Introducing the Core Campaign

Monday, January 26, 2015


Illustration by Grafit Studio

As the Pathfinder Society Organized Play campaign and the Pathfinder RPG itself has developed over the last several years, players have expressed increasing concerns about the availability of replay, new players being overwhelmed or overshadowed by over-optimized characters, Chronicle sheet rewards not having much meaning, and other concerns related to the sheer amount of information and options available to PFS players. With the help of our dedicated venture-captains, the team here at Paizo has developed a solution designed to solve all of these problems—and more. We call this solution the Core Campaign, a new mode of PFS play that utilizes all of the campaign's current scenarios and resources—only with a significantly lower barrier to entry. Here are some of the highlights:

  • The current Pathfinder Society campaign remains unchanged with use of all of Additional Resources. It is still named Pathfinder Society Organized Play. The new option will be titled Pathfinder Society Core Campaign. Both campaign "modes" use the same scenarios, modules, and other sanctioned adventure resources.
  • Every new and veteran player may participate in both the current and Core Campaign at the same time.
  • For players participating in the Core Campaign, only the Core Rulebook, Character Traits Web Enhancement, and Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play may be utilized for character creation.
  • At no time may any trait, feat, equipment, magic item, skill, animal companion, familiar, or any other character option come from a source beyond these three resources unless it appears on a Chronicle sheet. Race boons found on Chronicle sheets may not be used in the Core Campaign.
  • If an item appears on a Chronicle sheet, a PC may purchase and use it regardless of the book it comes from, with the exception of a boon that opens up a different character race.
  • Just like in the current campaign, a player may receive credit once for playing and once for GMing a scenario in the Core Campaign; this credit is independent of player and GM credit in the Pathfinder Society Organized Play campaign. This means a player can play once in each of the two campaigns and GM for credit once in each of the campaigns (four credits total, two per campaign), not including any limited replay opportunities established in the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play.
  • At any point a player wants to transition their character from the Core Campaign to the existing campaign, they may do so. However, they may not bring that character back to the Core Campaign. As set forth in the current rules, a character may not have two of the same Chronicle sheet assigned to him, regardless of whether it was earned in the Core or existing campaign.

  • Illustration by
    Jason Rainville
  • GMs may utilize whatever books a scenario, module, quest, Adventure Path, or other sanctioned adventure utilizes.
  • The Core Campaign offers limited replay opportunities for players who have already experienced an adventure in the standard campaign. There have been comments that veteran players have limited opportunities to play with new players and "show them the ropes." Opening up every adventure for replay an additional time allows for veteran players to play a scenario with a new player and still receive credit.
  • This initative allows for an immediate influx of four new play opportunities every month—two new senarios playable in the existing campaign and the same two scenarios avalable for play in the Core Campaign.
  • Game mechanics outside of the Core Rulebook, such as reposition and dirty trick, are not allowed unless a Chronicle sheet specifically opens it as a character option.
  • Retraining may be utilized as the rules currently allow, but only when a PC retrains to take an option from one of the allowed Core Campaign resources.
  • GMs will receive star credit for GMing a game, regardless of whether it was an existing campaign or Core Campaign game.
  • If a Core Rulebook option advises that something found in the Core Rulebook is clarified in the Bestiary 1, then the player uses that specific option out of the Bestiary 1 to meet the requirement set forth in the Core Rulebook. That would include, but is not limited to, animal companions, special abilities, summon spells, etc... Only the Bestiary 1 is available for these extra options outside of the Core Rulebook.

The next question I think people will ask is: when we will be able to start playing games in the Core Campaign? We're planning to have this system publicly available and ready for you to use later this week! When creating a new event, the new system will allow you to select if a scenario is being run in the existing campaign, Core Campaign, or both (for multiple tables of the same adventure). Likewise, when reporting data from completed sessions, the system allows the person entering data to choose to report which campaign the session was run in.

We hope that this new initiative, along with the new faction journal cards highlighted in last week's blog, will bring an exciting new energy to the campaign on a global scale. I look forward to reading thoughts about the new Core Campaign and how it will help your local Pathfinder Society community.

Mike Brock
Global Organized Play Coordinator

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Grafit Studio Jason Rainville Pathfinder Society
501 to 550 of 1,044 << first < prev | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Soluzar wrote:

Ok...this is going so be a little long and tongue in cheek but someone has to play the devil's advocate (no I never had any Cheliax characters).

-One of the cited goals was to make chronicle sheets viable again. That's nice, I'm sure I'm going to be chomping at the bit to get a Cloak of Resistance +1. Being...

