Can pregen deaths still be reassigned?

[Pink Dragon]

Andrew Christian wrote:

How would people feel if it were changed to...

To assist a new player with a character 3rd level or less that may have significant trouble paying the gold or become highly nerfed due to lack of equipment and nigh unplayable, that at the GMs discretion you can reapply to an unused number.

I still don't like the rule change on principle, and although your proposal helps mitigate the rule for new players, it does not address the situation I outlined in this post

[Andrew Christian]

GM Lamplighter wrote:

Is there a reason that "GM Discretion" needs to be involved?

I suggest setting a threshold based on potential wealth (not "actual" wealth, since some people spend money on non-permanent items, don't maximize day jobs, etc.)

Something like "If the Chronicle is assigned to a PC of level 3 or lower and the pre-gen dies, the character credit may be reassigned to a new character number."

That way, everyone knows for sure what the situation is before starting the game.

The reason this rule was changed was for folks who abused the previous rule and caused deaths or other losses for others. That activity needed to be stopped, as it was quite prevalent in some areas.

But if you add the ability back in, even on a limited basis, you need the GM to have the authority to an a player is not allowed to swap numbers if they are being a jerk with thier pregen.

[thunderspirit]

Andrew Christian wrote:

Jared Thaler wrote:

Andrew Christian wrote:

How would people feel if it were changed to...

To assist a new player with a character 3rd level or less that may have significant trouble paying the gold or become highly nerfed due to lack of equipment and nigh unplayable, that at the GMs discretion you can reapply to an unused number.

I like the concept, but would want to word smith it a bit.

Absolutely. This was just a 30 second toss out from my phone while playing in convoy Con as driving back from Gen Con

I agree that conceptually, this addresses the new player concerns (which, to be honest, are my only real concerns with the established policy at all).

Ideally, I would limit it to new players only, rather than any under-level-3 PC. I'm not entirely sure how to do that, nor whether it's the right approach; just throwing it into the hopper for debate.

[Andrew Christian]

Pink Dragon wrote:

Andrew Christian wrote:

How would people feel if it were changed to...

To assist a new player with a character 3rd level or less that may have significant trouble paying the gold or become highly nerfed due to lack of equipment and nigh unplayable, that at the GMs discretion you can reapply to an unused number.

I still don't like the rule change on principle, and although your proposal helps mitigate the rule for new players, it does not address the situation I outlined in this post

The other reason they changed the rule, was to purposefully add the risk back into the game.

There is a way to mitigate the example you gave. If your area uses a strict RSVP system, then the guy doesn't drive an hour for a spot where this risk could happen. If the organizers make sure they offer both high and low tier games and players make sure to have a few tier options, and the player pays attention and signs up early, they can make sure to play thier character instead of a pregen.

This does present an issue with walking, but an organizer can leave a table open for that with a backup GM if necessary.

But this problem largely goes away if the region stops running things on the day of, and organizes things a few weeks out.

[GM Lamplighter]

Andrew covered the sign-up solution I was going to propose, but I also know a lot of Lodges can't for whatever reason yet make the leap to having multiple tables of different tiers or sign-up only games. The details of the arrangement with the venue is only partially under a Lodge's control, after all.

I'm all for the risk issue, and for preventing abuse or unrealistic play with a pregen. At the same time, it can add a lot more risk than if the player could play their own character: for example, when a low-level PC is assigned to a 7-11 pregen, or when anyone plays Harsk*.

Remember that, by and large, the players most likely to have problems with the new rules are new players in new Lodges - in other words, the exact folks we should be trying to encourage and support. Losing a level 3 PC hurts, and it hurts worse if it only happened because you were the nice person who offered to play a pregen so everyone else could play/run what they wanted. That teaches new players to be selfish.

* disclaimer: I love the Harsk pregen, but I know many consider him to be less-than-optimal.

[Jayson MF Kip]

I expect most new players to be okay with the rules as they are, because, you know, they are the rules.

Maybe we can spend, say, a week before we decide this is a bad rule change?

[Pink Dragon]

Andrew Christian wrote:

The reason this rule was changed was for folks who abused the previous rule and caused deaths or other losses for others.

The part in bold is actually the first cogent reason I have seen for the rule change. However, is it so widespread that it required a change to the Guide, or could not the VO's at the various Lodges simply put a stop to it? A generalized punitive action is a pretty big sledgehammer for a local problem.

