|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Beckett --
Good point about the regional competition thing discouraging "traitorous" attendance at distant conventions.
The goals, as I understand it are:
1) To encourage current PFS players to attend conventions that they might have otherwise passed on. The reasons for growing conventions has already been explained on another thread.
2) To get people who have come to a convention intending to play other games, to try out Pathfinder instead,and to get excited about the organized play campaign.
If we get lots of the first, that's helpful for getting the second.
Going back to the original post, there is no mention of Cons, Game Days, or special events. I am not sure if that was a detail that was supposed to be hidden in the fine print to make the idea more palatable or was meant to be obvious and go without saying, but I was taking it at face value.
Purpose: To encourage PFS players to travel to new regions to play PFS.
Proposal: Starting at a point in the year where it would have least impact on non-exclusive regions do the following:
- Divide the world into 12 popular regions of Golarion based <on the> number of tables being reported (include 1 region for online play).
- Each month, the higher level scenario released is only released in one specific region (on an annual rotating basis).
- After three months, that scenario is released to the remaining 11 regions.
After two months time, every region would see two 'new' releases per month. At any given time, there would be two regions of the world that would have exclusive rights to offer a scenario that can not be played anywhere else.
Q: Why do we care if or want PFS players to have to travel to new areas to play PFS?
A: This is best discussed in another thread, but many players enjoy traveling to new areas to play with new people. Experiencing PFS with new players and GMs makes us all better and conventions increase the exposure of the campaign
-
Q: How are the scenarios going to be restricted exactly?A: No idea. Perhaps it's as simple as including a note on the chronicle that it isn't valid outside of Region X until Date Y?
To me, regardless if it is con or region specific, the end goal is to get people traveling. Does it really matter if it's traveling for a convention or for a gameday as long as the result is that people are traveling and supporting different regions? (and FYI a con has the potential for a lot more support than a singular gameday to any region).
This is the time where we should be looking at this from a campaign perspective and not a personal one. For me this thread should be about leaving personal prejudice against one aspect or another (conventions and not being able to personally go) at the door and think with a global head. What can happen in one region can affect what happens in another.
|
You might be attributing something to my post that I'm not really intending. I'm not against Cons. I'm about to be in Afghanistan, and not sure this would apply to me anyway, just trying to look at this rationally, but also fairly, while weighing the foreseeable benefits and drawbacks. I was initially under the impression that the proposal was not at all Con related, (and thus not just another attempt to net Cons more rewards). That might or might not be the case, I don't know anyone's intent, but if this is more focused on getting more for and from Con than it is to just boost travel and meeting new players and groups (I don't see them as the same thing), then I think the end result is just going to be a reward for regions that have more Cons more often (and would have already, so already getting more numbers of Boons and the like) while now preventing others, both at loosing regions, and also at home games from participating in what is now a reward for a small population of the player/DM base for months+/-.
I just don't see that as being good for really anyone outside of the group that already goes to Cons often, and I am not sure that it's a good idea for PFS as a whole, just that small group(s). Now, with that in mind, and again it's probably not going to apply to me for the next yearish at all, I am not a PFS authority, and am just basing it off of speculation and an educated guess from what info we do have. We still have no module of the 9-12 regions, and Online play really changes the playing field a great deal, so that needs to be tackled probably first.
|
|
So, counter idea/proposal. If the idea is to broaden Con travel rather than general PFS play, what if the special scenario's would be restricted to a given "winning" region for a temporary amount of time, but only for Cons and similar special events, (including Online events). But "home" games are not at all restricted, regardless of region. Assuming that the scenario in question IS NOT an exclusive special, just a normal scenario. In other words, exactly as the original post, except that the scenario is not a special or anything, just a given scenario, and also that the only restriction for not winning a region has is that they can not use that scenario in any Cons/Game Days/etc . . . in their (or any other loosing) region for a month or two, but they can still use it for "home" PFS games just like any other legal scenario play.
That would encourage some travel, and reward some people without actually taking anything at all from others (minus Cons being able to run a single scenario for a short time limit as part of their Con), but would also encourage a bit of friendly competition within region's, something that is more likely help encourage existing players to want to recruit more new players or into PFS. Everyone however, can still play it at any time (other than at Cons if they are not in that winning region), so it is not taking (or looking like it is taking) anything away from anyone else. Basically it's bragging rights for a region's Cons, but everyone else can still play it normally in home games.
Thoughts?
