Search Posts
10 minutes for you! As someone who works 3 jobs, any extra time I have to spend in prep beyond what I normally do is really hard to do. Perhaps you shouldn’t judge other people by your own privilege or ability to spend all that extra time.
I think it should be noted that what’s being missed is that Paizo shouldn’t be going out if it’s way to make MORE work for it’s unpaid GMs and volunteers, and though that isn’t the purpose of this change, that’s exactly what the effect is. Others have said the same thing. If this were my home AP campaign, sure, I’ll do that work (and I do) because in volunteering to GM for my group, I accept that work. But, as a GM for organized play? No, I don’t agree with that - Paizo can, and should, provide those stat blocks so as to minimize the extra work that GMs need to do.
Ok I've got to know this but you surely have had to look up stuff haven't you. Spells, monster abilities, subsystems, lore, pictures not included in the scenario, and Im sure more. Not during the game, I don’t. I capture all that stuff in my prep so I almost never have to look up anything in game. And that info that I need to add to a stat block, I can just add to the pdf in the scenario, and then print it out. I don’t have to go find stat blocks, compile them by encounter, do my own layouts, etc. And because I spend so much time in prep to get that info ahead of time so I don’t have to waste the time of the players at the table, I will never run cold again at a con if I ALSO have to worry about finding the stat blocks.
Happening in org play generally and happening at conventions are two different things. While it can happen at regular game days, I think that’s a pretty small number. Conventions, though? It happens a LOT. I have GMed or HQed at 10 gen cons, and probably 7-8 Origins, and I don’t know how many smaller, local conventions. And it has happened at least once at just about every one of them. It happens.
I have been involved with PFS since 2011. I was there in the “before times”, when only unique stat blocks were included. A few years later, after repeated requests from Venture Officers, Paizo started adding all stat blocks to the scenario. Those of you saying “this isn’t a big deal” - it may not be a big deal for YOU. But as someone who organized conventions, sometimes you have to hand a GM a scenario and ask them to run it on the fly. “But, Mark, they can use their phone to get the stat blocks!”. It isn’t that simple. Some convention halls don’t have good cell reception, and most don’t have available wi-fi. I can’t tell you how many times *I* have been asked at a con to run something on the fly. I will never do it again. Having to go out and search for those stat blocks, and have multiple tabs or whatever, is not only inconvenient, it greatly slows the table down. So, I am begging Paizo to reconsider this decision. It is a horrible decision with tremendous potential negative consequences, and very little positive upside. And let us just be clear here: there is no doubt in my mind this decision was made because Paizo honestly believes it will improve development, etc. and thus improve the program. People shouldn’t be questioning their motives or motivations - it is well-intentioned. But I don’t think it will have the positive impact they believe it will.
The VC absolutely may loan you a physical copy to run from. In fact, any person can loan another a physical copy of a scenario to run. That has been the case for years. Perhaps your VC didn’t know that (and if your VC did not know that, then that’s a major issue that needs to be resolved.). If the store owner is a registered retailer with Paizo, I believe they also get the scenarios, too, and could loan you a physical copy. But, generally speaking, it has been true since the beginning of organized play here that GMs were generally expected to buy their own scenarios, that’s not new.
I am not upset by this, but I am pretty darn disappointed. In 1e, a lot of venture-officers pushed hard to get all stat blocks included. This made prepping scenarios a LOT easier and take less time. But, I guess neither of those factors and how they will impact GMs were at all taken into consideration. It’s almost enough, but not quite, for me to cancel my society subscriptions and stop GMing society play altogether.
I understand all of that, but the ability isn’t a spell. Why should it use the rules for spells? That’s why I asked if it use the medicine skill (since that’s the connection’s skill.). (Honestly, using medicine doesn’t make a lot of sense either.) If the rules said something like “For spells or other non-skill abilities…” then that would answer my question. Maybe it is supposed to be treated AS a spell for this purpose but I don’t see anywhere that it is a spell, so I can’t presume the rules applicable to counteracting using a spell are applicable. Maybe I am reading too much into the “For spells…” language or reading “spells” too literally.
