|
Currently IMO I Believe replay as written should be only used as a last resort, this is not going to make me popular, but I am worried with all these worries about replay I have seen recently that too many people are using replay as not a last resort but as a viable option for their planned games, that people are planning replays so they can get credit on it with another character.
IMO replay should be your Plan C, Plan A being running a game no one has played in, Plan B being setting up tables in a way that you have legal tables without replay, and Plan C replay now because you have no other option. Replay should not be planned but should happen as a fallout plan if all else fails..
I am worried that people will start abusing replay and setting up games so they have no choice but to replay an get that credit now, even though they had a viable option not to set up things that way.
Hopefully my worries on this are unfounded and people are just getting clarity on the rule, just in the off chance that this rare occurrence happens.
These worries are only based on the rules of replay as currently written, if those restrictions on when replay can be used were lifted, I would have no issues with that.
|
These worries are only based on the rules of replay as currently written, if those restrictions on when replay can be used were lifted, I would have no issues with that.
The data should be able to be mined on the back-end to paint the real picture of what is going on. People who are clearly abusing the system (amazing 2nd and 3rd characters that keep getting XP) will stand out and let Josh know if this rule needs some kind of revision in post 2.2.
Like you, I also suspect there is are a number of people who are trying to game the system. Of course there are, there is a whole subculture of role-players who can't help but to min/max. :)
Being able to get 1 XP for playing it and also 1 XP for running it invites abuse.
I tried to mitigate that potential abuse by saying you can only ever get GM credit once for a scenario.
I'm also concerned that folks may be using replay as a viable strategy as opposed to using it as a tool to make legal tables happen.
|
|
I tried to mitigate that potential abuse by saying you can only ever get GM credit once for a scenario.
I'm also concerned that folks may be using replay as a viable strategy as opposed to using it as a tool to make legal tables happen.
Well you can always re attack it if you notice the possibility of abuse in the reporting.
Maybe a little modification to the replay rule is needed to where you can only play each sub-tier of a scenario once for credit, with the same requirement of it being a different character of a different faction each time. That way a player could get credit and a chronicle sheet for between two and four different characters max, depending on the number of sub-tiers in the scenario, once for the first time GMing it and once for each of the sub-tiers. That would still give some flexibility for when replay is needed for a legal table while stopping the potential abuse of a player thinking he can manipulate things to play the same scenario for credit from the view of every faction.
|
|
Maybe a little modification to the replay rule is needed to where you can only play each sub-tier of a scenario once for credit, with the same requirement of it being a different character of a different faction each time. That way a player could get credit and a chronicle sheet for between two and four different characters max, depending on the number of sub-tiers in the scenario, once for the first time GMing it and once for each of the sub-tiers. That would still give some flexibility for when replay is needed for a legal table while stopping the potential abuse of a player thinking he can manipulate things to play the same scenario for credit from the view of every faction.
Personally, I feel it should be 1 XP period. Weather you get it as a player or as a GM doesn't matter. 1 is 1. You can't unlearn what you learned and you can't unearn the XP. You allow a limited form or replay, but you are doing that for someone else's benefit, not your own. Therefore you shouldn't expect, nor receive, any benefit. Ultimately replay should be in the spirit of helping build community, not about personal gain.
We already had that discussion. :-)
This thread is not about that discussion nor is it a place to condemn or disagree with replay.
|
|
We already had that discussion. :-)
This thread is not about that discussion nor is it a place to condemn or disagree with replay.
My goal was not to condemn or disagree with replay, but to mention my worries about abuse of people not using it correctly. I was going to reiterate that after Matthew made his comment, but you beat me to it.. :-).
I suspect once you have Regional Organizers set up to help you out, any abuse out there will be reduced.
|
Don't forget that there are many of us that really like the replay rules, because they allow us to play more scenarios than we would have been able to without them.
I have written several times on these boards about our group and how small we are in membership. Without replay, we would rarely be able to put a legal table together. We also travel a minimum of 80 miles just to form a legal table and play.
Please don't let the few abusers ruin it for the rest of us.
|
|
Don't forget that there are many of us that really like the replay rules, because they allow us to play more scenarios than we would have been able to without them.
I have written several times on these boards about our group and how small we are in membership. Without replay, we would rarely be able to put a legal table together. We also travel a minimum of 80 miles just to form a legal table and play.
