As a regional coordinator, I am interpreting the Game Days as being ways to help promote and encourage Pathfinder Society gaming. They certainly aren't rewards or ways of showing favour. I know all the RVCs are looking at just how to distribute game days. For me, it is a case of allocating by country and targeting events or groups who would clearly benefit from a little extra support.

People have been asking for this for years, David. They have been asking for it in response to "GM boons at GenCon are rewards for our GMs" and statements similar to that.

Are you really going to say that now you can only earn a coveted race boon one of two ways: by going to a con or by being a fledgling Game Day in need of help?

I don't think the idea that GMs and coordinators should not get recognition for work already done is going to make a lot of us a fan of this new system. This will leave out all the people who have been saying that Con-only boons are bad, and grousing about this "favoritism" toward those who can afford to go, in the exact same situation: without any support.

Once again: looks like this program has serious problems.

Are you really going to say that now you can only earn a coveted race boon one of two ways: by going to a con or by being a fledgling Game Day in need of help?

Why do only fledgling game days benefit from a little support, in your eyes?

(Maybe David did mean this, so maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree.)

Drogon wrote:

Are you really going to say that now you can only earn a coveted race boon one of two ways: by going to a con or by being a fledgling Game Day in need of help?

Why do only fledgling game days benefit from a little support, in your eyes?

(Maybe David did mean this, so maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree.)

I've reread it, and that's what it looks like he said to me.

A better question, for those who think like him: How does my game day qualify as "benefiting from a little extra support?" After all, I do pretty well for myself, and hardly need anything else to make sure that continues apace. So, because of that, my GMs will be left out in the cold? Worse, they're going to start hunting for those venues who do need help, and abandoning me in favor of running games at those places. And they'll take players with them, assuming the boons reach the player base, as well.

[snark]One benefit to that, I suppose: eventually I'll end up on the list of "venues that need help."[/snark]

I've reread it, and that's what it looks like he said to me.

A better question, for those who think like him: How does my game day qualify as "benefiting from a little extra support?" After all, I do pretty well for myself, and hardly need anything else to make sure that continues apace. So, because of that, my GMs will be left out in the cold? Worse, they're going to start hunting for those venues who do need help, and abandoning me in favor of running games at those places. And they'll take players with them, assuming the boons reach the player base, as well.

This is what I tried to caution about earlier. "I", "my", etc. And I'm not picking on Drogon - just using it as an example.

The goal is to benefit Organized Play, not a particular store. If awarding a game day to a very successful store is in the best interest of Organized Play, then without question it should be awarded to that store. If, however, the bigger benefit would be to give it to newer, or struggling, venue, then that's what should be done.

At 10 per region per quarter, I'm pretty sure BOTH types of stores (and those in between) are going to get a Game Day. Now, a store might only get it once a year, and that's fine - certainly, we shouldn't see the same place getting a Game Day every quarter unless there is some overwhelming region.

I trust the RVCs to make the right call and assign them accordingly, based on requests from the VCs, and other relevant factors.

This is what I tried to caution about earlier. "I", "my", etc.

Sorry, Mark, but this is how people will see it. Especially when it's arbitrary instead of based on numbers.

I'm a pretty reasonable person, and that is how I see it. I stuck those words in there so I could stop "white knighting" BNW. He doesn't need it. But he, and others like him, deserve the support.

Mark Stratton wrote:

This is what I tried to caution about earlier. "I", "my", etc.

Sorry, Mark, but this is how people will see it. Especially when it's arbitrary instead of based on numbers.

I'm a pretty reasonable person, and that is how I see it. I stuck those words in there so I could stop "white knighting" BNW. He doesn't need it. But he, and others like him, deserve the support.

I know that's how people will see it, which is why I have cautioned people to try to avoid doing it.

I'm trying very hard to be politic and level-headed about this. I think if you look through my history you will see someone who very rarely "pops off" about things that are not worth getting worked up about. If I see a problem, I point it out; absolutely. But I always try to offer solutions. And I think I have proven that, when I see a problem, my stance is pretty well supported.

This problem will not be avoided by simply "playing nice" with each other. There is going to be a lot of resentment, and things will go poorly as a result, if my own thoughts are any indicator. Bear in mind that these thoughts are coming from someone who *usually* remains silent on the sideline (unless we're talking about replay).

I'm trying very hard to be politic and level-headed about this. I think if you look through my history you will see someone who very rarely "pops off" about things that are not worth getting worked up about. If I see a problem, I point it out; absolutely. But I always try to offer solutions. And I think I have proven that, when I see a problem, my stance is pretty well supported.

