Proposal: Unchaining Phantom Phenomena and Silverhex from the Pregen Requirement


Pathfinder Society

51 to 100 of 194 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Dataphiles 3/5

Jessex wrote:

After some thought I agree that quests should be restricted to pregens.

I would renew my call for a rebuild of all the pregens to be better. While I realize the pregens are based on the iconics they could still be tweaked a little to be less awful, particularly the first level pregens which ideally should be built strictly by the rules for a 0 x.p. character so we can hand them to new players who can play them as their -1 and customize them once they learn the game.

I wouldn't mind the pre-gens getting a rebuild, but I don't think it will make a difference in this instance. I wouldn't want to play a pre-gen for the quests no matter how well built they are, because i'm still not going to be invested in that character which will affect my enjoyment of the game.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Can we make the quests a Core campaign only with special dispensation to play non core pregens. (the pregens who haven't quite got the hang of this explore report cooperate thing and don't share their spell books with anybody. One of the reasons they don't make the cut in the core campaign)

Should keep out the worst of the cookie cutter builds and remains relatively simple.

Dark Archive 4/5 5/5 *

Jeff Cook wrote:

Can we make the quests a Core campaign only with special dispensation to play non core pregens. (the pregens who haven't quite got the hang of this explore report cooperate thing and don't share their spell books with anybody. One of the reasons they don't make the cut in the core campaign)

Should keep out the worst of the cookie cutter builds and remains relatively simple.

"Awesome first level cleric you have there, but it seems that you bought a Spring Loaded Wrist Sheath, so Kyra it is for you."

"Wait, this Quest is restricted to Core, but not reported as Core, so it's not really Core..?"

Let's not add more confusion to the system.

5/5 ** RPG Superstar 2008 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Put me down in the "let people use their shiny new PCs" camp.

4/5

I admit I'm in favor of playing your own character in the quests, for the same reason I'm not a big fan of the We Be Goblins series. When I come to play Pathfinder, I'd prefer to play my own character that I've invested some thought into the background and design of, even if it's a brand new L1. This is what leads to memorable stories about characters such as the musket master who blew the head off of a minotaur with one shot to save Janeira, the dwarf magus who struck down the shadow by spending a point of arcana as the only party member with a (temporary) magic weapon in a L1 module and the 1/2 orc paladin of Arshea that seduced the ship's officer in Consortium Compact so he'd be distracted while the rest of the party did their thing.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

And pregens lead to memorable stories like Ezren using his Hand of the Apprentice to bludgeon all the undead back into the grave while the barbarian can't hit the broad side of the barn, Chuffy crawling into the toad's mouth and choking it to death as it bites him unconscious, and Mogmurch leaping off the upper deck of the boat to escape while trusting his Bouncy trait to save him.

Pregens versus PCs is just trading stories, so I don't find that a convincing argument.

Dataphiles 3/5

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:

And pregens lead to memorable stories like Ezren using his Hand of the Apprentice to bludgeon all the undead back into the grave while the barbarian can't hit the broad side of the barn, Chuffy crawling into the toad's mouth and choking it to death as it bites him unconscious, and Mogmurch leaping off the upper deck of the boat to escape while trusting his Bouncy trait to save him.

Pregens versus PCs is just trading stories, so I don't find that a convincing argument.

I have a hard time believing that you believe your own statement here. There are pre-gens available for every tier range so if you don't see the value of using your own characters over pre-gens why would you have any of your own characters? The point isn't that you can't do memorable things with pre-gens its that the pre-gens are less meaningful to a player than a character they have invested time conceptualizing and creating. Its the same reason I would never want to apply pure GM credit to a character without playing it: I enjoy creating and playing my own characters.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

Since I was speaking about the 1st level pregens, which are the only ones available to quests and 1-2 modules, I didn't see relevance in the other pregens.

Dataphiles 3/5

The relevance is the same no matter what level the character or the pre-gen. Either way you will be more invested in your own character.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

I don't find that particularly relevant to the quests.

