![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Grasshopper](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/321.jpg)
...well not all of them...
But seriously, I started to dig a little and look at some of the retired 0-season scenarios. And as I plowed through them I noticed that a certain scenario doesn't deserve to be retired, at least not by modern standards...
...but to be honest, I'm merely pondering and exploring the possibility of bringing some of them back. I was on a hiatus when they were cast away so I don't know all the reasoning behind them. Actually, Josh never addressed the reasons, as I gather. Some say it was because the scenario was too deadly (Blood at Dralkard Manor), had no plot to it (Trouble with Secrets) or was otherwise arse (Asmodeus Mirage).
If I were to retire scenarios based on any of those criteria, I'd boot Drow of the Darklands Pyramid instantly. :)
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Karburtin Lightbrand](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/PZO90118-Lightbrand_500.jpeg)
Ehh, just because it's got one thing that's been done in one modern scenario doesn't necessarily mean that the whole scenario should be unreired. I've never played, nor read that scenario, but I understand that it had multiple problems.
Also: I GMmed a Seaso 0 scenario recently and now better understand the impetus behind retiring them - it had trouble holding together in places.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Grasshopper](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/321.jpg)
I get the gist why they are rather sucky. The initial four scenarios were good, but the quality control with the open call scenario was lacking.
As I said, I'm merely exploring the possibility. Think hypothetically. Would they be as bad as they were back then? The advanced assassin vine would hardly prove as challenging as it did back in 3.5.
I guess this gets too deep and ancient to ask, but I'll ask anyway. If you'd get to pick a retired scenario and bring it back, which would it be and why?
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Ghost](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/PZO9269-Ghost2_90.jpeg)
not all but the majority, of players have played and played long long ago
While I agree with your position about where Paizo should put it's resources, I completely disagree with this. These were retired before I started playing, a little over two years ago. My PFS number is 20826. I've just given out a couple last month that were 70000+. Even if every person before me played all of those scenarios (which obviously they didnt), then the majority still hasnt played them.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Queen Elvanna](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/PZO9072-Elvanna_500.jpeg)
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:not all but the majority, of players have played and played long long agoWhile I agree with your position about where Paizo should put it's resources, I completely disagree with this. These were retired before I started playing, a little over two years ago. My PFS number is 20826. I've just given out a couple last month that were 70000+. Even if every person before me played all of those scenarios (which obviously they didnt), then the majority still hasnt played them.
I still see no reason to keep arguing about the retired scenarios ... moot point and there are more fun and exciting scenarios out there to be played.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Goblin](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/PZO1114-GoblinKnight_90.jpeg)
I think Paizo should designate a month and open them for a limited time. Perhaps in honor of their 10 year anniversary, just so players both new and old can see how much the game has evolved in regards to mechanics, and quality. Sometimes it is fun to recreate the past and learn from the experiences.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
![Queen Elvanna](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/PZO9072-Elvanna_500.jpeg)
I think Paizo should designate a month and open them for a limited time. Perhaps in honor of their 10 year anniversary, just so players both new and old can see how much the game has evolved in regards to mechanics, and quality. Sometimes it is fun to recreate the past and learn from the experiences.
They can still be played ... just not for society credit ... so players can still see how far we've progressed...
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Imrijka](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/PZO1125-Imrijka_90.jpeg)
So an idea I had for retired scenarios:
Something I suggested locally as a store organizer is offer the concept of a character lab. It would be one slot at a game day (and not sanctioned PFS) where people could bring any PFS-legal character, but it could be any level. Like a "future" version of the character, to see how he would play out at higher levels and see if you would like to continue playing that character in sanctioned events, or a new concept that won't come into fruition until level 6, so you want to try it out before you waste all the XP on something that ends up kinda lame.
Since I didn't want to spoil any real scenarios for people who wanted to participate in this concept, my suggestion was to use the retired scenarios for the character lab slot.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Walter Sheppard Private Avatar](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/private/Private-WalterSheppard.jpg)
As I said, I'm merely exploring the possibility. Think hypothetically. Would they be as bad as they were back then? The advanced assassin vine would hardly prove as challenging as it did back in 3.5.
In just regards to this... for a home brew game of mine I once snagged some baddies from various retired scenarios; to create some interesting fights with things that my players hadn't already experienced. The advanced assassin vine in Blood at Dralkard Manor. They were APL 3 or 4. I had them get rescued by another group of travelers to avoid a TPK because this plant is so strong.
