Brew City Crafter's page

We're seeing a similar trend, here in SE Wisconsin. Convention play is dominated by D&D 5E (Adventurers league tends to have at least twice as many players as PFS, at the local conventions). As far as the local game days, we went from a peak of six locations with 25 plus tables per month (two years ago), down to three locations with about 12 tables per month (including Starfinder).

As has been mentioned up thread, new player recruitment has become more difficult. Player fatigue, ten years of rules bloat, four campaigns to support, and a pending new addition, seem to have really put a damper on enthusiasm.

Hopefully, things will get better, once the new edition comes out.

This is directly from Tonya, "The only items covered by the NDA are Paizo business operations, as sometimes venture-officers have knowledge of upcoming activities and products before their information is released to the general public. At no time have I meant to imply that venture-officers may not speak their minds; barring extraordinary circumstances like systemic or egregious breaking of community guidelines, we do not take action against those who do so. There are many posts on the boards where officers speak their minds and we have left them for public consumption. This thread received the moderation it did because I was out of town working UK Games Expo and unable to comment on the situation. We do not talk about disciplinary actions or investigations to protect the privacy of those involved and the sensitive nature of the investigations, not because it is against the NDA." (emphasis mine.)

I'm really not trying to make every thread about the NDA, but Tonya has made very clear what the NDA you are under does and not cover.

Beyond that, the amount of secrecy people think is warranted around Paizo organized play is frankly appalling, the adage, the cover-up is worse than the crime seems pretty appropriate regarding all of this. I mean seriously, what is everyone so afraid of.

I understand taking things seriously, but the amount of volunteers I see clam up when certain topics that are clearly not Paizo business related come up you'd think you were all under some sort of gag order.

What Tonya failed to mention (assuming just an oversight) is that what is discussed on the non public forums, is also covered under the NDA, unless specifically called out by the OPC as something that we (VOs) are allowed to share with the public. I believe much of the "we cannot share details, because of the NDA" is because of where much of the information that many of the VOs have, originated (i.e. non public forums).

I do agree with what you said, the coverup tends to be worse than the actual act and the longer this festers, the worse the public perception becomes. However, it is highly unlikely that continuing to bring it up will change Paizo's position. The most likely outcome is having this thread be locked by the moderators and/or posts/threads be deleted (it has already happened and the forum moderators have given no indication that they won't continue to do so).

In closing, while I empathize with your position, you are fighting a hopeless battle. I could be wrong (I genuinely hope that I am), but I don't see it being very likely that you will get the result you are seeking.

The short answer to your question, is no, Strength of the Sun does not apply to Day Job checks.

Strength of the Sun is only active during day light hours, therefore it is conditional, which in order for a "permanent" bonus to apply to Day Job checks, it must always be active. Because of the unquantified time between scenarios, when you actually make your roll could be several hours to any point during any number of days (or time of day) or weeks after your character finishes the current adventure.

Selvaxri wrote:

Why not expand the rebuild buffer to lvl 3?

Several reasons. At first level a PC has 150-1500 gp to r500mess around with. That covers armor, some consumable magic and other basics. At third level (even assuming a nerf to gp) that number is 4500. Magic armor of a special material becomes the norm for a newbie.

Similarly, 6 prestige points are waay less flexible than 18. (Why get a wand of CLW when resurrect is available?).

WBL assumes a certain amount of consumables. The longer a character avoids this 10/15/25%(?) cost the more it throws off this already delicate table.

There is an existing mechanic for rebuilds. Ignoring it punishes those who have bought the resource & expended the PP already. While this is true of Level 1, consider the existing rebuild a gift from the campaign coordinators (like it was when it first came available :)

Cherry-picking classes is easier to deal with if you don't have to 'suffer' through 6 hp & bad Saves to get ability X. Same with feats like Combat Expertise.

If one doesn't want to play one's character for three whole levels, it shouldn't matter if that level is 2 or 4 or 7. Existing buffer is 1/12 of a general PC's career. The proposal is 1/4 of it.

GMs blobs get these 'rewards' to encourage GMing.

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:

I'll go on record as opposed to most everything Harold said.

I'll go on record as agreed with most everything TOZ opposed.

While I agree with your sentiment, I feel the need to correct your math, as it is misrepresenting the disparity between level 2 and a potential level 3 rebuild.

