Races and Campaigns for Season 7

[Disturbed1]

Michael Brock wrote:

One of the things to keep in mind is that, if we are going to help cut the time back to a manageable four hour slot, most of the "unique" systems we've put in (mass combat, dog sled race in #16, etc...) are likely going to be done away with. When a GM has to teach the players about the mechanics of a unique system for that scenario only, that leans towards adding an extra 15+ minutes to the slot.

Boo. :(

New goal: Become a published Paizo author by writing a module about adventurers in a 'Mission Impossible/ Whodunnit' style mystery that leads to Mass combat and giant monster fighting, finishing up with and an infiltration. All taking place on another planet or plane.

Other things to add that Id like to see:
~Moar dragons!
~Moar monsters we havent seen yet from the Bestiaries.

If you are looking for ways to decrease GM prep time:

~Use more in-print flip mats/ map packs.
~More easy to draw maps (fewer circles, less 10sq stuff, all NSEW axis based, etc).

[Zach Klopfleisch]

Places I'd like to go:
Kelesh: More Qadiran than Qadira, with genies for construction workers? Sign me up!
Razmiran: They're such fun bad guys, and they wear masks! Sneaking in should be possible even for Barbarians. (Heck, the average 7 Cha Barbarian would probably fit in better than the 20 Cha Bard for once.)
Brevoy: I'm sure my image of the area doesn't match the creative team's ideas, but I'd love to see more of it. And a duel with a well built Aldori Swordlord might be fun for some of those optimized martials.
Rahadoum: Although we've been there a couple times before, this place is a bit of a guilty pleasure for me, not sure why. Maybe it just tickles my anti-establishment bone to play a divine caster there.
The First World: Because random is fun, in moderation.
Jormurdun: We spent a season getting to it, I hope we explore the tar out of it.

Things I want to do:
Explore some of those levels "blocked off by tons of rubble" or "not in the scope of this adventure." (See the spoiler for ideas.) Dungeon levels that we know exist but are simply blocked by a few hundred tons of loose rubble should be like an itch between Ambrus Valsine's shoulder blades.
Be a body recovery team. That entry on the chart of uses for prestige always tickled my imagination. Why not revisit an infamous TPK scenario from the perspective of the team sent out to recover the bodies. "This morning we sent out a group of initiates to run some errands. 12 hours later, one just wandered in saying something about a crazy halfling with a great axe and a psychotic sorcerer. Go find the rest of them and track down their gear because they were bringing back some important documents."
Continue experimenting with different style scenarios. We've done social scenarios, stealthy capers, investigations, mass combat, and others that are different than the normal 3 combats + an additional encounter. Keep trying new stuff. Maybe put us on the other side of the encounter: A group of adventurers/Aspis are expected to break in and steal something, stop them!
Run into more classes: We seem to see a lot of Oracles, but not many other Base classes. A few Maguses, and Alchemists, but everything else has been a one-off or completely absent as far as I can see: An Inquisitor, a Cavalier, no witches, no Samurai, no Ninja, no Summoners, a Gunslinger or two? When we face classed NPCs, consider spicing it up a little more.

Meta stories/arcs I'd like to see
Focus on some historical period or lost knowledge. I enjoyed how season 4 spent a lot of time exploring the lore of Thassilon. I'd love to see another season focused on something like Azlant, the history of Absalom itself, the Peacock Spirit, the Aboleths, Serpentfolk and Ydersius, the Vault Builders, the creators of Kaer Maga, etc. There's a ton of Golarion specific lore, and the Pathfinder Society is the perfect vehicle to explore it.
Competition between the PFS and Aspis: Both need access to places, and want to exclude the other. Or perhaps both are trying to track down a major archaeological site and are trying to keep the other from doing so, or maybe one stepped on the toes of the other too many times and the conflict heats up.
Interference by the Cult of Norgorber. The Reaper of Reputation is at direct odds with the Seekers of Secrets. Hijinks ensue.

*Here's a few scenarios with places we've visited that obviously have more to explore.*

Spoiler:

Black Waters: 2nd level of the dungeon.
Echoes of the Overwatched: Both the Blakros Museum and the Tower of the Horn.
Day of the Demon: The secret dungeon in Oestergard.
Halls of Dwarven Lore: Janderhoff

[Bardez]

I'd love to have some opportunity to play as Aspis agents, such as a slow spin-off of a parallel society with slightly less lofty goals. Don't be a jerk (to each other), but go ahead and stab 'n steal.

A parallel convention special, though, resulting in two tables PvP'ing (Aspis vs. Society) would be awesome for those who could handle it like adults and know to expect the PvP.

Or we could just fight cultists-- no; demons-- no; robots-- no; ok, dragons or drow and stuff.

EDIT:

Zach Klopfleisch wrote:

Be a body recovery team. That entry on the chart of uses for prestige always tickled my imagination. Why not revisit an infamous TPK scenario from the perspective of the team sent out to recover the bodies. "This morning we sent out a group of initiates to run some errands. 12 hours later, one just wandered in saying something about a crazy halfling with a great axe and a psychotic sorcerer. Go find the rest of them and track down their gear because they were bringing back some important documents."

I want this to be a 1-2 replayable scenario.

[zefig]

I like the body recovery team idea.

I'd love to jump through a starelfgate to have a romp on Sovyrian.

I want to explore the portal from Echoes of the Overwatched, the depths below the Godsmouth Ossuary (and more of Kaer Maga in general), the libraries of Nex, and the mana wastes.

