|
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, cwucify Bwian, but that can wait.
I hereby request that the Faction traits (and possibly prestige awards) that we've seen disappear along with their parent Factions over the past 2 Seasons (such as Cheliax's Fires of Hell, the Shadow Lodge's Medic, and Lantern Lodge's Meridian Strike, to name only three) be somehow made available in some shape or form (I'm not overly picky, but please make it reasonably easy to access, whatever it is) to new characters going forward. We've seen several very nice Faction Traits, with no duplicates of which I'm aware coming from non-Society sources, seemingly go the way of the dodo due to Faction extinction/mutation, and I see no need for that.
/signed
|
|
I was thinking they could print something new, maybe "reincarnate" some of these traits as traits of a different variety (Fires of Hell could become another Regional trait from Cheliax, for example, or they could even offer a new genre of "Class Traits" where a given trait was open to a set of 3-5 classes or something like that - in which case Meridian Strike could be open to Fighters, Ninja, Samurai, Monks, and Magi or something), or, at least in some cases, the new Factions could take some of the old traits under their respective wings, as appropriate.
|
|
That's one of the primary personal impetuses for my instigating the petition, but that's not the same as it being "what it all boils down to" - rather, what I personally would wish to do if the retired traits were re-introduced is merely symptomatic of the fact that, while we may lose Factions, there really ought to be a way for players to get another shot at the interesting traits that need not have died with them, and that it would be both 100% reasonable and to everyone's gain if something were done to this end. There were several good traits lost in this fashion, not merely the few I've cited as examples, so I'd consider this a worthy-sized issue for the Organized Play crew.
|
|
I support making a primary source available again for characters who have grandfathered traits. I do not support them being available again for new characters. They're special, they should remain that way.
You seem to be making a third suggestion, but I don't understand what it is. Care to elaborate?
Every time I see this thread title I vomit a little. Thanks for that.Indeed, if you want your petition to be taken seriously I'd advice using a serious title.
Since when is a touch of humor a bad thing? I was under the impression it sells, and Monty Python references and tabletop gaming have always been like Laurel and Hardy.
You're still not really giving much of an arguement for your idea. Why should they make faction specific traits for dead factions available again? There needs to be a compelling reason for them to break with the story in what I would consider a fairly major way. I don't consider it 100% reasonable at all. It seems very unreasonable to me, since the reasons why those traits were available are now gone. That the traits were good is not really convincing me at all.
We're obviously not on the same page (and possibly not even reading from the same book, to use an extension of the idiom) - I 1) feel that the bulk of my argument is sufficiently self-evident, and 2) agree that a major break from the story demands a very good reason, but am not asking for any such thing. There are many ways a character could acquire these traits (especially the ones from factions associated with geocultural region of origin), they needn't be glued to political entities (with the plausible exceptions of Grand Lodge, Shadow Lodge, and Silver Crusade, it seems to me like the traits are/were associated with the factions because they were predisposed to attract people with such backgrounds and talents, not because the factions themselves taught them to initiates - and in the case of Shadow Lodge, the one out of those three to no longer be with us, it's very much in that faction's spirit that its expatriates would disseminate their secrets to whatever factions they'd moved in with - Torch or no, someone still needs to watch the watchmen!).
|
I wouldn't mind if Paizo added old traits and vanities to the Guide for reference for people that already have the traits. However, I don't think they should be legal options for new characters. They could include the date the trait/vanity was retired, so that GMs could check chronicles to make sure it was a legal trait for that PC to have.
|
I seriously doubt they are going to spend much if any of their busy time on such a minor issue.
I dinnae think it is that much time or effort. The text exists, and the factions 'exist' at least in the form of former members still being PFS members. We even will get to see Amari Lee again soon. These traits could easily be turned into a Monday blog or added to the PDF trait download.
The boon for Scarzani is actually the limiting factor IMHO. For balance reasons one retired faction shouldn't be different than the others. It also hints at plans for retired scenarios at which we can only guess.