This problem will not be avoided by simply "playing nice" with each other. There is going to be a lot of resentment, and things will go poorly as a result, if my own thoughts are any indicator. Bear in mind that these thoughts are coming from someone who *usually* remains silent on the sideline (unless we're talking about replay).

No one is doubting that, as with any new endeavor, there will be problems. But, my concern here is that you have already started to impugn the character of the Regional Volunteer Coordinators. No, you haven't named anyone, but that is effectively what you have done by your repeated comments of favoritism, and how people are going to be slighted.

That isn't the least bit helpful.

Why don't we see how this works out before we castigate an entire group of people who, as of yet, have done nothing to deserve such criticism?

Perhaps the problem, perceived or real, is the number and way the gameday things are distributed. Has one per Venture Captain area per time unit been considered? At least this way, RVC areas with more game days will not be drawn thinner then those with less.

Drogon wrote:

I'm trying very hard to be politic and level-headed about this. I think if you look through my history you will see someone who very rarely "pops off" about things that are not worth getting worked up about. If I see a problem, I point it out; absolutely. But I always try to offer solutions. And I think I have proven that, when I see a problem, my stance is pretty well supported.

This problem will not be avoided by simply "playing nice" with each other. There is going to be a lot of resentment, and things will go poorly as a result, if my own thoughts are any indicator. Bear in mind that these thoughts are coming from someone who *usually* remains silent on the sideline (unless we're talking about replay).

No one is doubting that, as with any new endeavor, there will be problems. But, my concern here is that you have already started to impugn the character of the Regional Volunteer Coordinators. No, you haven't named anyone, but that is effectively what you have done by your repeated comments of favoritism, and how people are going to be slighted.

That isn't the least bit helpful.

Why don't we see how this works out before we castigate an entire group of people who, as of yet, have done nothing to deserve such criticism?

I'm repeating things because I'm defending my stance rather than shrugging and moving on, not because I'm trying to impugn the character of the RVCs.

Once again, announce the list of everywhere that got a Game Day, tell us why they got a Game Day, and tell us how those of us who have not gotten one can get one next quarter - and that method needs to NOT be "contact your VC and state your case."

Perhaps the problem, perceived or real, is the number and way the gameday things are distributed. Has one per Venture Captain area per time unit been considered? At least this way, RVC areas with more game days will not be drawn thinner then those with less.

I don't know if that was considered, but I'm not sure how equitible that would be. For example, Indiana has 5 VCs; the entire state of Ohio has two. I oversee, currently, 5 game stores. Another Indiana VC overees 1 or 2. So, in those cases, the smaller geographic areas, or the areas with fewer stores will, as a percentage or what have you, have more game days than larger areas, or areas with more stores.

The current method allows the RVC to take those factors into account (as they should be able to.)

And folks, I'm not arguing that the current system is without flaws - I have my concerns, too. But, I'm willing to give them a chance and address problems as they occur.

(I know you're one of the players in our area, Nohwear, and I'm mindful of your earlier post about the store that runs too late for you - I'll work with the other VOs to see how we want to try to roll this out. I'd hate to think someone would be excluded because they cannot make it to the store because of the hours - we have plenty of opportunities in our area, so it's a matter of moving them around to make sure we give people the best chance to attend one of those game days.)

Perhaps the problem, perceived or real, is the number and way the gameday things are distributed. Has one per Venture Captain area per time unit been considered? At least this way, RVC areas with more game days will not be drawn thinner then those with less.

From what I've heard, this is actually the case. But I must point out that this simply spreads the arbitrary decision making around. Also, I suspect that there are some regions with more than 10 VCs per RVC. How is the decision being made to narrow the field to ten in these cases?

I am just speculating here, but perhaps the reason that some people are having trouble with just waiting and see is because of the whole "once per quarter" thing. After all, giving it three tries is close to a year. I am not saying that support needs to be given more often, I am just thinking out load why some people are having trouble with just waiting to see how it works out.

SIlly question.

In this context, what is the definition of a Regional Venture-Coordinator? Is it a Venture Captain? Venture Captains and Venture Lieutenants? VOs of all levels?

The list linked to was of all VOs.

EDIT: Ah, I have now seen a post by someone with the title "Regional Venture Coordinator," so it is obviously its own thing. Must be relatively new.

People have been asking for this for years, David. They have been asking for it in response to "GM boons at GenCon are rewards for our GMs" and statements similar to that.

