|
Just make a new number. I don't think anyone is going to care (maybe i'm wrong) if you start replaying scenario's with a new number because it's literally the only way you can play for credit.
Not only is this illegal, but there ARE quite a few people who would care. If you want to replay, you can. Just not for credit.
|
Shrug, we have a lot of people of varying levels around here, most of the folks who play more, have more than one character and can play a few different levels, and nearly everyone brings their level 1's with them
I have replayed one thing for no credit already, and I am never, ever running out of scenarios, I simply don't play enough.
It's clearly illegal, idk that it should be I'd rather have someone make a new number than quit playing (assuming that's where their mindset is).
it's pretty unfair to say "sorry bro, you're done leveling". Either way, it's a pretty extreme point.
Lets be completely honest if you're in a situation where someone has GMd AND Played every single scenario in your organized play campaign, and is unable to continue running things for credit you're really going to deny that guy, who's put in more time than I can comprehend that's he's done advancing? I would make exceptions for that guy and anyone else who put that much effort into my organized play campaign. I'd want to give them some sort of honorary title that lets them play everything as much as they want.
I understand that I'll go down in flames for this, because I'm promoting and condoning "cheating" but there are exceptional cases and I think turning someone away at that point is about the worst thing a company can do, I don't believe Paizo would go that route. "you supported us too much and worked too hard to further the campaign, SUCKER!" isn't a good policy.
Either way, it's pretty unlikely that situation will occur, so meh.
|
Benris, I think you may want to ask around to some of the multi-starred GMs. I only have one or two stars (once all the sheets from previous conventions get put in) but we have a couple of five-stars and several four-stars in the local area. I know them quite well. I've also played at some of Kyle Baird's tables. I've talked to all of them quite in depth.
NONE of them GM "to level up characters." All of them have GMed some scenarios over and over again. Ask Kyle Baird how many times he's GMed Rats I & II. When you're talking about running 100+ scenarios, you don't do that to make the most awesome characters, you do that because you truly love the game. It doesn't matter to these people that they aren't getting credit. About the worst complaint I hear is "I'd like to occasionally play a scenario before I GM it."
Point: Unless I have GMed over 100 scenarios (which is what GMing everything adds up to nowadays) I don't think I can speak for someone who has.
|
|
What do you consider limited shelf life? Living City ran from like 92 or 93 through early 2000's (not sure when it finally went away). That's over 10 years. Living Greyhawk also lasted nearly that long if not longer. I forget whether Living Greyhawk started before 3.0 came out, or right when it did in the summer of 2000. Many other campaigns had shorter lifespans that had little to do with this particular set up.
Some failed because the parent company discontinued that line of books (Living Dragonstar), others had bad campaign management, others too much cliquishness, favoritism and politics.
As Mike Brock notes, Living City started in '87. It was the conversion to 3E in 2000/2001 (which was, in hindsight, a mess) that probably sealed its doom, as well as the RPGA's focus on Living Greyhawk. Living City was spun off in 2002 to Ryan Dancey's company, and struggled on for another year or two. Legends of the Shining Jewel, a smaller campaign which now uses the Pathfinder ruleset, was originally a spin-off of Living City, and is still going today.
Living Greyhawk ran for 8 years, through the entire lifespan of 3.x's support from WotC. It was, by any measure, extremely successful; the only reason the campaign ended was that WotC brought out 4E, and, having learned their lesson from the debacle of the conversion of LC to 3E, they concluded the campaign. Had 4E not been brought out, I'm reasonably certain that LG would still be going strong, and would now be in Year 12.
Campaigns like Living Death and Living Force were intended to have a finite life-cycle from the beginning (10 years and 5 years, respectively).
Living Arcanis was a third-party 3E/3.5 campaign, published by Paradigm Concepts. Paradigm, which published the game world (and the adventures), wrapped that campaign when 4E came out, as they decided to restart the campaign using their own ruleset. Legends of Arcanis (the sequel campaign, set ~25 years after the events of the earlier campaign) has been running for three years now.
Several other third-party Living campaigns, which were, at one time, supported by the RPGA, were taken "independent" by their publishers in the mid-2000s, when WotC chose to stop letting other game companies use the resources of the RPGA. A number of them (such as Shadowrun Missions and Heroes of Rokugan) continue, albeit in perhaps somewhat different forms, to this day.
