Pathfinder Society 2: GM Stars, Replay, and Boon Carryover

Wednesday, November 14, 2018

This is our third installment discussing our original sticky forum threads regarding the transition of the Pathfinder Society between version 1 and 2 of the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game. In past blogs, we discussed Tiers, Level Gain, and the Roleplaying Guild Guide and Boons & Chronicle Sheets. This week, we focus the conversations around converting PFS version 1 items, namely GM stars and boons, and what replay may look like for PFS version 1 after we launch version 2.

As each member of the Organized Play team focused on two issues, this week's blog includes discussion from myself, Lead Developer John Compton, and Developer Michael Sayre. Linda's got the week off from writing blog posts, but she'll be back in two weeks to discuss the final installment of original thread follow-up when we discuss Factions and Fame.

With the final installment of the blog in site and our refocusing of each issue to the most popular or most feasible options, we are closing down the original discussing threads. We wish to thank everyone who provided feedback, as it allowed us the opportunity to make PFS version 2 a community focused organization. While we know we cannot please everyone in all things, creating an organized play program that appeals to our community remains a top goal of the team.

Looking at today's topics. I focused on the GM stars conversion and PFS version 2 GM status indicator. Currently, the community poll regarding what to call GM status markers in PFS version 2 shows glyphs, but the poll doesn't close until December 1, so you still have time to weigh in. Submit your vote by visiting the October 3rd Organized Play blog and scrolling to the poll at the end.

GM star conversion is one area we've mostly made a decision on, as that choice isn't based on the results of the Pathfinder Playtest but entirely on player feedback, our analysis, and the ability of our technical department to support display of GM status markers. At this time, we are not planning converting GM status from PFS version 1 to version 2. We've also decided not to do a weighted model, where your first marker would be subsidized through your earned PFS version 1 GM Stars. Many factors weighed in on this decision, but in the end, we noted that the systems are substantially different, eighteen months into Starfinder we already have 4-nova GMs and carrying over discourages newer members of our community from participating.

We are currently in discussions as to how to process 5-nova GMs for Starfinder. We would like to automate some aspects of the process and are investigating with tech the feasibility of this option. We also are looking at how to make the Venture-Captain assessment more objective and standardized. In moving forward on the nova discussion, we intend that criteria to become the standard for both novas and PFS version 2 GMs achieving their 5th status marker.

Moving on from GM status, developer Michael Sayer weighs in on the matter of replay:

Replay Options

As some number of you all reading this might be aware, we've asked the community what your thoughts are on replay for the current PFS campaign and set up a thread for that discussion. There were a lot of thoughts and opinions expressed, running the gamut from not extending replay at all to opening everything up for unlimited replay.

Taking all of your feedback into account along with the prospective health of both editions of Pathfinder, we've come to the conclusion that the "no additional replay" option is not the correct path forward for the community as a whole. We believe that some additional replay options for the current Pathfinder campaign will be necessary for the health and well-being of those existing communities that rely on these play opportunities. That being said, we will not be implementing any changes to replay until mid-September to early October in 2019, and whatever replay option(s) we introduce will almost certainly be specific to the existing campaign as a means of compensating for the fact that we will no longer be producing new scenarios and will not reflect potential changes for Starfinder or the new edition of Pathfinder.

So, all that information out of the way, allow me to talk about what that really means for our GMs and players! We've come up with three new variations on our plans for expanded replay in the current PFS campaign once the new edition launches. These take elements of some of our earlier suggestions modified through your feedback and some discussions with our tech team to discover what was possible, and we'd like your input here to help us narrow down which of these options you'd most prefer as a community.

  • Option 1: A modest, fixed number of replays that would renew on a seasonal basis. These replays would not be level or character locked and would give opportunities to progress new characters through old stories or seat players who have already completed an adventure so that a full table can be formed.
  • Option 2: A more generous but fixed number of replays for all players and GMs. This would work much like option 1, except instead of a small pool that would refresh each season, you'd get a larger pool to spend at your discretion. However, with this option once you've used all of your replays, that's it.
  • Option 3: A sliding scale, fixed number of replays based on a percentage of total games played. This option would work much like option 2, except instead of everyone getting the same number of replays, the quantity of replays offered would scale up based on the number of games you've completed. This option would likely include a weighting mechanism whereby the number of GM stars you possess add some number of additional replays, rewarding our most devoted players and GMs with additional replays. One distinct benefit we see in this option is that it will help normalize the progress of groups with a mix of new and long-time players; long-time players will have more replays since they have fewer unplayed scenarios available to pick from, and newer players should find that it's easier to get tables for the remaining scenarios they still haven't played.

