February Update— Achievement Points , Stars, Novas, Spotlights and Conventions!

Wait, wait, wait, hold on a sec.

Is there 2 Conventions called CogCon, and they are both on the same weekend, in 2 different states?
Both Rolla(MO) and Sacramento(CA), have a CogCon the weekend of 3/27/2020?

b) For rebuilds, I see it as pretty amzing to have that offered at all. The campaign has traditionally been very cautious about post-level 1 rebuilds. The un-limited (and fairly cheap) under level 5 option, is a huge boon (no pun originally intended) for us. That they offer the 5 and up one as well, at increasing cost is still a nice relaxing of the rules, but at a steep enough cost that people won't show up week to week with a different build.

I guess I just don't see the problem with someone showing up week to week with a different build. You're already playing in a campaign where the players at a given table can change arbitrarily from week to week, what does it really hurt if someone decides to blow some AcP on multiple rebuilds? I mean yeah, I think it's a waste, but fundamentally is it really more disruptive than that spot at the table being filled by a completely different person with a completely different character?

@Wei Ji the Learner, if you refuse to participate in PFS2 unless you can immediately start play with an Uncommon ancestry, you'll be waiting a long time. In fact, you won't ever play unless transferable AcP is implemented or tengu are declared Common.

Is playing as another ancestry really worse than not playing PFS at all? I guess you could just GM until you get enough ACP.

The other ancestries that 'grab' me would be iruxi (point-gated) and kobold trueblood (not even on the radar yet).

The 'core races' just don't 'do it' for me, unfortunately.

I tried making a barbarian with an anger issue out of some of my Gen Con Gm credit, and it made me more sad as a player than the idea of playing rando pregen #X... which was also making me sad.

After the horrible experience I had trying to run at Gen Con (players had fun, I felt like a total hack and won't be able to get over that until enough playtime is had) I'm not GMing until I feel 'better' about the system.

The bigger problem is this... even if I can find a pregen I can 'live with' to play, those play opportunities will be *gone forever* for any tengu I want to play save for repeatables, of course and I'm not getting any younger or getting any more 'play time' so the chances to play are going to dry up over time, even under ideal circumstances.

I guess I just don't see the problem with someone showing up week to week with a different build. You're already playing in a campaign where the players at a given table can change arbitrarily from week to week, what does it really hurt if someone decides to blow some AcP on multiple rebuilds? I mean yeah, I think it's a waste, but fundamentally is it really more disruptive than that spot at the table being filled by a completely different person with a completely different character?

It does make cheating even easier than it currently is.

Right now, if I bring my level 2+ character to a table with players or GMs who have seen it before somebody may notice if it is substantially different. And ask to see the retraining chronicle sheet, or at least look at me with raised eyebrows.

But if it becomes the norm for characters to change then that (admittedly small) break on cheating is lessened.

On a semi-related note, I'm thinking that the PFS rebuild rules are actually bordering on the TOO generous side. The cost to retrain is a pretty trivial amount of money unless the player has SERIOUSLY optimized their downtime. I've been creating some characters and planning out their progress. In several cases I really want a multiclass but NOT until level 4 or 6, the dedication level 2 feat is basically somewhere between "meh" and garbage (only sometimes, I hasten to add. Sometimes ALL I care about is the dedication feat). It is now VERY cheap and easy to just wait until I'm about to hit level 4 and retrain the level 2 feat and then take the level 4 feat.

I really think people need to put the cost into perspective.

Play any single char to level 8 (21 scenarios needed) and get a boon for Leshy or Iruxi for you next char.

Play any single char to level 11 (30 scenarios needed) and get a boon for a hobgoblin.

Play at conventions and get it quicker.

GM and you can get it a lot quicker.

There are winners and losers. Certain play/GM styles gain a lot more now.

I played my first 2e on the 12th November, GMed my first game on 28th and just checked and have approx. 200 AcP already. Out of these I GMed 2 at a con, 3 slots I offered didn't get enough players, 1 slot I played. So at a CON I likely would have got something small or nothing instead. So yes - it is easy for me to tell others as I'm in the winner camp.

But overall I think the numbers are healthy. It just takes time until you can afford the shiny boons. If you play your char to high enough level you can start every new char with a boon eventually.

Just not yet - unless you GM. But 10 scenarios (a single star) to gain a leshy or iruxi to get a head start isn't too shabby either.

On a semi-related note, I'm thinking that the PFS rebuild rules are actually bordering on the TOO generous side.