Dataphiles 3/5

Its relevant because as previously stated people would like to play their own characters in said quests so that they can experience the storyline of the quests on a character they actually care about as opposed to place holder. Also, allowing people to play their own characters in quests is not going to impair your ability to quickly run at a convention. In fact its probably quicker for me to flip to a level 1 character in my binder than it is to determine which pre-gen a new player is going to try out. So while the GM, or other con volunteer, assists new players in quickly choosing a pre-gen players with their own characters could take a seat at the table and pull out the character they want to play. No time lost.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

I didn't find time selecting pregens to be a problem either.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

3 people marked this as a favorite.

My primary objection to letting non-pregens play Quests is their use in introducing new players to Pathfinder and to some extent PFS. I don't want characters that have instant "win" abilities to step in and ruin the experience for the new players who are relegated to spectator because their iconic build, while competent, does not have all the advanced bells and whistles that a custom built PC often does.

I am not entirely opposed to the idea of allowing custom PCs play Quests, however, I would like there to be a clause whereas the table GM and/or organizer could choose to limit to pregens only for the purposes of their event. If you want to assemble a group of custom characters and play a Quest series, great, I don't want to stand in your way. OTOH, if I am organizing a Quest table with the intention of introducing or focusing on new players, I want the ability to limit it to pregens.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Bob Jonquet wrote:

My primary objection to letting non-pregens play Quests is their use in introducing new players to Pathfinder and to some extent PFS. I don't want characters that have instant "win" abilities to step in and ruin the experience for the new players who are relegated to spectator because their iconic build, while competent, does not have all the advanced bells and whistles that a custom built PC often does.

I am not entirely opposed to the idea of allowing custom PCs play Quests, however, I would like there to be a clause whereas the table GM and/or organizer could choose to limit to pregens only for the purposes of their event. If you want to assemble a group of custom characters and play a Quest series, great, I don't want to stand in your way. OTOH, if I am organizing a Quest table with the intention of introducing or focusing on new players, I want the ability to limit it to pregens.

From an organizer's standpoint, I fully agree with the idea that there should be an ability to designate "all pre-gen" or "open PC" tables. I do that for my Learn to Play games, in a way: I allow veterans to sign up for the game, as their presence is helpful in getting new players comfortably involved, but I limit signups to 1st level PCs, despite an adventure being Tier 1-5 or 1-2.

I also kind of think that it should be assumed that organizers will do what they feel is best for their player bases and locations. Steven obviously has different ideas from me about this, and I don't think his ideas are invalid; they're just not applicable to my own situation.

One question arises from your comments, though: Are there really "instant win" PCs at 1st level? If there are, I would point at the wizard with the sleep spell or the barbarian with the Power Attack feat. I don't believe the pre-gens are exempt from those kinds of vanilla, Core Rule Book, options.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
I didn't find time selecting pregens to be a problem either.

I find the primary time loss in using PreGens over someone's created character comes in the middle of the game when players are trying to figure out what they can do and what equipment they have that might be useful in a given situation. This is not usually a problem for people who are using their own characters. Admittedly, this isn't nearly as bad for 1st level pregens as it is for 7th level pregens, but it still exists.

4/5

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:

And pregens lead to memorable stories like Ezren using his Hand of the Apprentice to bludgeon all the undead back into the grave while the barbarian can't hit the broad side of the barn, Chuffy crawling into the toad's mouth and choking it to death as it bites him unconscious, and Mogmurch leaping off the upper deck of the boat to escape while trusting his Bouncy trait to save him.

Pregens versus PCs is just trading stories, so I don't find that a convincing argument.

The difference here is that the pregen is not part of the continuity of *your* character's story, since it is instead Kyrabot#2513 or some equivalent. When I'm playing one of my characters and the NPC asks about my military experience I flip through my chronicles to tell the story of fighting in the Worldwound, and when they want to know what makes us different from the hotheaded adventurers who kill everything, I refer to the careful investigation in God's Market which was followed by an arrest rather than murdering the guy.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

Drogon wrote:
Bob Jonquet wrote:

My primary objection to letting non-pregens play Quests is their use in introducing new players to Pathfinder and to some extent PFS. I don't want characters that have instant "win" abilities to step in and ruin the experience for the new players who are relegated to spectator because their iconic build, while competent, does not have all the advanced bells and whistles that a custom built PC often does.

