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
851 to 900 of 1,044 << first < prev | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge 4/5

I was pretty excited for this. It would solve a lot of issues between what some players can still play and also each time we get someone new, someone either just cant play their character or someone just cant play. Sadly, everyone has declined based on how limited options are. Maybe the next solution, though. It kind of dawned on me that I think this option will be a lot more popular among the DMs than the players, but we will see.

:)

1/5

DM Beckett wrote:

I was pretty excited for this. It would solve a lot of issues between what some players can still play and also each time we get someone new, someone either just cant play their character or someone just cant play. Sadly, everyone has declined based on how limited options are. Maybe the next solution, though. It kind of dawned on me that I think this option will be a lot more popular among the DMs than the players, but we will see.

:)

Remember you can only apply GM credit to core only characters. One of the selling points of GMing in PFS for many players is that they can rotate but still level up their guys. If the first adventure is core only you're limited to core only race/class/feats/traits.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Understood. So far 9 players have outright declined to play CORE, mostly on the grounds that it disallowed many of the fun options they want while leaving others that are known issues, (pets for example) in.

Lack of Archetype options, favorite spells, or Feats that make some classes viable (Monk and Fighter where called out), not being able to use special earned races, or many of the books they have purchased, mostly JUST for PFS play just killed it.

My actual suggestion was to do Core for only level 1-3 or 4, finally allowing for everyone to be able to play together in level range (removing Tier 1-7 was a terrible idea) and finding those rare gems that someone had not played before. But even then, it would set player's builds/concepts too far behind, and well like I said, almost unanimous "I'm out".

It was a good idea, but just didn't target the right issue with PF bloat, in my opinion. I don't think it is going to increase play, but introduce further issues, and really, (and I hope I'm wrong), may very well drive people away. Especially in the areas where there are 2 or 3 tables, but are having the main issue I am, running low on valid Scenarios and each new player introduces a new gap that divides who can play together.

4/5

Initial reactions in my local area brought forth a few people who had interest of GMing come to light, but didn't want to be overwhelmed by the massive amount of resources currently available to players. As a result, it's likely I'll see some core only tables pop up in my local area but I definitely don't see it completely dividing the club's player base as there are still alot of us that are comfortable in the standard campaign. That includes many of the people in my area already GMing (myself included).

A general consensus see it more as a challenge from a few different aspects but wonder if character fatalities will become more common-stance since the modules and scenarios themselves will not be held to the "core only" restriction.

Personally, I will not be GMing any core games unless I am requested to do so. I certainly do not know nor always comprehend every available option out there, but I know a wide margin to be comfortable to make spot calls to keep the game moving. My concern from a GM standpoint is that certain adventures just might be suicidal to play in, or simply just boring since every character will be "old hat" to my standards. (Sometimes I like surprises.)

I would be more inclined to be involved as a player moreso than a GM since I could provide a veteran's experience at the table while still enjoying the challenge that comes from being so restricted on options.

Still, if there is just one more book I could add to the core only campaign, it would be the APG. Yes, it does add a few more classes and archtypes. I personally think however that this is the point of Pathfinder that things were fairly solid as far as power creep is concerned without there being too many options that could break things. As someone pointed out last night, $20 for two .pdfs can give a new player more than enough options to contribute even in the main campaign and still feel effective.

The Exchange 5/5

I'm tried to scan this entire thread for an answer to the following question - but don't even know if this thread is the right place to ask it....

Are the three spells that can last from one chronicle to the next still available? I mean I know that you would have to get access to Masterwork Transformation, but Continual Flame is Core so should be available right? and the other the others would also, if you could somehow gain access to them.... or have I missed a post that addresses this?

Shadow Lodge 4/5 **** Venture-Captain, Michigan—Mt. Pleasant

Rules for those are in the Guide to Organized play, so they should still be legal to have from game to game.

The four spells are masterwork transformation, continual flame, secret page, and secret chest the last three are from the CRB so should still be legal in CORE. Nothing has been said otherwise to make me think any different.

