Cottonseed Lodge (PFS2)

Game Master Redelia

I think there's a significant difference between two levels and a big difference between three, but that people overemphasize playing "up" or "down" because the highest CP low tier is comparable to the lowest CP high tier.

If there's a 2, 2, 2, 2, 3 (16 CP) game, there's not a lot of difference between the sixth player bringing a Level 1 character (18 CP) and a Level 4 character (22 CP).

---

I shrug at is the PbP concept of "first come, first serve" as if the people who post first somehow have higher priority. Just because the first 3 people to post are bringing Level 1s shouldn't obligate me as the 4th poster to match their level.

A third of the world is asleep when I post, so posting "the next person who posts gets to set the rules for everyone else" is going to favor a very specific set of people.

I'm happy to level match based on other priorities. I'll level match my kids when I'm playing with my kids, and I'll level match new players since they don't have flexibility with their characters.

PbP conventions, which largely run on a FCFS system, annoy the heck out of me. Note that as a US Pacific Time Zone player, I'm one of the greatest beneficiaries of the "Midnight GMT" system, so I'm not annoyed because I'm at a disadvantage.

---

But the thing that probably bugs me the most, and this is just in RPGs in general (although I think the PF2 system exacerbates the issue) is people just not adjusting their strategies for others on the team.

Yes, your ranger ideally wants to be 30' away so they can use their longbow without volley. But if you're Level 4 with a bunch of Level 1s and 2s, you have the most hit points, the highest AC, and even with your volley penalty, you've probably got the best to-hit. Congratulations, you've been field-promoted to Tank, and everyone else should be Delaying so that you can trigger the AoOs and give them flanking.

The same principle, but opposite effect, goes for low level characters. You might be a greatsword fighter, but maybe you shouldn't be tanking and Striking the 28-CP BBE 3x.

I swear this is relevant so bear with me: PFS2 has a disproportionate number of group skill challenges, i.e., 4 Successes to proceed. This means that often, the fate of the group is decided by the 4th best or 5th best at a skill - the Trained-but-0-INT Arcana roll, for instance, or the low-tier character who's rolling against the high tier DC.

tldr: Yeah, it's not great having a low tier character at a high tier table, but it's also not the end of the world if people pitch in.

Super Zero wrote:

Any particular scenarios folks are hoping to see during Outpost?

Lasha Tumbai has one more mission at level 4 and would like to help the goblins in #7-09 The Chitterwood Walks, Part 1: Scrambling the Tribes.

I'm prepping that one, actually. Looks like fun.

ATTENTION COTTONSEED GMS!

The change to the year comes with a change to a new Event Number for Cottonseed Lodge in 2026. Starting on February 1, 2026, if you wish to report your Pathfinder Society Second edition table recruited here at the Cottonseed Lodge under the Regional Support Program in 2026 (optional but recommended), please use the following Event Number:

#7095130

Reported Regional Support Program events for 2026 earn a 1.25x multiplier on Achievement Points for PFS2 tables.

For games concluding and being reported prior to February 1st, please continue using the current Event Number: #4921133.

All GMs listed as reporters to the Cottonseed Lodge for 2025 have already been added as reporters to the Cottonseed Lodge for 2026.

Any additional GMs who wish to be added as reporters to the Cottonseed Lodge for 2026 to report their PbP tables, should please send a request via PM on the boards (preferred) or leave a post below. Likewise, if you were a reporter for 2025 and no longer wish to be for 2026, please let me know and I will remove you from that status.

Happy Gaming!

Most importantly, I think if 3 or more characters are low tier, and effort should be made to keep it that way instead of people choosing toons that force the game into higher tier. (i.e.+ 1-2 Level toons get stuck playing High Tier because people choose 3-4 Level toons).