The arguments should be made stronger however:
Faction traits are interesting (lets not lose any)
Faction traits are campaign traits and the campaign is still going.
Retired factions members trying to assert influence on an ever-changing campaign.
These traits do not overlap with current traits.
Faction traits add flavor to character concept not (hugely)tied to combat.
More traits mean more options, and more options sells the game better.
The more traits available, the fewer 'reactionary' characters I will see. (OK reactionary seems to be missing from season six, and might be a counter to my argument--which is personal opinion anyway :)
Doubtful that I made the argument stronger, but thought I would try.
|
|
The bulk of your argument is not sufficiently self-evident. If you want to convince anyone of the merit of your proposal, you're going to have to actually support your arguement.
What do I need to do, compose a doctoral thesis? Curaigh was able to extract my points easily enough, so what's your problem?
You will notice that not a single person who has posted here has agreed with your position. That should be a very telling sign.
That's not true at all. Practically as soon as I'd posted, someone nominated me for a FAQ candidate, and 2 people marked my OP as a favorite. Are you telling me they don't count?
As for everyone else, read what they say again, and objectively this time. You're the only one who appears to be in vehement opposition - the first few replies took an "it probably won't happen" or "I see a snag" attitude, which is not the same as actually being opposed. Then we have two people who merely comment on the title and say nothing about the subject matter, and Mystic Lemur, who does express opposition, but is civil about it, unlike you.
You also should really listen to what people are saying about the title of the thread. You can defend your choice of titles all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that the title is a turn off.
TO YOU. I normally HATE people who use this for an argument, but in this case it's actually valid: Considering it a turn-off is, by definition, an opinion, NOT a "fact."
|
|
I support the OP, if not the tread title. Just because the Andoran faction changed to Liberty's Edge, my parents were retroactively unable to have me blessed by Erastil as a youth?
I don't understand. You don't lose access to traits you already had. New characters can't be created with the traits. You can certainly have been blessed by Erastil, but you no longer are able to create characters with that trait. Instead you can make a character with a new trait, a trait that wasn't available before. Embrace change.
|
|
I support the OP, if not the tread title. Just because the Andoran faction changed to Liberty's Edge, my parents were retroactively unable to have me blessed by Erastil as a youth?I don't understand. You don't lose access to traits you already had. New characters can't be created with the traits. You can certainly have been blessed by Erastil, but you no longer are able to create characters with that trait. Instead you can make a character with a new trait, a trait that wasn't available before. Embrace change.
Make new traits, keep the old - one is silver, the other gold. :)
Venture-Captain, North Carolina—Asheville
|
even if they are not made availible again, i would like a refrence to them if only to acertain if a pc is using it legaly.
I'm in agreement here. Should I make the jump to the GM chair, and a player with a former Lantern Lodge character show up to a table I run, I could be told that Meridian Strike auto-kills one opponent a scenario without an official way to verify how stupid that is.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
even if they are not made availible again, i would like a refrence to them if only to acertain if a pc is using it legaly.I'm in agreement here. Should I make the jump to the GM chair, and a player with a former Lantern Lodge character show up to a table I run, I could be told that Meridian Strike auto-kills one opponent a scenario without an official way to verify how stupid that is.
Sure there is, you ask the player to provide the source material for the material they are using, just like you should for any material you are unfamiliar with.
|
|
Sure there is, you ask the player to provide the source material for the material they are using, just like you should for any material you are unfamiliar with.even if they are not made availible again, i would like a refrence to them if only to acertain if a pc is using it legaly.I'm in agreement here. Should I make the jump to the GM chair, and a player with a former Lantern Lodge character show up to a table I run, I could be told that Meridian Strike auto-kills one opponent a scenario without an official way to verify how stupid that is.
Technically, the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play is part of the core assumption, so the player isn't technically required to bring that resource. It's only the Additional Resources that require the resource to be produced.
