Cottonseed PFS PbP (2E)

Game Master Redelia

A part of the Flaxseed Pathfinder Lodge for the Pathfinder 2E.


151 to 200 of 583 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

GM Sedoriku wrote:
I might be asking way too early, but if someone was to say look into running something playtest based for GameDay 7, what would we have to do? Are there pfs scenarios we can run for it, or would we have to try converting an existent scenario? And would a game like that earn PFS credits?

I would think any modules or APs that allows home campaign mode play could be played using PF2 Playtest rules and still earn PFS credits under PF1.

Silver Crusade

Venture Lieutenant, Play by Post (online), Hostess of Cottonseed Lodge (playtest)

The recruitment thread is not open, and contains a playtest game.

Silver Crusade

Venture Lieutenant, Play by Post (online), Hostess of Cottonseed Lodge (playtest)

Arggh, I saw my typo after the editing window. I should have said 'now open' rather than 'not open.'

Dark Archive

I ma excited about trying out the new system and want to thank those of you willing to give us that chance. When will we player have a chance to look at the new character creation rules?


Skorn wrote:
I ma excited about trying out the new system and want to thank those of you willing to give us that chance. When will we player have a chance to look at the new character creation rules?

The playtest rules drop on August 2nd, I would be shocked if any of us (GMs or Players) got access to them before then.

Grand Lodge

More Scenarios Added to PBP Gameday Selections

Hey GMs —

Jesse added the following scenarios in today into the PBP Gameday site as options you can select to run on the Gameday.

FPSP2 - Raiders of Shrieking Peak - Level 5
PFSP3 - Arclord's Envy - Level 5

Hmm


MAP TEMPLATES | Giantslayer | Fall of Plaguestone | Skull & Shackles | Flood

Would the following please dot in HERE

  • thunderspirit
  • Batpony
  • Gary Pepper
  • Xathos of Varisia
  • Enchanter Tim
  • numbat1/Katrina Hennessy

    To everyone else who signed up and didn't make it, I do plan on running additional tables, and I'll take new players for the others. Please, by all means sign up for other open tables. The more playtesting we do the better the game will be!


  • F HP: 8/8, AC 21/17/16, F+2, R+5, W+3, speed 40ft, Perception +1, init +5

    Would 1st gen 2e pfs PCs have access to feats/traits from only CRB, or to everything 1e?

    Lantern Lodge

    Sign up sheet Dragon.

    Presumably as with PFS, when created they have only access to what is available (i.e. the 2nd edition CRB), but as books are relesed, added to the "Additional resources" and purchased by the player, other options become available for advancement - or possibly retraining.

    They almost certainly won't have access to any 1e material.


    Hopefully there will be iconics so we can jump right in before absorbing the new rulebook.

    Grand Lodge

    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    I can verify that there are iconic pregens in 2E. I played with them in the Delve. That said, here’s your opportunity to make a primal elf sorcerer or a goblin bard. There’s some fun weirdness in PF2, and it’ll be interesting to see what characters people create.

    Hmm


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Venture-Agent, Play-by-Post

    I enjoyed both the iconic pregens I experienced in Playtest at PaizoCon and also what I saw of the others. That said, I am already toying with ideas for various characters based on what I have read in the blogs and I am trying to be patient as I await the release of the Playtest material so I can start developing them for real.

    Also, as I understand it, the team really would like as many of us as willing to generate our own characters, sometimes with specific guidance to test certain elements, though they are also willing to accept feedback on the current pregens so we will have great options with the actual release of the new edition in 2019.


    Honor's Echo: Blade

    Yes, they want to make sure that they're not building 'to the test' (pregen characters) and definitely want PCs to do *other things* with the rules... and also brought up during the 'How to Playtest' panel at PaizoCon:

    Expect to fail.

    Both as GMs and as players.

    It's not an undocumented design feature It's actually there to BE documented.

    There are some parts that will *stress test* the system (but they haven't said which ones) and they *need* that information.

    Make sure you as a GM and that your players are AWARE of this, so they don't get upset when it *does* happen TruthinText: I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around this myself, but at least I'll have the luxury of time to do so.

