Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau
aka Arnim Thayer
|
Well, not trying to stir anything up, but looking at that poll of the 26 or so that voted against the idea only 6 were Venture captains and unless the thread has been edited none of them seemed to make any comments.
True. When I mentioned the thread derail, I meant this thread here. On that thread they politely followed the suggestion and participated appropriately. So if we throw out their opinions, that puts the vote fairly even. And as Hyrum has said (and I have to agree), it isn't a real representative of the Paizo community. Not everyone participates on these forums.
There does seem to be a whole lot of smug going around, and a fair proportion of it seems to be coming from those with the Venture-Captain tag.
And not all of the VCs come across as smug. JP Chapleau and Doug Miles have been extremely polite, perhaps knowing that their words reflect not just on them, but the greater Paizo community. To that, I say kudos!
All of us who GM, Venture Captain or not, are volunteers. It is easy to forget how influential our actions and words can be to the Paizo community as a whole. Players see and hear us as representatives and ambassadors of the game regardless. Has this thread at times turned snarky? Yes. Is that how we want the RPG community to view PFS? I don't think so.
I have been frustrated on this forum (and this thread) and let that cloud my judgment. I again thank Ogre for coming through with the best,concise answer as to why he dislikes Replay. And I can agree with the base idea of representative fairness that he feels this unbalances.
I also see where the original OP has legitimate concerns on how it impacts PFS and growth; my own FLGS owner has posted a similar opinion.
AS I said earlier, hopefully this is just a bump in the road. With more low level scenarios, conversion of modules (hurray!), and additional entry level scenarios, maybe this will help fix the problem. Only time will tell.
..not all of the VCs come across as smug... Doug Miles ha[s] been extremely polite
LOL. Doug not smug. Of course we all know that Shackleton's the worst.
|
Venture-Captain, Texas—San Antonio
aka Dragnmoon
|
Arnim I have a question for you. How are you bringing up this subject and reacting to it with your local group?
Why I am asking, because being the leader of your area can influence all or some of the gamers in your area. If you have been reacting to the change of replay with words of discouragement or worry that you won't be able to work with the new rules, that reaction could be influencing your players which could cause them to be losing faith in being able to play and cause them not to be showing up. In other words you could be causing your own self fulfilled prophecy.
I have noticed that a lot of my gamers through my influence have a lot of the same opinions dealing with the society, so sometimes as a leader you need to act like everything is cool, even if you are uncertain and trying to work that out yourself, to those around you.
This is good advice to any coordinator out there, and not just a directed input to Arnim.
I am not saying not to be honest with your gamers, but to have a good face on and to choose your words wisely when you have a strong influence on the community.
Also Arnim, I am not posting this as an accusation against you, a far as I know you may have not been acting like this, but just a bit of advice that people should follow if they are not already.
You must have stopped reading the 25 daily e-mail updates Silverhair2008 is sending out :)
If my emails are that much of an harassment I will stop sending them out.(j/k)
My thought was to try keeping everyone informed of what was taking place and might have an effect on someone.
I can slack off now that everything is lined out and all GM's are present and accounted for.
My next worry project is hoping that we have enough players for all the games.
|
Rats. Long reply got eaten.
Gist was: Arnim, I think that some of what you are seeing may be due to the old messageboard lack of tone/expression. And I apologize for contributing towards some of the tangents, it was not intentional derailment, just banter with my friends.
No solution will please everyone, but I'm sure that we can count on the Paizo folks to listen. They have a pretty good track record.
..not all of the VCs come across as smug... Doug Miles ha[s] been extremely politeLOL. Doug not smug. Of course we all know that Shackleton's the worst.
It's just my avatar. Frost-itis ;)
|
Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau
aka Arnim Thayer
|
Arnim, I have a question for you. How are you bringing up this subject and reacting to it with your local group?
Right now, with the support of the FLGS owner, we have offered allowances to still allow Replay, when needed. Since PFS players "pay to play" at our venue (a small fee that helps provide for the purchase of the scenario, printing, binding, and our own GM Reqards),he was waived the fee if you are playing for Replay to make the table legal. This is an effort to still provide a table for new players that have just joined.