Whichever of these options you help us choose will be implemented about 1-2 months after the new edition releases, and will comprise the basis for continued play in the current campaign going forward, so let us know which option you think will be best for you and your local gamers!

Speaking to people at conventions, one of the most frequent conversations revolves around PFS convention boons and what will happen to them in PFS version 2. Organized play lead developer John Compton answers that:

Any discussion of how we're handling First Edition benefits going into the Second Edition campaign has always juggled at least three common considerations: established player loyalty, new player accessibility, and ease of implementation. I explore these ideas in one of our earliest Pathfinder Society blogs about the new edition, and these have been key in our examination of how to handle First Edition boons—and when I discuss boons here, I'm primarily referring to stand-alone boons commonly referred to as "convention boons" or "race boons," acquired through special events, the regional support program, and more.

So how do boons play out when examining these three considerations? From an established player loyalty perspective, having First Edition boons grant some benefit in Second Edition is typically good because it means that up to 11 years of play (and as much as 8 years of earning these boons) translates in some way to the new campaign. That's generally a nice feeling. The several counterpoints are discouragement of new players, design load, bookkeeping, and volume.

The more advantage a long-time player has, the more it can disincentivize someone joining the campaign. We hope that Second Edition's campaign can serve as a good jumping-on point for organized play, and starting people on a largely even playing field is important to us. From a design perspective, we have to balance how much time is involved in facilitating boons from one campaign to affect the other; this is one of the reasons that creating a conversion guide for all of the boons out there isn't feasible. Creating a whole bunch of conversions for boons would also be tricky because they'd require a lot of on-the-ground bookkeeping with trade-ins or validation, likely falling on the shoulders of venture-officers. In terms of volume, we have to consider not only that some very active players might have many dozens of boons, yet other campaign veterans may only have a couple. Anything we implement would need to ensure that somebody sitting on a boon trove wouldn't completely dominate the system while also ensuring that someone who has only a few boons still feels there's some benefit to using those boons for something in Second Edition.

When we considered the intersection of modest cross-campaign boon interaction, a realistic design footprint, ease of implementation for local organizers, and managing volume, we found ourselves repurposing a somewhat familiar tool: the "prize table" mechanic. This mechanic presents each player with their own set of potential prizes, which the player can purchase with some campaign currency (such as with the Playtest Points from our Pathfinder Society playtest). With few exceptions, there's only one of each prize, so a player can't just buy the same thing over and over.

What would this look like for boons? We're currently considering a Chronicle sheet similar to the Master of Spells/Scroll/Swords sheets issued for Pathfinder Society a few years ago. We intend one Chronicle for Pathfinder Society version 2 and one for Starfinder Society. A player may use one sheet in each campaign. Each Chronicle would include 5–8 benefits—most (or all) of them limited in scope to a single encounter or scenario, some of them personal boosts, and some of them benefits that could only be used on allies. In addition, we like the idea of having several benefits that would grant a notably bigger benefit if the player spent more than one boon when activating it. To use one of the benefits, you would take an unassigned boon, mark it to show it's been expended, and check off the benefit you used on this prize table Chronicle sheet.

For example, the Second Edition benefits sheet might have one option that says "Check the box that precedes this benefit and expend a boon to gain 2 Hero Points that last until the end of the adventure. If you expend two boons when activating this benefit, grant two other players 1 Hero Point. If you expend three boons when activating this benefit, grant every other player at the table 1 Hero Point." You expend your First Edition "Share the Wealth," "Celestial Traveler," and "Expedition Manager" boons, granting everyone at your table Hero Points that could avert death or turn the tide in a tough encounter. Once you use it, this benefit would be gone.

So how does the prize table approach to boon conversion aim to tackle the issue?

  • It presents the means to expend boons from one campaign on another to a limited degree—particularly in ways that provide a short-term benefit, not a permanent advantage.
  • By presenting a strong initial benefit, players who have only a few boons can still get a substantial benefit. By providing some options to expend additional boons when activating a benefit, those with many boons still have an outlet that doesn't substantially increase the frequency with which they can activate these benefits.
  • By including numerous options (and in some cases requirements) for these benefits to assist others at the table, these benefits can represent an experienced player's sharing their wealth with others, not excluding other players who don't have the same number of boons.
  • It places tracking in the hands of the players by means of a downloadable sheet.
  • Creating several such benefits sheets is a realistic project for the organized play team, in addition to the other projects we're currently handling.

We're interested to hear feedback on this plan, which we believe is a solid solution in handling the limited transfer of First Edition boons into Second Edition's campaign.

Next week, join organized play lead developer John Compton and developers Linda Zayas-Palmer, Michael Sayre, and Thurston Hillman as they preview the November Society scenario releases.

