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
601 to 650 of 1,044 << first < prev | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | next > last >>
The Exchange 4/5 5/5

Soluzar wrote:
I'm seeing a problem here. I know that this has likely been discussed internally for months. We're seeing a lot of VO's and 5 stars gushing about this. Then there are people like me. I don't object to it but I do have some concerns. There is a condescending vibe coming off of some of these responses. Just because some of you knew this was coming and already may have discussed some of these points does not make them less valid.

I don't think anyone is trying to be condescending. The two big differences are:

1. Every VO is also an organizer of some type. Many of the concerns we have about attendance and recruitment of GMs seem to be addressed by CORE. Some posters, on the other hand, don't organize or GM. They don't care who does what as long as - at the end of the day - someone GMs for them and there is a scenario they can get credit for. The huge upsides for the VOs are irrelevant to this segment of the posters.

2. VOs have had several weeks to get used to the idea and discuss. So we have had time to think on it and (for the most part) have decided this is a good step. No one believes this is going to be perfect right out of the gate (see: languages) but we've had the time to step back and think "OK, what are the impacts and what might it lead to down the road?" You're seeing that play out here and I agree it can come off as condescending. It's the unfortunate side effect of joining a conversation in progress where the earlier participants have come to a consensus about some issues.

Liberty's Edge 1/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Walter Sheppard wrote:

For people that are concerned, why don't we all just wait a month and see what happens?

At this point, it is still 100% speculation.

What is the problem with voicing our concerns? Why should those of us who have concerns be the only ones to remain silent while those who are happy with the change get to gush to their hearts content? That is the logical extension of what you are saying there.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

12 people marked this as a favorite.

The CORE mode reporting is now up!

Liberty's Edge 1/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Kevin Willis wrote:
Soluzar wrote:
I'm seeing a problem here. I know that this has likely been discussed internally for months. We're seeing a lot of VO's and 5 stars gushing about this. Then there are people like me. I don't object to it but I do have some concerns. There is a condescending vibe coming off of some of these responses. Just because some of you knew this was coming and already may have discussed some of these points does not make them less valid.

I don't think anyone is trying to be condescending. The two big differences are:

1. Every VO is also an organizer of some type. Many of the concerns we have about attendance and recruitment of GMs seem to be addressed by CORE. Some posters, on the other hand, don't organize or GM. They don't care who does what as long as - at the end of the day - someone GMs for them and there is a scenario they can get credit for. The huge upsides for the VOs are irrelevant to this segment of the posters.

2. VOs have had several weeks to get used to the idea and discuss. So we have had time to think on it and (for the most part) have decided this is a good step. No one believes this is going to be perfect right out of the gate (see: languages) but we've had the time to step back and think "OK, what are the impacts and what might it lead to down the road?" You're seeing that play out here and I agree it can come off as condescending. It's the unfortunate side effect of joining a conversation in progress where the earlier participants have come to a consensus about some issues.

VO's should be more careful how their posts are viewed. I have seen at least one post where a VO implied heavily that people who use more than core are not true "Role"players. And several posts from VOs that basically can be summed up as "Quit Whining". How is that not condescending?

As to point one, some of us who are organizing games/GMing, have voiced a concern with scheduling and been told that our concerns are pointless and we are wrong, again in various condescending ways. Yes other people have engaged in discussion, and been reasonable. What I, and I believe Soluzar, are saying is, people need to step back and stop being condescending.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

1 person marked this as a favorite.
graywulfe wrote:
Walter Sheppard wrote:

For people that are concerned, why don't we all just wait a month and see what happens?

At this point, it is still 100% speculation.

What is the problem with voicing our concerns? Why should those of us who have concerns be the only ones to remain silent while those who are happy with the change get to gush to their hearts content? That is the logical extension of what you are saying there.

You're right. Please continue to voice your concerns.

However, when people speculate another 10 pages of the worst outcomes that could come from this announcement, and assume to know the future actions of organizers as a result, it brings a level of negativity to what is otherwise an otherwise exciting opportunity.

As an FLGS owner myself, I will be sure to accommodate whatever gaming activities my players are interested in pursuing, be it Core Campaign, PFS, D&D Encounters, or otherwise. As a VO, if there are other stores in my region that are unable or unwilling to host both venues, I will do everything in my power to ensure that those concerns are handled and that people get to participate in the kind of campaign they like. And I am certain that other VOs will do the same. It's what part of our job is--growing organized play opportunities in our region. This will be no different.

