Will I be allowed to use a digital character sheet in organized play?


Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild

501 to 550 of 690 << first < prev | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Florida—Melbourne aka trollbill

Bill Dunn wrote:
trollbill wrote:


Yes, but this can actually perpetuate the problem, or at least, the perceived problem.

For example:

Player A picks up Hero Lab. The program is new to him and his proficiency is low, and he may not understand certain concepts about it such as the fact it isn't a legal PFS source. So initially, he is disruptive at the table with the product. Eventually his proficiency with the product increases and his misconceptions about it are cleared up, and this no longer becomes a source of disruption. That is, until Player B then gets Hero Lab and the whole cycle starts all over again. If these cycles continue to happen periodically, it can create the perception that Hero Lab is constantly disrupting the game.

I don't see how this is any different, really, than getting a relatively new player at the table in the first place. Chances are they'll have some problems with rules if new to PF, they'll have trouble understanding the character if playing a Pregen of a class they've never worked with before. They may even have trouble distinguishing between whether d20pfsrd.org is an official source or not.

Keeping it away just means there's another barrier to people becoming proficient with it when what we should want is for each player's transition to be quick and efficient.

There isn't really a difference other than new players are a disruption we have long ago accepted and resolved ourselves to dealing with. The growing prevalence of Hero Lab is relatively new. So it can appear to be more of a problem then it probably is.


Nefreet wrote:
You clearly focused on the wrong section of my post, then.

Let me correct myself then,

As for the Player vs. GM idea, a GM that automatically assumes that A technology is inherently disruptive is equally so.

While you do not consider all technology inherently disruptive, your posts have specifically stated that you consider HeroLab to be inherently disruptive.

I disagree. Disruption is entirely the player. I have seen people be disruptive with HeroLab, but I have seen many more cases where HeroLab is not disruptive. And I've seen some cases where HeroLab reduces disruption.

If you were allowed to ban it prematurely, it would be as prejudicial as banning them for the color of their eyes. Prejudice does not belong in PFS.

Shadow Lodge ***** ⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Philo Pharynx wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
You clearly focused on the wrong section of my post, then.

Let me correct myself then,

As for the Player vs. GM idea, a GM that automatically assumes that A technology is inherently disruptive is equally so.

While you do not consider all technology inherently disruptive, your posts have specifically stated that you consider HeroLab to be inherently disruptive.

I disagree. Disruption is entirely the player. I have seen people be disruptive with HeroLab, but I have seen many more cases where HeroLab is not disruptive. And I've seen some cases where HeroLab reduces disruption.

If you were allowed to ban it prematurely, it would be as prejudicial as banning them for the color of their eyes. Prejudice does not belong in PFS.

ok, 1) its not an assumption its a conclusion. How many years is he supposed to deal with the same problem before reaching that conclusion

2) there is no, and i mean no call for an accusation as nasty and pernicious as prejudice over a computer program. NONE. They are not remotely the same thing.


Jack Brown wrote:
throws a piece of pi at BretI. Hopes to see the results at Con of the North. Doesn't expect much change.

*the thrown pi flies in an arc and hits the wall*

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
How many years is he supposed to deal with the same problem before reaching that conclusion

do I get to apply that question to the entirety of the game and community? What if every experience I've had with paladins has been disruptive? Do I get to ban them from my table? HeroLan is a tool no different than any other we use to aid us in our gaming. The program is not disruptive, the player using it is and we have said time and time again when there is a disruptive player, you deal with them directly. Address the source of the problem, not a symptom. A player who doesn't know their character, can't explain where all their numbers come from, and have to constantly ask for help or look up rules is disruptive whether they are using a digital device or a dead tree.

I really don't understand why this "argument" continues to persist after more than 500 posts.

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Because the blog hasn't hit yet.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Philo Pharynx wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
You clearly focused on the wrong section of my post, then.

Let me correct myself then,

As for the Player vs. GM idea, a GM that automatically assumes that A technology is inherently disruptive is equally so.

While you do not consider all technology inherently disruptive, your posts have specifically stated that you consider HeroLab to be inherently disruptive.

