Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play: Guide 5.0 and Changes to Organized Play

Mike,

Did I understand correctly that the character needs a ITS but not the ITS sheet in the guide?

So, for example would it be possible to have an ITS that is text?

For example.

Bought: Potion of CLW, Potion of Darkvision, Scroll of Haste (total cost 1175 GP)
Used: 3 charges from Wand of CLW (37 remaining) Spent 30 GP in bribes, spent 170 GP for pooled Restoration.

Then the Chronicle sheet just reads "Purchases - 1375 GP" with the GM's initials.

Is that good?

Way late, but I'll just note that this particular format doesn't seem to note clearly when items were bought and consumed.

Part of the intent of the form is to be able to see easily if you still have an item. With this approach, I could check this line and see that you bought a Potion of Darkvision, but I'd have to check the entry for each and every following Chronicle to see if you'd used it.

An entry more like
Potion of CLW - Bought: 3 Used: Sold
Potion of Darkvision - Bought: 3 Used: 7 Sold

Would quickly let me know you still had the CLW, but had used the Darkvision.

More seriously, this could easily be a boon for Herolab users.

:-) Yep, if you use Herolab, no need to spend time writing your purchases anywhere. Just print them out (or keep them digitally)

If your target window is less than 4 hours, you shouldn't be playing PFS Scenarios or at the very least shouldn't EXPECT to be able to play, finish them and have a good time.*

*Unless Thea's running your table.

So let me preface responding to this quote specifically with this: I like the new guide. The majority of the changes look good to me on paper, and I'm interested to see how they play out. I also think the IT sheet specifically is a great idea. Perhaps in need of a little refinement, but a great idea.

That said, having a full 4 hour slot is certainly ideal. But I believe it would be ludicrous to tell someone not to even bother trying to be part of this (generally) awesome gaming community if they are going to run a little short of that. I don't think that serves as a valid excuse to let appropriate record keeping slide, but I certainly commend the toronto guys for making a lesser time slot work for game play. Perhaps emailing with the game day coordinator prior to after the game can help keep the records more organized?

BTW, I love you trying to make an argument that because we as humans take shortcuts, our laws should reflect those shortcuts. If that were the case, we wouldn't need lines or signs on our roads, or laws against theft or murder, because, well it's easier not to pay attention to those silly laws.

He could be arguing that. But then again, he might just be arguing that rules aren't an end in themselves, and that experience has demonstrated that these rules should be re-evaluated?

Nah, I'm sure it's the murder one.

Kyle Baird wrote:

Fromper wrote:

The need for item auditing is a large part of the main debate.

So now you want the debate to be, "should GMs need to review a player's item inventory at all?" WTF? That's been a rule since 2008!

Let's just say no! +5 Vorpal Holy Blades for every new character! Woooo!

Nobody ever said that GMs shouldn't be able to audit every part of a character. But this entire discussion seems to have started from an assumption on Paizo's part that auditing items is somehow more important than auditing feats, spell selection, point buy, skill points, etc. Why shouldn't we question that assumption?

As I said, I view the ITS as a tool. It makes questions about equipment far easier to answer, so I'm all for it. I personally have seen more problems with feats, but that is a tiny, tiny sampling of the PFS experience. I guess Ohio's not huge into the consumables :)

What I find interesting about this side debate is that there is no tracking of character features. Obviously the GM can audit and make sure my character is a legal build, but there's no way to tell if it's a different legal build than it was last week. Other than the same GM remembering me using different abilities in different games.

Does your VC know that you don't require players to track inventory? Don't ever perform audits? Are they going to be okay that you couldn't possibly be bothered to look at an ITS because of your rushed time slot? If so, I bet a certain someone would like to have a word with them.

I've already stated (admittedly, its a bit hard to follow all posts in this thread) that I am going to try to follow the new rules. Including enforcing the old rules.

He is certainly aware that I wasn't following the old rules.

He is certainly aware that at this point I have NEVER looked at an ITS

He is certainly aware that I very, very rarely perform audits.

He is certainly aware that I have a rushed time slot.

And I'll inform him (and Jiggy :-)) that yeah, if push comes to shove and I have to choose between more roleplaying and character audits more roleplaying will get the priority.

Kyle Baird wrote:

If your target window is less than 4 hours, you shouldn't be playing PFS Scenarios or at the very least shouldn't EXPECT to be able to play, finish them and have a good time.*

*Unless Thea's running your table.

