Jared Thaler wrote:

I think this is missing out that the previous system was (As far as I can tell, I am new enough that I haven't actually organized a con under the old system) "Go to your VO, and they will send your request to Tonya along with every one else in the world and Tonya will pick from that the number of cons that get support."

Incorrect.

The previous system was purely metrics:

1 - You must have at least 15 tables scheduled for your event.

2 - Your event cannot be longer than three consecutive days to hit that 15 tables.

3 - Submit your application with plenty of lead time for Paizo to put your request together and act on it.

The problem with this was that many events that qualified didn't have much lead time, or couldn't quite get to the 15 table minimum. And, honestly, there are many areas that will never even get close to 15 tables, but the players would never be able to travel to a convention to get these coveted boons.

No. Those were the requirements to *submit* the application, not to get support. To quote you:

Todd Reidenbach wrote:

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.

To get support, you had to have all those things, and also be first in line. Which would be better? To put your application in with every other application in the world, and miss out because some got a yes the week before you put your app in?

Or have a local RVC get all the events for the upcoming quarter, and be able to decide which are the most important and what the fairest distribution of support was?

Your pure metrics system you are proposing is a first come first serve system where charity events can be denied because smaller non charity events scooped all the support.

Drogon wrote:

Jared Thaler wrote:

I think this is missing out that the previous system was (As far as I can tell, I am new enough that I haven't actually organized a con under the old system) "Go to your VO, and they will send your request to Tonya along with every one else in the world and Tonya will pick from that the number of cons that get support."

Incorrect.

The previous system was purely metrics:

1 - You must have at least 15 tables scheduled for your event.

2 - Your event cannot be longer than three consecutive days to hit that 15 tables.

3 - Submit your application with plenty of lead time for Paizo to put your request together and act on it.

The problem with this was that many events that qualified didn't have much lead time, or couldn't quite get to the 15 table minimum. And, honestly, there are many areas that will never even get close to 15 tables, but the players would never be able to travel to a convention to get these coveted boons.

No. Those were the requirements to *submit* the application, not to get support. To quote you:

Drogon wrote:

Todd Reidenbach wrote:

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.

To get support, you had to have all those things, and also be first in line. Which would be better? To put your application in with every other application in the world, and miss out because some got a yes the week before you put your app in?

Or have a local RVC get all the events for the upcoming quarter, and be able to decide which are the most important and what the fairest distribution of support was?

Your pure metrics system you are proposing is a first come first serve system where charity events can be denied because smaller non charity events scooped all the support.

Or it was timing. If those events didn't give Paizo enough lead time, then they would have denied support.

To be clear about those two events: the information I was provided about the denial came from the Venture Captain at the time (who is VC no longer), not from Paizo staff.

And I'm not proposing a pure metrics system, at all. I'm proposing each venue gets one per year. That's as simple as it gets. For reference:

My post from the previous page containing my proposal.

I really appreciate the efforts toward transparency here. It's very easy to say "I don't like getting negative feedback!" and pull back on communication when this happens... I have gotten the feeling that this sort of thing has happened in the past, and I hope that the PFS team doesn't take that approach after this week.

I'm still happy to see the program has begun, although now that I've figured out what region I'm in (yet another Nor'Easter here! This one from Pittsburgh.), at the 10/quarter rate my local gaming scene might only see a couple of these go through before the heat death of the universe.

Growth and promotion depend on consistency, which is something this pilot program seems to lack at the moment. With that and the low rate in mind, it really does sound like a pilot program to me! I hope that's what it is, and wholly support that sort of testing and evaluation. There's a bit of language hinting at that in the post, but if the intention is to treat this as a pilot, my request (advice?) is, could you please:
1. State up-front that this is a pilot program (or something similar, like a beta), and
2. Set the date at which a decision on how to move forward will be made?

It's very easy to make an economic case that for those of us who don't get a game day nothing has changed, but the ways human measure wealth, esteem, and well-being are and always have been relative. So for a lot of folks, seeing that a program they spoke out for is going to be administered by people they've never met and the odds of them benefiting from it are fairly small, they're probably going to be upset. The economic argument that nothing's changed is overwhelmingly unpersuasive in practice in other contexts and I wouldn't expect PFS to be an exception to the rule.

