Building a better multi-table special


Pathfinder Society

1 to 50 of 82 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 **** Venture-Captain, Minnesota

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Multi-table specials have so much potential. I want to love them. While I'm enamored of the idea of every Pathfinder in the society working together to a common goal, the reality of them has been frustrating to me, not only as a player, but also as a GM.

Most of the time, I feel like I have no handle on the story of what's happening. We're in a meat grinder of combat after combat, many of which we don't get to finish before we're moved on to the next thing. Even worse, the logistics of these tend to be awful. If the sound system has problems, it's hard to hear the overseer over the babble of the room.

I think that the most recent specials did help mitigate some of this, but they still face the problem that most specials face: story getting lost in the mad rush.

In Siege of Serpents:
There was the promise of a fun fair with some RP and skill challenges at the beginning. Unfortunately, only one of us got to roll in that one before we were moved straight into combat, so what could have been a bit of fun light-heartedness was rushed too fast. Still, the death of a major NPC, and the chance to fight off the society's enemies made this one a bit more meaningful.

In Sky Key Solution:
I really like that this one has a mix of research, RP and combat opportunities. I do think that some of the skill checks and the secondary success condition might have set the bar too high, but I think this one had a good mix of challenges. Unfortunately, the story falls flat. Who are the serpentfolk? What is the real impact of what we are doing here?

In Cosmic Captive:
The story fell flat. We're rescuing this Lord of Air, and we have no idea who he is as a person.

On the other hand, I kind of love that this one offered RP random encounters, and three different tracks, including one that diplomats might get some value out of. Still, once again, the constant rush and chaos made us all wonder what we were really doing here.

Also as a GM... This was a monster to prep. I've never felt so lost preparing a scenario as I did this one.

Is there a way to really make the tables connected with each other with one single story across tiers without all of us feeling like we're in utter chaos? I know that early specials allowed a bard to inspire courage across tables and such. Later ones had aid tokens. The most recent special had special events that were unlocked when enough tables got a certain kind of success.

Personally, I'd like to see more cooperation, more story, more clarity, less frantic movement from one meaningless combat to another. Is there a way that we can make these specials more memorable and challenging story experiences? Is there a way that we can lower the frustration of participants, both as players and as GMs?

But maybe I'm in the minority here. If you love these specials just the way they are, I'd like to hear why. Is it the challenge? Do you relish the speed constraints? I'm interested in hearing how others feel about multi-table specials both as GMs and as players.

Hmm

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

I've now played a bunch of these, Gmd one, and Overseered one (prepping to is another)

I agree with a lot of your points, and the prep requirements can be a bit of a killer - a decent running sheet outlining key timings and events would help.

I also agree that the background noise and chaos can be a problem if the Overseer needs to communicate, but the same can be said for players and gms - fine or nuanced details are easily overlooked or lost.

The combats can be meat grinders but I suspect that is part of the draw, the further complexity being that different tables will progress at different speeds so hence some will move more content/some may get snipped short.

Anyhow, following with interest...

3/5 Venture-Agent, Georgia—Atlanta

I agree completely. The specials - both the ones I've played and the ones I've GM-ed - have been underwhelming. I've taken to GM-ing them rather than playing because at least then I can read the story and have some idea of what's going on, but my most recent experience (Cosmic Captive) was such an unpleasant experience to prep that I'm not sure I'll bother with another special in the future.

1/5 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

For Cosmic Captive:

DESPITE the fact that we had the opportunity to take on some tough opponents, it VERY much felt like all agency was taken out of the player hands in the 10-11 tier this past weekend when we played it at SkalCon.

*stated*

"Oh, you can go to whatever area you want."

IMPLIED through NPC interactions

"OH PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD HIGH LEVEL FOLKS GO FIGHT ALL THE BIG BAD STUFF BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE ALL DIE!"

...wouldn't burn me up so much EXCEPT that one of the boons is DIRECTLY related to WHICH areas the party engages encounters in, so someone following the requests of Society Leadership IC just got cut off from TWO of the options...

4/5 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Siege of the Diamond City was one of the best specials because the story was easy to communicate to players, easy for players to understand, everyone knew how their table's successes influenced other tables and everyone could see how their choices and success contributed to the overall success of the Society.

Every special since has tried to recreate the feel of that scenario by taking it's basic premise (several zones to choose and a certain number of successes in each to secure) and overlaying it on a new story. Unfortunately, they've failed to recapture the "magic" of Siege of the Diamond City and the new stories have become lost behind complicated and convoluted mechanics and encounters.

Siege of the Diamond City had a well-balanced mix of combat, roleplay and skill check encounters, each encounter was "logical" (its purpose being well-communicated) and each part was well-defined, with an obvious transition and a distinct departure in "feel" from the preceding part; the specials since have felt like one combat encounter after another and there's very little difference from one part to another.

But in all fairness, the specials since Siege of the Diamond City weren't all muddled slogs; I personally enjoyed both Siege of Serpents and Legacy of the Stonelords.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

For Cosmic Captive:

DESPITE the fact that we had the opportunity to take on some tough opponents, it VERY much felt like all agency was taken out of the player hands in the 10-11 tier this past weekend when we played it at SkalCon.

*stated*

"Oh, you can go to whatever area you want."

IMPLIED through NPC interactions

"OH PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD HIGH LEVEL FOLKS GO FIGHT ALL THE BIG BAD STUFF BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE ALL DIE!"

...wouldn't burn me up so much EXCEPT that one of the boons is DIRECTLY related to WHICH areas the party engages encounters in, so someone following the requests of Society Leadership IC just got cut off from TWO of the options...

It's interesting that's how it came across to you. Unfortunate, too. In truth that's not how it works under the hood.

Spoiler:

It's true that some routes were more brutal than others, but it was done the same at every tier. Regardless of what tier you were playing, if your table felt like challenging combat, go this way, and if you want to talk and tinker, go that other way. The same path was harder at every tier.