Liberty's Edge 1/5

I like the idea of playing in a Tolkienesqe type world again - in standard PFS is it rare to find a Hobbit.. err.. Halfling. Humans were about the only commonality between the two.

Silver Crusade 3/5

Rambone wrote:
I like the idea of playing in a Tolkienesqe type world again - in standard PFS is it rare to find a Hobbit.. err.. Halfling. Humans were about the only commonality between the two.

Weird. I have 11 characters. Four are halflings.

I have seen many elves and half-elves. And dwarves are probably the most common race after humans I've seen locally.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rambone wrote:
I like the idea of playing in a Tolkienesqe type world again - in standard PFS is it rare to find a Hobbit.. err.. Halfling. Humans were about the only commonality between the two.

That's probably area specific. In our region, halflings are relatively common, but the strong presence of the Flying Flutterfoot clan has a lot to do with that, I think (my husband and I often play sibling or cousin halflings, and our two halfling seekers have created a wandering circus-based Pathfinder lodge...). Still, in our Dragon's Demand home group, 3 out of 5 of the group turned out to be halflings, with no advanced coordination.

That said, you will probably see fewer halflings in Core campaign mode. The options that made halflings really interesting and viable are really in the Advanced Race Guide and the Halflings of Golarion splat book. Without the "Fleet Footed" alternate racial ability, the "Helpful" racial trait, and the alternate favored class bonuses, useful halflings will be very difficult to play.

The Exchange 5/5

Non-Core Pregen/Credit Questions:

1. Can Credit from a Non-Core Pregen run be applied to a Core character?

2. If so, could that credit come from a REPLAY of a scenario by the player (that would typically receive no credit, since they already played it once as Non-Core)?

3. Or, if the credit comes from the FIRST run by a player through a scenario and they apply the Pregen credit to a Core character, does it count as their Core run and can they then replay that scenario again for credit as Non-Core (since they applied their first Non-Core run to a character in the Core track)?

Thanks. These questions have come up in one of my campaigns.

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

1. No. The pre-gen was reported in the system as receiving credit in Standard Mode.

2.

3. Could you ask that again? I'm afraid I don't understand your question.

The Exchange 5/5

If the answer to #1 is No, then the answers to 2 and 3 are also No. They just relate to replays in the case where you are applying credit from Standard Mode to Core Mode.

BTW - Where does the answer to #1 come from so I can pass it on to my players? Thx!

Sovereign Court

This probably applies to your #1.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

Any idea when the new PFS Guide will be out?

The Exchange 5/5

Dain Nielen wrote:
This probably applies to your #1.

Thanks!

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Are they planning on a mid-season PFS Guide update? I think they did this with version 4 of the Guide. So, we could get a 6.1, or a 6.2. Otherwise, it won't be until August before we get version 7 of the Guide.

Silver Crusade 2/5 *

Tsriel wrote:

Initial reactions in my local area brought forth a few people who had interest of GMing come to light, but didn't want to be overwhelmed by the massive amount of resources currently available to players. As a result, it's likely I'll see some core only tables pop up in my local area but I definitely don't see it completely dividing the club's player base as there are still alot of us that are comfortable in the standard campaign. That includes many of the people in my area already GMing (myself included).

A general consensus see it more as a challenge from a few different aspects but wonder if character fatalities will become more common-stance since the modules and scenarios themselves will not be held to the "core only" restriction.

Personally, I will not be GMing any core games unless I am requested to do so. I certainly do not know nor always comprehend every available option out there, but I know a wide margin to be comfortable to make spot calls to keep the game moving. My concern from a GM standpoint is that certain adventures just might be suicidal to play in, or simply just boring since every character will be "old hat" to my standards. (Sometimes I like surprises.)

I would be more inclined to be involved as a player moreso than a GM since I could provide a veteran's experience at the table while still enjoying the challenge that comes from being so restricted on options.

Still, if there is just one more book I could add to the core only campaign, it would be the APG. Yes, it does add a few more classes and archtypes. I personally think however that this is the point of Pathfinder that things were fairly solid as far as power creep is concerned without there being too many options that could break things. As someone pointed out last night, $20 for two .pdfs can give a new player more than enough options to contribute even in the main campaign and still feel effective.

