Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau
|
I understand the reason for asking for this... consistency with numbering.
That is also the same reason it will never happen. If the numbers were changed, would this invalidate the original Chronicle? Or would a player be required to track down a GM to get the most current version? These are the kind of questions that would have be answered... too many to make the numbering change worthwhile. Unfortunate, but true.
|
I would think that the scenarios for season 1 would have a dual number. #1-01 (#29), #1-02 (#30), etc. A doable compromise.
Except that any change to the scenario numbering would still require a lot of data entry work for very little pay-off. And Michael makes a very good point about chronicles already in use; do we track those down and force the players to update them?
The actual inconvenience is pretty small. Just consider it a little quirk of the PFS.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
The way I see it, if Paizo staff are investing 100+ hours into PFS, there are tons of better things they can invest that time in.
It would definitely be nice, but each module has to be renumbered, go back through layout, republished to PDF, the web page has to be updated, etc... All this for old scenarios which sell far less than new ones.
If they are going to that much effort for old modules, I would far rather see they spend the time/ money up-converting Season Zero scenarios to PFRPG. They couldn't get them all, but they could get at least a few of the more popular ones.
