|
For ease of play in Pathfinder Society, a masterwork item can always be upgraded to a +1 item without paying for a new masterwork item again. Instead, you pay the difference between the cost of the +1 item and that of the masterwork item. This rule also applies to upgrading from a +1 item to a +2 item and so on—you never have to repay the original cost or sell your current item for half to upgrade to the next step. Note that this only applies to items of the same kind—you can’t, for example, turn your masterwork rapier into a +1 greatsword. You can similarly upgrade a composite bow to a higher strength rating by paying the difference between the two strength ratings (as appropriate for the type of composite bow).
How'szat?
|
Seems redundant IMO. The CRB already makes a distinction between the short and long bow with regards to the cost of the mighty quality. Why would it need to be added to the GtOP? Seems like unnecessary characters in a document that we need to keep as small as possible to avoid scaring new players away. It's not the function of the Guide to teach someone how to play PF in general, only those rules that exist within the framework of PFS.
|
Hey All--
I'm going to suggest continuing to post suggested and linked rule changes to this thread (good work on the bows, y'all) until the new 'real' PFS Guide to OP is released.
I believe that there are many more 'arcane' rulings that live in these threads that need to be addressed and documented and believe this is still a good a place as any for them.
If necessary, we'll do another draft of the Guide and then release it again.
Thanks again to all who have suggested language and links. It is appreciated.
-Pain
|
|
Ugh.
From my initial review (plz tell me I'm wrong), 3.3 version still has numerous omissions and clarifications that were linked and updated in this thread. Without being able to check the exact changes, the biggest clarifications were the Animal Intelligence issue, PPP, and the Replay Rules 6.2.
That said, I find it somewhat sad that this is the extent of the update when we brought many of Paizo's own clarifications and updates into one thread so they could at least get those into a new document.
If coordinators want, we can get the relevant updates of 3.3 into the Community Update so those two sections match and we can use a better and linked version.
What do you all think?
We'll need to work together to make sure we find any more changes in 3.3 and document them on this thread.
If we want to do this, we can. At this point, I'd rather have my players use the Community Update than the Ver3.3, however if everyone feels V3.3 is the best thing, we can let this thread die.
-Pain
The new version of the Guide is actually 3.0.3, not 3.3, but that is not a big deal. And considering in the past when Josh commented on it taking weeks to reformat and edit and update the Guide, I am guessing that most of what you gathered was already too late to make it into this small update. Version 4.0, due out in July, will hopefully have all of the other changes. Though if they are not in that one, we may have to assume that they decided to undo any missing changes and start over on the compilation of rulings after the release of 4.0.
Director of Brand Strategy
|
Compiling unincorporated information into this thread is still very useful. When it came to updating the Guide to 3.0.3, we had to pick the most important updates. This version is very much a stopgap to get things like the 1:1 rule and the update to animal companions into the official guide asap while we work on the expanded documentation.
I understand the desire to help the campaign and organize the community around improving things. Doing what you're already doing by finding rulings hidden among archived posts is actually the most valuable thing one can do at this stage of the game. Revising and compiling them into one document is something we're going to have to do on our end, though, as the layout and organization of all the campaign documents are going to change significantly.
|
|
Re-write of the replay rule
original rule:
You may replay a scenario as needed to fill tables, but
may only earn credit for a given scenario in the following
manner:
• 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.
Re-write -- this also gives separation between replay and receiving credit which I think causes a lot of the confusion -- feel free to amend as needed.. but i think this gives us a good basis
credit rules
Each individual player may receive two (2) chronicles per scenario.
You receive one (1) for playing the scenario and need to apply the "played" chronicle to the character that played the scenario.
You receive one (1) chronicle for GMing or judging the scenario. This judges chronicle can be applied to any OTHER character that has not played the scenario.
The order in which you obtain these credits does not matter, but an individual player cannot receive more that two (2) chronicles for any given scenario.
replay rules
Once you have received your one (1) player chronicle you may not receive another; however, you may replay the scenario if needed to make a legal table *in the spirit of PPP* but will not receive a chronicle for playing this scenario again.
|
|
This copy from another thread, I liked it as well:
Scenarios, Chronicles and Replay
You may earn GM or player credit regardless of the order
you play or GM a scenario. You may earn a maximum of 1 player
credit and 1 GM credit regardless of how many times you GM or
play a scenario. Player credit earned from a scenario must be
applied to the character that played through that scenario. GM
credit earned may be applied to any eligible character belonging
to the GM. However, no character may receive more than 1 credit
from a scenario, whether earned as player or GM. You are free to
use Play, Play, Play to replay in order to meet the four player
minimum needed for a legal table, but if you have already earned
your player credit, you do not earn an additional one.
Any preference on what is going to cause less confusion? How can we amend and fix either of these to be more Arodenesque (aka perfect)?
-Pain
Edit: Should we have an exception (if I'm right), about Godsmouth Heresy?
|
Did you see Thea's post regarding this above?Totally. I'm trying to find the best, least confusing version (though I know in my blackest heart that it will never be perfect).
Which one is clearer?
-Pain
Hah, I reread your post and realized you had and deleted my post but you ninjaed my delete!
