The Future of Level 1-5 Scenarios?


Pathfinder Society

351 to 392 of 392 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
5/5

Netopalis wrote:
I do have to say, I kinda feel this way. From what I hear, PFS started in a back room at GenCon with 26 scenarios per year. Now, five years later, we filled the Sagamore Ballroom to the bursting, and yet we are still not big enough to increase that number. It honestly confuses me. I realize that an awful lot of scenarios get given away, but I'm sure that PFS has driven a ton of sales for Paizo. For PFS, purchasing the materials is required - so, a ton of people who wouldn't normally buy the books do. I know that my GMming has brought a bunch of people in to play, and I know that if we were doing a home game, we'd probably all share the same books. Surely PFS is worth the development costs.

It's possible that it is, but they just can't afford an investment of this nature right now.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, West Virginia—Charleston

Well, fair enough. I'm just saying that the idea that we're not doing enough PFS to justify it isn't really an argument that holds much water, IMHO.

4/5 ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Something to remember from Vic Wertz stats is that only a very small number of PFS players ~1% IIRC play 24+ scenarios a year. (I know we've largely been talking about ease of coordination in this thread rather than pure running out of scenarios but I thought this point was worth noting)

One of the neat thing about publishing adventures is that if twice as many people play you don't need twice as many adventures. The number of players that run short on things of course grows. Of course if we've got 100,000 players that 1% that is playing everything is 10,000.

That said Erik Mona said they were looking to up the number of PFS adventures published but that it takes forever to turn the Paizo ship.

At the moment we're just at/under 30 a year. I wonder if we'll do better this season with things like the return of quests and maybe a new seeker arc. Or the release of the Goblin Attack mini game with PFS chronicles.

As another note both the length and quality of adventures has increased dramatically since season 0. IF PFS scenarios need to increase in price from $4 -> $5 to make it happen, make it so.

5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pirate Rob wrote:
As another note both the length and quality of adventures has increased dramatically since season 0.

I think many people forget this.

5/5

Pirate Rob wrote:
As another note both the length and quality of adventures has increased dramatically since season 0.

Heh. Maybe that was the wrong way to go! Less quality, more quantity.

(I kid. ... mostly.)

Grand Lodge 4/5 **

I go through 24 in a MONTH :P...then again...probablly nowhere near normal hehe.


Is there a way to not softball the earlier scenarios, without having them be more deadly?

You can post as many guides as you want on the forums, but most players do not read them. 1-5 scenarios are almost too easy and don't really prep for when things get real in 5-9 and 7-11.

This is the main reason I have done a lot of 1-5 scenarios, I make it high but a have of our players can't make it to level 5

Liberty's Edge 5/5

CWheezy wrote:

Is there a way to not softball the earlier scenarios, without having them be more deadly?

You can post as many guides as you want on the forums, but most players do not read them. 1-5 scenarios are almost too easy and don't really prep for when things get real in 5-9 and 7-11.

This is the main reason I have done a lot of 1-5 scenarios, I make it high but a have of our players can't make it to level 5

A lot of this problem is the GMs essentially not knowing when to pull back.

I also don't understand how you can complain about 1-5 being too easy and half your regions players not being able to get to level 5.


Andrew Christian wrote:


I also don't understand how you can complain about 1-5 being too easy and half your regions players not being able to get to level 5.

I disagree that this is the gm not knowing how to pull back. I play high tier and quite enjoy it, but maybe because I know that the game gets very real very fast? I am not sure

Should have said past level 5, but they die in the 3-7 tier stuff

5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Andrew Christian wrote:
CWheezy wrote:
1-5 scenarios are almost too easy and don't really prep for when things get real in 5-9 and 7-11.
A lot of this problem is the GMs essentially not knowing when to pull back.

I vehemently disagree with this statement. A GM shouldn't need to pull back in higher tier scenarios. If the GM's at the lower tier scenarios understood that part of their job is to teach the players how to play the game, the whole game, players wouldn't be so ill-prepared for darkness, invisibility, flight and multiattacking brutes who don't die in one hit but aren't afraid to pummel you into oblivion if you let them full attack you.

Pulling too many punches or glossing over certain rules at low levels can lead to players who aren't prepared for the dangers at higher levels.

