Sanctioning Update: Adventure Paths

Thursday, October 29, 2020

Art by Mark Molnar

In our monthly announcement, we stated our intention to sanction more content this month. Mid-month, we released our sanctioning for Lost Omens Pathfinder Society Guide. Today we’ve got more exciting sanctioning news for our community!

Before we dive into the details, we want to answer an important question.

Question: Hey, I’m not in the know on this whole Organized Play business. What does any of this mean?

Answer: Players participating in Organized Play adventures (for both Pathfinder and Starfinder) earn credit for their playthroughs in the form of Chronicle Sheets. Think of these Chronicle Sheets like record keeping so that when a player plays with a new GM, that GM has all the records of what that player’s character has accomplished. For most Adventure Paths that Paizo produces, the Organized Play team takes the time to sanction them so players can get Organized Play credit for playing through them. This means that players can enjoy the Adventure Path stories while also earning credit for their Organized Play characters.

On the Starfinder side, we’re happy to announce that the remaining three adventures of the Threefold Conspiracy Adventure Path are now ready, meaning that the entire Adventure Path is now sanctioned for play!

We’d also like to remind everyone that we’ve sanctioned several Adventure Paths for Starfinder Society credit, including: Dead Suns, Against the Aeon Throne, Signal of Screams, Dawn of Flame, and Attack of the Swarm. You can find the sanctioning document download link on any of the adventure product pages for the associated adventure path!

Our next focus is on the exciting Devastation Ark Adventure Path and we’ll have more news regarding our timelines before the end of the year.

For Pathfinder (second edition) players, who's ready to join the circus and save Absalom and the rest of the Starstone Isle from calamity? If your answer is you, great news! The Extinction Curse Adventure Path is now sanctioned for play! And with it, the rare, pug-faced shoony ancestry makes an appearance on the list of purchasable Achievement Point rewards.

After careful consideration, we’ve decided against sanctioning the Agents of Edgewatch Adventure Path for Pathfinder Society play. Agents of Edgewatch contains themes and content that are best explored in a home group setting, among players who are comfortable engaging with them together. We will, however, be adding a curated selection of player-facing rules from the adventure path to the list of rewards you can purchase with Achievement Points.

If you’re looking for other adventures that earn credit for your Pathfinder Society characters beyond our typical scenario lineup, check out the Age of Ashes Adventure Path and the standalone adventures The Fall of Plaguestone and Little Trouble in Big Absalom, as well as Pathfinder Bounties for first-level characters!

Our next projects on the Pathfinder side are the Pathfinder Beginner Box, The Slithering adventure, and future releases. We are also taking a look at some of the last adventure paths of Pathfinder (first edition). We don’t have a definitive timeline, so keep an eye on the monthly update blogs for more news.

If you missed it earlier, please check out our blog about changes to the 5 nova and 5 glyph GM rank program.

Happy adventuring!

Thurston Hillman
Starfinder Society Developer

Linda Zayas-Palmer
Organized Play Managing Developer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Organized Play Pathfinder Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Pathfinder Society Starfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Starfinder Society
1 to 50 of 236 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/5 Venture-Captain, Texas—Austin aka Partizanski

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Huzzah!

Quick question about the Extinction Curse chronicles.

Spoiler:
A lot of the time is says "You gain access to...". Does this open up access for just the character it applied to, or for all of your characters?

Dark Archive 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Turku aka Tomppa

10 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm... Surprised about the decision against sanctioning Agents of Edgewatch.
If you recall, you already removed the "play with society characters" option from 2e adventure paths, so by default, all adventure paths are already played as home games. There is no "public, bring your level 5 society character" option for them anymore anyway.

2/5 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston aka NielsenE

Milan Badzic wrote:

Huzzah!

Quick question about the Extinction Curse chronicles.

** spoiler omitted **

Spoiler:

I think that 'you' is the character with the assigned chronicle. They've used 'All your characters' when the mean you as in the player.

All of season 1 chronicles used 'you' for things that I think everyone has interpreted as the assigned character only.

Venture-Agent, Online—ACG aka redeux

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Many thanks for the hard work on sanctioning!

Grand Lodge 5/5 5/55/5 Venture-Lieutenant, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East

3 people marked this as a favorite.

