Organized Play Preview: 2022 Interactive Events

Thursday, March 17, 2022

Today we’re going to pull back the curtain on our two upcoming multi-table interactive events for the 2022 Paizo Organized Play season. If you’re not familiar, Pathfinder and Starfinder Organized Play release yearly multi-table events that can be played with as few as three tables and well over 150+ tables at the world’s largest events. These are intended to be epic adventures where players can work alongside others to accomplish monumental feats and battle great evils. In the past, these events have often been tied to key story points for Organized Play. Last year, we explored the unique events of a Pathfinder and Starfinder crossover. This year, we’re keeping away from the ongoing metaplots of our Organized Play years and making our multi-table interactive events a bit more standalone, so they can be enjoyed by anyone at any time.

Some of you may notice that the level ranges have dipped down a bit from what we’ve previously offered. There are a few reasons for this. We wanted to make sure these events offered a select level range to make it easier for event organizers to run and to ensure that these can be offered easily as walk-up events for new players at events around the world. Secondly, we’re trying to bridge some of the cognitive load that is required to run these events. As of right now there are effectively four scenarios worth of content in one of these interactives. Adding on additional level ranges makes them exceptionally tricky to slot for events and for GMs to prepare for properly. But worry not, we’ll have more high-level content coming in the future (in addition to the always growing repertoire of sanctioned content). Finally,because the workload on interactives is immense, it takes a lot of time and effort for Paizo’s extremely talented staff of developers, editors, and artists to complete. We want to make sure that these events can still continue without adding undue stress or delays on other projects for our staff, so this change is an important step in achieving that goal.

Pathfinder Society Second Edition: Year of Shattered Sanctuaries - Expedition Into Pallid Peril By Rigby Bendele Starfinder Society Year of the Data Scourge - A Time of Crisis by Dennis Muldoon


Starfinder Society #4–99: A Time of Crisis debuts at PaizoCon 2022 and is Organized Play’s first foray into the upcoming Drift Crisis event. In this adventure, a large group of Starfinders heads out on a routine archaeological mission, only to find themselves caught in the first event of the Drift Crisis. To survive the challenges to come, groups of characters from local communities or around the world need to come together and work as a team. In this exciting event, we’ll be giving characters the opportunity to answer, “Where were you during the Drift Crash?”—an event that kicks off the Drift Crisis and can be followed-up in all aspects of the Starfinder setting. Written by veteran author Dennis Muldoon, this interactive is intended for 1st to 6th level characters and is split into level range 1–4 and 3–6 to better help event organizers.

Pathfinder Society #3–98: Expedition into Pallid Peril is set to release in early August with a GenCon 2022 debut. In this multi-table event, the PCs head into the mountain region of Droskar’s Crag in search of the entrance to a fabled lost dwarven city. Prior expeditions involved lone groups of Pathfinders, such as Pathfinder Society #2–19: Enter the Pallid Peak and more recently Pathfinder Society #3–10: Delve the Pallid Depths. This expedition is the largest yet, with several Pathfinder groups set to explore the mountain ruins in hopes of finding the entrance to the lost dwarven city of Raseri Kanton, which is believed to be lost somewhere within the so-called Pallid Peak. The amazingly talented Rigby Bendele has put together a masterpiece adventure for multiple players. This event is intended for 1st to 6th level characters and is split into level range 1–4 and 3–6 to better help event organizers.

That’s all for today’s blog! Look forward to more information on these interactives as we get closer to the big conventions of the year.

Thurston Hillman
Senior Digital Adventures Developer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Organized Play Pathfinder Society Starfinder Society
101 to 150 of 156 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
1/5 *

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:

Do you propose that they exclude tier 1-2?

As was expressed, they only have so much staff time that they can spend on the interactives as a project. That is probably what the 'feasible' means.

Do you propose that they ignore other projects or overwork their staff for your sake?

This is a level of argumentativeness that I have thus far consciously avoided in my posts. You asked for my opinion, and I have given it. How, or even if, Org Play chooses to accommodate my wishes is not up to me, it is up to them. I do not know what resources are available, and i doubt you do either. I simply want to show them that there might be more value than they have perceived.