I want to uncover the existence of the super secret branch of the Aspis Consortium mentioned in Occult Mysteries. They sound like they'd make for FANTASTIC villains and could potentially spark a pfs/aspis team up.

I like scenarios with moral choices.

I also tend to like the weird rules in limited doses. I loved Assault on the Wound, but having so much of the scenario devoted to mass combat was a little much.

[UndeadMitch]

nosig wrote:

UndeadMitch wrote:

Michael Brock wrote:

Another reason to limit the unique subsystems to rarely, or more likely none, is because people have been asking for less prep times for GM's, and easier scenarios for new GMs and Gms running cold to run. Adding a new type of scenario-only subsystem goes counter to all three of those reasonable requests.

I understand completely where this is coming from, but I enjoyed the unique stuff from Year of the Demon like mass combat and the mythic rules. I GM'd the thing with the mythic rules and played in the thing with mass combat. I made sure I was prepped for mythic, and the person that GM'd the mass combat was super prepped and was able to give us a quick rundown of the mechanics of it before we started. If people don't want to put in a little bit of extra work to GM one of those scenarios, then there are plenty of other scenarios to choose from. I wouldn't want it in every scenario, but having some unique rules show up once or twice a season is pretty fun. But that's just my two cents.

Warning labels would be nice. Something like "This scenario uses the Mass Combat rules for several encounters"...

The GM isn't able to do that, you don't do that already? If there is something weird in a scenario (chases, etc.), I as a GM feel responsible to give people a heads up that there might be some shenanigans in a scenario. Stuff like that should be on the GM.

[grandpoobah]

UndeadMitch wrote:

The GM isn't able to do that, you don't do that already? If there is something weird in a scenario (chases, etc.), I as a GM feel responsible to give people a heads up that there might be some shenanigans in a scenario. Stuff like that should be on the GM.

I disagree. the value of a disclaimer on an adventure blurb, vs. a GM introduction is primarily TIME and scheduling. If I know (as a player) that mass combat rules are being used on an adventure before the game - I can read those rules and come to the game prepared. If the GM tells me at the table, I have to learn them (or review them) at the table or leave. This either takes extra time at the table, or disrupts the table.

Alerting players ahead of time gives them time to prepare (and thus saves a bunch of time at the table explaining things). Or, if you really dislike certain rules, a player can choose not to sign up and avoid any last-minute table changes at the game.

This is why I enjoyed the Mythic romp in Destiny of Sands #3. We all knew about it going in. Everyone had a few weeks to prepare their PCs and be familiar with the rules. It was a lot of fun. Everyone at the table knew what they were playing and wanted to be there.

[UndeadMitch]

But the thing is, stuff like that can be put up on Warhorn or whatever method one uses for pre-registration. But, I'll concede that putting some sort of notice shouldn't be too hard to put in a blurb. I wouldn't go so far as calling it a disclaimer, though. That sounds so severe.

[Ascalaphus]

I think PFS shouldn't be scared of special rules for scenarios like Library of the Lion. Don't apologize for them, become better at them. Some things I think could be done to improve them:

If the PCs must collect points of some kind, like in Library of the Lion or The Merchant's Wake, provide a table with a checklist of all the things in the scenario that provide an opportunity to earn points. Now they're scattered all over the scenario and that makes it hard for the GM.

In Library, I felt it was pretty bad; I love the scenario, but before you can run it you have to make your own summaries and tables just so you know where everything is and how to track it all. That's prep that everyone needs, and the writer needs to anticipate that.

As a writer, think about what the PCs should see of the mechanic. In Scars of the Third Crusade,

Scars:

When the PCs do suspicious things, popular opinion turns against the PCs. When it reaches a critical level, a mob assembles. The GM tracks this in a complicated way. However, it seems (from what I saw as a player) that there's little guidance given on what the GM should tell the players about what's going on.

If you have a pile of counters in the middle of the table representing mounting tension, you can put a counter there every time the PCs do something suspicious. The players get more insight in how their actions are moving the plot along, they're more involved. That's good.

When you tell PCs at least a little about what the rules system is doing, they can start taking actions to improve their situation. Knowledge of the rules increases player agency.

Mechanics should be simple yet powerful, with guidelines for the GM on how to expand on them. In Library of the Lion the players need to hide traces. You earn points by concealing evidence, as enumerated for a lot of actions that you need to take in the scenario. But it also tells the GM to award up to 3 points for clever things that the writer didn't anticipate.

This makes the mechanics more powerful; the GM can reward player cleverness and creativity in a way that's fair and within the design bounds of the scenario. The players can step off the railroad without crashing the scenario.

Tags for scenarios aren't a bad idea; you could have a tag for "dinner party" type scenarios, "long-running", "not for paladins", "must be literate", "mass combat", "mythic rules". They'll help some players pick exactly those scenarios to play, and others to avoid them.

Sometimes people complain that a scenario was no fun because it was "for people with social skills only" or something like that. Other people love those scenarios because they finally get to avoid all fights by talking and being smart.

By making it clearer that not every scenario is meant for everyone you get more freedom to use different styles. You can have scenarios without any combat at all, but you gotta label them on the tin. Likewise with scenarios that while maybe not necessarily evil, are so shady/chaotic that they're basically unsafe for paladins. Make it clear that paladin PCs should not do this scenario, and then you can write a scenario that's more extreme than you normally would.