Up-front clarification that this is a pilot program or a beta or some other "test", rather than saying that the full program has launched (with a minor note that it may be expanded), can really help to make these sorts of things more palatable to all of the people who don't get to benefit right away! And setting a date for reevaluating the program is critical in all organizations, but especially when communicating in a Paizo environment where most of the "Soon" projects are still languishing after years of inactivity. That the current incarnation is operating on a quarterly schedule hints that it could be a year or more before a serious reevaluation is planned, even if that wasn't the intention.

(And I don't mean to discount recent successes, like the holiday boon, or getting chronicles out for Iron Gods--that was awesome to see! But it takes time to change the expectation.)

Anyway, I'm still excited for this, and my fingers are crossed that it'll expand quickly. Thank you for putting this together at long last!

And I'm not proposing a pure metrics system, at all. I'm proposing each venue gets one per year.

Define venue.

This year, Sacramento will organize the following:

52-156 games at Great Escape Games. (1-3 a week)
12 games at A-1 Comics
52 (I hope, fingers crossed) games at The Game Room Adventure Cafe
6 game days, each at a different location (A park in May, a library in July)
2(?) picnics with no organized games (But games usually wind up happening)

That is 10 different venues. One venue runs hundreds of games. Another runs 3. One venue pulls new people into the hobby at an average rate of 1 per week. Some of the others are pretty much a party to get existing players together.

They probably shouldn't all get support packages, let alone *the same* support package.

Drogon wrote:

And I'm not proposing a pure metrics system, at all. I'm proposing each venue gets one per year.

Define venue.

This year, Sacramento will organize the following:

52-156 games at Great Escape Games. (1-3 a week)
12 games at A-1 Comics
52 (I hope, fingers crossed) games at The Game Room Adventure Cafe
6 game days, each at a different location (A park in May, a library in July)
2(?) picnics with no organized games (But games usually wind up happening)

That is 10 different venues. One venue runs hundreds of games. Another runs 3. One venue pulls new people into the hobby at an average rate of 1 per week. Some of the others are pretty much a party to get existing players together.

They probably shouldn't all get support packages, let alone *the same* support package.

You're correct, there.

It seems they have three different levels of support for this (basic, stretch goal, and super stretch goal, based on what the blog post says). So, create three different levels of support for differing venues, the difference likely being something as simple as how many boons of a given type are included in the package. After all, an event with six players only needs six things to make everyone happy, while an event with 50 players needs 50 things. Not that everyone should get something, by the way; I'm just trying to keep it simple.

As for defining a "venue," I think that is going to be up to Paizo. They need to determine who is going to benefit from this and why. And, honestly, that needs to align with Paizo's plans. If they want to reward coordinators for their work, then a "venue" is a coordinator who is diligent about creating and reporting events. If they want to reward stores for making Pathfinder successful as a product line, then "venue" is a store.

And, again, with different levels of support, all of these "venues" can get something that is likely to make them happy.

Jolene Danner wrote:

We don't want to be a "Game Day with boons" we want to be a Convention. It sounds like it's dumb, but it matters. I plan game days all the time. They don't take me nearly as long as planning this convention that's under threat of Game Day.

Rose by another name and all that. I don't see what the difference is if its just in a name?

Ahem...

Take the lead organizing Pathfinder Society activities at two or more conventions a year. Conventions must have 15+ sessions over three days to qualify. These conventions do not need to be in your community.

A rose by any other name is not always a rose.

Venture Captain Requirements wrote:

Take the lead organizing Pathfinder Society activities at two or more conventions a year. Conventions must have 15+ sessions over three days to qualify. These conventions do not need to be in your community.

A rose by any other name is not always a rose.

THIS is why a rose by any other name smells as a skunk cabbage.

MisterSlanky wrote:

Venture Captain Requirements wrote:

Take the lead organizing Pathfinder Society activities at two or more conventions a year. Conventions must have 15+ sessions over three days to qualify. These conventions do not need to be in your community.

A rose by any other name is not always a rose.

THIS is why a rose by any other name smells as a skunk cabbage.

