GM Rewards and Chronicle Sheets


Pathfinder Society

351 to 388 of 388 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge 1/5

E-mail me at Againsttheshadow at aol dot com. Depending on when you are here, we have PFS on Monday, Nov. 22nd, PFS at Black Friday GameDay on Friday Nov. 26th (We are collecting canned food and donations for Food Bank of the Rockies), then we have a handful of games in early December. It would be awesome to have to join us!

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Dave the Barbarian wrote:
I think because Denver is in the 2nd wave of Venture-Captain love. Besides myself, I know a couple other folks who have applied for it. We will see!

Dave it is good to see someone applied!

1/5

Dave the Barbarian wrote:

stuff

Spoiler:
For the Denver / Colorado Springs area we have 6 stores that run regular events.

We have 12 game days each month. All on different days and at different locations.

This is a total of 28 slots.

With more than 6 active players, you have to run a given scenario at least twice to give everyone a chance to play. For us, we would have to run it 16 times.

Let me answer your questions:

1) Almost 100 players. This is on the front range of CO and most players stick to the events closest to their home.
2) We have 2-4 new players per month. This number may be increasing if we keep promoting the game right.
3) Almost never. I can think of three times in over 100 reported tables. We needed the replay players to make a legit table.
4) 6 for most events. A few imprompto games during the week average around 4 and are where the replays occurred.
5) Try to schedule them often enough and in sequence so they can play them in order. All six game store coordinators keep an eye on what is being run so we can help get players through the series.
6) There tends to be a lot of switch up in my opinion.

We do a few things to help this:
We recommend that all existing players create an additional character once they hit 4th and then try to keep a few spread out so they have more options. Almost every player has multiple characters and a few 1st level characters just in case. This way if we have some new players, existing players will usually break out the 1st level pc's so the newbies can play.
Secondly, we try to schedule a handful of different tiers so that new players and experienced players will all have options.

There has been a handful of times where players had to skip a game day because they have played all three scenario's we were offering. They accept that and new players always have a chance to jump in.

We are lucky to have some of the best GMs and players around (completely biased opinion).

Thanks for the response Dave! The information helps quite a bit. I can only hope I get a player base so large. Right now I'd be happy with 30-40. I'm pretty sure a lot of my problems have to deal with the numbers we have in our group. We seem to be getting new players, but not a rate large enough to keep from having to require established players to catch them up so to speak. If I can get enough new players to get them to play through the older scenarios without sit-ins from the established players I might be ok. I've been working really hard on growing the group the last couple of months. I just want the best for everyone and am trying to figure out how to make it happen.

4/5 5/55/55/5 ****

Kyle Baird wrote:
Mark Garringer wrote:

The people who only put in half the time (all playing or all GMing) aren't being punished.

The people who put in twice as much time (playing and GMing) are being rewarded. And really they aren't being rewarded so much as getting parity with the time they've invested.

This.

I find it quite incorrect to say that a person who runs two games is somehow doing less work than a person who runs one game and plays in another.

I might agree that splitting between playing and running allows for a greater variety of GMs improving within the society (rather than it being reliant on a few to run games), but I find it a bit insulting to say that I am doing less work by running two games per week, as opposed to running one.

Grand Lodge 2/5

Blazej wrote:

I find it quite incorrect to say that a person who runs two games is somehow doing less work than a person who runs one game and plays in another.

I might agree that splitting between playing and running allows for a greater variety of GMs improving within the society (rather than it being reliant on a few to run games), but I find it a bit insulting to say that I am doing less work by running two games per week, as opposed to running one.

Don't be insulted. If you are running two games a week you are one of the good ones :)

The point I was making is that if you just play mod X (P hours) or just run mod X (GM hours, but everyone knows it's more than that with prep) you are doing less than someone who plays and runs mod X (P+GM hours). But in either case the people who only put in P or only put in GM hours aren't being punished they are still rewarded with a Chronicle for the time they've invested. The people who invest P+GM hours are being rewarded with 1 Chronicle for each.

If you are running mod X for 2GM hours a week then you are doing it for love. But for the sake of your play area I hope you are running mods X and Y for GM[1] and GM[2] hours!