My fellow GMs know I dislike the rule (and that I feel partially responsible for the change) and some have even vocalized on this and other threads about it. To my players, I have only provided the rule change and how it has affected the Replay rules (on paying) at our FLGS.
In general, I DO put on the happy face an am well aware of how even the slightest comment ("I'm not pleased with how this scenario is written" or "this scenario sucks!") can influence groups into not enjoying the scenario... and then telling others to avoid it if it gets scheduled again.
And, yes, I know Paizo has an awesome track record of listening... that's why I'm still here!
|
Venture-Captain, Texas—San Antonio
aka Dragnmoon
|
Right now, with the support of the FLGS owner, we have offered allowances to still allow Replay, when needed. Since PFS players "pay to play" at our venue (a small fee that helps provide for the purchase of the scenario, printing, binding, and our own GM Reqards),he was waived the fee if you are playing for Replay to make the table legal.
I am glad that my Local RPG store does not charge a fee, I know if they did I would not run the Society there, I would run it at my house (I could host up to 4 games at my house). Though at the same time I have no issues with funding of the printing, binding, and scenarios, I pay for all of that and provide it all to our GMs. It is not really a lot of money twice a month. I also provide them with Maps and Minis.
|
I am glad that my Local RPG store does not charge a fee, I know if they did I would not run the Society there, I would run it at my house (I could host up to 4 games at my house). Though at the same time I have no issues with funding of the printing, binding, and scenarios, I pay for all of that and provide it all to our GMs. It is not really a lot of money twice a month. I also provide them with Maps and Minis.
Right now, with the support of the FLGS owner, we have offered allowances to still allow Replay, when needed. Since PFS players "pay to play" at our venue (a small fee that helps provide for the purchase of the scenario, printing, binding, and our own GM Reqards),he was waived the fee if you are playing for Replay to make the table legal.
One of our FLGS charges $2.00 US to play a mod and then gives a $10.00 gift card to the GM. So I suppose they are making a little money from the play, but honestly it can't do more than cover the cost of sweeping up when we are done.
|
Well, not trying to stir anything up, but looking at that poll of the 26 or so that voted against the idea only 6 were Venture captains and unless the thread has been edited none of them seemed to make any comments.True. When I mentioned the thread derail, I meant this thread here. On that thread they politely followed the suggestion and participated appropriately. So if we throw out their opinions, that puts the vote fairly even. And as Hyrum has said (and I have to agree), it isn't a real representative of the Paizo community. Not everyone participates on these forums.
FWIW the 26 count is just the "-1" votes, not the verbal opinionatedness.
Considering everyone more or less understands both sides on the issue it's down to a simple matter of opinion of which path you think is right and neither side is inclined to changing their POV. I posted a reply on the other thread about a compromise solution which addresses fairness and preserves at least a GM reward and it got a little interest but I suspect most people are dug into their POV.
Once you have beaten a subject to death there is really nowhere for a thread to go. It either gets derailed or degrades into a flame-war...
Which is where we are now.
|
As one of the youngest guys posting on the thread for this, (assuming anyways) i don't see why ppp is out, ya people are breaking the game. thats a given, but can anyone here tell me that it's not going to be broken anyways? maybe without ppp u stop i'll say 30% due to rerunning is gone (random number). but that's not going to stop joe schmoe here to buy the mod, read the mod and play it with full knowledge and using full knowledge of said mod to gain everything easily.
now lisa posted making the ap mods pfs, works but then you have all these players that do both, who are going to play there ap, in a home game and then play it again in society, isn't that the same thing?
also i see players all the time who are only in pfs for that little thing called the chronicle, which last i checked is made out of paper (yes i'm quotting badwolf here)
yes so and so here can go and run a mod over and over and over up to 5 times the old way, but why not make it to where you can only get up to 2-3 credit regardless of whether you run or gm or both in any order. (i know you can run/gm a mod for 2 credit) but there are many players i know of around here that if they ran a mod to get there chronicle we would lose everyone at the table probably forever
pfs is designed so that the traveling salesman from alaska can come down to my local gaming store and play with us no problem, that is an awesome thing, but how many people who are actually doing that are running into a problem of running into the so and so guy?
