|
So I had an idea while talking to a friend about how much easier (and how much more fun) it is to GM a scenario more than once, and how some scenarios are actually more fun to GM than play. So I had a thought: is there any reason why GMs shouldn't be allowed to receive a second credit for running a scenario as long as they haven't received credit for playing? Or in other words, could GMs convert unused player credit for a given scenario into GM credit?
It provides a nice incentive to GM scenarios more frequently without handing out anything that we didn't already have. Thoughts/opinions/concerns?
Venture-Captain, Michigan—Mt. Pleasant
|
Have you seen the new reward they added for GMs in the latest Guide?
Alternatively, campaign GMs who are recognized for
their efforts by receiving GM stars (see page 37), may
receive additional player or GM credit for a number of
non-Tier 1 scenarios or sanctioned modules per GM star
they have earned. For example, a three-star GM may select
any three scenarios or sanctioned modules that she can
then play or GM for credit one additional time each. For
each of these adventures, she can thus earn a total of three
Chronicle sheets, rather than the two normally allowed.
When replaying a scenario with GM-star credit, the GM
completing the Chronicle sheet will annotate the Notes
section of the Chronicle sheet and add “GM Star Replay
Credit × Star” to annotate the use of star credit replay. The
GM Star Replay Credits are a once per star, lifetime benefit.
So GMs can get a second credit for running a scenario. I for one would much rather "spend" the player credit by actually playing the scenario. I love running, but I still enjoy playing too.
Venture-Captain, Germany—Hamburg
|
I'd say it's a bit risky to do that. (Edit: By that, I mean the original question. Eric's post got ninja'd in ;) )
Player credit is different from GM credit in a few ways.
One of the most important parts is that when receiving player credit for a scenario, you had to play a character in that scenario with the possibility of dying or getting negative conditions. A GM receiving GM credit doesn't have to risk death of a PC, and all he's giving up is the day job roll (which some characters can't do anyway because they have no skill to use as a day job).
Second, player credit is awarded based on the subtier actually played, while GM credit is awarded based on the subtier most suited for the character that gets the credit. So by playing with some high level PCs in the party, a low-level PC can get a good amount of additional gold and available items (although the additional gold has been reduced due to introduction of out-of-subtier-gold). On the other hand, a GM can apply credit for the higher subtier to his high level characters without having to play through the harder version of a scenario.
In addition, season 5 did introduce a means to encourage GMs to rerun scenarios: the GM star replay.
Also, by now, there are 4 complete seasons, each with about 25 scenarios, plus the first 5 scenarios of season 5. That's about 130 scenarios to choose from. Why should a GM necessarily have to rerun a scenario? He can just pick the next scenario. This would also be better for that GM's regular players, as they have already played the scenarios that GM ran in the past. And they can't replay them, either.
|
Personally I think there is nothing wrong at all for GM's to rerun something without getting character credit on it. It still counts to your star rating and you're providing a kickass time for your players, partially because you're so familiar with the material AND have the enthusiasm to run it. Besides, if each of your characters had a chronicle to #4-01 Rise of the Goblin Guild... that'd be kinda boring and samey...
Also, to Andreas, there are technically 5 full seasons plus the Season 5's. Season 0. Don't worry, I forget about that one, too. But that's even more choice of scenarios to run!
|
|
Besides, if each of your characters had a chronicle to #4-01 Rise of the Goblin Guild... that'd be kinda boring and samey...Without commenting on the original idea, the idea was that the second time you GM the scenario, it would count as your "player" chronicle, if you hadn't already played it. That way, you could still only ever get two chronicles for any non-replayable scenario, so it isn't any more "samey" than the current rules are.
Missed that detail. Thanks.