Re-Evaluating Replay


Pathfinder Society

151 to 200 of 210 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge 5/5

Starfinder Superscriber
trik wrote:
Does allowing every character you make to play any scenario, so long as the same character doesn't repeat a scenario count as "unlimited replay"? Just trying to figure out what camp I'm in.

Close enough. It makes things less useful for grinding for treasure for one character than allowing replay with the same character would. But, given that you can always create new characters, allowing to play each scenario once for a given character really is unlimited replay. (And would be a bad idea for all the reasons unlimited replay is a bad idea.)

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
trik wrote:
Does allowing every character you make to play any scenario, so long as the same character doesn't repeat a scenario count as "unlimited replay"? Just trying to figure out what camp I'm in.

Yes, that would be unlimited replay.

At this time, even with GMing and available replay options, no character can ever receive a chronicle for the same scenario more than once.

Sovereign Court

trik wrote:
Does allowing every character you make to play any scenario, so long as the same character doesn't repeat a scenario count as "unlimited replay"? Just trying to figure out what camp I'm in.

Effectively yes. Among the other reasons why that's bad, there are some scenarios that have particularly strong boons, so there would be incentives to run those far more frequently (honestly, I would not be surprised if people tried to run them once per character every character because some of these are very strong).

Spoiler:

Here's a list of some potentially problematic ones:
* Ioun stone that awards an extra feat.
* +2 profane bonus to an ability score for a year.
* Brands that apply moderately useful bonuses.
* A wide selection of boons, one of which is your character dies at HP == -(CON+7) instead of HP == -CON.

I think replay for credit is unhealthy, but I also think that what we have for reopening scenarios for replay is about right (the GM star recharge boon should not be convention only though). Replay for credit is problematic in summary because it removes the incentive to try new scenarios and just run the older, "superior" ones over and over again.

Replay for no credit would be a nice to have, because I think it's important to allow the "hard core players" to continue to participate. But unfortunately there are people out there who are not mature enough to allow people who can play for credit to have precedence when claiming seats. (And again, a lot of this has been solved already with core campaign so it's far less of a problem).

Paizo Employee 5/5 Developer

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I've been reading along for a while now. It's unlikely that we'll introduce any extensive expansion of replay, in large part because of the reasons mentioned above: squeezing out new players, exhaustion of scenarios as they're replayed heavily, increased boon farming (at least a few of which a player should not access more than the 2–3 times already allowed), and others.

I agree that the best way to expand play opportunities is to increase the rate of publication. That said, this is not the time of year that I look at expanding production; we're deep into scenario production for a series of conventions that call for as much as triple the amount of material (more if you consider the collateral). Once we're clear of the conventions and have caught up on everything crowding the back burner (e.g. sanctioning APs, sanctioning novels, sanctioning modules, performing spot revisions for some scenarios, and getting ahead in the production schedule [so that, among other things, GMs can receive adventures further in advance of conventions]), that's when I would revisit it.

If you're saying to this, "But Paizo should recognize the importance of the organized play campaign and invest more into it," remember that we have. Assistant developer Linda Zayas-Palmer has been an extraordinary help in pulling together the material for PaizoCon and Gen Con both. That takes the immense convention workload from unattainable to possible. What the distribution of work will look like after convention season is something I can't comment on, which is one big reason I'm not ready to comment further on more scenarios per month than saying, "Yes, an extra scenario per month would be helpful."

As a data point, Drogon, keep in mind that Season 6 was 11 months long and included 11 Tier 1–2 or 1–5 adventures, not including the interactive special Legacy of the Stonelords or the quest series The Silverhex Chronicles.

Paizo Employee 5/5 Developer

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Regarding the Expanded Narrative boon, that's something I'm willing to explore making more commonly available. One advantage of convention boons is that they allow the campaign to test out an idea, use it more if it works, or discontinue it if it doesn't without causing too much damage. So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

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

tivadar27 wrote:
I don't think there's enough backing for 3b OR 3c for that matter. We've heard one or two people advocate for unlimited replay, but they're very much in the minority. As I said previously, I think it's enough to say "There are people on both sides of the replay issue, some vocal, who think that either limited expanding of replay is a good idea, or that it is too risky".

Specifically acknowledging people is important. For instance, I am one who fits in the "3b" camp. I would actually advocate that no replay at all is the correct route, but am fully aware that this idea will not gain traction and will instead incite ire. Compromise has led us to where we are now, and can continue to play a role, so I don't wave my freak flag too much anymore.

And 3c is out there, believe me. Like me, however, they know better than to wave their flag too vigorously. And, seeing as the results of unlimited replay are what drives most of the arguments against replay in general, being aware of this specific position is also important. You and DM Beckett, for instance, would be (and have been) upset and defensive when lumped into the "Pro Replay" camp without distinction.

Edit: For proof of 3c's existence, and steadfast belief that they do not cause the playing community a problem, please see the following post.

1/5

rknop wrote:
trik wrote:
Does allowing every character you make to play any scenario, so long as the same character doesn't repeat a scenario count as "unlimited replay"? Just trying to figure out what camp I'm in.
Close enough. It makes things less useful for grinding for treasure for one character than allowing replay with the same character would. But, given that you can always create new characters, allowing to play each scenario once for a given character really is unlimited replay. (And would be a bad idea for all the reasons unlimited replay is a bad idea.)

If that's the case, unlimited replay is not innately a bad idea. It was implemented poorly in a past campaign that had other failings, which all culminated in failure.

1. Exclusionary groups are an issue with or without replay and a problem with the players, not the ability to replay. If people are going to behave this way, there is no logical reason that replay would exacerbate it. I personally find this a very weak argument. A better argument is that (some) people suck and it will be noticed in any social activity.

2. People not wanting to DM games because they aren't forced into it is a problem with the incentive to DM (be that entertainment value or rewards), not the ability to replay.

3. People reread books and watch movies more than once all the time. Consuming entertaining content multiple times is standard human behavior. This is the same thing as PFS replay, only a different entertainment medium.

As far as the complaints Drogon received specifically, here are my thoughts.

> The same guys are always playing.

Good. You have a healthy core player base and if they are cool people, it will grow from there.

> I can never get space at the table I want.