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
If someone's location or finances didn't allow her to get to a convention that offered Bonekeep, or Siege of the Diamond City, would you counsel her to quit the campaign?I am going to try to remain call here, but where the hell did I suggest I would counsel anyone under any circumstances to quit PFS, WHERE? This one really pisses me off.
That would be here, in your very first post in this thread, where you said "if Regional Specials became a thing I would probably walk" and further that "If not being able to regularly travel to other regions means I can't access special content, then I have little interest in continuing with the organization."
Granted, you were *technically* saying that you would quit and not that you would counsel others to do so, but Chris having made that connection hardly seems like enough of a leap to merit "really piss[ing] [you] off."
If you get that upset when people read your posts, you might be more comfortable leaving your thoughts and then using the "Hide Thread" feature so you don't get "really pissed off" by people asking about the things you apparently forgot you said.
|
|
You might be attributing something to my post that I'm not really intending. I'm not against Cons. I'm about to be in Afghanistan, and not sure this would apply to me anyway, just trying to look at this rationally, but also fairly, while weighing the foreseeable benefits and drawbacks. I was initially under the impression that the proposal was not at all Con related, (and thus not just another attempt to net Cons more rewards). That might or might not be the case, I don't know anyone's intent, but if this is more focused on getting more for and from Con than it is to just boost travel and meeting new players and groups (I don't see them as the same thing), then I think the end result is just going to be a reward for regions that have more Cons more often (and would have already, so already getting more numbers of Boons and the like) while now preventing others, both at loosing regions, and also at home games from participating in what is now a reward for a small population of the player/DM base for months+/-.
I just don't see that as being good for really anyone outside of the group that already goes to Cons often, and I am not sure that it's a good idea for PFS as a whole, just that small group(s). Now, with that in mind, and again it's probably not going to apply to me for the next yearish at all, I am not a PFS authority, and am just basing it off of speculation and an educated guess from what info we do have. We still have no module of the 9-12 regions, and Online play really changes the playing field a great deal, so that needs to be tackled probably first.
First off, Thank you for your service. I wish you well and a speedy return.
Second, it's entirely possible that I'm construing something that you're not intending.
I don't consider this a proposal for "just the con-travelers" I consider it something to entice more people to become con-travelers; that extra piece of the pie that would make someone decide that they can save for a couple of months and travel to X area and play Y scenario and get a piece of the Z pie.
Now add to that someone that is brand spanking new and reading these forums trying to decide if they want to play the game or not or they have found their local gameday and are hungry for more. They come onto the forums and find out that they can travel to X area and play Y scenario and get a piece of the Z pie.
For both of these gamers that added benefit of the a piece of the Z pie is that they also meet new people and make new friends. Let's say that Art from Tennessee decides to go up to Kentucky for a smaller convention; and in talking with Bob finds out that there is a caravan headed to Paizocon the following summer. Yes it's a long drive, but there are 5 people and everyone gets to take a turn driving and when you average out the cost of gas vs. a flight then well it's a heck of a lot cheaper and a trip to paizocon becomes affordable and with the realm of a possibility instead of looking at paizocon akin to a trip to Mecca over in the promised land. Not only that Art is now supporting two gaming regions as he makes it a point to buy something from each store.
Now Art is all super excited because he's got his Tennesse gaming group and he's now got gaming friends up on Kentucky and he has a few months to save for the roadtrip to Washington for Paizocon. He decides that on their roadtrip that they should play through some scenarios so he takes a look at GMing and see what needs to be done and works out how he can do maps and everything for playing in the car and oooo Art is now a GM; because he wants practice before going to paizocon he volunteers to pick up a game here and there locally and decides he really likes this GMing gig and volunteers to pick up a game or two at Paizocon... and then he hears about Gencon and goes there.. and he hears about Scarabcon and decides that SC in January sounds awesome and he's now made himself another set of Gaming friends and can plan to travel there (once or twice a year) and there is a third gaming region that he has.
And it all started because Art found out that he could travel to X area and play Y scenario and get a piece of the Z pie.
That is why we are on here discussing it and applying it to conventions.
|
Not only that Art is now supporting two gaming regions as he makes it a point to buy something from each store.
More likely, Art will not buy anything from either store, which hurts his FLGS more than it helps anybody else.
Most of us have a fixed amount of money to spend on this hobby. The larger the portion we spend on gas, airline tickets, or hotel rooms, the less we will have available to spend in our local stores. I'm failing to see how this helps the stores at all.
|
|
Not only that Art is now supporting two gaming regions as he makes it a point to buy something from each store.More likely, Art will not buy anything from either store, which hurts his FLGS more than it helps anybody else.