Do I think they should exclude tier 1-2? Frankly and honestly, I do. I do however recognize that the specials are an excellent marketing tool. I do not, however, think that they are in any way welcoming to a brand new player, there are just too many moving parts. My first experience at a PFS table was at Gencon and it was a lousy one. If my second game was "Siege of Diamond City", I would have had n clue what was going on. But once again, it is not up to me, it is up to them. All I can do is make the experience for any new player at my table to have a better first experience than I did.

Either way me and my friends will likely be at a 3-4 table at in-person Gencon for the PFS special, and will likely have 2-3 empty seats. Feel free to join our table if you wish, I'm sure it will be an awesome game. I am however done pleading my case here.

Grand Archive 4/5 5/55/5 *

I have appreciated your responses. And your last leads me back to my original point.

medtec28 wrote:
I do not know what resources are available, and i doubt you do either.

That is a curious thing to say as Thurston himself posted in this very thread...

Thurston Hillman wrote:
...The amount of development and editing that would require with our updated practices and way of presenting scenarios is just not sustainable...

I suppose that I specifically do not know. That may be true. But maybe..just maybe I can trust. In fact, here is the whole post.

I suppose that you could not trust their word. But I choose to.

1/5 *

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I am aware of Thurston's post, however can I point you to the very next post where

Mike Kimmel wrote:
We know we won't please everyone. And that's okay. We appreciate your feedback, as it helps us make these decisions.

So I would say that not only am I trusting, but am also honoring this request.

Grand Archive 4/5 5/55/5 *

Indeed.

3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It seem with second edition that the rules are much tighter and it should be easier to write scenarios because the authors have a better idea what the skill range will be for the PCs. A third level PC is going to have a maximum bonus of +11 (+3 level, max +4 stat, +4 proficiency), and more likely a +8 (+3 level, +3 stat, +2 proficiency). That three point range is a lot tighter than I've seen in 1E.

As to what tiers to offer, to me, offering the beginner range 1-2 doesn't make a lot of sense at the expenses of higher tiers. A walk in or new player don't have time to make a PC on the spot and can pick up a level 3 pregen just as easily as a level 1. Playing a level 3 will probably give them a better feel for the game and they'll have a little more fun because their PC can do more.

An overall range of 3-8 seems seem a better fit for what appears to be about the same amount of work.

Horizon Hunters 4/5 5/5 **

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Swiftbrook wrote:


As to what tiers to offer, to me, offering the beginner range 1-2 doesn't make a lot of sense at the expenses of higher tiers. A walk in or new player don't have time to make a PC on the spot and can pick up a level 3 pregen just as easily as a level 1. Playing a level 3 will probably give them a better feel for the game and they'll have a little more fun because their PC can do more.

Though it’s not a substantially large number, your point excludes people who have already made a level 1 PFS character, but who have never played. So, there is a circle of players who show up ready to play, but have never played before. And working at the info desk for PFS/SFS at Gen Con, I can say we would get tons of questions from a number of gamers about how to make characters, and then they grab an empty table and start working on one.

So, yes, a walk-in player who shows up at game time won’t have time to make a character, true, but there are walk-ins and new players who already have made characters. So, I think that pool is a little wider than perhaps you may think.

And, I can only speak for myself - I don’t find anything intrinsically more fun about playing a level 3 character over a level 1 or level 2. But, my play style and yours may not be the same, which is totally cool. I’m just pointing out that not everyone finds fun in the same things.

5/5 5/55/55/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.

At a convention you may also have new guy who's been playing for less than a day but has a level 1 character with 2 sessions on them, and getting to make and play YOUR character is a big draw of organized play at conventions

Grand Archive 4/5 5/55/5 *

I would also add that if someone has played one or more sessions, but has less than 24 xp on that character, they would not get to play their character should the 1-2 tier be excluded.

ninja'ed

5/5 5/55/55/5

I'd rather play (or run) a 1-12 special off of a google doc full ot typ0s than than a 1-6 special of the slickest pdf ever produced.

The scenarios exist for the DM as pdfs, and only as pdfs. No one picks them up and thumbs through them to conflate production value with content quality. They only exist for the player through the DM. For most people at the table that's a lot of of layers to think that the presentation of the words matters all that much.