I disagree. Disruption is entirely the player. I have seen people be disruptive with HeroLab, but I have seen many more cases where HeroLab is not disruptive. And I've seen some cases where HeroLab reduces disruption.

If you were allowed to ban it prematurely, it would be as prejudicial as banning them for the color of their eyes. Prejudice does not belong in PFS.

ok, 1) its not an assumption its a conclusion. How many years is he supposed to deal with the same problem before reaching that conclusion

2) there is no, and i mean no call for an accusation as nasty and pernicious as prejudice over a computer program. NONE. They are not remotely the same thing.

If I have a computer running HeroLab in the corner of the room. It's not going to disrupt the game. The program doesn't disrupt, players disrupt. If you say that "You can't use HeroLab because it's disruptive", you are prematurely accusing the player of being disruptive based on their use of a piece of software. You are literally pre-judging them.

As I've said before, everything Nefreet has said is a potential problem. But while he claims to see it every single time, I've only seen them sporadically. I also see that often a quick statement to the player corrects the behavior. It doesn't become something that ruins the game.

Scarab Sages ***

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Philo Pharynx wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Philo Pharynx wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
You clearly focused on the wrong section of my post, then.

Let me correct myself then,

As for the Player vs. GM idea, a GM that automatically assumes that A technology is inherently disruptive is equally so.

While you do not consider all technology inherently disruptive, your posts have specifically stated that you consider HeroLab to be inherently disruptive.

I disagree. Disruption is entirely the player. I have seen people be disruptive with HeroLab, but I have seen many more cases where HeroLab is not disruptive. And I've seen some cases where HeroLab reduces disruption.

If you were allowed to ban it prematurely, it would be as prejudicial as banning them for the color of their eyes. Prejudice does not belong in PFS.

ok, 1) its not an assumption its a conclusion. How many years is he supposed to deal with the same problem before reaching that conclusion

2) there is no, and i mean no call for an accusation as nasty and pernicious as prejudice over a computer program. NONE. They are not remotely the same thing.

If I have a computer running HeroLab in the corner of the room. It's not going to disrupt the game. The program doesn't disrupt, players disrupt. If you say that "You can't use HeroLab because it's disruptive", you are prematurely accusing the player of being disruptive based on their use of a piece of software. You are literally pre-judging them.

As I've said before, everything Nefreet has said is a potential problem. But while he claims to see it every single time, I've only seen them sporadically. I also see that often a quick statement to the player corrects the behavior. It doesn't become something that ruins the game.

Clearly your anecdotal evidence of not having a problem means that his anecdotal evidence of having a problem is false and merely the result of prejudice.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

Duiker wrote:
Clearly your anecdotal evidence of not having a problem means that his anecdotal evidence of having a problem is false and merely the result of prejudice.

I disagree. The prejudice is not the anecdotal difference of opinion, it stems from the idea that anyone who uses HeroLab is automatically disruptive. To be fair, prejudice is not really the right word. The situation is more akin to stereotyping or profiling, but I think we all know what the point is.

Can HeroLab does used disruptively? Absolutely so. Is HeroLab inherently disruptive? No any moreso than other gaming aids, and certainly not moreso than a paper character sheet.

*

Bob Jonquet wrote:
Duiker wrote:
Clearly your anecdotal evidence of not having a problem means that his anecdotal evidence of having a problem is false and merely the result of prejudice.

I disagree. The prejudice is not the anecdotal difference of opinion, it stems from the idea that anyone who uses HeroLab is automatically disruptive. To be fair, prejudice is not really the right word. The situation is more akin to stereotyping or profiling, but I think we all know what the point is.

Can HeroLab does used disruptively? Absolutely so. Is HeroLab inherently disruptive? No any moreso than other gaming aids, and certainly not moreso than a paper character sheet.

Are you claiming that neither are disruptive, or that paper sheets can also be disruptive? If you mean that both can be I am curious as to when paper sheets have been disruptive. This would be the first time that I have heard such a claim, and I am curious about what happened.

Shadow Lodge ***** ⦵⦵

Bob Jonquet wrote:
Duiker wrote:
Clearly your anecdotal evidence of not having a problem means that his anecdotal evidence of having a problem is false and merely the result of prejudice.

