|
Maybe we're just thorough here in the City in the Center of the States, but Omaha's procedure is:
1)Fill out top line (Name, Number, Faction)
2)Fill out XP, PP, GP, Day Jobs
3)Hand it to players to "Do math and get it back to me."
*Between-scenario purchases always go on the next chronicle.
4)Afterwards, get it back, look it over, THEN sign it.We never seem to have issues of missing chronicles or incomplete or partially filled out ones. Curious how a little enforcement goes a long way.
I would love having that kind of time available.
Either the store is closing, or they want us to leave because it already closed; or the GM and/or player(s) need(s) to leave at drop-dead time, because they have to get to work on time, or <insert other time sensitive issue here>.
Game runs to 11:00, store closes at 11:00, bus goes by at 11:01, next bus is a 40-60 minute wait. Been there, froze a sensitive bit because of it. While hoping my tablet wouldn't run out of battery power....
|
My lodge either finishes at around 5:30 or so, or 9:30 most sessions. Depends on if it's Sunday or Tuesday. The thing is, I don't have a car. And several people, including my ride, live out of town.
Which is why I do any purchases at the start of the session rather then at the end. Outside of stuff like status recovery, there's not really enough time to spend on data entry. Only real exception is when something is bought mid-session. In which case we record it on the item tracker sheet. Since I list everything I buy on my item tracking sheet, it's a good way to audit my expenditure.
Personally, I'm more concerned with if someone has access to the item granted by a chronicle that character earned and if it's listed in their tracking sheet then if they recorded the cost when they bought it on a different chronicle. I'd rather have only one source to go if I'm auditing someone.
Okay, so I'd still need to go over chronicles for stuff like clearing death and disease costs.
Of course if I'm running a game online I'll fill in such things before scanning and sending it.
|
Maybe we're just thorough here in the City in the Center of the States, but Omaha's procedure is:
1)Fill out top line (Name, Number, Faction)
2)Fill out XP, PP, GP, Day Jobs
3)Hand it to players to "Do math and get it back to me."
*Between-scenario purchases always go on the next chronicle.
4)Afterwards, get it back, look it over, THEN sign it.We never seem to have issues of missing chronicles or incomplete or partially filled out ones. Curious how a little enforcement goes a long way.
I would love having that kind of time available.
Either the store is closing, or they want us to leave because it already closed; or the GM and/or player(s) need(s) to leave at drop-dead time, because they have to get to work on time, or <insert other time sensitive issue here>.
Game runs to 11:00, store closes at 11:00, bus goes by at 11:01, next bus is a 40-60 minute wait. Been there, froze a sensitive bit because of it. While hoping my tablet wouldn't run out of battery power....
I'm not seeing a reason why you couldn't start earlier and follow the rules.
|
Not every store has a five hour slot, which is what scenarios are supposed to run in, last I heard.
7PM (assuming perfect start time for 'store designated slot') to 11PM =4 hours.
Not everyone can make a 6PM start in such circumstances due to tiny little things like work, school, *eating*, space availability...
|
Maybe we're just thorough here in the City in the Center of the States, but Omaha's procedure is:
1)Fill out top line (Name, Number, Faction)
2)Fill out XP, PP, GP, Day Jobs
3)Hand it to players to "Do math and get it back to me."
*Between-scenario purchases always go on the next chronicle.
4)Afterwards, get it back, look it over, THEN sign it.We never seem to have issues of missing chronicles or incomplete or partially filled out ones. Curious how a little enforcement goes a long way.
To add to what Jeff is saying, the players tell the GMs before the beginning of the scenario what purchases they are making "between" scenarios and the putting those purchases on the chronicle sheet for that night's game.
And this does work very well and takes very little time to complete.
So I see not need to change the rule.
|
|
Maybe we're just thorough here in the City in the Center of the States, but Omaha's procedure is:
1)Fill out top line (Name, Number, Faction)
2)Fill out XP, PP, GP, Day Jobs
3)Hand it to players to "Do math and get it back to me."
*Between-scenario purchases always go on the next chronicle.
4)Afterwards, get it back, look it over, THEN sign it.We never seem to have issues of missing chronicles or incomplete or partially filled out ones. Curious how a little enforcement goes a long way.
To add to what Jeff is saying, the players tell the GMs before the beginning of the scenario what purchases they are making "between" scenarios and the putting those purchases on the chronicle sheet for that night's game.
And this does work very well and takes very little time to complete.
So I see not need to change the rule.
