Android

The Only Star's page

46 posts. Alias of Jeffrey Fox.


RSS

4/5

mrspaghetti wrote:
CrystalSeas wrote:
Who "coerced" him?
I think he was either an employee of the game store hosting the event, or possibly even the PFS guy for that location. He indicated that he "always has to" GM, and didn't seem too happy about it.

Sounds like you're going to be out of luck.

If your GM always has to GM, that means no one is willing to do it. No amount of bad rating for that GM is going to fix the issue. It sounds like either that person GM's or no one does.

Seems like your choice is bad gaming, or no gaming.

mrspaghetti wrote:
As for "showing everyone how to do it correctly", most PFS players demonstrate that every game by trying to be nice. It's not something I could demonstrate any better as a GM than as a player. The reason the GMs attitude matters more is because he has a much greater impact on enjoyment of the game for everyone else.

It's not just about showing people how to do it correctly, it's also about getting the right people for the job. Right now it seems you only have the choice of the wrong person.

Also, because GMing is so important for the group, like you said, that means that trying to be nice as you put it, is more valuable as a GM trait than a player trait.


Ok, thanks.


Hello, I have a Lost Omens subscription but for some reason it doesn't seem to show the Lost Omens Character Guide as upcoming item for me and tells me that my next item is God's and Magic. Should my subscription include the Character Guide?

Also the discount from having four subscriptions won't kick in until I receive an item from the rule book line, correct?

4/5

Is the Hero Point awards suppose to be 1 per hour of play total (so around 4) or 1 per hour of play per player?

4/5

Congrats to all.

4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
A huge library of content while Paizo works to build up the 2E library.

That content exist outside of the OP requirement as well. That's not encouraging people to support both editions. The OP Non-Profit is trying to use 1e OP Replay to entice people to 2e OP.

Which is what it is, and really I'm not saying to not do that.

All I'm suggesting if that if you want people to stay in the 1e OP and to not form their own Shadow Lodge 1e OP is to at least provide them with the number of play opportunities a month they've been accustomed to.

Which is 2.

If you want to tie additional replays over that to boons and playing 2e that's fine.

Look, I don't want people to cheat, but in the end what I want most is for the people playing the games to enjoy themselves. If I play 2e OP I really don't want to be playing with people who are GMing or Playing just so they can replay the OP game they want to play. That will just hurt the table enjoyment of the 2e game.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
That's a weird stance to take. It's bad to incentivize players to support both editions?

No, it's not.

What do 2e players get by player 1e?

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
The Only Star wrote:
And that's fair TOZ, but what do you do when the set up a table in the game store next to you and run it without you, and with the store's permission?
Ban the player from my events and turn away characters with illegal replay credits earned at such other events.

Right, so it's still limited to the events you have personal control over, or have a way to influence the person that does.

Nothing can stop people from splintering off and making a alternate fan run version of the PFS 1e OP like people did when they got made with Adventures League and if they only use paper chronicle sheets which are the only official reporting method they could unintentionally or intentionally mix into the Guild run PFS 1e OP.

People are going to play the games they enjoy, especially if they invested in the game.

Tying the 1e replays to PFS 2e OP is not good for the people who want to keep playing 1e. The only reason to tie them together is to try and make more profit for Paizo.

And is the Non-Profit's goal to make more money for Paizo or to run an enjoyable OP campaign? Cause that's a weird non-profit if it's purpose is to make a profit for a company.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
The Only Star wrote:
I'm just pointing out that your little "we VO's won't allow it" philosophy is hollow and if people are going to do it to continue to enjoy the game they've paid tons of money to play they will.

I don't allow it.

Someone tries it at my table, I tell them no.

And that's fair TOZ, but what do you do when the set up a table in the game store next to you and run it without you, and with the store's permission?

In the end the power of the VO's really are the same as any other person running a game. Even banning a PFS number wouldn't do much as online reporting isn't a requirement and not all numbers are even activated for tracking in the system.

