Pathfinder Society 2: Replay, Rewards, and Rebuilds

Will there be a playtest specific reporting sheet for the 2E PFS playtest content? Even if only to track that we did play each module/scenario?

TiwazBlackhand wrote:

Another thought that occurs to me: It seems to me that, generally, the logic behind BoonGating races was that they were in some way "Complex" or had features that would be "Disruptive" to play, and by gating them to dedicated GMs theoretically they were kept in the hands of people who wouldn't cause a problem.

In PF2, depending on how Ancestries work, and ancestry feats, would it not be possible to take a race with "Disruptive features" and either JUST BAN those AncFeat options, or Gate JUST those powers with a boon?

Like (and this is just a crazy made up example) say Ifrit somehow got unlimited fireballs. Just ban that. Say a winged race got a feat for fly speed (at low level). Boon Gate JUST THAT.

Just. Don't lock/ban EVERY new race. Or MOST races. Make 90% of races available, and don't BoonGate things you KNOW are going to be super popular.

I am looking forward to your suggestions when it comes to incentivizing convention GMs.

EDIT: I unfairly quoted once a person who suggested it, but the question also goes out to everyone how has suggested restricting fewer races for GM rewards.

You know what Adventurer League GMs get? XP to apply to a character. Gold and Downtime days to apply to a character.

That's it.

So, as I said above, I have no problem with certs for, literally absurdly broken and abusive items. I don't consider access to Specific Magic Items to be a core part of a character.

Give the DM a cert for, as I said in my first post, a +10 Bazooka of Infinite Godslaying. IDGF.

But having aasimar, catfolk, changeling, dhampir, fetchling, gillman, grippli, goblin, merfolk, ratfolk, samsaran, suli, tiefling, vanara, vishkanya, gathlain, ghoran, and vine leshy gated behind GM Boons means there are 4 more locked races than there are freely playable.

There are 18 boon locked races.
There are 14 freely playable races.

Do you see how that feels really poop to those who CANNOT AFFORD in time or money to go to enough cons to grab these certs?
Do you see how that's infuriating to people who purchased the Advanced Race Guide and cannot use those races when other people can?

By all means, give boons. Give good stuff. Just consider that gating races, especially popular races like CATFOLK, GRIPPLI, GOBLIN, AASIMAR, & TIEFLING is a good way to put off new players and casuals.

Since "locked" races have come up, I'll say this. In PF1e, I think that by the end, there were *way* too many races to choose from. It was nice to open things up, but we also never sunset any races (after the first few seasons). I think this lead to an overwhelming amount of choices of races that should feel special, but actually weren't that special. What I'd like to see in PF2e is "Core +5", which can be described as follows:
1. The core races/ancestries are always available.
2. For the first ~5 years, add one new playable ancestry open to everyone.
3. Every year after that, add a new playable ancestry, and remove one of the existing ones. The one you add can be one that was playable previous (no reason you can't rotate back in).
4. Multiply these numbers as you see fit to accommodate how many ancestries will be available.
5. It's fine to decide something should become "core" if you'd like to see it in regular play.
6. When an ancestry rotates out, allow a player to keep at most X of that ancestry (3 seems reasonable), so people can't game the system.
7. Retain the right to ban an ancestry like we do feats in PFS1e if it becomes unreasonable.

This would allow for races to be centered around specific campaign themes, but give them some uniqueness. That ratfolk I got from 4 years ago? He's no longer legal, but I can play him up to level 12, and people think it's pretty cool I have him. Also, I wasn't "locked" from getting him by not attending a Con, and you're a new player who wants one? Maybe they'll rotate back in soon (but no guarantees)!

The mere fact they are willing to make accommodations to loyal players speaks volumes.

Regarding GM stars, I’ve never really gave a damn. I played AD&D2e from its birth to when I switched to Pathfinder in 2010 and played religiously nearly every single week with my group since then. So even if someone has 5 GM stars it was unlikely they had more experience than I did. It was also likely someone with 1 GM Star had a better grasp of rules than I did, too. So I didn’t put much thought in GM Stars, especially when the only time I ever saw them was if I were online looking for it (which was never) or if it was mentioned at a convention or something. GM stars never had any impact on who GMed my table at cons and nobody ever asked how many stars I had. I do understand people wanting recognition of their time and expertise, though. I’m just not sure I want to waste my time trying to figure it out. People at tables can tell pretty quickly who’s new, who knows their stuff, and who’s full of it. Maybe a simple button that players could wear? I know that GMing is hard and tedious work sometimes, so recognition of some sort is important.