Then you either have to hand out the chronicle sheet early, which can have some spoilerific boons on it, or remember what you bought and put it on a piece of paper, hope that survives and transfer it over.
The rule already changed.
Why does it mean nothing that they explicitly said they'd gotten rid of this and overwrote the entire area with more useful stuff this season?
|
|
To add to what Jeff is saying, the players tell the GMs before the beginning of the scenario what purchases they are making "between" scenarios and the putting those purchases on the chronicle sheet for that night's game.And this does work very well and takes very little time to complete.
So I see not need to change the rule.
So the players get the chronicle sheet before the scenario is completed? It sounds like it would actually be *more* complicated to do it this way than *less*, but I guess regional variation applies?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think I'll bring my notary seal with my to the next session and notarize my players' chronicle sheets :)Are you going to charge for the stamping, as a notary public? Or are you donating the stamps to the campaign? :P
I'll donate my stamps to the campaign. Will also certify any race boon trades as needed. I'll only charge Nefreet (got to pay for my HeroLab updates :) )
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll donate my stamps to the campaign. Will also certify any race boon trades as needed. I'll only charge Nefreet (got to pay for my HeroLab updates :) )I think I'll bring my notary seal with my to the next session and notarize my players' chronicle sheets :)Are you going to charge for the stamping, as a notary public? Or are you donating the stamps to the campaign? :P
Unless Louisiana has really different laws than California, you can't notarize your players' chronicle sheets, because the person who signed them is you, and you can't notarize your own signature. The race boon trade thing would still work though.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was being a little tongue n cheek but you are correct. You cannot notarize your own signature (But I could notarize other tables at our weekly session). Little bit of history lesson, CA and LA laws are more similar than most states as compared to LA. CA is based, in part, on the Siete Partidas. This also forms part of the frame work of LA law. (LA was once a Spanish territory.)
|
|
Then you either have to hand out the chronicle sheet early, which can have some spoilerific boons on it, or remember what you bought and put it on a piece of paper, hope that survives and transfer it over.
The rule already changed.
Why does it mean nothing that they explicitly said they'd gotten rid of this and overwrote the entire area with more useful stuff this season?
So the players get the chronicle sheet before the scenario is completed? It sounds like it would actually be *more* complicated to do it this way than *less*, but I guess regional variation applies?
Nope, don't get the chronicle early. Don't think I said that but if I did it was an error in my typing.
The players have already determined what major purchases we need to make from the last scenario. If that night's scenario gives us more info and there is an opportunity to make other purchases we do that. Than once the scenario is complete we write on the chronicle (or at least I do) the purchases and other stuff and the total gold spent. Add up the numbers and give back for the GM to review and sign. Of course the ITS is also updated as required. I have my major purchases already on the ITS. That way I just add any purchases made that night.
|
Maybe we're just thorough here in the City in the Center of the States, but Omaha's procedure is:
1)Fill out top line (Name, Number, Faction)
2)Fill out XP, PP, GP, Day Jobs
3)Hand it to players to "Do math and get it back to me."
*Between-scenario purchases always go on the next chronicle.
4)Afterwards, get it back, look it over, THEN sign it.We never seem to have issues of missing chronicles or incomplete or partially filled out ones. Curious how a little enforcement goes a long way.
To add to what Jeff is saying, the players tell the GMs before the beginning of the scenario what purchases they are making "between" scenarios and the putting those purchases on the chronicle sheet for that night's game.
And this does work very well and takes very little time to complete.
So I see not need to change the rule.
Then you either have to hand out the chronicle sheet early, which can have some spoilerific boons on it, or remember what you bought and put it on a piece of paper, hope that survives and transfer it over.
The rule already changed.
Why does it mean nothing that they explicitly said they'd gotten rid of this and overwrote the entire area with more useful stuff this season?
Or you can just write it in on your ITS and subtract the amount from the chronicle at the end. What I do (which is admittedly a lot less organized) is just write the things I'm going to buy on the back of my last chronicle sheet.
When he says put it on the chronicle sheet he means the GP total, not an itemized list of stuff (although some people do that too). And putting it on the chronicle at the end when we hand them out, not before.
|
|
So the players get the chronicle sheet before the scenario is completed? It sounds like it would actually be *more* complicated to do it this way than *less*, but I guess regional variation applies?
Nope, don't get the chronicle early. Don't think I said that but if I did it was an error in my typing.
