CAndrew Wilson's page

The problem seems to center more on the use of the Meetup.com site rather then PFS, as it is well established that the organizer of a venue can ban players from the venue (i.e. your home).

Ultimately the owner of the site (your VC), the Organizer, decides how their site operates; that's how Meetup Support will respond to any complaints.

I think you are left with two options:

1) Explain the venue ban with your Organizer and that this is acceptable by PFS rules. See if they will grant you latitude in the use of their Meetup site. (I wouldn't count on this one, but might be worth trying again with the rules backup you've received from your post here)

2) Organize your PFS sessions via other means, many good ones suggested above. Creating your own Meetup.com group would also be a possibility, then you can set your own rules for how events can or cannot work, and it might even offer opportunities to other PFS event planners in your area who might be chaffing under similar restrictions and wish to join your new Meetup.

Guide to PFSOP page 6 wrote:

If you play a 1st-level pregenerated character, you can apply the credit for her first adventure to a newly created character of your very own .. You may not apply a Chronicle sheet earned with a pregenerated character to a character that was already at the level of the pregenerated character or higher, as you should have used this character for the scenario instead.

There we go. Thank you!

...as you should have used this character for the scenario instead.

Assuming the scenario existed when the character was at that tier. (wow, the GtOP got snarky there!)

Provided a player has never been through a low level scenario (e.g. Tier 1), can they use a level 1 pregen to play it, then apply the chronicle sheet to an existing, higher then lv1 character?

Thanks for any assistance.

...This is all going to depend on GM adjudication. If the PCs are grossly negligent, and they are brash and open about illegal behavior, then there is nothing wrong with the PC being arrested. If it is warranted (such as murder in your specific example), then the character should be marked as "dead" and removed from play. An alternative to "save" the character from this fate would be for the PC to pay 5 PP to "recover his body" as it would represent the Pathfinder Society pulling strings to get him released from jail. In this case, it would also most definitely be an alignment shift towards evil, and if necessary, an atonement would be required. Also, you probably want to make a note so future GMs could be made aware of such actions.

Good answer. Adding this to my toolbox for handling sessions.

No answer here, but this is a fantastic question. I'll be watching answers with interest. Awesome question.

Yes. That is correct. And from the second floor, there is a mound of debris which slopes down to the ground, if I remember correctly.

Edit: also, PCs can climb up the outside of the tower along the East side as high as the 4th floor. The Climb DC is 15.

Awesome, just wanted to be certain. Thank you!

I am prepping for a session of "Master of the Fallen Fortress" and need some assistance with the 3rd floor of the tower, as I am finding the description of the floor and it's map confusing.

Here's the map and I have circled the confusing part:
i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag367/templeofwem/MasteroftheFallenFortressMap s_Floor3_question_zpsd9d7a5cb.jpg

I am thinking that this shaded area indicates where the floor of level 3 is missing and the players can see down to the 2nd floor. Does this seem correct?

Thank you in advance!

So, there's this contentious argument around our PFS events (and our VC concurred with the judgement) that this means the player can buy anything off of any of their sheets at any time during play (except during a battle). The reasoning for this is the assumption that the player could have obtained that particular item anyways due to the adventure it was found in and only has to pay for the gold to be able to produce it from their pack.

Provided I understood the original post correctly, I think this may be covered on pages 21, 22, 23, and 25 of the current Guide to Organized Play.

In regards to anything on chronicle sheets...

Page 21:
"A GM must be present in order for you to purchase items. This can be done before, during or after the adventure."

Page 21-22:
"Some items may be so valuable that the gold you receive in one scenario is insufficient to purchase it. If you are unable to purchase a valuable item immediately, you can save up your gold and purchase it during or after another scenario. Every item listed on your Chronicle sheets is considered always available for purchase for you, regardless of whether it’s on your first Chronicle sheet or your 21st Chronicle sheet. The only exceptions are items that have a purchase limit. You may never purchase more of that item throughout the life of your character than the number amount listed as the purchase limit."

In regards to anything purchased via Prestige points...

Page 23:
"For the sake of ease of play in Pathfinder Society Organized Play, players may always buy gear, spells and so on so long as their characters are in a town of more than 5,000 residents. Pathfinder Society Organized Play assumes that every faction has at least one representative in every small city or larger settlement on Golarion. If outside of a town, PCs may be restricted from buying anything, though this varies by scenario."

Page 25:
"Characters may not spend Prestige Points during combat. For the sake of simplicity, many GMs might consider limiting characters to spending Prestige Points only once per gaming session."

