Introducing the Core Campaign

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.

Agnosticism is never wrong, and yet so rarely advocated. Good on you.

I think the devs are aware that this is an experiment, so let's experiment. Report results faithfully and without bias, and so shall we be guided.

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

I don't think you're using the right reference frame to make that evaluation. People in the Core campaign are effectively not in PFS and people in PFS is not effectively in the core campaign. Grouping them together is more a matter of definition than reality.

"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.

"more people rejoining the OP environment" is meaningless to the individual player if they don't want to play with those people in the parallel campaign.

If you have 10 players locally and you go up to 20, but half of them play core you've at best gained nothing. If venue space is limited you've lost one of your weekly tables.

If you have 10 players and they go up to 15 and they go core you've lost the group.

I think halving again or doubling the number of people in PFS is an unrealistically optimistic goal but even those rosey projections don't end well for the individual.

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.

Three people coming back out of how many players that you know?

The math working out [for pfs] is not the same as the math working out [for any individual pfs player]. More importantly, the bigger the positive impact in terms of recruitment/reenlistment the more negative the impact on gaming availability.

"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.

And do what exactly? Tell me to use the other venue?

There isn't always another venue to send some people to.

Have the venue alternate between core and non core? That's going to frustrate and confuse the new players.

I know it's not everyone's reality and I never claimed it was.

Your solutions rely on it being everyone's reality. -The VO can look into it- is an incredibly vague non solution to some very specific and very real possibilities.

No, but at least you can play regularly. That hasn't been an option for lots of campaign vets for a long time now.

Then DM. Sure, you don't get credit, but credit should be pretty much irrelevant to someone with a full spread of characters anyway.

I fully understand the reason to limit the CC play to Core, PFS Guide and Web Traits; but I would ask that you consider adding the Inner Sea Guide to the list anyway.

Since PFS plays in Golarion, the one supplement that gives an overview on the places where the 95%+ of the scenarios should be on the list.

@BigNorseWolf

I think we can all afford to wait a few weeks to pass judgement on this development. There have been no options restricted, merely a new set of options offered. No one is requiring venues to run Core Organized Play (COP) events, it is simply one available thing to do.

This option appears to target 'outlier' players. In other words, it is for those who have not played pathfinder, or at least not PFS by having a 'rules-light' setting, and those who have played/GMed so much that there is little left they can do for credit. It will grant an opportunity for the experienced to introduce their hobby to the uninitiated.

It becomes problematic for the majority of 'us' who are not outlier players, but only if venues begin to fill up with tables intended for this new option. We have no way of knowing if that will happen. I know for a fact that the owner of my local venue will not be running COP events due to difficulties with tracking who is eligible to play what scenario.

All I'm saying is, give it a little time before we pass judgement. I agree that it could very well go poorly, but it could also be really great for attracting new members. We simply need to await real data.

I love making new characters. But if I've already invested money in various books so my characters can be legal in the main campaign, I'm going to want to continue utilizing those resources for any new character I create.

As it stands, all those extra options aren't mandatory for new players. We already have a campaign that only requires you to have the CRB. You don't have to be an Asimir gunslinger/tatooed sorcerer of the orc bloodline just because the guy next you is that. You only buy the new stuff if you want a ton more options for a character concept you have. I can't see any incentive for a new player in the Core Campaign to buy anything beyond the CRB if it's not going to be playable with the characters they make (unless they switch to the main campaign).

Thankfully, we've got a great group here that is helpful to the new players that seem to show up each week. But I do understand it's not like this outside of major metro's like Chicago, where there might not be a lot of gamers to begin with. Hopefully this will help the smaller markets.

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.

The ISWG version is not fully evil it just uses some devils blood and causes you to be detected as evil. Asmodeus isn't mentioned any more.

It is not very useful in combat, doesn't scale and can't be used to damage undead.

And frankly a number of my cleric players like that they don't have to carry the burden of healing alone, so yeah I am a fan, and I liked the fact, that arcane casters didn't have an excuse any more not to think about healing.

The ISWG version is not fully evil it just uses some devils blood and causes you to be detected as evil. Asmodeus isn't mentioned any more.

Gotcha. As mentioned earlier in this thread, chronicle boons are campaign specific. So, no cross-campaign mixing.

The term "Chronicle Boon" confused me.

It seems like everything is printed on chronicle sheets. I believe you mean boons on scenario chronicles are legal for that PC (Core PC or Standard PC). And holiday boons, GM boons, GM Star boons, convention boons, etc. are campaign specific (standard campaign unless it specifies it's usable in the Core campaign).