[LoPan666]

I can't say that I have ever seen the situation that this rule change was made to address (reckless play with pregens because there were no consequences). I am much more concerned that this new rule will discourage new players for the reasons outlined by other posters. If some players are being disruptive because there are no consequences, they can continue to suffer no consequences simply by assigning credit to a new placeholder number at the start of the game, resulting in no net positive effect. I agree with those who have said that the better way to deal with disruptive players is by addressing their behavior directly.

[TimD]

Andrew Christian wrote:

But this problem largely goes away if the region stops running things on the day of, and organizes things a few weeks out.

I've seen things organized months out that this "solution" would only hinder rather than aid. Most people I see sign up aren't very specific in what they are playing or what level and the further out the sign-ups the greater chance that things will be changed by the day of.

The real problem is that the "solution" actually doesn't stop the problem (and I'm assuming you correctly identified the problem the change was meant to address) - players who choose to be disruptive can still just assign the character to a random # and in the meantime those who used the rule in a non-disruptive way have no real alternatives other than electing not to play. I have enough reason to choose not to play, I was really not looking for more (and this is coming from someone who almost never plays pregens).

[Chess Pwn]

Andrew Christian wrote:

GM Lamplighter wrote:

Is there a reason that "GM Discretion" needs to be involved?

I suggest setting a threshold based on potential wealth (not "actual" wealth, since some people spend money on non-permanent items, don't maximize day jobs, etc.)

Something like "If the Chronicle is assigned to a PC of level 3 or lower and the pre-gen dies, the character credit may be reassigned to a new character number."

That way, everyone knows for sure what the situation is before starting the game.

The reason this rule was changed was for folks who abused the previous rule and caused deaths or other losses for others. That activity needed to be stopped, as it was quite prevalent in some areas.

But if you add the ability back in, even on a limited basis, you need the GM to have the authority to an a player is not allowed to swap numbers if they are being a jerk with their pregen.

I think it was shown that this could increase the potential for jerks pregen play and doesn't really do anything to prevent Jerk pregen play.

So instead of changing the pregen rule to try and stop jerks that it doesn't stop, how about we use the already existing rule of don't be a jerk/the expounded rule explaining how to not be a jerk to stop people from being jerks?

[Chris Mortika]

Andy, respectfully, allowing a PC to live by "GM's discretion" would be a mess. If I, as the table GM, don't let a player switch the character that he assigned at the beginning of the session, how will you decide when the player appeals that decision to you?

Would it make a difference if you know the player, and he's never been a jerk at *your* table?

--

A "Leeroy Jenkins" player can just assign the Chronicle to "xxxx-15", who doesn't yet exist, and kill off the party.

So, this rule does nothing to prevent a player from screwing around with a pre-gen and kill the party,. At best, it might warn the GM that the player is likely to do that, if the player assigns the credit to xxxxxx-99, Deady McDeadguy.

--

Question for the workhorse Venture Officers: let's say that I play a pre-gen and assign it to my xxxxxx-05 PC, and then that pre-gen dies, and I leave it dead -- and then, when it comes time to report, that pre-gen is illegal on that PC (maybe it's too high a level or maybe it's already died).

What happens? Well, probably nothing.

Or, the pre-gen lived! But, upon reporting, you find out that I assigned the Chronicle to xxxxxx-05, which is an illegal target, same as above. When someone asks me, I say, "My bad. I meant xxxxxx-07."

What happens? Well, I get to add the Chronicle sheet to my xxxxxx-07 PC.

This rule does nothing to impose risk.

--

A couple weeks ago, if I was playing a 4th-level pre-gen who died, that was it; I would never be able to play that scenario with any of my characters (GM star replays, Core campaign, yes yes...) and I wouldn't be able to get the loot or the boons.

Now, I can use the gold and prestige on my target character to bring that pre-gen back to life and get the rewards for the adventure. I might even be able to pressure the other players into paying into that recovery.

This rule removes a risk that was already present.

[Andrew Christian]

I'm not sure I understand Chris. The previous rule allowed you to:

A) reassign credit to an unused number.

B) use pregen and character gold/items to resolve the condition.

You currently cannot do A, but can do B.

[GM Lamplighter]

Chris is saying that there are lots of ways for people to get around this rule if they're really trying to abuse the system. That's what people like that do. This doesn't meaningfully reduce that risk.

