Starfinder Society Developer
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Official Clarification:: Assume that the items are available on the Chronicle Sheet at the end of the scenario, regardless of whether or not one or more of the PCs possesses this boon. This balances out the relatively low treasure count in this scenario.
Obviously, the PCs still need the boon to benefit from this equipment DURING the scenario.
|
Clearly "personas" are an important aspect of this scenario, but it's a little unclear how each character gets their persona and how much they're supposed to play to it. Is this supposed to be a player invented persona, or just what a GM observes and describes
My thought is to have Wazasha give a brief overview ("Remember, it's important to play to the audience! You're heroes, so make sure to be relatable!") Though I'm not sure if they should even know that the "anti-hero" option even exists.
Did anyone have any thoughts?
|
|
Ran this yesterday. We were slightly rushed because the party did the thing and the solar sortie ran a little short, so we skipped the dinner break to fit this in in between slots.
The party was a little overwhelmed with the reality show to put together the bigger mystery
Not sure if they wanted the sequel, but when the party saw zo! in the first mandate immediately after this they were estatic, so they're probably up for it.
Beyond the first fight where they're mentioned with the light I'm not exactly sure where to put the camera crew for them to be in the way.
a P on the map for "party starts here" would help. it may be described in the scenario, but in the middle of the game you want that information fast.
The party really did have a lot of fun with this one.
|
Organized Play Lead Developer
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Clearly "personas" are an important aspect of this scenario, but it's a little unclear how each character gets their persona and how much they're supposed to play to it. Is this supposed to be a player invented persona, or just what a GM observes and describes
My thought is to have Wazasha give a brief overview ("Remember, it's important to play to the audience! You're heroes, so make sure to be relatable!") Though I'm not sure if they should even know that the "anti-hero" option even exists.
Did anyone have any thoughts?
When I ran it a few weeks ago, I kept a sheet of paper on hand and wrote down a couple of words that applied to each PC’s behavior during the tunnels exploration and first encounter. I then asked soft but leading questions as a GM and as Wazasha to confirm the PC’s persona, like “Okay, seems like you’re going for kinda a wrestle-everything Steve Irwin vibe?” Or “Do you always tackle new creatures and try to lick them?”
It lets the GM observe and respond but offers the player a chance to course-correct in case something’s just not right.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ran this on Saturday. Didn't feel rushed, but also had two level 3 characters playing down on a table of 6.
The characters did not know if a sequel was a good idea, but the players are howling for more.
Throughout the adventure I was writing sticky notes and slapping them onto the front of my GM screen showing the audience's response to their actions ("Lame #LEE" "They have a mascot #LEE" "That explosion was fake, I know Holoshop so I know these things #LEE"), that seemed to help remind the players that the universe is watching. (I was careful to not let it slow things down and had several prepped before hand).
From my observations I would like a few more enemies involved in the final encounter, the run of the mill goblins didn't offer much challenge to a table of six, but the bbeg had them quaking as he came rocketing out of the mist.
I thought the scenario was great and would happily run a whole series of Live Exploration Extreme.
|
Starfinder Society Developer
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have a question regarding the price of the red star plasma kukri.
On the chronicle sheet it has a price of 2,450 credits in the description, but in the items found list its price is 3,200 credits.
Which one of these is the right one?
The higher price and higher item level are the correct values. I'll be seeing about updating this as soon as we can.
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
One thing that did greatly bother me, though, and this is Paizo-wide: the consent disclaimers.
I saw this in a couple of APs, and it's in this scenario as well. I get that a pre-written adventure can warrant a disclaimer for "make sure everyone is on the same page" or "make sure everyone understands table drama is not the same as RL inter-player drama" but framing it as consent is really stupid. Having an awkward or unpleasant experience at a gaming table is not even close to the same thing as being raped, which is specifically what is evoked by the terminology the company has been using for these things.
Well, yes and no.
I agree that the terminology might sound a bit dramatic.
However, I also think quite a few roleplayers may remember being picked on in high school ("nerds"), and the Booth experience might not be fun for everyone. Especially if multiple players all pile on to the same person, because he happened to make himself an easy target in the last scene. So I think it's a good idea to sharpen the GM's mind about this.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Scene A is all about the PCs discovering stuff and telling the audience. The GM first reading aloud to a player what he discovered kind of steals the scoop, so I made discovery cards. On one side the skill needed; on the other hand what you learn.
So when the players are exploring, put them down on the table with the skill-side up. The first player to pass the check gets to flip it and do the big reveal.
Uploaded to PFSPREP :)
|
This was clarified before. 2/4 is sufficient.
Let me guess: there’s another thread somewhere?
Edit: found it. It was in general discussion.
