|
The only question here I think is what "eats" means...does it mean to simply run a mod at any time? Or does it mean to run a mod before ever playing it? Or does it mean you physically have to munch on the paper in front of your table of players???
I was under the impression that the common understand of "eating" a mod is running it without having played it first.
It had been my understanding that "eating" a scenario was made obsolete when the replay rules were added. Before replay, "eating" meant you could not even play in that scenario once you had run it, the same as once you had played a scenario you could never play it again. The big thing about "eating" a scenario was that, sure you got the chronicle sheet and all once season one started (no rewards at all for GMing during season zero), but you were not playing your character and not having fun playing with others in any scenarios you ran.
I don't understand the need for anyone to ever have the same chronicle sheet apply to more than one character.
Eh, when I finally do some playing or running for credit, I would be happy with credit once for running a scenario and credit once for playing it. If all replay beyond that could only be done with pregens, I would be fine.
Director of Brand Strategy
|
It seems to me that people are using PPP as a loophole to game the system. PPP should be invoked in fringe cases where it's absolutely necessary, but I'm getting the impression that it's being used much more often than intended. If this is the case, then the rule needs to be reassessed on this end such that regular play can happen without needing to resort to it as often.
|
|
Eh, when I finally do some playing or running for credit, I would be happy with credit once for running a scenario and credit once for playing it. If all replay beyond that could only be done with pregens, I would be fine.
What's the need to have credit for running it AND playing it? It just doesn't make sense to me. (This isn't directed at you specifically, there are plenty out there who want credit twice or more)
As long as you get credit once whether it's from playing or GM'ing you're not falling behind someone who's only playing.
|
|
It seems to me that people are using PPP as a loophole to game the system. PPP should be invoked in fringe cases where it's absolutely necessary, but I'm getting the impression that it's being used much more often than intended. If this is the case, then the rule needs to be reassessed on this end such that regular play can happen without needing to resort to it as often.
Shouldn't the reporting system be able to tell you that? :)
|
Director of Brand Strategy
|
As long as you get credit once whether it's from playing or GM'ing you're not falling behind someone who's only playing.
You're only falling behind someone who's playing a scenario multiple times via PPP (which should be the exception anyway). Even then, it's not like one PC will gain credit more than once, so the max level for any PC should be the same, regardless of how many times a given player has played a scenario.
|
|
First off, let me apologize for being a bit grumpy when I posted previously. I've not been feeling well, and when the added variable of throwing this week's game night plans into chaos, when it was already thrown into chaos was a bit much for me to take.
My main concern isn't so much what the GM reward is, or even if there is a GM reward, its that whatever the program is or isn't is clearly explained.
I will also say that my initial thoughts upon reading the Guide would have been to assume that once you GM a game you could not play as a player in that scenario, but I met many people in my area that did not have this interpretation, I saw people on the boards that did not have this interpretation, and I even saw "clarifications" that made me doubt that my initial reading was accurate.
Unfortunately, I think the topic is widening a bit, and before I go on, I want to address something else that is tangentially related. I'm not a fan of the "Play, Play, Play" rule as it relates to replaying a scenario. In particular I'm thinking of the fact that its okay to replay to make a legal table. The problem is, the first half of the statement is true and there is no consequence for the second half of the sentence being ignored.
I'm not advocating that the second half should be enforced. I'm actually all for just saying that you can replay a scenario with a new character from a new faction, period, end of rule. Its easy enough to enforce "hey, you already have this Chronicle for this character, you can't play," its a lot harder to expect a GM to enforce "are you sure you haven't played this with some other character?" or "Well, we weren't sure it was going to be a legal table when I told you that you could play, but now that someone else has showed up at the table a minute before we start, you're out."
I think its too much of a judgement call hassle to foist onto GMs. If you want replay (and I think there is a good case for it, given the need to grow both the player base and the adventure base), then it should be simple and easy to adjudicate.
Now that that is out of the way . . .
If the issue is that once you GM, you can never play, and GMs can only ever count a session once if they don't play first, and if they don't play first, then they can only ever play once, then why not allow GMs to take a chronicle once for each faction, so that if he runs an adventure five times, he could advance five separate characters by one chronicle, and the sixth time, he's doing it pro bono. If he's already played as a player and recorded it for a given faction, he cannot get a chronicle for that faction again from GMing.