Are you really going to say that now you can only earn a coveted race boon one of two ways: by going to a con or by being a fledgling Game Day in need of help?

I don't think the idea that GMs and coordinators should not get recognition for work already done is going to make a lot of us a fan of this new system. This will leave out all the people who have been saying that Con-only boons are bad, and grousing about this "favoritism" toward those who can afford to go, in the exact same situation: without any support.

Once again: looks like this program has serious problems.

Not sure I understand what you are saying here. That may be because I'm coming from a different context. I haven't had anybody 'asking or this for years' but what I have had is people saying that smaller events are much more common but they don't get any sort of support. Supporting such things is, I believe, what this initiative is all about. In the UK, store events are a rarity. Outside of home games, conventions and game day events are the only venues for Organised Play. And in the countries in my region we just don't get the same numbers attending as in the US so very few events qualify for any support at all. And very few players/GMs from my region ever have the opportunity to go to an event like GenCon or PaizoCon.

I don't think I said anything about GMs and coordinators not getting recognition for their efforts. I was trying to respond to a view that only those events that are already successful (and not needing extra support) will benefit from this. I haven't placed any limitations on giving out boons. So I'm honestly not saying that there are only two ways for GMs to earn boons. Unfortunately there is a limitation on earning a boon - you can't receive it for running a home game, it has to be for running a public game. That's because this is support for a public organised play system.

Personally, I do think that GMs and coordinators don't get much recognition from the system. (Stars and boons don't really have much impact if you are GMing all the time.) However I don't have any good suggestions for alternatives.

If I've misunderstood your comments then please feel free to re-explain your view.

For added perspective on why I'm "rabble-rousing" here is a piece of an email I received today from Wizards of the Coast:

Wizards will be committed to working with retailers around the world to be sure stores that grow and strengthen gaming communities are appropriately rewarded for doing so. Together, we’ve had a good run with year after year of record business levels.

That is a specific comment from a company stating that they know what they need to do to continue the growth of their games.

I was at a charity gala the other night, and watched as person after person got recognized for doing what they did for that charity. Because of that recognition, those people will continue to support that charity.

Why, with this new PFS program, do you want to tell me that my support and efforts should not be supported, in turn?

At the risk of having every word picked apart and every decision scrutinized to the nth-degree, here is some insight into my understanding and intended application of this program for the Great Lakes region. My comments are not without emotion...

I am treating the rules as laid out as a guideline on how to qualify a location for support, but not a restrictive, black-and-white rule-set with no room for the application of common sense. Sort of like table-variation. We are not dealing with the tax code or a life-threatening condition here. This is a game. Let's try to remember that. If you don't get an 8-1/2x11 piece of paper with a minor, circumstantial in-game benefit this quarter, its not a catastrophic life-changing event. It doesn't mean I/we appreciate your efforts any less. We have thousands of gamedays to try and recognize. It will take some time to get around to most/all of them. And remember, if you don't get a GameDay reward this quarter, nothing changed for you compared to last quarter. Nothing is being taken away.

If the rules are too rigidly applied, the same events can/will receive the reward every quarter and that is not the intent. Some level of flexibility is being built into the system to allow the RVC to make the best decision for their region. We are a world-wide organization. One rule or set thereof is not gonna meet the needs of everyone, everywhere.

I currently have 14 VC and a couple of areas looking for one. It will be impossible for each to receive a support package every quarter. This means it could be 4-6 months before a VC sees a GameDay in their area get the rewards. Some type of rotation is "fair" even if one particular GameDay for one particular VC is consistently the biggest, brightest in the region. Most locations with lots of players, especially in a more urban location have more opportunities for convention support than a small community. One of the complaints those small communities have had is they have fewer chances to "win" rewards than larger communities. This program will allow us an opportunity to funnel some rewards their way independent of the convention system. Being the biggest is not the end-all be-all of PFS.

Let me be clear about one point. I am not going to publicized a list in the forums or anywhere else with a bullet list of why each location received support for that quarter. I will, however, work with the VCs to determine appropriate locations and provide a detailed account to Tonya for review. If she has any issues with the distribution, she can address it directly.

If I have learned anything in my years in the forum, its that telling people the "why" while being nice in theory ALWAYS spurns hateful dissection of the methodology and often results in attacks on the person's ability to function in their role. I watched it happen to Josh, Hyrum, Mike, and now Tonya. It happens to the VOs all the time. As much as we'd like to say the forums are a pleasant place of community discourse, too often it is a place of cries and gnashing of teeth.

