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
951 to 1,000 of 1,044 << first < prev | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | next > last >>
The Exchange 5/5

Mark Stratton wrote:
Prethen wrote:

This is probably in the morass of comments already here...

Is there any way to take the non-core GM credits and apply to a brand new character for which I wanted to be a Core character? That character would have never been used or modified for use in a non-core campaign.

No. The credit earned would have been non-CORE, so they cannot be applied to a CORE character, even one which hasn't been played.

I asked this same question earlier in the thread, but can anyone explain what possible difference it makes if the credit comes from NON-CORE? It's just a credit. I don't understand. Also, the same reasoning applies to playing a pregen. What am I missing, other than a rules technicality?

IMO, if Paizo wants to facilitate creation of CORE characters, then any GM or pregen credit should, minimally, apply to creation of a new L1 CORE character (capped at 500gp, etc.)...and maybe even other progression.

5/5 5/55/55/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Core does slow down the power creep a little (possibly negligibly), but it absolutely smashes many of the ways that make bad builds less worse.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Zan Greenshadow wrote:
I asked this same question earlier in the thread, but can anyone explain what possible difference it makes if the credit comes from NON-CORE? It's just a credit. I don't understand. Also, the same reasoning applies to playing a pregen. What am I missing, other than a rules technicality?

Because once you enter a non-Core credit into the system, that character can never be a Core character. Any Core tables that character sat at would be automatically converted to Normal, including every other Core character at that table.


Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Zan Greenshadow wrote:
I asked this same question earlier in the thread, but can anyone explain what possible difference it makes if the credit comes from NON-CORE? It's just a credit. I don't understand. Also, the same reasoning applies to playing a pregen. What am I missing, other than a rules technicality?
Because once you enter a non-Core credit into the system, that character can never be a Core character. Any Core tables that character sat at would be automatically converted to Normal, including every other Core character at that table.

That's a mechanics reason, not a actual reason. How it works, not why.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

Screwing other players out of Core isn't an actual reason?


TOZ wrote:
Screwing other players out of Core isn't an actual reason?

It only "screws other players out of core" because they set it up to do so.

It would be equally possible to set up the rules so that pregen credit and gm credit from either could be applied to characters in either campaign, as long as CORE characters using such credit were built using only CORE rules. So that it only mattered how the character was built and where it was actually played, not where any outside credits came from.

They didn't set the rules up that way. The question is why.

Grand Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

That would require more resources from the tech team, and has not been done yet.

You're talking about the guide rules, I'm talking about the database rules. Sometimes the former follows from the latter.


Steven Schopmeyer wrote:

That would require more resources from the tech team, and has not been done yet.

You're talking about the guide rules, I'm talking about the database rules. Sometimes the former follows from the latter.

I know you are, but I really doubt that was the question.

"Because it was easier to set the database up that way" is a reasonable answer, though a somewhat disappointing one.

I really hope there is some more thought behind it than that.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Unfortunately, I can only give the answers I know. :(

Liberty's Edge 1/5

thejeff wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:

That would require more resources from the tech team, and has not been done yet.

You're talking about the guide rules, I'm talking about the database rules. Sometimes the former follows from the latter.

I know you are, but I really doubt that was the question.

"Because it was easier to set the database up that way" is a reasonable answer, though a somewhat disappointing one.

I really hope there is some more thought behind it than that.

Do you code? No seriously, do you have any experience writing code? The number of things the tech team has on their plate, the huge list of requests for various functions, that is more than enough reason to stop at the "easiest way" to set up the database.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Reflecting on it a bit, to address the game rules side.

What would be the difference between allowing non-Core credit to apply to Core characters, and allowing someone to run a PFS scenario with characters using 30 point buy and synthesist summoners and undead lord clerics which then get applied to Normal Mode characters?

Obviously, the second one is explicitly against the rules due to not conforming to the GtPFSOP. But right now, so is the first. Is allowing Normal Mode chronicles to build up Core characters a bad thing? Maybe not, but it does soften the line between the two campaigns.

Right now, what happens in Normal Mode does not cross into Core Mode. You have to earn everything you have in Core, in Core. Allowing Normal Mode credit breaks that guideline.

Is there anything wrong with my thoughts thejeff? I know from experience I can count on you to pick out anything I might be missing.


graywulfe wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:

That would require more resources from the tech team, and has not been done yet.

You're talking about the guide rules, I'm talking about the database rules. Sometimes the former follows from the latter.

I know you are, but I really doubt that was the question.

