|
Not sure if this is the correct spot or not.
The other day 2 of us were talking and noticed we had the same chronicle sheet. But it had been awhile and we couldn't remember anything about 'Black Waters' until we asked around.
There is quite a bit of blank space on the chronicle sheets. Seems reasonable to include at least a sketchy outline to jog people memory.
If you are worried about spoilers, you could keep it at the set-up level of detail. You know something along the lines of the basic intro that is on a module back cover.
|
There is quite a bit of blank space on the chronicle sheets. Seems reasonable to include at least a sketchy outline to jog people memory.
If you are worried about spoilers, you could keep it at the set-up level of detail. You know something along the lines of the basic intro that is on a module back cover.
It might be challenging for the higher level sheets that often have long laundry-lists of items, but I think this is a awesome idea. I'm sure that Mike Brock will see this thread, but I will point him to it just in case.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The other day 2 of us were talking and noticed we had the same chronicle sheet. But it had been awhile and we couldn't remember anything about 'Black Waters' until we asked around.
You actually bring up a good example of a larger issue. I don't remember much of anything about Black Waters either. I realized awhile back, though, that a large amount of PFS content is just not very memorable. The scenarios themselves, by and large, are so full of routine combats, with very generic "go through the dungeon and clear the rooms" structures, such that it's really on the GM to make the scenarios much more than a tactical boardgame.
In other words, don't feel bad about not remembering the unmemorable.
And of course, if the scenarios were memorable, there would be no need for outlines of the scenarios to placed on the Chronicles to jog the players' memories.
-Matt
|
|
In other words, don't feel bad about not remembering the unmemorable
Maybe I'm reading too much into your "tone," always a dangerous thing to do in a messageboard, but you seem disappointed in the quality of PFS scenarios going all the way back to early season zero. If so, why would you continue to play and GM (you have three stars)? Please understand I am not trying to attack you, its just that I often hear players complain about one aspect of PFS or another, yet they continue to play. I know that if I wasn't enjoying myself, I would do something else.
IMO, the nature of limited time slots and a small window of allowance to pursue "fringe" aspects of the game system can make for some level of "rinse and repeat," but I think it is largely up to the players and their GM to be creative and bring the scenarios to life. YMMV
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe I'm reading too much into your "tone," always a dangerous thing to do in a messageboard, but you seem disappointed in the quality of PFS scenarios going all the way back to early season zero. If so, why would you continue to play and GM (you have three stars)?
I was wondering how quickly someone would ask that. I have actually given this matter quite some thought.
Like many other organized-play participants, my life, and the lives of my gamer-friends, just do not accommodate very much beyond the organized-play format. Homegames and Adventure Paths require a lot of preparation and coordination, whereas organized-play requires very little. Just show up, game for six hours, then go home knowing that you will not have to wrangle the group together again for the next session. No waiting for the right people to have the right availability for the next session to occur. Even preparation of a scenario is easy. All I have to do is examine what is provided to me, the self-contained scenario, instead of having to spend many hours preparing a homegame session or an Adventure Path session, hours I just do not have.
In other words, it's hard for adults with jobs, families, and commitments to get together. It often takes a wedding. Or a funeral.
The organized-play format is perfect. Also, I have a tremendous amount of fun playing my character, and interacting with other players who put forth the effort to play a character that is interesting to interact with. This fun is entirely outside what is printed in the scenarios themselves, however, as the scenarios are, by and large, very generic, overly routine-combat-heavy, unsuitable as an exploration of canon, and lacking in character-developing situations. The scenarios are just not very memorable.
Behind the GM screen, I have a great deal of fun with using my own GMing abilities to attempt to make the scenarios much more interesting than they are on paper. Any chance I get to create tension, pretend that the PCs' actions have meaning, insert bits of Golarion canon, encourage in-character interaction, treat the PCs as more than the Decemvirate's instruments of murder, and immerse my players in a world, I seize.