As far as character conversion, I think John is right on. When I first heard of PF 2e, my immediate thought went to how I’ll lose opportunities with all my PF 1e PFS characters, as I don’t get to play with them often (being a GM). I realize, now, that it would be impossible, as John mentions, to convert my Musket Master Gunslinger into PF 2e. My PFS 1e people will just have to stay 1e, that’s all there is to it. I do have some concepts I’d like to create, though, but these will inevitably have to wait until more material is released in the coming years for PF 2e.

I have a ton of boons, many of which I haven’t even used. Of course, these are still available for PF 1e PFS, but the opportunities to play PFS 1e will be dramatically reduced as people play the new edition. It would be beneficial to allow players to trade in boons for 2e boons. It would certainly make me feel better about playing PFS 2e, knowing some “legacy” carries over. I hesitate in doing some sort of trade comparison, because that seems like a ton of work for Paizo and the players, too. The “Boons for Benefit” might be a great option as it keeps things simple, allows for an easy quick transaction with the GM during gameplay, and still allows players to gain a benefit. Also, not all boons are created equal, so this could pose an issue.

While I dislike, generally, the idea of hiding options behind walls, I do think it’s probably a cool thing if non-core races were kept on boons. It’s a recognition that people like. If you’re someone who wants these boons, then you should be doing something special to get them. I’m also not a fan of Convention-specific boons, although I agree those who spend the time and money to go to convention should get something special in return. All GMs should receive the same boons, whether it’s con play or local play.

How about at GenCon, when we turn in our wooden token for a boon/prize roll, we can turn in boons for a new re-roll? That way we can get the new 2e boons in exchange for our unused 1e boons.
Regarding replay, I think it might be OK to allow replay of low level scenarios only. The only reason I’d replay a scenario would be because I have a newer character with no scenarios to run in.
As for GMs, I think they should be able to get credit for running the same scenario each time.

The journey to "hundreds" of books starts with "one book."

GM Stars: Pink Stars, yellow Novas, the colour out of space Glyphs (which I prefer over Sigils)... they are always after my lucky charms. I vote for new metric with reward: make Stars and Glyphs cumulative for re-rolls in either edition. Say I have three Stars and two Glyphs, I get a +5 on re-rolls in either edition.

First Edition Boons: I vote Expanded Boon Currency.

Replay: I would vote Unlimited Replay, barring that Heightened GM Star Recharge.

For the idea of incentivizing convention GMs:

Is this still an issue? Do organizers have trouble getting GMs for events that won't have boons? Do organizers get more GMs than they need for events that do have boons?

I haven't organized anything since September of 2016 (and that one I really was just oversight, everyone else did the work.) But toward the end, there were only a couple people I was aware of that wouldn't GM without the boon. Many GMs were excited about getting the boon, but I didn't have to persuade people to fill tables because I had a boon to give them anymore.

So I'm not sure the GM Race boon is necessary anymore.

I'd be interested if someone with facts from their region could disabuse me of that notion though.

Use achievements to unlock boons. End the lottery effect.

By using achievements you can rewards players consistently and fairly. Not everyone can attend all the conventions or be at the right table to get the random boons.

If you must reward special events differently, allow playing at them to advance towards boons quicker. For example, if you have to play 10 sessions to unlock the next boon, perhaps each game you play at PaizoCon counts as two.

Treat each game—PF1, SF, PF2—as its own organized play.

Cross-pollinating each group with benefits from another group is a disincentive for those who only like one of them.

You know what Adventurer League GMs get? XP to apply to a character. Gold and Downtime days to apply to a character.
That's it.
There's also special quests to get a cert for what is essentially an Amulet of Mighty Fists +1, or a 5 use 2d8 heal potion that also does Remove Disease/Remove Poison.

That's it.

So? Those seem to be the rewards for GMs in general, not offering your services a public event, which is what usually has given out race boons.

I know GMs who don't even take their certificate for GMing anymore, others enjoy building "GM babies" who want to use the scenarios as a background story, and others just want to make sure that the chronicle ends up on the right character.

