|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The other thing I am afraid of is when a player actually does want to be involved in the political battle. I have a cleric of Sarenrae who takes the faction's political struggle seriously and wants Qadira to win. He, therefore, does not assist other players in their missions if he suspects their action involves their mission. He has good sense motive skills and he's intelligent enough to make inferences. It shouldn't make me a douche because he is built that way. He especially dislikes Taldor because of their laws forbidding his religion. That being said, he happily heals, buffs, etc. and cooperates towards the primary goal.
The faction war was a good concept when PFS first started but has kind of diminishinitial its original design. So, what can be done about it? What should be done about it? How can we make factions, their missions, and the competition between them matter? Should we even try? What should the results mean? Should they be relegated like English soccer teams? Let me hear your thoughts. I really wat to make factions count for something but need a list of solid ideas of how to make that happen.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The faction war was a good concept when PFS first started but has kind of diminishinitial its original design. So, what can be done about it? What should be done about it? How can we make factions, their missions, and the competition between them matter? Should we even try? What should the results mean? Should they be relegated like English soccer teams? Let me hear your thoughts. I really wat to make factions count for something but need a list of solid ideas of how to make that happen.
Thanks for this Post Mike!!
I have a few suggestions and comments..
Comment: What happened to this seasons faction mission success rate meaning something for story line for the scenarios? Did that not happen?
Suggestion: Please for the love of Sarenrae if a faction mission needs to be kept secret from the rest of the group, make that clear in the faction mission.
Suggestion: All faction mission are either 2 versions of secret, either the mission have to be kept secret, the group can't know you are doing it at all, or the group can't know you are doing it for you faction.
Example: Instead of saying hey you Drunkard Paladin Bob can you help me find this Rotting hand for my Faction, the character would need to say hey Drunkard Paladin Bob can you help me find the remains of a lost relative of mine that is said to have died here? That would add more roleplaying and stop some metagaming, and would make some faction missions more difficult and lower the success rate down from 99%.
Suggestion: Make it more clear Pathfinder Society Comes first, though the Character is part of a Faction, their loyalties are still to the Pathfinder Society first and to the members of the PFS, make the players not actually Faction Members, but associates of that faction that help them out and get help in return.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the faction missions have added flavor and in some cases added additional information (player from faction X states that "I've come into some information that item Y that we are going for is guarded by something like monster x").
But for the most part have become something that players either pay more attention to completing vs. the regular mission, or rush through it while trying to get to the final mission.
Despite being told countless times (verbal and in writing) that not all faction missions will be obtained (they aren't guaranteed) GMs still face players that get upset if they miss a faction mission point because they couldn't do the mission (failure of some sort -- low roll, didn't have skill etc).
I think faction missions have become a communal item to be accomplished.. (hey, i need to intimidate person x to do what I want .. but I don't have a high intimidate.. who has higher than modifier z? Ooooo can you intimate this guy for me.. I want him to do "blah"). Unless I'm wrong, the faction mission were originally intended to create intrigue and add another depth to the overall mission; they aren't doing that anymore.
My thoughts on them are --
Enforce secrecy -- GMs should no longer ask openly at the table what your faction mission is.. instead wait until they get the reporting sheet and pass out mission face down (keeping secrecy is easier with the new format for faction missions as they all look the same)
If a faction mission specifically states that it needs to be done in secret ("let no one see you.. make sure you don't get caught... etc") then it needs to be done secretly -- personally I try to write the judge a note and pass it ... keeping the secret aspect to it all
Tighten the reins on "creative solutions" -- I know as players and GMs we like creative solutions as they help to make the game more fun, however, sometimes creative solutions to solve faction mission do get out of hand and players feel that because they've been sooooooo creative to achieve the mission they should get the point anyway; despite the fact that in truth they really failed it. As GMs we need to avoid the "yeah that was creative.. granted you didn't use diplomacy or another related skill, you didn't actually talk to the guy instead you stole the information, and you endangered the lives of innocents along the way; but in the grand scheme of things you got the information your faction wanted to yeah, here you go, you got your faction point." I'm guilty of this myself and am working towards changing it when I run games; going instead trying to mention perimeters in which they can achieve their faction mission w/in the boundaries of what the success conditions are.
Make them meaningful – tie them to the specific scenario better or tie them to the metaplot for the season somehow, but for the most part they seem to be more of an extra thing and in the long-run don't fit what the players are trying to do. (i.e. faction x needs to talk to NPC y and in turn gets another portion of the overall mission). Then there is the fact that completing faction mission was supposed to be an overall society "war" of sorts, see which faction is the best... We saw that Andoran "won" the first year; but who won the 2nd and who is going to win the third? Which faction is going to be the top to "rule" the other factions. Tying that in could make it more interesting; especially if the cheliaxans have to start doing what the Silver Crusade wants them to do because the SC is the top faction ;)
Difficulty – I think Dragnmoon mentioned this one (and gasp we agree) make it so they aren't gimmie points. Too often mission seem to "just happen" along the way and players get them by default
Rough ideas, but hopefully the thoughts are conveyed right
|
|
I'll be sure to bring this topic up with my friends over the next few weeks.
