Flaxseed Lodge (PFS1)

Game Master Redelia

I believe that it has to have a February 2019 or later start to count for OSP.

Hmm

*repeatedly F5s for the OSP guidelines*

I'm with Grandmaster TOZ. *writes script for F5ing*

Ooh, me too! GM Hmm never tells me ANYTHING.

This is awesome news. Its almost like we are a real lodge!!!

Almost 39,000 PBP posts in, and its clear the real treasure was the friends we made along the way!

That's quite impressive Gerald! That is averaged out to roughly 11 posts a day for the last 10 years from your first post back in 2009!

Hurrah for this news. Overdue but great to get. And congrats Gerald.

Changelings! Changelings everywhere.

Speaking of changelings.... Looking for more details for the new Online Support Program?

They can be found here:

http://OnlineSupportProgram.com

Hmm, that post almost needs confetti!

Speaking of changelings.... Looking for more details for the new Online Support Program?

They can be found here:

CONFETTI! http://OnlineSupportProgram.com CONFETTI!

There, better! EDIT: Aww the emoji diappeared

Great news! So for clarity, if I chose to run a game here (pbp), I should report it to VOs for OSP to apply?

You will report it via the system that will hopefully be live on Monday at the link above.

Are there any gms running lvl one friendly campaigns out there? I'm not pfs noob just new to pbp.

Are there any gms running lvl one friendly campaigns out there? I'm not pfs noob just new to pbp.

If you're willing to wait for a March start, you can sign up now for a Level 1 game for the upcoming Outpost II convention.

OutPost II Signup Sheet

It's a good time to be looking -- there's a ton of games ready for signups.

For Outpost II, for Solstice Scar D, if I have a level 9 character, can I sign up for tier 7-8, 10-11, or either?

Either. Tier 10-11 is traditional, but 9s can go either way.

Hmm

what does dot/dot and delete mean

It means to post something short in the Gameplay thread, wait for a few seconds after hitting Submit, then deleting the post. By doing this in Gameplay it registers your character to that campaign or adventure.

I guess you could just dot in with a period, hence the term. I always say something like "reporting for duty" or the like. Even tho it's just gonna get deleted.

Usually we delete the posts just to keep the gameplay thread clean at the start.

It's also how you keep "gameplay" threads clean of any out-of-character/out-of-game content! It's usually considered polite to dot/delete so you don't clutter the thread. Most of the discussion happens under the "Discussion" tab at the top, though there can sometimes be runaway conversations in "Recruitments" now and again. :)

*looks pointedly at Flaxseed's recruitment* ;)

I actually don't use recruitment threads anymore, as I find the discussion thread useful enough for that and general table talk. Gameplay threads are typically preferred to have just in-character actions and talk, with some minor ooc notes here and there. How much any particular table cleaves to this standard varies depending on how hard the participants police themselves.

Also the forums add a dot to any thread you have posted in, if you are looking at the full list of threads (individually, not your cmapaign tabs.) I always assumed the dot comes from that.

Huh? I always thought the dots were because of puberty.

I am a module subscriber.

Can I lend my copy of a module to a GM so that we can play it?

How about the pdf?

The best way to help out like that is to gift the PDF to them through the store. It costs the price of the PDF, which for some of the bigger modules is no joke, but it is the best way to go about it completely above board.

I have been thinking if I could use something like google drive: make it viewable only to the GM, and prevent editing/copying.

Then, once the module is done, unshare and take the file down.

Would that be possible? Tears at Bitter Manor pdf is $18, I'm loath to buy it twice.

The Season 10 Guild Guide doesn’t really talk about ownership of scenarios/modules. Obviously, it’s safe to assume that the scenario/module must be owned, but I’m not sure that it’s equally as safe to assume that there’s a requirement as to who at the table owns the scenario/module.

The pbp standard ought to be the same as the tabletop standard surely? As long as one of the players (GM or other) owns the module or scenario being played, that has to be enough. It would be enough if you were face-to-face.

I see it the same as supervillain. You can share books at a table so it shouldn't be any different here.

You certainly can loan someone your paper copy of a module. You can't loan someone your pdf because of the way copywrite law works for digital materials. (It's mostly the same reasoning that you can sell someone your paper copy of a book, but not of a digital book)

Well I can't see Paizo coming after the tons of people that pass their pdfs on tablets around the table and that wouldn't pan out well for them anyways. Also copyright law is far more ambiguous than that and licensing agreements vary wildly.

Loading a PDF on your own tablet, then handing that tablet to someone else to use at the table is one thing. Sending them the PDF via the internet is something else.

(puts on official VL hat)

It's not OK to send your PDF of an adventure to someone else.

(removes official hat)

We really don't want to give Paizo the idea that the Online play community supports violating Paizo's copywrites. That could have serious repercussions for the future of the Online region.

Fair play.

Thanks for the clarification.

Is it really different, though? I understand that sending someone a PDF is not undoable-- unlike a paper copy you can't take your PDF back, so in some sense both of you have it forever now-- but as long as someone at the table owns a PDF of the game, shouldn't that be good enough? It seems like forcing GM ownership like that is an unnecessary barrier to online play.

It's an unfortunate necessity of how Paizo handles electronic products.

It is a barrier, agreed. But Organized Play leadership becomes really prickly when there is any talk of sharing paizo adventures digitally.

When I started as an Online VO, we were not even a region yet. There was a ton of predjudice against Online play, and there were some RVCs who viewed us as a bunch of lawless hooligans with no respect for the rules of Organized Play and Paizo intellectual property. Changing that perception (and serving as a friendly face and ambassador for Online Play) was one of my chief goals when I joined the team.

Our reputation has shifted substantially in the past two years, and as a result, we've been recognized as a region. and an Online Support Program is now in place. We've been recognized as team players who follow the rules. This is a huge acheivement for all of us.