    Shadow Lodge

    3 people marked this as a favorite.
    Table Maps | Passing the Torch | Slaver's End

    New PFS Playtest blog is up!


    Survivor's Salvation

    Exciting!

    Any thoughts on the PTP tracker for online play? Will it be like the SFS alien archive boon all over again, where GMs give permission for players to initial on their behalf? It sounds like the online reporting will be the truly important number anyway.


    Alright, I'm kind of jumping onto the bandwagon a little late. Really only got started reading the playtest blogs a couple of days ago, and the more I read, the more I like it. But lo and behold, all the games advertised for session 1 are full (unless anyone has dropped out since I last checked). Did sign up for session 2, but that is 3 months away! :) Wondering if anyone might be opening another table? In return, I'll run any game that you request but it would likely be after Gameday. (Have committed myself to running 2 games already for each session, and I think that's my limit to ensure I do them justice. :P )


    Hmm, if it started a little later than Aug 13th would that be okay? I'd been contemplating running a game but I'll be travelling during the time the scenarios drop and that's not the best time to be trying to prep! I could get going about Aug. 25th or so, if you're interested.


    That would be great!


    Sorry about the time this took, but recruitment is open! I've even saved you a spot Kuey.

    Lantern Lodge

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Sign up sheet Dragon.

    Looks like playtest scenarios are starting to drop. Hurrah!

    Grand Lodge

    Oh, thank goodness. I was hoping that PBP Gameday scenarios would drop!

    Hmm


    I got my playtest scenario! I honestly wasn't expecting to see it before the official release date so... awesome!

    Hype levels rising...


    3 people marked this as a favorite.
    Survivor's Salvation

    Reposting the link here in case some people don't check the organized play forums:

    We have instructions on creating organized play characters for the playtest.


    Yep, and the item levels things is very worrying.


    Oh, please, no. That's my biggest pet peeve for Starfinder.


    MAP TEMPLATES | Giantslayer | Fall of Plaguestone | Skull & Shackles | Flood
    GM ThinkingFlesh wrote:
    Oh, please, no. That's my biggest pet peeve for Starfinder.

    Remember, the most important thing we can do is give clear feedback. I don't know what the survey will look like, but feedback is taken seriously. (Especially when it comes from play experience and not simply theorycrafting.)


    Could someone post links to the playtest rulebook pdf download, the society play guide or the playtest, and anyoother maerials I will need to create a character and learn the rules? I just looked for the download for 30 minutes and only found one version on a strange site that I did not trust.

    Silver Crusade

    Venture Lieutenant, Play by Post (online), Hostess of Cottonseed Lodge (playtest)

    They're not available yet, Miteke.


    The playtest is not out yet. It will be released in a few days.

    The playtest pfs rules, such as they are, can be found in the link GM Elinnea posted above.

    The normal pfs stuff can be found under the "Organized Play" link at the top of page.


    Doh! I had my dates all messed up.

    Dark Archive

    Hao Jin Cataclysm

    Interestingly enough I saw the playtest book on a shelf at a nearby Books A Million yesterday. Wasn't looking for it but was wondering what the red bound book was in the Pathfinder section.

    Dark Archive

    Venture-Captain PBP GM Tyranius PFS Reporting Tool | Scenario List | Scenario Sign-up Sheet

    Anyone have a link to the 2.0 Rulebook PDF product? I can find all the scenarios but not that for some reason.


    According to this blog post (at the end), it's only available 6am Pacific Time.

    edit: Interestingly, it's already up on Herolab Online.

    Dark Archive

    Venture-Captain PBP GM Tyranius PFS Reporting Tool | Scenario List | Scenario Sign-up Sheet

    Appreciate it. I was hunting all over for the product page, especially since the update they did yesterday.


    Rulebook is up on the main page paizo.com


    So, character creation was easy enough, for level 1 anyway. Now lets get this party started.