With an attack like that, and the confines of where you fight the plant in the manor, as a GM it's almost impossible not to kill a PC each round with this creature. And given it's wall-like health and defenses (AC 18, HP 114, immune electricity, resist cold 10, fire 10), it's not going down quickly. It's also a plant, so no mind-affecting control, sleep, or stun to shut it down.
I think that the amount of work required to transition some things (like this) over to Pathfinder and PFS standards would be more or less tantamount to the same amount of editing time required of new, fresh scenarios that have better plots, faction missions, and the like. There's really no point in reconstituting these old games, as I doubt it would be feasible.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
![Stone Giant](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/stone_battleCMYK.jpg)
I am sure that Mark would love the luxury of going back to all the Season 0s (save for Mists of Mwangi) and revising them. Both he and Mike are aware of the interest in this project, but it has been stated time and time again that until PFS gets a larger budget we aren't going to see these updates. Bugging Mike & Mark about it is like preaching to the choir. What we can do is recruit more local players, organize more games, be diligent about our reporting sessions, buy our PFS material from Paizo and discourage file sharing. If we aren't doing this, then don't bother requesting more scenarios be released.
I would like to see Stay of Execution revised and expanded. It had great potential and the blasted word count limit just ruined what might have been a great scenario. I also loved Blood at Dralkard Manor. It was always challenging to keep the PCs alive.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |
![Arodnap](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/Arodnap.jpg)
They can still be played ... just not for society credit ... so players can still see how far we've progressed...
Precisely. Some of these Season 0 retired adventures are great, and you can play them today. You just don't get a Chronicle sheet. That's the only difference. (Oh, and you don't lose any consumables or suffer any penalties for dying.)
I got to admit: I don't understand why the Chronicle sheet is such a big deal. At FlatCon a couple months ago, Clinton Boomer was one of the Guests of Honor. He was all set to run people through "Third Riddle" and "Hands of the Muted God". These are terrific adventures, and they were being run by the author. But because they are retired, he couldn't get any players for "Third Riddle" and he only got two of us for "Hands of the Muted God". (I was getting nervous about finding a third to make a legal table. And then realized we didn't need a legal table!) But that was the highlight of my convention experience for 2012.
Play these. Have a blast. If the GM wants to revise or tinker, go right ahead. (Ask me about what I've added to Alison McKenzie's "Stay of Execution" some time.) But play them for fun, not for character advancement.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Grasshopper](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/321.jpg)
I actually hated Third Riddle with a passion. :)
But to reiterate, I'm *NOT* bugging Mike nor Mark to somehow revise them. Hell, if either of you M&M are reading, I'll do those revisions for free if you allow me to. I don't have any credit to show though, so I doubt I ever get a chance. :D
And Chris, it is an interesting phenomena, isn't it? Organized play creates this obsessive way of constantly advancing your character, and thus all the retired scenarios would somehow be 'a waste of time'. In conventions people don't necessarily come to enjoy the scenarios but to advance their characters.
This conversation is getting a derail. No matter.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
Off in the Shower |
Ehh, just because it's got one thing that's been done in one modern scenario doesn't necessarily mean that the whole scenario should be unreired. I've never played, nor read that scenario, but I understand that it had multiple problems.
Also: I GMmed a Seaso 0 scenario recently and now better understand the impetus behind retiring them - it had trouble holding together in places.
Heard it had problems? Where? From who? I've personally never even heard that scenario mentioned before today.
Which? Why? Examples?
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Roy Greenhilt](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/Avatar_Roy.jpg)
But to reiterate, I'm *NOT* bugging Mike nor Mark to somehow revise them. Hell, if either of you M&M are reading, I'll do those revisions for free if you allow me to. I don't have any credit to show though, so I doubt I ever get a chance. :D
This brings up a point I've thought about before. We see a lot of threads on these forums about stuff we'd like to see, and frequently the response is "Paizo's employees have higher priorities". Which is fine, of course. We all want Paizo working on newer projects and putting out more new content.
But for things like re-doing retired PFS scenarios, or updating the season 0 scenarios from 3.5 to Pathfinder rules, or adding faction missions for the newer factions to season 0-2 scenarios, or even smaller stuff like fixing typos in old scenarios, why does it have to be Paizo employees doing the work? Why not use unpaid slaves... err, "volunteers"... from the community?
There would have to be standards, of course. Perhaps the finished products would have to go through a Quality Control team consisting of at least three venture officers and/or 5 star GMs before being published, to make sure everything's triple checked by people Paizo knows they can trust.