That Extinction Curse unlock....*slobbery, snuffling chef's kiss*

5/5 5/5

Blog wrote:
[W]e’ve decided against sanctioning the Agents of Edgewatch Adventure Path for Pathfinder Society play. We will, however, be adding a curated selection of player-facing rules from the adventure path to the list of rewards you can purchase with Achievement Points.

So, while I can get behind not sanctioning Agents of Edgewatch, in general, is it possible to have a way to reward those players and game masters that are playing through the campaign that rewards their play that is unique to them, even if would have a "blank" session or something recorded, rather than a blanket "everyone gets the participation" trophy?

Spoiler:
It could be a zero-cost ACP item that has a GM/Player that has an Agents of Edgewatch "session" reported. It would be an accommodation for those that are playing through Paizo's Adventure Paths that wouldn't neccessarily have something to level a character with, that is, a session that doesn't provide a chronicle sheet.

It could be a way to also reward players of future controversial Adventure Paths that wouldn't fit within the ideals of the Pathfinder Society, like a way of rewarding players and GMs of a future Hell's Vengeance style adventure with a limited boon but no other reward.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tommi Ketonen wrote:

I'm... Surprised about the decision against sanctioning Agents of Edgewatch.

If you recall, you already removed the "play with society characters" option from 2e adventure paths, so by default, all adventure paths are already played as home games. There is no "public, bring your level 5 society character" option for them anymore anyway.

+1

Blog wrote:
After careful consideration, we’ve decided against sanctioning the Agents of Edgewatch Adventure Path for Pathfinder Society play. Agents of Edgewatch contains themes and content that are best explored in a home group setting, among players who are comfortable engaging with them together.

I don't understand why the team isn't sanctioning AoE. The reason given, that it is best as a home game, isn't valid because APs are generally run as home games where the GM can hand out chronicle sheets. There are exceptions, but they're a small minority.

Is there something I'm missing here?


NECR0G1ANT wrote:
Tommi Ketonen wrote:

I'm... Surprised about the decision against sanctioning Agents of Edgewatch.

If you recall, you already removed the "play with society characters" option from 2e adventure paths, so by default, all adventure paths are already played as home games. There is no "public, bring your level 5 society character" option for them anymore anyway.

+1

Blog wrote:
After careful consideration, we’ve decided against sanctioning the Agents of Edgewatch Adventure Path for Pathfinder Society play. Agents of Edgewatch contains themes and content that are best explored in a home group setting, among players who are comfortable engaging with them together.

I don't understand why the team isn't sanctioning AoE. The reason given, that it is best as a home game, isn't valid because APs are generally run as home games where the GM can hand out chronicle sheets. There are exceptions, but they're a small minority.

Is there something I'm missing here?

Honestly, I think it's because of how the Agents of Edgewatch Player's Guide rules what the characters MUST do throughout the adventure (Such as inflicting non-lethal damage to everything). It doesn't quite seem to fit how the PFS normally plays, where you are allowed to kill things. It is a shame, but hopefully one day the decision can be overturned in such a way where the PFS states "If you are going to be guards, please don't tarnish our reputation by killing the citizens."

Dark Archive 4/5 Venture-Agent, Finland—Tampere aka CorvusMask

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm honestly just thinking its over reaction to be like "Okay, of all APs the Agent of the Edgewatch is the one we can't sanction" :/ I mean, you might as well be saying "Well since we shouldn't have never released this AP in first place, you shouldn't be buying it and playing it at all!", I don't really see Agent of the Edgewatch being on same level as Hell's Vengeance when it comes to not being able to work with society play.

Like I'm fairly certain some of older aps have more offensive stuff in 1e and they got sanctioned. They weren't topically offensive, but still Hook Mountain Massacre IS sanctioned ap part.

I guess if the actual reason of the this is that since law enforcement in USA is in bad need of reform that incentivizing players to play this AP for rewards comes across as pro law enforcement move which developers don't want to do due to the current horrifying state of it? In that case I can understand why it isn't being sanctioned rather than "its best left for home play" when only way to earn campaign chronicles IS home play.

