If replays have to sit out of tables because there are too many people that want to do replays, TOO BAD.
Regardless of other decisions we make in the future, "too bad" will never be something I'll consider when I'm thinking about how to get more people at each PFS event.
|
The subject says it all. I'm looking for a rational discussion with the Pathfinder Society community on this very topic. Are there specific reasons why you, the players and GMs of Pathfinder Society, would be opposed to allowing players to re-play Pathfinder Society scenarios? (And, to be clear, by re-play, I'm speaking of re-playing the scenario with another character, but if we want to discuss re-playing with the same character, by all means, let's do so.) On the flip side, are the specific reasons why you, the players and GMs of Pathfinder Society, would be in favor of allowing players to re-play Pathfinder Society scenarios?
I'd like to get a sense of the community. What say you? Should I or shouldn't I?
I would say no - at 28 scenarios a year, that is more than enough to play a different scenario each time. I can pillage the scenarios I purchase for home-campaign ideas too. :)
Once you play through a scenario, I wouldn't recommend permitting a "replay" any earlier than perhaps 2 years (replay season 0 in year 2 or 3 at the earliest) if at all.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I think Dan makes a good point, which meshes with the suggestions we've heard before.
Josh, some people have presented some good reasons why, under certain circumstances, it would be beneficial for new people to offer the opportunity for replays.
But not every scenario needs to be replayable. As Dan suggests, a scenario that plays very differently at Tier 1-2 than at other tiers --either because of different opponents' tactics, or perhaps even different reveals during the acts-- would allow experienced players to "replay" the scenario with new characters and still be surprised. This dovetails with the suggestion a couple of pages upthread, to build a few scenarios where random elements make replays a different experience.
(If we're making this concession for growing the PFS pool of players, for bringing new people into the fold, we only have to be concerned about low-tier adventures. Once somebody's played 6 scenarios, I'm not sure that the OP environment needs to be quite so accommodating ... )
Now, the trick to all this, is for GMs to make sure that somebody is ready to run one of these "replayable" adventures when needed. "Oops. We can't get everybody playing with their primary characters, and JoeBob's willing to run his lower-level PC, he's already run through the low-level adventure we were planning to use today. So, instead, we'll haul out that old 'Scenario #36: Time Loop in Cheliax' replayable scenario."
|
If replays have to sit out of tables because there are too many people that want to do replays, TOO BAD.Regardless of other decisions we make in the future, "too bad" will never be something I'll consider when I'm thinking about how to get more people at each PFS event.
If your only motivation is to get more people to play each PFS event, regardless if they are all replay or not, then I vote a massive NO to replays.
Filling out a table on a needs-only basis so that a table can play is one thing, having 4+ replays at a single table is something else.
----
If you want Pathfinder to spread, you need more people willing to step up and DM at different conventions or regularily at gaming stores. There have been 4 convention in my general area (that I know about) in the past month and no Pathfinder at any of them except the one I'm about to DM at. City population is in 6+ million range.
What aren't DMs stepping up in certain areas? I'm not sure what would motivate people to selflessly DM at conventions, maybe DM rewards or some kind of status symbol on the website?
When a DM puts his event into the event listing, they should try to label their game as "Pathfinder (D&D 3.75)" because a lot of people don't even know that Pathfinder is D&D, and that's a problem. Part of getting the game to grow is just getting the word out there.
|
|
Obviously those of us that believe in replays only because of where we live and the limit to the number of players we have, are a minority. I would love to live in a location where I didn't have to worry about replays. Consider yourselves lucky.
Now, if replays are not allowed, I foresee something similar to what I saw in LG happening. I personally know of several players who introduced their cat, dog, infant child, etc... to LG just so they could have enough players at the table. Their pets and children would have RPGA numbers and would even pass the DM test and be able to run the games. In this manner, you would have Fluffy run every game, get the DM credit, and your character would get full experience for playing the adventure. I've seen it happen in LG. It will happen in PFS if replays are not allowed. It probably already does.
It's easy to forget that some of us, albeit a minority, live in areas of the world where gamers are few and far between. I normally have to travel 2+ hours just to play once a month. As a father of three, that doesn't always work.
I would be okay with allowing replays for scenarios of the previous season, but not the current season. But I do need replays in order for us to be able to put a table together on a regular basis. My concern isn't for allowing new members into PFS, my concern is to keep those of us that are playing PFS, playing it, instead of leaving PFS for home campaigns and LFR.
|
|
I would say no - at 28 scenarios a year, that is more than enough to play a different scenario each time. I can pillage the scenarios I purchase for home-campaign ideas too. :)
As I've already found out the hard way, not all scenarios can be played at low levels. So that 28 per year is actually quite a bit less. Especially if you have new players stepping in. You can always make a new low level character, they can not make a high level character. And before you tell me they could play a pregen. Why would I play a pregen character and get no credit, and then not be able to play that scenario in the future with a legit character? Or am I misunderstanding the current rules?
|
I vote no to replays.
