RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Mike Brock:
In the thread about the PFS exclusive scenarios, you invited Dragnmoon, and presumably the rest of us, to brainstorm ideas for cool goodies that Paizo could give its most active GMs.
My suggestion:
Every two-month period, Paizo could put PDFs in the accounts of people who have GMed some threshhold of scenarios over the past period.
For sake of argument, let's say the threshhold is 3 scenarios. So, if I GM (and report) 3 scenarios in the months of January and February, Paizo would drop some PDFs in my downloads at the end of February.
Which PDFs? I would be giddy if they were full-scale maps from some upcoming scenario. So, at the end of February, I could download a map, which would come from either one of the scenarios on sale that last week of February or else one of the March scenarios, as sort of a teaser.
Right now, we have to either hand-draw, or else print out enlargements of the maps in the scenarios, using Acrobat to strip out the labels. Doug Miles enjoys the hand-drawing. I think Thea does, too. I'd rather spend my time studying NPC stat blocks and preparing hand-outs.
Notice that this incentive doesn't have anything to do with the star-rating of the GM involved. If I, at 3 stars, don't report any sessions during that period, I don't get the download. If a newbie GM does, he gets the reward for doing so. It keeps people consistently active.
You could offer more PDFs for more reported sessions, but that's way too complicated.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I think something along the lines of what Chris suggests would be fantastic.
Maps are great - feels good to have a for-real map. Similarly, minis. Nothing encourages someone to GM more often like the ability to stop using cardboard pogs labeled "Monster 1".
What if for each scenario reported, the GM received a tiny amount of store credit (say, $1, but the amount's not important) that was only redeemable on GMing supplies? That way, a new GM can gradually acquire minis, flip-mats, a GM screen, Condition Cards, etc and be more and more motivated to continue GMing.
|
I think something along the lines of what Chris suggests would be fantastic.
Maps are great - feels good to have a for-real map. Similarly, minis. Nothing encourages someone to GM more often like the ability to stop using cardboard pogs labeled "Monster 1".
What if for each scenario reported, the GM received a tiny amount of store credit (say, $1, but the amount's not important) that was only redeemable on GMing supplies? That way, a new GM can gradually acquire minis, flip-mats, a GM screen, Condition Cards, etc and be more and more motivated to continue GMing.
I rather like that. Shoot, I rather love that. I would have loved to be able to snag a box of the Pathfinder Battles minis for my players to enjoy (and add another dragon to my collection....), but a college student cant afford to shell out much cash. But, every once in awhile being able to get some new minis for players to enjoy? Awesome.
|
|
I really like these ideas, but I'll take Chris's idea about the maps one step further.
Why do GMs have to "earn" usable maps? Really? To me, having to hand draw maps is the biggest pain in being a GM. I have no artistic talent, and it takes a couple of hours of prep time to draw 3 or 4 maps for each scenario. I've only GMed for PFS twice so far, and drawing the maps was the part I dreaded the most in preparing both times. Plus, I only own two double sided blank grid maps, so after each adventure, I have to erase the maps I drew in order to make room to prepare for the next one. This eliminates the possibility of being able to have more than one adventure prepped and ready to go at any given time.
Given that someone at Paizo already created these maps, it's not like it would be that much more effort to put them into the scenario pdf at a printable size, without the labels and stuff. So why aren't printable versions already part of every scenario?
Venture-Lieutenant, California—Sacramento
|
I am going to Suggest something that I thought about on my ride back from work and it takes from Open Designs Patron Projects.
This is a Suggestion for a reward for 4 Star GMs.
Take a Multiple part Scenario *2 or 3 parts* with a basic idea for a Story synopsis that will be released late in the season or introduced in the beginning of the season at Gen Con and allow 4 Star GMs to get involved in the design of the scenarios in a similar way Open Design does.