    Grand Lodge

    4 people marked this as a favorite.
    Venture-Lieutenant - NH | Proprietor of Castamir's Station

    Hey everyone. If you're like me, you skipped adulting for the day to read the playtest. I'm currently looking at how to set my games up and execute. Here are some quick hits:

    Initiative:

    Unexpected initiative is going to be tricky. I plan on continuing to use quick posts, but it'll like look like:

    PC 1: Perception +2, Stealth: +2: 1d20 ⇒ 10
    PC 2: Perception +1, Stealth: +1: 1d20 ⇒ 17
    PC 3: Perception +2, Stealth: +2: 1d20 ⇒ 8
    PC 4: Perception +3, Stealth: +4: 1d20 ⇒ 13

    Exploration Mode:

    I also recommend GMs build default "Exploration Mode" procedures. While there will always be times when things are different, a default can keep PbP going.

    PC 1: Searching Perception: 1d20 + 1 ⇒ (20) + 1 = 21
    PC 2: Defending
    PC 3: Detecting Magic
    PC 4: Sneaking Stealth: 1d20 + 5 ⇒ (7) + 5 = 12

    Character Sheets:

    While everyone will have their preference, I threw one together to tweak. You can check it out HERE

    Grand Lodge

    5 people marked this as a favorite.
    Venture-Lieutenant - NH | Proprietor of Castamir's Station

    Hey everyone, a note on feedback.

    Flaxseed, for the past FIVE years a has been a place for some amazing gamers. We set a pretty high bar. Right now the playtest forum is full of disparaging remarks, hyperbole, and even making fun of the designers.

    While I haven't cross checked who posted what, this is a friendly reminder to keep feed back professional, polite, and poignant.

    Happy gaming!

    Silver Crusade

    Venture Lieutenant, Play by Post (online), Hostess of Cottonseed Lodge (playtest)

    For anyone who has come here to look into Play-by-Post based on the suggestion in the Playtest rulebook, welcome! I'm Redelia, Venture Agent here on Paizo's forums. You'll find that we are a friendly community, so please post any questions you may have, and someone should be able to help you. We have some games starting soon as party of Gameday VII, and I'm sure more will be starting soon. The recruitment thread of Cottonseed is where to keep an eye out if you're looking for a game.

    Scarab Sages

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Male Human Teacher 2/Librarian 1

    Pathfinder 2e Playtesters are gonna be like this


    When you create a playtest online char, do you create it as a PFS character or an alias? I assume alias, as it will not become an official PFS character? Am I correct?

    Grand Lodge

    Venture-Lieutenant - NH | Proprietor of Castamir's Station

    You make an official playtest character. XXXX-1501. You don't really need more than one as the reporting isn't for XP that carries into the new game.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    He doesn't believe in 'game balance'. He belongs to a prestige class whose sole requirement for entry is being him. ♬ He is indeed, the most interesting GM in the world. ♬ | Oathbreakers DIE! | What Prestige is Worth

    I've been reading the Playtest material and so, some preliminary thoughts:

    • No half-human heritage feat for elves?
    • I'm not a fan of the default character attribute creation method - I would rather have the baseline be 12, four 10s, and an 8 rather than straight 10's if only for possible variety.
    • I'm not sure that Paizo is hitting one of the stated goals of making the game easier to play and more accessible to people. It seems to me in reading the Playtest Rules so far that there are an awful lot of status effects to keep an eye on.
    • Still not really feeling the goblins as a full-on PC race (with no downside--especially not after making them such horrible little sociopaths; and slightly incompetent antiheroes in the We Be series). Why not orcs--the other half of half-orcs, or kobolds?
    • Not really feeling the more extreme barbarian options. I don't recall Conan, or Riverwind, or Thundarr ever growing antlers like a 10-point buck, or turning into a dragon. Maybe I'm old.
    • Doomsday Dawn is really, really good aside from one or two parts where the authors seem like they are forcing the whole the-party-goes-into-hiding-to-recover-for-2-years just so they can tie it to other events that don't really have anything to do with the adventure's plot, but are there purely for nostalgia. Still, very, very good.

    The above makes it sound worse than it actually is. I'm still reading, and haven't actually played yet, so these are only my first impressions, and then only of the things that really stand out to me out of hundreds of pages of text, and this is still only the draft version of the final game.


    Honor's Echo: Blade

    If you are reading ahead to prepare for GMing a particular session, that's one thing.