"Because it was easier to set the database up that way" is a reasonable answer, though a somewhat disappointing one.

I really hope there is some more thought behind it than that.

Do you code? No seriously, do you have any experience writing code? The number of things the tech team has on their plate, the huge list of requests for various functions, that is more than enough reason to stop at the "easiest way" to set up the database.

Yes, actually. Lots of it. As I said, I'm willing to take it as an answer, but I'd be happier with a reason they actually wanted it to work that way.


Steven Schopmeyer wrote:

Reflecting on it a bit, to address the game rules side.

What would be the difference between allowing non-Core credit to apply to Core characters, and allowing someone to run a PFS scenario with characters using 30 point buy and synthesist summoners and undead lord clerics which then get applied to Normal Mode characters?

Obviously, the second one is explicitly against the rules due to not conforming to the GtPFSOP. But right now, so is the first. Is allowing Normal Mode chronicles to build up Core characters a bad thing? Maybe not, but it does soften the line between the two campaigns.

Right now, what happens in Normal Mode does not cross into Core Mode. You have to earn everything you have in Core, in Core. Allowing Normal Mode credit breaks that guideline.

Is there anything wrong with my thoughts thejeff? I know from experience I can count on you to pick out anything I might be missing.

I guess I don't really think of it as "You have to earn it in the hard core CORE mode", but more as just keeping the actual characters limited to core. When it comes to GM credit (and to a lesser extent pregen credit), it seems much less important to me. It is a reason for designing the rules that way though. :)

GMs tend to be more of a scarce resource than players. If allowing GMs to apply credit from GMing towards whichever campaign they prefer to play in encourages more GMs to run, I'd say that's a good thing. Might not be necessary.

Grand Lodge 4/5

The other problem I see is the division of credit between the campaigns. Is it okay to have a GM apply his Normal credit to a Core character and then GM the scenario again in Core and apply that to another Core character? Effectively granting him two credits in the Core campaign? I suppose this problem crops up when Core character transfer to the Normal campaign as well.

Sovereign Court 3/5

Well, you can argue that it is not a big thing to use non-CORE GM credit for CORE.

However, also CORE needs GMs so if you don´t want to start from the scratch with just 150 gp, just GM a CORE session. You will get your CORE credit and players will have the opportunity to play CORE. Being able to gain a second GM chronicle for a szenario i have already GMed is at least for me motivation enough to start some CORE szenarios, which would be out of the game if you would allow the "leaking" of GM credit between the two campaigns.

Liberty's Edge 1/5

thejeff wrote:
graywulfe wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:

That would require more resources from the tech team, and has not been done yet.

You're talking about the guide rules, I'm talking about the database rules. Sometimes the former follows from the latter.

I know you are, but I really doubt that was the question.

"Because it was easier to set the database up that way" is a reasonable answer, though a somewhat disappointing one.

I really hope there is some more thought behind it than that.

Do you code? No seriously, do you have any experience writing code? The number of things the tech team has on their plate, the huge list of requests for various functions, that is more than enough reason to stop at the "easiest way" to set up the database.

Yes, actually. Lots of it. As I said, I'm willing to take it as an answer, but I'd be happier with a reason they actually wanted it to work that way.

Fair enough then. Too often on the boards I see people calling out complaints against the tech team where people seem to think that coding is easy and whatever they are asking for should not take more than a couple of hours. I, perhaps, overreacted to your comment.


Markus Richert wrote:


Well, you can argue that it is not a big thing to use non-CORE GM credit for CORE.

However, also CORE needs GMs so if you don´t want to start from the scratch with just 150 gp, just GM a CORE session. You will get your CORE credit and players will have the opportunity to play CORE. Being able to gain a second GM chronicle for a szenario i have already GMed is at least for me motivation enough to start some CORE szenarios, which would be out of the game if you would allow the "leaking" of GM credit between the two campaigns.

I actually originally was thinking more of it going the other way, particularly for those GMs who aren't interested in making CORE characters.

The Exchange 5/5

I appreciate the animated discussion on this issue. In reading the replies, I did not consider the point about GMs being able to re-run a scenario as CORE for additional credit. But, I'm still not sure that's a good enough reason to block how GM credit can be applied and agree that GMs should run a scenario in each mode to get both available credits as paizo intends.

But, after that reasonable requirement, GM/pregen credit should just be abstract credit and function in either direction. All that matters is that GMs indicate how they ran the scenario (CORE, STANDARD)...and scenario runs and characters should have CORE flags so that they can be identified (or certified) on the back end.

