Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau
|
First off, thanks Hyrum for locking down the previous thread. I asked for advice, not petty sniping. You were correct to close it down, even if the advice I was given was confusing. And thanks also for noting the problem and saying you'll look into it. The thing I appreciate more than anything is the fast response time from Paizo employees.
To all the rest; please be polite on these boards. One reason SO MANY left the forums of "that other company" was the sniping and constant bickering, myself included. these boards are were new players go to find information and the commentary found here is enough to drive some of them away, based on previous experiences. Please do not let this happen!
Thanks for your time.
|
Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau
|
You had already edited your post by the time I saw it. I thought your explanation was fair. But Hyrum was right to close it down before it got out of hand.
I was under the impression that if the range was 1-7, a player could expect to play if he fell within that range. I hate to turn a player away... and I feel that "forcing" them to play a pre-gen is exactly that.
Since it is a public venue, it gives the store and PFS a bad reputation IMO. And asking them to make a new character cuts into the "window" of time I have to run a game. So I ran the table average. Is that wrong? Not according to the Players Guide.
We had to go to a "ticket" format for PFS at our store to prevent the sniping among PFS players... things like "I won't sit at a table with _______." Since it's a blind sitting, I rarely know what levels I am looking at until they sign in at the table and I have no problems with that either. I can adjust on the fly rather well. If I am in the wrong, I will readjust how we run things.
I want the players to have fun. And when the spotlight seems to be on the higher level characters because the lower levels just can't to anything, it's no fun for anyone... even the GM (in this case, me).
Director of Brand Strategy
|
Tier 1-7 adventures are among the most difficult to write and develop, as what presents a challenge to a 1st level PC and what challenges someone of 7th level are very different. That said, they are among the most played scenarios, as they cover the most levels. Thus, they're attractive to players and coordinators at conventions and game stores where the exact makeup of a table may vary significantly based on who walks up. So we don't have plans at the moment to do away with 1–7 scenarios completely, but I would certainly be interested in finding a way to curtail, if not completely eliminate, the type of situation you ran into.
|
I want the players to have fun. And when the spotlight seems to be on the higher level characters because the lower levels just can't to anything, it's no fun for anyone... even the GM (in this case, me).
I really see those kinds of situations a pretty much lose for everyone. The high level PC loose because he took a cake walk and got under paid for it. The low level PC lose because they feel overshadowed by the high level PC who 'can do everything.' The GM will lose because nobody at the table was having fun.
I recently had to ask a player to play his level 3 instead of level 7 for this reason and the end result was a great time had by all, even though there were a few near death experiences at tier 3-4 :)
|
@Arnim Thayer
I mentioned it in the other thread but worth repeating. Bring pregens.
Don't force them to play the pregen but you might explain to them that playing their 6th level character in the adventure is going to be pretty boring and hurts their character's progression.
Then when they get home they can file the numbers off the pregen and next time they sit down they can work on expanding their new character.
Arnim,
It may not be as big a problem with the scenarios that only have two sub-tiers, but maybe with the 1-7's you should post what sub-tier will be run as well. That way people will know what to expect when they sign up for it, though posting sub-tier 3-4 could still get the whole range of levels to show up.
Mark,
Maybe it would be easier to stop doing tier 1-7 altogether and switch to making tier 3-9 scenarios, especially since it was announced that scenarios for 1st level characters are going to be produced. You would still have the issue of having three sub-tiers, but I think having a level 3 or 4 character running around with a level 8 or 9 is a lot better than having that level 1 playing with a level 7.
|
Tier 1-7 adventures are among the most difficult to write and develop, as what presents a challenge to a 1st level PC and what challenges someone of 7th level are very different. That said, they are among the most played scenarios, as they cover the most levels.
This is a little skewed isn't it? Due to the number of new players that start, but never continue in PF, plus all the part-time players who take longer to level wouldn't it be expected that lower-tier mods get played more often, especially at conventions? I wonder what the numbers are for level 6-7 PC's that play tier 1-7 mods vs. 5-9 mods. And if there was no option in the low-tier for them to play, would it result in more players being turned away or would more mid-tier games get scheduled.
|
Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau
|
Now THIS is what I expected from the forums; actual debate and brainstorming. THIS I like!
Someone on the other thread suggested a different spread of the Tier system...
Possible:
1-5 (1-2, 4-5)
3-7 (3-4, 6-7)
5-9 (5-6, 8-9)
7-11 (7-8, 10-11)
12 (12)
I think spreading it out would be great... if not for that meaning a whole new Tier to develop scenarios for. I don't know if that is truly a solution for now.
