Request: Unlimited 1e replay


Pathfinder Society Playtest

51 to 100 of 203 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
2/5 5/5 *

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber

@ Wageslave

Was that a function of replay or a function of the campaign not being supported?

Scarab Sages 5/5

Shifty wrote:


I'm really not getting where the 'no' vote is coming from.

I generally don't like replay. I enjoy replaying scenarios less than I did playing them the first time. I don't enjoy playing with folks who are replaying as much as if they play for the first time. I don't think replay is good for organized play in general.

Even should I choose not to transition to PF2 and PFS2, and all I have left is playing PFS1, and I run out of play opportunities completely. I still don't want replay. Because its a less enjoyable situation. And in a couple years, it could be just "all replay" for the majority of players. Which means everyone is just playing the same things over and over again.

But frankly, if people want to do that, there is nothing stopping them once August 2019 rolls around.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

4 people marked this as a favorite.

My main reason for no replay is that PFS1 rules don't have it and I don't want PFS1 to change once PFS2 is released. I want it to maintain the same rules and structure it always has. If we suddenly change the rules for replay and/or other things, it ceases to be PFS1 and the chances I will want to continue to support it fall off dramatically. If replay, evil characters, or any other changes were part of PFS1 as it exists now, fine, but please no new or significantly changed rules simply because there is a new kid on the block.

Scarab Sages 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Bob Jonquet wrote:
My main reason for no replay is that PFS1 rules don't have it and I don't want PFS1 to change once PFS2 is released. I want it to maintain the same rules and structure it always has. If we suddenly change the rules for replay and/or other things, it ceases to be PFS1 and the chances I will want to continue to support it fall off dramatically. If replay, evil characters, or any other changes were part of PFS1 as it exists now, fine, but please no new or significantly changed rules simply because there is a new kid on the block.

Agreed!

And if we open up replay for PFS1, it will also create a strong, strong call to open up replay for PFS2.

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

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Shifty wrote:
I'm really not getting where the 'no' vote is coming from.

Because I don’t want to run 1E scenarios in the future for people who have replayed everything multiple times. You want to replay a scenario? Have a GM run it for you for no credit. Do like my wife and I did, play the scenarios with a group as a campaign free of PFS rules.

Dark Archive 4/5 5/55/5 *** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Midwest

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I am firmly in the "please do not expand replay" for PFS 1.0 camp.

I cannot see how this will make the sun-setting campaign "better" -- all I see is a series of hand-picked scenarios, with most PCs running around with talking swords, faerie dragopn familiars, and axebeak mounts.

As has been said, you already have unlimited replay... just not for PFS credit at a PFS sanctioned event.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Shifty wrote:
I'm really not getting where the 'no' vote is coming from.
Because I don’t want to run 1E scenarios in the future for people who have replayed everything multiple times. You want to replay a scenario? Have a GM run it for you for no credit. Do like my wife and I did, play the scenarios with a group as a campaign free of PFS rules.

But you don't have to run for people who have replayed multiple times. Just like the the people who are saying if you don't like PFS 2.0 then you don't have to play. Nothing is requiring you to run it.

I think an expanded replay after PFS 2.0 launches is something that could not only help support the system Paizo spent 10 years crafting with minimal effort and support. If you don't want to offer PFS1.0 in your area you don't have to.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Madclaw wrote:
But you don't have to run for people who have replayed multiple times

You may not know that until you're sitting at the game table and by then it would be very bad form to simply walk away. This is especially true at conventions and/or charity events.

As someone who experienced this phenomenon in another OP, I do not want to experience it again, ever. I sat down to run an adventure I had never done before only to find out about an hour in that all the players had played said adventure multiple times and were simply there farming rewards for alternate characters. That it was about 50% investigative enhanced my displeasure. That at least once I was told an action I took was wrong, and to trust them, because they knew the adventure better than I did, was icing on the cake. I stopped the game, signed their sheets and left.

