|
I'm sure Threads like these have been done before but I rarely stop by these parts so I figured I'd start a new one.
Does anyone else think PCs level up too quickly in Pathfinder Society?
3 little Scenarios, that's all it takes.
Has there been any discussion about pushing the number of completed Chronicles to 4 for each levelling?
Or maybe even have a staggered progression, something like,
3 at 1st Level
4 from 2nd - 8th Level
5 from 9th - 12th Level
Or something.
What have Paizonians said about the levelling progression?
What has Paizo said about it?
|
|
Thanks Thea -- I had actually wondered about that and almost put it in my OP.
It just seems that, for those who play often (ie. the ones who spend the $$$ on Scenarios!) having to start a new PC so often might be a bother. (Of course, depending on the player)
Whereas, those who play seldomly (heh, like me as it stands now), have less interest invested in Pathfinder Society in general and THEIR PCs specifically.
Anyway, you answered my question.
Thanks again.
|
Thanks Thea -- I had actually wondered about that and almost put it in my OP.
It just seems that, for those who play often (ie. the ones who spend the $$$ on Scenarios!) having to start a new PC so often might be a bother. (Of course, depending on the player)
Whereas, those who play seldomly (heh, like me as it stands now), have less interest invested in Pathfinder Society in general and THEIR PCs specifically.
Anyway, you answered my question.
Thanks again.
Lol .. personally I like making them and trying to come up with a chracter concept and running with it .. my Gnomish Inquisitor (made specifically to annoy the crap out of Kyle B)is one of my favorites .. or my 1/2 orc taldan bear shaman druid with a bear named boo
I'm sure Threads like these have been done before but I rarely stop by these parts so I figured I'd start a new one.
Does anyone else think PCs level up too quickly in Pathfinder Society?
3 little Scenarios, that's all it takes.
Has there been any discussion about pushing the number of completed Chronicles to 4 for each levelling?
There's a trivial solution:
- Make two identical characters, e.g. Conan and Conann.
- Play with Conan for three adventures and then play with Conann for three adventures.
- ???
- Profit!
|
|
@Yoda Ate My Head,
I think we all know what that means is gonna happen this August when the new Season starts -- now it's just guessing at the particulars.
Cool. Thanks Mark.
I knew that with a fellow Woody Allen fan in charge, Pathfinder Society was in good hands!
@Thea,
Yeah, that's why I put the second parenthetical in my earlier post. For me, though, I just want one PC. I'll get him to 12th eventually and keep playing level 12 Scenarios. So I'd like him to take a while getting to 12th.
@Hogarth,
One step ahead of you (if I need to be) -- but I don't think we'd even have to do a Jedi-Clone name for this. Couldn't one have Pathfinder Society Character #99999-1, "Frank" and #99999-2, "Frank."
@Kyle,
Agreed, I think that's the single LOUDEST post I've seen in several weeks!
You are definitely not the only person that thinks leveling happens too fast. But I am glad to see Mark says there may be some changes to this structure so I'll wait and see.
Now, if someone will (also) do something about making some (more) adventures available for play past 12th level......
Iron Medusa is a nice start, but it'd be sweet to have 3-6 adventures each year for the experienced characters to do more country/world impacting things.
|
Whatever our Paizo overlords decide is ok with me, but when I think about it, at Gencon this year we can barely find 6 players that have level 12 characters waiting to do the level cap scenarios. And there are a lot of open tables at levels 5+.
So that makes me think the levelling system is fine. Definitely no slower at lower levels!
I can see your point though. Ideally:
1) Level 1 would only take 2 XP to finish.
2) Levels 6+ would take 4-5 XP to finish.
Having said that, I wouldn't mind seeing some high level convention play someday, and if it slows down much further that might never happen.
My home group only plays once per month, 12 times a year, if they don't TPK (unlikely it seems at this point) they might be level 5 in a year, level 9 in 2 years. I wouldn't want it any slower than that.
|
|
Another alternative is that everyone could play in Baird's games, and just play the same levels over again with new characters.
;)
EDIT: (says the GM who's killed characters of 2 of the posters above)
Psh, I managed to do something the mighty and 'deadly' Kyle Baird has never been able to do. Although I have a feeling I'm going to be paying for that with the lives of my PCs in PFS (hoping to build up more PA so I can survive the entire level 12 arc) and in our home campaign.
/Please don't hurt me! You know who you are. :(
|
|
Here's a suggestion: The # of XP required to gain a level = current character level.