Most of us have a fixed amount of money to spend on this hobby. The larger the portion we spend on gas, airline tickets, or hotel rooms, the less we will have available to spend in our local stores. I'm failing to see how this helps the stores at all.
I've spent time on a fixed income and I've know others on a fixed income that wanted to travel (since they had the time) and worked it so that they did things as inexpensive as possible and also supported the flgs of the area that they were in. I'm paying off the cost of moving to another state and setting up living -- it ain't cheap.. so my ability to attend conventions and spend money at an flgs is minimal right now... Please don't think I don't understand and get where you're coming from.
I'm saying that there isn't any possibility that should be discounted because of a personal circumstance .. again thinking globally on this vs individual.
|
|
To me, regardless if it is con or region specific, the end goal is to get people traveling. Does it really matter if it's traveling for a convention or for a gameday as long as the result is that people are traveling and supporting different regions? (and FYI a con has the potential for a lot more support than a singular gameday to any region).
The one idea that has come out of this thread is that we should encourage people to travel to new places to play. However by doing that what we are really encouraging is people to game with people from new places. If we prioritize literal physical travel then we are going to get people from the USA driving around the States to play with each other and people from Europe going around Europe to play with each other and people in Australia traveling around Australia to play with each other more, but we wills till have split the PFS community into several communities based on the largest physical barriers.
However in this age of ubiquitous internet we can do better. We need to encourage online play because that is what makes PFS one community. That is why if there are regional scenarios then online needs to be a common space where people can be encouraged to seek out DMs and players from other places.
This is the time where we should be looking at this from a campaign perspective and not a personal one. For me this thread should be about leaving personal prejudice against one aspect or another (conventions and not being able to personally go) at the door and think with a global head. What can happen in one region can affect what happens in another.
I see the direction of the campaign swinging away from cons slightly and trying to democratize PFS and widen the playerbase into places overseas that have not previously had any gaming presence. In both of these threads about cons I have seen that Mike is very concerned with making sure that any changes would be fair for people in relatively new PFS communities in far-flung places and that is great. I am basing my campaign perspective on continuing that direction which I have seen to be very beneficial. That is why I am against anything more that is con exclusive. It draws us away from where PFS has been heading and needs to keep heading.
I don't consider this a proposal for "just the con-travelers" I consider it something to entice more people to become con-travelers; that extra piece of the pie that would make someone decide that they can save for a couple of months and travel to X area and play Y scenario and get a piece of the Z pie.
But the con-goers are a still significant, but I suspect shrinking subset of PFS players as the playerbase broadens into new locations. This proposal is absolutely for con-goers. There is a maximal percentage of people who can go to cons and anyone left outside that group for monetary or geographic or time reasons is left wondering why they are suddenly further excluded from full participation in PFS and that is something we need to avoid at any cost. Thus online play is what we need to encourage rather than travel since the percentage of people unavoidably locked out of that are far fewer.
|
|
This is the time where we should be looking at this from a campaign perspective and not a personal one. For me this thread should be about leaving personal prejudice against one aspect or another (conventions and not being able to personally go) at the door and think with a global head. What can happen in one region can affect what happens in another.I see the direction of the campaign swinging away from cons slightly and trying to democratize PFS and widen the playerbase into places overseas that have not previously had any gaming presence. In both of these threads about cons I have seen that Mike is very concerned with making sure that any changes would be fair for people in relatively new PFS communities in far-flung places and that is great. I am basing my campaign perspective on continuing that direction which I have seen to be very beneficial. That is why I am against anything more that is con exclusive. It draws us away from where PFS has been heading and needs to keep heading
I don't see PFS as a whole swinging away from conventions, conventions are a lot of the bread and butter of growing a game -- and the new player quite honestly is an easier sell than a new player at a local gameday. Sometimes all it takes is a gentle nudge at a con vs. a sledgehammer at a local gameday.
At it's core PFS is a face to face social game; no matter how involved the internet may be in the game, it will (for me) never replace sitting down with people that I consider brothers and sisters (in the gaming world at least) and rolling dice. I can have fun in an online game, but there is a diminished level of involvement for me as I'm not totally immersed in the game as I am at a table. I don't think I'm the only one.