You mean PF2, not PFS. Retraining is baked into PF2 core rules.

I think that when we get into these rewards discussions, sometimes we lose sight that there are some fundamental ideas, such as “consistent” play that we are striving to maintain. With respect to things like rebuilds, most home-game GMs don’t just let you show up every session with a different character. To some extent that’s true in OP as well, but it’s focused more on keeping individual characters consistent in their career as possible. There are pretty permissive rebuild rules already written into the rules, plus you can earn more thru AcP. And that’s on top of the way you can build “GM babies” that essentially let you optimize both purchasing and build choices because you don’t have to deal with lower level play.

Especially with respect to 2E, if you ask the designers, one of the key aspects of their methodology is that choices matter. Sometimes you have to sacrifice the most optimal to be more functional. The more we allow rebuilding the more it erodes away at some of the design features that work together to maintain balanced play, or at least as much as can be had in a game with such a massive and growing rule set.

I think it helps to look at each character you have as if it exists in its own campaign, rather than all in the same one. Yes, you can switch characters after every session if you wanted to so there is not consistency from the GM’s perspective, but the development of individual characters is meant to follow the basic assumptions that for the most part they remain consistent from session to session. At least as far as the retraining rules permit it.

I really think people need to put the cost into perspective.

Okay. As mentioned above, playing once a week for a year will get you A Leshy OR AN Iruxi and playing for two years will get you A Hobgoblin. Life being what it is, two sessions a month is a rare treat and once a month is the norm. So that's 2-4 years for a Leshy or Iruxi and 4-8 for a hobgoblin. As Wei Ji mentioned, that's a long time to play your second choice.

As for GMing at a con, I have one local con (an hour or so drive one way) I could GM at. Anything else is time off work, hotels, and associated expenses. That's not really doable. I haven't GMed since AD&D and I didn't really enjoy it or do a good job I feel.

Paizo seems to have a idealized view of how things can be earned that doesn't match up with reality from my perspective.

How does it not?

It’s not simple or fast, but it is doable.

It’s not simple or fast, but it is doable.

Is the effort in proportion to the result? I say it's not.

Everything on the list is doable, why discuss changing anything? It can be done!

Keep saying it. I hope that it turns out well for you.

Thod wrote:

I really think people need to put the cost into perspective.

Okay. As mentioned above, playing once a week for a year will get you A Leshy OR AN Iruxi and playing for two years will get you A Hobgoblin. Life being what it is, two sessions a month is a rare treat and once a month is the norm. So that's 2-4 years for a Leshy or Iruxi and 4-8 for a hobgoblin. As Wei Ji mentioned, that's a long time to play your second choice.

As for GMing at a con, I have one local con (an hour or so drive one way) I could GM at. Anything else is time off work, hotels, and associated expenses. That's not really doable. I haven't GMed since AD&D and I didn't really enjoy it or do a good job I feel.

Paizo seems to have a idealized view of how things can be earned that doesn't match up with reality from my perspective.

Race/Ancestry boons have always been rewards for GMing because the Oranized Play team wants to encourage people to GM, for obvious reasons.

New to PFS2 is the fact 1) you can choose the ancestry boon you want, or even a non-ancestry boon and 2) people are rewarded for playing, not just GMing. Both are great improvements.

People who do not (or cannot) play often or GM ever are rewarded less than those who do. That's the nature of a reward system like the AcP.

Rysky wrote:

It’s not simple or fast, but it is doable.

Is the effort in proportion to the result? I say it's not.

Everything on the list is doable, why discuss changing anything? It can be done!

Everyone falls somewhere on the spectrum. Some will benefit a lot from this system, and some won't. The vast majority will be just fine.

You need a system where your biggest supporters get the biggest support.

On Valentine's Day weekend I'll be GMing 2 sessions of PFS2 (my first ones). Combining those points with all of the games I've already played online, and I'll be one game short of creating an Iruxi.

So that's six months of play, with a couple games GMed, and I'll have my first uncommon race. Plus, I've been able to play a Goblin this whole time. Seems pretty cool to me, and I'm the definition of a casual player (right now).

Can you think of a better setup?

Can you think of a better setup?

Make all races playable if you have the book. The end.

Nefreet wrote:

Can you think of a better setup?

Make all races playable if you have the book. The end.

Not going to happen. It's part of an incentive program for PATHFINDER SOCIETY. If you want to play a home brew with everything in it as you want it, go for it.