Sign ups are first come, first serve everywhere I play. Granted, we use Warhorn, but you still don't get to play if you sign up for a full game and everyone shows.

> I'm tired of being told I might have missed something and should look again, and lo' and behold, I did.

Bad player/DM behavior that is specifically not allowed under the replay text included in the Guide to PFS Organized Play. Basically, it's the DMs job to kick someone out of the game that is doing this to players, particularly if they are obviously uncomfortable with it.

> I'm tired of being told I should play something different because this or that adventure doesn't treat xxx class well.

The joys of power gaming. This happens now with limited replays. The only effect replays would have on this is that power gamers would likely have knowledge of more scenarios. They are not supposed to share any foreknowledge and if they are doing so, it's once again a player problem that needs to be resolved.

It's rather unfortunate that you have to deal with these types of players at your store, Drogon, but I play with people that wouldn't do any of these things. Also, following the replay rules that are already specified would remove these issues. Not following the rules is a player problem, similar to lying on dice rolls or intentionally altering stats or inventory.

In the end, I don't see replay as the *CAUSE* of any of the problems people cite. Replays may highlight some of the problems, which are generally due to player attitudes, but I can't see the direct causality.

Sovereign Court

John Compton wrote:

Regarding the Expanded Narrative boon, that's something I'm willing to explore making more commonly available. One advantage of convention boons is that they allow the campaign to test out an idea, use it more if it works, or discontinue it if it doesn't without causing too much damage. So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

I think the Expanded Narrative boon is designed correctly, because it incentivises and rewards people for GMing more often.

The accessibility is the only problem. Even for people who can attend conventions, I've heard a couple of stories about frequent and respected volunteer GMs in a few gaming communities being disappointed with being unable to get one of these boons at Gencon or Paizocon because of unlucky rolls at the token exchange counter.

This will make a lot of volunteers that help make PFS a better community happy.

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

Regarding specifically acknowledging people:

John Compton, you have always had the most remarkable timing I've ever witnessed. Like a Zen master, you know the exact moment you can achieve maximum effectiveness. I am continually in awe.

My only quibble: don't be frustrated with me for saying that low-tier adventure expansion could have been handled with better attention this season. Increasing the numbers was an excellent thing to do, especially for someone like me who does so much coordinating. I very much appreciate what you have done. But keep in mind that someone like DM Beckett, who wants to not have to be part of "the grind" also needs to feel the love. So when I say it could be handled better, I am only referring to the blow-back you are getting from other corners. You are already aware of the best solution: more publication. I want you to know that I am aware of the challenges that solution poses to you. Thus, I simply say, "handled better" instead of beating you upside the head with the same tired stick.

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

2 people marked this as a favorite.
trik wrote:
stuff

I am sorry, trik, but I will not argue these things with you. I will simply say that I disagree, and there is nothing you will be able to present to me that has more weight behind it than the years of time I have spent doing this and talking to my customers.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

John Compton wrote:

Regarding the Expanded Narrative boon, that's something I'm willing to explore making more commonly available. One advantage of convention boons is that they allow the campaign to test out an idea, use it more if it works, or discontinue it if it doesn't without causing too much damage. So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

I find it completely accurate John. I feel that GenCon would be a good time to move it to GM boon status. This will open up the availability of the boon even more without just making it available across the board. We should do this to increase the proliferation of the boon and see how that affects the campaign during the Year of the Serpent.

1/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Drogon wrote:
trik wrote:
stuff
I am sorry, trik, but I will not argue these things with you. I will simply say that I disagree, and there is nothing you will be able to present to me that has more weight behind it than the years of time I have spent doing this and talking to my customers.

I agree to disagree. :)

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Starfinder Superscriber
trik wrote:

If that's the case, unlimited replay is not innately a bad idea. It was implemented poorly in a past campaign that had other failings, which all culminated in failure.

1. Exclusionary groups are an issue with or without replay and a problem with the players, not the ability to replay. If people are going to behave this way, there is no logical reason that replay would exacerbate it. I personally find this a very weak argument. A better argument is that (some) people suck and it will be noticed in any social activity.

In fact, it has been pointed out explicitly, multiple times, why replay exacerbates this. Every table can every time be completely filled by all the same faces. New people end up pushed out. Some people who would be encouraged to GM because there's nothing for them to play one weekend no longer need to be encouraged, leading to burnout of the committed GMs and to a shrinking GM pool. This has been observed. This is the reason given. Unlimited replay, exactly of the form you have described, would enable these things. I don't know why you can't see this, given that exactly these arguments have been made multiple times in this thread.

As for "logic" -- that's not a matter of how convincing an argument is. It's a matter of whether or not your conclusions follow from your premises. So, let's look at the logic. It has been pointed out that in LFR, the fact that the same people could play every scenario offered every time it was offered meant that you got a lot of the same people showing up all the time. Your proposed replay method doesn't do anything to change the premise that allows this. So, logically, if it happened before, at the very least it could happen again, and although it's not logic, it's reasonable to expect that it would. Second, the same eggheads tiredly doing the same scenarios over and over ended up pushing out new players. So, again, logically, if it happened before, it could happen again.

Yes, some people suck. They suck anyway. Unlimited replay is an enabler. It's been argued many times. I suspect nothing will convince you, but to many of us, the evidence is pretty convincing.

Quote:
3. People reread books and watch movies more than once all the time. Consuming entertaining content multiple times is standard human behavior. This is the same thing as PFS replay, only a different entertainment medium.

People rereading books and rewatching movies don't use up spaces that stop other people from rereading those books or rewatching those movies. What's more, because they're not interactive, rereading or rewatching doesn't mean that incidental spoilers will happen to people watching it for the first time (unless you're annoying and spoil it for them while watching it with them). So, this doesn't really apply.

Particularly with regard to books, I strongly suspect that it's extremely rare for somebody to read a book more than 2-3 times in a 2-3 year period.

Quote:

> The same guys are always playing.

Good. You have a healthy core player base and if they are cool people, it will grow from there.

Drogon already explained why this can also be bad. You should go back and read it.

Quote:

> I can never get space at the table I want.

Sign ups are first come, first serve everywhere I play. Granted, we use Warhorn, but you still don't get to play if you sign up for a full game and everyone shows.