In fact, if they were allowed, I would poll the table if anyone had played the mod. previously. If at least one person replied in the affirmative, I would get up and play at another table where everyone was playing the mod. for the first time, if that possibility existed. The main reason for this would be to avoid metagaming chatter. Being an experienced player, it's hard enough to get challenged as it is...
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
I'm looking for a rational discussion with the Pathfinder Society community on this very topic
The only valid reason I see to prohibit you from replaying with a different character is to keep with Living Greyhawk tradition.
As it stands, the modules are purchasable products and nothing prevents one person from handing the PDF to another. So if the goal of "not allowing replay" is to "make sure the person playing the module has not read the module", then the goal will fail for all those folks wishing to know about a module.
So I don't see the difference in allowing players to play a module a second time with a different character and allowing a player to read the module before he plays it the first (and only) time he can play it.
In other words, not allowing replay doesn't prevent someone from knowing all there is to know about the module in a variety of ways (someone showed him the module pdf, he read a brain dump from a forum from someone who played, etc.) So the limitation doesn't help the cause.
1. You can only replay with a different character.
2. You cannot "spoil" the scenario for anyone who hasn't played it.
3. Replays should be rare and should only be used to insure a table (or a player) plays that wouldn't otherwise be able to play. For example, this would be like PFS's "soft" ceiling of 6 players and "hard" ceiling of 7.
1) Is a requirement in my mind. Allowing replay on the same character isn't needed and just simply doesn't make sense. Different characters are not the same person and could be thought of as in different universes.
2) Sadly, having this written down might be needed. It's common sense, but sometimes people don't exercise common sense.
3) I'm not sure I see this as a requirement.
|
|
As it stands, the modules are purchasable products and nothing prevents one person from handing the PDF to another.
Except something like copywrite laws.
So I don't see the difference in allowing players to play a module a second time with a different character and allowing a player to read the module before he plays it the first (and only) time he can play it.
Reading before you play is cheating.
I remember playing one particular Living Greyhawk module, I don't recall the name. We were transported to another plane. At the end of the mod, two or three of the other players 'volunteered' to stay back on the plane. It didn't make any sense. None of them were able as we had a table of 5. After I got the AR it sure looked as if they had read the mod. You got some really cool bonuses if you were the PC that was left behind. Reading ahead and prior knowledge can (not must) spoil a mod.
-Swiftbrook
Just My Thoughts
|
First of all, let me say this before I post my next question:
I HAVE NOT MADE UP MY MIND ON THIS ISSUE, NOR AM I MORE THAN PASSIVELY CONSIDERING SUCH A CHANGE TO THE SOCIETY. YOUR INPUT IS VALUABLE. PLEASE CONTINUE TO OFFER IT.
Now, that said, what if replay looked like this (condensed version):
1. You can only replay with a different character.
2. You cannot "spoil" the scenario for anyone who hasn't played it.
3. Replays should be rare and should only be used to insure a table (or a player) plays that wouldn't otherwise be able to play. For example, this would be like PFS's "soft" ceiling of 6 players and "hard" ceiling of 7.As others have mentioned above, we're allowing pregens to replay scenarios already in order to insure as many people as possible get to play. What do those opposed to replay see as the difference between pregen replay and replay with another character?
I'm genuinely curious
This is a tough question, and a good one.
Here's my take on it,I vote replays with different characters perhaps with specific or limited Scenarios & here are the reasons why;
1)The gaming group I am a part of has 9 players. Of which, 4 can get together to play with any real frequency. This creates problems when participating in the PFS since it leaves many of them multiple levels behind the core players.
2)Before the Pathfinder Society I was the primary gamemaster and ran once a week. I rarely got an opportunity to play except at conventions,which were few and far between.
3)Now with the release of the core book and the PFS DM rewards I have players who are stepping up to run games and I finally get an opportunity to play. Since the core book was launched, we have been playing twice a week and have attended a convention and have already completed 16 scenarios.
4)Not all 9 players have been available and are now behind. We currently have no replay option to help them catch up as we will run out of lower tiered scenarios before we can get them caught up & cannot play new characters to help them catch up.
So, we will have to have Dungeon Masters rerun for no credit and hope we can field enough players to fill a table out of the 5 semi-available left.
I realize we culd play another RPG or a different Pathfinder game however, if the PFS is what we all want to play & had revitalized our gaming group, why should another game be the only option?