So let me preface responding to this quote specifically with this: I like the new guide. The majority of the changes look good to me on paper, and I'm interested to see how they play out. I also think the IT sheet specifically is a great idea. Perhaps in need of a little refinement, but a great idea.

That said, having a full 4 hour slot is certainly ideal. But I believe it would be ludicrous to tell someone not to even bother trying to be part of this (generally) awesome gaming community if they are going to run a little short of that. I don't think that serves as a valid excuse to let appropriate record keeping slide, but I certainly commend the toronto guys for making a lesser time slot work for game play. Perhaps emailing with the game day coordinator prior to after the game can help keep the records more organized?

Why do people on the internet feel the need to extrapolate a position just to form an argument so they can feel they have the superior position?

If you and your friends consistently have a weekday window of fun time that is less than 4 hours long, PFS Scenarios might not be the best option. If you can fit them in and still serve the scenario justice and everyone has fun, awesome. But you can't then use the excuse of "our time window is too short to follow the rules" when you're already scheduling the game in a window of time that is less than the recommended 4-5 hour slot.

If you have a 4 hour slot and you are saying, "we can't follow the rules" because we can't fit it in a 4 hour window, then please look at ALL the factors that are contributing to this, not just the rules you don't want to follow anyway. I think it's further upthread by Jiggy.

Kyle Baird wrote:

BTW, I love you trying to make an argument that because we as humans take shortcuts, our laws should reflect those shortcuts. If that were the case, we wouldn't need lines or signs on our roads, or laws against theft or murder, because, well it's easier not to pay attention to those silly laws.

He could be arguing that. But then again, he might just be arguing that rules aren't an end in themselves, and that experience has demonstrated that these rules should be re-evaluated?

Nah, I'm sure it's the murder one.

Actually, I'd say there's often a good argument for rules, even if they won't be followed to the letter. Keeping the speed limit at 65 rather than setting it at 75-80 if that's where most people drive helps keep most people in that range instead of 10-15 above the new limit.

But there should be awareness of what rules are actually being followed and which ones really need to be and which ones are more like guidelines.

If nothing else, so you'll know what the consequences of choosing to strictly enforce them will be. In this case, you argue it should be the loss of a good number of PFS venues, GMs and players. Is that worth it?

Way late, but I'll just note that this particular format doesn't seem to note clearly when items were bought and consumed.

Part of the intent of the form is to be able to see easily if you still have an item. With this approach, I could check this line and see that you bought a Potion of Darkvision, but I'd have to check the entry for each and every following Chronicle to see if you'd used it.

An entry more like
Potion of CLW - Bought: 3 Used: Sold
Potion of Darkvision - Bought: 3 Used: 7 Sold

Would quickly let me know you still had the CLW, but had used the Darkvision.

Is that the intent? I thought it was more the intent (mixed with the chronicle sheet sign off) to track purchases, not so much expendatures. A good example for me is bribes. If I spemd 30 gold in bribes, where do I write it down? On the ITS? On the chronicle sheet?

I especially love that all this vitriol essentially comes from this announcement:

Here's a new tool to help you conform with rule X. This new tool allows us to put cooler things on a chronicle and will speed up the inventory section of an optional character audit and is a direct response from several threads here regarding the lack of space on chronicle sheets to track your item purchases.

More seriously, this could easily be a boon for Herolab users. If we can keep it in text format, then putting the information in the journal enteries becomes viable. (Which I've been doing myself for a while.) So if I sign up for 5-37 The Decembervate Needs Antacid, I can write in my purchases and print out the sheet, have the GM note the purchases on the chronicle sheet, then I have it stored digitally as well.

I've NEVER noticed that notes button before.

Thanks for pointing that out.

Worth (almost) the time spent reading this thread :-)

Lormyr wrote:

Kyle Baird wrote:

If your target window is less than 4 hours, you shouldn't be playing PFS Scenarios or at the very least shouldn't EXPECT to be able to play, finish them and have a good time.*

*Unless Thea's running your table.

So let me preface responding to this quote specifically with this: I like the new guide. The majority of the changes look good to me on paper, and I'm interested to see how they play out. I also think the IT sheet specifically is a great idea. Perhaps in need of a little refinement, but a great idea.