Silver Crusade 2/5

There's also the "random guy wanders in so we all play tier 1-5.. again." The biggest problem I've seen is people not sticking with the game or sticking with a single character long enough to get to 3-7.

The wild variation of difficulty of tier 1-5 isn't super helpful, either. I still sometimes have bad flashbacks about twigjacks.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

David Bowles wrote:

There's also the "random guy wanders in so we all play tier 1-5.. again." The biggest problem I've seen is people not sticking with the game or sticking with a single character long enough to get to 3-7.

The wild variation of difficulty of tier 1-5 isn't super helpful, either. I still sometimes have bad flashbacks about twigjacks.

If it is the random guy walking in, why are you inhibiting the group of regulars? If he is a random guy walking in the first time, why not give him a pregen to see if he likes the game first and will return, and then go from there?

Silver Crusade 2/5

A couple of reasons. Tier 1-5 is just what is being scheduled at my primary store in general. Secondly, players are not comfortable with new people playing pregens in a tier 3-7. Soon, I'm going to have to run every week or stop playing because I will have burned out so many tier 1-5s.

Grand Lodge 5/5 ****

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Michael Brock wrote:
If it is the random guy walking in, why are you inhibiting the group of regulars? If he is a random guy walking in the first time, why not give him a pregen to see if he likes the game first and will return, and then go from there?

As Kyle pointedly described it further up - if players aren't fit at higher levels then the GM failed to tech him.

I'm not agreeing with that. But I once did an eye-opening table

On one side was the PreGen.
On the other was typical challenges that Kyle (or Painlords list) would expect a player to be equipped for.

Damage Reduction adamantine, slashing, cold iron, magic, bludgeoning
Darkness
Invisibility
etc.

PreGens are NOT equipped for the above. So a new player with a PreGen at a higher table not only didn't have time to learn - he doesn't even get a character who has the equipment he needs.

Do I invite a new player to a higher level table with a PreGen if I'm close to running out on low tier and try him out?

Answer - yes - but I'm likely to hand him/her Valeros or Kyra and I vet the scenario first - so he isn't frustrated by 'simple' challenges that he has an auto fail for because he just isn't equipped for them.

But this works because I tend to have at least half a day warning and not a pure stranger suddenly appears at my table.

not 100% true:

It happened once - I had one new player - announced. Half an hour ahead of the game I get a phone call - could I bring a friend. As it turned out - the extra friend morphed into 2 by the time they arrived. But no harm done as it was a tier 1-5 anyhow.

Silver Crusade 2/5

"As Kyle pointedly described it further up - if players aren't fit at higher levels then the GM failed to tech him."

Which GM? Or the GM collective? Because I've ran into people who were taught things by GMs that were demonstrably false.

Additionally, even at tier 1-5, there can be issues of someone chooses the ninja or ranger for the pregen. Because those iconics are poor.

Grand Lodge 4/5 **

Kyle Baird wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
CWheezy wrote:
1-5 scenarios are almost too easy and don't really prep for when things get real in 5-9 and 7-11.
A lot of this problem is the GMs essentially not knowing when to pull back.

I vehemently disagree with this statement. A GM shouldn't need to pull back in higher tier scenarios. If the GM's at the lower tier scenarios understood that part of their job is to teach the players how to play the game, the whole game, players wouldn't be so ill-prepared for darkness, invisibility, flight and multiattacking brutes who don't die in one hit but aren't afraid to pummel you into oblivion if you let them full attack you.

Pulling too many punches or glossing over certain rules at low levels can lead to players who aren't prepared for the dangers at higher levels.

Except that the 1-5 and even the 3-7 doesn't really teach that...at all. That is why I suggested a while back that maybe we need a first steps part 2 where it takes place in the 5-7 range where you DO learn all these things so new players are prepped for high level play instead of getting murdered by the play dynamics getting pulled out from under them.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Cold Napalm wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
CWheezy wrote:
1-5 scenarios are almost too easy and don't really prep for when things get real in 5-9 and 7-11.
A lot of this problem is the GMs essentially not knowing when to pull back.

I vehemently disagree with this statement. A GM shouldn't need to pull back in higher tier scenarios. If the GM's at the lower tier scenarios understood that part of their job is to teach the players how to play the game, the whole game, players wouldn't be so ill-prepared for darkness, invisibility, flight and multiattacking brutes who don't die in one hit but aren't afraid to pummel you into oblivion if you let them full attack you.