If anything , when things get re arranged for word count white space and layout if often leads to making it harder to actually run the scenario (I'm looking at you Stablock map statblock)

Philistines unite!

Shadow Lodge 4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
I'd rather play (or run) a 1-12 special off of a google doc full ot typ0s than than a 1-6 special of the slickest pdf ever produced.

Having done so, I don't think you actually do. Unless you were at the Grand Convocation 2012?

5/5 5/55/55/5

TOZ wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
I'd rather play (or run) a 1-12 special off of a google doc full ot typ0s than than a 1-6 special of the slickest pdf ever produced.
Having done so, I don't think you actually do. Unless you were at the Grand Convocation 2012?

haven't been around that long, but I do remember when half of the scenario was the pfsgmprepsite print out

Dark Archive 1/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

Late to the party here but the topic of high-level play in PFS is important to me (and by high level I currently mean anything that’s level 7 and up). I recall being disappointed when last year’s special capped out at 8th level, and had a similar reaction when I learned of the level 6 cap this year. But the rationale behind the shift makes total sense. My disappointment isn’t really about what level the specials are. It’s the lack of sufficient higher level play opportunities.

In my case I have a level 9 character that I love playing, along with a level 6 not far from level 7 (where the content starts getting sparse). I would love to have more opportunities to continue the stories of these characters. Certainly more than 1 or 2 times a year.

For me, this isn’t just about quantity of play but quality of play. When I haven’t played a character for a year, I am a bit rusty when I pick that character up again. During play I can find myself forgetting an ability or something cool my character can do… and only remember towards the end of the game or even after. Fewer play opportunities makes it harder for me to get back into the rhythm of that character, and the game experience is less satisfying as a result.

One solution would be shifting the distribution of adventures each year. Perhaps a third are levels 1-4, another third are 3-6 and the final third is for levels 7 and up, and of those, ensuring there are 3 or more adventures available for characters above level 8. That isn’t too far off the mark for the current schedule, but Season 2 seemed to do a better job of this than Season 3 (which Pirate Rob did a great job breaking down). I’d be interested in other ideas to expand higher level play opportunities.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:
TOZ wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
I'd rather play (or run) a 1-12 special off of a google doc full ot typ0s than than a 1-6 special of the slickest pdf ever produced.
Having done so, I don't think you actually do. Unless you were at the Grand Convocation 2012?
haven't been around that long, but I do remember when half of the scenario was the pfsgmprepsite print out

That’s a lot of unpaid labor to rely on.

5/5 5/55/55/5

TOZ wrote:


That’s a lot of unpaid labor to rely on.

hmmm? No, What i mean is I'm familiar with a scenario format that is mostly done without any polishing, just copy paste print. Generally it's somewhere between I don't care to actually prefer that layout. So yes I do know what I'm getting into when i say I'd prefer the philistine approach to a wide range of levels than a polished approach to a narrow low level range (I don't think a narrow high level range for a special is a real possibility except for like, the last year or two)

Dark Archive 4/5 Venture-Captain, Online—VTT

BigNorseWolf wrote:
I'd rather play (or run) a 1-12 special off of a google doc full ot typ0s than than a 1-6 special of the slickest pdf ever produced.

Except that's not an accurate representation of how it actually works in real life.

Asking for more content but unpolished is effectively saying you want writers to work twice as much, and editors, layout, etc to go do something else. The only way that works is if the content comes twice as slow, writers can't magically produce twice as much content somehow.

Beyond that, editors are vital, the before and after of a scenario can be night and day, some writers are absolutely experienced in how to lay things out, what to include and what to cut, etc. But others are new to writing such content, or their skills are better in some areas than others, a good editor takes that and makes it work for ALL GMs, new or experienced.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Richard Lowe wrote:


Asking for more content but unpolished is effectively saying you want writers to work twice as muchsomething else.

That would be true IF I was asking for a product that took as much work , but I'm not. A product that's polished and one that isn't don't have the same amount of work put into them, which is kind of the point. (I mean I don't think you CAN qualify a number percentage but its obviously less by definition) The last 10% of something is often half the work and you can spend a theoretically infinite amount of time tweaking and improving things.

