Culture PFS sheets and strictness.

So, I was recently travelling and GMed a table where I learned a player had an item significantly beyond their fame limit during our pregame setup.
(+2 weapon at level 4)

I then learned that they had not filled out their chronicle sheets, didn't even know how much fame they had etc.

I insisted that they play a pregen.

It seems local culture is to not bother checking these things or even filling them out properly.

The player played a pregen for the slot but clearly wasn't very happy about it and was quite surprised that I cared about the numbers on their chronicle sheet

Did I do the right thing? How do you deal with culture differences when travelling, especially if those differences have rules issues?

This seems pretty egregious since a +2 weapon is more gold than a level 4 character "should" have. I suppose it is technically possible if they were part way to level 5, but even then a single other purchase would make it impossible.

And that is before we even get to the fame requirements.

IMO, you did the right thing. Another solution could have been asking them to play a different character (though it seems likely you would be risking the same issue). Personally, I would have also sent a note to the local VL to just have a look at the venue. Nothing about the specific person, just that there were some rule violations in the recording keeping that needed to be ironed out to insure consistency among the players (or something to that effect).

I agree you did the right thing. Saw way too much of GMing at GenCon.

I'm normally pretty anti pregen and anti paperwork but that's kinda nuts.

SentenceL KYRA!

This seems pretty egregious since a +2 weapon is more gold than a level 4 character "should" have. I suppose it is technically possible if they were part way to level 5, but even then a single other purchase would make it impossible.

And that is before we even get to the fame requirements.

I just checked the character I'm self auditing and she had 10,000 gp around then. It's easily doable. I think how it happens is that certain chronicles give out double the expected wealth by value if you play them in the right order.

Auditing characters is a requirement for GMs in PFS per the Guide.
If anything is wrong and no time for adjustments or a more detailed review to get the character within the rules then switching characters to one that meets PFS rules is required.

Auditing characters is a requirement for GMs in PFS per the Guide.

If anything is wrong and no time for adjustments or a more detailed review to get the character within the rules then switching characters to one that meets PFS rules is required.

It is but its also impossible to do correctly in any sort of timely fashion. Seriously, how do you expect me to audit people who its physically impossible to fill out a chronicle sheet in the way you want it to.

Locally, a relatively inexperienced player came with an enchanted adamantine weapon. He could afford it, but didn't have enough fame fior it.

We let his character continue with a non-adamantine version of his weapon and then the GM helped him settle his purchases after the game.

In the OP's situation, I might have let the player continue with a +1 version of the weapon and then tried to sort things out because people come to play their characters and playing a pregen when you weren't expecting it sucks--not that that means you did anything wrong by insisting they play a pregen in that situation. These sorts of calls are always audibles.

Unless by "Chronicles not filled out," you mean not even the character name and character number. That would be pretty aggregious.

Locally, a relatively inexperienced player came with an enchanted adamantine weapon. He could afford it, but didn't have enough fame fior it.

We let his character continue with a non-adamantine version of his weapon and then the GM helped him settle his purchases after the game.

I'm assuming it was enchanted with something other than a simple +1? Because a +1 adamantine weapon has no Fame requirement (RPG Guide page 21).

. As a +1 weapon and not a special material other than dragon hide its always available, and the special material doesn't matter. The +1 adamantine greatsword is always available.

(as a side note, because the fame hits exactly on the pluses, ie, 8000 for a +2, even a masterwork club is in the next bracket. So special materials won't affect when they're available)

Did I do the right thing? How do you deal with culture differences when travelling, especially if those differences have rules issues?

Honestly, I'm even more of a stickler when traveling/at conventions.

In the local area Venture Officers are running a balancing act. Because we have the two objectives of promoting and regulating Organized Play. We want to teach people to do things the right way but we don't want to drive people away by being overbearing. So we end up making little accommodations here and there. Because the RPG community is fairly close-knit and we don't want players bad-mouthing PFS because "they're such jerks and only care about paperwork." I'm not talking anything gamebreaking, it's letting a player who didn't bring her chronicles once play her character anyway. It is a balancing act and unfortunately locales sometimes get into a situation where a rule becomes ignored because it has been let slip too often.