First, best case scenario for a just level three character is 12 prestige points. If the character had 18, as you assert, that character would likely have at least 9 XP and be at least level 4

Second, the rewards per XP for level 1 and level 2 characters comes out to about 500 GP per XP, so a character with 6 XP (just level 3), would put total gold at ~3200 to 3300 GP (including the 150 GP each character starts with and maybe a Day Job check).

This is a known issue for all replayable content. Paizo's reporting system doesn't recognize any content as replayable.

Having played though "From Shore to Sea" we played for about ten hours and got about 2/3 the way through. I suspect that three six hour sessions would be sufficient to finish it.

A lot of Paizo staffers are at Origins, and have been since Wednesday or Thursday.

So, if you know that you are going to be out of the office, then get it done before you leave for Origins.

What I've found most helpful is to print the page with keyed location map separately from the rest of the scenario. While you may view this as a "waste of paper," I find it worthwhile to avoid my own confusion.

Also after almost eighty PFS tables, I've also found that while printing two scenarios two sided may "save paper," it does make for more akward page flipping, mid encounter.

YMMV

Daniel Ziermann wrote:

Applewood smoked is by far the best (and coincidently the signature flavor for the facility at which I am closest to), as some may prefer hardwood smoked (hickory being the predominant wood). The fruit wood smoked flavors are lighter and sweeter and produce a product that is worthy of being the center of the plate versus an ingredient among many (such as diced on a salad or added to a hamburger).

Never seen it commercially available but peach wood bacon is tasty as well. Knew a guy growing up who raised hogs and smoked his own bacon and hams.

Peach wood smoked bacon is generally not available at the retail level (i.e. at the supermarket), but is available through the foodservice channel (i.e. restaurants) or smaller delis or meat markets.

Daniel Ziermann wrote:

Matt Lewis wrote:

But let's be clear here, we're talking about proper bacon, rather than the far inferior American attempt, right?

As someone with first hand knowledge of the pork processing industry (my day job is working for the largest pork processing company in the US. I trust you can Google that, if you'd rather know specifically who), I can tell you that you are wrong, on several fronts.

1. True bacon is cured and smoked pork belly. To legally label a product as "Bacon" without any qualifiers, it must be pork belly that is cured and smoked. All other products require further parsing in the description that must be prominently displayed on the labeling.

2. "Canadian Bacon" is neither bacon nor is it ham. It is a cured pork tender loin. Ham is from the rear portion of the hog. The muscles that make up that portion of the animal are significantly leaner (less marveling and connective tissue) and have a higher density of glands, than other parts of the animal that are further forward.

3. Modern Bacon is an American invention. As such, it is far superior than all other versions (I am looking directly at you prosciutto) of processed pork products.

I here by name you leader of the Bacon Sage faction sir! Which style of bacon do you think is superior for the storing of the knowledge of esoteric secrets of the culinary arts for future generations?

Applewood smoked is by far the best (and coincidently the signature flavor for the facility at which I am closest to), as some may prefer hardwood smoked (hickory being the predominant wood). The fruit wood smoked flavors are lighter and sweeter and produce a product that is worthy of being the center of the plate versus an ingredient among many (such as diced on a salad or added to a hamburger).

But let's be clear here, we're talking about proper bacon, rather than the far inferior American attempt, right?

As someone with first hand knowledge of the pork processing industry (my day job is working for the largest pork processing company in the US. I trust you can Google that, if you'd rather know specifically who), I can tell you that you are wrong, on several fronts.

1. True bacon is cured and smoked pork belly. To legally label a product as "Bacon" without any qualifiers, it must be pork belly that is cured and smoked. All other products require further parsing in the description that must be prominently displayed on the labeling.

2. "Canadian Bacon" is neither bacon nor is it ham. It is a cured pork tender loin. Ham is from the rear portion of the hog. The muscles that make up that portion of the animal are significantly leaner (less marveling and connective tissue) and have a higher density of glands, than other parts of the animal that are further forward.

3. Modern Bacon is an American invention. As such, it is far superior than all other versions (I am looking directly at you prosciutto) of processed pork products.

This functionality was lost after the site update at the end of September. It has been posted several times and has not been fixed. As outlined above, the "bandade" is to report a "fake" session, so that you can download the session reporting sheet.

No update has been given, to when or if the previous functionality will be restored.

Kitsune has been a player legal PFS race for two seasons, and yet there still is not a prepainted Pathfinder Miniature.