For GM or player pregen credit, the above discussion has not changed my opinion that it would seem to make no important difference how the credit is ultimately used and would facilitate better integration of and access to CORE character building/progression.

And, to me, it seems like more work and worry for everyone to do it any other way. I hope this discussion eventually results in elimination of CORE/STANDARD credit restrictions that are purism over practicality, albeit well-intentioned.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, Nevada—Las Vegas

Zan Greenshadow wrote:

I appreciate the animated discussion on this issue. In reading the replies, I did not consider the point about GMs being able to re-run a scenario as CORE for additional credit. But, I'm still not sure that's a good enough reason to block how GM credit can be applied and agree that GMs should run a scenario in each mode to get both available credits as paizo intends.

But, after that reasonable requirement, GM/pregen credit should just be abstract credit and function in either direction. All that matters is that GMs indicate how they ran the scenario (CORE, STANDARD)...and scenario runs and characters should have CORE flags so that they can be identified (or certified) on the back end.

For GM or player pregen credit, the above discussion has not changed my opinion that it would seem to make no important difference how the credit is ultimately used and would facilitate better integration of and access to CORE character building/progression.

And, to me, it seems like more work and worry for everyone to do it any other way. I hope this discussion eventually results in elimination of CORE/STANDARD credit restrictions that are purism over practicality, albeit well-intentioned.

I admit to confusion, once you have the two GM credits, one in Core, one in Standrad, you get no more GM credits, just non-mode specific table credits.

For the third, GM Star Replay/Rerun credit, that would have to be specified, just as any other run is, as applying to a specific campaign mode. The same should apply to running any of the evergreens.

If anyone at the table is applying the credit to a Standard PC, whether it is the GM or one of the players, the system has no choice but to flag all the participants as Standard mode. Equally, since a PC can transfer from Core to Standard, but not the other way, any Standard <Mode PC changes the whole table to Standard. That would apply even if the Standard Mode PC conforms in all other ways to Core mode design.

Otherwise, you wind up adding a significant burden, on top of what they already have to deal with, to the workload on your volunteer GM corps. "Okay, so I ran The Pies of Valmont, and one of the PCs shows as being a Standard mode PC. Simon, I need to audit your PC to make sure that it actually conforms to Core mode so that you don't cause everyone else to have their PCs convert to Standard mode. Both your character sheets and your Chronicles, all of them, for this <X> level PC." And, of course, in the fullness of time, that PC could be up to 19.2.... That's a lot of Chronicles.

And, what if there are two of them that you then have to audit? Or most of the table? Excuse me while I run screaming down the hallway. At the Con. When there is only 5 minutes left for me to get lunch before the next slot begins. With my table halfway across the building...

Umm, yeah.

Spoiler:
I GM a lot locally because PFS has very few visibly active GMs in my area, and, all too often, it seems if I don't step up, there won't be a game. Add to this that I am currently, and for the foreseeable future, mainly using public transit to get to and sometimes from game, and my GM bag is a pain to bring to the store. Two buses, each way. My bag of CRB, Bestiary 1, dice, scenario, maps, add'l resources, pregens, combat pad, etc.

And, in addition to running the scenario, and using Core because it is a bit easier for me to handle, sometimes, you want to make running Core a bigger burden by requiring me to audit up to 5 PCs for Coreness? No, thank you.


I think you're missing the point.

1) It's a suggestion for changing the system so that someone using GM credit from a Core game for a Standard PC doesn't force the system to flag all the participants as Standard mode. Shouldn't be that hard to do, at least in theory. You can already have a character with both kinds of chronicles, since you can go from Core to Standard. That doesn't retroactively flag all games that character has been in (or used GM/pregen credit from) as Standard.

2) Even in the approach you describe I don't see why you would need to audit any more than you would otherwise. In theory, any Core PC could have been incorrectly built with non-Core options.

4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
David Neilson wrote:

I assumed as much, but I am glad to see I was not the only one unclear. I would be curious on what the decay rate of characters from Core Mode to Expanded Mode. Especially given that you have a roster of characters already using all the various options.

Also given that if you show up for game day with a Core character and everyone else is going Expanded there is the obvious temptation to just play even if it breaks the seal so to speak.

Also use table tents and write on player table tents "CORE CAMPAIGN" This would help at CONS when players are changing tables last minute.

Sovereign Court

PFS Core question:

Quote the guide: >If an item appears on a Chronicle sheet, a PC may purchase and use it regardless of the book it comes from

Does this mean Wizards can transcribe spells into their spellbooks, even if they don't come from the CRB, as long as the scroll is on a Chronicle sheet?

