Contributor
|
| 8 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Since there have been at least /two/ /different/ posts in recent memory about these sorts of issues, I wanted to present the question in the most general sense possible, and check to see if there is (or can be) an official PFS ruling on the matter.
The Question: If Source X and Source Y both have Item Z, but each source has different "stats" or other information for Item Z, AND if a Player owns both sources, which one takes precedence?
(Obviously, if Player A only owned Source X and not Source Y, they would only use the stats from Source X. If Player B owned Source Y and not Source X, they would only use the stats from Source Y.)
Options I can see from my chair:
A - The most recent of the conflicting sources
B - The oldest of the conflicting sources
C - Submit each item on a case-by-case basis for a ruling from the PFS Team (currently John, Linda, and Tonya).
My guess would be A, and as a GM that's how I would proceed if presented with this at a table, but this is one I'd love to find/get an official ruling on, if possible.
Thanks very much for reading!
|
That would create odd corner case situations like someone who is playing a Witch, but who only owns the Advanced Players Guide, being unable to take the Extra Hex feat, since it appears in both the APG and the Advanced Class Guide. The APG version of the feat is unlikely to ever be errata'd to match the ACG one, since the changes in the ACG are to accomodate the addition of the Shaman class. The feat doesn't function any different for a Witch no matter which version is used (unless they ever multicast into Shaman, but they'd need to own the ACG to do that anyway).
i think a better approach for a general rule is to say whichever version the player chooses, but if there is an item (like the scorpion whip) with conflicting or problematic differences between versions, PFS can make the versions it doesn't want to use illegal by way of the Additional Resources. That's more or less how things work now, I think.
|
Contributor
|
That sort of is how it works now, yea, but that puts the onus on the PFS team to constantly be aware of when new versions of existing items are published, which IMHO is a little unfair to them since they have so much on their plates already.
If there was a "unless clarified in Additional Resources, always use the newer version if you own multiple sources with different stats" ruling made, it could cover all eventualities, methinks.
|
My understanding has been that this is already covered by 'additional resources'. Variants which are no longer allowed for PFS play are listed there. Often with a pointer to the new version, instructions on converting, or other notes on transitioning.
Within that frame of reference, this thread is essentially asking, 'when are things allowed by Additional Resources NOT allowed'.
|
|
The issue with basing it off what books the player owns is in proving what books the player owns. If they don't want to use the newer version, they just don't bring the book it's in (provided they aren't using anything else from that book).
How many situations like this come up? And what problems are they creating? (A link to the previous threads would be fine, if you don't want this thread to rehash old topics) I think Ultimate Equipment is the likely main culprit, right?
How do your recommended solutions handle a situation like the Dueling weapon property, which is actually two different properties, instead of an update or change to the existing one? That would then need a call out in Additional Resources to exempt it from the new rule. Granted, there are likely fewer instances like that out there.
|
|
That one is high profile enough, it should be adjusted in Additional Resources. I suspect Ultimate Equipment will be the main culprit, since it reprinted so many items. Or in this case, an item from it was reprinted.
That being said, there's probably a designer post somewhere saying the price will be adjusted in Ultimate Equipment next time it's errata'd. I can't search right now, but will later. Unless Mark is watching this thread and can confirm. (Just hoping)
|
|
I don't think Mike, the OP, wants anything but clarity. In fact, he's indicated favoring something close to what you presented (use the most recent source). I might even be ok with that, as long as the issues I mentioned are addressed. Namely that it creates issues like a class not being able to utilize basic feats designed for that class from the same book that class is published in. I don't think that's a desirable result. Neither is people buying 500gp Masks of Stony Demeanor.
There is already a relatively new Venture Officer driven process for reviewing new material to determine what should be legal. I would suggest any overlap with previous books could be addressed then. Sure, something might slip through from an obscure splat book, but I'm guessing the VOs can catch the majority of the new issues. Cleaning up the past issues is the bigger problem. But it's a onetime cleanup, and the community could help gather the information for John, Tonya, and Linda to review.
A blanket statement that older resources are illegal isn't practical when someone who owns an older resource isn't aware something exists in a newer resource, and when they check the AR, all indications are that their source is legal. It's a rule that relies on someone being aware of the issue, and if someone is aware of the issues, it can be compiled into a list of items to address and the AR updated as appropriate. Extra Hex and Extra Channel wouldn't need an update. They are, and should be, legal from all sources. The Mask, on the other hand, should have the same price in both sources.
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
This should be one of those cases where PFS shouldn't be flexible. Everyone should play by the most recent printing or errata. If that forces people to buy a source to use something then it is a newer product so it won't be hard to get.