Actually this doesn't make that cloak any more valuable. You can still get any items from the Core Rulebook with whatever cash you've managed to accrue without needing the item on your boon sheet. The rule about items being inaccessible only really effects any stuff from beyond Core.

Shadow Lodge 5/5 ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Indiana—Southern aka CanisDirus

10 people marked this as a favorite.

Compromise isn't quite an art-form, but it is most definitely *not* a science.

The Core Campaign addresses several items that have been brought up time and again by players, GMs, store owners, and VO/volunteers:

- Running out of things to play / replay
- Power creep
- Rules bloat / overwhelming newer players & GMs
- Cost for players to own resources in order to play

Are any of these addressed in a 100% fix-it-all way? Probably not (though, as with all things, your mileage may vary - some opinions with more vitriol than others).

That said, the Core Campaign addresses parts of each of these. It creates new options without taking anything away from the existing "normal" PFS Campaign. Yes, scheduling might be tricky in some regions at first as a result - but that can easily be overcome by just keeping open communication with your local player-and-GM base about what they want.

The Core Campaign opens up a limited form of replay for playing and GMing, makes a stab at trying to address power creep and rules bloat, is already getting newer players and GMs interested in PFS, and cuts the cost to players down to virtually 0.

If you don't like it - all I can say is don't do it. Most compromises don't make everyone happy, but they do leave everyone with something they can deal with. I'm really sorry to see one or two people say that they're leaving "because" of these new options, but if you really feel that strongly about it...well, there's nothing else to say than take care and all the best to you. For those who are excited to start/rejoin PFS as a result of the new options the Core Campaign presents - welcome (back), and let's start rolling some dice!

Seriously, everyone...take a step away from the screen, take a deep breath, and look at the arguments going on here. Some of this is just silly, and some of it is getting out of hand. It's a game we all (mostly?) love to engage in - Paizo is creating options to try and address things that players have asked for - let's give them the benefit of the doubt and see how things go, okay?

Silver Crusade 5/5 ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

2 people marked this as a favorite.
deusvult wrote:

I get that Paizo has to keep publishing products to stay in business, but I really don't like the creep the game has seen. New options doesn't expand variability; it just introduces a treadmill of a fairly static number of ever more powerful optimized builds/munchkin templates.

A thousand times yes for the option of a "Core Only" reset.

I agree that with more material you get more nasty combinations, but a lot of the new material is really nice, and promises a smother experience than the old material.

Isn't going back to square 1 (the CRB, the source of 95 of my problems with pathfinder) like throwing the baby out with the batwater, just because it just happens to be on fire?

Can't we find an old tough sheriff (preferably only weeks before retirement, and too old for this) to clean up this town, and downright ban/fix some combinations?

Scarab Sages

Paul Trani wrote:


<music box melody>

Do you wanna play a pregen?

I think Paizo needs to adopt this as the theme song for CORE Pathfinder Society.

If they want it, it's theirs.

Has there been any progress on reaching 600 Venture Officers?
I need to get cracking on some lyrics, to pick up the gauntlet Mike threw down, a while back.

Grand Lodge 4/5

deusvult wrote:

I get that Paizo has to keep publishing products to stay in business, but I really don't like the creep the game has seen. New options doesn't expand variability; it just introduces a treadmill of a fairly static number of ever more powerful optimized builds/munchkin templates.

A thousand times yes for the option of a "Core Only" reset.

Given that some of the most powerful builds only get a little weaker when you restrict them to core only, the only impact on power will be to reduce the number of possible strong builds. Oh, and it'll have a bigger impact on the weaker character options, like trying to build around using a crossbow.

Going Core only is a win for a simpler (although still very complex) game, it's not really going to do much to weaken wizards, druids, and clerics.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
deusvult wrote:

I get that Paizo has to keep publishing products to stay in business, but I really don't like the creep the game has seen. New options doesn't expand variability; it just introduces a treadmill of a fairly static number of ever more powerful optimized builds/munchkin templates.

A thousand times yes for the option of a "Core Only" reset.

I agree that with more material you get more nasty combinations, but a lot of the new material is really nice, and promises a smother experience than the old material.

Isn't going back to square 1 (the CRB, the source of 95 of my problems with pathfinder) like throwing the baby out with the batwater, just because it just happens to be on fire?

Can't we find an old tough sheriff (preferably only weeks before retirement, and too old for this) to clean up this town, and downright ban/fix some combinations?

If a baby is still on fire despite being submerged in bathwater, it's clearly a demon baby and yes it should be thrown out.