@Ogre: We have MANY copies of all the pre-gens at our store... but no one wants to play them. Yes, I know they are in re-development, but most of our experienced players won't touch them. And that gives a bad message to the newbies too.
@Enevhar: We have had a slow-down with PFS recently. I won't go into the reasons here for fear of sounding like I'm complaining (cause I'm not). But we have seen it affect PFS participation and PF sales. Hopefully, the Inner Sea Primer will spark some new interest from players old and new. Maybe even encourage some of those who refuse to make a secondary character!
|
|
Now THIS is what I expected from the forums; actual debate and brainstorming. THIS I like!
Someone on the other thread suggested a different spread of the Tier system...
Possible:
1-5 (1-2, 4-5)
3-7 (3-4, 6-7)
5-9 (5-6, 8-9)
7-11 (7-8, 10-11)
12 (12)I think spreading it out would be great... if not for that meaning a whole new Tier to develop scenarios for. I don't know if that is truly a solution for now.
@Ogre: We have MANY copies of all the pre-gens at our store... but no one wants to play them. Yes, I know they are in re-development, but most of our experienced players won't touch them. And that gives a bad message to the newbies too.
@Enevhar: We have had a slow-down with PFS recently. I won't go into the reasons here for fear of sounding like I'm complaining (cause I'm not). But we have seen it affect PFS participation and PF sales. Hopefully, the Inner Sea Primer will spark some new interest from players old and new. Maybe even encourage some of those who refuse to make a secondary character!
Arnim,
I do not think Ogre meant for you to use the somewhat flawed PFS pre-gens, though the APG pre-gens seem much more accurate than the Core Book pre-gens, but that he meant to create your own pre-gens, at least for 1st level, to hand out for people to use.
|
Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau
|
As a group, every one of my local GMs has HeroLab and a file of about twenty pre-gens ready to go. With access to the stores printer, we can have a new player with a PFS legal 1st level character in minutes, thanks to laptops. We have the capability. Some players just don't want to spend the time developing a new character. But it is good advice to anyone else out there as well. Thanks for posting the suggestion.
|
|
I think spreading it out would be great
I like the concept, but my fear is that this would lead to scenario release being diluted. With only two scenarios per month, adding a tier would suggest to me a bi-monthly schedule. We are already gripping about more low-tier scenarios. The solution would be to release more mods per month, but that could lead to lower quality. I don't want to see that.
|
|
@Ogre: We have MANY copies of all the pre-gens at our store... but no one wants to play them. Yes, I know they are in re-development, but most of our experienced players won't touch them. And that gives a bad message to the newbies too.
I guess it depends on what exactly is meant by 'filing off the serial numbers'. I've played the pregens before then come home and pretty much rewrote the character and applied the scenario to the new character. Playing a pregen for one scenario isn't a big deal.
Alternately strongly encourage everyone to create and bring a second character as soon as they hit 4th level. Then they will never have to play down.
|
|
Assuming there are extra options coming for first level characters there's always the possibility of replacing the 1-7 tier with 3-7 as it was initially planned. Although that's more of a long term issue and reducing the amount of lvl 1 adventures with strict replay rules can be quiet dangerous.
As for the more immediate issue you might try advertising the adventure as something like 1-5 or 4-7 instead of the full 1-7. Also I've found most players are quite willing to be helpful and play different characters to help balance a table. I may be especially lucky in that regard to have quality players that are willing to be flexible to help make the tables work.
|
|
Honestly, I think that part of the appeal of the 1-7 scenarios is just the shortage of 1-5's.
I will be very glad to see the new lowlow tier adventures. IMO, 1st level should probably be its own sub-tier.
I'm also very happy to see a much clearer split in the publishing schedule for 1-5 and 5-9. I would love to see some straight tier 1 mods as well!
|
|
I'm also very happy to see a much clearer split in the publishing schedule for 1-5 and 5-9. I would love to see some straight tier 1 mods as well!Honestly, I think that part of the appeal of the 1-7 scenarios is just the shortage of 1-5's.
I will be very glad to see the new lowlow tier adventures. IMO, 1st level should probably be its own sub-tier.