I certainly don’t see anything that says it should be the spell or class based DC-10. And while Perses13’s suggestion that the counteract rank of TV would be half the character’s level rounded up (I mean, that’s effectively what spells are), I read that section as relating to the TARGET’S counteract rank, not the rank of the spell/ability being used to counteract the target effect/affliction. I just don’t think this ability is particularly well-written on that regard (but I like that countering is a secondary effect of the healing!)
Perfect Harmony for the healing connection says:
What check would I be making and what would my bonus be? And what level is the effect? EDIT: I presume, for the Healing Connection, I would use Medicine for the check as that is the connection’s skill?
I have a question about the chase in this scenario. 1. Goblins appear to start at least 1 obstacle ahead of the party.
Okay, I get all of that. But there is this part:
How is that possible? The goblins move to a new obstacle. The players spend their turn overcoming a prior obstacle. So, let's say the group gets enough points from crit successes. So, the others who didn't go could then conceivably move to the obstacle with the goblin (assuming it's the next obstacle) and then make an attempt to get the train? Am I understanding that right? Certainly it isn't suggesting that ALL PCs have to be on the same obstacle as the goblins. I'm just a bit confused about this part of the chase (in addition to the conversaton about where the "Conservatory" obstacle isn't even there.
I have a question about a creature's ability in this AP. Spoiler: The Eshmok (Wasp Demon) has an ability, Eshmok Infection. However, the creature has no ability that seems to allow it to actually infect another creature. Most creatures that can do this have it as part of an attack, but I don't see it under its melee attack. I presume its stinger attack should have something like "plus Eshmok Infection" or something like that, but it doesn't. And its Infesting Exhalation ability doesn't say the those subjected to it need to ave against the Eshmok Infection. And, Eshmok Infection is clearly an affliction as it shows the DC and various stage. Any ideas?
You probably should have put the details of the scenario in the spoiler tag.
The item’s language seems clear to me: “At the end of any turn where the persistent damage can’t overcome this resistance, end that condition.” It isn’t conditional on whether or not the damage could overcome the resistance, but whether or not it can’t. The GM rolled a 3 - the persistent damage could not overcome the resistance, and thus, the condition ends. Rolling less than the resistance would mean, at the end of that turn, it can’t overcome the resistance. I believe that is the right call. Otherwise, the item is entirely worthless against any random die roll for persistent damage where the size (d4, d6, etc) is greater than the resistance. Under the second interpretation, a d8 persistent damage would always continue if the resistance is 8 or less, for example.
Respectfully, your point keeps changing, so I don’t know how anyone will be able to give you a satisfactory response. Your first point, which included profanity and words in all capital letters, was that Paizo was forcing people to buy the remaster books. You were then corrected on your error. Then your point was that the remaster rules should be an addition to the game, not the default for the game. More responses were made by some pretty knowledgeable people to try to help allay your concerns. Now your point is that the rules aren’t currently available at AoN, which we know, and which they are working to get up to speed. And people have pointed out that all we can do is to do our best. Paizo isn’t going to show up at your table and tell you are doing it wrong, especially when full access to the rules online isn’t available yet. So, I am having trouble trying to find a way to help address your concerns, because they keep shifting, and I honestly do not know which of these things is the most important to you and your group. People here are honestly and genuinely trying to help you. Please accept that help - it will end up with a better long-term result for you and your community. The game you ran on Friday - what problems did you encounter without having the rules online? I presume you didn’t have the Remaster books because I think you made it clear none in your group were going to buy them, which is a fair and legitimate choice. So, not having the rules, what problems did you encounter in trying to run that game?
Not without the corresponding Required Alignments... with the loss of ALL Alignments, the characters can no longer meet the Alignment requirements.If a character option has not been reprinted, characters are free to use the option as previously printed, or to select it at any time.The champion has not been reprinted, thus you can continue to use the original until it is. So those characters are still legal. If alignment as been removed from the game, how can there be alignment REQUIREMENTS? You’re trying to take part of remaster and part of 2e original and merge them together in a way that is just nonsensical.
No. Alignment has been removed, which means all alignment requirements have been removed as well. They are replaced by anathema and edicts.