My current opinion on factions in general: 10 is too many. When it was just 5 factions they felt like they meant something. Now with 10 options it is all watered-down to having very little, if any impact on play at the table.
Dragonmoon has some excellent suggestions. I like the idea of the missions all leaning towards secrecy. Too often it ends up being each player getting help from everyone else at the table just to have a shot at completing a mission.
|
Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau
|
I think the Faction War should have some overall meaning to the life of the campaign. AS of right now, we have yet to see it impact any scenarios in any of the Seasons.
I *gasp* agree with the points that Dragnmoon and Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome have said as well, with the exception of the Creative Solutions. That is an area that involves some GM fiat, true, but that leeway is necessary sometimes. I hate that the Faction Mission is usually tied into one skill. Maybe the mission needs an alternate skill check listed for resolution, so as to give a secondary way of success. Either way, I think the need for secrecy needs to be reimplemented.
Lastly, I agree that 10 Factions is kind of unwieldy. As a GM, it is often hard to track what the Faction Mission is for all the Factions involved and still finish in 4 hours. I myself am guilty of failing to present an opportunity to complete a Faction Mission because of trying to complete a scenario on time. I'm not sure what solution there is for this though; since that door was opened, it will be harder to close.
|
|
I agree with pretty much everything DMoon and CBG said.
1. Make them somehow tied to the main plot of the scenario/metaplot instead of just something that coincidentally is there for them to do while they go on the mission.
2. Make them more secretive. Maybe more of the If the Qadira player finds out what/why the Taldor player is doing, the Taldor player loses the point.
3. When they are the 'without letting anyone find out' type, for the love of gods, make sure to include in the scenario how secretive it needs to be. Stealth check opposed by everyone else's Perception? There have been at least 3 Ive seen with missions like this, but only one listed if the player needed to make a Stealth check to keep it secretive.
How can we make factions, their missions, and the competition between them matter? Should we even try?
Personally, I'd like to see the faction system as a way of putting in some sort of low-stakes PvP dynamic. Obviously players should be forbidden from actually entering combat with one another, but these factions are supposed to be competing with one another for influence over the Decemvirate, so faction missions should reflect that somewhat. Maybe there could also be different relations between the factions that are spelled out for the players. For instance the Silver Crusade is interested in stopping Cheliax from becoming too powerful but isn't quite as concerned about Qadira's missions, for instance.
Maybe these suggestions are too hard to practically implement, but that's just my two cents.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a reward, how about a custom boon that players can apply to one of their existing PCs of the winning faction? Something small like a PF Tales boon, but specific to the winning faction?
edit: A more generic idea would be a boon that would give a +X bonus to that PCs fame score.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
People have complained elsewhere that the DCs for some of the missions are so high, they can't be completed, unless the whole group cooperates.
Make sure any skill DCs are set at a level appropriate for the sub-tier, achievable by a 'normal'-build PC, not some freak with a 20 stat, max ranks, and Skill Focus.
Allow more than one official method to complete the mission, make sure the completion methods aren't worded in such a way that only one class (or narrow band of classes) can complete them.
Be aware of the possibility of archetypes, and that certain iconic abilities (like Trapfinding) may have been traded away. Don't just add half PC level to the trap DC 'just to balance out the Rogue'.
|
|
Faction missions are going to change in focus and become harder to achieve in Season 4. What I'm asking for here is how we should proceed with the faction war, if at all. My understanding is that originally, factions would compete to get ahead of each other every season, and the top faction would receive a benefi of some sort.
I'm not worried so much in the mechanics of how faction missions are achieved. We are already moving in a direction to change that. I'm more interested in the political intrigue, secrecy, and the like, and what the playerbase would like to see to make them a better part of the campaign.
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Faction missions are going to change in focus and become harder to achieve in Season 4. What I'm asking for here is how we should proceed with the faction war, if at all. My understanding is that originally, factions would compete to get ahead of each other every season, and the top faction would receive a benefi of some sort.
The most significant way you can make it "matter" that people will pay attention to is with story. The winning faction each season has some impact that is felt throughout the following season. If this happens, people will pay attention, and that cleric of Sarenrae will have a reason to have built her character (and play it) that way, and people will respect it.
I'm not worried so much in the mechanics of how faction missions are achieved. We are already moving in a direction to change that. I'm more interested in the political intrigue, secrecy, and the like, and what the playerbase would like to see to make them a better part of the campaign.