The players have already determined what major purchases we need to make from the last scenario. If that night's scenario gives us more info and there is an opportunity to make other purchases we do that. Than once the scenario is complete we write on the chronicle (or at least I do) the purchases and other stuff and the total gold spent. Add up the numbers and give back for the GM to review and sign. Of course the ITS is also updated as required. I have my major purchases already on the ITS. That way I just add any purchases made that night.
Fixed that for you, before there's accusations of words being put in other people's mouths.
|
|
When he says put it on the chronicle sheet he means the GP total, not an itemized list of stuff (although some people do that too). And putting it on the chronicle at the end when we hand them out, not before.
I do actually write my itemized list of stuff (those over 25GP and consumables) on the chronicle that I purchase them on. Even on the new sheets where that section has been removed. I guess I don't really need to do it that way but it is the way I was taught so I am continuing to do it that way.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ask any Linguistic Anthropologist.
Oh, heck, just ask any English literature major.
There's a whole school of criticism that claims that no text has any inherent meaning, including whatever meaning the author intended. The basic idea is that meaning only exists in the act of reading a text and that each reader brings their own experience to the text. The net result is that the same text is supposed to have a different meaning for each individual reader, therefore no text can possibly have any objective meaning at all. Ever.
Speaking as a technical writer, I think that's an extreme position, but it is a legitimate movement in literary criticism.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
I was being a little tongue n cheek but you are correct. You cannot notarize your own signature (But I could notarize other tables at our weekly session). Little bit of history lesson, CA and LA laws are more similar than most states as compared to LA. CA is based, in part, on the Siete Partidas. This also forms part of the frame work of LA law. (LA was once a Spanish territory.)
I figured. I was appreciating the humor, and continuing it by taking it in earnest, but that is harder to do on the forums :)
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Ask any Linguistic Anthropologist.Oh, heck, just ask any English literature major.
There's a whole school of criticism that claims that no text has any inherent meaning, including whatever meaning the author intended. The basic idea is that meaning only exists in the act of reading a text and that each reader brings their own experience to the text. The net result is that the same text is supposed to have a different meaning for each individual reader, therefore no text can possibly have any objective meaning at all. Ever.
Speaking as a technical writer, I think that's an extreme position, but it is a legitimate movement in literary criticism.
I think it is a silly position, predicated on the idea that a thing can have only one meaning.
Each text has the meaning the author intended, the meaning the reader derived, the meaning created by the intersection of the two, created when the reader is aware of the authors intent, several literal meanings that can be parsed from it, meanings that result from several readers aggregating their understandings. And so on. All at the same time.
|
|
Ask any Linguistic Anthropologist.Oh, heck, just ask any English literature major.
There's a whole school of criticism that claims that no text has any inherent meaning, including whatever meaning the author intended. The basic idea is that meaning only exists in the act of reading a text and that each reader brings their own experience to the text. The net result is that the same text is supposed to have a different meaning for each individual reader, therefore no text can possibly have any objective meaning at all. Ever.
Speaking as a technical writer, I think that's an extreme position, but it is a legitimate movement in literary criticism.
I think it is a silly position, predicated on the idea that a thing can have only one meaning.
Each text has the meaning the author intended, the meaning the reader derived, the meaning created by the intersection of the two, created when the reader is aware of the authors intent, several literal meanings that can be parsed from it, meanings that result from several readers aggregating their understandings. And so on. All at the same time.
You just perfectly stated the position of those critics that Dorothy described—if a thing can have many meanings, then it has no inherent meaning.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
You just perfectly stated the position of those critics that Dorothy described—if a thing can have many meanings, then it has no inherent meaning.Ask any Linguistic Anthropologist.Oh, heck, just ask any English literature major.
There's a whole school of criticism that claims that no text has any inherent meaning, including whatever meaning the author intended. The basic idea is that meaning only exists in the act of reading a text and that each reader brings their own experience to the text. The net result is that the same text is supposed to have a different meaning for each individual reader, therefore no text can possibly have any objective meaning at all. Ever.
Speaking as a technical writer, I think that's an extreme position, but it is a legitimate movement in literary criticism.
I think it is a silly position, predicated on the idea that a thing can have only one meaning.
Each text has the meaning the author intended, the meaning the reader derived, the meaning created by the intersection of the two, created when the reader is aware of the authors intent, several literal meanings that can be parsed from it, meanings that result from several readers aggregating their understandings. And so on. All at the same time.
No. It has no *unique* inherent meaning. It has *several* inherent meanings, but no "One TRUE Meaning." The reaction a piece of art evokes from a person of a certain disposition is inherent in the thing. The problem occurs when you try to chose *one* meaning to be *the* inherent characteristics.