As a heads up, the Paizo offices are closed November 22nd and 23rd due to the celebration of Thanksgiving in the United States.

Until next time—Explore, Report, Cooperate!

Tonya Woldridge

Organized Play Manager

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Organized Play Pathfinder Playtest Pathfinder Society
1 to 50 of 179 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Huzzah!

***** Venture-Captain, Ohio—Northern aka GinoA

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I like the boon table approach, but it should provide some scaling benefit for the more "valuable" 1st edition boons. A GM race boon and a common player boon are not equal.

Providing a way to earn-up to more impressive 2nd edition boons is also desirable. A Hero Point is nice. It's not nearly as nice as opening a character option up.

Scarab Sages ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I haven't seen it mentioned, but I also could have missed it being mentioned in a previous post or discussion: Will version 1 GM credit continue to apply to version 1 GM stars once version 2 starts?

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

Reporting will continue to be supported exactly as it is now.

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't think any of these replay options are "good". Option 1 and 3 seem the best, but without knowing the actual numbers, it's impossible to judge.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Pennsylvania—Pittsburgh aka Terminalmancer

Not knowing the team's expectations on replay, it's really hard to evaluate any of the replay options. For example, what does "Modest" mean? Modest could mean 1, it could mean 5, it could mean 15, 30... all depending on the audience.

That said, option 1 sounds the best to me given what I understand of things right now.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Pennsylvania—Pittsburgh aka Terminalmancer

Re: replay, there are other variables at play that could significantly change how people interpret this. Will we continue to be able to use one Expanded Narrative boon per season to recharge GM stars, for example?

* RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I do not agree with the decision to not honor the hardworking GMs who earned their stars. System comprehension is only one of many aspects that make a great gamemaster.

(Also, I still think "sihedron" is a cooler name than sigil or glyph and would still technically be a star.)

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Texas—Austin aka Partizanski

For replays, I vote for option 1, though it would be nice your GM stars expanded on it.

ex.
X+GM stars replay per year

**

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Replays: I like 1 or 3. My opinion on 3 depends on how technically feasible it is. I also don't understand how it meets the stated goal of '[normalizing] the progress of groups,' but that's a big picture factor that doesn't really pertain to me.

Boon Table: Ultimately, OP has to do what they believe is best for OP, but the described system doesn't really inspire me to volunteer to GM PFS 1 scenarios going forward. Specials, online, as long as some form of indefinite replay is going to be supported, probably. Running 3-5 tables of the same scenario over and over for PFS 1? No, that doesn't interest me.

Fortunately, I enjoy SFS and anticipate jumping right into PFS 2, so that probably falls under "acceptable loses."

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

I like replay option 3 the best.

As for boons... I'm not a fan of the proposed system, personally, because of what I value about boons. My favorite boons were always those that offered a new character option or design choice. Turning something that let me create a character I couldn't otherwise create, into a boring power-boosting numbers benefit, isn't especially valuable to me.

That said, assuming option 2 doesn't get too much support, I can just save them for PFS1. I have so much left to do in this system. ^_^

**

10 people marked this as a favorite.

Counter-intuitively, we value the boons that make our characters cosmetically or narratively unique rather than those that make our characters more powerful.

Examples of PFS 2 effects I'd be more interested in:

* Elvish weapons are considered common for this character
* Dwarvish weapons are considered common for this character
* You can create a half-elf with aquatic elf ancestry, which allows you to take 'Quick Swim' as an Ancestry Feat (either with or without meeting the prerequisites).
* You can create a bleachling gnome: your ancestry boosts are Constituation and Intelligence rather than Charisma.

Grand Lodge Venture-Lieutenant, Colorado—Northern Colorado aka treidenb

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If replay option 3 can be programmed to calculate your recorded sessions and appear on players' account pages next to GM stars and/or games played, then it sounds great. However, it shouldn't be another bookkeeping item for players to have to spend 30 minutes reconciling chronicle sheets and recorded sessions every few months to check.

If it can't be calculated within the account page, then replay option 1 would be the next best option for veteran players to help fill tables and continue playing.

I don't know if an automated reset date on replaying would also help. Set a date, like six or seven years, where sessions that you played that long ago are re-opened for replay.

* RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

6 people marked this as a favorite.

I like replay option #3. Option #1 is also good.

I'm not happy with the boon table scheme. Only getting weak temporary bonuses from sacrificing valuable 1st Edition boons that do cool stuff for your character would feel more like a slap in the face to most players who invested in 1st Edition.

I will echo the response of Blake's Tiger. I value boons that are fun. Not necessarily boons that are powerful. I like boons that add flavor or add to a character's narrative or make them stand out.