Have to tell you the truth here... Why is being small and having traveled far making replay essential... I don't see it...even in this case I see it as being rare.
Being small should make it easier not to replay, you all know each other and you all should have played the same scenarios so you should all have almost played them all with each other, so it is easy to set up a scenario everyone has not played.
Josh... Is running out of scenarios because your group ran them all considered a good reason to replay a scenario?
|
|
Have to tell you the truth here... Why is being small and having traveled far making replay essential... I don't see it...even in this case I see it as being rare.Being small should make it easier not to replay, you all know each other and you all should have played the same scenarios so you should all have almost played them all with each other, so it is easy to set up a scenario everyone has not played.
Josh... Is running out of scenarios because your group ran them all considered a good reason to replay a scenario?
First, I never said we had played all the scenarios. On the contrary, I have "played" only 8 scenarios and "GM'd" a dozen.
While my group is small, we come from different areas, and there are a couple of people that are able to get to other games, that the rest of us are not able to attend those games. Thus making replay a necessity.
For example: There are only two of us in town A that play PFS (I am there, but the other person works half the time), we travel 76 miles to town B where there are three more people, but usually only one shows up. There are two more people from town C that drive 52 miles to get to town B. (It would be a 100 mile trip for us to drive to town C.) The two people from town C also play in their own town. I am the primary GM, I run about 2/3 of the games. Most of the time, in order for us to make a table we need at least one of the two from town C to play.
Now selfish or not, its hard to convince someone to drive an hour one way just to play a pre-generated character for a four hour time slot.
Now, I'm not putting down Josh, PFS, or Paizo or the number of scenarios that they have been able to put out for play. On the contrary, I'm very happy with what is available and the way everything has been handled thus far. And because replay is allowed, we are able to get together and enjoy a scenario or two as a group.
P.S. - And as an ex LG GM, I really like not having to read through 60 pages of scenario! Thanks Josh!
|
|
First, I never said we had played all the scenarios. On the contrary, I have "played" only 8 scenarios and "GM'd" a dozen.
While my group is small, we come from different areas, and there are a couple of people that are able to get to other games, that the rest of us are not able to attend those games. Thus making replay a necessity.
For example: There are only two of us in town A that play PFS (I am there, but the other person works half the time), we travel 76 miles to town B where there are three more people, but usually only one shows up. There are two more people from town C that drive 52 miles to get to town B. (It would be a 100 mile trip for us to drive to town C.) The two people from town C also play in their own town. I am the primary GM, I run about 2/3 of the games. Most of the time, in order for us to make a table we need at least one of the two from town C to play.
Now selfish or not, its hard to convince someone to drive an hour one way just to play a pre-generated character for a four hour time slot.
Now, I'm not putting down Josh, PFS, or Paizo or the number of scenarios that they have been able to put out for play. On the contrary, I'm very happy with what is available and the way everything has been handled thus far. And because replay is allowed, we are able to get together and enjoy a scenario or two as a group.
P.S. - And as an ex LG GM, I really like not having to read through 60 pages of scenario!...
Sorry, the question to Josh was separate from my question to you, should have distinguished that more...
I must not be understanding your situation because your description does not describe the necessity of replay to me. It may describe the necessity of better planning, but not replay.
Town B players I assume play the most games since you are playing there, Town C players I assume miss the most. You run the majority of games, with 6 players 1 GM. But none of that matters, distance is not the problem, it is the attendance that is the problem, everyone can be a block away from each other and still have attendance problems.
Have players missed enough games that the spread in level force to rerun games so other players can catch up with main characters? If that is the case, and that is the only reason I can think of why you would Need replay, is there really not enough scenarios of the prober levels for the characters that are behind that the higher levels have not played?
My point is, if you have the option to run a game that no one has played, you should always take that option first, but if you are deciding to run a scenario that others have played already just so the ones that missed it can get to play it, that would be "Abusing the system"
The only time you should ever replay is because you have zero games to run that everyone has not played, if you even have the option of 1 scenario that can be run without replay legally, you should run that.
If you find though it is the case you run into replay legally a lot, more power to you, some of your players must be playing like 5-6 times a month sometimes.
Edit: let me add a little IMO to all the above, I could be interpreting replay rules incorrectly.