Ah well, on the plus side, it means that when I play the game I don't need to be bummed about how my gm isn't society gm so I wouldn't get chronicles for playing it xD Plus it is honestly nice to be able to get access to ap stuff without playing the ap


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

I'm saddened that AoE isn't going to be sanctioned. It's a great way for people to explore how they want police forces to act. Having played thru to level 4 in the AP it very much seems to be up to GMs and players to interpret how the laws are enforced. Ive gotten hints that we get to fight corruption in the Edgewatch as well if we so desire. Graddok the Warpriest of Angradd Bountyhunter will just have to gaze at the Grand Lodge wistfully it seems.

The Exchange 2/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Maps, Rulebook Subscriber

I get AoE's lack of sanctioning, though I wish it weren't so.

But I'm pretty psyched to be an adventuring doggo!

Second Seekers (Luwazi Elsbo) 1/5 5/55/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

Oooooooh, Devastation Ark maybe getting sanctioned? Do go on!
(Also, aw, poor Obozaya...still hasn't figured out you're supposed to hit things with the pointy plasma edge of the doshko. Keep swinging, Big Girl! You'll...you'll get there someday.)

Envoy's Alliance

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tommi Ketonen wrote:

I'm... Surprised about the decision against sanctioning Agents of Edgewatch.

If you recall, you already removed the "play with society characters" option from 2e adventure paths, so by default, all adventure paths are already played as home games. There is no "public, bring your level 5 society character" option for them anymore anyway.

Count me as another person who is disappointed this won't be sanctioned for PFS play. The group I play with is currently working through Fall of Plaguestone and I was looking forward to Agents as something we could play. We can still play it but it's less likely we will because there won't be PFS credit for it, and we will look for other options.

If it were to be a sanctioned AP, players and GMs could simply make a choice to not play if they didn't like it, much like they can with other APs. I don't see the benefit of taking that decision away from participants and making the decision for them.

2/5 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston aka NielsenE

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Regardless of the arguments over why/etc for skipping AoE sanctioning, I'm glad to see that they're planning to use the reclaimed time in their schedule to revisit sanctioning some of the missing 1e content.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.

While I also wish they'd sanctioned AoE I'd like to point out a couple of things

1) I very much applaud their telling us that they are NOT going to sanction it. Kudos to them for being open and honest and telling us this in a quite timely fashion

2) This IS a sensitive topic right now. I'm currently running this with 2 groups and in both cases I sat down with my players BEFORE even agreeing to run it and set some "ground rules" as to the limits on PC behaviour that I was comfortable with.

That kind of agreement is easy to come to with a pre set group sitting down to play an entire AP together.

But I know that in PF1 LOTS and LOTS of time I played a single book of an AP as, essentially, a module with a pick up group. And I WOULD be uncomfortable with running or playing this AP with a pick up group. And, from Paizo's point of view, I'd be uncomfortable with this AP being played in an open game store with an unknown group of GMs and players.

Yes, this can most definitely be played in a mature fashion. But it is also extremely open to abuse with the wrong players.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5

10 people marked this as a favorite.
Gary Bush wrote:


Poor decision. We are all adults here.

As a matter of fact, PFS players are NOT all adults. There are inarguably quite a few children who play. And arguably more than a few who have the emotional maturity of children regardless of chronological age.

I know that I've played with people who I would NOT trust to be sensitive with this.

Not to mention the possible friction when a group contains people with very different views on how policing should work.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

3 people marked this as a favorite.
pauljathome wrote:
Gary Bush wrote:


Poor decision. We are all adults here.

As a matter of fact, PFS players are NOT all adults. There are inarguably quite a few children who play. And arguably more than a few who have the emotional maturity of children regardless of chronological age.

I know that I've played with people who I would NOT trust to be sensitive with this.

Not to mention the possible friction when a group contains people with very different views on how policing should work.

My point is that as adults, we can discuss these points and come to an informed decision. Most APs are played as a closed group anyways. Given this, if a younger player is possibly going to take part it is very likely there is an older, a parent or a trusted friend maybe, player there as well.

In an case. What is done is done. I don't like the decision. Not the first time. Will not be the last.

I view things from my viewpoint, as we all do, and this AP would not be a problem for me or the group I was planning to run this AP for. But now, the incentive is gone. I play Pathfinder for Society. I am not interested in playing out of Organized Play.

I also believe people are free to make their own choices and should not be told how they should act by others who believe they should act in a different way. That is where abuse of power comes from. Playing a fantasy game, for me, allows me to get away from our real world for a few hours.

