|
I guess we're just different. I enjoy myself as much, and usually more, when I GM, than when I play, regardless of credit. I don't see how the credit/no credit aspect has an impact on the enjoyment of the actual gameplay.
Ultimately, I think this is akin to arguing whether Oreos or Chocalate Chip Cookies are better. We won't get anywhere because it is a matter of subjective opinion. That said, if ever there was a place to vehemently express subjective opinions as if they were law rather than... well... opinions, I think the anonymous interwebs is the place.
I wanted to chime in and second TK here.
First and foremost I play any game to have fun, ideally in a social context. I don't need additional prestige or other rewards for that. PFS provides a structure that facilitates my gaming and that is more than anyone is obligated to provide. I view the perks as an added bonus. Given the chance to play/DM or not play at all I'll glady replay scenarios. Its a hobby, not a chore. Moreover, for me personally I have another aversion to the repeat play of scenarios with multiple characters...
The greatest draw to roleplaying for me is a cohesive narrative that serves as the foundation for a character's development. In my opinion, the story surrounding and contributing to the growth of a really cool character concept is something that can only be found in a solid table-top RPG. Sure, video games have character development, but at the end of the day, the freedom afforded in a TTRPG can't be touched.
With that in mind, I see the PFS as a venue where I can pursue that character development with a range of diverse stories and more importantly, other characters (and players). To me, replaying the same story over and over with different characters really makes that character diversity and development grow stale. I'd prefer each character be built up of unique experiences. Sure you can behave differently in each scenario and call it unique, but at its core, its the same.
All of this said, I think allowing a DM to earn credit for running a game in addition to playing the game is acceptable. In running the game, I don't feel any character development necessarily occurs. I view this is incentive to keep people DMing and as an opportunity (in my case) to keep my characters on par with my local players given that I am the primary DM.
Anyway, this post has run on longer than anticipated. I'll step away from the keyboard now.
Please listen to us.It seems to me when you say this what you mean is you want Paizo to ignore the needs of the rest of the community and listen to YOU exclusively. It just doesn't work that way.
How have they listened:
Since the topic of Replay was last beaten to death...
Paizo has released two modules for play, one of which is ideal for mixing new players and more experienced players.
Paizo has committed to releasing all new modules into PFS which will accelerate the flow of new material legal for PFS.
You can't turn a ship on a dime, how about a little breathing room here, things are changing for the better on this.
Well said.
|
Ah yes the replay discussion (rubs hands together, gets out valuable Onyx gem and begins casting raise dead, on dead horse) I am sure the “usual suspects” including myself will show up to kick this dead horse again. And it looks like i am late to the party.
Now I do understand that this is pretty much a closed issue and that the rules wont be changed any time soon. And I don’t mind them the way thy currently are.
Now Arim, I do sympathise with you, and I did like the “new faction new character”
I don’t mind the rules in their current incarnation. i think some serious thought went into it.
I have gone ahead and copied and pasted from one of my older posts, when I was trying to sum things up, for anybody who might not be familiar with this particular discussion.
“Perhaps it will be helpful if I put forth a “cliff notes” of the Replay discussion from another thread. I will also try to include the rules as well.
Well I have been reading one of the threads Arnim started concerning GM rewards and chronicle sheets.
From what I understand at first there was no replaying allowed, and GMs just GMed for the love of it.
Then GMs got one credit (not retroactive) for a scenario they GMed, that they could apply to a character of theirs.
Replaying was allowed as long as it was a different character of a different character. The further caviat was that this was to be used as a last resort to fill a table.
I am guessing the rules at this point theoretically could allow someone to “replay” a scenario as much as 5 times with a different character and different faction. Once he GMed he couldn’t then play a scenario and receive a chronicle sheet for his character.
This then led to a discussion of an imbalance.
Which led into a discussion the possible abuses of play play play, and limits needing to be placed on replay.
I see that replay was intended as a last result.
In a couple of posts Mark Moreland expressed concerns people were using the play play play rule to replay scenarios and “game “ the system
I also seem to remember reading somewhere someone expressing concern about payers “farming” specific scenarios to get a reward. I am guessing this refers to something I have seen Wow players sometimes do, they run through an instance until the magic item they wants randomly appears for them.
After some confusion and nashing of teeth, Which lead us to this ruling.
