Factions: do they matter?

[Drogon]

rknop wrote:

Drogon wrote:

And every purchase on an ITS still has to be signed off on if it's over 25gp,

What?

First I've heard of it.

Under the "Purchasing Equipment" section:

Guide to PFS OrgPlay pg 22 wrote:

A GM must be present in order for you to purchase items. This can be done before, during or after the adventure. All transactions must be recorded on the scenario’s Chronicle sheet and reflected on your character’s Inventory Tracking Sheet.

Just a little deterrent. But a deterrent nonetheless.

During a discussion when the ITS was introduced that line got interpreted on these boards as "A GM signs off on the purchases." I'm not going to hunt it down.

[rknop]

Gary Bush wrote:

rknop wrote:

Drogon wrote:

And every purchase on an ITS still has to be signed off on if it's over 25gp,

What?

First I've heard of it.

On page 10 of Season 7 Guide:

Guide wrote:

An Inventory Tracking Sheet has been included at the end of this document and is to be used for tracking all purchases of 25 GPs or more, ... and any consumables used.

Same language was in season 6. I can't say about any earlier than that because I have only been playing since season 6.

Well, sure, but it doesn't say anything about a GM signing off.

[rknop]

Drogon wrote:

rknop wrote:

Drogon wrote:

And every purchase on an ITS still has to be signed off on if it's over 25gp,

What?

First I've heard of it.

Under the "Purchasing Equipment" section:

Guide to PFS OrgPlay pg 22 wrote:

A GM must be present in order for you to purchase items. This can be done before, during or after the adventure. All transactions must be recorded on the scenario’s Chronicle sheet and reflected on your character’s Inventory Tracking Sheet.

Just a little deterrent. But a deterrent nonetheless.

During a discussion when the ITS was introduced that line got interpreted on these boards as "A GM signs off on the purchases." I'm not going to hunt it down.

Huh. That would not be my reading of it. Also, in my experience, very much not standard practice even to require a GM to be present; nor do I think it should be. The ITS is there for an audit if necessary. Why must a GM babysit players while they dither over and think about what they want to buy? That's just a waste of precious gaming time. (In my experience, GMs do not obey the rules for signing chronicle sheets. The rules are you're supposed to have entirely filled out chronicle sheets, with all accounting and everything, before you sign it. A few years ago I used to do this as GM, but I NEVER saw any other GM do it that way. They all fill out the GM sections, sign it, and hand it to you, letting you do the rest of the accounting later. Eventually, realizing that I was being a pain in the ass by making people do it the way the rules said, I started doing it the way everybody else does.)

I also am a little surprised, looking back, that it still seems to indicate that individual purchase have to be listed on the Chronicle sheet. I haven't done this in two years. When ITSes were introduced, this first came up, and the paperwork explosion had a whole bunch of us complaining. I distinctly remember there being the compromise that individual purchases no longer had to be listed on the chronicle sheets, just the accounting had to be right. And, indeed, for the last two seasons, chronicle sheets have no longer had the sections for itemizing purchases. I also remember there being discussion that GMs had to sign ITSes, but again complaints about paperwork explosion had them back off on that. So, my memory conflicts with yours, and as such I'm inclined not to read this requirement that way. (Also, I'm inclined to entirely ignore even the "GM must be present" requirement, for reasons already stated.)

The Guide sure sounds like you have to itemize them on chronicle sheets, but I can't help but think that's just a mistake. The ITS has that information, I remember it being otherwise, the chronicle sheets don't have space for it... and the whole thing is too much ridiculous double-entry paperwork if that really *is* the rule.

[rknop]

Update: Here's the blog post that says we don't have to itemize purchases on chronicle sheets.

I really wish they'd fix the Guide to reflect that.

[Drogon]

rknop wrote:

I'm inclined to entirely ignore even the "GM must be present" requirement, for reasons already stated.

This is what I do. I have no reason to not trust my better judgment. But the moment I have need to do so there is something to point at where I can say, "Please follow the rules."

And those who are inclined toward black and white interpretation will see this and do all their stuff in front of a GM. Which is fine. No skin off my back (it's not like it takes more than 10 seconds).

