Limit Aasimar / Teifling grandfathering

[gnoams]

With seasons 5 focus on the worldwound, an influx of planetouched characters fits the campaign. Now that is over, they go back to being rare and they're opening some new races to be common. I think it'd be cool if they did that every season.

It takes 66 games if you don't play slow to level a character from 1 to retired. If you play once a week that's about seven and a half months if you somehow manage to only play the one character. In practice, I started playing pfs off and on 5 years ago, and now regularly play and gm for the past two years. Counting only level 4+ characters I have 9, some of which haven't been played in over a year. I've never played any of them slow progression, I have one character that is now almost to level 12. I even attend cons twice a year. I don't get the fuss of stockpiling. I think it'd get boring playing the same scenario over and over many times in a row and you'll never use 10 new characters, but if that's fun for you who am I to stop it? I can get making one for that new concept you were wanting to try out, but more than that... when are you going to ever play them?

I for one like the change from a campaign point of view. I'd be happy to see them cycle more options in and out following the theme of each season.

[Pincasta Stonelord]

I feel bad for those who don't follow the forum and will be surprised they lost their chance at A/T character come August 14. I had a GM credit blob statted out as a Human Druid, but after this announcement I restatted him out to be a Aasimar Druid. I have no Aasimar characters but always wanted to try one, especially since I bought the Adv. Race Guide. If I don't like how it works I can always rebuild to human (or one of the new options) when I get to 3xp.

When the next Class guide comes out I would like a Nagaji Bloodrager, so maybe the Druid won't get much playing time anyway.

[SCPRedMage]

Pincasta Stonelord wrote:

I feel bad for those who don't follow the forum and will be surprised they lost their chance at A/T character come August 14.

Aye, there's going to be some of that, but hopefully those of us who DO frequent the forums will do a good enough job of spreading the word. The most likely to be caught unawares would be those who don't play very frequently, since they're the most likely to not talk to someone who HAS heard between now and then.

I know locally our VC included it in the last e-mail he sent out to the players registered on our Warhorn page, and I've tried to make sure everyone I've played with is aware of the change.

[JohnF]

gnoams wrote:

It takes 66 games if you don't play slow to level a character from 1 to retired.

Are you sure about that? 66 games at 3XP per level is 22 levels.

Retirement from regular PFS play happens at level 12 (33 games).

[Sitri]

Next thing you know these people will start slow playing these outsiders. Will the horrors never end? >.>

[gnoams]

John Francis wrote:

gnoams wrote:

It takes 66 games if you don't play slow to level a character from 1 to retired.

Are you sure about that? 66 games at 3XP per level is 22 levels.

Retirement from regular PFS play happens at level 12 (33 games).

Yeah my mistake, 66 for slow, 33 for normal. My point remains, how many characters do you expect to go through over the course of pfs?

[Andrew Christian]

If folks abuse the very generous grandfathering, by doing exactly what you were asked not to do, why would you think the next time would not be different.

I mean seriously. Campaign leadership asked us specifically to not abuse this. And so if you basically ignore that, abuse it, you are essentially spitting in their face.

Make a Tiefling. Make two even. Make sure you gave an XP on it. If someone wants to be overly officious because your second game is after August 14, then ask your VO then Mike to intervene. As I feel they are also breaking the intent if the openness of this grandfathering.

But please don't abuse it. If rampant abuse actually happens and is observed then you can expect this level of trust to disappear.

Why? You might ask. Because you are breaking a trust. You don't have to like it or even agree with it.

But its a trust they asked you in good faith to honor.

So will you honor that trust or spit on it to satisfy your own desires?

[Mark Stratton]

Someone in another thread came right and said that he was going to lie about the characters and their qualifications to be grandfathered, and essentially conveyed the sentiment that his VC has no problem with it or something (that wasn't a quote, but I got the impression from his statement that his VC was at least aware that this person was going to lie.)