Thirdly, Paizo has been very good at stringing me along with hints of future improvement. Every once in awhile, I see a bit of news in a blog, a post by Mike or Mark, or a scenario which gets me excited for the future. In Season 2, it was the Shadow Lodge as well as the departure of Josh Frost and with him seven-fight scenarios. The Dalsine Affair being so head-and-shoulders above anything that came before really helped here. In Season 3, it was the promise of a Ruby Phoenix plot, a plot which really didn't pan out due not enough dedication to the plot and due to the sudden mid-season 180 from the tournament to the Hao Jin Tapestry. Red Harvest, Temple of Empyreal Enlightenment, and God's Market Gamble were very hinting of good things to come, however. In Season 4, I was tantalized by the idea of more in-depth faction missions.
However, we're into the fifth year of the campaign now, and the pace of improvement has been quite sluggish. I guess I just have to understand that though the PFS format is perfect for me, I also desire a style of gaming that Paizo is just not interested in providing. Instead of innovation, we just get more generic material, even beyond what is published in PFS. I point to Not-Actually-Ultimate Equipment-Reprints, Mythic Arithmetic, and Ultimate Campaign (Do we really need printed rules to play teenage characters? Is that the best you guys can come up with to take up your page count?) as examples. Even the APs are proving to be combat-heavy dungeonfests, as I am slowly learning.
You are correct, Bob, in that it's really on the GM and players to bring the scenarios to life. However, a memorable scenario has memorable content. I distinctly recall being actually brought to tears by the Living Greyhawk scenarios HIG5-03 All Good Things, GEO3-06 Rite of Eternal Spring, and GEO5-08 Sorrow as Deep as Night. These were scenarios played nearly a decade ago, and they have proven to be more memorable than all but a tiny number of my PFS experiences, simply because of passionate writers who didn't let the constraints of time slots and page counts to stop them from delivering character-driven, dramatic conflicts presented in a coherent, visible world where the PCs were characters who could feel involved in the stories and whose actions were meaningful. Memorable stories take center stage, instead of making the drudgery of combat the centerpiece of the scenario.
It's not about pursuing "fringe" aspects of the gaming system, it's just about good storytelling. PFS has a great format going for it, but the memories are not generated by the scenarios; you have to do that yourself.
Or you can ask the campaign staff to do it for you with an outline on the Chronicle.
-Matt
|
|
Matt, I get where you're coming from and when I've been at my most disillusioned with organised play, I've thought some the same things.
Can I clarify some of your concerns? It seems like you don't like missions where there is simply an A to B. For instance, quest for Perfection 1, you go from base camp to the monastery and recover the macguffin. You don't seem to like these kind of missions.
However for a mission you like, Red Harvest, the party has a choice to aid two factions, or, if they have an excellent GM presiding, the party can somehow creatively develop a method of the peasants gaining independence, or, at the very least, the promise of a responsible leader to be dispatched to the settlement. But that relies on a great GM to prepare beforehand and deviate from the limited words as written. This is something we are told not to do. Do not deviate from the module! Do not let the party expend more resources than they would normally! (Doesn't matter if they have played up so many times their wealth per level is far higher than it should be)
It seems from your experience, memories are generated by player choice. Player choice is being impeded by restricted word counts and a great number of 'a-to-b' scenarios.
|
Not sure what I want to say, but here's what I wrote:
I see Pathfinder Society scenarios as the short stories of the Paizo adventure world (with modules being novellas, and APs being full-on novels). As a writer you have one, or at most two ideas you can develop within the adventure, and you generally can't cram it full of too many characters. You get very little room for exposition or character development; the 4-5 hour play format simply can't hold it. The best you can do is quickly draw the players in, introduce a few characters, present the players with an obstacle, and then (hopefully) give them a few choices for overcoming this obstacle in a way that doesn't make them feel completely rail-roaded, bored, or overwhelmed.
Telling this kind of a story concisely while still making it interesting is hard work. In addition you also have to create an adventure that pleases both the hack-and-slashers as well as those who enjoy flexing their role-playing muscles. That requires the ability to write memorable NPCs, combined with an interesting setting, and thrilling, yet not overpowered combats. That's quite a tricky balance!