Not only will this let your Seasoned GMs feel like they are really part of PFS and what goes into it but a few of them may learn enough of the design process that is involved with scenarios that you may get some future scenario authors out of it.
|
|
My suggestion:
Every two-month period, Paizo could put PDFs in the accounts of people who have GMed some threshhold of scenarios over the past period./more stuff/
You could offer more PDFs for more reported sessions, but that's way too complicated.
to play off this idea, which is great, and to incorporate the ideas of scale printable maps being more readily available, and the idea of credit:
(this would likely be rather complicated to enact, but just to blue-sky a bit)
perhaps GM's earned points for running scenarios, and those points could vary depending on whether you were running a home game, a local game day, or running at a convention. running a scenario at a game day would be worth more points than running it at a home game, and running it at a convention would be worth more than a game day, say double or triple points, respectively. with the same system, you could also make certain scenarios worth more points than others - maybe running a table of the special at a convention could become a really big deal (not that's it's not already :) )
points could be redeemed for various things with various points. the least expensive being things like the printable scale maps. next step up might be scenarios themselves or perhaps discount codes to redeem on the website. after that, you get into more expensive point purchases - maybe single Battles minis, or PDFs of books, or actual physical copies of certain items like condition cards and the GM Screen.
i know there are downsides (verifying games actually played, cost of distributing actual physical products, etc.) that could be logistically nightmarish, but if there was a system like this that worked, i think it would be really enticing to GM's.
|
|
I am going to Suggest something that I thought about on my ride back from work and it takes from Open Designs Patron Projects.
This is a Suggestion for a reward for 4 Star GMs.
Take a Multiple part Scenario *2 or 3 parts* with a basic idea for a Story synopsis that will be released late in the season or introduced in the beginning of the season at Gen Con and allow 4 Star GMs to get involved in the design of the scenarios in a similar way Open Design does.
Not only will this let your Seasoned GMs feel like they are really part of PFS and what goes into it but a few of them may learn enough of the design process that is involved with scenarios that you may get some future scenario authors out of it.
this is a good idea, but it's something that i would rather see as a generally instituted policy for anyone rather than just a reward for 4 stars.
personally, i don't see this working as a reward, since it's not something that every 4 star will really want to, or be able to, participate in.
however, as i said, i think maybe trying something like this out (open to the PFS public at large who are wiling to buy into the deal) for one or two scenarios each year might be a good idea.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, California—Sacramento
|
this is a good idea, but it's something that i would rather see as a generally instituted policy for anyone rather than just a reward for 4 stars.
personally, i don't see this working as a reward, since it's not something that every 4 star will really want to, or be able to, participate in.
however, as i said, i think maybe trying something like this out (open to the PFS public at large who are wiling to buy into the deal) for one or two scenarios each year might be a good idea.
I was thinking something more low key then everyone! too many chiefs and all. And this was advice as a Rewards so I kept it at that level.
And though I will admit I made this suggestion based on my taste, every 4 Star GM I have met are the most gung ho about PFS and the majority would not give up the chance to get at least a little involved in something like this.
|
|
this is a good idea, but it's something that i would rather see as a generally instituted policy for anyone rather than just a reward for 4 stars.
personally, i don't see this working as a reward, since it's not something that every 4 star will really want to, or be able to, participate in.
however, as i said, i think maybe trying something like this out (open to the PFS public at large who are wiling to buy into the deal) for one or two scenarios each year might be a good idea.
I was thinking something more low key then everyone! too many chiefs and all. And this was advice as a Rewards so I kept it at that level.
And though I will admit I made this suggestion based on my taste, every 4 Star GM I have met are the most gung ho about PFS and the majority would not give up the chance to get at least a little involved in something like this.
i'm sure a lot of 4 stars would definitely love that opportunity, but i'm sure there are those that, if nothing else, wouldn't be able to participate in something like that simply due to time concerns.
also, i wasn't simply thinking of opening it up to anyone, but rather to mirror the open design/patronage idea even more closely, giving different levels of involvement to those who donate different amounts... but, as you pointed out, this is about rewards, so that could be an idea discussed more fully elsewhere.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, California—Sacramento
|
also, i wasn't simply thinking of opening it up to anyone, but rather to mirror the open design/patronage idea even more closely, giving different levels of involvement to those who donate different amounts... but, as you pointed out, this is about rewards, so that could be an idea discussed more fully elsewhere.