Our goal in all of this is that everyone gets to play the campaign they want. Everyone that is concerned about no longer being able to play PFS, or the power dynamics of the Core Campaign versus PFS, is really just missing the point of this announcement in my mind.

This decision is something that costs Paizo $0, is easily managed using existing volunteers and player bases, and gives people another opportunity to participate in Pathfinder. This new campaign should be received just like the ACG OP system was--something that isn't for everyone but is nice as an alternative for people that are interested. Nothing more.

4/5

thejeff wrote:
Qstor 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.

I think the languages should be allowed. Just a thought...

Mike

I intend to put them on my character sheet anyway. If a GM objects, I'll gladly not use them.

It's about 95% an RP thing anyway.

So your going to knowingly break the rules of the Core campaign until a GM finds out and has to remove you from a Core table for playing a non-Core character?

If it's just a 95% rp how about you not break the Core Campaign rules and not bother writing the languages down since you won't be able to use them in game anyway. I understand the want for having the regional languages but intentionally breaking the rules because you don't like them is not a good example for other players and forces GMs to either break the rules themselves or seem like the bad person for enforcing them.

Liberty's Edge 1/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Walter Sheppard wrote:
graywulfe wrote:
Walter Sheppard wrote:

For people that are concerned, why don't we all just wait a month and see what happens?

At this point, it is still 100% speculation.

What is the problem with voicing our concerns? Why should those of us who have concerns be the only ones to remain silent while those who are happy with the change get to gush to their hearts content? That is the logical extension of what you are saying there.

You're right. Please continue to voice your concerns.

However, when people speculate another 10 pages of the worst outcomes that could come from this announcement, and assume to know the future actions of organizers as a result, it brings a level of negativity to what is otherwise an otherwise exciting opportunity.

As an FLGS owner myself, I will be sure to accommodate whatever gaming activities my players are interested in pursuing, be it Core Campaign, PFS, D&D Encounters, or otherwise. As a VO, if there are other stores in my region that are unable or unwilling to host both venues, I will do everything in my power to ensure that those concerns are handled and that people get to participate in the kind of campaign they like. And I am certain that other VOs will do the same. It's what part of our job is--growing organized play opportunities in our region. This will be no different.

Our goal in all of this is that everyone gets to play the campaign they want. Everyone that is concerned about no longer being able to play PFS, or the power dynamics of the Core Campaign versus PFS, is really just missing the point of this announcement in my mind.

This decision is something that costs Paizo $0, is easily managed using existing volunteers and player bases, and gives people another opportunity to participate in Pathfinder. This new campaign should be received just like the ACG OP system was--something that isn't for everyone but is nice as an alternative for people that are interested. Nothing more.

I get what you are saying regarding the unnecessary negativity, and people prognosticating. Problem is, I don't really see that happening here all that much. I see people raising concerns and being told to shut up your concerns have no merit. Not by you specifically but there have been posts that come off that way.

As far as everything you, and other VO's, will do for your areas, that's nice but does nothing for those of us with situations like I described. For people with small player bases this could end in disaster for their region. "Just don't use it" is not a solution if everyone else wants to. That may not be a problem in more numerous player bases but could be a problem for some, and the likelihood of that being a problem only increases the smaller the player base.

I get what the goal of this is. I am not missing the point of the announcement. I think you are failing to understand what it is like to game where there are very few people who are interested in the games you want to play.

And I really think people need to stop comparing this to the Adventure Card Guild. There is a totally different dynamic in play here. The characters in ACGOP have no relation whatsoever to the characters in PFS. There is no comparison between the two situation. No reasonable person is going to come to a PFS gameday expecting to play an ACG character. They are two completely different games, with some similar themes.

Standard and Core-Only are the same game. They use the same rule-set, just with different restrictions. So the conficts that can arise here are numerous.

On a side note, People were seriously panicking regarding how the Adventure Card Guild would ruin PFS???? Like that actually happened? It seems like a ridiculous concept to me. So comparing our concerns to that is especially insulting, just saying.

Again I hope that everything goes that way you expect. I really do. But if I sit back silently and say nothing about my concerns and my worst fears are realized, then I have only myself to blame.

5/5 5/55/55/5

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Walter Sheppard wrote:


However, when people speculate another 10 pages of the worst outcomes that could come from this announcement, and assume to know the future actions of organizers as a result, it brings a level of negativity to what is otherwise an otherwise exciting opportunity.