That is like saying that chess boards are colorless, because they are both black and white, and thus they have no *inherent* color.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
No. It has no *unique* inherent meaning. It has *several* inherent meanings, but no "One TRUE Meaning." The reaction a piece of art evokes from a person of a certain disposition is inherent in the thing. The problem occurs when you try to chose *one* meaning to be *the* inherent characteristics.
That is like saying that chess boards are colorless, because they are both black and white, and thus they have no *inherent* color.
I think you and Dorothy are describing the same thing and, at the same time, lending credence to the theory you are describing. ;)
|
Venture-Agent, Minnesota—Minneapolis
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is following the rules so abhorrent that you need to dispute the teleological meaning of words to avoid filling out chronicles properly?
I don't think so.
It is bad though when there are times where you can not follow the rules.
As an example, when someone plays a pre-generated character at above the level of their current character and holds the chronicle. I see no way to predict what their gold, fame and prestige will be once it is finally applied. Given my understanding of the slow track rules, I'm not even certain it is possible to fill in the XP for that case.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here's the real question: WHY do we keep having the rules written the way they are? Let's for the moment leave aside the fact that almost everybody outside of Omaha disobeys them, which already is an argument for change. But, the incumbent has an unfair advantage.
Let's pretend we're starting over right now, and we have two choices for how to handle recording our purchases in such a way that a GM could audit them if she wanted to. There are two options:
(1) Chronicle sheets just tell you what you got in the scenario. They include no accounting whatsoever. That means that once the day job is rolled, the GM can fully fill it out and sign it, without any need to know about purchases the player is made. Meanwhile, the player keeps an ITS that has a record of all gold earned (referencing chronicle sheets where they got them), all gold spent, and all purchases, including when things purchased get expended (with counter slots for expendibles like arrows). Probably the prestige should be on this as well.
(2) Chronicle sheets not only have what you got in the scenario, but also lines for accounting, including initial gold, gold gained in the scenario, gold spent, purchases, and gold after all of that. The ITS only requires you to write in some of what you purchase (things over 25gp), so it's not a complete record. The GM isn't supposed to sign the chronicle sheet until all of the accounting is done.
Here's my question: what, if any, advantages are there to system 2? I honestly do not see any advantages at all. The one I can anticipate -- a GM is there to make sure that the players are only making legal purchases -- I don't believe is real. Are we really going to ask GMs to audit fame and make sure each purchase is legal? Is the GM going to go to each source and make sure players are paying the right amount for each purchase? If so, then we need to schedule 6-hour slots, so GMs have the time to do all of this. If the GM is not doing all of this, then any seeming accountability by having the players do things in front of the GM is illusory, not real. And, auditing is harder in system 2, since everything is not together in one place. The ITS is incomplete. For incoming gold, you have to go to each chronicle sheet. It would be a pain in the butt to audit, either as a GM, or even you as yourself trying to make sure that everything adds up on your own characters.
However, system (1) above does have several advantages. First, it requires less work on the part of the players and the GMs during play sessions. Players can focus on playing, minimizing the amount of time dedicated to paperwork during those sessions to the minimum necessary to keep the campaign going. (That is, make sure sheets certifying that scenarios were completed are handed out.) The ITS in this system would be far easier for keeping track of your total amount of gold, and would be easier to audit if you wanted to. Players have the freedom to spend time figuring out their purchases between scenarios.
Honestly, I cannot see the advantages of the system we nominally have right now. "It's not so bad, we in Omaha are able to make it work" is not an argument for it; it's just an argument that if these are the rules, then it's possible to follow them. But I don't think the rules are good; I think a better set of rules could be devised, along the lines of my number (1) above. Independent of whether or not most players and GMs find following (2) above to be too cumbersome to actually follow, I think that (1) above is a better system.
I would like the PFS leadership to seriously consider moving to this system for Season 7.
|
|
Rknop nailed it. We have rules that are rarely followed because they don't add anything to the game. Just because they can be followed, as apparently they are in Omaha and nowhere else, doesn't mean that's the best way to do it. Changing them to reflect the reality that happens in most places would probably involve cleaning up the ITS to make it more useful, and the whole thing would just be a lot cleaner and easier for everyone.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whether or not the rules are 'rarely followed' doesn't change the rules.
I'm not sure why "I dislike the rules" is a fair reason to ignore them.