But seriously, attempting to "fix" combos is an option that will please no one. Mike Brock was wise enough to see that, I think. All in or all out are about the only viable ways to adjudicate what's in and what's out.

Sovereign Court

Another thought: The thead is TL;DR for me to bother reading every post.

Has this question been asked and answered:

Can an existing character with 1 or 2 XP be "blobbed" into Core Only?

Grand Lodge 4/5

deusvult wrote:

Another thought: The thead is TL;DR for me to bother reading every post.

Has this question been asked and answered:

Can a character with less than 3 XP (and thus still level 1) be "blobbed" into Core Only?

It has been asked, and the answer is no.

Sovereign Court 4/5 ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Agent, Georgia—Atlanta aka The Masked Ferret

deusvult wrote:

Another thought: The thead is TL;DR for me to bother reading every post.

Has this question been asked and answered:

Can a character with less than 3 XP (and thus still level 1) be "blobbed" into Core Only?

The question has been asked and answered, and the answer was, effectively, Only if the less than 3xp was Core XP.

Once you go PFS, the character is no longer core.

Silver Crusade 5/5 ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mike Bramnik wrote:

Compromise isn't quite an art-form, but it is most definitely *not* a science.

The Core Campaign addresses several items that have been brought up time and again by players, GMs, store owners, and VO/volunteers:

- Running out of things to play / replay
- Power creep
- Rules bloat / overwhelming newer players & GMs
- Cost for players to own resources in order to play

Are any of these addressed in a 100% fix-it-all way? Probably not (though, as with all things, your mileage may vary - some opinions with more vitriol than others).

That said, the Core Campaign addresses parts of each of these. It creates new options without taking anything away from the existing "normal" PFS Campaign. Yes, scheduling might be tricky in some regions at first as a result - but that can easily be overcome by just keeping open communication with your local player-and-GM base about what they want.

The Core Campaign opens up a limited form of replay for playing and GMing, makes a stab at trying to address power creep and rules bloat, is already getting newer players and GMs interested in PFS, and cuts the cost to players down to virtually 0.

If you don't like it - all I can say is don't do it. Most compromises don't make everyone happy, but they do leave everyone with something they can deal with. I'm really sorry to see one or two people say that they're leaving "because" of these new options, but if you really feel that strongly about it...well, there's nothing else to say than take care and all the best to you. For those who are excited to start/rejoin PFS as a result of the new options the Core Campaign presents - welcome (back), and let's start rolling some dice!

Seriously, everyone...take a step away from the screen, take a deep breath, and look at the arguments going on here. Some of this is just silly, and some of it is getting out of hand. It's a game we all (mostly?) love to engage in - Paizo is creating options to try and address things that players have asked for - let's give...

Look I and I suspect a lot of other well intentioned posters really don't want this to fail, but this really seems to be a perception problem.

I can understand, that running out of things to play is a serious problems for a number of players, but why not fix it in a way, that allows more material. Or allow GMs/players to replay if they have at least 50 & fresh players at the table (just my stupid idea).

And while power creep will always be an issue, it comes pretty much automatically once you increase the number of options, unless they are all lackluster and constrained. When I think of power creep, the APG seems to be the worst offender, I am actually pretty happy with the power level of the ACG (that in is in dire need of the upcoming errata).

Rules bloat / cost to play: I never understood this issue back in 3.0, nor do I understand it now, players can decide their own level of involvement.
Obviously sites like d20pfsrd don't help here, but frankly if you go to this very forum (or better the advice part) and state your situation (new player, lack of additional sources and rules mastery) and your concept... they will be able to help you.

I love to repeat myself, but I really can't see myself suggesting a rogue to a new player over a slayer. The new class delivers a more consistent experience, which is pretty important for new players (one or two scenarios as an ineffective two weapon fighting rogue can drive a new player far far away).

Well obviously CORE isn't aimed at me, but neither will it hit my players (who tend to complain about pathfinder a fair bit, and they would prefer a simpler game).
I hope that this will all work out, if I have the choice, I will likely stay in the traditional campaign, but chances are pretty good, that I will try CORE, if it results in additional chances to play and meet new people.

5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think because replay for the sake of replay isn't a great option for the campaign. Replay when it *also* encourages people to replay lower-level scenarios in a rules-lighter, beginner-friendly situation is (perhaps) worth the cost.

Grand Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm also pretty sure that Mike said that this was never intended to be a "solution" to the "replay problem" and that it just happened to have a secondary effect of also allowing a limited form of replay.