For that matter, what about Wayang, Tengu, and Nagaji? It seems kinda silly, that with literally thousands of Kitsune, Wayang, and Nagaji characters working for the Pathfinder Society all over Golarion, that they are not represented anywhere in the official Pathfinder miniature line.

Does anyone else think that Paizo could sell thousands, if they were available?

Congrats Steve!!

I print out the most current version in the days leading up to a major convention, that I plan on attending (so two or three times a year). Otherwise, I'll just check the digital version.

Finlanderboy wrote:

Mulgar wrote:

Reasons for outsiders to hate PFS.

We are at almost complete disagreement. Having emotional attachment to character doe snot give you right to break the do not be a jerk rule. If you can not handle your character suffering without an outburst at slight issues you should consider not playing in public.

Yes, our store holds us responsible for mediating issues. I talked to the store clerks and apologized and tried to make amends on my own well after. If we create issues they made it clear they will take actions. If i prevent and mediate it before they do something extreme we are better off. Plus I do not PFS to be known as the vulgar jerks in the store. I think you will find few VOs that agree with you on this.

I know the guy because I tried to convince him to play pathfinder. I try to be friendly and sociable with all the people that have potential to play. I do not know him closely. Although jokingly chanting that is not an issue to me. The fact it is an issue to you makes me question your judgement. The fact the player even admitted he was wrong and he should have not gotten mad at him saying that only defends my opinion. This type of rhetoric I Personally find offensive.

What I find personally offensive is your deleting my comments and representing your opinions as my statements.

I never said I agreed with what the player said. I only found it strange that you required the player to apologize to continue playing.

I see a situation where the two people needed to work it out, not have a third party to decicde who should apologize. Both people were jerks, and from the level of response I would expect that they had some history together already. Pausing the game to deal with it was the right move in my opinion, FORCING one person to apologize was a jerks move.

Mulhern, let me me summarize it and put this to bed

Random schmuck makes an unwarranted comment.
Player A takes offense.
Player A looses his composure and let's out a vulgar/profane response.
GM stops the game and takes Player A aside and discusses Player A's unacceptable behavior.
Player A agrees that his behavior was unacceptable and agrees to apologize.
Player A apologizes to everyone at the table.
Play resumes.

In response to your comment about it not being the GMs job to intercede. When we play at a public venue, we are "guests" and should we not be able to control the behavior of those at our tables, we will not be invited back. It is that plain and that simple.

Go to the Event you've created and hit the "Edit" button.
Scroll down to the bottom and there should be a field entitled "Delegated Reporters"
Enter the email address of the person/persons you would like to add as authorized reporters for your event (It is vital that the email address you enter exactly matches the email address that that individual uses to login to their Paizo account. This is speaking from personal experience).
Then hit the "Add Delegated Reporters" button.
If everything was entered correctly, it should list your delegated reporter, above the field where you previously entered his/her email address.

I hope this helps.

For those who went to Midwinter 2015 in Milwaukee will remember the quote of the Con, from a certain little goblin.

"I don't want to be a Pathfinder!"

I have not experienced this, as of yet, though this does concern me. I recently cloned one of my June events to create events for July. I had to re select the scenarios for the original event, but since there was nothing reported, it didn't seem to be a big deal, at the time. It seems that cloning future events would cause the least amount of work, IMHO

Has anyone out there played or GMed these at a participating store? If so, do you have any feedback or comments? We really would like to make this program special and improve upon it, but can only do so with the community's help. Thanks in advance.

We've run a total of three tables over the past two Sunday's, with a mixture of experienced and newer players. The feedback I've gotten from players has been quite positive. All three of our tables have run a little long, between 70 and 75 minutes.

As a GM, I've found that not having the starting location of the enemies indicated on the map slowed things down. Even after reading through a couple of times, I had difficulty determining where to place all of the enemies. Other than that, it was as good as could be expected.

*PAY* *ATTENTION* *WHEN* *THE* *GM* *IS* *READING* *BOX* *TEXT*

I would say that this is one of my biggest challenges, while DMing PFS.

When I sit down to run a PFS scenario I inform everyone that I have two rule.

#1. don't talk over me.

#2. don't talk over each other.

The players from our local lodge, that have been at my tables before, are familiar with these rules and know that if I suddenly stop in the middle of reading box text or answering a question, it is likely because someone is talking over me. This may go on for a few moments before another player tells him/her to zip it.