The End.

tl;dr - A decision seems to have been made to stop incentivizing GMing at smaller conventions more than at regular gamedays, and that's not good.

The real worry in this for me is what's been pointed out upthread with regards to conventions and GM rewards. At our smaller conventions, the race boons were often what got someone to step up and GM a game when they otherwise rarely or never GM at the local gamedays. Thinking about giving GMing a try? Do it at the con, and you get a boon out of it. This led to expanding our pool of GMs and was a way to get people past the hurdle of trying it for the first time. While also helping our regular GMs have time to actually play games at the convention or do other convention things instead of being stuck GMing all weekend.

The AcP system rewards people who consistently GM, which seems to be the goal. But I fear that it will do little to encourage new GMs, AND the people who consistently GMed at cons are getting less rewards than they did in the past (where 1 game at a con=1 race boon edit: was all that was needed. 1 boon per con), so many of them don't seem particularly happy about it either. All of that combined with the larger cons being weighted more heavily in the AcP system makes me think that what will really get hurt in all of this is the ability to recruit GMs for smaller conventions.

I know personally I've driven 3+ hours one-way before to attend 1 day of a con to GM once (and play twice) to get a particular race boon that I really wanted. I got my boon, which was good for me, and the convention organizer filled a GM slot they were having trouble filling, which was good for them. I would see very little reason to do that under the current system, as I'd be getting the same reward for offering to GM a game online as I'm getting for traveling and paying admittance to the convention. And on top of that, the majority of my unreported games from PFS1 were from conventions that were either misreported or never reported at all. Which means spending extra time and extra headaches tracking down whoever was supposed to do the reporting for the convention and trying to convince them to do it so I can get my boon.

Overall, I think the AcP system is an improvement over what we had before, in that it lets you choose your reward, and it solves the issue of players who can't attend conventions being able to get boons. That was a major problem. Like so many other things in PFS, this change seems to be swinging things too far in the other direction, to the point where GMing at a local convention seems as though it is no longer being rewarded at all (over GMing a regular game).

One simple improvement would be to bump up the rewards for convention GMing. GMing at any convention should provide more of a reward than GMing at a regular game. Something like:

Regular game 8 AcP
Convention 10 AcP
Premier Convention 12 AcP
Premier Plus Convention 16 AcP (this is easily worth twice a regular scenario, given the expense and time required to attend one of these. And Premier Plus convention boons in the past have been the rarest of the rare, easily worth twice what you get from a normal convention)

And even that doesn't seem like it would be enough to really convince a non-GM or someone who GMs rarely to step up for a local convention.

Based on what I've been told, Regional Support Program games will also be considered premiere. Because of this the only difference between a weekly RSP gaming store game and a con game is that the scenario being run will be sponsored by Paizo for the con.

On the point you were making, if RSP games are considered Premier, then there's less reward for GMing at a local convention than there is for GMing at your regular gameday.

Ferius,

As a convention GM and organizer of a convention's Org Play content, I agree with you on this. We are losing some of the incentives for the smaller cons based on what see right now. As we know, this is preliminary and not set in stone. I agree with you on those points but as I posted earlier, RSP should be in there for 10 points when one GMs a session as well.

I am wondering if Org Play may have another incentive for GMs at the smaller cons. Here's a great one: A Replay of any one PFS2 scenario to be used for a new character. I'm sure the community could come up with some other incentives that would be great for GMing at the small cons besides just the AcP. Personally, I think a replay of a scenario would be a great incentive.

I am hoping that with the addition of an admin to Org Play that the con support issues will cease to exist.

When it comes to reporting of game play, accuracy and actual reporting is going to have to be paramount. Those who don't want to report games need to either find someone who will do it or step aside. The pressure is going to come from the players who want their stuff reported. We as organizers and VOs have to be the ones who do the policing on that. Org Play can take steps to remove VOs who won't report sessions as well.

Under the old rules as indicated above I'd have potentially have five 'regional' GM race boons and one 'special' boon (from running at Gen Con). Given that's ninety-five percent of when and where I have run, it's reasonably impressive. Even if I only ran one game at each (most of the time I run several depending on needs of the convention and personal capabilities).

Under the newer rules to get an Iruxi (for example) I'd have to run at two or three 'local' conventions to get *one* due to both the weighting and the costs.

I can't lie, if I look at the amount of time involved with prep and even if I could stomach running PFS2 right now, I'd still probably select PF1 or SF -- and not because of the 'payoff' but because I'd feel like 'less of a hack fumbling through rules'.