Prestige is the only area where I can find the location of purchase or 'not in combat' limitations so far.

I'd imagine the chronicle sheet purchases might get the "While this system isn’t entirely realistic..." stamp on it, which appears a few times in this chapter.

Many thanks, loving these pre-made tools.

Hi, original poster here, and I'm the event coordinator for the venue in question.

Unfortunately there's been a second incident and I'm going to be giving a final warning with threat of a 6 month ban if there is even a hint of anything else from this problem player. This time there have been two separate reports of verbal abuse, and I just won't stand for that.

Thank you all for the solid advice and wonderful anecdotes.

Hope it works out well for you. It's always annoying when a bad apple surfaces and needs to be dealt with.

PFS Additional Resources, right hand sidebar

Thank you! Looked at that page prior to posting, but totally ignored the sidebar.

I need some assistance locating where I can download the Pathfinder Tales Boon Chronicle Sheets?

Thank you in advance.

Okay, I'm beginning to feel like I'm insane here. Where the heck are the pregenerated characters for Pathfinder Society? I'm going to need one for a game tomorrow and for the life of me, I cannot locate them anywhere, in the store, as a download, etc.

I feel like they're like, right in front of me and the answer is super obvious, but this is like my third natural 1 on perception here. Where can I find the pregens?

Had this same problem last week. It really is an oddly placed link.

..and the GM/other players say, "Eh, it doesn't really matter that much. Just pick Grand Lodge unless you have a specific concept in mind."

Heard that exact instruction offered by a GM to four new PFS players a couple weeks back.

Thanks!

Yes, you would run it in 'Campaign mode', with whatever rules you want, and give the players credit that they can apply to a PFS character.

There's no rule stating that a PFS character cannot play non-PFS things. If I run a character through a module for kicks (as in, no one was getting credit; maybe the GM needed practice) then it's essentially a home game with a character made to abide by PFS rules.

If you run the non-sanctioned part of the AP, the characters do not benefit from the additional content (except for story, which is the primary reason to run the whole book). Unless you stop all PFS character expenditure and progress when the sanctioned content ends, you run the risk of over-taxing your players. If those extra 10 pages cause your players to burn through 5k in consumables, that's 5k the AP does not account for, potentially putting characters at a financial disadvantage as their careers progress.

Thank you this is awesome advice. Yes, the prime reason is the full experience of the AP. But I'm very glad you mentioned the burn-out warning, so I can avoid it's effects on the PFS portions. Great stuff!

Where can I find these?

I'm needing to check if it is possible (provided the group is aware) to run the full content of an adventure path for a group, and then report for their PFS characters only the sanctioned content?

Well done!

He is correct. You don't want to just shut someone down unless they are truly and honestly causing a lack of fun at the table.

Its also probably best that you get your game day coordinator (if it isn't you) involved in any discussions about inappropriate behavior. Barring that, your Venture-officer.

The point is, everyone deserves to play the game in their own style up to the point that their style interferes with another person's style.

If compromise cannot be reached, then unfortunately someone has the unenviable task of putting one or both of those people in their place.

Fortunately, I've never had to do this. But the idea is that an ounce of diplomacy goes miles over a mound of intimidation.

Sounds good. Thanks!

1) Watch for how the behavior is negatively impacting the other PFS player character's gaming experience.

2) Discuss with the player using the loophole the effect it's having on overall play, confirm it is a valid use (based on current rules), but explain that it's now impairing the other players fun as it's overshadowing them. Ask for the use to stop, as it's damaging overall fun, a core PFS tenant.

3) If the player tries to keep using the same technique, shut it down, so the other players can engage in defeating enemies as well.

4) If the player gets upset, indicate that this was explained, and invite them to leave if they cannot abide the ruling. If they become extreme enough in their reaction, ban them from the table/event.

Replace 3... money.)

Probably a good point on 3, and I'll take your comments under advisement.

Replace 3... money.)

Probably a good point on 3, and I'll take your comments under advisement. Really looking for feedback from GMs with 1+ stars however. Thanks though!

EDIT: For clarity, when I say you can ask a player to do whatever you want, let me be clear. You can ask. If the player refuses, then there isn't much you can do about it. If their actions are legitimately driving other players away, and you've warned them about inappropriate behavior, then you can simply disinvite them from your game day.

Okay, I'm pretty sure I'm following this. Does this process seem appropriate:

1) Watch for how the behavior is negatively impacting the other PFS player character's gaming experience.

