Venture-Agent, Minnesota
|
| 8 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are still a few places (like Online!) where Core games still thrive but PFS chronicles are incredibly stingy with non-Core mundane loot. Why? Because at the time many of these were written, Core did not exist!
But there are hundreds of times that crucial mundane non-Core survival equipment shows up as treasure but does not appear on the chronicle sheet. For example, I just noticed in a game that I recently GMed the following items as treasure:
Anti-Plague
Weapon Blanch
Ghost Salt
If a group of Core players find these items, they are going to be ecstatic — until they realize that none of these items appear on the chronicle sheet.
There already is a mechanic where GMs can write down the scrolls and wizard spells found in adventures on chronicle sheets. Can we please have a mechanic where we GMs can write down on chronicles MUNDANE treasure that is provided in the adventures? Weird weapons? Alchemical survival items? I’m okay if you want to limit this with a cash limit and say that GMs can only write down mundane items under 1000 gold. Still, I think that this would be a great addition to Core.
Thank you for considering! As always, those GMs and Players who wish to provide arguments against my proposal are always welcome to do so! When rules changes are suggested, it is best that all sides are presented.
Hmm
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love this idea as a player. Obviously I really enjoy Core. Even if we have a purchase limit for them (3 or 4) that would turn these things into real treasures. I had a recent Core game where folk wanted to buy an Aldroi dueling sword - very much a focus of the scenario and with a good in game mechanic for it, but was unable to.
The downside obviously is that it pollutes Core games a little with extra items, which was the whole attraction of Core.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Were this to happen, I'd also appreciate a means to make certain items masterwork in Core. Much as I'd love to get that Aldori Dueling Sword, I think I'd cry knowing that I could never make it masterwork, let along magical.
Or maybe just a comment in the Guide stating that if you have access to a given item, then you also have access to the masterwork version of that item.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll +1 this. There's lots of handy, low-level mundane items that it always irks me I can't have in Core-- none of them are game-breaking and to me they don't violate the spirit of Core, but it's stuff like the items mentioned: basic solutions that it'd be nice to be rewarded for 'finding' in game, past that initial scenario.
|
Venture-Agent, Minnesota
|
Thanks for the feedback everyone! Also thanks for braving this thread despite the superlong title. Bret told me that it was far too long for forum etiquette — after the one hour edit mark had passed.
In hindsight, I should have just called it: “Core Chronicles, Mundane Items, and a Plea for an OPC Ruling.”
Hey, maybe I’ll flag my own post so that some kind mod will change it and I won’t have the verbose title again!
Hmm
|
Venture-Agent, Minnesota
|
Heh. I never thought I would make a proposal about the CORE campaign, but it is a big deal in my region. I am guessing that about the fifth of the games that I see go through Flaxseed Lodge are Core. I know that Core is also alive and well in France and Schools and a few other assorted places. I would love to see this Core-friendly proposal pass.
Hmm
|
Venture-Agent, Minnesota
|
Yes, I don’t want it to be all items... Just the ones that I wind up writing treasure cards for before a game because they are actually found in the scenario!
Hmm
PS Hmm peers at Stephen’s listed title, then reads his VA statement. So you’ve reduced your workload a bit? Sensible. I do think that will be my retirement plan as well. Once I’ve served my time, I think that going from VC to VA would be a sweet deal. Meanwhile, I hope that your replacement VC will be processed swiftly by the OPC.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The downside obviously is that it pollutes Core games a little with extra items, which was the whole attraction of Core.
This.
I've been the contrarian in most of these proposals. I was against allowing non-Core spells to be copied from enemy spellcasters' books. I don't even like non-Core items that appear on Chronicles being available for purchase.I play a considerable amount of Core and the attraction for my group is the challenge of adventuring with a very limited toolbox from which to equip our characters. Every time the door to additional non-Core items is opened wider, the Core campaign moves closer to the original campaign.
It's always been my opinion that if there's something non-Core a player wants for their character, they should probably be playing the original campaign instead.