Edit: And I prefer Thea's more concise version.
|
|
Did you see Thea's post regarding this above?Totally. I'm trying to find the best, least confusing version (though I know in my blackest heart that it will never be perfect).
Which one is clearer?
-Pain
My opinion was it seems people getting tripped up on the wording between the two rulings .. which is why I separated them, in hopes to make it clearer. I also took out some of the fluffy non-needed words.
|
|
Credit rules
Each individual may receive a maximum of two (2) chronicles per scenario.
You receive one (1) chronicle for playing the scenario and apply this chronicle to the character that played the scenario.
You receive one (1) chronicle for GMing the scenario. This chronicle is to be applied to any character that does not already have a chronicle for the scenario.
The order in which you obtain these chronicles does not matter, but an individual player cannot receive more that two (2) chronicles for any given scenario. Pathfinder Society play of sanctioned modules may provide exceptions on a case by case basis,
Replay rules
Once you have received your one (1) player chronicle you may not receive another; however, you may replay the scenario if needed to make a legal table *in the spirit of PPP* but will not receive another chronicle for playing this scenario again.
(Now I'm beating a dead horse) :)
|
|
I really like Thea's version (with Ziz's adjustmemts). IMO, it is clear and concise and separates the play from the replay issue I feel is important.
I'm not an English major, but is the "to be" require? To me, it reads "funny". And the "tense" of the sentence seems off. Perhaps...
"You receive one (1) chronicle for GMing the scenario. This chronicle is applied to any character that has not already received a chronicle for the scenario."
Feel free to tell me I'm wrong. :-)
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Just checking: Here's a scenario, and I'd like you to evaluate it under Thea's/Zizizat's wording:
Hyrum game-masters Scenario 2-24, and applies his chronicle to his PC Greenjaws. (Since this is Hyrum's first experience with Scenario 2-24, Greenjaws does not have a chronicle sheet, and this is legal.)
The next week, Hyrum plays Scenario 2-24 with Greenjaws. Since the order of GMing and playing does not matter, this is legal. Can Hyrum apply a second chronicle sheet to Greenjaws?
I know the answer should be "no", but based on that version of the rules, I believe it would be legal. The "already" in the second paragraph gives greater weight to the argument that applying the playing chronicle in this way is legal under the rules.
--
Is there any way to indicate that applying the Player chronicle is required, but applying GM credit is optional?
|
|
Just checking: Here's a scenario, and I'd like you to evaluate it under Thea's/Zizizat's wording:
Hyrum game-masters Scenario 2-24, and applies his chronicle to his PC Greenjaws. (Since this is Hyrum's first experience with Scenario 2-24, Greenjaws does not have a chronicle sheet, and this is legal.)
The next week, Hyrum plays Scenario 2-24 with Greenjaws. Since the order of GMing and playing does not matter, this is legal. Can Hyrum apply a second chronicle sheet to Greenjaws?
I know the answer should be "no", but based on that version of the rules, I believe it would be legal.
hrmmm ...chris you have a point
original re-write: credit rules
Each individual player may receive two (2) chronicles per scenario.
You receive one (1) for playing the scenario and need to apply the "played" chronicle to the character that played the scenario.
You receive one (1) chronicle for GMing or judging the scenario. This judges chronicle can be applied to any OTHER character that has not played the scenario.
The order in which you obtain these credits does not matter, but an individual player cannot receive more that two (2) chronicles for any given scenario.
This might be a better re-write of that section
Each individual player may receive two (2) chronicles per scenarios, however, only one (1) chronicle may be applied per character.
|
|
.
My $.02
.
Play Credit:
Each individual player may receive two (2) chronicles per scenario.
The order in which you obtain these credits does not matter, but an individual player cannot receive more that two (2) chronicles for any given scenario.
|
|
What about...
"You receive one (1) chronicle for playing the scenario and must apply it only to the character that played the scenario."
"You receive one (1) chronicle for GMing the scenario. It may be applied to any character that does not already have a chronicle for the scenario."
The use of "may" would infer that you are not required to apply it to a character. But I'm not sure if it now sounds like there is a loop-hole.
|
|
What about...
"You receive one (1) chronicle for playing the scenario and must apply it only to the character that played the scenario."
"You receive one (1) chronicle for GMing the scenario. It may be applied to any character that does not already have a chronicle for the scenario."
The use of "may" would infer that you are not required to apply it to a character. But I'm not sure if it now sounds like there is a loop-hole.
I would say there would be a loophole in the character chronicle .. it should be applied to the character that played the scenario ..
the GM chronicle is ok that way tho
|
|
I know the answer should be "no", but based on that version of the rules, I believe it would be legal. The "already" in the second paragraph gives greater weight to the argument that applying the playing chronicle in this way is legal under the rules.
--
Is there any way to indicate that applying the Player chronicle is required, but applying GM credit is optional?
I'm going to pick nits with you here, but I don't see it that way at all. Obviously, I rewrote it :)
The choice of words is actually quite deliberate, in that Greenjaws 'already have (has) a chronicle for the scenario.' It's part of the reason I took out the distinct references in Thea's version. There isn't a distinction. What matters is character 1234-1 can only have 1 chronicle for module 1. It is possible to earn 2 chronicles for module 1.
