mogmismo's page

Being followed? Cast it behind you and feed it a potion of invisibility.

I personally love delay: it helps make my players feel like they are a real team. I will sometimes suggest that, when they delay, they say something quick in character, like 'cover me, I'm going in', or, 'Some haste so I can get past thier lines?' They are the heroes, and if I it helps with group cohesion, I'm happy. I can always adjust the opposition to an appropriatly fun difficulty level.

For your homegame, why dont you try dropping it and playing the way you want, or even try something exotic and new like popcorn inititive?

We're still looking at creating a framework for an event mode and Linda has written up a proposal of what that will entail that we need to review as a team before we can take any further steps, but it is still under consideration and something that we're looking to continue working on as we're able, with as much priority as we can give it.

Thanks so much for the update, I look forward to seeing what you all come up with.

Linda's looking at some possible text for an event mode option that would work as a framework for any module sanctioned in this manner but would ensure that convention organizers would have something they could point to and say "We're running this event to Event Mode standards", or something of the like.

For modules and adventure paths, we wish to encourage players to try them out or play them as home games. Depending on the scope and content of the adventure, they may not fit well within the organized play environment. As a thank you for trying out other Paizo products, we’ve created chronicles that do fit within the campaign and may be applied to your Pathfinder Society character.

Latest blog post

Michael,

Thanks for clarify things in this thread, can you further clarify how we can expect Event Mode to work, in light of Tonya's statement? Should we continue to expect Linda to work on text for an Event Mode, or is that currently shelved with all the other work Tonya has highlighted?

Thanks for your time, as usual

I organize two events every month. It's called planning. We have an abundance of communication tools at our fingertips that I would have killed for back in 1979. Why are they not being used? There is no excuse in the 21st century for a lack of communications in organizing events.

I'm glad that Campaign Mode would still work for your two events, and you have many tools and platforms that you, your players and your GMs all use. Most organizers have to fall back on the lowest common denominator: email. A single player, who you may not know personally or have other contact information for, not responding promptly to an email may tank a table.

Having a PFS Mode alongside Campaign mode makes these kind of issues non-existent. It also allows you to sign up for any module table at any public venue anywhere that OP is offered and know you'll have a (relatively) consistent experience.

Is your fear that doing a PFS Mode, even with all the suggestions on this thread for making it easier on Paizo staff, will slow down sanctioning for your gaming group? If PFS Mode chronicle sheets and rules could be streamlined as to not delay release, would you have any further complaints?

I believe people here have asked you to step into their shoes as players, GMs and Organizers and see how this would affect their gaming communities. I've tried to do the same for you and your desire for fast sanctioning. Is there any room for a compromise Xathos?

EDIT Ninja's by Michael Sayre! Thanks for popping in and letting us know Paizo is reading this.

You ignore the reality that what you want already exists. You just want to deny players the ability to make choices so that they are forced to follow your demands.

Xathos, please take a minute and consider this from the point of view of an Event Organizer. Can you imagine running a convention with 6 tables running modules in Campaign Mode? Now imagine that each of those GMs has a separate set of rules they want to run their module in, and further, that they don't personally know the players?

You, as the organizer, are trying to balance the desires of those 6 GMs and 24-36 players. It may be easy to just say that the players and the GMs can work it out when they sit down to play, but in practice, in the first 10 minutes of mustering for an event like this, it would be complete pandemonium. The amount of shuffling around, when we are all playing in PFS Mode is already intense, but adding Campaign Mode to a convention makes management even harder.

It's been suggested that the solution is just the players and GMs coming to an agreement about consequences at the table (I'll voluntarily mark my character dead, or remove consumables! See we have PFS Mode!). Already our Event Organizers and Venture Officers try to help quell disputes that arise between players and GMs. We have a rule set (PFS Mode) to fall back on to determine if the scenario was run correctly and tactics were followed. There is also the ability to escalate issues to Venture Captains, RVC's and finally the Organized Play Coordinator, if the situation is that serious. That's why PFS Mode works, it is a standard set of rules that is written down.