I don't think it helps to alleviate peoples concerns when ya'll say that everything is fine but then don't seem to understand the concern.

Quote:
As an FLGS owner myself, I will be sure to accommodate whatever gaming activities my players are interested in pursuing, be it Core Campaign, PFS, D&D Encounters, or otherwise. As a VO, if there are other stores in my region that are unable or unwilling to host both venues, I will do everything in my power to ensure that those concerns are handled and that people get to participate in the kind of campaign they like. And I am certain that other VOs will do the same. It's what part of our job is--growing organized play opportunities in our region. This will be no different.

You own a gaming store. You are a venture officer. You live in an area where you have multiple stores in a region. You control the vertical, you control the horizontal. If something goes in a direction you don't like somewhere then you have other pfs options- Right down to sweeping the pokemon players off of their 6 o clock table and putting in core/non core PFS or bunnies and burrows if you're so inclined :)

I can definitely see why there's nothing for you to worry about under those conditions.

But please try realize that this is not everyone's reality. They can't guarantee access to a flat rolling surface, a fallback position and enough geeks for two campaigns. They would not be this worried if they didn't care about the campaign.

Quote:
Our goal in all of this is that everyone gets to play the campaign they want.

Some of the venture officers posts imply the opposite of this. Talks about whats good for the region, good for the campaign sound like losing one current player to pick up 2 future players is an acceptable risk. If you're an organizer putting overly large keisters in seats thats a concern. If you're trying to be one of those keisters its not.

Quote:
Everyone that is concerned about no longer being able to play PFS, or the power dynamics of the Core Campaign versus PFS, is really just missing the point of this announcement in my mind.

You have to realize that this is a heads you tie tails you lose situation for anyone that doesn't like PFS Core. Right now they have a venue they can reach playing the game they want. This can't improve that opportunity for them. I can't play in more than one game at a time. I can't DM more than one table at a time.

Quote:

This new campaign should be received just like the ACG OP system was--something that isn't for everyone but is nice as an alternative for people that are interested. Nothing more.

The card system is a different niche. PFS core is a very, very similar niche.

Sovereign Court 5/5

Michael Brock wrote:
RyanH wrote:
nightdeath wrote:

I noticed that Core Campaign traits uses only those from the Character Traits Web Enhancement.

I noticed that it had the trait 'Rich Parents'. Is that legal in current PFS? Granted It's being almost a couple of months since I'm playing PFS again.

I'm all for the Core Campaign Only!

Rich parents is not legal in PFS ... core or non.
Correct. Same with crafting feats and the like.

Got it. Thanks for the answers. PFS restrictions still applies. Good to know.

It'll make it easy to GM Games for newbies without having to refer to xxx number of books said newbie build their chars from. lol

"You sure you're a newbie?"

Grand Lodge 5/5 * Venture-Captain, New Zealand—Dunedin

2 people marked this as a favorite.

This entire conversation thread makes me feel like I'm wading through a crowded bar fight, just looking for an open spot at the bar where I can grab a drink.

In other words, I'm Cayden Cailean!

Sovereign Court 5/5

^^^^Cheers!

Grand Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paul Trani wrote:
In other words, I'm Cayden Cailean!

The hell you are! *barstool*

Liberty's Edge 5/5 5/5 *** Venture-Lieutenant, Indiana—Martinsville

Question...

Will the Faction Cards still be able to be used by the Core Characters?

Grand Lodge 2/5

I don't know if this was answered but will there be anything to change the sceneries since they have stuff that's none core in them so as a GM I still have deal with needing several books to run one.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
As far as everything you, and other VO's, will do for your areas, that's nice but does nothing for those of us with situations like I described. For people with small player bases this could end in disaster for their region. "Just don't use it" is not a solution if everyone else wants to. That may not be a problem in more numerous player bases but could be a problem for some, and the likelihood of that being a problem only increases the smaller the player base.

I believe that every nearly state now has a VO that is responsible for it. I didn't count for each state, but I'm pretty sure that all, or close to all are accounted for.

Even if there isn't a VO in your backyard, there is one nearby that you as a campaign participant can contact should your PFS play become in jeopardy. Even people that come from small player bases have a VO they can contact should things go sideways. And if they don't there is nothing stopping them from contacting the nearest VO for advice, or even applying to be a VO in their own region if they feel inclined.