Official PFS Ruling wrote: If you play you earn 1 credit that is applied to the character that played through the scenario. If you GM a scenario, you earn 1 credit that can be applied to any character that hasn't played through the scenario. You receive GM or player credit regardless of the order you play/GM the scenario. You may not earn more than 1 player credit and 1 GM credit regardless of how many times you GM or play the scenario. You are free to use PPP to seat legal tables, but if you already have earned your credits you do not earn any additional ones.
Hrym Savage wrote: We'll be clarifying and updating PPP soon as well but yes, if you play a character in a scenario there is always the threat of death (plus the use of consumables), regardless of whether or not you get credit for it.
Replay still exists, but not for credit. The replay rule has one reference to receiving a chronicle, and only then by saying a GM doesn't need to give you one if you spoil the plot. I don't see the need to further clarify it, though it will be reworded in the next version of the Guide to be less wordy and more concise. Hyrum.
The faction restriction no longer applies because a player can only get credit for playing with one character. If I GM #43, I apply the credit to my favorite character, who is a member of the Osirion faction. I later play it and since I lurve Osirion and refuse to play any of those other dumb factions, I play the scenario with my other Osirion faction PC. Or vice versa. Since I can't ever get credit with my third character, who may be another faction or may not, it doesn't matter. Some people really like one faction, and the current rule allows them to get both GM and player credit for that faction."
I know this is an awful lot of text to wade through, and i have copied/ pasted, but perhaps it will help frame the discussion.”
Now Arim, I do sympathise with you, and I did like the “new faction new character”
I don’t mind the rules in their current incarnation.
Perhaps it has already been mentioned, but I believe the “Godsmouth Heracy, is sanctioned for PFS play, and I believe might be the exception to the current rule of allowing replay but for now credit. It allows replay, and the credits have to go to different characters.
I hope this is helpful
|
Do you only get GM credit for Godsmouth Heresy/ Ebon Destroyers/ other upcoming mods of that type the once, like normal, or can you get it over and over and apply it to different characters, like the people playing get to do?
I can see where you guys are coming from, it just seems to me that the changing of the rules was a sort of blanket solution to the specific problem of some people 'gaming' the system. What about the people who enjoyed playing through the mods and wanting the specific rewards (since each chronicle sheet is unique, i believe) who replayed for the value of trying to make it a unique experience with a new character every time they played through it? Those people got hosed by this rule. Sure, it may not be a big group, but probably the group of people gaming the system wasnt that big either, Id hope.
Would I have a better suggestion though, probably not, lol.
|
Do you only get GM credit for Godsmouth Heresy/ Ebon Destroyers/ other upcoming mods of that type the once, like normal, or can you get it over and over and apply it to different characters, like the people playing get to do?
I can see where you guys are coming from, it just seems to me that the changing of the rules was a sort of blanket solution to the specific problem of some people 'gaming' the system. What about the people who enjoyed playing through the mods and wanting the specific rewards (since each chronicle sheet is unique, i believe) who replayed for the value of trying to make it a unique experience with a new character every time they played through it? Those people got hosed by this rule. Sure, it may not be a big group, but probably the group of people gaming the system wasnt that big either, Id hope.
Would I have a better suggestion though, probably not, lol.
Each chronicle is unique to the mod, not necessarily to each adventure. There was the fear (if I remember right) that people would revert to the "old LG/LFR" ways of "farming" specific mods for specific gear that would benefit their characters.
Instead of simply replaying for fun people were gaming the system and taking advantage of the original replay rules. If I remember correctly as well, the original replay thread challenged the rules using the base argument of GMs essentially being shorted on chronicles due to eating the mod and only getting the 1 GM credit for it and never being able to play it while others could refuse to GM it and have the potential for 5 chronicles.
I could be wrong on those points, as I've been trying to avoid the replay threads like the plague. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Personally I think the discussions need to cease and desist and people should just learn to work within the rules that they are given. Though I agree that this is a great place for discussion and to pick the minds of some of the communities greatest.
|
first thing, Elyas Ravenwood, i been waiting for u to post :) lol no reason i just knew u would is all.
second, well why not go with that replay token thing? if credit is a scary issue then why not just go with a little reward? maybe make it to where u get 1 reroll per shirt, and 1 reroll per token, per mod, so only 2 free reroll's a mod, (also maybe make it to where you can get only 1 token per replay, i dont think the 1 per new player is a good idea. I know that i would not only feel good for helping out, but then i would feel like i got my lollipop from the doctore as well. so a kinda win/win that doesn't break anything, all it does is give someone a chance to fix a screw up from there character.
|
However, expecting them to reply to a direct question is often futile, I've noticed. Has Mark answered yours, yet, Arnim?And still waiting.