Quote:
The only way that works is if the content comes twice as slow, writers can't magically produce twice as much content somehow.

No. There is objectively, a reduction in the amount of overall work required here from a polished 1-12 to a rough 1-12. Whether that lack of polish saves enough work to make the project viable, I couldn't say. But making it sound like I'm asking for the same amount of overall work with no loss isn't an accurate summation. I'm not asking that the writer make a publishing quality pdf without an editing pass, I'm saying we don't have a publishing quality pdf.

Dark Archive 4/5 Venture-Captain, Online—VTT

BigNorseWolf wrote:

No. There is objectively, a reduction in the amount of overall work required here from a polished 1-12 to a rough 1-12. Whether that lack of polish saves enough work to make the project viable, I couldn't say. But making it sound like I'm asking for the same amount of overall work with no loss isn't an accurate summation. I'm not asking that the writer make a publishing quality pdf without an editing pass, I'm saying we don't have a publishing quality pdf.

Yes. You are asking one person to do lots more work, whilst others do less. Sure overall it might be less (might be, there is literally no proof involved, merely supposition), but that's not a useful comparison when you're asking a writer to not only write more, but also to be judged (because they will) on that quality of writing when its never seen an editor or layout, etc.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Richard Lowe wrote:


(might be, there is literally no proof involved, merely supposition)

Objecting to this premise is just random. Of course editing and layout is work. There wouldn't be layout people and editors otherwise it would just be done as part of the writing.

It's doubly weird because there's dozens of reasons I could be off, from the amount of work to how badly the DMs would twitch over The philistine photons google doc (Some of my google docs cause HMM wisdom damage :) )

I really, really, dislike evading a converation like that instead of having one.

Grand Archive 4/5 5/55/5 *

In order to understand your point, maybe we should take it step by step. So, if they were to come out with less polished product, what would be the gain?

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 * Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
There is objectively, a reduction in the amount of overall work required here from a polished 1-12 to a rough 1-12. Whether that lack of polish saves enough work to make the project viable, I couldn't say.

Based on my experience, no, that would not be a viable model.

Dark Archive 4/5 5/55/5 *** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Midwest

On another point, talking about the scenario layout.

While I really like the way the current scenarios are set up, where you get all of the statblocks in the back, and such, if this is a cause of a large amount of development time, I would be more than willing to forgo that part. I can make do with stat blocks for unique monsters and NPCs, and then handle the bestiary pulls myself.

Is it as convenient? Not really. Would I sacrifice this to get more content? Absolutely.

Horizon Hunters 4/5 5/5 **

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Silbeg wrote:

On another point, talking about the scenario layout.

While I really like the way the current scenarios are set up, where you get all of the statblocks in the back, and such, if this is a cause of a large amount of development time, I would be more than willing to forgo that part. I can make do with stat blocks for unique monsters and NPCs, and then handle the bestiary pulls myself.

Is it as convenient? Not really. Would I sacrifice this to get more content? Absolutely.

Given that GM’s don’t get the scenarios really until the last minute, I wouldn’t be in favor of removing any stat blocks. I mean, I suppose if removing the generic ones (the ones you could get from the Bestiary,etc.) meant that GMs could get the scenarios significantly earlier, that might be a reason to consider doing so. But I suspect the generic stat blocks probably aren’t the problem.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Dennis Muldoon wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
There is objectively, a reduction in the amount of overall work required here from a polished 1-12 to a rough 1-12. Whether that lack of polish saves enough work to make the project viable, I couldn't say.
Based on my experience, no, that would not be a viable model.

We have had level 1-8. 1-12, and 1-16 specials before

Dark Archive 4/5 5/55/5 *** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Midwest

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Stratton wrote:
Silbeg wrote:

On another point, talking about the scenario layout.

While I really like the way the current scenarios are set up, where you get all of the statblocks in the back, and such, if this is a cause of a large amount of development time, I would be more than willing to forgo that part. I can make do with stat blocks for unique monsters and NPCs, and then handle the bestiary pulls myself.

Is it as convenient? Not really. Would I sacrifice this to get more content? Absolutely.