The successes earned were also worth the same at every tier; a L1 party can contribute just as much in the Earth path as a L10 party. Every encounter is worth the same amount of points if won.

There were a couple of "extra credit" encounters that were only available at one route and only intended for top-tier, but those were really HEAVY things. Quite likely to TPK-unrecoverable top-tier parties who attempt them. You get a big reward if you manage them, but it's not expected that you'll even try. We're talking CR 17 "eat your soul" monsters against a level 10-11 party; strictly optional.

I really liked the way The Cosmic Captive handled encounter difficulty; by letting tables choose their difficulty setting I was able to take a bunch of our local meta's notorious powergamers (bless their black little hearts) and give them a challenging run where it's okay to be that powerful because the enemies can match it. This was so much more fun to GM than Siege of Serpents where most enemies were defeated before getting a second turn. I really liked the room for the GM and table to adapt to a desired difficulty level.

---

More on improving specials later. This is a subject dear to my heart.

1/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've now played 3 specials and GM'd one and discussed this with people who have played many more.

Some thoughts:

1) The designers need to keep in mind that these are 4 hour events. Take Stonelords for an example, the PC's could conceivably fight something in about a third of the districts as well as the big set piece fights. That is just too much. Even a well organized GM is going to be hard pressed to run all of those fights and still give the players an enjoyable rp experience.

2) Too much prep. This goes along with #1. Some of these specials call for a lot of maps and all of them call for a lot statblocks. Now consider the mountain of data a GM needs to consume to prep for more than one tier. It's too much work before hand and results in pauses at the table while the GM shuffles through his stack of maps and statblocks looking for the right ones for the encounter.

A possible fix:

Instead of every tier playing through the same scenario just with different monsters why not have 6 nearly separate scenarios, 1 for each tier, which are each connected to the same story and built around achieving the same goal. Build in sequence points or achievements so that each tables successes or failures can affect the rest. The downside would be a large increase in the total size of the overall scenario and if GM needed to prep for multiple tiers it could be overwhelming. OTOH since each tier would be different substantial replay possible exists.

5/5 *** Venture-Agent, Netherlands—Utrecht

Jessex wrote:

I've now played 3 specials and GM'd one and discussed this with people who have played many more.

Some thoughts:

1) The designers need to keep in mind that these are 4 hour events. Take Stonelords for an example, the PC's could conceivably fight something in about a third of the districts as well as the big set piece fights. That is just too much. Even a well organized GM is going to be hard pressed to run all of those fights and still give the players an enjoyable rp experience.

2) Too much prep. This goes along with #1. Some of these specials call for a lot of maps and all of them call for a lot statblocks. Now consider the mountain of data a GM needs to consume to prep for more than one tier. It's too much work before hand and results in pauses at the table while the GM shuffles through his stack of maps and statblocks looking for the right ones for the encounter.

A possible fix:

Instead of every tier playing through the same scenario just with different monsters why not have 6 nearly separate scenarios, 1 for each tier, which are each connected to the same story and built around achieving the same goal. Build in sequence points or achievements so that each tables successes or failures can affect the rest. The downside would be a large increase in the total size of the overall scenario and if GM needed to prep for multiple tiers it could be overwhelming. OTOH since each tier would be different substantial replay possible exists.

That would mean effectively writing multiple scenarios. But achieving different goals would be fun. I haven't played it, but I believe Siege on the Diamond City did something similar: low-level groups could load and fire ballistas while in combat, which would damage enemies in higher tiers, while higher tiers could do stuff that eased the workload on the lower tiers. That looks way more manageable than the three different events that could happen at any time and aren't really placed anywhere logical for me to look up.

5/5

I've been GM or Overseer for all of the specials except for Cosmic Captive so far, and one thing springs to mind...

My favorites so far have been Siege of the Diamond City and Legacy of the Stone Lords, and definitely both benefit from clear vision, epic scope, and a great variety of encounters. They both had a lot to do, but neither felt incredibly rushed to me. I love the way that each there's successes are broadcast in the last phase of Siege. I think that Race for the Runecarved Key would rate highly for most of his too if the in-character leadership in it was a little more heroic.

Prepping and running both Siege of Serpents and Sky Key Solution for the same GenCon really burned me out on specials. Maybe for good. The sheer number of maps and encounters to prep in the very short amount of time available to do so was incredibly frustrating. The scenarios both seemed to be presented to run at a breakneck pace, and I often found encounters being cutoff by the next Overseer announcement. Siege of Serpents was okay in the plot department, but Sky Key Solution got really muddled. It fell pretty hard into the camp of scenarios where the GMs are presented with way more of what's going on than the players ever are, and trying to get more of that story to the players via roleplaying cuts even further into the very limited amount of time allotted to try to cram more encounters in.

I'm sure I'll have more thoughts on the specials once I play Cosmic Captive, probably at U-Con in November.

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

zefig wrote:
It fell pretty hard into the camp of scenarios where the GMs are presented with way more of what's going on than the players ever are, and trying to get more of that story to the players via roleplaying cuts even further into the very limited amount of time allotted to try to cram more encounters in.

Interesting you say that - I had a lot of players asking "What was all THAT about" at the end of Year of the Shadowlodge special too

5/5

Shifty wrote:
zefig wrote:
It fell pretty hard into the camp of scenarios where the GMs are presented with way more of what's going on than the players ever are, and trying to get more of that story to the players via roleplaying cuts even further into the very limited amount of time allotted to try to cram more encounters in.
Interesting you say that - I had a lot of players asking "What was all THAT about" at the end of Year of the Shadowlodge special too

I love scenarios steeped in Golarion and/or PFS lore, but multi-table specials really don't seem like the best time to try to explore the finer points of that. The players are being assaulted with encounter after encounter's worth of information. Background in broad strokes is great, but anything more than that seems to get lost in the whirl of experiences. Add to that that there seems to be a decent contingent of players who only play at cons, where the special may be the majority of Golarion they get in any given year.

