Mirliton's page

I had a similar situation and Josh requested that I send an email to him directly. Here's his response:

Quote:

We're working on a change right now that I hope corrects this sort of stuff. The change will go into effect after the Great Paizo Move of 2009. I'll hang on to your email and see if the issue is still plaguing you after the fix.

Thanks. I will send him an email and hope they can use their characters at DragonCon.

I am running into the same problem. I am receiving this message:

Player has already played scenario at session # 1 of event # 790 skull moon game on August 23, 2009.

This is occurring in an event I attended, and it is also occurring in a separate event that I ran while attempting to add my character and receive the DM reward. Neither works. Anyone have a solution for this, or is the problem a result of moving servers and settings?

I want to make sure all players get credit, because they will be playing at DragonCon this weekend...

Thanks,
M

Delroland, I stick to the guidelines, but I agree with you about the current treasure distribution methods and trusting players and DMs to do what is right. I think the current treasure system really takes the players out of the game and puts them into "accounting mode" rather than roleplaying the treasure distribution.

If a player finds a mithril shirt, it would be better if the party could figure out who keeps it. That should be part of the game. If they really can't work it out, or if someone is not playing nice, the DM needs to step in and arbitrate. The modules would probably have to cut back on the number of items used, but they could implement charges, buffs, or something similar to match the stats needed in the modules.

Another point about keeping the treasure is the roleplay opportunities and stories that go along with the items players pick up. I can hear my players saying, "Yeah, I ran Shana the Slayer through and keep her sword to this very day! It's a fine weapon, even if it does have a black past. See right here it says Shana on the hilt?" Every week, they would add something to their character's history and back story. That makes for more interested players who stick around as opposed to saving the gold distribution to buy a generic masterwork longsword...

Just my 2 coppers.

You couldn't drag me away with a spiked chain

Yea, I thought your reaction to those chains was going to be pretty negative. hehe

I stopped by and spoke with Mike today. The MidSouth Game Center opens at 10, so we won't start right at 10. He said 10:30 or so should be good, so we will play it by ear.

The game is also listed on the game finder, so if someone does a search for the Memphis area, they will find it.

...Metagaming occurs when there is a gap between player knowledge and character knowledge...

I love the way you put that!

Answering the original question: prevent as much "bad" metagaming as you can, and allow what "good" metagaming you and the players think is reasonable. When the information gap is a player knowing less than their character, I allow a knowledge roll. When a player knows more than their character, I discourage using the information.

You can discourage this and prevent many problems by setting some ground rules. I explain at the beginning of the game session that all talking is in-character, unless someone indicates they are speaking out of character. NPCs respond to the players' conversations, so when an NPC hears, "just come back and steal it later," or, "you shoot your wand at the one with the axe, and I will rush the healer," they respond accordingly. Of course I am talking about experienced players here, because I would allow plenty of leeway for inexperienced players and even players who are unfamiliar with a particular class. Whatever I do, I try to focus on the roleplay and gameplay to make the rules, rolls, and mechanics as invisible as they can be, so the players can get caught up in the story. Reiterating that goal and making sure the players are aware of what is "good" vs. "bad" metagaming at the beginning of a session can go a long way. Explain that using knowledge of the adventure or monsters or other players a character doesn't possess could really disrupt the gameplay. That is "bad" metagaming.

There are also limits to combat talking and the time players should take, because one combat could go on for a long time. Try to keep combat chat and planning to a minimum. If there is a lot of talk during combat, especially if someone is taking quite a while to decide on their action when it must be a reaction or at least a quick response in-character, I remind the other characters that they can always bark orders or requests in-character - speaking is a free action... Usually, this makes for some memorable game sessions, because if all goes well, the players really get into it. If a player is still undecided, I tell them they are holding action until they decide what to do and move on to the next in the initiative order. If they're inexperienced, I may run through a few options, or someone else at the table may do that for them if I need to move the game along to the next in the initiative order. This is a great way for players to learn more about their characters' capabilities, so I wouldn't "disallow" in-combat chat. Minimize within reason, and talk to the group about what is reasonable...

