Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
Okay everyone seems to be going off on random tangents about this question...to the original poster I say this , your question is valid and since there is a finite amount of modules a character can play before he retires its even more valid.
The only ones who can truly tell us why no retroactive application is allowed are the developers.
Now there is absolutely no reason I can see why this cant be allowed , it would be fair to everyone and would require a simple note on your latest cert at the end of a mod to correct, that all being said I ask the devs at this point... if its so trivial an adjustment and doesnt matter as most people on this thread say then.... why not just allow it and save the PFS all the heartache?
Hi there. The at times heated debate stems from the fact that in order to ensure that the player doesn't get more PA than is due there are a number of checks needed. You need to make sure each chron is eligible:
i.e.was played in year 1/2, is one of the year 0 scenarios with just 1 not 2 PA. You need to be happy to accept the players word that they really did complete the mission.
Many people feel that this would be time consuming and open to fraud. Also that when you don't have a tame GM from a home game people would be trying to get their extra PA sorted during a slot at a con or a game shop....which is not going to work.
Then to report online you need to either use an existing reporting procedure as a work around or have to write up a new one....which could be expensive.
Now a quick read on this thread will see that the way we play PFS round my neck of the woods means that this could be done on paper. Paizo lists the eligible mods on a special chron, the player shows they have those and only those chrons to a GM who checks the dates and accepts the players claim did finish the mission. GM signs chron, reports it and hey presto balance is returned to the force.....
Of course some ppl would rather see no extra PA awarded If a single one of them went to a cheat. The reporting system might not allow extra PA to be added via a special session report without also giving XP and GM points. Adding the extra PA via the reporting of an actual played scenario might not be possible and would tie doing the paperwork at a session where ppl are there to play.
I like to think it can be resolved but it could be that it cannot It just could be that given that changes are inevitable in organised play environments, Paizo feels it is opening too big a can of worms to try to backdate any changes as it would lead to un realisable expectations that it would always be done.
Hopefully post Gencon Mark will feel able to say why they reckon it was better not to do it which all we can ask.
W
Regional Venture-Coordinator, Baltic
|
No, the adapting of previously played scenarios is not permitted. Newly run scenarios should be adapted as written, but existing Chronicles should never be altered retroactively.
It's just the rule you never change existing chronicles. You can discuss fairness all you want, but it's not going to change anything.
Mark is currenlty at GenCon and I guess that's the only reason this thread isn't locked yet.
Please move on.
|
|
Dennis, Obviously I don't think we're going to see eye to eye on this issue of the random timing of your game so affecting the reward being a matter of fairness or not. I hope we can agree to disagree.
I keep banging on about the fact that if it can be done then it should be done but it is entirely conditional on it being practical.
Thing is if in your considered and well informed opinion you feel that the admin would be too much for your already stretched resources then there is clearly a big problem. It would be horribly inequitable if the playing resources in one area meant Frank can get his PAs updated and Frances cannot.
W
I'm not sure why this sounds more fair to you. Frank played scenario X at the con with Frances. They both go back to their homes. Frank's usual game is ran by his wife with their three kids. Certainly Frank's situation has plenty of time and trust with the GM for this to be fixed.
Frances, on the other hand, lives in a rural area and only plays his character at conventions and the occasional game day in town when it fits in his schedule. The *volunteer* coordinator doesn't have time to go over the sheets for the 20-30 people that show up to those, so Frances is out of luck unless he can get someone to do it at a convention, but no, the coordinators at the convention don't know Frances, so they can't vouch for his sheet.
They both have chronicles from the same day, same game, same GM, but Frances is out of luck.
That doesn't sound fair to me.
|
Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
Thing is if in your considered and well informed opinion you feel that the admin would be too much for your already stretched resources then there is clearly a big problem. It would be horribly inequitable if the playing resources in one area meant Frank can get his PAs updated and Frances cannot.
W
I'm not sure why this sounds more fair to you. Frank played scenario X at the con with Frances. They both go back to their homes. Frank's usual game is ran by his wife with their three kids. Certainly Frank's situation has plenty of time and trust with the GM for this to be fixed.
