|
I'll just throw this in and say I'm much opposed to this. Many scenarios already have 2 faction missions, and the ones with only one mission give you a free point just for finishing the scenario. This is from someone who has missed out an a good few faction mission because I didn't put enough ranks in Linguistics or just barely missed the Diplo roll. Hell, I down-right failed one scenario and got zero Fame or gold. It happens. The point is to make due with what you have.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
this is from the society guide
Alternatively, beginning with Season 4, each faction has
a specific goal it hopes to achieve by the end of the season.
A PC who undertakes a creative approach to forward this
goal outside of the prescribed faction mission may earn 1
Prestige Point for doing so in place of the Prestige Point
gained for the assigned faction mission, at the GM’s
discretion. See page 19 for details on all 10 faction goals
for Season 4.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You really need to relax. Enjoy yourself. All this focus on WBL, PP and making sure that you milk every last ounce of optimization out of your character can be very distracting. Make an interesting character that is somewhat effective at combat, and I promise that they will be unbelievably more fun to play than a fighter archer whose only personality trait is their DPS.
|
|
You really need to relax. Enjoy yourself. All this focus on WBL, PP and making sure that you milk every last ounce of optimization out of your character can be very distracting. Make an interesting character that is somewhat effective at combat, and I promise that they will be unbelievably more fun to play than a fighter archer whose only personality trait is their DPS.
Not everyone enjoys the game like you. I enjoy maximizing my character and roleplaying him. You can have a huge DPS fighter and make him still fun to play. If he is looking for advice on how he wants to play, not to be judged by you for how you like to play.
|
You really need to relax. Enjoy yourself. All this focus on WBL, PP and making sure that you milk every last ounce of optimization out of your character can be very distracting. Make an interesting character that is somewhat effective at combat, and I promise that they will be unbelievably more fun to play than a fighter archer whose only personality trait is their DPS.Not everyone enjoys the game like you. I enjoy maximizing my character and roleplaying him. You can have a huge DPS fighter and make him still fun to play. If he is looking for advice on how he wants to play, not to be judged by you for how you like to play.
The OP doesn't seem to be looking for advice; he's requesting a change in the way the campaign operates so that it's possible for all characters to have max fame.
I enjoy making optimized characters, but I agree with Netopalis that you certainly shouldn't focus primarily on whether your WBL is correct.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
You really need to relax. Enjoy yourself. All this focus on WBL, PP and making sure that you milk every last ounce of optimization out of your character can be very distracting. Make an interesting character that is somewhat effective at combat, and I promise that they will be unbelievably more fun to play than a fighter archer whose only personality trait is their DPS.Not everyone enjoys the game like you. I enjoy maximizing my character and roleplaying him. You can have a huge DPS fighter and make him still fun to play. If he is looking for advice on how he wants to play, not to be judged by you for how you like to play.
Well, paradoxically, if you are a huge fan of combat, you really shouldn't be going for a higher WBL. Why? Because it will make those combats extremely easy, and make your tactical choices irrelevant. The game is harder tactically and strategically when you are given less.
|
You may only earn at most 2 PP per Secnario, 4 PP per Module, and 1 PP for Free RPG Day Modules.
You have the option of doing something that will advance your Factions overall goals instead of attempting the Faction mission in the Scenario.
For older Scenarios with two Faction missions listed, you must complete both to earn both PP. The overall success of the Scenario mission does not matter for those Scenarios.
And while I can not speak for the campaign leadership, I'm guessing that allowing characters to earn more than 2 PP in a Scenario is not going to happen unless it comes in the form of a Convention boon or somesuch.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
You really need to relax. Enjoy yourself. All this focus on WBL, PP and making sure that you milk every last ounce of optimization out of your character can be very distracting. Make an interesting character that is somewhat effective at combat, and I promise that they will be unbelievably more fun to play than a fighter archer whose only personality trait is their DPS.You really need to save the sermon. Especially when you have no idea what you're talking about. My main character is a human ranger who took Fast Learner and is taking Improvisation. I also gave him a 14 INT so he'd have extra skill points.
So instead of judging others and trying to tell them how to play the game, just focus on you.