Those inclined to push the bounds of the rules, but not break them, also have something in writing that says, "Please do it this way." And that means something.

Last quibble: I don't think that blog post says anything about not having to have a GM present.

[Matthew Morris]

Thing I've always found funny about 'having a GM present.'

um, I am a GM. ;-)

[Mulgar]

I am to, and I am always present when I buy things for my character

[FLite]

Mulgar wrote:

I am to, and I am always present when I buy things for my character

I'm not sure I am always present.

Every so often I look back at my ITS and go "I bought a what? Why did I do that?"

[FLite]

So I play in Nefreets area.

A large part of why faction sheets are common there is because several of us printed out ten of each, and showed them to anyone who didn't have them at game and got people really excited.

And they have had way more flavor impact than anything the old faction missions did.

The silver crusade is probably the biggest example. They rush to the front when we have to take someone alive because of their ability to deal non lethal damage. They stock up on healing expendables for the purpose of using them on the party. They are far less likely to let evil outsiders and priests get away.

The Liberties Edge are a close second. Honestly, god help you if you are a slave owner and there are LibEdge in the party, and the scenario makes it possible to kill you. You are not getting out alive. They go out of their way to free slaves, even if it means spending their own money. They won't shut up about the virtues of liberty, trying to convert PC and NPCs alike.

Even the characters who don't make much use of their sheets that can be part of their character. My wife's LibEdge is always keeping an eye out to free slaves. Her SovCourt barely ever looks at his card, let alone checks things off. He is Taldan deminobility, so he feels he should support the sovereign court, but just isn't passionate about it.

Dark Archive and Scarab Sages are always looking for cool stuff to bring back. In one scenario we left a tied up, unconsious, strangler with a bow and a card around his neck on paracountess Zarta's front door step, knocked and ran off. Yelling back "Don't worry, it's not dead" may have been a mistake. It seemed to make the servants anxious. Yeah, it didn't actually get us anything on our sheets, but it seemed like the sort of thing rookie dark archive characters would do.

The exchange seems less prevelent in our area. I think it may be because the people who took exchange characters are in it for the price breaks, but just didn't build characters that are solid business men, so they have trouble closing the deal.

[N N 959]

Drogon wrote:

It has occurred to me that I have never, not once, signed off on a Faction Journal card as a GM. Moreover, after playing the other night, I realized that I'm not even carrying one around as a player to get goals signed off on. And I played the perfect scenario for my Exchange PC (at least, I assume I did; Guaril Karela figured prominently in the story). I asked around that night if anyone else was seeing them, and many of the players and GMs didn't even know what I was asking about.

Meanwhile, I have run Serpents Rise several times in the last couple months, and have delighted in having my players jump through hoops trying to figure out how to accomplish their goals and really get into their characters based on those goals.

So, these bits of seemingly disassociated data have made me realize that I sorely miss Factions. At least, I miss what they used to be. I feel that Factions gave a PC an immediate identity, one that players could use to flesh out their characters' backgrounds and personality. And the five minutes of "personal time" they had in each adventure made them define those characters even more. People would describe their characters often by leading with what faction they were part of. It was a point of pride.

I really do feel the campaign has lost a lot of its flavor and identity just because of this change in how Factions are handled.

Am I alone in thinking that Factions should matter? Or am I just an old has-been who is yearning for days of yore?

As the first person to advocate for the faction cards (that I am aware of), I have to echo a lot of the downsides of the old and the old-old system. The old old system, I grew to hate. rknop and others relate experiences similar to mine. The old-old system frequently if not consistently created an atmosphere where the central mission took a backset to everyone trying to accomplish the random and sometimes non-sequitor factions missions. The old system resulted in constant confusion and mental grating of trying to figure out what the hell I was supposed to do. Somehow many GMs got it in their head that the old system required the PCs to figure out on their own what their faction required of them in any specific mission. Ridiculous.

While I can agree with Drogon that not all players seem to be concerned with using the Faction Journal cards, if anything, that improves my experience compared to the old and old old system.

That having been said, I can understand some of what Drogon is unhappy about and the underlying question in the title of the post. To what extent should Factions influence PC behavior? The utter beauty of the Journal Cards, imo, is that each person can decide that on a PC by PC basis. I have some characters who don't particularly fit into any faction and for that character, I may do very little in support. Other PCs align rather nicely.

