Year of the Serpent

Monday, June 1, 2015

Season 6 of the Pathfinder Society Organized Play campaign is coming to a close, and the Society has finally pieced together the Numerian relic that gave this season its name: the Year of the Sky Key. During the second of this year's interactive Specials, The Sky Key Solution, we're going to fire up the device and see what happens!

Then again, the Sky Key helped us look back across the ages once before, and I want to look ahead to the future—namely Season 7. As I announced at the PaizoCon 2015 Preview Banquet and the Pathfinder Society Q&A panel about a week ago, Season 7 is going to be the Year of the Serpent! Too long has the Aspis Consortium been the source of ridicule and easily defeated low-level rogues, and I began to ask what would happen if the Aspis Consortium made a serious, concerted effort to tear down the Pathfinder Society. Where are those elite operatives we've always heard about, and what can they accomplish when bankrolled by one of the wealthiest operations in the Inner Sea? If you had a chance to play Pathfinder Society Special #6-97: Siege of Serpents and Pathfinder Society Special #6-98: Serpents Rise, you've had a good look at the Consortium's first major operation. However, there's a whole lot more in the works for this season with plenty of opportunities to foil Aspis plans (and occasionally even be foiled by Aspis plans). I'll let our new, serpentine overlords introduce the season's logo: a serpent consuming the Pathfinder Society's Glyph of the Open Road.

Of course, every great season becomes even better when we pick up a few loose threads in addition to spinning new stories, and I have already begun outlining some stories that pick up where we left off in far-flung locations from the Mwangi Expanse to Mendev—plus at least one more in the earthquake-shattered Precipice Quarter in Absalom.

And for those of you who were guessing whether the Year of the Serpent would involve the Aspis Consortium or the serpentfolk, why can't it be both?

John Compton
Developer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Society Year of the Serpent
51 to 100 of 129 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2014 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

8 people marked this as a favorite.

It's my year.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Well, I will have to scramble to make sure I get at least 2XP on my Kitsune, Nagaji, and Tengu PCs, before GenCon.

I won't even have time for a Wayang.

The Exchange

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Well, I will have to scramble to make sure I get at least 2XP on my Kitsune, Nagaji, and Tengu PCs, before GenCon.

I won't even have time for a Wayang.

Aye right? Thats the scramble I think a lot of us are in. I just got my Wayang to 2.1, now to get a Tengu.

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

Scramble if you like, there are no plans to retire the currently available races.

The Exchange

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Scramble if you like, there are no plans to retire the currently available races.

Such a stigma now, I just don't play all that often anymore so I want to make sure I get my Wayang and Tengu to at least 2.1. My Tengu has 2 xp he just needs one more game.

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

If you don't get to many games, it certainly makes sense to play the characters you want to be able to play long into the future. It sounds like you will at least have until Season 8 to play the current races.

The Exchange

That's cool and makes sense but still wasn't sure so I wanted to get some character ideas locked in just in case the rug does get pulled.

There was a recent thread talking about new races that people would like to see and that kind of got me worried they were planning on changing the races with Season 7.

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

The PFS Q&A panel at PaizoCon addressed the issue, and the current mix of races feels pretty balanced according to Mike and John. This does remind me that I need to come up with a concept that uses one of the Tian races, since I haven't played on before.

3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I find it hard to believe that the Aspis are rich and powerful. I've never seen them when they aren't having their operations destroyed by the Pathfinders. I guess I'll see.

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

Well, how are you going to see them as rich and powerful when the Pathfinders investigating them don't make it back to report on their successful operations?

2/5

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Every time I GM with Aspis NPC's I nearly wipe the party. This is going to be a rough season for some people.

Grand Lodge 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Please give some of the other factions a multipart scenario set... I am really getting tired of Scarab Sages.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Nice! I've always enjoyed the Pathfinder vs. Aspis arcs.

With the serpent theme....can we get Vishkanya added to the race list? Or at least as a convention boon or something? :)

Shadow Lodge

Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
The PFS Q&A panel at PaizoCon addressed the issue, and the current mix of races feels pretty balanced according to Mike and John. This does remind me that I need to come up with a concept that uses one of the Tian races, since I haven't played on before.

<Huge Sigh of Relief>

Glad I don't have to start shoehorning some high level GM credit on my Lvl 1 Kitsunes.

Silver Crusade

KestlerGunner wrote:

This is going to be a real challenge for the scenario writers.