2) Discuss with the player using the loophole the effect it's having on overall play, confirm it is a valid use (based on current rules), but explain that it's now impairing the other players fun as it's overshadowing them. Ask for the use to stop, as it's damaging overall fun, a core PFS tenant.

3) If the player tries to keep using the same technique, shut it down, so the other players can engage in defeating enemies as well.

4) If the player gets upset, indicate that this was explained, and invite them to leave if they cannot abide the ruling. If they become extreme enough in their reaction, ban them from the table/event.

The best you can do is explain how you feel about it to the player. Ask him not to use that tactic when you are the GM, or to agree to limitations when confronted with DR. If he refuses, you can let him know that you won't GM for him in the future. You vote with your feet. That's about all you can do.

Zero-Star PFS GM Question:

I've gone back over the GuidetoOP, GM101, and GM201, and it doesn't seem like we are suppose to do this in a PFS game.
(Home-game sure. But PFS? Which is why I imagine andy mcdonald 623 put the question in this forum rather than in Pathfinder-Rules; this seems very PFS specific)

Way to go! One more joins the ranks.

Sure, Carlos, you are right.i just wish that I could find 1 more mod to round it and make it level 20.

That would be epic.

Whoot! Way to go! That is a serious GMing achievement. (me so jealous)

Yep, I was clearly wrong about this. Not sure what more there is to say about it. It's been pretty well covered in prior posts.

Yep, I was clearly wrong about this. Not sure what more there is to say here. It's been pretty well covered in prior posts.

I'd say that that pretty open to debate, particularly on Alignment...

This breakdown of alignment is excellent, and I admit my bad, the current PF definition has addressed some of my concerns. I guess my opinion has been formed from years of gaming, and dealing with such players who have exploited this option.

Now the most recent event of that was this past Monday in an actual PFS session (where a CN character took off on the party for a significant portion of the adventure as "they didn't feel like following the group") but again, this is a player whose natural inclination was to do that, exploiting alignment as an excuse to do so (He had actually just changed his alignment from CG to CN, so I think the switch was very much motivated to allow such actions).

Think about it like this. Some people, and some play styles gravitate towards certain alignments. CN tends to (not sure if this is true, or that I agree with it), tends to appeal to people that are less interested in the team or group experience, particularly when it comes to their own fun.

Thank you, this is my point. Well said.

The existence of the alignment itself, and perhaps even it's inclusion as a PC choice, is not an issue in itself. It is the actions to which a willing player will use this alignment as an in-game, mechanical, justification to disrupt things.

That said however, I believe this current definition does give the GM, and the party involved, some lee-way to call BS on such actions. Not that will likely change the player, but as previously said, a player set on being a problem-player will be that no matter what alignment they choose.

I guess the biggest problem, as mentioned by DM Beckett, is the cross-purposes a individualist/loner character leaves a party-based game in, and this is a classic, age-old problem. In highly individualized games (Vampire; Don't Rest Your Head; etc) a focus on individualized storytelling is awesome. In Pathfinder, especially PFS play, a focus on the group is needed for successful sessions.

And Pathfinder is sufficiently different from older editions of D&D, which were in fact sufficiently different from each other that talking about a version of a system in a previous edition doesn't really hold up.

Just so I understand, are you saying that Pathfinder has completely redefined the alignment of Chaotic Neutral? Is so, please provide a link to this new definition.

And you say that CN isn't a problem...right before going back to blaming CN for player behavior. Whether you mean to or not, you're doing it.

No, that is incorrect. As per my comment, there is a significant difference between the alignment and players characters of that alignment. They are two separate concepts.

...quoting a page that doesn't even once mention or pull from Pathfinder.

What is the source material for Pathfinder? D&D.

This page also offers a relevant reference to CN behaviours.

The alignment isn't the problem, problem players are. And they'd be a problem no matter what alignment they wrote down.

Agreed. The alignment just offers them an in-game excuse to behave that way.

And my comment has never been that the alignment is bad. It has been that players with characters of this alignment is bad. This alignment works very well for NPCs.

And yes, LG played to the extreme can be just as cumbersome to a group.

Overall, players need to be trusted to understand that they are part of a collection of people trying to enjoy a game. CN however is an exclusionary, highly individualist, alignment that tends not to encourage characters who are "team players". Ergo, this is why CN behavior can be difficult to deal with. This was what the original post was responding to (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qlgl&page=5?Why-does-PFS-punish-the-good# 242).