[Ellias Aubec]

Per the special rules, I think Destiny of the Sands handled it well - use your multi-part scenario arc to introduce the idea of the special rules (mythic, mass combat, etc) and then allow its use in parts 2/3 so players can read up ahead of time. I personally loved the mythic and mass combat scenarios although our GMs did let us know ahead of time that mass combat would be included so we could read up on it.

For an overarching story, maybe something like Pathfinders infiltrate the Aspis leading to us taking them over and controlling them? Seems to me that there has not been as many Aspis entanglements in the last season or so.

An underwater scenario could be cool, maybe an arc over multiple as well - give us a chance to use those potentially expensive items for surviving down there more than just once.

I've not played too many high level games, but maybe visits to other planes as something different to just wandering around the world all the time.

[KestlerGunner]

I don't think we should be enacting a blanket ban on *any* rules sub-system for PFS. The important thing is asking the question: "Does it work?" If no, delete. If it's awesome, keep it in!

Rules sub-systems can make a normal scenario become very memorable. Of course you're going to remember going dog-sled riding in the ice, riding a mine-cart down tunnels, trading company stocks for the Qadirans or collecting evidence in a library. Some of these activities won't work without subsystems.

We shouldn't let negative feedback kill the creativity.

[KestlerGunner]

By the way, for all the people asking for more dragons in PFS, the brutal fact is that as long as we have gunslinger Musket Master and Pistoleros, dragons don't currently work as intended.

Any dragon in a fight with a gunslinger goes down in about 1-2 rounds.
I know that's not what happens in the movies but it's what happens in Pathfinder. So I wouldn't be holding my breath (weapon).

[feylund]

I am completely against any mechanic that involves not getting to play my character for more than half the slot... having not played the mythic stuff, i have no opinion on them.

I would like some more giant monster battles... but everyone should be participating.

Personally, i would enjoy a sort of town defense scenario.. using social skills to rally the townsfolk and then having some large/multiwave fight that changes depending on how you set up the towns defenses.
Also, a scenario where we get to be the actual bad guys for a change... maybe a two parter where we get alignment shifted and then a later one where we have different pcs come save them.

[Hrothdane]

The key is to keep them simple and intuitive. That's what I liked about the group chase. When I played it and when I ran it, it went by quickly and without any hemming and hawing over rules, and everyone seemed to just "get it" intuitively, much more so than a normal chase.

I'm hoping by him saying that "most" of the subsystems are going, Brock is leaving group chases. For the reasons above, among others, I would happily just do group chases and never see a normal chase ever again.

[powell01]

Personally, more multi part scenarios like Wonders in the Weave, Echoes of the Everwar, Destiny of the sands was good, even with a chase scene. This will allow people to become more invested in the overall story and show the relevance of the metaplot arc. Even do one for low, one for mid and one for high tier a year. Sure it will take up a significant chunk of the scenarios, but would act like a binding agent to give a sense of direction and purpose.

[Lou Diamond]

Mike. do away with chase scenarios I as a GM dislike them very much I do not like shoehorning my players in to something.

7-11 scenarios that deal with the Chelish civil war.
1-5 scenarios that deal with the hold of Blezkan and its ties to Giants.

A level 12 retirement arc tied to the Chelish Civil war. This could be keyed in recovering the sword from the upcoming novel in Nidial.

7 to 11 scenarios that have the Pathfinders work for one of the 10 in his schemes for the society.

Boons that actualy mean something. For hunters rangers and druids save a unique animal and have it become an animal companion. In the course of a scenario have arcane casters recover a staff and be able to use it.
No limited use boons make boons effect something permanent on the PC.

Thought out magic items on chronicles other than potions that can be bought and +1 items that are always available.

How about a scenario to find a smith for the intelligent sword that is broken.

Scenarios that involve angels or devils contacting the society and wanting the society to do something and then rewarding the PC's if they acomplish the task for the extra planer personage.

Perhaps have the pathfinders go on a recovery mission for a dragon that has had something stolen from him/her in return for access to some dusty magical tome the dragon has.

[JohnF]

feylund wrote:

I am completely against any mechanic that involves not getting to play my character for more than half the slot... having not played the mythic stuff, i have no opinion on them.

The Mythic subsystem, in my opinion, acts as a swing amplifier. It's hard enough to balance a normal tier 3-7 adventure so that a randomly-selected party has a good chance of success, while still presenting some sort of challenge to a well-suited group of adventurers all at the upper end of their subtier. Adding mythic abilities just makes the disparity even worse, particularly when just how you get to add those abilities depends critically on the past history of the character. I didn't feel it added anything really valuable to the experience, but in this particular case it wasn't too much of a problem.

The mass combat system though, was far less benign. It's a massive time-waster if you have to explain the rules and options to the players beforehand (especially when you add in the interaction with each player's chronicles). Not only that - a party of players who are experiencing these rules for the first time are going to take a lot longer resolving every round of combat (and even more so when a bit later on there's a different encounter which introduces yet another variation on the rules). I really feel that we are doing the player base a disservice if we drop them into this scenario unprepared. Plus, as you point out, for much of the scenario the players aren't actually playing their character. This is a big turn-off for quite a few players.

[Swiftbrook]

Michael Brock wrote:

So, with that said and confirmed, what kind of plot would you all like to see? Keep in mind we are going to work our very best to cut scenario play time back closer to four hours so we may not be able to fit as many sandbox or super roleplay heavy scenarios into a season (we are likely to still have a few).