But when I'm traveling, I don't mind being the bad guy. I can come down hard on missing ITS, audit everybody, and disallow the hunter from using his companion beyond what an animal can do. I have no compunction about only giving one Fame if they didn't meet the secondary success condition. (Yes, I've had players tell me "but we always get 2 Fame here!") Because after I leave, the local VOs can say "he was right, and he probably won't be back." Hopefully the players learn something and start doing it the right way, but without making the local VOs the bad guys.

If you know being a stickler makes problems for local communities what on earth makes you think it doesn't cause problems for conventions? You know, where people without as pack mule are physically not able to bring everything with them?

We had to do an entire table audit here in Denver a few weeks ago. Some of us veterans kept noticing a few players having wierd numbers, items, feats, traits, etc... on their PCs over the past few months. Rather than single out certain individuals, the VOs decided on an "Audit for all players before playing at the FLGS in July". The players had to send the GM pics or files of their sheets so they could audit them. It was a wise decision. Oh! Those that submitted their sheets for audit were given a boon from the GM's or VO's collection. I got a Vine Leshy!

If you know being a stickler makes problems for local communities what on earth makes you think it doesn't cause problems for conventions? You know, where people without as pack mule are physically not able to bring everything with them?

You have attempted to slip a bare assertion fallacy in with a legitimate question so I'll separate them and answer.

You know, where people without as pack mule are physically not able to bring everything with them?

The items of discussion are "do you enforce/how do you enforce clearly defined rules when visiting a local area that does not enforce them?" Your second question is not a question but rather a statement that the rules themselves are unfair. In addition to being unsupported, it is not the topic of discussion.

If you know being a stickler makes problems for local communities what on earth makes you think it doesn't cause problems for conventions?

My argument is that being a "face" that is seen repeatedly in a locale can cause public relations damage when attempting to enforce a rule that has not been previously enforced. So if I am as much of a stickler at a local convention then you are correct and it is a problem.

But if I happen to go to a convention in, say, New Jersey (never have, just an example, maybe they're perfect in NJ) and enforce all the rules, then the players aren't going to be unhappy with a local, but with an outsider. The object of the unhappiness (me) has left, but it gives the locals an opportunity to begin enforcing rules now that someone has.

I'm speaking from personal situation. I moved to the DFW area a few years ago. Some things just simply were rarely done here. I have a stricter style as a GM and more than one player has complained about my "rules lawyering" and "I've never had to do that before." I'm in the right. But I'm a VL and one of the few constant GMs. I want to enforce the unique rules of OP. But I know if I do I'll drive off some players. And frankly we don't have the players to spare.

You have attempted to slip a bare assertion fallacy in with a legitimate question so I'll separate them and answer.

Horsefeathers. I did no such thing.

In addition to being unsupported, it is not the topic of discussion.

"Hey, 80 pounds of books is kinda hard to haul to a convention" is so obvious as to not require any support (except lumbar)

Hey, you might want to turn DOWN, not up, the persnicket level on that one to bend with the physical realities of travel is an opinion but not one that is remotely unreasonable.

But if I happen to go to a convention in, say, New Jersey (never have, just an example, maybe they're perfect in NJ) and enforce all the rules, then the players aren't going to be unhappy with a local, but with an outsider. The object of the unhappiness (me) has left, but it gives the locals an opportunity to begin enforcing rules now that someone has.

People are going to be mad at

You

BlueBerryCon*

The local PFS scene

PFS in general, if the con was their introduction to PFS

You leaving doesn't change most of that. This isn't hypothetical. People pop up on the boards, online and in person miffed over things like that. If it drives off local players locally its still going to drive people away from PFS at cons.

It gets even worse when you hit something thats a gray area, like what critters can and can't do.