You will get push-back from the players who believe "if I don't max out my fame, my character is gimped."
I'm sure you're aware, but there are a great many people who really believe that, in order for their character to get access to everything they feel they should get access to, getting 100% of their faction missions completed is an absolute must. Moreover, they're pissed when they don't succeed.
Somehow, you need to illustrate that this is not the case (+2 weapons should not be available to characters of 5th level on a regular basis, for instance). Somehow, you need to make people realize that the expected progression is 75% of your missions completed - not that I know the number, by the way.
At any rate, the reason you see Qadiran clerics of Saranrae happily helping out Taldan Lion Blades at most tables is because of this belief, and the lack of impact "winning" has.
Make people understand what the progression means to their character by comparing it to "standard" game play.
Make the faction war matter for the story, so people can see the impact their characters have on the world.
And, by the way, make some characters that people care about. Have you noticed the "Designing Grand Master Torch" thread? If most people either hate the character, or don't care about it, then why would they work for it? I can't think of any faction heads I have any care for, whatsoever. Even the Society VCs that you can work for are slimy. The only character whose quirks I hear about from players are the Para-countess's - she, at least, gets paid attention to (and, by the way, this season she is considered boring due to the simplification of the opening lines for each faction mission). What I'm saying is that the ideals of the faction matter more than the people, when I pick my faction for a character. Change this, if you want better involvement.
Last - yes, it should matter. Yes, you should pay attention to this. Otherwise we're just playing yet another RPG, albeit with stricter rules on progressing our character.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, whatever is done about any conflict between the Factions, it needs to be done in a way that will preserve the No PVP rule. Putting in conflicting faction missions will not help with this. Putting in a story arc for the season that will encourage players to sabotage others' faction missions will not help. Having a prize that characters of a winning faction would receive at the end of a season will not help. The Pathfinder Society is about working together and the factions should always come second to that or the Society will not survive, story-wise. I personally feel that if one player does something to cost a second player their faction mission prestige point, that the first player lose the point that would have been earned from the Society for completing the main mission. Sort of a punishment for not following the rules of the Society. The conflict between the Factions really needs to be kept in the fluff of PFS play, because if you let it get into the mechanics and the rewards, then I feel the PVP conflict that will naturally occur will hurt play and drive away players. That said, I am not sure how to make the conflict between Factions be relevant without any mechanical reward being involved in the results.
The faction war also leads to some really bizarre conversations that will really sidetrack the scenario. "Hey, what are you guys doing with that portrait?" "Nothing....what are you doing with that giant stone statue?" :P
This is not faction wars, this is Frat Wars! lol
Part of the initial lure of PFS to me was the idea that faction points were being tracked to determine a "winner" each season. When they said "um, just kidding" I felt a good bit of disappointment. Yeah, Fame (as it is now called) allows you more expensive purchases, but big whoop.
Unfortunately, I don't know what to implement that is "fair". Already, one PP is a "freebie" for completeing the mission for the Society, so that should silence the "but I NEEEEEED my Prestige Point" crowd a bit. Maybe a boon or perpetual bonus for a season (or calendar year) for winning factions, maybe unusable by members with less than 20 Fame so that jumping on the winning bandwagon isn't encouraged. Maybe a discount, or a special addition to the "always available" lists for the winners in the faction war. With the advent of 10 factions, I'd be fine with the last place losers being eliminated from the list of playable factions, to be replaced in the next guide perhaps.
I don't really have a good answer, but I really hope we can find one, because I think this feature of PFSOP could be a big lure that distinguishes this OP from all others.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
Well, whatever is done about any conflict between the Factions, it needs to be done in a way that will preserve the No PVP rule. Putting in conflicting faction missions will not help with this. Putting in a story arc for the season that will encourage players to sabotage others' faction missions will not help. Having a prize that characters of a winning faction would receive at the end of a season will not help. The Pathfinder Society is about working together and the factions should always come second to that or the Society will not survive, story-wise. I personally feel that if one player does something to cost a second player their faction mission prestige point, that the first player lose the point that would have been earned from the Society for completing the main mission. Sort of a punishment for not following the rules of the Society. The conflict between the Factions really needs to be kept in the fluff of PFS play, because if you let it get into the mechanics and the rewards, then I feel the PVP conflict that will naturally occur will hurt play and drive away players. That said, I am not sure how to make the conflict between Factions be relevant without any mechanical reward being involved in the results.
I think it can be done. There is no reason that your faction can't simply tell you, "Do this for us, and help us win this war of influence. Don't get in other peoples' way, whether you know what they are doing or who they work for; we'd rather you weren't kicked out of the Society for 'not cooperating.' No, you don't have to help them, but don't hinder them. We'll win the war simply by being better than they are."