If you have a CN character that you cannot ever predict what they will do in a given situation, you don't actually have a CN character. What you have is an insane character.

"A subset of Chaotic Neutral is: 'strongly Chaotic Neutral'; describing a character who behaves chaotically to the point of appearing insane."

So how is CN behavior difficult to deal with? Looking out for one's own self-interest above all else is pretty normal.

"Above respect for life and good, or disregard for life and promotion of evil, the chaotic neutral places randomness and disorder." i.e. There is no way to predict what this character will ever do. As scenario/adventure design and GMing is 100% based on trying to guess how players will react so that you can provide a satisfactory play experience, this alignment stands in direct opposition to an enjoyable group-based gaming experience, which is why this alignment is typically reserved for antagonists.

A player who make a CN character is essentially declaring that their play experience needs to be 100% focused on them, and the rest of the party doesn't matter. They're whole point in playing is to make it about them and de-rail anything that the GM or party is trying to make work. They are 100% selfish, and it shows.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qlos?4-Encounter-Scenarios-Still-Only-1-XP

IMO, evil PC's or even borderline-evil PC's should be kept to homegames, where the built-up trust between the GM and the players can allow such dynamics to occur...

QFT. Ditto. I agree. YES!!!

Edit: I am sorry, I was not clear with my first post. When I said it doesn't have that many encounters, I was not intending to rebuff your claim that it has 5 encounters. I was trying to say that 5 encounters is not excessive. You know, as in "5 encounters is not that many." Rereading the posts, I understand the confusion, and I apologize for not being more clear.

Yes, that was the part of your response I was addressing. No worries.

And you are very right, I had forgot that New Steps part 2 was a small dungeon with 12 encounters, so this is not as new a development as I had thought. (I've even been through that adventure, so have no excuses)

Glass River Rescue does not have that many encounters.

Just to clarify, you don't consider traps encounters? And an optional encounter, if run, is not an encounter in your eyes?

As far as I'm aware (thus far) both have always been encounters for XP purposes.

Sorry, but when was this true? I started playing in Season 2 and it has always been true (since that time at least) that completing at least three of the encounters netted one XP. No XP for two or less, 1 XP for three or more.

Edit: you still get 1xp and any rewards from encounters you completed if you finish at least 3 encounters, even if you did not finish the scenario, that is still in the guide. You get fame based on if you completed the requirements for them. Almost always at least one fame is contingent on completing the scenario completely .

Thank you, this does offer some relief (I think someone was trying to explain this to me in a different thread but I was not getting it). At least that option is available for those who just cannot hanging when we have to go past hour 4 (or 5). Thank you!

No apologies necessary. This is an oft-cited complaint about the scenario that is totally my bad (rather than a glitch that appeared during John's development).

Very cool of you Sir.

I ran this a while back, with a table of 4 mostly newbies, and while it was tough, they survived it.

It definitely was a prolonged battle (ran over an hour), with the GM having to go light.

It was made especially difficult as party rolls for the first 80% of the battle rarely occurred above a 10, and the GM was rolling hot with no roll below a 15, and damage rolls typically near max (recurring acid damage was almost always max). It was thanks to the cleric's healing that the party survived. The group ended up needing to take a 1 day rest before proceeding, due to 1 player taking Con damage and the cleric exhausting all their spells.

As the party had successfully negotiated their way through Xer and had paper's for the checkpoint, this was the first combat encounter. Such a prolonged (and almost lost) battle, against two very tiny creatures, was kind of disheartening, especially as three of the group were 1st time PFS players. Luckily by end of night the tables turned in the final encounter, as all party rolls were much higher and GM rolls much lower (probability to the rescue), making them feel much more like heroes in the end.

Scenarios have been pushing 5 hours+ since season 3. I no longer schedule less then 5 hour slots or go to cons with only 4 hour slots, too many times I don't finish.

Understandable. In my area we try to have both weekend games, and importantly, weeknight games for family folk or those with weekend jobs. These longer scenarios can make for very late running sessions, especially if combat drags out.

It's interesting to me that the PFS Guide to Organized Play encourages us to not let the scenarios run past 5 hours, but then PFS starts putting out longer and longer scenarios which often push past that limit. Ouch!

Edit: you still get 1xp and any rewards from encounters you completed if you finish at least 3 encounters, even if you did not finish the scenario, that is still in the guide. You get fame based on if you completed the requirements for them. Almost always at least one fame is contingent on completing the scenario completely .

