|
We want to identify good GM practices and good GMs. We hope to be able to have some of these folks run seminars on good judging, compile some tips, and offer amazing play experiences for Pathfinder Society events all over the world.
I'm still a beginner DM myself, so any seminars put on by 5-Star GMs are seminars you'll likely see me attending, if and when at all possible. I still find myself reading the GM section of the Core Rulebook time and again, looking for new ways to expand my skills, but I would definitely attend such seminars.
Question though, if I run lets say a game or two at GenCon and get seen by Josh, will there be a "report card" to let me know if what I should improve to get that 5th star or something like it?
Even if I'm a 1-star GM, I'd love to get critiques from Josh or another 4/5-star GM. A 'report card' would be exceedingly helpful.
EDIT: Also, I absolutely love the new changes, Josh! I'll be looking forward to the Phase 2 and 3 changes!
|
Josh, Erik and the rest....awesome job. Even if someone doesn't like all the changes, they have to admit you guys at least care about the state of the game and are consistently and honestly listening to the playerbase...something specific other RPG companies can't even come close to claiming!!
Personally though, I love the changes...especially the gold amount for GMs and the replay -- here's to hoping the spirit of that does stay true!
|
Josh, Erik
Great changes - I like them a lot, As a one game reported GM (Dragonmeet where I took not only the plunge to GM in organized play my first time but also to organize) I guess my next big goal will have to be the first star.
Getting to more stars I guess I will have first to do a TPK on my home campaign. I've converted my wife to play and enjoy Pathfinder - but the rest of the group is still reluctant. Well - just a matter of time.
Yes - the UK can be challenging to get up the star ranking - no known players apart of my wife for me in a 100km radius. But I guess this is the whole idea.
And if everything fails - my kids are now slowly growing up into an age to play. I tried D&D last year and they had lots of fun and actually great roleplay ideas - just not yet the concentration span. Maybe a fallback plan.
If nothing else - it also helped me to check out the conventions in the next month. So one day, one day ...
Thod
Venture-Agent, Virginia—Hampton Roads
|
We want to identify good GM practices and good GMs. We hope to be able to have some of these folks run seminars on good judging, compile some tips, and offer amazing play experiences for Pathfinder Society events all over the world.I'm still a beginner DM myself, so any seminars put on by 5-Star GMs are seminars you'll likely see me attending, if and when at all possible. I still find myself reading the GM section of the Core Rulebook time and again, looking for new ways to expand my skills, but I would definitely attend such seminars.
Question though, if I run lets say a game or two at GenCon and get seen by Josh, will there be a "report card" to let me know if what I should improve to get that 5th star or something like it?Even if I'm a 1-star GM, I'd love to get critiques from Josh or another 4/5-star GM. A 'report card' would be exceedingly helpful.
EDIT: Also, I absolutely love the new changes, Josh! I'll be looking forward to the Phase 2 and 3 changes!
The issue of the "report cards" for GM's came up a few times in the past. I don't think Paizo staff could really manage that as a system as it is a subjective and the staff would need to observe at least a whole session and when is the last time you saw the paizo staff still that still at a convention? I think they might be able to give an unofficial critique but to make it a system is just to much to handle and keep up with deadlines.
|
|
The issue of the "report cards" for GM's came up a few times in the past. I don't think Paizo staff could really manage that as a system as it is a subjective and the staff would need to observe at least a whole session and when is the last time you saw the paizo staff still that still at a convention? I think they might be able to give an unofficial critique but to make it a system is just to much to handle and keep up with deadlines.
Awww.
But you're probably right. I'm sure if I do something wrong, the more experienced players will point something out.
|
Venture-Agent, Virginia—Hampton Roads
|
The issue of the "report cards" for GM's came up a few times in the past. I don't think Paizo staff could really manage that as a system as it is a subjective and the staff would need to observe at least a whole session and when is the last time you saw the paizo staff still that still at a convention? I think they might be able to give an unofficial critique but to make it a system is just to much to handle and keep up with deadlines.Awww.
But you're probably right. I'm sure if I do something wrong, the more experienced players will point something out.
A good player shouldn't point that out in mid game. The player should do that after a game so you don't disrupt the flow of events and possibly ruin the other players and / or GM's fun.
|
|
A good player shouldn't point that out in mid game. The player should do that after a game so you don't disrupt the flow of events and possibly ruin the other players and / or GM's fun.