This smacks of the time in the 80's when the moral minority made a huge push against AD&D as being "satanic" and "demon worshiping". A lot of places banned playing the game for that reach. Heck, my sister still thinks I am going to go a bad place because I still play "those" types of games.

Any ways, enough of my ranting. I don't care if anyone else agrees with me. That is my view. If you don't like, I respect your right not to agree. Please respect my right as well.

Dark Archive 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So Gary I support you completely. As a relic from that 80's era who had a friend whose parents actually burned their books. Any position that even indirectly supports a belief that this isn't a fantasy game is deeply troubling. And remotely equating city guards with a modern police force is that.

However as not a Venture Critter of any stripe I can look at all the things Org Play has going on and see why they'd look at this one and punt. Despite my feelings above I would have probably made the same call.

1/5 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Also, missed (or ignored) in the comments about AoE is that there will be player options despite the lack of full sanctioning.

That is no small thing.

Remembering my gaming experiences back in the '90s and 00s, the goal of an educated and aware
AP would not happen with a random table whether it happened at a FLGS or a convention.

Sanctioning an AP for 'just' home play doesn't help build community and would be an inefficient use of limited resources, imo.

It's rough, but I don't see a fix for it.

Radiant Oath 1/5

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


Sanctioning an AP for 'just' home play doesn't help build community and would be an inefficient use of limited resources, imo.

But that's what all APs in PFS2 are sanctioned for now. They aren't supposed to be run like Scenarios.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Evilgm wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


Sanctioning an AP for 'just' home play doesn't help build community and would be an inefficient use of limited resources, imo.

But that's what all APs in PFS2 are sanctioned for now. They aren't supposed to be run like Scenarios.

What you are missing is that there will be no chronicle that can be applied to a PFS character. It sounds like the interesting items that is contained in the AP will be made available for purchase through the AcP. To me, that sounds like anyone can buy them. No need play the AP. No recording to that would "open" an item to be purchased through AcP.

Who wouldn't want to get a fire kitty without having to actually play Plaguestone? The a certain crossbow?

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/5 Venture-Agent, Washington—Bellevue aka Tempest_Knight

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The APs are all 'Campaign mode'...

There is no Society option... so any argument that it isn't 'Society friendly' is an argument in bad faith.

~

PF1 APs had an option between Society and Campaign modes of play, so an AP not being 'Society friendly' was an issue...

Second Seekers (Luwazi Elsbo) 1/5 5/55/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber
Quote:
Playing a fantasy game, for me, allows me to get away from our real world for a few hours.

I really wanted to highlight this passage someone posted since this is, I'm pretty sure, the heart of the issue at hand.

The reason AoE isn't being sanctioned is precisely because dealing with such a sensitive topic right now removes the ability for people to just "get away from our real world for a few hours." That is exactly why Paizo isn't sanctioning it.

It's well and good for us to say "they should just let us play it, and we'll do it tactfully and with all due considerations." But - if you're a part of a marginalised community at a convention, and you see a Paizo banner and a bunch of slots for an adventure where you play fantasy cops? You don't see the GMs prepping to run things in a safe, supportive, informed, manner. You just see, well, a Paizo banner and a bunch of slots for an adventure where you pretend to be fantasy police.

And that's not a good look right now.

By not sanctioning it for org play, they're disincentivising folks to play it, especially in the high-visibility, public access venues where it's most likely to have that negative effect. As others have pointed out, it's making the best of a bad situation, and minimising risk. (In a perfect world it'd, of course, be safest to just not publish AoE, but hey, they're a business, and they can't just flush 6 months of AP revenue down the toilet during the worst recession in decades soooooooo)

Scarab Sages

Kishmo wrote:
The reason AoE isn't being sanctioned is precisely because dealing with such a sensitive topic right now removes the ability for people to just "get away from our real world for a few hours." That is exactly why Paizo isn't sanctioning it.

Actually, nobody at Paizo has said exactly why it's being sanctioned, besides "theme and content". It could be because of subject matter like serial killers and whatnot.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Skinsaw Murders hasn't been unsanctioned, so I'm sure it's not that.

5/5 Venture-Agent, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East aka Pirate Rob

3 people marked this as a favorite.