Preparing and running scenarios (in any environment) takes a lot of hours and the current GM rewards reflect that.

Give the DM a cert for, as I said in my first post, a +10 Bazooka of Infinite Godslaying. IDGF.

But having aasimar, catfolk, changeling, dhampir, fetchling, gillman, grippli, goblin, merfolk, ratfolk, samsaran, suli, tiefling, vanara, vishkanya, gathlain, ghoran, and vine leshy gated behind GM Boons means there are 4 more locked races than there are freely playable.

There are 18 boon locked races.
There are 14 freely playable races.

Do you see how that feels really poop to those who CANNOT AFFORD in time or money to go to enough cons to grab these certs?
Do you see how that's infuriating to people who purchased the Advanced Race Guide and cannot use those races when other people can?

By all means, give boons. Give good stuff. Just consider that gating races, especially popular races like CATFOLK, GRIPPLI, GOBLIN, AASIMAR, & TIEFLING is a good way to put off new players and casuals.

As a GM and organizer, I have a very different point of view.

---

Whether or not experienced GMs still need the allure of GM boons is a bit beside the point, for some of those it is just saying "thank you" for their service to the campaign. What makes those boons really worthwhile, is that it motivated players to invest the time and take the "risk" to GM.

Race boons are rewards for those that run under difficult conditions:

-Convention GMs (particularly those that run under challenging conditions like Gencon)
-Events at public events (through the RSP package)

These days, if you are willing to GM you have online conventions, play by post conventions, physical RSP events and quite a number of conventions all over the world.

Once you have earned a boon, you are free to trade for something you like more.

---

I am not sure where you offer to GM, but you very likely have the chance to earn them. When in doubt contact your local venture officer.

For the idea of incentivizing convention GMs:

Is this still an issue? Do organizers have trouble getting GMs for events that won't have boons? Do organizers get more GMs than they need for events that do have boons?

I haven't organized anything since September of 2016 (and that one I really was just oversight, everyone else did the work.) But toward the end, there were only a couple people I was aware of that wouldn't GM without the boon. Many GMs were excited about getting the boon, but I didn't have to persuade people to fill tables because I had a boon to give them anymore.

So I'm not sure the GM Race boon is necessary anymore.

I'd be interested if someone with facts from their region could disabuse me of that notion though.

People are busy and their time is valuable, these days a number of people who can GM often have so say no because they have too much to do with work/family so the demand for GMs is very real.

Another reason why we are always looking for more GMs is to lessen the burden on our existing GMs, some who have to run for almost the entire convention and really would like to play more.

I guess race boons are a good motivator to get people to make that first step and GM, and plenty of local GMs would likely support my events as a favor to me... but I think, that they deserve a little bit of recognition for their hard work and race boons are a good medium for that.
Of course, there are also GMs who would no longer offer to GM at events if their race boons were taken away, they already GM plenty of sessions outside of events, so I can hardly blame them.

GM Stars
Option 2 Doesn't sound horrible. It also doesn't sound too...well, for lack of a proper term, Overpowered. Let's be realistic, it's going to take some time for GM's to get up off the ground and get back in the saddle. I don't envision me hitting 4 or 5 glyphs that quickly, and maybe a little boost would be helpful in reaching that end road. Probably not even within the first year, to be honest. If option 2 seems to hard to implement (let's be frank, Paizo.com doesn't have the best track records with coding, especially when it comes to PFS), then option 3 would be my second choice.

Character Rebuilds
Blah. I don't even want to begin thinking of the headache required to rebuild alot of my favorite characters into 2e. I can't imagine that I'm alone, and the people who would probably have the easiest time would be the core players. Just sayin'. I am completely OK with my 1e characters staying sepperate from my 2e characters, though I would love to have the option to let one of my characters from 1e give mission briefings, if appropriate of course.

1st Edition Boons
It really feels like you've been watching the boards closely on these, as I've seen some of these ideas pop up there. I like the idea of options 3 and 4. To be honest, I've already given some away as it stands, since I'd rather someone enjoy them now, rather than run the risk of having them worth nothing when 2e comes out. However, if it's known that options 2-4 are on the table, even possibly as front runers, it might be worth it for people to hold onto those boons. Otherwise, if option 1 is the case, i feel sorry for anyone that just got their first tiefling or aasimar.