That said, having a full 4 hour slot is certainly ideal. But I believe it would be ludicrous to tell someone not to even bother trying to be part of this (generally) awesome gaming community if they are going to run a little short of that. I don't think that serves as a valid excuse to let appropriate record keeping slide, but I certainly commend the toronto guys for making a lesser time slot work for game play. Perhaps emailing with the game day coordinator prior to after the game can help keep the records more organized?

Why do people on the internet feel the need to extrapolate a position just to form an argument so they can feel they have the superior position?

If you and your friends consistently have a weekday window of fun time that is less than 4 hours long, PFS Scenarios might not be the best option. If you can fit them in and still serve the scenario justice and everyone has fun, awesome. But you can't then use the excuse of "our time window is too short to follow the rules" when you're already scheduling the game in a window of time that is less than the recommended 4-5 hour slot.

If you have a 4 hour slot and you are saying, "we can't follow the rules" because we can't fit it in a 4 hour window, then please look at ALL the factors that are contributing to this, not just the rules you don't want to follow anyway. I think it's further upthread by Jiggy.

Is it "Him and his friends"? In which case, you may be right that a home game approach might be better.

However, I've played ~30 tables across two GenCons and two PaizCons. I've been GM'ed by VCs, VLs, and five-star GMs (some of whom were fantastic -- Doug Miles, I'm looking at you). I've GM'ed about 30 tables myself. In all that time, at my own table and at those around me, I've seen a GM require the entire chronicle be filled out prior to signing it exactly once. And the one time it did happen, every player at the table expressed surprise.

This. A million times this. This is not being addressed, at all.

Well, Kyle Baird has addressed it. His answer is that all of those people you've played with, with the exception of that one GM, should just stop playing PFS.

However, if we're going to stay within sight of reason, I would like there to be some consideration of this issue. I suspect the rules will stay as is (accounting must be done on sheets before they are signed), and the practice will stay as is (not obeying the rules and therefore being unworthy of being in Kyle Baird's PFS, but being in everybody else's).

It would be nice to have the design of the chronicle sheets changed so that it would match something that people would actually do.

The ITS helps by moving inventory to something easier to deal with and easier to audit. But serious consideration should be given to codifing in the rules that it's OK for a GM to hand out a pre-signed chronicle sheet, and that all the accounting on it no longer needs to be done (since there's now the ITS).

And I'll inform him (and Jiggy :-)) that yeah, if push comes to shove and I have to choose between more roleplaying and character audits more roleplaying will get the priority.

I knew you were going to try and paint it as being a choice between bookkeeping or roleplaying.

That's why when I listed other choices you could have made but didn't, I intentionally left out "spend less time roleplaying". I didn't even want to suggest that option.

Yet even when denied ammunition, you still took the shot. When confronted with "there are lots of things you could do besides skip the bookkeeping", you turned it into "choose between more roleplaying and character audits".

You ignored what I pointed out, replaced it with an endangering of your roleplaying time, and then attributed my name to it. You were offered alternatives, but ignored them and put words in my mouth to make yourself look like you had the moral high ground. That's seriously not cool.

thejeff wrote:

Way late, but I'll just note that this particular format doesn't seem to note clearly when items were bought and consumed.

Part of the intent of the form is to be able to see easily if you still have an item. With this approach, I could check this line and see that you bought a Potion of Darkvision, but I'd have to check the entry for each and every following Chronicle to see if you'd used it.

An entry more like
Potion of CLW - Bought: 3 Used: Sold
Potion of Darkvision - Bought: 3 Used: 7 Sold

Would quickly let me know you still had the CLW, but had used the Darkvision.

Is that the intent? I thought it was more the intent (mixed with the chronicle sheet sign off) to track purchases, not so much expendatures. A good example for me is bribes. If I spemd 30 gold in bribes, where do I write it down? On the ITS? On the chronicle sheet?

Not so much expenditures or purchases, but Inventory - Inventory Tracking Sheet, right?

Your format looks like what was intended to go on the Chronicle in the old way of doing things. The problem with that is that you have to go through all the Chronicles to see what you have.

The new format has boxes for which Chronicle you bought, used or sold items. I assume that's for a reason and should be maintained for any alternate ITS formats.

Linking it in a fixed form to each journal entry in Herolab seems to defeat that purpose.

I don't think bribes and such would go on the ITS.

These tears are delicious. I can't wait until Gen Con.

Why do people on the internet feel the need to extrapolate a position just to form an argument so they can feel they have the superior position?