I have been known to be wrong before, but don't be too disappointed if nothing changes...
Though he may announce new upcoming solutions to people running out of scenarios..That would be cool.
|
Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau
|
Listen, I understand how unlimited replay can be bad ("farming" scenarios, etc). I am aware how stagnant that could make the game. But some degree of replay can be beneficial.
Last year, me and my stable of GMs attended a convention in an area that had no PFS activity. The local store didn't even carry Pathfinder. We chose to run our favorite scenarios for the convention, ones we had played through and ran many times before. Last slot of the night, we ended up with one player for a scenario we had all been through. We could have called it off and headed home; it was late and we were looking at an hour of travel home. But the other GMs brought out there secondary characters, and played it to make a legal table. They told the new player that they were putting him in charge, which made him feel like the focus of the adventure and not a side-line newbie. Not once did they hint they knew what to expect, even acting surprised and asking him what to do. The new player had a blast and is now the coordinator for Pathfinder for that area, and has convinced the local game store to not only carry Paizo product,but to host games there as well. To date, he has added 21 players that I know of.
I know this might not be the norm, but if it happens enough it can really help PFS grow. YMMV.
|
|
Listen, I understand how unlimited replay can be bad ("farming" scenarios, etc). I am aware how stagnant that could make the game. But some degree of replay can be beneficial.
Last year, me and my stable of GMs attended a convention in an area that had no PFS activity. The local store didn't even carry Pathfinder. We chose to run our favorite scenarios for the convention, ones we had played through and ran many times before. Last slot of the night, we ended up with one player for a scenario we had all been through. We could have called it off and headed home; it was late and we were looking at an hour of travel home. But the other GMs brought out there secondary characters, and played it to make a legal table. They told the new player that they were putting him in charge, which made him feel like the focus of the adventure and not a side-line newbie. Not once did they hint they knew what to expect, even acting surprised and asking him what to do. The new player had a blast and is now the coordinator for Pathfinder for that area, and has convinced the local game store to not only carry Paizo product,but to host games there as well. To date, he has added 21 players that I know of.
I know this might not be the norm, but if it happens enough it can really help PFS grow. YMMV.
Was there anything stopping you guys from playing and creating the same (what sounds like awesome) experience for the new recruit if he was the only one that received credit?
|
|
I know this might not be the norm, but if it happens enough it can really help PFS grow. YMMV.
And the lesson of this fantastic story (no sarcasm intended) is that without credit these guys wouldn't have done the same thing? They still wouldn't have played a great game? Still wouldn't have had fun? Still wouldn't have given this player a great experience? Your (collective) willingness to help the community is so strictly dependent on 1 XP and 2 PA?
|
|
Can someone please cast disintegrate on this undead horse? I'd also settle for plane shifting it to an elemental plane. Thanks!Isn't that a natural ability of fluffy pick bunnies?
Only when they have more than 14 HD. Purple bunnies, however, can cast Undeath to Death and Destruction. I'd settle for either one of those spells too.
|
|
Only when they have more than 14 HD. Purple bunnies, however, can cast Undeath to Death and Destruction. I'd settle for either one of those spells too.Can someone please cast disintegrate on this undead horse? I'd also settle for plane shifting it to an elemental plane. Thanks!Isn't that a natural ability of fluffy pick bunnies?
+1
|
|
I also see that rewarding people to replay for credit means that they won't be doing it for the right reasons and that abuse will occur more frequently, but I still don't see that as a reason to not reward GMing the same module repeatedly.
It might just be a piece of paper, a gold start or whatever, but I prefer playing to GMing and I'd like to see some of my characters get off of level one a little sooner.
GM credit is only earned 1 time, just like player credit. Repeated running of the same mod does count toward your star ranking though, which could yield you access to exclusive mods as well as-of-yet-unannounced 'good stuff.'
|
|
You can hate me for it, but I recently decided that going through the effort of promoting and GMing a local game wasn't worth the effort. Getting credit for running one I had already run might have made the difference.
As far as trying to take more HP out of this mount that is clearly negative and bleeding...