After all, there is no "PvP" in sprinting races, either, but I can still win. I.E., I still win by finishing ahead of you, but I am not allowed to flip a bolas at you while I'm running behind you in an effort to trip you, thus winning the race via PvP. But if I have lighter shoes, better training, or whatever, I'll still beat you.
|
|
Every faction should have a mission that should change the canon setting of Golarion. If that faction wins the Faction War of the season, that mission should be achieved.
EG:
Shadow Lodge mission Season 4: Uncover the identity of one of the Decemvirate.
Cheliax mission Season 4: Introduce a permanent Erinyes noble into Absalom society, complete with enormous influence over Absalom politics.
Andoran mission Season 4: Replace all Absalom town guard with Eagle Knights, and have Absalom's security privatised into their hands.
So, my Grand Lodge hero might actually like the SL mission for that season, and this would influence RPing.
Of course, if Paizo don't want the canon setting changed at all, there's no point in arguing this. Nothing can happen and it'd be best reduced to a +2 to something.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I realise that I'm in a tiny, tiny minority, but I'd rather get rid of the faction/prestige system altogether. (I understand that's not an option, though.)
Director of Brand Strategy
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Every faction should have a mission that should change the canon setting of Golarion. If that faction wins the Faction War of the season, that mission should be achieved.
That's the ultimate goal, and what I had hoped to do to a greater degree in Season 3 than in previous years. Turns out, though, that it involves having a lot of juggling balls in the air at a given time and I haven't yet gotten the wrangling of all the elements under control. Managing a plotline for 10 different factions across over 30 annual adventures written by dozens of authors is really tough, is what I'm saying. For now, I'm focusing on getting the metaplot aspects of campaign continuity down to a science, and then I'll put more thought into making the faction plotlines shine more.
In any case, there are some faction plots brewing under the surface if folks are paying attention. A few of them are likely to come out next season. Keep your eyes on Andoran, Cheliax, and Qadira.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would be interested in seeing some alliances within the factions. I am not saying that the alliance has to be for an entire season nor involving every faction, but an alliance between 2-3 factions for 3-4 scenarios would be an interesting element to the "Faction Wars" as well as bringing another layered depth to the interactive world of Golarion. (i.e.. Cheliax agrees to an alliance with Qadira for X series of scenarios based on storyline/ plot devices within season 4; with the success or failure of that alliance affecting/ shaping the world of Golarion even further through the completion of Faction missions).
With there being a "winner" from the completion of the most faction missions, I would also introduce a "runner-up category". This would mean that Cheliax is the leader of season 3 but Osirion has also gained measurable success in their endeavors. This is achieved by introducing a donation system where players can donate part of their financial earnings to either their personal faction, or perhaps other regions (such as Galt).
These donations will, in game, provide additional resources and funding to support the regions and elevate their influence upon Golarion. With this system you could also introduce a separate system of perks based on the characters level of support of a specific region/ faction, such as:
Hogwarts School of Witchcraft & Wizardry
Donation Level 1: 500gp+: Gain the support from a local spellcaster. Add +2 to any Know: Arcana, Know: History, or Spellcraft skill check. Usable once per scenario.
Donation Level 2: 1,000gp+: Gain the casting of a 3rd level spell from a local wizard free of charge. Usable once per scenario. Player also gains the benefit of Donation level One.
Donation Level 3: 3,000gp+: When enhancing any armor or weapons with a magical bonus, or purchasing any wondrous item you may decrease the cost by 5%. This benefit is usable up to three times throughout the lifespan of the character. Players also gain the benefits of Donation Level One and Two.
This is an example of what could be done on the surface with such a system in place, and it would provide a greater sense of involvement for most players. With regards to aiding others on faction mission and how that affects the Faction Wars, I do not feel any ruling or mechanic can be put in place to prevent such levels of metagaming that haven't already been placed with the PFS Guidebook.
Hope these ideas help...Game On!!
|
I like the concept of the faction war, but it needs a serious tweak. I would add an extra category to the reporting sheet: a "Victory Point" for the faction that best completed their and the pathfinder's goals. This actually encourages co-operation in the main goal, but should prevent others from aiding in other faction's missions. However, you need to make the faction war *matter* in some way. I don't know mechanical or story, but probably both. Right now, the point of factions is to gain PA to gain loot. We have no reason to give a rip if our faction "wins". In fact, Andoran "won", and got its logo changed (for the worse, imo) and alignment shifted to CG, forcing me out of it. Not much of a win there...