Also keep in mind this season. We have returned to the exploring and there will likely be 12-15 different locations adventures take place in. Also, contrary to what some keep saying, the season is not all based on tech (aka...don't judge an entire season on the first three scenarios). You will see a variety of different type of adventures. So, what would you like to see?

Michael Brock wrote:

One of the things to keep in mind is that, if we are going to help cut the time back to a manageable four hour slot, most of the "unique" systems we've put in (mass combat, dog sled race in #16, etc...) are likely going to be done away with.

OR ... Just ignore everything here that you said you can't do and have one double length adventure. Many Game Day events are running two slots back to back. Convention have multiple slots. And, even though it is difficult, you could split one 8-hour adventure (or 9) into two sessions on two different days.

So, sanction a 9-hour, double scenario. Write it in the sandbox style and include one of those items you just mentioned you were going to do away with.

[kinevon]

Or do the unique stuff in a scenario that is already known to be demanding, in the 4 Star Exclusive, where you can be fairly sure that the GM has had some experience running basic PFS scenarios and Pathfinder rules...

[Silbeg]

Chelish civil war???

[Avatar-1]

It'd be cool if there were was more scripted text for the bad guys who can talk in scenarios. Memorable villain lines/conversations could make a scenario.

At least, I think it would, if "I do this for Taldor!" is any indication of what a good line can do.

[Zach Klopfleisch]

I hope you keep trying new styles of scenarios, even new sub systems (especially if that is made obvious in the blurb.) Not everything will be a success, but you don't improve if you are too afraid of failure to try. And when you have competition, "if you aren't getting better, you're getting worse."

Silbeg wrote:

Chelish civil war???

I think they're talking about the fall 2015 AP: Hell's Rebels.

[Hrothdane]

Avatar-1 wrote:

It'd be cool if there were was more scripted text for the bad guys who can talk in scenarios. Memorable villain lines/conversations could make a scenario.

At least, I think it would, if "I do this for Taldor!" is any indication of what a good line can do.

I can't agree more with this. Adding in one or two characteristic lines of dialogue can really give a good guide to how the author intended the character to come off to players. A good bit of dialogue is light-years more useful than just using a couple adjectives to describe the person to the GM.

[Dubgall]

I would like to see some follow up scenario's the ones from the past ( like finding the master weapon-smith from night March of Kalkomedies}
I also liked running the multipart scenario's like Destiny of the Sands and glories of the past. Exploitation of Mwangi would be so much fun.
and can there be a possibility for race boons for PC's restricting to GM's only. Chase scenes are not well liked by player's and take up a lot of time if we are wanting to shorten game play to 4 hours.

[Kageki]

Michael Brock wrote:

Gamerskum wrote:

SteelDraco wrote:

It will be related to one of the APs they release that year, so either Giants or Cheliax.

Except I believe Mike said the new seasons will not tie in with the AP, and instead will have their own Metaplots.

So, with that said and confirmed, what kind of plot would you all like to see? Keep in mind we are going to work our very best to cut scenario play time back closer to four hours so we may not be able to fit as many sandbox or super roleplay heavy scenarios into a season (we are likely to still have a few).

Also keep in mind this season. We have returned to the exploring and there will likely be 12-15 different locations adventures take place in. Also, contrary to what some keep saying, the season is not all based on tech (aka...don't judge an entire season on the first three scenarios). You will see a variety of different type of adventures. So, what would you like to see?

Here is my ideal plots:

1. A 3 parter like the first steps, but with the playability that will get the new players engrossed in the Pathfinder Society. (Are a new part 2 and 3 that relates to the new factions) This was a great idea in the beginning and it really depended on how the GM ran it as to how good these scenarios worked to integrate new players into the Society.

2. More history on the Pathfinder Society... The Blakros Family is one of the story arcs, as the Grandmaster Torch arcs that a key to the Society history. We need to have more scenarios maybe 3 parters that take a look at other family lines and also some that actually tell the stories of some of the current Venture Captains.

3. Would like to revisit the Shadow Lodge to see what has been going on with Grandmaster Torch and get some... (closure).

4. How is the Lantern Lodge going now that it is no longer with the Pathfinder Society. Keep at least one scenario a season to keep us updated on them, as they should have a very important part in the history of world.

[Saint Caleth]

I am generally ambivalent about reducing use of uncommon rules subsystems. I agree that the exception to this is things like Library of the Lion or Scars of the Third Crusade. That kind of adventure is my absolute favorite to run.

I also really want to see places that we have never gone before on Golarion, places which are not in Avistan. How about all the cool stuff in the Mwangi Expanse and elsewhere in southern Garund? How about some of the more peripheral parts of Tian Xia? How about going into the Hao Jin tapestry again?

I think that a scenario on another planet or related to time travel would be really cool, like the last part of Legacy of the Stonelords.

I am probably in the minority on this but I love genre collisions like with the tech this season or Tian Xia a few years ago and I am really really sick of places like Varesia and Andoran.

[Ascalaphus]

I actually liked the Year of the Demon; a strong overarching theme. You know there'll be lots of demons, so you prepare for them and get good at fighting them.

Of course it's also interesting to have some monsters where part of the challenge is that these are monsters nobody normally prepares for; but it it's also fun when you can spend 3-6 adventures becoming really good at fighting those particular adversaries, and really getting to use that experience. If you encountered demons only once or twice, after that you'd be prepared for them but they never show up again, that'd be disappointing.