Blake's Tiger wrote:

Locally, a relatively inexperienced player came with an enchanted adamantine weapon. He could afford it, but didn't have enough fame fior it.

We let his character continue with a non-adamantine version of his weapon and then the GM helped him settle his purchases after the game.

I'm assuming it was enchanted with something other than a simple +1? Because a +1 adamantine weapon has no Fame requirement (RPG Guide page 21).

Yes. It was a +2 adamantine great axe (11,300 gp + the price of a great axe), and the character had 25 fame (8,000 gp limit).

EDIT: And like the OP's situation, the player hadn't bother to tally his fame.

I'm always interested to discover that the correct answer to "someone's not following the rules" is "they deserve a pass because it would be mean to enforce the rules".

I have a local guy who shows up with characters that have literal monster templates because of this logic prevailing under the previous local VO.

Definitely calling the player on a pretty big break was the right thing to do. I assume it was all done reasonably diplomatically, and because of conventions and the like I do think nods towards our best attempts to follow the rules are to everyone's advantage in the long term.

If Society play has rules, than enforcing them ought not make the person doing so "The bad guy."

I'm always interested to discover that the correct answer to "someone's not following the rules" is "they deserve a pass because it would be mean to enforce the rules".

One can enforce the rules meanly.

The response in the OP's situation could have ranged anywhere from disqualifying the player from the table to stopping everything to audit and correct everything in that character's file and everywhere in between.

It's a balance between ensuring the rules are followed, correcting mistakes, being diplomatic, trying to make sure the one who you're correcting still enjoys his or her time, and ensuring that the game is not terribly disrupted.

In your local venue, once you develop that balance, it is easier to maintain. When you leave your local venue and head into other cultures, you need to make adjustments to your reaction to a rule violation on the fly. That situation is never going to be perfect, but so as long as it's done with some degree of consideration for the player's time and desire to play, then you're doing the best you can.

In your local venue, once you develop that balance, it is easier to maintain. When you leave your local venue and head into other cultures, you need to make adjustments to your reaction to a rule violation on the fly. That situation is never going to be perfect, but so as long as it's done with some degree of consideration for the player's time and desire to play, then you're doing the best you can.

The statement could easily be written:

"When you choose to play organized play, that has a specific set of rules, you may make some calculation errors and mistakes. It is quite common that your paperwork may not be perfect, but so long as you make a good faith effort to be considerate of all the other players' and the GM's time and desire to play/GM, then you are doing the best you can."

The onus is not always on the GM to be considerate of others.

Huh?

I'm not seeing the connection between your comment and my comment.

I'm simply talking about the challenges of being a GM auditing characters and making rulings on character errors. Saying that being considerate of the player in making on-the-fly rulings certainly does not also say the player has no responsibility to be considerate.

Did you want to turn the thread into bashing on players who make mistakes?

Huh?

I'm not seeing the connection between your comment and my comment.

I'm simply talking about the challenges of being a GM auditing characters and making rulings on character errors. Saying that being considerate of the player in making on-the-fly rulings certainly does not also say the player has no responsibility to be considerate.

Did you want to turn the thread into bashing on players who make mistakes?

Perhaps I misread it, but your post came awfully close to saying, "If you are coming from out of town, don't be too strict, because you don't know what rules the locals choose not the follow." Which isn't fair to any GMs coming from out of town, just like some local rules may not be fair to players coming from out of town.

The game is supposed to be played the same around the world. And if a local area is being too lax, that's on the VO's there, not GM's coming into the area.

Thank you all for providing some thoughts and feedback. There are definitely different considerations when travelling and I don't think anything is gained from being overly pedantic towards paperwork in PFS, but there is some basic stuff that's required, like making a good faith effort to keep your chronicle sheets up to date.

Back when I was VC I got into the habit of warning people at the beginning of the slot that I would need their ending info from their previous chronicle sheet to fill out the new one. Most people have the numbers, or occasionally are a chronicle sheet or two behind from earlier games at the con but understand and take a few minutes to sort it out.