Pulling too many punches or glossing over certain rules at low levels can lead to players who aren't prepared for the dangers at higher levels.

Except that the 1-5 and even the 3-7 doesn't really teach that...at all. That is why I suggested a while back that maybe we need a first steps part 2 where it takes place in the 5-7 range where you DO learn all these things so new players are prepped for high level play instead of getting murdered by the play dynamics getting pulled out from under them.

Yeah, this is an issue as well. I know some GMs who find it amusing when PCs are ill-prepared, but, in general, it makes for a poor session.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Whether or not the iconics are set up for the challenge you are handing someone a higher level PC and asking them to operate something they don't necessarily know all the ins and outs of. This isn't fair to either them or the table of players they are joining.

Feral is a pretty vocal opponent of this practice, and while his stance is very extreme, it is fully understandable. To my knowledge I do not have players with that kind of stance in my store, but I would rather not *create* those kinds of stances, so I make it a point to not hand high level pregens to new players. 1st level, only; that's my goal on pre-gens, and even then only when it's Learn to Play night.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cold Napalm wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
CWheezy wrote:
1-5 scenarios are almost too easy and don't really prep for when things get real in 5-9 and 7-11.
A lot of this problem is the GMs essentially not knowing when to pull back.

I vehemently disagree with this statement. A GM shouldn't need to pull back in higher tier scenarios. If the GM's at the lower tier scenarios understood that part of their job is to teach the players how to play the game, the whole game, players wouldn't be so ill-prepared for darkness, invisibility, flight and multiattacking brutes who don't die in one hit but aren't afraid to pummel you into oblivion if you let them full attack you.

Pulling too many punches or glossing over certain rules at low levels can lead to players who aren't prepared for the dangers at higher levels.

Except that the 1-5 and even the 3-7 doesn't really teach that...at all. That is why I suggested a while back that maybe we need a first steps part 2 where it takes place in the 5-7 range where you DO learn all these things so new players are prepped for high level play instead of getting murdered by the play dynamics getting pulled out from under them.

So, Mr. Compton, is there any chance that this kind of comment would make you reconsider the Devil We Know style adventures? Those would certainly teach lower level players what to do in these situations.

By the way: I think there are a LOT of 1-5s and certainly 3-7s that teach this. But Kyle is right; entirely too many GMs play with the kid gloves on when their players start dying to things they aren't prepared for. All THAT teaches is the idea, "My GM will back off if things get too hairy."

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, West Virginia—Charleston

I would feel very uncomfortable sending a new player with a level 7 pregen into a 10-11 scenario. I would feel less uncomfortable having a new player play a level 7 in a 5-9, depending on the scenario. It depends on the out-of-society experience of the character and the difficulty of the scenario. It also depends somewhat on the effect that a level 7 pregen will have on the APL of the adventure.

Grand Lodge 4/5 **

Drogon wrote:
Cold Napalm wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
CWheezy wrote:
1-5 scenarios are almost too easy and don't really prep for when things get real in 5-9 and 7-11.
A lot of this problem is the GMs essentially not knowing when to pull back.

I vehemently disagree with this statement. A GM shouldn't need to pull back in higher tier scenarios. If the GM's at the lower tier scenarios understood that part of their job is to teach the players how to play the game, the whole game, players wouldn't be so ill-prepared for darkness, invisibility, flight and multiattacking brutes who don't die in one hit but aren't afraid to pummel you into oblivion if you let them full attack you.

Pulling too many punches or glossing over certain rules at low levels can lead to players who aren't prepared for the dangers at higher levels.

Except that the 1-5 and even the 3-7 doesn't really teach that...at all. That is why I suggested a while back that maybe we need a first steps part 2 where it takes place in the 5-7 range where you DO learn all these things so new players are prepped for high level play instead of getting murdered by the play dynamics getting pulled out from under them.

So, Mr. Compton, is there any chance that this kind of comment would make you reconsider the Devil We Know style adventures? Those would certainly teach lower level players what to do in these situations.

By the way: I think there are a LOT of 1-5s and certainly 3-7s that teach this. But Kyle is right; entirely too many GMs play with the kid gloves on when their players start dying to things they aren't prepared for. All THAT teaches is the idea, "My GM will back off if things get too hairy."