We all have our experiences that feed our biases and mine is I will not take part in a campaign with unlimited replay. That's merely my opinion and everyone is entitled to theirs. I have made my plea and will leave it at that. I encourage anyone with strong feelings about replay to express them to Paizo so they can make a decision they feel is in the best interest of the greater community. If that means expanding reply, so be it.

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

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Madclaw wrote:
But you don't have to run for people who have replayed multiple times. Just like the the people who are saying if you don't like PFS 2.0 then you don't have to play. Nothing is requiring you to run it.

If you want me to stop supporting the 1E players in favor of just running for my home crew, then by all means.

5/5 **

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

Rather than unlimited replay, I would be more in favor of sanctioning the rest of the pre-PF2.0 material to provide continued play.

Scarab Sages 5/5

6 people marked this as a favorite.
waltero wrote:

Rather than unlimited replay, I would be more in favor of sanctioning the rest of the pre-PF2.0 material to provide continued play.

THIS!

All the remaining modules & APs should be sanctioned before August 2019.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bob Jonquet wrote:
.....and I don't want PFS1 to change once PFS2 is released. I want it to maintain the same rules and structure it always has.

That structure is based on regular releases of new content, so for PFS1 not to change is simply impossible.

Scarab Sages 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
David Setty wrote:
Bob Jonquet wrote:
.....and I don't want PFS1 to change once PFS2 is released. I want it to maintain the same rules and structure it always has.
That structure is based on regular releases of new content, so for PFS1 not to change is simply impossible.

Not really. It just means that it will slowly die off in a couple years once enough people have played out all their options that you can't get a table together anymore.

And that's ok.

Sovereign Court 5/5

Tallow wrote:
David Setty wrote:
Bob Jonquet wrote:
.....and I don't want PFS1 to change once PFS2 is released. I want it to maintain the same rules and structure it always has.
That structure is based on regular releases of new content, so for PFS1 not to change is simply impossible.

Not really. It just means that it will slowly die off in a couple years once enough people have played out all their options that you can't get a table together anymore.

And that's ok.

unless new people join in... something that currently DOES happen.

Missed an older scenario? check among the "newbies" and see if there are players able to play it. Recently ran a table of Among the Living for a group of 5 players who had never played it... When we checked we found that most of them hadn't played the "...the Dead" or "... the Gods" either. They never get offered. After all, "why bother posting those? Everyone has already played those..."...

1/5 5/5

Blake's Tiger wrote:

@ Wageslave

Was that a function of replay or a function of the campaign not being supported?

Yes.

EDIT: (For Clarity)

It was a function of replay (those playing had nothing new to play, so they had to play older material) and not being supported (see: nothing new to play)

4/5 5/55/55/55/5

Bob Jonquet wrote:
Madclaw wrote:
But you don't have to run for people who have replayed multiple times
You may not know that until you're sitting at the game table and by then it would be very bad form to simply walk away. This is especially true at conventions and/or charity events.

Which would be pretty unlikely, as it's our Venture Crew who plan and organise the Conventions, game days, and FLGS events - pretty sure we aren't interested in seeing that sort of caper. What is being described above could only really be happening at home games (at least in this country).

As it stands, all that really happens is old stuff doesn't get run because we only get a couple of sign-ups from newer people, and the more experienced guys don't join in because that content is done.

I get that open replay could cause some trouble for some people, but really, play for no credit doesn't work either, as the rules suggest this is only possible to create a legal table - so the minute there's enough people you get punted.

Personally I have little interest in replay myself, I think it is reeeeeeally boring and despite having multiple stars and the ability to replay I haven't done it. I can't stand the 'evergreen' replayable scenarios out there and won't even GM them.

I suppose we could just play endless loops of the Evergreens - those open replayable scenarios... the exact concept that people are arguing against.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5 **

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Bob Jonquet wrote:
I will not take part in a campaign with unlimited replay.

The following is a serious and honest question. I'm just trying to understand your point of view.