I disagree. The prejudice is not the anecdotal difference of opinion, it stems from the idea that anyone who uses HeroLab is automatically disruptive. To be fair, prejudice is not really the right word. The situation is more akin to stereotyping or profiling, but I think we all know what the point is.

Can HeroLab does used disruptively? Absolutely so. Is HeroLab inherently disruptive? No any moreso than other gaming aids, and certainly not moreso than a paper character sheet.

]

Not all gaming aids are equally disruptive. Shooting foam d20's out of a ping pong ball launcher for example...


Duiker wrote:
Clearly your anecdotal evidence of not having a problem means that his anecdotal evidence of having a problem is false and merely the result of prejudice.

Not true. I admit that there are problem cases. I admit that there is a spectrum. Some players are disruptive with HeroLab. Some are not. I can see that a tremendously unlucky person might only have played with bad apples. But many people have said that they've seen good apples as well. I can also see that somebody who has issues with the program might be predisposed to see problems. (I am not claiming any interpretation on any specific person)

If a person were to ban the program because they assume that all HeroLab users will be disruptive, that behavior is prejudice.

As I've said before, a GM who has experienced bad behavior is well within his rights to say "Please check HeroLab against Paizo material and don't let the computer distract you from the game."

For most people, a gentle reminder will help them avoid disruptive behavior while still using their program. If they are disruptive, it's okay to ask them to use the paper sheet that Paizo rules require.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Something I'm curious about, what about Herolabs character sheets, printed, I assume you would still need an official pathfinder character sheet.

Sovereign Court *

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Can we have the obvious "no you can't blanket ban everyone using herolab" ruling now?

Shadow Lodge *****

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Look to it's coming, at first blog, on the fifth day.

Liberty's Edge ***** Venture-Agent, United Kingdom—England—Chester aka Paz

captain yesterday wrote:
I assume you would still need an official pathfinder character sheet.

This has never been a requirement; I know plenty of people that use other sheets (e.g. those from Dyslexic Studeos).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Sweet, so just a physical character sheet is all, excellent.

Thanks!

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

3 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Not all gaming aids are equally disruptive. Shooting foam d20's out of a ping pong ball launcher for example...

And as I've said before, people just love to take something someone says in the forums and extend it to the most extreme, and often obviously ridiculous, condition to muddle the generally reasonable value of original comment

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Nohwear wrote:
Are you claiming that neither are disruptive, or that paper sheets can also be disruptive? If you mean that both can be I am curious as to when paper sheets have been disruptive. This would be the first time that I have heard such a claim, and I am curious about what happened.

Paper character sheets are only disruptive if the player using it does not know the material contained therein. It is no different than HeroLab or any other digital character sheet/tracker. The point is, the PLAYER is disruptive, not he tool. As long as you know how to use it, there is no reason to take any action. Its only when a player demonstrates the are incapable of using their character tools without being a repeated disruption that the GM should decide what form of action to take against that player.

Sovereign Court *

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TOZ wrote:
Look to it's coming, at first blog, on the fifth day.

I'm hoping we get clarification on the strange "handing a tablet to the GM to satisfy additional resources and show them rules is okay, but handing it to them to show your character sheet isn't" dichotomy.

Shadow Lodge ***** ⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bob Jonquet wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Not all gaming aids are equally disruptive. Shooting foam d20's out of a ping pong ball launcher for example...
And as I've said before, people just love to take something someone says in the forums and extend it to the most extreme, and often obviously ridiculous, condition to muddle the generally reasonable value of original comment

Or to make a joke. (although now that i think about it that sounds really fun provided some sort of net setup and eye protection...)

As far as taking the argument to extremes, that's what you've done equating paladins and hero lab. Banning accessories you've found disruptive is arguably legal. Banning classes explicitly is not.

To be clear, some of my players use hero labs. My complaints against it don't go any further than old man get off my lawn grumbling but I get where nefreet is coming from.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game, Class Deck Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Bob Jonquet wrote:
Duiker wrote:
Clearly your anecdotal evidence of not having a problem means that his anecdotal evidence of having a problem is false and merely the result of prejudice.