If you guys take a look at the Schedule, 5 of the 6 future low level scenarios are 1-5. Also they announced some level 1 only ones, just no info yet.
|
|
Is this even legal? Also, is changing the scenario to accomodate 6-7 players legal? I see on these boards DM's changing the scenario for this occurence, but I have not seen it in the rule book. I would like to know as sometimes, a scenario seems extra easy for a party of 6 or more and would like to possibly add in a extra creature.Arnim,
I do not think Ogre meant for you to use the somewhat flawed PFS pre-gens, though the APG pre-gens seem much more accurate than the Core Book pre-gens, but that he meant to create your own pre-gens, at least for 1st level, to hand out for people to use.
Developing your own pregens is perfectly legal for level 1. The players still have to use that character should they decide to continue with the Chronicle Sheet earned on that one and simply 'file off the serial number' on it. It's just like coming to a game with a new level 1. Nothing says YOU have to create the character.
Also Pathfinder tables are legal for up to 7 players as per the Guide to Organized Play. You don't have to change anything except that 6+ players means you up the teir by one to increase the difficulty. I don't think it's optimal or very enjoyable to do it but it happens. It's actually a nice feature for organizers as previously we had certain numbers of players that just were a disaster at making a table. 7 in almost any other campaign was illeagl, leading you to 1-3 players you wouldn't be able to sit.
|
|
Also Pathfinder tables are legal for up to 7 players as per the Guide to Organized Play. You don't have to change anything except that 6+ players means you up the teir by one to increase the difficulty.I understand upping the tier by 1 to increase the difficulty. What I was asking is say you are playing a Tier 7-11 with 6 level 11 characters. Many of the challenges are going to be a cake walk and you cannot up the level as that would change the tier. How would I as the DM legally make the challenge fit the players? Or, do not change it at all and play the module as wrote? I have read where other DM's have changed the scenario by adding a extra creature to some of the encounters, played the creature smarter than what the statblock states in the Tactics section and such. I just want to be certain I am not skirting the line so to speak.
As part of an Organized Play system, I do not believe that you should make changes to the scenarios. Especially in a convention or FLGS environment, where you might be less familiar with the players/characters who show up. Others have different opinions.
There are a couple of other threads discussing this issue.
|
|
Also Pathfinder tables are legal for up to 7 players as per the Guide to Organized Play. You don't have to change anything except that 6+ players means you up the teir by one to increase the difficulty.I understand upping the tier by 1 to increase the difficulty. What I was asking is say you are playing a Tier 7-11 with 6 level 11 characters. Many of the challenges are going to be a cake walk and you cannot up the level as that would change the tier. How would I as the DM legally make the challenge fit the players? Or, do not change it at all and play the module as wrote? I have read where other DM's have changed the scenario by adding a extra creature to some of the encounters, played the creature smarter than what the statblock states in the Tactics section and such. I just want to be certain I am not skirting the line so to speak.As part of an Organized Play system, I do not believe that you should make changes to the scenarios. Especially in a convention or FLGS environment, where you might be less familiar with the players/characters who show up. Others have different opinions.
There are a couple of other threads discussing this issue.
+1
Not much you can do when you have 6 for the max teir
|
|
I think I read some of those threads in the past (although I don't know which ones they were-sorry) and that the official answer from paizo turned out to be that you weren't supposed to add creatures to the scenarios. You were supposed to run them as written.
Yeah, there is no room for ambiguity here. Organized Play is a lawful system, and the law says run them as written.
|
|
I'm not afraid to say (and i know there are more of you out there) that I have bent the "run as RAW" rule a few times. Never at a convention. I know the capabilities and play styles of the weekly group I play with and can usually judge when the challenges are not sufficient. Usually, this is just a case of adding another "mook" or two, but I have also mixed the monsters on occasion, using the lower-tier BBEG, with the higher-tier "mooks." This has worked very effectively. Fortunately, I have not killed any PC's when doing this. All of my kills, and TPK's, have come from running RAW.
|
Venture-Captain, Arizona—Tucson
|
I'm not afraid to say (and i know there are more of you out there) that I have bent the "run as RAW" rule a few times. Never at a convention. I know the capabilities and play styles of the weekly group I play with and can usually judge when the challenges are not sufficient. Usually, this is just a case of adding another "mook" or two, but I have also mixed the monsters on occasion, using the lower-tier BBEG, with the higher-tier "mooks." This has worked very effectively. Fortunately, I have not killed any PC's when doing this. All of my kills, and TPK's, have come from running RAW.
I've played pretty fast and loose when adjusting scenarios, but have never had a character death caused by my tampering. I have had PC deaths when running scenarios as written.
One near TPK resulted from a group "playing up": A couple of players didn't show for the slot, causing their party to be unbalanced. A couple of minor tactical errors (at the worst possible time) and half the party was down. Never play up with a short table: It seldom ends well.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
I'm not sure of the fix, but I figured I'd put up my experience and current problems.