Much more often than I would have guessed I run into people that haven't filled out their sheets at all. Most frequently they are players with their first low-level character who respond I have no idea how to fill these out I just get them thrown at me as we get shoved out the door of the local game store at closing time. In those cases we play and then take the time afterwards to get their sheets sorted out.

In general I would much prefer to let players play their own characters, fixing any mistakes as necessary or even taking care of them after the slot.

In this case a small error (not enough fame for a purchase) lead me to discovering a complete lack of proper record keeping. Given our conversation I was suspicious that there would be other errors, including total wealth that would take more time than I felt comfortable spending at that point resolving.

Just for some clarification after he mentioned the +1 keen weapon we got into a discussion about fame. Rather than look at his fame on his most recent chronicle sheet he attempted to figure it out based on his current level. After his logic got to an incorrect number he then flipped though his character's chronicle sheets and the starting and finished boxes for gold,xp,fame/prestiege along the right side did not appear to be filled out on any of the sheets I saw, although I didn't look through them myself.

I didn't see an ITS and don't think he had one but did not get to the point of asking to see one.

Blake's Tiger wrote:

Huh?

I'm not seeing the connection between your comment and my comment.

I'm simply talking about the challenges of being a GM auditing characters and making rulings on character errors. Saying that being considerate of the player in making on-the-fly rulings certainly does not also say the player has no responsibility to be considerate.

Did you want to turn the thread into bashing on players who make mistakes?

Perhaps I misread it, but your post came awfully close to saying, "If you are coming from out of town, don't be too strict, because you don't know what rules the locals choose not the follow." Which isn't fair to any GMs coming from out of town, just like some local rules may not be fair to players coming from out of town.

The game is supposed to be played the same around the world. And if a local area is being too lax, that's on the VO's there, not GM's coming into the area.

No, not at all. All I said was that it is harder for the GM to make all parties happy during character audits where mistakes are found when you're from out of town/a stranger to the culture.

I'm always interested to discover that the correct answer to "someone's not following the rules" is "they deserve a pass because it would be mean to enforce the rules".

Is Pathfinder Society that homogenized where you never run into a situation where you feel evil for enforcing the rules? I can think of three scenarios off the top of my head where I've kind of chucked the rules because they don't take into account issues people have. And the part that makes me leery about enforcing the rules like a hardliner is that the third scenario its impossible to tell why they would have issues unless you were told.

GM Tyrant Princess wrote:

I'm always interested to discover that the correct answer to "someone's not following the rules" is "they deserve a pass because it would be mean to enforce the rules".

Is Pathfinder Society that homogenized where you never run into a situation where you feel evil for enforcing the rules? I can think of three scenarios off the top of my head where I've kind of chucked the rules because they don't take into account issues people have. And the part that makes me leery about enforcing the rules like a hardliner is that the third scenario its impossible to tell why they would have issues unless you were told.

Depends on which rules weren't being followed. If the character looks/feels legit, and it literally doesn't matter to game play, then I will usually let it slide if I don't know the player (am in a new location.)

But if the player shows up with things not allowed, more stuff than they could possibly afford, a level 6 character for their first game playing, a Drow, Items above their fame allowance, and during the few moments I would have to try and help them sort through it all I find out they've been keeping zero records for their character...

Yeah, that isn't a time where I bend the rules, no matter what the reason might be. Sure, there are times to be lenient. And there are times not to be lenient. Common sense usually sorts out which is which.

MadScientistWorking wrote:

GM Tyrant Princess wrote:

I'm always interested to discover that the correct answer to "someone's not following the rules" is "they deserve a pass because it would be mean to enforce the rules".

Is Pathfinder Society that homogenized where you never run into a situation where you feel evil for enforcing the rules? I can think of three scenarios off the top of my head where I've kind of chucked the rules because they don't take into account issues people have. And the part that makes me leery about enforcing the rules like a hardliner is that the third scenario its impossible to tell why they would have issues unless you were told.

Depends on which rules weren't being followed. If the character looks/feels legit, and it literally doesn't matter to game play, then I will usually let it slide if I don't know the player (am in a new location.)