I agree with Andrew (who, BTW, was a campaign administrator for Living Dragonstar) -- of all the reasons which have caused the demise of an OP campaign, not being able to start a character at higher levels really hasn't been one of them.
|
|
Benris, I think you may want to ask around to some of the multi-starred GMs. I only have one or two stars (once all the sheets from previous conventions get put in) but we have a couple of five-stars and several four-stars in the local area. I know them quite well. I've also played at some of Kyle Baird's tables. I've talked to all of them quite in depth.
NONE of them GM "to level up characters." All of them have GMed some scenarios over and over again. Ask Kyle Baird how many times he's GMed Rats I & II. When you're talking about running 100+ scenarios, you don't do that to make the most awesome characters, you do that because you truly love the game. It doesn't matter to these people that they aren't getting credit. About the worst complaint I hear is "I'd like to occasionally play a scenario before I GM it."
Point: Unless I have GMed over 100 scenarios (which is what GMing everything adds up to nowadays) I don't think I can speak for someone who has.
which is why I said it's an extreme case, but be honest if that guy was like "I want to make this character but I can't cause I have played everything" is it fair to tell him that he can't?
I have 13 tables of GM credit, I have more tables as a player, and I have already replayed something as a player, for no credit, because we needed to fill out a table. It was fun i'm not complaining about that.
I'm mearly saying that if there is no other option for someone to level up a character, denying them that option is pretty bogus. It's an extreme case, and I doubt it would ever come up for the reasons you stated.
On your point: I would call it bogus if Kyle wanted to level up a new guy and couldn't because he had already played/GMd everything. As I would anyone in that situation. I'm not speaking for them, I'm speaking on behalf of people who put in the time.
this is a Pathfinder forum, we all know rules have intent, I'm sure the intent of playing 1&1 credit isn't to deny people the ability to acquire credit when they have done every possible avenue of acquiring legitimate credit. That is all I'm saying.
Back on topic: Elitism in organized play. Yup it exists, I noticed much of it at gencon this year, mostly just the MMO mentality of "are you good at these skills" "what's your AC/Atk bonus" but some of the "I've been playing longer than you I know more" which isn't actually true, it just means they have known what they know for longer ;0.
It's certainly not the greatest thing to have happen, but it's not the worst either. That type of player will gravitate to each other, and they won't impose their beliefs on others. Player's being told their character is bad or that they are bad is awful for the community and if people are mustering groups based on gear-score there is a pretty reasonable chance they would act that way in game.
I'm not perfect in this area either, I come from a competitive gaming back round. I only very rarely step in an comment when players are calculating things clearly incorrectly. (IE a level 7 fighter with 18 str, power attack, with a great sword, rolled 11 and said "16") I was like that can't be right. Turns out it was like 27 or something (in a hard fight against DR 15/-, I mean we needed it!)
It only happened once, but my first PFS muster at gencon was... odd. We showed up a bit late (cab took 30 minutes to show up, happens) and basically all the mustering was done. There were 3 guys that seemed completely lost but wanted to play so I wandered around, found a musterer asked if they had any GMs available and made a table happen. I'm not a 4 star GM, I'm a nobody that had been playing PFS a couple months. I'm in no "In crowd" I don't know secret handshakes, but I made a table happen. Those guys were ready to just wander off, they signed up for numbers and it seemed like they intended to use them again.
It doesn't take one of the "in crowd" to make an event happen, and if it does that event organizer is terrible, yes terrible. All it takes is a willing and able person and an event organizer who understands that the point is "get people to play".
If you die, you start at level 1, if you want to make it to level 12 don't die. If you make it to level 7, and then die, maybe you should have saved up some gold or PP. Starting around level 5-6 you should be able to have enough gold and/or PP to afford a raise dead, if you're dying a lot maybe you should go the the advice boards, or talk to local players who aren't dying for tips on how not to die.
Why is the journey so bad? honestly, just talk those guys into playing some lower level dudes with you until you catch up to their "mains" the vast majority of people are willing to do that, and the ones who really aren't well make your own table of people who don't want to stagnate new players.