I also see that rewarding people to replay for credit means that they won't be doing it for the right reasons and that abuse will occur more frequently, but I still don't see that as a reason to not reward GMing the same module repeatedly.
It might just be a piece of paper, a gold start or whatever, but I prefer playing to GMing and I'd like to see some of my characters get off of level one a little sooner.
Sorry for the abuse of your carcass Deceased Equine.
If we reward the GM for every single mod she runs then there will be the reverse of the problem that people complained about and caused the rules to be changed the first time. GMs will have an over glut of characters compared to players in their area. The "credit" GMs get is by reporting they get the GM star; there are rewards for hitting the higher tier of GMing with stars -- prestige, modules, and a plethera of other things I'm sure that haven't been released.
Think of all the years of 2nd ed and such that GMs Gm'd for the love of the game and no reward.. seriously .. this reward thing is starting to get ridiculous in some ways. As people have said, it's a piece of paper or a star.. either way the reward should be at the table IMO.
If you prefer playing to GMing that is totally your perogative, thankfully, there are some of us that love to GM and so will cater to the players that want to play and not GM. Not all of us feel the need to be "rewarded" each and every time we run a game. Personally, as long as I know my players had fun and I had fun I feel rewarded.
I haven't taken alot of the GM credit that I could have (and I know others who haven't either) because when I get a chance to play, I want to play my characters. Leveling shouldn't be seen as a race to get a prize at the end IMO.
|
|
For the people who dropped in late, this is my "replay for lesser reward" suggestion:
The following suggestion replaces Chronicle Sheets for Gold, PA and XP for replayers only.
Reward 1:
1) Each replay you do gets you a token/bookmark/etc. The bookmark is an expendable re-roll after seeing the first die roll. In essence, it's the same perk the Faction Shirt gives. The re-roll is tied to the character who replayed the mod.
1B) You get a number of additional tokens equal to one third of the number of Brand New PFS Members you played with at the table, rounded down. (This gives 1 re-roll per replayer no matter what, and 2 re-roll tokens for the replayer who plays with three brand new players.)
1C) Use of the re-roll requires giving up the token or bookmark. When used, it is used up for good.
1D) Re-roll tokens expire 13 months after they're issued (Expiration date written by GM on the card).
2) Each replay you do replenishes one CPA on a character of your choice. Your CPA can never exceed your TPA.
I'd say both options are available, but the the player has to choose at the start of the session which one he gets for the replay. The same character can replay a scenario twice, but has to choose a different reward each time.
Intent:
Reward 1 is there to encourage Play, Play, Play. It is also there to incentivize splitting replayers among multiple tables. You get more out of replaying for Reward #1 by being the fourth at a PFS table of newbies. It also encourages replayers to bring newbies in - since there has to be at least one newbie to get the reward at all.
Reward 2 is there to allow player who can't find a real table get a modest benefit (he gets no gold or gear, nor any XP) from replaying a scenario, and for someone who's a few PA from having the 16 CPA cushion to get raised, it's an incentive - but not great enough incentive to make 'farming' a scenario appealing.
Logistical Considerations:
The token/bookmark as reward suggestion requires that Paizo print up some non-forgeable bookmarks; given the way that module covers are printed, this should be easy to throw into the margins of an existing print job (this is how SJ Games creates bookmarks for Munchkin)
The +1 CPA option requires giving a modified chronicle sheet to the player, or writing on the prior chronicle sheet for the module tied to that character, and should impose no logistical burdens.
Criticisms to Date:
So far, the only criticism I've seen of this proposal is that it (theoretically) weakens the incentive to GM an adventure you've already played. It also gives no incentive to a GM to re-run an adventure; I have no real answer to this criticism, other than this:
Re-running a game for a group of players who've run the module before is...unpleasant. Re-running a game for a brand new group of gamers is fun. On the other hand, neither of the rewards above tend to be that useful to a GM, or a GM running their own characters. While I have no objection to allowing a GM to gather either reward for the second and third running of an adventure to people who aren't re-playing, I don't see any way to prevent the rewards becoming devalued. GMs running adventures multiple times is much more common than players running adventures multiple times, and they have fewer opportunities to burn off the rewards that they accumulate.