Why do GMs care what is available to the players? It's not their job to provide those rules.

Silver Crusade 2/5 *

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Undone wrote:
DM Beckett wrote:

I was pretty excited for this. It would solve a lot of issues between what some players can still play and also each time we get someone new, someone either just cant play their character or someone just cant play. Sadly, everyone has declined based on how limited options are. Maybe the next solution, though. It kind of dawned on me that I think this option will be a lot more popular among the DMs than the players, but we will see.

:)

Remember you can only apply GM credit to core only characters. One of the selling points of GMing in PFS for many players is that they can rotate but still level up their guys. If the first adventure is core only you're limited to core only race/class/feats/traits.

z

All my chronicle sheets from GMing core are going in the recycle bin after the table credit posts on Paizo.com.

Grand Lodge 4/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.
David Bowles wrote:
All my chronicle sheets from GMing core are going in the recycle bin after the table credit posts on Paizo.com.

Why waste paper? Just don't take chronicles. Enter your player number with no character number attached.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

Probably less a statement about wasting paper as much as a lack of interest in playing Core.

It's kind of what I was thinking above I think a lot of DM's will want to run Core, but less people will want to actually play it. But we will see.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I know I said this before, but I think it bears repeating, considering the negativity of the last few pages: I have a bunch of players chomping at the bit to play. I think the return of older players who have stopped playing for whatever reason, and the influx of new players as well, will be quite impressive.

It's much like the reason a new RPG always does so well: the barrier of entry is so easy to overcome (one book) that recruiting is effortless. Core Campaign will be a "new RPG release" all over again.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Drogon wrote:
...considering the negativity of the last few pages:...

Welcome to the Internet :(

"I am not interested in this thing, therefore it is objectively bad, and the people who like it are bad people, and the people who proposed it are "

WARNING, MESSAGE TERMINATED DUE TO GODWIN'S LAW

Liberty's Edge 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Me, personally, I'm looking forward to the Core campaign.

I'm of two minds about the whole Pathfinder rules set. One, I like all the shiny and enjoy thinking about characters that can use various options and such. Hell, even though it's probably not a very effective character (as in "less effective than a rogue in combat"), after Animal Archive came out I created a Carnivalist Rogue PFS character just because I liked the idea.

But, on the other hand, I feel overwhelmed by the quantity of rules out there. Especially this year, with ACG's publication being followed almost immediately by the playtest of Occult Adventures, the number of character classes I didn't have even a vague handle on that would potentially be brought to a PFS table had me questioning whether I still wanted to GM PFS or not.

I'm also very attracted to game systems like FATE that are designed from the get-go to be more simple. (Also more flexible, but that's another matter.) I've GMed Fudge a fair amount in the past.

Put all these things together, and the notion of being able to play Pathfinder while dealing only with the Core Rulebook sounds like a good thing to do. It's a sort of "mini-old-school-renaissance", where by old school here we mean "Pathfinder six years ago". It even inspired me to sit down and make a whole bunch of first-level CRB-only characters (and get experience with PCGen at the same time -- I needed an excuse for that), just in case I ever find myself with the opportunity to play in a Core-only game.

I have yet to run or play it, but given time I'm sure I will. There seems to be decent demand for online Core games, which is where I'm playing most of it.

Is it for everybody? No. Fortunately, there's still the standard campaign out there, so you can ignore it if you want to. Is it for me? Maybe. Not sure. But even though I like the standard, I also like the idea of Core, and it appeals directly to something that was starting to bother me about Pathfinder and PFS.

If you don't like it, just don't play it. That ended up being my approach to D&D/4e; those who did like it could keep playing it, and I didn't think there was anything wrong with them, or with the fact that they were playing a game that wasn't my first choice.

Liberty's Edge 4/5

I don't know if I missed this but will there be 1st games at GenCon that are core ONLY?

thanks

Mike

Grand Lodge 4/5

There will absolutely be Core tables at GenCon. Mike said he was looking at at least 50 tables of the GenCon special would be scheduled as Core.

