|
Hi,
I'd like to ask an Organiser the answer to the below question.
Can Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Scenarios be run in Campaign Mode (Homegames) as per p11 of the Guild Guide (copied below)?
Most seem to hint this in the "How to play" Section:
This scenario is designed for play in the Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild campaign, but it can easily be adapted for use with any world.
Campaign Mode: For sanctioned Adventure Paths, GMs are allowed to use their own rules for character creation and running the presented content (the entire book or series). Credit is applied to an appropriate Roleplaying Guild character as if the character created were a pregenerated character.
Thanks for your time on this,
Andrew
|
I'm not an organiser.
A Starfinder Society scenario is not a sanctioned Adventure Path and doesn't have a Campaign Mode.
If you bought the scenario, you can run it at home with any characters and rules you like. You or your players don't get a chronicle on a SFS character for it (nor does it stop you getting credit for it as a SFS scenario later, with the usual caveats).
Starfinder Society Developer
|
Campaign Mode only applies to the Adventure Path installments, and not to the monthly scenarios. If you want to receive Organized Play credit for those scenarios, they must be played using the Organized Play rules.
However, if you're just looking to have a fun game with your friends, then you can certainly run the Organized Play scenarios with a home group using whatever rules you want. You just won't get the associated Organized Play credit for your characters.
|
|
Starglim and Thurston,
First of all thank you for your quick responses.
@Starglim The problem is there's very little incentive for my players to play it again. Play everything twice? That adds up to a lot of time wasted. When I run them, I use the NPC's as is except for minor tweaks, almost always none at all. I run the combats as is with some minor tweaks, almost always none at all. Heck, converting Stats and tweaking takes time I don't have.
@Thurston My setting is different because I and the Players I attract like Science Fiction, not so much Science Fantasy. The setting is our own Milky Way Galaxy. The different Characters have different backgrounds (The Ysoki, for example, were originally created by Doctor Moreau on earth), but all their stats etc exactly as the core rules. The other player races are the same. A background change with all their stats etc exactly as the core rules. Golarion has never existed in this setting. There aren't Undead, just people who survived the virus but still are disfigured and sometimes have special powers (inspired from Z Nation, Walking Dead etc.). Their stats again remain the same as the Undead (remember special powers I mentioned).
All in all a change of setting to Science Fiction is easy with the Starfinder rules. I'm even happy to run with Starfinder Character Rules if need be. With so little change from the original I doubt my players would want to play the same scenario again. We certainly won't get through all the Scenarios offered, including the Adventure Paths. I GM several groups and can only GM so much. If I could give them a Chronicle as per Campaign Mode they could play others at other times with recognition of ones played with me. I also would receive recognition for running these Scenario Adventures.
If a change of setting with background changes and Location differences are enough to negate a Chronicle as per Campaign, then I am disappointed. This in no way changes my view all are entitled to their own opinions and we must follow the rules. Still I will be disappointed and a bit mystified as to why an adventure classed as an Adventure Path is ok, but an adventure classed as a Scenario is different (obviously some will be exceptions eg Specials and the like). Both are Modules. Can I put in a request to consider a change to make some Scenarios Campaign Mode?
Anyhow, thanks for your time. You are right, another RPG could better suit our setting.
Thanks again,
Andrew.
|
Organized Play Lead Developer
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Starfinder Society scenarios are, first and foremost, a resource.
With in the context of a home game, you can do as you wish with them. That includes using them as side quests for your own adventures, running all scenarios as the basis for a campaign, changing NPCs, borrowing entire subplots, replacing goblins with pokemon driving battle mechs, creating entirely new character classes, and/or changing the sci-fi fantasy setting into a strictly sci-fi setting. The RPG as a whole is about telling fun stories together, and however you want to tinker with Starfinder for your home group is your prerogative.
If you’re going to run scenarios in the context of organized play, though, there are guidelines and expectations, the vast majority of which exist to provide a consistent and fair gaming experience for everyone who shows up to the event. That means a consistency in the rules, a consistency in character design, an understanding that the GM isn’t taking significant liberties with the adventure as written , and consistency of setting. After all, the people who show up to an organized play game all made their characters to exist within the context of this shared setting. That’s what they signed up for, and that’s what our program delivers.
Adventure Paths allow for Campaign Mode because the organized play team recognizes that these adventures weren’t designed explicitly for organized play use; Dead Suns is a half-exception just because it assumes some or all of the PCs are Starfinders, but even then, it’s not developed with Starfinder Society encounter scaling and reward structures—no problem. Furthermore, it’s nice to experience an Adventure Path from start to finish and level “naturally,” which isn’t quite how the Event Mode versions operate for important campaign balance and logistical reasons. Finally, there’s a tradition of playing Adventure Paths in a home setting as a way to get a change of pace from organized play scenarios (gamers like variety), and when we started sanctioning Adventure Paths six years ago, we didn’t want to disrupt that by mandating org play rules in that context. All of that contributes to why Campaign Mode is an option...for Adventure Paths.