So what am I saying? PFS scenarios are hard to write. Sometimes they are great, and you come away from them with an experience you will remember for a long time. Other times they are less great, and in those cases you hope to play them with a group of people you like (or at least respect) that enjoy some of the same things in an RPG that you do, or where you can at least collaborate to tell a story that everyone can enjoy.
|
Contributor
|
This could be a productive discussion.
Matt (and others), given the peculiarities and limitations of organized play (the unavoidable necessities of campaign rules and discrete five hour games, I mean), what specific suggestions do you have that could make for more memorable play?
I'll start with an easy one. Fewer factions. The reason it's easy, of course, is that it's apparently already in the works. The onus on the writers to come up with TEN different interesting side-quests strikes me as a pretty heavy one, and that might be creative time and energy spent elsewhere.
Now a hard one. I wonder if there might be some way to reward players who invested in the campaign world more. There's already a start towards this with the Chronicles earned by buying and reading the novels in the Pathfinder Tales line, but maybe something like that could also be put in place for the Pathfinder Player Companion line? I mean, the extra player options in those products (feats, traits, what-have-you) are already kind of a reward in and of themselves, but I guess I'm trying to come up with something that rewarded players for learning more "lore" about Golarion, which seems to me to immediately enrich any playing experience.
What else?
|
|
I don't think getting players to buy more products will necessarily lead to a richer experience.
I think you need Venture Officers that stress to players the roleplay aspect of the game, and the need to develop rich, realistic characters who will need to interact in social situations such as investigations, diplomacy and intrigue. Essentially what we have now is a game that punishes players that don't know how to make a combat ready character, but will give a free pass to players who don't know how to make a roleplay ready character.
If you don't know how to fight effectively, you die. If you don't know how to roleplay, you get skipped to the combat. Doesn't seem fair and it leads to meaningless violence in PFS.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Back to the OP's idea about summaries on chronicle sheets: I would love something like that. I have played so many scenarios with so many different characters that I have trouble remember which is which sometimes too. And occasionally it is because the scenario isn't very memorable (although that tends not to be the case-we have some very talented local GMs and a lot of strong role-players around here), but usually it's just because I've played SO MANY scenarios. I've thought about jotting down notes after the game but I'm usually in a rush to get home and get some sleep before classes the next morning.
As a GM, I've started making a point to write memorable comments on at least one character's chronicle sheet, if not on everyone's. A few examples below.
|
|
... Chronicles earned by buying and reading the novels in the Pathfinder Tales line ...What is this?
Most (all?) of the novels have an associated PFS chronicle sheet, which gives a small bonus (typically a one-time bonus) that's thematically related to the story of that novel. You can have any PFS GM sign off on the chronicle, as long as you also show them your copy of the novel. (And, as far as I can tell, you can have one such chronicle from each novel for each one of your PCs).
|
|
... Chronicles earned by buying and reading the novels in the Pathfinder Tales line ...What is this?
If you own a Pathfinder Tales novel you can download a chronicle sheet for it that contains a boon. You can print off a chronicle sheet for every one of your characters. Just show the book to a GM and have them sign off on the chronicle sheet and then copy it enough times for all of your characters to have one.
Developer
|
This could be a productive discussion.
Very productive indeed! I run a mean combat when the time comes, but deep down I love good role-playing opportunities and a great story. I will go into some more detail in the blog that should be going up in about a week, but I will look forward to reading more of everyone's ideas, critiques, and observations in this thread.
Keep it coming.
|
|
This could be a productive discussion.Very productive indeed! I run a mean combat when the time comes, but deep down I love good role-playing opportunities and a great story. I will go into some more detail in the blog that should be going up in about a week, but I will look forward to reading more of everyone's ideas, critiques, and observations in this thread.
Keep it coming.
John: maybe this is out of your reach, but see my suggestions concerning the recent PFS sanctioning of APs here.
|
Contributor
|
I don't think getting players to buy more products will necessarily lead to a richer experience.