If you and your friends consistently have a weekday window of fun time that is less than 4 hours long, PFS Scenarios might not be the best option. If you can fit them in and still serve the scenario justice and everyone has fun, awesome. But you can't then use the excuse of "our time window is too short to follow the rules" when you're already scheduling the game in a window of time that is less than the recommended 4-5 hour slot.

If you have a 4 hour slot and you are saying, "we can't follow the rules" because we can't fit it in a 4 hour window, then please look at ALL the factors that are contributing to this, not just the rules you don't want to follow anyway. I think it's further upthread by Jiggy.

I'm not sure that is unique to people on the internet, but I digress.

I understand your point, and I also happen to mostly agree with you. My only point is that I believe if you have a group of folks with a certain time frame that is close to but less than 4 hours, and they really wish to be part of PFS and use their free time to that end while making every effort they can to do so properly, then they should do so. We can agree to disagree on that point if wish, however. You won't find hard feelings on my end.

Much like you wish to know why some folks on the internet expand the boundaries of a position to be argumentative and/or feel superior, I wish I understood why some folks feel the need to be condescending in their discussions instead of making an effort to courteously discuss their differing views.

Kyle Baird wrote:

Why do people on the internet feel the need to extrapolate a position just to form an argument so they can feel they have the superior position?

If you and your friends consistently have a weekday window of fun time that is less than 4 hours long, PFS Scenarios might not be the best option. If you can fit them in and still serve the scenario justice and everyone has fun, awesome. But you can't then use the excuse of "our time window is too short to follow the rules" when you're already scheduling the game in a window of time that is less than the recommended 4-5 hour slot.

If you have a 4 hour slot and you are saying, "we can't follow the rules" because we can't fit it in a 4 hour window, then please look at ALL the factors that are contributing to this, not just the rules you don't want to follow anyway. I think it's further upthread by Jiggy.

I'm not sure that is unique to people on the internet, but I digress.

I understand your point, and I also happen to mostly agree with you. My only point is that I believe if you have a group of folks with a certain time frame that is close to but less than 4 hours, and they really wish to be part of PFS and use their free time to that end while making every effort they can to do so properly, then they should do so. We can agree to disagree on that point if wish, however. You won't find hard feelings on my end.

Much like you wish to know why some folks on the internet expand the boundaries of a position to be argumentative and/or feel superior, I wish I understood why some folks feel the need to be condescending in their discussions instead of making an effort to courteously discuss their differing views.

Never any hard feelings. Those people who are rushed could also split the scenarios up into two parts, thus giving them more time to enjoy each scenario and try to follow the rules as written.

Matthew Morris wrote:

Mike,

Did I understand correctly that the character needs a ITS but not the ITS sheet in the guide?

So, for example would it be possible to have an ITS that is text?

For example.

Bought: Potion of CLW, Potion of Darkvision, Scroll of Haste (total cost 1175 GP)
Used: 3 charges from Wand of CLW (37 remaining) Spent 30 GP in bribes, spent 170 GP for pooled Restoration.

Then the Chronicle sheet just reads "Purchases - 1375 GP" with the GM's initials.

Is that good?

Way late, but I'll just note that this particular format doesn't seem to note clearly when items were bought and consumed.

Part of the intent of the form is to be able to see easily if you still have an item. With this approach, I could check this line and see that you bought a Potion of Darkvision, but I'd have to check the entry for each and every following Chronicle to see if you'd used it.

An entry more like
Potion of CLW - Bought: 3 Used: Sold
Potion of Darkvision - Bought: 3 Used: 7 Sold

Would quickly let me know you still had the CLW, but had used the Darkvision.

The ITS, that is currently available to view in the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play version 5.0, has 3 check boxes next to each line. One where you list the Chronicle that the item was purchased, one where you list the Chronicle that the item was sold, and one where you list the Chronicle the item was expended.

It is already there for you. And the good news is, you can customize an ITS to best fit the needs of your character.

Never any hard feelings. Those people who are rushed could also split the scenarios up into two parts, thus giving them more time to enjoy each scenario and try to follow the rules as written.

And that is a fantastic suggestion that should serve to cover all needs. You will be able to attend regular play as well as have the time required to keep your records in good order.

Kyle Baird wrote:

Never any hard feelings. Those people who are rushed could also split the scenarios up into two parts, thus giving them more time to enjoy each scenario and try to follow the rules as written.