Settling these kind of debates in the current Campaign Mode with an gentle-person's agreement at the table to play in PFS Mode isn't really PFS Mode. It leaves that whole system of Organized Play as irrelevant. There is no real way to apply the rules of PFS Mode to the table if there is a disagreement of any sort. The event organizer can't step in and help quell a debate, they were not there when the agreement was made.

In summary, the wide use of Campaign Mode at conventions and public spaces doesn't work well, as it's not PFS Mode, no matter what agreement the GM and players make table-side. We need a PFS Mode if we expect modules to be run at public spaces frequently.

We can't favor one style of play over another, but we can make it to where everybody can choose what style of play that want and that's through campaign mode.

I don't think anyone is favoring one mode over another. I *like* campaign mode for a homegroup, and have personally done it multiple times. It just doesn't work in public spaces, especially with strangers. We are asking for both modes, in as simple of a way as possible to not slow down sanctioning.

I feel we've enumerated the reasons that Campaign Mode doesn't work in public spaces well, especially in larger events, but if you feel that it would help to have us explain our reasoning concisely again, please let me know here, or even private message me.

We want this to work for everyone, in every setting, and with just a little more work, I believe it could.

That is indeed true. The Guide to Organized Play Replay Rules are pretty clear about that. Don't worry though, with two adventures a month, as well as the quests and sanctioned modules that are going to be coming on line, there will be opportunities to grow multiple characters over time. The start of a new system always struggles with content, and the Paizo team is working really hard to make more content for us as quickly as possible.

While waiting for new content I suggest trying some Pathfinder 1st Edition Society, or perhaps some Starfinder Society. Both campaigns have much more content while PF2 is just starting.

Do people run AP's and 32+ Page longer adventures at conventions?

Yes. We've run individual books of APs, not a whole AP at a convention, and we've run 64 page modules. Just this Memorial Day Weekend (May for non-US readers), we had a table do all of "Wardens of the Reborn Forge" in 4 days of epic gaming. I prefer scheduling the 32 page modules, for sure. We run *many* of those locally.

Either they don't finish because they don't work well in the time slots or they don't get the players.

I can imagine that problem, but haven't seen it locally. We regularly plan and run modules, but never rarely in regular game slots. We have a whole convention (10+ tables per slot) that is nothing but high-level modules and seeker scenarios, but we know what we are getting in for; We schedule multiple day long slots for the big ones.

As an organizer, I can tell you it is much harder to organize a table that is in Campaign Mode than PFS Mode. After a player signs up, I have to contact them asking if I can share their contact info with the GM to start creating a character. The players have to reply to me with permission, then the GM has to contact the party and begin to settle on what everyone is going to play. A single player ignoring a pre-planning email (or escalating to a text or even phone-call) can set up frustration table-side when the game starts. It is quite a bit of overhead, and honestly, I avoid scheduling anything in Campaign Mode if I can help it.

For home-groups, Campaign Mode is just fine. I've enjoyed it when I've done it. But that is not all that Society Play is.

For your home-game group, Campaign Mode may work just fine. For FLGS / convention play this is could be a real mess.

Most players do not read the full game descriptions on Warhorn (or other signup system), and will show up at a table not knowing the highly detailed rules the GM has set up for their Campaign Mode, even if those highly detailed rules say, "I'm pretending this is PFS, you should have a PFS character of X level", or perhaps "I allow all standard PFS rules, and I also allow Leshies, but not Tieflings!"

It would be really helpful to have a PFS Mode that is standardly understood by all parties, GMs, Organizers, and Players. Otherwise scheduling a module at a convention or gamestore will take up everyone's time with custom rules and disagreements.

We need a baseline for convention/gamestore play so that when attending an event where you know noone, you don't have to come to a consensus on what rules you are playing under. Traditionally, that's been PFS mode.

You want to run it in PFS mode? You can!