Thank you
|
Obviously those of us that believe in replays only because of where we live and the limit to the number of players we have, are a minority. I would love to live in a location where I didn't have to worry about replays. Consider yourselves lucky.
Now that online play is allowed, wouldn't one strategy be to actively promote that then? Bring together the people who lack large enough local communities, and assist them in banding together virtually?
Online play is getting easier and easier -- with things like Fantasy Grounds and TeamSpeak, it's actually pretty slick. If there were a concerted effort to help people get up to speed on this, it might help drive more PFS play.
Director of Brand Strategy
|
Obviously those of us that believe in replays only because of where we live and the limit to the number of players we have, are a minority. I would love to live in a location where I didn't have to worry about replays. Consider yourselves lucky.Now that online play is allowed, wouldn't one strategy be to actively promote that then? Bring together the people who lack large enough local communities, and assist them in banding together virtually?
Online play is getting easier and easier -- with things like Fantasy Grounds and TeamSpeak, it's actually pretty slick. If there were a concerted effort to help people get up to speed on this, it might help drive more PFS play.
+1. We have been having fairly high level of success with the Pathfinder Society Online Collective on google groups. Right now we're trying to grow the number of GMs available to run games and players to play in them at varying times of day and days of the week. The more the merrier!
I dont want replay for one reason. I play the game for the story. Period.
|
|
Here's my suggestion:
1) Only allow replays of scenarios that have been out for at least a year. For example, scenario #29 could not be played as a replay until August 2010.
2) You must use a new character or pregen in order to play a replay.
3) You will only get GM credit for any replays, instead of full credit or no credit. If played with a pregen, you would get no credit.
4) A player is limited to replaying a scenario only once. (This may be a little harder to enforce.)
I think this would alleviate the concern of those who don't want a replay sitting at the table ruining the storyline for them. Which seems to be the biggest group against replays. You still have one year to get the scenario in before this would happen. It also allows those of us who have a limited number of players the chance to allow all players get involved whenever we get together, no matter what scenarios they may have played elsewhere. As far as those who post "No Replays!", there is nothing I would suggest that would make them happy, as I am for replays.
Just my thoughts.
|
|
First of all, let me say this before I post my next question:
I HAVE NOT MADE UP MY MIND ON THIS ISSUE, NOR AM I MORE THAN PASSIVELY CONSIDERING SUCH A CHANGE TO THE SOCIETY. YOUR INPUT IS VALUABLE. PLEASE CONTINUE TO OFFER IT.
Now, that said, what if replay looked like this (condensed version):
1. You can only replay with a different character.
2. You cannot "spoil" the scenario for anyone who hasn't played it.
3. Replays should be rare and should only be used to insure a table (or a player) plays that wouldn't otherwise be able to play. For example, this would be like PFS's "soft" ceiling of 6 players and "hard" ceiling of 7.
I was initially opposed to replays, as suitable only for "board games" like LFR and not story-driven roleplaying games like PS. But I admit I don't have a whole lot of LFR experience, so I followed up on this with a few friends of mine who do play LFR (two very active players and one active player/convention organizer). None of them currently play PS. These are smart guys whose opinion I value about the play environment as a whole.
They are unanimously and strongly in favor of replays. They each have a laundry list of good reasons for it (allows new players to level up to where their friends are, allows easier mustering in every environment (cons, game days, etc)., and removes worries that you'll play an adventure with the "wrong" character, to name the popular top three reasons). Each of my friends was dismissive of the "bad outcomes" of replays: the players who "power level" a dozen characters each in their basements are not people you're likely to see or play with (and, when you do, they are only playing one character at a time with *you*, so their massive stable of characters is irrelevant); the people who are likely to actively "spoil" scenarios for others are generally jerks you'll want to avoid anyway, and word about those sorts of players gets around fast.
I was quite surprised to see such strong approval of replays. Even more surprising, each was able to tell me that replays have worked out very, very well in LFR. LFR has its problems, they'll each admit, but replays is not among them.
So I'm changing my vote to "Please allow replays, even limited as you propose above."
|
|
I dont want replay for one reason. I play the game for the story. Period.
But nothing prevents you from adopting a personal "I won't replay adventures" policy, even if replays are permitted in the campaign. I will probably adopt just such a policy for myself, but I prefer to allow replays, as it seems it will help others and grow the campaign as a whole.
I was quite surprised to see such strong approval of replays. Even more surprising, each was able to tell me that replays have worked out very, very well in LFR. LFR has its problems, they'll each admit, but replays is not among them.