Scarab Sages

GM Lamplighter wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:


Optimizing is not "breaking the game". In fact, in a core only game, optimizing may be required to even survive several scenarios (especially season six) or a module like Risen from the Sands.

If you think that optimizing in a core only game is grounds to be banned from your event, I hope I never play at your table.

Thanks to those who caught the issue for me, but I wanted to say they got my intent right. Optimizing by itself is not breaking the game. Over-optimization, and then using that as a weapon to break the game, is what I was on about.

P.S. I'd love to have you at my table.

P.P.S. and don't' get me started on "Risen from the Sands"... that's a whole 'nuther discussion! :)

I apologize for taking your comment out of context, I had missed the earlier "breaking the game" comment.

Silver Crusade 5/5 ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

2 people marked this as a favorite.
deusvult wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
deusvult wrote:

I get that Paizo has to keep publishing products to stay in business, but I really don't like the creep the game has seen. New options doesn't expand variability; it just introduces a treadmill of a fairly static number of ever more powerful optimized builds/munchkin templates.

A thousand times yes for the option of a "Core Only" reset.

I agree that with more material you get more nasty combinations, but a lot of the new material is really nice, and promises a smother experience than the old material.

Isn't going back to square 1 (the CRB, the source of 95 of my problems with pathfinder) like throwing the baby out with the batwater, just because it just happens to be on fire?

Can't we find an old tough sheriff (preferably only weeks before retirement, and too old for this) to clean up this town, and downright ban/fix some combinations?

If a baby is still on fire despite being submerged in bathwater, it's clearly a demon baby and yes it should be thrown out.

But seriously, attempting to "fix" combos is an option that will please no one. Mike Brock was wise enough to see that, I think. All in or all out are about the only viable ways to adjudicate what's in and what's out.

I hate to break it to you, but that baby has been flaming since conception. Some of the more valid complaints are there since the beta/have been grandfathered in, for the sake of backwards compatibility.

Obviously I would prefer a world where Paizo, let's a couple dozen optimizers take a stab ad a new publication before it goes to print, the same is true for VC/VLs so they can catch instances of unclear language/broken stuff, that will cause undue confusion/table variation in PFS... but alas, that is still a dream.

And putting the entire onus of declawing certain things on the campaign leadership is obviously not a workable solution, this process had to start sooner.

I guess this is a kind of soft reset for the campaign, we get a big boat, while the earth is scoured clean by quite a bit of water. I wonder what will happen, and how CORE players will react, when they leave their bubble for "the real world". ^^


Michael Brock wrote:
Kelly Youngblood wrote:
What of human languages from the Inner Sea World guide such as Kelish and Tien? Some scenarios seem to expect that you will know one or more of these.
Unless they appear on a Chronicle sheet, they are not available.

You know, I think all my existing PFS characters aren't legal. I don't own the Inner Sea World Guide and never even thought twice about assigning them appropriate languages.

Not that it's really come up, but still ...

5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Georgia—Atlanta aka Yiroep

If you play an adventure path in campaign mode, can it apply to either campaign of the group's choice, or is it just the extended campaign?

Grand Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
Kelly Youngblood wrote:
What of human languages from the Inner Sea World guide such as Kelish and Tien? Some scenarios seem to expect that you will know one or more of these.
Unless they appear on a Chronicle sheet, they are not available.

You know, I think all my existing PFS characters aren't legal. I don't own the Inner Sea World Guide and never even thought twice about assigning them appropriate languages.

Not that it's really come up, but still ...

You should pick up a copy. It's a great book if you're at all interested in Golarion lore, and it's a decent book if you're just looking for some mechanical stuff.

Dark Archive

If you own a player folio or a t shirt, do you still get once per session rerolls in Core? (spoiler - please say no)

Grand Lodge 4/5

strangepork wrote:
If you own a player folio or a t shirt, do you still get once per session rerolls in Core? (spoiler - please say no)

There's been no indication that that rule is being changed for the Core Campaign, so you probably still get a reroll.

Scarab Sages

strangepork wrote:
If you own a player folio or a t shirt, do you still get once per session rerolls in Core? (spoiler - please say no)

That is a rule from the guide to organized play, so yes. The rerolls are still in, unless they are specifically banned in core mode.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh man... Given the Rogue-bashing posts that have crept in, I totally need to do a Two Weapon Fighting Rogue now. Core-only Eyes of the Ten, here I come! Thanks, guys!

-Matt

Silver Crusade 5/5 ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

GM Lamplighter wrote:

I think because replay for the sake of replay isn't a great option for the campaign. Replay when it *also* encourages people to replay lower-level scenarios in a rules-lighter, beginner-friendly situation is (perhaps) worth the cost.