Unfortunately, Mike, you have already made an exception to this. One that I think is unnecessary. You said you can't apply the Eyes of Ten boon to a new Core PC. I don't see any real negative impact in allowing this. But, that's just my opinion.

Overall, I like the looks of the Core campaign. I'll wait and see how the scheduling of scenarios turns out locally and at GenCon.

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?

Yes unless it's a boon that opens up a new race.

Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

The ISWG version is not fully evil it just uses some devils blood and causes you to be detected as evil. Asmodeus isn't mentioned any more.

** spoiler omitted **

I'm not sure which is the better thread for this comment so I am posting it in both.

I play PFS exclusively on line and although I like the concept of CORE, my main concern is that it will reduce the number of game offerings for the non-CORE campaign, at least in the beginning. Whether or not that happens, and then evens out over time, remains to be seen.

I'm relatively new to PFS play. I only have two characters rolling with it at the moment.

My first exposure was at GenCon, and the 'cattle call' that happens before slots, even with a table of 'pure' ticket holders and no pre-gens.

The concern I have about this new launch is, simply put... does the Society have the *resources* to run this 'reset campaign' at the same time as maintaining the Legacy campaign?

Food for thought.

I'm relatively new to PFS play. I only have two characters rolling with it at the moment.

My first exposure was at GenCon, and the 'cattle call' that happens before slots, even with a table of 'pure' ticket holders and no pre-gens.

The concern I have about this new launch is, simply put... does the Society have the *resources* to run this 'reset campaign' at the same time as maintaining the Legacy campaign?

Food for thought.

Yes

After reading all the thread again (gotta love insomnia!), I do think we will have to monitor smaller venues carefully. It is likely that places that can only run 1 table, or who are playing somewhat in isolation from other nearby-ish groups, won't have the people-power to run both campaigns side-by-side. Adding Core Campaign for these groups will likely mean running alternate weeks or something, and will probably only happen when they run into replay issues. For such lodges, Core Campaign is probably not worth the hassle until replay is an issue. Happily, there is no obligation for groups to use Core Campaign at all.

This is probably a good time for VO's to check in on any such smaller and more independent groups in their regions (I'm sure many of them already do) to see if they need support for the Core option, or as an excuse to help groups cross-pollinate.

For larger groups, it seems pretty easy to incorporate, and definitely worth the hassle to allow the replay and benefit from the lower-cost entry point to recruit new players and train new GMs. I have seen several people on these boards say they are coming back to PFS because of it, and have heard the same from local people who have drifted away, so there *IS* data to suggest the positive side of things already.

To back up what GM Lamplighter just posted, and to respond to an earlier post by Pink Dragon:

I can promise that, for my part at least, it will only expand the number of offered tables. I plan on adding 10 tables to my stores' monthly schedule, all of them Core. I have no plans to take away any tables of Classic.

I'm not sure which is the better thread for this comment so I am posting it in both.

I play PFS exclusively on line and although I like the concept of CORE, my main concern is that it will reduce the number of game offerings for the non-CORE campaign, at least in the beginning. Whether or not that happens, and then evens out over time, remains to be seen.

On a personal level that's my biggest concern as well. Most of my "not played" list is in the 7-11 range. I suspect that will be even harder to schedule a standard season 2 7-11 game now that CORE is also an option.

Overall I think this is a good thing for Pathfinder Society. On a personal level it may cause a little bit of pain, but I will adapt.

Michael Brock wrote:

Gotcha. As mentioned earlier in this thread, chronicle boons are campaign specific. So, no cross-campaign mixing.

The term "Chronicle Boon" confused me.

It seems like everything is printed on chronicle sheets. I believe you mean boons on scenario chronicles are legal for that PC (Core PC or Standard PC). And holiday boons, GM boons, GM Star boons, convention boons, etc. are campaign specific (standard campaign unless it specifies it's usable in the Core campaign).

Unfortunately, Mike, you have already made an exception to this. One that I think is unnecessary. You said you can't apply the Eyes of Ten boon to a new Core PC. I don't see any real negative impact in allowing this. But, that's just my opinion.

Overall, I like the looks of the Core campaign. I'll wait and see how the scheduling of scenarios turns out locally and at GenCon.

Swift, not every boon on a scenario's chronicle are for that PC only. There are a few that open spells or archetypes to all your characters. Mike's said that those will be campaign specific. So if you get a chronicle in Classic that allows you to create a new character and use Sin Magic, you wouldn't be able to make a Gluttony mage in Core. Same with Eyes of the Ten. Getting a that boon in Classic wouldn't let you apply it to a Core character. Its just trying to keep everything on the same side. (Also, I believe you have to have a copy of the chronicle for the new character and if they had allowed it you'd have a Classic and a Core sheet on the character and they're not wanting that for Core characters. Make sense?)