Having said that, I won't be upset in the least if such a rule as HMM proposes is adopted. My group is free to ignore any non-Core spells or equipment that might be made available to us in order to keep our own game "pure". I don't believe any of us have ever purchased anything non-Core, even if it was on a Chronicle. And we're now at a level where we're unlikely to play with others who may have.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like this proposal.
Many of these items already ARE available on chronicle sheets (eg, antiplague) so it isn't as if we're adding anything particularly major to the Core Game. We are, admittedly, making some items MORE common.
If you want to keep the changes minimal to start then set the gold piece limit to something quite low (eg, 100 gold). Then if it IS a popular change you can raise the limit later.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I see the virtue of this proposal for the players, but I am concerned because it is my opinion that we need to keep the workload for GMs as light as possible.
A GM would need to go through the scenario and find out what items that appear are non-core. He or she would then have to find out what they cost and if they fall under the proposed threshold, whatever it might be. This work might be done by another GM and be in the GM shared prep folder, or not. Whether it is or not, it is something additional to do and the good GM would check another's work to see if he/she agrees.
Finally the GM has to add the items found and their price to each chronicle he/she hands out. All in all it is a bunch of additional work by the GM that adds (in my opinion) little to the game.
For some items (like the Aldori sword in Aerondor's example) I agree that it would have been nice if they appeared on the chronicle.
To follow Stephen's example ;-)
(I am a VL)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think that level of work would be necessary. It would be sufficient, in my mind, for the GM to be reactive rather than proactive and only add the item if requested by a player. The player notices that an Aldori dueling sword was used by a defeated opponent, the player could ask that it be added to the chronicle sheet. The player cold also look the item up and show the price. This puts the burden on the player, not the GM. A GM that is more proactive could do this up front if they wanted to, of course, but only if they wanted to.
|
|
A GM would need to go through the scenario and find out what items that appear are non-core.
I disagree. Its up to the players to notice the item and ask the GM to add it. They snooze, they lose.
To do otherwise would be to make this a complete non starter for me. Too much work.
So, the rules have to say something like
"The GM MAY (at a players request) add mundane items to the chronicle sheet"
Note : I'm quite happy and willing to write in "antiplague" on the chronicle sheet and/or pass them off to the players and initial the items they noticed. But I'm not going through the adventure before or after it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM who sticks with Core, I'm hesitant to add more non-Core items to what I'm supposed to know.
For my home games it's fine, but if you want me to step up and GM Core games other places, then you're adding to my frustration and uncertainty if every player I meet has a chance to be using an item I'm unfamiliar with and can't make good rulings about.
Core is not just for new players. It's also for new GMs.
|
Contributor
|
It bears mentioning that the players would still have to provide a legal source for such an item, so assuming your players are compliant with policy, you should have access to the full text.
In addition, in my experience, the type of items under discussion are very simple - I don't think you'll have much trouble figuring out antiplague, for example. ^_^
Yeah, keeping the gp price down, and making sure the stuff is simple would help a lot.
How would I know that an item was "simple" if a player comes up after the game? Again, assume that I don't have the encyclopedic knowledge that most GMs have.
I could, I suppose, do internet research there at the store, but frankly at the end of a long night it doesn't sound appealing.
The "50 gp" suggestion would be easy to implement. And being sure the item is "mundane".
|
Venture-Agent, Minnesota—Minneapolis
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've only been playing for a short time in Core.
Things that I keep stumbling across as wanting which aren't in core are:
* blunt arrows (Advanced Player's Guide/Ultimate Equipment), allow bludgeoning and non-lethal damage for archers.
* anti plague (Advanced Player's Guide/Ultimate Equipment), alchemical substance that works similar to anti toxin only for diseases
* weapon blanches (Advanced Player's Guide/Ultimate Equipment), alchemical substance that allows you to bypass DR based on special materials without having a weapon of that type
All of these are items that can be found on the PRD.
Perhaps the limit should be only those items found in the PRD and mundane?
The Core Campaign first appeared in Season 7. If you wanted to further restrict it, you could say only for chronicles before Season 7.