Dark Archive **

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I feel like GMs should be rewarded between systems for 'insert symbol name' conversion or reductions. A meager reduction in 'insert symbol name' accumulation is hardly going to scare away new player/GMs. Its not like they have a substantial mechanical benefit in 1e (+1-+5 once a game on a re-roll). So I highly question why a person having any amount of 'insert symbol name' deters another person from stepping up to GM. On one hand the obtainment of symbols is like obtaining reddit upvotes (essentially meaningless) so I feel like it doesn't really matter what you decide to do. However, you and others make a base assumption here that they are in fact rewarding to people who have invested hundreds of hours volunteering for your company. With that assumption in mind, it feels like you are basically hosing 1e GM volunteers for no reason. A key question is:

"Will the 2e Playest games GM'd contribute towards the 'insert symbol name' 2e PFS accumulation?"

(note I have seen 0-2 star GMs who are far better GMs then a 5 star, so again I'm really confused as to why you are taking away the imaginary point system you've set up as a metaphysical reward basis).

In terms of the 1e to 2e boon conversion. Your suggested change sounds lack luster and disappointing. Why can't you just let people trade in a race boon for a race boon? Your likely going to have season 1 or season 2 early race access boons anyways. So where is the harm in just letting them be exchanged. Those races generally get added a year later to the greater public anyways (e.g., legacy races in starfinder) so why are we splitting hairs about the 'long term' power gains here turning off new players. Its just silly if you ask me. To swap a character defining choice type boon that is 'no more powerful than any other for a extremely short term one off buff boon just sucks. Why bother at all. I have hundreds of normal chronicle sheets filled with that kind of 'boon' and 90% of them sit there unused. The 10% used are only for the bonekeep type adventures where I take extra preventative actions to ensure my PC keeps living.

The decisions being promoted above basically sound to me like a abandonment of your 1e PC player base. Anything that you gave in 1e that got people excited or having fun as a reward for making the campaign successful are being striped away in the red herring name of 'don't scare the new players'. Why not support your existing 1e fan base instead of ditching them in favour of the 'generically ambiguous new 2e PC' you keep formulating in these posts. The end result of the 2e treadmill math is a dramatic reduction the power floor/ceiling gap between any two PCs. So at this point you are essentially taking away flavour options (race A vs. B) and saying they are being removed because of game balance. It doesn't compute.

Grand Lodge ****

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I am still in favor of NO REPLAY.

Scarab Sages *** Venture-Agent

I am also still in favor of no replays, and I'm amazed that the option is being dismissed entirely rather than including it as an option for us to vote on.

**** Venture-Agent, Maryland—Hagerstown aka Z...D...

I agree with my twin...

Shadow Lodge ***** ⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.

"THREEEE"

** Venture-Agent, Ireland—Dublin aka EJDean

4 people marked this as a favorite.

For replays, options 2 and 3 are non-starters, because they run out eventually. Only option 1 will actually allow people to continue to play PFS 1e.

Honestly, the opinion of no replays, or severely limited replays (what we have now) baffles me. If a group wants to munchkin their way through the same "valuable" scenarios and crowd out new players, that is a social problem, not a game rules problem.

Grand Lodge **

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Peevenator wrote:
I haven't seen it mentioned, but I also could have missed it being mentioned in a previous post or discussion: Will version 1 GM credit continue to apply to version 1 GM stars once version 2 starts?

"At this time, we are not planning converting GM status from PFS version 1 to version 2. We've also decided not to do a weighted model, where your first marker would be subsidized through your earned PFS version 1 GM Stars. Many factors weighed in on this decision, but in the end, we noted that the systems are substantially different, eighteen months into Starfinder we already have 4-nova GMs and carrying over discourages newer members of our community from participating."

See paragraph five in the Blog.

**

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Zach Davis wrote:
I am also still in favor of no replays, and I'm amazed that the option is being dismissed entirely rather than including it as an option for us to vote on.

1. It's not a democracy. Ultimately, all we can ever do is express our opinion to the OPC, but how they incorporate it is fully in their control. I'd like a better boon conversion option, but I'm not going to demand an online poll to determine what they do let alone a poll for an option that they already said was a hard no.

2. Voting is biased toward active website visitors not a reflection of the international or even national community.
3. We did vote with our opinions in the official thread for a good long time.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Subscriber

I like the prize table concept for using up unassigned boons.

Also, I'm 100% behind Option 1 for replays. It's the only option that allows players to continue indefinitely into the future, which I feel is incredibly important.

*

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting Subscriber

I am in favor of whatever option requires the least amount of book keeping and cross referencing.