As for Holiday/Novel/GM Boons/Con boons, I'm pretty sure that Mike has said that those can go on either Classic or Core characters, unless it opens up a new race.

Now, I love making complex characters from a dozen sources like a lot of people, but I'm looking forward to remaking my 2nd/3.0/3.5 Elven Archer for Core, though I am a bit sad I won't be able to have durable adamantine ghost salted arrows... ;)

If you have 10 players locally and you go up to 20, but half of them play core you've at best gained nothing.

Nothing? Nothing at all?

As long as each group doesn't treat the other like they have cooties, and go talk to each other, they may find they have more in common than they think.

The guy who plays PFSCore, because it's a simpler pickup game he can play at the weekend with his kids, might have a seat free at his late-night, mid-week, anything goes game, on a night you're otherwise twiddling your thumbs.

BigNorseWolf wrote:

If you have 10 players locally and you go up to 20, but half of them play core you've at best gained nothing.

Nothing? Nothing at all?

How about, you've gained ten potential new friends?

As long as each group doesn't treat the other like they have cooties, and go talk to each other, they may find they have more in common than they think.

The guy who plays PFSCore, because it's a simpler pickup game he can play at the weekend with his kids, might have a seat free at his late-night, mid-week, anything goes game, on a night you're otherwise twiddling your thumbs.

Dunno about your venues, but at the ones I skip around between, people usually come in, find out what table they're at, and then socialize with their tablemates. If Alice and Bob are never tablemates, they never socialize with each other. I think that's what BNW's getting at.

Dunno about your venues, but at the ones I skip around between, people usually come in, find out what table they're at, and then socialize with their tablemates. If Alice and Bob are never tablemates, they never socialize with each other. I think that's what BNW's getting at.

I disagree. That fear is only applicable on a timeline of one night; there's no real incentive for those players to remain segregated on successive nights.

It's the entire point of PFS; you can switch between characters.

If so, then it's a terrible shame.

I thought the whole point of PFS was to meet new people.
Even if you don't get seated with them for the whole game slot, because they're playing the stripped-down rules and you're playing gonzo.
You can still chat during breaks, or after the slot's over.

Just because someone's playing a rules-light game right now, doesn't mean they don't also play at another venue you weren't aware of, in an anything-goes game.

Swift, not every boon on a scenario's chronicle are for that PC only. There are a few that open spells or archetypes to all your characters. Mike's said that those will be campaign specific.

I looked, and I couldn't find where he said this. (I saw no response from him about Eyes of the Ten, and when he answered my question about the Sin Magic boon, he made no such distinction.) Can you point me to it?

Eric Clingenpeel wrote:

Swift, not every boon on a scenario's chronicle are for that PC only. There are a few that open spells or archetypes to all your characters. Mike's said that those will be campaign specific.

I looked, and I couldn't find where he said this. (I saw no response from him about Eyes of the Ten, and when he answered my question about the Sin Magic boon, he made no such distinction.) Can you point me to it?

Over here:

Jiggy wrote:

Dunno about your venues, but at the ones I skip around between, people usually come in, find out what table they're at, and then socialize with their tablemates. If Alice and Bob are never tablemates, they never socialize with each other. I think that's what BNW's getting at.

I disagree. That fear is only applicable on a timeline of one night; there's no real incentive for those players to remain segregated on successive nights.

It's the entire point of PFS; you can switch between characters.

Not necessarily, and even if true, then not immediately. Remember, in context this was "add 10 new players and they all play Core," right?

In the previous thread discussion, there are two types of players who aren't playing PFS now who would start playing PFS due to the introduction of Core:

• People who don't like some aspect of what we're now calling the Standard Campaign and won't willingly play it, and
• People who might like PFS but find it too complex.

As for Holiday/Novel/GM Boons/Con boons, I'm pretty sure that Mike has said that those can go on either Classic or Core characters, unless it opens up a new race.

I'm not sure, Eric. If I play a normal PFS session, and win a player boon, or if I get a GM boon for playing a standard session, it's my understanding that I cannot assign that boon to a CORE character.

Door prize boons, book books, holiday boons: all those are cool.

I don't think you're using the right reference frame to make that evaluation. People in the Core campaign are effectively not in PFS and people in PFS is not effectively in the core campaign. Grouping them together is more a matter of definition than reality.