So it would take 1 XP to reach 2nd level, 3 to reach 3rd, 6 to reach 4th, 10 to reach 5th, etc. This would have the effect of pushing people out of the initial levels more quickly, helping to alleviate the shortage of tier 1-2 and 3-4 mods, and into the "sweet spot" levels. Yeah, those last few levels would take a while, but so what?
|
|
Here's a suggestion: The # of XP required to gain a level = current character level.
So it would take 1 XP to reach 2nd level, 3 to reach 3rd, 6 to reach 4th, 10 to reach 5th, etc. This would have the effect of pushing people out of the initial levels more quickly, helping to alleviate the shortage of tier 1-2 and 3-4 mods, and into the "sweet spot" levels. Yeah, those last few levels would take a while, but so what?
While the spirit of this suggestion is good, I do not think it is conducive to lesser experienced players. I think the pacing is good because it allows newer players to adapt at a steady pace to the rules and mechanics of the game.
From another point, it would mean that PFS would be heavily loaded on higher tier scenarios, and that's a bit much to ask based on the extra amount of work it takes to create gameplay at higher levels. That is a lot to ask out (too much IMO) of writers and out of GMs who have to run those games, because they have a tendency to run longer than you would expect.
Here's a suggestion: The # of XP required to gain a level = current character level.
So it would take 1 XP to reach 2nd level, 3 to reach 3rd, 6 to reach 4th, 10 to reach 5th, etc. This would have the effect of pushing people out of the initial levels more quickly, helping to alleviate the shortage of tier 1-2 and 3-4 mods, and into the "sweet spot" levels. Yeah, those last few levels would take a while, but so what?
While the spirit of this suggestion is good, I do not think it is conducive to lesser experienced players. I think the pacing is good because it allows newer players to adapt at a steady pace to the rules and mechanics of the game.
From another point, it would mean that PFS would be heavily loaded on higher tier scenarios, and that's a bit much to ask based on the extra amount of work it takes to create gameplay at higher levels. That is a lot to ask out (too much IMO) of writers and out of GMs who have to run those games, because they have a tendency to run longer than you would expect.
I think an experience pattern like this would be optimal:
2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7(2 xp to hit level 2, 3 for level 3 and 4, etc)
This way it speeds up the first level, keeps pace for the lower levels so they learn the rules but don't get bored of constant low levels, but keeps it so that the higher levels last longer than a simple 3 modules.
But they seem to have something in mind, so these ideas are slightly moot.
|
|
That's still a lot to ask of the writers and GMs. I would probably shoot myself if I had to GMed more 7-11 games than other tiers, just because the preparation necessary to have those fights go off and be challenging is a lot more than your standard 1-5, 1-7 game. Not to mention knowing the rules to the crazy environments and effects that normally get added to higher tier play eats up a lot more time.
/Although I can think of one 1-5 that gives me headaches! :P
|
|
That's still a lot to ask of the writers and GMs. I would probably shoot myself if I had to GMed more 7-11 games than other tiers, just because the preparation necessary to have those fights go off and be challenging is a lot more than your standard 1-5, 1-7 game. Not to mention knowing the rules to the crazy environments and effects that normally get added to higher tier play eats up a lot more time.
/Although I can think of one 1-5 that gives me headaches! :P
~45% of what I run is high tier. DougDoug sets 'em up...
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Here's what I hope: there'll be a way to catch up.
3-adventures-per-level might work well enough for people who play PFS at conventions. There's always some folks with similar-leveled PCs to play with.
But there are situations where everybody in a home group has 4th or 5th-level characters. And somebody needs to start a new character, either because her last character died or because she's new to the group. In standard Pathfinder, the GM can start her PC at or near the experience level of the other PCs. Even if not, the 1st-level PC will catch up to the rest of the party within a level or two.
In a home-campaign PFS game, the new PC will *never* catch up. She will always be 3 or 4 levels behind the rest of the party. And honestly, that's not much fun.
Here's hoping that there's some mechanism that allows the high-level characters to voluntarily slow down, or the lower-level character to speed up, possibly by paying Prestige.
|
Here's what I hope: there'll be a way to catch up.
3-adventures-per-level might work well enough for people who play PFS at conventions. There's always some folks with similar-leveled PCs to play with.
But there are situations where everybody in a home group has 4th or 5th-level characters. And somebody needs to start a new character, either because her last character died or because she's new to the group. In standard Pathfinder, the GM can start her PC at or near the experience level of the other PCs. Even if not, the 1st-level PC will catch up to the rest of the party within a level or two.
In a home-campaign PFS game, the new PC will *never* catch up. She will always be 3 or 4 levels behind the rest of the party. And honestly, that's not much fun.