I think you need Venture Officers that stress to players the roleplay aspect of the game, and the need to develop rich, realistic characters who will need to interact in social situations such as investigations, diplomacy and intrigue. Essentially what we have now is a game that punishes players that don't know how to make a combat ready character, but will give a free pass to players who don't know how to make a roleplay ready character.
If you don't know how to fight effectively, you die. If you don't know how to roleplay, you get skipped to the combat. Doesn't seem fair and it leads to meaningless violence in PFS.
For what it's worth, my experience of PFS gameplay doesn't map on to your description very well.
But, as to "getting players to buy more products" I take your point. I guess what I'm thinking is that the role-playing experience grows richer and more immersive when more players have good "world knowledge" to both build backgrounds for their characters and to enrich on-the-ground experience of the various settings Pathfinders get sent to. I'm struggling, though, to come up with a way to encourage/reward players for seeking out that world knowledge (which seems self-rewarding to me, but I'm not one who needs encouragement to do so). Thoughts?
|
|
I guess what I'm thinking is that the role-playing experience grows richer and more immersive when more players have good "world knowledge" to both build backgrounds for their characters and to enrich on-the-ground experience of the various settings Pathfinders get sent to. I'm struggling, though, to come up with a way to encourage/reward players for seeking out that world knowledge (which seems self-rewarding to me, but I'm not one who needs encouragement to do so). Thoughts?
I agree absolutely and that is the reason I love the Inner Sea World Guide so much and have started collecting some Player Companions and Campaign Setting books as well. As for how to get others to do the same, I don't have any big ideas. Yet. As a new player for the first couple months all of the setting material went right over my head and it was a bit overwhelming. I would have loved some incentive to learn more during those first couple months. Now that I have learned more my role-play experience has been greatly enriched. And that's why I encourage new players to explore the world a bit more. I know that when I'm GMing I sometimes try to talk a little about the country or city they are traveling to, especially if there are newer players at my table. Afterwards I encourage them to pick up ISWG to learn more. And when I'm playing I talk about my character's backstory and explain their country of origin to those unfamiliar. But I think new players are sometimes so overwhelmed with character creation and rules (and especially PFS-specific rules) that the setting material just doesn't sink in. I don't know but I hope you come up with something brilliant. I have a feeling someone will.
|
I think that leading by example is a good way to help roleplay become more meaningful. I have a few players who really enjoy roleplaying, and they roleplay each of their characters differently, as that separate character. So if I’m GM’ing a table with a bunch of people who haven’t showed an inclination to roleplay much, and one or two who do, the roleplayers get more face time, because I roleplay the VC briefing, the question and answers, the different encounters with them.
It becomes more difficult when you have a whole table full of great roleplayers, but then that becomes really fun.
My recent running of Blakros Matrimony had 3 brand new folk playing pregens, and two others who were really good roleplayers, and my wife, who roleplays well, but tends not to be very vocal at the table.
I really hammed it up with the two roleplayers, which drew the new folk in 100%, they bought in, and hammed it up with us, and my wife felt more comfortable being more vocal with her roleplay.
It made for the most enjoyable GM’ing experience to date in organized play for me, and all the players really, really enjoyed it, including the two great roleplayers declaring it was their favorite session of Pathfinder Society to date.
All I did, was what I always do, I roleplayed with the roleplayers, and got lucky that everyone else bought in.
Some scenarios, of course, lend themselves to this quite a bit more. This might have been quite a bit more difficult if I tried to do it with say Rebels Ransom (although there are some opportunities early on).
I find that it’s a rare war-gamer who doesn’t want to roleplay that plays PFS regularly (and continues to do so) that doesn’t roleplay because they don’t like to. They just typically haven’t been exposed to good roleplay. If you expose them to it, and they have fun with it, or see others having a blast with it, they most likely will want to join in on the fun.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
^This. I had the same experience playing Blackros Matrimony. It lends itself to good role play but by me (and a couple other good role players-including the GM) really getting into it, we got some decent role play out of a guy I'd never seen do much role play before. Murder on the Throaty Mermaid is another good one to try to bring out role playing.
|
|
Wow, sometimes it's really wierd to watch a thread warp.