I’m not against people having the option to rebuild, I was talking specifically about being able to rebuild a Runelord. To use the remaster rebuild requires you to bring your character into conformity with the remaster rules. But, there are no remaster rules for Runelords, nor should there be - they are built specifically under the concept of schools of magic, prohibited schools, and the like, none of which exist in that context in remaster. So, there would be no way to rebuild your Runelord to be in conformity with the remaster rules.
By all means, gather support from other Runelord players. I wish you the best. I am one of the “other” Runelord players. I like my character (he’s only level 1 or 2 at this point, not a lot of games under his belt.). But for the fact that Abjuration sucks for a Runelord (but it’s what I want to play), I have no desire to remake any part of my character. So, it’s anecdotal, but that’s one for the “not supporting the request to change the rules for Runelords.”
what determines if a con "gets support?" I've always just bought my scenarios. It was fine when they were $4 each, but now they're $6 and soon they'll be $9 each. And the only solution is either (what I presume is) a large con, or the VO prints them up with their own money and hands it to the GM? Still not thrilled with it.Wait wait wait wait, what are "interactive" scenarios? Those sound kind of cool...Those are the massive specials we play at conventions—many tables playing the same game and the results have canon in-setting consequences. The person organizing the PFS/SFS component can request support for the con. If they get it, they can make arrangements with Paizo to get the scenarios into the accounts of each of the GM who is running a particular scenario. So if I was organizing PFS for a convention and you were one of my GM’s and you were going to run a particular scenario that you did not have I would turn in your name and your contact information and the scenario or scenarios, and then at some point they will push all those scenarios out to the GM’s that don’t have them.
If a convention gets support, then the GMs can get the scenarios for free. Secondly, VOs can loan out the physical copy of any scenario they have for a GM to use. I’m. not thrilled about the cost going to $8.99, even though I get them all for free, but an individual GM may not actually have to pay the cost.
Wouldn’t that be 28 as a class feature?
There are 3 NPCs in each of those parts. What I did was have a player roll a d3 in each part, and then asked about the specific scenarios related to the corresponding NPC. I wanted to avoid the very thing you mention - asking about 6-8 scenarios and then having most of them not apply.
I just ran this today, and I had pretty much the same questions you all did. I’m glad to see some answers, but I just ruled stuff on the fly because that was my only alternative. I will say that the maze riddle helped the characters at my table - it kept them from looking down when they had the chance to do so. The large map is totally useless. There is no reason that even needs to be a map because it’s functionally all just theatre of the mind, EXCEPT perhaps for the one encounter that could end up in a fight (my table made friends of them, so it was a non issue.). I feel bad for people who bought the tiles for this just to have map that was pointless. And, I’m just going to request that when authors put monsters in a scenario, that they pick ones that have actual art. Some of the monsters do not have art, which of course, makes creating pawns for them (I run in person so I use physical pawns) difficult. But, all of that aside, the table was really enjoyable to run and my players had a GREAT time, particularly with reconnecting with NPCs they had met before.
No, “all of Sagamore Ballroom” is correct, at least for the last 8 or 9 years (edit: up until and including 2019). This is all anecdotal, but I think the first year I GMed for PFS at Gen Con was 2014, and as I recall we had the entire Sag that year (I played the year before, and we were in a different, and much smaller, room.). But in 2014, I don’t recall sharing the space with any D&D tables.
We did have more tables this year than last year, so that’s a bonus. But, for every table we have, we need a GM. Imagine how the room would have looked if we had the entire Sagamore, but most of the tables had no GMs. There is a lot of player demand, but without GMs, we don’t have a table for them. And as I believe that Paizo pays for that space, they have to make some guesses as to how much of the room will actually be used - I mean, they don’t want to throw money away. I hope the increased demand this year would mean we can get a little bit of the Sagamore back next year, and a little more the year after, etc. That’s my hope, at any rate.
By the way,I want to give a huge shout out to Phox (I think that’s his name). That dude did ALL the work - mustering, ran a TON of bounties with little time off in between, AND had to work on fixing RPGCHRONICLES when it suffered an attack. He was a total rock star!
