An Alternative to the Proposed Sanctioned Modules Restrictions

[Don Walker]

Chris Mortika wrote:

What were the objections to leveling-up or leveling-down a PC to meet a module's target range? In particular, if the consequences carried over, what do the venture-captains feel is the problem?

Chris,

I don't feel comfortable discussing particulars, even if I could remember them. But the obvious problem with allowing a PC to level down is on a Chronicle sheet with only one tier for gold, the higher level PC will be getting much less gold than they should for their level. One could also argue that the PC has already played through the level of the module and shouldn't be allowed to play at that level again.

[Chris Mortika]

Thanks, Don.

Insofar as it's the player's choice, I don't see the problem, but I could imagine other people feeling differently.

[Mad Alchemist]

Don Walker wrote:

Chris Mortika wrote:

What were the objections to leveling-up or leveling-down a PC to meet a module's target range? In particular, if the consequences carried over, what do the venture-captains feel is the problem?

Chris,

I don't feel comfortable discussing particulars, even if I could remember them. But the obvious problem with allowing a PC to level down is on a Chronicle sheet with only one tier for gold, the higher level PC will be getting much less gold than they should for their level. One could also argue that the PC has already played through the level of the module and shouldn't be allowed to play at that level again.

The obvious problem you mention is already solved by current rules. As I understand it the future one teir rewards would be created because in the proposed rules all leveling up and down was being removed. If it was left in in some form the obvious solution would be to save the work of redoing the current chronicles and form the future chronicles in the same format. I would like as a compromise for the lvl up down leveling option to remain and simply have all costs link. I think options for above cap play are great. I think the currently prposed idea is clunky an best, and should of been handled with specials or a more generic statement related to above 12cap mods so the rules will not have to be adjusted in the future to incorperate new 13th and 14thform mods.

[Dragnmoon]

Every thread I post in goes post crazy after I post in them... My work is done here..;)

[teribithia9]

Dragnmoon wrote:

Modules because they are so long are much harder to schedule for so for Small groups where there is a large disparity of levels it makes it harder to find the right amount of players with the right levels able to take the time it takes to play a Module..

That is why this hurts small groups.

This can/will be a death sentence to Module play for small groups like mine.

This.

[Mike Lindner]

Don Walker wrote:

The public discussion has helped to show what issues are important to the community, but any change will probably require a significant number of people speaking up rather than a handful of folks making repeated posts. (Which could actually weaken their position.)

In this vain I'll go ahead and chime in to add one more voice.

I have heard great things about many of the modules and have hoped to either play or run some (or both!). For reference I have a level 9 and a level 3, playing at almost every opportunity for 8-9 months now.

As a player I like the existing rules as it would allow me to step outside the normal PFS experience to try one of the many character ideas I have had without feeling that my PFS characters are stalled in the mean time. Yes I would have fun, but having fun while advancing my PFS characters is even more fun.

Linking the chronicle to an existing character would be fine with me, assuming custom-built characters are still allowed (playing a pre-gen I didn't create doesn't appeal to me), and that if the module character dies I would still have the time until the chronicle is applied to the linked PC before having to pay the raise dead cost. After all, I don't get any rewards until then. If at that point the "real" PFS character does not have the resources for the raise dead, so be it, that's my own fault. In my estimation there would be far more risk than potential reward to play a module within the PFS context.

As someone who just this weekend was looking at purchasing a module to run in a PFS context, I won't be doing so with these rule changes looming. Especially with no time frame for when these changes would take effect. Given the local group of PFS players, I just can't see getting a table together of enough people in the allowed level range (for Realm of the Fellnight Queen specifically).

I understand this does not apply to those in areas where you can reliably form a table of <pick a level> characters, but you can't do that everywhere.

Simply put, the more ways people can have fun within PFS without causing significant harm to organized play, the better.

[Scribbling Rambler]

Mike Lindner wrote:

For reference I have a level 9 and a level 3, playing at almost every opportunity for 8-9 months now.

I'm not intending to dispute your concerns, but I wanted to point out that with those characters, and the option of a new 1st-level character, you can play:

• We Be Goblins! (1st)
• Crypt of the Everflame (1st)
• Master of the Fallen Fortress (1st)
• The Godsmouth Heresy (1st)
• Masks of the Living God (3rd)
• Feast of Ravenmoor (3rd)
• Cult of the Ebon Destroyers (8th)
• The Harrowing (9th)
• Curse of the Riven Sky (10th)

That's 9 of the 15 sanctioned modules. And if your 3rd-level character gains a level, it opens up Carrion Crown and City of the Golden Death (and From Shore to Sea is just one more). Further, 2 of the next 3 module releases are within one level of your characters.

Yes, this will temporarily limit your access to some of the modules (most notably Fellnight Queen). However, I think it is less limiting than some people are portraying.

[Mike Lindner]

One point I want to make that I have not noticed above is the benefit new players can get by playing at high character levels with more experienced players. It seems to me that the mechanical and role playing options a player has at their disposal increases with the character's level. I firmly believe from my own experience that exposing new players to the rich diversity of what a PC can do and how they can be played is firmly positive and these opportunities should not be removed/discouraged lightly.

[Matthew Morris]

@Mike Good points. One (of the few) things I liked about DA2 was that when you play Hawke in the origin story (before the actual game) you play a 'high level' version of Hawke, who has the higher tier stuff. It gives a new player* a taste of what the high level characters can do.

Playing a 'Rey 7' or 'Ezren 7' would allow a player to go "Wow, that spell does what?? I got to get that!" Or "Whoa, I'm staying away from that feat."

I'm still mulling the 'level disconnect'. I do think that everything should apply immediately or not. No, I don't think 'Rey 2' should get 19K gold for 'Ezren 9' completing TotIM (the reduced tier award works fine for me). But if you're going to have Ezren 9's death kill Rey 2, but Ezren 9's win won't affect Rey until Rey is actually level 9, it doesn't seem just. Rey 9 might have enough gold/prestige saved up by then to make him better that Ezren 9 didn't because he was linked to Rey 2. It's penalizing the player twice 1) by making him play** a less than optimal (to him) PC and 2) denying that less than optimal PC resources another 9th level character have.

*

Spoiler:

And for this old player made him worry how bad it was going to be...

**

Spoiler:

No, no one is holding a gun to the player's head and saying 'play this character or else'. But then again, isn't one of the goals "play play play?" How is that conductive to play?

[Dragnmoon]

Matthew Morris wrote:

**** spoiler omitted **

*Perked ears* Did I hear play, play, play!... ;)

[John W Johnson]

Dragnmoon wrote:

Matthew Morris wrote:

**** spoiler omitted **

*Perked ears* Did I hear play, play, play!... ;)

Yes, yes you did.

I think that with all of the proposals, and I hope that Michael Brock is following this thread as well, is that we know that there is a lot of work to do before 4.1 comes. There are rules that people currently like that are going to go away. There are rules that people hate that will be coming in. But, the opposite is true as well.

The problem with a community like PFSOP is that no matter how hard Michael works, no matter how hard James Jacobs works. No matter how hard our VCs, VLs and GMs work, not everyone is going to be 100% happy. That's the way life is.

Just remember, 4.1 is not going to come next week. It may be months away. They may even wait until Season 4 to make these changes. So, instead of being Chicken Little, running around saying the sky is falling, we should work together to find a beneficial middle ground. We may not agree at what's best for the game, but we can work together to make it better.

Just remember...Play, Play, Play!