Just a thought (which might deserve its own thread).
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Arodnap](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/Arodnap.jpg)
Fromper, from what I understand, Paizo decided, very early on in the Pathfinder Society history, that everything would go through development and have a simple, but professional look. (This is in contrast to Living City, Arcanis, etc., which are fan-created and resemble Word documents.)
So, I understand that the revisions to Season 0 items have been written, some time ago, but still need to be developed and run through formatting and design.
That's not something that the volunteer base can do.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Mike Brock](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/private/MikeBrock.jpg)
Deussu wrote:
But to reiterate, I'm *NOT* bugging Mike nor Mark to somehow revise them. Hell, if either of you M&M are reading, I'll do those revisions for free if you allow me to. I don't have any credit to show though, so I doubt I ever get a chance. :D
This brings up a point I've thought about before. We see a lot of threads on these forums about stuff we'd like to see, and frequently the response is "Paizo's employees have higher priorities". Which is fine, of course. We all want Paizo working on newer projects and putting out more new content.
But for things like re-doing retired PFS scenarios, or updating the season 0 scenarios from 3.5 to Pathfinder rules, or adding faction missions for the newer factions to season 0-2 scenarios, or even smaller stuff like fixing typos in old scenarios, why does it have to be Paizo employees doing the work? Why not use unpaid slaves... err, "volunteers"... from the community?
There would have to be standards, of course. Perhaps the finished products would have to go through a Quality Control team consisting of at least three venture officers and/or 5 star GMs before being published, to make sure everything's triple checked by people Paizo knows they can trust.
Just a thought (which might deserve its own thread).
Because someone here in our offices at Redmond, WA, needs to access our database to make the changes in the files, redo layout and art, and then another edit pass since we may have typed in some info incorrectly. Even if we had all the changes for everything you mentioned above, Mark and I do not have the time to take all those changes and enter them into the files in our database here.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
![Valeros](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/PZO9435-Valeros_90.jpeg)
And when a few factions possibly end up getting the axe, do we go back and change all the scenarios yet again to reflect that?
Of ocurse! ;)
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Serpentfolk Seeker](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/PZO9040-Serpentfolk.jpg)
On a tangent, based upon DOug's suggestion, what would a kickstarter for potential extra mods in a year need to generate to continue the quality expected of PFS?
Would it be looked at, and if say 300-700 a month was generated via kickstarter, would that cover costs? I'm merely curious, as someone who writes for other campaigns, but also someone interested in the business side of publishing works.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Mike Brock](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/private/MikeBrock.jpg)
Michael Brock wrote:And when a few factions possibly end up getting the axe, do we go back and change all the scenarios yet again to reflect that?Of ocurse! ;)
** spoiler omitted **
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Baron Galdur Vendikon](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/Vendikon.jpg)
Nah you just kill faction missions, because all they do is derail the game at this point :). That is an entirely different discussion though.
Honestly, I avoid anything OGL published, it's not appropriately designed for the pathfinder system, and I don't think it has a place in organized play.
That being said, I don't think they are bad adventures, and it would be cool to update 1 season 0 scenario a month to PFRPG. It should be less work than designing/editing a whole new scenario.
it could even be "Scenario written by "Author", revised by "Author" and brought up to date with current faction missions ect.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() |
![Killian Paltreth](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/killian_color.jpg)
I'd like to see a module that awards 6 PP and 3xp for level 1 only. designed to run in 6-8 hours, that is a little more coherent of a storyline, and goes more into the backround of a pathfinder.
Like training camp, and tests by all the masters to progress you to a full fledged pathfinder :D.
There are modules that give 4 PP and 3 XP that you can play. A 6 PP module isn't likely to happen, given that PCs are not expected to get all their PP.
If you're just talking about wanting a new module revolving around being a pathfinder, well... that's unfortunately unlikely as well, because modules need to appeal to more than just PFS players.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
hogarth |
![Unicorn](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/unicorn2.jpg)
I actually loved Stay of Execution. It was my first PFS scenario, GM'd by Mike Azzolino. Shortly followed by Skeleton Moon, which was also one of my favorite PFS experiences. I would love to have a chance to run them for my local players, for credit, at some point. They are just great adventures!