I hope someone is understanding me on this cause this is the clearest i can get my thoughts on it, Now maybe it's because i'm young, maybe it's because i'm not the brightest apple in the bunch. but i don't really see a problem with ppp, although i can see how it would be extremely dull playing a mod for the 5th time, but that doesnt mean a playthrough or two or even three would hurt. why not let them ppp up to 2-3 times, and get credit for gming, no matter what order they do it in, SO LONG AS NO ONE GETS MORE THEN 2-3 CHRONICLE'S???
now if i overstepped my bounds here i'm sorry and i'll just go back to being the guy watching and reading the whole conversation, and not chiming in my own opinions on something. either way though i probably won't say nothing on this again just due to the fact that it doesn't seem like (to me anyways) that it's worth it. i honestly feel like this whole debocle has just gotten out of line.
|
|
A couple quick comments. First everyone is welcome to participate in the forums so no worries about being out of bounds.
An example might illustrate this best:
In the last scenario I played my alchemist wasted his mutagen when I drank it and had the duration run down as the party wandered down a long series of unoccupied sewers. If I'd played the scenario previously with a different character would I have made that same mistake?
When you are presented with a door in the game and you make the call about spells or resources you make that decision based on a lot of factors which for the first time player are made based on judgement. If you have foreknowledge these decisions are simple. Even for honest players its impossible to avoid being influenced, you cannot un-know things.
How do you deal with traps in a replay? or ambushes or anything that was a surprise? I've played in scenarios where traps have been quite nasty; replay more or less spoils them as useful game tools.
Replaying isn't inherently about being dishonest or cheating, it's just easier and not fair to the people who are playing a scenario the first time. No, it won't prevent a dedicated cheater and personally I don't see it as being about cheating.
As I posted in that other thread, I'm not 100% against replay, but I do think it shouldn't have the reward that you get for playing the first time since it is inherently easier.
|
|
Young shinny apple Luke brings up a good point. What if you already played the APs or modules that they convert for PFS? I am running a group through an AP right now and I have ran or played in a handful of the modules. I guess it will be slightly diffeerent based on the chroncile sheet, but it would still be replaying in a way.
Luke, you can actually replay a scenario a billion times if you want, you just don't get a chronicle sheet for it. With our group of players, almost any of them would jump in with a pre-gen to make a legal table, but nearly nobody would play just to play it again. Most of them will just go home and catch the next game they have not played a few weeks later.
|
|
dave i understand that i can replay again and again, but a few players like me are willing to do that, most people out there want that small almost useless piece of paper, and since u can ppp as a pregen thats great but when you need a ppp how many people are willing to do a ppp with a pregen to make the table? i would say probably about 20% or at least thats what it seems like to me,
ogre, i have replayed mods before and i completely understand that if you know this next room is going to be trapped, but thats you not your character, and character knowledge and player knowledge should be two different things,
example my level 7 fighter knows how to swing a sword and hit three targets in a crucial spot to kill them almost instantly, but he doesn;t know what a computer is.
while i know how to reprogram and wipe said computer i barely know how to swing a sword to hit my 1 opponent in the shoulder.
does this make sense? also i dont know about anyone else (and i'm sure im alone like this) but my characters always have spells that are meant for nothing more then character likes, i make my characters to fight a certain way and there fore they prep
are spells based on that, my wizard doesnt normally take ray of frost but if i know a fire elemental is in the mod i still won't take it, unless there is something about it in the name, the first box text, or in my prestige mission, i play my characters to there own knowledge, hence why when i see a troll, i make knowledge checks to try and kill them, otherwise he will stick to his self buff then smack with sword style ( fighter/wizard/eldritch knight)
|
|
ogre, i have replayed mods before and i completely understand that if you know this next room is going to be trapped, but thats you not your character, and character knowledge and player knowledge should be two different things,
Your character is a construct of your imagination and it's decisions are based on what you know, not some imagined knowledge it might possess. How well it 'knows' how to swing a sword is irrelevant because it doesn't decide who opens the next door, you do.