I disagree. The prejudice is not the anecdotal difference of opinion, it stems from the idea that anyone who uses HeroLab is automatically disruptive. To be fair, prejudice is not really the right word. The situation is more akin to stereotyping or profiling, but I think we all know what the point is.

Can HeroLab does used disruptively? Absolutely so. Is HeroLab inherently disruptive? No any moreso than other gaming aids, and certainly not moreso than a paper character sheet.

]

Not all gaming aids are equally disruptive. Shooting foam d20's out of a ping pong ball launcher for example...

Is... ummm... hang on I know this one... slightly disruptive but awesome enough that the benefit outweighs the problem!!

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Nohwear wrote:
Bob Jonquet wrote:
Duiker wrote:
Clearly your anecdotal evidence of not having a problem means that his anecdotal evidence of having a problem is false and merely the result of prejudice.

I disagree. The prejudice is not the anecdotal difference of opinion, it stems from the idea that anyone who uses HeroLab is automatically disruptive. To be fair, prejudice is not really the right word. The situation is more akin to stereotyping or profiling, but I think we all know what the point is.

Can HeroLab does used disruptively? Absolutely so. Is HeroLab inherently disruptive? No any moreso than other gaming aids, and certainly not moreso than a paper character sheet.

Are you claiming that neither are disruptive, or that paper sheets can also be disruptive? If you mean that both can be I am curious as to when paper sheets have been disruptive. This would be the first time that I have heard such a claim, and I am curious about what happened.

One of the claims of HeroLab being disruptive is that people can't find their information or spend time looking for it. Same argument applies to paper character sheets. Hence, yes, they can be disruptive too.

I have seen examples of people searching their character sheets at every session I have ever played.

Another claim is that HeroLab/tablets are disruptive in that they take up valuable table space. The paper version of my character takes up more space than my tablet. Hence, paper sheets are also disruptive. I would claim more so.

I have seen examples of paper sheets taking up table space at every session I have played.

Another claim about HeroLab is that the data is sometimes incorrect and players argue that they are correct. This happens on paper sheets as well. I would claim more often and certainly with less consistency than hero lab. Hence paper sheets are also disruptive in this case.

I have seen examples of people using the wrong bonuses in every game bless was cast.

There, three ways paper sheets are also disruptive.

*

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Although that does seem to be ignoring the main problems that come up with Hero Lab. Namely people feeling empowered that the wrong text is the correct one and that Hero Lab expansions are an acceptable source. Furthermore, when a Hero Lab sheet is of on a number, they are usually off by a lot. Where as physical sheets are far more likely to only be off by a few points.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Or to make a joke. (although now that i think about it that sounds really fun provided some sort of net setup and eye protection...)

I didn't see an emoji so if it was meant as a joke, I missed that. I apologize that my response may have some off as sounding condescending. I've been conditioned to expect comments like that presented with more serious intent.

EDIT--and it certainly sounds like a good time. Something funny about the idea of someone cosplaying as an iconic running through the GenCon ballroom shooting people with over-sized foam d20s.

Grand Lodge

Players using HeroLab as their primary source is NOT a HeroLab problem.Nor is it HeroLab being disruptive. It's a player being disruptive by not understanding the rules.

The biggest arguments I've seen in sessions were rules disagreements with paper based players.

Paper and HeroLab players are equally disruptive.

Please site all your examples of "a lot" ... So far one dinosaur with an obviously high number.

Mostly its characters losing there situation bonuses )which they are just as likely to miss on paper sheets) or stacking a couple traits that shouldn't stack.

So, no, you have convinced no one that HeroLab is more disruptive than paper sheets. And, no, people playing World of Warcraft is also not HeroLab being disruptive.

Grand Lodge **** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento aka FLite

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Nohwear wrote:
Although that does seem to be ignoring the main problems that come up with Hero Lab. Namely people feeling empowered that the wrong text is the correct one and that Hero Lab expansions are an acceptable source. Furthermore, when a Hero Lab sheet is of on a number, they are usually off by a lot. Where as physical sheets are far more likely to only be off by a few points.

Further, I think people are missing the core of Nefreet's objection.