The issue of the "report cards" for GM's came up a few times in the past. I don't think Paizo staff could really manage that as a system as it is a subjective and the staff would need to observe at least a whole session and when is the last time you saw the paizo staff still that still at a convention? I think they might be able to give an unofficial critique but to make it a system is just to much to handle and keep up with deadlines.Awww.
But you're probably right. I'm sure if I do something wrong, the more experienced players will point something out.
I've never run into that problem yet, but you make a good point.
|
Venture-Agent, Virginia—Hampton Roads
|
Granted it has been a while sense i played it but why is #10: Blood at Dralkard Manor being retired? I know why the other one is (i still like that adventure!) but nothing of #10 hits the "oh yeah, that's why" button.Josh has said that they don't want to discuss the specifics. I think, though, that it may have something to do with the fact that almost none of the encounters play quite out "as designed" under the Pathfinder rules set, making it wildly difficult to update. Since it's basically just a mediocre dungeon crawl, there's nothing that really justifies the massive amount of work that would be needed to update it. Other than that, it just happens to be on the chopping block first.
I just figured Hydra's fang woud have gone first.
I can't tell you how many TPK's we had on the at the beggining.....on a few row boats.
|
|
Josh and cast,
Thanks for these Phase 1 changes. They will go a long way for our local group of gamers. (And when I say local, I'm including a 150 mile radius) Some of us get to conventions while most don't, mainly because conventions happen 12+ hours away. These changes will allow us to play more scenarios and not have to skip a bunch just because two or three people played it at a convention only they went to. The changes will also allow the few GM's we have keep their characters on a level playing field with those who don't GM in our group. (I was seeing GM characters with half the gold and PA at level 4 and 5 in our group. Makes it tough to keep up on the output curve.)
Thanks again, and keep up the great work! Love the changes thus far.
|
|
We're still having problems with the "Play, Play, Play" rule.
We tried for a day back in December; we played the first two sessions of "The Devil We Know" arc and the guy I got to DM for us decided DMing wasn't what he wanted to do. His prerogative.
I think I can get us going again but I have a question regarding the new rule:
A GM now gets full credit for his character when GMing a scenario. "Full credit" means the GM gets the following:
* +1 XP
* 100% of the max gold for the tier most appropriate to his character (see below)
* Full Prestige per scenario (see below)The GM still does not get any special boons bestowed by a chronicle sheet such as free magical treasure, regional boons, or future bonus dice rolls.
If I end up DMing for our Society sessions can I use my Society PC as the DM-run pregen PC/NPC to make a minimum legal table (and Play, Play, Play)?
My character would NEVER give any advice or make decisions (as per DM-run pregen NPC/PC rules) and would only earn GM credit for the Scenario (no special boons, etc.). He would only roll dice.
If I'm DMing the Scenario then my PC's gonna be getting the GM credit anyway, at least this way he can actually be present. I gotta run a DM-run character anyway cuz we gotta have 4 PCs. I don't want my PC "sitting on the bench" while I play some pregen character!
Certainly, if we ever can expand to make a table minimum without having a DM-run NPC/PC, my PC will be left out (and just earn the GM credit without being there).
If I end up DMing for our Society sessions can I use my Society PC as the DM-run pregen PC/NPC to make a minimum legal table (and Play, Play, Play)?
This is one instance where I don't want to cross the streams. You will likely get credit for your character in this instance, but the GM-played character in the case of a 3-player table is (a) a silent partner and (b) shouldn't have any attachment to the GM. If I allowed GMs to play their characters in sessions, it opens the door to a bunch of drama I want to avoid. So, no. Please use a pregen if you're forced to play a character as a GM at a 3-person table.
And for all of you who loved #10, why didn't you review it and express that you loved it? ;-)
|
Venture-Agent, Virginia—Hampton Roads
|
And for all of you who loved #10, why didn't you review it and express that you loved it? ;-)
two easy answers for that.
1. There isn't enough time to write the reviews your products have eanred.
2. Have you not read my few post on here? My english is terrifying. It requires will saves to attempt and its is my primary lanuage.
|
|
This is one instance where I don't want to cross the streams. You will likely get credit for your character in this instance, but the GM-played character in the case of a 3-player table is (a) a silent partner and (b) shouldn't have any attachment to the GM. If I allowed GMs to play their characters in sessions, it opens the door to a bunch of drama I want to avoid. So, no. Please use a pregen if you're forced to play a character as a GM at a 3-person table.