I will admit that I established Outpost to get a wider variety of scenarios in the hands of GMs. If there is another humble bundle, I will advertise it here like I have in the past. Also keep in mind that it is okay to buy scenarios for your GMs, or even gift them with store credit so each person in the group pitches in a few bucks towards the purchase of the module.

We can work out ways to make the adventures happen, but please... let's respect Paizo's rules for us too.

Yours,
Hmm

It's different for the very reason you mentioned. There's nothing stopping the person who gave the PDF and the person who received the PDF from reusing it again and again (or even distributing it to other people.) If it was a physical copy, only one table could use it at a time (though of course, you could pass it back and forth if you were sitting close together.)

While everyone here would act in good faith, and it's not very likely one PDF sold is going to end up a dozen or more out in the world it is a slippery slope.

Don't forget Paizo is in the business of making money. Organized play is a way for them to market their product, but in the end, what they want is to sell more product. I'm sure if they thought the market would put up with it, they would insist everyone at every table own a copy of the adventure being played.

And they'd probably shut down how I get most of my physical books, which is through a second hand seller.

I'm still fairly surprised they let us use the official scenario maps to play. That's a blessing. While IRL GMs can print them, us PbP GMs put them on a shareable document. I'm no copyright lawyer but that always felt like a different use case to me. I'm glad they aren't upset about that.

Just to chime in from the Virtual Tabletop side of things as this is an issue we're all keenly aware of, the sharing of copyrighted pdf files (such as Paizo's) is illegal in many countries and due to the Berne Convention that means it's almost certainly illegal wherever you are. Showing someone at the table a pdf file on your tablet is an entirely different thing from either providing them an online copy they can freely access, or transmitting them a copy they can access.

Ultimately trying to get around this, or worse, publicly advocating for doing so will do nothing but harm to the Online Region and to Paizos trust in their players. We know it can be tough and that there are greater restrictions on us than on physical games, but a large part of that is because the law for digital and physical goods is different, please be understanding, thank you :)

It's an unfortunate necessity of how Paizo handles electronic products.

I think all publisher's want the rights of their electronic products respected. We had a player in our "real life" region whose Paizo account was blocked cause he kept uploading the Pathfinder pdfs with his watermark to illegal download sites.

I've had players who've I've asked to help out and GM say "Send me the pdf" I ALWAYS say - "Please buy it. If you can't afford the $4 US I'll give you the $4."

If I can't get customer service to add it to their account as part of an event. Just my 2 copper...

If this has been discussed before and I a missed, I apologize.

Not here to argue the merits of PF2 either way, just asking about a consequence.*
In my local area, almost no one is happy with the PF2 as currently presented. No one has expressed any interest in GMing or playing PF2 as society games. It seems PFS in my local area will continue with PF1 for some indefinite time period. (Probably getting lax on the replay rules.) I'm not sure what they will do when people have played most of everything and begin getting bored with replays. Won't be an issue for me. I kinda doubt I will ever have enough gaming time to get through all of it to the boring point.

Anyhow, I'm wondering about the PbP PFS. Will these fine folks switch to PF2, stick with PF1, or some combination of both?

* On a personal note, I have not made up my mind on PF2. Reading through the rules, it seems kinda screwy. But I felt the same way about D&D 5thEd, which actually works out fairly well in actual game play. So I won't make a decision on PF2 until I can at least get the opportunity to make an honest attempt at trying it out in actual play.

I'm still going to be around running 1E, while I also still have to see what 2E looks like in print before I commit either way. The playtest still felt like Pathfinder, so as long as I can handle the new levers it should be fine.

I would guess a combination of both, plus SFS. The Cottonseed Lodge was set up for playtesting but I suspect it will eventually be used as the hub for all things PFS2 just like Flaxseed is for PFS1 and Flaxseed Station for SFS.

Speaking for myself, I plan to learn and GM 2e unless I just absolutely hate the final product. But there's also tons of 1e material I've yet to play or GM so I'll be doing 1e for as long as there's an audience for it.

Same. I'm going to be playing PF1 until my family and I have played it all, many, many years from now. That said, when PF2 releases, I'm also going to learn how to play, teach my family, and give it a shot.

We'll be playing both online and in real life.

We are currently planning on making Cottonseed the PF2 Play-by-Post hub, along the same lines as Castamir's is the PBP Hub for SFS. Come June or July, I will ask if Customer Service can sticky Cottonseed Lodge as well to the top of the recruitment forum.

Flaxseed Lodge will continue to offer PF1 content as long as there are GMs and Players for it.

Hmm
VC for the PBP region

I only got into PFS as a result of finding this space to play PbP, and that was about a year before PF2 was announced. I have a LOT to catch up on, and I only play PbP (i.e. at a slow pace). Estimating that it will take me another decade to get through all the existing material isn't a stretch at all. I think PF1 will have a home here for a long time.

I feel the same. I hope that the final product for PF2 is great and that I want to play and GM it; I'll withhold judgment until I can actually try it. At the same time, I still like PF1 just fine and have plenty of material that I haven't done yet, so I'll keep going with it as long as others still want to play it.

Where I see a potential problem is with my real life games. I'm the venture agent for a small venue - we play once a month and usually only muster one table. If our small player base splits over which edition to play I worry that we'll lose the critical mass we need to keep going.

Fortunately, the online region doesn't have that problem. :-)

Even if I don't participate in 2E, I suspect that those that do will eventually come looking for more. The Online region is where people who can't play as much as they want in person come to find more. I expect 2E will bring people in to PbP much as 1E did. And when they are having trouble finding new 2E offerings they may decide to check out 1E as well. So I expect I will be able to continue offering new experiences to people like Zin for quite awhile.