That said, I think the robots are just a bit too much. Not because I dislike the theme - I'm fine with that, it's refreshing - but because I think Hardness is a bad mechanic.

Hardness rant:

I think there are several problems with hardness in general, and one more with robots.

1) Hardness was originally an object property, nor a creature property. Constructs generally had DR/adamantine. So there's quite a few anti-construct abilities out there that read "penetrate DR/adamantine and ignore the hardness of objects" or a variation thereon. But now that hardness occurs on creatures, those powers don't work anymore, because they don't penetrate hardness on objects. This is the sad result of adding hardness to the game way too late in the design cycle.
This can be fixed by adding ruling to the Hardness rules that anything that penetrates Hardness on objects also penetrates it on creatures. Such a fix would IMO stay entirely within the spirit of the design.

1a) Some abilities deal unspecific magic damage to constructs, without specific riders, because previously that damage only had to deal with DR (which it went around, not being normal weapon damage) or energy resistance (which it went around, not being some specific energy type). Hardness deals with all damage though. The issue with Hardness is that it's just a little more than "DR --/X, Resist [energy] X"; it resists all damage, even damage specifically intended against constructs.

2) The interaction between Hardness and Vulnerability is unsatisfactory. The consensus that Vulnerability is applied second is based on a 3.5 FAQ, and it means that the Vulnerability of robots to electricity is really not that significant.

3) Hardness constricts the choice of viable PC tactics; to things that do enough damage per single burst to get through (2H, magus nova) and to adamantine weapons. This reduces the diversity of viable PCs in those scenarios; 2WF, monks and so forth are punished severely. I think that's bad design,

4) Robots are intelligent but inherit the construct type's immunity to mind-affecting abilities. Here was a good opening to make an alternative attack vector viable, but it was just kept closed. Missed opportunity. Far too many things with minds are immune to mind-affecting things just because.

Bonus gripe: the Technologist feat. The reasons why people don't like the feat have been covered in exhaustive detail in other threads. My PFS-specific complaints are these: that it wasn't mentioned in the Guide to Organized play, and that there isn't enough tech to really make it worth it. Damned if you don't, damned if you do.

I'm rather happy with the way factions are doing in season 5 and 6 so far. I like that the new factions aren't really opposed to each other, so they don't create (or pretend to create) divisions in the party.

I also like that not every faction needs to feature in every adventure. I would however advise to put a link to the faction letters in the Guide to Organized play, because lots of people don't seem to know they exist at all.

[Woran]

We NEED We Be Goblins Three. (with a picture of a tree instead of a 3)

[Michael Brock]

Saint Caleth wrote:

I am generally ambivalent about reducing use of uncommon rules subsystems. I agree that the exception to this is things like Library of the Lion or Scars of the Third Crusade. That kind of adventure is my absolute favorite to run.

I also really want to see places that we have never gone before on Golarion, places which are not in Avistan. How about all the cool stuff in the Mwangi Expanse and elsewhere in southern Garund? How about some of the more peripheral parts of Tian Xia? How about going into the Hao Jin tapestry again?

I think that a scenario on another planet or related to time travel would be really cool, like the last part of Legacy of the Stonelords.

I am probably in the minority on this but I love genre collisions like with the tech this season or Tian Xia a few years ago and I am really really sick of places like Varesia and Andoran.

Well then it's a good thing this season has scenarios in both Mwangi and the tapestry.

[Netopalis]

Sorry that I'm late to the party.

I don't think the campaign needs fewer RP-heavy scenarios in order to keep it under 4 hours - I think we need to stop trying to cram so much into scenarios. Scars of the Third Crusade is a good example. I like the scenario, but there is so much going on that important details are missed. We've got 3 different tracks to keep track of, a massive number of NPCs and locations and yet we don't have the names of the individuals who were murdered. That's sort of important for a murder mystery. Similarly, The Merchant's Wake assumes the PCs know something about the NPCs from Destiny in the Sands and if the PCs do NOT know this, they do not have time in-game to find it out.

Honestly, many of the biggest violators of the 4 hour rule do so not because of RP, but because of combat. I recently ran The Sealed Gate at a convention, and I could have easily ran it for 6-8 hours. I dare anybody to successfully complete The Elven Entanglement, The Sealed Gate, Weapon in the Rift, Vengeance at Sundered Crag, Trial by Machine or The Silver Mount Collection with pregens in 4 hours. These are not RP-heavy scenarios, but the sheer strength and number of combats makes them take forever.

Sandboxy doesn't need to take a long time, and when done well, the scenario stays well within the timeframe. Port Godless is an example of this done really well. I've not heard many complaints about it going over time, nor have I heard complaints about it being railroady. It has a good story that knows its own limitations and doesn't try to cram a module into a scenario slot.

Finally, in regards to the unique mechanics for a single scenario, I think that those are excellent to try every once in a while. I don't think that they need to be used as much as they have been. In Season 5, it felt like half the scenario featured these special mechanics, and a lot of them were overly complicated. I would rather see them in about a quarter of the scenarios, with the rules never exceeding one page. For example, Library of the Lion uses 2 pages to explain its mechanics. Clever use of charts and a bit of streamlining could have reduced that to a single page. If interested, I could show an example. Similarly, the three tracks in Scars of the Third Crusade should have had fewer concrete rules and more room for the GM to advance them as necessary for the story to make sense.