Understood, thanks.
(Now I'm off to find someone else I can con into DMing these things for my {small} group.)
|
I just figured Hydra's fang woud have gone first.Hydra's Fang doesn't have a monster, feat, or tactic with significant alterations between 3.5 and Pathfinder in every single encounter. Dralkard Manor does.
If the criteria for conversion vs retirement is "how easy is the scenario to convert?", fair enough. However, if the criteria is "how did each scenario review?", then I'd expect Dralkard Manor to receive worse reviews due to the potential for TPK and, as I recall, some potential confusion between a couple of the faction missions. I think Dralkard was a much more engaging scenario than Hydra's Fang, and a conversion could be just what it needs to address the TPK factor, clean up the faction missions, and gain the credit it truly deserves.
When I played #10, we saw that particular thing and decided there was nothing that we wanted there.
I've GMed Dralkard a few times, and most recently the group spotted that particular thing and I suggested they could avoid it entirely by just closing the door and walking away (strongest GM hint evaaar!) Unfortunately, the players were convinced one of the hauntings lead into this room, and thus had to investigate it, and suffered the consequences.
This encounter could have been designated an "optional" encounter to save precious play time and avoid TPK. Unfortunately, this is the first encounter most groups will face, which will cripple their morale and resources for the remainder of the scenario. Note: the scenario requires an overnight stay, so there is opportunity to regain hit points, spells and other daily resources, though players are still going to need all the help they can get.
I do think it is unfortunate that Blood of Dralkard Manor is being retired. That was one of my favorite modules as it was one of the only ones where I felt empowered as a player to tackle the situation rather than wait for "roll for initiative" to be said by the GM. Too many of the modules make the players very passive, waiting for encounter triggers to occur, but this more "sandboxy" module was a lot of fun with an old school feel.
I completely agree, and couldn't have said it better myself. I also find this one of the most entertaining scenarios to GM, because the players can approach it from so many different angles, depending on what order they deal with the encounters, to potentially orchestrating their own ambush (one group wore bed-sheets to add their own "hauntings" to the manor!) This is indeed a scenario that never plays the same way twice, and isn't that the appeal that drew many of us to the hobby in the first place?
Director of Brand Strategy
|
I imagine this sort of debate is exactly why Josh doesn't want to reveal the decision-making process for retiring scenarios. No matter what reasons are given, people are always going to have their own subjective take on an adventure, or their own personal experiences with it.
|
|
I imagine this sort of debate is exactly why Josh doesn't want to reveal the decision-making process for retiring scenarios. No matter what reasons are given, people are always going to have their own subjective take on an adventure, or their own personal experiences with it.I fully appreciate that. Though Josh himself asked:
And for all of you who loved #10, why didn't you review it and express that you loved it? ;-)
It may not change anything to express our views after the fact, but at least it gets it off our chest.
|
|
And for all of you who loved #10, why didn't you review it and express that you loved it? ;-)Actually, there are many reasons:
- Time and effort preparing a coherent review;
- Me developing a consistent review format (eg, what are those stars worth?);
- Book reviews are something I hated at high school; internet ranting comes natural!
- Want to avoid giving away spoilers;
- If a scenario didn't run well, was it a bad scenario, or was the GM (in many cases, myself) just having a bad day? Eg, King Xeros of Old Azlant has five star rating after only one review, but my group found themselves verging on TPK after each frustrating encounter, and the techno-references in-game really out-of-character. Based on that experience, I'd rate it only one star! (sorry _Metz_). Does a scenario deserve a bad review after just one play? Scenarios often run much better the second time you GM them (this is why I Slot Zero scenarios with my home group before running them at a convention). I've been waiting for an opportunity to read King Xeros myself to see if there's anything I'd run differently, filing off the rough edges, maybe it is a good scenario?
Maybe I should take a more active role in Paizo product reviews. I'm a Superscriber, and run a lot of scenarios (chasing my third star). I'll give this some more thought ...
|
|
Mists of Miwangi is played at every damn con
I've heard this claim a couple of times now. Don't get me wrong, Mists is a good scenario, I just don't think it's the best one out there - there are a number of scenarios I'd have run before Mists at a convention. However, I do think it's popularity has been helped a lot recently with the release of it's sequel, Voice in the Void, which I think is actually better than Mists of Mwangi - but as a two-parter played as a back-to-back double on the same convention day by the same table of players, they can't be beaten!
|
|
Mists of Miwangi is played at every damn conI've heard this claim a couple of times now. Don't get me wrong, Mists is a good scenario, I just don't think it's the best one out there - there are a number of scenarios I'd have run before Mists at a convention. However, I do think it's popularity has been helped a lot recently with the release of it's sequel, Voice in the Void, which I think is actually better than Mists of Mwangi - but as a two-parter played as a back-to-back double on the same convention day by the same table of players, they can't be beaten!