I really dislike the excuses of "well we don't have a VO that can help," that are being repeated here. Yes, you do have a VO that can help. Just find that person and talk to them.

We are here to help you guys out. Please talk to us if Core vs. PFS legitimately becomes an issue. It's our job to get these events organized. If you don't talk to us we can't help.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

thaX wrote:

Question...

Will the Faction Cards still be able to be used by the Core Characters?

Yes

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steve Derouin wrote:
I don't know if this was answered but will there be anything to change the sceneries since they have stuff that's none core in them so as a GM I still have deal with needing several books to run one.

They won't be changed and you can use print outs from the PRD to cover what you might need to GM that isn't included in the scenario.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:

I don't think it helps to alleviate peoples concerns when ya'll say that everything is fine but then don't seem to understand the concern.

I understand the concerns, I think they aren't very realistic concerns.

"This will split the players." -- I don't think it will. There is no evidence to support this. All the data coming in suggests more people rejoining the OP environment. Personally, I know of three people that had effectively retired from PFS that are now coming back to play core. Conversely, I know of no people that are quitting PFS because of this announcement.
"I won't be able to play PFS anymore, Core will dominate my area." -- Again, I don't think this will happen. If it does, you have resources in the form of VOs you can contact that will look into it for you.

Quote:

You own a gaming store. You are a venture officer. You live in an area where you have multiple stores in a region. You control the vertical, you control the horizontal. If something goes in a direction you don't like somewhere then you have other pfs options- Right down to sweeping the pokemon players off of their 6 o clock table and putting in core/non core PFS or bunnies and burrows if you're so inclined :)

I can definitely see why there's nothing for you to worry about under those conditions.

But please try realize that this is not everyone's reality. They can't guarantee access to a flat rolling surface, a fallback position and enough geeks for two campaigns. They would not be this worried if they didn't care about the campaign.

I know it's not everyone's reality and I never claimed it was. I mentioned that because I think it's important for people to know where I am coming from. I see aspects of PFS from tons of different levels--as an organizer, store owner, VO, GM, player, and a fan of PFS. I felt that was important to mention.

I am not just a mouthpiece of the hierarchy when it comes to discussing this. I am someone that genuinely wants PFS to flourish--it's a key demographic to my financial stability and I wanted that to be clear.

Quote:
You have to realize that this is a heads you tie tails you lose situation for anyone that doesn't like PFS Core. Right now they have a venue they can reach playing the game they want. This can't improve that opportunity for them. I can't play in more than one game at a time. I can't DM more than one table at a time.

No, but at least you can play regularly. That hasn't been an option for lots of campaign vets for a long time now. And I'm not blowing smoke. Look up all the old discussions about replaying for no credit--you'll find my posts all over the place talking about no longer participating as a player in PFS. Our solution until Core was announced has been to play adventure paths or modules during PFS slots. That has been literally the only other option available to us.

-------------------------------------
Again, so much is being gained with this decision. We are getting people back into Pathfinder. There have even been postings of this nature up thread. People that have wanted limited replay now have more opportunities. People that complain they can only play so much now have more opportunities for play. People that complained about bloat in PFS now have a bloat-free environment.

The only arguments I am hearing against this announcement are from players that are afraid there will be less PFS play as a result. And if that ends up being the case, there are people (VOs) who's responsibility it is to fix that. If you don't know who your VO is, look it up. There are hundreds of us now, and we will look into it for you.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

David_Bross wrote:
Since only core rules apply I assume retraining is not allowed in this campaign?

Second to last bullet point in the blog already addresses this.

Lantern Lodge 3/5

Again, sorry if this has been asked before, but are the upcoming Faction Journal cards going to be used in the core campaign?

Also, would there be any Faction Journal card entries there would likely be impossible to complete, due to the lack of additional resources? (Just asking here...)

Finally, if the Faction Journal cards to give access to sources? Could you use them in CORE? (I'm assuming the cards can give access to somethings.)

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

Secane wrote:

Again, sorry if this has been asked before, but are the upcoming Faction Journal cards going to be used in the core campaign?

Also, would there be any Faction Journal card entries there would likely be impossible to complete, due to the lack of additional resources? (Just asking here...)

Finally, if the Faction Journal cards to give access to sources? Could you use them in CORE? (I'm assuming the cards can give access to somethings.)