I have great respect for Kyle and all the 5-Star GMs because of the monumental dedication they give this game, but I am an event organizer by trade and I know what pushes people away from organized play in general. PFS is an awesome campaign and I think everyone is doing a great job to make it what it is today.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
To be honest...I guess it's just disappointing that I go to a con in my city, see 15-30 people playing, and then when I start playing the local games, so few of those people actually show up, even though I am told that many live close by. We had two tables one night. The next week after that, it was 3 newbies, one experienced player and a mostly inexperienced DM. The week after that, we were cancelled because there weren't enough players. I'm really hoping we have enough tomorrow when I go back to play, but I am told that those people who were at the con probably won't be back for the reasons I have described.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
that is a bit troublesome, help get those players some experience and try to get more new players :D
GMs improve as they GM more, players do likewise. Just stick with it and try to drum up more players, it can be challenging sometimes :D
Well, I AM working on it. Honestly, my tastes run more towards GMs anyway, and I understand that a lot of times we need more GMs locally, so I'm going to be running a game on the 2nd. I've run two online as well for some folks I met at the con who live in another region. Unfortunately, though, I only moved to this city in August, so I really don't know many people. The few that I do know are in the legal field, so they tend to be older and not really into gaming.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
On the whole "dying sucks, don't do it" tangent, I disagree. In LG my characters died plenty and I kept playing them and having fun. My first character, Brother Melchior, died I believe 5 times. In all my characters died 16 times and I started the campaign in 2006. People have some strange notion that dying = falling behind the Wealth By Level curve = my character sucks. There's more to the game than mechanics. It is, after all, a role-playing game. A character should be more than the gear they carry. Dying doesn't end your character, dying builds your character :)
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
On the whole "dying sucks, don't do it" tangent, I disagree. In LG my characters died plenty and I kept playing them and having fun. My first character, Brother Melchior, died I believe 5 times. In all my characters died 16 times and I started the campaign in 2006. People have some strange notion that dying = falling behind the Wealth By Level curve = my character sucks. There's more to the game than mechanics. It is, after all, a role-playing game. A character should be more than the gear they carry. Dying doesn't end your character, dying builds your character :)
So you just rebuilt the same person at level 1?
|
On the whole "dying sucks, don't do it" tangent, I disagree. In LG my characters died plenty and I kept playing them and having fun. My first character, Brother Melchior, died I believe 5 times. In all my characters died 16 times and I started the campaign in 2006. People have some strange notion that dying = falling behind the Wealth By Level curve = my character sucks. There's more to the game than mechanics. It is, after all, a role-playing game. A character should be more than the gear they carry. Dying doesn't end your character, dying builds your character :)So you just rebuilt the same person at level 1?
No, he spent the gold to get raised and kept playing the character.
You keep acting like Death means you can never play your character again.
That is so not the case.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are some comments wandering through these threads that I think need to be scaled back. Exclusivity, in terms of who has a voice, is not what any Organized Play system should be about. Specifically, I don't want to see PFS wander down the elitist path that some prior Organized Play campaigns have tread.
I will, however, agree that death isn't too big a deal in PFS. We in Denver have a running joke: "Death is merely a condition. Fix it, and let's get on with the adventure." The only characters I've seen go perma-dead are the ones that players were bored with, so they allowed them to have that death as a way of defining them.
Even in the scenario being debated Mark has given an "out" of sorts to the people who die via that attack. For reference, see his post in the scenario's thread.
I do want to chip in on the "earn the right to play" comment, even though I shouldn't, I suspect: playing at higher levels really is something you should earn, and be proud that you earned it. I watched in Living Forgotten Realms as all kinds of players got their backs up when the overseers of that campaign began allowing people to create PCs at whatever tier they wanted so that they could play. Far from helping out by gaining new players, it drove established players from the system in droves. Now, instead of having 9 regular tables per week at my store for that system, we are lucky to see two. Often, there are none. Though certainly not the only reason, this rule is a contributing factor to that. The mentality that engenders that rule is sure to lead to many of the same mistakes that LFR made, leading to the doom and gloom that some are predicting. PFS shouldn't go down that road, either.
