending young impressionable pathfinders off to death and glory. Only now those subplots would now justify full scenarios to themselves instead of secondary goals in unrelated missions. 100% working toward the success of the scenario and 0% looking for that one skill check.

1/5

Patrick Harris @ MU wrote:
Walter Sheppard wrote:
The one thing that hasn't worked in the past is complaining about stuff.
There is, perhaps, some evidence to the contrary.

rofl

Silver Crusade 2/5

DesolateHarmony wrote:
Sior wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
I've never received a faction letter, nor do I know where to find them. Where are they?
In the Factions sections of these forums. They're stickied there.

per your icon:

Silver Crusade Season 5 start Faction Letter.

So they are labeled "status report"?

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

David Bowles wrote:
DesolateHarmony wrote:
Sior wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
I've never received a faction letter, nor do I know where to find them. Where are they?
In the Factions sections of these forums. They're stickied there.

per your icon:

Silver Crusade Season 5 start Faction Letter.

So they are labeled "status report"?

No. The Season 5 Faction briefs were publicly published HERE

The Season 5, Mid-Season updates to those faction briefs were publicly published HERE

If you have an email registered here to receive PFS emails, you would have also received the faction briefs in August and in February.

They are posted to the message boards as well.

If you want to argue semantics, then so be it. Briefs, letters, status reports, etc... They are all the same thing.

Grand Lodge 5/5

Michael Brock wrote:
If you have an email registered here to receive PFS emails, you would have also received the faction briefs in August and in February.

I remember having problems with them in August. I think it took a bit for them to all go out, but I eventually got them.

I have received 0 of them for February. :/

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aberrant Templar wrote:
Said a lot of good stuff.

I'm with both TOZ and you on this.

We don't need the factions any longer, they've run thier course. With a few exceptions I never really based my roleplaying moments off of the factions. I either based them off of nations within Golarion (some of which happen to be factions) or class/race/religion specifics (Rping a Paladin of Ragathiel). Although I have seen some players roleplay factions and the conflicts between them really well. I've also seen a some fantastic roleplaying of a dwarf cleric, complete with faux-scottish accent at Paizocon in 2012 with nary a care about factions.

I'd say lets get rid of ALL of them for Season 6 so we can all just play as pathfinder field agents.

For those that want the factions we could introduce a faction vanity:

Faction Member:(5 PP) You belong to faction, a subgroup within the society with primary interests and goals that may or may not conflict with the Decemvirate. Your primary loyalty lies with this group and although you will not outright betray the society for them, you nonetheless ensure your faction's goals are furthered when undertaking missions for the society. This loyalty in turn gives you access to special favors, items and vanities that are specific to your faction.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Definitely not. The factions provide a lot of role playing opportunity and justification for why people are in the society at all.

51 to 100 of 180 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Factions on the wane? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.