It's not just a matter of "police bad"

Content and spoiler warning below. Reading this will spoil some bits of the AP and contains brief descriptions of some problematic elements.

Some issues with AoE 1:

Pickled Fetus Monsters (w/artwork)

Economics: "The guards’ only actual means of earning liquid cash is by requisitioning possessions and money from any criminals they catch breaking major laws—no trial required."

Expected way to deal with a labor dispute: "either through negotiation or by wiping out the kobold threat" because it's okay to slaughter the laborers since they're kobolds, which is part of the reason they were hired in the first place because of the expectation that they were easy to abuse.

"Unlike kobolds or owlbears, the following monsters and situations might hit a lot closer to home, with disturbing themes such as torture, voyeurism, and violence to children."

Children in danger has traditionally been a red line for Paizo and it can be very surprising to have this pop up.

Scarab Sages

TOZ wrote:
The Skinsaw Murders hasn't been unsanctioned, so I'm sure it's not that.

But I don't know of any product that has been "unsanctioned" at all, do you?

I think Paizo going forward will handle certain content differently than they had in the past. While I disagree with their decision not to sanction AoE, I now expect them not to sanction the upcoming Malevolence adventure.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

NECR0G1ANT wrote:
TOZ wrote:
The Skinsaw Murders hasn't been unsanctioned, so I'm sure it's not that.
But I don't know of any product that has been "unsanctioned" at all, do you?

Yes, actually. (The retired subsection appears to no longer exist on the site but there are more.)

5/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Let me just say, regarding the Extinction Curse boons, ...

In case it's considered a spoiler when it's in clearly there in the Boons tab:
I *really* like having a discounted race boon as a reward. It allows players who really want to have the race without playing the AP to do so (eventually), but also gives a strong incentive to play the AP.

As for the other boons, they're all great, but I think they further highlight the need to figure out a way to implement Bequeathal or a similar boon in the new system. It would be the exceedingly rare character concept that could make use of them on the same character.

2/5 5/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Eric Nielsen wrote:
Milan Badzic wrote:

Huzzah!

Quick question about the Extinction Curse chronicles.

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

I agree on the interpretation of the syntax, but unless I misread something...

Spoiler:
The Chronicles only unlock Shoony on the character to which the chronicle is applied. It just seems a little clunky unless you create a character specifically to receive the chronicle as chronicle #1.


Blake's Tiger wrote:
Eric Nielsen wrote:
Milan Badzic wrote:

Huzzah!

Quick question about the Extinction Curse chronicles.

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

I agree on the interpretation of the syntax, but unless I misread something...

** spoiler omitted **

The good thing is it means you're starting with a level 2 one, which should increase the survivability (compared to say, level 1) to make it so that you're less likely to lose a fancy character. And it can be any under 12 xp. Besides, dont all characters with race boons need them applied at level 1 anyway?

Scarab Sages

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
NECR0G1ANT wrote:
TOZ wrote:
The Skinsaw Murders hasn't been unsanctioned, so I'm sure it's not that.
But I don't know of any product that has been "unsanctioned" at all, do you?
Yes, actually. (The retired subsection appears to no longer exist on the site but there are more.)

Skeleton Moon was retired due to one combat causing a lot of TPKs, though, not because of objectionable themes.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

Retired, unsanctioned, I don’t consider it much difference.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/5 Venture-Agent, Washington—Bellevue aka Tempest_Knight

2 people marked this as a favorite.

TOZ, the point was it was retired for bad Scenario/Encounter design, not objectionable themes...

Thus not proving the point of retiring/un-sanctioning because of things that have become* objectionable themes.

~

*<Uncomfortable Truths...>
The 'objectionable themes' in Agents of Edgewatch were ok with Paizo during development... (proof: It was developed.)

The Objection has come since it has become socially mandated that companies loudly and visibly object to the 'objectionable themes'...

Those 4 issue Pirate Robb highlighted in his SPOILER were ok with Paizo during development... (proof: It was developed.)

Current(2020) Socio-Political Current Events are the only real issue behind not sanctioning the AP... If the AP was truly objectionable to Paizo, it would not have been developed, let alone published.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

Stephen Meadows Jr wrote:
TOZ, the point was it was retired for bad Scenario/Encounter design, not objectionable themes...

It wasn’t my point.