Regardless of how well you are able to compartmentalize, my personal experience is most players aren't very good at it.
|
|
Luke - You are correct on the number of people who would replay for a legal table. Most of our player base will replay with a pre-gen if needed to complete a table. This almost is never needed anyway. I am not interested in replaying a scenario, although as a GM who ran most of the scenario's already and now can get credit as a player, this is essentially what I can now do.
Ogre is correct that it is difficult to not spill any beans or act differently. In the last adventure I played in, which I already ran, I spent most of my time assisting the groups decisions and at one point their plan was to have me charge the bad guy. I knew this was a bad plan, but my character would not have. So I did as they asked and charged him, and got my butt kicked. That part was awesome, but it is difficult not to say things when I know characters are missing their PA chances, but I did it anyway.
|
Venture-Captain, Texas—San Antonio
aka Dragnmoon
|
I have been against replay since the beginning, and I am satisfied with the way Current rules are but then they go and make 1st level Modules unlimited replay, which makes no sense to me, because at that point if you are going to make that unlimited it makes no sense now to not allow replay for credit on scenarios using some of the same restriction with the level 1 modules.
I am mostly playing devils advocate here, because I am happy with the current rule, just my sense of fairness and consistent rules got jostled with the new rule... It makes no sense!!
Can someone help me make sense of it all!!!
KHAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
I have been against replay since the beginning, and I am satisfied with the way Current rules are but then they go and make 1st level Modules unlimited replay, which makes no sense to me, because at that point if you are going to make that unlimited it makes no sense now to not allow replay for credit on scenarios using some of the same restriction with the level 1 modules.
I am mostly playing devils advocate here, because I am happy with the current rule, just my sense of fairness and consistent rules got jostled with the new rule... It makes no sense!!
Can someone help me make sense of it all!!!
KHAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If I had to guess... by allowing replay for 1st level modules, it encourages and rewards veteran Pathfinder Society players for joining players new to Pathfinder's Organized Play. This way newer players get to interact with (possibly) more experienced player (where, without this rule, that player may have not been invited to the game. This helps build low level tables and teach newer players about the game.
|
Venture-Captain, Texas—San Antonio
aka Dragnmoon
|
If I had to guess... by allowing replay for 1st level modules, it encourages and rewards veteran Pathfinder Society players for joining players new to Pathfinder's Organized Play. This way newer players get to interact with (possibly) more experienced player (where, without this rule, that player may have not been invited to the game. This helps build low level tables and teach newer players about the game.
The same can be done with regular Scenarios... Remember, for the modules you get a reward based on any character you want at any level and the reward is based on the level... You can do the same thing with Scenarios..
The new rules just broke my sense of consistency... I hurt!!! It think it broke something inside me.. ;)
|
|
Can someone help me make sense of it all!!!
My understanding is this:
One of the main complaints about 'no replay for credit' is that some more experienced players don't want to help out newbies because they get no credit. They've played everything so helping out lvl 1 Bob isn't high on their personal character development path. Sad, but true.
Now with the way they've structured this level 1 replay, lvl 1 Bob can have his new character, and lvl 7 Joe can always create a new lvl 1 character to join in a party of lvl 1 characters and everyone will be able to claim credit. Level 7 Joe can take the 3 XP from the mod and apply it to his main character and now be level 8. Bob can apply it to his new level 1 character and blamo he's level 2.
This effectively eliminates the 'we don't have anything to play if we get killed' argument. You could always replay this with a level 1 and get to level 2 at least. Also the 'there's nothing in it for me to help the new players' argument as they can now create level 1 characters and apply the credit to their high level PC for being helpful.
