As far as I understand it, if your character has completed the first of a three part scenario, then that character must complete the remaining parts before he can participate in any other. Is this correct?
If so, what happens if you miss a part?
I read what I believe to be the appropriate part of the PFS guide, but would just like to verify this.
Edit: just realized I was on the wrong board... Trying to relocate now
|
Generally you can complete the scenarios in any order. There are a few that the boon on the last sheet indicates it needed to be in order.
If possible you should try to play them in order, but it is not necessary.
If you are talking about a sanctioned module or adventure path, then these do lock your character in until you complete them.
In the case of a module/AP the guide to roleplaying guild organized play pdf has instructions on how to deal with missing parts, generally your rewards would be lessened depending on how much missed.
Ok cool, thanks for the responses! :D
|
Kelly, players are required to play "Devil We Know" parts 1 and 2, then part 3, and then part 4.
I thought even that was technically optional these days. I know I've GMed all 4 parts, and just played whatever happened to come up, so I don't even remember which parts I've played, let alone what order, and I almost certainly played different PCs in different parts. I'd have to look it up.
|
Kelly, players are required to play "Devil We Know" parts 1 and 2, then part 3, and then part 4.
It says that in the text of the scenarios itself (though I think they're inconsistent), but those rules were lifted by forum postings long ago. Nowadays, you can play them in any order.
Here's an indirect reference. (It quotes Mark Moreland saying you don't have to play them in order, but doesn't link to the original post where he said that.)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Rules of the Swift is the fourth and final installment in the Devil
We Know series. While it is not required that players play the
previous three installments before tackling this scenario, this
scenario will make a lot more sense if played as the conclusion
to the series.
---
As it is more recent than parts 1-3 that were released before it, I believe part 4 lifted the restriction when it was released.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Again, Pirate Rob, I'm reading that text to mean that a player could play part 4 without playing parts 1 - 3 first. I'm not reading that as a lifting of the restriction that, once you play part 4, you can't then go back and play earlier installments. If you play them all, you have to play parts 1 and 2 first (in either order) then 3, and then 4.
|
|
I guess I would go with the more permissive rather than the more restrictive reading as a default. If you read what Robert quoted that way, then I suspect there are quite a number of other things you would read as implied restrictions. (F'rinstance, the wording of a Bard ability led many to believe for a long time that you couldn't take 10 on Knowledge checks. We finally got a FAQ clarifying that.)
It would be nice to have an official clarification on this matter from campaign leadership.... John, are you out there?
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
There is a post somewhere, that I found when I first ran TDWK, where Mark Moreland basically says something along the lines of "yeah, we thought that would work better than it did. Consider it optional."
As far as Lock In. Rats of Round Mountain has a psuedo lock in, in that if you want the full benefit you must play parts 1 & 2 back to back with no shopping outside the scenario even.
The timeline of TDWK actually works *better* if you play a couple of games between parts 2 3 and 4.