Umm...from what I remember, the 1-2 and 3-4 sub tiers of those were pretty straight forward or the small bumps you run into can easily be brute forced by low level tactics just fine. The 6-7 had a few nasty ones in it...but then again, so does some of the 6-7 sub tiers in the 3-7. However, running into it a couple of the high level game changers in a 6-7 does not prep new players for high level challenges...not in the least.

Grand Lodge 4/5 **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Netopalis wrote:
I would feel very uncomfortable sending a new player with a level 7 pregen into a 10-11 scenario. I would feel less uncomfortable having a new player play a level 7 in a 5-9, depending on the scenario. It depends on the out-of-society experience of the character and the difficulty of the scenario. It also depends somewhat on the effect that a level 7 pregen will have on the APL of the adventure.

Generally speaking...a level 7 pre-gen in a 10-11 is just bad news. Doesn't even have to be a new player.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Cold Napalm wrote:
Netopalis wrote:
I would feel very uncomfortable sending a new player with a level 7 pregen into a 10-11 scenario. I would feel less uncomfortable having a new player play a level 7 in a 5-9, depending on the scenario. It depends on the out-of-society experience of the character and the difficulty of the scenario. It also depends somewhat on the effect that a level 7 pregen will have on the APL of the adventure.
Generally speaking...a level 7 pre-gen in a 10-11 is just bad news. Doesn't even have to be a new player.

Most level 7's, pre-gen or not, are bad news in a 10-11; the game is becoming very non-linear at this point.

5/5 *

Netopalis wrote:
I would feel very uncomfortable sending a new player with a level 7 pregen into a 10-11 scenario. I would feel less uncomfortable having a new player play a level 7 in a 5-9, depending on the scenario. It depends on the out-of-society experience of the character and the difficulty of the scenario. It also depends somewhat on the effect that a level 7 pregen will have on the APL of the adventure.

I actually do hate the level 7 pregens in any scenario for new players (3-7, 5-9 or 7-11 regardless)

But I would have no problems giving a new player the level 4 pregen for a subtier 3-4 or 4-5 adventure. At those levels it's still manageable for new players, at least for MOST of the classes.

Heck, I HATE giving a new player the level 1 Ezren, because he has TOO FEW options.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Cold Napalm wrote:
Drogon wrote:

So, Mr. Compton, is there any chance that this kind of comment would make you reconsider the Devil We Know style adventures? Those would certainly teach lower level players what to do in these situations.

By the way: I think there are a LOT of 1-5s and certainly 3-7s that teach this. But Kyle is right; entirely too many GMs play with the kid gloves on when their players start dying to things they aren't prepared for. All THAT teaches is the idea, "My GM will back off if things get too hairy."

Umm...from what I remember, the 1-2 and 3-4 sub tiers of those were pretty straight forward or the small bumps you run into can easily be brute forced by low level tactics just fine. The 6-7 had a few nasty ones in it...but then again, so does some of the...

You had a nice GM, then. While some of the combats were not difficult, these are incredibly challenging for the idea of an evergreen Tier 1-2, which is what John and I discussed a bit further back.

I ran Parts 1 and 2 back to back over the last few weeks for a group of mixed 1st and 2nd level PCs, and could pretty easily have TPK'd them in either scenario if I had applied pressure in just the right spot. Instead, I taught them their lessons (enemy clerics that channel negative energy and work alongside undead pets are BAD, as are darkness and things that can fight you from out of reach) and "let them off the hook" so to speak. Kyle would call it putting on kid gloves.

The difference is that, at the end of the scenario, I asked what they thought they needed to be prepared for that stuff. Those players now know what to do, and have what is necessary.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

David Bowles wrote:
A couple of reasons. Tier 1-5 is just what is being scheduled at my primary store in general. Secondly, players are not comfortable with new people playing pregens in a tier 3-7. Soon, I'm going to have to run every week or stop playing because I will have burned out so many tier 1-5s.

If all the store is scheduling is 1-5 scenarios every week, or defaulting to 1-5s every time a new person walks through the door, even if we made sure there was a 1-5 published each month, it wouldn't help your situation because there are 4-5 weeks every month. If you aren't regularly scheduling higher scenarios than 1-5, nothing short of us producing five 1-5 scenarios every month is going to help and that isn't going to happen anywhere in the foreseeable future.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

Netopalis wrote:
I would feel very uncomfortable sending a new player with a level 7 pregen into a 10-11 scenario. I would feel less uncomfortable having a new player play a level 7 in a 5-9, depending on the scenario. It depends on the out-of-society experience of the character and the difficulty of the scenario. It also depends somewhat on the effect that a level 7 pregen will have on the APL of the adventure.