Can we not also turn this thread into a criticism of Shieldknight and his group? He and I have spoken about his group's specific needs as I have spoken to other small groups across the US with similar needs and I feel those needs plus everyone's feedback in the replay thread led myself and Erik to the conclusion that replay to make a legal table was necessary. Let's not spend this thread telling Shieldknight how to run his group.
If there are concerns about replay being abused (the point of this thread) let's discuss that specific point.
And to assuage Shieldknight's fears: I have no interest in removing replay because some people might be abusing it. I'm not going to punish everyone because 1 or 2 people can't read the rules.
|
|
Can we not also turn this thread into a criticism of Shieldknight and his group? He and I have spoken about his group's specific needs as I have spoken to other small groups across the US with similar needs and I feel those needs plus everyone's feedback in the replay thread led myself and Erik to the conclusion that replay to make a legal table was necessary. Let's not spend this thread telling Shieldknight how to run his group.
you are correct, and I apologize, I got too worked up on specific subject in general and I inappropriately targeted shieldknight. Sorry shieldknight.
Edit: Also I need to not put my frustrations of trying to quit smoking into these boards ;)
|
|
I'm not going to punish everyone because 1 or 2 people can't read the rules.
Josh part of this thread was to clarify to those that may inadvertently abuse the replay because of misunderstanding the rules, I think that will hopefully be weeded out with time and teaching how the rule works. I however am really more worried about those who purposely abuse the rule in the guise of misunderstanding, that may come down to my lack of trust for anyone but me though ;). I also would like to clarify I am not against replay in anyway, and would also not like it see removed, that is not my goal here.
The new system the way I think it works, though I am unsure since I have never myself reported anything yet here, *That should change hopefully with my move back to the states though* allows for the person to put in a replay, and only does not allow it if it is reported for the same character, am I correct?
Is there a way to sometime in the future add a warning stating to the person reporting the game that a player has played the scenario and are you sure you want to report this player as completing the scenario? That way the GM/Organizer can catch someone trying to get a fast one by the GM/Organizer. I an not extremely familiar of what kind of work that would take to add that and the feasibility of it.
Also if anyone has any suggestions on how to reduce possible abuse of the replay please go ahead and post it here. I would love to hear those ideas. I think to start the best way though is education on when you can use replay.
|
|
In response to Dragnmoon, we do try to play unplayed scenario's first.
The biggest boon for us will be the new rule that allows you to credit a character for the first time you GM a scenario, whether you have played it previously or not. This will help me get those who have played with other groups to GM for our group.
I understand everyone's concern that we do not abuse or misuse the replay rules. I spend way too much time on the message boards checking the rule updates and what we can and can't do. I do not wish to misuse the replay rules, and am trying my best to make sure it doesn't happen in my group. While my situation is by no means unique, it is not common. Thank you for trying to help me in addressing this issue, and believe me we are doing our best.
For those that are curious as to where my location might be that puts me in this situation:
I will restate, I have no intention of misuse, and am trying my best to keep my group in compliance with the rules. As long as new scenarios are available we will play those. But as I said earlier, I only have two left for levels 1-7. At least until a new one comes out.
On a side note, I am working on learning to use rptools maptool software. The only snag I've run into thus far is the inability to connect to the server. But that is a topic for another thread.
|
|
Is there a way to sometime in the future add a warning stating to the person reporting the game that a player has played the scenario and are you sure you want to report this player as completing the scenario? That way the GM/Organizer can catch someone trying to get a fast one by the GM/Organizer. I an not extremely familiar of what kind of work that would take to add that and the feasibility of it.
I'm sorry, but I'm not really sure what issue that would be intending to solve. Could you describe the situation that sort of check would produce a positive result?
|
|
Is there a way to sometime in the future add a warning stating to the person reporting the game that a player has played the scenario and are you sure you want to report this player as completing the scenario? That way the GM/Organizer can catch someone trying to get a fast one by the GM/Organizer. I an not extremely familiar of what kind of work that would take to add that and the feasibility of it.I'm sorry, but I'm not really sure what issue that would be intending to solve. Could you describe the situation that sort of check would produce a positive result?
