|
Hi guys,
I just looked over my session history, and I noticed a small problem going forward.
My slow-tracked characters, their sessions are showing up as receiving one Prestige/Fame in many of their session entries, even though they completed both the Society objective and the faction objective.
Now normally, this would not be a problem at all, but going forward, it is. It has been made known that faction survival will be at least partially dependent on success rate of faction missions. The only way the coordinators can determine success rate is to look at Prestige/Fame earned.
If a character completes both the Society objective and the faction objective, but is reported as having received one Prestige/Fame, then it is my understanding and fear that this will end up wrongfully looking like a 50% success rate, which will likely harm his faction's chances of survival.
If by the written rules, this problem shouldn't be coming up, and my GMs have been in error, then these reporting rules need to be clarified, as a majority of my PaizoCon 2012 sessions are showing one Prestige/Fame earned even though I completed both of my objectives.
Assuming this actually is a problem, and that there isn't some behind-the-scenes safety-net that I don't know about, can something be done about this problem before Season 4 begins? I would hate to see a faction go because of a problem with how reporting works.
-Matt
|
They can't really look at reporting and presume 1 point = 1 mission complete, 2 points = faction + main goal complete.
because there's no deliniation in prestige reporting for whether the faction mission was completed but the primary objective failed or vice versa. There's also no way they deliniate whether your character is fast or slow in reporting.
I think they'll be going based on how many players play characters of that faction. ie. how many games show up with characters of a particular faction in reportin. not how many prestige points they earn.
|
My slow-tracked characters, their sessions are showing up as receiving one Prestige/Fame in many of their session entries, even though they completed both the Society objective and the faction objective.
This is because, when you choose the slow advancement track, you are getting either 0 or 1 PP for a scenario.
As currently written, the rules for slow track do not allow .5 PP in a scenario.
I would assume that "fixing" this would require adding a new checkbox to the session reporting, as to whether the PC is on slow track or not.
But that is an IT issue, and Paizo might not be able to spare he resources for it at this time.
|
|
This is because, when you choose the slow advancement track, you are getting either 0 or 1 PP for a scenario.
As currently written, the rules for slow track do not allow .5 PP in a scenario.
That's not actually true:
Step 4: Determine how many Prestige Points the character earned over the course of the scenario. A character on the standard advancement track can earn a maximum of 2 Prestige Points for completing both her faction mission and the overall success condition of the scenario. A character on the slow advancement track can earn a maximum of 1 PP: 1/2 PP for completing her faction mission, and 1/2 PP for the scenario’s success condition.
Regardless, it's the reporting procedure that I have noticed will create trouble in the future. Perhaps the simplest change that could correct the problem would be to clarify how reporting Prestige/Fame works under "Reporting Scenario Results" in the guide, as well as a change to the tracking sheet at the end of the scenarios, so as to clarify what goes in the "Prestige" box.
-Matt
|
|
Consider the following:
To maintain balance between characters on both advancement tracks, those PCs utilizing the slow advancement track may only earn 1 PP per scenario. This point is dependent on completing both the overall scenario objective and the character’s faction mission.
Interesting that they appear to have made yet another "below the radar" change. As the quote above implies, and an earlier iteration, I thought, explicitly stated, someone on slow track could only earn 0 or 1 PP, not 1/2.
|
|
I belive the all or nothing for slow track PCs was to avoid any 1/2 PP remainders. But that unfairly penalizes slow track PCs and it doesn't break the chronicle sheets to list X.5 PP on them, so it was changed in the PFS Guide 4.1. The paragraph above was probably missed during the edit.
As to the original poster's point, the PC gets to play 6 scenarios per level and can earn the full 6 PP if they are lucky. But in the system it could appear that they only earned half the available PP in the scenario.
It may not be advantagious to play on slow track.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Don, it's not just disadvantageous to the player character involved, but also to all her faction colleagues.
The idea of a faction competition is, presumably, to stir up some friendly rivalry among the factions, and to encourage players to try to "win" some goal. If you were a competitive sort of person, and you found out that several of your PCs' faction colleagues were taking slow progression, you might have a gripe with them, since they may cost your faction that victory.
|
I s'pose that there are those who might grip about such things. It then, there are people that gripe about being given something for free, about the sky not being blue enough, or the grass being too fresh.
I can't see how it's any business of anyone else's how I (or anyone) choose to advance my character, especially to the point of having a problem with it.
As has been said above, it's unlikely that they will use prestige awards to track the faction progress, as this would cause the problems mentioned here. There's no one on the face of the earth who has the authority to tell someone they're not playing right and that they have to face retiring their character, just to get some faction goal.
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West
|
I wouldn't get all hot and bothered about the effect slow track would have on faction mission completion percentage, let alone on any effect this will turn out to have on future events - based on my (admittedly limited) experience there just aren't enough people playing on slow track to make a significant contribution. I'd expect far more variation to be introduced by strict/lenient interpretations of the completion criteria.
|
|
Hmm ... in reading my previous post, I can *totally* see how it can be read in a tone that would be considered "hot and bothered" or "a bit dramatic". Please trust in the fact that when it was written, I was "thinking it" in a calm level tone. Think of a doctor, lawyer, or Charley Brown's teacher.
So ... Though I didn't wirte it that way, I apologize for the tone that can be inferred by other readers. I'll be certain to try to avoid putting mood in my posts, except when I really feel like trolling a little. :) <grins impishly, with a great deal of humor>
|
|
I have discovered another potential point of trouble:
How does the reporting of prestige interact with replaying a scenario for no credit?
Is zero prestige reported for the replayer, because the PC doesn't gain any? If so, that would cause the system to think that the PC failed both the Society mission and his faction mission.
Should the faction mission results of replaying PCs count at all towards whether a faction survives Season 4?
It sounds like the prestige/fame reporting rules could use some clarification.
-Matt
|
|
I was under the impression that if someone replays for no credit you don't enter them in when reporting.
Is this stated in the rules anywhere?
I know that the reporting system doesn't reject reporting having played a scenario multiple times. My player-session list shows me having played #51 The Shadow Gambit twice, earning a total of four prestige.
Also, I've found another potential problem. A PC who earns no Prestige receives a dash in his session list. I see that when I have elected to not specify a character for GM credit, that GM session entry also receives a dash. Several times, I notice a faction is declared, and thus associated with that dash.
Does the prestige system that the coordinators will examine have the ability to distinguish between "GM prestige" and "player prestige?" If not, the situation above would harm the listed faction's chances of survival.
It looks like the prestige-reporting rules need to be clarified and perhaps expanded.
-Matt