I'm really not getting your point.

Jared,

As far as I'm aware, as long as you gave Mike enough lead time, and your Con met the requirements, you got support.

In my 4-1/2 years as VO up here, we have yet to have an event denied support. But then we only asked for two or three times a year. For some areas, they may have been denied support due to trying to get it for every gathering they had. And then consistently not reporting a full 15 tables.

I'm really not getting your point.

Let's stop talking in euphemisms then.

Paizo really, and I mean really upped the requirements for being a Venture Captain, or any Venture Officer really, awhile ago. They're now significant enough, I as a former VC, wouldn't even consider applying for the position due to the fact that it's now pretty much an unpaid "job". To be clear, I'm not using that term lightly, it's a job with far more responsibilities than empowerment/advantages that easily requires at least part-time employment levels of dedication. This unpaid sales/marketing job, may come with advantages in the form of the ego boost and sense of self-importance it grants but also comes with access to product. But let's be honest, how many VCs aren't already subscribers, so this benefit is far less valuable than it would seem. In any case, the job requires dedication, time, and access to personal resources in the form, quite frankly, as your own money out of pocket to market the hell out of the product.

The new requirement requires that you "take the lead in organizing" at two or more conventions. This doesn't mean "helping out" this means "organizing". VLs have similar responsibilities. This was an enormous burden already put on the venture core. Originally, VOs were required to help out at PaizoCon or Gen Con, where "helping out" comes, not insignificantly, out of their own pockets as travel dollars. Now, the VOs are responsible for setting up and organizing convention play locally. Operative term here is convention, which is pretty explicitly stated. Some areas have lots of conventions, some do not. So in order to meet this goal, the VOs now need to start working on creating their own "conventions" in order to make this arbitrary and in no-way easy goal. In many cases, the VOs, which are already paying for this "privilege" to be a VO, are now needing to start paying for a lot more out of their own pocket. Some areas, such as Minneapolis/St. Paul, were able to negotiate better rates with event space at the local "game store" (which is a game store in name only, since it's really the convention space for organized play of Asmodee/Fantasy Flight Games) in order to meet this burden. This burden takes at least a dozen people weeks/months to pull off, because you know...organizing a convention is in no way easy.

So, by deciding to call an enormous classification of convention play "game days" simply because of venue, they have made meeting this requirement fundamentally more difficult. Flippantly calling it "a rose by any other name" is not only an insult, but absolutely offensive to the amount of work that these good people put into running things for their local players. Something I might add, that they decided to do because it was helping people, not just helping us play our game (see the commentary about the amount of money raised for charity).

So yes, this arbitrary decision to start calling one thing a rose, and one thing not a rose, when both actually are does smell. It smells absolutely rotten, and I'm actually embarrassed for Paizo at this point at the harm that this has done to the relationship with local players.

I will agree that a convention and a game day are not the same thing. I don't think calling one the other is accurate, so inasmuch as MisterSlanky makes that particular point, I agree with him.

When the new VO requirements were drafted (and let's be honest, the only part that's new for VCs is the convention requirement, at least that's all that's new since I became a VO), Game Days weren't an official thing.

I certainly would be in support of the requirement being expanded to include Game Days, so that a VC, for example, would have to take the lead in organizing at least two Conventions or Game Days a year. I think that would be consistent with at least the implementation of the requirement itself and Game Days more generically. As well, doing so would allow newer VOs (VCs and VLs who have such a requirement) to cut their teeth on planning a smaller event before trying to tackle a con.

Something for Tonya and others to consider.

I have to stand with my Minnesota brethren. We are very passionate for our games and for each other. And this hit very close to home, to something near and dear to our hearts.

I truly hope the third tier "Retail Convention" suggestion is looked very closely at as an compromise/resolution.

We are very passionate for our games and for each other.

AWWWWWWW YISSSSSSSSSSSSSSS.

You forgot to include the beer, though.

When the new VO requirements were drafted (and let's be honest, the only part that's new for VCs is the convention requirement, at least that's all that's new since I became a VO), Game Days weren't an official thing.