I don't mind the idea of restricting by price, but think that requiring it be in the PRD and mundane is probably a better restriction. Too many restrictions and it starts getting complicated -- a GM who hasn't run across something like this is likely to not want to do it if there are too many restrictions.
---
I agree that it should be by player request. Those who are using Core Campaign as a hard mode then would just never request it. With the additional requirement that it be found in the PRD, that should allow any GM to relatively quickly look it up. As always, the players would be responsible for having the materials.
|
|
Two additional concerns:
1. Chronicle farming. I imagine there must be a significant portion of the Core campaign player base that is active in the original campaign. It is possible that they would know in which scenarios certain non-Core items that would become available under this proposal can be found. I don’t know if this breaks the intent of the Core campaign or not, but such players could seek out such scenarios for specific non-Core gear that might “optimize” a Core character in ways the campaign never intended.
2. A level playing field. For the most part, all Core characters have (or will eventually have) access to the same gear. The current exception, of course, is non-Core gear that appears on a Chronicle sheet. Adding additional non-Core gear to that exception just heightens the perception that there’s a disparity between characters based upon the scenarios those characters have played. “Oh, you don’t have non-Core item X? You should have played scenario Y. You’re gong to need that item to be successful.”
Perhaps the limit should be only those items found in the PRD and mundane?
<snip>
With the additional requirement that it be found in the PRD, that should allow any GM to relatively quickly look it up.
If you're going to allow everything in the PRD, then you've added:
Advanced Class Guide
Advanced Player's Guide
Advanced Race Guide
Game Mastery Guide
Mythic Adventures
Pathfinder Unchained
Occult Adventures
Ultimate Campaign
Ultimate Combat
Ultimate Equipment
Ultimate Magic
Technology Guide
At that point, you might as well expect me to GM all PFS games, because I could "relatively quickly look it up".
No thanks
|
|
CrystalSeas nails the issue, in my opinion.
I have complex thoughts on the Core Campaign, but I've come to realize that its biggest value is as a GM training ground. Yes, I know players want things like blunt arrows and antiplague. But, do they *need* them? Isn't part of the challenge of core, having to do things differently?
More succinctly: do players of Core campaign need non-core items more than we all need the next generation of GMs who have built confidence and experiencing GMing Core Campaign? A new GM enables up to 7 new players; one less GM means 3-7 players don't get to play.
|
|
CrystalSeas nails the issue, in my opinion.
I have complex thoughts on the Core Campaign, but I've come to realize that its biggest value is as a GM training ground. Yes, I know players want things like blunt arrows and antiplague. But, do they *need* them? Isn't part of the challenge of core, having to do things differently?
I echo and support CrystalSeas' and GM Lamplighter's thoughts on this.
|
Venture-Agent, Minnesota—Minneapolis
|
Two additional concerns:
1. Chronicle farming. I imagine there must be a significant portion of the Core campaign player base that is active in the original campaign. It is possible that they would know in which scenarios certain non-Core items that would become available under this proposal can be found. I don’t know if this breaks the intent of the Core campaign or not, but such players could seek out such scenarios for specific non-Core gear that might “optimize” a Core character in ways the campaign never intended.
2. A level playing field. For the most part, all Core characters have (or will eventually have) access to the same gear. The current exception, of course, is non-Core gear that appears on a Chronicle sheet. Adding additional non-Core gear to that exception just heightens the perception that there’s a disparity between characters based upon the scenarios those characters have played. “Oh, you don’t have non-Core item X? You should have played scenario Y. You’re gong to need that item to be successful.”
Chronicle farming can be a problem.
Do you believe this would make it a larger problem in Core than it currently is?
As for the second complaint, I really don’t see a change. Chronicles already modify what a character has available to them in either campaign. I can think of several chronicles that give access to things that otherwise are not available in either campaign.
Axe Beak
An intelligent longsword
An intelligent shield
Early access to Pseudo Dragon with a special ability
I am sure there are other examples.
Perhaps the limit should be only those items found in the PRD and mundane?