This year is going to be different, by a significant chunk. Due to good family reasons, I'm not going to be able to make Gen Con. (Strike the Premier Plus of that list).

Paizo Con hasn't given a race boon in the time I've been GMing there. OrgPlay has been giving other neat boons, but not Race.

That leaves about four 'local' cons to consider for GM opportunities... and another salient point that has been missed is that under the old system, most organizers would give a GM boon if you showed up, on time, with your table prepped, and ready to run.

Under this new system, one could theoretically spend all that time prepping, be on time, be ready to run... and the table doesn't *fire*.

Now all that time cannot be recognized AT ALL, because the points only apply if one actually *runs* or *plays* a game.

Worst case, imagine prepping for five slots at a local convention (going to run the whole weekend).

No tables fire for that GM. (Don't laugh, it's happened to me in the past. It's part of the reason I only have 1 star up there...)

Not only does the GM NOT get the GM boon for all the work, prep, travel, etc they did to get to that convention to provide a presence, but they will at best half the points (due to only playing vs. GMing).

Not having the GM boon for the convention is an exceptionally detrimental thing.

Not even having the means to say, spend a bunch of points as an organizer to make sure that my GMs are taken care of is equally bad planning.

And I'm not suggesting throwing the whole system out. I like the general direction of things. I just also know how difficult it is to get GMs to volunteer for a con when there's no incentive to do so.

Part of posting is to encourage Org Play to look at whether there are other ways they can do that. Granting replays seems unlikely when a replay may eventually be something that you can purchase with AcPs. One of the strengths of the AcP system is that it reduces the need for specific rewards like that, which need their own system to manage. Though maybe the replay system for 1E could be leveraged in this particular instance to make it more viable.

I'm just hoping that there's some way that we can provide more of a reason for people to step up at a con than we can currently. Or to step up in general.

Is it possible to offer increased AcPs for a first game GMed? Nothing drastic, but like double the points of what the game would normally earn or something? Giving someone 16 once (or 20 or 24 AcP) doesn't seem like it breaks the system, but is 4 times what they would get for playing a game, so it might help. Again, not sure this is the ideal solution, but I'm looking for things that work within the framework they've set up.

And maybe award it even if the tables don't fire?

I'm not trying to be super-selfish here, but prep DOES take time and effort to be done right.

And maybe award it even if the tables don't fire?

I'm not trying to be super-selfish here, but prep DOES take time and effort to be done right.

I agree with you on this point. I believe most of the in-person conventions I've GMed at handled it this way. I've never been in the position where none of my tables made at a con, but clearly in the drive 3 hours to GM one game situation that was a possibility (I've done that a few times, but thankfully without a table falling through). Online conventions are tied to reporting the table, generally, but I can also understand why things might need to be more strictly enforced there in this instance.

Nefreet wrote:

Can you think of a better setup?

Make all races playable if you have the book. The end.

This has never been a thing.

Can you elaborate why it should change now?

Can you elaborate why it should change now?

To allow PFS player to play the characters they want to play. The whole focus of PF2e is "to create a hero of your own design", "offer deeper customization than ever before!", and "providing the depth of character options".

Limiting ancestries puts the brakes on that, same as it did in PF1e.

Nefreet wrote:

Can you elaborate why it should change now?

To allow PFS player to play the characters they want to play. The whole focus of PF2e is "to create a hero of your own design", "offer deeper customization than ever before!", and "providing the depth of character options".

Limiting ancestries puts the brakes on that, same as it did in PF1e.

And it worked just fine in PF1S.

PFS goal was never “to allow you to create a hero of your own design”, it was to participate in the Society Campaigns, which changed with the Seasons.

“Making whatever you want” is the dwelling of home games, not organized play.

And it worked just fine in PF1S.

No, it didn't.

Rysky wrote:

And it worked just fine in PF1S.

No, it didn't.

It did, you just didn’t like having options limited, period.

I’m not trying to be mean, but I doubt there’s going to be anything for you to gain from this debate. PFS is not going to change and allow all options to accommodate you. They didn’t in PF1S, they certainly aren’t going to now.