Frances, on the other hand, lives in a rural area and only plays his character at conventions and the occasional game day in town when it fits in his schedule. The *volunteer* coordinator doesn't have time to go over the sheets for the 20-30 people that show up to those, so Frances is out of luck unless he can get someone to do it at a convention, but no, the coordinators at the convention don't know Frances, so they can't vouch for his sheet.They both have chronicles from the same day, same game, same GM, but Frances is out of luck.
That doesn't sound fair to me.
I pretty much feel that the pros and cons both in principle and in practice have been covered here, so barring some brilliant new insight I wasn't planning on carrying on but I hope no one will mind me clearing this one up.
You misunderstood what I was saying! That was my point, it would be horribly inequitable (unfair) if where you game allows one player opportunity to get the backdated PA and another no chance at all.
|
|
Thing is if in your considered and well informed opinion you feel that the admin would be too much for your already stretched resources then there is clearly a big problem. It would be horribly inequitable if the playing resources in one area meant Frank can get his PAs updated and Frances cannot.
W
I'm not sure why this sounds more fair to you. Frank played scenario X at the con with Frances. They both go back to their homes. Frank's usual game is ran by his wife with their three kids. Certainly Frank's situation has plenty of time and trust with the GM for this to be fixed.
Frances, on the other hand, lives in a rural area and only plays his character at conventions and the occasional game day in town when it fits in his schedule. The *volunteer* coordinator doesn't have time to go over the sheets for the 20-30 people that show up to those, so Frances is out of luck unless he can get someone to do it at a convention, but no, the coordinators at the convention don't know Frances, so they can't vouch for his sheet.They both have chronicles from the same day, same game, same GM, but Frances is out of luck.
That doesn't sound fair to me.
I pretty much feel that the pros and cons both in principle and in practice have been covered here, so barring some brilliant new insight I wasn't planning on carrying on but I hope no one will mind me clearing this one up.
You misunderstood what I was saying! That was my point, it would be horribly inequitable (unfair) if where you game allows one player opportunity to get the backdated PA and another no chance at all.
You're right, I did misunderstand what you were saying. I agree that one person should not be able to get a backdated chronicle and another person not be able to.
My apologies for misunderstanding you.
edited to let dozing dogs lie.
|
|
My question.
Do the prestige rules presented in the 4.0 Guide mean that Season 0 scenarios run NOW earn 2 Prestige Points for a character if (1) a Pathfinder completes his faction specific mission and (2) the overal mission is completed?I know I should let old threads die and all that, and maybe my question does not fit on this thread, and maybe in the earlier posts above this somewhere it was addressed, but I could not find.
The reason I ask is that at my local game shop I have run Season 0 scenarios that have only one faction mission, and I have been marking the PA as 2, yet when I went to a local CON this weekend and played several Season 0 events, it was explained that most of the Season 0's only give 1 PA. Have I been doing this wrong? do I need to go back and grab the local players Season 0 CRs and "correct" the awards that I marked because of the following from the guide?
"A scenario provides a potential 2 Prestige Points for a
character to earn over the course of the adventure. One of
these is tied to the completion of the overall mission for all
Pathfinders, and is outlined in the “Success Conditions”
section of the adventure. The second Prestige Point is gained
when a Pathfinder completes his faction specific mission, ..."Thank you!
No, it sounds like the local CON GM didn't realize the change to the rewards with this season's guide. Your reading of 1 PA for the faction and 1 PA for completing the overall mission is correct. After all, season 3 scenarios only have 1 faction mission as well.
|
|
No, it sounds like the local CON GM didn't realize the change to the rewards with this season's guide. Your reading of 1 PA for the faction and 1 PA for completing the overall mission is correct. After all, season 3 scenarios only have 1 faction mission as well.
I believe that you are incorrect. The new rule adjusts how the potential 2 PA are awarded per scenario. It doesn't say that the older scenarios with one faction mission suddenly provide an extra PA.
|
|
No, it sounds like the local CON GM didn't realize the change to the rewards with this season's guide. Your reading of 1 PA for the faction and 1 PA for completing the overall mission is correct. After all, season 3 scenarios only have 1 faction mission as well.I believe that you are incorrect. The new rule adjusts how the potential 2 PA are awarded per scenario. It doesn't say that the older scenarios with one faction mission suddenly provide an extra PA.