When it comes to the ability to replay the 1st PFS OP the campaign should be looking at ways to keep these players engaged because they are loyal customers and they still want to enjoy the games. All you do by setting a way to get replays by forcing them to play 2e will sour them on 2e.

The goal should be at least 2 replays a month per person before having to use boons or Achievement Points. You also have a better chance of the players joining 2e down the road by not making them feel ostracized by still wanting to enjoy 1e.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bob Jonquet wrote:
The Only Star wrote:
How do you propose they stop it?
Wow, did you wildly miss the point. Our campaign is largely based on the honor system. We assume that by choosing to play, you have agreed to follow the rules. Don’t encourage people to break them simply because there isn’t a Paizo cop waiting around the corner to arrest you. Let’s demonstrate a little “truth, justice, and the American way” and not encourage people to be deceitful simply because they might be able to get away with it.

So no way to really stop it. Gotcha.

I'm not encouraging people to be deceitful because they might get away with it. I even said I'd rather them not break the rules. It's also not because "Paizo cops aren't around the corner", it's "Paizo Cops don't exist."

I'm just pointing out that your little "we VO's won't allow it" philosophy is hollow and if people are going to do it to continue to enjoy the game they've paid tons of money to play they will.

And frankly the Organized Play campaign was built on the idea of two new play opportunities a month for years, if you want the people who will continue to play PFS 1e OP to follow the OP rules then you should at least allow them that many opportunities to play without having to commit to the PFS 2e OP that they don't want to move to.

The current proposal falls short of that, and Paizo should at least find a way to hold up their end of the bargain of the PFS 1e OP if they want the player base to.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bob Jonquet wrote:
If you want to allow free replay of scenarios at you events, that’s fine, but it’s not organized play anymore and your organizers and Venture-officers should not allow it.

How do you propose they stop it? Seriously the idea that a Venture Officer could go into a game store that is allowing people to break the rules and tell them to stop is laughable.

Your only recourse is to tell them it's not official, which obviously won't matter to the people breaking the rules.

Look I'd rather see people stop playing then break the rules, but this idea that Vo's could just not allow it is extremely laughable.

4/5

TimD wrote:
While I'm not positive, I think that some of the dice may have been made by some of the local PFS groups to give out at local conventions / game days / etc. and not just by Paizo. I seem to recall a conversation by some of our former VO staff about ordering custom dice for one of our year-end holiday parties.

I don't think any of them were ever made by Paizo, they were commissioned by VO's out of pocket.

4/5

Tallow wrote:
Does 5th Ed have more than 1 extra rulebook other than their core book anyways? I'm unsure if this isn't just the sources they have rather than a restriction.

They currently have four, with a 5th supplement next month. I find it to be a great idea...

but it wouldn't work for Paizo because they produce books at too high of a rate to make it feasible.

4/5

Regional Scenarios could look like how Adventure League does their community created content. It could get created for small events, and local conventions and then after a short time it could be sold to whomever wanted to buy it. So you'd have a regional exclusive for a short time, 6 months maybe, and then after that it'd be available for purchase and play anywhere.


14 people marked this as a favorite.

Hmm. Paizo will lose me as a customer unless Paladin returns to it's pre-Gygax roots and has a gun and is willing to travel. I will not budge.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Michael Hallet wrote:
If they cared about 1e "competing" with 2e, they would put a hard stop to the 1e PFS campaign next year and stop supporting at all, like WotC did when they went from Living Greyhawk to Living Forgotten Realms to Adventurer's League. But being willing to have 1e coexist with 2e says they'd rather compete with themselves than have people leave for a competitor's product.

Except you can still play and download the LFR scenarios and I also know quite a few people that played Living Greyhawk after that ended. They just stopped making new content.

The same way Paizo will stop making new content for 1e PFS by July 2019.

The only difference is that Paizo will still let you report scenarios, and I assume Wizards doesn't anymore [Though I know they could for LFR a few years ago, even after AL's launch.]