...and, if all of your regulars are eligible for every single table, that only puts more pressure on the sign-ups and greatly increases the chances that the tables will be immediately full with eager regulars every time. Hence, new players get pushed out.

Look, whether or not there are causes in addition to replay for bad things that happen, for many of these replay is at the very least an exacerbating factor. It's worth acknowledging that.


DM Beckett wrote:
tivadar27 wrote:
You know, please base your responses on actual facts from the actual posts. And don't suggest bias, particularly intentional bias, on my part, when your amendments have things that are blatantly incorrect in them.
rknop wrote:

Not entirely fair; a rather biased summary. You left out:

3a: A fair amount of people also think expanding limited replay would be a bad idea, because it's too risky.
tivadar27 wrote:
This is implied, and obvious. If *not everyone* thinks it's a good idea, then some people think it's a bad idea... It's unclear which is more popular, which is why I didn't say "most".

Either way, it does read as insinuating that one side is off by thinking so. I don't think that was your intent, but I can see it coming off that way, too, which does sound pretty bias.

Ahh, ok, sorry, that wasn't my intent. I apologize, and am happy to change that, in fact, to say something that does acknowledge both sides exist.

DM Beckett wrote:


rknop wrote:
3b: Some people think there already is too much replay.
tivadar27 wrote:
Literally 0 people suggested this, and I've re-read the posts. Please reference at least one instance where someone indicated they thought this was the case.
To be fair, there have been some people that have said "any and all replay is too much". Not sure if they where here, but I have seen people say this on these boards. Might be similar to the notion that somehow "unlimited" Replay was being talked about, despite people repeatedly specifying that basically no one was talking about it?

Did that statement come before evergreens and GM stars? My point was that those are the current level of replay, and I haven't heard anyone complaining about those. It's possibly somewhere else, but I was attempting to summarize the thread.

I was also trying to only include things that had a large backing. Yes, there are some backers for unlimited replay, but I don't think there'd be much argument that they are in the minority. If that changes, we should pay attention to it, but we can probably focus on limited replay right now.

1/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

While I certainly see the resistance to more open replay policies, I'd be curious to see what would happen if there were some 1-5, 3-7 and 5-9 evergreens made available. It would probably be best to make them available on a trial basis, just in case replays really do have a negative impact on the campaign as a whole. Offering it on a trial basis gives the option of saying "Whoops!" and pulling them from legal PFS material or just removing the replay option from the scenarios/modules. I think this is probably the solution that acknowledges the most positions on the topic and could provide some very valuable insight for continued discussion.


John Compton wrote:

I've been reading along for a while now. It's unlikely that we'll introduce any extensive expansion of replay, in large part because of the reasons mentioned above: squeezing out new players, exhaustion of scenarios as they're replayed heavily, increased boon farming (at least a few of which a player should not access more than the 2–3 times already allowed), and others.

I agree that the best way to expand play opportunities is to increase the rate of publication. That said, this is not the time of year that I look at expanding production; we're deep into scenario production for a series of conventions that call for as much as triple the amount of material (more if you consider the collateral). Once we're clear of the conventions and have caught up on everything crowding the back burner (e.g. sanctioning APs, sanctioning novels, sanctioning modules, performing spot revisions for some scenarios, and getting ahead in the production schedule [so that, among other things, GMs can receive adventures further in advance of conventions]), that's when I would revisit it.

If you're saying to this, "But Paizo should recognize the importance of the organized play campaign and invest more into it," remember that we have. Assistant developer Linda Zayas-Palmer has been an extraordinary help in pulling together the material for PaizoCon and Gen Con both. That takes the immense convention workload from unattainable to possible. What the distribution of work will look like after convention season is something I can't comment on, which is one big reason I'm not ready to comment further on more scenarios per month than saying, "Yes, an extra scenario per month would be helpful."

As a data point, Drogon, keep in mind that Season 6 was 11 months long and included 11 Tier 1–2 or 1–5 adventures, not including the interactive special Legacy of the Stonelords or the quest series The Silverhex Chronicles.

Thanks John, and yes, extra publications would certainly help, though I realize that's a heavy burden on your end as well. Thanks for recognizing the difficulty around low-level scenarios as well.

The only other thing I'd personally like to emphasize is if you do plan on continuing to hand out Expanded Narrative, please do consider doing this at more than just conventions. There are plenty of local GMs who can't make these for various reasons, but do dedicate time to GMing and likely deserve this as much as GMs who do attend conventions. I'm fortunate enough *not* to be one of those, but I know a few in the area who are.


John Compton wrote:

Regarding the Expanded Narrative boon, that's something I'm willing to explore making more commonly available. One advantage of convention boons is that they allow the campaign to test out an idea, use it more if it works, or discontinue it if it doesn't without causing too much damage. So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

Oh wow, and I completely missed your second post. Yes, that's generally the impression I personally have heard. If people have had issues though, feel free to say so. I've seen these used about 5-10 times locally and haven't seen a problem.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber
John Compton wrote:

Regarding the Expanded Narrative boon, that's something I'm willing to explore making more commonly available. One advantage of convention boons is that they allow the campaign to test out an idea, use it more if it works, or discontinue it if it doesn't without causing too much damage. So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

I tried to be explicit in my statement that I think XN as a "campaign boon" - maybe even distributed similar to the, or with the, Star Reward Boons Chronicle package.

To expand my thoughts: I like the notion of rechargeable replays. I believe the right way to do that is the mechanism of a continuing number of tables GMd is linked to recharging. I don't think it should be gated by convention attendance, specific event type attendance, or anything else other than reported games. Without investing time with the Tech Team, a broader distribution strategy for XN seems to be a fitting way to do it.

Shadow Lodge 5/5 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Northwest aka WalterGM

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Acedio wrote:
But unfortunately there are people out there who are not mature enough

As I experience more and more of humanity, I find this to be overwhelmingly true.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
John Compton wrote:

Regarding the Expanded Narrative boon, that's something I'm willing to explore making more commonly available. One advantage of convention boons is that they allow the campaign to test out an idea, use it more if it works, or discontinue it if it doesn't without causing too much damage. So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

I would say yes, that is accurate.