I didn't single out level 7 pregens. If you give someone a 4th level pregen in a subtler 3-4 of a 3-7 scenario, it isn't bad as a one time trial by the brand new person.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

David Bowles wrote:

"As Kyle pointedly described it further up - if players aren't fit at higher levels then the GM failed to tech him."

Which GM? Or the GM collective? Because I've ran into people who were taught things by GMs that were demonstrably false.

Additionally, even at tier 1-5, there can be issues of someone chooses the ninja or ranger for the pregen. Because those iconics are poor.

Then you steer them away from those two choices of pregens. Advise them if they want to create their own ninja or ranger, you will help them at a later time, but advise those aren't the wisest choices for *this* game and that there are more than 10 other pregens to choose from.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Michael Brock wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
A couple of reasons. Tier 1-5 is just what is being scheduled at my primary store in general. Secondly, players are not comfortable with new people playing pregens in a tier 3-7. Soon, I'm going to have to run every week or stop playing because I will have burned out so many tier 1-5s.
If all the store is scheduling is 1-5 scenarios every week, or defaulting to 1-5s every time a new person walks through the door, even if we made sure there was a 1-5 published each month, it wouldn't help your situation because there are 4-5 weeks every month. If you aren't regularly scheduling higher scenarios than 1-5, nothing short of us producing five 1-5 scenarios every month is going to help and that isn't going to happen anywhere in the foreseeable future.

I'm not asking for that at all. I realize the publication limitations. I'm just reporting the situation at a single location.

I personally think that 3-7 is underutilized in my area, but maybe it's just my perception. And again a couple of 2's turns that into a pregen fest.

I'm not even complaining about playing so much tier 1-5. I'm not that picky. It's just that I'm going to run into physical limitations here soon, and that makes me unhappy :(

Grand Lodge 4/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Also, seeing the comments that a new person is either not best prepared to handle a level 4 pregen or the other players aren't comfortable playing in a 3-7 scenario with a 4th pregen confirms that we don't need to consider the other suggestions in this thread to allow people to create characters at anything higher than 1st level.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Kyle Baird wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
CWheezy wrote:
1-5 scenarios are almost too easy and don't really prep for when things get real in 5-9 and 7-11.
A lot of this problem is the GMs essentially not knowing when to pull back.

I vehemently disagree with this statement. A GM shouldn't need to pull back in higher tier scenarios. If the GM's at the lower tier scenarios understood that part of their job is to teach the players how to play the game, the whole game, players wouldn't be so ill-prepared for darkness, invisibility, flight and multiattacking brutes who don't die in one hit but aren't afraid to pummel you into oblivion if you let them full attack you.

Pulling too many punches or glossing over certain rules at low levels can lead to players who aren't prepared for the dangers at higher levels.

I must have misunderstood chweezy, because I understood him to say that the folks he's playing with can't get to 5.

I agree with you Kyle.

But a lot of the problems with lots of low tier deaths is because the GM is running advanced tactics as though it was a high tier table. That isn't teaching either.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Michael Brock wrote:
Also, seeing the comments that a new person is either not best prepared to handle a level 4 pregen or the other players aren't comfortable playing in a 3-7 scenario with a 4th pregen confirms that we don't need to consider the other suggestions in this thread to allow people to create characters at anything higher than 1st level.

Eek. It frightens me to think that this was even on the table. Sooo happy you took it off.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

Drogon wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
Also, seeing the comments that a new person is either not best prepared to handle a level 4 pregen or the other players aren't comfortable playing in a 3-7 scenario with a 4th pregen confirms that we don't need to consider the other suggestions in this thread to allow people to create characters at anything higher than 1st level.
Eek. It frightens me to think that this was even on the table. Sooo happy you took it off.

It wasn't on the table at any point thus far. But, I read the comments both here, as well as previous posts about the same subject and was responding to those.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Even better, then. (-:

Silver Crusade 2/5

Andrew Christian wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
CWheezy wrote:
1-5 scenarios are almost too easy and don't really prep for when things get real in 5-9 and 7-11.
A lot of this problem is the GMs essentially not knowing when to pull back.