Replays
I could see a combination of options 2 and 3 getting you alot of good will from people who love pathfinder, play pathfinder society, but don't have the funds available to go all in on 2e right out of the gate. Personally, I would love to see Option 2 hit the table, and I think that would give alot of players incentive to have one last hurrah. I'd probably see a lot more tables of Bonekeep, Ruby Phoenix tournament, etc.

Earning Playtest Credit
I've already let my static group know that I fully intend on participating in the playtest, and if they want, I want to run doomsday dawn for them. I've gotten good vibes from everyone about it, but what tickled me pink the most is this - a few of my players in 1E flat out refuse to play spellcasters, mostly because even though they've been playing 1e for a few years now, there are just so many options for spellcasters (of any type, take your pick) that it can be overwhelming. One of those players is looking forward to playing an arcane caster for the playtest. That, in and of itself, I consider a win.

I just wanted to chime in on boons, specifically race/ancestry boons... please, no. Don't make these. If a race is too strong for organized play, then ban it outright; don't make it a rare thing people can get. If it's too good for wide distribution, then it's too good to be divvying out to haves and have-nots.

If a race is likely going to be popular for certain character concepts, then make extra sure it won't wind up being too strong. EDIT: And be willing to walk it back post-release if you have to. (End edit, resume original post) I was very disappointed the Aasimar was PFS-banned without some boon I had no chance to obtain as a new-ish player, because it would have perfectly fit a few of my character ideas. Didn't want it for the power; I would have gladly played a toned down Aasimar. I wanted it for the flavor.

Finding out "Nope, not allowed to do that idea because others ran it into the ground and we weren't willing to issue a balance patch to it... instead, we locked it behind a rare boon so SOME people, but NOT YOU, are allowed to have this specific kind of fun" did a lot to damage my interest in PFS1. I'm mostly sitting out to see how PFS2 turns out, accordingly.

Character Rebuilds

I'll again throw out my probably futile request to allow one or two REBUILDS of PFS1 characters. This would not involve any complicated conversion rules. It would just use whatever rebuild rules that are included in PF2e. Yes, it might be difficult or impossible to rebuild some characters exactly as they were in PF1e but giving players some ability to do this is better than none at all.

Please see the post below from Dame Candi Payne, Paladin of Calistria, for an alternative point of view.

Dame Candi Payne, Paladin of Calistria spits out a large hunk of half-chewed cigar and rumbles ...

I'm looking forward to being able to take a more "hands on" approach to managing Candi's Booze-O-Rama and Booty Call-A-Palooza. However, I will be adopting many young adults and taking many lovers and encouraging all of them to join the Pathfinder Society.

Praise Calistria!

As for character rebuilds, I'm fairly strongly against it. As was mentioned, given how different the systems will be, it's essentially saying "make a character of level X". Also, handling gold will be hard, because the economy will presumably be different. And all those old chronicles won't work. Let's not even get into the fact that presumably high level content will be scarce early on...

That being said, I don't think it's a terrible idea to give people some number of "you can start your character at level 2" boons for existing PFS characters. This makes some assumptions about first level and replayable scenarios, but it would help get people over the 1-4 hump, particularly in a time when there are no/few evergreens...

More than a few comments. GM stars, modify your option 2 to 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 Stars/Runes/Glyphs/What ever. Replay, this is a BIG area of contention with active play. Look at it in these terms, you put out say 30 scenarios a year, that means you need to be able to replay those scenarios multiple times over the course of 5-10 years. Why you might ask, when you have new players coming and going all the time, you need to be able to re-run a huge amount of starting scenarios to get the players up to the rest of your players. All scenarios need to be evergreened. Even with the super dungeons and adventure paths, there won't be enough published material. Boons and Races: Fresh from the start. Each character will have to start with a new faction sheet, so all boons should start then. Character rebuild..Just Don't, not worth it.

Remember folks, there are specific threads started to make your posts. This thread is not the designated place.

Thank you.

Carry on.

By the way, before organized play starts please remind players that all Pathfinder 1 material will not apply, and please put into the season guide any and all prestige purchases or have the flat book ready for the pathfinder society.

I took some time to think about this, so this is where I stand for now.