Dark Archive 4/5 5/5

Compared to Siege I was pleased that Cosmic Captive did not cut us off in combat nearly so much, the prep load for Cosmic though was definitely a strain. I appreciated the attempt to really creative distinctive choices. Given how complex these get I think the biggest help would be running these in a longer slot. I don't know that I'd even increase the length of the scenario, but expecting it to run say 5 hours seems like it frees up a little bit of breathing room.

Grand Lodge 2/5

They're too chaotic. Meat grinder is the perfect term for it.

This last time we finished only two encounters. This had a lot to do with just my GM, but I'm sick of having bad GMs for what are supposed to be epic encounters and then being locked out of a chance of getting to play it how it's supposed to be.

Great strides were made this year to make sure the story was portrayed well enough (talking about gencon with the pre-recorded voice and the displays having scrolling text), but as a player I didn't feel at all connected to what was going on around me. I felt like I was on a plume ride shooting past encounters that I just tried to reach out and slap as they rushed by.

So between bad experiences with con specials, having to assign pregens blindly without knowing what you're signing up for, and con-time-slots being too late for anyone that doesn't have a bed provided by paizo, my only option is to not play any of the specials at GEN Con.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Baltic

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Davor Firetusk wrote:
Given how complex these get I think the biggest help would be running these in a longer slot.

This. Over here we run the Multi-Table specials in 7 hour slots. Some still feel rushed though!

5/5 5/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.

First off, let me apologize for the length of this post. I think that this is an interesting topic that deserves some thoughtful discussion, and so I have a fair amount to say.

Having played and GMed large-scale interactive events for three different organized play campaigns, I can say from my experience that a lot of the issues discussed by Hilary Moon Murphy are endemic to the format (particularly when they are held in large convention venues). I've been fortunate to play most of the Pathfinder interactives in smaller venues where the noise level has not been too much of an issue, but if the Overseer GM cannot be heard, things go very poorly because the players don't have a sense of what they're supposed to be doing and the table GMs don't get the prompts they need to properly pace their encounters. So, the first suggestion I would have to those who are running an interactive would be to make sure that the Overseer GM is able to project to the whole room or that you have a functioning audio system.

In my opinion, the second priority for running an interactive is making sure your table GMs are aware of how you plan to communicate table results (whether by runners, hand gestures, or semaphore). Some of the best interactive experiences I have had were the ones where the GM crew held a meeting in advance to discuss the timing and communication procedures. Taking five minutes before the start to make sure everyone is up to speed can make things run much more smoothly and save a lot of time down the line. As I recall, most (if not all) of the Pathfinder interactives discuss this in the GM instructions, but I think it deserves particular attention.

In regard to the interactive content, I agree with a number of the posters that my favorite so far has been Siege of the Diamond City. I think that the missions are clearly stated and the interactions between tables was handled very well. With that in mind, in discussing things that I found make for good interactives, I would suggest that the first priority is to make the mission objectives clear to the players during each phase of the interactive. While it is good to allow multiple solutions to a given challenge, the players need to know their goals so that they can more forward efficiently. My experience is that the greatest frustration comes when they players feel like they don't know what they should be doing and whether they are helping overall success. Related to this - it is good to include Overseer GM progress reports to the entire group (Siege of the Diamond City and Legacy of the Stone Lords handled this particularly well, in my opinion).

Second, the thing that sets interactives apart from just a bunch of tables running the same scenario at the same time is the interaction between tables. Most often, this is done by having table successes change the overall environment in ways that affect all the tables, but I think that it might be interesting to look at other ways that the things done at one table might affect others. While it may disrupt encounter balance to have the 9th level cleric's channel heal adjacent low-level tables, it makes for more of a shared experience if the things you do have specific effects for others near you. Maybe it heals the thing they're fighting as well as the PCs, if the cleric isn't able to select it out. I don't think it would be fun to have a high-level table swoop in and demolish an encounter for a low-level table, but it might be nice if tables that are having a tough time could call out for aid and get some.

Third, I personally prefer interactives that have a variety of encounters. Interactives that have a series of combats one after another with little in between tend to feel repetitive and I don't think the players are given as much opportunity to engage in the story.

4/5 *

5 people marked this as a favorite.

8-00 Cosmic Captive was the first special I've ever played before GMing or Overseeing it (yay for succession planning paying off!). I really had idea what was going on for most of it, as we were bounced from encounter to encounter without a lot of time to do much besides roll initiative. At the end we were making skill checks without any clear understanding of what we were even doing - although in fairness to the authors, this may have been because our GM felt under the time crunch to keep things moving and cut to the mechanics.

I've GM'd or overseen all the specials. 5-00 Siege is a good special, for sure - things seemed to work really well there, but that's probably because it was a wargame, essentially, and so the wargame-phase approach worked well. Other themes don't really benefit as much from this type of mechanic.

I still harken back to 2-00 for some of my favorite scenes. The idea of the entire room all facing a <redacted> which would kill any one group on its own was fantastic. (Plus, you only need three tables to run it.)

But for me, the BEST multi-table special was the Grand Convocation 4712 A.R. at PaizoCon 2012 and PaizoCon UK 2012, which included a lot more than just a table of encounters. There were costumed characters instead of an overseer (although, yes, there was too much going on to take it all in, and noise and scheduling was a problem). There were in-character Harrow readings, contests, and roleplaying beyond just your table. There were a series of short quests you could do. There was a big set-piece encounter finale which was like the current multi-table specials, but shorter, more focused, and building on all of the roleplaying and character stuff that happened earlier. The results of the event helped choose how a major theme of the next season played out (Blakros wedding, anyone?) so there was real impact on the storyline from the event. I was lucky enough to work on the team that helped do that, so I know it was way more work than is sustainable... but it was awesome.

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

I with I could have seen that, Lamplighter. It sounds awesome.

Hmm

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Maybe it'll be useful to look at specials from a GM and a player perspective separately, to identify problems and possible solutions.