All I'm saying is that you're not sacrificing *that* much to do a module. If you're really so worried about 2 PP that you wouldn't play a module, then you might want to reconsider why you play PFS. If you are the sort of person who takes those sort of traits, then I can imagine that you would *love* modules like Carrion Hill, The Harrowing, Masks of the Living God, etc. Why should 2 PP prevent you from playing them?
|
|
I do think that Fame is a major issue for certain types of characters (ones who don't use weapons and armor and thus can't get something out of the always available and also don't have a spellbook, so mostly sorcerers) until about 18 Fame. I would think twice about applying module credit to a sorcerer, though this has been somewhat lessened by the addition of Ring of Spell Knowledge, which is a reasonable sorcerer item to buy before 18 Fame. After 18 Fame, you'd have to be playing up through the roof or else randomly saving up for one huge item for ages before you run into fame issues. For instance, level 9 WBL is 46,000 gold. That's about what you'll have if you haven't been playing up to 10-11s as a level 8. And with max prestige you are able to buy a 41,000 gold item and 1 away from enough for a 54,000 gold item. So if you play up to a 10-11 and get almost 8k in your first adventure at level 9 and you eke out every single prestige point, you can maybe buy an item that costs all of your money. Now if you failed every single mission, having 24 prestige and only being able to buy 8000 gold items would sting quite a bit. Even if you only succeeded half your missions, on hitting level 9 you would have the prestige to spend 23000 gold on one item, which is half your money on one item.
So in summary, I think the system works perfectly fine, and there's no need to scrounge for every point of prestige (except at low levels it's brutal if you don't want something that's always available).
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
All I'm saying is that you're not sacrificing *that* much to do a module. If you're really so worried about 2 PP that you wouldn't play a module, then you might want to reconsider why you play PFS. If you are the sort of person who takes those sort of traits, then I can imagine that you would *love* modules like Carrion Hill, The Harrowing, Masks of the Living God, etc. Why should 2 PP prevent you from playing them?You really need to relax. Enjoy yourself. All this focus on WBL, PP and making sure that you milk every last ounce of optimization out of your character can be very distracting. Make an interesting character that is somewhat effective at combat, and I promise that they will be unbelievably more fun to play than a fighter archer whose only personality trait is their DPS.You really need to save the sermon. Especially when you have no idea what you're talking about. My main character is a human ranger who took Fast Learner and is taking Improvisation. I also gave him a 14 INT so he'd have extra skill points.
So instead of judging others and trying to tell them how to play the game, just focus on you.
That has nothing to do with what you said. Now you're back-peddling. You're first post is an ad hominem which attempts to condemn a plays-style you obviously don't approve of.
Try an apology for jumping to conclusions instead.
At the risk of feeding the trolls, my first post was about how I felt that the ability to play a module was more important than eking out every last PP out of every single scenario. The second post you quoted was about how the PP you are missing out on doesn't matter all that much. My position has not changed, and I am not backpedaling.
|
|
You really need to relax. Enjoy yourself. All this focus on WBL, PP and making sure that you milk every last ounce of optimization out of your character can be very distracting. Make an interesting character that is somewhat effective at combat, and I promise that they will be unbelievably more fun to play than a fighter archer whose only personality trait is their DPS.
This would insult me as well. "You really need to relax. Enjoy yourself" You are making assumptions on his personality and implying he does not enjoy the game.
Your second part is you preaching to someone how they should play. Also by saying along the line of "I promise that " is an itnent in your words to show you know what things he enjoys more than himself. What is fun for you might nto be fun for him.
Let people play how they want to. If you do not like his stly eof play do not table with him. If you want to critize his style of play make him aware it is your opinion so it is not so biting.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
You really need to relax. Enjoy yourself. All this focus on WBL, PP and making sure that you milk every last ounce of optimization out of your character can be very distracting. Make an interesting character that is somewhat effective at combat, and I promise that they will be unbelievably more fun to play than a fighter archer whose only personality trait is their DPS.This would insult me as well. "You really need to relax. Enjoy yourself" You are making assumptions on his personality and implying he does not enjoy the game.
Your second part is you preaching to someone how they should play. Also by saying along the line of "I promise that " is an itnent in your words to show you know what things he enjoys more than himself. What is fun for you might nto be fun for him.
Let people play how they want to. If you do not like his stly eof play do not table with him. If you want to critize his style of play make him aware it is your opinion so it is not so biting.