I certainly would be in support of the requirement being expanded to include Game Days, so that a VC, for example, would have to take the lead in organizing at least two Conventions or Game Days a year. I think that would be consistent with at least the implementation of the requirement itself and Game Days more generically. As well, doing so would allow newer VOs (VCs and VLs who have such a requirement) to cut their teeth on planning a smaller event before trying to tackle a con.

As much as I like the suggestion Mark (and think it would be reasonable) my issue with that would be 'Does the Game Day have to be an approved and supported Game Day?'.

With 10 a quarter for the entire MidWest, we'd have to either do a lot of travelling (and taking over in place of organizers to count as an 'organizer' for the 'Game Day'), or they'd have to be distributed to people needing to meet their requirements for the year.

On the other hand, if we can count anything that would qualify as a 'Game Day' we have about 48 a quarter and our environment suddenly supports many more VOs.

Retail Convention. It's very simple, very elegant, we can all understand what the definition entails - a standard convention without the prize support that could slight or offend the Retail Location. An easy way for the less accessible (or less affluent) VOs and regions to hold a 'convention' with everything that it normally entails.

Andrew Torgerud wrote:

We are very passionate for our games and for each other.

AWWWWWWW YISSSSSSSSSSSSSSS.

You forgot to include the beer, though.

The beer part is a given. C'mon, I mean, really... "It comes in a tower!"

As much as I like the suggestion Mark (and think it would be reasonable) my issue with that would be 'Does the Game Day have to be an approved and supported Game Day?'.

With 10 a quarter for the entire MidWest, we'd have to either do a lot of travelling (and taking over in place of organizers to count as an 'organizer' for the 'Game Day'), or they'd have to be distributed to people needing to meet their requirements for the year.

On the other hand, if we can count anything that would qualify as a 'Game Day' we have about 48 a quarter and our environment suddenly supports many more VOs.

I think, for purposes of the requirement, that it should be something more than just the routine "schedule a couple of tables at a store" thing that most of us do. I also think, for purposes of the requirement, something less than a full convention should suffice. For me, that's somewhere between "regular gaming events" and "Convention." To me, the new "Game Day" fits that bill quite nicely.

I suspect, as we move ahead, we'll see the 10/region/quarter limit will flex a bit. That's not based on any insider knowledge, just my sense based on my experience in developing and adjusting new programs.

So, by deciding to call an enormous classification of convention play "game days" simply because of venue, they have made meeting this requirement fundamentally more difficult

I was not being flippant. I wasn't aware that the gameday classification was interacting with the rules from venturecritters. We're an autonomous collective here and don't interact with the system much, so t

I don't think getting conventions out of stores is the intent. I know we're used to reading pretty technical rules for a game, but PFS rules don't tend to be written that tightly. We don't know that the change of classification was intended. A simple fix in the VC requirements of "event of x number of tables" or Just having retail cons come under the same person as gamedays because they have the keys to the boons but not the gift certificates, fixes that.

We don't know if they actually changed the rules the way you said.
If they did its an easy fix.

So, by deciding to call an enormous classification of convention play "game days" simply because of venue, they have made meeting this requirement fundamentally more difficult

I feel like you're overreacting.

I know you're passionate about this; so am I, obviously. And while I certainly think the implementation of this was botched, I feel that what BNW says is a key takeaway:

We don't know if they actually changed the rules the way you said.

If they did its an easy fix.

My complaints stemmed from how to get what you want. You are calling attention to the why, which is important as well, but easily changed at this stage. In fact, I'm willing to bet that the PFS staff actually didn't think about this interaction any more than it seems many other posters here did.

After the last day, I seriously doubt that they are unaware of the concerns that have been raised here, and I would be quite surprised if they didn't address them appropriately.

In other words, you've stated your case. Going into attack mode is probably not going to help.

We don't know if they actually changed the rules the way you said.

As Keith pointed out, therein too lies a problem. By changing the definition of "retail convention" nearly every single weekend in this area probably qualifies as a "retail convention". I don't know how the RVC is going to feel about the roughly 52+ requests a year for support in this matter, or if Paizo is ready to work with the changing definition and how it fits with the resulting alleviation of their deliberately-difficult VO requirements.