To me, regardless if it is con or region specific, the end goal is to get people traveling. Does it really matter if it's traveling for a convention or for a gameday as long as the result is that people are traveling and supporting different regions? (and FYI a con has the potential for a lot more support than a singular gameday to any region).The one idea that has come out of this thread is that we should encourage people to travel to new places to play. However by doing that what we are really encouraging is people to game with people from new places. If we prioritize literal physical travel then we are going to get people from the USA driving around the States to play with each other and people from Europe going around Europe to play with each other and people in Australia traveling around Australia to play with each other more, but we wills till have split the PFS community into several communities based on the largest physical barriers.
However in this age of ubiquitous internet we can do better. We need to encourage online play because that is what makes PFS one community. That is why if there are regional scenarios then online needs to be a common space where people can be encouraged to seek out DMs and players from other places.
As long as there are table top games, the world as a whole will be split into regions, it's just not feasible to travel to Germany in January and then Australia in February. I think the online play and online play community is a HUGE part of the overall PFS community, but I don't see them taking over as the primary way this game is played. At it's core PFS is a face to face game and I see it staying that way.
|
|
actually Saint Caleth, I read this thread as being about "Regional Exclusive Scenarios", not about "Con Exclusive Scenarios".
During LG, most of my "out of region" gaming was NOT at a CON - it was when I traveled on business or to visit family far from my home. And I hosted many an out of town gamer who was in my home town for the week end and there wasn't a CON or a Game day.
I think there is a mix of language as some people are thinking in a convention setting (and calling it such) and some are thinking it's a regional setting (and calling it such) and we are all talking about the same thing lol
|
|
I think there is a mix of language as some people are thinking in a convention setting (and calling it such) and some are thinking it's a regional setting (and calling it such) and we are all talking about the same thing lolactually Saint Caleth, I read this thread as being about "Regional Exclusive Scenarios", not about "Con Exclusive Scenarios".
During LG, most of my "out of region" gaming was NOT at a CON - it was when I traveled on business or to visit family far from my home. And I hosted many an out of town gamer who was in my home town for the week end and there wasn't a CON or a Game day.
Yea, I was assuming that they would be both. Regional scenarios available at any table might actually be something that I would support.
As long as there are table top games, the world as a whole will be split into regions, it's just not feasible to travel to Germany in January and then Australia in February. I think the online play and online play community is a HUGE part of the overall PFS community, but I don't see them taking over as the primary way this game is played. At it's core PFS is a face to face game and I see it staying that way.
Well online will never take over face to face tables completely, but I think it is going to become a larger percentage of the PFS community than it is even now. We can and should use to to overcome those splits.
|
|
Option 1: (Paizo produced scenarios)
Take an AP that is about to be sactioned, say Carrion Crown.
"Regional Exclusive Scenarios" would mean that for some exclusive region (or regions) people could play the adventures from that AP for credit in PFS.Say Missouri USA, Queensland Australia, France (Europe), São Paulo Brazil, Andhra Pradesh India, Kenya (Africa). If you aren't in one of those regions, you would have to travel to them to play part (or all) of that AP for PFS credit. Wow... I am not going to be happy with that.
Why can't it be that with the option to wait a couple of months and then play it? The original idea didn't add or remove content. Every single region, no matter how finely split would see two newly released scenarios per month. The only difference would be that at any given time there would be a couple of scenarios out there that could only be played in a certain area or areas of the world that would be used to encourage people to travel to those areas to play. If you can't travel or don't want to, for whatever reason, wait a couple of months.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
So persons who travel to cons burn their future scenario choices.
"Sorry guys, I can't play this week's new release at the shop, 'cause I went to Origins last month."
That's a bum reason. Playing any scenario anywhere means that you can't play it again elsewhere.
That statement boils down to either: "Hey, guys, I can run this week's new release because I went to Origins last month."
or
"Knowing that our store was going to run this scenario at some point, I chose to play it at Origins last month. So I'll play something else."
which is functionally the same as
"Knowing that our store was going to run this scenario tonight, I chose to play it at a convention last weekend. So I'll play something else."
If it's important to play a scenario at a local game day, then exercise a little restraint and don't sign up to play it ahead of time at a convention. This has nothing to do with staggered release schedules, unless your local store always runs both new releases the first day it can. (If that's the case, play the other scenario.)
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why can't it be that with the option to wait a couple of months and then play it? The original idea didn't add or remove content. Every single region, no matter how finely split would see two newly released scenarios per month. The only difference would be that at any given time there would be a couple of scenarios out there that could only be played in a certain area or areas of the world that would be used to encourage people to travel to those areas to play. If you can't travel or don't want to, for whatever reason, wait a couple of months.Option 1: (Paizo produced scenarios)
Take an AP that is about to be sactioned, say Carrion Crown.
