|
This discussion was started on the 3pp.d20pfsrd.com Facebook group but that is a private group only open to publishers of Pathfinder content.
The thought occurred to me that it would be nice to be able to go to various game conventions and sit down at organized play tables that are a bit different than what PFS offers, most notably a wider range of module styles and lengths AND the ability to play content created by 3rd Party Publishers.
A few publishers indicated a very high level of interest in establishing such an organization. I put a call out to other 3rd Party Publishers to see if there was more BROAD interest in the concept because, to be honest, if the bigger, or more prolific 3pp aren't interested, or just plain overall there is a lack of interest, there isn't much point. A few of the publishers suggested posting here because a) we wanted to see if there was fan/player interest in the concept and b) perhaps the 3pp didn't see the discussion on Facebook and Google+.
Oh, also, the discussion was kept in the private fb group because we weren't sure if the idea would be well-received by Paizo, meaning, if successful, this org could potentially split the player base that would ordinarily be playing PFS so we're just not sure if its something Paizo would even like to see happen.
So, what about it? Is there interest in such a thing? Ultimately I think this would be a great way to promote and grow the 3pp community as well as grow the PFRPG brand by offering an organized play option for players who don't quite get what they're looking for from PFS.
?
We commented on FB, but just occurred to me that something like this could possibly tie into the "what 3pp do you want to see team-up" style thread that was going on here. Where 3pp were discussing how they collaborate on some sort of large adventure path or campaign.
|
|
I agree, and to be honest, that's one of the things that got me to thinking about this. I started a Google Doc with some ideas on how this could be organized/handled but I didn't want the cart to get too far out in front of the horse if this ended up being a non-starter for whatever reason. I've got lots of ideas on this subject but again, want to see if there is any buy-in from the majority of publishers before investing too much effort.
I know that we at LPJ Design would be interested in this since we are already working on something like this.
Perhaps we can work together on something Louis - spread out the work and all :)
I think I will have to drop you an email.
|
As a player and GM, I think this is an awesome idea. I too love PFS, but a few of its flaws have really taken their toll on me/my group.
Primarily, group size and replay-for-credit-ability.
I'd love to see some organized play modules that can scale in two ways - not just for level, but possibly also for table size. It would be a lot of fun to run and play in some 2-player scenarios, or 3-player w/out the GM having to play an NPC to make a table "legal."
I understand there's a lot of discussion and disagreement over replay issues. I for one wish replay were an option, even if it meant an alloted time limit (no replay with 1 year's time) or character penalty (you can only replay scenarios from a retired, deceased, or "sacrificed" character - in any case, that character is no longer a viable play option).
If either one or both of those ideas were involved, that would greatly increase my interest.
I think the most important objective for this kind of project is to make sure a given dm has control over his or her respective table the way they would at a home game. Organized play and living world dont have to be the same thing. I would drop the whole living world aspect of organized play, and focus on the idea that there are specific adventures set up by an organization. In this way you could reduce the required control over characters that organized play usually has to maintain.
Let the objective be the game itself and not some influence on a wider world. Whether its an ongoing game, or a convention one shot, let characters live and die at a single dm's table, based on what that dm wants to allow (within certain guidelines). No need to track character advancement, or wealth, or anything else.
Just organize play sessions and let the dms handle things the way they normally would for any old group. And if you want to bring a character to a new dm's table, require any needed conversion or alteration to that particular dm's requirements (or create standardized sets of materials allowed) for the level of what ever adventure is being run.
|
|
Hell what about Rappan Athuk! How about if you could carry the same PC from one scenario that starts off outside Rappan Athuk and into the first or second level then you could go to later sessions that handle 1-2 levels at a time. If a PC dies he has to go back one step. Just thinking out loud of course but that would rock for me. Then I'd be more pumped about going to cons.
|
Here's an interesting idea: instead of using level tiers like PFS uses, make it table-size tiers. For example, there would be four tiers of play in a scenario; 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, and 8 players. The treasure would be the same per player, but the items available would increase as the players (and thus the enemies) increased. Each scenario could have a fixed level, and players within 1 level of that designated level could play it, like PFS modules are currently. So there would be no level 7s carrying level 1s through scenarios and similar such nonsense that bugs me about PFS.
|
So there would be no level 7s carrying level 1s through scenarios and similar such nonsense that bugs me about PFS.