That is still possible with the star system, we can open it up to different levels depending on the amount of stars you have, so it is a reward over all the stars, not just 4 stars.That was my original idea but I was trying to simplify it.
Also credit can be given in the scenario to those GMs who do participate as a further reward.
|
|
also, i wasn't simply thinking of opening it up to anyone, but rather to mirror the open design/patronage idea even more closely, giving different levels of involvement to those who donate different amounts... but, as you pointed out, this is about rewards, so that could be an idea discussed more fully elsewhere.That is still possible with the star system, we can open it up to different levels depending on the amount of stars you have, so it is a reward over all the stars, not just 4 stars.That was my original idea but I was trying to simplify it.
Also credit can be given in the scenario to those GMs who do participate as a further reward.
i definitely like that as an in-between.
|
|
I also like the map idea, though if you do go with that, please specify which scenario the maps are supposed to be for, so we arent left buying random stuff just to match up the map with the scenario.
@ Fromper, map suggestion help for you:
1) Buy Gaming Paper. It's like $5 per roll, and you get a lot of it. Good stuff.
2) Open Microsoft Excel or some other similar program, and mess around with the dimension of the boxes until they make about 1" squares. Print it out on an 8"x10" grid. Photocopy. Tape multiples together for bigger maps.
3) A lot of the maps have the text, legend, traps, etc on a separate layer from the actual map. Highlight the map and copy into Paint. Select the area you want to print (8.5sq x 11 sq), Copy and Paste it into another Paint window. Fit the Paint canvas thing to the map section is the only thing showing. On the Page Setup, set it to print on 1 page x 1 page, with 0 in all the margin settings. Print, and trim edges where appropriate. Tape together. Im sure this is doable (and probably more easily) in Photoshop or whatever, but I dont have that program, and dont know how to use it, lol.
Sometimes it comes out kinda grainy since the map is significantly enlarged, but if you've got a good printer, it wont look too bad.
|
|
Mike Brock:
In the thread about the PFS exclusive scenarios, you invited Dragnmoon, and presumably the rest of us, to brainstorm ideas for cool goodies that Paizo could give its most active GMs.
My suggestion:
Every two-month period, Paizo could put PDFs in the accounts of people who have GMed some threshhold of scenarios over the past period.
An alternate viewpoint:
Stuff is stuff. In the end it will just create judges who are judging for stuff rather than judging for the good of the group/community. And when their needs for stuff (either perceived or real) diminishes, so will their judging.
I would rather play under judges who are judging for the community than judges who are judging just to get 'stuff'. Yes, there is a difference. Judges who judge for the good of the community are much more invested in quality than those who are judging for stuff.
From my experience, the only thing you need to do to:
1) Encourage judging by asking appropriately;
2) Show off what is already offered for judge rewards/explain the benefits already of judging/explain the benefit to the community;
3) Don't take 'no' for answer; (people can contribute in a myriad of ways)
4) Help and Supporting the judge once they have agreed;
5) Thank the judge (and provide helpful, constructive feedback) once they have judged.
Do this often enough and you'll create a 'Culture of Community Contribution' wherein people know it's expected and aren't surprised then they are asked to judge...because most people do it.
While I, too, want more random stuff for my judging efforts: *It's not why I judge or why I would *WANT* to judge.* I judge because I enjoy my communtiy, I enjoy my chance to interpret the scenario for my players, and because I think it makes me a better player. Heck, it's also fun.
The "More Stuff For Judging" will come at a price: both to all of us and to Paizo. I *much* rather have Paizo use their resources to address our long term PFS needs (like hiring a 2nd scenario guy to bust out of the low production rut we are in or a story guy to make PFS have a great, interesting, engaging overarching story) rather than offering judge rewards that really won't help the problem.
-Pain
|
|
Two points:
-I think it should be the responsibility of the VCs to judge who is someone that they want to reward for GMing more as opposed to all judges receiving rewards. Some judges are better than others.
-When I received Paizo credit for judging (not even that many sessions!) I used the entirety of it buying new scenarios for me to judge more. Without even planning on it that way, all the credit was used for me to judge more.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ideas:
Copy of HeroLab to reward getting first star?