And that is a fantastic suggestion that should serve to cover all needs. You will be able to attend regular play as well as have the time required to keep your records in good order.

After all of this, at Gen Con I am going to try to introduce the ITS to my players. I'm going to try to explain how it works and look over their purchases as required. I'm even going to perform some audits (especially for Eyes of the Ten for more than one reason really) despite knowing that Parts 1 and 4 run especially long. If I find myself unable to review item purchases within my slot along with everything else I normally do, I'm going to re-evaluate everything. I may even find that this ITS thing DOES add too much time. And after I try it out and if I reach that conclusion, then I will provide that information to campaign management.

Why is that so hard to ask of everyone else?

thejeff wrote:

Matthew Morris wrote:

Mike,

Did I understand correctly that the character needs a ITS but not the ITS sheet in the guide?

So, for example would it be possible to have an ITS that is text?

For example.

Bought: Potion of CLW, Potion of Darkvision, Scroll of Haste (total cost 1175 GP)
Used: 3 charges from Wand of CLW (37 remaining) Spent 30 GP in bribes, spent 170 GP for pooled Restoration.

Then the Chronicle sheet just reads "Purchases - 1375 GP" with the GM's initials.

Is that good?

Way late, but I'll just note that this particular format doesn't seem to note clearly when items were bought and consumed.

Part of the intent of the form is to be able to see easily if you still have an item. With this approach, I could check this line and see that you bought a Potion of Darkvision, but I'd have to check the entry for each and every following Chronicle to see if you'd used it.

An entry more like
Potion of CLW - Bought: 3 Used: Sold
Potion of Darkvision - Bought: 3 Used: 7 Sold

Would quickly let me know you still had the CLW, but had used the Darkvision.

The ITS, that is currently available to view in the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play version 5.0, has 3 check boxes next to each line. One where you list the Chronicle that the item was purchased, one where you list the Chronicle that the item was sold, and one where you list the Chronicle the item was expended.

It is already there for you. And the good news is, you can customize an ITS to best fit the needs of your character.

Agreed. I was just pointing out to Matthew that his customized example wouldn't have the same information. Or at least not available as easily.

I just retro-fitted an ITS to the character I intend to play tonight (an 8-th level gunslinger with five or six different varieties of ammunition, and a goodly selection of potions). It probably took me around half an hour.

The form at present isn't well-suited to tracking ammunition (which can be quite a significant expense for a gunslinger); if I had detailed all the purchases over the life of the character, rather than just taken a snapshot of what the character has today, I'd have filled many more lines of the sheet. It's not particularly well suited to multiple items, either (a problem for things like scrolls holding multiple copies of a spell). But it's still an improvement over digging through 24 chronicles (not a mistake; 6 were on slow track).

The important points, as I see them, are that the ITS provides a unified place to look for inventory items, and that the line items are linked back to a chronicle.

EDIT: And showing all the information on any particular item on one line.

Deane Beman wrote:

Michael Brock wrote:

rknop wrote:

Would it really be so terrible to move to inventory being on the ITS only and remove the requirement that any record at all of the purchases show up initialed by a GM on the chronicle sheet? What would be the harm in removing this last requirement?

If we did that, GMs would then have to sign both the Chronicle (for XP and PP) and the ITS for equipment purchases. People voiced serious concerns it would be too onerous on GMs to sign two sheets instead of just one.

But why would they have to sign both? If the goal is for ease of auditing, and the information on the ITS is clearly listed and accurate, haven't we accomplished the goal?

They....don't....have....to...sign....off....on....both.

I answered a question that I quoted.

I know that they don't currently have to sign both sheets. But in the situation presented by the post you were quoting you implied that the GM would need to sign both sheets...and my question was directed toward that situation.

Lormyr wrote:

Kyle Baird wrote:

Never any hard feelings. Those people who are rushed could also split the scenarios up into two parts, thus giving them more time to enjoy each scenario and try to follow the rules as written.

And that is a fantastic suggestion that should serve to cover all needs. You will be able to attend regular play as well as have the time required to keep your records in good order.

After all of this, at Gen Con I am going to try to introduce the ITS to my players. I'm going to try to explain how it works and look over their purchases as required. I'm even going to perform some audits (especially for Eyes of the Ten for more than one reason really) despite knowing that Parts 1 and 4 run especially long. If I find myself unable to review item purchases within my slot along with everything else I normally do, I'm going to re-evaluate everything. I may even find that this ITS thing DOES add too much time. And after I try it out and if I reach that conclusion, then I will provide that information to campaign management.

