Project Bazaar: A Game Market place for Pathfinder 1E

Game Master Azure_Zero

Project Bazaar: The Give and Take. A market place for GMs and Players

We have many who wish to be players including Forever GMs and not enough games,
and generally Forever GMs get screwed when applying for games as players.
But how to solve this issue, simple, Make more games and encourage GMing.

If you know a forever GM looking to be a player again, point them to this Bazaar.

Since this is a Bazaar (a Market Place), everyone will be paying the price of entry and the exchange.
Here Modules/Adventures and Characters are the currency of exchange in this Bazaar.
So EVERYONE has to RUN an adventure or Modules as GM to be able to play in ANY game in this market place.

Now how will it be setup, Each Player offers a choice of 3-5 modules (I've provided a list below for quick reference) and runs 1 of them.

Now for veteran GMs and Forever GMs, they can make a group and each one runs one of the Modules they offered and has the others in their game as Players.
This means a group of 3 GMs will have 3 games, each one being a GM in one and a player in 2, or even
5 GMs running 5 games, each one running 1 game as GM, and in the other 4 as a player.
Effectively the bigger the group of GMs together the more games they will immediately get in.
They'll use the Veteran and 4Ever GM character creation rules

GMs look at what other GMs are offering and ask if they have something they like on offer. If yes, it starts a group that others can join if they have offers they like, so offering more choice means better chances of getting into a bigger group with a bigger game play pay off. When the group feels they are big enough the players vote on the modules on offer from each GM, the GM offering can break the tie if there is one.

For those that have not GMed before, you'll have to offer a choice of 2-3 modules (I've provided a list below) and run one of them in a public open recruitment.
I recommend them use the New GM character creation rules to avoid complexity and many other issues.
A GM that joins your game has to let you into a game THEY RUN, either an old one or a new one for the new GM (this can be open recruitment using any CC rules).

Now some Character's or groups would like to continue after the module, but the GM is not feeling it, so All characters will follow the Character creation RULES to make a standard character currency with some choice flexibility for easy character transition to a new GM or adventure, kinda like PFS.
Now While it does not offer everything in the Pathfinder library, it is to follow the KISS principle (Keep it Simple Silly) while allowing access to some forgotten gems and content and also allow those trying to be a GM to have something to follow and NOT be overwhelmed from content and options.

System - Pathfinder 1e
Online sources Path Finder Reference Document by Book and Archives of Nethys

-----------------------

For modules there are many of them and if your up for it, you could offer to run a AP instead of a module.

To pay the entry fee into the Bazaar, you should list your offerings like I'll do below.

I'm offering to run

Hangmans-Noose
Revenge-of-the-Kobold-King (It's part of a Mini-AP)
Feast-of-Ravenmoor
Gallery-of-Evil

I would be willing to run the following one-shots, listed in order of level:

1E:
Master of the Fallen Fortress
Dawn of the Scarlet Sun
Carrion Hill
The Gauntlet

2E:
The Fall of Plaguestone
Crown of the Kobold King
Troubles in Otari
Sundered Waves
Mark of the Mantis

Again, I'm not a very experienced GM - I'm the Forever GM for my own group, but that mostly consists of sobbing into my adventure notes as a gang of murderhoboes gets themselves killed trying to rob the Magaambaya (despite the campaign taking place in Goka).

dot

Based on the ability to hand over to another GM, I see the use of the single set of rules. Along with the options, what about further limits such as striking fighters from available classes? It would keep a GM from adding a bunch of stuff others may not want to add but would allow for tailoring down.

What's your thought on how the games work? Simultaneous or switching off?

Love the link to the older reference document. It's awesome how it is broken out by book.

Based on the ability to hand over to another GM, I see the use of the single set of rules. Along with the options, what about further limits such as striking fighters from available classes? It would keep a GM from adding a bunch of stuff others may not want to add but would allow for tailoring down.

What's your thought on how the games work? Simultaneous or switching off?

Love the link to the older reference document. It's awesome how it is broken out by book.

I don't understand the question "what about further limits such as striking fighters from available classes?" could you re-phrase it. If it is for removal of a whole class, no. If it is in the CRB it is cleared to go. It is easier to restrict at the start and allow later, then to allow at the start and deny it later.