I think that the subsidized metric for GMs will help retain GMs, so I am for it. In Northwest Indiana, one of our challenges is having enough GMs. (We also lost our venue recently, but we will find a new one.) So, keeping GMs and Golarion knowledge will help keep the campaign going.

A favored character option might work for replay. One challenge that I sometimes run into is not rerunning scenarios. I am not sure how many people will want to still play PF 1. Still, some form of replay is needed -- as some people have played many early scenarios.

I do like the "prize table" approach for playtest credit. I think it will help people become emotionally invested in the new system.

** spoiler omitted **

"Paladin" is a state of mind. She's really a bloodrager, but she calls herself a paladin.

Ahhh, understood. That did not come through from the previous post. Thx

Ahhh, understood. That did not come through from the previous post. Thx

We do have a character locally who is a paladin/bloodrager of Ragathiel. I wonder if anything like that can be made in PF 2.

Bob Jonquet wrote:

Ahhh, understood. That did not come through from the previous post. Thx

We do have a character locally who is a paladin/bloodrager of Ragathiel. I wonder if anything like that can be made in PF 2.

Define "like" :-). But given that I can do something like that in PF1 Core in several ways I'd be amazed if I can't do something like that in PF2 in several ways.

At the "character concept" level there is remarkably little that can't be done in Core. Perhaps not overwhelmingly effectively but something close and at least viable can usually be done for all but the most specific of concepts (songbird of doom, for example, might be difficult :-) :-))

About the only vaguely general concept that I can think of off hand that can't be done in Core is the Mounted Warrior. Between the lack of animal companion mounts and the huge armor check penalty for armor its really hard to get a viable character without resorting to magic

We do have a character locally who is a paladin/bloodrager of Ragathiel. I wonder if anything like that can be made in PF 2.

Depends on how close you want it to be. I would not expect bloodrager or Ragathiel to be in the 2E CRB. Without knowing the requirements for paladin (namely LG) or barbarian (non-lawful) we cannot know if that multi-class is possible. I'm sure you can build something in the spirit of the character even if the mechanics are challenging.

Bloodragers do not have alignment restrictions. They also work off STR and CHA like Paladins do. Paladins are very front-loaded, so after Level 2-3, there really isn't much more, so Bloodrager can step in with things like Rage, Enlarge Person/Demonic Bulk, etc.

Bloodragers do not have alignment restrictions. They also work off STR and CHA like Paladins do. Paladins are very front-loaded, so after Level 2-3, there really isn't much more, so Bloodrager can step in with things like Rage, Enlarge Person/Demonic Bulk, etc.

Sure, but PF2 is not going to start with Bloodragers. Therefore, if rage is your primary concern for your character concept, you'd have to build with a barbarian. If spellcasting is your primary concern, you'd have to build with a sorcerer. I suppose you could multiclass Barbarian, Sorcerer And Paladin for this concept.

Fresh Start for everything.

"But i put in time.....I want people to know...."
Yes you did. It is advertised right next to you name.

"But I wanna be rewarded for....."
You have been. You already have been. You do not need to be constantly rewarded. That is silly

On the issue of races:
It will likely never happen but...Why not have every race have the same base additions? Like if every race started like humans. That way you can create whatever flavored character you want without the concern about "overpowered".

Let's start with a disclaimer, I've never GMd society before and have only played a limited amount.

GM Stars - I prefer option 3. I definitely agree though that the reward should be flavourful instead of overpowering.

Boons - I prefer the Legacy Boon option, but please for the love of god, stop limiting races/ancestries to boons. I very much believe if a players legitimately owns the required sources and the race is not banned for a specific reason, it should be allowed for all.

The way races are locked down in PFS and SFS is THE number 1 reason I can't convince any of my home players to ever play Society and why Society is dead in my country. There's literally not a single group left. The only reason I'm able to play Society at all is because I travel a lot.

PF1 replays - I *REALLY* like the Favored Character idea that's being mentioned. Make it so! ;)

The way races are locked down in PFS and SFS is THE number 1 reason I can't convince any of my home players to ever play Society . . .

I hear variations on this here and there, and I, personally, do not understand it. How does a campaign become unplayable because you have "only" 14 options in PFS or "only" 6 options with multiple pathways for players to unlock new races in SFS?