At least locally, our Core games are nearly totally experienced players. It is quite common for most of the people at the table to have played or run the scenario.

Online it is also quite common to play a scenario where several of the players have previously run it.

As a GM, its quite rare for me to play a scenario that I haven't run before.

And then there are the GM star replays.

So the existing campaign already has a fair bit of replay baked in. Most players try hard to avoid spoilers and largely succeed. I'm honestly not seeing why unlimited would be appreciably worse.

Hmm, as I typed that in I had a realization. The people who are doing the replaying are almost all GMs and many are 3+ star GMs. So they've GMed a lot. And GMing DOES change ones perspective of a game. It does make you more aware of how your actions can affect the entire table.

I may have just answered my own question :-). Bob, did I ? :-)

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5 **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Shifty wrote:

I can't stand the 'evergreen' replayable scenarios out there and won't even GM them.

Have you tried the 2 most recent ones? They've done a MUCH better job of making them actually replayable and fun when replayed.

Not perfect of course. They still get stale after awhile. But, for me, that while is a lot larger number than it was.

Note - If you HAVE tried them and they're still not to your tastes that is fine and dandy. We all have our tastes. Just wanted to point this out in case you were judging the new ones by what the older ones achieved.

Silver Crusade 4/5 Venture-Captain, Pennsylvania—Pittsburgh

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It really seems like the assumption is that PFS 1e will die out shortly after the release of 2e. If that's the assumption, I'm not entirely sure why opening up replay, in full or in part, for the groups that would prefer to stay legal is that much of a problem?

So long as the replay doesn't extend into PFS 2e a lot further than it already does into PFS 1e, I still think it would help Paizo's goals.

You:
1. Help keep tables full at existing events during the year or two year cutover before we have a significant backlog of PFS 2e scenarios to run at secondary events
2. Keep people happy and give them an opportunity to play 1e characters into retirement instead of simply having their adventuring careers unfulfilled due to a lack of playable scenarios
3. Encourage the soft retirement of PFS 1e if replay over time is really that problematic?

When you think about it, Paizo has a really remarkable opportunity to use PFS 1e as a testing ground for ideas starting in August 2019. Because it won't be moving current product, it probably won't be a critical marketing arm, which means that if things go wrong, it's not that big a deal.

1/5

I don't really have much of a horse in this race, as I only have 1 character at level 12 and about 6 characters at levels 1-6, with only 3 GM credits to my name at present, but here's some thoughts I have nonetheless.

Things I think would be good moves, in order of importance/ease:
1. Open up all 1E (and 2E) scenarios for credit for GM's. This increased ability to get games started (I am assuming the main resource constraint is GM's, and neither players nor table space itself) would let the players who have characters they are still working get their characters through the levels to see how they function. This is particularly true for people who are trying to run classes that won't be in the 2E CRB, but rather are classes without 2E support for the next 1-2 years.

2. Open up the 1E (and 2E) evergreens for replay ability at all their valid character levels. There aren't any rewards in those that I see people trying to replay for specific items/boons. It just broadens the ability to get characters advanced higher (and generally through early levels), and eliminates tracking which character level you have played a particular scenario. It does add a lot of repetition though.

3. Open up the remaining 1E scenarios / sanctioned AP's + modules for replay ability at all their valid character levels. Chronicle sheets already exist. The 1E campaign will die off soon enough anyway.

4. Create chronicle sheets for other yet-to-be-sanctioned AP's and modules for 1E, along with some PFS specific suggestions/rules for GM's running these in the organized play setting. Of everything on the list, this would offer the most flavor for the Paizo customers (players and GM's get some diversity of play), but the most amount of work for Paizo.

Note that none of these in particular will get Paizo a bunch of new sales, and would likely in fact just eat into the [more profitable] push to 2E ...

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paul Jackson wrote:
So the existing campaign already has a fair bit of replay...

Too much IMHO

Silver Crusade 5/5

waltero wrote:

Rather than unlimited replay, I would be more in favor of sanctioning the rest of the pre-PF2.0 material to provide continued play.