1) I have a weekly PFS group where we all started at level 1. Some players came, some players left. Some show every week, some show most weeks. Some nights have 7 players, some nights have 4 players. What is the end result you ask? They currently can't play and they all started out together. They have 7th level players 2 adventures from leveling. They have 4th level players also 1 to 3 adventures from leveling. They have no available 1-7 to play so they all can play. They can't play 5-9 since they have two remaining 4th level guys. So they can't play anything until more level 1-7 are released.
2) I have a different problem for me playing (I DM the above.) I can't find hardly anyone local wanting to play 7-11, so I can only play when I go to CONs with a lot of higher level folk and that is very few CONs as most have mostly low level folk. Some say start a lower level, but I'd rather not play. So I can't play, until next year maybe July/August at Origins or GenCon.
3) They often play up (6-7) with the lower level guys. But it is sometimes a cake walk and other times a near TPK. They still want to play up. I sort of wish the tier 3-4 and 6-7 didn't have so many "throw a lot of guys" at them encounters and more higher level CR monsters to make the encounter CR. This would lessen the cake walk scenario a lot. Because as it stands now, a moderately optimized "tank" means that a level 5 to 7 ish Full Plate tank can only be hit on a 20 from most tier 3-4 mobs except the "beaters".
|
Honestly, I think that part of the appeal of the 1-7 scenarios is just the shortage of 1-5's.
I will be very glad to see the new lowlow tier adventures. IMO, 1st level should probably be its own sub-tier.
I love this idea. Intro mods are always welcome, especially at cons with newbies. You could even make them a little shorter (like 3 hours) so you have time to help newbies learn the game.
Like I said, seems like an easy fix..
have the high level players make level 1s to play with the lower level players, run Tier 1-5 Scenrios since all 1-7 have been run *Not sure how that happened, math does not work out right, lot of deaths?* until the lower level get closer to the level 7s.
No, he is saying that the original starting players cannot all play together because some of them have 7th level characters and some have 4th level characters and they have no more tier 1-7 scenarios left that all of them can play together for credit. A tier 1-5 would not help because the level 7's cannot play out of tier like that.
|
|
No, he is saying that the original starting players cannot all play together because some of them have 7th level characters and some have 4th level characters and they have no more tier 1-7 scenarios left that all of them can play together for credit. A tier 1-5 would not help because the level 7's cannot play out of tier like that.Like I said, seems like an easy fix..
have the high level players make level 1s to play with the lower level players, run Tier 1-5 Scenrios since all 1-7 have been run *Not sure how that happened, math does not work out right, lot of deaths?* until the lower level get closer to the level 7s.
Sure they can... The level 7s make Level 1s, and the Level 1s play with the Level 4s until the level 4s reach level 5, then the level 5s can play with the level 7s in Tier 5-9 scenarios.
That case everyone is still getting credit.
|
|
There's the problem that lvl 1s should be playing subtier 1-2 if at all possible, so the 1s and 4s don't make a particularly good pair either. Do you play down and make the lvl4s frown about their gold or do you play 4-5, go easy on the level 1s and just let them have extra gold? Or do you run 4-5 normally and reward your 7th level players for being helpful by killing their brand new characters?
|
|
There's the problem that lvl 1s should be playing subtier 1-2 if at all possible, so the 1s and 4s don't make a particularly good pair either. Do you play down and make the lvl4s frown about their gold or do you play 4-5, go easy on the level 1s and just let them have extra gold? Or do you run 4-5 normally and reward your 7th level players for being helpful by killing their brand new characters?
Much better to have some level 1s play with level 4s at Sub-Tier 4-5 and get credit *and it is legal as long as the APL is good*, then to ask them to play their level 7s in scenarios they played already and get zero credit. And it will only be for 3 Scenarios max, Only until they get Level 5.
No, he is saying that the original starting players cannot all play together because some of them have 7th level characters and some have 4th level characters and they have no more tier 1-7 scenarios left that all of them can play together for credit. A tier 1-5 would not help because the level 7's cannot play out of tier like that.Like I said, seems like an easy fix..
have the high level players make level 1s to play with the lower level players, run Tier 1-5 Scenrios since all 1-7 have been run *Not sure how that happened, math does not work out right, lot of deaths?* until the lower level get closer to the level 7s.
Sure they can... The level 7s make Level 1s, and the Level 1s play with the Level 4s until the level 4s reach level 5, then the level 5s can play with the level 7s in Tier 5-9 scenarios.