Link to the clarification in case anyone else comes to GM discussion with the same question.
|
|
One thing that did greatly bother me, though, and this is Paizo-wide: the consent disclaimers.
Consent applies to a much broader range of situations than rape.
If my character flirts with another player's PC and it makes that PC's player uncomfortable, I would be engaging in sexual harassment. It doesn't matter that we're role playing, I as a player made the choice in how to act.
Now if I ask that other player if they consent to PC-PC flirting or they consent through roleplay (eg, flirting back), and this doesn't make anyone else at the table uncomfortable, its fine.
Harassment already happens in PFS/SFS from a small number of players, a scenario that encourages players to emulate the behavior of reality show actors amplifies the potential for it.
|
Exactly what Arc said. Reality shows are all about petty sniping, oneupsmanship, and backstabbing. Players that aren't comfortable with that sort of social dynamic shouldn't be forced to deal with it, so if someone has a problem with it, the GM should work to adjudicate around the problem.
I would suggest you make your peace with the consent disclaimers. They aren't going anywhere.
|
|
Okay, i thought it was because i was in a hurry and not really planning to run this but as I'm prepping this for online play.. no. The layout on this is absolutely horrible and confusing.
The four player adjustment for encounter D (final fight with the goblins and Big genius) , is after the map before encounter D which is before the description of encounter C.
The goblin scrappers stat block is broken up over three pages with a map in the middle
the map for encounter D is before fight C (i have no idea why those pages aren't just switched)
Absolutely love the scenario, but the layout results in a lot of confused flipping back and forth
|
Organized Play Lead Developer
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
One thing that did greatly bother me, though, and this is Paizo-wide: the consent disclaimers.Consent applies to a much broader range of situations than rape.
If my character flirts with another player's PC and it makes that PC's player uncomfortable, I would be engaging in sexual harassment. It doesn't matter that we're role playing, I as a player made the choice in how to act.
Now if I ask that other player if they consent to PC-PC flirting or they consent through roleplay (eg, flirting back), and this doesn't make anyone else at the table uncomfortable, its fine.
Harassment already happens in PFS/SFS from a small number of players, a scenario that encourages players to emulate the behavior of reality show actors amplifies the potential for it.
This. Consent is also a significant part of the social contract—the same one in which we might agree on house rules or character creation standards—to running a horror game. We’re ultimately here to have fun, even if that means being made somewhat uncomfortable by spooky themes or social conflict in the name of narrative. Consent informs everyone where the red line is so that everyone can respect personal boundaries and keep roleplaying situations from becoming outright distressing.
I would suggest you make your peace with the consent disclaimers. They aren't going anywhere.I don't consent to consent disclaimers.
Alternatively, we could just add a Consent tag so that those who don’t consent to respecting the consent of others can make an informed consent decision and run a different scenario to which they do consent. Of course, for that you would need to respect consent in the first place so that you could exercise it in the first place.
Which is my snarky way of saying that consent sidebars aren’t going to show up in every scenario, but when they do, it’s for an important reason. If consent in non-rape contexts isn’t something you as a GM can respect for the sake of your players, there are many other great adventures for you to enjoy together.
|
Organized Play Lead Developer
|
I'm not arguing for dropping disclaimers for any of the situations where I've seen them pop up. I'm just saying you should call them something else.
Consent applies to far more than sexual violence, and I say that with no intention of downplaying the impact of sexual violence. Consent is also the term I've seen most commonly used when it comes to issues of advertising questionable content and seeking the emotional buy-in of participants for a tabletop roleplaying game. If there's a larger controversy about using "consent" to describe anything outside of sexual situations, I've missed it (as have others at Paizo, considering we use the term extensively in Horror Adventures) and am open to being pointed to articles or other discussions.
Is there some other word you expect to see here?
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I just ran this, had a great time. Got a barstool and put it in front of a spot of blank wall to use as The Booth. There's something about sitting on a barstool with nothing in front of your legs that makes people squirm a bit. Everyone was dreading their turn in the Booth but nobody wanted to be left out either so I think I got the right amount of squirm.
I didn't put the disclaimer in terms of consent so much as "keep it nice, and when you don't know the other person that well, be a bit more careful", and that worked out fine.
|
Organized Play Lead Developer
|
I just ran this, had a great time. Got a barstool and put it in front of a spot of blank wall to use as The Booth. There's something about sitting on a barstool with nothing in front of your legs that makes people squirm a bit. Everyone was dreading their turn in the Booth but nobody wanted to be left out either so I think I got the right amount of squirm.