Given that GM’s don’t get the scenarios really until the last minute, I wouldn’t be in favor of removing any stat blocks. I mean, I suppose if removing the generic ones (the ones you could get from the Bestiary,etc.) meant that GMs could get the scenarios significantly earlier, that might be a reason to consider doing so. But I suspect the generic stat blocks probably aren’t the problem.

We’ve been getting them much earlier lately. As I recall We had at least a month for the last two Gen cons to work on the specials

I also would be surprised that this was a primary cause for additional work load, but it was mentioned above.

3/5 5/55/5 *** Contributor

7 people marked this as a favorite.

As a GM, I would not be in favor of losing the bestiary stat blocks. Particularly when GMs are often asked to prep multiple tiers, that is a ton of extra work on top of the already large amount of work to prep the special.

As a writer, I would not want anything to go straight from me to the GMs and players without going through development and editing. They do so much more than just fix typos that all makes the adventure clean, sensible, and easier to run.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Kate Baker wrote:
As a GM, I would not be in favor of losing the bestiary stat blocks. Particularly when GMs are often asked to prep multiple tiers, that is a ton of extra work on top of the already large amount of work to prep the special.

I cannot see this being a big issue. They're just added as pages to the end. I can do that in 2 minutes with a pdf editor and my degree is in tree.

Quote:
As a writer, I would not want anything to go straight from me to the GMs and players without going through development and editing. They do so much more than just fix typos that all makes the adventure clean, sensible, and easier to run.

This is frequently cited as the bottleneck for having the specials. The point is we don't want ANY of the options, it's a matter of which one we want the least.

3/5 5/55/5 *** Contributor

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I am indeed expressing what I would want the least. I think that fewer tiers is much, much better than what we would have if the specials went straight from the author to the GMs without the steps in between.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 * Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East

4 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Dennis Muldoon wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
There is objectively, a reduction in the amount of overall work required here from a polished 1-12 to a rough 1-12. Whether that lack of polish saves enough work to make the project viable, I couldn't say.
Based on my experience, no, that would not be a viable model.
We have had level 1-8. 1-12, and 1-16 specials before

Yes, and I would bet that the devs all put a TON of work into those. I don't think you have an accurate view of the differences between an author's turnover and a finished product, especially on something as massive as a special.

Kate Baker wrote:
I am indeed expressing what I would want the least. I think that fewer tiers is much, much better than what we would have if the specials went straight from the author to the GMs without the steps in between.

+1

Paizo Employee 5/5 Digital Developer

11 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
I cannot see this being a big issue. They're just added as pages to the end. I can do that in 2 minutes with a pdf editor and my degree is in tree.

I want to address this because it's a bit of a misconception on "how easy" this is...

It's not just copy/paste pages to the end of the document.

First off, by moving our statblocks to the end of a document, it requires a change in process that either means we're moving text around from the specific encounter to an appendix, or jumping back/forth from that text when we're doing our development. Either way, it opens up the potential for more errors and is a bit trickier in terms of our development pass.

If we're talking just a Bestiary grab, then the process involves inserting the text into the pre-layout word document (many authors send text, but typically they have some copy/paste or transcription error that requires us just to re-grab from the source anyways). This means the dev has to copy/paste from existing sources and then ensuring the formatting comes over correctly.

Following all this, the document goes through an edit pass (we mark for edit what creatures are ported from print products to ensure no additional edit is done).

Then the product gets laid out, this is handled by our art department.

When this is done, the dev does a copyfit pass from the dev and this involves making sure text lines up, no weird artifacts got in. This is also where we change any "see page XX" to be the proper page. The issue here, is that each additional page means we have to keep on the ball for these changes and we need to check over them, even if it is just a copy/paste there is still the potential for something to sneak through. Moving them into an appendix also means we need to do a lot of juggling in terms of those "see page XXs" so if something gets bumped, then the whole thing gets a bit tricky.

So yeah, there's a good amount involved in setting up these appendices, all of which get handled by several different folks (author, dev, dev2, editor, layout, copyfit, final checks). In the end, it would absolutely just be easier for us to have the statblocks appear inline like our other adventure products do, or reference out and require the GMs look at our print bestiaries/online references. The overwhelming feedback we've had is that people want us to keep these, so we respect that. However, please don't think it's just "2 minutes" of work to do all this.