As a GM who has designed his own campaigns, I understand the need to limit options for the sake of setting. There are certain players that dislike the very concept of limitation, and would never want to play in my home campaigns. But that feeling is so prevalent and so vehement that a table of 4 can never come together under a common rule set is baffling to me.

Humans are my favorite race to play and there must be people like me all over the world. Yes, I very much appreciate the opportunity to play something unusual every once in a while, but non-humans are the minority of my PFS characters. In SFS, I'm trying to have a more cosmopolitan stable, but I have more race options available to me than I have builds.

I think it is because home players want to have all options open to them and don't see or understand that the "organized play GM" has set limits on what is allowed in the "organized play campaign".

Or to say it a different way, home players don't see organized play as a being controlled by a GM.

There’s been also a lot of dissapointment in the lack of skittermander availability in SFS. I know that when Charli finally gets to her wayfinder capstone, that’s what I’ll be getting with it. I love all the races that available in SFS — our core grouping is awesome — but, oh, how I really want to play a skittermander.

Alas, they’ve made skittermanders so rare that they’re nigh on impossible to get. I could see how that could disappoint some new players.

Hmm

The 'Racial Boonwall' is very much a deterrent for casual players.

ESPECIALLY ones that have a very neat concept for a non-O/P race.

I will freely admit I didn't even consider playing PFS until Tengu were made part of the 'always available' races, and I'm pretty sure there are others who have a 'favored race' that isn't 'Drizzt-clone' that use the same sort of measuring stick.

How many players have been disappointed to learn that 'just because you bought the book doesn't mean you can use the race from it'?

This is something that needs to be considered moving forward in PFS2.

Please note, not advocating for Drow Ancestry or even Assimar/Teethlings, they are determinedly more powerful than other races.

So I see that many have already made the comments about the Gm stars and boons that I was thinking myself and was not going to comment, but I was encouraged by my local VL to comment anyways.

GM stars: I do like the idea of Option 2—Subsidized Metric. I'm not going to quit playing and lose all hope if my stars don't carry over. And it is not taking anything away from new GMs if already long time GMs get some sort of recognition for their continued support.
Either way I still plan to go for 5 stars.

Boons: While there are some that I would love to bring to Pf2 (xenphobia). I would not be heart broken to have a freash start. Though the idea of have being able to use the Pf1 boons to help the table, such as use an old race boon as a breath of life, that also would be cool. I could see myself using to save someone's character.

The 'Racial Boonwall' is very much a deterrent for casual players.

ESPECIALLY ones that have a very neat concept for a non-O/P race.

At what point though is it a deterrent?

At the point where the new, casual player didn't read the guide to organized play and showed up with a level 5 Drow Noble priestess of Elistraee?(sp?)

I mean, if you start by reading the Guide (which I did), or just the CRB, you know what the racial limitations are, generally. So why would a new, casual player show up with a concept that doesn't fit into the CRB races, unless they didn't read the campaign documents or the CRB?

And if they've been playing awhile, they know the score and know what's required to get the special stuff. If they choose not to do those special things (there is almost never a situation where 100% can't is really true--its usually they don't want to make the necessary sacrifices to do so), then they don't get the special things.

Can that be demoralizing? Possibly. I can see that. But don't make it sound like its a deterrent to getting new players, unless the people that are teaching them the campaign for the first time are teaching them about what they can't have before what they can have.

Let's start with a disclaimer, I've never GMd society before and have only played a limited amount.

GM Stars - I prefer option 3. I definitely agree though that the reward should be flavourful instead of overpowering.

Boons - I prefer the Legacy Boon option, but please for the love of god, stop limiting races/ancestries to boons. I very much believe if a players legitimately owns the required sources and the race is not banned for a specific reason, it should be allowed for all.

The way races are locked down in PFS and SFS is THE number 1 reason I can't convince any of my home players to ever play Society and why Society is dead in my country. There's literally not a single group left. The only reason I'm able to play Society at all is because I travel a lot.

PF1 replays - I *REALLY* like the Favored Character idea that's being mentioned. Make it so! ;)

Just out of curiosity, which country?

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

The 'Racial Boonwall' is very much a deterrent for casual players.

ESPECIALLY ones that have a very neat concept for a non-O/P race.

At what point though is it a deterrent?