I vehemently disagree with this statement. A GM shouldn't need to pull back in higher tier scenarios. If the GM's at the lower tier scenarios understood that part of their job is to teach the players how to play the game, the whole game, players wouldn't be so ill-prepared for darkness, invisibility, flight and multiattacking brutes who don't die in one hit but aren't afraid to pummel you into oblivion if you let them full attack you.

Pulling too many punches or glossing over certain rules at low levels can lead to players who aren't prepared for the dangers at higher levels.

I must have misunderstood chweezy, because I understood him to say that the folks he's playing with can't get to 5.

I agree with you Kyle.

But a lot of the problems with lots of low tier deaths is because the GM is running advanced tactics as though it was a high tier table. That isn't teaching either.

Yeah, I run advanced tactics when I GM tier 1-5, and those CR 2 guys have a tendency to still get owned by PCs with 2Hers. The game is still linear in difficulty in that regime.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Michael Brock wrote:
Also, seeing the comments that a new person is either not best prepared to handle a level 4 pregen or the other players aren't comfortable playing in a 3-7 scenario with a 4th pregen confirms that we don't need to consider the other suggestions in this thread to allow people to create characters at anything higher than 1st level.

Yeah, that's a bad idea I think. In my experience, people don't balk at a level 4 for tier 1-5, but for 3-7, they are uneasy.

Sovereign Court 5/5 RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

David Bowles wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
Also, seeing the comments that a new person is either not best prepared to handle a level 4 pregen or the other players aren't comfortable playing in a 3-7 scenario with a 4th pregen confirms that we don't need to consider the other suggestions in this thread to allow people to create characters at anything higher than 1st level.
Yeah, that's a bad idea I think. In my experience, people don't balk at a level 4 for tier 1-5, but for 3-7, they are uneasy.

Just curious in general, has anyone ever seen a table where it's 1-3s and a player wants to play a level 4 iconic? (tier 1-5 scenario)

Grand Lodge 4/5 **

Drogon wrote:
Cold Napalm wrote:
Drogon wrote:

So, Mr. Compton, is there any chance that this kind of comment would make you reconsider the Devil We Know style adventures? Those would certainly teach lower level players what to do in these situations.

By the way: I think there are a LOT of 1-5s and certainly 3-7s that teach this. But Kyle is right; entirely too many GMs play with the kid gloves on when their players start dying to things they aren't prepared for. All THAT teaches is the idea, "My GM will back off if things get too hairy."

Umm...from what I remember, the 1-2 and 3-4 sub tiers of those were pretty straight forward or the small bumps you run into can easily be brute forced by low level tactics just fine. The 6-7 had a few nasty ones in it...but then again, so does some of the...

You had a nice GM, then. While some of the combats were not difficult, these are incredibly challenging for the idea of an evergreen Tier 1-2, which is what John and I discussed a bit further back.

I ran Parts 1 and 2 back to back over the last few weeks for a group of mixed 1st and 2nd level PCs, and could pretty easily have TPK'd them in either scenario if I had applied pressure in just the right spot. Instead, I taught them their lessons (enemy clerics that channel negative energy and work alongside undead pets are BAD, as are darkness and things that can fight you from out of reach) and "let them off the hook" so to speak. Kyle would call it putting on kid gloves.

The difference is that, at the end of the scenario, I asked what they thought they needed to be prepared for that stuff. Those players now know what to do, and have what is necessary.

Spoiler:
The negative channel clerics were a cakewalk. Seriously, one SoD (witch sleep hex, color spray), one good hit of a hitter (the 1-2 boss has 11 hp and the tougher cleric has 28...A level 1 THF can crit for 28 easily and drop the 11 on a none crit) or heavens forbid an actually good combat build. Unless your in the 6-7 tier that is...and only for the first one since she gets a spectre. The darkness wasn't use to full effect honestly because the in the 1-2 tier it's a lone critter that is easily taken down and in the 3-4 tier, the mooks it has is rather useless. In the 6-7 tier, that whole encounter is pretty much nullified by one good boom spell or two okay ones that you should have at those levels. Even if you have a party of beat sticks, it's still pretty easy since they go down to a hit anyways.