My intention wasn't to insult, it was to encourage him to consider other playstyles. Based on his other posts on this forum, I have a mental image of him being a bit rules-happy, and sort of eschewing the softer parts of the game. Maybe that's wrong, maybe it's not. Never gamed with him in person. But I do know that, far too often, making sure you get every last GP and PP out of every scenario can be very frustrating, boring and unnecessary. It turns the game into a mechanical search for loot rather than an opportunity to act in-character. Do we *really* need to scrape the gold off of the walls?
|
|
I agree there are people like that. But if they want to play that way, ehh let them. I know a guy that will leave the table during the roleplay parts and comeback for the fights. He comes every week and enjoys it. The issues I have with him is he is so oriented on winning that he cheats. But that is another issue.
I am all about making the most powerfull character I can that has reasons not to fight.(My gnome will start looting potions and drinking them during a fight, you know for the experience of magic.)
Although you know what Oscar Wilde says when you assume.
I try to give people the rules to what they want and step out of their way.
|
There are only two things that I remember from looking at the chonicle sheets:
The first is Chapter 6 of the "Rise of the Runelords". It gives a boon that retroactivly maximizes your fame to 6 x Character Level. The drawback to this is that the scenario is a level 16-18, which is basically well beyond a normal way to retrieve fame.
The second one is Thornkeep's Dark Menagerie, a level 5-7 scenario. It does not retroactivly give you fame, but it does give you a chance to max an upcoming scenario's fame if you botch it up. It is a one time use boon, though.
|
|
My intention wasn't to insult, it was to encourage him to consider other playstyles. Based on his other posts on this forum, I have a mental image of him being a bit rules-happy, and sort of eschewing the softer parts of the game. Maybe that's wrong, maybe it's not. Never gamed with him in person. But I do know that, far too often, making sure you get every last GP and PP out of every scenario can be very frustrating, boring and unnecessary. It turns the game into a mechanical search for loot rather than an opportunity to act in-character. Do we *really* need to scrape the gold off of the walls?
And if he has and he likes the way he plays? You assuming there is something wrong with somebody who plays a character that wants to scrape gold off the walls. What you consider boring, others find fun. I have played with enough differing play styles to realize that people can have fun for a whole slew of different reasons. So don't knock other people's fun.
Now I do kinda like the idea of being able to make up lost PP...however due to the system difficulty of such an implantation...I don't think it's worth the headache it would cause. I do kinda dislike that bad GM calls on PP issues aren't easier to rectify. I lost a PP because we didn't destroy an object that was part of a faction mission for another faction for example...which if we did would have been under the don't cheat rules. A lot of the faction missions are also VERY badly written...enough so that following what the players get ends up in you FAILING the mission. I am unsure how it could be made easier to fix such issues however.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
My intention wasn't to insult, it was to encourage him to consider other playstyles. Based on his other posts on this forum, I have a mental image of him being a bit rules-happy, and sort of eschewing the softer parts of the game. Maybe that's wrong, maybe it's not. Never gamed with him in person. But I do know that, far too often, making sure you get every last GP and PP out of every scenario can be very frustrating, boring and unnecessary. It turns the game into a mechanical search for loot rather than an opportunity to act in-character. Do we *really* need to scrape the gold off of the walls?And if he has and he likes the way he plays? You assuming there is something wrong with somebody who plays a character that wants to scrape gold off the walls. What you consider boring, others find fun. I have played with enough differing play styles to realize that people can have fun for a whole slew of different reasons. So don't knock other people's fun.
Now I do kinda like the idea of being able to make up lost PP...however due to the system difficulty of such an implantation...I don't think it's worth the headache it would cause. I do kinda dislike that bad GM calls on PP issues aren't easier to rectify. I lost a PP because we didn't destroy an object that was part of a faction mission for another faction for example...which if we did would have been under the don't cheat rules. A lot of the faction missions are also VERY badly written...enough so that following what the players get ends up in you FAILING the mission. I am unsure how it could be made easier to fix such issues however.