I am not entirely opposed to the idea of allowing custom PCs play Quests, however, I would like there to be a clause whereas the table GM and/or organizer could choose to limit to pregens only for the purposes of their event. If you want to assemble a group of custom characters and play a Quest series, great, I don't want to stand in your way. OTOH, if I am organizing a Quest table with the intention of introducing or focusing on new players, I want the ability to limit it to pregens.

From an organizer's standpoint, I fully agree with the idea that there should be an ability to designate "all pre-gen" or "open PC" tables. I do that for my Learn to Play games, in a way: I allow veterans to sign up for the game, as their presence is helpful in getting new players comfortably involved, but I limit signups to 1st level PCs, despite an adventure being Tier 1-5 or 1-2.

I also kind of think that it should be assumed that organizers will do what they feel is best for their player bases and locations. Steven obviously has different ideas from me about this, and I don't think his ideas are invalid; they're just not applicable to my own situation.

One question arises from your comments, though: Are there really "instant win" PCs at 1st level? If there are, I would point at the wizard with the sleep spell or the barbarian with the Power Attack feat. I don't believe the pre-gens are exempt from those kinds of vanilla, Core Rule Book, options.

Having run the Phantom Phenomena at GenCon 4 times, I can vouch for the fact that the Warpriest, Barbarian and Boodrager pregens definitely have a tendency to overpower the other builds at the table at 1st level. And it seems the power gamers familiar with these pregens know that and gravitate towards them. So it seems the problem of overpowering the table exists already whether you use the pregens or not.

Also, if we do allow the option to exist to play your own builds instead of pregens, I would suggest that the 'default' for playing these is PREGEN ONLY, with non-pregens being allowed only by specific permission of the event organizer (and preferably announced ahead of time). This might help alleviate some of the confusion that might be associated with this.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
RealAlchemy wrote:
The difference here is that the pregen is not part of the continuity of *your* character's story...

Nor are the quests supposed to be, in my view.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
RealAlchemy wrote:
The difference here is that the pregen is not part of the continuity of *your* character's story...
Nor are the quests supposed to be, in my view.

The entire point of this request is to expand the Quests from what they were supposed to be to something more expansive. We all know what the Quests were meant to be. That doesn't mean that's all they ever can be.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

trollbill wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
RealAlchemy wrote:
The difference here is that the pregen is not part of the continuity of *your* character's story...
Nor are the quests supposed to be, in my view.
The entire point of this request is to expand the Quests from what they were supposed to be to something more expansive. We all know what the Quests were meant to be. That doesn't mean that's all they ever can be.

Agreed.

More playing options are always good. Especially if these become 1st level "evergreen" options. I'd really like to have a time-flexible lineup that I can throw onto my schedule that would be attractive to new players and veterans alike.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
trollbill wrote:
The entire point of this request is to expand the Quests from what they were supposed to be to something more expansive. We all know what the Quests were meant to be. That doesn't mean that's all they ever can be.

And if it isn't clear by now, I disagree with the idea of expanding them.


Drogon wrote:

I would like the Quest line available to players of any type of PC for one reason, above all other reasons: I want to see a lineup of adventures that are capable of filling 6 to 8 nights, once per week, over the course of a couple months, with "drop in and play" style games available for all who care to show up.

To be clear about what I want, I will point a finger at the D&D Adventurers' League Encounters program. This program was built on the idea of "one encounter per session," which very much feels like the Quest style of adventure.

What works for Adventurer's League works because 5th Edition is a considerably rules light game compared to Pathfinder.

The existing Quest system is designed to get newbies up and running quickly into a game. There are enough first level modules for players to run their own characters.

And speaking as someone who has to run these things in time limited situations, I vote a big NO to this idea.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
trollbill wrote:
The entire point of this request is to expand the Quests from what they were supposed to be to something more expansive. We all know what the Quests were meant to be. That doesn't mean that's all they ever can be.
And if it isn't clear by now, I disagree with the idea of expanding them.