That clears it up, right? :)

5/5

If a person only GM's and never gets to play, why do they need credit for their characters?

The above assumption of 3 different types of people is incorrect, it's really more like:

a) Plays all the time.
b) Usually plays, but will GM once in a while.
c) Splits time between GMing and playing.
d) Usually GM's, but plays once in a while.

What we don't know, and can only speculate based on our relatively narrow view of the Society, is what percentage each category is of the entire population.

Grand Lodge 2/5

Kyle Baird wrote:
What we don't know, and can only speculate based on our relatively narrow view of the Society, is what percentage each category is of the entire population.

Reporting data could reveal this :)

5/5

Mark Garringer wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
What we don't know, and can only speculate based on our relatively narrow view of the Society, is what percentage each category is of the entire population.
Reporting data could reveal this :)

You mean reporting tables might help the Society as a whole? Crazy!

And "we" (the denizens of the boards) will never know the data. We are left to trust that our Society overlords will use the data wisely.

Grand Lodge 2/5

Kyle Baird wrote:
And "we" (the denizens of the boards) will never know the data. We are left to trust that our Society overlords will use the data wisely.

I know. I'm such a data nerd, I pine for this data which I will never see. *tears*

The Exchange 5/5

Mark Garringer wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
And "we" (the denizens of the boards) will never know the data. We are left to trust that our Society overlords will use the data wisely.
I know. I'm such a data nerd, I pine for this data which I will never see. *tears*

*hands tissue*

The Exchange 5/5

*gets all choked up*

The Exchange 5/5

Doug Miles wrote:
*gets all choked up*

*hands tissue*

ooooo I found my new job .. can I get paid for handing out tissues?

The Exchange 2/5

I wanna see that data too. I would geek out if we ever got any play data from Paizo.

Wish everyone would submit their sessions though. I have a couple that I played from over a year ago that have never shown up.

5/5

Shieldknight wrote:

I wanna see that data too. I would geek out if we ever got any play data from Paizo.

Wish everyone would submit their sessions though. I have a couple that I played from over a year ago that have never shown up.

pfft. I have 7 tables from Dragon*Con, 1 from Gen Con (Sunday?) and 5 from Paizo Con that haven't shown up yet. I'm expecting my 7 tables from U-Con (Nov 13-14) to be entered before either of those. Quit holding back my stars you lazy coordinators! ;-)

Grand Lodge 2/5

Kyle Baird wrote:
pfft. I have 7 tables from Dragon*Con, 1 from Gen Con (Sunday?) and 5 from Paizo Con that haven't shown up yet. I'm expecting my 7 tables from U-Con (Nov 13-14) to be entered before either of those. Quit holding back my stars you lazy coordinators! ;-)

Your Sunday GenCon table is the only table of mine yet to be reported...

Damn the man for holding you back at 2 stars!

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Kyle Baird wrote:

pfft. I have 7 tables from Dragon*Con, 1 from Gen Con (Sunday?) and 5 from Paizo Con that haven't shown up yet. I'm expecting my 7 tables from U-Con (Nov 13-14) to be entered before either of those. Quit holding back my stars you lazy coordinators! ;-)

Well Pazio Con you have someone to Blame. ;)

With Dragon*Con from what I remember the coordinator was not a PFS person, just a general RPG coordinator, so unless someone took that up, good luck getting those recorded!

For me, All my stuff has been recorded except on Player session at Gen Con 2010

5/5

Dragnmoon wrote:

Well Pazio Con you have someone to Blame. ;)

With Dragon*Con from what I remember the coordinator was not a PFS person, just a general RPG coordinator, so unless someone took that up, good luck getting those recorded!

For me, All my stuff has been recorded except on Player session at Gen Con 2010

I don't really "blame" anyone. Hyrum's on the case for the Dragon*Con tables. There were about 70 tables or so this year (+/- 10?), and it would be sweet to get them entered this month! It took several months last year to get them entered (by the same person).

I think I'm just spoiled by having Doug Doug enter these things so quickly.