Win + Win = 2Win.
|
Now with the way they've structured this level 1 replay, lvl 1 Bob can have his new character, and lvl 7 Joe can always create a new lvl 1 character to join in a party of lvl 1 characters and everyone will be able to claim credit. Level 7 Joe can take the 3 XP from the mod and apply it to his main character and now be level 8. Bob can apply it to his new level 1 character and blamo he's level 2.
I'm not sure this is the situation.
The conversion document says "If a player uses a legal Pathfinder Society character for the adventure (existing, or newly created), he must apply the Chronicle to this PC. A player who plays a pregenerated character may apply the credit to any existing Pathfinder Society character."
So if you create a PFS character, you must apply the credit to that new character. If you have a 7th level character, the only way you can apply credit to the 7th level character is to play a pregenerated PFS character (which I expect means 'one of the official pregens, rather than one created by you, your GM, local organiser, or whatnot). So while Joe can play Godsmouth and apply the credit to his level 7 character, he can only do this by playing a pregen.
It also seems that you only ever get one GM credit for Godsmouth, regardless of how many times you GM it, as the exception at the end of the Getting Credit section only applies to "replay[ing] for credit".
Stuff
And the other advantage is that I, as a GM, can avoid running these modules if I don't want to run games for replayers. ;-)
|
|
I'm not sure this is the situation.
Sorry, must have been confusing it with something else. I went back and reread it and a (new) point that becomes unclear for me is:
A player may also create a 1st-level version of an existing Pathfinder Society character for use in the module.
So if Level 7 Joe forks his character back to a level 1 version and plays through and gets 3 XP where does that go? By even including this line in the document it implies to me that the credit could/should go back to the level 7. Otherwise there isn't really any reason to remind players they could always make an 'level 1 version' of their character and play that. Is there?
I read it the same as pedr, that you only get the "open" credit to apply to any PFS character if you play an official pre-generated character. Until otherwise clarified, this is how I will treat it.
+1
Play it with a freshly written PFS character, the XP goes to that character.
Play it with a level 1 version of a higher level character, the XP goes to the higher (and real) level character.
Play it with a pregen, put the XP toward any character you already have (including a new character).
GM it and put the XP anywhere you want.
|
Venture-Captain, Texas—San Antonio
aka Dragnmoon
|
My point is, if you are going to open unlimited replay with some funky rules with modules, why not have some consistent rule across the board and open unlimited replay to at least all the low level scenarios with some funky rules also.
Mark/Hyrum had some reason for getting rid of the old replay rules, but those reasons where thrown out the door and not considered with the level 1 modules, so obviously to me it seems what ever those reason where are not considered anymore, since they are not considered anymore, you might as well do the same for scenarios..
I am more having problems with the lack of consistency here then anything else..
If you have a reason to get rid of replay... Stick with it, or get rid of it, don't get all inconsistent later..
|
Venture-Captain, Texas—San Antonio
aka Dragnmoon
|
I read it the same as pedr, that you only get the "open" credit to apply to any PFS character if you play an official pre-generated character. Until otherwise clarified, this is how I will treat it.+1
Play it with a freshly written PFS character, the XP goes to that character.
Play it with a level 1 version of a higher level character, the XP goes to the higher (and real) level character.
Play it with a pregen, put the XP toward any character you already have (including a new character).
GM it and put the XP anywhere you want.
and those same rules can be used with all the scenarios. And the scenarios can be adjusted accordingly with the chronicle sheet with out breaking the scenario..