If after all of your discussion you think the "bad" metagaming continues to be a problem, don't let it go unchallenged. Let the players know immediately why it's a problem, tell them not to do it, give them an example of another approach that would be acceptable, and move back into the game as soon as possible. If they do it again, tell them they will not fare well against NPCs that know almost everything about each of them, and if they STILL persist, I would ask them what they want out of the game, because your goals for the session and their approach are not working out. I would strongly suggest that vs. blindsiding them with an altered NPC or monster, so they understand what you want them to do and why...

After re-reading through some of the previous posts, there are many great suggestions in this thread, and my post is re-hashing some of it. Bottom line, talk to the players about "bad" metagaming in advance, and make sure you let them know what is "good" vs. "bad"...

Just curious... why use Society rules and not just the Pathfinder rules? I'm new to the whole idea of organized play, too, but what appeals to me is that I can play with my regular group and then, once in a while, pick up my same character and take him to a con. To me, that's what makes the Society's stricter rules worth it.

We have been playing pathfinder for a long time, but we're new to the organized Society rules play, so we want to give it a try without losing the continuity of long-term character development, since the group will be starting at level 1. I should have said that in the first place...

As you mentioned, the players would like to be able to use their characters in a con. A few will be going to Dragoncon, so they're hoping to bring the characters with them for organized play. I may also run the modules for others to let more people know about pathfinder, and the other group I may run this for usually goes to GenCon, so I will use society rules again for that, too. If I go to Dragoncon, I'll volunteer there, too, but right now it does not look like I can make it to the con.

On another note, I am amazed at the responsiveness of the community here. The feedback is VERY much appreciated. :)

Thanks much, all. It's good to see a supportive community. I have a couple of interested players; what do you think is a good number of players? Do most of the scenarios hanlde 4-6 w/out issue?

If you only have 4 players, they need to know how to get the most out of their characters. If your group is 4 players who are not on top of their characters' capabilities, I have read that things may get dicey in some of the modules, so if they're somewhat green players, I recommend more than 4 players.

I am starting something similar, and we're starting with 6. Several players have a lot of experience, but others may not get the most out of their characters until they have a few adventures under their belts (and they will learn from the other players).

Many of the modules include information gathering parts, in which there is a lot of time to roleplay. There's also the little hints you can do... have a gnome in the party that isn't doing cool things to avoid bleaching? tell him that he's feeling dull and dejected. Let the Cleric of Cayden Cailen throw holy beer instead of holy water (or even suggest it). Remember: home games do not require you to stay in the time limit, so allow the group to roleplay as mush as they want/need to get a feel for their characters

Yep, the information gathering will be a huge hit with the group. I am really looking forward to this (and so are the players)!

M

Thanks everyone for the input. I am hoping we will simply roleplay the markets, etc., because the group enjoys it for the roleplay alone. We're lucky to have good roleplayers, and I want to give them all plenty of chances to do their thing and develop the characters as they level.

We are planning to have the same players take their characters through the modules and to go through them based on levels (in other words, typical society rules play). In some ways, that limits haggling. However, I am planning to stay within the rules and to make this a cohesive series rather than something that would otherwise have a disjointed feel. Hopefully, there will ways to tie some of the modules together, but I have not been through them in detail enough yet to string anything together.

This plan is for our local gaming group only, but last night I started discussing this with some old friends, and we may try a module using a virtual table top game. That would be a completely separate thing, but would also be a lot of fun.

What does everyone think of the treasure allocation in society play? My group is soon planning to start a society campaign, and I am wondering if anyone has had problems with character development using the society play guidelines? The leveling and equipment are simplified, but does the simplicity of purchasing items and lack of between module play and development cause players to become more hack and slash minded? I have been running our pathfinder game for a while, but it is in a custom world. Our group tends to enjoy the roleplay of trading and intrigue as much or more than they tackling various encounters, so I'm a little concerned about keeping them as interested in the society play as they have been in other games.

Obviously, the society play will be a new thing to our group. I know the modules are great, but I am concerned about the way the players in our group will develop their characters. I want to make sure we all stay as excited about it later as we are now, because we want to go through as many of the modules as we can... Am I worried about nothing?

M

I recently struck up a conversation that lead to a game, and that lead to another, and another, and now my friends and I are reforming groups that used to game years ago. I found that I am not the only DM who saved their stuff, and I am glad to have found out about your company. I received my first shipment today, and I have already been on the phone with friends to let them know about you.

Thanks for the great products, and especially the responsiveness to your customers. You DO get it, and it IS appreciated!

Brian