Gah... I have yet tp play Mists of Mwangi. :-( I did run Voice in the Void at OwlCon a few weeks ago and my only regret is that I didn't get a chance to play it first. VoV is an awesome scenario.
|
No, you may only receive credit for a scenario once. So if you played it and got credit, you don't get additional credit as a GM to apply to another character. Otherwise GMs could conceivably have twice as many max level PCs as folks who just play.
I'm curious as to why this is seen as a problem? Wouldn't this just encourage players who otherwise already have credit for every scenario (or most scenarios) to run games? (Rather than replay them with another character) For that matter, wouldn't it encourage players who have played *any* scenario to use that experience to run the scenario themselves?
GMs generally spend 2-4 hours (minimum) preparing for a game. So they spend about twice as much time as a member who just plays in the scenarios. I'm not sure what possible harm could come from allowing them twice as many "max level PCs" or even more. Wouldn't this just mean that they've spent far more time making the Society more fun for more players?
|
|
Gah... I have yet tp play Mists of Mwangi. :-( I did run Voice in the Void at OwlCon a few weeks ago and my only regret is that I didn't get a chance to play it first. VoV is an awesome scenario.
Mists is set among the display halls of the museum, whilst Voices is set in the basement storage rooms - but the events can occur in either chronological order, so if you still have a chance to play Mists of Mwangi, you'll enjoy it all the same. Though flavour-wise, Mists and Voices are an obvious double to run together.
To be fair, players do seem to enjoy Mists a lot. I think my earlier assessment of Mists might have been clouded by behind-the-screen GM issues - presentation and organisation of information the GM needs to refer to during play, which I think some of the early scenarios suffered from as they were still trying to nail down their format. Even though I've GMed Mists several times now, I still seem to stumble through one encounter in particular, due to constant page-flipping, trying to extract required information buried in paragraph text, and keeping the details of three similar but different creatures in one encounter straight in my head. The players might have enjoyed it, but it made for a difficult scenario to GM in parts, which down-graded my memory of the scenario.
|
Gah... I have yet tp play Mists of Mwangi. :-( I did run Voice in the Void at OwlCon a few weeks ago and my only regret is that I didn't get a chance to play it first. VoV is an awesome scenario.Mists of Miwangi is played at every damn conI've heard this claim a couple of times now. Don't get me wrong, Mists is a good scenario, I just don't think it's the best one out there - there are a number of scenarios I'd have run before Mists at a convention. However, I do think it's popularity has been helped a lot recently with the release of it's sequel, Voice in the Void, which I think is actually better than Mists of Mwangi - but as a two-parter played as a back-to-back double on the same convention day by the same table of players, they can't be beaten!
That's very unfortunate. We played Mists of Mwangi at Owlcon on Friday night! In fact, it was my first PFC scenario ever.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
Retiring Scenarios
Over the next several years the 3.5 scenarios from Season 0 will either be retired or converted to Pathfinder RPG (time permitting). We will always give a one-month warning of an impending retirement meaning you have four weeks to purchase, play, and report that scenario as official play. Once the scenario is retired, though, it is no longer legal for play, will no longer be purchasable, and will be removed entirely from the reporting system meaning you can no longer legally apply it to your character.
Should scenarios due to be retired at the end of this month be clearly marked as such? I'd be ticked if I bought something on the 28th to find out I couldn't play it. At the same time, I might want to grab some before they're gone to run as unofficial PbPs.
Should scenarios due to be retired at the end of this month be clearly marked as such? I'd be ticked if I bought something on the 28th to find out I couldn't play it. At the same time, I might want to grab some before they're gone to run as unofficial PbPs.Retiring Scenarios
Over the next several years the 3.5 scenarios from Season 0 will either be retired or converted to Pathfinder RPG (time permitting). We will always give a one-month warning of an impending retirement meaning you have four weeks to purchase, play, and report that scenario as official play. Once the scenario is retired, though, it is no longer legal for play, will no longer be purchasable, and will be removed entirely from the reporting system meaning you can no longer legally apply it to your character.