It does meaningfully increase the risk that new players lose their own characters because they play a pre-gen, though, whether it's because they have to or because they are being helpful to making the table work.

[pH unbalanced]

Seriously, Griefers gonna grief.

Here's what I don't understand. If you have a problem player who is purposefully playing pregens in such a way that the party TPKs, why would you ever seat this player?

After the second time it happened, I can't imagine other players being willing to play at the same table. This rule will do nothing to prevent that, and the organizer is still going to have to have the same awkward conversation.

I say this as someone not particularly concerned about the rule, outside of pregen-only scenarios. I just don't think it will fix this problem.

[DM Livgin]

What if, now wait for it... The FAQ and the Season 8 Guide are both current and written as intended...

That would only mean that if a pregen dies you still have the option of assigning it to a new number. Or if you really wanted that chronicle sheet, there are some minimum costs that your PC must pay.

[andreww]

DM Livgin wrote:

What if, now wait for it... The FAQ and the Season 8 Guide are both current and written as intended...

That would only mean that if a pregen dies you still have the option of assigning it to a new number. Or if you really wanted that chronicle sheet, there are some minimum costs that your PC must pay.

The Gencon Magic 8 Ball suggests the FAQ will be removed.

Also Andrew C was leading the guide revision team.

[DM Livgin]

andreww wrote:

DM Livgin wrote:

What if, now wait for it... The FAQ and the Season 8 Guide are both current and written as intended...

That would only mean that if a pregen dies you still have the option of assigning it to a new number. Or if you really wanted that chronicle sheet, there are some minimum costs that your PC must pay.

The Gencon Magic 8 Ball suggests the FAQ will be removed.

Also Andrew C was leading the guide revision team.

Sometimes you roll a 1 on your rules-bluff check. Sometimes your bluff auto-fails cause the audience knows better...

[nosig]

DM Livgin wrote:

andreww wrote:

DM Livgin wrote:

What if, now wait for it... The FAQ and the Season 8 Guide are both current and written as intended...

That would only mean that if a pregen dies you still have the option of assigning it to a new number. Or if you really wanted that chronicle sheet, there are some minimum costs that your PC must pay.

The Gencon Magic 8 Ball suggests the FAQ will be removed.

Also Andrew C was leading the guide revision team.

Sometimes you roll a 1 on your rules-bluff check. Sometimes your bluff auto-fails cause the audience knows better...

sense motive- take 10 - (-2 low wisdom & no ranks) = 8. Heck, I believed the bluff!

[Michael Hallet]

pH unbalanced wrote:

Seriously, Griefers gonna grief.

Here's what I don't understand. If you have a problem player who is purposefully playing pregens in such a way that the party TPKs, why would you ever seat this player?

Because some stores will make it a rule that if you use their space to play you have to seat anyone who shows up as long as there is room.

I know one group who ended up changing venues for just this reason. There was a disruptive player that the organizer tried to ban and the store said let him play or find somewhere else for the game.

That's fine if you have multiple places nearby to play, but what if you don't?

[nosig]

looks to me like this rule change was intended to discourage people from playing the Pregens.

Looks like it is going to work. I know I'll most likely not play any any more. I can always just sit a game out.

[andreww]

nosig wrote:

looks to me like this rule change was intended to discourage people from playing the Pregens.

Looks like it is going to work. I know I'll most likely not play any any more. I can always just sit a game out.

With this rule in place I cannot imagine I would apply it to anything other than a new character number. This goes double for stuff like Serpents Rise, Serpents Ire, True Dragons etc.

[nosig]

Michael Hallet wrote:

pH unbalanced wrote:

Seriously, Griefers gonna grief.

Here's what I don't understand. If you have a problem player who is purposefully playing pregens in such a way that the party TPKs, why would you ever seat this player?

Because some stores will make it a rule that if you use their space to play you have to seat anyone who shows up as long as there is room.

I know one group who ended up changing venues for just this reason. There was a disruptive player that the organizer tried to ban and the store said let him play or find somewhere else for the game.

That's fine if you have multiple places nearby to play, but what if you don't?

I wonder how many people the player has been driving away?