By and large enemy humanoids with class levels always fall to the PCs because the wealth difference is so large, they are vulnerable to every status condition and their stats are comparatively poor compared to monsters.

[...]

I appreciate the narrative direction to 'reboot' the Consortium, but I'm seriously expecting Season 7 to be easy mode.

Really hoping and praying that PFS didn't peak with the Lissala Season + Worldwound Season back to back.

It might be a bit too "experimental" for by-the-book PFS, but the <Automatic Bonus Progression> from Unchained might be one way to address this problem. <As Mark suggested>:

Mark Seifter wrote:
I'd give an NPC PC level-1, since they are one CR lower. This is a boost for NPCs, who frankly needed the boost, but had no way to get the boost without giving the PCs too much money for beating them.

5/5 Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston

Though I could see an amount of aggravation in "Hey, apparently the universe is on the Aspis' side." Then again I have not been bothered by monsters with a bit of mythic added on to them.

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

pH unbalanced wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
The PFS Q&A panel at PaizoCon addressed the issue, and the current mix of races feels pretty balanced according to Mike and John. This does remind me that I need to come up with a concept that uses one of the Tian races, since I haven't played on before.

<Huge Sigh of Relief>

Glad I don't have to start shoehorning some high level GM credit on my Lvl 1 Kitsunes.

shoehorning a few more times Just to be sure.

Lantern Lodge 5/5

As everyone makes such open passive-aggressive statements about "shoehorning" things that might be removed from Always Available Status, I hope the next rotation includes zero grandfathering. Or maybe at a different number.

"Starting in Season 8, <insert race> characters with less than 5.5 XP must be rebuilt into a different race. Class and equipment may not change."

5/5 Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston

Be a real bugger if you are built around being a species only archetype.

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jayson MF Kip wrote:

As everyone makes such open passive-aggressive statements about "shoehorning" things that might be removed from Always Available Status, I hope the next rotation includes zero grandfathering. Or maybe at a different number.

"Starting in Season 8, <insert race> characters with less than 5.5 XP must be rebuilt into a different race. Class and equipment may not change."

That would be ridiculously punative. Sometimes the race is incorporated into the build.

There's nothing passive aggressive about it. Its still legal. There's some ideas percolating that haven't quite come to fruition, and the time that they're legal MAY be ticking away. Its just like getting your term paper done at the last minute instead of month ago

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
Jayson MF Kip wrote:

As everyone makes such open passive-aggressive statements about "shoehorning" things that might be removed from Always Available Status, I hope the next rotation includes zero grandfathering. Or maybe at a different number.

"Starting in Season 8, <insert race> characters with less than 5.5 XP must be rebuilt into a different race. Class and equipment may not change."

Let me explain what I mean by shoehorning. I think you will be less concerned.

I mean that I have two Kitsune characters. One has 3xp. One has 2xp. That means that between now and Gencon I would have to put 1xp on the first and 2xp on the second in order to grandfather these characters. (and 1 each has to be from play, not from GMing, following the Summoner precedent.)

Because the region where I am playing only has game days every other week, that means I will only be earning 4xp between now and Gencon. This week I am GMing a 5-9, and until I heard this I was planning to put that credit on the 2xp character to keep on track for not losing her *even though I hate putting high level chronicles on first level characters*.

That's all I meant. "Shoehorning" means giving them a chronicle that really makes more sense for a different character.

Those of us in low-play areas are the ones who have the hardest time dealing with the short window on grandfathering rules. If kitsune had to be grandfathered at 4xp, that means that keeping two kitsune takes 33% of all my experience earned since they were legalized. That's pretty rough, and means I had to start planning how to deal with this 6 weeks ago.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Agent, Florida—Melbourne aka trollbill

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Jayson MF Kip wrote:

As everyone makes such open passive-aggressive statements about "shoehorning" things that might be removed from Always Available Status, I hope the next rotation includes zero grandfathering. Or maybe at a different number.

"Starting in Season 8, <insert race> characters with less than 5.5 XP must be rebuilt into a different race. Class and equipment may not change."

Please explain to me how the PFS staff sucker punching their player base with sudden rule changes that invalidates perfectly legal characters is in any way, shape or form, beneficial to PFS.


I'm glad that the rush to change races isn't happening in the time frame I was thinking. I'd like to get some of the tian races played, but I'm currently only making the core game nights so that I have more things I can play with my roommates who just got into PFS. I haven't played much outside of core for the last 3 months, which has been fun, but I'm beginning to miss my options.