Well, if he wants to be as extreme about it as to not play modules because they give out 2 fewer PP, that's his business. I still think he'd be missing out on a lot of great times.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think there is a need. The assumption in PFS is that players earn 3/4 of the PP on average. All of the wealth tables (what is always available, how much you can purchase based on fame, how much direct PP purchases cost) is based on this assumption. If you are doing better than 3/4 of total available PP then be happy.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, if he wants to be as extreme about it as to not play modules because they give out 2 fewer PP, that's his business. I still think he'd be missing out on a lot of great times.And if you would focus on reading comprehension instead of passing judgment, you'd see that what I'm suggesting would open the door for more people to play modules.
I seriously doubt that the rationale for modules giving 2 PP less has anything to do with how enjoyable it is. So if we give players a way to make up for the lost PP, more people will be motivated to play modules. How can this be a bad thing? I'll guarantee you I'm not the only one who either completely forgoes modules because of the PP hit, or has limited the number they'll play.
Considering how you are the only poster here whose approach is to insult my choices as a player why don't you just stay out of this discussion?
I know, from my experience, that many of the players that I deal with on a regular basis would rather play modules instead of scenarios. They don't care that they only get 4 fame from them.
As a GM, I really want to feel for you, but I can't, because as a player, I have made choices that have kept characters of mine from having a full amount of fame for their level, whether it be at character creation, or flat out not doing a faction mission, or playing in a module.
The point of the game isn't to be able to always buy that snazzy +2 Flaming Great Sword. The point is to have fun. If the fact that you aren't able to generate the maximum amount of fame per session is defeating your fun, then I don't know if there's anything that can be done to help you.
But what you're asking is for a complete rewrite of the rules so that everyone can have something that not everyone should be able to get. I can't agree with that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are only two things that I remember from looking at the chonicle sheets:
***spoiler omitted***
Cao, not a knock on you, but for future reference, if you are bringing up something off a chronicle sheet, please use the spoiler tag, as it can unintentionally lead to metagaming.
|
|
Also remember that you can buy anything from your Chronicle Sheets regardless of Fame limits. Yes, it's a limited list, but it's there in just this instance of players having missed a lot of their Fame. However, as stated previously, Fame is not meant to be achieved 100% of the time. Roleplaying is about taking your lumps with your cream. Trying for 100% isn't feasible. Not in this case.
|
|
Fame is not meant to be achieved 100% of the time. Roleplaying is about taking your lumps with your cream. Trying for 100% isn't feasible. Not in this case.That's false. If it weren't not meant t be achieved 100% of the time, the DC's would be unattainable. And you might want to look up the definition of feasible.
While it may be statistically improbably that people get 100% of their faction missions, making sure that was true would require one massive effort on the part of PFS.
Yes, failure happens. And this would give players a chance to feel like they've atoned for those failures with their faction.
For a lvl 1, a DC 20 can be hard to hit, especially in a skill you don't have trained. It has been stated that a character is assumed to complete a faction mission only 75% of the time, and that's okay. Many players are well above that ratio. But I don't know anyone who has 100% success rate for long.
As far as making up for failure, that's every faction mission you get. You are always trying to succeed. You won't always. That's what makes it roleplaying. Once again saying, you have to take the bad with the good. It creates character for your character.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
I have what (I think) is a related question:
Should player characters be allowed access to more power than the Core Rule Book's chart on page 399 says they should be allowed? "Power" being defined as wealth, in that question.
The reason I ask is because the Fame limits were designed to take that chart into account, and the assumption was that players would not earn all the fame they might have access to via scenarios.
Now, before you jump on me and point out that a single item's cost has nothing to do with that chart, I wish to point out that I'm aware of that (though I have a follow up argument, and a personal gripe after that). However, the people who set up this campaign were very likely aware of the fact that it is conceivable for a character to always "play up" throughout their career and thus be WAY ahead of everyone else on the wealth curve. The Fame limits of item purchase keep that possibility from over-powering characters via too much wealth from really getting out of hand.
The follow up argument: By the way, there is a line on page 400 that pertains to this chart (Table 12-4). That line states, "Characters should spend no more than half their total wealth on any single item." Essentially, that line limits the price of any item in the character's possession in the same way that Fame limits what a PFS character can possess.
The personal gripe: going by table 12-4 and the advice on page 400, characters shouldn't be in possession of something as expensive as a +2 weapon until 7th level, at least. I see characters with +2 weapons well before that level on a regular basis. Allowing 100% access to Fame simply encourages that kind of imbalance to spread. I'd rather not see that result.