It is not "Hero Lab is always disruptive." As I read it, it is "when I am playing with people who do not know me, and Hero Lab does become disruptive, it derails the entire game for an hour, which during a 4 hour con slot running a 5 hour scenario is a risk I am no longer willing to take."

For clarity sake: This is not my position. But until people *actually* start addressing the issue Nefreet raised, and not the issue they think he raised, this thread is not going anywhere.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

Nohwear wrote:
Although that does seem to be ignoring the main problems that come up with Hero Lab. Namely people feeling empowered that the wrong text is the correct one and that Hero Lab expansions are an acceptable source. Furthermore, when a Hero Lab sheet is of on a number, they are usually off by a lot. Where as physical sheets are far more likely to only be off by a few points.

That is certainly a problem, but I have also experienced just as many people using paper CS and using other online sights as a source or arguing about having to even own everything. Again, this is not a problem exclusive to or inherent of the tool.

Grand Lodge

Jared Thaler wrote:
Nohwear wrote:
Although that does seem to be ignoring the main problems that come up with Hero Lab. Namely people feeling empowered that the wrong text is the correct one and that Hero Lab expansions are an acceptable source. Furthermore, when a Hero Lab sheet is of on a number, they are usually off by a lot. Where as physical sheets are far more likely to only be off by a few points.

Further, I think people are missing the point of Nefreet's objection.

It is not "Hero Lab is always disruptive." As I read it, it is "when I am playing with people who do not know me, and Hero Lab does become disruptive, it derails the entire game for an hour, which during a 4 hour con slot running a 5 hour scenario is a risk I am no longer willing to take."

I have never seen a derailment take more than five minutes. These again were rule disagreements from paper based players. And have never seen a "derailment" from HeroLab. ("You forgot Bless", "Oh, then that's a 15", takes what, 2 seconds?)

If I show up at a table and am told I can't use HeroLab. THAT'S a disruption and will likely take longer than 5 minutes to sort out as we try to find me a new table.

Paizo Employee Community & Digital Content Director

Locking this one for now. Tonya mentioned there would be a ruling, and I'm not sure this continued back and forth is really all that productive.

Paizo Employee ***** Organized Play Coordinator

50 people marked this as a favorite.

So the team discussed the issue. Over the course of the thread, several topics emerged as issues related to, but independent of, the original post (OP).

OP — Digital Character Sheets
The campaign recognizes the use of technology in the Pathfinder Society organized play program and the variety of tools available to players. However, a player must possess a clear and legible character sheet that they are comfortable giving to a GM to review. There is no standard character sheet format required. Regarding electronic devices, if you are not comfortable with a GM viewing (and perhaps briefly handling) the device in order to review your character information, you should consider keeping character information in a format you are willing to hand to a GM.

Related — Banning Electronic Devices at the Table
Nothing is inherently banned at the table.

Related — Distractions at the Table
No game table is completely free of distractions. However, if something (like an electronic device) creates an ongoing distraction, a GM can request that the player put it away or police his own use of the device (such as not also using a tablet computer to play a video game). If the device continues to be a distraction, the GM has the right to ban that particular item for the duration of the game.

Related — Losing a Player at a Table
Sometimes circumstances prevent a player from completing a scenario. Reasons include—but are not limited to—personal emergencies, device battery issues, venue problems, and bad timing. To mitigate the impact on the table, GMs may exercise their discretion by adjusting the scenario’s subtier to accommodate the table’s new APL, bring in the pregenerated character that most closely resembles the lost PC, or postpone the game until all players are able to complete the scenario. In the event that a character sheet is no longer accessible due to a loss of battery power, the player may play the pregenerated character and apply the scenario’s rewards to his original character. In all cases where the GM applies one of the above remedies, rewards for all players are based on the lowest subtier played during the scenario.

Sovereign Court *

Sensible rulings are sensible.

*

Thank you Tonya. Also, if I am understanding you right, you are saying that while a physical sheet is not mandatory, there are risks for not having one, correct?

Silver Crusade ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thanks Tonya and the rest of the PFS team! Will the above be added to the guide?

*

Nohwear wrote:
Thank you Tonya. Also, if I am understanding you right, you are saying that while a physical sheet is not mandatory, there are risks for not having one, correct?