Oh, that is perfectly clear. :-)

I don't really expect to change you mind.

I just wish you would stick with more valid arguments like the confusion it might cause rather than more questionable arguments like "don't change it because what it is is what it was meant to be" or "playing PreGens is just as rewarding as playing your own character." In particular, I don't think anyone is buying the latter argument.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

I didn't make those arguments. I only disagreed with the arguments presented.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
trollbill wrote:
The entire point of this request is to expand the Quests from what they were supposed to be to something more expansive. We all know what the Quests were meant to be. That doesn't mean that's all they ever can be.
And if it isn't clear by now, I disagree with the idea of expanding them.

Nope, it's pretty clear. I'm not sure why people haven't learned that poking you repeatedly tends to not have the effect of making you quiet down. (-;

I am curious about a couple things, because it seems you have a pretty solid opinion about these adventures. I have not read or played them, just so you know.

1 - Are the stories good? Do they work as a "linked run" of encounters? Or are they disjointed "delves" along the lines of the Beginner Box Bash encounters?

2 - Would your opinion change if there were more of these? Meaning, if Paizo were to produce a half-dozen or so of these each season, would you still want them set aside for convention purposes only?

Edit: Thought of a third question - If there were Quests that were higher level than 1st, would that have an impact on your opinion?

Grand Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

I'll get back to you after today's gameday Drogon. Just want to make sure you know I'm not ignoring you.

4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ****

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Bob Jonquet wrote:

My primary objection to letting non-pregens play Quests is their use in introducing new players to Pathfinder and to some extent PFS. I don't want characters that have instant "win" abilities to step in and ruin the experience for the new players who are relegated to spectator because their iconic build, while competent, does not have all the advanced bells and whistles that a custom built PC often does.

...

Kyra in The Phantom Phenomena in the Harrow segment.

I have run this segment dozens of times, and Kyra ends it in less time then it takes me to set it up.

So the insta-Win concern means we need to ban Kyra (Pregen) from the Phantom Phenomena?

I have run both Quest sets enough that I can tell you, with the right Pregens almost all of the segments can be insta-Win experiences.

~

I have seen no good argument to keep the 6-part Quests restricted to Pregen only.

I agree with Bob, that should they be opened to PFS Characters, there should still be an option to restrict at the Organizer level to simplify Conventions and such...

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
There are enough first level modules for players to run their own characters.

If there are 'enough' first level modules for players to run their own characters, then why does this thread exist asking for more? Clearly, not everyone agrees with you that there are enough.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Drogon wrote:

I would like the Quest line available to players of any type of PC for one reason, above all other reasons: I want to see a lineup of adventures that are capable of filling 6 to 8 nights, once per week, over the course of a couple months, with "drop in and play" style games available for all who care to show up.

To be clear about what I want, I will point a finger at the D&D Adventurers' League Encounters program. This program was built on the idea of "one encounter per session," which very much feels like the Quest style of adventure.

What works for Adventurer's League works because 5th Edition is a considerably rules light game compared to Pathfinder.

Encounters was first set up when 4th Edition was still going strong. That system was not even CLOSE to being "rules light."

4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ****

I feel the reason people want the 6-part Quests opened is more for the themes then the total number of 1st level options...

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

Drogon wrote:


1 - Are the stories good? Do they work as a "linked run" of encounters? Or are they disjointed "delves" along the lines of the Beginner Box Bash encounters?

I can't vouch for The Silver Hex Chronicles as I have only ever played part of that because, guess what, I couldn't play it with my own character so I wasn't that interested. Having run Phantom Phenomena several times I can definitely say it has a good story that is connected through the quest segments and one of the segments in particular is really the finale and I would not recommend playing it until you have played the others. This includes the fact that previous segments give you both info and items that can help you with the finale. The others can be played in any order, but work best as a contiguous story if played in order.

To be honest, one of the reasons I would like to see the change is because I love the story for The Phantom Phenomena (there are some really great role-playing elements in it) and I would love to run it for local groups, but there just isn't much interest because people don't want to play pregens.