Why is that so hard to ask of everyone else?

If I had a reasonable answer to that question, I'd gladly offer it brother. I love the idea of the sheet. Some very experienced GMs may not need it, but I can easily see how it would be a great boon to newer GMs, and even save more experienced time if an audit is needed or requested.

Even just writing up on a sheet of plain as day notebook paper a list of what you bought, how much it cost, and what the # of the chronicle sheet you purchased it on would work great if you have a beef with the IT sheet itself.

Never any hard feelings. Those people who are rushed could also split the scenarios up into two parts, thus giving them more time to enjoy each scenario and try to follow the rules as written.

Is that even legal? I guess there's no real reason it shouldn't be.

It really only works if it's a set group of players. If it's an open Gaming Store type of game, the logistics go out of control as new players show up and regulars miss weeks, Characters get tied up in unfinished games, etc.

Kyle Baird wrote:

Never any hard feelings. Those people who are rushed could also split the scenarios up into two parts, thus giving them more time to enjoy each scenario and try to follow the rules as written.

Is that even legal? I guess there's no real reason it shouldn't be.

It really only works if it's a set group of players. If it's an open Gaming Store type of game, the logistics go out of control as new players show up and regulars miss weeks, Characters get tied up in unfinished games, etc.

If they can't make it for the second part, you have a couple of options.

A) Run a different scenario.
B) If they made it through 3 encounters, you can give them a chronicle with 1 XP and appropriate gold and PP for what they've completed.

You ignored what I pointed out, replaced it with an endangering of your roleplaying time, and then attributed my name to it. You were offered alternatives, but ignored them and put words in my mouth to make yourself look like you had the moral high ground. That's seriously not cool.

Sorry, I really didn't intend to do that. Sincere apologies.

I already do most of what you suggest, and some other things besides. There really isn't a lot more that I can cut while still enjoying being a GM. I'm already pushing my comfort zone in what I do.

As to not running PFS at the FLGS. I think that solution is far, far worse than the problem.

I'll reiterate what I've already stated. I'm going to try to follow the rules (old and new). If it takes a few seconds or even a minute or two I can almost certainly cut that much time from my normal run time. But IF it is more than I can compensate for WHILE STILL HAVING FUN then I really see only a few choices. I stop having fun. I quit GMing. Or I stop following this particular rule.

I just retro-fitted an ITS to the character I intend to play tonight (an 8-th level gunslinger with five or six different varieties of ammunition, and a goodly selection of potions). It probably took me around half an hour.

Reading the policy, I think you only need compliance for transactions, eg, every time you buy/sell after a scenario. That is, you need to fill out ITSs going forward, rather than catch up to where you sit today.

Over time this will reduce the auditing burden. Mike et al. don't appear to be asking for compliance by filling in ITS for your previous state. (Though, I plan to just to ease wand tracking.)

GM 101 and 201 have a great list of ideas on how to speed up encounters so GMs can spend more time roleplaying.

There's also threads here with similar tips on speeding up your game while still having fun and even tips on how to do a PC audit more quickly.

Is there a download for GM 201, like there is for 101? I cannot find anything.

Hmmm, will it really be viable to use Herolab to track the items? The problem is that you're supposed to get a GM signature with every set of item purchases.... and that means every time you reprint the item tracker sheet from hero lab, you've lost the previous GM signatures. You'd have to carry around all your old item tracker sheets as well in order to have all the old GM signatures.

If I've missed something that suggests otherwise, sorry. I've only been able to skim this huge thread XD

Is there a download for GM 201, like there is for 101? I cannot find anything.

Not until after Gen Con at the earliest. Last I knew it still had some more development work before being released beyond the GMs who wrote it.

Hmmm, will it really be viable to use Herolab to track the items? The problem is that you're supposed to get a GM signature with every set of item purchases.... and that means every time you reprint the item tracker sheet from hero lab, you've lost the previous GM signatures. You'd have to carry around all your old item tracker sheets as well in order to have all the old GM signatures.

If I've missed something that suggests otherwise, sorry. I've only been able to skim this huge thread XD

The signature only happens on chronicle sheets.