As far as I can tell, this is not true, but I may be mistaken. If you mean that a GM can act like it's PFS mode and "clone" characters, expendables and danger still don't matter. It's just "Campaign Mode" with the exterior trappings of "PFS Mode".

As I've stated above, Many People play this game to Play Their Character, not a pregen or a temporary character. If the threat of death isn't on the line, it's not heroic, and they really aren't playing their character.

Another big problem is that mimicking "PFS mode" voluntarily is a table-wide decision by a GM. It isn't a convention-wide decision, as all content is "Campaign Mode". It leaves much fear, uncertainty and doubt for people signing up for games as they don't know if it's home-brew'd "PFS Mimic Mode" or "GM's Choice" campaign mode. Trying to put a convention together with any AP and Module content will lead to an incredible amount of Table Sudoku for the organizers as GMs will all have their own house rules (see "I don't run for Goblins!" above), as well as confused and angry players.

I would really like to see some kind of PFS mode, or at least some kind of hybrid mode in the guide and sanctioning docs that the convention/gameday organizers can use to express that PFS characters (not clones) can join a table.

It seems odd to me that we’d be worried about a GM making a decision about removing small bits of content to fit a game into a standard length game session, but we’re ok with them changing any rules they want about the game, adding creatures, and essentially doing anything they want as long as the module is still recognizable.

Indeed! We are trusting them more with Campaign mode. Of course, if death is irrelevant to a PFS character and consumables aren't used up in campaign mode, trust isn't really required. It is a one-off experience that you get to apply basically a boon to your PFS character for doing.

I've spoken to multiple people locally about this, and I think the real problem is that Many People play this game to Play Their Character, not a pregen or a temporary character. We have people who don't sign up for games if we don't have anything for their tier for their character. They've built a backstory, and invested. They play to continue the story of their hero. If we can't sanction modules for the hero they care about, they will not play.

If we let GMs cut content, the GM forums for those scenarios will be very important to crowd-source what the best things to chop are.

I've personally always appreciated the amount of creativity and ingenuity of PF1 GMs introducing PF1 modules to society play. What Venture Captain they choose to give the PCs the mission and how they "reskin" the intro to make it make sense for PFS mode with Society agents.

Um, are people with legal PFS characters being denied seating because the GM doesn't like their legally selected ancestry?!?

In Campaign Mode, the GM has greater leeway. This has been discussed previously in numerous places. The general consensus is that "Campaign Mode" is up to GM discretion.

The old guides had entries like this:

Campaign Mode: For sanctioned modules and Adventure Paths, GMs are allowed to use their own rules for character creation and running the presented content (the entire book or series). Credit is applied to an appropriate Roleplaying Guild character as if the character created were a pregenerated character.

which seems to me to indicate that (if we don't change the definition of Campaign Mode), a GM could certainly ban goblins from their tables for AP segments or goblins. Which is why I was suggesting a Hybrid Mode, that requires the GM to accept PFS characters.

I'd like to round back to what Campaign Mode currently is, and perhaps present a possible middle ground by altering what Campaign Mode is in the new PF2 world. More like a "Hybrid Mode" Currently the guide has just this:

Adventure Paths often offer the opportunity to experience them in Campaign Mode, which does not use Pathfinder Society rules, allows the GM to freely modify the encounters and story, and still awards a Chronicle sheet afterward.

We would be in better shape if we went ahead and offered full XP for the experience, much as we do now. Don't care if it's on a single sheet or three, but the important part is that you get credit for the sections you play. GMs would be required to accept PFS characters, but could, much like current campaign mode, allow people to roll up characters to suit. This way, in a convention setting, there isn't a situation where a GM denies a valid PFS character to the table because "I don't run for Gunslingers", or the new "I don't run for Goblins" and the modules work for conventions / long blocks at gamedays.

As long as those players are seated, people without characters could work out what to play (PFS pregens or crazy Campaign Mode characters the GM accepts).

For anyone going through the adventure in this mode, but choosing to bring a PFS character would loose resources as normal, and get credit for all the levels played (checkboxes on a single sheet if three sheets is too much). Non-PFS characters could still get the less experience as shown in the Plaguestone sheet to entice them to play in the campaign, but not start with an over-powered PFS character.