"Regional Exclusive Scenarios" would mean that for some exclusive region (or regions) people could play the adventures from that AP for credit in PFS.Say Missouri USA, Queensland Australia, France (Europe), São Paulo Brazil, Andhra Pradesh India, Kenya (Africa). If you aren't in one of those regions, you would have to travel to them to play part (or all) of that AP for PFS credit. Wow... I am not going to be happy with that.
so persons who travel to CONs burn their future scenario choices.
"Sorry guys, I can't play this weeks new release at the shop, 'cause I went to Origins last month."
"The good news is that means I'm prepped to GM it now!!" :P
|
as it stands, i look at thee boards and see all the special events posted...how many actually travel to them? pullman had winterfest...1 car load of uss traveled to it..rest were all local. spokanes doin blood under absalon in a few weeks...so far we have had 3 from pullman show interest, other areas are all quiet. so i dont see enough people willin to go 3-5hrs away...y would they come from another state?
|
|
Purpose: To encourage PFS players to travel to new regions to play PFS.How far are you looking to have people travel?
-TimD
Simply outside their usual region. For some people that means 10 km, for others it means half-way around the world. I don't often make it to Madison which is just over an hour away. Why would I? It means more time driving, I have to budget an extra $15 for gas for the month, etc...
A: I do it to meet new people, make new friendships, and in the scope of PFS, be a better PFS member (a better GM, better player, more knowledgeable, more in touch with other opinions, making contacts to help with various local events, etc).
There's value in having our member base become more interconnected through personal relationships.
*Takeing this more meta and generalizing, if this doesn't fit you perfectly, I really don't care*
Non-gamers frequently say that we gaming nerds aren't social. That's BS. We are social. Unfortunately we're often only social within a small network of friends and/or we're not well practiced at it (evident with how we often treat those who disagree with us on these boards...). We are also usually only social when we have a common 'thing' we can focus our discussions on.
Bringing in new players from different perspectives, whether physically local or distant helps the entire community. Meeting new people outside our normal comfortable circle of nerds makes us better people. It establishes friendships with people we'd normally never meet. Yes we can meet people online and even play through PbP or VTT's. Those are great and should be promoted! But the relationships formed by meeting people in person are important and shouldn't be overlooked by our members or by Paizo. How many subscribers, authors and even Paizo employees are there because they got to experience a convention with a heavy Paizo/PFS/PFRPG presence? How many people became VO's after having met Mike or another VO at a convention? There's an energy at conventions that needs to not only be captured but also cultivated.
*steps off soap box filled with jars of Caubo's tears*
Stuff
Okay, well how will this help that? From my perspective, its done heavy handedly by asking people to go out of region for the wrong reasons and also denying them the chance to play that scenario regularly. The heavy handed nature of it is what mostly bothers me.
|
A question for anyone who thinks this is a good idea: how do people think the regions should be partitioned (whatever their eventual number would be)?
Equal population?
Equal no. of registered PFS players?
Equal no. of reported sessions?
Equal no. of major(?) conventions?
Equal size?
International boundaries, regardless of size?
|
|
StuffOkay, well how will this help that? From my perspective, its done heavy handedly by asking people to go out of region for the wrong reasons and also denying them the chance to play that scenario regularly. The heavy handed nature of it is what mostly bothers me.
Call it what you want from your perspective (twice even). There are those who call any sort of reward elitist, because someone "can't possibly" do whatever's required to earn it.
There's no punishment in this system. It's structurally similar to the way Gen Con scenarios are released.
|
|
A question for anyone who thinks this is a good idea: how do people think the regions should be partitioned (whatever their eventual number would be)?
Equal population?
Equal no. of registered PFS players?
Equal no. of reported sessions?
Equal no. of major(?) conventions?
Equal size?
International boundaries, regardless of size?
Probably more focused on size/distance with a consideration for population and online play.
I don't think a system like this should be for conventions. I think it should be small enough that a well publicized game day near the border could draw people from a couple hours away, but hopefully work out scheduling/alignment with the some of the regions conventions.
Call it what you want from your perspective (twice even). There are those who call any sort of reward elitist, because someone "can't possibly" do whatever's required to earn it.StuffOkay, well how will this help that? From my perspective, its done heavy handedly by asking people to go out of region for the wrong reasons and also denying them the chance to play that scenario regularly. The heavy handed nature of it is what mostly bothers me.