Any other critiques or suggestion? Should I break this out into its own topic for discussion, or leave it here on the hopes that Mark Mooreland (who's reading this thread...) will see it, and consider it?
|
|
This has been run into the ground. I think the only thing that can be universally agreed on is that some folks need positive reinforcement to fully enjoy the game. Others view the game in-and-of-itself as the reward and view more flexible mechanical perks as problematic for any number of reasons.
Attempting ot shift the camps is, in my opinion, futile.
So I ask, Oreo or chocolate chip?
|
|
For the people who dropped in late, this is my "replay for lesser reward" suggestion:
The following suggestion replaces Chronicle Sheets for Gold, PA and XP for replayers only.
Reward 1:
1) Each replay you do gets you a token/bookmark/etc. The bookmark is an expendable re-roll after seeing the first die roll. In essence, it's the same perk the Faction Shirt gives. The re-roll is tied to the character who replayed the mod.
1B) You get a number of additional tokens equal to one third of the number of Brand New PFS Members you played with at the table, rounded down. (This gives 1 re-roll per replayer no matter what, and 2 re-roll tokens for the replayer who plays with three brand new players.)
1C) Use of the re-roll requires giving up the token or bookmark. When used, it is used up for good.
1D) Re-roll tokens expire 13 months after they're issued (Expiration date written by GM on the card).2) Each replay you do replenishes one CPA on a character of your choice. Your CPA can never exceed your TPA.
I'd say both options are available, but the the player has to choose at the start of the session which one he gets for the replay. The same character can replay a scenario twice, but has to choose a different reward each time.
Intent:
Reward 1 is there to encourage Play, Play, Play. It is also there to incentivize splitting replayers among multiple tables. You get more out of replaying for Reward #1 by being the fourth at a PFS table of newbies. It also encourages replayers to bring newbies in - since there has to be at least one newbie to get the reward at all.
Reward 2 is there to allow player who can't find a real table get a modest benefit (he gets no gold or gear, nor any XP) from replaying a scenario, and for someone who's a few PA from having the 16 CPA cushion to get raised, it's an incentive - but not great enough incentive to make 'farming' a scenario appealing.
Logistical Considerations:
The token/bookmark as reward suggestion requires that Paizo print up some...
This kind of discussion is productive, in my opinion. Feels much less circular with an eye toward compromise.
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
This kind of discussion is productive, in my opinion. Feels much less circular with an eye toward compromise.
Agreed. This thread actually started out pretty productive, and remained that way for a while. I'm sad to see it degenerate into the same old same old.
If Mark would just weigh in, I suspect all sides would leave this alone, again.
|
So far, the only criticism I've seen of this proposal is that it (theoretically) weakens the incentive to GM an adventure you've already played. It also gives no incentive to a GM to re-run an adventure; I have no real answer to this criticism, other than this...
I don’t know if the only reason you haven’t seen any criticisms is because there are none. I have a couple of issues with what you’ve outlined, but mainly from a, “I have to do what now too?” standpoint.
I’ll start out with full disclosure. I do not agree with replay. I also do not agree with additional GM incentives. I think for players, if you’re really hitting that kind of hard cap (which happens if you’re playing more than twice a month), you should consider helping PFS in other manners. I think for GMs, the star system for “additional benefits” as well as frankly the joy of GMing should be reward enough. I believe that most of the issues identified indicate that a PFS group should be expanding and that forcing replay really lessens the impact of the game. Saying that though, I’m going to address your solution directly from the standpoint of, “it’s already in place and I have no say whether I like the very concept.”
Option 1 seems too clunky to me. The player need to maintain a token card just means I have one more thing to carry with me, and as a GM it means one more thing for me to frantically finish as people are packing up to leave. I have to check the reroll card every time a character wants to reroll, which by math could turn out to be a ton of rolls at the rate some of these players are claiming they replay modules. My biggest concern though is the whole “new player” math. I understand the purpose of the incentive, but not only does it mean even more work as a GM to get things finished, but the whole thing feels so artificial and easy to abuse by having friends “fake” being new players I also don’t like that the number or rerolls can get as big as it can and there are no clear limitations such as, “you can only use one a session.” The concept of rerolls isn’t offensive to me though, and if a better alternative were proposed I could get on board with that option as a “middle ground” solution.
Option 2 I think should be shot down on the gold/level principal alone. It’s far too easy to start buying a ton of gear at 750 gp each and either selling it back for coin or outfitting certain classes of characters (spellcasters come to mind) with a pretty obscene amount of gear. I don’t have much else to say except that I strongly oppose any solution of this type.