I'm just brainstorming here, I'm sure there are plenty of issues I haven't thought through yet. Trying to find some middle-ground where it all works. Anyone, feel free to riff on this idea any way you like and point out where I may be misguided.

What is stopping people from playing their PFS characters in Campaign mode? Just make an identical copy of your PFS character, call it your campaign character, and play that? Then assign credit to your identical PFS character after the game is over?

Is that not identical to playing it in PFS mode?

That would work until your GM at the convention you are attending says it doesn't. They are bound by the campaign mode rules, not PFS rules, so may say something like, "I don't like goblins, they can't be played at my table". You, the player with the PFS legal character, may be out-of-luck, even though you signed up weeks ago for the event on warhorn (or other system).

Campaign mode has always had more leeway for the GM running content the way they want to run it, which is sometimes nice (Hey, roll up strange races or try these awesome pregens I made that fit right into the scenario!), but in this context could cause convention organizers mountains of trouble managing different GM expectations.

However, considering the level of effort it would take to make this feasible, I understand why the developers took this route; it seems we're lucky to get a sanctioning model at all this go-around.

In my opinion, no sanctioning is better than bad sanctioning. I can still run unsanctioned content at my conventions and have a note on our signup system that this is a home-game. This method of sanctioning will come with a bunch of rules, guidelines and tips that don't have it dovetail into PFS, but PFS organizers will still have to follow. It adds to the overall bureaucracy, but with very little value to the GM and Players; Just a single chronicle sheet to represent what they did as a home-game.

We are not lucky to get a sanctioning model at all this go-around. We get a partial system that's easier to implement for Paizo. Switching over to the Organized Play Foundation should theoretically provide volunteer help in sanctioning, if Paizo wants it. The passion in this thread on this issue shows me that people care, perhaps enough to help out on the sanctioning front. A new system at the same time as PFS moves more to the volunteer OPF model may offer solutions that are better than just settling for so-so sanctioning that we feel lucky to get.

If modules and APs can’t be played in PFS mode, then they aren’t additional content for PFS. The biggest benefit of sanctioned content was that it made more things available to play with your PFS characters.

As an organizer for a convention (Seekerpalooza) dedicated to long-form content, with full-day slots only, and some games lasting 2, 3 or even 4 days, I agree entirely. This isn't PFS, this is a way for a home-group to claim a small amount of PFS credit for some post-game bureaucracy.

This change makes my event unappealing for most PFS players, as well as much more work for the GMs. Players will have to roll up new characters based on the desires and restrictions of every GM they plan to sit with on the long weekend. That's a lot of work for a convention organizer, connecting 80+ players with 15+ GMs before the convention weekend to roll up characters, as well as quite a bit of game-time verifying that the characters are created up to the GM's standards. Basically an untenable situation for convention play.

...but we also don’t want those of you who enjoy those convention marathon playthroughs to feel like you got the short end of the stick. Our potential solution involves adding a section to the organized play guide discussing convention play and providing tips to GMs and organizers on how to run these adventures in a way that fits into your slots and would still allow you to receive and issue Chronicle sheets for completing the playthrough.

People who like playing modules at conventions are choosing to play them at conventions. They choose which way to play, and fully know the consequences. As far as adding some guidelines and tips for convention play, I would have to see this section to adequately discuss this topic further. But I feel it is premature to ask the community's input on a direction without fully fleshing out the convention play section first.

Please reconsider your stance on this form of sanctioning, and give us both a PFS mode and a home-game mode.

I'm quite impressed. Indeed it does seem to be working for 2e rules instead of the playtest now. I've purchased the app to remove the ads and support the developer in the early days of the project.

Another thing I noticed and approved of: It's PDF export is a fillable PDF, so if the program has any issues (it's young, it has some issues) or features that aren't yet included (Pathfinder Society backgrounds), you can manually fix the PDF before printing.