That shouldn't be happening anyways and if it is it is wrong. From P. 25 of the OPG:
"Some scenarios and special events offer more than two subtiers. In these cases, no PC can play at a subtier more than 1 step away from her character level."
So, in a Tier 1-7 scenario, a level 1 could only play in subtier 1-2 or 3-4 and not 6-7.
I would be get excited about organized play opportunities in:
Midnight
Scarred Lands
Ptolus
Diamond ThroneOther than that, you would have to really do a good sales job to pull me out of PFS.
The funny part to this post for me is that 3pp are NOT trying to "pull you out of PFS". Why would we want to? That would not be good business for us. The more people that play Pathfinder means the more potential customers for us all. Making Pathfinder MORE successful only helps LPJ Design MORE.
Think of it like ice cream, vanilla is the most popular flavor but not every one likes vanilla. Some like rocky road, strawberry or chocolate. But they all help sell ice cream, which in turn helps them all grow stronger.
WOTC's RPGA supported several 3PP companies "living campaign" (See a list of them here) back end infrastructure, while the companies help expand niches in fantasy that WOTC/RPGA might not find to be profitable if they did them. If I was Paizo I would create something that 3PP could use their back end. Sign 3PP to a exclusive Paizo.com only deal to do use their back end system, charge they 50% sale of their online adventures do do online sales and make a OGL version of the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play that 3PP must follow to make their "organized Play campaigns. Set minimum number of adventures that must be released and if the sale don't hit a certain numbers they can drop the 3PP from the services.
Extra money for Paizo, more exposure of Pathfinder, and even better relationship with the 3PP. Who would want this?
The thought occurred to me that it would be nice to be able to go to various game conventions and sit down at organized play tables that are a bit different than what PFS offers, most notably a wider range of module styles and lengths AND the ability to play content created by 3rd Party Publishers.
I've actually done quite a bit of investigation into this subject, talking to folks who've been deep into the RPGA, Living Shining Jewel, Living Planescape, Living Greyhawk, and a couple of others, and there's a lot of underlying infrastructure necessary to get it off the ground, along with some questions of record keeping.
Some of it can be reasonably addressed by gathering a large enough initial core of contributors willing to provide material, but then you're creating an engine of content generation which could, potentially, self-maintain as long as you've got volunteers.
One particular benefit of such a system is that it fosters nascent designers, giving them a space to create and experiment.
One way to avoid alienating PFS is to welcome PFS characters at events. Sure, they may not gain experience for the event, but they get to play their character, and that's the big benefit-- you don't lose the investment of time and still get to enjoy the character you've created.
-Ben.
|
|
@terraleon: I'd love to have you as part of the active group of people working on this since I, personally, have essentially no experience running these sorts of things. All I have is a vastly inflated opinion of myself and a desire to see this happen :) A little "inside info" would go a long way to help organize this if its really something people think is a worthwhile pursuit.
|
|
I'd really like to see this come to some sort of fruition but in all honesty I can't be the only person driving it. I can help, and use d20pfsrd.com to help drive awareness of it, as well as to host any online tools that get developed, but I can't be the only one driving it. With that said, I'm going to revert back to focusing on d20pfsrd.com right now since there's a ton of stuff that we need to get posted. Hopefully one or more 3pp can pick this ball up and carry it somewhere. I'll be available should that happen.
I love the concept, but I have no expertise when it comes to Living-style games, and am unfortunately already overloaded. I'd love to help out where needed, but I don't have the skills or time to be the driver... At least, not for some time.
The downside of organized play is that, well, someone has to organize it.
If you're interested in this idea, you'll need writers and judges, and someone to organize a con every so often.
There's a bunch of prep-work getting the judges ready to judge the adventure as well, assuming that they get some kind of benefit for that. If not, you'll need to work much harder to get volunteers, or pay them.
I'm not any kind of official Paizo person, but you should be able to find some names on this website. Talk to the head of PFS, and go for it.
YES! I would much enjoy being apart of this either as a player or a volunteer. Don't think I would be the one to call as far as running it, but I am certainly willing to do my part to help.