I think a lot of good points have already been brought up on this, particularly from WaterySoup. Here's a few problems I've had with "high tier PC's joining games with low tier PCs":

- As a GM i ran a game for four level 1's at GenCon 2020. Two level 4's walked-in pushing the game into high tier. At the time mentor boons cost reputation. They refused to spend reputation to buy mentor boons which I felt was the bigger issue. But mentor boons no longer cost reputation. Problem solved
- As a GM I could've killed a new player's PC because a scenario had a solo BBEG whose scaling made it particularly dangerous to level 1 PC's. I crit for max damage and this would've killed the PC from massive damage. Using GM discretion, I put them in dying 2 and ignored massive damage. This has also been mostly resolved, as now you are treated as having at least 20 hit points for massive damage rules.
- As a Player I once had my level 2 cloistered cleric of zon kuthon play a scenario with a solo BBEG and we had been "forced" into high tier because a level 4 sorcerer had joined. We had no tank. My cloistered cleric became the tank because the level 4 sorcerer refused to acknowledge they had higher AC and hitpoints than anyone else. Also, the first of three times my PC was knocked into dying from a crit, the level 4 PC started fleeing combat. My PC would've died without heroic recovery. Somehow the other PC's finished the BBEG without the level 4's help. There is no resolution for this issue, it was not a system issue. The biggest issue is the lack of cooperation when they fled combat at the first sign of danger. Pushing us into high tier or even refusing to take a hit aren't necessarily problems. I suspect that particular player would have had problems in other situations too, regardless of the tier of their PC.
- As a GM I sometimes feel like low tier PC damage playing high tier in the 1-4 range feels unsatisfying compared to high tier PC's who have striking weapons or rank 2 spells. For weapon users, this can be compensated for with potency crystals (via pfs provisions) so long as other healing exists since you wouldn't be taking healing potions from pvs provisions. The biggest issue here is just that one PC, such as a level 4 fighter, has greatly more potential to do damage than a level 1 playing up to the point it does steal the spotlight a bit. I have just accepted that this sometimes is the result of organizing a global campaign, and with the new scenarios limited on one tier, then this has been resolved going forward.
- Not a problem but worth mentioning: as a GM I once had a table go from max challenge points of low tier to minimum challenge points of high tier because someone switched their PC to a high tier character. This change saved the group from being in a firing squad of 6 fireballs. In general I agree with Watery Soup that there isn't much difference between the high-end of low tier and the low-end of high tier. Other times, like this specific scenario, I would say playing high end of a given tier can be deadly and the player switching their PC unknowingly saved them from an encounter that was uniquely capable of a TPK against their party composition.

In the past 2 years I have:
- Ran 2 PFS scenarios
- Played 5 PFS scenarios (1 GM Zoomba, 1 Dax Thura, and 3 GM tiger) thank you!

I've been playing games with PC's at the high tier range because that's generally what I have. I don't have other choices. I don't have time to get other choices. I have GM credit that could make a GM blob into some PC's but when we're talking about 9-12 range, that takes significant amount of time to build a new PC from scratch and really I just want to play my level 11 rogue. At the 1-4 tier, I will try to make adjustments if there's a bunch of new players at the table, but when we talk about the PC I want to play the most in that range, that PC is currently level 4.

From my perspective, many of the mechanical issues of high tier PCs pushing low-tier PC's into high tier have been resolved. What remains perhaps are social issues. Do I wish I had more time and capacity to play more games so I could always ensure I play games at low sub-tier? sure, that would be amazing. But I dont have that kind of time and capacity.

I also don't think it really matters what someone's motivations are for bringing a PC to a game. It's a global campaign and so long as players are following the rules and willing to cooperate with the rest of the party then we should just be accepting and cooperate with them. The cooperation goes both ways.

Wouldn't it be cool if players could poll their "top two" or "top season" and prospective GMs could look at that list before deciding what they want to run?

I think it would be pretty cool to see. I've been out of the game so long I don't know whats good or whats not to run since the last season I ran quite a bit from was season 3.

. My cloistered cleric became the tank because the level 4 sorcerer refused to acknowledge they had higher AC and hitpoints than anyone else. Also, the first of three times my PC was knocked into dying from a crit, the level 4 PC started fleeing combat. My PC would've died without heroic recovery. Somehow the other PC's finished the BBEG without the level 4's help. There is no resolution for this issue, it was not a system issue. The biggest issue is the lack of cooperation when they fled combat at the first sign of danger. Pushing...