I don't find it surprising, considering what has been posted on this thread by LFR players. Only one seemed to have a bad impression of replaying (the DM who knew less about the module than the players who had played through it 5 times), and the rest seemed generally in favour.
|
|
I was quite surprised to see such strong approval of replays. Even more surprising, each was able to tell me that replays have worked out very, very well in LFR. LFR has its problems, they'll each admit, but replays is not among them.I don't find it surprising, considering what has been posted on this thread by LFR players. Only one seemed to have a bad impression of replaying (the DM who knew less about the module than the players who had played through it 5 times), and the rest seemed generally in favour.
That's a good point. I think it's significant that, even here in this thread, people that have actually experienced the only "replays allowed" campaign are voting "yes, allow replays, it's a good thing."
|
replaying...removes worries that you'll play an adventure with the "wrong" character... (and many other things I agree with)
I've kept my big mouth shut on this thread for a while, but I just ran into this. I played a scenario Saturday ([sarcasm]I'm up to FOUR now. I'm a veteran. You should listen to me.[/sarcasm]) for which I was rewarded the chance to buy Bracers of Armor +1. Unfortunately, I played that scenario with my ranger, not my wizard. At low tier (where the new players dwell), chronicle access to items seems to play a big part your overall item access.
Now this might lead to such metagaming thoughts as, "I want to play PFS scenario #85 again so I can get access to the Uber Sword of Special Destiny with my fighter instead of my wizard." Metagaming my irritate some people, but it's hard to argue with a sentence which starts off, "I want to play PFS..." One scenario I played granted access to a book called, "The Inward-Facing Circle" which is a really "flavorful" item with a minor game effect. I would love to buy that & use it in play sometime, but my barbarian played that scenario. He's not much of a reader. :( I also played a great Taldor scenario... that my Taldor character missed out on.
Legalizing replays would likely reduce the amount "wasted flavor" (where cool parts of a scenario are wasted on characters who are disinterested) and reduce the occurrence of people deciding to NOT play a scenario because they want to save it for the character who could actually use the rewards. To illustrate the latter part, here's an example:
There's a sub-tier 4-5 table of Scenario #74 that could use the help of your 4th level fighter. You have heard, though, that #74 rewards cool stuff for wizards, so you would rather wait until your 1st level wizard is high enough level. You could play up with the wizard, but with AC 11 and 7 hp, it seems too dangerous.
Now, the anti-replayers may say, "You shouldn't be snooping into what rewards are offered by scenarios!" If replaying were allowed, though, "chronicle chasing" would be unnecessary. You could always go back with your Andoran ranger if you ran across The Longbow of Freedom and Devil-Piercing with your Chelaxian wizard.
|
|
That's a good point. I think it's significant that, even here in this thread, people that have actually experienced the only "replays allowed" campaign are voting "yes, allow replays, it's a good thing."I was quite surprised to see such strong approval of replays. Even more surprising, each was able to tell me that replays have worked out very, very well in LFR. LFR has its problems, they'll each admit, but replays is not among them.I don't find it surprising, considering what has been posted on this thread by LFR players. Only one seemed to have a bad impression of replaying (the DM who knew less about the module than the players who had played through it 5 times), and the rest seemed generally in favour.
Yes but the majority of people who are against it are the ones who organize game days and GM tables.
It is easier to accept and like when you are a player you get more opportunities to play.
As an organizer I think the motive of the players needs to be considered. If it is truely to make a table then the pre-gen only replay should work for everyone. If the idea is to advance multiple characters through the same stories I have to suspect that the player will not abide by the non-interference rules discussed in this thread.
|
|
Yes but the majority of people who are against it are the ones who organize game days and GM tables.
I organize game days and GM tables a lot, and I'm in favor of replays. Of the 20+ adventures I've played, only 4 were played at an event I didn't organize. I've judged at least 8 or 10 times.
I intentionally sought a good cross-section for my personal "have replays been good for LFR?" poll. When I polled by LFR friends for their thoughts, I intentionally asked (i) a heavy LFR player, (ii) a heavy LFR GM, who also plays, and (iii) the organizer of the largest LFR cons in our area, who also plays and GMs. I avoided asking people who would answer "What's best for me is...".
|
|
I was quite surprised to see such strong approval of replays. Even more surprising, each was able to tell me that replays have worked out very, very well in LFR. LFR has its problems, they'll each admit, but replays is not among them.I don't find it surprising, considering what has been posted on this thread by LFR players. Only one seemed to have a bad impression of replaying (the DM who knew less about the module than the players who had played through it 5 times), and the rest seemed generally in favour.
Replays were one of the biggest turn offs of LFR for me. The games feel rushed to get another toon geared up. I miss the story telling and surprise that seems to get lost with several players replaying the module.
|
|
Yes but the majority of people who are against it are the ones who organize game days and GM tables.