Make sense?
I'm not really sure why its of deadly import to make sure that GMs can only count an adventure the first time they run it anyway. Is it that much less time, or that much less of an investment of effort to run five sessions than one?
Like I said, I'm not invested one way or the other, these are just ideas. I just want really clear rules on the subject. Ironically, I can adjudicate rules of the game just fine most of the time, its the actual rules of organized play that I don't feel comfortable making judgment calls with.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
It makes sense for a small PFS group for the GM to be able to get one chronicle sheet for a scenario in order to keep within the same level range as the rest of the group when GM duties rotate.
The issue is when you have a large, inconsistent group like PFS Olympia. You'll have probably 2 or 3 GMs and maybe a dozen players on any given game day, running from four to six slots (afternoon and evening). The burden is on the people who can GM to do so... and we do, without regard to not getting GM credit for GMing the same scenario multiple times (I'm no longer a GM up there since I moved). I get it, it comes with the territory of being a PFS GM, you will not get credit for the scenario most of the time; that's not the problem. The problem is that if GMs cannot ever play a scenario they've GM'ed, it would make it very, very difficult for large groups to make legal tables without excluding players: "sorry, you GMed this one. You can't play here. Go eat a Snickers for 4 hours." Even the most prolific GMs like to play instead of GM sometimes, and forbidding GMs from playing scenarios they've run severely limits their ability to join tables.
It's important for the small group GM to get GM reward chronicles to keep up with his players when it's his turn to take a break from GMing. It's just as important to large group GMs to be able to play scenarios they've already GMed, so they can take a break from GMing and play for a change.
PPP is a good rule. I would think from a marketing standpoint you'd want to avoid any situation where you're requiring your GMs, the people who usually organize and run these events and buy all the scenarios, to sit out of Society tables.
|
Campaign docs are challenging to write and there are always players who view them more as IRS documents to overcome, as opposed to legislation to guide good conduct. I am more than willing to abide by the formal ruling and interpretation of campaign staff. However, there are clear clarity issues here.
|
It seems to me that people are using PPP as a loophole to game the system. PPP should be invoked in fringe cases where it's absolutely necessary, but I'm getting the impression that it's being used much more often than intended. If this is the case, then the rule needs to be reassessed on this end such that regular play can happen without needing to resort to it as often.
This I agree with and I have been warning about it in the forums for a while now, Josh said he would keep an eye on it, but You guys only have eyes on it if it is reported.
|
|
All this is why it is very important to keep detailed track of what everyone has played so you don't run into these situation. If this is done properly then you will never run into a situation you have to tell someone they can't play because they already GMed it it played it.
And don't tell me that is to hard, or that is not possible, because I know it is, because I am doing it, With 15 Players and with players visiting from out of town.
Organizers need to organize and they won't have problems.
|
|
And don't tell me that is to hard, or that is not possible, because I know it is, because I am doing it, With 15 Players and with players visiting from out of town.
Organizers need to organize and they won't have problems.
Not impossible, but it can be difficult. Like herding cats sometimes. Some people are on totally different levels of organizational obsession. I'm trying to keep my hands around 54 players currently.
|
Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau
|
I want to be clear about the circumstance that Mr. Frost judged on.
We have a fairly sizable amount of PFS players in our region. But being a college town, during the summer we lose a lot of steady players for a much smaller group returning home from the college they attend. In the case at hand, we had a PFS game scheduled. Only two newbies showed for the scenario, but myself and two others (both fellow GMs) were there. Both GMs had played through it when I had originally run the scenario and legally could make the table only through PPP (minimum of four players). One of them suggested I play through it, since I rarely get the chance to play. I did, with a different character than the one who had the GM credit, and had a great time. And I received a Chronicle (under the assumed PPP). To make sure that I was legal, I consulted Mr. Frost on these very forums. His response ...
Version 2.2 of the rules expands the GM rewards but does not retroactively apply that expansion to anything you may have GMed prior to 2.2.