Does this program carry the risk of some favoritism? Sure, but in a community this large and diverse I don't know that we can avoid it entirely without having an overly oppressive and inflexible rules-set that cannot possibly be applied fairly across the entire community.

There are a lot of upset feelings about this new program. I'm getting a ton of emails, texts, and messages that range from "hey this is great" to "OMG the sky is falling." All I ask is that the regions trust in their RVC to make fair decisions before we string 'em up as elitist fascists (an accusation actually stated to me). Remember, this program will increase the amount of rewards we issue each year and that should be a good thing. Where we once had no chance of rewards, there is now the possibility.

I apologize if my comments are harsh or hurt anyone's feelings. That is not my intent. I am just a little worn-out and a bit frustrated with having to field all the "hate mail" regarding this change to prize support over the past few days. I know its new and new things can be scary. Please relax and see how it works. There is no reason to get upset over the prospect of BadWrongFun in the light of what could (and probably will) be GoodRightFun.

Explore! Report! Cooperate!

I haven't had anybody 'asking or this for years' but what I have had is people saying that smaller events are much more common but they don't get any sort of support. Supporting such things is, I believe, what this initiative is all about. In the UK, store events are a rarity. Outside of home games, conventions and game day events are the only venues for Organised Play. And in the countries in my region we just don't get the same numbers attending as in the US so very few events qualify for any support at all. And very few players/GMs from my region ever have the opportunity to go to an event like GenCon or PaizoCon.

How is this not "asking for this for years?" By pointing out the inequality of the old system they are doing exactly that: asking for a different system, instead.

And you are pointing out the benefits of a different system. That's what we all want.

But in the US, we *are* able to host lots of games in retail venues. Because of that "game days" are a weekly occurrence (or even more frequent). Do those events deserve to get left out of this process because they are either "too big" for Game Days or "not big enough" for Conventions?

As seems to be indicated by the blog post that started this, it *seems* not to be the case. But I would like to see the list, and see the reasons. Because I want to be on that list, too.

. My comments are not without emotion...

You can't start a lead like that and then not sound the least bit growly!

At the risk of having every word picked apart and every decision scrutinized to the nth-degree, here is some insight into my understanding and intended application of this program for the Great Lakes region. My comments are not without emotion...

I am treating the rules as laid out as a guideline on how to qualify a location for support, but not a restrictive, black-and-white rule-set with no room for the application of common sense. Sort of like table-variation. We are not dealing with the tax code or a life-threatening condition here. This is a game. Let's try to remember that. If you don't get an 8-1/2x11 piece of paper with a minor, circumstantial in-game benefit this quarter, its not a catastrophic life-changing event. It doesn't mean I/we appreciate your efforts any less. We have thousands of gamedays to try and recognize. It will take some time to get around to most/all of them. And remember, if you don't get a GameDay reward this quarter, nothing changed for you compared to last quarter. Nothing is being taken away.

If the rules are too rigidly applied, the same events can/will receive the reward every quarter and that is not the intent. Some level of flexibility is being built into the system to allow the RVC to make the best decision for their region. We are a world-wide organization. One rule or set thereof is not gonna meet the needs of everyone, everywhere.

I currently have 14 VC and a couple of areas looking for one. It will be impossible for each to receive a support package every quarter. This means it could be 4-6 months before a VC sees a GameDay in their area get the rewards. Some type of rotation is "fair" even if one particular GameDay for one particular VC is consistently the biggest, brightest in the region. Most locations with lots of players, especially in a more urban location have more opportunities for convention support than a small community. One of the complaints those small communities have had is they have fewer chances to "win" rewards than larger communities. This...

Normally I agree with the vast majority of what you say.

This time I don't.

I want no part of a system that doesn't recognize what I do for it. Very few people who donate their time to it, free of charge, do. I don't want to "win" because of what I do for it. But I certainly do want the occasional pat on the back. And it shouldn't be that hard to provide it, nor cause you any undue strain to recognize my COOPERATION in this endeavor.

Last: you said "minor benefit" when referring to that boon. If you think a race boon is a "minor benefit" you haven't read very many of these board posts regarding the topic of Con boons.

For added perspective on why I'm "rabble-rousing" here is a piece of an email I received today from Wizards of the Coast:

Greg Leeds wrote:

Wizards will be committed to working with retailers around the world to be sure stores that grow and strengthen gaming communities are appropriately rewarded for doing so. Together, we’ve had a good run with year after year of record business levels.

That is a specific comment from a company stating that they know what they need to do to continue the growth of their games.