It has become obvious now, that given the negative feedback from this announcement, people assume this. However the people that are interested in the Core Campaign are coming from the exact same player base as those that are not interested. So the concerns of both sides are valid here—they are concerns from PFS participants. I am grouping them together because for the last 7 years we have been playing in the same campaign and now a new opportunity for play has arisen and I’d like it to work out for everyone.

I doubt that we will have a Core only messageboard, but who knows, such things might happen. Until that time, I will continue to think of both campaigns as simply two aspects of PFS play. And I will continue to assume that people that participate both are worth my consideration.

"more people rejoining the OP environment" is meaningless to the individual player if they don't want to play with those people in the parallel campaign.

If you have 10 players locally and you go up to 20, but half of them play core you've at best gained nothing. If venue space is limited you've lost one of your weekly tables.
If you have 10 players and they go up to 15 and they go core you've lost the group.
I think halving again or doubling the number of people in PFS is an unrealistically optimistic goal but even those rosey projections don't end well for the individual.

“If venue space is limited” is the crux of your argument here. “If venue space is limited” and the store decides to host DND Encounters alongside PFS, you might have a problem. “If venue space is limited” and you host PFS during a Magic: the Gathering tournament, you might have a problem.

It is irrelevant what that other activity is, “if venue space is limited.”

However, if it isn’t limited, instead at the end of the day what we have is (to use your example) 10 more people playing Pathfinder. That is a WIN for organized play. And if you simply assume that there will be no over-lap between groups then I have to agree with Snorter, that is sad. I, on the other hand, assume that at any weekly gathering of people playing Pathfinder, there would be community development between both groups of 10, and in the end you would just have one group of 20. That’s what happens now with high and low ends of PFS, and it’s what will happen with Core/PFS being run alongside each other. There is literally nothing stopping people from playing in both campaigns, only their own decision not to.

Three people coming back out of how many players that you know?

The math working out [for pfs] is not the same as the math working out [for any individual pfs player]. More importantly, the bigger the positive impact in terms of recruitment/reenlistment the more negative the impact on gaming availability.

Three people coming back to play Pathfinder within 24 hours of the announcement in my area with zero people leaving is a great ratio as far as I am concerned. Since venue space is not limited for my local players, this announcement is a great thing. If venue space is legitimately an issue where you are, that may also be a good thing. It could mean that your group has grown in size to the point where you may need to consider other venues, or splitting game days. This is something that happens quite frequently, and something that VOs have been handling for some time now. If you need help handling this please contact your local VO.

And do what exactly? Tell me to use the other venue?

There isn't always another venue to send some people to.
Have the venue alternate between core and non core? That's going to frustrate and confuse the new players.

I don’t know, is this a hypothetical or an actual situation? I’m guessing hypothetical.

In both, I would ask for more information before trying to help. I would probably first contact your local VO and get them in on this. Then I would advise contacting other shops in the area and see if there are more venues out there. Even if there haven’t been in the past, things change and there may be untapped space out there just waiting to have PFS or Core at it. If that isn’t an option, I would try to work out a second game day, similar to what Drogon described, at your current venue. There is no need to “confuse” new players with this, we simply have PFS on Friday and Core on Saturday, or however you wish to organize it. If something like that isn’t an option—we could continue this, but since it’s a hypothetical issue, I can’t really advise on it, can I?

If “Core vs. PFS” really becomes an issue in your area, please do not assume that your VO is unable of helping you out. Instead, please contact your local VO and see what they can do. If you assume we can do nothing, and you don’t contact us, we will do nothing because we don’t know there is a situation.

Your solutions rely on it being everyone's reality. -The VO can look into it- is an incredibly vague non solution to some very specific and very real possibilities.

It's the correct solution for any issues that arise at your gaming venue. If your local organizer feels overwhelmed by these changes they are expected to contact your local VO. I don't see how this is a vague non-solution when it is simply following the chain of command that has been a fixture of this campaign for some time now.

I do understand that not all VOs are within stone-throwing distance of every game, but we are here, listening, and wanting to help. However if people view us as non-solutions to their issues, it severely limits what we can do for them. Every VO is literally 1 email away from being notified of a players concern. It seems relevant, so here is the exact text from the guide.

Feel free to contact your local Venture-Captain or Venture-Lieutenant at the email provided next to their name if you have questions about private or public game days, regional events and other play opportunities, if you want to know how you can help out with expanding or growing Pathfinder Society Organized Play in your area, or to suggest a game store or convention at which you’d like to see Pathfinder Society Organized Play events offered.