Remember I am playing devils advocate here... I just don't like the inconsistency..
|
Venture-Captain
aka TwilightKnight
|
I think the point here is that Hyrum/Mark is trying to give all of us something rather than "screwing" some players. We have some who have said that unlimited replay would drive them out of the society. There are also some that the lack of replay is driving players away. I see no reason why we can't have a form of limited replay that will give both sides something they want. The game is loaded with exceptions as it is, albeit mostly "in-game" exceptions. I think we can handle a couple of "out of game" ones if it increases the player-base. Granted the language may need to be cleaned up bit based on the feedback so far, but I think this replay rule is a good one.
|
Venture-Captain, Texas—San Antonio
aka Dragnmoon
|
I think the point here is that Hyrum/Mark is trying to give all of us something rather than "screwing" some players. We have some who have said that unlimited replay would drive them out of the society. There are also some that the lack of replay is driving players away. I see no reason why we can't have a form of limited replay that will give both sides something they want. The game is loaded with exceptions as it is, albeit mostly "in-game" exceptions. I think we can handle a couple of "out of game" ones if it increases the player-base. Granted the language may need to be cleaned up bit based on the feedback so far, but I think this replay rule is a good one.
So in other words, we are throwing people who want replay a Bone, a small bone but a bone none the less..
That I can except, but it still opens it up for inconsistent rules, and that I am not a fan of..
I read it the same as pedr, that you only get the "open" credit to apply to any PFS character if you play an official pre-generated character. Until otherwise clarified, this is how I will treat it.+1
Play it with a freshly written PFS character, the XP goes to that character.
Play it with a level 1 version of a higher level character, the XP goes to the higher (and real) level character.
Play it with a pregen, put the XP toward any character you already have (including a new character).
GM it and put the XP anywhere you want.and those same rules can be used with all the scenarios. And the scenarios can be adjusted accordingly with the chronicle sheet with out breaking the scenario..
Remember I am playing devils advocate here... I just don't like the inconsistency..
The difference here, is that I don't expect Modules to show up at very many conventions.
|
|
The other BIG difference is time commitment.
Anecdotal evidence suggests that Godsmouth Heresy would run well over 8 hours - so 3 sessions. A re-player would have to play 3 sessions, and survive, to get the full credit for the mod.
If re-play were unlimited for scenarios, they could play the same scenario 3 times in the equal number of sessions to virtually guarantee themselves a better reward.
|
The other BIG difference is time commitment.
Anecdotal evidence suggests that Godsmouth Heresy would run well over 8 hours - so 3 sessions. A re-player would have to play 3 sessions, and survive, to get the full credit for the mod.
If re-play were unlimited for scenarios, they could play the same scenario 3 times in the equal number of sessions to virtually guarantee themselves a better reward.
Once again, I don't see why there isn't a time limit on replays. Make it "you can only replay / GM a scenario for credit once every 3 months, and that new credit can only apply to a different character of a different faction than the credit(s) originally applied."
So, in essence, you could only replay or GM a scenario a total of 5 separate times, and it would take at the very least a year to do this. I really doubt someone will replay or GM the same scenario 5 separate times, but I think this imposes a real limit while throwing replayers / GMers a bone. And I mean, chronicle sheets are dated, so we should easily be able to keep track of this stuff.
|
|
So, in essence, you could only replay or GM a scenario a total of 5 separate times, and it would take at the very least a year to do this. I really doubt someone will replay or GM the same scenario 5 separate times, but I think this imposes a real limit while throwing replayers / GMers a bone. And I mean, chronicle sheets are dated, so we should easily be able to keep track of this stuff.
It is entirely possible to GM the same scenario 4-9 times at GenCon.
EDIT: The problem with time-based replay is that it does not take into account different frequencies of play.
|
|
It is entirely possible to GM the same scenario 4-9 times at GenCon.So, in essence, you could only replay or GM a scenario a total of 5 separate times, and it would take at the very least a year to do this. I really doubt someone will replay or GM the same scenario 5 separate times, but I think this imposes a real limit while throwing replayers / GMers a bone. And I mean, chronicle sheets are dated, so we should easily be able to keep track of this stuff.
By Sarenrae's flaming hair...how many tables happen at GenCon?
Alright, well if time limits are an issue, just set a hard limit of replay / GM credit totaling a number of 5, where each credit must be for a different character of a different faction. That should completely top out all you can do as a player / GM in a scenario. Past that, you're just adhering to PPP or wanting to up your GM star level.