I think this is a bad idea. Imagine the following scenario:
- I see something nice in my friend's APG and decide to buy the APG so I an use it too. My character gains a few levels/
- A new printing of UE comes out featuring that item with a small tweak. And it so happens I don't own UE. It so happens that APG covers all my needs, there's nothing in UE I particularly want.
So now there are the following options.
- Refer to a book I don't own, which is not allowed
- My character becomes illegal (even though I'm using a legal source according to Additional Resources)
- To continue playing my character as-is, I need to buy a book I don't want and didn't need before to play the exact same character
All of these are very unpleasant; they're essentially saying to the customer "whoops, you shouldn't have bought that other book from us".
This is rarely done (unchained summoner) and it's very painful. It should be done only as a last resort.
It also undermines the premise of the current Additional Resources: if AR says book X is a sufficient legal source for Z, then it really should be legal if you own X.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
Tracking grandfathering for everything would be very messy.
It's probably less cumbersome to accept that for a handful of items there's meaningful "book variation". It's not the end of the world. Every printing of bear traps is different but life goes on. If the variation is too extreme (mask of stony demeanour, scorpion whip, 3.5 ruleset items reprinted with PF rules) you can de-select that item from AR from other sources. However, that should only be done if the benefit of the change (such as perhaps significantly improved game balance) really outweighs the costs (irritation, confusion, bookkeeping).
|
Contributor
|
My understanding has been that this is already covered by 'additional resources'. Variants which are no longer allowed for PFS play are listed there. Often with a pointer to the new version, instructions on converting, or other notes on transitioning.
Within that frame of reference, this thread is essentially asking, 'when are things allowed by Additional Resources NOT allowed'.
Yea, I'd recommend you read my original post a bit more closely.
The main point of the thread is asking "when two Additional Resource-legal items have different stats, is one of them 'more correct' than the other?" (to try and say it a bit easier to understand).
Obviously, if AR says that an older one is no longer legal, that's the rule (like with Armored Kilts and Scorpion Whips). But as more books come out, the PFS team isn't going to catch every single individual item (see: Bladed Scarf, Skinwalkers, others), so having some rule in place to cover these eventualities will be helpful for everyone, regardless of who's "happy" in the end with rulings on specific items.
|
|
Yea, I'd recommend you read my original post a bit more closely.
Why? I understood it just fine the first time.
The main point of the thread is asking "when two Additional Resource-legal items have different stats, is one of them 'more correct' than the other?" (to try and say it a bit easier to understand).
Yup, that's exactly what I thought you meant... and my response is that AR already covers it. Some variants are specifically called out as no longer allowed. Others are not. Ergo, no, one of the allowed variants is not 'more correct' than the other(s). If it were, AR would say so.
But as more books come out, the PFS team isn't going to catch every single individual item (see: Bladed Scarf, Skinwalkers, others), so having some rule in place to cover these eventualities will be helpful for everyone, regardless of who's "happy" in the end with rulings on specific items.
As I said, my understanding is that the 'default' rule is 'option D'... all variants listed as allowed by AR are, in fact, allowed. They check those on a case by case basis (option C) and specifically remove any which aren't allowed.
Indeed, logically 'option D' HAS to be the default rule... because people will often not even be aware that another variation EXISTS. You can't take the later (or earlier, or whateverer) version as 'the one true option' if you don't know more than one variant exists... which happens all the time.
Basically, the rules are clear that you can use things from books you own if they are listed as approved on AR. There is no 'unless another version exists' exception. Thus, I really see this thread as suggesting a change to those rules. Unless that happens, there really isn't an issue here.
|
Obviously, if AR says that an older one is no longer legal, that's the rule (like with Armored Kilts and Scorpion Whips).For the record, the OLDER version of the scorpion whip (the one in the Adventurer's Armoury) is the one that IS legal. The version in Ultimate Equipment is not legal.
Has anyone had issues where a player bought one from UE and was forced to buy AA in order to maintain a legal character?
No, but I have a Dhampyr, and only own one of the currently legal stat sources.
If I later buy the other one, which is on my list as money comes available, do I need to change my Dhampyr's stats to match it, since it is the newer source, or do I keep the stats from the other legal source, even though there is actually in-forum errata from the Paizo developer saying those stats are wrong, and giving the "correct" stats as being identical to the ones in the newer book?Both sources are, currently, legal. The errata post is not PFS legal, since it is a general Pzizo developer post, not from the PDT or PFS folk.