I guess only time will tell, I for one would not be surprised to see a lot of cherry picking. Playing a level 7-11 with a pregen, only to apply the chronicle to a level 1 character and immediately corrupt him with non-core options.

And obviously the source, of that keen longbow should garner some interest (I am a bit biased here, since I have the thing, and would not mind running it for a CORE group).

Silver Crusade 5/5 ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

Mattastrophic wrote:

Oh man... Given the Rogue-bashing posts that have crept in, I totally need to do a Two Weapon Fighting Rogue now. Core-only Eyes of the Ten, here I come! Thanks, guys!

-Matt

Well, you seem motivated ^^ good luck, and for your personal hard mode try it with dual rapiers (no not evil, just German^^)

Edit: Also it is not so much rogue bashing, as complaining, that sneak attack looks much better on paper that it ends up being. There is a reason why our beloved elven rogue inconic uses a (masterwork) shield..

Also we try not to bash them to hard, they really don't have the hit points ^^ :P

Grand Lodge 4/5

Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
GM Lamplighter wrote:

I think because replay for the sake of replay isn't a great option for the campaign. Replay when it *also* encourages people to replay lower-level scenarios in a rules-lighter, beginner-friendly situation is (perhaps) worth the cost.

I guess only time will tell, I for one would not be surprised to see a lot of cherry picking. Playing a level 7-11 with a pregen, only to apply the chronicle to a level 1 character and immediately corrupt him with non-core options.

And obviously the source, of that keen longbow should garner some interest (I am a bit biased here, since I have the thing, and would not mind running it for a CORE group).

That could get you the items early, but not anything boon related. Boons wait until the level of the proper subtier, as of the most recent Guide.

Silver Crusade 5/5 ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

Jeff Merola wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
GM Lamplighter wrote:

I think because replay for the sake of replay isn't a great option for the campaign. Replay when it *also* encourages people to replay lower-level scenarios in a rules-lighter, beginner-friendly situation is (perhaps) worth the cost.

I guess only time will tell, I for one would not be surprised to see a lot of cherry picking. Playing a level 7-11 with a pregen, only to apply the chronicle to a level 1 character and immediately corrupt him with non-core options.

And obviously the source, of that keen longbow should garner some interest (I am a bit biased here, since I have the thing, and would not mind running it for a CORE group).
That could get you the items early, but not anything boon related. Boons wait until the level of the proper subtier, as of the most recent Guide.

I am aware, but once the character is in traditional campaign, they can just get the free rebuild before level 1, and play the character/add some pregen/GM chronicles.

To be positive I could easily be persuaded to GM the Dissapeared in CORE, the boon is very fitting for a number of planned characters.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
Rules bloat / cost to play: I never understood this issue back in 3.0, nor do I understand it now, players can decide their own level of involvement.

More than anything I see this as a GM issue. I've been on all sides of this (player with complex build, GM when someone has a crazy feat interaction going, and player at the table observing the GM trying to understand a complicated build). You can see the fun level lowering when the GM tries to understand it but can't and just has to take it on faith that the player is correct. Especially with new GMs.

My personal story:
from back when I was a one-star involves an inquisitor using teamwork feats from Orcs of Golarion. I *knew* something was wrong with how he was interpreting the feats but I also knew it was going to take me 5-10 minutes to sort it out and make sure I was right. Rather than stop the game I let it ride.

But it's players too. My classic example is the table I was at where a player sat down with her 7th level cleric specialized for channeled healing. High Charisma and a phylactery of positive channeling for 6d6 channels quite a few times a day. All Core. Then another player sits down with a 5th level variant breed Aasimar (Blood of Angels) Life Oracle (Advanced Player's Guide) using the alternate favored class bonus (Advanced Race Guide) to boost his effective channel revelation level. He too had a phylactery and was channeling for 6d6. And he had just used retraining (Ultimate Campaign) to change a feat to Channeled Revival (Ultimate Combat) so he could bring back the dead. Needless to say the 7th level player felt like a useless appendage next to the 5th level player.

So you are correct, players can determine their own level of involvement. The problem is that sometimes you don't have fun unless you own/know those obscure books and rules.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

I was thinking a TWF barbarian. A Dwarf from Molthune perhaps.

To be honest, now that I mull it over, not needing to go browse any of the archetypes or guesstimate when two furious weapons become affordable or look over the hundreds of traits for that awesome one which turns heavy shields into light weapons, I feel...lighter I guess.

Man, I can't wait to play!