Player
I've played a bunch of specials, with mixed feelings, in this order:


  • Siege of the Diamond City - I was a brand new PFS player, playing the 1-2 tier. We had a great time with the initial missions. The final showdown however saw us trying to defend a catapult which we also had to fire. However, that required cooperation between a large number of PCs, and didn't scale very well to the number of players. So we alternated between fighting off waves of enemies (including the same wave three times in a row) and ploinking with the lesser siege weapon. Was rather disappointing.

    Lessons Careful with waves, once players see the pattern ennui sets
    in. Scale mechanics to the number of players on a table.

  • Year of the Shadow Lodge - It was the very first one, so let's be kind. Although it was a bit linear, it wasn't bad. At some point there was a monster that the low tables tried to avoid; then the high table defeated it and everyone could go on. That was fine. Then there was a door, and before the GM had properly told us what it looked like another table had smashed through it. Final fight took place in a room that looked rather implausibly small for such a final battle.

    Lessons Make sure you have enough room for your final battle so that you can really imagine multiple teams of pathfinders operating there at the same time. Stonelords learned this lesson very well. Also, one table affecting another is both a cool thing, but can also be annoying when it goes too fast.

  • Legacy of the Stonelords Oh man this was awesome. Definitely my favourite special. We had a very efficient party and GM, doing lots of encounters. We got to see and do lots of things, didn't get bogged down anywhere. Part of that was a well-skilled party of strikers, and neither us nor enemies went for battlefield control that slowed things down.

    Encounters here were thematic and reasonably varied; there was both stuff there for people with a dwarven angle to their character, and people with a demon-hunter angle. Archeology and skills too. Real choice of which area to go to (armory, temple district etc) was also very nice.

    And the big big big fight was perfectly set.

    Spoiler:
    We all make it to the Throne Room, which is big and has wide steps leading up to the Throne. Over there of course is the local demon overlord, but every step leading up to him had demonic defenders, each more terrible than the last. So the great invading pathfinder force pushes upwards like a wedge, junior pathfinder covering the flanks on the lower steps, and the most elite agents pushing up to the throne to challenge the demon king himself. It was an epic location and as a mass battle the whole place just made sense.

    Lessons Build encounters so they can run fast; avoid controller slogging matches. Multiple areas the PCs can go to, with some idea of what to expect (area name, thematic clues) are a nice thing. Your big fight should not be in "a room" but in an epic location that makes sense for a mass brawl.

  • Blood Under Absalom This one's a bit cheesy. It's got the intellectual grandeur of the Mortal Combat movies, really. Which isn't bad, if you don't try to take it seriously.

    Not so ideal was that this one had cut scenes and invisible walls like a poorly designed video game. Situations where an NPC tells you to "get to me if you can" and tosses some minions in the way, which you're supposed to fight. But after say, level 4, PCs start getting ideas about flying, just plain running past enemies or dimension door. Running smack into invisible walls because you can only transition to the next scene when # tables complete an encounter is annoying.

    We also had a LOT of encounters that we'd only just started when we got pushed to the next one because apparently enough other tables had finished theirs. This special had very rigid "synchronization" between tables; everyone does the same scene, then transitions. Such hard syncing means a lot of tables are either waiting or not getting to finish their scene.

    Lessons Avoid too much synchronization between tables. If parties can do multiple encounters in a row before (after a few hours) everyone gets shuffled off to the next act together, that means you avoid a lot of "couldn't finish our fight" angst.

    Avoid invisible walls. If you're not supposed to go somewhere yet, don't show it.

  • Race for the Runecarved Key We had a wonderful group for this, full of moral vacuums. Duly warned by all the reviews, I did not bring my paladin or inquisitor of Abadar, but instead my Urgathoa-gluttonizing investigator. Even so, when we got our first missions and realized "we're being sent here to kill these people and leave no witnesses", there was a moment around the table when it sank in that we were going over a moral horizon. The galling thing was really that it wasn't explained why this runecarved key was so important that we suddenly threw all morals out of the window, when normally we don't get ordered to do evil stuff even for things that do look important.

    Lessons Make sure the players understand the stakes and why the main point of the special is important.

  • Sky Key Solution I'd been looking forward to this one, but honestly I was disappointed. We brought a pretty powerful group, but I just didn't really feel challenged. Enemies weren't that hefty, most encounters were over before expending resources even became an option.

    But the most annoying thing here was the time pressure. We got cut off from a really cool encounter in the first half, and then during the second half we spent a lot of time with uninteresting cultists before being shuffled off to somewhere else. All the time were told the clock was ticking and we should hurry. The feeling I took away was that during specials, you should avoid talking to NPCs; that that's a waste of time, that you should bludgeon them with your optimized Diplomacy check and if that doesn't work, go to the next encounter rather than try to salvage a time-waster.

    Lessons Specials like this need a Time Plan, where the GM clearly knows which scenes are really important and which ones to skip if he's running out of time. To make sure that works, mark scenes with a "time budget", how long it's supposed to take. If you don't have that much time left until you need to transition to a new act, don't start the scene, that's better than starting and not getting to finish.

    I think such a time budget would really help a lot also in the writing; if a writer sees that the total time required to complete all scenes in a normal player's path through the special is more than the time allotted to the special, he knows that the adventure he designed is impossible.

The Exchange 3/5

I actually think most specials I've played have been pretty well run. It always makes me excited to play them more when I can. The meat grinder aspect is actually the single biggest appeal to me because of how different it is from a typical scenario. It helps a lot to actually have a group who can beat each combat before time is called. I would say time being called on what you are doing detracts the most from the experience because it makes everything seem rushed and leaves the party unsatisfied (but sometimes thankful.)

4/5 *

Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

I with I could have seen that, Lamplighter. It sounds awesome.

Hmm

One day it will happen again, somehow. When we started our local Convocation event, we did a bit of in-character stuff on a much smaller scale. Maybe one year Winnipeg and MSP can combine for an international convocation? We could host in at the Wounded Wisp...

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Winnipeg and MSP could totally combine! That sounds like fun!

Everyone else, it's really interesting reading all the perspectives.