...or if GM already owns HeroLab, additional addins
I'm not sure of any of the details here, since I'm not a PFS GM, but I know we'd definitely support something along these lines. We've already given free Hero Lab licenses (or add-ons) to GMs at the past two PaizoCons. If Paizo likes this idea, we'd be very open to figuring out something that will work.
And once we finally get Realms Works out, ooooh, that's something many of you PFS GMs will be *very* interested in. Sorry I can't go into more details at this point, but there are some teasers you can peek at on our website and we're just starting early Beta testing of the product. I'm sure we'll have lots more info at PaizoCon this year, and hopefully before that.
|
|
Two points:
-I think it should be the responsibility of the VCs to judge who is someone that they want to reward for GMing more as opposed to all judges receiving rewards. Some judges are better than others.
I can understand the desire for this, but I think in the end it would create an atmosphere of discontent amongst area judges. What if you had one person that actually was pretty good, players thought they were could and there had never really been any complaints about their judging.
Enter in the person who is supposed to critique them who doesn't get along with the judge on a personality level. That personality level is going to overshadow any critique -- even thought it shouldn't we're all only human. Personality conflicts are a larger part of PFS then they probably should be but they do exist
-When I received Paizo credit for judging (not even that many sessions!) I used the entirety of it buying new scenarios for me to judge more. Without even planning on it that way, all the credit was used for me to judge more.
Have to agree with you on this one... my credit for judging at Gencon, after I bought my shiny new UM, all went for more judging supplies. It's a vicious cycle.
Stuff is stuff. In the end it will just create judges who are judging for stuff rather than judging for the good of the group/community. And when their needs for stuff (either perceived or real) diminishes, so will their judging.
Have to agree with this ... Some people need the incentive of "stuff" to fuel their desire to judge, but once they have everything what incentive do they have then.
I personally like the incentive of the exclusive special and working towards being able to run that. That is something that I'll have available to me new each year -- thought I'll have to beat Todd down with a stick so I can run it.
|
|
Two points:
-I think it should be the responsibility of the VCs to judge who is someone that they want to reward for GMing more as opposed to all judges receiving rewards. Some judges are better than others.
I can understand the desire for this, but I think in the end it would create an atmosphere of discontent amongst area judges. What if you had one person that actually was pretty good, players thought they were could and there had never really been any complaints about their judging.
Enter in the person who is supposed to critique them who doesn't get along with the judge on a personality level. That personality level is going to overshadow any critique -- even thought it shouldn't we're all only human. Personality conflicts are a larger part of PFS then they probably should be but they do exist
I don't like this idea, either, but for a completely different reason. The nearest VC to my local PFS group is about a 3 hour drive away, so nobody in my local group has ever met him. There's a con coming up next month where we'll probably meet him, but none of the 4 GMs from my local group will be GMing at the con, so how would the VC be able to judge the quality of our GMing?
|
|
Ideas:
+1 on the $1 store credit idea
+1 on maps.
Copy of HeroLab to reward getting first star?
...or if GM already owns HeroLab, additional addins
Kobold Quarterly subscription on getting a star
For PFS, Herolab is basically useless unless you get all the addons. At that price $140.00 I doubt you will get that as a prize for any level of GM.
|
|
For PFS, Herolab is basically useless unless you get all the addons. At that price $140.00 I doubt you will get that as a prize for any level of GM.Ideas:
+1 on the $1 store credit idea
+1 on maps.
Copy of HeroLab to reward getting first star?
...or if GM already owns HeroLab, additional addins
Kobold Quarterly subscription on getting a star
I wouldn't say useless. I only buy the add-ins for the books I have, which is has only run me $20-$30 for addons. I suppose though if you have all books and need to have them all accessible for practicing different builds, then it would get pricey. For those that would only buy as they need, its not a bad option.
|
|
Ideas:
Copy of HeroLab to reward getting first star?
...or if GM already owns HeroLab, additional addins
I'm not sure of any of the details here, since I'm not a PFS GM, but I know we'd definitely support something along these lines. We've already given free Hero Lab licenses (or add-ons) to GMs at the past two PaizoCons. If Paizo likes this idea, we'd be very open to figuring out something that will work.