A reward is a bonus. Denying someone something they would normally get and allowing it conditionally isn't really a good reward. Its a fake sort of special. Giving someone something extra would be a good reward though.
|
|
Denying someone something they would normally get and allowing it conditionally isn't really a good reward.
What are you being denied? There are no longer July scenarios. There are only three August scenarios now. Where was the outrage then?
What if Paizo pulled ahead two scenarios to make this happen (one by two months, the other by a month)?
January 29th, two scenarios (5-12/13) are released everywhere and 5-16 is released to region 1.
February 26th, 5-14/15 are released, 5-18 is released to region 2.
March 26th, 5-16 is released globally along with 5-17 and 5-20 is released to region 3.
April 30th, 5-18 is released globally along with 5-19 and 5-22 is released to region 4.
Continue...
Denying someone something they would normally get and allowing it conditionally isn't really a good reward.What are you being denied?
Erm... The scenario in question unless I go to the location or wait a period of time? I did add the word conditionally. After all if I can get there I can play it.
Regardless I'm not likely to move any further because the society has something special in one area, I might say "wow that's cool when I get there!", but I won't go out of my way for it. So may its not for me. Its for those who are lucky enough to be able to do so. Who are the guys who can do it anyway and may very well be the people who do already.
|
|
Erm... The scenario in question unless I go to the location or wait a period of time? Regardless I'm not likely to move any further because the society has something special in one area, I might say "wow that's cool when I get there!", but I won't go out of my way for it. So may its not for me. Its for those who are lucky enough to be able to do so. Who are the guys who can do it anyway and may very well be the people who do already.Denying someone something they would normally get and allowing it conditionally isn't really a good reward.What are you being denied?
You're already forced to wait until the end of the month for two scenarios. Every month.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're already forced to wait until the end of the month for two scenarios. Every month.
And there's no other way for me to play them. I'm not actually being denied. I also can't play the scenarios that come out next year because they don't exist yet. Its not the same thing.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would simply like to reiterate my perspective as a fairly casual PFS player: I'm not "traveling" to play this game, period. I am not impressed by or interested in expending real-life resources to take part in race boons, con specials, or regional specials. The idea just doesn't get me all hot & bothered either way.
If I happen to be out of town and have the chance to play PFS at some other locale, that would be cool. Maybe.
But is this going to incentivize me to travel or make me feel so excluded that I get upset, no. I'll still play PFS either way.
If Paizo wants to do something that might make a difference to a few hundred people, so be it.
But as I've asked before - can any of you 5-star GM's, VO's, or Paizo folks tell me in real numbers how many people this will really make a difference for? I think the pushback is coming from the vast majority of PFS players who just aren't that into this thing as much as you are.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Instead of regional Scenarios, here is a different Idea that can encourage Traveling to different Conventions and has less development of a full scenario.
Regional Boons.
Create Boons for Separate areas/regions that interact differently with each other as you gather different boons from conventions from different areas around the world.
Getting one boon from a local convention say here in Texas has minor boon, while if I get another boon from say Colorado or Seattle the 2 interact with each other for a better affect.
Say of I go all the way to Australia for a convention, all the boons I already have and due to the distance traveled come together for an even greater affect.
This is just a basic framework of an idea, a lot would have to be put into how they would actual work with each other and how to determine greater rewards based on the traveling.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Instead of a regional specific scenarios which seem to have a series of serious issues to overcome, how about a multi-part special boon that would be completed by traveling to different areas. It could start out small (say five local games which must be at different locations and posted as public through the PFS website) and would expand from there (perhaps with a completion after traveling to a different country). Another option would be to have each step be a convention that could then be signed off when you play a scenario there.
This is just my 2 cents for a way to encourage travel without Paizo making a huge investment into developing multiple scenarios (instead just the cost of developing a boon). It would also encourage people to travel to other locations locally without feeling required to travel long distances (ie small reward for short distances, bigger reward for longer distances).
OR...
Instead of full scenarios what about regional quests. Not quite so potentially game breaking and there are still far too few PFS quests.
|
|
But as I've asked before - can any of you 5-star GM's, VO's, or Paizo folks tell me in real numbers how many people this will really make a difference for? I think the pushback is coming from the vast majority of PFS players who just aren't that into this thing as much as you are.
Vast majority? Can you please provide data?
IMNSHO, if any regional reward system gets just one person to venture out to a new area and meet new people, it's worth it. They may just be the next Brock, Compton, Courts, Moreland, etc...