Although I didn't quite get that close to death I've had virtually the same experience.

Good day all. Reintroductions and apologies are in order.

I had disappeared 2 years back, I had moved to a different country, my marriage broke down, and I was just alone and lost for a long time without motivation. I lost all my pathfinder hardcopy materials as well. It's been about a year since my divorced and I am slowly picking back pieces, I've moved to Melbourne 4 months ago, just bought a digital copy of the new player core, and hoping to re-join and get a game or two in, and eventually pick up GMing again.

If anyone has room for a lowly level 1 character please let me know!

Good day all. Reintroductions and apologies are in order.

I had disappeared 2 years back, I had moved to a different country, my marriage broke down, and I was just alone and lost for a long time without motivation. I lost all my pathfinder hardcopy materials as well. It's been about a year since my divorced and I am slowly picking back pieces, I've moved to Melbourne 4 months ago, just bought a digital copy of the new player core, and hoping to re-join and get a game or two in, and eventually pick up GMing again.

If anyone has room for a lowly level 1 character please let me know!

I'm sorry to hear it, but glad to hear of your return! I've got some games coming up, you're welcomed at my table!

ANNOUNCEMENT - PLAY-BY-POST OUTPOST IX

The Event Listing sheet has been opened up so that GMs can start adding their game details in, such as start dates and server/channel info. This is especially useful for those GMs running GM Choice recruitment so that they can begin to advertise their recruitment channels now.

Remember, you can advertise your recruitment, but may not seat players until the GM and General Seating dates.

I just GMed 1-25 Grim Symphony for the second time. Am I able to use a Replay in order to assign the Chronicle to a PC?

From what I've read, the answer is no, even though it does add to ACP and the table count. But I'd like conformation.

It's a nice scenario though. I even played the organ music. I recommend, Toccata and Fugue in D Minor for the initial approach, Danse Macabre just when entering the concert hall and Thriller for the actual combat.

I also played a Tesla coil version of Also Sprach Zarathustra prior to the first encounter.

Wish Paizo would commission more musical themed scenarios.

Granted and purchased Replays can only be used on adventures that grant 4 XP or fewer. Each granted or purchased Replay allows you to play an adventure you have already played as though that adventure had the Repeatable tag. You cannot use a Replay to gain an additional GM Chronicle.

Emphasis mine.

Can I get a VA or someone knowledgable to clarify?

1. I am under the impression that mid-session character rebuilds, even because of errata, are not allowed. Is that correct?

2. In general, are there PFS guidance for when errata take effect? Are we required to rebuild characters immediately, at the next available opportunity, or is there a date that's usually given?

3. What are the ownership rules for Remastered books? For example, I own a hard copy of Dark Archive (so I will not be receiving a revised PDF for free), will that, along with the errata, be sufficient for the ownership requirement for psychic and thaumaturge?

(Yes, I know that I probably should have asked this when G&G Remastered came out, but I don't have any PFS gunslingers or inventors, so, I didn't bother.)

1)

[url=https://lorespire.paizo.com/tiki-index.php?page=pfs2guide._.Full-Guide#Rule_Changes]Rules Changes

The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game is a living game, meaning sometimes game elements change over the course of a PC’s career. However, if you begin playing an adventure before the effective date of a rule change, you are not required to use the updated rules for that play of the adventure. Similarly, if a convention or other gaming event begins before the effective date of a rule change, you are not required to use the updated rules for adventures run as part of that event.

2)Errata is almost always effective immediately, see above about not having to follow mid event.

"Are we required to rebuild characters immediately"

I think you may have a fundamental misunderstanding or are mixing up terms as rebuilds are never required.

3)The pre-remaster books fulfill the ownership requirements.

I hope previous versions count as ownership. Do you realize how many versions of Core Rulebook and Player Core we would have to own just to keep up with all the Errata of them alone?

2)Errata is almost always effective immediately, see above about not having to follow mid event.

"Are we required to rebuild characters immediately"

I think you may have a fundamental misunderstanding or are mixing up terms as rebuilds are never required.