That's not saying that they want to coexist, that's just admitting the fact that people can still play games even if a company stops printing more books.

Nothing in the FAQ or announcement made it seems like Paizo will still be making 1e PFS boons for conventions for after July 2019, or releasing new guides, or putting anymore resources into it.

4/5

Honestly is it going to matter once the switch to 2e happens?

They seem like they won't be making more scenarios for 1e PFS and I would think that by the end of the first year of 2e most conventions will stop offering 1e PFS games. I imagine many other gaming locations will make the switch once their player bases makes it hard to muster for 1e.

When new material isn't coming out, and official support for the 1e PFS campaign is over, do you really have an Organized Play campaign anymore?

Is Paizo going to keep a roster of Venture Officers to cover legacy 1e PFS issues?

Personally I don't see the point of worrying about 1e PFS rules after the campaign is all but officially dead.

But unlimited replay after the campaign ends, officially endorsed by Paizo, could cut into the number of players switching to 2e at major conventions. You really don't want to compete with yourself and that could encourage people running both 1e and 2e PFS events at the same cons which could split the player bases there.


I think the easiest way to rule it would be if the half-race is eligible to take human options [Traits, Feats, etc], then it should work for them. So yes for half-elf and half-orc, but no for races like Dhampir or Aasimar that aren't allowed to take human options.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TheAlicornSage wrote:
On the way there I bought a certificate sized piece of parchment and attached a silent image to it, with the intent of altering the image to match the certificate the clerk brings out once I saw (which isn't noticeable as spellcasting). Swap out the parchment with the image for the real thing and I walk away with the certificate and the clerk knowing they put it back where it belonged.

That is one of the worst plans I've ever heard. Silent Image is Verbal and Somatic, and while you can move it around you can't change what it looks like after you cast it. So you would have needed to cast it after seeing the paper work.

And then you'd have to take a -20 for trying to sleight of hand as a move action, because your standard is concentrating on the spell. That means you'd need to roll a 40 for you to be able to lift the small object off the person.

Plus this official would get a Perception check to notice what you did against your roll. So even if you fail you're most likely getting caught because of the -20 to your roll.

Which means that most likely your group would at least not get time alone in the room, and potential would have the guards called on them.

So, maybe the GM decided that it was better to not derail the scenario for the other players and ruin their fun by letting you do your idea.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
MrBear wrote:
I'm surprised at the local VOs didnt step up. I mean, I hear these PAX cons are pretty big deals.

I'm not sure why it's surprising that Volunteers didn't spend thousands of dollars out of their own pocket to get the space from PAX, especially without being allowed to charge fees for the games. Hell even Adventurer's League needed permission from PAX to be able to use Kickstarter to afford to run events there, and that almost didn't fund.

But PAX Unplugged did say they'll have space for open gaming so I wouldn't be suprised to see tables of PFS in the open play area.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Contact your local Venture officer and ask them, they're the only ones that could possibly undue it (Legally for PFS).

4/5

Isn't Celestial Armor made of bright silver or gold?

4/5

You could go to a staples or kinkos and have one coil bound.

4/5

Tusk the Half-Orc wrote:
I can understand not aiding on knowledge checks during combat or high pressure situations, but I have not been able to find anything in the rule books or the main Rules Questions thread to suggest that you can't aid a knowledge check otherwise. Is this a PFS-specific thing? Have I just missed something obvious?

Aid Another has some caveats,

Aid Another wrote:
"In many cases, a character's help won't be beneficial, or only a limited number of characters can help at once. "

and

Aid Another wrote:
"The GM might impose further restrictions to aiding another on a case-by-case basis as well."

These caveats give the GM a lot of leeway on aid another rulings and one should expect table variation. One of the reasons you'll see GM's not allow Aid Another is because of

Knowledge Skill wrote:
"Try Again: No. The check represents what you know, and thinking about a topic a second time doesn't let you know something that you never learned in the first place.

implying that Knowledge determines whether you learned something in the past, and someone aiding you in the present can't help you learn things in the past if you didn't already know it. So it really comes down to whatever the GM decides.