That case everyone is still getting credit.
But that is the problem. From what he is saying, they want to play their established characters together, not start new ones, but can't because they do not have any more 1-7's left that none of them have played yet.
|
|
But that is the problem. From what he is saying, they want to play their established characters together, not start new ones, but can't because they do not have any more 1-7's left that none of them have played yet.
IMO that is just being unreasonable,
They have a choice then, play without credit, make new characters for a short time and play for credit. Seems like to me an easy choice.
|
|
But that is the problem. From what he is saying, they want to play their established characters together, not start new ones, but can't because they do not have any more 1-7's left that none of them have played yet.
The problem is if you insist on having 7th level players at the table with low level players someone's game is going to suck. There is either no challenge or it's too difficult for low level characters. 1st level characters can easily get instantly killed in a tier 6-7 game which isn't any fun either. The more active players have to play a second character or the game just winds up screwy.
We're dealing with this issue also, we have a very small group with mostly 4th-7th level characters but a couple players who are first/ second. All of the more active players have a second character for those weeks. We've scheduling some weeks for tier 5th-9th which means the low level players aren't going to get to play.
|
|
I am not sure what other situations are like, but my current local game (which for better or worse has much fewer players to draw from) doesn't have any scenarios left for them all to get credit from. Out of the four potential players, two have actually played in every open tier 1-5 and 1-7 scenario. Unless at least one of them isn't getting credit that week, there are not any scenarios the whole group can play in.
My online game has been in a similar situation where two players have played almost all of the open tier 1-5 and 1-7 scenarios, and unless one of them did not get credit, there are no scenarios they both can play through.
I did get keep the games going a few more sessions by having those players run games, but that only extended the games by a couple sessions before it got back to the point where one person had to skip the night without credit.
|
|
1st level characters can easily get instantly killed in a tier 6-7 game which isn't any fun either. The more active players have to play a second character or the game just winds up screwy.
Just a quick point.. I am sure this is not what you meant..
But..
1st Level characters can't play in a Sub-Tier 6-7 game...
|
|
1st level characters can easily get instantly killed in a tier 6-7 game which isn't any fun either. The more active players have to play a second character or the game just winds up screwy.
Just a quick point.. I am sure this is not what you meant..
But..
1st Level characters can't play in a Sub-Tier 6-7 game...
I'm not sure what I was thinking there. You are right of course. I think the module we got trashed in it was a 3rd level playing in a tier 6-7.
|
Director of Brand Strategy
|
I think the module we got trashed in it was a 3rd level playing in a tier 6-7.
In this case, it's a 5-level discrepancy between the PC's level and a "challenging" encounter for the subtier. A 3rd-level PC shouldn't be going up against a CR 7 monster, much less a CR 8 encounter designed to make 7th-level PCs sweat a little bit. Unfortunately, this type of situation is sometimes unavoidable in a tiered system like this. Organizers and GMs are strongly encouraged to find solutions to mustering tables that avoid a player on the low end of a sub-tier playing up into the next sub-tier.
|
... you might try advertising the adventure as something like 1-5 or 4-7 instead of the full 1-7.
This was exactly how I scheduled PaizoConOz 2010 Brisbane last September. You can >> refer to the thread << to see a full listing of scenarios and sub-tiers advertised. Some scenarios were scheduled twice over the weekend at different sub-tiers. Players were advised they could play one level either side of the table's advertised sub-tier if necessary, but mostly players found the right sessions for their characters.
This system seemed to work well, at least for a convention sized event; though I can also see it help managing smaller groups if advertised ahead of time to encourage players to bring level-appropriate characters to the table.
Tier 1-7 scenarios were only produced to give GMs flexibility in scheduling sessions at different levels, not for 1st level characters to play at the same table as 7th level characters.
Cheers,
DarkWhite
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Sure they can... The level 7s make Level 1s, and the Level 1s play with the Level 4s until the level 4s reach level 5
I've suggested this, but it was rejected by the 7th level players. They would rather not play than play a new 1st level character. So last Weds they came and with no module to play, they suggested playing a board game (Battlestar Galactica) instead of PFS since they couldn't play their "main." I came up with the "run #10 even thou they can't get credit and won't advance" idea just to play PFS instead of the board game.
we got trashed in it was a 3rd level playing in a tier 6-7.
In our game, the low levels often get knocked unconscious and spend most of the combat out. It was really worse when several were 3rd level playing with 6th levels and playing up.