Grand Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
taldanrebel2187 wrote:
Does this mean Wizards can transcribe spells into their spellbooks, even if they don't come from the CRB, as long as the scroll is on a Chronicle sheet?

Yes. He must purchase the scroll as normal however.

5/5 *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
taldanrebel2187 wrote:
Does this mean Wizards can transcribe spells into their spellbooks, even if they don't come from the CRB, as long as the scroll is on a Chronicle sheet?
Yes. He must purchase the scroll as normal however.

Unless he scribes it during the scenario. Non wizard spellcasters can access non core spells on their list but only by buying the scroll.

Lets say you find a scroll of Life Bubble, a wizard/cleric/druid/ranger spell. A wizard could scribe the spell into his spellbook during the adventure and use it thereafter provided the group was happy with the scroll being used up for the scenario. If he subsequently met another wizard in a later adventure that wizard could scribe the scroll from his book.

After the adventure where the scroll was found if it is on the chronicle anyone with access to any of those lists could purchase the scroll and add the spell to the ones they could subsequently use. A sorcerer could add it to their spells known if they had a new 5th level spell known available or retrained, a druid could prepare it etc but the process expends the sroll.

Grand Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
andreww wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:


Yes. He must purchase the scroll as normal however.
Unless he scribes it during the scenario.

Note that the question was specifically referring to after the scenario.

1/5

Michael Brock wrote:
GM Lamplighter wrote:

OK, the obvious question: can characters of Core Campaign and regular PFS sit at the same table to play?

EDIT: Ninja'd!

No, the reporting system cant handle a mix. It was the only downside of this initiative and one I can live with.

Additionally, one of the goals of Core Campaign is to make running games easier for new GMs. A mixed table defeats the purpose of that goal.

Thank you for the clarification, although it took me a while to find all this info on the new Core campaign. I was particularly interested in a ruling on mixing core/standard pfs chars at a table as our local VL and the coordinator at one store (the VL's spouse have been running mixed tables and saying it was ok.

1/5

AlBeddow wrote:
GM Lamplighter wrote:

OK, the obvious question: can characters of Core Campaign and regular PFS sit at the same table to play?

Thank you for the clarification, although it took me a while to find all this info on the new Core campaign. I was particularly interested in a ruling on mixing core/standard pfs chars at a table as our local VL and the coordinator at one store (the VL's spouse have been running mixed tables and saying it was ok.

I learned some things after I posted but it's too late to edit the original...

The organizer is labeling core sessions in the module title. The case I spoke of was explained to me as the player of the core char wasn't we planned the impact of playing at a standard campaign with a core campaign char. I appologize for not ensuring I had all the facts.

Grand Lodge

So no more regular Society games in Sacramento now?
After looking on Warhorn it looks to be pretty much core.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Grim Gravelskull wrote:

So no more regular Society games in Sacramento now?

After looking on Warhorn it looks to be pretty much core.

Did you email your VC to see what was going on or if regular games can be scheduled? I just did. Did you volunteer to GM a normal mode game? VOs can only work with what people volunteer to GM.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Grim - there are days dedicated to each type of play in Sacramento. Core campaign games are scheduled Sundays at Randy's and Monday afternoons at Great Escape. Thursdays at Great Escape and Saturdays at Randy's are devoted to regular PFS. Check out our schedule at https://warhorn.net/events/sacramento-pfs. It will say CORE before the listing on Warhorn of a Core game and regular pfs will simply appear as scenario.

Grand Lodge

Richard Flynn wrote:

Grim - there are days dedicated to each type of play in Sacramento. Core campaign games are scheduled Sundays at Randy's and Monday afternoons at Great Escape. Thursdays at Great Escape and Saturdays at Randy's are devoted to regular PFS. Check out our schedule at https://warhorn.net/events/sacramento-pfs. It will say CORE before the listing on Warhorn of a Core game and regular pfs will simply appear as scenario.

I did, all I see is core.

Grand Lodge

Michael Brock wrote:
Grim Gravelskull wrote:

So no more regular Society games in Sacramento now?

After looking on Warhorn it looks to be pretty much core.
Did you email your VC to see what was going on or if regular games can be scheduled? I just did. Did you volunteer to GM a normal mode game? VOs can only work with what people volunteer to GM.

You want me to run a game that I just started playing?

And all I see at Randy's is core.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Grim, I see Normal Campaign sessions today and tomorrow.