Personally I have used my Expanded Narrative boon to earn back all 4 of my star replays (GMed 15 adventures since November 2014 and June 2015) and have spent 2 of them again already this season. 5 of my replays were used so that I could play with my home group which introduced a new player. They were all low tier scenarios which I had played at one convention or another. Another member of my home group ran them for the GM credit as he had played them with me. 1 replay was so that I could play at a local game day. I was available to play on a night when I normally do not play. The scenario being offered was one that I had played and their was a seat open.

I am hoping to get another Expanded Narrative boon for season 7 so that I will have more options to play with my local community and to open up scenarios for our home group that a few of us may choose to play at conventions. It would be nice if it was more of a sure thing that I am able to get one.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 Venture-Captain, Texas—San Antonio aka Dragnmoon

John Compton wrote:

Regarding the Expanded Narrative boon, that's something I'm willing to explore making more commonly available. One advantage of convention boons is that they allow the campaign to test out an idea, use it more if it works, or discontinue it if it doesn't without causing too much damage. So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

That is Accurate. I am not sure about offering to all beyond convention but I do think it should be a GM boon.

Though there is some confusion over the boon that clarification would be nice.

We are aware that the games GMd for the boon are during the time period of one season only, the question is that if you lose those extra replays once the season ends.

For example I have gotten 4 more replays on my boon, I can't add anymore sessions on the boon once Gen Con starts but do I also lose those 4 extra replays?

Liberty's Edge 5/5 5/5 Venture-Agent, United Kingdom—England—Chester aka Paz

John Compton wrote:

So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

Personally I am happy with it being a convention boon, I would just like it to be more reliably available to GMs at those conventions. As someone who mostly GMs, an Expanded Narrative boon would be far more useful than the GM reward Undine race boon that I received at my last event.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I took it to mean that your replay star potential is refilled. If you had 4 and spent them and earned back 4 and spent 2 more you would still have 2 replays available.

If you got another boon for the following season, you could spend your 2 remaining replays and earn back as many as you have stars. If you went from a 4 star to a 5 star GM, you could spend your 5th replay and re-earn it if you GM enough games.

That would mean that a 5 star GM could have a maximum of 10 replays in a single season but that would mean that they had 5 unused replays from the previous season and re-earned them during the current season. They would start the next season with no replays and at max could re-earn and replay 5 times.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Paz wrote:
John Compton wrote:

So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

Personally I am happy with it being a convention boon, I would just like it to be more reliably available to GMs at those conventions. As someone who mostly GMs, an Expanded Narrative boon would be far more useful than the GM reward Undine race boon that I received at my last event.

Convention boons are good to help encourage/reward convention attendance.

But I think Expanded Narrative is a boon that is not good to limit to conventions. There are plenty of local GMs that can't attend conventions that do enough in their local circle that they would deserve this reward. It should be distributed like the Star Reward Boons Chronicle.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I agree that the Expanded Narrative boon doesn't seem to be causing any problems in my area. My wife has used hers to replay scenarios, either because she had a bad experience with them or because she realized after playing that a different character would've been a perfect fit. (Not for boons or anything, just because the character's background fit the scenario very well.) Personally, I've only replayed one scenario, and that was to help make a table. I plan to use stars to replay the bonekeep series with a table who actually knows what bonekeep is and is prepared for it. (Played Bonekeep 1 with a pregen and an 8 year old. Played BK 2 with a 9 year old.) I'll probably eventually use my expanded narrative boon, but TBH, for myself, play opportunities are so slim I hate to waste them on scenarios I've already played.

Again, just my take on it. I might use my stars at some point to replay Eyes of the Ten in a couple of years, when the memory of it is not so fresh, if only because that was the best series I've ever played.

5/5 5/55/55/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
John Compton wrote:

Regarding the Expanded Narrative boon, that's something I'm willing to explore making more commonly available. One advantage of convention boons is that they allow the campaign to test out an idea, use it more if it works, or discontinue it if it doesn't without causing too much damage. So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

Yes.

I know that replays are a contentious issue and the star thing was going to be a dipping the toes in for a trial period, but having not seen the dreaded candiru of LFR the star replays eventually refresh is something that really should be a reward for all dms.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Venture-Captain, California—Los Angeles aka Neume

1 person marked this as a favorite.
John Compton wrote:

Regarding the Expanded Narrative boon, that's something I'm willing to explore making more commonly available. One advantage of convention boons is that they allow the campaign to test out an idea, use it more if it works, or discontinue it if it doesn't without causing too much damage. So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

Yes. On more than one occasion this season this boon has saved a table by having someone jump in to GM it because they wanted to get a star recharged. To be fair each time it was the same person, but I still count that. That person could have just played the game they were at but instead were inspired to jump up and GM.

I am a HUGE proponent of anything that gets more people to GM.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Superscriber

Free kittens for GMs!

Shadow Lodge

John Compton wrote:

Regarding the Expanded Narrative boon, that's something I'm willing to explore making more commonly available. One advantage of convention boons is that they allow the campaign to test out an idea, use it more if it works, or discontinue it if it doesn't without causing too much damage. So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

I would say it is accurate that the Expanded Narrative Boon, (having never actually even seen one), from what I understand, is a very good method, but the fact that it was so restricted in being handed out is the issue. I know I've been part of at least 3 game days and it was not offered. I've also made multiple attempts to trade for one, so I could give it to one of my players who has the greatest difficulty playing with anyone else because he has the longest history with PFS. He also does DM sometimes, but a lot of times it puts us into a position where he runs something that I've already run for him.

Honestly, in my personal opinion, probably the best way to make it work might be to offer it as an option for either a long missed Holiday Boon or it could even be a sort of cool reward for DMing certain normal scenarios each season. Say, 1 or 2 Chronicle Sheets have a small section that only applies to the DM for running it. This would both help to encourage more people to DM more often and continue to reward DM's for DMing, but also be something that would be very fair across the board. Everyone would have the opportunity to achieve it, it's entirely a matter of them doing so.

Obviously the one hiccup might be that it might encourage a sort of DM Chronicle Hunting, but if it only applies to the DM who receives credit for running it, I don't think that would be too much of an issue, and even if you used a Replay to re-earn it, you are not profiting.