ITS sheets aren't filled out correctly and no tracking of prestige or fame. The record keeping rules are bad exclusionary and really don't work and its really hard to tell if it not being filled out is malicious or not at times.

Tallow wrote:

MadScientistWorking wrote:

GM Tyrant Princess wrote:

I'm always interested to discover that the correct answer to "someone's not following the rules" is "they deserve a pass because it would be mean to enforce the rules".

Is Pathfinder Society that homogenized where you never run into a situation where you feel evil for enforcing the rules? I can think of three scenarios off the top of my head where I've kind of chucked the rules because they don't take into account issues people have. And the part that makes me leery about enforcing the rules like a hardliner is that the third scenario its impossible to tell why they would have issues unless you were told.

Depends on which rules weren't being followed. If the character looks/feels legit, and it literally doesn't matter to game play, then I will usually let it slide if I don't know the player (am in a new location.)

ITS sheets aren't filled out correctly and no tracking of prestige or fame. The record keeping rules are bad exclusionary and really don't work.

I likely won't notice, because I don't audit characters at the table unless I'm asked to, or I notice something is significantly off.

I disagree with you that they are bad, exclusionary, and don't work. But I'd like you to explain how they are exclusionary. That doesn't track for me at all. I can see an argument for bad and don't work even if I disagree with it.

I try to take it on faith that the players are going to have legit characters. But once something comes up where I question that legitimacy, and in taking a closer look I notice they have no records, I can't then ignore that.

Auditing characters is a requirement for GMs in PFS per the Guide.

If anything is wrong and no time for adjustments or a more detailed review to get the character within the rules then switching characters to one that meets PFS rules is required.

Look over each player’s character sheet and most recent Chronicle sheets for accuracy. Identify any egregious

issues to the event coordinator to follow up on.

Auditing is no longer a requirement for a GM and hasn't been since I think Guide 6 or 7. Indeed, Guide 8 reinserted the above stronger language, where earlier guides made even doing that much merely a suggestion.

I likely won't notice, because I don't audit characters at the table unless I'm asked to, or I notice something is significantly off.

I disagree with you that they are bad, exclusionary, and don't work. But I'd like you to explain how they are exclusionary. That doesn't track for me at all. I can see an argument for bad and don't work even if I disagree with it.

Filling out paperwork is harder than you would think for an significant portion of the player base. Its something that is flagrantly obvious when you think about it but apparently not??? And I've hit some really unnoticeable cases of people who have a hard time doing that.

Filling out paperwork is harder than you would think for an significant portion of the player base.

In what way? Physical disabilities?

Tallow wrote:

I likely won't notice, because I don't audit characters at the table unless I'm asked to, or I notice something is significantly off.

I disagree with you that they are bad, exclusionary, and don't work. But I'd like you to explain how they are exclusionary. That doesn't track for me at all. I can see an argument for bad and don't work even if I disagree with it.

Filling out paperwork is harder than you would think for an significant portion of the player base. Its something that is flagrantly obvious when you think about it but apparently not??? And I've hit some really unnoticeable cases of people who have a hard time doing that.

If a player is brand new:

1) When I was VL and VC (over 5 years time), I likely knew who was new, and would ask them to show up about 30 minutes early so I could go over their first character with them. And I'd go over how to fill out the ITS right from the get go, and the chronicle after the game.

2) If I didn't get to meet with them early, I would likely be fairly lenient on them that first time unless things were completely out of whack as I noted a couple posts above.

3) If I'm in a new location, I won't know if they are brand new or not. I will try my best to assume the best always. But sometimes circumstances conspire to create an unfortunate situation.

4) If local leadership isn't willing to train their players on how to fill out paperwork, that's their own fault. But it doesn't mean that I just let some of the most egregious errors fly by because the players were set up for failure by their leadership. I will, however, do my best to be polite, pleasant, and empathetic to the player and do my best to make sure they get to play, if at all possible, with their own character.