I do see that the Saturday offerings at Randy's are listed as Core sessions. Are you only able to attend at Randy's?


Grim Gravelskull wrote:
Richard Flynn wrote:
Grim - there are days dedicated to each type of play in Sacramento. Core campaign games are scheduled Sundays at Randy's and Monday afternoons at Great Escape. Thursdays at Great Escape and Saturdays at Randy's are devoted to regular PFS. Check out our schedule at https://warhorn.net/events/sacramento-pfs. It will say CORE before the listing on Warhorn of a Core game and regular pfs will simply appear as scenario.
I did, all I see is core.

Just from a quick glance at the events linked from that page, it looks like Sat, Sun & Mon are Core and Wed, Thu & Fri are regular. They're definitely there.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Ah, looks like the weird string of words I saw was indeed a typo. That post makes a lot more sense now. :)

Grand Lodge

thejeff wrote:
Grim Gravelskull wrote:
Richard Flynn wrote:
Grim - there are days dedicated to each type of play in Sacramento. Core campaign games are scheduled Sundays at Randy's and Monday afternoons at Great Escape. Thursdays at Great Escape and Saturdays at Randy's are devoted to regular PFS. Check out our schedule at https://warhorn.net/events/sacramento-pfs. It will say CORE before the listing on Warhorn of a Core game and regular pfs will simply appear as scenario.
I did, all I see is core.
Just from a quick glance at the events linked from that page, it looks like Sat, Sun & Mon are Core and Wed, Thu & Fri are regular. They're definitely there.

I don't know what you're reading but Randy's is only running core.

PF Mod: Thornkeep—The Accursed Halls Core Campaign
Saturday, Mar 7, 12-8pm (GMT-08) at Randy's House of Games s

PF Mod: Masks of the Living God Core Campaign
Saturday, Mar 21, 12-9pm (GMT-07) at Randy's House of Games

A Place to Game is up in Yuba city, which is at least an hours drive to there from Sacramento.

As for PFS 5-04: The Stolen Heir
Thursday, Mar 5, 6-10pm (GMT-08) at Great Escape Games
There's no DM.

Grand Lodge

Just forget it, It was silly of me to even get on here and ask.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Grim - thank you for bringing this to my attention. I was still bleary-eyed when I composed my first response, I am sorry for that.

Yes, this week and next week it was requested by the player base that we push the CORE campaign because next weekend is a convention here - ConQuest Sacramento X - and there are scenarios that people want to player there that are outside the beginner tier. However, I will schedule more beginning tier regular campaign PFS games for the upcoming week. Once again, thank you for bringing this to my attention.

Might I also suggest that you consider attending the upcoming convention next weekend. We have a huge offering of games of all tiers; most of which are regular campaign.

I hope to see you around and I'll PM you telling you when I have an amended schedule posted on the warhorn.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

Grim Gravelskull wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
Grim Gravelskull wrote:

So no more regular Society games in Sacramento now?

After looking on Warhorn it looks to be pretty much core.
Did you email your VC to see what was going on or if regular games can be scheduled? I just did. Did you volunteer to GM a normal mode game? VOs can only work with what people volunteer to GM.

You want me to run a game that I just started playing?

And all I see at Randy's is core.

I wasn't aware you just started playing. You made no mention one way or the other.

Scarab Sages 5/5 5/5 ** Venture-Captain, Washington—Spokane

AlBeddow wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
GM Lamplighter wrote:

OK, the obvious question: can characters of Core Campaign and regular PFS sit at the same table to play?

EDIT: Ninja'd!

No, the reporting system cant handle a mix. It was the only downside of this initiative and one I can live with.

Additionally, one of the goals of Core Campaign is to make running games easier for new GMs. A mixed table defeats the purpose of that goal.

Thank you for the clarification, although it took me a while to find all this info on the new Core campaign. I was particularly interested in a ruling on mixing core/standard pfs chars at a table as our local VL and the coordinator at one store (the VL's spouse have been running mixed tables and saying it was ok.

This post was just brought to my attention and I felt a response was required. First, AlBeddow has not played at the location in sometime and not since the Core Campaign was introduced. Second, at the location mentioned, we run both Core and Standard tables and players are NEVER mixed. If a standard campaign character is to have been played in a core campaign table, the sheet gets flagged on reporting and the player is talked to about insuring that they are aware of the issue. All games that are core are posted on Warhorn and announced as core before the start of the game to insure that all players are using the proper characters.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

Bryun Battlehammer wrote:
Richard Flynn wrote:
Grim - there are days dedicated to each type of play in Sacramento. Core campaign games are scheduled Sundays at Randy's and Monday afternoons at Great Escape. Thursdays at Great Escape and Saturdays at Randy's are devoted to regular PFS. Check out our schedule at https://warhorn.net/events/sacramento-pfs. It will say CORE before the listing on Warhorn of a Core game and regular pfs will simply appear as scenario.
I did, all I see is core.

