|
Does the following sentence apply to only season 0-3 (where the quote was taken), or does it also apply to season 4 and 5?
In the fringe case where there are no players that are high enough to have reached the subtier level (such as a party of six 3rd level characters), the group may decide to play down to the lower subtier.
It would seem to me that if you have six PC of 3rd level that you wouldn't want to force them to play up to subtier 4-5, no matter which season it was.
Clarification please.
|
To be fair, we just took a 6-person table through 4-26: The Waking Rune with only one character being in tier for the 10-11. I was the furthest from being in-tier with my Lvl 7 gnome Oracle 1/Bard 4/Pathfinder Chronicler 2 - certainly not made for survivability (I only have 10 Con). We made it through with some scarily dramatic moments, but did surprisingly well. I think that the action economy of a six-player table is fairly capable at tackling the challenges of being 3 or 4 levels outclassed with the 4-player adjustments.
|
|
No. If no member of the party is within the level range of the high subtier, then the group may choose to play the low subtier.
RAW, unfortunately you're wrong, it's not written that way, which is why I'm asking for clarification.
Jason - all covered in PFSOPG v5., Page 31.
As theJeff already explained, RAW my quote does NOT apply to seasons 4-5. I guess that went over everyone's head, so I'll quote the entire script now.
Starting with Season 4, scenarios are designed for six characters and contain instructions on how to adjust the scenario for four-character parties. When the APL of a table is between two subtiers (like APL 3 for a Tier 1–5 scenario), a party of four characters must play the lower tier without any adjustments for party size. A party of five to seven characters whose APL is between two subtiers must play the higher tier with the four-character adjustment.
For scenarios written in Seasons 0 to 3, when the APL is in between subtiers, a party of six or seven characters must play the higher subtier. Parties with four or five characters must play the lower subtier. In the fringe case where there are no players that are high enough to have reached the subtier level (such as a party of six 3rd level characters), the group may decide to play down to the lower subtier.
Btw, I find it very interesting that the choice to play up or down when between subtiers has been taken away, especially when there is such "fear" (and distain) in this community about playing up. I guess everyone has to put on their big boy/girl pants now.
|
Does the following sentence apply to only season 0-3 (where the quote was taken), or does it also apply to season 4 and 5?
In the fringe case where there are no players that are high enough to have reached the subtier level (such as a party of six 3rd level characters), the group may decide to play down to the lower subtier.It would seem to me that if you have six PC of 3rd level that you wouldn't want to force them to play up to subtier 4-5, no matter which season it was.
Clarification please.
Table of 6 Level 3(3) Level 2(3) have the option of playing up or down. This is due to the fact none of the characters are level 4. This is the only time the party gets the option of what they want to play. If you hade a table of 4 they must play down. If you hade a level 4 at the table you must play up.
Table of 6 Season 4 & 5
Levels 4 3 3 3 2 2 APL3 Must play up with 4 players adjustment.
Levels 3 3 3 2 2 3 APL3 Have the option of playing up or down. 2
Levels 3 3 2 2 2 2 APL2 Must play in tear.
Table of 4 Season 4& 5
Levels 4 3 3 2 APL3 Must play down.
Levels 3 3 2 2 APL3 Must play down.
|
|
For seasons 4 & 5, if the table is between subtitles, use the following rule:
A party of 4 whose APL is 3, must play the lower subtler without any adjustment to the party size.
A party of 5 to 7 whose APL is 3, must play the higher tier with the 4 player adjustment.
This comes straight from the guide. Their is no choice for the players or GM in this case.
|
|
For seasons 4 & 5, if the table is between subtitles, use the following rule:
A party of 4 whose APL is 3, must play the lower subtler without any adjustment to the party size.
A party of 5 to 7 whose APL is 3, must play the higher tier with the 4 player adjustment.
This comes straight from the guide. Their is no choice for the players or GM in this case.
Exactly. It's pretty straightforward. The choice for seasons 0-3 is, by design, only for seasons 0-3.
|
|
It is straightforward, although several people have already misunderstood it.
My question is "was that the intention?". Because it seems cold to force a low level group to play up in season 4/5. I can see several GMs not implementing this correctly, either by mistake or intentionally. Gencon is coming up, I'll be able to tell you if my theory is correct. :)
|
Yeah. That 3/3/3/2/2 party having to play 4-5, even with the 4-player adjustment is going to be rough.It is straightforward, although several people have already misunderstood it.