Just an idea.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Drogon wrote:
And 3c is out there, believe me. Like me, however, they know better than to wave their flag too vigorously. And, seeing as the results of unlimited replay are what drives most of the arguments against replay in general, being aware of this specific position is also important. You and DM Beckett, for instance, would be (and have been) upset and defensive when lumped into the "Pro Replay" camp without distinction.

I just want to point out I am neither upset nor do I feel I'm being defensive. I just feel that the distinction between opening Replay options up more and unlimited Replay is important. The arguments I use for more Replay options do not hold true for infinite replay.

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Agent, Ohio—Columbus aka Incendiaeternus

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Drogon wrote:

So, the suggestions:

1 - For the groups experiencing problems, please try some of the solutions presented. They work. It has been proven by those who have had the same problems you are currently experiencing. Try the ones that you think you could implement, and report back in a few months on their success, or lack thereof.

One of the things that is starting to get really old about having to bring this back up. Is assuming we are too stupid to have been trying these, when some of the groups going through this are saying we have tried these things or they cannot work for group made up of x.

There are groups running APs - there are only so many APs. There is only so much time to run them even when you can 'break up the sessions' -- we are giving you the feedback and Drogon you're specifically saying our feedback back from trying these things for months before this came up is not worth our time or effort to helping with this issue. It's coming close to saying that it's not worth our time to be a part of PFS if we can only play for a few weeks out of the year.

There are groups running modules, but unless they are evergreens you can only run them once. Even if you do split the up modules for groups that can get the same together for 4-hour slots.

We are already rotating GMs as much as we can. We are already running non-PFS games (why some of us don't have too great of stars, due to non-PFS games as well). But playing non-PFS games return us to why are we a part of PFS, if you only get to play with distant friends at cons and that's it.

If you want to ask for the Feedback, please accept it when it's given.

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Agent, Ohio—Columbus aka Incendiaeternus

John Compton wrote:

Regarding the Expanded Narrative boon, that's something I'm willing to explore making more commonly available. One advantage of convention boons is that they allow the campaign to test out an idea, use it more if it works, or discontinue it if it doesn't without causing too much damage. So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

Thank you, for understanding that we are not wanting an expansive opening up of replay, but simply a fix that will help groups that are starting to be pigon holed, into areas which is limiting play that we have no solutions for at this time.

I think it would be a good 'feedback' from us that something like this is a limited 'expansion' that is still limited enough for hopefully most from areas where there are issues with replay options that have been mentioned.

I think something that may be useful to also look into is when is 'replay for no credit' a viable option as well. Not to open it up for areas where we have people who would sit down to grind someone for a scenario, but where we have 7 people, 3 have played it, one's the GM, at current I can only accept 1 of the 2 others and we only have 7 people so no other table for a local group.

Dark Archive 4/5

John Compton wrote:

Regarding the Expanded Narrative boon, that's something I'm willing to explore making more commonly available. One advantage of convention boons is that they allow the campaign to test out an idea, use it more if it works, or discontinue it if it doesn't without causing too much damage. So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

I really like this boon.

Thanks to getting a copy of this at a local con back in February, I haven't felt like (as much of) a hoarder with my stars, and have used a couple replays to either get credit for making a legal table, or to play a scenario with a more (thematically) fitting character. If I hadn't lucked out with my roll to acquire this boon, I probably wouldn't have been so casual about using my stars.
I do agree though that this should be more widely available, as not everyone can get to a con. I would suggest allowing the VOs the ability to distribute this at their discretion to those GMs who have gone above and beyond, allowing PFS to thrive in their area.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Incendiaeternus wrote:
If you want to ask for the Feedback, please accept it when it's given.

I have now read all 20 of the posts on your messageboard history, and nowhere in those posts have you said you tried any of the following things:

1 - Announce games ahead of time for people to sign up.

2 - Recruit new players via a "Learn to Play" night at your local store.

3 - Set up a master spreadsheet on Google documents with every player in your group getting access to it so that they can each mark what they have and have not played.

4 - Tried to run Core games so that all your local players can experience the adventures a second time.

5 - Contacted your Venture staff to get help with specials or running a mini-con to get outside players.

Additionally, I'm looking at your aliases, and you have 11 characters, but only 1 star. You say you are rotating the GM duties a lot. If so, do you have so many players in your area that 11 PCs per 29 (or fewer) games GM'd is achievable? That's a lot of GMs. Seems to me that you have a reasonably sized player group, not a handful of people in a corn field. If it's just because you like designing tons of characters that you don't really get to play, then I can concede your group is as small as you say.

I don't necessarily know that you DON'T do these things. Then again, I don't know WHAT you do.

I.E. - I don't think you're stupid. Rather, I think you haven't given any feedback, nor any information about how you run your game nights.

Who is your coordinator?

Who is your VC/VL?

How many games do you run in a night/week/month?

How many stores/libraries/playing locations are in your area?

How many schools are in your area?

When you give this information and feedback, you'll get suggestions you may be able to use. I don't see railing at me about assuming you're stupid as particularly helpful to your cause.


Regarding "methods" of continued play outside of expansion, Drogon, I realize there are things *I* could do to extend the number of things I can play. Some of these techniques are valuable. However, the main issue is that scenarios are hard to come by, and APs are hard to schedule.

Our local VC typically doesn't schedule many APs during open gaming slots, just due to the fact that they don't fit and you can't count on players being there over multiple weeks. I don't blame them for this. Yes, a lot of us could pick up a regular group of players to play with outside of the open/free play, but then you have to pick times when everyone's available, and find an AP where everyone has a character in range and no one has played yet. At this point, it almost becomes more difficult than Homebrew scheduling, which is hard enough for me as it is.

One last thing to mention about this, Pirate Rob's plan includes playing 27 evergreens (level 1 only) scenarios/modules, that's basically a quarter of the plays. While it's playable, you're going to wind up with a whole bunch of low level characters taking this approach, and not many higher.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber

If all the potential non-scenario product in a year gets sanctioned, the campaign releases about 70 XP a year of playable content.

About 12XP of that is likely to only be playable on high Seeker levels.

I've got a bare handful of Standard Play Mode 1-5s left available, and I'm jumping up and down with the concept "the amount of replay we have will be perfect if all GMs have continued-GMing-linked annual star refreshes" (AKA Expanded Narrative global availability for GMs).