Really? I'd like to see the data that you've collected to support your statement. I've seen some people say they are GMs, but I've also seen a lot of people just expressing their views without mentioning how many players they'll take with them when they take their ball and go home. If you have to rely on unsubstantiated claims to make your case...
It is easier to accept and like when you are a player you get more opportunities to play.
So... are you against players having more opportunities to play? Are you saying that GMs having more opportunities to GM is not a plus?
As an organizer I think the motive of the players needs to be considered.
Uh oh, I sense danger.
If it is truely to make a table then the pre-gen only replay should work for everyone.
If playing pre-gens for no credit was fine with everyone, we wouldn't need all this organized play structure. We would just play one-shot adventures set in Golarion. I think it's safe to say that playing a pre-gen for no credit is less satisfying than playing your own PFS character.
If the idea is to advance multiple characters through the same stories I have to suspect that the player will not abide by the non-interference rules discussed in this thread.
Are you saying that you would suspect that any replayer would spoil the story? If, as you say, their motives must be considered, does that mean you would turn people away because you think they might break the rules?
|
|
Replays were one of the biggest turn offs of LFR for me. The games feel rushed to get another toon geared up. I miss the story telling and surprise that seems to get lost with several players replaying the module.
Unfortunately, my experience with LFR (and I do have a bit of it having played over half the adventures up to date, and most of those I have replayed) is that they are just bad for roleplaying to start with. And always feel rushed because combat takes forever and gives you little time to roleplay. And even when you do have the opportunity to roleplay, its through a skill challenge and gets too stressful for anyone to enjoy.
Our group has begun playing PFS more often now instead of LFR because of the better written scenarios (in our opinion) and that your lv10 character feels different compared to when it was lv1. (Not just more hit points and a better AC and attack that progresses slower than the monsters.) But that's another discussion.
The comment I get from everyone is that they enjoy Pathfinder much more than 4E and want to continue their RPG habit with Pathfinder. I run the PFS/LFR portion of the local university gamedays (PFS is prefered) and find that if replay's are not allowed, we will eventually be unable to put tables together. It's a small university with a limited number of players. If we have new players show up and the existing players are higher level and have played all the low level adventures, what do we do? Or if someone misses a few game days and ends up a couple levels behind, how do you get them back up with the rest of the group without repeating adventures? These are a couple of the situations we find ourselves in because of our location and small group size. I don't have the perfect answer, and I don't think there is one. But we need to come up with a compromise that will benefit everyone, or almost everyone, without alienating a significant portion of the PFS players worldwide. I've previously posted my suggestion, and I think it would work as a good compromise without completely offending those who don't want replays. I even have a sneaky suspicion that if replays were allowed in some form, you would see some of those opposed to it doing it.
As an added comment, if you allow replays without giving some form of reward, that new player isn't going to get to play, because nobody is going to continually replay adventures without a reward. Especially in my situation where people are driving a minimum of 60 miles to play. They don't want to have to spend the entire day playing pregens just so one or two people can begin a new character. Now, they will do it once in a while, but if it begins happening more often they'll either quit coming or just tell that new player not to even bother sitting down. And we don't want either of those things to happen.
Just my thoughts.
|
|
Yes but the majority of people who are against it are the ones who organize game days and GM tables.Really? I'd like to see the data that you've collected to support your statement. I've seen some people say they are GMs, but I've also seen a lot of people just expressing their views without mentioning how many players they'll take with them when they take their ball and go home. If you have to rely on unsubstantiated claims to make your case...
"I can read the thread Bob can you? Look at the people who have said they are against replays. You have me the head of the NY group with 100+ tables logged to date. You have the organizers from Finland who Josh has said is one of his benchmark groups. You have Yoda8myhead who created the Pathfinder Wiki and there are others. That is some serious support
Do you run a game day do you worry about lining up judges and mustering players week in and week out?"
It is easier to accept and like when you are a player you get more opportunities to play.So... are you against players having more opportunities to play? Are you saying that GMs having more opportunities to GM is not a plus?
"I am saying that what is the point of playing if it is the second or third time around for some players. Pathfinder is about the story."
As an organizer I think the motive of the players needs to be considered.Uh oh, I sense danger.
"More like experience"
If it is truely to make a table then the pre-gen only replay should work for everyone.If playing pre-gens for no credit was fine with everyone, we wouldn't need all this organized play structure. We would just play one-shot adventures set in Golarion. I think it's safe to say that playing a pre-gen for no credit is less satisfying than playing your own PFS character.
"So is playing the same mod multiple time Bob"
If the idea is to advance multiple characters through the same stories I have to suspect that the player will not abide by the non-interference rules discussed in this thread.Are you saying that you would suspect that any replayer would spoil the story? If, as you say, their motives must be considered, does that mean you would turn people away because you think they might break the rules?