It takes but a few months to get a character to 7th level. Moreover, you will have an interest in that character, and know what it does. Why is there a need to be impatient on this?
|
|
Do you think our arguments would be invalid?
If that other campaign had already been successful and growing for over 4 years, I wouldn't expect my arguments to carry much weight. Whether or not it actually did isn't really the issue.
I appreciate what Andrew was trying to say, although that argument never sits well with certain types of people.
What I don't appreciate is someone saying "This is a horrible problem with PFS" when that someone has only experienced a very small sample of the entire experience. If people who have been around since the campaign's inception and have played or run over 80% of the available scenarios say, "X actually isn't very common and it isn't really an issue," then I would expect the new person to be reasonable and say, "Okay, maybe I got unlucky with my experience and I'll trust those other people are right and try out some more scenarios."
The original concern still has a right to be a concern and it should be something that is considered and weighed so that it doesn't actually become a problem.
FWIW, I've had 5 unrecoverable deaths at my table. All 5 came with my only TPK which was at tier 1-2. I've detailed it somewhere else, but it came down to unavoidable dice of death (i.e. players literally never rolled over a 6 the entire encounter). I've had one more character reported as dead, but it wasn't unrecoverable. They were unwilling to sell their gear (or ask for help from their party) to pay for a resurrection. I noted earlier about the one player who needed a wish to recover from death. This was at 12th level and they only needed a wish because of something that character had done at a previous table and not because of something I did at my table.
For such a "deadly GM," one half of one percent of players at my tables have experienced an unrecoverable death.
Well.. from my experiences, I have found PFS to be NOT very "new user" friendly. I'll go into detail with what I have experienced so far....
I have never played PFS to date, and having read many great tales here on the these forums, wanted to "check it out". I looked for the local PFS peoples, and found the group. ( I don't know if there is a Venture Captain here, or if this is a "legal" group..I don't know how organized PFS is in that regard )
I contacted said group via their webpage, to get more information, such as play times, places to play, table space availability, etc. I did get a response, and was told to "be sure to keep an eye out on the forums for play times". I found listings for a game, on a Saturday afternoon, which didn't really work for me, as I usually work that day. But was assured other games on different days would be posted soon (tm).
This was in August, the last post was basically mine at the beginning of September.... NO games posted, no chatter, no nothing there...
So while, initially I got a response, I feel they aren't very interested in promoting much of anything, or getting new people into the games. Almost like it was a complimentary "pat on the head" and "move along son"
So just wondering if this is a typical scenario most people see played out, when trying to get involved??
|
|
So just wondering if this is a typical scenario most people see played out, when trying to get involved??
I suspect you just have the misfortune of having encountered a local group which is either (a) poorly organized, and / or (b) isn't really interested in adding any new players.
They are almost undoubtedly a "legal" group (you don't need to have any connection to a Venture Officer to legitimately run a PFS game), but it sounds like they may not be working with a VO.
My suggestion would be to see if there's an actual Venture Captain or Venture Lieutenant in your area, and reach out to that person to find where else there may be opportunities for you to play.
|
So just wondering if this is a typical scenario most people see played out, when trying to get involved??
Hardly. I've introduced several new players to not only organized play, but Pathfinder itself. I play every Thursday night at 6PM at the local FLGS. Anyone that shows is welcome to generate a character or use a pregen. I spend the first hour helping new players with that, and other players with updating their current characters, and then run a scenario. Usually wrap things up at 11PM. (The store owner is kind enough to let us play past store hours.) If I can't make it due to work, I try to let him know ahead of time so he can let people know there is no game.
|
|
I think there is a Huge difference between Letting a player play a 7th level Pregen so a game can go off or to make sure the player gets to play and letting a player start off with a new PC at a higher level and continue on with the PC. I am good with the first not the second..
6 Reported Deaths
Damn Kyle I think I have more Reported deaths then you as a GM...
|
|
It is interesting to come back from a convention and to see how this has derailed so much ...
It seems now a pregen discussion.
In this regard - here is a question to the posters who like to ban pregen play at high level.
What do we do with players who have played enough games to have a PFS legal level 7+ character of their own - but who are so inexperienced that the power level of their character (on paper plus how good they play) is around the power level of a PreGen in the hands of an experienced player.
I have seen it this weekend - and it wasn't pretty.