You still haven't really given an example or valid reason for why requiring paperwork to be filled out is exclusionary. Just because, "a lot of players seem to have an issue with it," is more an issue of a lazy local culture, rather than an exclusionary issue.

ITS sheets aren't filled out correctly and no tracking of prestige or fame. The record keeping rules are bad exclusionary and really don't work and its really hard to tell if it not being filled out is malicious or not at times.

Can you please explain how these rules are exclusionary to those of us who don't see the problems you're referring to? Also, even if the record keeping rules are difficult for someone to follow isn't that more of a situation where members of the community who don't find it difficult can be of assistance rather than a reason to just ignore the rules? If I showed up to a game, and someone was having difficulty with some aspect of the game whether in character or with filling out their sheets I'd be happy to help them as would many others I'm sure.

I've found the new players often keep quiet about the problems they have in filling out paper work. A very quick scan usually identifies a need to find some time to help them. I tend to let them play but then talk them through afterwards. Usually find a number of innocent errors and a player happy to learn. an occasional audit can be a good thing but time can be an issue plus most mistakes I've seen are actually hurting the character although the +2 item is usually the give away a conversation is required.

This is more common than you think. Many people play PFS casually and show up at events with nothing but a folder of disorganized chronicle sheets. I've seen one guy who played nothing but pre-gens and never bothered to keep track of anything other than his character level.

Though, I personally don't fill out chronicle sheets either. Instead, I use a ledger that records fame, prestige, gp, and XP gained or spent. Much easier to audit and keep track of.

I've found the new players often keep quiet about the problems they have in filling out paper work. A very quick scan usually identifies a need to find some time to help them. I tend to let them play but then talk them through afterwards. Usually find a number of innocent errors and a player happy to learn. an occasional audit can be a good thing but time can be an issue plus most mistakes I've seen are actually hurting the character although the +2 item is usually the give away a conversation is required.

This is exactly why I suggested that Paizo has a table at GenCon for players to go to get help straightening out the paperwork. Unfortunately, they have not does this.

This is exactly why I suggested that Paizo has a table at GenCon for players to go to get help straightening out the paperwork. Unfortunately, they have not does this.
Maybe next year. But it is sorely needed.

Anyone who cares to have proper paperwork doesn't need such a table as they will get it sorted out through reaching out in other ways. Anyone who doesn't care to have proper paperwork will not seek out such a table, so either way I'm pretty sure such a table wouldn't get used very much.

Gary Bush wrote:

This is exactly why I suggested that Paizo has a table at GenCon for players to go to get help straightening out the paperwork. Unfortunately, they have not does this.
Maybe next year. But it is sorely needed.

Anyone who cares to have proper paperwork doesn't need such a table as they will get it sorted out through reaching out in other ways. Anyone who doesn't care to have proper paperwork will not seek out such a table, so either way I'm pretty sure such a table wouldn't get used very much.

LOL! Actually, I’d be at the table for 3 or 4 slots, I’d love to have someone double check my paperwork - in a non-confrontational way - as long as we aren’t burning someone else’s “game time”. Perhaps I could even pick up some new pointers on organizational habits...

I know I would point beginners at it as we wrapped up an Intro game - and if there were Beginner Boons and Chronicle Zero handouts, and maybe someone to offer pointers on character creation? Yeah - it would be a very busy table.

My problem is, I have 60 PCs, so it would easily take more than the 3 or 4 slots of to go over them all...

Tack a boon of some sort on it (call it a “Tax Audit”) and IMHO the table would stay busy the entire CON. But then you would need someone to man it - and that I don’t see happening. At least not by someone qualified to do the work needed.

In the OP situation, I don’t have an issue with how it was handled. There are other ways it could have been handled, but using a pregen is fine. I’d have probably just let them play with a +1 Weapon. Either way, I’d suggest following it up next time with offering to help them sort out their paperwork after the game. There isn’t typically time for that before the slot unless it’s specifically set up, so doing what best fits into the spirit of the rules to get the game going is fair to the table, not just the player in question. Helping the player after the game would probably go a long way to both correcting the problem and softening any hard feelings. It may be that there isn’t time after the scenario, either. In that case maybe talk to the organizer or local VO and see if they’ll set up time to help the player.