But this one is still an interesting discussion (as opposed to the child's flame war that I often see).
I have kinda mixed feelings on the current topic. I would say that our local PFS tends to have a bit less Role Play than I would like to see. Not a lot less, but a little bit less.
However, I would say that is mostly a side effect of some good things.
1) New players - We have a fairly high fraction of new players that are still struggling to learn the rules. They tend to be less comfortable with that aspect for awhile. Most should get better as time goes by.
But it is [u]great[/u] to have new players.
2) Environment - We often have 5 tables with 7 people at each table. Total of 35 people with alot of them talking at the same time. The noise level gets pretty high. Sometimes it is difficult to say role play begging a noble for help when you have to shout to be heard or ask to repeat himself 3 times. I've noticed more happens when we only have 3 tables going. There has been talk of splitting it to fewer tables every weekend rather than a bunch every other weekend. I don't know if that will happen or help.
But again, it is wonderful that our group is growing this large.
3) Time - This is not so good, but I don't know how to get around it. Several of the scenarios we have struggled to get completed even going an hour overtime. This is especially true when we have several new players. So we sometimes find ourselves rushing through entertaining RP opportunities (even if we don't need to) because we're afraid we won't get done in time. Before hand we as players have no way of knowing if this will be a quick one or if we will be pushed for time.
Recently we had one where we all thought we would spend a bunch of time investigating before we found our target. So we were really pushing through some conversations. But we apparently just happened to pick the exact perfect choices. We were astonished when we had succeeded in 2 hours and 10 minutes.
As I said, I see no real way to get around this.
|
|
In my experience, sessions have been a mixed bag. Some have been excellent and a lot of fun to play/run. Some have been run of the mill, not particularly memorable. Some have been disappointing. I read reviews and discussion threads before I buy. I really try to select the scenarios I think will be enjoyable.
Question: Who is responsible for the scenario being memorable, the Author or GM?
Answer: Both.
The author needs to provide a scenario with plot hooks and opportunities for creativity. Then the GM needs to run with it to enhance and give life to the experience. Blakros Matrimony is a great example. With a prepared GM, it can really shine, but it is also possible to turn the social interactions into a mechanical dice fest and blow through the first half of the scenario. I played in Gods Market Gamble. I recognize it as a well written scenario and I am looking forward to running it myself. However, the GM I played under did a couple of things that left a bad taste in my mouth. A good scenario, but a bad GM can ruin it.
On the flip side there is just so much the average GM can do with a scenario that gives him nothing to run with. With a boring scenario the GM needs to do extra preparation and go over the top to make it memorable. It requires a lot of extra work that the average GM just does not have the time/world knowledge to do.
Thought: The impression I get from some of the scenarios is that the author turned in their product, and it was published weather it was good or not. IMO, the folks in charge of PFS need to review the content of a scenario, not just do editing and layout. Then if it’s not a decent scenario, go back to the author and say “This is not good enough here, and here. Redo it.” If you are responsible for what PFS puts out, then be responsible for the quality of the story you are telling as well. Admittedly, I don’t know how the actual writing/editing process works, and I know there is a hard time line laid out for publication so doing this may be more difficult that I make it sound.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Idea: What if we add a Player Handout to all new scenarios called “Things Pathfinders Know”? This can be handed out to players to add to the setting and background of the things they experience. It could briefly give a history of the area and a couple points about culture. It could give a couple things about the VC you are working for. It could mention important points about organizations or well known items you will be dealing with, like the Aspis or the Tapestry. This would be a great way to get new players rolling quickly, and then you don’t have to have the GM or the VC explain things like everyone is a new recruit. I always thought that seemed a little out of character for the VCs when they explain stuff that everyone they are talking to should already know.
|
|
Idea: What if we add a Player Handout to all new scenarios called “Things Pathfinders Know”?