Grand Lodge

John Compton wrote:

Regarding the Expanded Narrative boon, that's something I'm willing to explore making more commonly available. One advantage of convention boons is that they allow the campaign to test out an idea, use it more if it works, or discontinue it if it doesn't without causing too much damage. So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

In answer to this question, yes I (personally) think it works well and encourages some continuation of GMing beyond the fifth star for the opportunity to play (or even run) more games for credit. I know people who have been able to use them for longer series and modules (Eyes of the Ten and Dragon's Demand) without as much worry about never being able to use them again. (Especially, since some had previously planned out where every star they would burn would be used.)

I'd be interested in a method that distributes them to more of the GM base than just conventions. Whether that means you get one as a free download and print it off, the first time you GM in a year, whenever you hit a new star level (or every 50 tables if already 5 star) or the nearest VO distributes them. (Or frankly any of a number of other options) While I personally have no problem making it to a number of conventions a year I know a number of other GMs who can't.

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

tivadar27 wrote:

Regarding "methods" of continued play outside of expansion, Drogon, I realize there are things *I* could do to extend the number of things I can play. Some of these techniques are valuable. However, the main issue is that scenarios are hard to come by, and APs are hard to schedule.

Our local VC typically doesn't schedule many APs during open gaming slots, just due to the fact that they don't fit and you can't count on players being there over multiple weeks. I don't blame them for this. Yes, a lot of us could pick up a regular group of players to play with outside of the open/free play, but then you have to pick times when everyone's available, and find an AP where everyone has a character in range and no one has played yet. At this point, it almost becomes more difficult than Homebrew scheduling, which is hard enough for me as it is.

One last thing to mention about this, Pirate Rob's plan includes playing 27 evergreens (level 1 only) scenarios/modules, that's basically a quarter of the plays. While it's playable, you're going to wind up with a whole bunch of low level characters taking this approach, and not many higher.

I believe you will notice that, in large part, I am fairly quiet about running modules/APs to supplement PFS play. Why? Because I agree with each of the points you listed. I believe you will also notice that, largely, I'm not a fan of evergreen scenarios (I've even argued against them during my more militant anti-replay days), so I don't really schedule them. Why? Because I have been active in looking for solutions to heavy play that do NOT involve replay of any kind, and therefore people in my area tend to view replay dis-favorably, allowable via evergreen status or not.

Rob put that together over the course of a few hours work, in response to someone saying they wanted to play that much, and that it was impossible to do without replay being expanded. He did it because I knew it could be done, and had offered a reward to the person who was willing to write it up. And I made good on my reward, too. It was also an avenue for a single player to take that didn't have to pay attention to what anyone else was playing (besides, obviously, recruiting other players to play with). Keep that in mind, when looking at that schedule.

But I think it wouldn't be hard to put together a plan that doesn't rely as heavily on evergreen scenarios. Especially if you have a group of willing participants. And doubly-especially with the advent of the Core Campaign.

I get the fact that the path he laid out isn't all that appetizing to some. And I get the fact that every group has its own challenges. But that bet I made, and Rob's efforts, proved that finding a way to accomplish heavy play habits does not have to involve expanding replay rules, and proved it rather easily. Walter Sheppard's play group is more proof. Dragnmoon's play group is more proof. Even Benn Roe's play group is proof, assuming he's still running the number of games I hear he runs, and he won't support anything I say and dislikes me thoroughly (he'll tell you he doesn't, but he does).

Regardless, this is just rehashing things we've already discussed. I think this last day has shown there are reasonable people involved in this thread, and that options are being discovered and explored. Let's see what happens.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Incendiaeternus wrote:

One of the things that is starting to get really old about having to bring this back up. Is assuming we are too stupid to have been trying these, when some of the groups going through this are saying we have tried these things or they cannot work for group made up of x.

There are groups running APs - there are only so many APs. There is only so much time to run them even when you can 'break up the sessions' -- we are giving you the feedback and Drogon you're specifically saying our feedback back from trying these things for months before this came up is not worth our time or effort to helping with this issue. It's coming close to saying that it's not worth our time to be a part of PFS if we can only play for a few weeks out of the year.

There are groups running modules, but unless they are evergreens you can only run them once. Even if you do split the up modules for groups that can get the same together for 4-hour slots.

We are already rotating GMs as much as we can. We are already running non-PFS games (why some of us don't have too great of stars, due to non-PFS games as well). But playing non-PFS games return us to why are we a part of PFS, if you only get to play with distant friends at cons and that's it.

If you want to ask for the Feedback, please accept it when it's given.

Your gaming group is so stable that most of you have played all of the roughly 200 PFS scenarios?

I'm not trying to be rude but why not try a real home game for a while. Organized play was never meant to be more than a substitute for that and as something to do at cons.

Even a once a month on going campaign would take some of the pressure off PFS and surely someone could manage to keep a campaign going at that rate.

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Agent, Ohio—Columbus aka Incendiaeternus

Drogon wrote:
1 - Announce games ahead of time for people to sign up.
Drogon wrote:
2 - Recruit new players via a "Learn to Play" night at your local store.

We don't have a 'local' store, the next closest store is 1+ away.

Drogon wrote:
3 - Set up a master spreadsheet on Google documents with every player in your group getting access to it so that they can each mark what they have and have not played.

Yes, If you've looked at my posts, then you should see that I'm the person that made the master google spreadsheet in the format for groups to see what others have played. I originally made it because we needed it, and decided to share a blank.

Drogon wrote:
4 - Tried to run Core games so that all your local players can experience the adventures a second time.

Almost no interest in playing it with the local players. We've run it, but most of my 'core' experience is from cons.

Drogon wrote:
5 - Contacted your Venture staff to get help with specials or running a mini-con to get outside players.

...we are small town, in the middle of nowhere, there is no recruiting in an environment that thinks that RPGs and MTG is on the same level as devil worship.

Drogon wrote:


Additionally, I'm looking at your aliases, and you have 11 characters, but only 1 star. You say you are rotating the GM duties a lot. If so, do you have so many players in your area that 11 PCs per 29 (or fewer) games GM'd is achievable? That's a lot of GMs. Seems to me that you have a reasonably sized player group, not a handful of people in a corn field. If it's just because you like designing tons of characters that you don't really get to play, then I can concede your group is as small as you say.