Here’s a middle-ground option though. How about X number of replays lets you rebuild? That way we can tie together both of the controversial topics!
|
|
I'm relatively new here (PFSOP for just a few months), and maybe I just don't get it, but I keep hearing case closed and really don't see a direct, compelling, counter argument.
May I suggest searching for the other replay threads and skimming them. There are good points and bad points in all of them, but will give you an insight to A: why it is a dead horse and B: why some of us prefer to just not ever see a replay thread again.
For me (my opinion here) is that there will always be two sides; the Player/GMs that want to see more incentive for Gming since they'd rather play, and the GM/Player that GMs for the fun not the incentive.
|
|
Without going into too much detail, let me say first that I can live with the rule as it is now. And don't want it to change again and again and again. However, I would greatly appreciate it, if a revised Guide would be submitted. I've got players/gms who refuse to acknowledge any new rule until it is written in the guide. They believe that it is ridiculous to require everyone to sift through the 1,000's of posts in order to find a single rule.
I bring this up because we are a small community with limited players. However, we have two significantly separate groups that play with a couple of us that play/gm between the groups. What usually ends up happening is that I don't get to play half the scenarios because I gm for one group and the other group plays without me, so that no one is left for me to play with through the scenario.
Before everyone starts submitting suggestions to maximize my playing, don't. I already do. It still means I miss out on playing about 1/3 of the scenarios. What also happens is that I have characters I have never played and have no tie to them. It also means that I have yet to play/gm more than a couple of scenarios with a minimum level of 5.
I'm sorry for ranting on about this topic. It has always been a topic close to my gaming group and has affected us and how often we play. We made it through LG, I'm sure we can make it through this.
EDIT: There are those of us that love Pathfinder, and have made it our game. Replay will not stop/keep us from playing Pathfinder Society. The biggest reason I play PFS instead of other games is because of my limited time. I can pick up a scenario, read through it in about half an hour and spend another half an hour prepping and be ready to run it for my group. We have a great time, and we usually schedule 5 hours for a scenario so don't worry about time limits. It's a lot of fun and it gives those of us with limited time a chance to play our favorite game with out all the work normally associated with it.
My dad always said to KISS everything you do. (For those of you that don't know what that means: Keep It Simple Stupid.)
Thank you to Paizo for providing me with an enjoyable past-time.
|
|
I don’t know if the only reason you haven’t seen any criticisms is because there are none. I have a couple of issues with what you’ve outlined, but mainly from a, “I have to do what now too?” standpoint.
Well, I'm also figuring that the potential criticisms are being drowned out by the "Aiiigh! Undead Horse Is Rising [big]AGAIN[/big]. So I'm actively soliciting feedback, which you've provided. Thanks!
I’ll start out with full disclosure. I do not agree with replay. I also do not agree with additional GM incentives. [snip of things I generally agree with].
Before I started reading this read, I was of the opinion that replay for full credit with different characters was boring, but not a problem. After reading this thread and the older ones, I changed my opinion to "Replay with full rewards encourages bad behaviors." So I looked for lesser incentives and tried to tie them to things we want PFS to encourage.
Option 1 seems too clunky to me. The player need to maintain a token card just means I have one more thing to carry with me, and as a GM it means one more thing for me to frantically finish as people are packing up to leave. I have to check the reroll card every time a character wants to reroll, which by math could turn out to be a ton of rolls at the rate some of these players are claiming they replay modules. My biggest concern though is the whole “new player” math. I understand the purpose of the incentive, but not only does it mean even more work as a GM to get things finished, but the whole thing feels so artificial and easy to abuse by having friends “fake” being new players I also don’t like that the number or rerolls can get as big as it can and there are no clear limitations such as, “you can only use one a session.” The concept of rerolls isn’t offensive to me though, and if a better alternative were proposed I could get on board with that option as a “middle ground” solution.
The players I've met who do PFS usually have a homework style folder where they have their character sheet and chronicle sheets in order; the character sheet is paper clipped to the Chronicle Sheet. Clipping the replay card to the sheet or tucking it in the folder when you get it seems like it's not too much of a burden.
If I were designing the card, there would be a place for two dates and the character's name and the scenario number, plus a place for the GM to sign. I'd hand the replayer the card while I was filling out the chronicle sheet and say "Please fill this out so I can countersign it with your Chronicle Sheet."