Edit: I feel the need to expand on this with personal experience.
When I first moved to the city I currently live in, I was very much into PFS (Season 2-3). My wife and I found a store nearby and started going there... and in about 6 months found that most of the players showing up at the store on game nights were people we really didn't want to play with. All the "fun" people had moved on (home games? or ... someplace...). So we "shopped around" and found another store - and found some of the people we had seen when we started at the first store. It took a couple years for the "socially challenged persons" to migrate to the new store. And so we took a group of friends out of that store and started playing in our home (at one point we had 3 tables going at once on a game night in my home). In time, it got to be a bit of work to keep arranging it at home, and we've cut back... but now we'd started looking again, and found a third store.

But you know what? if that first store had "policed" it better, and pushed out the disruptive players, we would likely still be going there.

Or maybe not...

[nosig]

andreww wrote:

nosig wrote:

looks to me like this rule change was intended to discourage people from playing the Pregens.

Looks like it is going to work. I know I'll most likely not play any any more. I can always just sit a game out.

With this rule in place I cannot imagine I would apply it to anything other than a new character number. This goes double for stuff like Serpents Rise, Serpents Ire, True Dragons etc.

yeah. I'm prepping Serpents Ire now, due to run it 3 times at a Con in the middle of next month. I've already had two of my friends back out of the one of the sessions due to this rule - and my wife is going to assign her game of it to a new first level (not even one game)...

[pauljathome]

Pink Dragon wrote:

Andrew Christian wrote:

The reason this rule was changed was for folks who abused the previous rule and caused deaths or other losses for others.

The part in bold is actually the first cogent reason I have seen for the rule change. However, is it so widespread that it required a change to the Guide, or could not the VO's at the various Lodges simply put a stop to it? A generalized punitive action is a pretty big sledgehammer for a local problem.

I'm repeating what I've said before, but I just don't see how the rule change addresses the issue. Those players just assign the credit to a 1st level char and continue to play like jerks

[pH unbalanced]

Michael Hallet wrote:

pH unbalanced wrote:

Seriously, Griefers gonna grief.

Here's what I don't understand. If you have a problem player who is purposefully playing pregens in such a way that the party TPKs, why would you ever seat this player?

Because some stores will make it a rule that if you use their space to play you have to seat anyone who shows up as long as there is room.

I know one group who ended up changing venues for just this reason. There was a disruptive player that the organizer tried to ban and the store said let him play or find somewhere else for the game.

That's fine if you have multiple places nearby to play, but what if you don't?

Fair enough. Most store owners I've known are savvier than that with regards to letting one person drive off potential customers, but on the other hand a lot of places store owners don't see PFS players as potential customers.

(Reminder: Please actually buy something from your FLGS on game day, if you can. Even a soda builds goodwill.)

[nosig]

pH unbalanced wrote:

Michael Hallet wrote:

pH unbalanced wrote:

Seriously, Griefers gonna grief.

Here's what I don't understand. If you have a problem player who is purposefully playing pregens in such a way that the party TPKs, why would you ever seat this player?

Because some stores will make it a rule that if you use their space to play you have to seat anyone who shows up as long as there is room.

I know one group who ended up changing venues for just this reason. There was a disruptive player that the organizer tried to ban and the store said let him play or find somewhere else for the game.

That's fine if you have multiple places nearby to play, but what if you don't?

Fair enough. Most store owners I've known are savvier than that with regards to letting one person drive off potential customers, but on the other hand a lot of places store owners don't see PFS players as potential customers.

(Reminder: Please actually buy something from your FLGS on game day, if you can. Even a soda builds goodwill.)

Yeah. Always do. That's why I have so many of the Flip Mats/Map Packs. And if they don't have any I don't already have, I order one or two (waiting on two ordered that should come in this week). Yeah - I could order direct, but got to support the local store too.

[Andrew Christian]

andreww wrote:

DM Livgin wrote:

What if, now wait for it... The FAQ and the Season 8 Guide are both current and written as intended...

That would only mean that if a pregen dies you still have the option of assigning it to a new number. Or if you really wanted that chronicle sheet, there are some minimum costs that your PC must pay.

The Gencon Magic 8 Ball suggests the FAQ will be removed.

Also Andrew C was leading the guide revision team.

While this is true, this change happened after the guide revision team turned suggestions over. I did get clarified directly from Tonya and John, though, while at Gen Con the reasons and purpose for this change.

[Chris Mortika]

Andrew Christian wrote:

The previous rule allowed you to:

A) reassign credit to an unused number.