Silver Crusade 1/5

While I was excited about the idea of the core campaign at first.. I'm not sure I have interest in it anymore.

I've grown used to playing PFS with all the options provided through various books. By allowing replay for credit though limiting it to the CRB, I feel like each class will be forced into stereotypical roles. The only time I have available outside of work was dedicated to Society play. I'm willing to bet this is more of an isolated situation, but I really don't like the notion that I can only replay things with an very limited rule set. I don't have many gripes with the limitations in PFS as they currently are.

I'm worried less tables will be ran as there will be a schism between people wanting to play core vs. non-core. This may mean a whole table may not end up getting to play.

As I said earlier, my particular situation may be more isolated than most other players... I'm not going to participate in something if I don't enjoy it. I went out of my way to purchase the necessary books so that I could legally play specific characters. It almost feels like I wasted money purchasing all the PDF's that I did because there isn't much left for me to play.My materials are now effectively useless. There is no inventive for me to keep playing or purchasing products from Paizo. I've also made plenty of characters using the CRB as is, so it feels a little more than over-done.

Yes, I am complaining some, but I don't want anyone to misunderstand me: I do not think Paizo intended this at all. I really appreciate the idea of replay value. I don't know if making all scenario's replayable (once per character) would be the best idea, but is this the only other way to allow people to enjoy Society play? Sorry Paizo, but I think you have lost my business.

4/5

Silhren Rilbahn wrote:
I don't have many gripes with the limitations in PFS as they currently are.
Silhren Rilbahn wrote:
I don't know if making all scenario's replayable (once per character) would be the best idea, but is this the only other way to allow people to enjoy Society play? Sorry Paizo, but I think you have lost my business.

I'm not sure I understand. You didn't have a problem with the current limitations. They opened up a new option with its own set of limitations and now they've lost your business?

Have they only lost your business if it affects your ability to get a seat at a Normal table?

Because otherwise it sounds kind of like this:
"Dear McDonalds, I have no problem with your current menu, but I do not like your new dollar menu, as I am willing to pay the premium for the full range of menu options. You have now lost me as a customer."

Or is it because you want to be able to replay scenarios, and the new option to do so limits the characters you can use with it? In which case this might be a more accurate analogy:
"Dear McDonalds, I am glad you have finally allowed a single free refill of a fountain beverage, however I am disappointed that you have limited it to Coca-Cola Classic. You have now lost me as a customer."


Silhren Rilbahn wrote:

While I was excited about the idea of the core campaign at first.. I'm not sure I have interest in it anymore.

I've grown used to playing PFS with all the options provided through various books. By allowing replay for credit though limiting it to the CRB, I feel like each class will be forced into stereotypical roles. The only time I have available outside of work was dedicated to Society play. I'm willing to bet this is more of an isolated situation, but I really don't like the notion that I can only replay things with an very limited rule set. I don't have many gripes with the limitations in PFS as they currently are.

I'm worried less tables will be ran as there will be a schism between people wanting to play core vs. non-core. This may mean a whole table may not end up getting to play.

As I said earlier, my particular situation may be more isolated than most other players... I'm not going to participate in something if I don't enjoy it. I went out of my way to purchase the necessary books so that I could legally play specific characters. It almost feels like I wasted money purchasing all the PDF's that I did because there isn't much left for me to play.My materials are now effectively useless. There is no inventive for me to keep playing or purchasing products from Paizo. I've also made plenty of characters using the CRB as is, so it feels a little more than over-done.

Yes, I am complaining some, but I don't want anyone to misunderstand me: I do not think Paizo intended this at all. I really appreciate the idea of replay value. I don't know if making all scenario's replayable (once per character) would be the best idea, but is this the only other way to allow people to enjoy Society play? Sorry Paizo, but I think you have lost my business.

As many have said before, you should at least wait and see if you won't be able to play at normal tables. As long as you can, nothing has really changed. You can still use all your books. You've still got incentive to buy more. You can still you make all the cool weird concepts.