Lantern Lodge 5/5

trollbill wrote:
Jayson MF Kip wrote:

As everyone makes such open passive-aggressive statements about "shoehorning" things that might be removed from Always Available Status, I hope the next rotation includes zero grandfathering. Or maybe at a different number.

"Starting in Season 8, <insert race> characters with less than 5.5 XP must be rebuilt into a different race. Class and equipment may not change."

Please explain to me how the PFS staff sucker punching their player base with sudden rule changes that invalidates perfectly legal characters is in any way, shape or form, beneficial to PFS.

It keeps people from complaining three months in advance of every event that "something might happen, better play my <insert thing> a bunch of times."

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

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Come on Jayson, you KNOW there is nothing we can do about people complaining.

Lantern Lodge 5/5

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Come on Jayson, you KNOW there is nothing we can do about people complaining.

I can complain about it!

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Jayson MF Kip wrote:


It keeps people from complaining three months in advance of every event that "something might happen, better play my <insert thing> a bunch of times."

And would replace it with SIX months of complaining about it , plus the well earned complaints from peoples who's characters have been effectively killed.

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Well, it would stop the complaints from the people who rage quit PFS entirely over such a decision.

Shadow Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Season 8: Return to the mists of Ustalav and the Whispering Tyrant Rises. . .

Just saying.

3/5

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

Season 8: Return to the mists of Ustalav and the Whispering Tyrant Rises. . .

Just saying.

I'm all for this if only to teach the next generation of gamers that vampires do NOT sparkle in sunlight...

Shadow Lodge 4/5

But...but we had an undead season already. It was the Season of the FROOOST.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Jacksonville aka Kyrie Ebonblade,

trollbill wrote:
Jayson MF Kip wrote:

As everyone makes such open passive-aggressive statements about "shoehorning" things that might be removed from Always Available Status, I hope the next rotation includes zero grandfathering. Or maybe at a different number.

"Starting in Season 8, <insert race> characters with less than 5.5 XP must be rebuilt into a different race. Class and equipment may not change."

Please explain to me how the PFS staff sucker punching their player base with sudden rule changes that invalidates perfectly legal characters is in any way, shape or form, beneficial to PFS.

A how much 'fairer' is to folks in low play areas hearing about Marathon runthrus of level 1 of thorn keep and emerald spire to get 5+ aasimars and/or tie flings on the books?

I heard of one area getting like 5 sessions through in the same day.

Then hearing about this 'exploit before the ban' for months afterward.

You have to consider overall fairness, not just your local area. Folks were pretty miffed about what they saw as exploiting the system.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

FiddlersGreen wrote:
DM Beckett wrote:

Season 8: Return to the mists of Ustalav and the Whispering Tyrant Rises. . .

Just saying.

I'm all for this if only to teach the next generation of gamers that vampires do NOT sparkle in sunlight...

They don't?

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Agent, Florida—Melbourne aka trollbill

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thomas Graham wrote:
trollbill wrote:
Jayson MF Kip wrote:

As everyone makes such open passive-aggressive statements about "shoehorning" things that might be removed from Always Available Status, I hope the next rotation includes zero grandfathering. Or maybe at a different number.

"Starting in Season 8, <insert race> characters with less than 5.5 XP must be rebuilt into a different race. Class and equipment may not change."

Please explain to me how the PFS staff sucker punching their player base with sudden rule changes that invalidates perfectly legal characters is in any way, shape or form, beneficial to PFS.

A how much 'fairer' is to folks in low play areas hearing about Marathon runthrus of level 1 of thorn keep and emerald spire to get 5+ aasimars and/or tie flings on the books?

I heard of one area getting like 5 sessions through in the same day.

Sorry, but this is not an argument. High traffic areas get to do EVERYTHING more than low traffic areas. And while I can understand this is frustrating to low traffic areas, singling out this one thing is disingenuous. The only thing that would be 'fair' by your definition would be to limit high traffic areas to being able to do NOTHING more than a low traffic area can. And that isn't going to happen because it would be grossly unfair to the high traffic areas. It is not anyone's fault they are high traffic and you are low traffic. It just is.

Quote:
Then hearing about this 'exploit before the ban' for months afterward.

So Paizo should give in to everyone who complains loud and long no matter how unjustified they may be?