Following is a list of all Venture-Officers at the time of this guide’s release (this document will be updated periodically as more coordinators are named).
If you don’t see a Venture-Officer listed for your region and feel you would make a good addition to the Pathfinder Society Organized Play volunteer team, please contact the Pathfinder Society campaign staff at mike.brock@paizo.com to find out what’s involved and to apply for a position.

Then DM. Sure, you don't get credit, but credit should be pretty much irrelevant to someone with a full spread of characters anyway.

This is a good tip for keeping up participation in PFS, but that has never been an issue for me—I keep busy plenty. You also assume I care about credit.

If you check my posting history, you can find a berth of posts where I rally for people to be able to “play for no credit,” because honestly I just want to play the game, with or without a chronicle at the end.

Also, sometimes I just want to play rather than GMing… again.

But when you can’t replay for fun, and you can only replay to make a legal table size, and when you only have a handful of unplayed scenarios left, you end up playing a lot less. This is where a majority of these 4-5 stars you see posting are coming from. Now, with the announcement of Core, we get to play again.

Eric Clingenpeel wrote:

As for Holiday/Novel/GM Boons/Con boons, I'm pretty sure that Mike has said that those can go on either Classic or Core characters, unless it opens up a new race.

I'm not sure, Eric. If I play a normal PFS session, and win a player boon, or if I get a GM boon for playing a standard session, it's my understanding that I cannot assign that boon to a CORE character.

Door prize boons, book books, holiday boons: all those are cool.

Chris, Player Boons and GM Boons aren't earned by playing/GMing Core or Classic. They're handed to you during an event, or traded online.

There is literally no way to track how you got it. Those Boons may be applied to any PFS character. Core, or Classic.

But for the Boons actually earned by playing thru a particular scenario, those are campaign specific. Eyes of the Ten, The Waking Rune, and The Paths We Choose are examples of this. Not Convention Boons.

Gotcha. As mentioned earlier in this thread, chronicle boons are campaign specific. So, no cross-campaign mixing.

The term "Chronicle Boon" confused me.

It seems like everything is printed on chronicle sheets. I believe you mean boons on scenario chronicles are legal for that PC (Core PC or Standard PC). And holiday boons, GM boons, GM Star boons, convention boons, etc. are campaign specific (standard campaign unless it specifies it's usable in the Core campaign).

As for Holiday/Novel/GM Boons/Con boons, I'm pretty sure that Mike has said that those can go on either Classic or Core characters, unless it opens up a new race.

Looks like I'm not the only one confused by the term "Chronicle Boon".

Looking forward to the opportunity to play Core Mode.

For me, this will be an opportunity to enjoy Season 0-1 adventures "as intended". I joined in season 3, with Ultimate Combat just out; so most of my play experience was "super easy". I'd love to play those games with 4-5 players on Core mode.

I know the old factions are retired, but it would be nice if we could try and resurrect the old faction missions. Maybe that can just be an RP element for the players and GMs (with no real impact on the results, outside of secondary success criteria).

I want to say "We do this for Taldor!" one more time...

I believe Mike meant "scenario boon", not "chronicle boon", since, as you say, everything is on a chronicle sheet, one way or another.

Novels/Holidays/Player Boons/GM Boons should be applicable to either Core or Classic PCs.

Otherwise, say you downloaded a Novel Boon, or traded for a GM Boon. How would you be able to tell what PC you could apply it to?

i have a ranger that i made and has 0xp. I want him to be CORE, he was when i made him (half elf ranger, no archetype, nothing except CORE rulebook items/feats etc) how do i get his PFS registration labeled as CORE if he was made prior to the CORE tab for making a new character? i do not want to lose the number for no reason whatsoever.

Jiggy wrote:

Dunno about your venues, but at the ones I skip around between, people usually come in, find out what table they're at, and then socialize with their tablemates. If Alice and Bob are never tablemates, they never socialize with each other. I think that's what BNW's getting at.

I disagree. That fear is only applicable on a timeline of one night; there's no real incentive for those players to remain segregated on successive nights.

The entire premise of CORE seems to disagree with you: it seems to be an outlet for people who either can't (because of lack or replay) or won't (because of being newbies or disliking something about standard PFS) play anything but Core.

Although there will be some players flipping back and forth, all the branding/advertising so far seems to have been aimed at folks who would otherwise not be playing PFS, and therefore are not likely to mix with the standard PFS tables.