Reasonably sized.... no as I said we have seven players. Which is why if we have more than one person who played it, were telling someone you cannot play, as you can only have a single player play for no credit as the rules go.

As for my 'PCs' - when I go to conventions, I don't go I'm going to play x character, if we already have others playing that and need something filled in. I go to the convention with a folder of pregens of every class and level. Some of my 'numerous' PCs are one or two sheets of pregens. I have two-three around level 8. I'm not the most prolific of our players, as 90% of our group goes to conventions. Most have been members for 3+ years.

Yes we are rotating GM duties, but since we are limited in PFS, some like myself also run the non-PFS games. I started running PFS after my non-PFS started to wind down. We have 5 PFS GMs in a group of seven people. But it's nice to know that my one star means I should just shut up and quit PFS. Because we ran non-PFS.

Drogon wrote:


How many games do you run in a night/week/month?

Once a week, and one to two times a month playing full day (i.e. AP, or Module)

Drogon wrote:
How many stores/libraries/playing locations are in your area?

That are viable? Only homes.

Drogon wrote:


How many schools are in your area?

See above about culture here, this will get us almost non-existent very quickly and some are professionals that picked this up when *we* were in school elsewhere.

Drogon wrote:


When you give this information and feedback, you'll get suggestions you may be able to use. I don't see railing at me about assuming you're stupid as particularly helpful to your cause.

Because you never said anything about wanting this but just this won't work people like us don't exist.

5/5 Venture-Agent, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East aka Pirate Rob

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Here's a totally more awesome specific plan...

How to PFS Lots of times a month during season 6, playing only things released/sanctioned during this season while not overdosing on evergreens. This also does not include any CORE or ACG play, just pure classic PFS.

Things that were sanctioned:
August: Emerald Spire (Going to assume these fit 1 slot each for 1-8 and 2 slots for 9-16)
November: Tears at Bitter Manor
December: Wardens of the Reborn Forge
December: Plunder & Peril
The later parts of Mummy's Mask were also sanctioned this season, but I don't have the exact dates so I'm going to leave them out.

Calendar Details:

August:
1-2: Play the 2 new scenarios
3-4: Play the 3rd new scenario this month, GM once
5-6: Play Legacy of the Stone Lords, Play Bonekeep 3
7-8: GM a second time, Play We Be Goblins

September:
1-2: Play the 2 new scenarios
3-4: Play Emerald Spire level 1, GM once
5-6: Play The Paths We Choose, GM a second time
7-8: Play Murder's Mark (2 slots)

October:
1-2: Play the 2 new scenarios
3-4: Play Emerald Spire level 2, GM Once
5-6: Play Silverhex Chronicles, GM a second time
7-8: Play Crypt of the Everflame (2 slots)

November:
1-2: Play the 2 new scenarios
3-4: Play Emerald Spire level 3, GM Once
5-6: Play Tears at Bitter Mannor c1 (2 slots)
7-8: GM a second time, Play 1st Steps p1

December:
1-2: Play the 2 new scenarios
3-4: GM once, Play Emerald Spire 4
5-6: GM a second time, Play The Confirmation
7-8: Play Tears at Bitter Manor c3 (2 slots)

January:
1-2: Play the 2 new scenarios
3-4: GM once, Play Emerald Spire 5
5-6: Play Thornkeep 1, GM a second time
7-8: Play Wardens of the Reborn Forge p1 (2 slots)

Feburary:
1-2: Play the 2 new scenarios
3-4: GM once, Play Emerald Spire 6
5-6: Play Godsmouth Heresy (2 slots)
7-8: Play Wardens of the Reborn Forge p2 (2 slots)

March:
1-2: Play the 2 new scenarios
3-4: GM once, Play Emerald Spire 7
5-6: GM a second time, Play Plunder & Peril p1
7-8: Play Wardens of the Reborn Forge p3 (2 slots)

April:
1-2: Play the 2 new scenarios
3-4: Play Emerald Spire 8, GM once
5-6: Play Master of the Fallen Fortress, GM a second time
7-8: Play Mummy's Mask p1 (2 slots)

May:
1-2: Play the 2 new scenarios
3-4: Play Emerald Spire 9 (2 slots)
5-6: GM once, GM a second time
7-8: Play Plunder & Peril p2 (2 slots)

June:
1-2: Play the 2 new scenarios
3-4: Play Emerald Spire 10 (2 slots)
5-6: GM once, Play WBG Free
7-8: Play Plunder & Peril p3 (2 slots)

Summary:
11 Months
88 Total Slots
26 New Scenarios (29.5%)
10 New Single Slot Modules (11.3%)
18 (9*2) New Double Slot Modules (20.5%)
4 Re-playable Single Slot (4.5%)
10 (5*2) Replayable Double Slot (11.3%)
20 GM (22.7%)

Total xp earned 180 (assuming every GM slot is worth 1, and no extra Wardens sheet)

That's enough to level 5 characters from level 0 to 13 (obviously it doesn't actually work out evenly in practive)

Earning 21 re-playable xp, when you're fully leveling 5 characters doesn't seem unreasonable to me, especially when you don't have to replay anything over the course of the year.

Also you don't need nearly a complex plan if you're not trying to do things 8/month, but if I try and go up to 9-10/month it gets ugly pretty quickly.

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Agent, Ohio—Columbus aka Incendiaeternus

Jessex wrote:


Your gaming group is so stable that most of you have played all of the roughly 200 PFS scenarios?

I'm not trying to be rude but why not try a real home game for a while. Organized play was never meant to be more than a substitute for that and as something to do at cons.

Even a once a month on going campaign would take some of the pressure off PFS and surely someone could manage to keep a campaign going at that rate.

If you haven't noticed, I've mentioned we already do this, but if you play for a few weeks and then have to keep waiting you have a complete disconnect from characters that are not played for a while.

You also reach the point where if you want to play with friends at conventions you need to have appropriate level characters for things, so need to also keep playing.

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

Places that think RPGs are devil worship still exist? Bizarre...

Your challenges are definitely unique. I'm sorry you have to put up with that.