Also, as far as ideas I would mirror what was said in the other post about a conglomeration of 3rd party people. If you have several of the larger 3pp contributing a small amount of content on a consistant basis as apart of a shared OGL agreement then I think that would be enough to get the writing for it. Also, adding it as an addition to pathfinder society instead of would be a better option as well. Allowing PFS characters and creating an open content guide as to what will and wont appear would be needed as well. That way it may be possible to have it hosted as apart of PFS events which would lessen the burden of finding cites as well as give a recruiting base for volunteers. Also, it would deepen the bond already shared between Paizo and its 3pp as well as allow them to make extra money on the side, assuming the surcharge mentioned above.
Anyways, if anything comes of this pm me as I am certainly excited for it.
@terraleon: I'd love to have you as part of the active group of people working on this since I, personally, have essentially no experience running these sorts of things. All I have is a vastly inflated opinion of myself and a desire to see this happen :) A little "inside info" would go a long way to help organize this if its really something people think is a worthwhile pursuit.
Sure. Shoot me a pointer to where this discussion is, and I'll add what I can.
-Ben.
|
So there would be no level 7s carrying level 1s through scenarios and similar such nonsense that bugs me about PFS.That shouldn't be happening anyways and if it is it is wrong. From P. 25 of the OPG:
"Some scenarios and special events offer more than two subtiers. In these cases, no PC can play at a subtier more than 1 step away from her character level."
So, in a Tier 1-7 scenario, a level 1 could only play in subtier 1-2 or 3-4 and not 6-7.
Where I have seen it occur, it has been a case where the table as a whole was playing in Tier 3-4 with several level 1s and one or two level 7s.
|
|
Sure. Shoot me a pointer to where this discussion is, and I'll add what I can. -Ben.
I created a Google Doc with some notes in it. My initial thought is that anyone who wants to contribute to this can edit that doc and it can serve as a central "thinking out loud" place. If you (or anyone) want to be able to edit it, send me a Google ID.
I love the concept, but I have no expertise when it comes to Living-style games, and am unfortunately already overloaded.
This is the same for me.
|
|
Where I have seen it occur, it has been a case where the table as a whole was playing in Tier 3-4 with several level 1s and one or two level 7s.So there would be no level 7s carrying level 1s through scenarios and similar such nonsense that bugs me about PFS.That shouldn't be happening anyways and if it is it is wrong. From P. 25 of the OPG:
"Some scenarios and special events offer more than two subtiers. In these cases, no PC can play at a subtier more than 1 step away from her character level."
So, in a Tier 1-7 scenario, a level 1 could only play in subtier 1-2 or 3-4 and not 6-7.
And that is one reason why we moved away from Tier 1-7 and now you have Tier 1-5 and Tier 3-7. But, I don't want to derail this thread any longer. Feel free to take further discussion of PFS tiers to the PFS General Forum and I can discuss further there.
|
|
but I have no expertise when it comes to Living-style games
Ditto but I have such a high opinion of myself I figure I can do anything I decide I want to do badly enough.
...and am unfortunately already overloaded.
Ditto but I think this has a potential to GREATLY expand the acceptance of 3pp products, which ultimately is in the interests of 3pp and therefore probably something that might be worth spending at least some time on. If you don't agree that it has the potential to greatly expand your market and potential sales then its clearly not worth the additional expenditure of time and effort for sure.
If you don't agree that it has the potential to greatly expand your market and potential sales then its clearly not worth the additional expenditure of time and effort for sure.
I didn't say that. I said I'd be willing to help, but I can't be the one who is driving - after nearly 6 years of doing RPGs, I know my limitations, and I would much rather see this succeed than to try to be the one who leads it knowing that it would likely languish or fail.
Tell me what you (or anyone else handling this project) need and I'll do my best to help out. If that's access to rules, if that's proofreading, if that's opinion, if that's input in some sort of overall design, if that's some sort of financial backing, let me know. I don't make any guarantees, but if it's reasonable and possible, I'm in.
In other words, unequivocally, I would love to help out however I can.
|
|
Thanks Jeremy. Ultimately I don't mind kind of being the central point of contact on this but I just don't want to also have to be constantly pinging people for thoughts, opinions, suggestions, or the like.
I see this as in the interests of all 3pp. Ideally there could be some form of group discussion where representatives of the participating 3pp hash out the pros and cons of how best to set it up. Given that I already invest MANY (easily 8-10) hours per day on d20pfsrd.com its very hard to also try to constantly poke and prod people for help/ideas/suggestions/whatever on other things.