Hmm

The Exchange 3/5

Lau Bannenberg wrote:
  • Year of the Shadow Lodge - Then there was a door, and before the GM had properly told us what it looked like another table had smashed through it.
  • I think a lesson learned here is any time tables interact with each other maybe the overseer should be in charge of the box text of that section? It would control the pacing enough to let all the tables make a decision at the same time.

    4/5 *

    Lau wrote:
    The galling thing was really that it wasn't explained why (spoilers)...

    Well, Sheila Heidmarch *did* give the briefing on that one... that's sometimes a bit of a warning right there.

    Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5 **

    As others have stated, I think the biggest problem by far is that there is just way too much material to get through. Maybe it works at Gencon with 5 hour+ slots and, by definition, nearly everybody being very dedicated gamers but at smaller cons with shorter time frames there is just too much happening.

    Locally, we often just decide ahead of time what things to cut. But with all the overhead we still go over time :-(.

    The other issue at local cons is the extreme variation in player ability one gets. The high tier tables have experienced players, the low tier tables often have complete newbies. Makes coordinating things difficult.

    Prep time for the more recent scenarios can get quite extreme. Which is going to translate into significant differences in how prepped the GM actually is at any specific table.

    So, my suggestions would boil down to:
    Be less ambitious. Make the scenario something that doesn't take too much prep time, that can absolutely be run in 3:45 (possibly with an optional encounter bringing timing to 4:45)

    4/5

    I'm amazed to hear how many people have a high option of Legacy of the Stonelords. My table was so disgusted with the bait-and-switch nature of it that it really diminished our opinion of Season 5 as a whole, which is quite sad. I guess that really isn't related to how well it ran as an interactive, just the choice of encounters we experienced.

    My understanding of why there is so much material is because there is a fear of people getting done earlier and being disruptive. I think that fear is overblown. I was at a table that got all the way through the Sky Key Solution, and we were perfectly happy to pack up and quietly wait for the closing ceremonies.

    5/5

    Eric Ives wrote:

    I'm amazed to hear how many people have a high option of Legacy of the Stonelords. My table was so disgusted with the bait-and-switch nature of it that it really diminished our opinion of Season 5 as a whole, which is quite sad. I guess that really isn't related to how well it ran as an interactive, just the choice of encounters we experienced.

    My understanding of why there is so much material is because there is a fear of people getting done earlier and being disruptive. I think that fear is overblown. I was at a table that got all the way through the Sky Key Solution, and we were perfectly happy to pack up and quietly wait for the closing ceremonies.

    Bait and switch? Can you be more specific? I didn't think the twist was really a "switch," since it doesn't really change too much of how the scenario operates.

    The problem I ran into when playing it was a GM with the playtest version of the scenario who didn't realize there was a second half.

    4/5

    zefig wrote:
    Eric Ives wrote:

    I'm amazed to hear how many people have a high option of Legacy of the Stonelords. My table was so disgusted with the bait-and-switch nature of it that it really diminished our opinion of Season 5 as a whole, which is quite sad. I guess that really isn't related to how well it ran as an interactive, just the choice of encounters we experienced...

    Bait and switch? Can you be more specific? I didn't think the twist was really a "switch," since it doesn't really change too much of how the scenario operates.

    The problem I ran into when playing it was a GM with the playtest version of the scenario who didn't realize there was a second half.

    Answer is a spoiler:

    spoiler:
    What I meant was that after an entire year of collecting anti-demon weapon, spells and allies, and bringing our greatest holy warriors to the table, my table ended up just fighting waves of constructs and other things. It felt really anticlimactic for what should have been a great season.

    5/5 *** Venture-Agent, Netherlands—Utrecht

    I've played/GMed in all of the specials with Lau, except for Siege on the Diamond City (GMed Cosmic Captive, Siege of Serpents, and Stonelords). Not in the same group, but in the same room. I echo his sentiments.

    My main problem with specials is, they've really upped the density of encounters in order to make it feel more "special." But I'd like to propose something different: why not do the opposite? There's still a time component, but with all scenarios I've become pretty good at keeping within the time limit. No need to artificially hurry us along. Give us some time to explore stuff Year of the Shadow Lodge or Blood Under Absalom didn't feel exactly special-like, but that's not really necessary. Running the same scenario at the same time feels cool enough to me. Give us more opportunities to interact with each other. In a few of the specials there were aid tokens. While they weren't used a lot, I liked them mechanically. I'm not sure how feasible it is to give out different clues, but conceptually I like the idea of calling a short break and the different tables putting their heads together to puzzle together what they've found out.

    Also, I'd like to see true interaction between tables. During my first special, the Shadow Lodge, GMs allowed buffs to persist across tables. It felt pretty good to have a low-level table pop a Bless or Bardic Performance and have the high-level table benefit from it. And later, a high-level Cleric came to our table, channeled energy to heal us, and went back to his own. Not sure how you'd incorporate that into your adventure, but it's possible. If it's during the first encounter, you know people are reasonable at the same spot, and that allows the fiction to really split up afterwards.

    Also, not sure if this is a good idea, but I'm just spitballing here: maybe it's a fun idea to use more esoteric mechanics during the special. Planning a heist during Sun Orchid Scheme would've been a great piece for a special, if it was shortened somewhat. If specials are simplified somewhat, there would be room to incorporate something like this, I feel. Have it last for an hour or so, maybe less (during SOS it was pretty much three-quarters of the adventure) to let people get a taste of it and have it truly feel spectacular, to give off that "special" feel. Right now the last few specials have felt like a mad dash to the finish line with no room for any personal input, whereas I get the feeling people prefer to have specials feel more like something they can interact with. It's the opening to a new season, you don't want your first impression to feel like a chaotic and underexplained meatgrinder. Have your specials do really awesome stuff, not just narratively (going back in time, landing on an asteroid), but also mechanically (Sun Orchid Scheme, Blakros Connection, and so on).