5/5 Venture-Agent, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East aka Pirate Rob

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Stephen Meadows Jr wrote:

TOZ, the point was it was retired for bad Scenario/Encounter design, not objectionable themes...

Thus not proving the point of retiring/un-sanctioning because of things that have become* objectionable themes.

~

*<Uncomfortable Truths...>
The 'objectionable themes' in Agents of Edgewatch were ok with Paizo during development... (proof: It was developed.)

The Objection has come since it has become socially mandated that companies loudly and visibly object to the 'objectionable themes'...

Those 4 issue Pirate Robb highlighted in his SPOILER were ok with Paizo during development... (proof: It was developed.)

Current(2020) Socio-Political Current Events are the only real issue behind not sanctioning the AP... If the AP was truly objectionable to Paizo, it would not have been developed, let alone published.

Your implication that Paizo development is incapable of making mistakes is laughable.

Also material that may be appropriate for private play is different than material that's appropriate for public support from organized play.

Scarab Sages

Stephen Meadows Jr wrote:

TOZ, the point was it was retired for bad Scenario/Encounter design, not objectionable themes...

Thus not proving the point of retiring/un-sanctioning because of things that have become* objectionable themes.

Yes, that was my point, thank you. :)

Stephen Meadows Jr wrote:

*<Uncomfortable Truths...>

The 'objectionable themes' in Agents of Edgewatch were ok with Paizo during development... (proof: It was developed.)

The Objection has come since it has become socially mandated that companies loudly and visibly object to the 'objectionable themes'...

Those 4 issue Pirate Robb highlighted in his SPOILER were ok with Paizo during development... (proof: It was developed.)

Current(2020) "Socio-Political Current Events" are the only real issue behind not sanctioning the AP... If the AP was truly objectionable to Paizo, it would not have been developed, let alone published.

The problem with this argument is that the Organized Play team are completely different employees than the ones who worked on the AP, and what works for one may not work for the other. The Organized Play Team decided what worked for an AP doesn't work for public-facing games, and I doubt AoE was developed for PFS in mind either.

I personally don't understand the decision not to sanction AoE, but it could be the problems Pirate Rob pointed out rather than "Socio-Political Current Events"

I'm curious to see if Malevolence gets sanctioned, since I reckon I'll have loads of the same edgier themes that AoE had.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/5 Venture-Agent, Washington—Bellevue aka Tempest_Knight

I assume that the Chronicle for AP #153 Life's Long Shadows should say Golem Grafter not Golem Crafter, correct?

Sovereign Court Venture-Agent, Philippines—Quezon City aka Muzouka

Why does the discounted ancestry boon show up in all the chronicle sheets? An incentive to spread out the chronicles to multiple characters?

3/5 Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro aka MadScientistWorking

Stephen Meadows Jr wrote:


*<Uncomfortable Truths...>
The 'objectionable themes' in Agents of Edgewatch were ok with Paizo during development... (proof: It was developed.)

The Objection has come since it has become socially mandated that companies loudly and visibly object to the 'objectionable themes'...

Those 4 issue Pirate Robb highlighted in his SPOILER were ok with Paizo during development... (proof: It was developed.)

Current(2020) Socio-Political Current Events are the only real issue behind not sanctioning the AP... If the AP was truly objectionable to Paizo, it would not have been developed, let alone published.

No actually if you go back and read the original post not everyone at Paizo was happy and one person pushed the idea.

Edit
The item with rape implications whose name I forgot is one such case of something being unsanctioned because well.... Phial of Love?

Also for the record civil forfeiture falls under the category of cops bad. I'm not even sure why that's separate.

2/5 5/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
TheGoofyGE3K wrote:
Blake's Tiger wrote:
Eric Nielsen wrote:
Milan Badzic wrote:

Huzzah!

Quick question about the Extinction Curse chronicles.

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

I agree on the interpretation of the syntax, but unless I misread something...

** spoiler omitted **

The good thing is it means you're starting with a level 2 one, which should increase the survivability (compared to say, level 1) to make it so that you're less likely to lose a fancy character. And it can be any under 12 xp. Besides, dont all characters with race boons need them applied at level 1 anyway?