Paizo Employee Director of Brand Strategy

On the reporting front, I've got sessions 1-9 from GenCon 2010 reported, with only the final Sunday session left to go. PaizoCon reporting slips are sitting here on my desk. As important as these are, getting product out on time and in good shape is the priority.

5/5

Mark Garringer wrote:
Your Sunday GenCon table is the only table of mine yet to be reported...

Hmm... maybe there's a conspiracy. Just because I killed a future V-C's cleric, the table's not getting reported.

I've said it before, *I* didn't kill your cleric, the human-hating gnome did.

5/5

Mark Moreland wrote:
On the reporting front, I've got sessions 1-9 from GenCon 2010 reported, with only the final Sunday session left to go. PaizoCon reporting slips are sitting here on my desk. As important as these are, getting product out on time and in good shape is the priority.

Happy to hear you found the PaizoCon sheets!

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Kyle Baird wrote:
Hyrum's on the case for the Dragon*Con tables. There were about 70 tables or so this year (+/- 10?), and it would be sweet to get them entered this month! It took several months last year to get them entered (by the same person).

you talk to Michael Brock? He might be able to help push things along.

Dragon*Con is one of my favorite Cons and now that I am back in the states I am hoping to attend.

Maybe Mike can take over the PFS there in the future.

Grand Lodge 2/5

Kyle Baird wrote:
I've said it before, *I* didn't kill your cleric, the human-hating gnome did.

I didn't even bring that up. Smells like guilt to me! ;)

5/5

Mark Garringer wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
I've said it before, *I* didn't kill your cleric, the human-hating gnome did.
I didn't even bring that up. Smells like guilt to me! ;)

Guilty for killing your lame cleric?

Grand Lodge 2/5

Kyle Baird wrote:
Mark Garringer wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
I've said it before, *I* didn't kill your cleric, the human-hating gnome did.
I didn't even bring that up. Smells like guilt to me! ;)
Guilty for killing your lame cleric?

Guilt, now anger. We are getting closer.

Grand Lodge 5/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mark Garringer wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
Mark Garringer wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
I've said it before, *I* didn't kill your cleric, the human-hating gnome did.
I didn't even bring that up. Smells like guilt to me! ;)
Guilty for killing your lame cleric?
Guilt, now anger. We are getting closer.

# Five Stages Of Grief

* 1. Denial and Isolation.
* 2. Anger.
* 3. Bargaining.
* 4. Depression.
* 5. Acceptance.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Dragnmoon wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
Hyrum's on the case for the Dragon*Con tables. There were about 70 tables or so this year (+/- 10?), and it would be sweet to get them entered this month! It took several months last year to get them entered (by the same person).

you talk to Michael Brock? He might be able to help push things along.

Dragon*Con is one of my favorite Cons and now that I am back in the states I am hoping to attend.

Maybe Mike can take over the PFS there in the future.

I've already sent several email requests to Brook Banks but still haven't heard back from him. I am hoping in the future to run the PFS show at Dragon Con. I am anal retentive when it comes to entering Session Sheets and will have them entered within a week of the end of the con.

I'm also hoping we can run the Pathfinder Special and Venture Captain Special at next Dragon Con. That is, of course, if the Dragon Con folks allow me to run the PFS show there.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Michael Brock wrote:

I've already sent several email requests to Brook Banks but still haven't heard back from him. I am hoping in the future to run the PFS show at Dragon Con. I am anal retentive when it comes to entering Session Sheets and will have them entered within a week of the end of the con.

I'm also hoping we can run the Pathfinder Special and Venture Captain Special at next Dragon Con. That is, of course, if the Dragon Con folks allow me to run the PFS show there.

With the horror stories I have heard, If you can pull control of it from him let us know, would raise my interest in going.

Liberty's Edge 1/5

Reporting of PFS has been a big problem at conventions. It can undo all of the goodness of bringing in new players. We had this happen at Genghis Con in Denver early this year and a whole handful of players got miffed and it took us six months to earn their trust back.

If you run PFS at a convention, do not underestimate the importance of accurate reporting.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Just to update everyone who attended Dragon Con, the entries have started being made and should all be recorded in the next few days.