So no, it's not a one-night thing, at least if the reality comes anywhere close to the impression being presented.

how do i get his PFS registration labeled as CORE if he was made prior to the CORE tab for making a new character? i do not want to lose the number for no reason whatsoever.

Make sure his first session is a Core session. If the GM has trouble reporting him as a Core character, contact customer service to see if it can be adjusted on the server side.

deusvult wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

Dunno about your venues, but at the ones I skip around between, people usually come in, find out what table they're at, and then socialize with their tablemates. If Alice and Bob are never tablemates, they never socialize with each other. I think that's what BNW's getting at.

I disagree. That fear is only applicable on a timeline of one night; there's no real incentive for those players to remain segregated on successive nights.

The entire premise of CORE seems to disagree with you: it seems to be an outlet for people who either can't (because of lack or replay) or won't (because of being newbies or disliking something about standard PFS) play anything but Core.

Although there will be some players flipping back and forth, all the branding/advertising so far seems to have been aimed at folks who would otherwise not be playing PFS, and therefore are not likely to mix with the standard PFS tables.

So no, it's not a one-night thing, at least if the reality comes anywhere close to the impression being presented.

Well, all the replay players will continue playing new scenarios in the regular PFS, and probably talking it up, so there'll be some cross-pollination.

deusvult wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

Dunno about your venues, but at the ones I skip around between, people usually come in, find out what table they're at, and then socialize with their tablemates. If Alice and Bob are never tablemates, they never socialize with each other. I think that's what BNW's getting at.

I disagree. That fear is only applicable on a timeline of one night; there's no real incentive for those players to remain segregated on successive nights.

The entire premise of CORE seems to disagree with you: it seems to be an outlet for people who either can't (because of lack or replay) or won't (because of being newbies or disliking something about standard PFS) play anything but Core.

Although there will be some players flipping back and forth, all the branding/advertising so far seems to have been aimed at folks who would otherwise not be playing PFS, and therefore are not likely to mix with the standard PFS tables.

So no, it's not a one-night thing, at least if the reality comes anywhere close to the impression being presented.

People who drink Coke can also drink Pepsi; they just obviously don't drink both at the same time. Only the very rare fanatic will turn down drinking brown fizzy sugar water entirely if they can't have their preferred flavor.

I don't know very many PFS members who play only one character. I don't think I know ANY, in fact. There's nothing stopping you from participating in Vanilla and Core concurrently, and in fact the nature of PFS in general gives you every incentive to actually do so.

I know that here in the Baltimore area, there are many players currently involved in the "Classic Campaign" that are excited for the oppertunity to play in the "Core" mode. So far as I can tell, none of them will stop playing in classic games. Of course, we here in the Charm City area are fortunate. I myself live within an hours drive of at least six venues that have regular games. The only thing that Core will do for me is to give me more oppertunity to play more PFS. I win! ;-)

I get the whole scheme of brining in new players and creating an atmosphere of playability. Indeed, jumping in now is quite daunting, but I don’t understand how creating an entire new mode campaign addresses the underlying issues without affecting other aspect of the game.

I’m actually worried about unintended consequences. Now the new players will just be confused when they enter a room and see different “modes.” I may be incorrect on my interpretation of the new system, but it appears to me that the changes were 1) made for new players 2) made for experienced players to play with new players.

It’s been stated that also 1) GMs were complaining about carrying tons of books 2) 300 replay options open up 3) provide a better play experience when in a group of munchkin players.

Addressing the above, I know GMs complain about having to carry all the books around; but I usually never saw a GM at my years at GenCon carrying around a ton of books anyway. In my area I’m a GM and I usually don’t carry everything, either. Replayability is nice and everything, but it isn’t really in this case. We still can’t replay in the same mode on most scenarios. I would argue most replays are done by experienced people anyway.

I do see a good issue, and that’s encouraging more GMs. The new mode seems to encourage new players and have experienced players play with them, including pairing down the options for those experienced players so they don’t run the table; but won’t this happen anyway? Experienced players can simply maximize their builds, and they will likely know what happens in the scenario. <p>
Large conventions will be more confusing with two modes…already players need to figure out which tier to play as well as which adventure. Planning ahead can only do so much; what if you lose your group or your guy dies?

I’m not yet convinced the new system will solve the issues it tries to without causing more.

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

I think this is a smart move that I wholeheartedly agree with for a few different reasons.

It breaths life into the core rule book and the core classes. It also brings (sanity) Pathfinder back to a place in my opinion that it should be at. Pathfinder like any other game has experienced power creep and I will agree with the above threads that class in the last couple of books the: advance class guide or the advanced players guide (advance players class guide or the players guide to advanced classes coming soon??) or the archetypes has made scenarios from seasons 0-5 a walk through if not a snore fest.