If you're running out of scenarios to play, then you're no worse off than you were before this change. At least you can replay in Core, if you can find a character you'd like to play. That wasn't an option before.

If it turns out the way you fear, then you have a valid problem, but give it a bit of a chance and see what happens. And make sure the VOs coordinating things in your area know what you're looking to play.

I think this is intended more as a feeder to draw new people in and bring back some who've drifted away, not as a replacement for regular PFS. If it doesn't turn out that way, I'd expect changes.

Silver Crusade 1/5

redward wrote:
Silhren Rilbahn wrote:
I don't have many gripes with the limitations in PFS as they currently are.
Silhren Rilbahn wrote:
I don't know if making all scenario's replayable (once per character) would be the best idea, but is this the only other way to allow people to enjoy Society play? Sorry Paizo, but I think you have lost my business.

I'm not sure I understand. You didn't have a problem with the current limitations. They opened up a new option with its own set of limitations and now they've lost your business?

Have they only lost your business if it affects your ability to get a seat at a Normal table?

Because otherwise it sounds kind of like this:
"Dear McDonalds, I have no problem with your current menu, but I do not like your new dollar menu, as I am willing to pay the premium for the full range of menu options. You have now lost me as a customer."

Or is it because you want to be able to replay scenarios, and the new option to do so limits the characters you can use with it? In which case this might be a more accurate analogy:
"Dear McDonalds, I am glad you have finally allowed a single free refill of a fountain beverage, however I am disappointed that you have limited it to Coca-Cola Classic. You have now lost me as a customer."

I was fine with the rules set for the standard PFS rules is what I meant. But because my only option now is to play core, I'm not as interested for replay value. My concern is that because my only option at this point is pretty much limited to core campaign, I'm probably less likely to see play in my local lodge. (There seems to be very little interest in core play. So much to the point that GM's won't even allow it and let players decide)

After checking what scenario's I have left to play, I can get one more character to level 6. Beyond that, I could maybe get one more character to level 3 or 4. As for the first character I mentioned, I won't be able to make them go much further beyond that point. I have made several characters with the core classes as is. I just don't have as much interest making more of the same things.

It seems to be a bit of odd luck with the scenarios left available for me will not allow me to progress much farther than low to mid level (I consider mid level to be 5-7)

Horizon Hunters 4/5 5/5 ****

Silhren Rilbahn wrote:

But because my only option now is to play core, I'm not as interested for replay value. My concern is that because my only option at this point is pretty much limited to core campaign, I'm probably less likely to see play in my local lodge. (There seems to be very little interest in core play. So much to the point that GM's won't even allow it and let players decide)

After checking what scenario's I have left to play, I can get one more character to level 6. Beyond that, I could maybe get one more character to level 3 or 4. As for the first character I mentioned, I won't be able to make them go much further beyond...

Why is your only option to play CORE? Is it because you've pretty much played everything else in standard PFS?

Silver Crusade 1/5

I hope that makes things a little more clear, jeff?

Silver Crusade 1/5

Mark Stratton wrote:
Silhren Rilbahn wrote:

But because my only option now is to play core, I'm not as interested for replay value. My concern is that because my only option at this point is pretty much limited to core campaign, I'm probably less likely to see play in my local lodge. (There seems to be very little interest in core play. So much to the point that GM's won't even allow it and let players decide)

After checking what scenario's I have left to play, I can get one more character to level 6. Beyond that, I could maybe get one more character to level 3 or 4. As for the first character I mentioned, I won't be able to make them go much further beyond...

Why is your only option to play CORE? Is it because you've pretty much played everything else in standard PFS?

Yes.

Horizon Hunters 4/5 5/5 ****

I understand. But, CORE isn't taking anything from you, and it's not preventing new scenarios from being written. In your particular case, it's matter of not enough material left in regular PFS.

So, CORE isn't the problem. Do I understand that correctly?

Silver Crusade 1/5

Mark Stratton wrote:

I understand. But, CORE isn't taking anything from you, and it's not preventing new scenarios from being written. In your particular case, it's matter of not enough material left in regular PFS.