Not a big fan of this idea. It benefits, really, only the people who dump intelligence and/or don't take knowledge skills. And then it makes those who do have those knowledge skills wonder why they spent skill points for those knowledge skills.
|
|
Not a big fan of this idea. It benefits, really, only the people who dump intelligence and/or don't take knowledge skills. And then it makes those who do have those knowledge skills wonder why they spent skill points for those knowledge skills.
Idea: What if we add a Player Handout to all new scenarios called “Things Pathfinders Know”?
Not sure, but I think he means the things everyone knows even if they didn't take knowledge ranks. Chelaxians have a reputation for devil worship. Andorens hate slavers. Mwangi are tribesmen in uncivilized areas.
This would be to help the new players that don't have the guides memorized yet.|
|
Idea: What if we add a Player Handout to all new scenarios called “Things Pathfinders Know”?
Not a big fan of this idea. It benefits, really, only the people who dump intelligence and/or don't take knowledge skills. And then it makes those who do have those knowledge skills wonder why they spent skill points for those knowledge skills.
If it covers the things that repeatedly get brought up in scenarios, like Aspis and Tapestry, then I think it's useful because it can reduce the amount of redundant filler time in scenarios. If it's much more than that, I agree with you.
Personally, I would like to see each briefing be presented in a printed letter, with a note from the relevant VC to meet at their office at such and such time to discuss any questions. These can be handed out prior to the session start to each player, they can get the gist of what's going on for the day, they can formulate a few questions, and then they can go off to the meeting.
This would cover the request to give a blurb about the scenario, wouldn't give away anything within the purview of knowledge skills, and would save table time, which can be repurposed into something interesting. There are only so many times that I can listen to a description of the newest McGuffin to fetch before I feel like I've wasted 10 minutes more of my life on a GM monologue.
|
|
Not a big fan of this idea. It benefits, really, only the people who dump intelligence and/or don't take knowledge skills. And then it makes those who do have those knowledge skills wonder why they spent skill points for those knowledge skills.
Idea: What if we add a Player Handout to all new scenarios called “Things Pathfinders Know”?
Not sure, but I think he means the things everyone knows even if they didn't take knowledge ranks. Chelaxians have a reputation for devil worship. Andorens hate slavers. Mwangi are tribesmen in uncivilized areas.
This would be to help the new players that don't have the guides memorized yet.
As a GM, I do that anyways.
|
|
Indeed, I’m not talking about giving specific information that would replace a Knowledge check. I would not support that. I’m talking about information to set the stage. This VC has a reputation for such-and–such. The country you are going to allows slavery and primarily worships (god’s name). This time of year is the rainy season in (country). The current relationship between the society and the Aspis, in general. What the Tapestry is and how we got it, because every Pathfinder should know that, even if you have a 7 Int.
Nothing that would take away an in-game advantage for your Int based characters, just something that gives new players the knowledge and background that their character are assumed to have.
I also like Serisan’s suggestion.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Idea: What if we add a Player Handout to all new scenarios called “Things Pathfinders Know”?
Not a big fan of this idea. It benefits, really, only the people who dump intelligence and/or don't take knowledge skills. And then it makes those who do have those knowledge skills wonder why they spent skill points for those knowledge skills.
MAybe not for each scenario, but a general 'welcome to the Pathfinder Society, We hope you survive the experience.' Written in the nice flowing method of Society propoganda to give new players the Society's name/mission statement/general background. Not the "There are 10 masked members who are called the Decembervate. They are all Veiled Masters." Kind of stuff, but the "what pathfinders do, and why we're so awesome."
|
|
As a GM, I do that anyways.
Right, but if you didn’t need to do that it would save time at the table to get into the story. And you would not be boring the players that already know it all.
Also, I would not count you in the class of ‘Average GMs’. You have more world information and society background than the majority of GMs. Sometimes GMs don’t know the information themselves, or they don’t think to bring it up unless a player asks for it. Many players would not know to ask, or may not want to speak up about it.
|
|
Idea: What if we add a Player Handout to all new scenarios called “Things Pathfinders Know”?