My complaints stemmed from how to get what you want. You are calling attention to the why, which is important as well, but easily changed at this stage. In fact, I'm willing to bet that the PFS staff actually didn't think about this interaction any more than it seems many other posters here did.

This isn't a matter of choosing the right words. Mere semantics aren't going to fix the underlying problem in this. I think the choice of "convention support" in the role was deliberate, and the one-size-fits-all approach is already rough enough on what is essentially an unpaid sales force. I appreciate very much that you're calling out the "how", but ignoring the "why" has already caused a local rift. Worse off, I think you're giving too much credit to our ability to modify the "why". If the reasons for the change to game day support, and VO requirements are what I think they are, there are some pretty fundamental changes in thinking that have to occur before the "why" gets addressed.

I think the choice of "convention support" in the role was deliberate...

And I don't. I think they were trying to point out why the Game Day designation was a good thing, and got tripped up by something that caught them by surprise.

It'll get addressed.

For me, that's somewhere between "regular gaming events" and "Convention." To me, the new "Game Day" fits that bill quite nicely.

Mark, A "Game Day" is any public PFS gaming event. It is not a special category that is slightly less then a convention. So a Game Day is your regular events as long as it is public.

Look at what the stated purpose was.

Some Pathfinders desire the rewards of attending conventions, namely boons, but couldn't see a way past the barriers blocking their path. On the organizational side, we receive requests for convention support from events that don't meet the requirements for venue or size. We don't like saying "no" to these events, so we put our heads together, and developed a "Game Day" program to augment our convention support program.

It took a few months to get the details hammered out on who qualifies, what they receive, and support distribution methods. We came up with a flexible program that allows us to tailor our response based on the region and needs of the community. The Game Day program supports three non-convention venues—the venue that is a consistently strong performer that needs recognition for its accomplishments, the venue that is new and could use support to establish itself, and those events that are not quite conventions because they occur in retail establishments or are just under the table requirements. All Game Days still must follow the requirement of being open to the public, registered on paizo.com, and having some form of online advertisement.

• Events that are not big enough to qualify under the existing convention requirements (such as not enough tables or too small).
  
• Events that most likely do not pay to reserve an area for them -- thus the expectation that they are at a retail store.
  
• Events that attract people who wouldn't attend conventions.

They need to fix up the location rules a bit. It should allow for other public venues such as town halls (some towns allow residents to use the town hall for minimal or no charge), churchs, and other public venues.

They also should clarify that this is for events that do not meet the convention requirements. If an event meets the requirements for convention support, that event should be considered a convention. The Game Day is for things that don't meet that requirement.

Mark Stratton wrote:

For me, that's somewhere between "regular gaming events" and "Convention." To me, the new "Game Day" fits that bill quite nicely.

Mark, A "Game Day" is any public PFS gaming event. It is not a special category that is slightly less then a convention. So a Game Day is your regular events as long as it is public.

To be fair, when I queried Tonya on exactly this when things were coming down the pipe a few months ago, as I was concerned about our VLS meeting the requirements because our VLS were hired to do something different than is typical of the position, I was told that what you and I call game days were local gatherings.

I'm not sure if this is an idiom thing based on Tonya getting her start in England or not. But I say this to illustrate that when Tonya and the RVCs talk about game days, they are redefining that term. So we should stop conflating the new game day term with the weekly events we put on that we have called game days for years.

So while I'm on board with all the MN crew who are in here complaining about Skal Con being relegated to Game Day, it certainly isn't really helping our argument when we conflate the new game day with our weekly store gatherings.

Mark Stratton wrote:

For me, that's somewhere between "regular gaming events" and "Convention." To me, the new "Game Day" fits that bill quite nicely.

Mark, A "Game Day" is any public PFS gaming event. It is not a special category that is slightly less then a convention. So a Game Day is your regular events as long as it is public.

I think that's only your interpreation, because the many discussions I have had with others indicates that normal gatherings are not "Game Days" as contemplated in the new blog post.

I'm happy to be wrong, and to be corrected by Tonya, however.

I do want to add this, so I'm clear:

While I don't condone some of the tone and implication in the posts of some of the Minnesota crew, I want to go on record that I am absolutely in support of their argument related to Skal Con still being a convention, even though it's in a retail store.