Oooooh! Nice.
|
|
Throughout the adventure I was writing sticky notes and slapping them onto the front of my GM screen showing the audience's response to their actions ("Lame #LEE" "They have a mascot #LEE" "That explosion was fake, I know Holoshop so I know these things #LEE"), that seemed to help remind the players that the universe is watching. (I was careful to not let it slow things down and had several prepped before hand).
Can I just say that I totally stole this idea with the sticky notes when running it myself. Made up some semi-amusing usernames and used them to act as feedback and to keep the pace going.
Worked really well...........stroke of genius from you I think.
|
|
Ran this yesterday. We had a great time! Everyone just laughed off the consent warning, as everyone at the table are friends and are quick to tease each other as is. The camera crew was interesting, though both my players and I wish I had used them to get in the way a little more. If I run this again I will definitely do so. The goblin mascot I also feel I underused, though. Perhaps the best part was the meeting of the dwarves. It through everyone for a loop, and watching their confusion made for great TV!
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
I think it's fine if the camera crew isn't too annoying. I used 6 ghoul minis and kept moving them up a bit behind front-row PCs trying to get good shots of the action. Occasionally that made it tricky for someone else to get close to the front line, which was just annoying enough.
And when they realized the camera crew's bright lighting was interacting with the spicodranth there was a momentary "of COURSE!" groan.
I had the camera crew talk about how eating goblins is basically mystery meat junk food - you don't know what it's eaten. And zoom in lustfully any time a PC got hurt. When I pulled the Pharasmin priest soldier into the Booth he kept talking while the camera focused on his wounds from the recent fight; kind of an "eyes up here" moment.
|
|
For the first encounter (using the Tech Dungeon flip-mat), where do the PCs start? There's a few places that seem plausible (such as that tunnel on the left and that staircase in the center), and with so many walls it'll make a difference.
Edit: I'm guessing the staircase in the center of the map represents the ladder of rebar the PCs are supposed to climb? It'll be crowded in that small room (especially with the camera crew!) and there wouldn't be line of sight to the spicodranth so I thought I'd better double check.
|
|
It is a bit confusing, but I believe your read is right - based on the way the narrative plays out the PCs are exploring a tunnel, fight some goblins, climb up to the habitat, and encounter dwarves. Since the ruins beneath and above have similar structure, it's safe to assume that the center bit is what they climb up, which means the only other way onto the map is the western tunnel.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just for fun, here's a few of the social media (Twitter-equivalent) messages I wrote on notecards for the PCs to see if they examine the holo-feed.
LOL, this holo sux. What is Starfinder? Wish Envar Tamm were on it! #LEE!
This holo is RAD-7 to the X-Treme!!! What's in that moon?!?! #LEE!
OMG, that android is so nova-hot! I'd like to lube his piston! #LEE!
This is so FAKE! Those dwarves are obvs actors. A prank on Starfinders? They're so dumb! #LEE!
|
The social media and playing to the audience parts of this were a lot of fun, but as a GM, I had some serious issues with this scenario.
1) When are the PCs supposed to realize they are in a simulation chamber? It's one of the potential questions to ask the dwarves about. There's no direction for skill checks or descriptions of the areas that I can find that would lead to this conclusion until they find the terminal in area D.
2) Some read aloud descriptive text of each area would have gone a long way. I was tempted to just read what's written, but it slides into spoiler territory for the players immediately.
3) The layout for this scenario is really bad. The map placement in relation to the encounter details and stat blocks. The scaling sidebars being on a different page than the stat blocks. Art of an NPC next to the stat block of a different creature from a completely different area. This encounter was extremely difficult to run from the digital source.
|
|
1. The only way the party would know for sure that they're in a simulation chamber is at the end, but savvy party members might put things together. After all, there are a lot of things that don't line up, and the characters know they're exploring an artificial moon. However, the dwarves have no idea what the characters are talking about - the simulation is their existence, after all.
2 & 3. Can't disagree here.
|
|
Regarding what the PCs think is happening, that's a major theme of it being a live reality show. The production assistant subtly prompts them them to narrate their thoughts, and asks them direct questions in the Booth. Fan theories over the infosphere should add to the range of possibilities: Are these real dwarves from someplace who have been kidnapped, brainwashed, and taken here? Is the whole show a hoax/prank, and these are actors? Have the Starfinders somehow crossed a dimensional nexus into Old Golarion? Maybe the goblins and dwarves are robots! Etc, etc.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The higher price and higher item level are the correct values. I'll be seeing about updating this as soon as we can.I have a question regarding the price of the red star plasma kukri.
On the chronicle sheet it has a price of 2,450 credits in the description, but in the items found list its price is 3,200 credits.
Which one of these is the right one?