Really, either what I proposed before with the time in-between or the one above should be able to satisfy the vast majority of PFS players (aka within 3 standard deviations of the mean!).
By Sarenrae's flaming hair...how many tables happen at GenCon?
Total tables is around 300 (there were 36 tables for 10 slots, most of them were full every slot except the special and on Sunday). I ran #52 five times at this year's Gen Con.
|
|
It is entirely possible to GM the same scenario 4-9 times at GenCon.
EDIT: The problem with time-based replay is that it does not take into account different frequencies of play.
Let's not forget the actual logistical nightmare of tracking this, for which there exists no actual enforceable mechanism currently.
|
|
Let's not forget the actual logistical nightmare of tracking this, for which there exists no actual enforceable mechanism currently.It is entirely possible to GM the same scenario 4-9 times at GenCon.
EDIT: The problem with time-based replay is that it does not take into account different frequencies of play.
Don't you have to report on what day you played the game? It's not perfect to give exact timing, but it does show the day you played a scenario on.
PS. I just checked my listing of player AND GM sessions and it does list the day the game was played.
|
|
Don't you have to report on what day you played the game? It's not perfect to give exact timing, but it does show the day you played a scenario on.PS. I just checked my listing of player AND GM sessions and it does list the day the game was played.
And when you walk up to the table how I am going to know that? Please don't suggest that I check the Chronicles of everyone. I believe we are back to logistical nightmare. Not to mention whatever value you assign to NUM_DAYS you will have people trying to play at NUM_DAYS - X where X is some number reasonably (as defined by the replayer) close to your game day. "But it's only 3 more days until the 60 day rule expires and I can't play next week. *sob*"
In general terms I don't like my rules to have lots of exceptions, caveats or branches. It's one of the things I like about the 1 and 1 credit rule.
|
|
It appears the response to this ruling has been decided. In my quest to play or run 50 in 50, I've struck out in the the last 3 states I've been in. Philadelphia, Little Rock and Phoenix, their game stores near their respective colleges no longer offer Society games, even if I offered to GM. It's a shame. I'll be back in Philadelphia tomorrow and I'll be swinging by Redcap's to see what games are afoot!
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
It appears the response to this ruling has been decided. In my quest to play or run 50 in 50, I've struck out in the the last 3 states I've been in. Philadelphia, Little Rock and Phoenix, their game stores near their respective colleges no longer offer Society games, even if I offered to GM. It's a shame.
Meanwhile, in Colorado stores keep on adding more and more games. I wonder what the difference is.
|
|
And when you walk up to the table how I am going to know that? Please don't suggest that I check the Chronicles of everyone. I believe we are back to logistical nightmare. Not to mention whatever value you assign to NUM_DAYS you will have people trying to play at NUM_DAYS - X where X is some number reasonably (as defined by the replayer) close to your game day. "But it's only 3 more days until the 60 day rule expires and I can't play next week. *sob*"
In general terms I don't like my rules to have lots of exceptions, caveats or branches. It's one of the things I like about the 1 and 1 credit rule.
This line of reasoning seems a bit like the goalposts are being moved back further.
There are many ways you can double check what scenarios people have played without checking chronicle sheets (but they should be bringing ALL of them whenever they go to a PFS meeting anyway). First, you can have everyone bring a printout of the scenarios that they've played from Paizo.com (My PFS Account -> Sessions -> Show Player / GM Sessions). Right there is a nice 1 (or 2 page) summary of everything that person has played and / or GMed and gotten credit for along with date played and what character the credit was applied to. And really, this is not too much to ask for because you already require players to bring by any and all material pertaining to their character so they can show where they got information from to create their character or what chronicle sheets says what they could buy. This really is not asking for that much more.
Or, for instance with a group of dedicated players, you can create a spreadsheet (like the one I'm working on for the Georgia PFS players) that contains almost all that information (don't have date played yet built in, but I will), and you can check for your regulars that way. This is not as good of an option as requiring it from Paizo.com, but it works almost the same.