B) use pregen and character gold/items to resolve the condition.

You currently cannot do A, but can do B.

Maybe I'm the one who didn't understand, Andrew. I have been running that a player could sell pre-gen loot to pay for a new heartbeat, but could not haul out their own PCs and pay money or prestige for the raise dead/restoration costs.

[Ascalaphus]

Andrew Christian wrote:

andreww wrote:

DM Livgin wrote:

What if, now wait for it... The FAQ and the Season 8 Guide are both current and written as intended...

That would only mean that if a pregen dies you still have the option of assigning it to a new number. Or if you really wanted that chronicle sheet, there are some minimum costs that your PC must pay.

The Gencon Magic 8 Ball suggests the FAQ will be removed.

Also Andrew C was leading the guide revision team.

While this is true, this change happened after the guide revision team turned suggestions over. I did get clarified directly from Tonya and John, though, while at Gen Con the reasons and purpose for this change.

I'd be very interested in hearing from the horse's mouth the Whys and Hows of this change - what problem was it supposed to fix, how was it supposed to do that, and why are the side effects worth it?

I'm only just back from vacation and just reading all of this, but my first impression is that this is not a good rules change.

1) Personally I hadn't seen a problem in action that this is supposed to fix. I haven't seen pregens die a lot actually.

2) I suppose it's not unreasonable that there is some risk even to playing a pregen in a regular scenario. However, the implementation leaves me puzzled. If I play a pregen, die, and pay to come back. What chronicle sheet do I use to note the gold spent by my real PC? It can't be the current scenario's chronicle because that's held for the future. It can't be the previous cronicle sheet either, that's a different session. Do I need a kind of dummy chronicle sheet? And can I use money earned in the current scenario, or only money from my real PC and sold gear from the pregen?

3) This new rule doesn't work well with pregen-only scenarios.

• Pregen-only scenarios usually feature stranger pregens than most (evil PCs, unusual races, non-allowed abilities). And there's usually no time to review the pregen before the game slot. So the fairness of running full risk is questionable.
  
• These scenarios usually give interesting chronicle sheets that may be of particular interest to some PCs. It's annoying that you have to pre-allocate them to a specific PC beforehand when the outcome may be more interesting for another PC. I know that can go for regular scenarios as well. If you played a real PC, of course that PC should get the chronicle. If another of your PCs would benefit greatly, GM credit it sometime. But if it's a pregen-only scenario, why is it so important to commit to a specific PC beforehand anyway? And since many of these require 4+ GM stars, GM credit isn't always an option either. This is just a needlessly harsh side effect.
  
• Do these new rules even allow for assigning chronicles from pregen adventures to regular characters in the chronicle's tier? If I play True Dragons, can I even apply the 3-5 chronicle sheet to a L5 PC under these rules?
  

I think a good (compromise) solution would be to recognize that forced-pregen adventures are a separate situation where you just assign the chronicle to any PC after the adventure, even a sacrificial one if needed. I believe the rewards tend to be high enough that everyone should be motivated to make it. And pushing people towards "full" risk with PCs they had no chance to study before the game doesn't seem fair.

Maybe it would be better to roll back this change entirely, but I think at least for the pregen-only scenarios it needs revision.

[Fromper]

nosig wrote:

andreww wrote:

nosig wrote:

looks to me like this rule change was intended to discourage people from playing the Pregens.

Looks like it is going to work. I know I'll most likely not play any any more. I can always just sit a game out.

With this rule in place I cannot imagine I would apply it to anything other than a new character number. This goes double for stuff like Serpents Rise, Serpents Ire, True Dragons etc.

yeah. I'm prepping Serpents Ire now, due to run it 3 times at a Con in the middle of next month. I've already had two of my friends back out of the one of the sessions due to this rule - and my wife is going to assign her game of it to a new first level (not even one game)...

And there it is. We've just walked out of the theoretical discussion and into an ACTUAL impact of this rule. It just drove 2 experienced PFS players away from a game.

Personally, I'd just do what his wife did and assign it to my -24 PC (out of 23). I want to play Serpent's Ire eventually, but not at any risk to one of my real PCs. I don't care about the rewards going to a real PC - I'm just in it for the fun single session.

As others have said, if this rule was meant to stop abusive behavior by pregen players, then you're doing it wrong. The way to do that is to enforce the "Don't be a jerk" rule, not by making rules that hurt good players.

pH unbalanced wrote:

(Reminder: Please actually buy something from your FLGS on game day, if you can. Even a soda builds goodwill.)