4/5

Philadelphia itself has Redcap's Corner and Allied Hobbies, and West Chester has the Games Keep and those links will lead you to the Warhorn that they use to schedule the events.

I'm not sure what the parts of Maryland or Delaware that are closer to Oxford have though.

4/5

This sounds interesting.

Bunch O Stats:
Top Ten GMs, by tables

1 Iammars (22)
2 quikndead (19)
3 Joe Lai (10)
4 Benn Roe (8)
5t Casey Croson (7)
5 tHimokl (7)
7 Alexander Augunas (5)
8t twilsermail (4)
8t William Dougherty (4)
10t Arloror (3)
10t Bristor (3)
10t Carnithia (3)
10t Drizzt1080 (3)
10t Silver-Hawk (3)
10t Tobi, The Masked One (3)

I've played a total of 145 times. So Iammars is my best and most played under GM. She's an amazing GM. I've missed all the Prestige twice, and missed a point of prestige additional 6 times.

Top 3 Characters

1 Holden Kane/ Holden (23)
2 Vance Caster/ Vance (19)
3 Baron Marcell (12)

Top 3 Factions

1 Silver Crusade (30)
2 Taldor (29)
3 The Exchange (24)

Of course it's also currently saying I GMed 317 tables, which I think is including the 81 tables of card games, so I'm sure some kinks need to be ironed out.

4/5

Skarm wrote:

My perplexity regards the fact that its magical equivalent, the Shozoku of Night Wind, is reported as "legal" for Pathfinder Society play and so I don't understand...

...why the magical item is listed and the mundane one is not listed?

The "Shozoku of the Night Wind" does not reference the "Shinobi Shozoku" rules. while they are both described as thin black bodysuits [Shozoku] the game rules are different and don't over lap. One provides a competence bonus to stealth and the other provides a circumstance bonus. So games wise they aren't related items so no reason for them to be lumped together when determining whether they should be legal.

The "Shionbi Shozoku" is probably illegal because 50gp for a blanket stealth bonus is rather good.

4/5

DrewAustin wrote:

I can't find rulings 100% on this, which leads me to believe it isn't kosher, so I thought I would get all of your guys input.


  • Two PCs were were having one PC mount the other. A halfling cavalier mounting a dwarf barbarian. They said the Dwarf barbarian had an exotic riding saddle and the handling was within the Dwarf's weight restriction. From what I can see, this is bunk. two PCs can't share the same square (unless they are ratfolk), but the ride rules & familiars carrying their familiars breaks that, so not sure.
  • One of those same characters, at early level 3 had a mithral breastplate. He said he had a cert that gave them 3500gc - has anyone heard of a cert like this?

Mounted creatures are assumed to share the square of the creature they mounted. I imagine a dwarf would be considered an unusual steed but seeing as humans can ride on other humans shoulders in real life it's not very far fetched in a fantasy game.

And yes several modules give out that much gold and can be played by second level characters.

4/5

GM's call based on this rule quote "A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw." the GM can determine if identifying the spell counts as proof it's not real.

And spellcraft is trained only so you have to a rank in order to have a chance to identify.

4/5

Awesome, congrats!

4/5

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
The Only Star wrote:


So what you see as inclusion, is seen as exclusion for some.

I guess the summary of it all is that some people want a play style that is closer to what PFS was years ago, and that means that the rules of the game would be more restrictive rather then less so.

...and the CORE campaign does not fit this requirement?

As I mentioned in the post, no.

But to expand, I don't care for hard-mode PFS. I like being able to be saved, or to save character by using First Aid Gloves. I like having items that that mitigate the negative effects of Save or Suck spells, and I like classes because some of the core classes don't stack up well with other core classes. I found appeal min the human-centric Golarion that once existed.