But I think the old old system compelled players to do Faction based things for the Prestige and as believable or logical as that may have been, it wasn't enjoyable for me given the format of PFS (no PVP) and the time constraints of the missions. While I can understand the perspective that competing Factions is more realistic and makes the campaign feel more gritty. I don't think that approach lends itself to PFS.

And really, the Journal Cards don't prevent PFS authors from creating conflicts and setting Factions against each other. Nor do the Journal Cards prevent authors from adding scenarios that focus on a specific faction or require specific faction goals. When I first suggested the cards, the goal was to provide a system that had more continuity and fluidity in how a PC worked for their faction. I felt that Faction work should not be limited to some arbitrary task at singular point in time. My goal was not to tell PFS or individual players whether Factions should "matter," but how to facilitate Faction work for those who wanted Factions to matter.

[Zach Davis]

I'm a little late to the party on this thread, but personally I am in favor of Factions and their corresponding Journal cards. I use them on every character, and before the journal cards I actively sought out scenarios with Faction missions, and before that worked diligently to accomplish the original incarnation of faction missions. I don't let my faction define my characters, but I think an in game way of having characters strive towards goals that reflect their personal interests is a great idea. I don't think the Factions have always been handled perfectly, but it seems to me that the Paizo team has made an effort to constantly evolve them in search of a way to make them truly feel relevant to the majority of the player base.

As far as GMs signing off on the cards I had GMs do this for all of season 6 despite not needing to until my VC specifically asked me to stop, because he didn't want to require any more work on the part of his GMs than was necessary.

[kinevon]

rknop wrote:

Update: Here's the blog post that says we don't have to itemize purchases on chronicle sheets.

I really wish they'd fix the Guide to reflect that.

And here is one of Mike Brock's posts stating explicitly that the ITS does NOT need to be signed off on.

Mike Brock wrote:

You don't have to get your ITS signed off, as has been mentioned numerous times in this thread. You make sure your purchases are placed on the Chronicle, make sure the ITS is correctly documented as to which Chronicle the 25+ GP purchase was made, and you are golden. No need to worry about your ability to purchase gear depend on the GM's time management skills.

[Drogon]

FLite, NN969, those descriptions of the use of faction cards get me excited. I'm pretty happy to see that they are getting that much play and offer that much to characters.

I'll be printing them out and handing them out like candy to my players. Believe me. And thank you for the encouragement.

Kinevon, thanks for finding that post.

[Drogon]

Fromper wrote:

...I miss that direct communication with the faction leaders.

... I'd love to see a return of faction missions, but only a couple of factions would have them in each scenario. Kinda like last season, but with actual written faction missions like in the early seasons.

I wanted to jump back in and address these statements from Fromper. It resonated with me and has made me think about this little conundrum all day.

First, I am committed to printing the Faction Cards out and handing them out to my player base. I think that will reinvigorate the Factions and the feel of the campaign in my area. I think it will help a lot of us reconnect with our characters' identity, and give us a bunch of new ideas to play.

Second, considering the feedback above, I want to make it clear that I am not calling for a return to the old-style Faction missions. That is obviously not necessary.

But a more regular connection with Faction leadership might be nice. I know that they sometimes show up in scenarios, which is cool if you're playing the right character when that happens. Like Fromper, however, I'd like to see occasional communication from them going out to their agents. I know in the past we've had emails from them. I'm not sure this is effective. It's "out of the moment" really, and happening in a medium that isn't really conducive to the game we are playing.

Now, I'm assuming that when the adventures are developed, an eye is kept on possible Faction goals appearing in the adventure. A little tweak here (make the smuggler a slaver instead) and a little tweak there (make the downtrodden NPC a once highly respected Taldan noble instead of a foreign aristocrat) go a long way and are easy to accomplish, where the old-style missions actually required effort to place correctly.

So, assuming I'm right about that eye being kept open, is it possible to give a little sidebar in adventures where there are good possibilities? Considering the above tweaks, something like the following could appear in my made up scenario:

Sidebar wrote:

Before beginning the adventure, after the mission briefing, find out if there are members of the Liberty's Edge or Sovereign Court Factions in the party. If so, have Colson Maldris or Lady Gloriana approach the appropriate PC with a few words of encouragement.