My question is "was that the intention?". Because it seems cold to force a low level group to play up in season 4/5. I can see several GMs not implementing this correctly, either by mistake or intentionally. Gencon is coming up, I'll be able to tell you if my theory is correct. :)
It is terrible how some GMs have trouble with simple division and the concept of rounding. I suspect some math errors might occur in such a party; for some GMs - Sudden Onset Arithimetic Failure (SOAF).
|
If that's directed at me:
3+3+3+2+2=13
13/5 = 2.6 which rounds to 3 (nearest integer).A 5 person party of APL 3 must play up to subtier 4-5 in season 4-5.
What did I do wrong?
I guess he was too subtle. He was implying that some GMs might selectively forget how to round to the nearest whole number. I can't say whether I would or not. Hopefully the issue will get resolved before I have to make that choice.
|
|
It certainly does seem to be.It is straightforward, although several people have already misunderstood it.
My question is "was that the intention?".
I guess what I'm really saying is that I consider it a design error.
Season 0-3 scenarios were designed for 4 players, so you'd think that a season 4-5 scenario adjusted for 4 players would be the equivalent, and they'd both use the same rules. If you force a group to play up in season 4/5 (4 player adjustment), you'd also force a group to play up in seasons 0-3, for consistency.
We all know however that season 4-5 is a lot harder, even with the 4 player adjustment. I'd much rather give a 3/3/3/2/2 party the choice to play down in season 4/5 compared to season 0-3. For example, that group could easily finish Frostfur Captives, but I highly doubt the same group could finish Severing Ties. In other words, I'd rather give that option to season 4/5, not 0-3. Or give it to both. Just not what we have now.
|
|
It certainly does seem to be.It is straightforward, although several people have already misunderstood it.
My question is "was that the intention?".
I guess what I'm really saying is that I consider it a design error.
Season 0-3 scenarios were designed for 4 players, so you'd think that a season 4-5 scenario adjusted for 4 players would be the equivalent, and they'd both use the same rules. If you force a group to play up in season 4/5 (4 player adjustment), you'd also force a group to play up in seasons 0-3, for consistency.
We all know however that season 4-5 is a lot harder, even with the 4 player adjustment. I'd much rather give a 3/3/3/2/2 party the choice to play down in season 4/5 compared to season 0-3. For example, that group could easily finish Frostfur Captives, but I highly doubt the same group could finish Severing Ties. In other words, I'd rather give that option to season 4/5, not 0-3. Or give it to both. Just not what we have now.
Ah! Well, that's a horse of a different color.
I would be prepared for the possibility that they actually playtested it and are comfortable with it, but I think an explicit approach like that would lead to more coordinator response.
Because apparently that's how we roll around here.
|
|
It is terrible how some GMs have trouble with simple division and the concept of rounding. I suspect some math errors might occur in such a party; for some GMs - Sudden Onset Arithimetic Failure (SOAF).Yeah. That 3/3/3/2/2 party having to play 4-5, even with the 4-player adjustment is going to be rough.It is straightforward, although several people have already misunderstood it.
My question is "was that the intention?". Because it seems cold to force a low level group to play up in season 4/5. I can see several GMs not implementing this correctly, either by mistake or intentionally. Gencon is coming up, I'll be able to tell you if my theory is correct. :)
If that's directed at me:
3+3+3+2+2=13
13/5 = 2.6 which rounds to 3 (nearest integer).A 5 person party of APL 3 must play up to subtier 4-5 in season 4-5.
What did I do wrong?
Season 4-5
A party of five to seven characters whose APL is between two subtiers must play the higher tier with the four-character adjustment.Season 0-3
In the fringe case where there are no players that are high enough to have reached the subtier level (such as a party of six 3rd level characters), the group may decide to play down to the lower subtier.
|
|
The 4 player adjustment is not consistent across all scenarios. However it could mean the difference between TPK, and just being hard. We will not know how this works out until after there are scenarios run with the new rules. I think it will cause players to change out what character there playing for the scenario in question. It could have more players thinking about needing more then one character. Just in case this comes up.
|
Does the following sentence apply to only season 0-3 (where the quote was taken), or does it also apply to season 4 and 5?
In the fringe case where there are no players that are high enough to have reached the subtier level (such as a party of six 3rd level characters), the group may decide to play down to the lower subtier.It would seem to me that if you have six PC of 3rd level that you wouldn't want to force them to play up to subtier 4-5, no matter which season it was.
Clarification please.
What exactly needs clarified?
|
|
3+3+3+2+2 is the worst possible scenario for season 4/5 now. So, yeah, in this particular case, their formula probably has some problems. Players just have to be smart and perhaps deploy a different character or maybe have someone play at a different table.
They wanted to get rid of the bullying, and for the most part, I think this will do the trick. However, there are a few rare instances like this that some table engineering might be required.
Also, there are some groups that could probably pull this off as well. So it's a fraction of a rare case.