As to scamming the system - no system can avoid being scammed. However, a re-roll that gets burned out (and expires after 13 months...) is a much lower incentive to 'farm' scenarios than a full chronicle sheet.
Let's assume that someone plays four PFS games a month - two scenarios and two replays. Unless that group is generating so many NEW PFS members a month that he's got the only replayer in two brand new tables a month that only show up in his replay nights, he's accumulating two expendable re-rolls per month.
And playing four scenarios. Which means that he's probably burning those things at about the same rate he's acquiring them. Or he's saving them up to take to GenCon.
I have no problem putting a maximum cap of, say "No more than three re-roll tokens can be used in a given mission." But for someone who's playing to get them, I expect they'll burn nearly as quickly as they're gained.
And the player in the above situation would still be better off saying "Hey, I'd like to GM a session or two." and run scenarios he's already played in.
Option 2 I think should be shot down on the gold/level principal alone. It’s far too easy to start buying a ton of gear at 750 gp each and either selling it back for coin or outfitting certain classes of characters (spellcasters come to mind) with a pretty obscene amount of gear. I don’t have much else to say except that I strongly oppose any solution of this type..
You cannot resell items bought with PAs, unless that rule has been changed (which I doubt). While first level wands (which would require two replays to get the CPA to acquire...) are useful, by the time the character is at 3rd or 4th level, replenishing two CPA this way should be pretty minor. I know players who refuse to spend any CPA until they have 16 banked up for that raise dead spell...
Even so, thank you for the feedback and critique. It is only through processes like this that ideas get refined -- like putting a cap on the number of re-rolls someone can burn in a session -- and improved.
|
|
I know this might not be the norm, but if it happens enough it can really help PFS grow. YMMV.
I guess the question becomes, is it worth the risk of loosing the chance for this (very) uncommon occurrence in order to block the more prolific occurrence of the player/GM "gaming" a more liberal replay system? Would reverting to the previous version of replay cause more current players to quit than those that would be added? "The world may never know."
|
|
Thank you for those of you who have patiently explored this, I've enjoyed this replay of meta scenario 46: "Pitfalls of Replay"
...I'm now trying to figure out how to put a Groundhog Day type vibe on encounters for a scenario called The Clocks of Kaer Maga. Thassilonian Pit Traps would definitely be in theme. :)
|
|
Maybe when I'm more experienced it'll take me less time to prep a scenario and it won't be such a big deal. I wish Paizo would make their excellent scenario maps printable as battle mats. Drawing or printing maps is the big pain point I have now.
Lol .. I've been Gming hard and heavy for just about a year now .. (ok hard and heavy in my mind) I still take about 2 hours to prep a mod -- tho I definatly admit some of that is my OCD kicking in.. I have notecards for each tier with major information for each monster, I have the mod highlighted in different colors for things that NPCs might say during the text of the mod vs. what is DC information and what I consider GM information. That two hours of prepping the mod doesn't include the time to handraw and color the map -- I refuse to spend the money to print the mod out at a Kinkos or whatever.
I love the liberal use of flipmats in scenarios, however, I don't buy mappacks, so those I still draw out.
|
|
Maybe when I'm more experienced it'll take me less time to prep a scenario and it won't be such a big deal. I wish Paizo would make their excellent scenario maps printable as battle mats. Drawing or printing maps is the big pain point I have now.Lol .. I've been Gming hard and heavy for just about a year now .. (ok hard and heavy in my mind) I still take about 2 hours to prep a mod -- tho I definatly admit some of that is my OCD kicking in.. I have notecards for each tier with major information for each monster, I have the mod highlighted in different colors for things that NPCs might say during the text of the mod vs. what is DC information and what I consider GM information. That two hours of prepping the mod doesn't include the time to handraw and color the map -- I refuse to spend the money to print the mod out at a Kinkos or whatever.
I love the liberal use of flipmats in scenarios, however, I don't buy mappacks, so those I still draw out.
I thought I would clear up why it doesn't take me as long to prep.
#1-I'm a fast reader. I read straight through the mod without looking at stat blocks. This gives me the feel of how the writer is intending for the scenario to play out.#2-I then re-read the scenario highlighting (with different colors) skill checks and NPC info.
#3-I buy the flip-mats and map packs, so I don't have to draw too often anymore.