I was recently conflating these terms as well (rebuild vs errata update). The title of this section linked from yours seems to reinforce it.

Errata Rebuilds

If I advertise a table for Outpost as FCFS, can I reserve 2 seats? (would it still qualify as FCFS or should I just list it as a GM Choice/Lottery) -- it's somewhat in the middle...

I think above VC says you have to at least open 1 seat to the public.

This seems to satisfy that condition.

The response above was to a completely different question. That was about being a lot she game. This recent question is about convention FCFS game. To be on the convention FCFS spreadsheet, in general we don't allow reserved seats.

The response above was to a completely different question. That was about being a lot she game. This recent question is about convention FCFS game. To be on the convention FCFS spreadsheet, in general we don't allow reserved seats.

Ok so a reserved seat recruitment will be GM's choice then? There's really no third option.

Well nothing's stopping you from reserving two seats and then accepting the first four other people to sign up. That makes it effectively a FCFS with two reserved seats.

But for classification, yes, that is GM Choice, even if how you choose the next for seats is the next 4 to sign up.

ok, so I defined it correctly then.

anyone have a link to the blog? i'm failing my Perception check to find it...

playtest announcement blog

ty

for someone who doesn't do playtesting, I might just join this one. Daredevil looks cool! Looks almost like a rogue/swash combo without taking a separate dedication feat.

I’ve been tinkering with a demon-slayer concept using the existing classes, but the playtest Slayer might finally be exactly what I’ve been looking for.

Do note that they have changed the playtest rules for Society play and credit. You can only use level 1 PCs to playtest within Society play. That's per 2 VCs that I've heard from and is IAW the blog post.

Although the rules for using level 3 and 5 playtest characters are still on the Lorespire site, they are apparently no longer valid.

You can only playtest using a level 1 PC. Please read the blog to see how playtest PCs will be handled going forward.

From what I can tell:
- lorespire still permits rules for building a level 1, 3, or 5 playtest character and assigning the credit to an existing PFS character.
- the blog has added really cool rules that let you create a level 1 character from playtest material and treat it as a normal PFS character even after playtest period ends (with a rebuild once the finished class is published).

These are not mutually exclusive--there is no comment from campaign leadership that the old rules are being nuked/changed, and lorespire itself has not been updated.

Provenance is getting more important with each passing day, and frankly I just don't trust two random VC's all that much since I have no idea the context of the conversation they are having in an NDA black hole. I have no idea if what they are saying is true or if they misunderstood something. I don't even know if they broke NDA to tell us these supposed rule changes that may not be finalized yet. But I shouldn't have to know, this is why we have rules around campaign leadership.

I had been considering planning a lvl 5 adventure for the playtest and already spent some time investing in that. This is highly annoying to hear rules may have been changed without the trusted sources actually being updated. And if that change is in fact true then it would be trading one cool thing for another cool thing. That is to say that creating a lvl 1 normal PFS character of a playtest class is cool, but it is also valuable to be able to play a level 3 or 5 version of playtest character which would only benefit Paizo's playtest feedback. It would honestly shock me if they rescinded those existing rules.

Pathfinder Society has some new rules that allow players to use the playtest classes even after the playtest concludes!

I wasn't paying much attention to this Playtest, but GM redeux sparked my attention. Reviewing the blog, I believe their interpretation is correct.

Base playtest rules apply for the duration of the playtest period, so different levels can be tested.

However, NEW, if you want a character that you can keep playing even after the playtest period closes, it must start at level 1. I.e., you can't make a 5th level playtest and keep playing after window closes.

EDIT: And I saw no change to the GM Opt In clause to go along with this, which I appreciate assuming it was intentional.

I'm not sure about whether the new rules are supposed to be in addition to or instead of the existing rules. I've put in a request for clarification somewhere appropriate, and I'll share what I find out as soon as I do. And if I can't share an answer, I'll at least let everyone know that, and let you know the answer when I can.

I think it is also worth noting that the GM has the power to veto a player playing a playtest class character.

This is cool!

In past playests, I've used a new PFS character alias to build a character, play the playtest, then they sit on the shelf for a year or two...