Sorry, I know I'm crossposting with a different discussion that's happening. Back to the rewards for local conventions... It's possible I'm misunderstanding things and every convention that receives support is meant to be a Premier event. It's the line "Premier events include many conventions and special events designated by the Regional Venture-Coordinator" that makes me think that's not true. That sounds like the RVCs have the ability to designate something a Premier convention in their region, similar to how Paizo/OPF is determining the Premier Plus conventions. So, for example, DragonCON might be a Premier convention, but MomoCon might not, because DragonCON is the big convention in Atlanta. (I've not been to MomoCon, so no offense intended. It's no doubt much larger than my local convention. Just an example of two in the same city).

If it is the case that any supported convention is at least a Premier event, then that helps a little, though I still find a 2 AcP bump/table over a normal game to be a very small bonus compared to what we've gotten in the past.

Donald wrote:

Rysky wrote:

And it worked just fine in PF1S.

No, it didn't.

It did, you just didn’t like having options limited, period.

I’m not trying to be mean, but I doubt there’s going to be anything for you to gain from this debate. PFS is not going to change and allow all options to accommodate you. They didn’t in PF1S, they certainly aren’t going to now.

In pf1 it kinda didn't work well at all. If you weren't a hyper con goer, you pretty much didn't have anything except the BASIC bonus races that everyone had access to. If you didn't GM a ton at Gencon or at any big con, you didn't really have anything special. You had just about as much as anyone else at any time. If you didn't do cons, you didn't have anything special. And that was extremely difficult for society players with the many many options that said "you need a boon" which meant "you need to go to every con and gm as many slots as possible or you'll NEVER get what you wanted, because nobody knows what boon will ever be anywhere"

It was really unfair to non con goers. Which is why they did this new system. It might be SLIGHTLY less good for convention GMs but I'm sure they'll get other boons in person probably.

tl;dr - A decision seems to have been made to stop incentivizing GMing at smaller conventions more than at regular gamedays, and that's not good

I just spoke to Tonya this weekend to confirm the current expectations for AcP. Course, this could change before it “goes live” when tech resolves the issues with the coding. Generally, GameDays will receive the standard level of rewards and any event that qualifies as a convention will be a premier event. For the time being the RSP will continue. Each RVC will be given an allotment of designations to declare certain events as RSP. Any event so designated will receive premier awards just like conventions. However, the number of GameDays receiving that treatment will be limited unlike how it’s been for the past few years so there will a difference between GameDays and conventions for the most part. They will have the ability to change which GameDays are designated each calendar quarter. This should allow them to share the program across their region with the intention that when there is a convention in an area, the local GameDays would not be receiving RSP and therefore there would be the incentive draw to the conventions.

“BASIC bonus races that everyone had access to”

And?

“If you didn't GM a ton at Gencon or at any big con, you didn't really have anything special.”

So it’s wanting something special? That aside that was the point of them offering Con rewards like that, they were a thank you for volunteering your time to run during the Convention. Not a light task.

But they were just that, rewards, not basics required to function.

“It was really unfair to non con goers.”

Again, it was a reward and incentive for people putting aside their time to GM at cons, not a f&*~ you to everyone else.

And maybe award it even if the tables don't fire?

I doubt that will happen if for no other reason than AcP is based on the reporting system and they are having a difficult time just making that work. Creating “ghost” rewards that are not based on any recorded metric or trackable data is highly unlikely. It’s going to be challenging enough for us to make sure events are generating the right amount of AcP.

You mean like overseer GM credits?

The difference is that the overseer did run their “table.” It was a way to reflect their involvement in an event even though they didn’t have any specific players. That’s not the same as a table that cancelled. I cannot even fathom how much abuse would occur if you could “report” cancelled tables for AcP credit. I’m not a fan of creating rules and limitations to stop the cheaters, because they will usually find a way to cheat anyway, but that doesn’t mean we should leave the register drawer open for them.

I would much rather our efforts be focused on finding a way to Incentive and recognize our thousands of event organizers than giving table credits for a cancelled event. YMMV

Ferious Thune wrote:

tl;dr - A decision seems to have been made to stop incentivizing GMing at smaller conventions more than at regular gamedays, and that's not good

I just spoke to Tonya this weekend to confirm the current expectations for AcP. Course, this could change before it “goes live” when tech resolves the issues with the coding. Generally, GameDays will receive the standard level of rewards and any event that qualifies as a convention will be a premier event. For the time being the RSP will continue. Each RVC will be given an allotment of designations to declare certain events as RSP. Any event so designated will receive premier awards just like conventions. However, the number of GameDays receiving that treatment will be limited unlike how it’s been for the past few years so there will a difference between GameDays and conventions for the most part. They will have the ability to change which GameDays are designated each calendar quarter. This should allow them to share the program across their region with the intention that when there is a convention in an area, the local GameDays would not be receiving RSP and therefore there would be the incentive draw to the conventions.