Finally, a disclaimer: this argument of mine has nothing to do with whether earning Fame via the faction missions is considered fun. Please don't misunderstand my stance on this issue as being anti-fun.
|
|
I do think that Fame is a major issue for certain types of characters (ones who don't use weapons and armor and thus can't get something out of the always available and also don't have a spellbook, so mostly sorcerers) until about 18 Fame. I would think twice about applying module credit to a sorcerer, though this has been somewhat lessened by the addition of Ring of Spell Knowledge, which is a reasonable sorcerer item to buy before 18 Fame. After 18 Fame, you'd have to be playing up through the roof or else randomly saving up for one huge item for ages before you run into fame issues. For instance, level 9 WBL is 46,000 gold. That's about what you'll have if you haven't been playing up to 10-11s as a level 8. And with max prestige you are able to buy a 41,000 gold item and 1 away from enough for a 54,000 gold item. So if you play up to a 10-11 and get almost 8k in your first adventure at level 9 and you eke out every single prestige point, you can maybe buy an item that costs all of your money. Now if you failed every single mission, having 24 prestige and only being able to buy 8000 gold items would sting quite a bit. Even if you only succeeded half your missions, on hitting level 9 you would have the prestige to spend 23000 gold on one item, which is half your money on one item.
So in summary, I think the system works perfectly fine, and there's no need to scrounge for every point of prestige (except at low levels it's brutal if you don't want something that's always available).
+1 dueling cestus for always on +4 initiative are nice for every sorcerer.
|
|
Fame is not meant to be achieved 100% of the time. Roleplaying is about taking your lumps with your cream. Trying for 100% isn't feasible. Not in this case.That's false. If it weren't not meant t be achieved 100% of the time, the DC's would be unattainable. And you might want to look up the definition of feasible.
While it may be statistically improbably that people get 100% of their faction missions, making sure that was true would require one massive effort on the part of PFS.
Yes, failure happens. And this would give players a chance to feel like they've atoned for those failures with their faction.
The campaign staff have explicitly stated that they assume a character does not have maximum fame. The DCs and the missions are built with that in mind. It is indeed statistically improbable that a character should have maximum fame, and I don't think the PFS staff want to make it anymore likely.
I repeat: Working as intended.
|
|
You are not capable of getting 100%, due to the aspect of random rolls and the lack of appropriate skill bonuses, and since capable is a meaning of feasible, it's time to stop attacking my word choice.
In regard to one of your fallacies, the PFS staff actively expects not all players will achieve 100% faction mission success. They scale it in a manner which does not penalize those who do not have 100% faction mission success. They scale it in a manner to not so much be better for the game, but good for the player base.
At the risk of making you type "ad hominem" yet again, if people want more opportunities for role-playing, they should find and create them without forcing Paizo to give it to them. It's a very weak "pro" to your proposal compared to the cons of publishing and, as you yourself stated, it would take longer for 10 factions (minus whichever they take out next season) to act out their added missions. Many tables are already under time constraints as is. Two strong cons.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
3. The "failure is good for you" is another ad hominem, lacking merit and accuracy. See the above about character death. More to the point, characters will still fail faction missions. Adding an option for a second more difficult faction mission means more failure, not less.
That's not what ad hominem means.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
Not expecting success is not tantamount to not wanting success. By the logic offered here, one could argue that PFS doesn't want all characters to survive until retirement. If someone has a FAQ or message board post that shows Mike or others think that players with max PP is a threat to the game, please show me. In the absence of such a post, the assertion that PFS intends to make sure players don't have max PP is simply false.
Here you go: A post from Mark Moreland about level appropriate treasure and fame.
Also, the question that was raised about the expense of writing and developing more factions missions has been specifically addressed by both Mark and Mike. They don't want to raise that cost, and are actually trying to lower it further, if you consider the idea of eliminating factions due to lack of success, which is a theme for Season 4.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Feasible : Possible to do easily or conveniently. Likely; probable
It is a definition, not your definition.
And since you seem to be doing to most accusation on what we are saying or meaning, going into semantics, I'm thinking this is going to go nowhere. I, on the otherhand, and capable of going elsewhere. So I exercise that ability.