...does this mean my L1 Runesmith is PFS legal (provided GM is cool with it) per current change in rules?

This is cool!

In past playests, I've used a new PFS character alias to build a character, play the playtest, then they sit on the shelf for a year or two...

...does this mean my L1 Runesmith is PFS legal (provided GM is cool with it) per current change in rules?

They also apply immediately for the concluded necromancer and runesmith playtests, but not for earlier playtests.

Looks to be so (Assuming your GM opts in)

While I'm very much in favor of playtesting and having lots of options for characters, players should be aware that not every GM keeps up with the playtest material.

Personally, I'm not able to keep up with published stuff, much less playtest stuff - I'm pretty familiar with Player Cores 1&2, Secrets of Magic (un-Remastered), Guns & Gears (un-Remastered), Dark Archive (un-Remastered), Book of the Dead (un-Remastered), and Rage of Elements. I'm still working on Howl of the Wild and War of the Immortals, but don't even own Battlecry. I'm not as active as I used to be, but I bet there are a lot of people in my position where the books are simply coming out faster than I can play through them.

If someone showed up at my table with a necromancer or runesmith, 10 minutes ago, I wouldn't have even known that those classes existed - I completely missed the playtest and any announcement of it, much less the nuances of playing one in PFS. I only heard about them (as well as the current playtest) through this second-hand discussion.

Don't get me wrong, players at my tables will still be welcome to bring playtest material, and I'll try my hardest, but PCs have to understand that I'll be taking their word for things a lot of the time. The excess burden is going to have to be taken up by the PCs, especially if there are multiple classes I'm unfamiliar with (like exemplar / animist / guardian / marshal). I know I can't be the only GM that feels this way.

It's opt-in, so there should be no shame or pressure or even a need to explain yourself.

The player should ask every time, or the GM can announce playtest characters are fine in whatever way ahead of time they prefer.

Player: Can I bring a playtest X?

GM: Yeah sure.
OR
GM: No thanks.

Player: Great, thanks.

While I'm very much in favor of playtesting and having lots of options for characters, players should be aware that not every GM keeps up with the playtest material.

Personally, I'm not able to keep up with published stuff, much less playtest stuff - I'm pretty familiar with Player Cores 1&2, Secrets of Magic (un-Remastered), Guns & Gears (un-Remastered), Dark Archive (un-Remastered), Book of the Dead (un-Remastered), and Rage of Elements. I'm still working on Howl of the Wild and War of the Immortals, but don't even own Battlecry. I'm not as active as I used to be, but I bet there are a lot of people in my position where the books are simply coming out faster than I can play through them.

If someone showed up at my table with a necromancer or runesmith, 10 minutes ago, I wouldn't have even known that those classes existed - I completely missed the playtest and any announcement of it, much less the nuances of playing one in PFS. I only heard about them (as well as the current playtest) through this second-hand discussion.

Don't get me wrong, players at my tables will still be welcome to bring playtest material, and I'll try my hardest, but PCs have to understand that I'll be taking their word for things a lot of the time. The excess burden is going to have to be taken up by the PCs, especially if there are multiple classes I'm unfamiliar with (like exemplar / animist / guardian / marshal). I know I can't be the only GM that feels this way.

That's true, but players really should have down how their own characters work.

Like you said, you can't be expected to be intimately familiar with every class as a GM. I've got most of them down, but there are a few I don't know well. That isn't necessarily more true of playtest classes.
(Though they're opt-in for GMs for other reasons, regardless.)

I'm not sure about whether the new rules are supposed to be in addition to or instead of the existing rules. I've put in a request for clarification somewhere appropriate, and I'll share what I find out as soon as I do. And if I can't share an answer, I'll at least let everyone know that, and let you know the answer when I can.

OK, unfortunate news. The new playtest rules are intended to replace the old ones. In particular, the new playtest classes cannot be made at higher level for society play. I can't point you to any public statements saying that, either. I had people try to tell me this should be 'obvious' from the blog post, but I do not find it so. However, I've shared with you the best I can find out (and I don't have any doubts it's the actual answer, even if it's not been made clear in public).