I've found these two rules are especially helpful/important at gaming conventions, where there are several tables going on in the same room.

I try my best to find a solution where everyone who shows up to play can find a spot at a table. However, we are very lucky in that our local lodge has a relatively large group of GMs (such as Finlanderboy) that are willing to step and run another table, at a moment's notice.

While for the most part, all of our regulars sign up in advance, we do have a few semi regulars that either don't sign up or sign up less than 24 hours in advance. Regardless of my own personal concerns with the logistical impact of this behavior, we've found a way to make it work.

With regard to seven player tables, I've only run two of them and they have both been at Cons (coincidently, Cons run by the same local organizer). While I didn't particularly enjoy how it can (and did) trivialize parts of a scenario, I don't want to turn people away. I sucked it up and put aside my own misgivings and did what was best for the players and in the end everyone had a good time. And in the end this is supposed to be fun.

Knurheim,

you are not alone and your situation is pretty common. The event we ran today was in a shared space with two other games going on (D&D and MTG). While having all three groups in the store at the same time isn't normal, it does happen often enough (our FLGS does host PFS and D&D both on Sunday, though we try to start by Noon and the D&D guys usually don't show up until around three).

We do our best, as GMS, to make sure that we spread out the different tables as much as possible and I try to make sure that I speak a little louder than I think is necessary, to be sure that my players can hear me. Also, I've found it very helpful to stand up while reading box text, as this ensures I am not speaking into the table or my GM screen.

I hope this helps.

Looking forward to another scenario set in a cold climate.

Our local VC introduced our group to these earlier today at our regular Sunday Game Day. Like myself, many of our players were intrigued by the concept, but will need to try them out before forming an opinion.

To CipsionN,

First, you seem to have missed the point of the thread. The point is to close a loophole, which you yourself admit that you're exploiting, to return balance to low tier scenarios. It isn't a personal attack on you, though, by your own post, you seem to have quite the chip on your shoulder.

Second, as far as your concern about the "attitude" of local GMs only being concerned about the body count. You are painting with a very wide brush and risk covering everything with paint. In other words, lumping all of your local GMs together is a very risky move. Lucky for you I am not easily offended, but I won't speak for everyone else.

Third, in the fourteen tables that I've run in the last six months, I've only had one character death, and that was just two weeks ago. I roll all of my attack rolls and damage rolls out in front the screen so everyone can see. While I may not always agree with the RAW, we are required to adhere to as PFS GMs, it is what it is. I try my best to be fair with the tactics that I use and every player who sits down at one of my tables knows that character death is always a possibility. The dice can sometimes go your way and other times not. That is just part of the game.

Numerous sources allow a PC to purchase an animal to serve as a mount, companion, or combatant; however, a PC can only purchase an animal if its Challenge Rating is lower than that character's level (minimum CR 1).

I agree. This seems to be a reasonable middle ground that fixes the issue of purchased combat animals out classing class feature ACs on the low end and also dealing with purchased combat animals trivializing low tier scenarios.

I DM and play in the same area as both Finlander and Brew City. The player in question has eight, check that, EIGHT different characters all with a trained tiger. I played with him last week in a 1-5 where he was level 2 playing up. We got to the final encounter and he held the tiger back until there was any small amount of resistance from the enemies and then let it loose on the BBEG. The tiger took him out in one round, flat.

Now that people see what his little pet can do they're starting to copy him with his total approval. It won't be long until there is literally no point in playing low level scenarios in our area if things continue this way.

I'm sorry but I see no reason for a character that doesn't get an animal companion as part of his class to be able to purchase any one of the several over powered animals that are effectively always available. And while some in this thread use the excuse of having to make Handling checks, you have to know these people plan that in.

Brew is right, it was cute the first time, now it's just BS. It kills the fun faster than the tiger killed that BBEG.

ZenthaneX brings up a good point. What do we do when this spreads and makes playing low-level scenarios academic?

I can imagine that some time in the near future we'll see new players sit down at a table with four other characters with Tigers and see them kill everything before the new player gets to do anything. This happens again the next two of three times. Will this new player come back if his characters never get to do anything to contribute?

sigh....

PFS is not all about combat. There are a LOT of scenarios where having a large cat will cause issues.... And even if we only consider the combat, there are still issues. Let's check out the first dozen low level adventures and see how many you can use that big cat in...