I believe Dragnmoon is referring to the inappropriate replaying of a scenario. The issue Dragnmoon is trying to catch wouldn't be caught, as it would be too late by the time you report the session. The player would already have the chronicle sheet. Not sure how to fix this one efficiently.
|
|
I believe Dragnmoon is referring to the inappropriate replaying of a scenario. The issue Dragnmoon is trying to catch wouldn't be caught, as it would be too late by the time you report the session. The player would already have the chronicle sheet. Not sure how to fix this one efficiently.Is there a way to sometime in the future add a warning stating to the person reporting the game that a player has played the scenario and are you sure you want to report this player as completing the scenario? That way the GM/Organizer can catch someone trying to get a fast one by the GM/Organizer. I an not extremely familiar of what kind of work that would take to add that and the feasibility of it.I'm sorry, but I'm not really sure what issue that would be intending to solve. Could you describe the situation that sort of check would produce a positive result?
good point, I forgot he still would have the hard copy...
Probably should just be done at the GM level by looking over the chronicle sheets.
truthfully though if a player wanted to cheat, he is going to cheat and find a way to do it, not really that difficult, the system is heavily reliant on the honor system.
|
|
good point, I forgot he still would have the hard copy...
Probably should just be done at the GM level by looking over the chronicle sheets.
truthfully though if a player wanted to cheat, he is going to cheat and find a way to do it, not really that difficult, the system is heavily reliant on the honor system.
Well, I just meant that I didn't see the situation that alerting the GM/organizer would really mean anything.
For example, there is an event that is running three scenarios. The player comes and finds that he has either played in all of them, so he just replays one of them because, in my interpretation of the rules, that would be the only way for him to actually play and not just be excluded from the event.
Later on, when the event is being reported, it alerts that the person has already played in that scenario. That alert doesn't say whether or not that player is "cheating."
I would suggest that it would just push some organizer to make a poor decision and refuse to report the person they decided was cheating.
The only cases that I see it doing anything really is that one is running multiple events and the offending player is continually choosing to replay in scenarios rather than go to the table with a different scenario. I do not believe that this is really a problem that would plague the society, I was wondering if that you had additional information about the situation that would make it an issue.
|
|
comments about my comment
Does not really matter really, the system would not work anyway, since like Shieldknight pointed out they would have the chroincle sheet by then anyway, and that is the report that really matters.
Blazej, it really comes down to this for me.. People cheat, IMO the amount of people who do cheat is a lot higher then people suspect. From my experience I just don't trust people. I was looking at making it harder for cheaters to cheat, but the system really relies heavily on the Honor System, so if people are going to cheat, not much can be done about it.
So I am just going to worry about my players and make sure they don't cheat and also help clarify rules here on the boards.
For example, there is an event that is running three scenarios. The player comes and finds that he has either played in all of them, so he just replays one of them because, in my interpretation of the rules, that would be the only way for him to actually play and not just be excluded from the event.
No, replay is allowed only in order to make a legal table, not just to let one extra person play if the table is already of legal size. If you have at least 4 players and there is another person that can only play by replaying the scenario being run, then that player is out of luck even with the "play, play, play" rule. "Play, play, play" is there to get more new players involved, not to let regular players get in an extra session as a replay.
|
|
No, replay is allowed only in order to make a legal table, not just to let one extra person play if the table is already of legal size. If you have at least 4 players and there is another person that can only play by replaying the scenario being run, then that player is out of luck even with the "play, play, play" rule. "Play, play, play" is there to get more new players involved, not to let regular players get in an extra session as a replay.
For example, there is an event that is running three scenarios. The player comes and finds that he has either played in all of them, so he just replays one of them because, in my interpretation of the rules, that would be the only way for him to actually play and not just be excluded from the event.
I admit that I could be incorrect in thinking that replay might be allowed in that instance, but I suggest sort of comes into conflict with the "Play, Play, Play!" rule that you refer to.
Specifically, you said, '...then that player is out of luck even with the "play, play, play" rule.'
But, the 'Play, Play, Play!' rule includes, "You, as the GM or coordinator, have the ability to stretch the rules in small ways (most of which are stated throughout this document) in order to ensure that as many players as possible can play. Do not ever turn away players! If you have an issue where you feel the rules are forcing you to turn someone way, ask on the Pathfinder Society messageboards or email pathfindersociety@paizo.com for guidance on how to handle your specific situation. Turning away players only serves to build walls between the Society and new players—avoid whenever possible!"