A bunch of people complained that some other people were having fun playing PFS in a manner they don't approve of so those people needed to be stopped without regard to the overall effect on the campaign. This attitude is known as Elitism and is a cancer to organized play that is far more detrimental than beneficial. So giving into such elitist cries of 'other people should only have fun my way' was a bad decision on Paizo's part.

Quote:
You have to consider overall fairness, not just your local area. Folks were pretty miffed about what they saw as exploiting the system.

I am considering the entire area. Only the local area is actually effected by a local group of people gaming the system. But the entire area is effected by a blanket rules change. I really do not see how people can compare the bad taste left in one's mouth from having their favorite character suddenly invalidated with the bad taste left in one's mouth from hearing about someone you have never met gaming the system.

5/5 ⦵⦵

The Fourth Horseman wrote:
I find it hard to believe that the Aspis are rich and powerful. I've never seen them when they aren't having their operations destroyed by the Pathfinders. I guess I'll see.

The most effective traps are the ones you underestimate.

5/5

trollbill wrote:
A bunch of people complained that some other people were having fun playing PFS in a manner they don't approve of so those people needed to be stopped without regard to the overall effect on the campaign. This attitude is known as Elitism ...

When "having fun your way" gives you unfair advantage over other players, including new players who are judging PFS based on that first experience, it makes sense to prevent that from happening again. It is also destructive to the campaign, and the community has shown that asking people nicely not to be abusive does not work, because some people will do things even when John asks them nicely to NOT do them.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Agent, Florida—Melbourne aka trollbill

1 person marked this as a favorite.
GM Lamplighter wrote:
trollbill wrote:
A bunch of people complained that some other people were having fun playing PFS in a manner they don't approve of so those people needed to be stopped without regard to the overall effect on the campaign. This attitude is known as Elitism ...
When "having fun your way" gives you unfair advantage over other players,

There was no unfair advantage. Everyone had the same opportunity to do the same thing. The fact that you chose not to, or the fact that taking advantage of this opportunity in low traffic areas may be more difficult does not mean everyone was not given the opportunity and thus there was no unfair advantage. Or, at least, the advantage was no more unfair than many other advantages Paizo offers.

Quote:
including new players who are judging PFS based on that first experience, it makes sense to prevent that from happening again.

We've been over this. There are plenty of adventures you can play in PFS (including ones used to get people into PFS, such as the We Be Goblins series) that are not truly representational of how PFS is normally played. Singling this one thing out while ignoring the others is, again, disingenuous. If misrepresentation of the PFS experience is a problem, then it is a problem that needs to be rectified across the board, not just by fixing one single example of the problem.

Quote:
It is also destructive to the campaign,

I have yet to see any convincing argument that this is actually a true statement.

Even if it were, you still have to compare the destructiveness of this behavior compared to the destructiveness of having your character suddenly invalidated by the campaign staff. People get invested in their characters from the moment of their creation. So invalidating a character without warning is one of the worst things a campaign can do. Paizo effectively used a sledge hammer to swat a fly on the collective player base's arm. Had they used a fly swatter I wouldn't be complaining near as much.

Quote:

and the community has shown that asking people nicely not to be abusive does not work, because some people will do things even when John asks them nicely to NOT do them.

Arguments aside as to whether or not this really was abuse, if John and/or Mike feel it is then I understand why they need to take steps to fix it. That does not mean the end justifies the means. And I have yet to see anyone justify how a small group of people gaming the system is actually worse than suddenly invalidating people's characters without warning.

5/5

John's blog post said, "now, technically people could just go out and run a bunch of aasmimars through Master of the Fallen Fortress to stock up, but I hope we don't see that kind of behaviour," (paraphrased, with Canadian spelling added on purpose).

Since I think John has a pretty good sense of the campaign and I respect his opinion, I took that as a directive. So did almost everyone who doesn't push the line as far as they can.

The only people that did do it, basically thumbed their nose at the campaign staff and did whatever it took to get as many powerful races as possible, regardless of whether they followed the rules or spirit of the campaign. A lot of GMs don't want to deal with that level of player shennanigans (just like we don't want GMs go to the nth degree to try and kill PCs - oh, but wait, we have RULES about that!) Losing GMs is the worst thing that can happen to an organized play campaign, simply due to scale.