Look five posts up.

No, there should. Not be any that are impossible to complete.

Just like Chronicle sheets, if you earn something on a faction journal card, you get it in Core mode regardless of the sourcebook it appears.

The Exchange 5/5

Michael Brock wrote:
The CORE mode reporting is now up!

having problems reporting regular sessions now.

It's not letting me select the scenario.... the drop down for scenario selection has no selections....

:-(

edit: the problem appears to be with the "Show All Scenarios" button... it appears to remove everything from the dropdown list...

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Grimmy wrote:
This Core Campaign appeals to me, I think I'm going to go give PFS a try.

Hey Grimmy --

I think that you should. I've found PFS to be a blast. It's an all you can eat gaming buffet of yummy goodness.

Here's my thought on Core / Regular (original flavor) PFS:

Original Flavor:

I like archetypes and a rich set of options, and I have barely scratched the surface of the available PFS scenarios. I'm likely sticking with regular PFS game nights.

Retro Core:

Like old coke, there are fans who want CRB only games. When I GMed a table of 7 recently, six of the people there had core-only builds. I see a lot of core barbarians, fighters, rogues, clerics and rangers in my area. Clearly there is a demand. And it will give the PFS junkies out there more playing opportunities with a higher level of challenge. I may make up a core-only character in case scheduling issues cause me to show up on a core night.

And if it will bring in a wonderful old-school player like Grimmy, I say, "Huzzah!"

So we have two great flavors... Sure, you cannot have them both in one bowl. But otherwise, does it matter?

Hmm who likes both Vanilla and Chocolate

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

nosig wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
The CORE mode reporting is now up!

having problems reporting regular sessions now.

It's not letting me select the scenario.... the drop down for scenario selection has no selections....

:-(

edit: the problem appears to be with the "Show All Scenarios" button... it appears to remove everything from the dropdown list...

Did you add Core selections to the event?

The Exchange 5/5

Michael Brock wrote:
nosig wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
The CORE mode reporting is now up!

having problems reporting regular sessions now.

It's not letting me select the scenario.... the drop down for scenario selection has no selections....

:-(

edit: the problem appears to be with the "Show All Scenarios" button... it appears to remove everything from the dropdown list...

Did you add Core selections to the event?

PM sent... sorry should have done that at first - wasn't thinking about cluttering this thread with tech issues....

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

nosig wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
nosig wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
The CORE mode reporting is now up!

having problems reporting regular sessions now.

It's not letting me select the scenario.... the drop down for scenario selection has no selections....

:-(

edit: the problem appears to be with the "Show All Scenarios" button... it appears to remove everything from the dropdown list...

Did you add Core selections to the event?
PM sent... sorry should have done that at first - wasn't thinking about cluttering this thread with tech issues....

Put any future tech issues In this thread.

Silver Crusade 1/5

When should we expect an update for the Guide to Organized Play to reflect5 the new campaign mode?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hmm wrote:

So we have two great flavors... Sure, you cannot have them both in one bowl. But otherwise, does it matter?

Hmm who likes both Vanilla and Chocolate

I do. Also, I think we should start a flame war on the Chocolate/Vanilla segregation vs. integrationist approach. Maybe it will distract everyone who is already bickering.

I'll start: Neopolitan has changed this country for the better, and any assertions to the contrary are simple bigotry.

As for the actual tone of this thread, I like that it is an option for those who would be unlikely to give organized play a try otherwise. I understand the concerns of splitting the player base, and so this is how I've handled it for the session I will be running this coming Monday. Our local playgroup has an active facebook group, and on there I have offered to GM it in Core or non-core mode. I will only do core mode if it is unanimously decided among my players. I'll probably make this a standing offer, and see how often it actually winds up in core mode.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

Sera Dragonbane wrote:
When should we expect an update for the Guide to Organized Play to reflect5 the new campaign mode?

No specific ETA. Soon.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota

Le Petite Mort wrote:
Hmm wrote:

So we have two great flavors... Sure, you cannot have them both in one bowl. But otherwise, does it matter?

Hmm who likes both Vanilla and Chocolate

I do. Also, I think we should start a flame war on the Chocolate/Vanilla segregation vs. integrationist approach. Maybe it will distract everyone who is already bickering.

I'll start: Neopolitan has changed this country for the better, and any assertions to the contrary are simple bigotry.

Cue Neal Patrick Harris Voice:

"Challenge Accepted!"