And once we finally get Realms Works out, ooooh, that's something many of you PFS GMs will be *very* interested in. Sorry I can't go into more details at this point, but there are some teasers you can peek at on our website and we're just starting early Beta testing of the product. I'm sure we'll have lots more info at PaizoCon this year, and hopefully before that.
Definitely looking forward to see what you guys have coming up!
|
|
Joining in on this thread. I like the special mod for 4 star judges. I like even better that the mod was out for a year and then trickles down with some adaptation to the rest of us who have not hit that magic number of mods run yet.
What I would like to see, and won't cost much to implement is something to recognize the organizers who do a great deal of the heavy lifting required to have tables go off. I'd be happy with a unicorn or something similar next to where the judge stars go. Something like 1 for every hundred tables reported or so would be nice.
Mostly I picked unicorns because I thought it would be funny.
Den
|
|
Joining in on this thread. I like the special mod for 4 star judges. I like even better that the mod was out for a year and then trickles down with some adaptation to the rest of us who have not hit that magic number of mods run yet.
What I would like to see, and won't cost much to implement is something to recognize the organizers who do a great deal of the heavy lifting required to have tables go off. I'd be happy with a unicorn or something similar next to where the judge stars go. Something like 1 for every hundred tables reported or so would be nice.
Mostly I picked unicorns because I thought it would be funny.
Den
Are unicorns the new Godwin? How bout Skullheads?
I'm half expecting someone to tell me that there ARE hellcats up there or something.|
|
Two points:
-I think it should be the responsibility of the VCs to judge who is someone that they want to reward for GMing more as opposed to all judges receiving rewards. Some judges are better than others.
I can understand the desire for this, but I think in the end it would create an atmosphere of discontent amongst area judges. What if you had one person that actually was pretty good, players thought they were could and there had never really been any complaints about their judging.
Enter in the person who is supposed to critique them who doesn't get along with the judge on a personality level. That personality level is going to overshadow any critique -- even thought it shouldn't we're all only human. Personality conflicts are a larger part of PFS then they probably should be but they do exist
I don't like this idea, either, but for a completely different reason. The nearest VC to my local PFS group is about a 3 hour drive away, so nobody in my local group has ever met him. There's a con coming up next month where we'll probably meet him, but none of the 4 GMs from my local group will be GMing at the con, so how would the VC be able to judge the quality of our GMing?
Where are you from???
|
|
Here's a thought for going forward into Season 4:
Give a special GM boon on a chronicle sheet just for the GM.. Alot of my GM's are players, and getting them to GM is like literally PULLING TEETH. They know about all the bonuses (as well as special ones in our society.) But they still would rather play than GM. If there was a special boon that they could have, that players could not have unless they GM the session it would be helpful.
It doesn't have to be anything insane, heck, it could be extra gold for all that matters, but in a society where the players get bigger rewards than the GM's, it still goes back to the saying "everyone wants to play, no one wants to GM." and we as a society are combating that issue, and I know a lot of other groups that are having the same issues as well.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
Where are you from???
I don't like this idea, either, but for a completely different reason. The nearest VC to my local PFS group is about a 3 hour drive away, so nobody in my local group has ever met him. There's a con coming up next month where we'll probably meet him, but none of the 4 GMs from my local group will be GMing at the con, so how would the VC be able to judge the quality of our GMing?
Don't sound so surprised, my area's in a similar boat. Pullman Washington's nearest VC is either 6 hrs to Seattle or 6 hrs to Boise or 6 hrs to Portland.
|
|
Have to agree with you on this one... my credit for judging at Gencon, after I bought my shiny new UM, all went for more judging supplies. It's a vicious cycle.
Haha, I was thinking of using the phrase 'vicious cycle' but I decided against it. That's the best term for it though! ;D
I didn't realise that there were that many groups who were far away from the VC. We have one such community in my state, but in my experience, they always get to meet the VC during conventions, and it doesn't take much for the VC to ask the players who the dedicated GMs are.
I think it's best to entrust the VCs because the system needs a human element and they're the most responsible individuals to oversee that.