This isn't just some convention - it's a charity convention that brought in a significant amount of money. And, they apparently don't even want gift certificates (is that what I read?) They just want to still call it a convention, and for it to be a convention, even though it's in a retail store.

Now, there's a lot of unnecessary angst and worry, I think, but I honestly think they are on the right side of the argument, particularly as they are only 5 months or so from the event. So, my hope is that, at least for this year, while time is short, they can still have it as a convention, in a retail store, and let cooler heads try to work out some long-term solution or whatever in the background.

The tone of the argument nonwithstanding, especially the ones that impugned the character of campaign leadership and ascribed to them motives of less than reptuable note, the substance of their arguments have merit, and I put my full support behind trying to find a way to resolve that.

Here in Sac, "Game day" is a gathering where we spend all day gaming. (2-3 slots, usually no more than once a month.). The weekly store gathering is a "Weekly game" or "The Thursday game.". Or things like that. I don't think I have ever heard it called a game day.

Mark and Andrew, there is nothing to indicate in anything she has said since coming up with the "New" rules for Game Day boon, that your regular gaming day event would not qualify.

I can't go into more details here.

Mark and Andrew, there is nothing to indicate in anything she has said since coming up with the "New" rules for Game Day boon, that your regular gaming day event would not qualify.

I can't go into more details here.

Then why put this here?

Mark and Andrew, there is nothing to indicate in anything she has said since coming up with the "New" rules for Game Day boon, that your regular gaming day event would not qualify.

I can't go into more details here.

I agrre, but I'm sure the intention is not to submit all 48 game days we have per quarter.

Let's all take a deep breath.

I think there's been a lot of confusion here. Let's look at what's causing this.

1) Part of it is due to terminology. We already have "Game days" (our regular events) but now the term is being used for something else.

2) Part of it is due to an apparent change in rules which may make some events that were formerly "Conventions" no longer qualify for that term, including our beloved Charity fundraiser, SkålCon.

I cannot believe that the PFS Board intended to disenfranchise some of our local conventions. Instead, I believe that the intent was maybe to expand out boons to those who never qualified for them before.

However, I think what we all need is clarity. Jon, Tonya, and Linda, I believe you can make this right and help all of us better understand what the new rules are and how they work. Perhaps you can even fix the language that excludes some wonderful conventions (surely SkålCon is not the only one that happens in retail space?) from qualifying?

We don't want to take away support from the little guys who deserve it. We just want to be able to run our wonderful con and make as much money for our charity as we possibly can.

Thank you so much!

Hmm
(Also proudly part of the Minnesota Lodge)

The pretty clear intent is that this was intended as a way to allow not-quite-cons to get GM boons, not to allow every weekly game to get them. I'm also pretty sure no one was meant to be disenfranchised over this. Paizo needs to call these different events something, so when someone asks for "convention support" they get Package A, which doesn't offend a store owner who loses out on sales because they get a box of free CRBs as well as boons.

I'm sure Tonya and the crew will sort it out, provide clarity, and make it work.

I do want to add this, so I'm clear:

While I don't condone some of the tone and implication in the posts of some of the Minnesota crew, I want to go on record that I am absolutely in support of their argument related to Skal Con still being a convention, even though it's in a retail store.

This isn't just some convention - it's a charity convention that brought in a significant amount of money. And, they apparently don't even want gift certificates (is that what I read?) They just want to still call it a convention, and for it to be a convention, even though it's in a retail store.

Now, there's a lot of unnecessary angst and worry, I think, but I honestly think they are on the right side of the argument, particularly as they are only 5 months or so from the event. So, my hope is that, at least for this year, while time is short, they can still have it as a convention, in a retail store, and let cooler heads try to work out some long-term solution or whatever in the background.

The tone of the argument nonwithstanding, especially the ones that impugned the character of campaign leadership and ascribed to them motives of less than reptuable note, the substance of their arguments have merit, and I put my full support behind trying to find a way to resolve that.

Thank you, Mark.