The Exchange 5/5

Michael Brock wrote:
Just to update everyone who attended Dragon Con, the entries have started being made and should all be recorded in the next few days.

My five sessions there have all been reported, it looks like your e-mail worked.

Dark Archive

Doug Miles wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
Just to update everyone who attended Dragon Con, the entries have started being made and should all be recorded in the next few days.
My five sessions there have all been reported, it looks like your e-mail worked.

Mine was reported as well. :-)

5/5 5/55/5 *

I can't say I'm thrilled by the no credit replay thing. This is mainly because the group I organize is kind of small right now and a few of them sit in on the "session 0" since there are only 2 DMs right now (myself and a student of mine). I mainly run it for him to see it run from a player perspective to help him prepare for the monthly public event. Attendance at the actual public games has been mixed with some people unable to make it different months. If there are enough people to run 2 tables its fine, but otherwise at least 1 person ends up replaying the scenario with a different character. Personally as a player I would look forward to replay with a different character that falls into a different subteir. Looking through some of the sceanario's I've run, many of the encounters are different enough to make for good re-playability. Different critters, big bads with new abilities and tricks make things not quite the same. I guess I understand replay being intended only to make a table "legal" for play, but I can't help but hope there could be a better middle ground then no credit for replay. I'll be honest and say I havn't had time to read the entire thread, but I assume there was some kind of abuse that many people feel no replay is necessary. I figured I'd express my opinion rather than just sit and say nothing in case the group appealing for something else besides the current ruling was large enough to gain some consideration. I accept that this is how things are now.
On another note, does the new ruling mean that GMs can play a scenario they've run? I just want to make sure I am interpreting it correctly. I wouldn't be surprised if this question as been answered already and I just missed it.

Grand Lodge 2/5

XperimentalDM wrote:
On another note, does the new ruling mean that GMs can play a scenario they've run? I just want to make sure I am interpreting it correctly. I wouldn't be surprised if this question as been answered already and I just missed it.

Yes. The 1 and 1 rule doesn't care about the order.

5/5 5/55/5 *

Mark Garringer wrote:
XperimentalDM wrote:
On another note, does the new ruling mean that GMs can play a scenario they've run? I just want to make sure I am interpreting it correctly. I wouldn't be surprised if this question as been answered already and I just missed it.
Yes. The 1 and 1 rule doesn't care about the order.

Thats how I had read it. Thanks for the quick reply.

5/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Mark Moreland wrote:
I lurve Osirion and refuse to play any of those other dumb factions...

I knew you were one of us Mark...

The Exchange 4/5

I know this is beating the already dead and rotting horse, but why can you only receive GM credit once? I started my own thread and didn't get any official answers.

I understand 'for the love of the game' and that whole reasoning. Trust me. But I mean, is falsely reporting an event like this really that rampant? I'm just curious as to the rational to why PFS deals with it this way now.

I just don't see why it would be such a big deal to GM a scenario and apply the credit to a different character every time. Especially if you put a time limit like 'you can only receive GM credit once every 3 months, and it must be applied to a different character than the last.'

Just because I can: As an aside, it is possible for a person to have two level 12s, two level 11s, and two level 3s if someone were to play and GM every single scenario. But let's be honest with ourselves, out of 71 different scenarios (more like 73 considering the length of 'The Godmouth Heresy,') who has had all the time and enough people to both run and play all the scenarios. (No, I didn't sit there with a pen and paper to figure all of this out, I have my nifty little tracker to calculate this stuff for me! :) )

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

Joseph Caubo wrote:
I know this is beating the already dead and rotting horse...

Unfortunately, yes, you are. Re-read this and other similar threads and this topic has been thoroughly discussed to the point that the only thing left is to argue who's opinion is more valid. Numerous credit plans have been suggested and there are supporters and detractors for all of them, including the current system. Mark/Hyrum/Josh have commented, albeit limited, on this topic and the guidelines are what they are. We need to let this topic die to prevent more sniping on the boards.

351 to 388 of 388 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / GM Rewards and Chronicle Sheets All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Society