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Two points:
-I think it should be the responsibility of the VCs to judge who is someone that they want to reward for GMing more as opposed to all judges receiving rewards. Some judges are better than others.
I can understand the desire for this, but I think in the end it would create an atmosphere of discontent amongst area judges. What if you had one person that actually was pretty good, players thought they were could and there had never really been any complaints about their judging.
Enter in the person who is supposed to critique them who doesn't get along with the judge on a personality level. That personality level is going to overshadow any critique -- even thought it shouldn't we're all only human. Personality conflicts are a larger part of PFS then they probably should be but they do exist
I don't like this idea, either, but for a completely different reason. The nearest VC to my local PFS group is about a 3 hour drive away, so nobody in my local group has ever met him. There's a con coming up next month where we'll probably meet him, but none of the 4 GMs from my local group will be GMing at the con, so how would the VC be able to judge the quality of our GMing?
I have to wade in with this one, and say I don't like this, either. Having met a fair number of the Venture Officers, I can say that most are dedicated gamers and should be commended for that dedication. They often are *not* personnel managers, and should not have any kind of say in whether one GM is better than another. Especially when every GM in the system is essentially volunteering.
The current static system is fine. If it is enhanced, it should be through using that same system.
|
Venture-Captain, Michigan—Mt. Pleasant
|
Don't sound so surprised, my area's in a similar boat. Pullman Washington's nearest VC is either 6 hrs to Seattle or 6 hrs to Boise or 6 hrs to Portland.Where are you from???
I don't like this idea, either, but for a completely different reason. The nearest VC to my local PFS group is about a 3 hour drive away, so nobody in my local group has ever met him. There's a con coming up next month where we'll probably meet him, but none of the 4 GMs from my local group will be GMing at the con, so how would the VC be able to judge the quality of our GMing?
Yeah, I'm in the same boat. After Doug stepped down from MI, my closest is Chicago, easily 4 hours away.
|
|
Where are you from???Two points:
-I think it should be the responsibility of the VCs to judge who is someone that they want to reward for GMing more as opposed to all judges receiving rewards. Some judges are better than others.
I can understand the desire for this, but I think in the end it would create an atmosphere of discontent amongst area judges. What if you had one person that actually was pretty good, players thought they were could and there had never really been any complaints about their judging.
Enter in the person who is supposed to critique them who doesn't get along with the judge on a personality level. That personality level is going to overshadow any critique -- even thought it shouldn't we're all only human. Personality conflicts are a larger part of PFS then they probably should be but they do exist
I don't like this idea, either, but for a completely different reason. The nearest VC to my local PFS group is about a 3 hour drive away, so nobody in my local group has ever met him. There's a con coming up next month where we'll probably meet him, but none of the 4 GMs from my local group will be GMing at the con, so how would the VC be able to judge the quality of our GMing?
I'm in southeast Florida. Florida's a big state, and I believe our only VC is in the Tampa area.
Honestly, I'm surprised that people are surprised by groups not having a "local" VC.
|
|
I didn't realise that there were that many groups who were far away from the VC. We have one such community in my state, but in my experience, they always get to meet the VC during conventions, and it doesn't take much for the VC to ask the players who the dedicated GMs are.I think it's best to entrust the VCs because the system needs a human element and they're the most responsible individuals to oversee that.
Looking at what you wrote above, especially the part I bolded, how exactly is that any different from just looking to see which GMs have the most stars? Why would we need a VC for that?
|
|
So-called "rewards" need to be affordable. There is a very limited budget here.
Something in the nature of special GM Boons would be more appropriate than the very expensive suggestions which aear in this thread.
A special Pathfinder Society GM shirt, in a limited run, available for purchase on Paizo.com only to those GMs that qualify would make some sense for a more tangible reward.
The most affordable rewards can be simple, such as the boons given out at conventions. It's just a pdf with no monetary value (ebay aside). Record x games in a month and get a random boon, or allow the GM to choose one from a list. Rotate the boons on offer on a monthly or quarterly basis to encourage people to get the extra games in for a certain period. I know a lot of people dislike boons being handed out at conventions as it penalises anyone whose job or financial situation precludes travelling. This would level the playing field in that regard too.