So, CORE isn't the problem. Do I understand that correctly?

I see what you are saying and understand, it isn't the best wording on my part. It isn't Paizo's fault that my local GM's refuse to run core. I was trying to put my concern to words while also at work near the tail end of a shift, so mistakes were made.

Silver Crusade 2/5 *

The GM's refuse to run CORE? That's kind of a strange situation, I think.

Silver Crusade 1/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
David Bowles wrote:
The GM's refuse to run CORE? That's kind of a strange situation, I think.

Not really. If they don't want to play core, they aren't going to bother running a scenario to get credit for a character who could only be used in core. *shrug*

Horizon Hunters 4/5 5/5 ****

Silhren Rilbahn wrote:
I see what you are saying and understand, it isn't the best wording on my part. It isn't Paizo's fault that my local GM's refuse to run core. I was trying to put my concern to words while also at work near the tail end of a shift, so mistakes were made.

Oh, wow. I missed that part.

Silver Crusade 2/5 *

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Silhren Rilbahn wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
The GM's refuse to run CORE? That's kind of a strange situation, I think.
Not really. If they don't want to play core, they aren't going to bother running a scenario to get credit for a character who could only be used in core. *shrug*

I plan on doing exactly that. I'll run it, and just not keep any sheets for myself because I'll never play it. I think they are being rather selfish. It's no different than GMing a game more than once.

Silver Crusade 1/5

Before this gets crazy, I've not seen all of my local and regular GM's announce their refusal to run core, but it certainly seems to be the popular opinion.

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

Clearly you just need to run some tables of Core and show them how fun it can be Silhren! Once you've given your GMs a taste of it, then they'll be itching to play more.

Silver Crusade 1/5

David Bowles wrote:
Silhren Rilbahn wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
The GM's refuse to run CORE? That's kind of a strange situation, I think.
Not really. If they don't want to play core, they aren't going to bother running a scenario to get credit for a character who could only be used in core. *shrug*
I plan on doing exactly that. I'll run it, and just not keep any sheets for myself because I'll never play it. I think they are being rather selfish. It's no different than GMing a game more than once.

To be fair, they get to decide what they do with their characters as much as any player.

Silver Crusade 1/5

Walter Sheppard wrote:
Clearly you just need to run some tables of Core and show them how fun it can be Silhren! Once you've given your GMs a taste of it, then they'll be itching to play more.

Perhaps? I've tried my hand at GMing and prefer playing. I'm all for people playing core, but I feel they (other GMs) have as much interest or lack thereof to do it as I do (though for different reasons).

Shadow Lodge 4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Once I get everything fixed up for this PbP Game Day, Ill go ahead and toss out a few Core PFS PbPs and see if anyone bites.

Silver Crusade 2/5 *

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Walter Sheppard wrote:
Clearly you just need to run some tables of Core and show them how fun it can be Silhren! Once you've given your GMs a taste of it, then they'll be itching to play more.

I think it sounds like the opposite of fun, but I'll still run it because others might love it.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Silhren Rilbahn wrote:
Mark Stratton wrote:

I understand. But, CORE isn't taking anything from you, and it's not preventing new scenarios from being written. In your particular case, it's matter of not enough material left in regular PFS.

So, CORE isn't the problem. Do I understand that correctly?

I see what you are saying and understand, it isn't the best wording on my part. It isn't Paizo's fault that my local GM's refuse to run core. I was trying to put my concern to words while also at work near the tail end of a shift, so mistakes were made.

That's weird. I have so many GMs asking me if I'll be running it that I have had to make a blanket announcement for my plans to hold off all the questions.

Having said that, I think your options are no less limited than they were before Core Campaign, even if you have played *everything* that has so far been published: 2 scenarios are published each month, along with an Adventure Path volume. And every three months there is a module in the Pathfinder Modules line. At minimum, that is 20 hours of PFS per month (assuming 4 hour sessions, and 3 sessions for an AP volume - which is likely a low estimation).