Thanks. This is helpful. Though RSP sounds weird and overly complicated to me now. Sometimes your gamedays will be RSP days and sometimes they won’t?

In pf1 it kinda didn't work well at all. If you weren't a hyper con goer, you pretty much didn't have anything except the BASIC bonus races that everyone had access to.

Online conventions have virtually no cost associated with them and there are many every year. Most of my PF1E race boons have come from running at them.

In pf1 it kinda didn't work well at all. If you weren't a hyper con goer, you pretty much didn't have anything except the BASIC bonus races that everyone had access to. If you didn't GM a ton at Gencon or at any big con, you didn't really have anything special. You had just about as much as anyone else at any time. If you didn't do cons, you didn't have anything special. And that was extremely difficult for society players with the many many options that said "you need a boon" which meant "you need to go to every con and gm as many slots as possible or you'll NEVER get what you wanted, because nobody knows what boon will ever be anywhere"

It was really unfair to non con goers. Which is why they did this new system. It might be SLIGHTLY less good for convention GMs but I'm sure they'll get other boons in person probably.

There was also the Regional Support Program every year. If you GM'd a dozen scenarios, you get that year's race boon. Not that the current system isn't an improvement.

Quote:

It was really unfair to non con goers. Which is why they did this new system. It might be SLIGHTLY less good for convention GMs but I'm sure they'll get other boons in person probably.

There was also the Regional Support Program every year. If you GM'd a dozen scenarios, you get that year's race boon. Not that the current system isn't an improvement.

This showed up in the latter years of PF1 and had a LOT of gnashing of teeth for people to cede that much to game days.

I do rather like everything being "one pool", instead of some rewards only being available if I go to another continent.

Thanks. This is helpful. Though RSP sounds weird and overly complicated to me now. Sometimes your gamedays will be RSP days and sometimes they won’t?

Its the balancing price we pay to try and allow people who never attend conventions to see some advanced rewards, without marginalizing the conventions by giving all the same rewards to GameDays.

It is unclear if moving the RSP around will just affect the awarding of the boons, or it will also mean sometimes you can earn RSP at your GameDay and sometimes you cannot. The latter would greatly impact the boons that require boxes to be checked over time. It could get complicated very quickly so I think we need to take a close look at how these rewards interact and decide which problems/challenges we are willing to endure and which ones are nonstarters.

I am really not a fan of playing around with the RSP game day rewards. In our region they are the way the large percentage of players relate to the organised play program. When people are calculating how many points they need to get their sweet Iruxi boon, they need some certainty, not some arbitrary on/off switch.

As mentioned above, there are 4 levels of play within organised Play; Home play, RSP/game day play, small conventions and large/important conventions, the AcP system should have four levels of points to reflect this.

I posted suggestions way up the thread, but I honestly don't see why most of the issues people have couldn't be removed or strongly curbed by the following suggestions:

1.) Decrease the ACP cost to 1/month play for 1 year to obtain one more common race boon (i.e., 48 points for a leshy).

2.) Give ACP for marshaling (i.e. desk duty).

3.) Provide ACP rebates if costs of boons decreases in the future.

4.) Continue to give GM boons, especially to small cons. To avoid both concerns of cancelled slots (wasted prep) and avoid creating 'ghost' boons that can be copied then just make it a one time code to obtain ACP. For example, for GMing you get a unique 16 digit barcode (i.e. something people can't guess) for 48 ACP that can only be entered in the system once so people can't copy/duplicate it. It also can't be exploited for 'cancelled games' because the already vetted play org con organizer will hold power over distribution (i.e., someone can't take your event code and 'report something' for points). It also has complete traceability because you know which con got it and who input it for ACP into the system (i.e., its linked to their personal PFS account). That makes any exploitation easy to investigate and should curb people's desire to attempt to exploit it. It also should be easy to code because every retail website (including Paizo's) has a gift certificate/coupon code software module that can be reworked.

...levels of play within organized Play

The challenge is making a system that works internationally. The rules we impose in the midwest of the US may not be effective in the Far East, etc. That's why we have also tried to give the RVCs as much discretion to tailor the programs to meet the unique needs of their communities.