Actually, yes it does.
When running a Season 0 scenario with 1 Prestige Point
available per PC, treat this as the sole faction mission,
and award a second Prestige Point to PCs that complete
the overall scenario goal, as given by the venture-captain
at the scenario’s introduction. If a Season 0 scenario has
two faction missions per faction, consider one mission
that of the faction and the other the overall success
conditions for the scenario. As Season 0 scenarios are
converted to Pathfinder RPG rules, these faction mission
differences will be eliminated as the old scenarios are
brought in line with the current system.
|
Having the PA be retroactive would definitely be a nice thank you to all the players who started in season 0. Their characters tend to have less PA for their lvl compared to someone who started in say season 2. I leave it up to the organizers to consider a possible mechanism for doing so. I do like the idea of a one time PA alteration on the first scenario played in season 3, just like a faction change.
This already happened. If you started in season 0 (as I did), then you got a PA boost when converting your 3.5 character to PFRPG for season 1.
Is this PA boost still on the table?
This PC started in Season 0, only played Season 0, to level 2, and was put to one side for another PC beginning Season 1.
I've never converted him, but now my replacement PC has overtaken him, I thought it would be a good idea to do so, so I have a level 2 spare, in case I'm ever asked to complete a Tier 1-2 table.
I'm not complaining if I missed the chance; I just want to know, if he is eligible for a one-time PA boost, how does one go about arranging that, and I want to be sure I've got the audit trail, to be able to prove he's been upgraded legally.
|
Is this PA boost still on the table?
This PC started in Season 0, only played Season 0, to level 2, and was put to one side for another PC beginning Season 1.
I've never converted him, but now my replacement PC has overtaken him, I thought it would be a good idea to do so, so I have a level 2 spare, in case I'm ever asked to complete a Tier 1-2 table.
I'm not complaining if I missed the chance; I just want to know, if he is eligible for a one-time PA boost, how does one go about arranging that, and I want to be sure I've got the audit trail, to be able to prove he's been upgraded legally.
See This FAQ entry on how to convert them
|
|
Thanks, that seems to cover everything.
It's not as straightforward as simply 'double your current PA'.
I'll make sure to bring the old chronicles to prove the story so far.
Am I right, that any items 'unlocked' in previous scenarios are superceded by the new 'max value' column, and that I would ignore those previously unlocked Season 0 items going forward? Just use the Season 3 'always available' list and the current 'max value' from PA?
How does that bonus PA get reported onto this site?
Would the GM of his first PF mod have a box to tick, for 'converted PC' when submitting the report of the session?
|
Thanks, that seems to cover everything.
It's not as straightforward as simply 'double your current PA'.
Well, it's fairly easy. For me, it was just add one PA.
I'll make sure to bring the old chronicles to prove the story so far.
It's always best practice to have your old chronicles with you.
Am I right, that any items 'unlocked' in previous scenarios are superceded by the new 'max value' column, and that I would ignore those previously unlocked Season 0 items going forward? Just use the Season 3 'always available' list and the current 'max value' from PA?
Items listed on old chronicle sheets are still valid for purchase. I don't know if there are items that were substantially changed or had their value significantly revised going from 3.5 to PF that appear on chronicle sheets, but I guess anyone running/playing a season 0 scenario now still has that issue.
How does that bonus PA get reported onto this site?
I e-mailed customer services, but I had other problems with my reported sessions that needed sorting out too.
Would the GM of his first PF mod have a box to tick, for 'converted PC' when submitting the report of the session?
Say your season 0 3.5 PC has 5 as his 'final PA total' on his last chronicle sheet. For his next chronicle sheet, I'd put 6 (existing 5, plus the bonus 1) in the 'starting PA' box, and tell the GM that the reason they don't match is due to him being converted from the 3.5 rules, and show him a print-out of the specific FAQ that Cpt_kirstov linked to above.