Really, you're bringing strawberry into this? That's the problem with integrationists. They just don't know when to stop. Before you know it, we'll all have ice cream headaches...

OKAY -- BACK TO TOPIC

Le Petit Mort wrote:
I will only do core mode if unanimously decided among my players. I'll probably make this a standing offer, and see how often it actually winds up in core mode.

I like your solution for how to handle whether or not you do core mode. It is simple and elegant.

To everyone else: change is daunting, but your old-style PFS is not going away. All they did was add another flavor to the menu.

Hmm

The Exchange 5/5

Hmm wrote:
Le Petite Mort wrote:
Hmm wrote:

So we have two great flavors... Sure, you cannot have them both in one bowl. But otherwise, does it matter?

Hmm who likes both Vanilla and Chocolate

I do. Also, I think we should start a flame war on the Chocolate/Vanilla segregation vs. integrationist approach. Maybe it will distract everyone who is already bickering.

I'll start: Neopolitan has changed this country for the better, and any assertions to the contrary are simple bigotry.

Cue Neal Patrick Harris Voice:

"Challenge Accepted!"

Really, you're bringing strawberry into this? That's the problem with integrationists. They just don't know when to stop. Before you know it, we'll all have ice cream headaches...

OKAY -- BACK TO TOPIC

Le Petit Mort wrote:
I will only do core mode if unanimously decided among my players. I'll probably make this a standing offer, and see how often it actually winds up in core mode.

I like your solution for how to handle whether or not you do core mode. It is simple and elegant.

To everyone else: change is daunting, but your old-style PFS is not going away. All they did was add another flavor to the menu.

Hmm

(bolding mine) all you have to do to get Core added to the schedule is to get EVERYONE to agree to it? Wow. I can't get PFS players all to agree on ANYTHING

edit: why not just set up a Core game with say a months lead time... then switch it to Non-Core if at least 80% of the players want it Non-Core?

Grand Lodge 4/5

Forgive me if this was already addressed, but am I correct in assuming players can use Core Class Pre-Gens in Core Campaign events?

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

Mikey V wrote:
Forgive me if this was already addressed, but am I correct in assuming players can use Core Class Pre-Gens in Core Campaign events?

Yes

Grand Lodge 4/5

Thank you Mike

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hmm wrote:

Cue Neal Patrick Harris Voice:
"Challenge Accepted!"

Really, you're bringing strawberry into this? That's the problem with integrationists. They just don't know when to stop. Before you know it, we'll all have ice cream headaches...

OKAY -- BACK TO TOPIC

Le Petit Mort wrote:
I will only do core mode if unanimously decided among my players. I'll probably make this a standing offer, and see how often it actually winds up in core mode.

I like your solution for how to handle whether or not you do core mode. It is simple and elegant.

I don't know where, you live, but here in 'Merica we have a little thing we like to call freedom. That means I can put whatever flavors in my bowl that I like! Heck, I'll mash them all together with my spoon if I want to!

Also, thanks. I'm hoping PFSCC mode takes off where I live to an extent, but I will definitely want both to continue to exist here. I like having power heavy sessions, and I like having simple rules-light games as well. I hope we can strike a balance, and leaving it to player unanimity is the best solution I can come up with. I chose a season 2 scenario to kick it off with, and I think that might be a good tact to take for others. Start with easy stuff, or things like We Be Goblins! so that people can get a feel for what they are now capable of. Paizo has done a good job of addressing power creep by increasing challenge steadily from season 4 onward, so anything I do in core mode will probably be a 1-5 from seasons 0-3 for the time being. Eventually (once players are used to not having everything at their disposal) I'll do some of the more TPK-probable quests.

Grand Lodge

nosig wrote:

edit: why not just set up a Core game with say a months lead time... then switch it to Non-Core if at least 80% of the players want it Non-Core?

That isn't the way things are done in my area. We meet every Monday, sign-ups go live for the following Monday on Tuesday at 7 PM. The FLGS owner figures out who's GMing the next week some time while we're playing.

Also, I'm only asking if any players have a distinct disinterest in playing Core for the time being. Most of our people are easy-going, so I suspect that a few people will say they want to do CC mode, and the rest of the table will have reservations, but be willing to give it a shot.

Liberty's Edge 1/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Walter Sheppard wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

I don't think it helps to alleviate peoples concerns when ya'll say that everything is fine but then don't seem to understand the concern.