Here's hoping that there's some mechanism that allows the high-level characters to voluntarily slow down, or the lower-level character to speed up, possibly by paying Prestige.
As a GM who runs a weekly home game, I have thought about this a great deal. What do you do when your group's characters hit level 6 or so and someone dies? I know it's likely they will have AP saved up for a raise dead at that point (it's what I'm currently encouraging my players to do) and that the party likely has enough gold to pool in and buck up for a raise, but what if they don't?
The rules have clearly established the fact that you can not play up more than one tier and that you must start all PCs at level 1. So, failing sufficient GP or AP my characterless player would have the option of either playing a pregen every session till the group either TPKs or reaches level 12 and retires, or grab the reins and GM since I have an appropriate leveled character from GM credits. Although, neither of those options seem ideal in my opinion. Am I missing something?
|
|
The rules have clearly established the fact that you can not play up more than one tier and that you must start all PCs at level 1. So, failing sufficient GP or AP my characterless player would have the option of either playing a pregen every session till the group either TPKs or reaches level 12 and retires, or grab the reins and GM since I have an appropriate leveled character from GM credits. Although, neither of those options seem ideal in my opinion. Am I missing something?
Well, there's the choice were everyone else makes level 1 characters out of sympathy and everyone starts over. =)
|
|
The rules have clearly established the fact that you can not play up more than one tier and that you must start all PCs at level 1. So, failing sufficient GP or AP my characterless player would have the option of either playing a pregen every session till the group either TPKs or reaches level 12 and retires, or grab the reins and GM since I have an appropriate leveled character from GM credits. Although, neither of those options seem ideal in my opinion. Am I missing something?Well, there's the choice were everyone else makes level 1 characters out of sympathy and everyone starts over. =)
You do have a point sir! This will continue to be a better and better option as more low level content is released.
|
|
There are situations where....
And honestly, that's not much fun.
This is a really good point.
I remember when I started my first PC in the RPGA and was waaay behind the other PCs.
Hopefully they'll figure something out (if they're changing in Aug) or stick with the current model -- or just making it 4XP per level instead of 3 -- that may be a happy medium.
Actually -- what Paizo needs is a math guy who also knows D&D and has organized play experience.
....Maybe someone that has published some D&D stuff in the past;
Plays Pathfinder and is a Society member;
and is cool enough in math that he writes (or wrote) math questions for the ACT.
Any ideas, Arodnap?
|
|
But I would certainly not push Players into starting a new 1st Lvl PC just cuz someone needs it.
Lots of Players would have no problem with it but some would and it's not cool to do that.
I think a better option for general home-games and really small LGS communities might be to ask Players to have two or three PCs at any given time. That's more palatable to the Player who likes sticking with his already-7th-Lvl PC. If he starts three PCs and plays lots of early Scenarios getting each one to about 3rd lvl THEN grabs one and sticks with it for a long time, he'll be less put out if he has to pause his 7th Lvl PC and go back to one of his 3rd Lvl PCs for a dozen or so Scenarios.
I dunno, maybe.
And like we said earlier, he can make the same build -- the same PC even -- and just have a slightly different name or even keep the name each time.
|
|
The rules have clearly established the fact that you can not play up more than one tier and that you must start all PCs at level 1. So, failing sufficient GP or AP my characterless player would have the option of either playing a pregen every session till the group either TPKs or reaches level 12 and retires, or grab the reins and GM since I have an appropriate leveled character from GM credits. Although, neither of those options seem ideal in my opinion. Am I missing something?
Hard-capping the level ranges of the modules solves this problem. If your group hits L6, and ever wishes to play any newly-released Tier 1-5s, they will have to make new PCs.
It's really on the organizers to have offerings that fit the character levels of his expected players.
-Matt
|
I recommend you follow the Paizo blog closely in the coming weeks, especially the Pathfinder Society blogs every Monday morning.As I disagree with the OP this just makes me nervous :P
I think the current rate is fine. It's also much slower than many of the OP games I've played in the past.
I'm on board with keeping the current system as well. Anything else just sounds like it gets complicated.
Here's a suggestion: The # of XP required to gain a level = current character level.
*snip*
This would have the effect of pushing people out of the initial levels more quickly, helping to alleviate the shortage of tier 1-2 and 3-4 mods, and into the "sweet spot" levels. Yeah, those last few levels would take a while, but so what?
Let me echo your thoughts, this is the exact number/model my group and I have settled on as being the optimal progression scenario. I'd even be approving of a system where its 3 events per level until 4th, then your current level of events to advance.