BigNorseWolf wrote:
How much of the star wars cantina was the planetouched baby boom

Locally to me, nearly 0. Only two people locally went out of their way to exploit the planetouch baby boom as you called it and those players weren't well received locally by the majority in my area anyway.

4/5

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
Why do we need to *remove* races? Shouldn't the goal be 'working towards more inclusion', not 'restriction'?

Need is always a strong word in these situations, but I do want races more restricted.

When I first got into PFS one of the selling points was that Golarion was a human-centrist world and wasn't into the "Alien-Cantina" vibe of Living Forgotten Realms. Slowly over the last five years PFS has drifted far from that. Which means that the Organized Play system that I've GMed over 200 games for and spent way more money then I should have to support, is no longer one I like to be apart of. Core play doesn't work for me, because I like classes.

So what you see as inclusion, is seen as exclusion for some.

Now I doubt that what I want [only core race without a boon], or even a compromise of what I want [small list of rotating open races and limited boon access to racial boons] is ever actually going to happen because the trend of the campaign has been less restrictive.

Personally when I first started boons where far rarer and racial boons even more so. Those rewards seemed special, now I tend to just hand boons I've earned out to people because they're neither as special nor rare.

[With one boon exception for me that isn't a charity boon, but is rare and treasured]

I guess the summary of it all is that some people want a play style that is closer to what PFS was years ago, and that means that the rules of the game would be more restrictive rather then less so.

4/5

Thomas Hutchins wrote:
they aren't armor.

Armor of Bones says that it "conjures armor" so I find it hard to argue that it's not armor. As such magic vestment should work on Armor of Bones just as well as magic vestments works on clothing or any other piece of armor..

4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Wraith235 wrote:
again ... polymorphed Creatures do NOT Loose their feats

They don't lose their feats, but since feats are usually extraordinary abilities they may lose access to them when polymorphed. It is GM's discretion as per the rules in the core rule book about what forms can use what abilities.

It should not be used to debuff a character build that needs to be fixed by an errata team.

But a GM could say that Snake Style doesn't work as a hummingbird because snake style says that the users hold their hands together to mimic the heads of a snake and that hummingbirds don't have hands or snake heads, and that using wings in that way would preclude the hummingbird flying. But a GM doing that should allow crane style because that form tries to mimic wings.

Again though a gm shouldn't enforce these rules as a way to hurt the character using an item the gm deems overpowered, they should really believe it and apply the same rules to other people that change forms as well.

4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
thorin001 wrote:
Someone spends 50 GP on a fake mustache as a MW tool for Diplomacy. Can a GM decide that that is silly and deny the benefit of the tool?

Yes the GM can decide that the circumstance bonus doesn't apply in that circumstance.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

One of the things to remember when looking at stuff that you want to be included is the lore. Dragoon weapons are mentioned to be only found in use by members of the Cruel Musketeer faction and they are the only people who know how to make them or use the feats in that section.

It is very possible that the rarity mentioned in the lore may prevent their inclusion in the Organized Play. Also I'm not sure what Queen they were meant to serve as their lore seems to not be Golarion specific.

4/5

My only requirements back when I became a Venture Captain, before I stepped down obviously, was to call back when Mike did Call Me Maybe as explained back here. I was always a sucker for a good cover song.

4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Michael Hallet wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


That is logistically unfeasible for larger conventions (or any convention, for that matter).

The Boon line/roll for conventions would go from a matter of minutes to much longer if they have to verify each person's PFS number and enter it mechanically (not just handwriting on the sheet) so as to prove that it isn't just some scrawled in random number.

In addition, this would have a very chilling effect on new players who *just* got a brand new PFS number and haven't memorized it yet.

I'm not sure who you are responding to, but I'm not asking for anything more complicated then handwriting a PFS number on the sheet.

As someone who has personally worked the GM Prize table and has personally hand signed boons one year when the table was open after the Friday Special I can tell you that having people do that much hand writing is not that much fun. And Tonya and company eliminated that this year, thankfully. But smaller conventions may still have to do the hand signing.