So says the Guide, at least.
|
|
Technically, the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play is part of the core assumption, so the player isn't technically required to bring that resource. It's only the Additional Resources that require the resource to be produced.So says the Guide, at least.
Interesting loophole I never thought about - has it been stipulated in what realm do previous editions of "the Guide" fall (to be fair, while I could imagine justified applications of such grey area, it would be a pretty Mephistophelian trick if someone actually tried to take unfair advantage of it, the kind of thing that ought to be taken care of by the "Don't Be A Jerk" clause)?
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
Technically, the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play is part of the core assumption, so the player isn't technically required to bring that resource. It's only the Additional Resources that require the resource to be produced.
So says the Guide, at least.
The core assumption is what every participant is suppose to have, not the stuff just the GM is expected to have.
The Guide is a free download, so it should be easy for every player to save a copy of each year's guide during each season they play PFS. Which means if a particular item is removed from the Guide during an update they should have the older copy available to them.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Technically, the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play is part of the core assumption, so the player isn't technically required to bring that resource. It's only the Additional Resources that require the resource to be produced.
So says the Guide, at least.
The core assumption is what every participant is suppose to have, not the stuff just the GM is expected to have.
The Guide is a free download, so it should be easy for every player to save a copy of each year's guide during each season they play PFS. Which means if a particular item is removed from the Guide during an update they should have the older copy available to them.
At least as long as you aren't trying to save drive space by deleting obsolete material.
I don't have any Shadow Lodge or Lantern Lodge PCs, so I no longer have a copy of the GtPFSOP that contains any of those traits. I have several Andoran PCs, at least one of whom has Hunter's Eye, but I almost didn't have a copy of the GtPFSOP with that trait in it, because I was cleaning out old copies when I got the new Season 6 Guide.
Now, if I had deleted all my copies of the older Guides, would I have to replace that trait with a current trait? Or would my 12th level PC with that trait now be considered illegal for PFS, without an older copy of the Guide available? No way to retrain it, since there are no retraining rules for traits....
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
At least as long as you aren't trying to save drive space by deleting obsolete material.
I don't have any Shadow Lodge or Lantern Lodge PCs, so I no longer have a copy of the GtPFSOP that contains any of those traits. I have several Andoran PCs, at least one of whom has Hunter's Eye, but I almost didn't have a copy of the GtPFSOP with that trait in it, because I was cleaning out old copies when I got the new Season 6 Guide.
Now, if I had deleted all my copies of the older Guides, would I have to replace that trait with a current trait? Or would my 12th level PC with that trait now be considered illegal for PFS, without an older copy of the Guide available? No way to retrain it, since there are no retraining rules for traits....
If someone else at the table can't help provide a copy of the version of the Guide you need, it will result in one of two ways.
A friendly GM might let you play with that trait effectively being a dead trait. Since you don't have the rules for it with you.
A strict GM will tell you that you can't use that character, and either need to switch to a character you have all the rules material to support or a pregen.
Either result is the fault of the player, since they are the ones who are responsible for having the rules to cover their own character.
|
Venture-Captain, North Carolina—Asheville
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
. . . or the fault of the player's hard drive. I find it troubling that one of my characters could effectively be retired from the campaign due to circumstances beyond my control -- especially over something as situational as Hunter's Eye.
Were someone's physical books destroyed in a house fire, I would not be surprised at all to see other PFS players gift a PDF to the unfortunate soul. However, that same person would have no way to obtain his or her own legitimate copy of the text for Meridian Strike. That bothers me.
|
|
At least as long as you aren't trying to save drive space by deleting obsolete material.
I don't have any Shadow Lodge or Lantern Lodge PCs, so I no longer have a copy of the GtPFSOP that contains any of those traits. I have several Andoran PCs, at least one of whom has Hunter's Eye, but I almost didn't have a copy of the GtPFSOP with that trait in it, because I was cleaning out old copies when I got the new Season 6 Guide.