And so what if people play before NUM_DAYS are up? There are already a number of hard rules in place that people can whine about. But that's always going to be the case regardless of whatever the rules pertain to, and you just have to stick to them.
There is no exceptions or caveats, 5 credits split between playing and GMing for 5 different characters of 5 different factions. Call it a 5-5-5 deal (or at least until Dominoes sends you a cease and desist! :) ). As both a player, but moreso as a GM, you should be getting credit for replaying / GMing a scenario again as long as you aren't applying the same credit to the same characters you have before.
The current status quo does not go far enough in terms of giving credit and I think that there is a way to compromise for both sides of the issue to get what they want - and I personally believe 5-5-5 is it.
I appreciate the added suggestions but we're not going to be revising the replay rules for the forseeable future. I'm not going to be thinking about that particular issue for awhile as there are more important things that need to be addressed as we head into the second half of "Year of the Shadow Lodge".
Hyrum.
|
|
There are many ways you can double check what scenarios people have played without checking chronicle sheets (but they should be bringing ALL of them whenever they go to a PFS meeting anyway). First, you can have everyone bring a printout of the scenarios that they've played from Paizo.com (My PFS Account -> Sessions -> Show Player / GM Sessions). Right there is a nice 1 (or 2 page) summary of everything that person has played and / or GMed and gotten credit for along with date played and what character the credit was applied to. And really, this is not too much to ask for because you already require players to bring by any and all material pertaining to their character so they can show where they got information from to create their character or what chronicle sheets says what they could buy. This really is not asking for that much more.
Not all sessions are reported or tracked, so having a printout from online is impractical. The physical chronicles are the players record. However, I'm in Mark's corner with I'm not auditing each player each game. If you have a table of 7 9th level players that is to much time taken away from the actual game that we are all there to play.
I'm a GM, I'm there to augment the game experience and to ensure that I and the players have a fun time. I am NOT there to be their mommy and audit their characters. If we're going to use the analogy of throwing both sides a bone then take the bone, gnaw on it and enjoy it. But don't expect me as a judge to play mommy. I'm there to enjoy the game just as much as the players.
The 1 and 1 rule works for me (I don't really take judging credit anyway tho) and it seems to be the easiest for both sides.
|
|
I appreciate the added suggestions but we're not going to be revising the replay rules for the forseeable future. I'm not going to be thinking about that particular issue for awhile as there are more important things that need to be addressed as we head into the second half of "Year of the Shadow Lodge".
Hyrum.
[sadface] Well, just as long as I can have my character join the Shadow Lodge instead of being a PFS member...
(I have wanted that option ever since I read about the Shadow Lodge table GMing the Special)
|
|
Not all sessions are reported or tracked, so having a printout from online is impractical. The physical chronicles are the players record. However, I'm in Mark's corner with I'm not auditing each player each game. If you have a table of 7 9th level players that is to much time taken away from the actual game that we are all there to play.
I wasn't suggesting for someone to go through every chronicle sheet, I was responding to easier ways of making sure someone is honest. And if the printout is impractical, it should be of no fault to the players since they aren't the ones who report that information.
/Although, as much as I don't like to, sometimes you do have to mommy. Especially when someone says 'and I pull out my scroll of limited wish' and you're like, "WTFOMGBBQ?!" But fortunately that scenario is retired and there is no longer access to that brokenness from the players at large...
//But this is all moot now, so I digress...
///Slashies!
////And ellipses...
/Although, as much as I don't like to, sometimes you do have to mommy. Especially when someone says 'and I pull out my scroll of limited wish' and you're like, "WTFOMGBBQ?!" But fortunately that scenario is retired and there is no longer access to that brokenness from the players at large...
//But this is all moot now, so I digress...
Just so you know, you do not lose access to what is on a chronicle sheet from a scenario that has been retired after you played it. And since the rule was changed from buying only from the last two chronicle sheets to being able to buy from any chronicles you have ever earned, it can still come up unless the item itself has been banned from play.