I was at a charity gala the other night, and watched as person after person got recognized for doing what they did for that charity. Because of that recognition, those people will continue to support that charity.

Why, with this new PFS program, do you want to tell me that my support and efforts should not be supported, in turn?

Personally, I don't see anything in that comment that would assuage any of the same fears you are expressing with the new PFS program. In fact, it lacks any level of explanation of how it is or will be implemented. Tonya could have just as easily said, "Paizo is committed to working with retailers around the world to be sure stores that grow and strengthen gaming communities are appropriately rewarded for doing so. Together, we’ve had a good run with year after year of record business levels."

. My comments are not without emotion...

You can't start a lead like that and then not sound the least bit growly!

Grrrrrrr

I want no part of a system that doesn't recognize what I do for it. Very few people who donate their time to it, free of charge, do. I don't want to "win" because of what I do for it. But I certainly do want the occasional pat on the back. And it shouldn't be that hard to provide it, nor cause you any undue strain to recognize my COOPERATION in this endeavor.

So do you feel you deserve rewards every single quarter and/or somehow your efforts are more valuable than those of countless other organizers? No one is saying you won't get prize support—you just are not likely to get it every time its rewarded. That does not mean your efforts are any less appreciated.

I will, however, work with the VCs to determine appropriate locations and provide a detailed account to Tonya for review. If she has any issues with the distribution, she can address it directly.

Since you ARE my regional coordinator I hope you can see why I am unhappy with this reply.

Don't got no VC here. Despite having at least one good candidate. So presumably that means no support here.

What appears to be unfair lack of attention feeds on itself. We get ignored so that we then get MORE ignored.

How is this not "asking for this for years?" By pointing out the inequality of the old system they are doing exactly that: asking for a different system, instead.

And you are pointing out the benefits of a different system. That's what we all want.

But in the US, we *are* able to host lots of games in retail venues. Because of that "game days" are a weekly occurrence (or even more frequent). Do those events deserve to get left out of this process because they are either "too big" for Game Days or "not big enough" for Conventions?

As seems to be indicated by the blog post that started this, it *seems* not to be the case. But I would like to see the list, and see the reasons. Because I want to be on that list, too.

People have been asking for more support and more events being supported. That's what this is supposed to bring about. The way this extra support is to be assigned is down to individual RVCs but with the goal of supporting and encouraging Pathfinder Society. I assume that's what we all want.

So I still don't understand your criticism of this initiative. Previously, not every event received support because they didn't meet Paizo's convention support requirements. With the new system, potentially 10 events in each region will now benefit from support when previously they wouldn't have. Those events that do qualify for support aren't denied support. In fact, they may even qualify for more support because they are 'growing and strengthening the community' as doing that is what (in my opinion) is the reason for me to nominate an event.

@David Harrison, It is some support, but to some of us it does not feel like much. Depending on the number of game days in your RVC area, and your travel range, you may only see this support once a year at most. The perceptoin, at least, is that this is very little support for what many consider the backbone of the organization. If others are unhappy for other reason, feel free to add or correct me.

Drogon wrote:

For added perspective on why I'm "rabble-rousing" here is a piece of an email I received today from Wizards of the Coast:

Greg Leeds wrote:

Wizards will be committed to working with retailers around the world to be sure stores that grow and strengthen gaming communities are appropriately rewarded for doing so. Together, we’ve had a good run with year after year of record business levels.

That is a specific comment from a company stating that they know what they need to do to continue the growth of their games.

I was at a charity gala the other night, and watched as person after person got recognized for doing what they did for that charity. Because of that recognition, those people will continue to support that charity.

Why, with this new PFS program, do you want to tell me that my support and efforts should not be supported, in turn?

Personally, I don't see anything in that comment that would assuage any of the same fears you are expressing with the new PFS program. In fact, it lacks any level of explanation of how it is or will be implemented. Tonya could have just as easily said, "Paizo is committed to working with retailers around the world to be sure stores that grow and strengthen gaming communities are appropriately rewarded for doing so. Together, we’ve had a good run with year after year of record business levels."

No, I am not trying to impune WotC's program. I am sure it is effective and adequately rewards their community. But, I fail to see the difference here.

If she had, I would be awaiting the email from her explaining what I need to do to get that recognition and not be poking holes in this program. Just like I'm waiting to see what WotC wants me to do instead of repeating myself over and over on a message board (excuse me, "impugning the integrity of the Local Coordinators").