Sorry if this is a bit vague, but I'm in a tight spot here in terms of sharing with everyone here. I've given you the best info I can.

GM Redelia wrote:

I'm not sure about whether the new rules are supposed to be in addition to or instead of the existing rules. I've put in a request for clarification somewhere appropriate, and I'll share what I find out as soon as I do. And if I can't share an answer, I'll at least let everyone know that, and let you know the answer when I can.

OK, unfortunate news. The new playtest rules are intended to replace the old ones. In particular, the new playtest classes cannot be made at higher level for society play. I can't point you to any public statements saying that, either. I had people try to tell me this should be 'obvious' from the blog post, but I do not find it so. However, I've shared with you the best I can find out (and I don't have any doubts it's the actual answer, even if it's not been made clear in public).

Sorry if this is a bit vague, but I'm in a tight spot here in terms of sharing with everyone here. I've given you the best info I can.

Ok, so what happens when the playtest period ends? Does the PC gather dust until such time Paizo releases the actual source for it? Can I apply a GM Chronicle to it in the interim?

I've never done a playtest -- so if I were to bring a Daredevil to a Society game, is it treated like a pregen (or it's a new PC with a unique id [OP#-20xx]?)

No, that's how it used to work. The new rule is that you can just build characters normally using playtest classes, and those characters remain legal until the classes are published (at which point they must be updated to the final rules).

Including for the other two as-yet-unpublished classes.

So you can just build Necromancers, Runesmiths, Daredevils, and Slayers and play them normally, with the caveat that using these characters in games requires the GM to opt in.

Will yo have to automatically adjust live characters if the final rules differ from the Playtest?

Will yo have to automatically adjust live characters if the final rules differ from the Playtest?

Yes

GM Redelia wrote:

I'm not sure about whether the new rules are supposed to be in addition to or instead of the existing rules. I've put in a request for clarification somewhere appropriate, and I'll share what I find out as soon as I do. And if I can't share an answer, I'll at least let everyone know that, and let you know the answer when I can.

OK, unfortunate news. The new playtest rules are intended to replace the old ones. In particular, the new playtest classes cannot be made at higher level for society play. I can't point you to any public statements saying that, either. I had people try to tell me this should be 'obvious' from the blog post, but I do not find it so. However, I've shared with you the best I can find out (and I don't have any doubts it's the actual answer, even if it's not been made clear in public).

Sorry if this is a bit vague, but I'm in a tight spot here in terms of sharing with everyone here. I've given you the best info I can.

What about L3 Bounties?

As I understand it, Bounties are played in "Campaign Mode".

I know APs and other "non-PFS" Adventures are also played in "Campaign Mode", which relaxes most of the restrictions of PFS, but can also issue chronicle sheets for PFS characters.

Thank for digging!

To all the tables I’m running and playing at, my apologies. I’m too exhausted to post updates after today’s (another) external audit, and I didn’t get proper sleep last night due to an upset stomach. I’ll also need to rest properly for our company excursion, which runs until Sunday.

If I’m a player at your table, please feel free to bot me as needed. If I’m your GM, kindly wait for my update, Sunday evening at the earliest (my timezone), hopefully. Thank you for your understanding.

GM Redelia wrote:

I'm not sure about whether the new rules are supposed to be in addition to or instead of the existing rules. I've put in a request for clarification somewhere appropriate, and I'll share what I find out as soon as I do. And if I can't share an answer, I'll at least let everyone know that, and let you know the answer when I can.

OK, unfortunate news. The new playtest rules are intended to replace the old ones. In particular, the new playtest classes cannot be made at higher level for society play. I can't point you to any public statements saying that, either. I had people try to tell me this should be 'obvious' from the blog post, but I do not find it so. However, I've shared with you the best I can find out (and I don't have any doubts it's the actual answer, even if it's not been made clear in public).

Sorry if this is a bit vague, but I'm in a tight spot here in terms of sharing with everyone here. I've given you the best info I can.

Thanks Redelia. I agree it isn't clear to me, but your statement is and since its your lodge I'll abandon my plans to run a level 5 PbP adventure here for playtest only classes.