There's the first dozen scenarios - I see one where you could actually use a big cat, and another where you might be able to pull it off... maybe. And ten where it would be a problem - and perhaps some RP oppertunities!
PC: "I tell you officer, he's a shape changed druid friend of mine - really!"
Judge: "roll me a bluff...."

Sorry - I'm not seeing this as an issue.

Your analysis is invalid. Season 0 scenarios are irrelevant, compared to five years of power creep. When compared to season five or six scenarios, the numbers are much different. While a tiger might draw attention or be impractical, the prevalence of adventurers, and druids/rangers specifically, make it easily explainable.

GM Lamplighter wrote:

I have a hard time believing that this is an actual issue that needs a solution, though. Has anyone actually seen it happen? A whole party who is so detached from the story that they want to play farmers or zookeepers instead of adventurers?

Yes, twice in a month and it is getting worse because they are teaching others. If you want to particpate in combat get a cat like mine or you will sit and watch. Because it is a large creature and takes up all the room

even 1 person at level 1 bringing in a large cat wrecks the game completely. Heck even at mid levels.

Would you have fun with a player that everyone of his characters has a large cat? Should i leave the table every time he sits down knowign i will have to wacth his cat do the combat?

I have to agree with you completely. The first time it happened, it was novel. Now, he does it with every character. I've had to experience this from both sides of the GMs screen and have had more than one player express to me that this is getting old. The problem is a player blatantly exploiting a loop hole in the rules. I don't believe for one minute that the intention was for classes that don't have animal companions to have animal companions.

I was able to go back and enter the missing data for two of my sessions, though only one of the character's information auto populated (my guess is that this character has been registered). I had to enter the rest of the info in, but it didn't give me an error message and allowed me to save the session. Also when I went back, the information was still there. Am I correct in assuming that the "fix" has been applied?

Yes, he does have a multi class character (I found out after posting my question). As a PFS GM, I am finding the ACG classes to be very popular in my area, as I haven't seen a table this year not have at least one bloodrager.

I don't currently have access to the Advanced Class guide, but will have to GM a table tomorrow where a player has stated that he is brining a level 1 invulnerable rager / level 1 bloodrager? Invulnerable rager is an archetype of barbarian. Can barbarian archetypes be applied to bloodragers?

The talk about Paladins aquiring Gamin and eventually having him enhanced brings a related question to mind. Can Gamin be chosen to be part of said paladin's Divine Bond?

Is there and ETA/time line on when this "next release" will be in place? I am asking, as I have several events over the next week, or so, and if the issue will likely be resolved soon, than I'd rather just wait to enter the information, versus adding to my stack of events that are missing data.

While its frustrating, its hardly game breaking.. as the Chronicle sheet is the most important thing for people. The reporting online comes a distant second. Please take the time you need to fix this issue properly.

While it is true that the physical chronicle sheets are most important for the players, the GMs rely upon the online reporting to get credit.

Time is of the essence. The longer this goes on, the larger the backlog will grow for unreported/under reported tables. As has been stated in the guide, "reporting is very important to the
success of Pathfinder Society Organized Play!"

Me too. Hopefully, I'll be able to get three or four sessions in as a player and at least a couple behind the screen.

There seems to be a few scenarios where the PC's are attacked or ambushed for being Pathfinders before you even get to announce yourselves as such. As if the NPC automatically knows your affiliation and goes into attack or flee mode.

Toot! Toot!

I feel like for every scenario where you get bad reactions from identifying yourselves as pathfinders, there's an equal number where you get good reactions from identifying yourselves as pathfinders. So depending on what scenarios one has played, they may get the impression that everyone likes the pathfinders.

It's also a way to pass on blame. A fairly common knee jerk reaction. It's not my fault, I'm just following orders, blame the institution that told me to do it not me.

I have to disagree. Today I completed my twentieth session and the best initial reaction I've had was a begrudging acceptance that you were needed (that was Assault on the Wound and in retrospect, I attribute that to minimal interactions with NPCs). The rest of the time people were indifferent or downright hostile, with NPCs knowing who you are, when they have no reason to (I've also played in Scars of the Third Crusade and felt the sting of a railroad job care of a lazy writer).

Call me jaded, but I've found it best to not say that I am a Pathfinder. The NPCs will know without me telling them (toot toot). I haven't had a situation, yet, where identifying oneself as a Pathfinder wasn't a liability.