The initial intent was when a group is ready all the games are run in parallel, this ensures payment is given for playing as a player was the intention. Though if the group wants they can do hand-off and make it a form of Adventure path with a character or whole party rotating in and out, the standardize character creation rules does help out in a module rotation within the group, which I did not think of. The only troublesome option is the automatic bonus progression if one GM uses it and another not as it'll impact gear which can be an annoyance to change, so the group should decide before hand which setting for automatic bonus progression if doing a rotation of games with the same characters.

Yeah I figured it would be a good thing to refer to the older reference document since it is broken down by book, so a quicker and more accurate way to tell if it is within the allowed sources.

Based on the ability to hand over to another GM, I see the use of the single set of rules. Along with the options, what about further limits such as striking fighters from available classes? It would keep a GM from adding a bunch of stuff others may not want to add but would allow for tailoring down.

What's your thought on how the games work? Simultaneous or switching off?

Love the link to the older reference document. It's awesome how it is broken out by book.

If striking fighters is referring to fighters with the vital strike feat, they can't take it as vital strike is in Ultimate Combat, and not in the APG.

--------

I see a few errors in the CC or missing items of note from the CC rules,
I'll update it it later today.

Heya, I almost missed this since I didn't look back in at the new posts in the recruitment thread for a few days. I'm super busy today, but I'll take a look at what's up tomorrow.

I would be willing to run the following one-shots, listed in order of level:

<snip>

2E:
The Fall of Plaguestone 1st level
Crown of the Kobold King 2nd level
Troubles in Otari 2nd through 4th level (So, I assume 3rd level)
Sundered Waves 5th level
Mark of the Mantis 6th level

I don't have any of these (actually, I have the hard copy of Fall of Plaguestone), but, I'd certainly be willing to purchase one of them (Troubles in Otari, preferably) to participate with others who would take the helm on running the other four.

I understand the limitations that Azure Zero put on 1e. I would assume there would be some similar limitations on 2e. I would suggest that standard PFS-style builds would be required (especially for 1st level). But, then, open up the restrictions on Uncommon and Rare items/feats/abilities at 2nd level.

Crown of the Kobold King doesn't have a Chronicle sheet. I would suggest running Malevolence instead. It is designed for 2e, while Crown of the Kobold King isn't. Then, Troubles in Otari could be run at 2nd level.

For 4th level, there is The Enmity Cycle

To recap:
1st level: The Fall of Plaguestone
2nd level: Troubles in Otari
3rd level: Malevolence
4th level: The Enmity Cycle
5th level: Sundered Waves
6th level: Mark of the Mantis

You don't need any of the books another GM lists, you have to have your own list of what you offer.

As I didn't list Tower of the Last Baron on offer, since I know it is a module that requires a certain mindset to be in as a player, though I would enjoy it as a player.

---

I don't have any 2nd Ed books, though did buy the playtest, which turned me off from 2nd ed very quickly.

For PF 2e, it would be restricted to the first 2 Hardcover books, so 2nd Ed CRB and 2nd ed APG. It should follow the Background development method presented as it is logical to background development, instead of Point-buy.

The limit of the two books is for the KISS principle

You don't need any of the books another GM lists, you have to have your own list of what you offer.

As I didn't list Tower of the Last Baron on offer, since I know it is a module that requires a certain mindset to be in as a player, though I would enjoy it as a player.

---

I don't have any 2nd Ed books, though did buy the playtest, which turned me off from 2nd ed very quickly.

For PF 2e, it would be restricted to the first 2 Hardcover books, so 2nd Ed CRB and 2nd ed APG. It should follow the Background development method presented as it is logical to background development, instead of Point-buy.

The limit of the two books is for the KISS principle

I completely understand why the playtest turned you off. Lot of half-baked ideas in it.

I don't understand limiting 2e to the first two hardcover books, since everything is online, and fellow GMs would understand if a GM is unclear on a concept, and would offer to help a fellow GM improve. I know with some other groups I'm in (majority face-to-face) discussions can ensue -- as long as everyone agrees to Rule 0.

...

I don't understand limiting 2e to the first two hardcover books, since everything is online, and fellow GMs would understand if a GM is unclear on a concept, and would offer to help a fellow GM improve. I know with some other groups I'm in (majority face-to-face) discussions can ensue -- as long as everyone agrees to Rule 0.

there are many Reasons, following the KISS principle (Keep it Simple Silly), more books, more content, more complexity.

With the amount of campaigns I'm in right now, probably won't participate in this, sadly.

Also, isn't 2e built around not allowing the game-breaking interactions that munchkins so heavily rely on?

With the amount of campaigns I'm in right now, probably won't participate in this, sadly.