Come join us in the Blue Ridge Mountains of North Carolina (Just outside of Asheville), for Seekerpalooza 3, on Memorial Day weekend, and reunite with some of your seeker characters that you haven't played in a while. We have 10+ tables / slot of only high level content.

Lodging is available at our retreat location, and we casually start games at 9AM, and close the gaming hall every night at 8PM, so that you can hang out with fellow pathfinder enthusiasts from the Southeast or explore the area.

Further details can be found on our website and our schedule is viewable on our warhorn. Let me know if you have any questions.

I don't know what the difference is of "This is rare - Says the DM" and "This is Rare - says a Tag supplied by the DM".

Because the GM can say, "Talk to me about anything marked uncommon", or "You've just arrived in a city of ____ size, you can buy anything that costs less than X gold that is common, and there are these few uncommon items." It preempts players assuming they can purchase anything in a magic shop, which is a way I've seen some groups play.

Also, I suspect it'll work very nicely in PFS. I'm hoping for a system where you can buy anything common, and Fame helps you get into uncommon items. Rare items are for Chronicle sheets alone!

First off, Game Masquerade, thanks for working as hard as you do for our hobby. It sounds like you are putting your all into it. That’s how I started helping out, moving from a player to a steady GM, to a VL and con organizer.

I know your first instinct isn’t to “sit down and talk with your leadership”, but that is step one. They may be very happy to have the official help, especially if they are indeed burnt out as you suspect.

It sounds like you are at least doing the work of a Venture Agent at your current store and some of the work of a VL for the upcoming convention. If you don’t get resolution from your Venture Captain, you can find your Regional Venture Coordinator on the “Coordinators” page, and drop them a line. I would make sure that you first exhaust all local options before taking that step.

The fact the Shadow Lodge cares even less than the Decemvirate about collateral damage is what makes me unimpressed.

I believe you are conflating the "modern" Shadow Lodge with the private motivations of Grandmaster Torch. It is pretty obvious he was using the organization for his own vendetta, and got carried away. Since his departure there have been missions that involve the current Shadow Lodge still working inside the Society. In one scenario they fund a rescue mission to save agents that the Society does not deem to be important enough to expend the resources on.

Edited to add "modern" in front of shadow lodge, to differentiate it from the season 2 organization, which was despicable.

I don't think we really need boons to transfer, if there is an occasional easter-egg in PF2 for players that played in PF1. If there are a few 2e boons that say, "If you played _____ in 1e and the have the chronicle applied to any 1e character, this bonus is increased", I suspect that older players would cherish those moments, and because they would just be minor additions to existing boons new players would not really be penalized.

Also, I'd love to finally see something done about those that Gnoll Boon in "Slave Pits of Absalom", and I don't care if it's in season 10, or PF2 society.

.Why not just let players use the simple monster creation rules to create their summonable creatures with a few restrictions applied

That's an interesting idea, but I'm not sure that most players will have the time or interest in doing that. In addition, it is assuming that the monster creation rules have absolutely no exploitable loopholes in it that would let players game it. In 1e, it's possible to make drastically different power levels of monsters by stacking precisely different abilities, or applying templates that make things tougher even though they lower CRs (I'm thinking of the young template for instance, which gives +4 size bonus to Dex, while lowering the CR by 1. This can be devastating to parties applied to the correct base creature).

Secondly, if the player can build whatever they would desire at the table with this feat, it would be wildly overpowered. The player could choose the exact SLA, feats, spell-like abilities, etc.. to easily overcome the current challenge. Already in 1e, I see Conjuration Wizards scouring the summons lists for "just that SLA" to get them out of tight spots (which is inventive), but with this new system they could just create a monster blob with some hitpoints that happens to have what they need as special abilities right at that moment. (Oh! no one has see invisibility? Summon Monster IV something I just designed with Scent or see invisibility/constant)