4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ****

Silverhex is more 6 disparate segments with a tentative link.

Phantom Phenomena are a solid 6-part story.

Grand Lodge 2/5

Bob Jonquet wrote:
My primary objection to letting non-pregens play Quests is their use in introducing new players to Pathfinder and to some extent PFS. I don't want characters that have instant "win" abilities to step in and ruin the experience for the new players who are relegated to spectator because their iconic build, while competent, does not have all the advanced bells and whistles that a custom built PC often does.

You mean like the pregen bloodrager already does in any combat in one of these since each section is a new day and he can destroy anything in one hit?

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Drogon wrote:

I am curious about a couple things, because it seems you have a pretty solid opinion about these adventures. I have not read or played them, just so you know.

1 - Are the stories good? Do they work as a "linked run" of encounters? Or are they disjointed "delves" along the lines of the Beginner Box Bash encounters?

2 - Would your opinion change if there were more of these? Meaning, if Paizo were to produce a half-dozen or so of these each season, would you still want them set aside for convention purposes only?

Edit: Thought of a third question - If there were Quests that were higher level than 1st, would that have an impact on your opinion?

1. Silverhex is a rather disjointed series. This is a strength in that you can play them in any order without any concern for having poor flow. Phantom Phenomena has a tighter story that as has been mentioned needs to be played with the last quest as the capstone. Both are decent stories with memorable NPCs driving them. But they are not as good as a full scenario, naturally.

2. More of the same would not change my opinion. These quests are pushovers with just the pregens. Unless that problem were addressed, it doesn't matter if they scrap the next one and cease publishing them completely. We don't need full on PCs waltzing through this for free credit.

3. Since we already have one such quest, I don't imagine it would. Urge to Evolve isn't quite the same, but it is similar enough despite my unfamiliarity with it.

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Drogon wrote:

I would like the Quest line available to players of any type of PC for one reason, above all other reasons: I want to see a lineup of adventures that are capable of filling 6 to 8 nights, once per week, over the course of a couple months, with "drop in and play" style games available for all who care to show up.

To be clear about what I want, I will point a finger at the D&D Adventurers' League Encounters program. This program was built on the idea of "one encounter per session," which very much feels like the Quest style of adventure.

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:

What works for Adventurer's League works because 5th Edition is a considerably rules light game compared to Pathfinder.

The existing Quest system is designed to get newbies up and running quickly into a game. There are enough first level modules for players to run their own characters.

And speaking as someone who has to run these things in time limited situations, I vote a big NO to this idea.

Drahliana, I would suggest the following solution:

1) If you want to play your own PC, it needs to be a Core Campaign PC. For this particular purpose, players can mix Core Pcs and non-core Iconics.

2) If you play anything besides a Quest, you can no longer play through the Quest with that PC. So, at this point, you could play through both series with the same PC and end up with 2 XP.

Sovereign Court 4/5 * Organized Play Coordinator

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Read through the above and am contemplating the different ideas presented.

1/5 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I had a very huge mental disconnect trying to apply the 'pregen credit' to a L1 PC after playing Silverhex.

The character that the credit was being applied towards was *nothing* like the character I played, and I found it a little bit difficult for the remainder of 1st level to 'make it work' right.

My experience can't be the only one like that?

5/5 5/55/55/5

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


I had a very huge mental disconnect trying to apply the 'pregen credit' to a L1 PC after playing Silverhex.

The character that the credit was being applied towards was *nothing* like the character I played, and I found it a little bit difficult for the remainder of 1st level to 'make it work' right.

My experience can't be the only one like that?

Wait, you wanted a consistent interconnected narrative for a pfs character? Are you sure you didn't eat some bad roadkill?

4/5 5/55/55/5 *** Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Minneapolis

Thanks for considering it Tonya.

It seems to me that most of the reasons for restricting tables to Pre-Gen isn't really specific to Quests. The same things that make it a good idea at a convention would also apply to playing through a module or scenario. It would have all the same advantages for those organizing and GMing the events that want that sort of thing.