And I don't find "but the rules say so" to be a compelling reason to do something I think is stupid.
I'm pretty sure this is just a cleverly veiled alignment argument thread.
Well, that's all the excuse I need.
|
|
The rules were changed and the guide didn't get updated to reflect that . Address that or stop claiming people are ignoring rules or not doing things properly.
GM's don't have to sign off on individual purposes, but those purchases do have to be put on a chronicle, and when I'm GM'ing I'm not signing off on a chronicle that hasn't been properly filled out.* This is the reason that when I've GM'd at Gencon there have been people (more than one) playing in 7-11's that haven't filled those boxes in on their PC's chronicles ever.
*That is not a blanket statement. There are of course always exceptions to the rule.
|
|
As an example, when someone plays a pre-generated character at above the level of their current character and holds the chronicle.Kind of curious - anyone from the Omaha crowd want to explain how you handle this situation?
It's easier. Fill out 1xp, 2pp, some gold, and 'HELD UNTIL LEVEL 7' somewhere.
Then, take a minute to ensure the player knows what that means.
|
|
It's easier. Fill out 1xp, 2pp, some gold, and 'HELD UNTIL LEVEL 7' somewhere.
Then, take a minute to ensure the player knows what that means.
Okay, so in a given situation a player has three scenarios that are 'held' until Level 7. They play the last scenario of Level 6 at an Omaha event at the end of a convention/gameday...
How do those three chronicles apply/purchases get made/etc? How can that information be 'filled in' if the player doesn't even know what that information is going to be?
|
|
It's easier. Fill out 1xp, 2pp, some gold, and 'HELD UNTIL LEVEL 7' somewhere.
Then, take a minute to ensure the player knows what that means.
Okay, so in a given situation a player has three scenarios that are 'held' until Level 7. They play the last scenario of Level 6 at an Omaha event at the end of a convention/gameday...
How do those three chronicles apply/purchases get made/etc? How can that information be 'filled in' if the player doesn't even know what that information is going to be?
Just take care of the chronicle for the scenario played at that gameday, and take care of the held chronicles on your own time, they would already be signed so there is nothing else that the GM would need to do.
|
|
As an example, when someone plays a pre-generated character at above the level of their current character and holds the chronicle.Kind of curious - anyone from the Omaha crowd want to explain how you handle this situation?
Sure. I have done it twice so far.
The basic stuff is put in and signed by the GM with approriate notes: "Apply at 7th level" or "Apply at 4th level" or "Played 7th level pregen".
The totals are not filled out and neither are any purchases included.
The chronicle number is also not filled out.
When it came time to apply the chronicle to the character I put the next number on the sheet and then did all the math for XP, Prestige/Fame, Gold so the beginning and ending totals are correct.
Bam.. just got a 1/3 of a level.
Helps?
|
|
It's easier. Fill out 1xp, 2pp, some gold, and 'HELD UNTIL LEVEL 7' somewhere.
Then, take a minute to ensure the player knows what that means.
Okay, so in a given situation a player has three scenarios that are 'held' until Level 7. They play the last scenario of Level 6 at an Omaha event at the end of a convention/gameday...
How do those three chronicles apply/purchases get made/etc? How can that information be 'filled in' if the player doesn't even know what that information is going to be?
As I understand and how I did it, apply the chronicle for that game first, thus taking you to 7th level. Then apply each chronicle in the order that they are dated, oldest first. I am pretty sure that is how it is detailed in the Guild but not sure. As Mitch said, since the chronicles are already signed, you can do it all yourself. The only thing you can't do is purchases so those would wait until your next game at 8th level.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wei Ji:
I think there's some kind of logical disconnect between the situation you're trying to put me in, and the situation as it would be.
The setting:
You sit at a table for a session that would put you to level 7 with a character that has 3XP worth of chronicles that are marked "HELD UNTIL LEVEL 7."
The game would finish up, I'd scrawl We Ji, AKA "Jenny", PFS# 86753-09, SCru, 0.5 XP (slow, right?), 1 PP, some gold, ask for a day job, cross out relevant chronicle info, and hand you the chronicle with the instructions 'do some math and get it back to me.'
You'd look at your last chronicle, fill in starting numbers, do math, hand it back.
I'd look down the side, give your math the eyeball test, fill out the bottom, sign it and hand it back to you. At this point, as a table GM, I'm done.
Congrats! You're [very briefly] level 7. The held credit applies, so you would apply them now, totaling the math the same way you did for the chronicle you just played. Congrats! You're level 8.