Colson Maldris: I hear you have been assigned to a mission that brings you in contact with The Black Hand. I wanted to warn you that he is a notorious slaver in addition to whatever the Society is looking to get back from him. Keep an eye out on the possibility of disrupting his operation in some way, or maybe even exposing more links in his network.

Lady Gloriana: I have been told you are to be sent to Veldraine for your next mission. It is a small city, so there is the possibility you hear the name Veranna Tevar. He is a good man who has fallen on hard times. I would enjoy the chance to be put in touch with him, if at all possible. If you hear the name, and can verify he is in residence there, I would be grateful.

Would this kind of interaction be too disruptive for those who hated the old missions so much? Would it detract from how the Faction Cards currently work?

Like Fromper, I'd like to see a bit more regular interaction for people to enjoy.

Alternatively, a side bar in each adventure giving a heads-up to GMs for what to keep an eye on, Faction-wise, would be good. GMs could more easily involve their players this way, and not be surprised by someone suddenly trotting out the anti-slavery speech (and perhaps shutting it down because it is unnecessary to the plot). I think I've realized I miss the factions more from a GM standpoint than I did as a player. The chance to have a different interaction with each group of players, dependent on their faction choices, was really what appealed to me about the old-style missions. I always relished the chance to trot out this NPC or play up this other situation, and really dig away at a faction member's willingness to do something above and beyond the call of duty.

Thoughts?

[FLite]

I'd really rather not, Drogan.

One of the things that really broke immersion for me was how psychic the VCs always seemed to be.

"We are going to send you through this portal noone has been through before to find out where it goes. By the way, if you see a yeti, bring it home for me"

"Hey guys, I think we are going to need snow gear."

[Drogon]

FLite wrote:

I'd really rather not, Drogon. <--corrected that for you. :P

One of the things that really broke immersion for me was how psychic the VCs always seemed to be.

"We are going to send you through this portal noone has been through before to find out where it goes. By the way, if you see a yeti, bring it home for me"

"Hey guys, I think we are going to need snow gear."

I don't think that kind of omniscience is necessary. The Faction Cards are pretty open-ended, and imply that most Faction members will be able to find *something* to do in nearly any adventure. Having the "obvious" parts of an upcoming mission be points of conversation for merely a couple of the Faction leaders wouldn't be a real stretch.

However, having looked at the cards at this point, I think I'd be able to have a reasonable amount of fun contemplating different approaches during my prep. So, no biggie if no one wants to do it.

[rknop]

One thing we could do right now, perhaps, is print out the faction letters from the season appropriate to the scenario we're running and pass those out to the appropriate players. It's not as immediate as the faction head showing up, but it does indicate some sort of communication from the faction heads. (And, yeah, it'll get old after a player has seen the same letter four times in a couple of months.)

[thecursor]

Drogon wrote:

.

Am I alone in thinking that Factions should matter? Or am I just an old has-been who is yearning for days of yore?

The problem as I see it is that the factions have never really mattered and PFS didn't take the opportunity to really make the journal cards mean anything.

Getting lots of prestige in a faction doesn't mean getting awesome loot or even cool powers and because of the way PFS is oriented, they never will mean getting loot and powers. Okay, fine, so it's a vanity thing and it's always been a vanity thing. At least that means we're going to go on cool adventures to achieve our vanities right? ... Um, no. Half of these journal card are "check off a box because the scenario occurred in a certain country."

It's a wasted opportunity to up the uniqueness factor of our characters. Does it ruin the game? Hell no, but its a wasted opportunity.

[Fromper]

FLite wrote:

I'd really rather not, Drogan.

One of the things that really broke immersion for me was how psychic the VCs always seemed to be.

"We are going to send you through this portal noone has been through before to find out where it goes. By the way, if you see a yeti, bring it home for me"

"Hey guys, I think we are going to need snow gear."

And that's why I said I don't want to go back to the old faction missions, where the writers had to squeeze in a faction mission for every faction, whether it made sense or not. What I miss is getting regular communication from the faction leaders, not the old missions themselves.