Also, isn't 2e built around not allowing the game-breaking interactions that munchkins so heavily rely on?

Anything made by man can be destroyed by man,

Any chance this can be done on Roll20 or Foundry, like each game/module on day in real time? Play by Post will take forever if each one DMs a module, and playing more than 3 modules on play by post is a lot more exhausting than playing 3 or more scenarios or even bounties. Some of us might not be around in 2 years having moved onto other things or lots of real life things happen in that time. 2 Years would probably get us through less than a third of the modules, 5 years or more to play them all assuming we do one at a time. I would not want to play more than 3 modules at a time. 2 is Plenty, 3 can be a bit much and 4 is a ton.

It'll be up to the groups and the GMs on how to run them.

This is just the market place, helping to connect merchants with clients and standardising the currencies and exchange.

Crown of the Kobold King doesn't have a Chronicle sheet. I would suggest running Malevolence instead. It is designed for 2e, while Crown of the Kobold King isn't. Then, Troubles in Otari could be run at 2nd level.

For 4th level, there is The Enmity Cycle

Apologies, I should have been more clear. The aforementioned list was of the modules I own, so I cannot in fact run Malevolence or The Enmity Cycle, as I do not have either of said modules.

TechnoDM wrote:

Crown of the Kobold King doesn't have a Chronicle sheet. I would suggest running Malevolence instead. It is designed for 2e, while Crown of the Kobold King isn't. Then, Troubles in Otari could be run at 2nd level.

For 4th level, there is The Enmity Cycle

Apologies, I should have been more clear. The aforementioned list was of the modules I own, so I cannot in fact run Malevolence or The Enmity Cycle, as I do not have either of said modules.

Well, I don't have any of them, so, I'd be willing to purchase one of those two, if we had other GMs willing to run the others.

Looks like we have a 2E group starting to form.

Based on the ability to hand over to another GM, I see the use of the single set of rules. Along with the options, what about further limits such as striking fighters from available classes? It would keep a GM from adding a bunch of stuff others may not want to add but would allow for tailoring down.

...

I just realized another benefit of the standardized CC rules,

After some more consideration, I've decided to step away as PbP GM for some time so that I can focus more on running the game at my home table. While I appreciate the offer to join this project and wish the remaining members nothing but the best, I would like to withdraw from Project Bazaar.

It is a shame to not see kobold on the proposed racial list. To allow tieflings and dhamphir a place but not the noblest of races. Shame indeed.

It is a shame to not see kobold on the proposed racial list. To allow tieflings and dhamphir a place but not the noblest of races. Shame indeed.

your right, I missed them since they are among the forgotten races, and they have some interesting racial options.

I'll put them in the list and update it in the errata section at the top.

It is a shame to not see kobold on the proposed racial list. To allow tieflings and dhamphir a place but not the noblest of races. Shame indeed.

beats up a kobold oracle!

8)

You brute! You're not a paladin! Just a ham-handed lout!

I can place hands on all the 1e aps maybe, but no 2e even though I greatly enjoy 2e.

With that said, I gm something, and y'all play, and you gm something and the rest of us play?

...

With that said, I gm something, and y'all play, and you gm something and the rest of us play?

That is the pretty much the deal.

Though I have found thou experience, that not all GMs have the mental fortitude to GM an entire AP
(raises hand, only reached the end of the first book of an AP once, I believe).
So that is why I picked a smaller and more manageable length of adventures for folks so everyone has a more manageable length of time as GM.
As being a GM can be a more a burden for some GMs then others in they might add more details and twists then what is present.

I am late to the game and just finding this thread. Quite interested in the concept. Did any games ever get off the ground here? I would run most any AP or mod, but would want to use the PF2 ruleset even if its an older PF adventure. Can just modify and rescale.

No, no games took off sadly.

Outpost is still going on, wait till it ends.

Dr. Evil, I am willing to enter the round robin for 2e. I have preference for Seven Dooms or something in and around Sandpoint, if you are up for it... (and anyone else, for that matter)..

Here's a second for 2e.

I'm up for a 2e rotation with a group as well. If you get something going, PM me as I'm likely to miss a post here.

This is a PF 1E Bazaar, please make a new Bazaar thread for PF 2e

Sorry Azure!

GM Shadowlord, check out our Interest check here!

This is a PF 1E Bazaar, please make a new Bazaar thread for PF 2e

Apologies, I must have lost that as I read the posts.