As I understand the rules (corrections welcome), PFS would not currently allow you to say something like "Pre-Gen only" for a public event running something like The Confirmation.

Would the rules be any more complicated if instead of the current restriction on all quests, it were "Hosts are allowed to restrict approved material to only allow pre-generated characters where normally any legal character is allowed. This must be clearly announced at the time that the event is published."

Probably a better way to phrase that...but I think it gets the idea across.

4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ****

Or simply make the allowance part of the Quest rules found in the Quest PDF itself...

5/5 5/55/55/5

Without being available for peoples own characters these things aren't even on our radar.

1/5 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:


Wait, you wanted a consistent interconnected narrative for a pfs character? Are you sure you didn't eat some bad roadkill?

Not only am I sure I did not eat car murder-hobo'd fluffies, I am also sure that it is possible to make this happen if one is wise.

Silver Crusade 4/5 5/55/55/5

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

Came up again for me--I've got a venue who's interested in hosting PFS. They get people coming in all the time and asking about it! But the combination of busy weekends and no chairs means that the best option is probably to get quests running in the weeknight evenings for an hour or two at a time. But... the people who are coming in and asking about PFS are people who already have characters and want to play them. So even the quests aren't a good fit.

We probably won't be doing much, if any, PFS at this venue as a result. And no, the quests aren't a perfect solution--they're all low-level and there's not very many of them even if they were opened up to non-pregens. It's just... yet another reason why PFS probably won't work at this place, and that kind of makes me sad.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 **** Venture-Captain, Minnesota

Thank you for considering my proposal, Tonya!

Hmm

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, Texas—Houston

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Without being available for peoples own characters these things aren't even on our radar.

That's pretty much the reaction I've gotten from players locally. They want to play characters of their own creation.

Scarab Sages 4/5

Kelly Youngblood wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Without being available for peoples own characters these things aren't even on our radar.
That's pretty much the reaction I've gotten from players locally. They want to play characters of their own creation.

This has mostly been the case in my area as well. The quests almost exclusively run at conventions, and many of the players who have been around for a while have never played them. I have played Silverhex, but I did so online. We just don't have enough new players week to week to ever offer a table of the quests at the game store, and there hasn't even been interest in using them to fill in time after a short game.

Like several others here, I don't see how allowing somebody's own character affects how Quests can be used at conventions. Just label the sign ups pre-gen only if that's what you want for the convention slot.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

And we all know that players read the signups, like my player that brought a lucky 7 Int/Wis/Cha fighter to Bid for Alabastrine.

3/5 5/5

Ferious Thune wrote:
Kelly Youngblood wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Without being available for peoples own characters these things aren't even on our radar.
That's pretty much the reaction I've gotten from players locally. They want to play characters of their own creation.

This has mostly been the case in my area as well. The quests almost exclusively run at conventions, and many of the players who have been around for a while have never played them. I have played Silverhex, but I did so online. We just don't have enough new players week to week to ever offer a table of the quests at the game store, and there hasn't even been interest in using them to fill in time after a short game.

Like several others here, I don't see how allowing somebody's own character affects how Quests can be used at conventions. Just label the sign ups pre-gen only if that's what you want for the convention slot.

Same sentiment from my group.

They've just learnt the system, have worked out their characters and the rules that most frequently pertain to their characters, and are eager to play their characters.

Limiting the quests to pregens means that my players have no interest whatsoever in playing them. On the other hand, if they got to play their characters in a series of short encounters and see how they hold up, they'd be all for it.

3/5 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TOZ wrote:
And we all know that players read the signups, like my player that brought a lucky 7 Int/Wis/Cha fighter to Bid for Alabastrine.

I feel like there should a good story to tell from this. XD

5/5 5/55/55/5

TOZ wrote:
And we all know that players read the signups, like my player that brought a lucky 7 Int/Wis/Cha fighter to Bid for Alabastrine.

art imitates life?

51 to 100 of 194 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Proposal: Unchaining Phantom Phenomena and Silverhex from the Pregen Requirement All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.