I chose to transfer the whole of the current inventory for that PC onto an ITS form for two reasons; partly as an experiment to get a feel for the ITS process as a whole, and partly because I think it will make my inventory management simpler. I know it's not required (and certainly not today; the new guide doesn't go into effect for another week).

The form at present isn't well-suited to tracking ammunition (which can be quite a significant expense for a gunslinger); if I had detailed all the purchases over the life of the character, rather than just taken a snapshot of what the character has today, I'd have filled many more lines of the sheet. It's not particularly well suited to multiple items, either (a problem for things like scrolls holding multiple copies of a spell)

I just filled out a sheet for my level 4 gunslinger, who has made enough purchases in his career to reach a 2nd ITS already.

I agree that tracking ammunition and "stacks of consumables" is a bit wonky. I've actually tracked, prior to the new ITS, every bullet fired, but because of the way the three little boxes works, I used a line for each batch of bullets purchased, and I guess will try to sort out how to track the expenditure box with a FIFO-approach.

I can see the same issue with alchemist fires or other things that you'd buy a couple of at a time. Hypothetically you bought a stack of 3 on chronicle #1, and you expend them on chronicles #3, #5 and #8... I suppose you can just fill in tiny "3,5,8" in the box.

I look forward the those folks in the community with extra time and typesetting skills making a better version for consumables/ammo.

It took about 5 minutes to fill out the sheet from 7 chronicles, and I don't consider myself especially fast with a pen.

John Francis wrote:

The form at present isn't well-suited to tracking ammunition (which can be quite a significant expense for a gunslinger); if I had detailed all the purchases over the life of the character, rather than just taken a snapshot of what the character has today, I'd have filled many more lines of the sheet. It's not particularly well suited to multiple items, either (a problem for things like scrolls holding multiple copies of a spell)

I just filled out a sheet for my level 4 gunslinger, who has made enough purchases in his career to reach a 2nd ITS already.

I agree that tracking ammunition and "stacks of consumables" is a bit wonky. I've actually tracked, prior to the new ITS, every bullet fired, but because of the way the three little boxes works, I used a line for each batch of bullets purchased, and I guess will try to sort out how to track the expenditure box with a FIFO-approach.

I can see the same issue with alchemist fires or other things that you'd buy a couple of at a time. Hypothetically you bought a stack of 3 on chronicle #1, and you expend them on chronicles #3, #5 and #8... I suppose you can just fill in tiny "3,5,8" in the box.

I look forward the those folks in the community with extra time and typesetting skills making a better version for consumables/ammo.

It took about 5 minutes to fill out the sheet from 7 chronicles, and I don't consider myself especially fast with a pen.

Ammo and similar things probably go best in the "Wands" format.

I'd probably actually track small numbers of items individually.
Alchemist Fire 1 3
Alchemist Fire 1 5
Alchemist Fire 1 8

rather than

3 Alchemist Fires 1 3/5/8

More lines, but less confusion in each.

thejeff wrote:

Kyle Baird wrote:

Never any hard feelings. Those people who are rushed could also split the scenarios up into two parts, thus giving them more time to enjoy each scenario and try to follow the rules as written.

Is that even legal? I guess there's no real reason it shouldn't be.

It really only works if it's a set group of players. If it's an open Gaming Store type of game, the logistics go out of control as new players show up and regulars miss weeks, Characters get tied up in unfinished games, etc.

If they can't make it for the second part, you have a couple of options.

A) Run a different scenario.
B) If they made it through 3 encounters, you can give them a chronicle with 1 XP and appropriate gold and PP for what they've completed.

That works if turnover is occasional.

That works if turnover is occasional.

If it's different sets of players every time, it becomes a problem.
A) leads to lots of different scenarios half run by different subsets of the group, some characters tied up if you still hope to finish, or just abandoned games.
B) leads to lots of frustration with scenarios used up at half rewards for scheduling conflicts.

Of course no single solution is going to work for everyone, instead of pointing out the obvious, why not work on additional options or solutions?

Mike Brock,

To quote myself from GM 201 at this year's PaizoCon:

"You deserve this."

Hmmm, will it really be viable to use Herolab to track the items? The problem is that you're supposed to get a GM signature with every set of item purchases.... and that means every time you reprint the item tracker sheet from hero lab, you've lost the previous GM signatures. You'd have to carry around all your old item tracker sheets as well in order to have all the old GM signatures.