As an example, when I was RVC, I granted RSP status to every GameDay in my region. Extrapolating that to the existing situation would mean all GameDays would receive the same rewards as a convention. Most agree this would hurt recruitment for volunteers at the cons so it would not work for us. Alternately, a place in say Europe with virtually no conventions within a reasonable distance would benefit greatly from awarding RSP benefits along the line of conventions.

Give ACP for marshaling (i.e. desk duty)

We don't have any method to report that within the online system. It appears that AcP rewards will be tied to reported table participation. Since HQ/organizing staff is not involved in individual tables, or even in a similar fashion as an Overseer, we don't have a system to award them.

Not to mention not all roles in HQ/organization are equivalent so it may not be appropriate to reward them equally.

“BASIC bonus races that everyone had access to”

And?

“If you didn't GM a ton at Gencon or at any big con, you didn't really have anything special.”

So it’s wanting something special? That aside that was the point of them offering Con rewards like that, they were a thank you for volunteering your time to run during the Convention. Not a light task.

But they were just that, rewards, not basics required to function.

“It was really unfair to non con goers.”

Again, it was a reward and incentive for people putting aside their time to GM at cons, not a f#@$ you to everyone else.

you forgot the part about "maybe they'll still get boons in person" yknow like free raffle prizes and such. Be honest, the big reason to gm cons is for special boons you can't get anywhere else.

Also even online cons take time, of which not everyone (most people) can afford to make time for because of life.

Also in pf1 A TON of options are just entirely blocked from society. A metric ton. Literally like half of all content was blocked from society play (rough guess, additional resources was rrreeeaaalllyyyy long with "not legal not legal not legal" and I'm probably slightly wrong on this but not by much) and luckily that didn't carry over to 2e. In 1e like half of the current heritages and ancestry feats and most of the archetypes from current books would have entirely been blocked from society without a boon.

And again, there will probably be physical in person bonus rewards for gming besides just the points to make up the difference since apparently a handful of people that go to cons aren't happy with the loss of a random boon and arent happy with the option to get whatever boon they CHOSE (with a tiny bit more work, which is way better than a random boon you don't want and then have to put in extra work to trade regardless, so roughly same effort)

maybe they'll still get boons in person" yknow like free raffle prizes and such

We are generally moving away from this practice. I can see a future where there is no paperwork changing hands. All reporting is done online. All rewards are distributed online. If all the programs were integrated into the AcP program, something that would be relatively easy to do once they fix the source code, we could eliminate all paper boons. Record of your boon purchases would be maintained on your account and could if an audit was to occur, be shown digitally or at the player's discretion printed.

Literally like half of all content was blocked

I seriously doubt it. It sounds like you are speculating, and any attempt I would have to refute your estimate would also be speculating, but we did do an unofficial count back around season five and found that (IIRC) something like 90% of published content was legal for OP. That may of changed over time, but many of us would say its no where near 50% blocked.

“ Be honest, the big reason to gm cons is for special boons you can't get anywhere else.”

I literally just said that was the incentive and thank you for GMing at Cons. Twice in the same post.

The only way I could be more honest is if I added more swears.

Also in pf1 A TON of options are just entirely blocked from society. A metric ton. Literally like half of all content was blocked from society play (rough guess, additional resources was rrreeeaaalllyyyy long with "not legal not legal not legal" and I'm probably slightly wrong on this but not by much) and luckily that didn't carry over to 2e. In 1e like half of the current heritages and ancestry feats and most of the archetypes from current books would have entirely been blocked from society without a boon.

Do you GM? Asking because I see nt stars/novas next to your name.

How can a GM even begin to have an understanding if EVERY POSSIBLE THING was allowed in PS1??? No Way. I seriously doubt a home game GM allows everything. It is too much for a GM to keep track of. And there are some combinations that prove to be too powerful. So those options have been make "not legal". With what is allowed there is already builds that are encounter stoppers!!

At GenCon, I saw a high level inquisitor archer take down the final boss at the end of the special on the first round where he acted first. Perfectly legal build. So we went on to another encounter with the brother of the boss. The other ranger archer took down the boss on his turn, first round. Again a legal build.

There needs to be limits, if nothing else for the sanity of the GM!!

I like the limits. They provide balance for the GM and for the players.

If you don't like the limits of Society play, your welcome to play a home game. But please don't tear down the game that I really like.

pauljathome wrote:

On a semi-related note, I'm thinking that the PFS rebuild rules are actually bordering on the TOO generous side.