<snip>
With the additional requirement that it be found in the PRD, that should allow any GM to relatively quickly look it up.If you're going to allow everything in the PRD, then you've added:
Advanced Class Guide
Advanced Player's Guide
Advanced Race Guide
Game Mastery Guide
Mythic Adventures
Pathfinder Unchained
Occult Adventures
Ultimate Campaign
Ultimate Combat
Ultimate Equipment
Ultimate Magic
Technology GuideAt that point, you might as well expect me to GM all PFS games, because I could "relatively quickly look it up".
No thanks
First of all, it was never everything. Please do not exaggerate that way. It would have to be something either given as treasure during the scenario or listed on an NPC’s gear and be mundane.
Yes, I do think it is reasonable for a GM to look up items that are used by NPCs or given as treasure in a scenario. I realize that isn’t always practical, but the instances of running a scenario relatively cold are hopefully rare.
In most areas that I am aware of, the GM chooses what they will or will not run. In either campaign, only run things you are comfortable with.
That said, the limit of only chronicles before Season 7 would eliminate Occult Adventures from the list and prevent any further growth. I am not against such a limit.
——
I gave a list of items that I noticed missing from Core. They are all things that I am used to using in the standard campaign.
How do the people who play a lot of Core currently deal with not having those items?
|
Venture-Agent, Minnesota—Minneapolis
|
CrystalSeas nails the issue, in my opinion.
I have complex thoughts on the Core Campaign, but I've come to realize that its biggest value is as a GM training ground. Yes, I know players want things like blunt arrows and antiplague. But, do they *need* them? Isn't part of the challenge of core, having to do things differently?
More succinctly: do players of Core campaign need non-core items more than we all need the next generation of GMs who have built confidence and experiencing GMing Core Campaign? A new GM enables up to 7 new players; one less GM means 3-7 players don't get to play.
The location I host at doesn’t offer any Core. We train GMs by starting them out on quests and easy scenarios. We also try to make sure there is at least one helpful, experienced player at their first few tables. As an organizer, I also try to warn when someone signs up for a scenario that I know to be tricky.
I’ve just started Core with a group in PbP. I wasn’t looking for an increase in challenge level, it was so the group could actually play most of that season again. As I’m sure many know, it can be quite challenging to find older scenarios that a group of people all can play.
|
|
I gave a list of items that I noticed missing from Core. They are all things that I am used to using in the standard campaign.
We're all used to using things or playing characters in the original campaign that aren't available in the Core campaign. This may sound harsh, but in my opinion, if there's something in the original campaign you can't play without and you know it isn't available in the Core campaign, maybe you shouldn't be playing in the Core campaign.
How do the people who play a lot of Core currently deal with not having those items?
The same way we deal with everything else that isn't in the Core campaign. I know that sounds snarky, but speaking for myself, one of the reasons I'm playing the Core campaign is because those things aren't available.
It's a different campaign; let's learn to do things differently (instead of the way we're used to doing them in the original campaign).
Again, if the only way you can "deal" with the Core campaign is to use items from the original campaign, the Core campaign may not be for you.
|
|
I’ve just started Core with a group in PbP. I wasn’t looking for an increase in challenge level, it was so the group could actually play most of that season again.
I suspect this may be the case with some players looking to open up Core to more non-Core items. They want to replay scenarios for credit, but don't really want to play the Core campaign.
|
|
Chronicles already modify what a character has available to them in either campaign. I can think of several chronicles that give access to things that otherwise are not available in either campaign.
In this current proposal, it's not the Chronicle that's modifying what's available; it's the GM and/or player.
If something non-Core appears on a Chronicle, it can be bought by any Core character to which that Chronicle has been assigned at any time, provided they meet any purchase requirements.With a non-Core item that doesn't appear on the Chronicle, the player needs to know they may want to purchase it in the future and remember to ask the GM to write it on the Chronicle. Otherwise, the item won't be available. That has the potential to create a disparity between Core characters when characters who have played the same scenario with the same results don't have the same item availability.