#4-Sometimes I use a pdf extractor and posterazor to print off maps that are too detailed or too big to draw.
#5-I print everything at work with the laser printer. Cuts cost and time.
In all reality, my total prep time is probably between 1 and 2 hours. Depends on if I have to draw maps and the type of scenario (murder mystery or straight encounters). I also like to read through the scenario about 4 or 5 days before prepping it. This allows me to think about it for a couple of days before finally digging into it.
|
|
Maybe the little push that I am asking for to get more people to GM would be better solved by amortizing the cost of prep work across Player/GMs instead of credit.
What I mean is what if there were a place that GMs could upload/download digital content, eg. the stats/encounters notes, scaled maps, etc.? Since the maps and most of the content are not covered by the OGL, it would need explicit, written license from Paizo to modify and share scenario content, and they would probably want to restrict it to use by buyers of the scenarios exclusively for running the modules.
This is actually pretty exciting. If I could buy a scenario, pull organized encounter notes such as stats, spells, etc. (to save time flipping through books while running a complicated encounter), print scaled maps (color or B/W, depending on how much I want to spend), it would save me hours and I would actually buy more scenarios rather than fretting about what to do about the ones I've already prepped. As an added bonus to all of you, I would be Playing/GMing instead of posting in the forums!
All we would need to do this is license from Paizo to share our work derived from scenarion (with limitations mentioned) and somewhere to share them (Paizo could host, but wouldn't have to, I could provide a FTP server). Anyone from Paizo care to OK this or shoot it down?
Are you talking about when a stat block isn't included in a mod? For the most part the information should be right there .. I know simple things like goblins, skeletons, etc., aren't always included, but stat block that are to be used are included if they are needed. Mark has answered the map question before in that they pay for the maps at a specific scale and to have them bigger means it isn't cost effective for the company as there is a higher level of detail that the map-makers need and therefore the price goes up.
My notes are all on notecards so I don't think those would upload easily anywhere
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I've only skimmed the thread, so maybe I'm missing something, but can't you play the 2 PFS scenarios a month and then run non-PFS games still, whether they're adventure paths, or homebrew campaigns? That would still contribute towards a) having fun playing Pathfinder, b) growing the player base, c) spurring sales of new product.
I guess I have a hard time understanding only wanthing to play Pathfinder for PFS credit.
|
|
And can even covet the same thing in different ways...Me too, but I guess the short version is "Everyone covets different things."Kind of how I covet my neighbor's ass?
yup using MisterSlanky's coveting as an example it could be..
mmmm that is a fine ass, I want a piece of that!
or, wow she has such a Nice ass, I wish mine was like that.
;)
|
|
Many threads ago, someone proposed the idea of "Two credits, regardless of type (GM or player) and regardless of the order of play." THIS would have gone a long way toward compromise in my opinion, and I was a supporter of it.
And that essentially is what you have now...
[PFS Update] Official Replay Rules
Hyrum Savage (Marketing Manager), Mon, Nov 22, 2010, 09:38 AM Flag | List |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----
If you play you earn 1 credit that is applied to the character that played through the scenario.
If you GM a scenario, you earn 1 credit that can be applied to any character that hasn't played through the scenario.
You receive GM or player credit regardless of the order you play/GM the scenario. You may not earn more than 1 player credit and 1 GM credit regardless of how many times you GM or play the scenario. You are free to use PPP to seat legal tables, but if you already have earned your credits you do not earn any additional ones.
Thanks!
Hyrum.
|
|
Many threads ago, someone proposed the idea of "Two credits, regardless of type (GM or player) and regardless of the order of play." THIS would have gone a long way toward compromise in my opinion, and I was a supporter of it.
If it would satiate the opponents to the current system, I would be willing to give it a try.
|
|
Me too, but I guess the short version is "Everyone covets different things."Kind of how I covet my neighbor's ass?
My attempt to derail this thread into a discussion of Oreos versus chocolate chips failed. Perhaps the "what dost thou covet?" angle will be more successful.
I covet Oreos.
And cholcolate chip cookies.
Hey everyone,
First off, I appreciate the civil tone this thread has, a lot.
Second, we're not going to be adjusting replay any time soon so while you're free to talk about it, I'm only going to be casually looking at this thread, primarily to make sure everyone is playing nice. :)
Thanks!
Hyrum.