I have been delightfully surprised with Season 6 scenario's and the Emerald Spire. Its been quite a rude awaking for many players.

Same story for races. I was overjoyed that Paizo put restricted the Tiefling and Aasimar character races. With all of the bonuses of the Tiefling and Aasimar classes there was virtually none of the base races from the core rulebook with the exception of maybe the Half Orc. There have been times I have ran games with only Tiefling and Aasimar present for races.

Call me a purist but I think that this is a good option for those of us who want play Pathfinder this way. For those who don't good for them they can continue to creep along.

I have next to no interest in playing the Core Campaign. I like the expanded range of options, and how they allow me to try out characters that are mechanically infeasible under Core rules. I like seeing everyone else's crazy character concepts (when they're played responsibly by players willing to share the spotlight). I feel like I've explored as much as I care to within the core set of classes.

But I'm really glad it's available as an option.

Anything that gets more people playing is a good thing, in my opinion. Especially if it's drawing back experienced players who are feeling burned out or left behind and those who can't afford to buy all of the various rulebooks to keep up with the players around them. I think they deserve a place to play just as much as I do.

If you are concerned that the introduction of Core is going to negatively impact your PFS experience, please humor me and consider this:

PFS organizers are volunteers. They should be allowed to organize the kinds of games they want to play.

If you want Standard PFS and only Core is on offer, make it happen.

If you want Core and only Original Flavor PFS is on offer, make it happen.

If both are on offer and people are choosing the one you don't like, it's pretty damn selfish to want to force them into your preference.

The internet exists and is a great way to find like-minded people. Your next-door neighbor might be a closet Pathfinder player! He might also be a sex offender. Either way you should find out.

tl;dr Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it shouldn't exist

Michael Brock wrote:

Gotcha. As mentioned earlier in this thread, chronicle boons are campaign specific. So, no cross-campaign mixing.

Swiftbrook wrote:

The term "Chronicle Boon" confused me.

It seems like everything is printed on chronicle sheets. I believe you mean boons on scenario chronicles are legal for that PC (Core PC or Standard PC). And holiday boons, GM boons, GM Star boons, convention boons, etc. are campaign specific (standard campaign unless it specifies it's usable in the Core campaign).

Eric Clingenpeel wrote:

As for Holiday/Novel/GM Boons/Con boons, I'm pretty sure that Mike has said that those can go on either Classic or Core characters, unless it opens up a new race.

Looks like I'm not the only one confused by the term "Chronicle Boon".

If it's a Chronicle sheet/boon not earned through scenario play (holiday boon, novel boon, prize table boon, etc...) it may be assigned to either mode character. If it is a boon earned through scenario play, such as Eyes of Ten, it may only be assigned to a character of the same mode of play.

I think this is a smart move that I wholeheartedly agree with for a few different reasons.

It breaths life into the core rule book and the core classes. It also brings (sanity) Pathfinder back to a place in my opinion that it should be at. Pathfinder like any other game has experienced power creep and I will agree with the above threads that class in the last couple of books the: advance class guide or the advanced players guide (advance players class guide or the players guide to advanced classes coming soon??) or the archetypes has made scenarios from seasons 0-5 a walk through if not a snore fest.

I have been delightfully surprised with Season 6 scenario's and the Emerald Spire. Its been quite a rude awaking for many players.

Same story for races. I was overjoyed that Paizo put restricted the Tiefling and Aasimar character races. With all of the bonuses of the Tiefling and Aasimar classes there was virtually none of the base races from the core rulebook with the exception of maybe the Half Orc. There have been times I have ran games with only Tiefling and Aasimar present for races.

Call me a purist but I think that this is a good option for those of us who want play Pathfinder this way. For those who don't good for them they can continue to creep along.

I am not going to call you a purist, but please don't start complaining when people with enough system mastery still walk through those scenarios. Frankly comments like creep along, only motivate such a behavior.

People who drink Coke can also drink Pepsi; they just obviously don't drink both at the same time. Only the very rare fanatic will turn down drinking brown fizzy sugar water entirely if they can't have their preferred flavor.

"Very rare fanatic"? I think you're way off on that estimation. That said, the difference between PFS Core and PFS isn't a brand and decades of marketing. It's the difference between a Subaru Outback with satellite radio and seat warmers and a Subaru Outback with a basic FM radio and no seat warmers. In both cases, it's still a Subaru Outback.