"I am saying it is not worth the risk Bob. If someone cheats then yes I would turn them away."
|
|
I am posting this without reading anything other than Mr. Frost's first post.
Here is our situation. We have a small group and usually can only barely get the minimum number of players to play. There are two of us who are DMs and we would both like to advance our characters. But if we have to DM a scenario then we miss out on advancing our characters.
I hope that makes sense. If we can re-play with new characters, then the other players in our group who have already played a scenario can play the game again so the guy who DMed it can play it too.
|
Director of Brand Strategy
|
I am posting this without reading anything other than Mr. Frost's first post.
Here is our situation. We have a small group and usually can only barely get the minimum number of players to play. There are two of us who are DMs and we would both like to advance our characters. But if we have to DM a scenario then we miss out on advancing our characters.
I hope that makes sense. If we can re-play with new characters, then the other players in our group who have already played a scenario can play the game again so the guy who DMed it can play it too.
You do know that you now get full XP, half gold and half prestige for any scenario you run before having played it, right?
No I didn't.So if I DM a scenario, my character gains all that? Awesome. Thanks.
If you DM a scenario that you've never played before, yes. But if you've played that scenario already, you don't get anything.
|
|
You do know that you now get full XP, half gold and half prestige for any scenario you run before having played it, right?
Full XP, half gold, and 1 prestige. It looks like half because all Season 1 scenarios should have 2 prestige, but you get 1 prestige as a DM regardless of the number available in the scenario.
I am completely against replay in *regular* game play!
If replay is approved I suggest the following:
If there was a specific set of modules, the equivalent of "intro mods" in LG, that were ONLY apl 1-2 and the rules for them *explicitly* said that those were repayable, I could give that much.
This would provide extra play opportunities for *new* players (after all that is the main augment for replay) and the "regular" play would remain the same.
You do know that you now get full XP, half gold and half prestige for any scenario you run before having played it, right?No I didn't.
So if I DM a scenario, my character gains all that? Awesome. Thanks.
Read the GM chapter in this free PDF that I hope everyone is downloading and reading ESPECIALLY if they're the GM.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Reading all the way through this thread again, I have a recommendation, Josh:
Don't take half-measures. If you think that allowing replays under certain circumstances will solve some problems, then I recommend you allow replays in all the circumstances necessary to solve all the relevant problems.
For example, some people have suggested allowing players to replay a module, but only once. That's a bad idea.
So, in January, a local gaming club plays Scenario #49 (a 4-10 Tier adventure) as 4th - 6th Level. Russel is the GM, and Christopher, Billie, David, and Noel play their characters, who are now 7th Level.
In February, some new people (Catherine and Freema) show up with 5th Level characters. The club doesn't have any new scenarios available for those characters, and Catherine and Freema aren't willing to play either new 1st-Level PCs nor 7th-Level iconics. So, Russel hauls out Scenario #49, and Christopher and Billie play their secondary 4th-Level characters, replaying the adventure.
So, here comes March. Neither Catherine nor Freema show up, but two new players, John and Kylie, come in with their 9th-Level PCs. Sad to say, nobody knew they were coming and had prepared a high-level adventure for them. They could play in Scenario #49 (Russel is a saint, I tell you) but that would require Christopher and Billie to play the adventure for a second replay, and for them to be using their high-level characters, who've already experienced the 4th-6th subtier. And, you know, I'd bet they're getting frustrated with their characters getting, at best, reduced rewards month after month.
This isn't an outlandish, corner-case scenario. New people pop in and out of gaming clubs all the time. If the PFS allows replays at all, it should allow replaying scenarios in a loose enough way to accommodate this kind of situation.
Personally? So far, I haven't seen any argument that's convinced me that replays are a better option than playing iconics.
I am for it with some conditions.
1. Same character can't play the same adventure twice. Even better would be not allowing players to play at the same level.
2. Player can't influence the game by giving away spoilers.
3. No more then 1/2 the players at the table can have done the mod before.
Some of my conditions are to limit Cheating.
A group of players were playing a LFR mod at a LGS while I was playing miniatures at the table next to them. After they finished I saw them agree with each other that they would just all say the each ran the mod for each other again and then count the mod to help level up their characters.
I am not sure how you stop this but I wouldn't want the results skewed for the factions.
I also think replays should be allowed. Obviously with a different character but also should be a different faction. I also am fine with full rewards.
I've played LFR for the last year or so and have gone out of my way to make sure I'm not replaying a module. Just about all the players I've seen are doing the same. I am gratefull however that should the need arise I can replay a mod with one of my other characters.