6 reported Death (final) in a single day at a small convention. Several more resurrected characters. I know of a player who experienced at least one death on each table she took part.
These were tier 4-5, 6-7 and 10-11 games.
In two cases despite a GM trying his utmost to prevent characters from dying.
There was a common theme here. Groups < 6. New season scenarios. Several below average experienced player at the table, power gaming / character optimization players at different tables. And at least one character at the table that I would regard at or below the PreGen power level (and I'm well aware there are no pregen level 10 or 11 - just extrapolated).
And the permanent death tended to be with the weaker players. The stronger players (yep - also a multi star GM who died) tend to have prestige or other ways to ensure it isn't permanent or did cluster together.
I'm located near Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
Hm. I'm not sure what our asking, Thod.
The rhetorical question is easy for me to pin down: making judgment calls about who can play, and under what circumstances they are "allowed" to play, is not what we should be doing. If they get to 7th level and want to play at that tier, then they should be allowed to, regardless of whether they are "any good at it." If they want to pick up a pre-gen and join a table on the fly, I personally believe they shouldn't, regardless of how "experienced" they are. Things like this should be black and white.
Which brings me to a side note: Dragnmoon, I agree that there is a difference in what you pointed out. But, I kind of agree with Kyle's initial statement in his thread; I don't know that ANYONE should be able to pick up a pre-gen and join a high level. Again, it should just be black and white. Right now, they're allowed to. That's fine. I can live with that. But if that were changed, I'd be okay with that, too.
Back to Thod.
If this becomes a kid gloves, kittens, and puppies game then I think we will find ourselves without players very quickly. Do we really want to debate whether I, or you, or anyone else, has the right to determine whether someone else is CAPABLE of playing at high tiers? That is a dangerous line of thought, and one I realize you are actually saying to stay away from. But even opening that can of worms is unpleasant to think about.
People get to play. If they get their character to a certain level, they get to play at that level. If they stink at it, they'll get punished in their own way.
The only way to mitigate this that is reasonable is to embark on player education crusades, instead. Painlord's threads on "What to Expect" are excellent starting points. GM 101 courses are, as well.
But no one should be excluded from what they want to do by an arbitrary judgment from someone who has merely been here longer.
|
|
In this regard - here is a question to the posters who like to ban pregen play at high level.What do we do with players who have played enough games to have a PFS legal level 7+ character of their own - but who are so inexperienced that the power level of their character (on paper plus how good they play) is around the power level of a PreGen in the hands of an experienced player.
I don't think it's so much a question of an experienced PFS player running a pregen, what has been talked about the most is an inexperienced player/new player being handed a lvl 7 pregen, given a pat on the butt and a "go get'em boy" comment.
That provides a disservice to everyone involved and shouldn't happen.
A player that doesn't understand how to play the character they supposedly created is another topic all together and is a completely separate topic that isn't involved with this one.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A player that doesn't understand how to play the character they supposedly created is another topic all together and is a completely separate topic that isn't involved with this one.
I hope as the orignal poster of the thread I'm allowed to have my own opinion what is or isn't related to this topic.
Yes - it might not be related to certain derails in my absence.
This topic started about me feeling if PFS slowly becomes more of a closed environment with bigger hurdles for new and inexperienced players.
The problem about players not understanding (well) how to play their characters is related to this.
In the first two years this was much less of a problem.
1) the majority of players going up in levels belonged to experienced players and players who played a lot. Casual players with maybe 10 sessions a year wouldn't reach higher levels.
2) in the beginning there was only the CRB. Less options, less to screw up if you don't invest the time.
I'm in 100% agreement with you and Kyle. Giving an inexperienced player a high level pregen and let him lose on his own on a high tier scenario is a recipe for disaster and should be avoided wherever possible.
But how is the casual player - and with casual I would say someone spending 80%+ of time gaming PFS and 20%- reading boards how to get better, upgrading and planning his/her character, ever to learn higher level play? Do we ask him to die 5 times first before he/she is allowed to participate.
And here we come back to PreGen characters. I think they should stay as they give a base line. If a scenario can no longer be played by experienced players using the pregens then we are in danger that power creep and optimization had gone too far.