You mean PF2, not PFS. Retraining is baked into PF2 core rules.

Not quite. The difference between a home campaign and PFS is that in a home campaign there is often going to be uncertainty as to when the characters will be able to retrain and whether they'll be able to find somebody to do the retraining. In PFS this retraining is automatic so you can build your characters planning on retraining at specific times.

Its a minor thing and I can't think of any solution that wouldn't be WAY worse than the problem but at some level I don't like it. It somehow feels a bit like cheating to take an option knowing that I'm going to toss it away, it feels like I should HAVE to take the suboptimal choice now for the cool stuff later.

I know, I can always choose to take the feat earlier and NOT retrain. But sometimes the roleplayer side of my personality loses to the mini/maxer side :-(

Azymondiaz wrote:

maybe they'll still get boons in person" yknow like free raffle prizes and such

We are generally moving away from this practice. I can see a future where there is no paperwork changing hands. All reporting is done online. All rewards are distributed online. If all the programs were integrated into the AcP program, something that would be relatively easy to do once they fix the source code, we could eliminate all paper boons. Record of your boon purchases would be maintained on your account and could if an audit was to occur, be shown digitally or at the player's discretion printed.

Azymondiaz wrote:

Literally like half of all content was blocked

I seriously doubt it. It sounds like you are speculating, and any attempt I would have to refute your estimate would also be speculating, but we did do an unofficial count back around season five and found that (IIRC) something like 90% of published content was legal for OP. That may of changed over time, but many of us would say its no where near 50% blocked.

Well they did say they were probably wrong. In defense, all of the important content wasn't legal unless you went to a convention for a boon. Buying the book meant nothing unless you had the exceedingly rare boons that were convention gain only. A large amount of content wasn't ACTUALLY legal to everyone unless you somehow got the rare-mostly-convention-only boons.

If you count content locked behind boons as being not legal, like races and all their related stuff and archetypes, and don't count the many many tiny items that almost never actually saw real play and the giant items that also don't see play because society rarely goes above 12 (which is pretty subjective in all situations) then there was significantly more than 10% of not legal content because the majority of society players don't have and most likely won't have easy access to it. I seem to remember a whole lot of "not legal unless you have a boon" stuff in additional resources as well. Which meant "not legal unless you got lucky gming a convention and got what you wanted instead of some random stuff that doesn't interest you"

But also there is a lot of high level content, and society play just so rarely does that content. Almost mostly convention special events are the few times you see it or society games taken home and spread out once a week over a month.

So it's probably much more than 10% realistically in terms of "does this TRULY get used enough to justify it as being legal, or does this truly exist as legal when it's 15th and up level content that is nearly nonexistent in society"

I apologize for rambling, I'm probably fairly wrong about this stuff too. I only started around the end of season 8 and remember seeing a lot of stuff as boon locked, not legal, or basically out of reach by level

Azymondiaz wrote:

Also in pf1 A TON of options are just entirely blocked from society. A metric ton. Literally like half of all content was blocked from society play (rough guess, additional resources was rrreeeaaalllyyyy long with "not legal not legal not legal" and I'm probably slightly wrong on this but not by much) and luckily that didn't carry over to 2e. In 1e like half of the current heritages and ancestry feats and most of the archetypes from current books would have entirely been blocked from society without a boon.

Do you GM? Asking because I see nt stars/novas next to your name.

How can a GM even begin to have an understanding if EVERY POSSIBLE THING was allowed in PS1??? No Way. I seriously doubt a home game GM allows everything. It is too much for a GM to keep track of. And there are some combinations that prove to be too powerful. So those options have been make "not legal". With what is allowed there is already builds that are encounter stoppers!!

At GenCon, I saw a high level inquisitor archer take down the final boss at the end of the special on the first round where he acted first. Perfectly legal build. So we went on to another encounter with the brother of the boss. The other ranger archer took down the boss on his turn, first round. Again a legal build.

There needs to be limits, if nothing else for the sanity of the GM!!

I like the limits. They provide balance for the GM and for the players.

If you don't like the limits of Society play, your welcome to play a home game. But please don't tear down the game that I really like.

funny enough, contrary to your comment, someone else says 90% of content IS legal in pf1 lol. But pf1 was an entirely different game where building your character to be a 1man army was VERY easy, and now in 2e it is much less so with how EVERYTHING scales and how bad guys can cheat on being built

Woo 200th comment. So many rambling comments lol