When your sitting down to a table with 6 people at a games day who play regularly and you don't normally game with theres a pretty good chance that at least 1 of you will have played the mod before. (I should also note that the way games are done here is you get allocated a table and the gm then picks the mod to be played while trying to get one nobodies played.)
|
I think replaying scenarios should *not* be an option for Pathfinder Society. The scenarios are story-based so the person replaying it will just sit by to play the combats? I don't understand why someone would want to sit down, quiet and uninvolved, until it's time to roll initiative. If the reason to create replay rules is to fill out a table that's short a seat I say toss that detail over to the coordinators at the game days to figure out. I run A Gathering of Players in metro-Phoenix. I sometimes get stuck in 7-player sign-up situations and don't feel replay rules is the way to fix the issue. Also, if replays were allowed I can see it becoming a burden for the coordinators. There are many people who are only players and who are not involved as coordinators or judges (which is fine, no issue there), but, I can foresee demands on the coordinators and regular judges by these play-only players to run the scenarios again so they can get credit on another PC. Makes me shiver actually because there is a lot of work to run regular game days. If there are people out there saying they want replays so they can get exposure to play a different race/class then just create it and play it at the next, new scenario run. Or play Paizo's Adventure Path's and Gamemastery modules.
I know there's a lot of assumptions on people's motivations who want replays. They do not apply to everyone but I do believe they apply to some degree.
|
The grudge I've kept having about replays is not the issue with other people coming and playing something they played already. Some who have read every post noticed the infamous Team Finland is already against replays, and as a localized community and a similar mindset we wouldn't have to accept that in our home games. So it's not much of a problem seeing people who, for some really odd reason, want to play tabletop games like any MMORPG. Okay, sure, give them a chance.
But please don't let that affect the scenario quality. The last thing I want to see is an increasing absence of plot-driven scenarios. I feel the need to press the issue as particular kinds of murder mysteries and other investigations would become idiotically easy and boring if too much caution is taken. This is my only fear in allowing replays.
So I shift my position to 'indifferent', as long as the scenarios don't suffer with replays.
|
|
I think replaying scenarios should *not* be an option for Pathfinder Society. The scenarios are story-based so the person replaying it will just sit by to play the combats? I don't understand why someone would want to sit down, quiet and uninvolved, until it's time to roll initiative. If the reason to create replay rules is to fill out a table that's short a seat I say toss that detail over to the coordinators at the game days to figure out. I run A Gathering of Players in metro-Phoenix. I sometimes get stuck in 7-player sign-up situations and don't feel replay rules is the way to fix the issue. Also, if replays were allowed I can see it becoming a burden for the coordinators. There are many people who are only players and who are not involved as coordinators or judges (which is fine, no issue there), but, I can foresee demands on the coordinators and regular judges by these play-only players to run the scenarios again so they can get credit on another PC. Makes me shiver actually because there is a lot of work to run regular game days. If there are people out there saying they want replays so they can get exposure to play a different race/class then just create it and play it at the next, new scenario run. Or play Paizo's Adventure Path's and Gamemastery modules.
Kudos to you for coordinating, Rene. I see that you do post the scenarios which you plan to run on Warhorn. Do you have an idea of how many people decide not to come down to the Inn because they have already played the offered scenario for that slot? For instance, you probably know a number of the players who regularly attend. Do they call you to let you know when they aren't coming?
I get the sense that you feel that if replaying were allowed, all these replayers would clamor for scenarios to be rerun so they could level up different characters. Are you worried they will want these reruns in addition to the two (presumably) new scenarios you run each month, thus burning out you and your judges? I assume that's the case because I find it hard to believe someone would want to skip playing the new one in order to replay an old one. So why not tell them (or put in your Warhorn overview message) that the current judges are maxed out? If people want reruns/additional slots run, some new judges are going to have to step up. Maybe that would be enough to nudge some of those folks who only play to try their hand at GMing.
I share your fear (if I interpreted it correctly, that is) though. Losing GMs is the worst possible result. As much as I have heckled the honorable gentlemen from Finland about "taking their ball and going home", losing a GM has a LOT greater impact on the amount of PFS that gets played than losing a player. If replaying causes issues which affect all GMs, then those will need to be addressed.
I know there's a lot of assumptions on people's motivations who want replays. They do not apply to everyone but I do believe they apply to some degree.
I think your assumptions are pretty applicable. I hold my stance on the issue (I think replays should be allowed) because I think it will allow more PFS play. However, I am personally motivated to engage in replaying to level another character, as you suggest. The first character I played is a barbarian on track to be a dragon disciple. I also have a Chelaxian conjurer (the crunch and fluff for such a character in PFS/Golarion is just too cool to pass up) starting out. Yes, I can play the conjurer in new scenarios instead of the barbarian, but there are several reasons not to:
- If I slow the advancement of the barbarian to a crawl, it could be years before he ever gets to his prestige class, and frankly, I'm impatient. Who knows? I might get a job which precludes PFS play. I could grow tired of PFS. I could get hit by a bus. My nerd-dream of breathing fricking lightning on some doods would never be fulfilled.