All in all, Season 5 had some really good ideas, and I think that a lot of the scenarios were really good. I would encourage the developers to look at streamlining language for special mechanics and questioning whether or not it is wise to fit 5-6 combats in a single adventure. I would prefer to see a good, RP-heavy scenario with only 2 combats.

[Qstor]

Michael Brock wrote:

So, with that said and confirmed, what kind of plot would you all like to see? Keep in mind we are going to work our very best to cut scenario play time back closer to four hours so we may not be able to fit as many sandbox or super roleplay heavy scenarios into a season (we are likely to still have a few).

Also keep in mind this season. We have returned to the exploring and there will likely be 12-15 different locations adventures take place in. Also, contrary to what some keep saying, the season is not all based on tech (aka...don't judge an entire season on the first three scenarios). You will see a variety of different type of adventures. So, what would you like to see?

I wouldn't mind seeing a few scenarios that fit with Hells Rebels or the Giant based APs. I love the G series from AD&D and it would be interesting to see the Dark Archive get involved in the goings on in Cheliax.

If there isn't a tie into an AP. Then Grandmaster Torch is always interesting. Tie ins to old modules are good too.

I hope that Tim Hitchcock comes back to working on PFS stuff too. I always liked his stuff.

Mike

[Ascalaphus]

I think Season 5 was very promising due to the number of scenarios that are easier to complete if you don't play like a murderhobo. Like Library of the Lion, Stolen Heir, Merchant's Wake, Weapon in the Rift and (presumably; soon to run) Wardstone Patrol.

If you keep that up, people will start to learn that being combat-optimized isn't the same as being PFS-optimized; that to achieve consistent full prestige you need to have a much wider array of skills and perhaps a balanced party rather than a maximum amount of DPRs.

I mean, a good combat is a lot of fun and I don't want flowers and pacifism everywhere. But some of these scenarios have shown that an adventure with very little (or if you do everything right, no) combat can still be good fun.

---

I would however, make sure indicate this somehow in advance, so that people will enter the scenario with the right kind of expectations. For example, if you went into Library of the Lion expecting some good brawls you'd be be disappointed. But the "backflip blurb" gives strong hints that this is not that kind of scenario, so most people come with the right kind of mindset to it and have a great time.

Library is a good example; I think Scars a little less good. It refers to Golarion lore a lot. If you're well-read in the lore than the blurb is quite clear; tiefling barbarians stay away. But for casual or first-time players it's not so clear. Sometimes the hints are too subtle. Likewise for Assault on the Wound; "Can the PCs lead their motley army to victory deep in the Worldwound?" could mean Mass Combat rules, but it could also be a variant escort quest where the players are mainly running their own PCs.

TL;DR: expectation management. Don't be afraid to be obvious. It will help people pick scenarios they'll enjoy. When I read reviews it seems about half the negative reviews are due to people getting an adventure that wasn't what they expected. As a result they brought a mismatched character and didn't get to participate in the good stuff in that scenario.

[Woran]

Ascalaphus wrote:

TL;DR: expectation management. Don't be afraid to be obvious. It will help people pick scenarios they'll enjoy. When I read reviews it seems about half the negative reviews are due to people getting an adventure that wasn't what they expected. As a result they brought a mismatched character and didn't get to participate in the good stuff in that...

Well, this. Its sad a lot of scenarios dont get the love they deserve because people did not have the right characters (or GM!) for a scenario.

I try to remedy this by adding in my reviews who I think would enjoy this the most and who (or what types of characters) should stay away.

A little extra in the blurb saying something about the type of scenarios will help us pick the right characters for the right scenario.

[bdk86]

Michael Brock wrote:

Gamerskum wrote:

SteelDraco wrote:

It will be related to one of the APs they release that year, so either Giants or Cheliax.

Except I believe Mike said the new seasons will not tie in with the AP, and instead will have their own Metaplots.

So, with that said and confirmed, what kind of plot would you all like to see? Keep in mind we are going to work our very best to cut scenario play time back closer to four hours so we may not be able to fit as many sandbox or super roleplay heavy scenarios into a season (we are likely to still have a few).

Also keep in mind this season. We have returned to the exploring and there will likely be 12-15 different locations adventures take place in. Also, contrary to what some keep saying, the season is not all based on tech (aka...don't judge an entire season on the first three scenarios). You will see a variety of different type of adventures. So, what would you like to see?

What about a serious run at a metaplot in the Mwangi Expanse? I've always lamented how little tabletop RPGs explore mythology out of civilization in Africa (there was some good 3PP stuff in 3.5) and was really happy to see the attention given to Mwangi in Pathfinder. There's a lot of great tie-ins (anything involving Old Man Jatembe, really). Something in the vein of Serpent's Skull (perhaps a spiritual sequel a la Year of the Risen Rune). There are some great PFS scenarios taking place here, but all self contained (except perhaps Rescue at Azlant Ridge).

Of course, just like the Year of the Ruby Phoenix, this would work best if there was content coming down the pipe expanding on options related to this region.

[BigNorseWolf]

I want an andoran scenario playing Harriet Tubman in cheliax.(now that they're not officially on our team anymore...)

[Jayson MF Kip]

On the subject of linking to old scenarios:

4-16 Fabric of Reality:

Cheliax pathfinder's faction mission involves obtaining a ledger of criminal dealings penned by a centuries-old Golden League elf assassin. A whole subplot of putting their actions to light could be pretty interesting.