I'd also like to see GM credit made available for every running of a module - as a thank you for running something multiple times. You could only apply a specific chronicle to any particular character once, but some of us play and retire a lot of characters, so GM credit is very useful to experiment with. That would promote GMs running for secondary or tertiary groups and costs Paizo absolutely nothing (except some whingeing on the messageboards from those who dislike GM credit) :-)
In response to Painlord; I think there are two types of GM to encourage. One is the newbie, who just needs subtle persuasion and encouragement as per your post. The other is the regular who already gives back to his group but could be encouraged 'to run that mod one more time'. That's the kind of GM I'm suggesting we increase the rewards for. I'd also argue that just because a GM is running for the rewards doesn't mean they won't be professional and put their best into running the mod. I assume all GMs do that anyway. The reward is just that added something that persuades them to drive to another town and GM, or give up another Sunday, or offer to run instead of play at a convention. If a GM doesn't want those rewards then good for them, but they're not really the target audience for this thread.
|
|
Where are you from???stuff (cut for brevity sake)I don't like this idea, either, but for a completely different reason. The nearest VC to my local PFS group is about a 3 hour drive away, so nobody in my local group has ever met him. There's a con coming up next month where we'll probably meet him, but none of the 4 GMs from my local group will be GMing at the con, so how would the VC be able to judge the quality of our GMing?I'm in southeast Florida. Florida's a big state, and I believe our only VC is in the Tampa area.
Honestly, I'm surprised that people are surprised by groups not having a "local" VC.
There has been a need for a "Southern Florida" VC for a while, however the main metro people are concerned with is Miami. I looked into what it would take to be a VC, but unless I lived in Miami proper, I wouldn't be able to even consider it.
Our group is essentially a "home group" though we do recruit from meet-ups and other sources. We (the GMs involved) do not run "open to the public promotional" games or conventions (yet). My guess is that these rewards are mainly aimed at those GMs who take on the task to promote Pathfinder to the masses. The amount that our group runs would not be enough to be considered for any kind of volunteer reward.
That said, for folks who are three or four star GMs, a little assistance (say with maps) would be a great boon.
|
|
The reward itself doesnt so much matter to me. Im GMing with or without them. If you are going to give me an option to voice how I thinhk rewards should be passed out though, I think it could be beneficial to base a reward off of new players registered per GM.
Since you have to be logged into your Paizo account to print a sheet of PFS numbers, Im sure Paizo already has it set so they know which GMs those numbers are all going to. You could base a reward off a GM getting X new numbers passed out to players, with the number being reported as having played a session.
If nothing else, it may encourage some GMs to push for new players harder.
|
|
A Pathfinder Shirt for every star. Although considering how much Paizo sells shirts for this is probably too expensive.
Not if those shirts are made available for purchase -- and only available to those that qualify to be able to purchase them.
We all like to wear our chevrons on our sleeves, as it were. This would be a tangible and valuable "reward" that costs nothing to Paizo and would be appreciated by most (though perhaps not all) PFS GMs.
|
|
We all like to wear our chevrons on our sleeves, as it were. This would be a tangible and valuable "reward" that costs nothing to Paizo and would be appreciated by most (though perhaps not all) PFS GMs.
I would be open to the idea of Paizo issuing star pins to those who are at the three star or higher level. Should not be cost prohibitive, but may be more than Paizo wants to dedicate to its judges.
I plan on going down to the local Army Navy Surplus Store and picking up a 2 Star General Pin (replica, of course) when I earn my 2nd star.
|
|
Because there's two measures called quality and quantity.
In my view, one session GM'ed awesomely, by a GM that knows the module inside and out, doesn't 'get stuck', supplies acting, voices and satisfies the curiosities of all his/her players interests is worth three or more sessions by a GM that cannot be bothered.
If we have GMs that are just doing it for the rewards, who run the modules cold, get lost mid-session, get confused, speak in a monotone voice, doesn't explain any of the context for events, fudges the players faction missions, cuts the games short and don't do justice to the module written (resulting in unfair reviews) then that's a bad thing for PFS. Especially if the bad GM in question is intent to GM as many games as possible to as many people possible.