It appears to me that digital character sheets are now considered legal.

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Online—PbP aka Hmm

Thank you Tonya!!!

***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The only thing I was scared of was legalizing electronic dice rollers.

EVERYTIME I have seen one used they used to cheat. I watched a guy reprogram his to not roll 1s.

Dark Archive *

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Wow, that's pretty cohesive and hits pretty much every point of contention/concern.

I particularly appreciate that last point.

Grand Lodge **** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento aka FLite

3 people marked this as a favorite.

This whole thing has been worth it for that last paragraph alone. Can that please be added to the guide? We have needed that for a long time.

Grand Lodge

Finlanderboy wrote:

The only thing I was scared of was legalizing electronic dice rollers.

EVERYTIME I have seen one used they used to cheat. I watched a guy reprogram his to not roll 1s.

If you're worried about cheaters, watch for these non-digital dice sets

I'm sure there's weighted dice as well... that'd be impossible to catch. But I'm not going to spend much of my energy worrying about cheaters... kind of hard to fathom such people, but whatever.

Thanks for the ruling Tonya!

Silver Crusade **

RyanH wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:

The only thing I was scared of was legalizing electronic dice rollers.

EVERYTIME I have seen one used they used to cheat. I watched a guy reprogram his to not roll 1s.

If you're worried about cheaters, watch for these non-digital dice sets

I'm sure there's weighted dice as well... that'd be impossible to catch. But I'm not going to spend much of my energy worrying about cheaters... kind of hard to fathom such people, but whatever.

Thanks for the ruling Tonya!

According to the reviews they are not weighted the 1 is replaced with the highest number. I have had someone try to use the loaded dice.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

Hmmm, I thought this thread was locked

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

Temporarily.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tamec wrote:


According to the reviews they are not weighted the 1 is replaced with the highest number. I have had someone try to use the loaded dice.

Read the reviews, those dice are OBVIOUSLY cheater died and they aren't "loaded". One die is all 5's and one is just 2's and 6's. The die description is completely dishonest. The first time you threw them down at a table, people would take one look at them, pull out a gun, and shoot you (kidding, they wouldn't shoot you unless you are in Texas. Still kidding. Mostly.)

Scarab Sages ***** Venture-Captain, Washington—Spokane

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Fox wrote:
Thanks Tonya and the rest of the PFS team! Will the above be added to the guide?

Provided our Guide Revision Team Leader agrees, we will be suggesting adding these rulings to the new guide.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Captain, Germany—Aschaffenburg-Würzburg

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Please not, that Tonya is talking about Character sheets and and similar items, you still need to bring your physical chronicle sheets, and ITs (you will need to be able to add and subtract items, and cross off boons).

Liberty's Edge *****

...of course, those of us who play both online and in person end up having to have both a digital and a physical copy of each sheet. So, the whole boon-crossing-off thing ends up being something that we have to manually sync later anyway.

Liberty's Edge ** Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tonya Woldridge wrote:
In the event that a character sheet is no longer accessible due to a loss of battery power, the player may play the pregenerated character and apply the scenario’s rewards to his original character. In all cases where the GM applies one of the above remedies, rewards for all players are based on the lowest subtier played during the scenario.

This last part seem unfair to the other players who, by no fault of their own, could see the rewards reduced because of another player's action, or inaction.

Silver Crusade ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
(you will need to be able to add and subtract items, and cross off boons).

All of which is possible to do digitally.

***** RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32

Gary Bush wrote:
Tonya Woldridge wrote:
In the event that a character sheet is no longer accessible due to a loss of battery power, the player may play the pregenerated character and apply the scenario’s rewards to his original character. In all cases where the GM applies one of the above remedies, rewards for all players are based on the lowest subtier played during the scenario.
This last part seem unfair to the other players who, by no fault of their own, could see the rewards reduced because of another player's action, or inaction.

If a player has a habit of not having physical backups to their digital device, and frequently having their device fail during a game. I think many players in their area will begin to avoid having them at the table.

501 to 550 of 690 << first < prev | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild / Will I be allowed to use a digital character sheet in organized play? All Messageboards