Replay is now legal in 2.2 to make a legal table. If the only way to make a legal table was for one of the GMs in your example to sit down and play, they could replay the scenario for current credit so long as they weren't applying that credit to a PC that received credit for that scenario already (PCs may never get credit twice for a scenario and replay must be with a different character in a different faction than the last time you played the scenario).
So, specifically for Arnim, you would get credit playing the scenario if you were using replay to make a legal table. If you are not using replay to make a legal table, you will need to play a pregen and play for no credit.
Replay is only to be used to make a legal table and if you played/GMed the scenario already, you can't play the scenario unless the only way to make the legal table is for you to play.
Man I hope that makes sense."
I am not against PPP and would hate to see it removed; it does allow us, as Knight Errant JR says, to not have to turn away anyone from a scheduled PFS event at our FLGS. I DO think some clarification needs to be made about GMing and PPP. Maybe something like the Rule of Two...
A Player shall not have more than two Chronicles for any scenario, regardless of how they are received; playing, PPP, or GMing, in any order.
|
|
Not impossible, but it can be difficult. Like herding cats sometimes. Some people are on totally different levels of organizational obsession. I'm trying to keep my hands around 54 players currently.And don't tell me that is to hard, or that is not possible, because I know it is, because I am doing it, With 15 Players and with players visiting from out of town.
Organizers need to organize and they won't have problems.
Yeah but you are a Venture-Captain, that is Expected ;).
I am still thinking about applying for Austin, Just not Sure what Austin would think about that, I can be a Tight ass when herding cats ;).
What resources do you use? I find Obsidian Portal Very Useful!
|
Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau
|
And obviously I am not the only one who assumed I was doing right.
See, and I think it's perfectly fine for a GM to replay, especially if they've only ran it one time. In truth, they aren't that much more ahead of the curve (if at all) then any player playing it again, and replay is allowed (per PPP, etc.), so why not?
And for my two cents of thought, I have always understood the rules as: You can get credit 5 times...one for each faction, and no more than one of these can be from GM credit.
I think anything otherwise is ripe for "gaming the system" and agree that is bad for Organized Play, as a whole. It skews PPP in favor of the player that can find a game and can milk a scenario for a Chronicle. If it was only FLGS organized play, this would be easy to catch. Throw home games in, and this becomes near impossible.
|
I see I'm not the only one who was confused about GM's getting to play.
The way the rule reads now, it is splitting PFS into 2 groups: GM's who because they run a game, they cannot play. And players, who can play up to five times.
So why should anyone volunteer to GM, when you always have a chance to get asshat players to deal with. (easier to deal with as player than as GM.)
|
|
What resources do you use? I find Obsidian Portal Very Useful!
Interesting. I've tried to use OP for my home game but just don't quite like it enough I guess. Does it help you with invite/RSVP functionality?
Right now I'm using email, Facebook, google groups and local store message forums and google docs (spreadsheet for player tracking). The biggest issues I have right now are in the RSVP realm. I like Facebook for all that, but not everyone uses it or wants to use it if they aren't already at this point. Strangely enough in this day and age, even getting everyone on email (or checking their email more than 1/year) is surprisingly challenging. I was thinking about going with a Meetup group, but not really sure I want to eat a $12/month cost for it and was thinking about approaching the local game stores to split the cost since we'd be posting events taking place in their stores.
|
Honestly, expecting every GM to know if a player has played a scenario already with a different character if they've never even played with that person before is unrealistic. Still, this is a problem that does need to be addressed, and I think it would be a good idea to try and come up with some sort of solution.
|
|
Wait . . . so how am I suppose to know if someone that signs up to play at a convention has played a scenario with a character that they aren't currently using?
A convention is a different Beast all together,All you can do is ask the player or hope the player is being honest, and check over chronicles, this is where you run into problem, One good thing is when you report the event Paizo's system warns you that the player already played and if you want to give him credit again, You can say No!, of course he still has the chronicle, and all you can hope is that this dishonest player gets caught in the future.
Or how am I suppose to know if someone shows up for a game at the FLGS and they have already played the scenario with their home group with another character?