+1.

4/5 5/55/55/55/5

Paul Jackson wrote:
Note - If you HAVE tried them and they're still not to your tastes that is fine and dandy. We all have our tastes. Just wanted to point this out in case you were judging the new ones by what the older ones achieved.

All good.

I'm at least giving them a playthrough once, and some of them are quite fun, but the endless Confirmation/Wounded Wisp/Consortium Compact loops I saw in play just make me die a little.

Tome of Righteous Repose was just the final straw.

What really gets me in this whole argument is that there's this moan about how people might sit in small groups repeating the same scenarios forever, yet how far can you get (level wise) just churning the same legal evergreens etc right now?

Confirmation
Wounded Wisp
Consortium Compact
House of Harmonious Wisdom
Tome of Repose

Dark Archive 4/5

I'll chime in here with the request to finish sanctioning on 1E material, maybe even consider the old 3E modules you have on clearance. I can dream about them producing a once a year special or something on top of that, but I get that the development costs and constraints are real on giving out new content once the new edition debuts. However there is still a lot of product sitting in the Warehouse, and sanctioning is a good way to keep those assets valuable with a fairly modest time investment.

3/5

Dennis Muldoon wrote:
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:


2) Expanding all evergreens to be replayable throughout their range.

This means that Gallows of Madness would be replayable on second and third, and that the 1-5 quests (8-16 House of Harmonious Wisdom!) and (9-16 Fallen Family, Broken Name) are replayable on levels 2-5. Same deal with the other modules.

If nothing else, please this. I would love for evergreens to be fully replayable anywhere in tier from the beginning in 2e, as well.

On that point, did anyone ever explain why the various low-level evergreens are only replayable with first level characters? I don't have a huge problem with it, but it is a bit fiddly and I have always wondered what the payoff is.

I would also support this (for both PFS1 and PFS2), but probably not anything more on the replay side of things.

Tallow wrote:
waltero wrote:
Rather than unlimited replay, I would be more in favor of sanctioning the rest of the pre-PF2.0 material to provide continued play.
THIS! All the remaining modules & APs should be sanctioned before August 2019.

Agreed.

Also, maybe un-retire some or all of the retired scenarios. Although similar to the above, I don't actually know why they were retired in the first place, so I am not sure if this a good idea. Does anyone know?

_
glass.

Dataphiles 3/5 Venture-Agent, California—Manhattan Beach

First off I do not support unlimited replay whether I make the move to 2E or not. Expanded options for replay could be viable though.
I definitely believe all the 1E Content should be sanctioned as soon as possible.
As far as expanding replay goes possibly some variation of the Expanded Narrative boon. Open it to scenarios played or GMed? So after X number of games you participate in you earn a replay.
I'm really just spitballing here, but I feel that while unlimited replay would definitely drive 1E into the grave some form of earned limited replay that's available to all could be reasonable.

EDIT: @glass It depends on the given scenario. I've been told some of the scenarios were overly deadly. I'm also fairly certain some scenarios like First Steps 2 and 3 were for story reasons.

Dark Archive

I vote for Unlimited Replay.

3/5

Zach Davis wrote:
EDIT: @glass It depends on the given scenario. I've been told some of the scenarios were overly deadly. I'm also fairly certain some scenarios like First Steps 2 and 3 were for story reasons.

For those that were too deadly, they could un-retire them and add a warning on them, like Bonekeep has IIRC.

As for First Steps, I always assumed that was because it introduced you to factions that no longer existed, but that has been true of part 1 for a while as well and that is still available to play as far as I know.

Actually that's a thought - what if brought back all the retired factions for PFS1? Even though it would not greatly increase the total stock of available adventures, it would increase the relevance of a lot of them!

_
glass.

The Exchange 3/5

I vote for unlimited replay as well. If there won't be more content created people should be able to play the old content again.