My suggestion of having faction letters for each faction in maybe 25-35% of scenarios could be things specific to the scenario, or they could just be reminders about the faction cards. ie A Liberty's Edge PC could receive a letter from his faction leader that says "I heard you're being sent to a country where slavery's legal. Remember, if any opportunity comes up to free some slaves, don't hesitate!" Whether or not there are any opportunities to do so in the scenario really doesn't matter - it's a letter that reminds the player that the faction cards exist, and hopefully gets more players to look at them and start using them.

And even if they don't start using the faction cards, at least they're getting some personal contact from the faction leader, so being in a faction actually means something. Right now, if you don't use the faction card, it really doesn't matter what faction you're in.

[claudekennilol]

I've never filled in my purchases on the chronicle sheets. Heck, I don't even mark down how much gold I spent on the chronicle sheets. I just use the ITS and keep a track of how much I've spent there (and I mark purchases under 25g). Because having it in one place is easier than having it thirty places.

[Drogon]

Fromper wrote:

Right now, if you don't use the faction card, it really doesn't matter what faction you're in.

Which is doubly frustrating because you still have to choose a faction for your PC. If there was a "factionless" option, this would make more sense.

[Gary Bush]

rknop wrote:

Gary Bush wrote:

rknop wrote:

Drogon wrote:

And every purchase on an ITS still has to be signed off on if it's over 25gp,

What?

First I've heard of it.

On page 10 of Season 7 Guide:

Guide wrote:

An Inventory Tracking Sheet has been included at the end of this document and is to be used for tracking all purchases of 25 GPs or more, ... and any consumables used.

Same language was in season 6. I can't say about any earlier than that because I have only been playing since season 6.

Well, sure, but it doesn't say anything about a GM signing off.

Agreed but a GM does have to sign a chronicle. And some notation of the purchase has to be included on the chronicle, even if it is by reference ("SEE IIT for purchases). So by reference, it does get sign off by a GM. Just not directly.

Any ways, dead issue. Sorry for taking the thread off in a different direction.

[FLite]

Drogon wrote:

Fromper wrote:

Right now, if you don't use the faction card, it really doesn't matter what faction you're in.

Which is doubly frustrating because you still have to choose a faction for your PC. If there was a "factionless" option, this would make more sense.

That's kind of what grand lodge is.

You are devoted to the pathfinders as a whole, not to any one subfaction. Sure, if you rise high in that faction it may mean you are more devoted to the leadership than to the average pathfinder, but the rank and file grand lodge member is just someone who doesn't care about all these other groups trying to use the Pathfinder Society for their own, petty, agendas.

[Drogon]

FLite wrote:

Drogon wrote:

Fromper wrote:

Right now, if you don't use the faction card, it really doesn't matter what faction you're in.

Which is doubly frustrating because you still have to choose a faction for your PC. If there was a "factionless" option, this would make more sense.

That's kind of what grand lodge is.

You are devoted to the pathfinders as a whole, not to any one subfaction. Sure, if you rise high in that faction it may mean you are more devoted to the leadership than to the average pathfinder, but the rank and file grand lodge member is just someone who doesn't care about all these other groups trying to use the Pathfinder Society for their own, petty, agendas.

Sort of.

If "Grand Lodge Member" meant "perform your duties as a member of the Pathfinder Society" (i.e., play through the scenario and do your best to accomplish what needs to be accomplished) then I would agree with you.

Instead, "Grand Lodge Member" means you have to select that faction at the beginning of each adventure and (assumed) means you are promoting the goals of the Grand Lodge Faction. Which is inherently different than simply doing your job. NOT promoting those goals makes you an inactive member of the Faction(tm). It's subtle, but there is definitely a difference.

[FLite]

Fromper wrote:

My suggestion of having faction letters for each faction in maybe 25-35% of scenarios could be things specific to the scenario, or they could just be reminders about the faction cards. ie A Liberty's Edge PC could receive a letter from his faction leader that says "I heard you're being sent to a country where slavery's legal.

I admit, I haven't GMed a lot of season 7, but what you are describing basically *is* season 6.