So to get to your closing point, Starfinder sounds like a really good fit for your group with the adaptations you noted. Starfinder Society scenarios sound like they could be a great fit for your group with the adaptations you noted. The adaptations you noted just don’t sound like a good fit for organized play, and that’s totally fine. What I recommend is playing a few rounds of Starfinder Society “as intended” with a public community and seeing if it’s something you might enjoy. If so, run those Adventure Paths in any way you like, and assign the credit. If it’s not what your group’s looking for (not my desire, but I respect different tastes), then you shouldn’t feel any consternation about whether or not to adapt scenarios to fit you own setting
And in the end, Starfinder Society scenarios are a resource, and I encourage you to use them for your home group in whatever way provides the most fun: as written for organized play or as adjusted for a home game.
|
|
Hi John,
Thanks again for your thoughts.
I thought issuing a Chronicle as the "Campaign Rules" states was 'a consistent and fair gaming experience' (Paragraph 2)
I take your points in Paragraph 3 about the Adventure Paths. Their just a bit long for me and most of our GM's to commit to. The Scenarios would have been perfect.
We are a smallish group (a bit over 30) of Sci-Fi Guys looking for a new system as our old one is old with little support now. What made Starfinder attractive is the Organised Play because we always struggle for GM's and I thought (wrongly) our games could count if people wanted extra or give us GM's a rest. I know many would not like starting at Level 1, especially seeing modules they have already played and receiving no credit for.
I already have played several and know what it is like. It's good and when I'm not GM'ing our Group, I'll play again.
If our games don't count at all for Organised Play then it has no advantage over the other Systems on the table at the moment so it's harder for me to convince others.
Anyhow it's all mute now, I will continue to play as I can and our Group will decide on a System soon. Sigh, it looks like Savage Worlds Sci Fi. A bit simple for me.
Anyhow, keep up the good work and thanks,
Andrew
|
The characters playing through these modified scenarios couldn't be played with actual Organized Play characters, but that's about all you're missing out on. I don't understand why you have to move on to yet another gaming system. That system won't have an Organized Play option, either.
So say you run a scenario with Sci-Fi and no Ysoki. You all have a blast and it comes time for rewards. You read off the # of credits and Fame that the characters would have gotten from an actual Chronicle, and plan your next session.
There's like no fundamental difference, other than those characters simply couldn't participate in an actual Organized Play event elsewhere. You still run through all the same motions otherwise.
Venture-Agent, Georgia—Atlanta
|
Andrew,
Can I ask a silly question? Why not just play the scenarios as they are? Magic does exist, but does not run rampant in the setting. You will miss out on Technomancers and Mystics, but that is ok. Just ignore the magic parts of it. Maybe preview the scenarios before hand, and don't play the ones that have magic (01-02 comes to mind). Or, you could apply the "any significantly advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology" theory to the magic. Call it "Quantum Physics" or something instead of Magic or Mysticism.
Settings wise, Starfinder and Starfinder Society in general will support most of this play style, as long as you ignore the elephant of magic. Just give out chronicles with the caveat that their experience in other Society play may be different.
I have played with a Starfinder Society character who does not believe in magic. It has been fun to watch the character say things like 'this is not Science' or 'your science has failed you'.
As for the APs, so far, I have run the 1st and 2nd module of Dead Suns, and I have managed to fit them both in 2 4-hour sessions.
Starfinder Society is so much more flexible than most of PFS, from my observation. There is room for your playstyle as well, as long as you follow the campaign rules in the the Roleplaying Guild Guide.
Sincerely,
The Masked Ferret
|
|
Hi Nefreet
First up, as always, thanks for your time.
"The characters playing through these modified scenarios couldn't be played with actual Organized Play characters, but that's about all you're missing out on."
We wouldn't be playing these Characters. We would be playing different ones as per the Campaign Rules.
"I don't understand why you have to move on to yet another gaming system. That system won't have an Organized Play option, either."
I'm sorry as I must have been unclear in my previous post. We are a group of 30+ Guys (and a couple of women) looking to change "to" another System. Our Group currently plays a very old System, certainly not Starfinder. It is I, and I alone that have played a couple of Starfinder Society Adventures and read a couple more. I like them very much and could see how just changing the setting (not plot, combats, system etc) would work for us and especially me as a GM. I subscribed, only me.
Summary: A growing Group of Sci-Fi Roleplayers, currently playing a very old RPG, is looking for a new System. A minority voice (me mainly) is arguing for 'Starfinder'.
"That system won't have an Organized Play option, either."
Exactly. I said to my Group, if we choose Starfinder, we can go to Conventions, play online and play the same Level (not the same PC's) in a different setting for a change because I can issue Chronicles under the Campaign Rules. I argued this was an advantage the other talked about settings didn't have. I was wrong and glad I checked up on it. If we play the Adventure Paths we can do just that (as I understand it). As I mentioned their length is a bit much, where the Senarios would have been great. As you rightly point out, no organized play for other Systems either, so Starfinder is no different to New Traveller or Savage Worlds Sci-Fi (the two most put forward Systems our Group is talking about).