I understand the concerns, I think they aren't very realistic concerns.

"This will split the players." -- I don't think it will. There is no evidence to support this. All the data coming in suggests more people rejoining the OP environment. Personally, I know of three people that had effectively retired from PFS that are now coming back to play core. Conversely, I know of no people that are quitting PFS because of this announcement.
"I won't be able to play PFS anymore, Core will dominate my area." -- Again, I don't think this will happen. If it does, you have resources in the form of VOs you can contact that will look into it for you.

Quote:

You own a gaming store. You are a venture officer. You live in an area where you have multiple stores in a region. You control the vertical, you control the horizontal. If something goes in a direction you don't like somewhere then you have other pfs options- Right down to sweeping the pokemon players off of their 6 o clock table and putting in core/non core PFS or bunnies and burrows if you're so inclined :)

I can definitely see why there's nothing for you to worry about under those conditions.

But please try realize that this is not everyone's reality. They can't guarantee access to a flat rolling surface, a fallback position and enough geeks for two campaigns. They would not be this worried if they didn't care about the campaign.

I know it's not everyone's reality and I never claimed it was. I mentioned that because I think it's important for people to know where I am coming from. I see aspects of PFS from tons of different levels--as an organizer, store owner, VO, GM, player, and a fan of PFS. I felt that was important to mention.

I...

Okay so I am done with this discussion. I understand that you are trying to help, but I am becoming convinced that you are incapable of understanding the circumstances that I and BNW are describing. I do not say this to insult you. I simply can not come up with another way to explain my perspective. Further, I am not petitioning for anything. I am not trying to stop this change and I don't believe anyone else is. I have no delusions that anything I say will cause Mike Brock to stop this change, especially before it sees use. I don't even want to stop this change, I just want people to stop trivializing my concerns. So please stop trying to convince me that I am wrong to have concerns. I am prepared to wait and see, I have been from the start.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

No problem graywulfe, if you ever want to discuss this again let me know. I am happy to chat here or via a PM if you'd like.

If a situation ever arises like the one you are concerned about, I encourage you to seek out your local VO and express your concerns.

Again, VOs are here to help make organized play happen, so if it isn't for whatever reason, please let us know.

PS: I'm sorry if it ever felt like I was trivializing your concerns. If I honestly thought that your perspective was without merit, I wouldn't be trying so hard to understand it. It's obvious we're looking at this from different angles, but if you want to meet in the middle somewhere let me know.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ***** Venture-Captain, Minnesota

Le Petite Mort wrote:
Hmm wrote:

Cue Neal Patrick Harris Voice:
"Challenge Accepted!"

Really, you're bringing strawberry into this? That's the problem with integrationists. They just don't know when to stop. Before you know it, we'll all have ice cream headaches...

OKAY -- BACK TO TOPIC

Le Petit Mort wrote:
I will only do core mode if unanimously decided among my players. I'll probably make this a standing offer, and see how often it actually winds up in core mode.

I like your solution for how to handle whether or not you do core mode. It is simple and elegant.

I don't know where, you live, but here in 'Merica we have a little thing we like to call freedom. That means I can put whatever flavors in my bowl that I like! Heck, I'll mash them all together with my spoon if I want to!

I really should stop...

Will Save: 1d20 - 1 ⇒ (1) - 1 = 0

Fails will save! I knew I shouldn't have dumped wisdom. Continues pseudo argument.

I'm as 'Merican as you are, but I know a pinko flavor when I see it! And that's strawberrry...

Le Petit Mort wrote:
Also, thanks. I'm hoping PFSCC mode takes off where I live to an extent, but I will definitely want both to continue to exist here. I like having power heavy sessions, and I like having simple rules-light games as well. I hope we can strike a balance, and leaving it to player unanimity is the best solution I can come up with. I chose a season 2 scenario to kick it off with, and I think that might be a good tact to take for others. Start with easy stuff, or things like We Be Goblins! so that people can get a feel for what they are now capable of. Paizo has done a good job of addressing power creep by increasing challenge steadily from season 4 onward, so anything I do in core mode will probably be a 1-5 from seasons 0-3 for the time being. Eventually (once players are used to not having everything at their disposal) I'll do some of the more TPK-probable quests.

I think you have an excellent plan going forward. May your ice cream headaches be few.

Hmm

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Mike:

1) Thank you for this opportunity.