Raids on (or by!) monks and ninja make for interesting combats. Interesting terrain can make for memorable fights without the "extra page of rules text" that comes with (say) 5-24's Mass Combat rules or 0-22's minecart fight. Maybe a fight in a bamboo field, where line of sight is severely limited. Or atop a waterfall or something, with hazards tailored to their strengths.

And a final fight with 5 monks each with different style feats.

[Netopalis]

If we're mainly talking regions to visit, I vote Galt.

[Rambone]

There was a certain Barbarian in season 4 who had forseen the end of the world... something in the frozen north to follow up with that.

[Under A Bleeding Sun]

Codanous wrote:

My favorite seasons were seasons 2 and 3. They lacked all the politics and dramatic world changing events, it was just fun adventuring and having to deal with the occasional betrayal and annoyance of the Shadow Lodge/Aspis.

I am happy to see that with this season scenarios are moving back towards just random, but fun, adventures.

If there has to be a meta-plot, I would like something that isn't world-threatening, looking at you Waking Rune or the Worldwound.

I personally agree with this. The one thing I like about the society is that you aren't some super good do gooders, your explorers, archaeologist and treasure hunters cataloging and basically "stealing" artifacts. I played most of Season 4, but tuned out about half way through Season 5(Honestly, I really don't know what happened in the world wound still). I'd really like to see the society kind of return to the internal power struggle and NOT be involved with oh my god this is the end of the world situations. It was alright for a Season, but thats what AP's are for (IMO obviously) and I vastly prefer the society Pre-Season 4.

If we do go deep into a metaplot, it doesn't have to be save the world, but could be something different all together. For these reasons I'd be highly against the Chelish Civil War or some other earth shattering thing. It's really not in alignment with the original goals of the society, at least as far as I can tell. Sure, we may help a friend here or there in the middle of the war(possibly to get information for ourselves), but as a plot I suspect it will turn into the monotony of Season 5.

I also have seen several somewhat "open ended" storylines before. Lets explore some of those. I believe there have been at least 2 or 3 doors locked and warded beyond this scenarios depth, a few hinted at artifacts, etc. Lets follow up on these. Oh, and rescue party pathfinders, that idea sounds fun too.

Of course, I may in a minority here, but just stating my opinion since it was asked for.

As far as cutting specific or unique rulesets, all for it. I find them to often be poorly written and take away from the gameplay of the entire table. I hate the chase system myself, and would like to see that cut as well. I just don't feel its set up very well in its present form, and WAY too often people come up with clever solutions and the GM goes "too bad"!

I also agree with "tags". I find it completely asinine that my hypothetical 5 charisma barbarian gets sent to a wedding over my also hypothetical same tier 20 charisma bard. I don't think knowing whats the basis of the adventure would be is bad, and it makes the society look like its not a bunch of hick losers when it comes to composing a party. Businesses do it all the time in real life. I bet it happens in Paizo all the time, you probably don't usually have editors make adventures and vice versa. It also allows the "snowflake" characters to know when you can bring them out to shine.

I'd like to see more multipart adventures too. I really tend to enjoy them (even when they don't all get on the same PC) and they usually have a nice depth to them.

For locations the Tapestry, Kar Maga(I fricking love this place), of course Absalom, perhaps even the orient again some. I also love(and simultaneously hate) unique/difficult environment, such as underwater, plane of air, zero gravity environment, etc. It adds unique challenges that are fun to deal with in small doses.

[Silbeg]

Netopalis wrote:

If we're mainly talking regions to visit, I vote Galt.

Oh, Galt. So many possibilities.

Sovereign Court wanting to re-establish the nobility.

Silver Crusade wanting to destroy the Final Word guillotines (and the Dark Archive wanting to know how they are made).

So much potential.

And, perhaps, The Red Raven makes a return (or Son of Red Raven?)

[blackbloodtroll]

Arcadia.

Anything that touches upon it.

[BigNorseWolf]

Silver crusader: So we're going to destroy the final blades right?

Dark Archive: Of course! Why don't you believe me?

Silver Crusader: It might have something to do with that 30 foot trolly you're wheeling around.

[Hmm]

I feel odd chiming in here, since I am a very new player in PFS and not a GM (yet.)

I love being able to have the option to occasionally talk my way out of fights. I would love if scenarios were tagged a litle better so that I could know if some of them are more oriented to social skills,, and which might be more suited to Face Smashers.

I like having roleplay options, and villains that make sense. Sometimes it seems like a scenario has no options but that the bad guys will attack -- even if you have made it against their self-interest to do so... This is especially odd with villains that are supposed to be somewhat intelligent.

I like the idea of exploring the world further -- going into the Mwangi expanse, Keleshite countries, Dragon Empire. I enjoy learning more about the society and uncovering secrets. I love the idea of a body recovery mission! It can be entertaining to have story "carryover" from one scenario to another -- I've loved it when story in one scenario was related to another scenaril that I played, with NPCs with whom I've interacted before.

Hmm

[grandpoobah]

Hmm wrote:

I feel odd chiming in here, since I am a very new player in PFS and not a GM (yet.)

I love being able to have the option to occasionally talk my way out of fights. I would love if scenarios were tagged a litle better so that I could know if some of them are more oriented to social skills,, and which might be more suited to Face Smashers.