Summary: I argued, as a unique option, Organised Play (using same Level (not the same PC's) under the Campaign Rules) stood Starfinder above the other Systems put forward. Not so. I am in a minority in our Group and can't see others on board without such an advantage.
"So say you run a scenario with Sci-Fi and no Ysoki. You all have a blast and it comes time for rewards. You read off the # of credits and Fame that the characters would have gotten from an actual Chronicle, and plan your next session."
Not sure where you got the idea I didn't want Ysoki. Their my personal favorite, that's why I mentioned them. I simply changed their background and said they were originally created by Doctor Moreau on earth. As to the rest of the paragraph, sure and other voices will argue we can do the same with New Traveler or Savage Worlds Sci-Fi.
"There's like no fundamental difference, other than those characters simply couldn't participate in an actual Organized Play event elsewhere. You still run through all the same motions otherwise."
I think I covered this earlier. Not same Characters, new ones under the Campaign Rules. No can do, no level advantage now under the Campaign Rules, we can simply play as an add on activity starting at Level 1 and go for any system we want for us to use personally. Very few will follow me into Starfinder in this situation.
We'll vote on the System to adopt in June when we will start afresh, buying books etc.
Hopefully I have been more clear this time,
Thanks again,
Andrew
|
|
Gosh. I'm reading and re-reading everything you're typing and I guess I'm just not getting it. Maybe because I don't know anything about the other gaming systems you're talking about.
Most of the points you repeated I already understood. I guess Starfinder Society may not be what's best for your group. It's not for everybody. Your group probably knows what's best for them.
Often times over in the Pathfinder Society Forum people would ask for similar allowances to do things "differently". Or people who had just started recently would ask for changes to the system that had already been tried, tested and failed. It can be difficult for an experienced person to explain to a newbie why something doesn't work.
As much as we'd love for your group to join our community (and Paizo to earn your money), we equally wish you good luck in finding a new system.
Maybe a couple people will find the spare time to fit some Starfinder into their schedule ^_^
|
|
Hi Ferret
As always, thanks for your time.
"Can I ask a silly question? Why not just play the scenarios as they are? Magic does exist, but does not run rampant in the setting. You will miss out on Technomancers and Mystics, but that is ok. Just ignore the magic parts of it. Maybe preview the scenarios before hand, and don't play the ones that have magic (01-02 comes to mind). Or, you could apply the "any significantly advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology" theory to the magic. Call it "Quantum Physics" or something instead of Magic or Mysticism."
It's a good question. My answer is setting is important to our Players and I. The setting is our own Milky Way Galaxy, not the Pact Worlds. If we choose New Traveler, Savage Worlds Sci Fi we will do the same. We have put many loving years into our setting and are looking for a System. Society play I was arguing (in a good sense) with our group was an advantage over these other Systems put forward. Something we could do for a change. Something I could do with simply a change of locality names. Now no can do. Please see my above post to Nefreet why it's important for me that Starfinder has an advantage over the rest.
"Settings wise, Starfinder and Starfinder Society in general will support most of this play style, as long as you ignore the elephant of magic. Just give out chronicles with the caveat that their experience in other Society play may be different."
As I understand it, I cannot give Chronicles unless the Setting is the same. I would gladly do what you say as the Characters would be different under the Campaign Rule.
"I have played with a Starfinder Society character who does not believe in magic. It has been fun to watch the character say things like 'this is not Science' or 'your science has failed you'."
LOL, I love it and will keep this in mind.
"As for the APs, so far, I have run the 1st and 2nd module of Dead Suns, and I have managed to fit them both in 2 4-hour sessions."
Cool, I will look at that. My experience of Adventure Paths is that they take far longer than that...but I take you're point and will certainly look into it. I have a Subscription :)
"Starfinder Society is so much more flexible than most of PFS, from my observation. There is room for your playstyle as well, as long as you follow the campaign rules in the the Roleplaying Guild Guide."
Happy to do that, but the moment I say Absalom Station is near Saturn, the Ysoki come from experiments done by Dr. Moreau etc., it negates any chance of giving a Choricle as the Society Scenarios have no Campain Mode and the Setting must be the Pact Worlds. It seems playing the combats and NPC interaction the same don't count unless the Setting is exact too. To me disappointing, but I understand rules are rules.
Thanks again,
Andrew
|
|
Hi Nefreet,
I'm sorry I'm not clear. I don't know how else to put it. I just wish Campaign Mode (as per the Organized Play rules) also applied to Scenarios. John Compton explained to me why it doesn't in his post.
Please don't spend any more time on this, John and Thurston answered my question.
I really appreciate everybody's time on this,
Andrew