If I've missed something that suggests otherwise, sorry. I've only been able to skim this huge thread XD

You can use what ever you want to track items as long as it tracks everything that the guide version does and you can carry a print out of said inventory. My issue with herolab tracking is that I have not seen an output that will list said things, especially what scenario you purchased and what scenario you sold an item.

Mike Brock,

To quote myself from GM 201 at this year's PaizoCon:

"You deserve this."

But you were holding a beer at that moment.

Matthew Morris wrote:

More seriously, this could easily be a boon for Herolab users.

:-) Yep, if you use Herolab, no need to spend time writing your purchases anywhere. Just print them out (or keep them digitally)

I must have missed it, when did Hero Labs add Purchase Tracking?

if a player isn't keeping track of equipment they purchase, and consumables such as charges on their sheet then how do they know when the wand runs out?

My group tracks wand usage (and all other consumables) on their character sheet. They update and print out a new character sheet with the new charge total. Some have a fresh sheet every adventure. Some print a fresh sheet each time they level.

It is hard to get some of the players to update their sheets.

The biggest problem I foresee with the ITS is that a "current inventory list" will soon spread across 4 to 6 pages with crossing off nightmares leaving 4 to 6 items per page. I certainly don't want to see a current inventory list spread over that many pages. I do not know if that is an exhaggerated concern or a realistic one yet.

We shall all find out together.

What happens if you lose your sheet before a game? I know I keep my characters on my phone so I can re-print my stats sheet... and my PDF's are on there as well so I have my resources... but if I lose my ITS am I just screwed... I don't have the signatures any more. Does my character suddenly become naked and therefore I should just quit the game?

What happens if you lose your sheet before a game? I know I keep my characters on my phone so I can re-print my stats sheet... and my PDF's are on there as well so I have my resources... but if I lose my ITS am I just screwed... I don't have the signatures any more. Does my character suddenly become naked and therefore I should just quit the game?

1. The ITS does not get signed.

I think that rknop has hit the nail on the head with his analysis. The common practice at this point is that GMs aren't looking over purchases on the players' chronicles. They are filling out the "GM only" sections, signing the sheets, and handing them out.

I don't think the new rule is significantly more onerous than the previous rule. However, why people are upset is because they aren't comparing the old rule to the new rule -- they are comparing the existing common practice to the new rule. And that, you must admit, is a significantly bigger difference.

Personally, I agree with rknop that we should just trust the players to fill out their own ITSes on their own time. Make them subject to GM review, of course. But don't require GMs to sign off on the purchases. We already trust players to not cheat when building their characters. What difference does it make whether GMs are signing off on every purchase or not, as long as everything is laid out in a clear way in case the character *is* audited?

Ok,. then let me clarify. MOST of the auditing I have observed in the more than 100 conventions and/or game days I have been to were initiated because a player pulled out their 9th potion of the day, or their 14th scroll of the day, or burned through two and a half wands. The GM, wanting to confirm all of that had been purchased had to slog through 28 Chronicles and a character sheet instead of just looking at one sheet where those purchases would all be noted.

I don't disagree with you here. It *is* much easier to just look at a character sheet and an inventory tracker to verify things than to have to sort through all the chronicles. The thing is that even on those chronicles, the GMs probably did not examine the purchases before signing. Is that contrary to the rules? Yes. Is it what people do? Again, yes.

Having one sheet to track items is not a bad idea. Frankly, though, if I had a game like that, I'd be just as likely to only check the character sheet. If they had the foresight to purchase items ahead of time, it should be written down there. Is that a full audit? No. But it is a heck of a lot faster and should catch most people who aren't deliberately cheating.

Velsa wrote:

What happens if you lose your sheet before a game? I know I keep my characters on my phone so I can re-print my stats sheet... and my PDF's are on there as well so I have my resources... but if I lose my ITS am I just screwed... I don't have the signatures any more. Does my character suddenly become naked and therefore I should just quit the game?

1. The ITS does not get signed.

2. Keep the ITS with your Chronicles. If you lose your Chronicles, you are pretty screwed. Losing the ITS with them will seem a minor issue in comparison.

But as it stands I keep all my Chronicles stapled back to a stat sheet from the level they were done at and now I don't have to bring everyone of those to each module will I need to start bring 3-4 binders to each module?

You do have to bring your Chronicles to each game - they are part of your character record.