Ah, sorry, my unwritten point was:

Spoiler:
All the other things granted by the chronicle are then stuck on the Shoony. E.g. if you had a character that you'd like to gain the Juggler archetype, you have to choose between making a Shoony or gaining access to the archetype. Sure, out of 6 chronicles, at least one of them will likely have other content you don't want to use, but it still seemed weirdly clunky.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Question for whoever at Paizo about the chronicle for SFS Threefold Conspiracy - Puppets Without Strings (Book 6):

Spoiler:
There is no "cross off this boon to..." language on this. As currently written, it's a permanent raise dead AND an infinitely reusable mnemonic editor for 6 levels. Was this the intent, or does it need to be changed? Thanks!

Hoping this doesn't get buried in the PF2 discussion...

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento aka FLite

Adam Yakaboski wrote:
Stephen Meadows Jr wrote:


*<Uncomfortable Truths...>
The 'objectionable themes' in Agents of Edgewatch were ok with Paizo during development... (proof: It was developed.)

The Objection has come since it has become socially mandated that companies loudly and visibly object to the 'objectionable themes'...

Those 4 issue Pirate Robb highlighted in his SPOILER were ok with Paizo during development... (proof: It was developed.)

Current(2020) Socio-Political Current Events are the only real issue behind not sanctioning the AP... If the AP was truly objectionable to Paizo, it would not have been developed, let alone published.

No actually if you go back and read the original post not everyone at Paizo was happy and one person pushed the idea.

And in fact Eric Mona expressed regret that he had let the idea go through and didn't listen to the people expressing their reservations, and all but stated that if it wasn't essentially financial ruin for Paizo at that point, he would have pulled the product.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

NECR0G1ANT wrote:
Stephen Meadows Jr wrote:

TOZ, the point was it was retired for bad Scenario/Encounter design, not objectionable themes...

Thus not proving the point of retiring/un-sanctioning because of things that have become* objectionable themes.

Yes, that was my point, thank you. :)

The Golemworks Incident and City of Strangers 1 & 2 have been given a soft ban, but not unsanctioned.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento aka FLite

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
NECR0G1ANT wrote:
Stephen Meadows Jr wrote:

TOZ, the point was it was retired for bad Scenario/Encounter design, not objectionable themes...

Thus not proving the point of retiring/un-sanctioning because of things that have become* objectionable themes.

Yes, that was my point, thank you. :)
The Golemworks Incident and City of Strangers 1 & 2 have been given a soft ban, but not unsanctioned.

Can confirm

2/5

Why Golemworks? Just curious.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Problematic representation that Paizo feels is not appropriate in a public event setting. It is best handled in a private setting between players who know each other and can handle it with care and attention.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/5 Venture-Agent, Washington—Bellevue aka Tempest_Knight

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jared Thaler wrote:
Adam Yakaboski wrote:
Stephen Meadows Jr wrote:


*<Uncomfortable Truths...>
The 'objectionable themes' in Agents of Edgewatch were ok with Paizo during development... (proof: It was developed.)

The Objection has come since it has become socially mandated that companies loudly and visibly object to the 'objectionable themes'...

Those 4 issue Pirate Robb highlighted in his SPOILER were ok with Paizo during development... (proof: It was developed.)

Current(2020) Socio-Political Current Events are the only real issue behind not sanctioning the AP... If the AP was truly objectionable to Paizo, it would not have been developed, let alone published.

No actually if you go back and read the original post not everyone at Paizo was happy and one person pushed the idea.

And in fact Eric Mona expressed regret that he had let the idea go through and didn't listen to the people expressing their reservations, and all but stated that if it wasn't essentially financial ruin for Paizo at that point, he would have pulled the product.

... Did it make it through Development to go on to be published?

.. it wasn't 'objectionable' enough to be deemed a no-go until Socio-Political Current Events mandated it be objected to...

Since then, it has been given the 'can't touch it with a 10-foot pole' treatment... as socially mandated for anyone who doesn't want to be labeled as pro-(Bad)Cop and/or racist.

~

You can argue semantics, but that is the simple truth...

I'm not trying to callout anyone or accuse anyone of anything, but pointing out that if it was 'objectionable' enough to warrant the 'untouchable' treatment it is currently receiving, it was 'objectionable' enough to warrant it not making it out of development.

1 to 50 of 236 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / General Discussion / Paizo Blog: Sanctioning Update: Adventure Paths All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.