Liberty's Edge

Mattastrophic wrote:

Oh man... Given the Rogue-bashing posts that have crept in, I totally need to do a Two Weapon Fighting Rogue now. Core-only Eyes of the Ten, here I come! Thanks, guys!

-Matt

Mine is doing fine so far, albeit only at level 3. (OK, he does wield gladii form UC). Most rogue hate seems to apply at higher levels where their BAB discrepancy shows most.

To Lamplighter: I wasn't trying to be a jerk. I missed the context of your earlier posts about pets. I agree that summoned critters, in particular, slow down games quite a bit. My 6th-level wizard doesn't have a single summoning spell in his book. And he's still pretty useful.

I'm personally excited by this announcement. Every time I consider an RPG purchase I have to justify if the added enjoyment outweighs the cost. Most of the time it does not. Paying $10 or more just to access a feat? Just not worth it to me. So now I have an excuse to stop buying as many rules. There, I said it. But now I can divert those funds to adventures, or pawns, or maps which make my GM presentation so much better!

I'm no graybeard, but I've played over a third of the scenarios, and having a chance to replay sounds cool. Many scenarios get repeated with regularity. Core still lets me try things out that are new to me. Been wanting to do a druid for a while. And I really dig Amiri. I might have to build a level-one clone and see how it goes. And maybe that "vanilla" bard I've been toying with.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

Andrew Roberts wrote:
If you play an adventure path in campaign mode, can it apply to either campaign of the group's choice, or is it just the extended campaign?

"Both campaign "modes" use the same scenarios, modules, and other sanctioned adventure resources."

That means the group can apply Campaign mode sessions to either the Core Campaign or Normal Campaign. But it must be unanimous due to the constraint of reporting the entire table as one or the other.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why not take it one step further? We have a lot of people who have played most the scenarios and GM them. Why not add a new category and let players play those scenarios again for PFS credit as players, but only if everyone at the table is doing the same. Don't limit the replay credit or GM credit so that way more games will be run and played, but only if everyone at the table has played that scenario before. This will help the veteran players who have bought so many books and played so many games to be able to replay them. I know I would love to replay all the scenarios I've played over again and not have to use GM star replays to do so, since I've used my player, and GM credit for that scenarios, AP or modules already.


Awesome!

A few questions though:

Are human ethnicities and languages illegal in core?

Can I apply boons originally earned with a non-core character to a core character?

Can I include a copy of a non-core chronicle from one character to the records of a core character? I'm talking about ...

Spoiler:
... the "New Recruits" thing from The Paths We Choose - can a core character be the apprentice of a non-core-character?

Sovereign Court 4/5 ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Agent, Georgia—Atlanta aka The Masked Ferret

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Friendly Lich wrote:

Awesome!

A few questions though:

Are human ethnicities and languages illegal in core?

Can I apply boons originally earned with a non-core character to a core character?

Can I include a copy of a non-core chronicle from one character to the records of a core character? I'm talking about ... ** spoiler omitted **

If I recall correctly (and I don't have time to look it up right now), the chronicle has to be gained by a Core character before it can be applied to the Core campaign.

Grand Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Friendly Lich wrote:

Awesome!

A few questions though:

Are human ethnicities and languages illegal in core?

Languages are currently illegal, but that might change. They're debating adding them to the Guide, which would make them legal. Ethnicities themselves aren't, but you can't gain any mechanical benefit from them right now (such as languages).

The Friendly Lich wrote:
Can I apply boons originally earned with a non-core character to a core character?

Nope!

The Friendly Lich wrote:
Can I include a copy of a non-core chronicle from one character to the records of a core character? I'm talking about ... ** spoiler omitted **

Nope!


Thanks for the quick responses!

Silver Crusade

Don't you need a special feat for to use knowledge on the robots, equipment and weapons in season 6? How will people get that with only core book?

5/5

poundpuppy30 wrote:
Don't you need a special feat for to use knowledge on the robots, equipment and weapons in season 6? How will people get that with only core book?

Currently, yes, and they won't. Far fetched fantastical scientific stuff will stay that way it seems...

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andrew Roberts wrote:
Dhjika wrote:
but lack of magical lineage and wayang spell hunter and some other traits and feats make them actually work at it a little more.
Magical Lineage is completely available in Core, actually.

thanks for the update - I thought it APG and Ultimate Campaign, did they reprint it in the web supplement

Also, no spring loaded wrist shealths and no infernal healing.


Derek Weil wrote:


Mine is doing fine so far, albeit only at level 3. (OK, he does wield gladii form UC). Most rogue hate seems to apply at higher levels where their BAB discrepancy shows most.