    Grand Lodge 4/5

    Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
    Lau Bannenberg wrote:
    There were a couple of "extra credit" encounters that were only available at one route and only intended for top-tier, but those were really HEAVY things. Quite likely to TPK-unrecoverable top-tier parties who attempt them. You get a big reward if you manage them, but it's not expected that you'll even try. We're talking CR 17 "eat your soul" monsters against a level 10-11 party; strictly optional.

    Spoiler:
    That was the fight Wei Ji was talking about.

    We killed it.

    Shadow Lodge 4/5

    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

    I with I could have seen that, Lamplighter. It sounds awesome.

    Hmm

    It was my first experience GMing for PFS. It WAS awesome.

    4/5 ****

    4 people marked this as a favorite.

    My favorite special is Legacy of the Stonelords, followed by Siege of the Diamond City.

    I have helped oversee Siege of Serpents and The Sky Key Solution but haven't table GMed either of those or the Cosmic Captive.

    Prepping them is just so much work.

    It already takes me ~6 hours to prep a normal scenario. Getting all the background and tactics and maps and minis and story notes and handouts etc.

    I want to make sure my players have the best possible experience. They only get to play the scenario once and it's my responsibility to give them the best experience I can.

    To do so for a special requires north of 20 hours for me to prep properly and then to run at full intensity for ~4-5 hours. Leaving me totally exhausted.

    Frankly I currently can't handle running a special at high enough quality that it would satisfy my inner perfectionist at the moment. 2 years ago, before having a baby I could, so maybe it's just me...

    I think there's a lot we could do to make running the specials easier on our GMs and I suspect doing so in a responsible manner would help improve the average experience of players.

    4/5 *

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber

    I'm with Pirate Rob on my favorites: Legacy #1 and Siege #2. I also really liked Year of the Shadow Lodge.

    I much, MUCH prefer GMing them because, like Abraham Z., I found as a player I was missing a whole lot of the story. As a GM, I try to pepper some of that in with the encounters, but it's not easy with the proverbial ticking clock.

    For those who consider Specials to be meat-grinders: part of their purpose is as an endurance test for your PC, so in many ways they are meat-grinders. But the better ones do a decent job of mixing up the encounters so it's not just combat after combat after combat (*cough*BloodUnderAbsalom*cough*)

    Grand Lodge 4/5

    Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

    Year of the Shadow Lodge was so very much easier to run, with a comparable lessening of epicness.

    Sovereign Court 4/5 * Organized Play Coordinator

    Lau Bannenberg wrote:
    Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
    Redacted

    It's interesting that's how it came across to you. Unfortunate, too. In truth that's not how it works under the hood.

    ** spoiler omitted **...

    Edited post to add spoiler tag. Please remember not everyone on the thread has played/ran these games.

    Dataphiles 3/5

    I have played Legacy of the Stonelords and GMed Blood Under Absalom, Race for the Runecarved Key, Legacy of the Stonelords, Siege of Serpents, The Sky Key Solution, and Cosmic Captive.

    Legacy is also my current favorite. Blood Under Absalom was hands down my least favorite.

    I agree that table interaction is something I really like to see in these specials. The aid tokens were a cool mechanic.

    Waves of identical enemies can be pretty anti-climactic. If you're going to do waves 2 or 3 specific and unique waves would be better in my opinion. IF the table can actually complete more than 3 waves using the mechanic of moving them up to the next tier for an "epic" fight is one I've always liked. Moving down to the previous tier, and fighting an easier tier wouldn't be as epic, but maybe you could include the option that if you move down one tier effects like Bard song could provide a bonus to tables of that tier. Which would allow more table interaction on a limited scale.

    On the topic of helping our GM's prep:

    @Rob I recently ran Runecarved Key when I visited KublaCon. I received the scenario in plenty of time, I knew exactly which tiers to prep, and I received a file with full stat blocks by tier for both tiers I was asked to prepare. Cosmic Captive included bestiary by tier, but was such a mountain of work that it didn't have the same effect. I really want to thank the leadership at that Con for making that special run so smoothly.

    Locally we run 0 slots of the specials for our GM's this is also very helpful, and I would really recommend this for anyone not already doing so. A huge thanks to my local leadership for organizing these. Seeing the event in action, even on a small scale, is very helpful.


    I've played in all the GenGon specials except Siege of the Diamond City, and Shadow Lodge was one of my favorites. It had the feel of a cooperative event, where every table no matter the tier had something to contribute.

    Other than cleaning up some logistics concerning mustering, audio/video quality, etc, I feel that the best way to improve the specials is to recapture that feeling of putting obstacles in front of each table appropriate for their tier that still work to achieve the main objective in different ways. High tier holds back the horde, but the lower tier has to get the drawbridge up, while mid-tier works to decipher the McGuffin to close the portal letting the horde into Golarion... That sort of thing. Not "everyone fights the same fight, but CR adjusted for your tier".

    Or, go back to the promise of the original factions, and have tables muster by faction and compete for an exclusive goal, which gives a boon good for the next year. Silver Crusade vs Dark Archive vs Scarab Sages and so on. Bonus points if your actions can actively help or hinder other tables at the same event. Not PvP, obviously, but "throwing some marbles under your rival's boots during a chase" sort of interference, or preventing some misfortune from derailing an allied table.

    Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 *

    Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
    GM Eazy-Earl wrote:

    Siege of the Diamond City was one of the best specials because the story was easy to communicate to players, easy for players to understand, everyone knew how their table's successes influenced other tables and everyone could see how their choices and success contributed to the overall success of the Society.

    Every special since has tried to recreate the feel of that scenario by taking it's basic premise (several zones to choose and a certain number of successes in each to secure) and overlaying it on a new story. Unfortunately, they've failed to recapture the "magic" of Siege of the Diamond City and the new stories have become lost behind complicated and convoluted mechanics and encounters.

    Siege of the Diamond City had a well-balanced mix of combat, roleplay and skill check encounters, each encounter was "logical" (its purpose being well-communicated) and each part was well-defined, with an obvious transition and a distinct departure in "feel" from the preceding part; the specials since have felt like one combat encounter after another and there's very little difference from one part to another.