Bob Jonquet wrote:

I will, however, work with the VCs to determine appropriate locations and provide a detailed account to Tonya for review. If she has any issues with the distribution, she can address it directly.

Since you ARE my regional coordinator I hope you can see why I am unhappy with this reply.

Don't got no VC here. Despite having at least one good candidate. So presumably that means no support here.

What appears to be unfair lack of attention feeds on itself. We get ignored so that we then get MORE ignored.

Try not to read between the lines. I'm not unreasonable. Of course if an area does not currently have a VC in place, that does not mean they are exempt from rewards. As I said in my previous post, "the application of common sense."

I have to concur with Drogon with the concerns here.

And remember, if you don't get a GameDay reward this quarter, nothing changed for you compared to last quarter. Nothing is being taken away.

Not actually true:

Now we have two types of support - Convention Support and Game Day Support - and we are working to divide up the events into each category. The differences in the support packages are the type of GM boon and that cons get gift certificates. The cons which occur in retail space now apply for Game Day support via their RVC.

Before this decision, if you had enough tables at a game day using retail space to qualify as a convention, you could request convention support. Now you can no longer can do so as you are required to go through your RVC for one of the 10 per quarter Game Day support packets.

That is a change, and not necessarily for the better.

Drogon wrote:

I want no part of a system that doesn't recognize what I do for it. Very few people who donate their time to it, free of charge, do. I don't want to "win" because of what I do for it. But I certainly do want the occasional pat on the back. And it shouldn't be that hard to provide it, nor cause you any undue strain to recognize my COOPERATION in this endeavor.

So do you feel you deserve rewards every single quarter and/or somehow your efforts are more valuable than those of countless other organizers? No one is saying you won't get prize support—you just are not likely to get it every time its rewarded. That does not mean your efforts are any less appreciated.

No, I don't feel I deserve something every quarter. But I do deserve to know that I have as good a chance to get something as the "cool kid" who opened a gamer bar in LoDo. (not that this is what happened; I currently have no idea who in Colorado, or my region, gets one).

Catching up reading all the commentary. Will try to address the questions. If I miss one, please restate so I can answer.

Transparency - We aim to make this program as transparent as possible. A list of all the Game Days each quarter will be posted, either as a link to a document or on the website. The list will include location, region, coordinator, and why it was selected. In addition, we are encouraging those venues selected to advertise as such, so that people know who they are.

Current Game Days - Only three are set. Two in the Southwest region and one in Western Europe/Middle East (WEME). The rest are open for application. One of the reasons to run the blog was to get interest in the program and set the schedule for second quarter. If you want to be a Game Day, talk to your local VO asap!

Qualifications - There are three main types of Game Days - consistent solid performing venues, up and coming establishments, and special events (i.e. events that don't quite qualify for con support due to location or number of sessions).

Method of selection - Event organizers need to contact their local VOs to assist with paperwork and as a heads up of an event in the area. Submit the application to the RVC. Information should be submitted by the 1st of the month preceding the quarter the event occurs in. We are using calendar quarters, so the deadlines are 1 March, 1 June, 1 Sept, and 1 Dec. There is nothing wrong with submitting earlier, if you know you will be holding your event in 6 months. The more information you provide, the easier it is to schedule. The RVC reviews the applications and lets each venue know the status of their application. The RVC provides all information to me for review (including acceptances and denials). This allows the PFS team to review targets for the upcoming quarter.

More information on applying is included in a spoiler below.

Frequency - No venue should be named a Game Day for consecutive quarters. The RVCs are looking how to spread the wealth. From early on, one of the concerns was to mitigate favoritism by allowing the same venue to receive support over and over again.

Strict numerical criteria - If we impose strict numbers, i.e.one per VC per quarter or one per state, we remove the flexibility of the program. The needs of Europe are different than Singapore, which is different than Chicago. The only way to have a program that has a chance of working was to remove the strict metrics.

Favoritism - The Venture-Officer model works on up channeling. This is true for all issues, not just Game Days. If you feel your VO is unresponsive, please contact the next higher VO. If you feel your RVC is not giving your application a fair review, then you bring the issue to me. I asked the RVCs to take the lead, as they can tailor the program to their area, but I am still very much involved and talking to them on a frequent basis. One of the requirements to be an RVC is the ability to be impartial in making decisions for the region.

We acknowledge this is a fledgling program and will make tweaks to it based on feedback. Also, the 10 per region was a starting point large enough to give us good data but not large enough to spiral out of control. As we see this program unfold, we plan on revisiting the numbers and the likelihood of increasing the numbers is high.