The Exchange 1/5 5/5 **

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Don't know if it matters, but my vote is for NO open replay. I replayed two scenarios this weekend at a Con for no credit, to fill out a table, and had a great time in both games playing with people who hadn't played them before. I wouldn't have done it if they had all played it before and were just replaying it, I would have went and found something else at the Con to do.

I also run scenarios multiple times, for no chronicles, and would do so for no credit, for no other reason but I enjoy running/rping the NPCs in them and giving my players a great experience. But I'm me.
YMMV

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Agent, Rhode Island—Lincoln

I think at one point you should have to come to terms with the fact that there are no more scenarios, and things coming to an end.

I do not think it a good idea to have unlimited replay and vote for no unlimited replay. There are plenty of replay opportunities already.

3/5 Venture-Agent, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Regardless of if you are for or against replays, for whatever reason, you have to realize there is going to be an initial problem of availability of scenarios. This problem has already reared its ugly head with Starfinder. I understand why there are only two scenarios published a month, and obviously we dont want to rush Paizo as we would rather have quality scenarios, but in the mean time there isnt going to be much to do.
If we had unlimited 1e replays, at least for the first year or two (at which point Im betting there would be enough content for 2e that 1e would just die out naturally, as previous editions of games such as AD&D did).

That said, I do think the reasons for disallowing replays, and perhaps slightly laxer rules regarding them should be examined. I see old PFS players in my store all the time playing 5th Ed, and when I ask them why they don't play Pathfinder anymore, 9/10 of the time the answer is along the lines of it became too hard to find games they could play anymore, so they moved to another system where that wasnt an issue for them.

The Exchange 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Posting my suggestion that I first put in one of the other "1e replay" threads...

ok, I've been giving this a lot of thought.

First - for full disclosure: I really do NOT like Re-Play. Never have. Know it will be bad for PFS... Argue against it each time it has popped up (every 6 months or so) Don't really like the re-play we have now (though I take full advantage of it! Sometimes I'm just weak I guess...)

There - now for my "silly idea".

When it rolls around to "Season 11", why not just re-number and re-issue the "Season 01" scenarios? No other changes, just the scenario number - switch the #1-29 to #11-29 and list it as a "new" scenario?

So our scenarios numbering system picks up another digit in the front, and we re-issue the Season 01 scenarios as Season 11? That gives us the same amount of "new" content each month/year. Scenarios would be "sort of new" as that they have not been played in a number of years (for some of us it will have been 10 years!), the existing support systems (tracking etc.) require very little changes - after all, we would be tracking:
Scenario #01-29: The Devil We Know—Part I: Shipyard Rats
as a different scenario than
Scenario #11-29: "The Devil We Know—Part I: Shipyard Rats"

then when Season 12 rolls around we'd get ...
Pathfinder Society Scenario #12-01: "Before the Dawn—Part I: The Bloodcove Disguise".

This would require very little work on Piazo part - and yet that very small effort they would be producing "new" products that they list and sell. Heck I know I'd buy them (with the new numbers), and I still have the ones I bought the first time!

1st edition players would be able to continue the PFS1e campaign with much the same number of new scenarios each month... And I'm sure we'd still get people complaining that they "have nothing to play! We need to expand re-plays!"...

"Re-plays" of scenarios would be limited to one per player (and one per Judge)...

And in 10 years? we could always do it again... Scenario #21-29: "The Devil We Know—Part I: Shipyard Rats"...

And I can get in ANOTHER 10 years of play in a Campaign sort of like PFS1e...

Or is this just a "silly idea"?

I do think that at least some of those persons pushing for "open replay" will not be happy with this, as it does still limits re-playability, and does not allow for re-playing favorite scenarios over and over. We'd only get 6 chances to put the same CR on different PCs. (1 run, 1 judge and 1 replay for both numbers...) and we'd only have 20 years of scenarios available... and APs, and Mods... and Specials... Not nearly enough games...