You are correct in that we do not ask for product or prize support. We wanted to be very clear about that with FFG. We had items donated from our community members that were not available in the general store (City of Shackles HC). If anything, we should ask FFG to stock a few more items for us that weekend (Player Portfolios!). All we ask for are boons for our volunteer GMs and player boons to give away.

What is most heart breaking for me, and I can only speak for myself here, is that something I wanted to do for a long time, conceived a way of execution that allowed us to do it, got 6-8 other people to buy into my hare-brained idea (Create a con in six months? Sure!), pulled it off, and by anyone's metric successfully, is now no longer a convention all because of location. What we worked very hard to do is now on the same footing as a regular game day event that enters Thunderdome by June 1.

And then to have other posters not grasp how insulted/angry/sad I felt about this is just gasoline on the cut. If our tone is objectionable, I agree we can be a Surly bunch, it is because this exposed a nerve that just keeps getting hit. We are mad. We are angry. We are fierce in our love for the game and our community. When we feel we are wronged, that passion sharpens to a point wielded by barbarians at the gate. We receive condescending pats on the head telling us not to worry, Buttercup, everything is gonna be just peachy all the while not telling us how this happens only that it will if we just give it a chance.

I will apologize, Jon, if I've been condescending - I certainly didn't mean to be. I have to believe, somehow, this is going to get worked out. If not, I'll be quick to say I was wrong.

But, I just ask that folks (not just on this thread but all of them, really) express themselves with a little less...vitriol (maybe that's not the right word.) As I told Andy, I'm happy to help, I really am, but not if someone is going to repay my help by biting my head off. :-)

At any rate, I'll try to work toward a positive solution. It's not my area, but as a VC, I have a responsibility to help improve the overall program.

Hang in there.

The question is, what is the purpose of GM boons? To encourage people to GM (at conventions) one would assume.

For conventions GMs usually already get benefits in terms of free/reduced admission, free/reduced con merch, and in some cases you can even get your hotel room comped if you GM enough slots.

Within 1-3 hours from my place there are probably enough conventions where I could attend one a quarter, GM a slot or two at each and stock up on GM boons.

But what about the person who GMs several times a month at the local game store, but doesn't have a con within a few hours? What does that GM get for their efforts? GM stars which get you limited replay opportunities and a bonus on your once per session shirt/folio reroll along with a kind of meh GM star chronicle boon?

Personally I'd rather have the boon that opens up new races to play, that's why I do most of my GMing at conventions and don't earn GM stars too quickly as I tend to GM only about 10 games a year.

So maybe the new program will give me another opportunity or two each year to earn a boon, but it certainly won't entice me to become a more regular GM.

I will apologize, Jon, if I've been condescending - I certainly didn't mean to be. I have to believe, somehow, this is going to get worked out. If not, I'll be quick to say I was wrong.

But, I just ask that folks (not just on this thread but all of them, really) express themselves with a little less...vitriol (maybe that's not the right word.) As I told Andy, I'm happy to help, I really am, but not if someone is going to repay my help by biting my head off. :-)

At any rate, I'll try to work toward a positive solution. It's not my area, but as a VC, I have a responsibility to help improve the overall program.

Hang in there.

I appreciate your support Mark. I don't think we mean to come across as vitriol filled raging barbarians. As we all know text doesn't always translate. I believe that all the MN people who've spoken on this thread have the best intentions and only want to make sure SkalCon is not in fact SkalGameDay.

We're only 150 something days from our con now so we don't have the luxury to sit and hope. We need answers and solutions. We've put in a lot of time and effort already and we're about to start major crunch time.

The pretty clear intent is that this was intended as a way to allow not-quite-cons to get GM boons, not to allow every weekly game to get them. I'm also pretty sure no one was meant to be disenfranchised over this. Paizo needs to call these different events something, so when someone asks for "convention support" they get Package A, which doesn't offend a store owner who loses out on sales because they get a box of free CRBs as well as boons.

I'm sure Tonya and the crew will sort it out, provide clarity, and make it work.

Is this is where my confusion comes in. Just based on her public comments, the intent of this is to get Boons to those who can't get to Conventions. That is all. I don't see anything that says it was just for Not quite conventions. There are areas that can't even do that.