Not a big fan of this idea. It benefits, really, only the people who dump intelligence and/or don't take knowledge skills. And then it makes those who do have those knowledge skills wonder why they spent skill points for those knowledge skills.
I think the point was missed, with all due respect. The discussion is how to make the scenarios more immersive in a role-playing sense. Generally, before a mission, wound it not make sense to give a basic synopsis of the history of the region and key players, general lay of the land, ect.?
|
|
... I think the point was missed, with all due respect. The discussion is how to make the scenarios more immersive in a role-playing sense. Generally, before a mission, wound it not make sense to give a basic synopsis of the history of the region and key players, general lay of the land, ect.?
With all due respect, the discussion origianlly was 'can we get a short description on the chronicle sheet.'
Just kidding. I actually like where this has gone.
I believe some of this may be due to the comments on lack of time and/or new players not having some of the information that their in-game PC's would have.
|
|
I am fairly new to PFS and the problem I have run into is, wanting to learn as much as I can about the setting and the story arcs, yet not have scenarios spoiled before I play them, hence a one page "briefing" would be helpful and relevant.
P.S. Sorry to reinforce the derail, I just thought since the thread had John Compton's attention that it would be a good place to act as a soundboard. Unfortunately, I think the onus of descriptions should fall to the players if they want to remember the scenario. The OP has caused me to print off the scenario descriptions and file them with my chronicles, so thank you for the great idea!
|
As a GM, I've started making a point to write memorable comments on at least one character's chronicle sheet, if not on everyone's.
I love this, and it is indeed a great way to make the scenario live on in the players mind. I was almost able to write 'Owes a debt of gratitude to the Sczarni' on the chronicle of a paladin recently.
However, in a way you are handing out unofficial, minor boons. What if one of the players waves their chronicle in front of a different GM in future and asks what bonus it gives them? I'm torn.
|
|
As a GM, I've started making a point to write memorable comments on at least one character's chronicle sheet, if not on everyone's.I love this, and it is indeed a great way to make the scenario live on in the players mind. I was almost able to write 'Owes a debt of gratitude to the Sczarni' on the chronicle of a paladin recently.
However, in a way you are handing out unofficial, minor boons. What if one of the players waves their chronicle in front of a different GM in future and asks what bonus it gives them? I'm torn.
Answer: There is no bonus.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
As a GM, I've started making a point to write memorable comments on at least one character's chronicle sheet, if not on everyone's.I love this, and it is indeed a great way to make the scenario live on in the players mind. I was almost able to write 'Owes a debt of gratitude to the Sczarni' on the chronicle of a paladin recently.
However, in a way you are handing out unofficial, minor boons. What if one of the players waves their chronicle in front of a different GM in future and asks what bonus it gives them? I'm torn.
Generally, they're something fun or silly that happened during the scenario. The idea is that, if it comes up at all, it can be a nice bit of roleplaying fluff. As an example, one of my players once purchased a bogus artifact of Cayden Cailean for 10 sp, and it was included on their chronicle. I'd imagine that it could be a bit of a funny thing if he were ever to show it to a cleric or inquisitor of Cailean.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
As a GM, I've started making a point to write memorable comments on at least one character's chronicle sheet, if not on everyone's.I love this, and it is indeed a great way to make the scenario live on in the players mind. I was almost able to write 'Owes a debt of gratitude to the Sczarni' on the chronicle of a paladin recently.
However, in a way you are handing out unofficial, minor boons. What if one of the players waves their chronicle in front of a different GM in future and asks what bonus it gives them? I'm torn.
a player for me in a game of Gods Market Gamble bought "a worn silver coin, direct from the coin purse of Abadar! you have my Gar-In-Tee of it!" as the chronicle says, it insures that "5% of his attack rolls are natural 20s! over the live of the holder, or double your money back!"
