|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe the argument is that if they contract and remove it why do I need to list it on the sheet? Especially if there was no cost involved because a party member removed it.
A parallel is that we don't record that characters took damage and were healed by a cleric's channel. Why put down that they had blindness, and the cleric removed it with remove blindness?
|
Well, one reason is so that future GMs who look at the sheet might wonder why (for example) a low-Con wizard didn't fall victim to that nasty disease that everyone gets at the end of that scenario - if the info is there, they don't have to wonder or ask.
We don't track healing because being damaged goes away automatically with the indeterminate time between scenarios, but being blind (for example) doesn't.
I see your point, and hopefully you see mine. The higher-ups have decided that this way works best, though.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think anyone is ignoring a disease. But just wondering why we have a lot of busy work. For example, the only reason I'd have to check a previous disease was removed is a scenario that cares about a previous. In that case the bad actor could just write down PFS #1099 Tony Stark and I've got no way of confirming 1099 played and has remove disease on his Tony Stark character. If I'm suspicious I could send a report to Tonya. But there wouldn't be anything I could do. So what's the value in bothering to write it down if it is solved in game? I legitimately don't see the benefit.
|
|
Well, if you suspect a player of cheating, it helps to have their own falsified records as evidence - but you're right, it rarely if ever comes to that.
I think on issues like this, there is a difference between folks who mostly play at cons, where time is tight and you likely don't know everyone, versus home lodges where you are playing with the same few dozen players every week. There's also probably a difference between groups that play in 4 hour versus 5 hour slots. I always find I have enough time to do all the paperwork at the end, but YMMV.
When it comes down to it, you've gotta draw the line somewhere, and I think recording the resolution of permanent conditions is a reasonable place to draw it.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
As an aside: the Faction Journal Cards have had their fix pushed through, and I'm working on the rerolls page currently.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Shouldn't have been since Mark Moreland clarified this in 2011.This was an issue of table variation.So they clarified that Priests (referred to Clergy) of a specific deity must be Clerics. This might change a player's build that uses a benefit tied to priesthood (such as unique spells known). This would mean that Oracles will not benefit and Clerics would.Non clerics were never allowed to be priests.
I am unfamiliar with his post.
I can think of at least one source that references "priests" as being other classes beyond Cleric, though it's only in reference to one of the variant summoning lists (and they're not particularly useful summons, either).
|
Shouldn't have been since Mark Moreland clarified this in 2011.This was an issue of table variation.So they clarified that Priests (referred to Clergy) of a specific deity must be Clerics. This might change a player's build that uses a benefit tied to priesthood (such as unique spells known). This would mean that Oracles will not benefit and Clerics would.Non clerics were never allowed to be priests.
I am unfamiliar with his post.
I can think of at least one source that references "priests" as being other classes beyond Cleric, though it's only in reference to one of the variant summoning lists (and they're not particularly useful summons, either).
When I get back from Gen Con I'll search it out.
|
|
why not? If I'm allowed to play my personal lv7 character. Or would you advocate that me bringing a personal lv7 character would need to play a lv4 pregen since the rest of the party are 3-4? Or is there something else that I'm not seeing?
The decision was made to clarify that the pregen should match the sub tier being played.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Priests are defined in deity articles and ISG, so not being aware of Mark's old post, I always assumed that is what was used for variant summon lists. It's nice to have it made clear... and probably nice to limit things a bit. Frankly, the Hell Hound thing was just an error to begin with (3.5 to PF, as it came out in the first PF AP, and hell hounds moved from 3rd to 4th between editions).
|
|
why not? If I'm allowed to play my personal lv7 character. Or would you advocate that me bringing a personal lv7 character would need to play a lv4 pregen since the rest of the party are 3-4? Or is there something else that I'm not seeing?The decision was made to clarify that the pregen should match the sub tier being played.
The guide says, "Within each tier, PCs or pregenerated characters should be used in the subtier in which they fall whenever possible"
So if I have a personal lv4 and lv7 and everyone else is a lv4 can I play my personal lv7?
If I have a personal lv7 and everyone else is lv4 should I use a pregen? Since a pc or pregen should be used in the correct subtier when possible, and it's always possible to play a pregen in tier in a 3-7.
If in these cases I'm free to play a personal lv7 and since the rule is the same for personal or pregen then I'd also be free to play a pregen lv7.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually had assumed you could use the pregen to manipulate the sub-tier (as long as it would end up being the right sub-tier). Quicker not to factor it in, though do you recalculate for purposes of 4-player adjustment and such afterwards? For instance... 3 level 3's sit down. They will play down, so get a L.1 pregen. But that's 2.5 total average, which could normally play down *with* 4-player adjustment.
Thomas... I'm pretty sure the guide isn't saying you can't play a character out of sub-tier, just recommending it, while conflating it with the pregen requirement.
Venture-Captain, Minnesota
|
Okay, I have a question about the adjacent subtiers line. We ran a Season 2 scenario at Dreamers that was tiers 1-7. We had 2, 3, 4, 5 and one 7 who was there because he wanted to distribute heightened continual flames to as many of the new people as he could. He was a support build, who made it his job to let the others shine -- literally -- with his heightened flames.
Technically, all three tiers were adjacent, as we had a range of characters there. Would this still be allowed? Or does adjacent mean that the lowest and highest characters must be in adjacent tiers?