@David Harrison, It is some support, but to some of us it does not feel like much. Depending on the number of game days in your RVC area, and your travel range, you may only see this support once a year at most. The perceptoin, at least, is that this is very little support for what many consider the backbone of the organization. If others are unhappy for other reason, feel free to add or correct me.

I agree that it's not much in the grand scheme of things, but it is more than previously given. If it is proving successful in growing PFS then I assume Paizo will invest more in it, so we will get more than 10 a quarter.

Yes we all want more support. There's a lot of us who support PFS and have done for a long time, at many events with no support at all. For us, any increase in support is seen as a good thing. To be honest, with the amount of enthusiasm and hard work I have seen amongst all the volunteer GMs and coordinators for PFS I don't think it is possible to give enough support to adequately reward them.

An awesome start to something good.

However, I take umbrage with this part:

If you want to be a Game Day, talk to your local VO asap!

I do NOT want to participate in a Hunger Games contest of last man standing. There are coordinators with far more time on their hands than I, and they are far more likely to get in ahead of me with just as many good reasons to get a Game Day as I. That, and they haven't spent half a day b@%%~ing at everyone on the internet about this...

I suggest that you remove the "Ten per RVC" stricture, and let each application be judged on its own merit, without having to worry about having a cap to the number of events. Not getting consecutive quarters, or simply limiting a venue to one per year, will hold your numbers down adequately.

I do NOT want to participate in a Hunger Games contest of last man standing. There are coordinators with far more time on their hands than I, and they are far more likely to get in ahead of me with just as many good reasons to get a Game Day as I. That, and they haven't spent half a day b!+%!ing at everyone on the internet about this

I can only speak for my region, but I will try to treat this program as clinical as possible. The squeaky wheel will not automatically get the grease. The details will be important. There is no way I can know all the events in the region without help. I will expect a thorough and complete list of all events in a VC's area to be reported so all can receive an equal opportunity for support. Using the delegation system, that should trickle down to the VL to the VA to the non-titled organizer. Each should report their events up through the next layer of leadership until it reaches me. Only them can I make an informed and reasoned decision. The required information is not daunting or time consuming. Most of it is data the organizer should already know otherwise how could they schedule events appropriately?

Not getting consecutive quarters, or simply limiting a venue to one per year, will hold your numbers down adequately.

Do you believe this will keep boon distribution to the desired proportion?

There are coordinators with far more time on their hands than I, and they are far more likely to get in ahead of me with just as many good reasons to get a Game Day as I. That, and they haven't spent half a day b!&%@ing at everyone on the internet about this...

Is timeliness an issue? I didn't see anything about first-applied, first-granted...

If you get support your first application, great! If not, you are more likely to receive some on your second or third between increased availability generally and other venues being taken out of the running. In any case, I'm treating the current setup as a beta- or trial phase.

So my one thought on this is the retailer space not being able to be used for a convention and that it must be a gameday.

My local flagship store for PFS holds two three day PFS conventions and and two 15 table one day PFS conventions a year. By previous rule these all counted as conventions for support.

Now all of them are gamedays.

Our fall event Unseelie Court tends to run equal or more tables then the two Fall Conventions that are within a few hours of Philly. And our Spring one Seelie Court while smaller than Unseelie is also in the same ball park as the spring conventions.

The Winter and Summer 15 table, one day cons we were turning into charity conventions. Which this past Winter we did Aid Another to benefit charity and I think it was a great starting point.

Now the problem is that since we have to compete with other gamedays rather than conventions we need to adjust our schedule or rent space. Renting space is a problem in Philly because the prices are a bit prohibitive in places with lower crime rates.

So we're going to have to change our schedule. Which means that most likely the charity events are going to have to get dropped.

But that still leaves us with two gamedays for my region, one that I've been told will be supported Seelie Court 2016 and Unseelie 2016 which we don't know about and then I have to worry about 2017...

And every time I get support that means a place like BNW's location isn't getting it. Because we're in the same RVC region I believe.

In the end though I trust my RVC. I trust Tonya. So I trust that things will work out for the better. I'm just a bit anxious and stressed out because I don't like failing my community and if I can't get them the support they want, when I use to be able to, I feel like I'm failing them. And that kinda sucks.

Drogon wrote:

Not getting consecutive quarters, or simply limiting a venue to one per year, will hold your numbers down adequately.

Do you believe this will keep boon distribution to the desired proportion?