Silver Crusade 4/5 5/5 * Venture-Agent, Ohio—Cincinnati

How much do I love that idea, Nosig? Lots! Not that it needs to be implemented in exactly that way, but a gradual unlock of scenarios for replay (once, as if they were an entirely new thing) is awesome. I think I’d still disallow putting the same scenario (even if it were renumbered) on the same character. Because that’s just silly.

5/5 5/55/55/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bob Jonquet wrote:
My main reason for no replay is that PFS1 rules don't have it and I don't want PFS1 to change once PFS2 is released. I want it to maintain the same rules and structure it always has.

The big reason that no replay works at all is because new content is being released. Once no more new content is being released that rule becomes massively problematic.

Quote:
If we suddenly change the rules for replay and/or other things, it ceases to be PFS1

The ship of Theseus is a philosophical conundrum with no objective answer, but still I don't see how now replay is such a defining feature of pathfinder 1 that it overrides all other concerns.

No one but the largest of venues are going to be able to scheduel games for everyone

Quote:
but please no new or significantly changed rules simply because there is a new kid on the block.

Its not because there's a new kid on the block. Its because you've cut off the water supply. You're going to have to start recycling.

2 e is here,----> Something happens---? unleash the kraken!

That makes no sense.

2e is here ----> 1 e games are no longer being made ---> without new games putting together tables of non ever greens is hard

That makes a lot more sense. And they're not the same argument.

The Exchange 5/5

Aaron Tysen wrote:
How much do I love that idea, Nosig? Lots! Not that it needs to be implemented in exactly that way, but a gradual unlock of scenarios for replay (once, as if they were an entirely new thing) is awesome. I think I’d still disallow putting the same scenario (even if it were renumbered) on the same character. Because that’s just silly.

So, any suggestions on how to modify/change/etc. the suggested procedure?

anything we adopt/get TPTB to adopt is going to have to be as simple as possible, so that it takes very little (preferably zero) work on the part of Paizo staff & resources. Simple is also good, so that the player community doesn't have trouble understanding how it works.

Yeah, I agree, we should disallow putting "the same" scenario on the same character... but we sort of do that now with Judge credit/Player credit. We rely on the player community to keep that strait.

I do think that some sort of gradual release of scenarios for replay should be used...IMHO it would help maintain some of the "feel" of PFS 1e.

And we would have to (eventually) have some direction on how playing Scenarios that are part of a "Series" will be handled. Does 01-29 Devil We Know part 1 connect with 11-30 Devil we know part 2?

Also, by putting a single digit in front of the number we will loose out on replaying all of season zero. Otherwise we'd have 10-01 Silent Tide...and 10-06 Black Waters (one I would personally like to Re-play!).

5/5 *** Venture-Agent, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I actually kinda dig this idea. Just combine 0 and 1 into 11 since they share numbering anyway.

Silver Crusade 4/5 5/5 * Venture-Agent, Ohio—Cincinnati

nosig wrote:


So, any suggestions on how to modify/change/etc. the suggested procedure?

I figure you could get by with a blogpost or language in whatever document governs future seasons similar to: "All Season 0 scenarios are eligible for replay, once each as a player and GM. This replay does not count against those granted by other sources (GM Stars, the Expanded Narrative Boon, etc.). No character can ever have more than one copy of the same chronicle sheet attached to it."

Then a year on, you alter it to "Seasons 0 and 1" and so forth.

Either way, it's just a different mechanical implementation of the same basic premise, and it's the premise I'm fighting for. :)

Another complication: it would be possible to restrict replay to those who played the scenario prior to the unlock (to restrict replay to the old hands), but I'm not advocating for that.

Of course, in my dream world, the old scenarios would be re-released in a remastered version. But that's probably a terrible use of the devs time. Maybe a Greatest Hits album?

The Exchange 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aaron Tysen wrote:
nosig wrote:


So, any suggestions on how to modify/change/etc. the suggested procedure?