After all - these characters have been created by above experienced people (Paizo Staff) and if they are unable to create a moderately playable character - what chance to we give newcomers and casual gamers.
To reiterate: High level pregens should be avoided if possible. But banning them is another step into making our tables less welcoming. Not for new low level players. But to the less invested ones who stay on long enough to reach higher levels.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A player that doesn't understand how to play the character they supposedly created is another topic all together and is a completely separate topic that isn't involved with this one.I hope as the orignal poster of the thread I'm allowed to have my own opinion what is or isn't related to this topic.
Yes - it might not be related to certain derails in my absence.
This topic started about me feeling if PFS slowly becomes more of a closed environment with bigger hurdles for new and inexperienced players.
The problem about players not understanding (well) how to play their characters is related to this.
In the first two years this was much less of a problem.
1) the majority of players going up in levels belonged to experienced players and players who played a lot. Casual players with maybe 10 sessions a year wouldn't reach higher levels.
2) in the beginning there was only the CRB. Less options, less to screw up if you don't invest the time.
I'm in 100% agreement with you and Kyle. Giving an inexperienced player a high level pregen and let him lose on his own on a high tier scenario is a recipe for disaster and should be avoided wherever possible.
But how is the casual player - and with casual I would say someone spending 80%+ of time gaming PFS and 20%- reading boards how to get better, upgrading and planning his/her character, ever to learn higher level play? Do we ask him to die 5 times first before he/she is allowed to participate.
And here we come back to PreGen characters. I think they should stay as they give a base line. If a scenario can no longer be played by experienced players using the pregens then we are in danger that power creep and optimization had gone too far.
After all - these characters have been created by above experienced people (Paizo Staff) and if they are unable to create a moderately playable character - what chance to we give newcomers and casual gamers.
To reiterate: High level pregens should be avoided if possible. But banning them is another step into making our tables less welcoming. Not for new low level players. But to the less invested ones who stay on long enough to reach higher levels.
Personally, and with all due respect, I think that you are mixing two different ideas and combining two mole hills into a mountain that doesn't need to be there.
I get that you feel that it's becoming more closed minded and that the posts on removing lvl 7 pregens perpetuates that.
However, I don't see it that way, and I'm not ever going to agree with you that preserving the play experience of players that have worked their way up to high level play, that have fostered and nurtured and even dealt with character death along the way; is less than the play experience of a new player that hasn't worked their way up to that level of play.
I understand the thought process of wanting to include all players no matter what. But what happens when players start getting up and leaving the high level tables because they don't want to play with a new player and their pregen that they don't understand? I haven't seen it happen yet, but let's face it, people get up and walk away from a table for less.
You asked how a new player was to learn higher level play... here is my answer.
By starting at level 1 and working their way up to higher level play just like all the other players that have worked their way up to higher level play. It isn't a question of dieing so many set number of times before we allow them into the secret club. It's about working their way up the pathfinder ranks.
That might be a hard stance to take, but PFS isn't a "everyone gets a trophy for just showing up" deal.
I'm a fan of lvl 1, lvl 4 pregens being put in the hands of players at all levels. Level 7s I think should be reserved for GMs to run to complete a table at that level.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The way people talk about the issue, players are being "forced" to use a high-level pregen in order to participate. IMO, that is a failure of the organizer to provide an environment where everyone has an option to play. Too often I hear about events where only mid/high level scenarios are being offered. I am primarily an organizer myself, and if that were the case 'round here, I would be pointing the finger of blame squarely at myself. With four+ seasons worth of scenarios and modules, there is almost no reason for players to have to use pregens to play.
Granted, there are times when some unforeseen factor arises where there is truly nothing that could be done to plan for it and someone has to use a mid/high level pregen, but it should be extremely rare. If it happens more than a couple of times per year, you (the organizer) has to accept the responsibility.
There are also times when it is right for a player not to get to play. I have also seen (again too often) players that take no interest in helping the organizer schedule/coordinate the game. They refuse to use pre-reg/signup systems, no show when they do signup, etc. An organizer should only be expected to go so far to accommodate all players. There has to be a mutual level of respect that, unfortunately, is sometimes missing.