;)
Nice. My story, of course, is from the same scenario. Other products on offer: Iomedae's Impenetrable Chastity Belt, Pharasma's Eyeliner of Deeper Darkness, and Shelyn's Opera Glasses
|
|
As a GM, I've started making a point to write memorable comments on at least one character's chronicle sheet, if not on everyone's.I love this, and it is indeed a great way to make the scenario live on in the players mind. I was almost able to write 'Owes a debt of gratitude to the Sczarni' on the chronicle of a paladin recently.
However, in a way you are handing out unofficial, minor boons. What if one of the players waves their chronicle in front of a different GM in future and asks what bonus it gives them? I'm torn.
People above already clarified this, but you'll notice my little comments never have a mechanical benefit. It's just so the player can go, "look, I killed someone by singing a wrong note!" or "Hey, we're in Geb? I'm a minor celebrity here, I once saved the town of Geb's Rest. . . "
It's nothing more than roleplay fluff. Now it does say somewhere deep in the rules that GMs are allowed to give bonuses to things like Diplomacy for good roleplaying and other circumstances and these bonuses are often even written directly into scenarios. So it is fully within a GM's power to say, "Oh, you're a celebrity in Geb? Well, maybe I'll give you a +1 to all your Diplomacy checks then." But they don't have to and that's the point. I mainly just do it to make the scenario a little more memorable and my local players know that.
|
|
What happens when you write something negative on a player's chronicle sheet?
"Physically scarred by a night hag in a terrifying ambush."
"Watched his brother be driven insane by a Gibbering Mouther."
"Saw his best friend dismembered by Salt Mummies."
"Now on the bad side of Grandmaster Torch after a particularly rude joke involving bathtubs."
Does the player generally have a tantrum?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What happens when you write something negative on a player's chronicle sheet?
"Physically scarred by a night hag in a terrifying ambush."
"Watched his brother be driven insane by a Gibbering Mouther."
"Saw his best friend dismembered by Salt Mummies."
"Now on the bad side of Grandmaster Torch after a particularly rude joke involving bathtubs."Does the player generally have a tantrum?
Once a wizard murdered a bunch of people (not complete innocents, but the violence was unnecessary) in a scenario where the Pathfinders already have to stand trial in Qadira and then teleported to Absalom while using magic jar to possess the body of an Erinyes, cradling the corpse of his normal body in his arms. He didn't return for the rest of the scenario. Hilarity ensued at the trial, as the PCs blamed everything on the wizard. The Qadirans let the PCs go in exchange for being deputized to extradite the wizard to Qadira if they get a chance, which I wrote as a boon. The wizard got "wanted to stand trial for murder in Qadira" and I explained to everyone that the Venture Captains pulled a few strings with Aaqir al Hakam to make sure the Qadirans won't push the claim unless he goes to Qadira again. Because of the necessity of pulling in political favors which could be revoked, I also gave him the boon of being on a short leash of the Venture Captains. The player seemed to really enjoy the boon and roll with the punches, and the wizard has shaped up his act. Last time I saw him he was planar binding Hound Archons and agreeing to abide by the paladin's code of Torag in exchange for their help. I know the others still grin about that deputized boon occasionally, mentioning sometimes "Well you're lucky this last mission's in Tian Xia, since if it was Qadira...".
So sometimes players enjoy the negative boons too. Especially if they're related to the infamy of their character.
|
|
What happens when you write something negative on a player's chronicle sheet?
"Physically scarred by a night hag in a terrifying ambush."
"Watched his brother be driven insane by a Gibbering Mouther."
"Saw his best friend dismembered by Salt Mummies."
"Now on the bad side of Grandmaster Torch after a particularly rude joke involving bathtubs."Does the player generally have a tantrum?
Player's I've run seem to enjoy it. Including:
"Married to Skagra the shewish goblin in a shotgun (well, firework) ceremony""Owes a favor to a devil"
"Lost left pinky toe to a dimensional mishap"
"Will never be able to get another job in Magnimar as long as s/he lives"
The only player who was upset (and I can understand why) was:
"Forced alignment change to Lawful Neutral [for the paladin], after making a deal with a devil."