I figure you could get by with a blogpost or language in whatever document governs future seasons similar to: "All Season 0 scenarios are eligible for replay, once each as a player and GM. This replay does not count against those granted by other sources (GM Stars, the Expanded Narrative Boon, etc.). No character can ever have more than one copy of the same chronicle sheet attached to it."

Then a year on, you alter it to "Seasons 0 and 1" and so forth.

Either way, it's just a different mechanical implementation of the same basic premise, and it's the premise I'm fighting for. :)

Another complication: it would be possible to restrict replay to those who played the scenario prior to the unlock (to restrict replay to the old hands), but I'm not advocating for that.

Of course, in my dream world, the old scenarios would be re-released in a remastered version. But that's probably a terrible use of the devs time. Maybe a Greatest Hits album?

My problem with this is the fact that they are released for replay in big lumps. All scenarios of a given season released at once on one day... Either right after GenCon, or on the new year or whatever... so it becomes kind of "feast or famine" with the run up to the next "release date" with a bunch of posters pushing to release early ("they are ALREADY ready - what's the harm of giving us access NOW. Heck, why can't we just get all 10 seasons released now..."... anyway. I like the gradual release of scenarios... it feels more like what we have now.

Also, by giving them a "new" number we would still be able to track them for Judge Star credits and everything just as if they were "new" product...

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 *** Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

Aaron Tysen wrote:
Of course, in my dream world, the old scenarios would be re-released in a remastered version. But that's probably a terrible use of the devs time. Maybe a Greatest Hits album?

It certainly would be a quick and dirty way to get "new" content for PFS2.0.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
The big reason that no replay works at all is because new content is being released. Once no more new content is being released that rule becomes massively problematic.

That may be true for scheduling, but there is nothing to address the game-play issues that arise from more replay. Which is the issue so many of us have with more relaxed replay. So the question becomes will expanding replay actually work in practice? If the number of people who simply refuse to participate given expanded replay is larger than the number of people who can play only with the expansion of replay, then we've done more to hurt the campaign than help it. If the reverse is true, great, it worked. I dunno if that can be determined without actually doing it and by then, there's no turning back. As I've said, I can only speak for myself that if replay is expanded, I'm out. If its just PFS1, then you'll only find me participating in PFS2. If it is extended to PFS2 as well, then I guess I'll just be focusing on my home group.

5/5 5/55/55/5

TwilightKnight wrote:


That may be true for scheduling, but there is nothing to address the game-play issues that arise from more replay.

It changes the decision making around it. The question isn't "does x have drawbacks for the campaign" the question is "do the drawbacks of x outweigh the benefits?" Even though the drawbacks of replay remain mostly the same the benefit of it becomes a near necessity.

Quote:
I dunno if that can be determined without actually doing it and by then, there's no turning back.

How is it remotely possible to maintain a group without relaxing the replay rules somewhat when no new content is coming out? You need to have enough geeks together that can play the same thing , not just one game available for one geek.

Thats going to get exponentially harder with each game and its going to hit your most experienced/dedicated/ fans (like your DM pool) the hardest.

Show me how you could possibly maintain a player base when it keeps getting harder and harder to put together games for them? How many weeks does someone have to be ineligible to play before they stop checking their warhorn?

Walk me through any scenario where you can maintain a group of DMs in a system that they NEVER get to play in when there are no usable benefits to DMing. (the credit/raceboon/RSP doesn't matter if you can only apply it to characters that can't play)

If that decision means you're out then you're out. It's a big loss but if it's the least bad option around then its the best option.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

BigNorseWolf wrote:
"do the drawbacks of x outweigh the benefits?"

That's exactly what I said. If the players we lose because they won't play with expanded replay is greater than the play we have with those who remain, then the benefits do not outweigh the drawbacks. Or vice versa.

No one is denying that scheduling will be a greater challenge after PFS2 launches, but many of us do not believe that expanding replay to make that process easier is the "right" answer.