    They mentioned during the 'How to Playtest' Seminar at PaizoCon that players reading ahead on the Playtest scenarios is a *bad* thing, because they want to stress-test the system, and if everyone knows what the test is going to be, then folks will *build to the test* and 'study to the test'.

    The expectation is that players WILL fail some of the scenarios, and if they don't, it's going to be a sign that folks aren't holding to the spirit of the playtest and rather going for the letter.

    The expectation ALSO is that GMs WILL fail in some of the scenarios. Again, it's built-in specifically to see how and where the system needs work.

    My current issue is I tried to build my goblin paladin of Shelyn, and I've had to resort to grabbing the pregen Seelah and effectively 'cloning' her, then swapping out the things that are for my character, because the character creation process is... awkward.

    My second 'test' is going to be trying to make 'myself' in the game. If it has similar results I'm not quite sure where to go from there.


    - INACTIVE (finished campaign) -

    Interesting thoughts!

    I like the character attribute method just fine. I'm not sure it's perfect, but I think I like it better than point buy. It's certainly easier and faster. I could never do point buy without using one of the "calculators."

    Having played the game, I think it's *much* easier to play and much more accessible. My cousin's wife was in two of our games and her words were something like "Pathfinder was too complex for me, but I actually understood what was going on in the Pathfinder Playtest." It's true they are using keywords for conditions and actions (Stupefied 1, Staggered 2, etc. and Strike, Stride, etc.) but most of them are a) easy to explain thanks to the simple action economy and b) won't be hard to remember after you've played a few times.

    The new action economy (and probably some of the other changes) have made combat go much faster and smoother.

    Overall I think the system is much simpler and much more self-consistent. I'm very pleased.

    My gripes are more around how at level 1 you get a class feat and an ancestry feat and that's all. Since you get no race features without spending ancestry feats, and your class abilities are *mostly* tied up in class feats, that means that you actually get *fewer* feats as a level 1 character. Take a Human Fighter, for instance. In PF1, a Human Fighter would get some Fighter abilities (including a bonus feat; neither here nor there with the other changes to Fighter) and two feats that could go to whatever you want. So, for instance, you could get Power Attack using your Fighter feat, and then take Improved Initiative and some kind of Background feat. As a human you would get the Skilled racial feature as well.
    In the Pathfinder Playtest you can spend your Ancestry feat to get the equivalent of Skilled, and you can spend your Class feat to get, say, Power Attack, but that's all you get.
    I suppose you do get a skill feat from your Background, but the point is that the free-floating, add to whatever-feat-tree-you-want feat is gone.
    On the other hand, feat trees are largely gone also. There are still some 1-feat dependencies, mostly in the class feats, but those aren't too bad.
    My other gripe is that at some levels you get a "general" feat that you can't use to get more Class feats. You can get more Ancestry feats through it, but only because they made a General feat that explicitly lets you pick an Ancestry feat.

    All in all, pretty minor things to be unhappy about. I made an effective* Archer Bard via Fighter multiclassing. I am pretty sure if I wanted it to be more Bardy, it could be fairly effective* using just a shortbow.

    *effective enough for me :)


    He doesn't believe in 'game balance'. He belongs to a prestige class whose sole requirement for entry is being him. ♬ He is indeed, the most interesting GM in the world. ♬ | Oathbreakers DIE! | What Prestige is Worth
    GM Wageslave wrote:
    If you are reading ahead to prepare for GMing a particular session, that's one thing.

    Reading ahead? It was released last week. I mean I bought the book, so I know. I think it just called reading at this point. ;)

    The creation system is a bit weird because it is so fragmented between background, ancestry, and class and you have to keep skipping around to find what you are looking for. Hero Lab Online has not been much help in the matter. In fact, I've rage quit it twice so far, and just used the book and paper.

    Alton Underbough wrote:
    I like the character attribute method just fine. I'm not sure it's perfect, but I think I like it better than point buy. It's certainly easier and faster. I could never do point buy without using one of the "calculators."