I would suggest adding, in a later book (not the CRB, probably down the line in 2e's equivalent to to the Unchained book) an optional feat or subsystem to allow players to design summons before-hand with some guidelines, and have the GM approve them. This would be much like letting players design custom spells in downtime. But never allow summon spells to make up creatures "on the fly"

In 1e, Summon Monster / Summon Nature's Ally was a mess because the initial list was released when there wasn't much content to add to it. We got strange additions to the list as books came out. Could we just solve this from the beginning by writing the summoning rules saying that you can summon anything with a "Summonable" entry/tag in the bestiaries and other books? That entry could list what lists they are added to, and at what level (Summonable III, as a tag in the monster block for instance). It could also list if they require a specific class feat to do it. I imagine there will be class feats to extend the list. The entry could be then "Summonable: Expanding Summoning III"

This is much simpler than trying to maintain a coherent list via additional sourcebook updates and splatbook feats. It avoids the problem that exists in 1e that when you buy a player companion, and it has a feat in it to extend the list. Then no future bestiary or supplement will ever add to that feat's list of choices, even if the new monster would thematically be a fitting monster for the list.

Getting this correct and simplified from the beginning will make the system steamlined and probably sell more bestiaries later as people (particularly in PFS) get them to extend their lists.

Thanks, it is a good time to consider quests. I can see doubling the quests released per year, but I would be disappointed to lose many more PFS scenarios per season. Trading a single scenario for another quest series sounds like a good balance.

They *are* valuable additions, and good for demos, but one of the real things we have going for us in in-depth stories. Higher level quests would be amazing as well.

Lawful Evil characters can work well in an hierarchy, follow commands and generally be skilled and diligent pathfinder agents. Conceptually, I would love to allow LE agents. Realistically, I'm just very aware that a small percentage of players can't handle it, so unfortunately I'm also very opposed to this idea.

Allowing worshipping of LE evil gods by LN characters is a good compromise at the moment. It allows GMs to remind the players of their true alignment and reign in disruptive behavior, while allowing some of the flavor.

Perhaps we'll see a few NPC agents who are LE in Season 10.

Wealth also varies based on what the party does in the scenario, so if you are looking for clean math on audits, you would have to drop that feature as well.

I personally like the "if the party fails to _____, remove X gold" but lots of GMs seem to ignore it.

Please add some CSS to internal, body links (a tags) so they are visibly different than regular body text. It's very hard to tell what is clickable. If you must go with black for both regular body text and links, please at least use text decoration of underline so we know what is clickable. It's particularly bad in the forums and the product listings.

Also, has anyone written the letter mentioned in the intro? I am running this at a con and want to have the letter handed to each player when they check in to the con.

Probably a bit late for your November run, Jared, but I just uploaded a letter for the intro to pfsprep here: PFSprep.com Gauntlet files

Okay, I have to ask. Why put it the same weekend as PaizoCon?

It is a convenient, long weekend that's early enough in the tourist season that we can still afford the beautiful retreat we are renting for the event. Much of the high tier content, like Eyes of the Ten, requires three days so holiday weekends work best. Other holiday weekends are already claimed by other regional conventions.

Also, many east coast players go to GenCon instead of PaizoCon. Last year we ran 5 tables of AFI and 2 tables of EotT, and only a couple of people complained about not making it due to attending PaizoCon.

We are now officially recruiting GMs for our event. If you would like to volunteer, please sign up here: Seekerpalooza 2 signup form.

If you are interested in playing, please take a moment to sign up for notifications on our website: Seekerpalooza.com. We'll notify the players as soon as we have the GMs lined up and know the schedule.

Go ahead and mark your calendar: May 26th-28th, 2018 (Memorial Day weekend), in at the Montreat Conference Center, in the beautiful mountains of North Carolina.

The current mix seems just about right to me. We run all the new content in our lodge. We *always* schedule a 1-5 in each slot of our big game days, and then fill out our other tables with higher tier stuff.

One thing we always suggest to new players is to always start a new level 1 character when their previous character hits level 3. We get "batches" of characters this way, and everyone can always play a 1-5 with at least a character, if not 3 or 4.