I'm sorry that you can't see that as being unfair, but I'm not going to try and change your mind anymore. Enjoy your games.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Agent, Florida—Melbourne aka trollbill

1 person marked this as a favorite.
GM Lamplighter wrote:

John's blog post said, "now, technically people could just go out and run a bunch of aasmimars through Master of the Fallen Fortress to stock up, but I hope we don't see that kind of behaviour," (paraphrased, with Canadian spelling added on purpose).

Since I think John has a pretty good sense of the campaign and I respect his opinion, I took that as a directive. So did almost everyone who doesn't push the line as far as they can.

The only people that did do it, basically thumbed their nose at the campaign staff and did whatever it took to get as many powerful races as possible, regardless of whether they followed the rules or spirit of the campaign. A lot of GMs don't want to deal with that level of player shennanigans (just like we don't want GMs go to the nth degree to try and kill PCs - oh, but wait, we have RULES about that!) Losing GMs is the worst thing that can happen to an organized play campaign, simply due to scale.

I'm sorry that you can't see that as being unfair, but I'm not going to try and change your mind anymore. Enjoy your games.

Okay, so the campaign staff feels its a problem. Fair enough. I won't argue that point anymore. But was there really no alternative solution to this than invalidating characters without warning? It may have been the simplest solution. And, yes, the simplest solution is frequently the best one, but not always.

Shadow Lodge

GM Lamplighter wrote:

John's blog post said, "now, technically people could just go out and run a bunch of aasmimars through Master of the Fallen Fortress to stock up, but I hope we don't see that kind of behaviour," (paraphrased, with Canadian spelling added on purpose).

Since I think John has a pretty good sense of the campaign and I respect his opinion, I took that as a directive. So did almost everyone who doesn't push the line as far as they can.

The only people that did do it, basically thumbed their nose at the campaign staff and did whatever it took to get as many powerful races as possible, regardless of whether they followed the rules or spirit of the campaign. A lot of GMs don't want to deal with that level of player shennanigans (just like we don't want GMs go to the nth degree to try and kill PCs - oh, but wait, we have RULES about that!) Losing GMs is the worst thing that can happen to an organized play campaign, simply due to scale.

I'm sorry that you can't see that as being unfair, but I'm not going to try and change your mind anymore. Enjoy your games.

Well, to be fair, they also suggested that people do that in another thread to stock up on a few of these races. Different people have a different view of what "a few" means. I also think that continuing to bring this up is a bit odd. Realistically, those individuals are probably never going to play more than maybe 4 of those characters, and that's assuming they do not already have a few characters. Heck, they should probably be congratulated for pulling it off, (that takes some effort), not scorned for doing exactly what was suggested. I'd even go so far as to say it is the complaining about it that ruined it for us all rather than the fact a tiny group of players did it to begin with.

The whole Aasimar/Tiefling thing is also a pretty bad example, as it really seems it was just a few DMs that had an issue with them, but they had Leaderships ear.

3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've written and cancelled about a dozen posts with varying amounts of vitriol regarding campaign decisions and what likely led to many of those decisions when it comes to removing player options, especially when announcing / previewing the new PFS Season.

TrollBill, thank you for saying things that I would probably say in a far, far more negative manner.

-TimD

Grand Lodge 5/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I would like to add that while the issue with tiefling/aasimar is one thing, there seems to have been no such issue with the FAQ reversal for SLAs, or if there was one it didn't have anywhere near the outcry on the forums, many GMs I have talked to are upset set about the summoner.

To use myself as an example, not only have I spent the majority of my rime GMing recently, but I had 4 wisdom teeth that needed to be extracted. Now, I knew unchained was coming out, and I knew that summoner was likely going to be forced into unchained, but I was fine with it as my summoner was a 4th level GM blob, waiting til 5th level so I could get a feat (Harrowed) to play it, but it was high enough it should be fine. Now I havea 4th level blob I don't want (my archetype isn't legal and I despise the fluff for the new summoner.)

Now the new grandfathering rule, who did it effect really? People who for one reason or another spend more time GMing than playing.

I am trying to keep polite here, so I will apologize if I offended anyone.

Shadow Lodge

There had been one, and as I recall it was individuals mostly talking about how the change had ruined their character which had not made the cut off, and how it was something out of the blue.

A lot less on the validity of the change, as I recall.

One group that the new one did affect, though I'm not sure just how large they are, is those individuals that do not own Unchained, and thus can not play their character for that reason. It's kind of like the deal with the Tech Guide in a sideways way being made a required book, but in this case, it affects players more directly.