The VCs can ask players from out of their region what the situation is. They could get responses like this:
'Bob GMed 5 games for us, but he was a bit unsuited to it. There was a bit of arguing and confusion during those games. We recently have had 2 games GMed by Sarah and she's awesome! She does the voices, knows the rules and we never have any faction mission conflicts any more!'
|
I would be open to the idea of Paizo issuing star pins to those who are at the three star or higher level. Should not be cost prohibitive, but may be more than Paizo wants to dedicate to its judges.
I plan on going down to the local Army Navy Surplus Store and picking up a 2 Star General Pin (replica, of course) when I earn my 2nd star.
I'm trying to do stuff like that for all of the local GMs (out of my own pocket). First star was something small, but second and up will be better goodness.
|
|
The reward itself doesnt so much matter to me. Im GMing with or without them. If you are going to give me an option to voice how I thinhk rewards should be passed out though, I think it could be beneficial to base a reward off of new players registered per GM.
Since you have to be logged into your Paizo account to print a sheet of PFS numbers, Im sure Paizo already has it set so they know which GMs those numbers are all going to. You could base a reward off a GM getting X new numbers passed out to players, with the number being reported as having played a session.
If nothing else, it may encourage some GMs to push for new players harder.
the problem with that approach is that often it's the event organizer who applies for and prints out the new PFS numbers, not the actual table judges. so those numbers wouldn't give an accurate account.
|
|
We all like to wear our chevrons on our sleeves, as it were. This would be a tangible and valuable "reward" that costs nothing to Paizo and would be appreciated by most (though perhaps not all) PFS GMs.I would be open to the idea of Paizo issuing star pins to those who are at the three star or higher level. Should not be cost prohibitive, but may be more than Paizo wants to dedicate to its judges.
I plan on going down to the local Army Navy Surplus Store and picking up a 2 Star General Pin (replica, of course) when I earn my 2nd star.
All those gold stars or chevrons will do is put a big bullseye on you & your GMing. There are players that love to be a thorn in the GM's side and coming to the table with any kind of coup like that will make you a target. Why do you think the VCs wear red shirts?
|
|
We all like to wear our chevrons on our sleeves, as it were. This would be a tangible and valuable "reward" that costs nothing to Paizo and would be appreciated by most (though perhaps not all) PFS GMs.I would be open to the idea of Paizo issuing star pins to those who are at the three star or higher level. Should not be cost prohibitive, but may be more than Paizo wants to dedicate to its judges.
I plan on going down to the local Army Navy Surplus Store and picking up a 2 Star General Pin (replica, of course) when I earn my 2nd star.
All those gold stars or chevrons will do is put a big bullseye on you & your GMing. There are players that love to be a thorn in the GM's side and coming to the table with any kind of coup like that will make you a target. Why do you think the VCs wear red shirts?
Someone needs to come up with a reliable jerk-dar so we can pick those players out and tell them they need to leave beforehand, and people wonder why I like newbie tables. Sure they have "newbie" questions but I've yet to run into a jerk "newbie".
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Someone needs to come up with a reliable jerk-dar so we can pick those players out and tell them they need to leave beforehand, and people wonder why I like newbie tables. Sure they have "newbie" questions but I've yet to run into a jerk "newbie".We all like to wear our chevrons on our sleeves, as it were. This would be a tangible and valuable "reward" that costs nothing to Paizo and would be appreciated by most (though perhaps not all) PFS GMs.I would be open to the idea of Paizo issuing star pins to those who are at the three star or higher level. Should not be cost prohibitive, but may be more than Paizo wants to dedicate to its judges.
I plan on going down to the local Army Navy Surplus Store and picking up a 2 Star General Pin (replica, of course) when I earn my 2nd star.
All those gold stars or chevrons will do is put a big bullseye on you & your GMing. There are players that love to be a thorn in the GM's side and coming to the table with any kind of coup like that will make you a target. Why do you think the VCs wear red shirts?
Become a girl .. we're born with Jerk-Dar ;)