Having to write every players PFS number would be far worse and would substantially increase the time it takes for the prize table at Gen Con, and other conventions to get it's job done.


Keith Smith wrote:

I'm playing an Investigator(Empiricist) in PFS, and I've got him up to third level. Two of the adventures he was on, issued Chronicle Sheets that gave the option of getting a familiar - assuming enough spellcasting levels and the Improved Familiar feat. Do investigator levels count as spellcasting levels in order to take a familiar or am I going to have to take another feat as well?

Investigator doesn't grant familiars and I don't think they can get the alchemist discovery that allows a familiar. I don't know the chronicle sheet rewards but normally they only grant familiars to classes that normally get familiar.

So most likely you would need extra feats to be able to acquire a familiar. I think Eldritch Heritage (Arcane) and Skill Focus (Knowledge: Arcana) is the easiest road.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Wow, so much awesome from so many people.

4/5

Mighty Squash wrote:
If Golarion doesn't have half-drow about the place, then why do Golarion specific splat books have a bunch of half-drow options in the first place?

They get what 2 pages of content shared with Drow in the how many hundred of Golarion setting books? I'm not sure that constitutes a bunch. They aren't non-existent they are rare to the level of practically non-existent.

Catfolk and Androids are at least a thousand times more populated in Golarion then half-drow and only one person gets to play a Catfolk in PFS and like two get to play Androids.

Plus drow options sell, because not everyone buys Golarion books to use in Golarion.

4/5

zook1shoe wrote:

obviously, but some people find firearms or tech weapons just as, or more, repugnant as drow/half-drow.

i even know someone that hates all but the core races, and wishes they weren't used.

its all a matter of opinion.

The difference is one breaks the immersion of the game setting, and the other breaks people's personal ideal of that game setting. Those aren't the same thing.

Gunslingers are an established part of the setting and many gunslinger archetypes are banned when they don't fit the flavor of the Golarion setting.

Drow as a race walking around above ground and mating with humans is against the lore established for Golarion.

PFS isn't a generic fantasy game, it's a Golarion game. Having things in a PFS game that aren't in golarion is grating to people who want to play a game in Golarion and not in Greyhawk or the Forgotten Realms.

4/5

Half-Drow break the immersion of the game world, so they do hurt the game for some people.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm happy for more people to get this boon.

I'm sad for all the local GMs that took expanded narrative as their reward for helping out a Con near the end of season 7 that now feel like they got no reward for helping out.

An advance notice would have helped soften the blow and not made those GM's feel like they ended up with less rewards than other GM's who worked the event.


Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
tl;dr: Is there anything we can do to help aside from remaining patient?

I have a feeling that Paizo doesn't want volunteer help on the pregens because they'd still need to be developed, edited, and then given a layout. I imagine layout is the hardest part since they need to make sure everything relevant is on the sheet for the players while also keeping as much of the character backstory as possible.

So patience and understanding are probably the best we can offer.

One thing I've noticed over the years is that whenever I see Paizo employees on social media post about working on a holiday, or working late they always mention that either the PFS team or John Compton was working, and they generally follow up when they leave by saying that John is still there at work.

I mention that because John and Linda are extremely hard working and knowledgeable. They are going to do the best that they can do to get out the scenarios, AP sanctioning, custom boons for events, campaign clarifications, and handling FAQ and Errata issues that arise in PFS. Why pregens are important to them as evidenced by John still working on them they have so many logs in the fire and are already working so hard that they can't achieve everything even when though they try.

kevin_video wrote:

Come on, now. You don't need to be like that. The pregens were done and released in pdf form back in 2010, as I stated above in my response to John. The backgrounds in 2011 on the blog. They just aren't legal with today's rules because of the point buy being 15. The Pathfinder Community already updated them to 20, but again, they're not legal for play because they don't have the official stamp on them.