You ask and to show prove, here you have more control over it, If the guy is being faithful he will show it, if he gives you a hard time, well then he is not being faithful, You have more room in being a tight ass here.
This one is easy to control, Most times you will know before hand when a new player will show so you can get from him what scenarios he has played so there is no conflicts. And if he does just show up out of the blue, you get from him what he has played.
I can look through chronicles before a session to make sure people are the right level and their points look right and that this character hasn't already played this scenario, but am I suppose to do a background check on everyone that shows up at the table? Get online and try to see if they posted on the forums that they have played the scenario before?
I'm kind of glad I've been out of the GMing business, since, clearly, I don't have the kind of dedication needed to do it anymore.
Well you don't have to look online... and Nope it does not sound like you have the kind of dedication needed, or at least not the same as me.
GMing takes some work, but GMing and Organizing takes a lot of work and dedication, if you don't have the time have some one else do it who likes organizing.
|
|
Honestly, expecting every GM to know if a player has played a scenario already with a different character if they've never even played with that person before is unrealistic. Still, this is a problem that does need to be addressed, and I think it would be a good idea to try and come up with some sort of solution.
Dane, At a Convention yes... But at a Game store or Home game it is very realistic, you just need to be able to be an ass sometimes. It is not fun being that Ass, but sometimes you have to.
Edit: Also If I have to be an ass, there is something wrong... As long as the player is being honest everything runs smoothly.
|
|
What resources do you use? I find Obsidian Portal Very Useful!
Interesting. I've tried to use OP for my home game but just don't quite like it enough I guess. Does it help you with invite/RSVP functionality?
Right now I'm using email, Facebook, google groups and local store message forums and google docs (spreadsheet for player tracking). The biggest issues I have right now are in the RSVP realm. I like Facebook for all that, but not everyone uses it or wants to use it if they aren't already at this point. Strangely enough in this day and age, even getting everyone on email (or checking their email more than 1/year) is surprisingly challenging. I was thinking about going with a Meetup group, but not really sure I want to eat a $12/month cost for it and was thinking about approaching the local game stores to split the cost since we'd be posting events taking place in their stores.
Mark, email me me. I had all those problems, I will tell you how I fixed it. dragnmoon(at)gmail(dot)com
|
|
Yeah... cause being an @$$ is what brings new players into PFS! That's a solution!
Like I said, most of the time you don't have to be an ass, only have to be an ass when you run into a dishonest player, and then at that point, If it gets to far I don't want him playing anyway.
Edit: Also new players you never have to be an ass to, that never played so you know they not played the scenario!
Example:
I had a player that illegally Played up who game from out of town, I Had to play the bad guy and tell him he could not play that character our groups unless we came up with a solution to the problem, He was an honest player and a good guy and we where able to come up with a solution that made it so he can play that character. Being an ass is not a bad thing with a honest player.
|
|
I'd just like to say good luck to Mark and Hyrum finding the ultra GMs you will need to grow PFS. I know at one point in time it seemed like there was a certain pride in the fact the PFS was laid back enough to not have things like GMing tests, but you may want to consider them. You don't want casual GMs screwing with things that are way beyond their talents.
|
|
I'd just like to say good luck to Mark and Hyrum finding the ultra GMs you will need to grow PFS. I know at one point in time it seemed like there was a certain pride in the fact the PFS was laid back enough to not have things like GMing tests, but you may want to consider them. You don't want casual GMs screwing with things that are way beyond their talents.
Knight, these are my opinions not Marks and Hyrums.. Don't put what I said into their mouths.
I feel it can be done... I fell that with prober organization you do not have to worry about most of the issue brought up here. I am the one who told you if you don't have the time to do that then you should have someone else do that. Not mark or Hyrum.
|
|
Honestly, expecting every GM to know if a player has played a scenario already with a different character if they've never even played with that person before is unrealistic. Still, this is a problem that does need to be addressed, and I think it would be a good idea to try and come up with some sort of solution.Dane, At a Convention yes... But at a Game store or Home game it is very realistic, you just need to be able to be an ass sometimes. It is not fun being that Ass, but sometimes you have to.