AMEN!!! Support your local stores!

True story: I recently went on a diet and stopped drinking soda, so I actually felt bad that I wasn't buying my weekly bottle of soda from our local store while playing. I think I made up for it when I bought $110 in flip mats last weekend for a friend prepping 8-00 for Gen Con who didn't have the opportunity to go shopping in advance. :)

[nosig]

Has anyone totaled the sell value of the equipment on existing Pregens? Which ones have enough to pay for the Raise Dead/Restorations needed?

Just wondering... it might make a difference if a player was trying to decide between which 4th level Pregen to risk running...

and it would make the "end of game slot" paperwork run a lot faster.

Player: "How much does a +1 Longsword retail for? What's half price on that? What's the value of a wand of cure moderate wounds with ...ah... 5 charges left?"

edit: corrected spelling and language issues.

[Chess Pwn]

I believe the total gold per character should be roughly equivalent for a given level. +- 25g I'd wager.

[pauljathome]

nosig wrote:

Has anyone totaled the sell value of the equipment on existing Pregens? Which ones have enough to pay for the Raise Dead/Restorations needed?

Just wondering... it might make a difference if a player was trying to decide between which 4th level Pregen to risk running...

and it would make the "end of game slot" paperwork run a lot faster.

Player: "How much does a +1 Longsword retail for? What's half price on that? What's the value of a wand of cure moderate wounds with ...ah... 5 charges left?"

edit: corrected spelling and language issues.

I am not sure but I think they all started with the by the book WBL for their level. So just take 1/2 of that (+- a little if they have cash or used consumables)

[pauljathome]

Lau Bannenberg wrote:

Andrew Christian wrote:

I did get clarified directly from Tonya and John, though, while at Gen Con the reasons and purpose for this change.

I'd be very interested in hearing from the horse's mouth the Whys and Hows of this change - what problem was it supposed to fix, how was it supposed to do that, and why are the side effects worth it?

Very much agreed. With particular emphasis on how this is supposed to fix the problem

[TriOmegaZero]

nosig wrote:

pH unbalanced wrote:

Fair enough. Most store owners I've known are savvier than that with regards to letting one person drive off potential customers, but on the other hand a lot of places store owners don't see PFS players as potential customers.

(Reminder: Please actually buy something from your FLGS on game day, if you can. Even a soda builds goodwill.)

Yeah. Always do. That's why I have so many of the Flip Mats/Map Packs. And if they don't have any I don't already have, I order one or two (waiting on two ordered that should come in this week). Yeah - I could order direct, but got to support the local store too.

I decided to hold off on the new flipmat here at GenCon just so I could pick it up at our local store.

[nosig]

Paul Jackson wrote:

nosig wrote:

Has anyone totaled the sell value of the equipment on existing Pregens? Which ones have enough to pay for the Raise Dead/Restorations needed?

Just wondering... it might make a difference if a player was trying to decide between which 4th level Pregen to risk running...

and it would make the "end of game slot" paperwork run a lot faster.

Player: "How much does a +1 Longsword retail for? What's half price on that? What's the value of a wand of cure moderate wounds with ...ah... 5 charges left?"

edit: corrected spelling and language issues.

I am not sure but I think they all started with the by the book WBL for their level. So just take 1/2 of that (+- a little if they have cash or used consumables)

Maybe I'll pull some out tonight and do some totaling. I can stick a note in my "Pregen" binder with a list of how much in gear each of them carries... I'd hate to have to figure this out at 11:30 PM with a store closing around me.

[medtec28]

Paul Jackson wrote:

Lau Bannenberg wrote:

Andrew Christian wrote:

I did get clarified directly from Tonya and John, though, while at Gen Con the reasons and purpose for this change.

I'd be very interested in hearing from the horse's mouth the Whys and Hows of this change - what problem was it supposed to fix, how was it supposed to do that, and why are the side effects worth it?

Very much agreed. With particular emphasis on how this is supposed to fix the problem

I don't know that we will get that specific answer, nor do I think we are entitled to it. If leadership chooses to make their reasons known, it is their choice. If Andrew felt he could discuss this here, I assume he would have. If Tonya and John say they have good reasons, then they do.

Wow, am I seriously the voice of reason here?