Umm yeah so like I said, small bumps...and ones easily brute forced over. The problem is that these issues at higher levels are not so easily brute forced over. So unless you have some of the really high end builds that are doing 100+ damage on a non crit by level 7, brute forcing stop working and you need to apply the normal counters for things.

The Exchange 4/5 5/5

Perhaps we need to create an entirely different thread about pregens, and when they should be used, and what GMs can do to make things better. I don't personally think that new players with pregens are a problem that impacts the game so much that you can't play high tier. I DO think a level 7 pregen can be an overwhelming introduction for a new player.

EDIT: rather than rehash it here

In case it is relevant:
I GMed Bonekeep Part 2 (and 1) at GenCon (Tier 3-7). My Part 2 table (low tier) had two level 4 players with played-up characters. And four level 4 pregens. Two people who had just started playing that weekend (and therefore only had level 2 characters) and two people who were "trying out this PFS thing." It was a horrible time for the two experienced players, the group barely made it through three rooms. Two deaths (both pregens, mercifully).

So is the moral of the story "Don't let pregens play Bonekeep?" Nope.

When I played Bonekeep 2 (high tier) two weeks later at Dragon*Con, we had a pick-up table of five. Three experienced players and two brand-new players with level 7 pregens. We had a great time and got through all but the last two rooms before leaving. (I had the player knowledge that we *might* have been able to finish, but I didn't push. With the magus out of spells and having one arcane point, Seelah out of LoH, and me down to one level 3 and two level 1 spell slots, they didn't want to risk it.) No deaths.

The difference was in the numbers. Dropping one or two new players in with higher level pregens will (in all but the absolute deadliest scenarios) not impact the success of a group. It might impact the enjoyment of the new players though. In that Bonekeep 2 play-through, the pregen players said afterwards that they didn't really get to feel like they were learning how the game worked (too much help from us experienced players with the advanced mechanics of level 7 characters), even though they had a good time.

Swing the other way - 4 new players and 2 experienced in a subtier 7-8 scenario - and you've got a recipe for disaster. But in that case you should DEFINITELY be able to put together a 1-5 table of some older scenario.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Belafon wrote:

Perhaps we need to create an entirely different thread about pregens, and when they should be used, and what GMs can do to make things better. I don't personally think that new players with pregens are a problem that impacts the game so much that you can't play high tier. I DO think a level 7 pregen can be an overwhelming introduction for a new player.

** spoiler omitted **...

Been there, done that. With all the inherent grumpiness.

You can find more, too. Just look for the long ones (50+ posts).


Andrew Christian wrote:


I must have misunderstood chweezy, because I understood him to say that the folks he's playing with can't get to 5.

I clarified later, please follow along. Not only did I say the wrong level, I made the mistake of putting a number to a generalization. Here is the fixed statement:

"Most of the players locally cannot get to mid levels, due to the relative ease of the early missions and how easy it is in pathfinder to make a poor character"

Actually, when I gm, I go super hard on the tactics in the 1-5 tiers, mostly because the enemies you fight are quite weak (fighters with 13 strength, a bunch of rogues with smokesticks, etc.). When it gets to upper tier and the bad guy uses a Chaos Hammer, or basically a problem that can't be solved by used 1d4+1 wand of magic missile, it becomes an issue

EDIT: Also, I agree that pregens are universally awful, and I cringe when someone has to play valeros or merisial

Lantern Lodge 4/5

Michael Brock wrote:
If you give someone a 4th level pregen in a subtler 3-4 of a 3-7 scenario, it isn't bad as a one time trial by the brand new person.

I've done this a few times, and it's really not a bad option. It gives players a test-drive of a more sturdy character with more options, a taste for what the game offers, and something to aim for. Playing at a table with more experienced gamers also helps set the tone and expectations of the game. And they walk away with a Chronicle sheet which they can apply to their first new character, with only two more sessions to play before advancing to 2nd level.

But you do have to know your audience. Ask the players a few questions: "have you played any RPGs before, previous Editions of the game perhaps?" If they seem a bit out-of-their-depth, then perhaps a session of We Be Goblins might be a better fit to teach them the basics of Roleplaying (skill checks, combat, roleplaying etc) - they still walk away with a Chronicle sheet they can apply to their first character.

351 to 392 of 392 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / The Future of Level 1-5 Scenarios? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Society