I don't know very many PFS members who play only one character. I don't think I know ANY, in fact. There's nothing stopping you from playing Vanilla and Core concurrently, and in fact the nature of PFS in general gives you every incentive to actually do so.

Well, you know one now. I don't have a lot of time to play PFS scenarios. Just a bit online here and at Gen Con (and maybe I'll get a chance at Geek.Kon or GameholeCon this year since I can't do Gen Con). So I concentrate on developing one PC. While there are many regular participants who can get into enough games to develop more than one PC, I doubt us part-timers are all that rare.

People who drink Coke can also drink Pepsi; they just obviously don't drink both at the same time. Only the very rare fanatic will turn down drinking brown fizzy sugar water entirely if they can't have their preferred flavor.

I turn down Mist and Slice and only drink Sprite. There's a significant difference and those without the pallet to taste the difference make me shake my head in disapproval.

Bit of an odd question, but would there be any problem with creating a database of available items from chronicle sheets for the purposes of COP (Core Organized Play)?

I was thinking of making something where you input your 'scenarios played or GMed' in standard mode, and it generates a categorized and searchable list of everything from outside of the CRB that you can buy with any given scenario. Looking through the hard copies of my Chronicle Sheets for cool things to pick up is kind of exhausting.

I am not going to call you a purist, but please don't start complaining when people with enough system mastery still walk through those scenarios.

You seem to imply here that those of us who don't build juggernauts that inevitably dominate season 0 to 3 scenarios lack the ability to do so. Am I wrong?

EDITED for clarity

Bit of an odd question, but would there be any problem with creating a database of available items from chronicle sheets for the purposes of COP (Core Organized Play)?

I was thinking of making something where you input your 'scenarios played or GMed' in standard mode, and it generates a categorized and searchable list of everything from outside of the CRB that you can buy with any given scenario. Looking through the hard copies of my Chronicle Sheets for cool things to pick up is kind of exhausting.

If you're talking about creating your own database (in this case, often in the form of a spreadsheet) for your character, listing which not-always available items they can purchase due to access via that character's chronicle sheet, then, nope, nothing wrong with that.

If you're talking about taking all the chronicles you ever played on any character (regular or Core mode) and making a database of chronicle access items and/or boons, then using it to determine which scenarios you should play with which Core mode character, that would likely be frowned upon by most of the player base (at least in my opinion). At best, it can be thought of as meta-gaming. At worst .. down right cheating. Do people do it? They sure do. Does that make it OK? Not in my opinion.

People who drink Coke can also drink Pepsi; they just obviously don't drink both at the same time. Only the very rare fanatic will turn down drinking brown fizzy sugar water entirely if they can't have their preferred flavor.

I don't know very many PFS members who play only one character. I don't think I know ANY, in fact. There's nothing stopping you from participating in Vanilla and Core concurrently, and in fact the nature of PFS in general gives you every incentive to actually do so.

I don't think you're understanding what's being talked about here.

To some people, yes, it's basically a flavor choice.

But to some people, they've already played so many PFS scenarios that they CANNOT play PFS unless it's in the Core Campaign.

To others, there are things so objectionable about regular PFS that they WILL NOT play PFS unless it's in the Core Campaign.

And not only do both of these categories of people exist, but they've both been branded as intended targets of this new campaign.

I don't know how you missed that, especially since I told you in the post to which you were replying.

Personally, I like the idea of using Core Campaign gameplay as a bridge for new players. I can totally see how a Core Campaign player might want to transition to standard PFS play, simply by exposing them to new material via Core Campaign scenarios.

But when you can’t replay for fun, and you can only replay to make a legal table size, and when you only have a handful of unplayed scenarios left, you end up playing a lot less. This is where a majority of these 4-5 stars you see posting are coming from. Now, with the announcement of Core, we get to play again.

Yup.

If you're talking about creating your own database (in this case, often in the form of a spreadsheet) for your character, listing which not-always available items they can purchase due to access via that character's chronicle sheet, then, nope, nothing wrong with that.

If you're talking about taking all the chronicles you ever played on any character (regular or Core mode) and making a database of chronicle access items and/or boons, then using it to determine which scenarios you should play with which Core mode character, that would likely be frowned upon by most of the player base (at least in my opinion). At best, it can be thought of as meta-gaming. At worst .. down right cheating. Do people do it? They sure do. Does that make it OK? Not in my opinion.

I was talking about the latter, though for my personal use it would be more for little items that are somewhat necessary rather than methods of powering my character to ungodly heights. Ghost-salts and the like, or swarmbane clasps.