Hmm
|
|
Quote? Previously that table would be allowed, but forced to play 3-4... Looking for the language you're talking about...
Oh, page 10, I see it... Yeah, 2 and 7 could not play together anymore. This could also impact Specials with unusual level mixes... like mostly high level, but three 2's and two 6's, who previously could have shared a 3-4 table.
|
Venture-Captain, Minnesota
|
I'd also like a clarification on the re-roll wording in v8.0.
Personally, I'd much prefer to keep my +5 bonus with one re-roll per game than to now have up to 6 re-rolls per game with no bonus.
Chris Lambertz says that we will be getting a clarification soon. Since I have a game day tonight, I think we're going to have to have a GM powwow about how to handle this until the clarification comes through!
Hmm
I'd also like a clarification on the re-roll wording in v8.0.
Personally, I'd much prefer to keep my +5 bonus with one re-roll per game than to now have up to 6 re-rolls per game with no bonus.
Chris Lambertz says that we will be getting a clarification soon. Since I have a game day tonight, I think we're going to have to have a GM powwow about how to handle this until the clarification comes through!
Hmm
Er, I did say the rerolls page would be up (and it is now!); I generally can't/don't promise clarifications like this. As much as I'd love to help, it's not my bailiwick or area of expertise :)
|
|
If you have 1, 4, 4, 4, 4, 7, then the APL is exactly 4, and you run the 3-4 subtier, and everyone can play.
"For scenarios with more than two subtiers, characters must be in adjacent subtiers to play together."
Lots of cleaning up ... poor-play situations... by removing the possibility.
Chris: Thanks! I'm sure someone will ask Tonya at Gen Con and post the answer soon.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since I have a game day tonight, I think we're going to have to have a GM powwow about how to handle this until the clarification comes through!
Since the date on the front of the new Guide is August 4, I'd assume it doesn't go into effect until tomorrow. You shouldn't have to worry about it for tonight's game.
|
|
Er, I did say the rerolls page would be up (and it is now!); I generally can't/don't promise clarifications like this. As much as I'd love to help, it's not my bailiwick or area of expertise :)I'd also like a clarification on the re-roll wording in v8.0.
Personally, I'd much prefer to keep my +5 bonus with one re-roll per game than to now have up to 6 re-rolls per game with no bonus.
Chris Lambertz says that we will be getting a clarification soon. Since I have a game day tonight, I think we're going to have to have a GM powwow about how to handle this until the clarification comes through!
Hmm
Link?
|
|
They're adjacent to the subtier being played.If you have 1, 4, 4, 4, 4, 7, then the APL is exactly 4, and you run the 3-4 subtier, and everyone can play."characters must be in adjacent subtiers to play together" the 1 and the 7 are NOT in adjacent subtiers.
Again "characters must be in adjacent subtiers to play together" the 1 and the 7 are NOT in adjacent subtiers. would it not read "Characters must be in AN adjacent subtier (singular) to play together" For your interpretation?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Link?Er, I did say the rerolls page would be up (and it is now!); I generally can't/don't promise clarifications like this. As much as I'd love to help, it's not my bailiwick or area of expertise :)I'd also like a clarification on the re-roll wording in v8.0.
Personally, I'd much prefer to keep my +5 bonus with one re-roll per game than to now have up to 6 re-rolls per game with no bonus.
Chris Lambertz says that we will be getting a clarification soon. Since I have a game day tonight, I think we're going to have to have a GM powwow about how to handle this until the clarification comes through!
Hmm
|
|
Though this bit is worth reposting here...
"A player may display any of the products listed on this page and receive the following bonus: once per scenario, after you roll the dice, you can reroll 1d20 die; you must take the new result.
Additionally, when a player uses a free reroll, she may present her Pathfinder Society membership card (available on their My Pathfinder Society page) and receive an additional +1 for every GM star she has earned, for a maximum of a +5."
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think recording the resolution of permanent conditions is a reasonable place to draw it.
But this is assumed, since if it isn't resolved you, as GM, are required to report the character dead.
So what are we gaining with the additional information? More work from the GM, the player, the helping player?
I'm kinda serious. The more paperwork you push onto players the less who want to play. We used to have 20-30 people playing weekly locally. We have 8-10 now, and while some say their life changed - more than a handful say "I hate all the paperwork" or "too many gotchas".
So if we keep adding more gotchas and more "tsk tsk you should have done it this way", don't we push more people away? For no value. I do mean no value. If a player wanted to forge a PFS number, signature, etc. Only Tonya or others on the data side can verify that is forged. I can't at Gencon because I wasn't GM or organizer for your game with the alleged person who cured you.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Score!
Coordinator Polos
Regional Venture-Coordinator
Venture-Captain
Venture-Lieutenant
It doesn't state what condition they need to be in, or if the Venture Officer in question is still wearing it, or if it is acceptable to off the Venture Officer in question to obtain his shirt!
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Score!
It doesn't state what condition they need to be in, or if the Venture Officer in question is still wearing it, or if it is acceptable to off the Venture Officer in question to obtain his shirt!Coordinator Polos
Regional Venture-Coordinator
Venture-Captain
Venture-Lieutenant
Good thing I kept my old one, then! Been meaning to have "RETIRED" embroidered on underneath the title...