Ultimately this would be unlimited replays, but of the options listed (none of which I am a huge fan of) options 1 seems to require the least amount of paperwork and looking up which character has played what, and which thing I ran etc.

I will also second (third? fourth?) the notion that _flavor_ boons are the best boons. I absolutely loath boons that offer one time benefits, or that can be only used in extremely limited situations. I am never going to remember that I get +1 to hit vs kobolds from cheliax on the third wednesday of the month.

My absolute favorite boon of all time was the merfolk boon. Sure it ate up a bunch of clearly superior boons, and allowed access to a mostly useless race , but it was both fun, flavorful, and did not require me to remember some random floating bonus, or track a limited use effect.

*****

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Option 3 for replay, please. There can't really be infinite support of PFS1, and it's always harder to schedule a vet than a new person. This gives Lodges more ability to schedule PFS1 games for a long time without losing veteran players (whoa re often also GMs).

Why I changed my mind on replay:
I used to be against replay, but then I also seem to have bad at having "that person" at my table, who will exploit every loophole. Then, I replayed a scenario using a GM star and had absolutely NO recollection of what had happened the first time! I thought it may have been a reporting error, it was so unfamiliar. Granted, my memory isn't the best, and that was a Season 1 scenario. Still, I think that for every person who might use it to game the system/boon fish/whatever, there are more people who will just use it to play their PFS1 characters to retirement. An end during "the grinder" may not be everyone's cup of tea.

*****

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Option #3 seems like the best option to me. It's hard to say for sure because we don't know the numbers.

In the end I vote for whatever option lets me play PF V1 the most.

*****

5 people marked this as a favorite.

As far as GM Stars not carrying over, I understand the reasoning, but I'm conflicted. A couple of points to consider:

I think that the main thing most GMs gain as they run more games is not rules mastery, it's setting mastery and storytelling ability. This is as valid in PFS2 as in PFS1.

On the disincentive for new players: some newcomers may be put off by veteran players who have more Glyphs*, but consider the converse: a GM that reached 5 stars several years ago may now run fewer times per week/month/year than they used to. Maybe they've taken on admin duties at their Lodge, or concentrate on running no=-credit games to recruit new players, or organize cons, or became a Venture-Officer, or all of those things. Those experienced GMs could be put off by the fact that they have to "pay their dues" all over again, competing with the folks who are still gaming every day. I don't want GMs or Lodges to be put in the position of needing to drop important-but-unrecognized-by-Paizo volunteer work so they can re-build GM cred and whatever benefits again.

So yeah, conflicted. We expect a lot of new players, but we are counting on a lot of existing GMs. Tough balance.

*:
See what I did there? Glyphs. Even though the Sihedron may look cooler, it's the symbol of the seven sins**, each one of which makes for a bad GM. They're not marks of achievement, they're penalty flags.

**:
Plus, they're caster-based, and we don't want to increase the caster-martial disparity. :)

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Texas—Austin aka Partizanski

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I also want to say that flavor boons, even if they give little no mechanical bonus are much preferred to anything that is one time use or boons that are only useful in very specific circumstances.

Permanent, thematic boons are something I am vastly more interested, rather than turning my collection of PF1 boons into a blank currency.

Grand Lodge **

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Tonya,

Thank you for recapping the discussion for those of us that are just entering the fray of these important topics.

Regarding PFS 1E Replays: I'm of the opinion that Option 1, is probably the most viable for the veteran players who have been the foundation Organized Play, and will provide the means by which these veterans players might be able to continue to provide value to 1E tables, both as players, and as GMs, while still permitting them to receive benefit (i.e. chronicles), for so long as 1E retains interest.

I believe it's a safe assumption that the cadence of scenario publication is unlikely to change from the current model (~2 per month). If we assume that our veteran players (who have few, if any, playable scenarios) will pick up PFS 2E, this means that those veteran players, who are often the backbone of our store presence, and attend on a weekly basis (sometimes more) will have PFS 2E "completed" each month in 2 sessions with nothing further to play (for benefit), unless we provide a means of allowing them to continue to garner benefits (i.e. chronicles) for their 1E characters via replay.

The ability for these veteran players to continue to garner "personal benefit" in the form of chronicles for 1E scenarios will also help to maintain the flow of traffic in our Friendly Local Game Stores, who are the backbone of some of our Lodges facilities.

Thank you for permitting me to provide my thoughts.

Shadow Lodge ***** Venture-Lieutenant, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East aka thistledown

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Shared the blog with my players last night. All agreed that we'd need to see numbers first, but most leaning towards 3 if the numbers are sufficient and 1 if they are not.