Now, if I had deleted all my copies of the older Guides, would I have to replace that trait with a current trait? Or would my 12th level PC with that trait now be considered illegal for PFS, without an older copy of the Guide available? No way to retrain it, since there are no retraining rules for traits....
If someone else at the table can't help provide a copy of the version of the Guide you need, it will result in one of two ways.
A friendly GM might let you play with that trait effectively being a dead trait. Since you don't have the rules for it with you.
A strict GM will tell you that you can't use that character, and either need to switch to a character you have all the rules material to support or a pregen.
Either result is the fault of the player, since they are the ones who are responsible for having the rules to cover their own character.
Heh, I have been playing that PC with that trait being effectively dead for most of his PFS career.
However, you are blaming the player because they figure that they only need the current version of the Guide in their possession? Sorry. I am likely to not want to play with your so-called "strict GM" because I want a GM who is interested in playing the game, not one who is so... <redacted> that he makes the whole thing unfun for everyone.
After the first couple of drives had been copied over, and we are talking 500 gb to 1 TB drives, going to a 4 TB drive, I stepped away while the last one was copying over. Everything had gone swimmingly to that point. The final drive was the largest one, and had a lot of stuff to copy, and Windows was showing a couple of hours to do so.
I ran some errands, getting back a few hours later, and it appeared to have copied over, no big error messages, just that it had skipped a folder due to system files.
Later, after I had reformatted that drive, it turned out that Windows had played me a dirty trick, and, instead of skipping the files it couldn't copy, had stopped copying entirely, with about 2/3rds of the drive uncopied. I lost a lots of files, several of them pretty much stuff that I cannot replace.
Among the items lost:
All my files for WotC's Dawn of Defiance Star Wars Sage Edition campaign
All my scenario files I had from my LG GM days.
All my scenario files I had from my LFR GM days.
Many other, less identifiable files, some of which I have found from the original source, some I have not.
Overall, that means that I would have to start rebuilding my scenario files for LFR, if I ever start running it again. I no longer have any source for a Greyhawk-based 3.5 campaign. And, while I can probably find some of the DoD files, I am not sure if the original files are still available form WotC. Nor the various add-on files...
If this had happened to my Pathfinder files, it would have sucked, and I would have lost the older Guides, from that. I think I did, actually. Now, other than a copy of the updated 5.0 Guide, for a couple of faction traits, and the 6.0 Guide, as that is current, I have none of the older Guides.
Most of them would just be curiosities, but, as it turns out, some of them are now needed to make some PCs legal for the campaign. And, if you have a strict GM, you might not be allowed to play your primary PC, apparently. Meh.
|
Venture-Captain, North Carolina—Asheville
|
I get where you're coming from, but Murphy has a way of chasing people down. A fire can still result in an illegal character, and nothing can regain you access to that resource. If Paizo can scoop out the APG trait file, is posting a selection of retired faction traits (clearly labeled as only for reference) so anathema?
Venture-Captain, Australia—NSW—Greater West
|
I actually agree with the people proposing a copy of the traits are made available, not everyone is as organised or committed as the people on this thread. I have many friends who would only have the most recent version of the guide, not realising that their faction traits are now not legal without the older guides.
Maybe those who have a copy of the older guides (I would have to search around to see if I have copies) could host them somewhere, like the GM prep file, so nice GMs (like me), could have a copy.
|
I'm not sure I understand why you are being so defensive over a thread title. People have suggested ways to help you show your petition in better light to the campaign staff and players in general. I, for one, had no idea what the threat title even meant, and I've seen every MP movie and own most seasons of the show. I too, might suggest editing your title to be more professional.
|
|
I'm not sure I understand why you are being so defensive over a thread title....
I didn't think I was - I was under the impression there was more argument about everything else. As for editing it, I can't really do that now that the thread's been posted...can I? I made the title that way on a whim (and note that I put a little extra in at the start of my OP to make sure people knew what I was doing) and didn't think it was a terribly big deal any which way at the time. I still don't, and would rather this thread be about the actual content of my petition.