Also, keeping your lodge's characters involved in talking about character concepts makes veteran players always wanting to try something new. Adding some discussion in your lodge's social media, newsletter, slack team or however you communicate to the players in your region really helps.

And finally, so that those Veteran players *do* get to play higher tier, plan private events months in advance to send them through seeker arcs and high level modules. Something special for just them.

Hey, I'm one of the organizers of Seekerpalooza. We are still in the early stages of planning for our memorial day event this year, taking GM requests. Last year we ran 2 tables of "Eyes of the Ten" and 5 tables of "All for Immortality" (with 20 hours of play-time), started at 9am every day, and ended at 8 at night for BBQ cookouts.

This year we hope to have some of the seeker arcs, as well as "Witchwar Legacy" and "The Moonscar", and perhaps some of the "Wardens of the Reborn Forge". Lots of our attendees have also already played the seeker arcs. We are willing to consider any PFS sanctioned content above level 11, as long as we get an amazing GM to run it well.

If you are interested in GMing, please message me now. Last year, the quality of the GMs was exceptional with over three months for them to prepare. We expect GMs to put on their A-game, and 3D terrain is highly suggested. If you feel that you could travel to the east coast on Memorial Day weekend (same weekend as PaizoCon) and deliver an epic experience, please let me know now so we can start preparing!

We'll be opening up ticketing for players some time in January, after we've lined up our stellar GMs (which will all have bios on the site). I don't think we *want* to grow above 10 - 12 tables max. This is a convention is for people who *love* PFS and have dedicated enough time to it to achieve high level.

More details will be added to the website over the next month or two, but while you wait, you can immediately sign up for updates via the "Get Notifications about the event" newsletter signup.

At Magic the Gathering events, the judges are required to remove their judge shirts while on break. It something that should be done for GMing, as it cuts down on questions and it also doesn't let customers see us "goofing off" when we should be "working". In other words, it looks like you are wasting Paizo time when getting food, or chatting with friends.

GMs would then need to make a required trip to their room before and after running, with no stops chatting or "goofing off". Someone who has to get food between two slots would have to go to their room, change shirts, go out and get food, then go back to their room and put the shirt back on before their next game. I don't see that working at all.

They may be able to change quickly in a bathroom stall, but then we have a mad dash between slots to the bathroom stalls creating queues. Some people may also not feel comfortable changing anywhere besides their rooms, as well and we should respect that.

Leave it like it is, please.

Great work, appreciate the faq updates. I understand the reasoning behind the paragraph about paladins and poison due to thier code of conduct, but i would appreciate a futher clarification for some of the oaths, such as oath of vengence that replaces the code of conduct class feature, expecically if the paladin's race gives them a natural poison. Oath of vengence's Code of Conduct reads, "Never let lesser evils distract you from your pursuit of just vengeance" so may allow at least the racial poison.

...as the most famous Shadow Lodge member...

If you are Shadow Lodge and famous, you aren't really in the Shadow Lodge <grin>

Ok, I made the unified version (GM and Player data in one json) with the parsing out the scenario number and season as requested. Moved the import from the "My Pathfinder Society" section of the site to the "Sessions" (leaving a note in the old place). I think it will be easier to have one import. Look for the "role" key/value in the json which will be either "GM" or "Player"

Also, as you requested "scenario" as a value, full name is now stored in "ScenarioName" instead of scenario to avoid collisions.

A list of campaign service award recipients.

Why are you not on the list, Eshleman? I would like to nominate you for a campaign service award. You have travelled 1/2 the state over and over to support PFS in Western NC at every public event we have had in the past couple years. Players turn to you for rule advice regularly, and you run a mean game of Pathfinder... Not to mention, you've just clocked over 450 games as a GM.

I just noticed your edit, Simon, where you mentioned not getting it to run. Looking into it I found that there is another page (per user) on paizo that also shows all this data: https://secure.paizo.com/people/<=username=>/sessions Are you going to "My Pathfinder Society" -> Sessions tab?