Thanks for attending my "one small part of being an OP developer" TED Talk.

Paizo Employee 1/5 Pathfinder Society Developer

17 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm speaking solely for myself here, not the rest of the team. This thread is mostly talking about interactive specials, but it's tangentially touching on our overall approach with regard to "quantity vs. quality," and I have some thoughts.

I help make Pathfinder Society adventures because I love doing it. I take pride in the stories and experiences we create.

I have no interest in lowering the quality of my work for the sake of producing more content. I value my work, and I want it to look good. I want editors to review my scenario outlines and developed turnovers and show me how they can be better. I want the adventures I develop to have layout done by talented professionals with the proper tools. I want quality art. I want to be able to show our adventures to people and say, "I helped make these. Aren't they awesome?"

If the time comes for me to apply for a new job, I'll need to point to the products I've helped to create in my time on this team, and I'll want them to look good. If being on this team meant that I was cranking out low-quality products for the sake of meeting demand, I would have an incentive to leave the team and join another one where I got to make higher quality products.

I feel for everyone who wants more content. I also wish we had the additional time and resources to produce more org play content. Our setting is enormous. I have more adventure ideas than I know what to do with, and more prospective freelancers than I could ever possibly hire.

I appreciate everyone trying to come up with ways that we could produce more content. The fact that you want more content shows that you enjoy what we create. Speaking personally, I wouldn't like to cut pieces of the production process so we can fit more adventures through the production pipeline, because I do not want to reduce the quality of our adventures. I also can't even think of a part of the process we could reasonably cut. Everyone who works on our adventures is essential to the process.

Enough rambling from me. Thank you for your contributions to the discussion. Time for lunch... then back to making adventures!

Dark Archive 4/5 Venture-Captain, Online—VTT

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Dennis Muldoon wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
There is objectively, a reduction in the amount of overall work required here from a polished 1-12 to a rough 1-12. Whether that lack of polish saves enough work to make the project viable, I couldn't say.
Based on my experience, no, that would not be a viable model.
We have had level 1-8. 1-12, and 1-16 specials before

You do realise you're arguing against the actual, factual experience of people who write these scenarios for Paizo right? Like, I get you want more stuff and personally are fine with a lesser quality. The people who both write and edit the scenarios are saying that's not a tradeoff that can be made, maybe, just maybe, they have a bit more experience and insight to this than those of us on the outside?

Shadow Lodge 4/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Running off your authors doesn’t seem like a good plan for expanding content.

5/5 5/55/55/5

TOZ wrote:
Running off your authors doesn’t seem like a good plan for expanding content.

I'll add authorial revolt to the list of things that would go wrong with my evil plan and be sure to stock up on roots of the mountain, breath of the fishes, footfalls of a cat.....

4/5 5/55/55/55/5

TOZ wrote:

Having done so, I don't think you actually do. Unless you were at the Grand Convocation 2012?

Would be good if they ever did something like that again, or handed something similar to the international community - something to fresh to add in rather than just the usual multi as the capstone event of a con.

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

Between the players hopping from table to table to the repetitive waves at the end, I'm glad we haven't done another of those since.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

If one of the time consuming bits of development is fitting text around the art, which I understand from my own editing experience, wouldn't it make sense to move that art to its own page?

Or, barring page count, group images horizontally?

• Put the "Where on Golarion" map side-by-side together with the NPC giving the briefing.
• Put the image of the villain side-by-side together with the Challenge Point table.
• If you're meeting two NPCs together, group them side-by-side above the text.
• Put the puzzle box of death beside the rules for how it kills the PCs.

Although I appreciate the grid of images in the back, they're small and pixelate easily. I really liked how Absalom Initiation had full-page art for each NPC (and many of the enemies).

Doing full-page art also opens the opportunity for the occasional action scene, rather than just a portrait.