Personally this removes any desire of mine to interact with a playtest within PFS confines. I don't touch every playtest but when I do I like to run higher level adventures since level 1 play with a new class isn't as interesting for me to test a class.

Thanks again though

You can't change a character in the middle of a game. If the final class came out in while your play test character is in the middle of a game, you would finish that game and then immediately update the character.

Edit: I should clarify if by 'a game' you mean a group playing through several scenarios together, you would need to update between scenarios.

As I understand it, Bounties are played in "Campaign Mode".

Bounties are played in Campaign Mode, but the characters need to be PFS characters. By PFS characters, it means not just PFS legal, but actual PFS characters assigned actual numbers that are locked for the duration of the game, and formally get assigned Dead if they die during the bounty, etc.

rainzax wrote:

As I understand it, Bounties are played in "Campaign Mode".

Bounties are played in Campaign Mode, but the characters need to be PFS characters. By PFS characters, it means not just PFS legal, but actual PFS characters assigned actual numbers that are locked for the duration of the game, and formally get assigned Dead if they die during the bounty, etc.

Re: Dead. Actually, PFS characters can't die from bounties. I wrote a thread about it a few years ago Adventure Mode in PFS Guide 3.0 What does it mean?. Some of the exact quotes used in my post have changed, but the core message hasn't changed AFAIK.

Bounties are played in adventure Mode. And the thread mentions that unless the sanctioning document (the bounty itself) says otherwise, death wouldn't carry over. Even if death did carry over, in Adventure mode, chronicles are assigned at the completion of the adventure, rather than the beginning. Meaning there would be nothing stopping you from assigning that chronicle to another PFS character you've never played and that unplayed character dies.

Similarly consumables used during a bounty are not expended for the underlying PFS character unless the sanctioning document says otherwise. Nor do they get to keep any treasure from their adventure except as outlined in the sanctioning document (the bounty itself).

So to answer rainzax's question: to earn credit, you just need to have:
Recognizably Pathfinder.
Recognizably the same story.
Recognizably the same setting.

The Bounty would need to be a level 1 adventure, because bounties do still require the character to be a PFS character and in the context of playtest that means level 1 (to start). If you were to somehow keep the game recognizably pathfinder, recognizably the same story, and recognizably the same setting then you could theoretically as the GM in adventure mode say "[your favorite deity] has made all of you level 3 and you sense your enemies grow stronger as well". Effectively you could scale the level 1 bounty while keeping the rest of things in place. Just keep in mind none of those changes or level ups transfer over to the underlying PFS characters. They'd just get the normal XP/Gold/rewards as outlined in the bounty.

Though the character did get marked Dead under the old playtest rules (except for Bounties), too. They worked like pregens, and that's part of the pregen rules--you designate a Society character they're standing in for, and all rewards and consequences apply to that character.

Incidentally, unrelated to the playtest, as I read the Adventure Mode rules you could convert an adventure to a different edition of the same game and still report it for credit. Do I have that right?

I've been wanting to get around to running Signal of Screams, though if I do it at this point I'll probably convert to second edition.

The Bounty would need to be a level 1 adventure, because bounties do still require the character to be a PFS character and in the context of playtest that means level 1 (to start). If you were to somehow keep the game recognizably pathfinder, recognizably the same story, and recognizably the same setting then you could theoretically as the GM in adventure mode say "[your favorite deity] has made all of you level 3 and you sense your enemies grow stronger as well". Effectively you could scale the level 1 bounty while keeping the rest of things in place. Just keep in mind none of those changes or level ups transfer over to the underlying PFS characters. They'd just get the normal XP/Gold/rewards as outlined in the bounty.

Wait really?

I could host a Playtest Bounty and invoke this loophole to get the L3 or L5 or L7 experience? Because [deity]!?

Sounds pretty slippery...

=)

You could also just run a non-PFS adventure.

I might do that, actually.

Just dropping a note here for TPTB: I have not yet received scenario for Outpost. Is that expected?

If so, is there an ETA when we will get the scenarios?