I’ve never had a personal experience of an audit at a con (for me or another player at a table I was at), but I have heard horror stories from PaizoCon where a GM spent half the session auditing characters and the table didn’t get past the first encounter of the scenario as a result. That just seems like a bad situation all around.

I have been involved in local audits. Sometimes prior to a big convention, a location will do a help session/audit so players showing up at the con representing the area have their paperwork in order. That’s been well received when I’ve seen it.

Online there are a few GMs who regularly request character sheets ahead of time. I’ve got no problem with that. Occasionally I’ve skipped signing up for a game because of it, but it’s usually because it’s a character I haven’t played online much, and it would take me a lot of time to convert the sheet to a digital format (I prefer not to send scans of my chicken scratch handwritten sheets).

Locally, we’re struggling to get enough players to make a table most weeks. We’ll point things out if we run across something wrong. Usually stuff like items that aren’t legal (potions of shield, etc.), but trying to get players to show up early for an audit or on a day we aren’t playing isn’t likely to help our already struggling situation. But we’re happy to help a player that wants to fix things.

I think the original poster did things right. They spotted a problem, then made some inquiries and were given reason to believe that a full audit would uncover more.

Asking them to play a pregen at that point seems a perfectly reasonable response.

LOL! Actually, I’d be at the table for 3 or 4 slots, I’d love to have someone double check my paperwork - in a non-confrontational way - as long as we aren’t burning someone else’s “game time”. Perhaps I could even pick up some new pointers on organizational habits...

I know I would point beginners at it as we wrapped up an Intro game - and if there were Beginner Boons and Chronicle Zero handouts, and maybe someone to offer pointers on character creation? Yeah - it would be a very busy table.

My problem is, I have 60 PCs, so it would easily take more than the 3 or 4 slots of to go over them all...

Tack a boon of some sort on it (call it a “Tax Audit”) and IMHO the table would stay busy the entire CON. But then you would need someone to man it - and that I don’t see happening. At least not by someone qualified to do the work needed.

This is fair. There are some people who would take advantage of such a thing but I think your idea of combining it with character creation is likely the way to go.

Back in the ye old times there used to be character creation tables, which could serve such a purpose. I know there are now Herolab character creation stations which are not precisely the same thing but maybe it makes sense to bring something like that back for 2nd edition playtest and second edition since they will be brand new.

They had a character creation seminar for Starfinder but not a dedicated staff table as far as I know (although maybe there was something and I'm misremembering.)

Off-topic but I actually have fond memories of Erik Mona helping me create my first character for 3rd edition which had just premiered at the character creation station at Gen Con 2000 and then playing River of Blood (which he wrote and is a whole story onto itself regarding what would fly today and what the controversy of the day was back then.)

I see no reason why something like this couldn't come back, but I wouldn't dedicate the table just to character 'audits' I would dedicate it to character creation and have the ability to audit and teach paperwork as a side effect.

nosig wrote:

LOL! Actually, I’d be at the table for 3 or 4 slots, I’d love to have someone double check my paperwork - in a non-confrontational way - as long as we aren’t burning someone else’s “game time”. Perhaps I could even pick up some new pointers on organizational habits...

I know I would point beginners at it as we wrapped up an Intro game - and if there were Beginner Boons and Chronicle Zero handouts, and maybe someone to offer pointers on character creation? Yeah - it would be a very busy table.

My problem is, I have 60 PCs, so it would easily take more than the 3 or 4 slots of to go over them all...

Tack a boon of some sort on it (call it a “Tax Audit”) and IMHO the table would stay busy the entire CON. But then you would need someone to man it - and that I don’t see happening. At least not by someone qualified to do the work needed.

This is fair. There are some people who would take advantage of such a thing but I think your idea of combining it with character creation is likely the way to go.