    My point here was you can't make a laconic (low Charisma) human ranger, a dumb (low Intelligence) human cleric, or an impulsive (low Wisdom) human barbarian. You can't (by the primary character creation method) give any human character a mechanical ability flaw, where as in the current version of the game nearly all of the human iconic pre-cons have something they are not particularly good at--something that maybe gives them a bit of character or makes character creation a bit more strategic. All 10s are just a bit blah to me.

    Lantern Lodge

    Sign up sheet Dragon.

    I think the all 10s starting is because in PFS there is a bit of stat dumping going on to min-max. This was foreshaddowed in Starfinder with everything starting at a ten as well.

    Overall, I'm not bothered by nobody starting with less than a 10, although in a home campaign you can do what you want.

    Though once again this does tend to reduce the differentiation between characters which is the big thing lacking in the Playtest. The difference between the same character (i.e. ability scores, race etc) who is a wizard vs a fighter is.... 4hp and a 2point difference in their primary abilities.

    Okay, at first level the PF fighter only has a +1 BAB adjustment difference, but that actually improves as characters level up, pretty fast. At 17th, there is only a +2 difference (assuming the wizard goes up to "Expert" with their weapon).

    Yes, the fighter knows how to wear armor. But the basic skill difference between the wizard and the fighter is minimal, which makes the random factor of the d20 much more significant.


    He doesn't believe in 'game balance'. He belongs to a prestige class whose sole requirement for entry is being him. ♬ He is indeed, the most interesting GM in the world. ♬ | Oathbreakers DIE! | What Prestige is Worth

    So.... Discussion.... ;)

    I kinda thought this would be one of those happening threads, you know.


    It's one of those things where I can't give good advice until I get to experience the system firsthand. Too many theoreticals are going around right now.

    I will mention it's hard to min max a single skill. It's also impossible to bomb most skill checks, since at worst you start at a [level - 2] bonus.

    Heightening spells work differently than in 1E, since you need to prepare or memorize the heightened version. At first I didn't understand it but now I realized they just wrapped the higher level spells into the basic spell, so my bard doesn't have to learn Charm Person, Charm Monster AND Mass Charm Person.

    Silver Crusade

    Human Female Paladin of Shelyn 5 | hp 48 | AC 21 T 11 FF 20 | CMD 19 | F +10 R +6 W +8 | Spd 20' | Init +1 | Diplo +10, HAnim +10, KnNob +5, KnPla +6, KnRel +5, Perc -2, Ride +6, SensM -2 | smite 2/2 | lay hands 6/6 | wand clw 39/50 |
    GM Aerondor wrote:
    I think the all 10s starting is because in PFS there is a bit of stat dumping going on to min-max. This was foreshaddowed in Starfinder with everything starting at a ten as well.

    Yeah, about that game!

    GM Aerondor wrote:
    Yes, the fighter knows how to wear armor. But the basic skill difference between the wizard and the fighter is minimal, which makes the random factor of the d20 much more significant.

    So you agree(?) a little deviation could be a good thing.

    I say this as one of those min-maxers who minimized his character's Wisdom to maximize her fun. (The real-life version of this involves giving up both Wisdom and sobriety for fun, but that's a whole other thread.)

    I don't really have a problem with min-maxing on the whole so long as there are consequences. If your PC has a Charisma 7 folks have the right to know why your character is so off-putting (or unnoticeable), likewise folks with Str 6 need to double check their encumbrance penalties, and so on.

    I realize that +1s and -1s are a slightly bigger deal in this game but really compared to the d20 itself not really that big a problem. Likewise there is cap of how worthwhile the bonus becomes since after 18 it costs more to improve a stat (just like in regular old pathfinder point-buy starting a 14). All my suggestion (PC starting array 12, 10, 10, 10, 10, 8) does is allow humans to be as taciturn as dwarves at first level if they want to be and dwarves to be really, really taciturn in exchange for a slight bump elsewhere. It gives role-players a mechanical excuse to play a slightly different character than they might otherwise have done. Basically it is an option that I would like to see be set in text (read: stone).

    151 to 200 of 583 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Online Campaigns / Play-by-Post Discussion / Cottonseed PbP PFS 2E Playtest Discussion All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.