If I play a scenario in which blunt arrows (for example) makes an appearance and I don't realize I may want them or I forget to ask the GM to note them on my Chronicle, I'm unable to purchase them later when I realize I do want them; another character who played the same scenario may have grabbed those arrows right away. Two characters. Same scenario. Different item availability. Playing field is no longer level.
|
|
Maybe an alternative to the original proposal would work?
We (as in the community) come up with a relatively short list of items that should be allowed. I'm thinking of the kinds of things that everybody really wants, that aren't particularly powerful, that are easy to GM for.
My personal list would be something like
smoked goggles (maybe too powerful)
smelling salts (no real downside that I can see)
blunt arrows (lets not be quite as murder hobo-ish)
antiplague
I actually do NOT want weapon blanches (archers are already powerful enough).
So, we'd take some time to come to something approximating consensus but I'd bet we'd be able to come up with a dozen or 20 candidates that most liked and few REALLY disliked.
Heck, we could then even mine the scenarios for this limited list of items and put it up on pfsprep.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Again, if the only way you can "deal" with the Core campaign is to use items from the original campaign, the Core campaign may not be for you.
I have exactly 1 Core character, so I don't have much investment in this discussion. However, I did want to point out that not everything non-CORE is super complex/rule bending/cheesy.
I can buy a fishhook, but I can't buy string or twine in Core.
There are a lot of mundane things that should just exist that didn't make it onto the CRB equipment list. If someone added a masterwork backpack to a Core chronicle (I'm pretty sure there isn't one of these in anyone's treasure), I'd be super excited. Even ear plugs (because I table variation on what kind of wax wax candles are made from and can you make ear plugs without some sort of craft check).
But back to the more pertinent items: being able to take that Aldori dueling sword off of the magus or the antiplaque you found in the dispensary would be nice treasure for the Core player.
I suspect that saying it would force us to use more references is a bit disingenuous as we already have to do that with magical items on Chronicles.
|
Venture-Agent, Minnesota—Minneapolis
|
Chronicles already modify what a character has available to them in either campaign. I can think of several chronicles that give access to things that otherwise are not available in either campaign.In this current proposal, it's not the Chronicle that's modifying what's available; it's the GM and/or player.
If something non-Core appears on a Chronicle, it can be bought by any Core character to which that Chronicle has been assigned at any time, provided they meet any purchase requirements.With a non-Core item that doesn't appear on the Chronicle, the player needs to know they may want to purchase it in the future and remember to ask the GM to write it on the Chronicle. Otherwise, the item won't be available. That has the potential to create a disparity between Core characters when characters who have played the same scenario with the same results don't have the same item availability.
If I play a scenario in which blunt arrows (for example) makes an appearance and I don't realize I may want them or I forget to ask the GM to note them on my Chronicle, I'm unable to purchase them later when I realize I do want them; another character who played the same scenario may have grabbed those arrows right away. Two characters. Same scenario. Different item availability. Playing field is no longer level.
Thanks you for the above explanation, Earl. I had not realized that was what you originally meant.
I can see where that may cause problems because there would be significant table variation. Although I can immediately come up with multiple solutions to that, the ones that spring immediately to mind would cause their own complications. I’ll need to think a bit more on this.
Sorry you don’t feel I should play Core.
|
|
I'm for it (mundane treasure on written on chronicle by GM).
However, I think GM Aerondor mentioned a purchase limit. I'd be in favor of that. Say ammunition a one time purchase of 10..and everything else is just a one time purchase and then you cross it off.
I'd also keep it to items 500gp or less for simplicity and balance sake.
|
Venture-Agent, Minnesota
|
Guys, I think the question of whether someone belongs in Core or not is unproductive. There should be no Core litmus test. There are many reasons to be in Core. Maybe you have run out of scenarios in the regular campaign. Maybe you want a simpler and cheaper campaign. Maybe you want that GM training ground.
Or maybe you are just a person like me who wants to support Core in the region she administrates, and who has discovered that by playing Core she can play with a great group of friends that she would not otherwise be able to find common ground with.