Additionally, I agree that getting past 5th level is where the mot "fun" happens as far as what a character can do and when the player actually can see some things come together for characters skills/abilities. I personally think the game is best in the 7-11 range, once 7th level spells begin things get tougher to mange.
|
|
Aha!
I was prepared for that argument, Githzilla (cool avatar name, btw).
As much as discussiing the different possibilities and their ramifications and maybe even design implications, whatever system they come up with is bound to be amazingly SIMPLE.
As simple as it is now, making a staggered model will remain just as simple as long as 1 Chronicle = 1 XP.
The way we play and deal with it may be equally as complicated as it is now (Can I be in this Scenario?; Can I run that Scenario?; What's a legal table w/ x number PCs of those levels?; etc.), but won't get more complicated.
The "1 Scenario = 1 XP" mechanic is brilliantly simple. And AWESONME.
So much so that I've adopted it to my reagular games. It's far superior to the ways we've done XP for the last 30+years. AND IT'S SIMPLE!
Whatever our Paizo overlords decide is ok with me, but when I think about it, at Gencon this year we can barely find 6 players that have level 12 characters waiting to do the level cap scenarios. And there are a lot of open tables at levels 5+.
So that makes me think the levelling system is fine. Definitely no slower at lower levels!
I am definitely not a fan of slower leveling at lower levels, its the higher ones and the 12th level cap that I struggle with and think can be improved.
And while there may be difficulty finding players that will play level 12 games at GenCon, it does not mean they are not out there.
For example, the folks I regularly play with (and yes most of us have played since the beginning) will have, after GenCon (if we play everything there), two characters that are 12th level, one that is in the 6-8 range, and another that is in the 2-3 range. And this is like three tables of people, not just barely one.
Yes, we play (or will have by then) most everything that is available. We'll either play a bunch of games (5-7) at a regional con or we'll have weekends at someone's house. But it still comes out all of us that we level too fast. "We're always about to level" is our mantra. Maybe we're "old" and recall the days of previous organized play campaigns where leveling (like in 2nd Ed) was very (too) slow - but, still, it just feels like you have no time to "get to know" your character before he goes from newbie to almost retired.
Here's what I hope: there'll be a way to catch up.
But there are situations where everybody in a home group has 4th or 5th-level characters. And somebody needs to start a new character, either because her last character died or because she's new to the group. In standard Pathfinder, the GM can start her PC at or near the experience level of the other PCs. Even if not, the 1st-level PC will catch up to the rest of the party within a level or two.
In a home-campaign PFS game, the new PC will *never* catch up. She will always be 3 or 4 levels behind the rest of the party. And honestly, that's not much fun.
I agree that some rule to provide a player to start a new PC (due to permanent character death) at an appropriate level to the rest of the group would be ideal. The reality is, we're playing this game to have fun so shouldn't be such rules sticklers as to block that for a home group or established set of players.
That said, I am always a bit baffled about the arguments of death ruining a play group. In PFS, there is really NO penalty for death if the rest of the party can recover the body and pay for a Raise Dead (16 PAs, 10,910gp, both of which are reasonably obtainable totals, especially since a group can pitch in gold for spell casting services). And if a group has played itself to 4-6th level and has been mostly successful in faction missions and earned some gold there is no reason that spell can't be afforded. Past 6th level this si about a moot issue, imo. Obviously, there are always specific situations that nullify recovery/casting options but I think they are the exception, not the rule, and should be applied accordingly.
I've found that most PFS events are MOST deadly at 1st and 2nd level, since there's usually 3-6 combats per day and healing/powers are in short supply.
And like we said earlier, he can make the same build -- the same PC even -- and just have a slightly different name or even keep the name each time.
That's the thing. It seems easy to me to slow down a character's progress for those who like a slow progression (just make two identical characters, as you and I noted). But if you changed the system to 1 level = 4 (or 5 or 6) scenarios, I doubt there would be an equally easy way to advance faster than that (for people like me who like a faster leveling pace).
If Paizo are planning on changing 3xp = 1 level then we really need advance warning of that, as it affects game planning, what we sign up to at forthcoming conventions and so on. If the change is due to start in August then we could do with knowing that now.
Having said that, the biggest issue with changing the 3xp rule is that wealth by level will be wrong based on the rewards in current mods. If they don't provide new ARs for old mods then we'll all be rich if they slow levelling down, or stony broke if they speed it up...