There are also some out there that just play too much. A shocking statement, perhaps, but knowing the finite amount of sanctioned play, if you are playing 4+ times per month, you will run out of legal play in short order. Your entire gaming life does not have to be legal for PFS. Play Adventure Paths, board games, other gaming systems, MMORPG, console games, whatever. Too much of anything, even something as awesome as PFS, is a bad thing.
Now, all of this being said, it still comes down to one important thing. At the event, in the moment, the organizer has a willing player in their face and it is their duty to try and find them a seat. No one wants to tell a player, "sorry, try again next time." The organizer is going to find something, anything, even if it leads to a less-than-optimal arrangement or, at the extreme, borders on something illegal by PFS guidelines.
|
|
You asked how a new player was to learn higher level play... here is my answer.By starting at level 1 and working their way up to higher level play just like all the other players that have worked their way up to higher level play. It isn't a question of dieing so many set number of times before we allow them into the secret club. It's about working their way up the pathfinder ranks.
That might be a hard stance to take, but PFS isn't a "everyone gets a trophy for just showing up" deal.
I'm a fan of lvl 1, lvl 4 pregens being put in the hands of players at all levels. Level 7s I think should be reserved for GMs to run to complete a table at that level.
I do agree - up to a certain level.
I'm not for giving something out for free. But in the end it is about balance.
Pregens are there for rare occasions. If they get overused, disrupt the fun of existing players then their use needs to be reduced.
At the same time I have lately seen that they can be used very useful for inexperienced players (own character level 4-5) to experience with a group of experienced players at the table what to expect and work towards with their own character.
I have to admit that at my local games I'm in full control to invite / ban them. I invite the players, I set the scenario that gets played. I know the strengths / weakness and can take an educated guess if a pregen is likely to be disruptive / drags down a table or will add to the overall enjoyment as the rest of the table likes to have that additional person around for a good evening.
And I tend only to allow the original 4 pregens - and at higher level likely not even Ezren.
Maybe in your area they have become a nuisance, are not used the right way, cause more harm as good. Maybe if I would play / GM in your area I might be of a different opinion.
But used in the right way they can be a valuable tool.
And I stay with my opinion - they do give a good baseline. If people have to work towards higher level play - this keeps in perspective what is the minimal level expected of them is. If a tier 7-8 can't be played without multiple death by a group of pregens then we should ask ourselves why and if this is good.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem I think Thod is the difference in investment between a player who has played to level 7 and a person playing a pregen, if your a new person playing a pregen you lose basically nothing (you get a chronicle that says your brand new level 1 PC is dead), where as for a person who has played their PC up to level 7 they risk losing the character they have invested the last 18 sessions building.
I keep seeing this said over and over again, and I still don't agree with it.
We need to do a better job of explaining to people they are actually losing a lot by playing pregens with no Concern.
Not only do you lose Credit if the Pregen Dies, but you also lose the ability to play that scenario ever again, which are both huge disadvantages.
|
|
You asked how a new player was to learn higher level play... here is my answer.By starting at level 1 and working their way up to higher level play just like all the other players that have worked their way up to higher level play. It isn't a question of dieing so many set number of times before we allow them into the secret club. It's about working their way up the pathfinder ranks.
That might be a hard stance to take, but PFS isn't a "everyone gets a trophy for just showing up" deal.
I'm a fan of lvl 1, lvl 4 pregens being put in the hands of players at all levels. Level 7s I think should be reserved for GMs to run to complete a table at that level.
I do agree - up to a certain level.
I'm not for giving something out for free. But in the end it is about balance.
Pregens are there for rare occasions. If they get overused, disrupt the fun of existing players then their use needs to be reduced.
At the same time I have lately seen that they can be used very useful for inexperienced players (own character level 4-5) to experience with a group of experienced players at the table what to expect and work towards with their own character.
I have to admit that at my local games I'm in full control to invite / ban them. I invite the players, I set the scenario that gets played. I know the strengths / weakness and can take an educated guess if a pregen is likely to be disruptive / drags down a table or will add to the overall enjoyment as the rest of the table likes to have that additional person around for a good evening.
And I tend only to allow the original 4 pregens - and at higher level likely not even Ezren.
Maybe in your area they have become a nuisance, are not used the right way, cause more harm as good. Maybe if I would play / GM in your area I might be of a different opinion.