[Mark Stratton]

Here is what this person said on the other forum - I copied and pasted this from his posting:

"I made no such notion that I would be quitting. The current plan is stocking up even if that means lieing about my played games to have my Aasimars already have the 1exp... An if those run out be it legit or cheated haven't decided yet... I'm going to play them anyways... An if that's not going work my venture captain has said he would look for me some boons for them"

I am troubled by two things:
1. This person is going to cheat
2. The VC knows this is the person's plan and, if the plan doesn't work out, will look for boons.

I'm not concerned about looking for boons; I am concerned that the VC knows this person is prepared to lie or cheat and, if that doesn't work out, will look for boons.

I'm sorry, but to know that a VC is potentially involved is disturbing. I hope this is just a part of grandstanding on the part of this player, and not an accurate reflection. If, however, his statement is true, that a VC is knowledgeable about this and is going to allow it to happen, that person should not remain a VC.

[Jiggy]

Mark Stratton wrote:

Here is what this person said on the other forum - I copied and pasted this from his posting:

"I made no such notion that I would be quitting. The current plan is stocking up even if that means lieing about my played games to have my Aasimars already have the 1exp... An if those run out be it legit or cheated haven't decided yet... I'm going to play them anyways... An if that's not going work my venture captain has said he would look for me some boons for them"

I am troubled by two things:
1. This person is going to cheat
2. The VC knows this is the person's plan and, if the plan doesn't work out, will look for boons.

I'm not concerned about looking for boons; I am concerned that the VC knows this person is prepared to lie or cheat and, if that doesn't work out, will look for boons.

I'm sorry, but to know that a VC is potentially involved is disturbing. I hope this is just a part of grandstanding on the part of this player, and not an accurate reflection. If, however, his statement is true, that a VC is knowledgeable about this and is going to allow it to happen, that person should not remain a VC.

I don't think he's implying the VC is involved, I think he's saying that his VC is already looking out for boons for him but the player's just not relying on that fact except as a Plan B if his cheating doesn't work.

[Mark Stratton]

I didn't read it that way, Jiggy, but maybe you're right. I hope that's actually the case.

[trollbill]

Mark Stratton wrote:

Here is what this person said on the other forum - I copied and pasted this from his posting:

"I made no such notion that I would be quitting. The current plan is stocking up even if that means lieing about my played games to have my Aasimars already have the 1exp... An if those run out be it legit or cheated haven't decided yet... I'm going to play them anyways... An if that's not going work my venture captain has said he would look for me some boons for them"

I am troubled by two things:
1. This person is going to cheat
2. The VC knows this is the person's plan and, if the plan doesn't work out, will look for boons.

I'm not concerned about looking for boons; I am concerned that the VC knows this person is prepared to lie or cheat and, if that doesn't work out, will look for boons.

I'm sorry, but to know that a VC is potentially involved is disturbing. I hope this is just a part of grandstanding on the part of this player, and not an accurate reflection. If, however, his statement is true, that a VC is knowledgeable about this and is going to allow it to happen, that person should not remain a VC.

I agree. It's disturbing. I just don't see how changing the grandfathering rules is going to change any of that. Cheaters are going to cheat.

[SCPRedMage]

Mark Stratton wrote:

Here is what this person said on the other forum - I copied and pasted this from his posting:

"I made no such notion that I would be quitting. The current plan is stocking up even if that means lieing about my played games to have my Aasimars already have the 1exp... An if those run out be it legit or cheated haven't decided yet... I'm going to play them anyways... An if that's not going work my venture captain has said he would look for me some boons for them"

I am troubled by two things:
1. This person is going to cheat
2. The VC knows this is the person's plan and, if the plan doesn't work out, will look for boons.

I'm not concerned about looking for boons; I am concerned that the VC knows this person is prepared to lie or cheat and, if that doesn't work out, will look for boons.

I'm sorry, but to know that a VC is potentially involved is disturbing. I hope this is just a part of grandstanding on the part of this player, and not an accurate reflection. If, however, his statement is true, that a VC is knowledgeable about this and is going to allow it to happen, that person should not remain a VC.