Edit: Also If I have to be an ass, there is something wrong... As long as the player is being honest everything runs smoothly.
Note that I said with players they've never encountered before. At a game store, and especially at a home game, usually you have some sort of rapport with the players, and know whether to trust them or not (or whether they've played the scenario with another character because you've usually played with them)
I prefer to not be an ass if I can avoid it. That's not the kind of attitude I want to bring to the Society, and I'd honestly like to see other GMs acting with a bit of decorum. Even if someone does try to game the system, you can deal with it without reducing yourself to being an ass.
And KnightErrantJR, don't take Dragnmoon's words as gospel. I, and I would hope the other Venture-Captains (though I can't speak for them), actually disagree with this kind of approach.
|
|
I prefer to not be an ass if I can avoid it. That's not the kind of attitude I want to bring to the Society, and I'd honestly like to see other GMs acting with a bit of decorum. Even if someone does try to game the system, you can deal with it without reducing yourself to being an ass.
Dane, Look at my example above about what I mean about being an ass.
|
|
I'm not. I never said they did. I'm just wishing them luck in finding more people of your caliber.
Knight, these are my opinions not Marks and Hyrums.. Don't put what I said into thier mouths.
But you sound like your blaming the whole society for my attitude. It is just mine, it may not be the Society as a Whole.
|
|
But you sound like your blaming the whole society for my attitude. It is just mine, it may not be the Society as a Whole.
Don't worry about it. Let's just drop it. My opinion doesn't really matter any more at this point, because I'm not going to GM again. I don't want to bog this down any more than that, which is why I tried to kill my original post before anything happened with it.
|
|
Don't worry about it. Let's just drop it. My opinion doesn't really matter any more at this point, because I'm not going to GM again. I don't want to bog this down any more than that, which is why I tried to kill my original post before anything happened with it.
But you sound like your blaming the whole society for my attitude. It is just mine, it may not be the Society as a Whole.
I'm honestly sorry to hear that. I hate that someone's willingness to GM was soured for any reason. Still, its your choice.
|
|
I think it's important to remember we do this for fun. Obviously fun takes on different means for different people and there is still plenty of casual left in this community. Play at a level that is fun for you. I do. If it's not fun for you, examine your options for getting back to fun. If not playing is your best option, I'm sure there will be open tables in your future should you change your mind.
Dragnmoon, more Lawful Good and less Lawful Evil. :)
|
I haven't GMed at all yet, so take my post with more than a grain of salt.
I had a good laugh thinking about someone "gaming the system" in PFS just to retire that character.
Your character retires at lvl 12. You only get 3 slots per lvl so any one character is only going to play something like 36 slots!
So someone "gaming the system" advances their character faster than they should ... then they have to retire that character! That karma is funny and right on the money.
Has any GM gotten a character to lvl 12 yet and never played with him/her? That would be an interesting competition.
|
|
I haven't GMed at all yet, so take my post with more than a grain of salt.
I had a good laugh thinking about someone "gaming the system" in PFS just to retire that character.
Your character retires at lvl 12. You only get 3 slots per lvl so any one character is only going to play something like 36 slots!
So someone "gaming the system" advances their character faster than they should ... then they have to retire that character! That karma is funny and right on the money.
Has any GM gotten a character to lvl 12 yet and never played with him/her? That would be an interesting competition.
Doug Doug could have. I had thought about doing that once, but eventually decided not to. (Something like a Taldan Noble who shows up for a Tier 12 game having never adventured before. "Ewww! Blood!")
|
|
Like to make one other distinction.
I am mostly talking about Organization in Large Non convention groups, Groups with more then one table that get new players or roaming players.
I am not talking about GMing, I am talking about Organizing. It is very possible to be a GM without being an organizer. In my group I am a GM/Organizer and I have other GMs that have nothing to do with the organizing, I would not want to put them through that frustration, Kortz knows how frustrated i get ;).
IMO an organizer needs to know their players and and anticipate new players coming in *New to the group not PFS*, and be willing to find out from those new players that players history so you can fit them in properly, If they show up out of the blue and already played all the scenarios being run you need to be able to say No to that player but invite them to come again next game so you can properly schedule it around them *I also I have one scenario on the side ready to run at all times just in case*.