My experience has shown that the 5-6 levels are the tough times, but once you get that 4th sneak attack die, the good times start rolling!

-Matt

Silver Crusade 5/5 ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

Kevin Willis wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
Rules bloat / cost to play: I never understood this issue back in 3.0, nor do I understand it now, players can decide their own level of involvement.

More than anything I see this as a GM issue. I've been on all sides of this (player with complex build, GM when someone has a crazy feat interaction going, and player at the table observing the GM trying to understand a complicated build). You can see the fun level lowering when the GM tries to understand it but can't and just has to take it on faith that the player is correct. Especially with new GMs.

** spoiler omitted **

But it's players too. My classic example is the table I was at where a player sat down with her 7th level cleric specialized for channeled healing. High Charisma and a phylactery of positive channeling for 6d6 channels quite a few times a day. All Core. Then another player sits down with a 5th level variant breed Aasimar (Blood of Angels) Life Oracle (Advanced Player's Guide) using the alternate favored class bonus (Advanced Race Guide) to boost his effective channel revelation level. He too had a phylactery and was channeling for 6d6. And he had just used retraining (Ultimate Campaign) to change a feat to Channeled Revival (Ultimate Combat) so he could bring back the dead. Needless to say the 7th level player felt like a useless appendage next to the 5th level player.

So you are correct, players can determine their own level of involvement. The problem is that sometimes you don't have fun unless you own/know those obscure books and rules.

Well hell is other people, but the very same effect, can happen between 2 characters from the CRB, there are some pretty nice tricks, that players with less system mastery won't be able to think of.

Imagine playing a one of the first season 6 scenarios, a fighter who decided to invest his money into a +1 cold iron bastard sword, will be good against demons, while the other guy with the MW adamantine bastard sword only really deals 1 damage less, but will be able to deal with hardness 10.

The assimar example is a good one, I think that books is one of the very best examples of power creep out there, but to be frank the the level 7 player just learned of the existence of an awesome feat. And if he is like my players, he found the feat selection in the CRB rather lackluster for channeling clerics.
Obviously more options gives players the chance to do some pretty nice things, but let's not forget that clerics are often quite better at removing negative conditions after a scenario, the oracle has a set spell list and can't just prepare remove disease.
IMO cleric is a pretty hard class to play well, oh an he can use pearls of power.

Some options work well, right out of the CRB, others do not, and there is a difference between doing good damage and being interesting to play (I am talking about fighters ...).
Oh you can fix anything, but I really don't think that previous design decisions are somehow sacrosankt, IMO the material has been getting better, even if some options become more an more niche.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
And everybody makes mistakes, the inquisitor with the orc feats might have been obvious to some GMs, you really only have two choices even with CORE. Trust the players or do an audit, I dare say, that most players aren't familiar with every single bit of FAQ and errata, and sometimes a simple type on the character sheet causes trouble.

And frankly you don't have to be familiar with everything, at most you will have 4 to 5 quite rules proficient players, it is absolutely within the bounds of reason to ask them nicely to take a look at the character sheet to their left and check for any obvious errors.
This doesn't assume or claim ill intent, but everybody makes mistakes. Until yesterday I was pretty sure that flurry of blows works in armor (not having touched the class for a long time, and not ever wanting to do an armored monk), but as it turns out the flurry restriction is under armor and weapon proficiency and if you only read the flurry part....

Well I found a way to flurry in armor with my large temples sword, but my point is that even after so many years we make mistakes, some of us mix up 3.5 and PF when it comes to some corner cases like incorporeal enemies.. it happens and it will always happen.

For my 2 cents, I hope that this experiment is successful in drawing new players, retaining the old, and growing the hobby, and that the campaign leadership uses chronicles to fine tune the balance of the CRB a bit^^. I am just not very willing to abandon so many of my toys, and well in my other thread I argue for self censorship.

Sovereign Court 4/5 ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Agent, Georgia—Atlanta aka The Masked Ferret

1 person marked this as a favorite.
poundpuppy30 wrote:
Don't you need a special feat for to use knowledge on the robots, equipment and weapons in season 6? How will people get that with only core book?

It is not in the Core book, so it should not apply. The feat itself is not mentioned in the current guide.

Silver Crusade 5/5 ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

Dhjika wrote:
Andrew Roberts wrote:
Dhjika wrote:
but lack of magical lineage and wayang spell hunter and some other traits and feats make them actually work at it a little more.
Magical Lineage is completely available in Core, actually.

thanks for the update - I thought it APG and Ultimate Campaign, did they reprint it in the web supplement

Also, no spring loaded wrist shealths and no infernal healing.