While it does have a line at the beginning talking about rules coming into conflict with making legal tables that seems to be a minor portion if it. To me that, "Do not ever turn away players!" seems very, very clear as to the intent of the rule. Turning away players, whether they are new players or old, seems to be the complete opposite of what that rule states.
I would suggest saying, "that player is out of luck as far as playing in a game," breaks the 'Play, Play, Play!" rule and with the guide, as written, in front of me, (as a GM) I would let the player get into the game (or find some other way to include them, like as a GM or see if I had another scenario handy that none of the players had played) or (as a player) just leave the table/event if the organizer/GM excluded that player.
Of course, I thankfully doubt that I will be put into this situation (because it is unlikely that if they had played in all of the scenarios at an event and even more unlikely that a new table could not be formed to be able to include them), anytime in the foreseeable future and my interpretation of the rules might be quite wrong (and if I am corrected here, I will respect the ruling).
From page 18 of the current Guide under the heading "Replaying Scenarios"
Replay is legal as of 2.2, but only in this manner:
You may only replay a scenario in order to follow the
“Play, Play, Play” rule to make sure a legal table happens.
This means that if you previously played a scenario but the
only way to make a legal 4-person table is for you to replay
it again, relay is now allowed.
|
|
From page 18 of the current Guide under the heading "Replaying Scenarios"
Replay is legal as of 2.2, but only in this manner:
You may only replay a scenario in order to follow the
“Play, Play, Play” rule to make sure a legal table happens.
This means that if you previously played a scenario but the
only way to make a legal 4-person table is for you to replay
it again, relay is now allowed.
I have reread that already after you mentioned it in the previous post and did find that the wording was not what I thought originally. But I do think that in that very, very rare instance, "Play, Play, Play!" makes itself quite clear that turning away a player is not an option.
You, as the GM or coordinator, have the ability to stretch the rules in small ways (most of which are stated throughout this document) in order to ensure that as many players as possible can play.
It even says that the GM/coordinator has the ability to stretch the rules in small ways for this purpose. To me, allowing a single player to replay when they would otherwise be forced to leave would be streching the rules in a small way.
|
|
Blazej, it really comes down to this for me.. People cheat, IMO the amount of people who do cheat is a lot higher then people suspect. From my experience I just don't trust people. I was looking at making it harder for cheaters to cheat, but the system really relies heavily on the Honor System, so if people are going to cheat, not much can be done about it.
So I am just going to worry about my players and make sure they don't cheat and also help clarify rules here on the boards.
I understand that. I do wonder about cheating, but in the way of forging chronicle sheets and such. As far as cheating goes, abuse of replay comes so far down on my list that it just doesn't really come into my view as that big a thing to worry about for myself.
|
|
As far as cheating goes, abuse of replay comes so far down on my list that it just doesn't really come into my view as that big a thing to worry about for myself.
I suspect for the Vast majority of PFS player's Replay will rarely come into play.
Edit: and I agree with you Blazej, if the only options are replay or not play, even if the table is already legal, I think the spirit of Play, Play, Play! allows for the replay.
|
The fact that its limited to a different character with a different faction really limits how many times you can replay (only 5 different characters, each from a different faction). The only problem I could see with this: With prior knowledge of the adventure, a player could 'tweak' their character so that he/she had an advantage in the given scenario and make it a cake-walk. I haven't really seen that situation too many times in the games I've been running (they've all been sufficiently diverse and challenging), but that's what I could see. Even if they didn't spoil the plot for other players, they could still use the prior information to their advantage.
|
|
The fact that its limited to a different character with a different faction really limits how many times you can replay (only 5 different characters, each from a different faction). The only problem I could see with this: With prior knowledge of the adventure, a player could 'tweak' their character so that he/she had an advantage in the given scenario and make it a cake-walk. I haven't really seen that situation too many times in the games I've been running (they've all been sufficiently diverse and challenging), but that's what I could see. Even if they didn't spoil the plot for other players, they could still use the prior information to their advantage.
The problem for me, as Mok asks 'who does this hurt' is that when I sit down at a table with random players I want to feel reasonable sure they have earned their character as I have earned mine. Grinding out characters is not my idea of fun, and I wouldn't want to share a table with someone who is just there to grind it out. If they are 'abusing' this rule, then I'm sure it doesn't stop there. What else are they willfully misusing?
Does this hurt me as a player? Not really. Does it further my already dim view of humanity? You bet! :)