Of course you can't always catch the non honest players right away, but luckily once you report a game you will catch them at that point because the reporting system will tell you they played it already. From there you can either have a talk to that player to solve that issue, or if it is not solvable tell the player he is no longer invited if it gets to that point. Though I think it should be a last resort, I think an organizer needs to be willing to make those calls if needed.
|
Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau
|
Right now, "Play Play Play" says that you do NOT do this if there's a seat available. This may change in the near future, of course. That player gets a spot if they have any valid character, and a pregen if they don't.
And if he has GMed and gained credit before with a different character, I would never know. To be honest, the system works best with those who can be trusted to "do the right thing." And my initial post was made because I was accused of otherwise, whether the other GM meant it that way or not. If I was "gaming the system", I would never have asked in the first place.
I can say that I have players that I firmly suspect of having played through or ran a scenario come in to sit at a PFS session at our FLGS. I have no way to confirm this anymore, since PPP went into effect; the reporting doesn't warn me anymore that the character is invalid to receive a Chronicle. A player not wanting to be honest could very well take advantage of PPP, especially at bigger conventions where mustering a table can get hectic and a GM doesn't have time to review a player's Chronicles.
I tend to be very organized (ask any of my players!), but I can't be expected to be omniscient.
As to the original post, I still feel validated in having that second Chronicle; Mr. Frost himself said it was okay. If this is an insight into the changes we can expect from PFS in the future under the "new management", maybe it is the right time for me to bow out.
|
|
If they show up out of the blue and already played all the scenarios being run you need to be able to say No to that player. . .Right now, "Play Play Play" says that you do NOT do this if there's a seat available. This may change in the near future, of course. That player gets a spot if they have any valid character, and a pregen if they don't.
True you can always offer a PreGen, And I have. But You will find players that refuse to play a PreGen.
|
|
And if he has GMed and gained credit before with a different character, I would never know. To be honest, the system works best with those who can be trusted to "do the right thing." And my initial post was made because I was accused of otherwise, whether the other GM meant it that way or not. If I was "gaming the system", I would never have asked in the first place.I can say that I have players that I firmly suspect of having played through or ran a scenario come in to sit at a PFS session at our FLGS. I have no way to confirm this anymore, since PPP went into effect; the reporting doesn't warn me anymore that the character is invalid to receive a Chronicle. A player not wanting to be honest could very well take advantage of PPP, especially at bigger conventions where mustering a table can get hectic and a GM doesn't have time to review a player's Chronicles.
I tend to be very organized (ask any of my players!), but I can't be expected to be omniscient.
As to the original post, I still feel validated in having that second Chronicle; Mr. Frost himself said it was okay. If this is an insight into the changes we can expect from PFS in the future under the "new management", maybe it is the right time for me to bow out.
Arnim a Couple Of things.. The Reporting system Does Warn you if a player already played a scenario already, Now it just lets you ignore that warning. So if that warning never came up with your session reports, no one played that scenario.
Also You are validated thinking you can play that game, because you say Josh told you, you could *I have not seen the original post in its original context* the problem is he was very clear every where else Many of us saw him post on the subject that once you get GM credit you can never get credit again No matter what. So there is a contradiction *Once again I never saw the post you say he posted you have a link?*, and Mark has cleared that up for now, though It may change since they are looking into working on that rule.
|
|
True you can always offer a PreGen, And I have. But You will find players that refuse to play a PreGen.And if they have a valid character, they have every right to. A valid character is one that is the correct level, has not played the module, and doesn't share a faction with any other character the player has who has played. The rules, right now, are pretty clear on that much (presuming they haven't GMd, which seems to be where the confusion has come in.)
Huh?.... I was talking about saying No to a player that did not Have a Valid Character and after you brought it up, refused to play a Pregen, Of Course if he had a valid character I would let him play. But if he played the Scenario He Does not have a Valid character.
Edit: If I already Have a Table of 3+ Players, I already have a legal Table so The player that already played the Scenario, even if he has a character of another faction at the right level, Can't Play under Re-play since the Table is already legal.