I also agree with the alliance system, I would recommend having several smaller "sub-wars" each season. For example, Andoran wants to have the Eagle Knights be in charge of security in Absalom, while Chelliax wants the Hellknights to do so. The Scarzi would prefer to not having such Lawful types in charge, so they back andoran's bid. Plus, the original Shadow War was about national control of Absalom for their own benefit. The new 5 aren't nations at all. And, its hard to see 10 factions all getting irritable over the exact same thing, and having 10 different solutions. Plus, making Cheliax and the Silver Crusade allies of convenience at some point...well, it would lead to some great roleplay.
|
|
if there is a faction "war" we are going to get "war crimes". What do we do when player A lets a PC B bleedout, because he thinks B succeeded in his faction point - if he lives thru the adventure?
Why would I EVER help pay to bring a dead PC of a different faction back?
We're going to build some great trust, sitting down with 5 strangers at a Convention, and realizing that some of them want my PC to die. After all, dead there's less chance he was able to finish his faction mission, and less chance that he can mess up theirs.
I don't see why it would suddenly stop being the DM's job to keep players from violating no PvP. I know that this is a borderline case, and technically falls outside of the bounds of PvP, but it would still merit a stern warning from me if it happened at my table, since the player is blatantly being a dick, which is compeltely not acceptable. This would have to be enforced more vigilantly by DM's if more factionalism were to be introduced, which runs counter to the current push to homogenize the PFS experience over all Dm's which seems to be happening ATM. Whatever happens it I know that it will be taken by certain players as carte blanche to cause problems and be dicks, so it will probably fall to the DMing portion of the community to reign that in, since far before the PvP line is the DBAD line and you can't cross that line either.
Tighten the reins on "creative solutions" -- I know as players and GMs we like creative solutions as they help to make the game more fun, however, sometimes creative solutions to solve faction mission do get out of hand and players feel that because they've been sooooooo creative to achieve the mission they should get the point anyway; despite the fact that in truth they really failed it. As GMs we need to avoid the "yeah that was creative.. granted you didn't use diplomacy or another related skill, you didn't actually talk to the guy instead you stole the information, and you endangered the lives of innocents along the way; but in the grand scheme of things you got the information your faction wanted to yeah, here you go, you got your faction point." I'm guilty of this myself and am working towards changing it when I run games; going instead trying to mention perimeters in which they can achieve their faction mission w/in the boundaries of what the success conditions are.
While I can see why this is something that needs some boundaries, be really careful of tightening this to far. I will always remain fairly lenient about creative faction mission solutions, since so much of DMing in PFSOP is really restrictive and hide-bound, I guess out of necessity for OP. It would put a damper on my fun if a DM were to tell me that my solution doesn't work because I "didn't use an obscure enough skill" or some such nonsense. It's not really a big deal, but there is definitely another side to this.
Also, I really like Dragonmoon's suggestion for how to, you know, roleplay faction mission cooperation. If the importance of the conflict between factions were to be increased, please consider that it would choke off this sort of RP which is bad. Take Alexander_Damocles' suggestion if you have to do this, that way Pally McSmiterson does not automatically wind up telling Mr. von Cheliax to shove it when any sort of request is made.
My point is that if any chage in the faction system were to be made, there is going to be a hit to cooperation and a raise in table antagonism, so I guess it depends on where the balance point is for both Mike and the player base, but I think that caution is in order.
Also, I just realized, it could make things harder for organizers since players might sign up in larger groups that share a faction, or players just refuse to play with certain other characters/factions. This is also something we do not need
|
|
How long before we see faction missions that read "see if you can arrange for one or more members of other factions not to come back from this mission."
I think I just figured out how Kyle Baird manages such an effective kill ratio...
In all seriousness though, take a look at my "Victory Point" suggestion for the faction war. Does that resolve your concerns?
|
|
In your suggestion, who gets to decide what faction gets the Victory Point? Is it the DM, who has his own characters and might be calculating which one he most wants to have whatever the victory boon is? Do the players decide, which then just leads to people only playing if they can get together a block of their own faction?
|
|
I personally don't like the idea of "winning", but given the possible outcomes I wouldn't mind. Each of my characters has a different faction, so I'm not out there to let one faction win it all.
Secrecy hasn't been all that high in our games, which is a shame. The guide actually never elaborates the details; when to give out the missions, should every player get a mission even if they are all in the same faction etc.
Visible notions that some faction has made its move would likely improve the whole faction war thing. For example if you a chelish PC discovers an Andoran spy somewhere, later the group witness a group of militia take said person away.
|
|
In your suggestion, who gets to decide what faction gets the Victory Point? Is it the DM, who has his own characters and might be calculating which one he most wants to have whatever the victory boon is? Do the players decide, which then just leads to people only playing if they can get together a block of their own faction?
The GM decides. Considering the lee-way given to GM's about creative solutions of faction objectives, any PA based system runs into the same problem. Likewise for a GM who wants their faction to win could start having NPC's target members from other factions first. Assume the GM is fair and balanced, because a GM determined to skew the result will always find a way (even if they cheat) and that destroys any real discussion on proposals.
|
|
I like the idea of secret missions.