Those seem to be pet peeves, is infernal healing really that offensive ?

Sovereign Court Venture-Captain, New Mexico—Roswell aka Rob Duncan

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I love this idea. I spend a lot of time running/coordinating games, so the idea of building my own character from a staggering number of books is just overwhelming. This makes it to where I can actually enjoy being a player again. :)

Scarab Sages

Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
Dhjika wrote:
Andrew Roberts wrote:
Dhjika wrote:
but lack of magical lineage and wayang spell hunter and some other traits and feats make them actually work at it a little more.
Magical Lineage is completely available in Core, actually.

thanks for the update - I thought it APG and Ultimate Campaign, did they reprint it in the web supplement

Also, no spring loaded wrist shealths and no infernal healing.

Those seem to be pet peeves, is infernal healing really that offensive ?

People don't like wizards healing. There is also the fact that it is fully "evil" in game lore.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
poundpuppy30 wrote:
Why not add a new category and let players play those scenarios again for PFS credit as players, but only if everyone at the table is doing the same. Don't limit the replay credit or GM credit so that way more games will be run and played, but only if everyone at the table has played that scenario before.

This has the unfortunate side effect of possibly turning new players away because all of a sudden the table becomes illegal with them joining in. "Sory mate, you can't play because you haven't already played this one and we all have" doesn't sound like something the campaign staff are going to enable.

Scarab Sages

Michael Brock wrote:
Mike McFarland wrote:

If a player plays Confirmation as their first chronicle for their fisrt Core character, do they

** spoiler omitted **

Why wouldn't they get it?

Sorry, I should have clarified. I have a regular campaign character who has played Confirmation and gotten the free reward. If I play it again with a Core campaign character and it is his first chronicle sheet, does this count as the first time any of my characters have done this, since Core is technically a different campaign?

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why not add a new category and let players play those scenarios again for PFS credit as players, but only if everyone at the table is doing the same. Don't limit the replay credit or GM credit so that way more games will be run and played, but only if everyone at the table has played that scenario before.

This has the unfortunate side effect of possibly turning new players away because all of a sudden the table becomes illegal with them joining in. "Sory mate, you can't play because you haven't already played this one and we all have" doesn't sound like something the campaign staff are going to enable.

Isn't telling the regular PFS player he can't sit at this scenario unless he uses a core character the same discrimination or hindering the player to conform to what the table is playing? It's just as easy to slap a sign and call it Veteran Confirmation as it is to call it Core Confirmation or just Confirmation.
If you are that worried I don't see why the gm can't just add Veteran to the top of the chronicle sheet the veteran gets so that way he can even sit in with regular PFS players. The main thing is getting the replay credit limiter taken off so the veterans can play these games again, enjoy them and apply credit to the new character or even old character as long as the pfs character is within the required tier of the scenario or module they want to play.

5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Georgia—Atlanta aka Yiroep

poundpuppy30 wrote:
Isn't telling the regular PFS player he can't sit at this scenario unless he uses a core character the same discrimination or hindering the player to conform to what the table is playing? It's just as easy to slap a sign and call it Veteran Confirmation as it is to call it Core Confirmation or just Confirmation.

Except that a newbie can still play...they just can't play with that character. With your method, they simply can't play at all.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Bob Jonquet wrote:
Philderbeast wrote:
Please please please please let core characters sit at the same table as non-core characters without losing there core only status.
I disagree. Reporting is not the driving issue here. If a player with a CORE character is sitting at a mixed table, s/he gets to benefit directly or indirectly from non-CORE content through their interactions with the non-CORE characters at the table. That is not what CORE is about.

I can see that there could be issues in Core characters moving back and forth - you'd want to have Core-only Chronicle sheets to keep the characters Core-only and that would be a hassle worthy of disallowing the switch back.

But why worry about Core-only characters benefiting from non-core content from time to time? Shouldn't the focus be more on the PC remaining Core only to support the player's desire to not be personally involved in the higher complexity of the full game with their own character choices? If they want to "play up" in complexity on occasion while remaining compatible with the Core-only campaign, where's the real harm? I don't see a point to that rationale.

Silver Crusade

Ok so why not just add Veteran to the top of the chronicle sheet of the veteran player if they are replaying the scenario and he can sit in with regular PFS new players too. So now everyone is happy. So now what is the problem?

501 to 550 of 1,044 << first < prev | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Paizo Blog: Introducing the Core Campaign All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.