    But in all fairness, the specials since Siege of the Diamond City weren't all muddled slogs; I personally enjoyed both Siege of Serpents and Legacy of the Stonelords.

    I think thing brings up a lot of the major points as to what has been the issue since with the specials. Siege of the Diamond City had a very good hook for people and kept them not only interested but kept us on the hook for the season to attempt to know what was going to happen next. We all thought we would be gathering up towards a larger issue and were doing something worthwhile. You also had the clear impression that what you were doing regardless of the tier that you had a direct impact upon the success or failure of the special.

    From Running things...:
    In Siege of the Diamond City it says right in the scenario every time you fired the main weapons -- the generals took notice, and each wave got cumulatively harder the more that you were succeeding. It didn't matter if you were tier 1-2, your actions had a much larger impact. Things changed up enough that it didn't matter your map didn't change waves of *different* enemies were coming. If your GM played it up you knew you had an impact.

    It was a bit confusing post Legacy of the Stonelords when we fought our way towards a major monument near the Worldwound, and then never finishing anything going on with what we started in Siege of the Diamond City. It seemed like it would become an outpost to further the Crusade but...we see a few things there but nothing really much after putting that much resources in that direction. Is the society really that fickle?

    IC thought process:
    Hey we managed to find this place next to the Worldwound we should see if it is useful to helping with the very large threat next door. Oh look we found this shiny thing... lets ignore the Worldwound and see if we can find the pieces to put it back together... and it lets us travel through time lets poke at this instead of being worried about the large hold to the Abyss that is still open. It doesn't quite work as well, lets see about this comet flying around.

    It's this bouncing around and not really finishing or keeping on with things characters would follow up but we have no follow ups. I understand we need to keep things fresh and change things up but it's the disconnect that has been forming and still going on.

    We don't have a hook into why we are there and doing things anymore and Cosmic Captive very much was missing the feel of anything that we were doing and a complete disconnect to things that went on before. The closest we had was the fall out of Serpents Rise to understand who we were working for. Siege of the Diamond City you had the lore of Golgarion itself to hook us into lots of attacking demons that want to take over the world is something that grabs people's attention. Legacy of the Stonelords we still knew how it connected as to why we were there from the last seasons/special.

    One thing that has been getting worse from Siege of the Diamond City onward is the pacing. Legacy of the Stonelords we started to see the pace creep but still made sense with the story and was not as bad. Siege of Serpents and Sky Key Solution you could see it was an issue when you had 'options' but could not get to everything that was going on. The worst I've seen of it was Cosmic Captive and I don't know if it was just in execution but even if you only focused on one path -- you felt oocly rushed too much that we were not even involved but everything in the background was happening at a complete disconnect to what was going on at the table. It wasn't just that we had zero idea ICly what we were supposed to be doing -- but the pace was so rushed it was obvious what we were doing had no impact with our progress when in the same encounter there is two announcements of progress. Which is night and day from Siege of the Diamond City where you were making a difference.

    1/5 5/5

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
    TwoWolves wrote:


    Or, go back to the promise of the original factions, and have tables muster by faction and compete for an exclusive goal, which gives a boon good for the next year. Silver Crusade vs Dark Archive vs Scarab Sages and so on. Bonus points if your actions can actively help or hinder other tables at the same event. Not PvP, obviously, but "throwing some marbles under your rival's boots during a chase" sort of interference, or preventing some misfortune from derailing an allied table.

    NOPE.

    Seriously, if that was a part of a given event I'd avoid it and warn everyone else I knew to avoid it, too.

    4/5 *

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
    Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
    TwoWolves wrote:


    Or, go back to the promise of the original factions, and have tables muster by faction and compete for an exclusive goal, which gives a boon good for the next year. Silver Crusade vs Dark Archive vs Scarab Sages and so on. Bonus points if your actions can actively help or hinder other tables at the same event. Not PvP, obviously, but "throwing some marbles under your rival's boots during a chase" sort of interference, or preventing some misfortune from derailing an allied table.

    NOPE.

    Seriously, if that was a part of a given event I'd avoid it and warn everyone else I knew to avoid it, too.

    Table vs. table competition is one of the things I hated about Race for the Runecarved Key.

    I understand that TwoWolves would enjoy this, and he is not wrong for seeking something like that. However, as it would not be enjoyable for me, like Wei Ji I'd decline to participate.

    The Exchange 5/5

    I would kind of like to see "filler" scenes be something besides combat.

    A scene where you "Fight the Monster" - then have a "filler" while you take care of the refugees you just recued. Spend some RP rounds calming down frightened civilians, or healing a bunch of level 1 commoner slaves, or even entertaining some rescued children. When the rest of the tables have finished the combat and the majority are ready to move on - the Coordinator comes on over the speaker to say something like - "we've opened the Gate! Time to move on!" and the players get to say "Duty calls! Keep your head down till we Save-The-World!". You know, the scene from the old war movie, where the troops are interacting with civilians after the town liberation, and the officer drives up and says "Move it out!"

    Instead we seem to get waves of attackers that are basically the same creatures over and over. "Didn't we just kill this guy - like 5 times already?". It's enough to make the players want to "pad" their turn. "Wait, I think I have a boon for this, let me check..." 3 minutes later "nah, guess not. Hay, remember last week when we fought the giant snake?" yeah, stretch out the turns, cause the "padded combats" just burn resources and don't actually DO anything and worse are often BORING.

    The Exchange 5/5

    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    I just ran a 3-4 table of Cosmic Captive, and at one point the PCs are being attacked by XXXX. As the blurb ends I set up maybe 8 or 9 pawns and the Mook in the front yells "Follow me!" and charges into combat, being followed by a mass of enemies - and I say - "and a stray fireball from the that table" pointing at what everyone knows is the 10-11 table beside us "erupts at the edge of your battle, incinerating" drag most of the pawns off the map "a bunch of the enemy!". Heck, for a 10 second toss into the game - it added a "feel" of being part of a larger event.