I enjoyed Skeleton Moon well enough, although I believe that our GM handwaved away the
(which was almost certainly the reason the scenario got retired in the first place). So I suspect my experience was atypical.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
Off in the Shower |
Netopalis wrote:Ehh, just because it's got one thing that's been done in one modern scenario doesn't necessarily mean that the whole scenario should be unreired. I've never played, nor read that scenario, but I understand that it had multiple problems.
Also: I GMmed a Seaso 0 scenario recently and now better understand the impetus behind retiring them - it had trouble holding together in places.
Heard it had problems? Where? From who? I've personally never even heard that scenario mentioned before today.
Which? Why? Examples?
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Arodnap](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/Arodnap.jpg)
I actually loved Stay of Execution. It was my first PFS scenario, GM'd by Mike Azzolino. Shortly followed by Skeleton Moon, which was also one of my favorite PFS experiences. I would love to have a chance to run them for my local players, for credit, at some point. They are just great adventures!
Alexander,
1) Have you read "Stay of Execution," or just played it? I ask because a lot of GMs have done a great job with it, but that scenario requires the GM to invent a lot.
(For those playing along at home, "Stay of Execution" is a damn fine 'break Bob McGuffin out of jail' job, but the very tight page count requires the GM to tell the PCs that there's a prison riot going on, without giving the GM stats for any of the rioting prisoners, the guards, or giving a map of the entire prison, for that matter. It feels like it wants to be a sandbox caper scenario, but only supplies the GM with information for one narrow path of PC decisions.)
2) Why not run it for them, regardless of credit?
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Grasshopper](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/321.jpg)
Ah yes, Stay of Execution was a horrible scenario as is, but the whole idea and setting would have been top material. The final fight with the gargoyle was beyond absurd, which really broke the whole thing for me. Because of the lack of details the scenario lasted only 2 hours with a group of 6 and a lot of off-topic table talk.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Roy Greenhilt](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/Avatar_Roy.jpg)
Education psychology phrases it "external rewards extinguish internal rewards."
Are you trying to say that football players care more about the score of the game than their own physical fitness and enjoyment of playing???
I'm shocked!!! Shocked, I say! I've never heard something so scandalous!
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
![Arodnap](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/Arodnap.jpg)
One counter-intuitive ramification is that if somebody is getting a lot of satisfaction out of something you want her to be doing, don't pile on enough external rewards to extinguish that inner motivation.
A corrolary: if somebody's doing something that you find annoying, give him a dime every time he does it. After a week, stop giving him dimes. The behavior will be gone.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Goblin Baby](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/PZO9431-GoblinBaby_90.jpeg)
Chris Mortika wrote:Education psychology phrases it "external rewards extinguish internal rewards."Are you trying to say that football players care more about the score of the game than their own physical fitness and enjoyment of playing???
I'm shocked!!! Shocked, I say! I've never heard something so scandalous!
Unfortunately the Philadelphia Eagles seem to care more about physical fitness than the score.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Psionic](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/57-Psionics-Maenad.jpg)
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:They can still be played ... just not for society credit ... so players can still see how far we've progressed...Precisely. Some of these Season 0 retired adventures are great, and you can play them today. You just don't get a Chronicle sheet. That's the only difference. (Oh, and you don't lose any consumables or suffer any penalties for dying.)
I got to admit: I don't understand why the Chronicle sheet is such a big deal. At FlatCon a couple months ago, Clinton Boomer was one of the Guests of Honor. He was all set to run people through "Third Riddle" and "Hands of the Muted God". These are terrific adventures, and they were being run by the author. But because they are retired, he couldn't get any players for "Third Riddle" and he only got two of us for "Hands of the Muted God". (I was getting nervous about finding a third to make a legal table. And then realized we didn't need a legal table!) But that was the highlight of my convention experience for 2012.
Play these. Have a blast. If the GM wants to revise or tinker, go right ahead. (Ask me about what I've added to Alison McKenzie's "Stay of Execution" some time.) But play them for fun, not for character advancement.
Boomer is an awesome GM too... a lot of people robbed themselves of an amazing time.
Chronicles are there to enhance enjoyment over the long term, but sacrificing a great play session over that is ridiculous.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![Halgrak](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/halgrak_color.jpg)
Are you trying to say that football players care more about the score of the game than their own physical fitness and enjoyment of playing???
I'm shocked!!! Shocked, I say! I've never heard something so scandalous!
Back in the day, Michael Jordan's contract was written to allow him to play basketball any time that he wanted and he was known for showing up to pick up games all over Chicago. So yes some people also play for the enjoyment of playing.