Also to your second point the wording which TwlightKnight didn't like in mine was intended to allow that very understanding :)
Player Chronicle - 'and apply this' (non-optional)
GM Chronicle - 'to be applied' (aspirational)
The order in which you obtain these chronicles does not matter, but an individual player cannot receive more that two (2) chronicles for any given scenario. No character may have more than one (1) chronicle for any given scenario applied to it. Pathfinder Society play of sanctioned modules may provide exceptions on a case by case basis.
I'm not against making things clearer, by any means however.
|
|
This was my attempt I posted on the other thread about replay:
Each scenario may be played once for credit. The chronicle sheet will be awarded to the character that participated in the scenario. Additionally, you may GM the scenario for credit and apply this credit as appropriate (reference appropriate section for how to do this and what is appropriate) to a character that has not already received play credit. The order in which you play or GM is not important, however any prior knowledge of the scenario should not be revealed during play. Any GM has the right to ask anyone to leave the table if prior knowledge has become a problem.
Replaying a module:
Scenarios may be replayed to help create a legal table. No credit will be awarded for replays, but all the risk of playing through a scenario (i.e. death, use of consumables, et. al.) remains.
Applying GM Credit:
Insert appropriate text here
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
You receive one (1) chronicle for playing the scenario and apply this chronicle to the character that played the scenario.
You receive one (1) chronicle for GMing the scenario. This chronicle is to be applied to any character that does not already have a chronicle for the scenario.
The order in which you obtain these chronicles does not matter, but an individual player cannot receive more that two (2) chronicles for any given scenario. Pathfinder Society play of sanctioned modules may provide exceptions on a case by case basis,
I know the answer should be "no", but based on that version of the rules, I believe it would be legal. The "already" in the second paragraph gives greater weight to the argument that applying the playing chronicle in this way is legal under the rules.
I'm going to pick nits with you here, but I don't see it that way at all. Obviously, I rewrote it :)
The choice of words is actually quite deliberate, in that Greenjaws 'already have (has) a chronicle for the scenario.'
That language is only in the GM-credit paragraph, Mark. When Hyrum GMed, he applied the credit to Greenjaws, who doesn't have any chronicle yet.
The language isn't in the player-credit paragraph. There, you note that the chronicle must go to the character who played the scenario, and is silent about special exeptions when he 'already has a chronicle'. So not only is Hyrum allowed to give Greenjaws a second chronicle sheet for the module, he's required to do so.
What matters is character 1234-1 can only have 1 chronicle for module 1.
The rules should state that somewhere.
|
|
re-submission -- using updates in the thread -- but using marks original re-write of mine for word usage...
Credit rules
Each individual player may receive two (2) chronicles per scenarios, however, only one (1) chronicle may be applied per character.
You receive one (1) chronicle for playing the scenario and apply this chronicle to the character that played the scenario.
You receive one (1) chronicle for GMing the scenario. This chronicle is to be applied to any character that does not already have a chronicle for the scenario.
The order in which you obtain these chronicles does not matter, but an individual player cannot receive more that two (2) chronicles for any given scenario. Pathfinder Society play of sanctioned modules may provide exceptions on a case by case basis,
Replay rules
Once you have received your one (1) player chronicle you may not receive another; however, you may replay the scenario if needed to make a legal table *in the spirit of PPP* but will not receive another chronicle for playing this scenario again.
|
|
That language is only in the GM-credit paragraph, Mark. When Hyrum GMed, he applied the credit to Greenjaws, who doesn't have any chronicle yet.
The language isn't in the player-credit paragraph. There, you note that the chronicle must go to the character who played the scenario, and is silent about special exeptions when he 'already has a chronicle'. So not only is Hyrum allowed to give Greenjaws a second chronicle sheet for the module, he's required to do so.
I'm with you now :) Thanks!
Regarding Day Job rolls for the FAQ:
You cannot take 10 on Day Job rolls.
T-shirt rerolls *can* be used on Day Job rolls.
|
|
Regarding Day Job rolls for the FAQ:
You cannot take 10 on Day Job rolls.
T-shirt rerolls *can* be used on Day Job rolls.
Thanks Maze.
I'll try to get an updated Guide out this week with a version of the above along with what changes we can find from the Ver 3.0.3 guide as well.
I appreciate your previous contributions as well.
-Pain
|
|
Hey All--
Draft version of the new Community Update:
1) Has what changes I could find from the Ver.3.0.3 guide:
a) Animal rules
b) Wording for Chapter 13
2) Replay rules (Thea's wording)
3) Maze's additions
4) A couple more spelling and format fixes.
Quickest Version: Google Published Doc has the most tweaked formatting, but is quick and hyperlinked.
Slow opening (about 5 min...but it works, I promise): Google Document you can download and save.
It's also in the file section of this Yahoo Group.
This is still a draft and so any suggestions or fixes are *appreciated*.
Post them here. I am happy for full and complete Community feedback.
I'll gather input and comments until the middle of next week, then re-publish a 'final' version.
-Pain
This is great! Thank you!