The way I got it to work in the newer version is the script runs on any page that matches https://secure.paizo.com/* but immediately stops with no more processing if the page doesn't have a div in it with the content "Player Sessions" and "GM Sessions".

Also, I PM'd you (on this site), my full JSON so you have a second data set to look at. Can you PM me (or email me at mogmismo (at) gmail) with your browser version, platform and if you are using greasemonkey or tampermonkey? I'll test your exact platform, to make sure it is working.

Ok, updates to the userscript, starting to shape up. It's prettier (I borrowed some site CSS from the sessiontracker), has links to copy the data into the clipboard, and works no matter how you navigate to the session tab on paizo.

The multitable specials are hard to identify via name. Few options here: I'm already parsing out the number (in the sky key solution's case, 700 for #7-00). I can format that number any way you want to match on Sessiontracker side, if that helps

Alternatively, I could put the scenario/module URL in the json, if you have that to match against.

Getting more data than is in the table currently is problematic: Simply scraping the data of the viewed page into JSON doesn't spider the paizo site, so think it's legit, If I followed the scenario link and got the next page's title, that would definitely be spidering the paizo site: not good.

Grab the latest version from github: PFS sessiontracker userscript

Simon, I was able to kick something out as a proof of concept after work today. Tampermonkey / Greasemonkey script on GitHub just so you can see the data available. It is pretty rudimentary at the moment, but does give you json data. I'll clean it up over the next week or so.

I don't think I can make the json download as a file (browser restrictions, ya'know?) so I'll add in a button to "copy to clipboard" so that perhaps the tracker can have a "Paste JSON" textarea to ingest the data.

Sure, sure. Give me a week or so to get the tampermonkey plugin working. I've got a lot of gaming coming up (Local mini-con this weekend). You can work on your end after I've got the tampermonkey userscript.js ready and you can test the json with your own data.

Hey Simon,

If I wrote a Tampermonkey / Greasemonkey script to create and download a json file of games from the "My Pathfinder Society -> Sessions" tab when logged in, would you be willing to write an importer for the same format? That would cut out a lot of the initial work people would have to do to get started.

I don't think that will break any guidelines, as it's no more requests to the Paizo server, and there are already some well-used Greasemonkey scripts that are promoted in the forums.

Well... Since Esheleman is traveling hours to come, the least I can do is go the 30 minutes... Count me in!

I too can't find this in the FAQ. Can we get the "answered" tag removed so it can continue collecting FAQ votes?

Another question: Skelg's stat block states he is immune to unconscious conditions. Does this refer to all of his unconscious related rage powers (which don't make him immune), or is something "extra" for him.

He has Guarded Life (Converts dmg to non-lethal when below 0) and Raging Vitality (Rage doesn't end when unconscious).

As I read it, if he is really immune, that means that when he is under 0 hitpoints, Guarded Life is going to be a pain, basically giving him something approximating DR 15 on top of his normal DR until they eat through all his non-lethal hit points or manage to do enough lethal to finally drop him.

My questions are: Does he really have immunity to unconsciousness and how did he get it? If he has it, does it work the way I'm thinking? We are running for a party of 6 modern characters with all the new splatbook tricks, so I'm inclined to leave this interesting immunity in place.

All of this discussion brings me to another question. Why does Adril actually think killing 5 of the Decemvirate will somehow let him take over the Society? There are still 5 more. Is his (unstated) plan to have almost a majority if he and 4 associates replace them secretly? Wouldn't replacing 6 be a more sensible number? And if so, how is that the other 5 will not notice that their inner sanctum has been breached? Surely Shemis has shared the assault on Skyreach with the other members, as she must have known the assault is coming.

Hey all, this is a series of questions I have about EoT while prepping. I can’t think of ~anything~ more spoilery than this, so I’m going to post this in spoiler tags even though we are in the GM forum:

Thanks for any help you may be able to provide. Question involving the foyer room and the arena above are the ones that most concern me. Most of the others are smaller rules related, and I'll muddle through and still make it epic for the players.