If instead they're thinking about advancing levels for replacement characters then that's cool. It would still be useful to know what they have planned, but it's not as critical. If it's "for every character of level 7-11 that dies, you can start a new character at 7th" then I'll be overjoyed. I don't like raising characters unless they're immortal in some way, or a reincarnated druid perhaps, as it just feels like a computer game then. But it means I struggle to catch up.
|
I agree that some rule to provide a player to start a new PC (due to permanent character death) at an appropriate level to the rest of the group would be ideal.
I am strongly against allowing of character creation beyond level 1. Yes, there are workarounds with the modules lines, but you still have to earn those xp by sitting at a table. The minute this happens is the minute I walk away from PFS (as it was the final straw for LFR for me).
That said, it sucks when you play with a group and a PC dies and is unrecoverable, but a group that isn't willing to find a way to continue on with the player probably wasn't worth playing with anyway. New level 1 characters aren't a punishment, they're an opportunity.
Sorry if I sound a bit harsh in that first sentence. That topic, more than anything, is my line in the sand. And from my experience its the difference when playing a game with a heart versus some of the other systems that haven't lasted.
To the OP: As a committed player, but a fairly casual OP player, I love the 3 XP per level. Also, 33+4 scenarios is, after all, something like 150 hours of gametime. It's difficult to imagine me clocking more time than that in PFS with my home group, family life, and whatnot.
For Paizo, I would encourage running stats on just how many characters are actually retiring. If those retirement scenarios aren't being run, it seems like a waste to slow progression.
|
|
From the beginning, I wanted to see a staggered XP table, gradually getting bigger (more XP req'd) as you went up in levels, but since that didn't happen, I embrace the current system and would now prefer it not change.
I'm not a fan of fundamental system/mechanics changes this late in the game (pun intended) especially when the the current rules aren't "broken" and most feel they are working just fine.
There are many things a player can do to "catch up" to other player's PC levels.
Go to conventions. You can play more games, or do some GM'ing if you want to avoid those low levels. There are likely many local/regional conventions all the time. Of course, I am in what is considered the "heart" of the RPG'ing world (midwest) where there is seemingly a con every weekend, but if you're willing to drive a few hours, I'm fairly sure you can find something. Contact your closest Venture Captain.
Found a new group of players, perhaps at a different game store, university, etc. This opens up a lot of opportunities for more player options and you may find additional GM's.
|
|
HOLY CRAP I JUST GOT A GREAT IDEA.
Actually, it may have already been covered somewhere but who cares.
Pathfinder Society has PreGen PCs that a Player can use if need be. And when one uses a 1st level PreGen he can always convert that PreGen to a real PC.
It's not really different from a DM who gets credit for his PC when he DMs a Scenario his PC has never done before.
The Paizo folks would have to make some fine-print to ensure Players don't find a way to take advantage of it but at least a new Player can join a group without making the group start over with new PCs.
Note that the pupose IS NOT to get new Player "up to the other PCs' level" but just so he can play.
|
|
If you think you're leveling too fast, run most characters.
In LG, you pretty much had to run one character one mod a week to see him make 14th level in two years, three if he died a couple times. I was fortunate enough to be in a big city with a lot of conventions, and averaged about six mods a month, and had four characters. Only one of them made it past 10th. Four characters was optional, since you could always play as far up as you dared (although ex/gp would be reduced); and was sometimes required to make a legal table, such as a 2nd-level barbarian joining three 12th-level characters (they buffed the ever-livin' snot out of him, he survived, and came out of it with a +2 ghost-touch weapon).
In PFS, I'm averaging three mods a month, and there's a hard cap on how far you can play up (not far), which means -- if you want to play -- you need a character for every possible tier the table might wind up at.
Personally, I'm looking forward to having a stable of retired characters who occasionally come out for "specials". (Gad, I wish we had a real convention network like LG.)
I dunno, I played online a few times and stopped because I couldn't really enjoy it. The GM was good, but the focus from the groups I was in was consistently on speedily grinding out the scenario to level up into the next tier as quickly as possible. One session didn't go that way, but in that one almost everyone was new.
Maybe it's different in person (and I plan to find out at PaizoCon), but from my experience at least it would just increase the frustration level from the regular players.
|
|
JUST GOT A GREAT IDEA
I know this was discussed but not sure if it appeared in the forums. The real gain for the player would be if it functioned like the mods; where you can play a pregen or altered version of a legal PC and apply level appropriate rewards to another character. That would allow the player to play at higher tier tables and still get credit.
However, the standard scenarios do not have scaled rewards outside of the associated tier. So allowing it under the current system would not help a player catch up to higher level PC's. They would just have a stack of unapplied chronicles that would drop as soon as the PC was high enough to qualify.