Silver Crusade 1/5

Drogon wrote:
Silhren Rilbahn wrote:
Mark Stratton wrote:

I understand. But, CORE isn't taking anything from you, and it's not preventing new scenarios from being written. In your particular case, it's matter of not enough material left in regular PFS.

So, CORE isn't the problem. Do I understand that correctly?

I see what you are saying and understand, it isn't the best wording on my part. It isn't Paizo's fault that my local GM's refuse to run core. I was trying to put my concern to words while also at work near the tail end of a shift, so mistakes were made.

That's weird. I have so many GMs asking me if I'll be running it that I have had to make a blanket announcement for my plans to hold off all the questions.

Having said that, I think your options are no less limited than they were before Core Campaign, even if you have played *everything* that has so far been published: 2 scenarios are published each month, along with an Adventure Path volume. And every three months there is a module in the Pathfinder Modules line. At minimum, that is 20 hours of PFS per month (assuming 4 hour sessions, and 3 sessions for an AP volume - which is likely a low estimation).

That sounds like a reasonable amount of time. But like I said earlier, my availability to play is limited due to work. It isn't the fault of anyone, but it can't be helped either. If it's something that can't happen on one of two evenings, I don't play. Plain and simple. I'll just wait for more scenarios to come out before really playing much again. I wish this core campaign idea would have been something introduced earlier, because I would have been the first to jump on the band-wagon. Hindsight is 20/20.

Silver Crusade 1/5

My original point to posting: Why does replay value have to be associated with the core campaign? How will Paizo address the issue of GMs not wanting to run core mode?

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

Silhren Rilbahn wrote:
My original point to posting: Why does replay value have to be associated with the core campaign? How will Paizo address the issue of GMs not wanting to run core mode?

There have been lots of posts regarding replay and PFS. Here's a few you can review.

PFS Replayability value

PFS, double take

Replaying Scenarios (without stars)

TLDR of those is that PFS will never have unlimited replay, and it will only ever have limited replay.

So to answer your question, Paizo already addressed replay in PFS by disallowing it entirely, with the exception of Star replays and people replaying to make a legal table size. Core campaign changes none of this.

I think that by making Core a second campaign alongside PFS allows them to have double the play options for people interested in playing Pathfinder without expending any additional resources. In addition, while we could see people abusing it as they might have with extended replay in PFS, by virtue of it being separate and distinct from PFS if there are issues with the amount of replay available, they won't bleed over and effect PFS.

Silver Crusade 1/5

Walter Sheppard wrote:
Silhren Rilbahn wrote:
My original point to posting: Why does replay value have to be associated with the core campaign? How will Paizo address the issue of GMs not wanting to run core mode?

There have been lots of posts regarding replay and PFS. Here's a few you can review.

PFS Replayability value

PFS, double take

Replaying Scenarios (without stars)

TLDR of those is that PFS will never have unlimited replay, and it will only ever have limited replay.

So to answer your question, Paizo already addressed replay in PFS by disallowing it entirely, with the exception of Star replays and people replaying to make a legal table size. Core campaign changes none of this.

I think that by making Core a second campaign alongside PFS allows them to have double the play options for people interested in playing Pathfinder without expending any additional resources. In addition, while we could see people abusing it as they might have with extended replay in PFS, by virtue of it being separate and distinct from PFS if there are issues with the amount of replay available, they won't bleed over and effect PFS.

I guess it is better to look at the core campaign as seperate and not just something you are replaying. It doesn't really do anything for me, but I'm glad players have another option.


Silhren Rilbahn wrote:
My original point to posting: Why does replay value have to be associated with the core campaign? How will Paizo address the issue of GMs not wanting to run core mode?

One of the selling points is that it's easier for new GMs to pick up and start running.

If everyone's really refusing to run, that's going to be a problem. Sounds like it might be a regional thing though. Are you just going from anecdotal evidence or have you talked to a local VO or other organizer and they've had trouble getting DMs willing to run CORE?

Also, we're about a week into this, right? It may just need a little time to shake out.

851 to 900 of 1,044 << first < prev | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Paizo Blog: Introducing the Core Campaign All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.