I guess what I'm hoping for is that I start this ball rolling and then let the 3pp community MOSTLY drive it from there. I'll also help out by way of providing technical and marketing support, as well as a technical infrastructure for promoting and announcing games etc.
Well does this have to be a "formal" thing like PFS or could we just agree to a list of thing that we might do in writing and philosophies of creating adventures? Maybe more them more story driven (a la Adventure Path) but make the "successes" and "failures" mean more to those involved. To me, I get the feeling PFS adventures have more the "play and forget" aspect to them.
For me personally, I just want to be able to sign on to an event at a convention where I see something like this on the Events list:
Event: Rappan Athuk
Format: Deadly
Org: PFRPG-3PP
Levels: 5-6
Description: Bring your PFRPG-3PP Approved level 5 or 6 character to Crazy-Con 2012 for a marathon Extended Length 6 hour session of old-school death and mayhem in one of the most famous megadungeons of all time. As this is the Deadly format, be prepared to die. We hope you don't love your PC much. Oh, but if your PC lives, be prepared for some Deadly-level rewards!
And then I play a PC, he lives, and I keep that character in the Deadly format for future scheduled events.
You guys don't HAVE to write specific stuff specifically for this format but you might end up tweaking things going forward depending on how things get added into the Approved Products list.
These are my thoughts, not yours, so just ponder on that a spell! :)
|
While they are not exactly society type events (I provide the characters for instance), this will be my second year running Kaidan scenarios at Origins using Rite Publishing material. What I think might be neat is to have multiple 3pp events at the different cons, but coordinated so that we are all in the same area, working together, playing off each other.
I guess, I am asking, does it have to be a society format, or would a 3pp con presence with each publisher working together to run events accomplish much the same thing? I know that I would be more than happy to share my material with anyone who would like to run them at other conventions.
Wicht: I think that even might be enough for me, but as long as there is also a convenient online place I can check for what games are available at what cons, and whether I BRING a pc, or they are provided etc. Ultimately I want to be able to FIND games that are at cons that allow 3pp material, and which might also in some way allow for carrying that PC from game to game. I'd be happy to help with the first part (setting up a central tracking place for con and store games etc.) and would be happy just to be able to see the second part accomplished somehow.
|
|
Perhaps the first thing to do is for 3pp to enlist people who are willing to run games at Cons next year using 3pp material (I think its already too late to start planning for this year). Perhaps create a guild of 3pp GMs through the promise of free stuff for the GMs and then allow those GMs to use the guild name when signing up to run events, or have one person for each Con willing to run things and sign up the GMs.
If anyone is willing to play this way, I, for instance, would be willing to handle running the Origins oversight.
Yeah, I checked GenCon - it's too late to register an event for this year.
Chief Technical Officer
|
I'd just like to note one thing from a legal point of view... in this thread, you've only ever referred to stuff as "PFRPG," which is totally fine, and exactly the right thing to do if commercial publishers are to be involved in the organization running it. Given existing licenses, an alternative org play group would only be able to use the actual "Pathfinder" trademark if the whole thing were done under our Community Use Policy, which would mean it couldn't be run by a commercial publisher, and nobody could ever charge money to play.
Thanks Vic. Yeah right now I/we were just sort of throwing around vague ideas. If/when it every developed into something more concrete I'm sure we'd make sure to cross the T's and dot the i's etc.
I have never attempted anything on such a grand scale before, but I love the idea and I'd love to see it happen. I suppose we should take a poll about whether people want the shared world or not, because for me that's a big pull of organized play. Either way I'd love to be involved however is needed.
I'd just like to note one thing from a legal point of view... in this thread, you've only ever referred to stuff as "PFRPG," which is totally fine, and exactly the right thing to do if commercial publishers are to be involved in the organization running it. Given existing licenses, an alternative org play group would only be able to use the actual "Pathfinder" trademark if the whole thing were done under our Community Use Policy, which would mean it couldn't be run by a commercial publisher, and nobody could ever charge money to play.
Well here is a question that I think you might be able to answer or at least lead us in the right direction. Since this has a lot of legal issues attached to it, would Paizo even consider developing a system where 3PP could approach Paizo with a "living campaign" and handle the back end support while the full front end it done by the 3PP? What I am think similar to what Paradigm Concepts' Living Arcanis did with the RPGA. Something like this IS possible and is already proven to work.