Sovereign Court **** ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Agent, Georgia—Atlanta aka The Masked Ferret

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I would vote 3, the my second vote would go for 1, if 3 were not chosen.

Grand Lodge **** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento aka FLite

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Personally I lean toward a very generous 1.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Alex Wreschnig wrote:
Re: replay, there are other variables at play that could significantly change how people interpret this. Will we continue to be able to use one Expanded Narrative boon per season to recharge GM stars, for example?

Currently, the idea is that all three of these options would be in addition to the replay opportunities already available.

Zach Davis wrote:
I am also still in favor of no replays, and I'm amazed that the option is being dismissed entirely rather than including it as an option for us to vote on.

No replays was one of our earlier options and wasn't dismissed entirely; as I linked in the blog this is something we started discussing and considering several months ago and on which we have received considerable feedback from players and venture officers.

Ultimately there needs to be some form of expanded replay made available, otherwise we truly would be abandoning the current campaign, at least for our most ardent players and GMs who already consume materials as fast as (in some instances faster than) we can create it. This is especially true for small lodges who are already struggling to seat tables due to their players not having identical play progressions.
Ultimately the venture officers in charge of each region will be making the decisions about what scenarios they want to run and when they want to run them. Giving them tools to make that an actual decision where they can control and implement the solutions that work best for them instead of forcing them to struggle within a narrowly defined space of whatever cross-section of unplayed scenarios might be left is going to be important for the health and continuation of a number of regions.

** Venture-Agent, Canada—Nova Scotia—Halifax aka Redgar

3 people marked this as a favorite.

For what it may be worth, I think Option 1 is preferable. Reasonable replay that would enable:

a) experienced players to continue to meet monthly to (re)play some PFS 1.0 scenarios together; and,

b) experienced players to gain some credit (and thereby incentivize participation / full tables / fun times) when they tag along to support new groups/players playing through PFS 1.0 content for the first time.

Small lodges, like ours here in Halifax/Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, benefit greatly from the enthusiasm, engagement, and knowledge of veteran PFSers. There are some great PFS 1.0 stories to be told to new players who want to play PFS 1.0, and option 1 helps new players experience that content (if, as is usually the case in my experience, there are 1-2 brand new players in the hopper, and a motley crew of veterans with different play experiences for whom sometimes new-to-them content can be scheduled, but who sometimes find themselves filling out a table for a scenario they have already played).

Plus, it would be a nice gesture to providing at least a minimum of "Legacy" support to the system many veterans have expended significant piles of gp and years of their lives investing in. Helps offset the great devaluation to come with the advent of PFS 2.0. ;)

(Tongue in cheek reference to the GP = SP change in the new system, and an acknowledgement of the real financial cost that Paizo will be asking new players to bear when they switch to 2.0. Coming from the CCG/LCG world, the current play value of 'legacy' products influences perception of the longevity/value of today and tomorrow's 'new' products, at least in my experience... .)

** Venture-Agent, Canada—Nova Scotia—Halifax aka Redgar

1 person marked this as a favorite.

@ any veteran PFSers with piles o' GM boons, etc, for PFS 1.0:

Don't think you'll get value for your trade-in at the PFS 2.0 table? Then come on down to Honest Redgar's Used Boon Emporium! No sp, gp, pp, or ep will change hands, we favour the good ol' fashioned barter system. Who knows what wonders might be found in our vaults that could form a bargain to satisfy Abadar himself!

Who knows, Grandmaster Torch might even make you an offer you can't refuse!

(Offer not valid where prohibited by law, scripture, or Dragon. Your mileage, much like that of our inventory, may vary.)

Dark Archive ***** ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Germany—Rhein Main South aka schattenstern

9 people marked this as a favorite.

While I like the prize table approach I think ifd you sacrifice permanent (race) boons you should get a permanent benefit in PF2.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Subscriber

Though it is difficult to make a reasoned choice without at least knowing the ballpark the numbers will fall in, for replays I currently favour version 1. Version 3 has some appeal, however, I am concerned that there would be a scrambling to chase unreported games or hard feelings from those who have many games not showing in the system at the time the replays are assigned. I also wonder how it will affect play as the date for conversion approaches.

As to boons, I am one of those not expecting any carry over from one version to the other so this table simply offers me some options which I may or may not choose to avail myself of. Thank you.

The Exchange *

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I like option 1 for replays if we have to have replays at all then that's the one I will choose.

As far as the boon trade in or whatever, I also believe that if I turn in a GM race boon that I had to GM 5+ tables at GenCon to earn I ought to get one of comparable value, NOT a one or however many time mechanical value benefit!