Yes, we're all Pathfinders and we will help each other accomplish the Society's objectives. But the different factions in some cases openly oppose each other. Cheliax and Andoran. Taldor and Qadira.
If different factions are vying for control over the Decemvirate, it would be nice if the accomplishment of faction missions made an impact on the struggle. And influencing the metaplot, well, that would be even better.
|
Venture-Captain, Alabama—Birmingham
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to see the faction war just fade away. Making the factions conflict, even for just bragging rights, much less a competition, undermines the spirit of cooperation in the Society.
I like the faction missions for granting limited access to favors and magic items, while their different flavor adds a lot of great RP potential, but making them work against each other just adds an extra reason for the jerks to be jerkier.
|
|
If my faction isn't trying to actively do anything (If I get *ONE MORE* mission to go talk to some obscure guy no one cares about, I'm burning down our national Embassy on the way out, so help me Abadar), then I have no reason to care about the PA. Why bother with what they want, we talk to them and leave. Or we gather the mold. Or we burn the paper. Who *cares*, what does it actually do for our faction? If it literately makes no difference to our faction if we succeed or fail, why are they even bothering to give us extra stuff?
Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Pullman
|
Faction wars. Old rivalries are always fun. I think it would be great to see factions having to stop other factions from completing their faction missions.
Faction vs Major Rivalry, Minor Rivalry
Chelaxia vs Andorian, Silver crusade.
Silver crusade vs Shadow lodge, Chelaxia
Grand Lodge vs Shadow Lodge, Sczarni
So on and so forth. I have a Pirate character that would love to mess up the faction missions of some of the other characters in the player pool I play in because he doesn't like the characters. It brings the faction war down to a much more personal level.
If I really like your character I might choose to look the other way when you complete yours even if my faction is opposed to it. It allows for a much more in depth role playing. It seems like most of the time down at the local shop as long as the faction missions aren't secret everyone pretty much group hugs and that is pretty bland.
Super excited for this!
|
|
If anything, play down the faction war. Pathfinders should be cooperating, not competing. If you're making changes to the faction rules, please make them so that they would rather decrease than increase the time required for resolving faction matters. Then again, I'm quite fine with the system as it is now.
What I'd rather see is more scenarios where there's a reasonable chance of failing the main mission even if the PCs survive. For example, like:
Ghenett Manor Gauntlet
|
Regional Venture-Coordinator, Baltic
|
I do like the idea of personal missions, but I don't care for the secrecy that much. A personal mission gives a character a reason to interact with the adventure, the NPCs, but also the other PCs.
Factions started out as opposing sides in season 0, but it seems to have shifted to just different sides since then. There's no reason to fight each other, so everybody can win!
|
|
I'm still kind of new, but here's what I've noticed so far.
-Most people seem willing to help with faction missions, especially if someone that doesn't have a secret mission gets the ball rolling by announcing what they need to do and asking for help.
-The faction missions take up a lot of time, not insofar as actually doing the mission itself, but mostly with the paranoia of it being missed. The DM is really the only way the characters can see the world, so unless they're prompting the players that there might be something there you have to greyhawk EVERY. single.room. Npc. object.and effect. You come across because it MIGHT be the thing you're looking for. Some of them are in some pretty odd and illogical places.
A mission/puzzle that itself is harder and takes more time but you'll know it when you see it might cut down on that.
5 people trying detect magics, knowledge skills, etc can add up after enough random or semi random items.
-There seem to be a few faction missions that are supposed to be done in secret... but the instructions given to the player don't bother to mention that.
-I don't think you can outright ban PVP and then set the missions directly at odds with each other. If the chelaxian is trying to chain people up it breaks suspension of disbelief for the andoran ranger NOT to beat the snot out of him and leave him in the chains...at the least.
- I really don't like limiting creative solutions. If i wanted my success to be determined by the random number god (polyhedral be his name) I would be playing a computer game. Getting off the wall strategies and solutions that a computer could never handle is half the reason I like tabletop gaming. If the goal of the mission is a stealth check to put something in a room without being noticed, there's no non metagame reason why teleporting into the room, polymorphing into a mouse, disguising yourself as someone with access to the room and walking in, or bribing someone with access to put it there shouldn't work.
If you need to get information out of someone diplomacy works, but so does speak with dead. (The barbarian kills first, the Cleric asks questions later)
________________
The only way coming to me that would make it relevant without adversely affecting the players a the table too much would be to take the records of each faction and see which one accumulates the most points (or most points on average) and then give all members of that faction an extra boon, available item(s) or vanity. That way me helping the other player across the table is very unlikely to hurt me personally.
|
I like the idea of factions, I don't like the idea of warring factions. My 2 cents.