At the point where the new, casual player didn't read the guide to organized play and showed up with a level 5 Drow Noble priestess of Elistraee?(sp?)

I mean, if you start by reading the Guide (which I did), or just the CRB, you know what the racial limitations are, generally. So why would a new, casual player show up with a concept that doesn't fit into the CRB races, unless they didn't read the campaign documents or the CRB?

And if they've been playing awhile, they know the score and know what's required to get the special stuff. If they choose not to do those special things (there is almost never a situation where 100% can't is really true--its usually they don't want to make the necessary sacrifices to do so), then they don't get the special things.

Can that be demoralizing? Possibly. I can see that. But don't make it sound like its a deterrent to getting new players, unless the people that are teaching them the campaign for the first time are teaching them about what they can't have before what they can have.

I didn't know about the PFSRPGG for Year of the Demon until a month before GenCon 2014.

Up until that point, I was blissfully ignorant and the ONLY reason I picked it up was to make sure that I hadn't missed anything and because I was diligent, and worried.

Not everyone is.

Someone new who goes Oh, hey, I've played Pathfinder before, I've got this neat Suli character concept right now, I've got a slot free, I'll just drop in, I should be able to play, it's just Pathfinder, right?

Wait... what?!? I bought the Race Guide AND the Inner Sea Race Guide and you're NOW telling me I can't play this character without a special 'permission slip'?'

They are NOT going to be very receptive to "Well, here's a nice shiny pregen to play that doesn't have your character's race on it, and no, you can't play that race until you get your 'permission slip' to play that."

Not everyone can 'get' the special things. This makes the campaign exclusionary rather than inclusive.

There are areas out there that refuse to give Boons to GMs that prepped their tables, showed up on time, and the table didn't fire.

There are conventions that don't qualify for support, or recieve far too little of it far too late for it to matter.

There are areas where there are no conventions, so there's no way for folks who can GM to GM convention tables to get those boons.

It's not a choice to not do 'special things' if there's no option TO do 'special things'.

It's beyond demoralizing.

...and we kinda have to teach folks what they can and cannot have at the table as part of our obligations as a GM if they show up with an illegal build.

It's part of the 'not being a jerk' aspect.

This goes back to the whole point of, "people in general don't tend to read the information they need to in order to make an informed decision." I can understand if someone is making a quick snap decision about something, and sure, it might be disappointing that they don't get to play what they want.

But here's the deal. If they have time to build a character from scratch before the event, they have time to read that they need to make a PFS legal character and at the very least ask someone what that means. If they don't do that, then its their own fault for being demoralized.

EDIT: I'd think that maybe this is regional, but I've experienced roleplaying from coast to coast (Maryland, California, Ohio, Minnesota, and Texas) that wasn't organized play. And I have yet to run into a private gaming group that likes having a player drop into their game with a character without first finding out from the GM what's appropriate/available. And having been to conventions from coast to coast, I have yet to run into a game where the GM is ok with you just showing up with whatever. They all have rules for what you are allowed to make (if they even have that option.)

So it really is alien to me, this entitled attitude, that you can just make whatever you want to show up to someone else's game, without at least checking on what's available.

How is that different than say going to a movie or attending a sporting event at the last minute. Hey, I've heard the consessions are expensive at this event so I'll just stop off at the convenient store and get some drinks and snacks and save some money. Then you go and find out no outside food is allowed and then blame the event for your failure to read the rules written on the back of the ticket. You cannot simply say you watch movies or sports at home and therefore attending those events must be the same thing.

Now, I'm not saying we shouldn't look at our process for boons and perhaps make some changes, but to blame the system for following its published rules and getting upset about it because you chose not to read them is a non-starter for me.

We are looking at a new system.

Remaining aware of the pitfalls of the current methods while also utilizing the benefits of said system will make whatever option in the next iteration for greater draw of future participants in the new system and grow it.

How do we grow past 'permission slips' while still maintaining campaign integrity?

And Bob? I've been to several movies and not made a fuss when they said my diet-restricted items (which weren't on the menu) weren't allowed in.

It's been about fifty-fifty on that, with the other half of the time the person ushering/running concessions giving a polite and understandingly meaningful nod then a meaningful glance towards the bottle of water placed strategically on the counter... almost as if a provision was in place to address the concern for folks of limited dietary range...