I hope you reconsider this. As a Level 5 weapon that only does 1d4 damage, even if it is two damage types (because it is a plasma weapon with electric and fire damage), and costs 3200 creds is whack. Consider the lackluster amount of credits that are awarded for each scenario as it is. It would take at least three scenarios for a level 3-4 character to purchase a basic melee weapon - a knife. I, personally, would never pay that much. The lower level and cost is more reasonable, in my opinion. As a level 5, it is 4 levels higher than the survival knife at 1d4 damage, and only 2 away from a level 7 that does 2d4 damage. With the extra damage type, having it as a level 4 puts it more in line with a logical progression of knives specifically, and basic melee weapons in general. Also consider the fact that it is a powered weapon.
As an alternative, if you want to keep it as a level 5 weapon at 3200 credits, then perhaps consider increasing the damage to 1d6.
In fact, a better weapon that would make more sense would be a vibroblade, or buzzblade, to put it into league as a knife version of the buzzblade dueling sword. It would maintain the powered and operative special features, and due to the vibrating action, a slight damage increase (maybe 1d4+2) would be in line.
Isn't it an operative weapon that targets EAC? None of the other operative weapons do that right now. The amount of damage that it does, base, is pretty inconsequential when you're adding trick attack damage and have an average of +10% to hit (+20% if you add trick attack).
I would definitely count that as worth an investment for an Operative or anyone with a high Dex who needs a melee weapon.
I'm running this this coming Thursday, and have a question regarding infamy. The text on page 8 says:
"A PC who ends the scenario with a negative Fan Favor total earns 1 point of Infamy, but he qualifies for all credits rewards and boons on the Chronicle sheet tied to a high Fan Favor score."
Then page 22 says:
"Finally, any PC who ended the scenario with at least 3 Fan Favor earns the Budding Media Celebrity boon; remember that a PC who received Infamy and had 0 Fan Favor also earns this boon."
And:
"Remember that a PC who received Infamy and had 0 Fan Favor should lose no credits."
So, my question should be fairly obvious. Well, the first one, at least. If they are getting infamy, they have a non-zero (because they have negative) fan favor. These two conditions seem mutually exclusive.
My second question has to do with the credits earned. Say they fail to defeat the goblins in area A. Does a PC with infamy get full credits for that encounter while any other PC does not? Or is that only a reference to the final credit distribution in the conclusion?
(This is likely to be a fairly moot point -- I don't think I've had a party yet that failed to defeat all the parts of the scenario. Always a chance for the first time, though.)
Venture-Agent, Netherlands
|
Just for fun, here's a few of the social media (Twitter-equivalent) messages I wrote on notecards for the PCs to see if they examine the holo-feed.
LOL, this holo sux. What is Starfinder? Wish Envar Tamm were on it! #LEE!
This holo is RAD-7 to the X-Treme!!! What's in that moon?!?! #LEE!
OMG, that android is so nova-hot! I'd like to lube his piston! #LEE!
This is so FAKE! Those dwarves are obvs actors. A prank on Starfinders? They're so dumb! #LEE!
Ohhhh this sounds awesome! I am definitely going to borrow the idea, especially making reference to the first one as some of my PC's will have encountered Envar (complete with backwards baseball cap and reflective aviators!)
Great idea! Kudos :)
|
|
Just a question about the Goblin Scrapshooters AC. is it really supposed to be E11/K12? Because that is one hell of an armor check penalty as their Dex mod is +4. They would be better off going into battle naked. That being said, goblins are not the brightest creatures in the galaxy so I could see them wearing armor that they thought looked cool but did not help them at all.
I can also see a canny party doing a "work" (in pro wrestling parlance) for the benefit of the cameras. That is, working out some hostilities and juicy goings between the party members on that are agreed on in advance that everyone knows are going to be said or done for the benefit and titillations (sp?) of the audience and are not in earnest. My group that I played this adventure with did not think of this but if the group I'm running for this weekend thinks of it I will totally run with it. I doubt Zo! would care and would run with it too.
|
Starfinder Senior Developer
|
Just a question about the Goblin Scrapshooters AC. is it really supposed to be E11/K12? Because that is one hell of an armor check penalty as their Dex mod is +4. They would be better off going into battle naked. That being said, goblins are not the brightest creatures in the galaxy so I could see them wearing armor that they thought looked cool but did not help them at all.
Hey there! In Starfinder, NPC armor class values are less about what the creature's Dex bonus and armor are and are more based on benchmark values (see the final chapter of Alien Archive. Thus the goblins' EAC/KAC are 11/12 because of their Dex and armor but rather because they are creatures of a given CR. Building creatures according to benchmarks rather than based on full PC-facing design rules is one of the bigger changes in Starfinder from Pathfinder's first edition.