As I said in that thread, I'm pretty sure the VC's offer to hunt for boons for him was probably made independently from his decision to cheat; nothing in what he said really indicates otherwise.

[Mark Stratton]

trollbill wrote:

I just don't see how changing the grandfathering rules is going to change any of that. Cheaters are going to cheat.

This.

[TwilightKnight]

Mark Stratton wrote:

that person should not remain a VC.

I will go further and say that IF* the comments are accurate and represent the actions both the player and the VC intend to do, then both of them should be banned from organized play. I have neither the time nor the patience to deal with people who both know the rules and blatantly intend to cheat.

*in reality, I believe that the player is grandstanding or just having a tantrum because the campaign intends to limit their favorite race option. I also think that the reference to the VC is either, made up, or a gross misrepresentation of what the VC knows and intend to do about it

[Brigg]

The upcoming Drop of Aasimar and Tiefling prompted me to recreate one of my Level 1 characters with 2 XP into a Muse-Touched Aasimar for easy grandfathering purposes.

I had a Tiefling already rolled up, but still haven't played with him yet. <.<

Personally, I see nothing wrong with creating at least one of each in the off-chance you want to play them later. Making half-a-dozen would be a little excessive for me. But for others, hey, if you want it, go for it! ^.^

[Tignous "Tig" Nio]

^ Cheating is bad, don't do it mmmmkay! mmmkay!

Hypothetically speaking, let's say they did limit the grandfathering amount to 1 active tiefling and aasimar in Pathfinder Society.

1. How would anyone track and enforce a limited grandfathered amount of aasimars and tieflings at a table?
2. I have more than a couple active aasimars and tieflings well over 1xp and over a year old. Would this force me to retire them? How would that be fair if so?

[glass]

Chris Mortika wrote:

glass, I've never said that this character-farming, this "stock-piling" of 1-XP PCs, "doesn't hurt anything."

You said "well, initially nothing". You then said that the bad things would come next time races were due to be cycled out. I was just pointing out the circular logic there "its abuse because it is bad, and it is bad because people are abusing it".

I've met Mike Brock, and he seems like a pretty smart guy. Certainly smart enough to realise that this announcement would result in a slight uptick in Aasimar being created. I have created two myself, tripling the number of aasimar amongst my local play group, and if there were any sessions left* between now and 14th I'd probably create a Tiefling too.

You can call that abuse if you like, or immature, or any other ad hominems you care to think up. I do not think it is, and I do not believe Mike thinks so either.

EDIT: Cheating's not cool though, obviously. I think we (almost) all agree with that...

glass.

(* Apart from Paizocon UK, but that was all signed up for an locked before the announcement anyway...)

[Chris Lambertz]

Removed some posts containing personal attacks and the replies/responses to them. Be civil to each other please. Also, if you have a concern over a VO and cheating, please direct this person to contact Mike Brock at [e-mail].

[WalterGM]

Guys, let's keep this civil. We don't need Chris working OT just for the PFS boards.

EDIT: I am one slow reader! Ninja'd by Chris.

[kinevon]

Mark Stratton wrote:

I didn't read it that way, Jiggy, but maybe you're right. I hope that's actually the case.

I parsed it out about the same as Jiggy did.

1) The player is unhappy that Aasimars and Tieflings are being returned to boon-only status.
2) He is trying, I hope, to get a bunch of low-tier games in to lock in, campaign-legally, a batch of aasimars for later use.
3) His local VC, knowing his preference for aasimars, is trying to find some spare, if old, aasimar boons for him, as a backup to grandfathered PCs.
4) He claims he is willing, if he runs out of grandfathered aasimars, and boons to create more legally, to cheat and fake-grandfather more aasimars.

Hopefully, number 4 is hyperboly, rather than a stated action.

And, for number 2, he can, if he is willing, be able to get in a bunch of Tier 1 repeatables through the Pathfinder Society Online Collective. I know there are a bunch of them going on because of the blog post saying they are going away on August 14th.