I like having roleplay options, and villains that make sense. Sometimes it seems like a scenario has no options but that the bad guys will attack -- even if you have made it against their self-interest to do so... This is especially odd with villains that are supposed to be somewhat intelligent.

Hmm

@Hmm:

If you haven't already, I'd suggest playing PFS418: the veteran's vault. It's one of my favorites to run, and offers a lot of what you're talking about.

[Silbeg]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Silver crusader: So we're going to destroy the final blades right?

Dark Archive: Of course! Why don't you believe me?

Silver Crusader: It might have something to do with that 30 foot trolly you're wheeling around.

The Exchange "Merchant": Sorry, that was mine. There's valuable metal to be sold there.

Sovereign Court Noble... isn't there... fearing for his neck.

Liberty's Edge: We must free the poor trapped souls in the blade! Crusader, strike it down!

[Hmm]

grandpoobah wrote:

@Hmm:

If you haven't already, I'd suggest playing PFS418: the veteran's vault. It's one of my favorites to run, and offers a lot of what you're talking about.

Thanks for the recommendation!

Hmm

[nosig]

What I like to see in a scenario? I like a story line that I can understand (even if it is a simple one - simple ones are great!).

Games with only one or two big fights are great. Much better than the long drawn-out slug fests some scenarios turn into. They don't even have to be the end fight! And everything doesn't have to be solved with a fight!

A story that goes somewhere is often lost in the "little" fights - with the judge trying to ensure that every Iron Cobra fights to the last HP... but who trims the NPC telling us WHY we are even here.

If I was Judging and we are in the boss fight and one of the players asks "who is this guy and why are we trying to kill him again?" then I know I as the judge have failed (perhaps the scenario is at fault, but I should have tried to come up with some sort of a reason to fit the story). It may be a little failure, but it's still a fail.

But you know what? If we are in the boss fight and the Pistol Cheese Whiz drops the BBE and all the mooks in 3.2 seconds before anyone else in the party can do anything... and the Sorcerer goes over to kick the body, because the "evil dude" deserves it, that's a win. Even if the fight was a "Cake Walk"...

[Aleksandrs Zdancuks]

I'd like to see more:

1) Scenarios oriented to social/skill characters (Dissapeared, Library of the Lion, Throaty). My players sometimes are too cautious, sometimes too lawful and they tend to search for fight-less solution in many cases. Everytime, I can support that, I do.

2) Scenarios that gives benefit for mounted characters and allow to shine in 3d. There are scenarios, that are focus on tight group and close quarter fights. I'd like to see scenarios, where paladin & cavalier might use their mount, bows win over crossbow because of range increment and other rare stuff.

3) I'd like to see a specific scenario, which can be played only by low-level dead character. In developing area, it takes time to fully upgrade a character to point it can be raised dead. Having some "Unrested agent" which completes a secret mission in Boneyards of Pharasma (or small garden of other gods) to help his living friends would be totally awesome. Upon completion of such mission, character might become a guardian angel and keep on waiting for more "Unearthed" scenarios.

More interparty drama, please. I liked personal faction goals because they made characters care of getting prestige point for completing them. I'd like to see more faction mission, that actually demand characters to forge an alliance: The Exchange character's has objective to acquire item for Dark Archive character for research. But, item has evil nature and Silver Crusade is willing for item to be destroyed. And then, it is possible for them to arrange that item is researched and documented by DA agent.

As about Golarion regions, I think Ustalav, Rahadoum, Nirmathas, Molthune and more Varisian missions would be great.

[Hrothdane]

Just make every scenario in Ustalav from now on.

[zefig]

Aleksandrs Zdancuks wrote:

3) I'd like to see a specific scenario, which can be played only by low-level dead character. In developing area, it takes time to fully upgrade a character to point it can be raised dead. Having some "Unrested agent" which completes a secret mission in Boneyards of Pharasma (or small garden of other gods) to help his living friends would be totally awesome. Upon completion of such mission, character might become a guardian angel and keep on waiting for more "Unearthed" scenarios.

That would be friggin awesome.

[kinevon]

nosig wrote:

What I like to see in a scenario? I like a story line that I can understand (even if it is a simple one - simple ones are great!).

Games with only one or two big fights are great. Much better than the long drawn-out slug fests some scenarios turn into. They don't even have to be the end fight! And everything doesn't have to be solved with a fight!

A story that goes somewhere is often lost in the "little" fights - with the judge trying to ensure that every Iron Cobra fights to the last HP... but who trims the NPC telling us WHY we are even here.

If I was Judging and we are in the boss fight and one of the players asks "who is this guy and why are we trying to kill him again?" then I know I as the judge have failed (perhaps the scenario is at fault, but I should have tried to come up with some sort of a reason to fit the story). It may be a little failure, but it's still a fail.

But you know what? If we are in the boss fight and the Pistol Cheese Whiz drops the BBE and all the mooks in 3.2 seconds before anyone else in the party can do anything... and the Sorcerer goes over to kick the body, because the "evil dude" deserves it, that's a win. Even if the fight was a "Cake Walk"...

One of my most favorite scenarios played recently was Part 2 of the Destiny of the Sands trilogy. Our GM probably screwed up, but it was not harmful to the scenario, and gave us access to the wonderful backstory in the GM sections of the scenario for GMT.

DotS2:

Our GM, instead of making the Speak with Dead ability of the sarcophagus once per day, made it once per day per body. Nothing game breaking, since our questions were all directed at the story of the pathfinders in the group, and what happened to them.