What people are trying to understand, and are asking of Paizo is, why is it taking so long when in Jan 2011 everything was already 3/4 done (just from their own work alone, not including the Community stepping in, in 2014)? That's it. They said back in 2014 they were getting worked on. Okay, so finished in 2010 to release for "Masters of the Fallen Fortress", and then 3/4 complete in 2011 due to the point buy stipulations, and getting worked on in 2014. Then the Core characters get the complete revision to make them more optimized to be put alongside the ACG iconics in landscape format, and then we got the Occult. Cool. Why weren't the APG? I get Balazar because he's unchained. No problem. The others should have come out when the Core ones were given the spit shine polish.

Sorry I'm chopping the post up to make it easier to address your points.

First off the Pathfinder Community pregens are 1, 7, 12 levels.

Secondly John and Linda weren't on the staff in 2010 and I imagine the pregens from then aren't what they want for PFS.

Third I believe you are seriously underestimating the amount of work that goes into making pregens. Like I said above layout is not something a player base can help with and it's probably the most important and hardest part of the pregens. It's also the part that probably requires people from outside the PFS team to do, the people who are working on layouts for the Paizo books as well.

And lastly I did need to be like that, because treating the Paizo employees like children is deplorable and everyone who loves this game should be upset when people vilify the hard working people who help make this game continue.

kevin_video wrote:
Also, let's talk about money because you brought that up as well. What makes a company money? For starters, people buying their products. If a customer doesn't feel that a company has their best interests at heart or won't meet their needs, they go elsewhere. That's the joy of this new generation who know what they want, know it should be available to them, and want it right now. Not only that, who has what they want.

The joy of this new generation you're talking about is a ridiculous level of entitlement that shouldn't be glorified. Trying to tell me that Paizo should be forced to provide free content to make people happy is absurd. That'd be like me standing in front of a McDonalds and demanding samples of a Big Mac before I'll continue to by their food.

That level of entitlement will not lead to good game play when their character dies, or misses a prestige point, and isn't healthy for the campaign as a whole and shouldn't be catered to.

And really good luck with the other organized play campaigns out there, because right now none of them put out as much content as PFS or are anywhere near as polished.

kevin_video wrote:
This can be especially disheartening to a brand new player that's looking to get interested in the game. As others have said, people ask for what's not available all the time. At least with the witch I can still offer up the arcanist and sorcerer as a substitute, but it's usually met with mixed results.

Offer the shaman up instead for Witch, it's the closest you'll get.

But I've GMed over 200 games and organized probably 2-3 times that and I can honestly tell you out of that 1500 hundred or so seats I haven't had a single issue with the available pregens. In fact I have far more complaints from new players about the amount of pregens to look through then about any that are missing.

Also here is a little trick for 1st level pregen play, if a player really wants to try out a witch then make a witch for them. It's first level play and whether or not you use a pregen or a custom made character you still have three sessions to play with the character before you need to be locked in. I personally don't do that because I haven't seen the need, but it's an option.

Again sorry for cutting your post up into pieces, I hate doing it but my opinions would be rather chaotic looking otherwise.


MidknightDiamond wrote:

Not hardly. Being harsh is not the same as demonizing, being strict is not the same as demonizing. Parents can be harsh with their children when they do something wrong, or don't do something at all that they were supposed to and it's not demonizing, teachers can be harsh with their students for similar reasons.

Are you a parent or teacher to any of Paizo's staff? Because the relationship of customer to business is not anywhere close to that.

Paizo is a business they are not required to follow your time table on releasing free to use content. If Paizo wants to pay their employees to put out content that makes them money and not worry about the content that doesn't then they are free to do that.

You trying to lecture Paizo about how much effort it takes to make pregens is almost comical in how little you seem to understand about the effort it takes to produce stat blocks and get the layout done so that all the relevant abilities can fit on the sheet in a way that is useable and easy to navigate.

The Pregens will be ready when they're ready and I for one would rather see the Gen Con scenarios completed before the thought of pregens even enters the Paizo staffs mind.