I'd also love such a service. While I feel pretty good about the legality of my PCs, I also know that it's what I don't know that will trip me up.

In response to the OP, we have the problem described with young players around these parts. Last week, I had to ask such a player to run a pregen because his chronicle sheets were a mess and didn't appear to enable the PC that he claimed he had.

You still haven't really given an example or valid reason for why requiring paperwork to be filled out is exclusionary. Just because, "a lot of players seem to have an issue with it," is more an issue of a lazy...

That's because your acting creepy and intrusive in regards to people I GM for? Just dam well accept it and stop acting like its some conspiracy.

He is not asking for personal information, he's asking for general examples. If you aren't comfortable sharing situations even stripped of private information, that's understandable. But don't expect us to accept 'it just is' as a valid reason.

Tallow wrote:

You still haven't really given an example or valid reason for why requiring paperwork to be filled out is exclusionary. Just because, "a lot of players seem to have an issue with it," is more an issue of a lazy...

That's because your acting creepy and intrusive in regards to people I GM for?

EDIT: No need to be too confrontational.

Ok, so here's the thing. Its hard to just take someone's word for it without some explanation of what you are referring to. I can make a ton of guesses and assumptions as to what you are talking about. But that wouldn't be fair either.

Personal Anecdote: I've GMd and helped players who have various learning disabilities and/or who are neuro-atypical. And sure, sometimes these folks may have more difficulty understanding how to fill out the paperwork. But as an organizer or GM in an organized play system, it behooves you to set aside the time necessary to help those people do things correctly.

Make sure they understand that you don't judge them, and be ultra patient and helpful with them. So that when they are heading off to a convention or a different lodge, they know they can come to you to help them get all their paperwork in order.

What you don't do is treat them differently insofar as the rules go, but just not enforcing the rules at all. Because now you may, or may not, have a level of trust where they would come to you and ask for your assistance. And they may go to another lodge or convention and be ill-prepared for the response when a GM or organizer doesn't know their personal situation.

Requiring paperwork is not exclusionary. Treating folks, who find doing so difficult through no laziness or fault of their own, differently by creating a paradigm by which the rules are not followed, absolutely creates an exclusionary situation. But that isn't the fault of the rules. That's the fault of the home lodge that doesn't help them maintain their records accordingly.

More random character audits should be conducted ... and there was the case when I saw a player couldn't justify the crunches of his character under a minute. And I might discover more surprises down the road.

Protecting a group is fine, but that's not what a GM is supposed to do. It is also to make sure the players play within the rules of the game.

Romari Sycamore wrote:

I've found the new players often keep quiet about the problems they have in filling out paper work. A very quick scan usually identifies a need to find some time to help them. I tend to let them play but then talk them through afterwards. Usually find a number of innocent errors and a player happy to learn. an occasional audit can be a good thing but time can be an issue plus most mistakes I've seen are actually hurting the character although the +2 item is usually the give away a conversation is required.

This is exactly why I suggested that Paizo has a table at GenCon for players to go to get help straightening out the paperwork. Unfortunately, they have not does this.

Maybe next year. But it is sorely needed.

At Kublacon one year I ran a table that was about society rules, paperwork, and auditing. It ended up being more useful for players new to pathfinder entirely to get introductions to the Golarion setting, but it helped a few people. But those most in need of audits generally used the time to keep playing at real tables.

He is not asking for personal information, he's asking for general examples. If you aren't comfortable sharing situations even stripped of private information, that's understandable. But don't expect us to accept 'it just is' as a valid reason.

I mean you pretty much guessed what the issue is and then are acting like its some mysterious thing that needs examples for. At that point you just want to rubberneck.

Partially, the reason why I am being so flippant about this is that most of the advice Tallow is giving is useless.

Thank you for answering my question.

I honestly don't know how an individual has trouble filling out chronicles but doesn't have trouble filling out a character sheet. Maybe electronic aids help, but that comes with its own issues of affording the electronics as well.