Of the scenarios in my GM folder for season 6 (there are a few more I GMed, but they never made it into the folder and I don't have time to track them down individually.) only 6-01 (where you are barely rookie agents) and 6-03 (which really should have had a note for the Exchange, but feels like it was rushed to get it out for gen con) do not have personal letters or interactions with one or more faction leaders.

Spoiler for 6-02 The Silver mount Collection:

You are slipped a letter by Zarta

Spoiler for 6-11 Slave Masters Mirror:

Maldris stops the PCs in person on the way out of the briefing.

Spoiler for 6-18 From Under Ice:

Tahonikepsu messages you with magic and asks you to find her a specific gem. This one is a bit psychic, but she gets a pass on it because she is a time dragon, and can be expected to be a little psychic.

Spoiler for 6-22 Out Of Anarchy:

Personal letters from Zarta and Maldris. Zarta's shows up mysteriously in your luggage, Maldris is delivered by an Eagle.

(Played, not GMed)

Spoiler for 6-?? Overflow Archive:

Zarta takes you aside and talks to you in person.

[Katisha]

Drogon wrote:

FLite wrote:

Drogon wrote:

Fromper wrote:

Right now, if you don't use the faction card, it really doesn't matter what faction you're in.

Which is doubly frustrating because you still have to choose a faction for your PC. If there was a "factionless" option, this would make more sense.

That's kind of what grand lodge is.

You are devoted to the pathfinders as a whole, not to any one subfaction. Sure, if you rise high in that faction it may mean you are more devoted to the leadership than to the average pathfinder, but the rank and file grand lodge member is just someone who doesn't care about all these other groups trying to use the Pathfinder Society for their own, petty, agendas.

Sort of.

If "Grand Lodge Member" meant "perform your duties as a member of the Pathfinder Society (i.e., play through the scenario and do your best to accomplish what needs to be accomplished) then I would agree with you.

Instead, "Grand Lodge Member" means you have to select that faction at the beginning of each adventure and (assumed) means you are promoting the goals of the Grand Lodge Faction. Which is inherently different than simply doing your job. NOT promoting those goals makes you an inactive member of the Faction(tm). It's subtle, but there is definitely a difference.

...several Pathfinders in the Shadows nod in soundless agreement...

[FLite]

Drogon wrote:

FLite wrote:

Drogon wrote:

Fromper wrote:

Right now, if you don't use the faction card, it really doesn't matter what faction you're in.

Which is doubly frustrating because you still have to choose a faction for your PC. If there was a "factionless" option, this would make more sense.

That's kind of what grand lodge is.

You are devoted to the pathfinders as a whole, not to any one subfaction. Sure, if you rise high in that faction it may mean you are more devoted to the leadership than to the average pathfinder, but the rank and file grand lodge member is just someone who doesn't care about all these other groups trying to use the Pathfinder Society for their own, petty, agendas.

Sort of.

If "Grand Lodge Member" meant "perform your duties as a member of the Pathfinder Society" (i.e., play through the scenario and do your best to accomplish what needs to be accomplished) then I would agree with you.

Instead, "Grand Lodge Member" means you have to select that faction at the beginning of each adventure and (assumed) means you are promoting the goals of the Grand Lodge Faction. Which is inherently different than simply doing your job. NOT promoting those goals makes you an inactive member of the Faction(tm). It's subtle, but there is definitely a difference.

That may come down to a matter of semantics. From the GtoP:

"members of the Grand Lodge faction give their loyalty to the Ten and the Pathfinder Society itself."

In my view it basically *is* the "non faction faction"

Look at the grand lodge faction card goals: (In order)

Explore

Report

Get the job done 3 times in a row

Get the job done 6 times in a row

Disrupt the Aspis

Kill an Aspis

Save a VC

[Rusty Ironpants]

Drogon wrote:

Kerney wrote:

As a player in Drogons area/store I now use faction cards and I know a lot of players who do.

Who? I want to chat with them and see what they think. I'd like to try to incorporate their use into setting up my schedule.

Hey Drogon!

Most of the regulars over at CollectorMania are using faction cards on at least some of their characters. As others have stated, GM signoffs are not required but I have encouraged players to ask their GMs if they have met the requirements for checking off a goal. I also have to regularly remind people that they are only allowed to check off one goal per scenario, unless the goal specifically states otherwise.