I'm trying to get a rough idea of what 10 per quarter per regional coordinator would look like if regional coordinator= the guy above the vc.

https://www.zeemaps.com/map?group=1948126 and it looks like your chances of ever being a player that gets on is almost nill.

It varies a bit but from what i've seen at a con you can get a boon about 1/5 times playing.

10 per quarter with, 40 venues= 1 sheet per venue per year.

At best, thats 1/6th of a chance to get something once per year for attending 25 games, or 1/150, likely signifigantly less.

It has a bit more value as a cookie to hand out to dm, but that is still really low.

And every time I get support that means a place like BNW's location isn't getting it. Because we're in the same RVC region I believe.

I think the minicon well is an entirely seperate repleneshing spring than the game day well from the description but I could be mistaken.

Thanks to the PFS team for coming up with a way to spread GM support to other events. I look forward to seeing how it goes. I'm pretty disappointed to hear about volunteers helping to handle the program getting hate mail, though, and the tone on this forum has been similarly upsetting. I understand there are strong feelings here, but come on, people.

Drogon wrote:

There are coordinators with far more time on their hands than I, and they are far more likely to get in ahead of me with just as many good reasons to get a Game Day as I. That, and they haven't spent half a day b!&%@ing at everyone on the internet about this...

Is timeliness an issue? I didn't see anything about first-applied, first-granted...

If it's not, then how did these venues get an event before I'd even heard the possibility of an event existing?

I can only speak for my region, but I will try to treat this program as clinical as possible. The squeaky wheel will not automatically get the grease...

Bob, I truly believe that all the RVCs have their position because none of them would end up mis-managing this kind of thing. But that won't stop hurt feelings as others get left out or feel they have been overlooked (yet again, in many cases).

I just feel that there should be *something* in place that assures someone like BigNorseWolf, or Nowhear, TimD, or myself for that matter, that we will not be on the outside looking in for long. Frankly, the only thing that's going to do is turn us all into squeaky wheels, and if you are expressly NOT going give those wheels grease, well...

Tonya has gone a long way toward relieving that concern. I am now in a place where I'm willing to take a "wait and see" approach. Just be aware that when you see negative feedback like this, you shouldn't simply shut it down. Do what she did, and respond to it with positive direction.

JeffreyFox wrote:

And every time I get support that means a place like BNW's location isn't getting it. Because we're in the same RVC region I believe.

I think the minicon well is an entirely seperate repleneshing spring than the game day well from the description but I could be mistaken.

Mine aren't because they are held in a game store, so they are gamedays and come from the gameday pool. Currently at least.

We have a great RVC though, so I'm sure things will work out for the best.

An event that schedules 21 games over three days and raises $1,600 for a charitable cause should be congratulated with convention support.

An event that schedules 28 events over three days and is relocated to this venue at the last minute should be congratulated with convention support.

Under the new definitions, however, these events would have to compete with a handful of other events for Game Day support and not convention support, simply because that venue is a retail store.

Those are just two examples of Enchanted Grounds supporting the PFS community and I hope we can continue to commend businesses like this for all they do.

I think this retail component which now downgrades conventions into Game Days should be reconsidered. Events of that scale are not a Game Day.

I'm just a bit anxious and stressed out because I don't like failing my community and if I can't get them the support they want, when I use to be able to, I feel like I'm failing them. And that kinda sucks.

This exactly sums out how I feel about this situation as well. My region has five yearly retail-based conventions that suddenly aren't conventions. If I can only support two of them, I don't know if the others are going to survive.

Drogon wrote:

Not getting consecutive quarters, or simply limiting a venue to one per year, will hold your numbers down adequately.

Do you believe this will keep boon distribution to the desired proportion?

As BigNorseWolf pointed out, I believe it will put it UP to the desired proportion.

An event that schedules 21 games over three days and raises $1,600 for a charitable cause should be congratulated with convention support.

An event that schedules 28 events over three days and is relocated to this venue at the last minute should be congratulated with convention support.

Under the new definitions, however, these events would have to compete with a handful of other events for Game Day support and not convention support, simply because that venue is a retail store.

Those are just two examples of Enchanted Grounds supporting the PFS community and I hope we can continue to commend businesses like this for all they do.

And not to beat a dead horse, but those events did NOT get convention support, because I was the "last one in" on application. I was specifically told I could not get support because other events in Colorado had already been granted all the support that was available. The VC at the time used left over from prior events, and many of us gave away all the con boons we had horded and not used, instead.

It really seems like there are two camps here. Some are just grateful to finally get something. Others feel like Charlie Brown at Trick or Treat.