Thank you, this does offer some relief (I think someone was trying to explain this to me in a different thread but I was not getting it). At least that option is available for those who just cannot hanging when we have to go past hour 4 (or 5). Thank you!

Understanding that this is also for levels 2-3, my primary comment on this relates to level 1 characters, especially for 1st time players of PFS.

Including a Young River Drake who shoots a 5-foot-radius spread acid attack doing 2d6 points of acid damage and 1d4 damage thereafter (for those hit), this seems like an aggressive move for characters with an apx. HP of 10, especially as the party will likely be centered on the Water Snake it has flung on-board previously, so can all be easily hit by a well-timed spread.

Even with the reduce Reflex save (40% chance to avoid the attack) this can easily spell TPK to a party with low rolls or who are lacking a well stocked healer.

Does this seem like an overly intense encounter for a Tier 1-2 to anyone else? Or am I going to light on low level players?

And as a personal, unrelated, side note...
"The captain of the Abacus takes the boat down whichever river fork the PCs suggest; however, both routes lead to the encounter described below.."
...is super lame. The illusion of choice is not a choice. I'd feel better having players just head right into the encounter rather then having them left with a fake "decision" to make. (Apologies to Mike Shel, but this element of an otherwise intriguing scenario is lacking.)

3. Morally Questionable Orders While faction missions no longer work like they used to...

Always playing Good characters myself, I agree. There seem to be a number of mechanical & thematic shifts in Season 5 that aren't sitting right with me (Perhaps it's the influence of "The Year of The Demon"?).

That said, I'm making the best of it (for the love of PFS), and think what you have done here is a positive step. As customers we need to sound-off with feedback (as well as those out there who like these shifts) so Paizo can weigh it all and see what changes stick and which ones go.

So I was ran through my first Season 5 scenario last night, #5.01 The Glass River Rescue, an adventure with 5 encounters. In this I learned that now the old "3 Encounters = 1 XP" no longer applies and it's "1 Scenario = 1 XP" (a new shift to me).

In the instance of 5.01 it leaves the players doing almost twice the encounters (and playing for almost twice as long, in an already tight time-block) for the same reward. In my opinion this is not a positive change for PFS. If anything a shift to rapid, 3 encounter scenarios playable in 3-4 hours would be better for us week night players, with modules and adventure paths available for longer sessions (weekends, holidays) or for night owl players.

I'm wondering what anyone else thinks?

No problem, it can be flagged as in the wrong forum and moved.

Thanks! Just flagged it.

Just realized I accidentally posted this in Grand Lodge and not Pathfinder Society GM Discussion. My apologies.

CAndrew Wilson wrote:

So, just to be clear, the scenarios, regardless of length, are only worth 1 XP?

Unless otherwise stated, yes.

Wow, that is awful. In this case they are required to put in almost double the time and effort to achieve the same reward as previous 3 encounter scenarios. Not a fan of this.

You get only one XP if you complete 3 of those 5 encounters, or .5 if on slow.

In my situation the party completed 5 of the 5 encounters.

PFS scenarios are worth 1 XP. The few exceptions specifically state how many more XP are earned. The Glass River Rescue can only grant 1 XP.

So, just to be clear, the scenarios, regardless of length, are only worth 1 XP?

I'm needing to clarify something I am misunderstanding about a Season 5 scenario.

As far as I'm aware (thus far) PCs get 1 XP per 3 encounters, and I'm pretty sure scenario 5.01 The Glass River Rescue is worth only 1 XP.

As I read it however, it seems to contain 5 encounters:
1) A1. The Docks of Xer or A2. Faith Barge Checkpoint (CR 3 or CR 6)
2) C. RIVER DRAKE AMBUSH (CR 3 OR CR 6)
3) E12. The Phantom Steed (CR 2 or CR 5)
4) F8. Sentry Duty (CR 3 or CR 6)
5) G. THE RAZMIRI FAITHFUL (CR 4 OR CR 7)

Am I counting too many encounters, or is this scenario worth more than 1XP?

One of the most exciting features of the Golarion setting is how fully realized it becomes through the many source books related to races, regions, classes, and even alignments. As a GM however, this can really add up to information overload.

My question: What are any tips and tricks veteran GMs out there use to keep up with the new books as they drop, and even better, how you keep all this information straight in your mind, to assist with running PFS play?

Many thanks in advance for the advice.

Yes.

Thanks for the heads up, was almost planning on running those.