- I don't currently have any characters who can (safely) play in higher tiers. This has caused me to play PFS less often. This Saturday evening at Fields of Honor scenarios 10 and 32 are offered. Neither of those*** can be played by my first level characters, so I'm missing out on some PFS play because of the bad combination of my characters' levels and the scenarios offered.
- Of the 32 scenarios offered, only 22 of them can be played below 5th level. So, it is currently only possible to have one character beyond 4th level. Once you play 8 scenarios with one character, no other character can make 5th.
- If trying other character concepts means that my characters don't advance much, then they become static and a little bit more like playing pregens. To me it seems like PFS is currently only set up to allow each player to play ONE character to its fullest. Is that what's best? I guess I should have put a little more thought into which character I wanted to be my "main".
***
|
|
Keeping it simple...
Replaying removes all the obstacles to play regarding "Who still needs what?", "Who can run something the rest of us haven't played?", and "Is there a module that one of us can run that the rest of us hasn't played at a character level we can all play in?"
Then we have to add the obstacle of "Can I safely purchase this module? Do I know that I'll have a table when game night arrives?"
And those are gigantic obstacles to play. Any measure to remove them will lead to a more successful campaign. Allowing replaying, fortunately, removes them all. It's no longer is a detriment to have to eat a module, because you'll get to play it later. (The current GM rewards are a detriment, by the way.) It's no longer a detriment to bring a new player into your group and play a one-shot L1 PC with him, as you can still play that module with the PC you're focused on later. And of course, it means that a playgroup can actually play, as the obstacles of finding a module that works for the group are gone.
As a rebuttal, we have the issue of the story being spoiled for the replayer. Well, as long as the Pathfinder Society module consist of simple hack-n-slash adventures with storylines as complex as an MMO sidequest, there's really not much to be spoiled, is there?
Thus, for the side of not-replaying to be valid... the modules have to start including more in-depth stories. And that would be nice.
Until then, bring on the replay. It'll make for a more successful campaign, and lead to more book sales, plain and simple.
-Matt
|
|
The grudge I've kept having about replays is not the issue with other people coming and playing something they played already. Some who have read every post noticed the infamous Team Finland is already against replays, and as a localized community and a similar mindset we wouldn't have to accept that in our home games. So it's not much of a problem seeing people who, for some really odd reason, want to play tabletop games like any MMORPG. Okay, sure, give them a chance.
Ooo, them's fightin' words, mister!
But please don't let that affect the scenario quality. The last thing I want to see is an increasing absence of plot-driven scenarios. I feel the need to press the issue as particular kinds of murder mysteries and other investigations would become idiotically easy and boring if too much caution is taken. This is my only fear in allowing replays.
I plan to submit a scenario for the Open Call, and I can tell you I have no intention of just stringing some combats together. I have been dismayed by the number of 2- & 3-star-reviewed scenarios offered. These are Paizo products, for Heaven's sake! However, doing something about it is probably more productive than my *****ing about it, so I'll see what I can come up with.
So I shift my position to 'indifferent', as long as the scenarios don't suffer with replays.
Wow... I didn't expect that. I thought the Finnish PFS community would stop playing entirely if replays were allowed, but perhaps you didn't say that. My memory is pretty poor - another reason I'm not worried about replays spoiling the story for me! :D
(I am SO using an alias if I ever go to www.ropecon.fi)It might be only a low-level phenomenon, but it seems like you get equipment faster through chronicle access, rather than faction prestige. My wizard plays one scenario (okay, two scenarios to get enough gold) and gains access to bracers of armor +1, but only if he plays that specific scenario. Otherwise, he has to play nine scenarios to get access through his faction. Looking at one of my other chronicles, a 4th-5th level character could get access to +2 full plate armor, which could otherwise take 22 scenarios (7th level) to acquire via faction PA. I remain unconvinced that chronicle access is pointless. To me, it clearly impacts character advancement. Plus, it's cooler to wield a greataxe which you wrestled from the grasp of a flea-bitten gnoll... than to wield the axe you bought from MagicMart.
Bracers of armor +1 are an improvement over no armor at all, which is what my wizard currently wears. Yes, BoA +2 (or +8) would be better, but he doesn't have the gold or the access for those. Mage Armor gives a better bonus but takes a round to cast, while bracers are always on.
Edit: Mattastrophic, that was a brilliant post.