Grand Lodge 5/5

I meant as in abuse of the rules of change, not validity of the change itself

Silver Crusade 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quintin Verassi wrote:
I meant as in abuse of the rules of change, not validity of the change itself

There was an outcry on the forums, I know there was a thread on grandfathering that just wouldn't die, and I know of several others on the boards that were upset about it. One of my characters lost Arcane Strike, but them's the breaks.

The unchained summoner change left some GM's out in the cold, but leadership made a deliberate choice when they made their ruling, and stuck to it. I respect that. If they had made concessions, I'm sure we would have had more new APG summoners for a good long time to come. You still have a fourth level amorphous blob of GM credit, you might not be able to make an APG summoner but there are plenty of other non-summoner options available to you.

Our player base has shown they don't have the maturity to be responsible when management gave us a chance to make another aasimar/tiefling before they rotated out. I would prefer management not give us advanced notice of any future rotations. Full disclosure, I have a single grandfathered aasimar and a single grandfathered tiefling, to this date they have not been used yet.

The Exchange

UndeadMitch wrote:
Quintin Verassi wrote:
I meant as in abuse of the rules of change, not validity of the change itself
Full disclosure, I have a single grandfathered aasimar and a single grandfathered tiefling, to this date they have not been used yet.

I admit, I also have a tiefling that is grandfathered, I've made four new characters and none of them have used that grandfathered tiefling yet.

3/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
UndeadMitch wrote:
Our player base has shown they don't have the maturity to be responsible when management gave us a chance to make another aasimar / tiefling before they rotated out. I would prefer management not give us advanced notice of any future rotations.

Speaking of vitriol... thanks for that honest opinion of your fellow PFS players, volunteers, and game masters. I now have a good metric for your opinions of PFS.

-TimD

Silver Crusade 5/5

TimD wrote:
UndeadMitch wrote:
Our player base has shown they don't have the maturity to be responsible when management gave us a chance to make another aasimar / tiefling before they rotated out. I would prefer management not give us advanced notice of any future rotations.

Speaking of vitriol... thanks for that honest opinion of your fellow PFS players, volunteers, and game masters. I now have a good metric for your opinions of PFS.

-TimD

No vitriol intended.

The vast majority of the players that jumped into the aasimar/tiefling grandfathering conga lines and ended up with a bunch (I have no issue with one or two grandfathered characters, but I know of a handful of people that have/had four or five grandfathered aasimar with one XP) of grandfathered PC's knew that doing so went against the spirit of Mike and John's ruling.

I hold no ill will towards those people, but I think that when it comes time to rotate races again (whenever they decide to) they shouldn't announce it ahead of time.. They gave us that trust once, and people abused it.

Silver Crusade 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

But enough threadjacking! After reading Siege and Serpents Rise, I amvery excited for season 7! If the rest of the season can pack as much heat as the first two specials, I think this will be one of the strongest seasons yet!

One request though, MOAR KYLE BAIRD! He is easily one of my favorite scenario writers, and I hope we get some more scenarios by the Care Baird!

Sovereign Court

UndeadMitch wrote:
Quintin Verassi wrote:
I meant as in abuse of the rules of change, not validity of the change itself

There was an outcry on the forums, I know there was a thread on grandfathering that just wouldn't die, and I know of several others on the boards that were upset about it. One of my characters lost Arcane Strike, but them's the breaks.

The unchained summoner change left some GM's out in the cold, but leadership made a deliberate choice when they made their ruling, and stuck to it. I respect that. If they had made concessions, I'm sure we would have had more new APG summoners for a good long time to come. You still have a fourth level amorphous blob of GM credit, you might not be able to make an APG summoner but there are plenty of other non-summoner options available to you.

Our player base has shown they don't have the maturity to be responsible when management gave us a chance to make another aasimar/tiefling before they rotated out. I would prefer management not give us advanced notice of any future rotations. Full disclosure, I have a single grandfathered aasimar and a single grandfathered tiefling, to this date they have not been used yet.

The criteria for grandfathering has been relatively easy to meet (4 XP), so there was a small amount of people impacted by the changes.

The people who are impacted seem to feel blindsided and that's most certainly a notable downside of the approach. Though it seems like the benefits of the strategy outweigh the downsides so far, and it's clear (at least to me) that they've been putting effort in minimizing the ripple effects. Can't please everybody, unfortunately.

51 to 100 of 129 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Paizo Blog: Year of the Serpent All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.