[Finlanderboy]

Fromper wrote:

pH unbalanced wrote:

(Reminder: Please actually buy something from your FLGS on game day, if you can. Even a soda builds goodwill.)

AMEN!!! Support your local stores!

True story: I recently went on a diet and stopped drinking soda, so I actually felt bad that I wasn't buying my weekly bottle of soda from our local store while playing. I think I made up for it when I bought $110 in flip mats last weekend for a friend prepping 8-00 for Gen Con who didn't have the opportunity to go shopping in advance. :)

This is an awesome attitude.

I often buy my DM something to wet their whistle. So I do a twofer for appreciation.

[Jeff Morse]

Chris Mortika wrote:

Andrew Christian wrote:

The previous rule allowed you to:

A) reassign credit to an unused number.

B) use pregen and character gold/items to resolve the condition.

You currently cannot do A, but can do B.

Maybe I'm the one who didn't understand, Andrew. I have been running that a player could sell pre-gen loot to pay for a new heartbeat, but could not haul out their own PCs and pay money or prestige for the raise dead/restoration costs.

Maybe Im wrong here, but I thought it meant you hold the cert till your character reaches that level to apply it, and than must resolve the death or report character as dead. Course as type there seems some wrongness there. Still too tired to think straight.

[pauljathome]

medtec28 wrote:

Paul Jackson wrote:

Very much agreed. With particular emphasis on how this is supposed to fix the problem

I don't know that we will get that specific answer, nor do I think we are entitled to it. If leadership chooses to make their reasons known, it is their choice. If Andrew felt he could discuss this here, I assume he would have. If Tonya and John say they have good reasons, then they do.

I'm not saying that I'm entitled to an answer or that I expect one. I am sure that Tonya and John had reasons for what they did and I absolutely trust their good intentions.

But I also think that they're human and are known to make mistakes from time to time. And, absent any new information, this certainly looks like a mistake to me. And to what appears to me to be the significant majority of posters to this thread.

Tonya and John have both publicly stated that they WANT feedback from us. This thread has been pretty respectful and reasonable with people posting reasonable arguments why they see this as a bad change.

[Majuba]

Sell value of Core Pregens gear:

List:

Barbarian 1: 83.5gp
Barbarian 4: 3010gp
Barbarian 7: 11760gp
Bard 1: 88gp
Bard 4: 2966gp
Bard 7: 11828gp
Cleric 1: 79.5gp
Cleric 4: 3017gp
Cleric 7: 11650gp
Druid 1: 84gp
Druid 4: 3011gp
Druid 7: 11729gp
Fighter 1: 82gp
Fighter 4: 2997gp (a good bit of his loot goes into the tankard)*
Fighter 7: 11802gp
Monk 1: 74gp
Monk 4: 2999gp
Monk 7: 11773gp
Paladin 1: 82.5gp
Paladin 4: 3014gp
Paladin 7: 11850gp
Ranger 1: 88gp
Ranger 4: 3026gp
Ranger 7: 11842gp
Rogue 1: Estimated Gross $400 Million
Rogue 4: 3017gp
Rogue 7: 11758gp
Sorcerer 1: 68gp
Sorcerer 4: 3096gp
Sorcerer 7: 11847gp
Wizard 1: 83gp
Wizard 4: 3045
Wizard 7: 11271 (excludes cane +1, arcane bonds sell for 0)

[Starglim]

Majuba wrote:

Sell value of Core Pregens gear:

** spoiler omitted **

Thanks! So at 7th level, edit: as long as part of the body is recoverable (because they'll have to put in 2000gp of a resurrection regardless), people are worrying about nothing, while a player of a 4th level pregen is likely to have to dip further than the rules require into chronicle gold and a 1st level pregen is just dead (as a 1st level character would be).

[Majuba]

Yes. Although at 4th level, I foresee other condition removal being the more likely drain on PC gold (remove disease, etc.) [Still amazed I played so long thinking you could naturally recover disease damage before it was cured.]

[Sin of Asmodeus]

Funny, I played Serpents Ire and assigned it to a character and yes risked that character (that wasn't first level) and didn't die.
I accepted the real risk of death, and played and had fun at Gen Con.
All I hear from a lot of people and ymmv, is that they want zero risk of death in PFS and all the rewards.
Character death happens. Learn to deal with it. It happens and that's all there is to it.
If all you have is a first level character than don't pregen a 7th. This by the way should only apply to a brand new player. Everyone else should be assigning to higher level pcs.