Although, all of that said, I suspect the reasoning may be cost, or possibly page count, so if that discussion's already been had and our current setup is the best compromise, then.. nevermind ^_^

2/5 5/5 ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think the reason for the inline art that makes it more time consuming to layout, is that's what's become defined as a 'quality rpg' product. If you look back to early rulebooks from the 80s you might see a piece of art every 4-8 pages. Overtime that ratio has increased, most WotC or Paizo products these days have 1 piece of art per set of facing pages. Its part of the brand image/customer expectation. I hate that its become the expectation throughout the industry, it drives the cost of the books up, and often drives the share of the profits for the content authors down, etc. But art sells, and people often have a 'this is too dense' reaction to just seeing solid blocks of text.

4/5 5/55/55/55/5

TriOmegaZero wrote:
... to the repetitive waves at the end...

OK that wasn't evident in the brochure and the happy snaps I saw :p

Wayfinders 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ** Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So let's talk for a moment about content rather than structure. I am so excited that the Starfinder Special will launch us into the Drift Crisis!

Star Daddy wrote:
In this exciting event, we’ll be giving characters the opportunity to answer, “Where were you during the Drift Crash?”—an event that kicks off the Drift Crisis and can be followed-up in all aspects of the Starfinder setting.

Given what I've already heard from the Developers on Twitch, if you're on a ship in the Drift, you get dumped out elsewhere. Will we be on ships? Will we get dumped out in different planes? What's gonna happen? I wanna know!

Star Daddy wrote:
Written by veteran author Dennis Muldoon, this interactive is intended for 1st to 6th level characters and is split into level range 1–4 and 3–6 to better help event organizers.

I like that the two level ranges overlap. That will make it so much easier for us to have tables make. Will any part of this special be repeatable, or will it be a one and done?

Hmm

Paizo Employee 5/5 Organized Play Coordinator

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
Will any part of this special be repeatable, or will it be a one and done?

The plan for the repeatable rules is that you can play it twice at any tier, so you can traumatize *two* characters! I mean, what.

plans may change see store for details don't hold me to this until the PDF comes out


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Super excited to see where that story goes

5/5 *

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

The GenCon event Catalog is out now and the Special on Saturday night only lists Tier 1-2. Is that just a placeholder or do we need to wait for more Tiers to be listed?

Paizo Employee 5/5 Organized Play Coordinator

1 person marked this as a favorite.
waltero wrote:
The GenCon event Catalog is out now and the Special on Saturday night only lists Tier 1-2. Is that just a placeholder or do we need to wait for more Tiers to be listed?

Gen Con made some errors when approving our events, I emailed them on Friday to get them sorted out. I expect they'll be fixed by the time registration begins on the 15th.

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

Very late post here, but I think if we're limited to a six level range, it should start at the HIGHEST pregen then go up from there. So PF2 would be 5-11 and starfinder would be 8-13. The specials are when people get to pull out all their cool shiney things and share them.

Horizon Hunters 4/5 5/5 **

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Well, the tables for Tiers 1-4 went super fast for Gen Con. Snagged a ticket for 5-6. That was fast!

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, Texas—Houston

2 people marked this as a favorite.
thistledown wrote:
Very late post here, but I think if we're limited to a six level range, it should start at the HIGHEST pregen then go up from there. So PF2 would be 5-11 and starfinder would be 8-13. The specials are when people get to pull out all their cool shiney things and share them.

This was discussed extensively in another thread, but giving a new player a high-level pregen in a timed event is not a great way to experience a system for the first time.

The Exchange 1/5

Do people seriously think that the INTERACTIVE specials will be the means for new players to experience PF2 and PF2 Society play? If this is indeed what is going to be happening rather than existing players, then I am all for it. Anything to help revitalize and generate even a little new player interest in PF2 Society play would be welcome.

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

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Hsui wrote:
Do people seriously think that the INTERACTIVE specials will be the means for new players to experience PF2 and PF2 Society play?

From experience over multiple Phoenix Comicons, yes.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/55/5 **** Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

It's worth mentioning, that players might already have some experience with RPGs or even PF2 and SFS before they discover that organized play exists.
And while I think that they are likely not the best entry point into org play, they certainly are popular ^^

101 to 150 of 156 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / General Discussion / Paizo Blog: Organized Play Preview: 2022 Interactive Events All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.