Seeing as you are seven guys who are very tight-knit, I would like to suggest an outside the box solution:

You can replay as much as you like. You can write up a line of play that utilizes all your favorite adventures, weaving them together in exactly the plot line you want. Follow the entire Shadowlodge story start to finish, or run all the way through the Tian Xia storyline, finishing with the Ruby Phoenix Tournament itself. Don't trouble yourselves with what has or has not been played by whom. Just play what you want to play. Design and build PFS characters, hand out PFS chronicles when they are earned, and follow all the PFS rules. Just don't report them as official games.

This is simply shot from the hip, and I know there are pitfalls for this, too, as there are with ANY solution that will be proposed: you won't earn stars, you won't be able to take that PC to an official game, and sometimes someone will play something for NO credit that they've never actually played FOR credit. But you'll still be playing PFS with all it's inherent good qualities, as well. If this is a twice-a-month thing where you seven get together to supplement your official PFS play, it would take you a year and a half to get through to 13th level, and in the meantime you'd have been able to officially play newly published adventures twice per month the whole time.

When I can find more time tomorrow I will post other things I think I would try were I in your shoes.

And sorry I missed your spreadsheet comment. I breezed over that one for whatever reason...

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

Robert Hetherington wrote:
So much awesome!

I'd send you more stuff, Rob, but this time I think you had fun without my prompting. (-;

5/5 Venture-Agent, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East aka Pirate Rob

I'm good. I was never entirely happy with the first job I did, this one is much better.

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Agent, Ohio—Columbus aka Incendiaeternus

Drogon wrote:

Places that think RPGs are devil worship still exist? Bizarre...

Your challenges are definitely unique. I'm sorry you have to put up with that.
...
This is simply shot from the hip, and I know there are pitfalls for this, too, as there are with ANY solution that will be proposed: you won't earn stars, you won't be able to take that PC to an official game, and sometimes someone will play something for NO credit that they've never actually played FOR credit.

As things stand right now with the rules, if we have two people playing for no credit, only one *should* be playing to fill out a table. If I have more than four players, I should not have anyone playing for no credit. It's why we would be happy with not a 'replay' option, but a 'no credit' option.

There are scenarios that we could run, if we can have multiples play for no credit. It's still fun for the people playing, and then helps even out PCs for convention travel and playing with out of town friends. Ours is an issue of we cannot have everyone at a table when we have and it's usually 2-3, which lets out one person after one GMing and one for no credit (but we're already over number for no credit).

Part of this looking at our calendar and sheet for this next month (including gencon). The end of season 6 beginning of 7 will be completed at gencon.Also something that I mentioned, is that most of us go to conventions, which is 9+ slots, of playing with non-local 3+ times a year at least. That doesn't take into considerations being invited to smaller cons by friends in distant places and traveling for the weekend.

That's why we're not locked into 'need replay' but just no credit play would work.

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

I don't think any of that means my suggestion doesn't work, though.

Edit: You ARE allowed to simply say, "I don't like it," of course...

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, Nevada—Las Vegas aka kinevon

John Compton wrote:

Regarding the Expanded Narrative boon, that's something I'm willing to explore making more commonly available. One advantage of convention boons is that they allow the campaign to test out an idea, use it more if it works, or discontinue it if it doesn't without causing too much damage. So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

No idea on how well it works, as I have never seen it, nor has it been available at any of the recent conventions I have GMed or played at.

I know someone was willing to offer almost anything for a boon I had, but they did not have that boon available for trade.

The convention I just ran for, and played at, had a set of 4 boons available. None of them were this boon.

Greater availability would be great.

Just as a data point:
I have spent all 4 of my GM Star replays.
One was on a scenario I had wanted to replay, as the original time I played it was a bust. TPK, and questionable GMing.
The other three went to replay Dragon's Demand, in PFS mode instead of campaign mode, but to help make the tables, and provide my support for the GM running it.

Spoiler:
I am, I think, somewhere around 115-120 tables of credit, and only 3 Specials/Exclusives, out of 10 needed. Along with being in a place that insists on remaining a PFS backwater, it makes that 5th star for me unlikely, so...

Count me as being in favor of wider distribution of the Expanded Narrative boon.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden aka Ascalaphus

John Compton wrote:

Regarding the Expanded Narrative boon, that's something I'm willing to explore making more commonly available. One advantage of convention boons is that they allow the campaign to test out an idea, use it more if it works, or discontinue it if it doesn't without causing too much damage. So far the feedback I've heard about the Expanded Narrative boon is "This shouldn't be a convention boon" or "This should be a GM boon," which by omission seems to say "Otherwise, this boon works fairly well with the exception of those issues."

Is that accurate?

I think it's a fair boon, I'd like to actually get my hands on one though. I would prefer a distribution channel that isn't Con-reliant, because cons aren't so common here in the Netherlands.

In general, I'm uncomfortable with using big cons in the US as a distribution venue for boons, because it's not something I can afford to visit.

It's fine as a first testing ground, of course, but I'd like it if - when it turns out it works well - this kind of thing is made available more locally.

I'm fairly happy with the current level of replay, it could be just a shade more - occasionally recharging stars would do it for me.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden aka Ascalaphus

1 person marked this as a favorite.
trik wrote:
While I certainly see the resistance to more open replay policies, I'd be curious to see what would happen if there were some 1-5, 3-7 and 5-9 evergreens made available. It would probably be best to make them available on a trial basis, just in case replays really do have a negative impact on the campaign as a whole. Offering it on a trial basis gives the option of saying "Whoops!" and pulling them from legal PFS material or just removing the replay option from the scenarios/modules. I think this is probably the solution that acknowledges the most positions on the topic and could provide some very valuable insight for continued discussion.

I've been prepping The Wounded Wisp and comparing it to The Confirmation, and I think it's an interesting development. The Confirmation has random encounters to keep it "fresh", but playing it twice and running it 3-4 times (I lose track) for me the only thing that's really novel is how the end fight will play out. (That's gone differently every time though.)

The Wounded Wisp shows more finesse in writing evergreens; the random elements don't provide just different combats, but also put a different spin on the story.

Based on that experience, it'd be sweet to have an evergreen L3 and L6 (levels often reported as being hard to get past) that's maybe 64 pages long, but that can take so many twists and turns that it'll stay fresh for a long time.

151 to 200 of 210 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Re-Evaluating Replay All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.