EDIT: The point being, it was an immediate and accessible 'fix' that satisfied all parties while understanding the needs of both the provider and the customer.

There is a flipside to the permission-slip concept. Without it, we lose the only meaningful way to reward GMs and volunteers at conventions and local events. If you simply make all the restricted races and such open to everyone, now what is the plan for rewarding those people. It is clear that simply depending on the altruism of GMs does not work.

We are looking at a new system.

Remaining aware of the pitfalls of the current methods

Well, not everyone sees this as a pitfall. I understand that some do. But some of these things might not change between campaigns. And that doesn't mean that they did the wrong thing.

Oh, definitely not arguing it, but what other things could we put in place that are not horribly overpowering yet a 'nice thing to have' that GMs could acquire that aren't restricting future content instead of driving it?

Bonuses to die rolls?

Flat money amounts for day job type checks?

Equipment 'loans'?

Pro-rated experience values for advancing characters? (though admittedly that could cause even more 'blob' issues)

Expanded 'Always Available' lists for experienced GMs, with singular exceptions for GMs as a convention boon?

So far, GMs are saying they want race boons and value those above all the rest. The reward has to have value or it ceases to be an incentive.

Someone new who goes Oh, hey, I've played Pathfinder before, I've got this neat Suli character concept right now, I've got a slot free, I'll just drop in, I should be able to play, it's just Pathfinder, right?

Wait... what?!? I bought the Race Guide AND the Inner Sea Race Guide and you're NOW telling me I can't play this character without a special 'permission slip'?'

I get where you are coming from, but I heard that story before and it's usually a summoner (regardless of race).

And in that example, if chances are that the character was not PFS legal in the first place, and even if the race was the only illegal part, if that game was not a 1-5 but a 3-7 that player would not have been able to play that character.

That said, I think the reward structure for PFS2 is worth discussing.

Maybe we could go for a rewards structure, not unlike arcades where GMs get points to unlock stuff:

Each table at a public location/event under the supervision of a VO(to accommodate online) would reward GMs with a certain number of points that could be redeemed at their local VO.

For prizes:

10 tickets: uncommon race boon (Sylph etc.)
20 tickets: rare price boon (aasimar)
50 tickets: rare and amazing (Skittermander, Catfolk)
75 tickets: rare and a bit bonkers (Merfolk)
100 tickets: custom stuff(half dragon - balanced with a couple of negative levels etc.)

or other thank you rewards:

10: Student of the PFS Masters boon (like the GM reward boons we already have)
20: Wayfinder with breath of life
100: Protege boon

A convention could give maybe 3-5 tickets per slot and premium events like Gencon could reward 10-15.

---

I think players could also have ways to earn tickets, like helping new players to create his first character, helping to set up a venue etc.

EDIT: And of course we could add the purchase of a replay to that list ^^

They already had a problem with 'Token Hoarding' from some conventions for the GenCon Boon table, so much so that they are stepping away from that system.

I can't see stepping back to that system, unless there were some safeguards built in... safeguards that may ultimately kill interest because there's no reason to contribute 'outside of most RoI' venues...

Perhaps I'm being a bit cynical here?

If they make all races the same then everyone can just build the character they want.

They already had a problem with 'Token Hoarding' from some conventions for the GenCon Boon table, so much so that they are stepping away from that system.

I can't see stepping back to that system, unless there were some safeguards built in... safeguards that may ultimately kill interest because there's no reason to contribute 'outside of most RoI' venues...

Perhaps I'm being a bit cynical here?

Interesting, I need to work a bit more on that suggestion, but I am going for something that has a more or less global loot table.

Not everyone can 'get' the special things. This makes the campaign exclusionary rather than inclusive.

I disagree with the underlying premise: that everyone deserves to get special things (and I don't live in an area where it's easy to GM a convention or have a life situation that makes completing a RSP boon easily doable).

Exclusionary: You can't play because you have red hair.

Inclusive: Anyone can play. Here are the rules.

Not Exclusionary: You cannot create a catfolk character without a boon, but you're more than welcome to play with us and create a character using any of these 14 races and, please, let me help you create your character.

If they make all races the same then everyone can just build the character they want.

The OPC has explained their reasoning behind it quite a few times. However, even if we ignored their valid OP reasons, then you lose that as an incentive to get GMs to volunteer at conventions.