But used in the right way they can be a valuable tool.
And I stay with my opinion - they do give a good baseline. If people have to work towards higher level play - this keeps in perspective what is the minimal level expected of them is. If a tier 7-8 can't be played without multiple death by a group of pregens then we should ask ourselves why and if this is good
You're welcome to your opinion, however, my opinion is based on the numerous conventions I've gone to and the number tables I've GMd over the last couple of years. Not just on my local area where lvl 7 pregens are very very rarely used. So I'll keep my opinion that lvl 7 pregens should be kept for GM use only.
|
|
I absolutely agree with Dragnmoon.
Playing a pregen with no concern to lose a character is just wrong and against the spirit of the community. You do a disservice to PFS. Someone doing this at my table wouldn't play a pregen a second time until he/she has redeemed him/herself.
Personally I have never seen this - neither local nor at a CON.
The closest I experienced (and I was part of the game in question) was when helpless Kyra (played by the GM) was threatened with a coup de grace and all three real players decided (me included) not to surrender and hand over our weapons but risk her near certain death.
|
|
And this is part of the reason I'm in favor of high level pregens not being put in the hands of players ... thank you for stating my point
Playing a pregen with no concern to lose a character is just wrong and against the spirit of the community. You do a disservice to PFS.
Thod wasn't making your point.
Is there any evidence that people come and play pregens like they're nothing, without any respect for the other players. I have never seen it. Thod has never seen it. I have seen someone almost cry when their pregen came close to death, but the inverse, never.
|
|
Is there any evidence that people come and play pregens like they're nothing, without any respect for the other players. I have never seen it. Thod has never seen it. I have seen someone almost cry when their pregen came close to death, but the inverse, never.
Forgive me for asking FK, but how many convention have you been to and how many high level tables have you run at those conventions where there have been pregens?
I'm only asking because, essentially, you're calling my opinion based on what I've seen, into question. An opinion that has been shared by others that have seen the same problems. So I feel it's only fair that you share your experience to back up your claims before calling my experiences into question.
Just because you haven't seen problems with high level pregens, doesn't mean the problems don't exist.
|
|
Is there any evidence that people come and play pregens like they're nothing, without any respect for the other players. I have never seen it. Thod has never seen it. I have seen someone almost cry when their pregen came close to death, but the inverse, never.
Forgive me for asking FK, but how many convention have you been to and how many high level tables have you run at those conventions where there have been pregens?
I'm only asking because, essentially, you're calling my opinion based on what I've seen, into question. An opinion that has been shared by others that have seen the same problems. So I feel it's only fair that you share your experience to back up your claims before calling my experiences into question.
Just because you haven't seen problems with high level pregens, doesn't mean the problems don't exist.
Oh so you are back to asserting your authority?
I am sorry that my questions bother you.
I am fairly newto living campaigns, only having been 2 dozen or so cons. As for organizing myself, only maybe 300 tables across all the campaigns I have helped on.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not asserting any kind of authority, and the questions don't bother me. You basically said that my opinions were groundless because you haven't seen the issues, so it's only fair that I get to call your experience into question.
Here is my experience and why I have my opinion about high level pregens.
I've seen players with high level pregens with their nose in the books the entire game trying to figure out the character that they were handed.
I've seen players with high levels pregens going into a scenario with a devil may care attitude because they aren't really out anything if the pregen dies.
I've seen players with high levels pregens purposefully trying to screw up a scenario with no regard to the real characters that are playing
I've seen players with high levels pregens just not care, that are just there for a good time and screw everyone else on the table.
So you tell me how that fosters a playerbase when high level caters to the new player vs. the "older" players that have an investment in what happens at that table?
|
|
Is there any evidence that people come and play pregens like they're nothing, without any respect for the other players. I have never seen it. Thod has never seen it. I have seen someone almost cry when their pregen came close to death, but the inverse, never.
Empirical evidence. My estimation is that about 5-10% of pregens don't care for their characters life and thus endanger the party. That number radically increases to around 50% ime when talking about experienced players using 7th level pregens. The "well I don't care if I die" sentiment is definitely out there. I would have a dramatically different opinion about 7th level pregens if I had never encountered this attitude.