    (another point)
    At several Multi-table events I've run Buffing PCs and always felt kind of short changed when I couldn't turn to the table beside us and "toss them a bone". Say I'm running a Cleric and I cast hero's feast, that would effect 1 target per level, and I only half use it. I'd love to pass the extra to a different table. Or as we are "gearing up" at the start of the event, have my Bard use "Triple Time" (again 1 target per level) to add an hour of +10 ft. movement to several PCs NOT on my table. Or a Witch with healing hex... just wander over to another table and say "anyone need any healing?". This would be cool.


    Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
    TwoWolves wrote:


    Or, go back to the promise of the original factions, and have tables muster by faction and compete for an exclusive goal, which gives a boon good for the next year. Silver Crusade vs Dark Archive vs Scarab Sages and so on. Bonus points if your actions can actively help or hinder other tables at the same event. Not PvP, obviously, but "throwing some marbles under your rival's boots during a chase" sort of interference, or preventing some misfortune from derailing an allied table.

    NOPE.

    Seriously, if that was a part of a given event I'd avoid it and warn everyone else I knew to avoid it, too.

    "Hey, thanks for thinking it over though."

    Grand Lodge 4/5

    5 people marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
    TwoWolves wrote:
    "Hey, thanks for thinking it over though."

    Both WeiJi and I played Serpent's Ire together at PaizoCon and experienced some feeling of cross-purposes between PCs. It was not fun. It did not add to the experience. It actively detracted from it. I felt the same way in the early seasons with faction missions. We threw out the shadow war for Absalom for a reason.

    The Exchange 5/5

    5 people marked this as a favorite.

    Some time ago, I was running the low tier table at a multi-table special(APL 1-2), when the adventure got to the major Challenge (Required a Disable Device DC60?!!! - everyone was supposed to find a way around this - flight or climbing or something) and the "big guy" at my table (a 3rd level Dwarven druid that got dropped in to fill the table up to 4 PCs) announces he's going up and using a Boon that he has just gotten. It allows his PC to succeed at "any one skill check the PC is untrained in" .... and he says he's going to open the gate.

    I read the Boon. I called the head judge. Who looked it over and went to tell the high level table that they saw a Dwarven druid walk up and push the gate open. From the Tier 1-2 table. It was one of the high lights of the night for my table. And we still tell that story...

    The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

    4 people marked this as a favorite.

    Yeah, that boon is nuts. Not "roll a 20"; "succeed."

    "I jump to the top of the Citadel."

    "I convince the Runelord to see reason; and join the Dark Archive, to boot."

    Dark Archive 5/5 5/5

    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    GM Lamplighter wrote:
    Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

    I with I could have seen that, Lamplighter. It sounds awesome.

    Hmm

    One day it will happen again, somehow. When we started our local Convocation event, we did a bit of in-character stuff on a much smaller scale. Maybe one year Winnipeg and MSP can combine for an international convocation? We could host in at the Wounded Wisp...

    Maybe hold the convocation in Fargo?

    A bunch of us are rolling up in November. We should all sit and discuss making this happen.

    The Exchange 4/5 5/5

    Two completely different points I want to address.

    1. Too much prep/too many possible encounters
    I did some math for Cosmic Captive, and I agree. It's a little spoilery:

    Spoiler:
    There are 21 possible encounters in the "district claiming" portion. The minimum number of successes to complete the claiming is (2-2/3 x # of tables). So realistically the average table is going to see 3 or 4 encounters before the Overseer calls to move to the next section. So the really prepped GMs have prepped five times as many encounters as they will run.

    2. Cross-table buffing
    It sounds cool and interactive, but it can seriously unbalance things at the low tiers. When we played 10-11 at GenCon heroes feast was on the low end of the scale when it came to group buffs we were throwing around. I can picture turning to the 3-4 table beside us and saying "OK, so +2 morale to attacks, damage, skills, and saving throws, +3 competence to attack and damage, and we're about to cast prayer so go ahead and factor that in as well. There will probably be more next round.". . ."Oh yeah, forgot to ask. Does anyone over there worship Sarenrae? If so you've got more buffs to calculate."

    Deciding where to draw the line is the tough part. There's no way to put every possible situation in the scenario, so some locales would end up having a much easier time than others. I think the aid tokens that high tier tables have given to lower tier tables in past years worked pretty well. But I do think that there was just too much going on in Cosmic Captive to try to work them in as well.

    Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

    Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
    Lau Bannenberg wrote:
    There were a couple of "extra credit" encounters that were only available at one route and only intended for top-tier, but those were really HEAVY things. Quite likely to TPK-unrecoverable top-tier parties who attempt them. You get a big reward if you manage them, but it's not expected that you'll even try. We're talking CR 17 "eat your soul" monsters against a level 10-11 party; strictly optional.

    That was the fight Wei Ji was talking about.

    We killed it.

    Good for you. Honestly.

    It was one of the more heinous statblocks I've seen. In the end I decided as GM that I'd push my players away from it because I believed it would most likely push half of the table into a state where they'd be unable to play on, due to

    Spoiler:
    being sent to another plane, petrified, have their souls eaten...

    I like that the option was there, and that I didn't have to use it if it wasn't appropriate.

    I'm glad I did get to run the special enemy towards the end;

    Spoiler:
    The oni opened up with Earthquake, burying the entire party. It took three rounds before the PCs had rallied enough to even deal any damage to their enemies.

    I really liked the room to scale challenge to group while running the high tier.

    Grand Lodge 4/5

    Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
    Lau Bannenberg wrote:
    Good for you. Honestly.

    And the point Wei Ji was making is that either the boxed text or the presentation from the GM made it seem like we really needed to deal with this thing or the entire operation was lost. I don't think it was the GMs fault, but more the gung-ho nature of the party to go gloriously succeed/fail. It also was colored by the fact that four of us had run it at GenCon and had an idea of what we were getting into.

    1 to 50 of 82 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Building a better multi-table special All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.