Welcome to Team Orange! :)
I volunteered for 8 slots - 7 at the Info Desk and 1 as a GM (I GMed the PFS special at tier 7-8). PROS:
I got to see a really good college friend I hadn’t seen in 25 years. I got to reconnect with people I only ever see at Gen Con. I got to watch two solid and exceptional volunteers get rewarded: VC Bill Tobin getting his Campaign Service Award and Gen Con Lead Organizer Heather Vigil be awarded the Order of the Wayfinder. I watched Lucas Servideo’s Pathfinder Academy bring in a lot of kids to try out PF for the first time. Organized Play is about people, and people playing games. I’m super stoked to have been a part of this phenomenal program once again! Until next year!
Jack was one of those people who you may not know very well, but couldn’t wait until you saw them again. I only saw Jack at Gen Con, and during the one visit I made to MSP to GM for Skal Con. He was just a fun guy to be around. He was always kind to me and had asked me to come back to Skal Con (and, one day, I will return, if for no other reason than I think doing so in his memory would be a small way to thank him.) I can’t imagine how those who knew him so well are handling this news - I wasn’t a close friend of Jack’s, and I know how empty this feels to me. So, let his name be written on the Wall of Remembrance, and may Pharasma guide him to his richly deserved reward. Godspeed, Jack.
It may not be an oversight. They may have decided it was legal at the point the source book had been released, but had not yet decided on how access would be granted. There may be an in-game way that it will later be made available, or it may be some other way. But, it may not be an oversight.
When you run those games outside of PFS rules, then you are running it in “Adventure Mode.” In that mode, you aren’t bound by the limitations of PFS - someone wants to play an Anadi? They can, and they don’t need a boon. You want to use Hero Point cards, or the critical hit or critical fumble decks? Go for it! (That’s what I do for the Abomination Vaults campaign I am running.) Each AP has a Sanctioning document that tells you at which points you will earn a chronicle sheet, and any special rules that might apply to that AP. You can find the link to the sanctioning document (which also contains the chronicle sheet) in the item’s page on Paizo’s website.
The pawns are too low-res to print (not that I would -- that's not a very maintainable activity, especially in comparison to the preprinted ones that I already dearly miss getting new ones of!… I couldn’t disagree with you more. Not only is the resolution just fine for printing, it’s also more economical for me to print them when I need more copies of a monster than come included with the physical price.
And so, one does just what you have decided: you buy only what you want/need, and nothing further. I don't see why that's a problem.
I have a question about something at high tier. high tier spoiler:
There is a trap on a door, and the trap is triggered when the door is opened. However, the text explicitly states that the door is impossible to open. How, then, would someone actually trigger the trap? That trap at low tier uses a different trigger, so that’s not an issue. thanks!
The password protection is not new. But, what I do in Acrobat is use the SIGN tool, and then SIGN YOURSELF. This will put box where you want it and you can type in it. It works the way the typewriter tool used to work. That’s how I do my chronicle sheets. Occasionally, I do get the Wingdings thing when I print chronicle sheets. Sometimes, closing and then reopening the document fixes it.
I am sorry that you were disappointed. I am. It wasn’t the usual presence we are accustomed to, but there are number of factors. First, a lot of people still aren’t comfortable gathering with thousands of other people in such close proximity. Second, Gen Con Online certainly took a fair number of players and GMs, some of whom might otherwise have been in attendance in Indy. Third, as to the content of the special, no special appeals to everyone - I have played most of the specials, and this one was one of my favorites. YMMV. And, I am sure there are likely other factors, as well. If Paizo thought or knew attendance was going to be significantly lower, then they may have decided the financial expense of renting the entire Sagamore wasn’t justified - if you thought there were a lot of empty tables in the room as it was, imagine if we had been in the entire Sagamore. On a more personal note, I volunteered roughly 48 hours at HQ to help out and to try and make sure people had a good experience. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I’m sorry that, as a volunteer, I failed in that attempt in regards to you. BNW is right - it’s an unusual, single datapoint. I wouldn’t read too much into it. Hopefully next year things will be closer to normal.
|
Pathfinder Society GM. Starfinder Society GM. 1,435 posts (1,450 including aliases). 8 reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist. 39 Organized Play characters. 1 alias. 