2) Thank you for your patience in this thread.

3) Now that CORE environment exists, please consider revising the rules for Silverhex Chronicles, to allow CORE PC's to play through it.

Silver Crusade 3/5

So basically, you are saying that we should punish our GMs by not allowing them to play the scenarios they volunteered to GM for people, OR allow everyone to replay as much as they want?

Allow everyone to replay as much as they want. I was using the gm knowledge thing in case someone brought up the fact that someone replaying a scenario would have all the knowledge of that scenario already.

Lantern Lodge 3/5

@Michael Brock,

Thanks for the reply.

CORE has got everyone excited here in my area. Many of the older players are very interested in re-playing the scenarios.

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Question.

Let's say I attend a convention, and play / GM some standard mode PFS, and some CORE Mode PFS.

When I play a standard PFS adventure, I might get a boon. I should attach that boon to a legal Standard Mode PFS character.

When I play a CORE adventure, I might get a boon. I should attach that boon to a legal CORE Mode PFS character.

If I get a boon for attendance, or for buying books, or for anything else that isn't linked to a scenario play, can I apply that boon to a CORE Mode PFS character?

4/5

Thanks Mike. Looking forward to seeing core in action. Already ran one core game and it was pretty much like my other 4 runnings of the confirmation.


Well, I am glad that so many people are interested in CORE mode. Personally, not having all available character options at my fingertips drives me crazy, so I'm probably going to steer clear of it for the most part.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5 **

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Walter Sheppard wrote:


I understand the concerns, I think they aren't very realistic concerns.
"This will split the players." -- I don't think it will. There is no evidence to support this.

Uh, there is no evidence to support ANY opinion right now. How can there possibly be when this has just gone live?

As I've said before, I'm personally quite optimistic that this will have a net positive effect. But there is VERY, VERY clearly a risk that this will have negative effects, either locally or campaign wide. To just dismiss those concerns strikes me as either arrogant or foolish. To claim that VOs will be able to wave a magic wand to alleviate all those concerns also strikes me as either arrogant or foolish.

One thing that I've noticed and that concerns me is that the people who have been playing PFS for a long time seem to be more enthusiastic about this than the people who have been playing a relatively short time. And, of course, one of the main target audiences (people who haven't started PFS because of the complexity) are going to be largely unheard from at this point.

I know that the VOs and Mike have been discussing this for a long time under NDAs. And I know that they're a bright bunch of people, have the interests of the Campaign at heart, and have thought about pretty much all the issues that we're raising. But, pretty much by definition, that set of people are quite exceptional in their viewpoints and it is quite possible that their opinions will be quite at variance with the rank and file.

I think that we all have to try this and see what the results are. I think people who are confidently predicting a disaster AND the people who are confidently predicting a wild success are BOTH wrong. There is no good reason to be confident of the outcome.

I'll emphasize that I personally think that this is a good thing. And I greatly respect Mike et. al. for being willing to do this. But it IS an experiment and, like all experiments, can fail OR succeed beyond peoples wildest expectations. Or, more likely, will have BOTH positive and negative effects.

Sczarni

3 people marked this as a favorite.

So I'll admit I haven't read every single post. With that in mind, I jumped for joy when I read this blog. I've avoided pfs for lack of ingenuity seen at tables. I remember playing my yearly dip into pfs last year and having to use Kyra because I wasn't high enough level. Good thing I did. We dealt with hellknights and I was the only one with a respectable diplomacy. Everyone else built cannons.

This is great for me. I want to gm core mode only and bring my group to convention. Or do it for it home group. Heck, if my marine nephew who rarely plays is home, he won't feel overwhelmed and can spend time with his uncle. I don't own a FGLS or anything but if this works well and I get some cash I'm just going to buy a whole season and run with it.

As for experienced players, as a player of 3.0 onward, I look at this for what it is: hard mode. Not hard to understand, but challenging. I'm so excited to just pick a base class and run with it. I might even be a gnome!

Ok that last part was a lie. I hate gnomes.

1/5

Are the pre-gens from the CRB legal for CORE? This may have been asked already (haven't read all 13+ pages...)

Grand Lodge 4/5

slikkiller wrote:
Are the pre-gens from the CRB legal for CORE? This may have been asked already (haven't read all 13+ pages...)

Yes.

1 to 50 of 1,044 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Paizo Blog: Introducing the Core Campaign All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.