I like that I can look at a faction and say, well I'm going to make an Andoran cleric. He cares about freedom and cares for others.
I like to help people in their missions too. I'm pretty sure I had a perception king who would have spotted some pcs scribbling a map somewhere to which I said, Pfft my character wouldn't have been watching his fellow pathfinders like a hawk, he would be too worried making sure everyone is doing ok.
I think that you take it a bit far, Nosig, but I also realise that I am incredibly naive and even GM for players capable of doing this to each other. That said, I think that making the faction war count too much could accommodate some badwrongfun play.
|
|
First off: i am for faction intrigue. i am still thinking on ways to improve it.
that being said, 1. i think they are working pretty well. i have seen some awesome interparty fun with the factions and during the years of pfs i have played, I have yet to see nosigs fears come to life.
In fact, i have just played at a table split 50/50 andoran/cheliaxian. good times and good cooperation.
2. i am not sure having actual in game campaign consequences of faction victory is great. While many may have playfully booed when andoran was declared victor, i am not so sure a cheliax victory would play so well if there was actual campaign changes from it. This is ever more revelant as the silver crusade/andoran split fractured the leading faction. just something to keep in kind.
The friendship is magic faction wins no one really minds, the conquering Cheliaxian with infernal subordinates on the other hand.....
|
|
To the guy who said "Old rivalries are always fun. I think it would be great to see factions having to stop other factions from completing their faction missions. " think about what you are saying! You sit at a table with 5 other players. Every one of them is actively trying to prevent you from "winning"?!! Are we playing Risk here or what?
Nope, there is no winning in RPGs only surviving.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Perhaps one way to reduce the intensity of the faction war while still keeping it interesting for those who like it would be to give big incentives for players to pick the 'neutral' faction of Grand Lodge.
That way if you wanted to actively participate in the faction war you'd be giving up some significant boon (something very significant game-mechanics-wise, like a gold bonus or access to certain traits or items) that Grand Lodge gives you in exchange for the chance to bump up the prestige of your favorite faction and influence the story arc for them in some way. It also never made sense to me that some 90% of Pathfinders are secretly loyal to some other faction outside of the Grand Lodge.
|
|
Perhaps one way to reduce the intensity of the faction war while still keeping it interesting for those who like it would be to give big incentives for players to pick the 'neutral' faction of Grand Lodge.
That way if you wanted to actively participate in the faction war you'd be giving up some significant boon (something very significant game-mechanics-wise, like a gold bonus or access to certain traits or items) that Grand Lodge gives you in exchange for the chance to bump up the prestige of your favorite faction and influence the story arc for them in some way. It also never made sense to me that some 90% of Pathfinders are secretly loyal to some other faction outside of the Grand Lodge.
That actually makes perfect sense to me. If you're a member of the Pathfinder Society, and your only motivation is to follow orders and bring things back, then that makes for a pretty one-dimensional character and personality. Especially given some of the revelations that come about the Decemvirate and the reason for the decisions they make - following blindly can get you into a lot of trouble with an organization that can be as shady as the Pathfinders can.
Frankly, it makes more sense for some Pathfinders - in my opinion, MANY Pathfinders - to see the Pathfinder Society as a means to advance some more personal goal. Fame? Fortune? Perhaps. But why not freeing the slaves? Why not "leaning" on the enemies of the Family? Why not developing a trade monopoly?
After all, it's not like anyone in the real world belongs to just a single club. :)
That actually makes perfect sense to me. If you're a member of the Pathfinder Society, and your only motivation is to follow orders and bring things back, then that makes for a pretty one-dimensional character and personality. Especially given some of the revelations that come about the Decemvirate and the reason for the decisions they make - following blindly can get you into a lot of trouble with an organization that can be as shady as the Pathfinders can.
I see your point - in the Golarion lore, is it supposed to be that most Pathfinders have these ulterior motives? Or is that sort of left open? I'm just saying the faction composition of the players should somewhat reflect the campaign setting, if it really is only around 10% Grand Lodge loyalists, then so be it :)
|
|
The faction war was a good concept when PFS first started but has kind of diminishinitial its original design. So, what can be done about it? What should be done about it? How can we make factions, their missions, and the competition between them matter? Should we even try? What should the results mean? Should they be relegated like English soccer teams? Let me hear your thoughts. I really wat to make factions count for something but need a list of solid ideas of how to make that happen.
The other thing I am afraid of is when a player actually does want to be involved in the political battle. I have a cleric of Sarenrae who takes the faction's political struggle seriously and wants Qadira to win. He, therefore, does not assist other players in their missions if he suspects their action involves their mission. He has good sense motive skills and he's intelligent enough to make inferences. It shouldn't make me a douche because he is built that way. He especially dislikes Taldor because of their laws forbidding his religion. That being said, he happily heals, buffs, etc. and cooperates towards the primary goal.