Core is an interesting experiment for me. I do like the lack of choice paralysis that I have when leveling. The higher challenge is interesting, too. But it is not my first choice for play. I admit that I love having choices. Still, I am enjoying my long term Core Campaign, Moar Core. My fellow players and GMs are wonderful and it is interesting doing a long PFS campaign of scenarios.
My guess is that chronicle fishing already happens more in Core than in Standard. Why? Because people generally have already played a game in Standard before they have in core. So they read through their old chronicles and suddenly remember, “Hey, Soapy in the Shackles had an unlimited supply of bubble bath! I should play that on my character so that I can offer some scented bubble bath to Grand Master Torch the next time I see him!”
I was hoping that my proposal would cause less chronicle fishing rather than more, because then players would be less tempted to steer themselves towards newer scenarios with more listed core loot.
I don’t want to cause disparities. I wanted to reduce them. For me, as a GM who preps, I write out treasure cards now before every game. I want players to know what their treasure is so that they can use it, and turn it back into me if it is a consumable. I don’t want to increase GM workload or complicate the campaign. I just want to be able to help my players be able to purchase basic survival gear without having to chronicle fish for it.
I’m still hoping that we can find a workable balance here.
Hmm
|
|
I just want to be able to help my players be able to purchase basic survival gear...
Perhaps this is the true heart of my reluctance to agree with your proposal. Perhaps what you're viewing as basic survival gear is something I'm viewing as a "crutch." Perhaps I'm being overly protective of a game that isn't mine and I'm expecting everyone to want to play it the same way I do. I don't want to be that guy who tells someone they're not having fun the right way, so let me look at this another way.
I’m still hoping that we can find a workable balance here.
I could get on board with accepting a small list of "Always Available" non-Core items. That should eliminate any Chronicle farming for such items and should eliminate any table variation.
But what items should be on such a list?
I could accept just about any item that doesn't circumvent, replace, or otherwise mitigate anything for which there is already a Core mechanic. That's probably not very clear, so let me give you a couple of examples from items mentioned earlier.
Smoked goggles? No. They mitigate the already existing mechanics of averting one's eyes and/or wearing a blindfold.
Blunt arrows? Yes. I don't know of any other way to deal non-lethal damage with a bow.
Weapon blanches? No. They would replace the already existing availability of weapons made of special materials.
Non-Core weapons? Probably not. There are a lot of weapons in the CRB; does one really need more?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry you don’t feel I should play Core.
My apologies; that was not my intent. I should have used a universal "one", instead of an easily misunderstood "you." What I meant to convey was that, in my opinion, if one finds the Core campaign too restrictive, perhaps the Core campaign isn't for them. I didn't mean for you to think I was singling you out or attacking you in anyway. Again, my apologies.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry you don’t feel I should play Core.My apologies; that was not my intent. I should have used a universal "one", instead of an easily misunderstood "you." What I meant to convey was that, in my opinion, if one finds the Core campaign too restrictive, perhaps the Core campaign isn't for them. I didn't mean for you to think I was singling you out or attacking you in anyway. Again, my apologies.
This idea wasn't about Core being too restrictive--HMM can correct me if I'm wrong--or adding an always available list of non-Core items. It was: if scenario A-B lists two antiplagues as lootable treasure, can we write 'antiplague (limit: 2)' on the chronicle.
As HMM said, all the discussion about why someone should or shouldn't play Core detracts from the actual topic, because you playing because you want what you see as a challenge has no bearing on why someone else plays or if they should and will only introduce fire to the thread.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
I currently only have on Core character and the last Core session I played or ran was quite some time ago.
To be honest, I have mixed feeling on this one I already kinda dislike the chronicle farming in Core, since it feels a bit like farming a certain number of replayable might be the "best" start for a new character... but that aspect is kinda baked into the whole campaign.
Another potential issue would be that players could feel penalized when a GM does choose an encounter that does not feature the item they are searching for ( a recent 3-7 replayable comes to mind) and would like to be added to their chronicle sheet.
The suggestion certainly has merit but seems like something the current roster of active Core players and GMs should have a long discussion about (the environment feels somewhat distinct from the general PFS environment, so every change should be carefully considered).