Greetings, Bryun! And welcome to PFS!

The CORE Campaign in Sacramento is something new we've added to our regular PFS lineup.

Before CORE was introduced we held regular PFS sessions throughout the greater Sacramento region almost every day of the week.

With the introduction of CORE we added two more slots to our lineup: Monday afternoons and Sunday evenings. Our primary goal in doing this was to offer at least a couple times per week to play CORE without subtracting time from the Standard PFS Campaign.

With our Convention coming up we did replace a few sessions with CORE games to accommodate players who wanted new characters for the event. You just happened to join during a period of increased CORE play. Starting in a couple weeks we'll be returning to our regular lineup.

Sunday evenings in particular were my suggestion. Until recently there were no venues that were open during that time. I'll be GMing on those nights more often than not, so if you're interested in signing up for a game check out the Warhorn site linked up thread, or feel free to send me a PM =).

We look forward to having you!

Liberty's Edge

I had completely lost interest in PFS because of the overwhelming number of sources and the need to create super optimized characters, it was no longer fun. This is what I have been wishing for and it will get me back to playing again.


Our LGS is just getting ready to run our first Core session next weekend and I am trying to get a few things cleared up. I apologize if any of these are answered further back in this thread but at nearly 1000 posts i just can't read through them all.
1. If something is in the core book but relisted elsewhere with a modified description/effect/stat which should I use?
2. Just for clarification this means we don't have favored class bonuses?
3. With Clerics are we allowed to choose a diety outside of the core book if the domains are both from the core book but no core deity has both?

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, Texas—Houston

DomonKashu wrote:

Our LGS is just getting ready to run our first Core session next weekend and I am trying to get a few things cleared up. I apologize if any of these are answered further back in this thread but at nearly 1000 posts i just can't read through them all.

1. If something is in the core book but relisted elsewhere with a modified description/effect/stat which should I use?

The version from the latest printing of the Core Rulebook.

Quote:

2. Just for clarification this means we don't have favored class bonuses?

Favored class bonuses are limited to 1 hit point or 1 skill point per level. (core page 31)

Quote:
3. With Clerics are we allowed to choose a diety outside of the core book if the domains are both from the core book but no core deity has both?

Clerics are limited to the deities on page 43 of the core rulebook.

1/5

Preston Hudson wrote:
This post was just brought to my attention and I felt a response was required. First, AlBeddow has not played at the location in sometime and not since the Core Campaign was introduced. Second, at the location mentioned, we run both Core and Standard tables and players are NEVER mixed. If a standard campaign character is to have been played in a core campaign table, the sheet gets flagged on reporting and the player is talked to about insuring that they are aware of the issue. All games that are core are posted on Warhorn and announced as core before the start of the game to insure that all players are using the proper characters.

Preston is right I have not played in a while because of how he manages the campaign at the store...

but it was a player who related to me that the table was run as a core table he having one of his characters played several times at preston's lodge PRE-CORE, and was never told it was a core campaign table.

Unfortunately it was related to me in a confused manner and once I saw the warhorn sigh up page seeing the "CORE" in the NEW events (I couldn't of course go back check the past listings) I posted my correction.

Grand Lodge

Wow this thread has gone off topic a bit eh? No matter. I just recently played in the first Core Campaign game at my local game store, and as a long time player of classic games it was a fun twist to get back down to basics...and more fun role-playing without using a million supplements and options. More laughs and less dickering over who has what option on what new race or character. Go Core!!!

Shadow Lodge 3/5

Michael Brock wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Wraithcannon wrote:

What about core spells that use other resources?

RAW, Summon Monster allows you to summon Elementals from Bestiary I and II.

Polymorph spells like Beast Shape, Plant Shape, and Form of the Dragon also allow you to transform into creatures that are from all 4 current Bestiaries.

It's been clarified that if the CRB points to the Bestiary for something (like with summon monster) then you can use that thing from the Bestiary. Not sure if that includes 2-4, though.
Just Bestiary 1 unless a different sourcebook is specifically called out.

Does this include animal companions, eg. giant frog or elephant?

4/5 *

Yes.

951 to 1,000 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.