I believe it was stated in another thread not in the PFS section that all scenarios being retired will be clearly marked as that in the Paizo store. What you quoted was also apparently changed, again according to the other thread that I can't find right now, that they will still be for sale, just that you can no longer get any credit for them once they are retired.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
I believe it was stated in another thread not in the PFS section that all scenarios being retired will be clearly marked as that in the Paizo store. What you quoted was also apparently changed, again according to the other thread that I can't find right now, that they will still be for sale, just that you can no longer get any credit for them once they are retired.Should scenarios due to be retired at the end of this month be clearly marked as such? I'd be ticked if I bought something on the 28th to find out I couldn't play it. At the same time, I might want to grab some before they're gone to run as unofficial PbPs.Retiring Scenarios
Over the next several years the 3.5 scenarios from Season 0 will either be retired or converted to Pathfinder RPG (time permitting). We will always give a one-month warning of an impending retirement meaning you have four weeks to purchase, play, and report that scenario as official play. Once the scenario is retired, though, it is no longer legal for play, will no longer be purchasable, and will be removed entirely from the reporting system meaning you can no longer legally apply it to your character.
Is #10: Blood at Dralkard Manor still going to be retired in a couple of weeks? It isn't marked as such. Good news about the still available for purchase though.
Should scenarios due to be retired at the end of this month be clearly marked as such? I'd be ticked if I bought something on the 28th to find out I couldn't play it. At the same time, I might want to grab some before they're gone to run as unofficial PbPs.
Hmm, good point. I'm not sure why we hadn't added the appropriate text yet. I've requested a note be added to each warning of upcoming retirement.
Hey Josh, no pressure was just wandering when we should be expecting phase 2 :) since I'm in the middle of making a second character for Saturday, I figured I would ask, in case something will change by then.
I'm not really able to talk about dates or possible changes until they're ready to be talked about. Sorry, man. :-/
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Should scenarios due to be retired at the end of this month be clearly marked as such? I'd be ticked if I bought something on the 28th to find out I couldn't play it. At the same time, I might want to grab some before they're gone to run as unofficial PbPs.Hmm, good point. I'm not sure why we hadn't added the appropriate text yet. I've requested a note be added to each warning of upcoming retirement.
I did that earlier today.
|
Director of Brand Strategy
|
Could this be errata'd so the wizard can sell back for purposes of death at the creation cost?
This is probably a better question to ask in the FAQ, since it deals more with the actual rules than those mentioned in this update. By the time a PC is 6th or 7th level, they should have enough PA for at least a raise dead, so they shouldn't need to sell anything, but if a wizard has to sell things, they should liquidate their pearls of power, headbands of vast intellect, and rings of protection before turning to their bonded item, which, as you mention, is not a very good investment in terms of resale value.
|
|
A GM now gets full credit for his character when GMing a scenario. "Full credit" means the GM gets the following:
* +1 XP
* 100% of the max gold for the tier most appropriate to his character (see below)
* Full Prestige per scenario (see below)
I'm running my first game, and it's one that I haven't played before - so I have a question or two:
Is there any particular way for reporting this? I know that I will be putting the Chronicle in with the PC that I choose, but is there a way to note it specifically on the sheet, or how it is reported for my character on his list of sessions?
You report your PC that is receiving credit exactly like you report the PCs actually playing. In the online reporting system you just add one more line and drop your PC in there with the other PCs. For your chronicle sheet, you fill one out and grant it to yourself.
|
|
Is there any particular way for reporting this? I know that I will be putting the Chronicle in with the PC that I choose, but is there a way to note it specifically on the sheet, or how it is reported for my character on his list of sessions?
Number one: Why are you running a game and not inviting me?
Number two: When you report the scenario you'll add whatever character you want to assign credit to the list of players at the table. There's nothing special that you do to the chronicle, but the fact that you have an event number is a good enough authentication test.
Edit: Wow, it really took me 4 minutes to type that? You Paizo guys are really on your stuff!
|
|
Number one: Why are you running a game and not inviting me?Edit: Wow, it really took me 4 minutes to type that? You Paizo guys are really on your stuff!
O.o Well ... <tee hee> Perhaps I should've IM'd you on Yahoo!
And, yes, it's surprising how quickly the guys at Paizo will respond. Especially Josh. That's the fourth time, I think, that he's responded to one of my posts personally. It's another prime example of why I love Paizo and the PFS so much!