[TOZ]

Sin of Asmodeus wrote:

Everyone else should be assigning to higher level pcs.

No.

[Kalindlara]

At the same time... perhaps there's room for policies that allow other people to play the game in a way that they'll enjoy, too. ^_^

That's just how I approach this, though. Who knows? Maybe I'm wrong about PFS.

After all, if people don't want to play the game this way... they won't. They'll find something better to do with their time and money. All that you accomplish, by telling people to suck it up and "learn to deal with it", is driving people away from PFS. And all for the sin of not being hardcore enough.

Is that worth it? And - setting this specific policy aside - is that attitude really best for the Society as a whole? That only the most hardcore "real gamers" belong here?

[Michael Hallet]

I have no problem risking death for my characters... when I'm playing my characters.

I do have a problem risking death for my characters when I'm forced to play a pregen because that's all the scenario allows or I'm doing others a favor by playing a pregen when I don't have a character available in tier but they need me to help make a table go off.

[RealAlchemy]

pH unbalanced wrote:

Michael Hallet wrote:

pH unbalanced wrote:

Seriously, Griefers gonna grief.

Here's what I don't understand. If you have a problem player who is purposefully playing pregens in such a way that the party TPKs, why would you ever seat this player?

Because some stores will make it a rule that if you use their space to play you have to seat anyone who shows up as long as there is room.

I know one group who ended up changing venues for just this reason. There was a disruptive player that the organizer tried to ban and the store said let him play or find somewhere else for the game.

That's fine if you have multiple places nearby to play, but what if you don't?

Fair enough. Most store owners I've known are savvier than that with regards to letting one person drive off potential customers, but on the other hand a lot of places store owners don't see PFS players as potential customers.

(Reminder: Please actually buy something from your FLGS on game day, if you can. Even a soda builds goodwill.)

I bought a plate of chicken strips and an alcoholic drink from my local game store last night. Helps when a restaurant is attached :)

[TimD]

Sin of Asmodeus wrote:

All I hear from a lot of people and ymmv, is that they want zero risk of death in PFS and all the rewards.

That may be all you are hearing, but that's not what I've seen anyone saying. I know it's an election year and all, but please stop with the straw-man arguements...

[pH unbalanced]

Sin of Asmodeus wrote:

Funny, I played Serpents Ire and assigned it to a character and yes risked that character (that wasn't first level) and didn't die.

I accepted the real risk of death, and played and had fun at Gen Con.
All I hear from a lot of people and ymmv, is that they want zero risk of death in PFS and all the rewards.
Character death happens. Learn to deal with it. It happens and that's all there is to it.
If all you have is a first level character than don't pregen a 7th. This by the way should only apply to a brand new player. Everyone else should be assigning to higher level pcs.

I'm really glad you enjoyed yourself playing Serpents' Ire. I'm looking forward to it.

Pathfinder is a funny game that appeals to a lot of different people for a lot of different reasons. Some people are in it for the story. Some people are in it for the camaraderie. Some people enjoy tinkering with systems. Some people enjoy the process of seeing a character develop.

Compared to other RPGs, one of the thing that Pathfinder emphasizes is player control over their character -- I would go so far as to call that one of the foundational principals. As an old school gamer, I have a love-hate relationship with that principal, but it is so core to the game I just, as you say, deal with it.

One of the things that makes the pregen-only Specials so entertaining is that it is a creative way to violate that principal without upsetting people. The scenario is making a deal with you. "Look," it says, "We're taking control away from you to build your character, but trust us. it'll be fun. This scenario is a safe space to do some things you would otherwise never get to do."

And people *love* these scenarios. But I would argue that that promise of safe space is vital to the fun -- it allows people to relax and put themselves into a situation they otherwise couldn't, because loss of control is scary.

The problem with changing the rules for chronicle assignment for pregen only scenarios is that it violates that promise of safe space. This will scare some people away from playing at all, but *worse* it will also change the way people who do play these scenarios relate to them, and they will stop being as fun.

Now, Sin of Asmodeus, maybe none of this interacts with how you approach the game. But this is the dynamic I see for a lot of people, including myself. Hopefully this explains why "learn to deal with it" seems inappropriate when talking about these kinds of scenarios.