As an aside, I have found that after the announcement of PF2 I have been GMing less PF1 and more Starfinder and I will continue to do so as I believe we are now in a time of diminishing returns for PF1. I also almost always take a SFS boon over a PFS boon if give the choice unless it is a race boon or something that I can use on a current PF1 character immediately. That's just my YMMV.

Again,

Option 1

Better or weighted Boon for Boon transfer system.

***** Venture-Lieutenant, Online aka Magabeus

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Guide to Organized Play page 8 wrote:
A GM has the right to deny replaying an adventure to players if she feels uncomfortable running an adventure for players who have foreknowledge of the story.

I ripped this sentence out of context, but if this would apply to all kinds of replay then I don't mind the option to have unlimited replays.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Red Griffyn wrote:
The decisions being promoted above basically sound to me like a abandonment of your 1e PC player base.

This, this entirely. Basically if you like PF1e, you're being told to get lost here.

I haven't done a lot of organized play because it isn't supported here, but I had hoped it would still be a real option post 2nd edition (which I do not like and will never like).

This is making it clear that not only will it not be a real option, but that anyone who was invested in it is not appreciated by Paizo.

Liberty's Edge ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hi :-)

Boons - it's been said a few times but what makes a boon fun is that it makes a character different - a permanent fun boon is waaaay better than a mechanical benefit.

Even if there's little or no mechanical benefit I'd far rather have a flavor boon.

Also, spending boons for one off bonuses (no matter how powerful) would be pretty soul destroying (bye bye vanarra, dhampir, ganzi - hello minor benefit on rolls).

GM boons are a thank you for the time effort and often money that GMs have put into making conventions fun. Printing, buying maps, buying minis etc... quite often you'll look round a convention hall and see GMs have scratch-built 3D terrain or created unique minis for important foes... We do it to make the gaming experience as fabulous as possible for our players, GM boons have always been really important to me in feeling that Paizo values that effort and investment.

*

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's also a matter of respect and courtesy.

We need to respect and understand the amount of time and sacrifice PF1 GMs have put in (at least, I HOPE they've put in) to make PFS an organizational success that is growing.

Failing to do so, or devaluing the play experience to the point that it is no longer viable does the community no good, and will encourage independent communities to spring up, without the safeguards, without the measured pace, and with a definite decline in quality assurance as time goes by.

I've played, GM'd, and coordinated for campaigns in settings that have had their rules turned obsolete.

The OrgPlay leadership role is no picnic, and the amount of work involved at times can be soul-searing.

As far as replay options, I suspect 1 is the most viable of the three, followed by 3 if the logistics can be reliably worked out.

As far as Boons?

Something with flavor or history versus some random 'one-off' reroll or die bonus, please. A lot of resources were devoted to earning those in some cases, so turning them from Guinness to Miller Lite is not the solution...

Paizo Employee ***** Organized Play Manager

6 people marked this as a favorite.
cycnet wrote:
Red Griffyn wrote:
The decisions being promoted above basically sound to me like a abandonment of your 1e PC player base.

This, this entirely. Basically if you like PF1e, you're being told to get lost here.

I haven't done a lot of organized play because it isn't supported here, but I had hoped it would still be a real option post 2nd edition (which I do not like and will never like).

This is making it clear that not only will it not be a real option, but that anyone who was invested in it is not appreciated by Paizo.

I'm trying to understand the sentiment expressed by Cycnet, Red Griffyn, and others and would appreciate some feedback.

As I see it, if Paizo wanted to abandon PFS version 1 when we started PFS version 2, we would just shut down reporting, no longer count PFS v1 tables for event support, not count PFS v1 activities when looking at Venture-Officer coverage in an area, stop sanctioning APs, and not look at what convention rewards post-Gen Con 2019 would be available. This would be far less time consuming and relieve some of the time-stressors of the Org Play team. We haven't taken any of those steps to date and our communications with the community are directly opposite. Communities that continue to play PFS v1 post-Gen Con 2019 will be able to do so and those games will count towards community/convention totals. Boons will still work, games still count towards GM Stars, and players may register new characters on paizo.com.

Statements about not supporting PFS v1 with new scenario production after July 2019 are absolutely correct. We do not have capacity in our team to produce more than 4 scenarios & 1 quest a month, along with the supporting material such as sanctioning , additional resource review, and convention support. So we have to cut something and PFS v1 scenarios is where we are doing it.

In what ways are we showing we are abandoning our players, do not appreciate our player base, or are making PFS v1 "not a real option"? What actions could we take that would change this feeling? What messaging should we be focused on?

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

5 people marked this as a favorite.