First off I do like the Factions and the shadow war.
From what I understand, initially the factions were essentially national intelligence services. It did make sense with the city state of Absalom sitting astride the major trade routs in the inner sea, that the surrounding nation states would vie for control of the city, and recruit pathfinder society agents to help them with their goals. This made sense when the factions were nationally aligned, namely Andoran VS Cheliax, Taldor VS Qadira, and Osirion looking to uncover lost lore and stolen antiquities.
In a way Absalom reminded me of Singapore, a small city-state, sitting on a key trade route.
So through Season 0, Season 1, and Season 2, the five factions vied for influence and control of Absalom. This was represented by the accumulation of prestige points. After Season two, Andoran was declared the winner by far; they had “recruited” the most agents… (Players picked that faction the most frequently), then Osirion came next, Taldor and Qadira came next, with Cheliax coming in last. I did enjoy the “my tender flesh morsel” beginnings of the Cheliax faction missions.
Now I haven’t yet had the chance to play Wrath of the Accursed, You only Die twice, nor Mantis pray, the Dalsine affair, so I don’t quite know all of the details of how the “Year of the Shadow lodge” resolved. From what I understand, the faction leaders became actors in the story line.
So after Season 2, Andoran was declared the winner, and some changes were made. The Andoran Faction leader was promoted, The Cheliax faction leader “sternly warned” and there are new faction leaders for Qadira and Taldor.
Now there are 10 factions. The field has expanded. The new factions are non-state actors.
The Grand lodge represents well the Pathfinder society; The Lantern Lodge represents the Pathfinder members and the branch of the Pathfinder society in the Dragon empires,
The Scarnzi represents the “Varissian” mafia, The Silver crusade represents the interests of Lawful good characters, and they desire to use the Society’s resources for good. I am not quite sure what to make of the Shadow lodge, because I haven’t yet played through the end of the Season 2 scenarios. I guess they are trying to prevent the Decemvirate from abusing their agents.
With the addition of these new factions, while welcome, (I like the addition of the silver crusade and the grand lodge particularly), I think the “waters” have become muddied.
Now how can we make the factions missions matter?
Well by tying a character’s fame to what magical items they can have access to purchase, the faction missions will always be important. I think this is one of the main reasons players cooperate to complete their faction missions. It is a “you scratch my back, and I will scratch your back “ attitude. Helping out other members of your Pathfinder team is actually beneficial in the long run because, if your teammates have better gear, then that increases your chances of survival.
How can we make the competition between the factions matter?
Well with the beginning of this season, and the publication of the Pathfinder Society field guide, we found out Andorran won, and the leader was promoted from captain to major. That was it. I have done my part to help the Andorran cause, with a 12 and a 9th level PFS character in the Andorran faction.
I think one way to make the competition between the factions matter to the players, is to include some small in game bonus to the members of the faction that wins. Perhaps one simple reward might be a +2 to Diplomacy checks while gathering information in Absalom for those of the winning faction to represent the success and size of their network of agents.
However, I think we want to strike a balance…if the players are actively sabotaging other peoples' faction missions that will breed irritation and disgruntlement amongst the players.
I understand that there has been a decision to move away from the “point piling” to see who has the larges pile of prestige points (fame) to determine which faction is ahead in shadow faction war. How are things now being determined?
my two cents thanks
|
|
I tend to agree with those who don't want faction missions to become too much of a rivalry. If players have an excuse to get in each other's way, it'll be abused, and border on PVP. Personally, I like the faction missions just the way they are, in theory. But I do agree with others complaining that there are some that need to be more clearly written.
When members of our group ask for help with our missions, we always use a non-faction "excuse" for why we're doing something. My cleric of Sarenrae doesn't lie (Sarenrae is the goddess of honesty, after all), but she will say, "I know someone back in Absalom who would be interested in this MacGuffin. Can you help me retreive it?", without stating that the person she's getting it for is the head of the Silver Crusade.
I do think if we're going to declare a winner each season, it should be based on percentage of missions successfully completed by faction members, not total. That way, the faction with the most members doesn't win by default. So if Andorans earn their fame point 90% of the time, and Scarznis succeed 92% of the time, then Scarzni would come out ahead, even if there are 50 times as many Andoran PCs. This would reflect that in the game world, there are a roughly equal number of members of each faction, even if that's not the case among those agents who happen to be PCs instead of NPCs.
|
|
I honestly thought the events in Dalsine Affair were a prize awarded by faction performance reported in PFS up to that point.
It kind of takes the magic away to realize it wasn't.
So if I were the head of PFSOP, that's how I would do it. Once per year or so, issue a scenario revolving around how the winning faction makes the losing faction suffer.