There seems to be no size requirement, I see nothing that says I could not request boons for one of my normal schedule gaming days per quarter.

I will apologize, Jon, if I've been condescending - I certainly didn't mean to be. I have to believe, somehow, this is going to get worked out. If not, I'll be quick to say I was wrong.

But, I just ask that folks (not just on this thread but all of them, really) express themselves with a little less...vitriol (maybe that's not the right word.) As I told Andy, I'm happy to help, I really am, but not if someone is going to repay my help by biting my head off. :-)

At any rate, I'll try to work toward a positive solution. It's not my area, but as a VC, I have a responsibility to help improve the overall program.

Hang in there.

Thanks Mark.

I also want to apologize for any tone I may have conveyed.

This has been a very emotional couple of days for us up here in the Frosty North.

While I don't know that I can speak for everyone in MN, I do know that some have cried, some have been on the verge of tears, and many are extremely angry and dissapointed.

This convention--Skal Con--is a labor of love for us. And sitting on unstable and confusing grounds is certainly disenfranchising.

Hopefully soon, we will have an equitable solution commensurate to the size and scope of the event. One that doesn't inadvertently lump it into a category for which it cannot belong.

I don't know what else to say. Nerves are very RAW up here right now.

I don't know what else to say. Nerves are very RAW up here right now.

Do we really need to include the whole RAW, RAI argument in this thread too? We've told you about this Andy, you can't have it both ways.

Andrew Christian wrote:

I don't know what else to say. Nerves are very RAW up here right now.

Do we really need to include the whole RAW, RAI argument in this thread too? We've told you about this Andy, you can't have it both ways.

Now that Nerves are broken, do I get a free rebuild?

I think that requires Regenerate.

Mark Stratton wrote:

I will apologize, Jon, if I've been condescending - I certainly didn't mean to be. I have to believe, somehow, this is going to get worked out. If not, I'll be quick to say I was wrong.

But, I just ask that folks (not just on this thread but all of them, really) express themselves with a little less...vitriol (maybe that's not the right word.) As I told Andy, I'm happy to help, I really am, but not if someone is going to repay my help by biting my head off. :-)

At any rate, I'll try to work toward a positive solution. It's not my area, but as a VC, I have a responsibility to help improve the overall program.

Hang in there.

Thanks Mark.

I also want to apologize for any tone I may have conveyed.

This has been a very emotional couple of days for us up here in the Frosty North.

While I don't know that I can speak for everyone in MN, I do know that some have cried, some have been on the verge of tears, and many are extremely angry and dissapointed.

This convention--Skal Con--is a labor of love for us. And sitting on unstable and confusing grounds is certainly disenfranchising.

Hopefully soon, we will have an equitable solution commensurate to the size and scope of the event. One that doesn't inadvertently lump it into a category for which it cannot belong.

I don't know what else to say. Nerves are very RAW up here right now.

Hopefully things will work out for the best. Worse comes to worst I've got some GM and player boons that I'm never going to use on my characters I can donate for con support.

I'll apologize, too, be it for any head-patting I may have done or for any vitriol I may have started. It wasn't ever my intention, and I'm happy to see that our cooler selves are starting to prevail.

I'll apologize, too, be it for any head-patting I may have done or for any vitriol I may have started. It wasn't ever my intention, and I'm happy to see that our cooler selves are starting to prevail.

I have only seen concern and advice from you not vitriol. Unless it got deleted ;).

Some of us are vitriol filled raging barbarians, and we love Skal Con.

We are fortunate to have such passionate leadership in Minnesota.

Skal Con is shining example of the best of what a Con can be and should be supported as such.

Being passionate is no excuse to impugn the character of others.

Being passionate is no excuse to impugn the character of others.

Excuse no. But I'm hoping a reason that others can understand and forgive.

Lets move past the impugning and move on to the potential solutions.

Andrew Christian wrote:

I don't know what else to say. Nerves are very RAW up here right now.

Do we really need to include the whole RAW, RAI argument in this thread too? We've told you about this Andy, you can't have it both ways.

While the situation is serious, I am happy we can still derail ourselves in the true way of these forums.

The One True Smurf!

One Smurf to rule them all...

There can be only one smurf!