[Fromper]

FLite wrote:

Fromper wrote:

My suggestion of having faction letters for each faction in maybe 25-35% of scenarios could be things specific to the scenario, or they could just be reminders about the faction cards. ie A Liberty's Edge PC could receive a letter from his faction leader that says "I heard you're being sent to a country where slavery's legal.

I admit, I haven't GMed a lot of season 7, but what you are describing basically *is* season 6.

Of the scenarios in my GM folder for season 6 (there are a few more I GMed, but they never made it into the folder and I don't have time to track them down individually.) only 6-01 (where you are barely rookie agents) and 6-03 (which really should have had a note for the Exchange, but feels like it was rushed to get it out for gen con) do not have personal letters or interactions with one or more faction leaders.

I was away for much of season 6, so I haven't played much of it. So maybe I missed it. I guess I'd like to see more of it. And sometimes, just reminding the PCs of the stuff on the faction cards can be good enough, and help promote the faction cards, without having to add any real material to the adventure.

[BartonOliver]

Honestly I feel like the faction cards make up a pretty nice middle ground between the old faction missions and the complete lack of them.

I do miss the letter from the faction every mission, but don't miss the entirely 1 skill based in a random corner and possibly time limited faction goals. So I feel like it adds to play a connection that was completely missing in season 5 (and the beginning of 6) without overwhelming the table with oh and I need to do x, he needs y, she needs z.

That said we made a pretty big push for them when they came out, and I see a lot of players using them. I know I have one printed for every character, though often I build character then decide which faction they fit.

[Jayson MF Kip]

For what it's worth:

Under the old factions, I built characters to fit in- -the faction was one of the first things solidified.

Now, it's sort of a pingeon-hole decision at the very end.

"I suppose I don't really fit in any faction, so I'll join the Illuminati at least. " Writes "SoCo" in the faction blank

[Mike Lindner]

I like the faction cards overall, although I don't have them printed for every one of my characters. I think they are better than the old faction missions by far. They don't spoil the plot and they fit with the faction's objectives rather than just being "collect a teapot" tasks. At worst they make for a short distraction of making a skill check to fulfill a condition on a card. It has been my experience that the time spent on faction cards that distracts from scenarios is far less than the old faction missions that had nothing to do with the real plot, which was a lot of them.

[MeriDoc-]

I miss my love letters from Zarta, snif she just doesn't care anymore.

Neil Diamond
You don't bring me flowers.....anymorree

[TriOmegaZero]

Oh, she does still write. We just can't publish most of them anymore. She's gotten...more explicit.

[BartonOliver]

MeriDoc- wrote:

I miss my love letters from Zarta, snif she just doesn't care anymore.

Neil Diamond
You don't bring me flowers.....anymorree

I saw a couple of people receive hand-written letters from her just this week. The GM actually wrote the letters from her to the players at the table.

Scenario Name:

Fortress of the Nail. - Oh and the GM was me, it was pretty fun.

[Fromper]

Well, if nothing else, this thread inspired me to finally print out the faction cards for all my PCs. I'll have to go through and check off the ones that I've applied a GM credit to this season. I think I've GMed maybe 3 times since GenCon - I don't GM for PFS much any more.

[Ascalaphus]

I miss Zarta and also Jacquo's letters. There's just a certain charm to that old looney's requests.

[MadScientistWorking]

Fromper wrote:

Haven't read the whole thread, but I just wanted to say that I agree with Drogon's original post. I keep forgetting about the faction cards, and rarely see them used. Some of the old faction missions were silly, but I miss that direct communication with the faction leaders.

Really the card missions for the most part are just variants of the most common faction missions from previous missions. The one I just ran basically had tie ins with pretty much all of them (Exchange and Grand Lodge Excluded) because the older missions were the same exact wording.

EDIT:
I will say this. I actually like the boon method for the new Factions. So far I've done the Dark Archive, Exchange, and Liberties Edge ones and they are pretty fun. Don't know if there is a Sovereign Court one yet but all around the plot to a lot of them have been pretty fun.