No one’s option was dismissed. The reality is we’ve spent the last few months or more arguing about replay and PFS2 GM credit. Paizo has listened to the comments, reviewed the options and decided their course of action. Personally, I don’t want to see replay expanded, but that option is no longer on the table. Moving forward I can be part of the solution and support the one I can most tolerate or I can bail on the whole subject. Arguing about no expanded replay is falling on deaf ears at this point. I would strongly encourage everyone to take a similar review of the state of affairs. This thread is no longer about unlimited replay, or no expanded replay or transferring star credit to PFS2, it’s about the options offered in the blog. Let’s focus on those.

Grand Lodge *** Venture-Lieutenant, Ireland—Newtownabbey aka Ampersandrew

2 people marked this as a favorite.

re: Replays

Option 1 seems to be the only option that allows for continued play on an ongoing basis. So I'd have to go for that.

I think I would really prefer an option 1.5 that relates to option 1 the way option 3 relates to option 2.

Option 1.5: A sliding scale, fixed number of replays based on a percentage of total games played that would renew on a seasonal basis.

If you've played a lot you get more replay opportunities because it's harder to find a game you haven't played yet. This should allow players who wish to continue playing first edition to do so, indefinitely.

What I really want to see is better support in the IT. The system currently complains when you use a GM star to replay something that you've played it before. I would like some way to tell it that its authorised.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

6 people marked this as a favorite.

On replay, I think option three is really unfair to new players. When you sit at a table and someone is “forced” into a replay situation, the length of their play history does not impact the viability of that table or the experience of that player at that moment. I shouldn’t be any more able to replay than a player who joined the campaign last month.

If the idea is to allow PFS1 to continue indefinitely option two would not support it. A finite replay system will cause the campaign to end as people run out of replays. If that is the intent, fine, but that is not the impression I am getting from leadership

Option 1 seems the best, not because I like it as an option, but of the three, it seems the most fair and it will allow replay as long as there are players willing to play.

I also want a system that is easy to explain and easy to implement. Sliding scales with some arbitrary formula to determine the number of replays is an unnecessarily complicated feature.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

Tonya Woldridge wrote:


I'm trying to understand the sentiment expressed by Cycnet, Red Griffyn, and others and would appreciate some feedback.

I should be clear up front that I'm quite comfortable with Paizo's position. I agree that you ARE continuing to support PF1 to the extent that you reasonably can while making PF2 your very clear primary focus.

I think that the sentiments expressed are just people expressing frustration and not being particularly careful in the WAY that they're expressing that frustration.

Speaking only for myself, I believe that the reality is that (at least in my local area) PFS1 will fairly rapidly die off as a viable proposition after GenCon 2019. I just think that not many tables will actually fire.

Again, speaking only for myself, I'll have probably played EVERY PFS1 scenario before the end of 2019. Replay will keep me playing a little longer. I'll likely run some PF1 games if players explicitly request them.
But my default position will be to run PF2 games.

So, I believe that it is quite reasonable that people expect PFS1 to gradually die out. It will happen more quickly in some areas than in others but I expect it to be the rare location that has any in store PFS1 games in 2021.

And people who prefer PF1 to PF2 just wish that wasn't true. That fact frustrates them. And their statements about lack of support are really just venting that frustration publicly.

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Bob Jonquet wrote:
No one’s option was dismissed. The reality is we’ve spent the last few months or more arguing about replay and PFS2 GM credit. Paizo has listened to the comments, reviewed the options and decided their course of action. Personally, I don’t want to see replay expanded, but that option is no longer on the table. Moving forward I can be part of the solution and support the one I can most tolerate or I can bail on the whole subject. Arguing about no expanded replay is falling on deaf ears at this point. I would strongly encourage everyone to take a similar review of the state of affairs. This thread is no longer about unlimited replay, or no expanded replay or transferring star credit to PFS2, it’s about the options offered in the blog. Let’s focus on those.

As people know, I fairly often publicly disagree with Bob. This is NOT one of those times :-). He is right. Opinions were considered, decisions made. Its time to accept those decisions and move on.

As to replay options, I want as many as possible frontloaded as much as possible. Correctly or incorrectly I think PFS1 is likely to only have a fairly limited time span before it disappears (at least locally) and I want to play as much as possible in that time period.

* RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.
GM Lamplighter wrote:
Even though the Sihedron may look cooler, it's the symbol of the seven sins**, each one of which makes for a bad GM. They're not marks of achievement, they're penalty flags.

The sihedron originally represented the fruits of just and honorable rulership.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

...and the swastika originally represented good fortune. Sometimes, things change meaning.

1 to 50 of 179 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild / Paizo Blog: Pathfinder Society 2: GM Stars, Replay, and Boon Carryover All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.