5/5 5/55/55/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bob Jonquet wrote:
one is denying that scheduling will be a greater challenge after PFS2 launches, but many of us do not believe that expanding replay to make that process easier is the "right" answer.

How is scheduling even going to be possible after PFS 2 launches without replay? What is a better answer?

Oh its a challenge, rise up, do it harder... Yeah. No. That's a pile of pap. How is it remotely possible to do this without the campaign screaching to a halt? We can't KNOW isn't a very good answer.

I'm not happy that PFS1 is ending but being forced out of it by a lack of play is going to push me from meh aboutpfs2 to #$(#$*ed off.

2/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Bob Jonquet wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
"do the drawbacks of x outweigh the benefits?"
That's exactly what I said. If the players we lose because they won't play with expanded replay is greater than the play we have with those who remain, then the benefits do not outweigh the drawbacks. Or vice versa.

FWIW, I'm pretty confident that if we don't have a robust system of PFS1 replay where I play, we are going to lose players. I know that I would be one of them.

Bob Jonquet wrote:
No one is denying that scheduling will be a greater challenge after PFS2 launches, but many of us do not believe that expanding replay to make that process easier is the "right" answer.

I gotta say, I really don't understand the basis for your objection to expanded PFS1 replay if you're not going to participate in it. If you want to spend your time and energy on the limited number PFS2 scenarios that will be available post August 2019, that's fine with me. But please don't interfere with my and others' desire to continue to play PFS1 after that point.

The Exchange 5/5

Please excuse the ol'guy rambling...

Given the current replay parameters (i.e. "no replay"), I plan to play PFS1, and run (GM) games in PFS1 for as long as I can. Right now I am thinking that will be a couple years... maybe 4?

That means that in scenarios I have (currently, up thru #9-21) 34 left to play, mostly seasons 8 and 9. At a rate of 2 per month (an average for me) I have 17 months of play left (Not counting APs or Specials).

During that time I expect that I will be running games as well, and lately I seem to run about half of the time... so being conservative, I would say I will be running about 1/2 as much as I play... so say 27 months of gaming in PFS1 (Not counting Season #10).

But then I might play more as I am working at expanding game play in a newer venue and trying to keep them up to 2 tables a week... so maybe weekly play? Which means I might actually end up running more, as the last month I have been helping several new players start up at a new venue in PFS1...

OH! and I am planning on going to GenCon again this year... which might effect this a lot of different ways (maybe find a new/old game system?)

And locally we are talking of starting up a set of (PFS1) APs at the newer venue... so maybe more play time from that? We were deciding who would be running which book (looks like we're going to do Reign of Winter maybe?)

Anyway... If the "Request: Unlimited 1e replay" were to become reality, with the push to make it effective immediately (this will be the push), then I can say that I will likely just move to other games now. If the "unlimited replay" kicks in before 2e is released, I'll have to start looking for a different game now... heck, I still have my old Battletech stuff... and I know I could interest at least PART of the crew at the Venue in trying RuneQuest...

Yeah. I guess it would be ok to start up "Unlimited 1e replay" - I'll get a couple years jump on whatever game I move to...

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'll have to go revisit other discussions of replay to see if anyone has answered why this doesn't work.

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
You want to replay a scenario? Have a GM run it for you for no credit. Do like my wife and I did, play the scenarios with a group as a campaign free of PFS rules.

The Exchange 5/5

pjrogers wrote:

...snipping...

I gotta say, I really don't understand the basis for your objection to expanded PFS1 replay if you're not going to participate in it. ...

snipping...

I want to play PFS1e out to the end. I have a number of months (maybe years) of gaming in my favorite hobby (that I have played for 9+ years now) that I would like to have before someone starts to "...interfere with my and others' desire to continue to play PFS1 ...". Please don't take that from me.

"...expanded PFS1 replay..." is not, IMHO PFS1. It is someone's home game.

Sitting at a table with someone who may be playing this scenario for the X time, perhaps for the X time this month, week or day ("yeah, it was more fun in the morning slot, but I screwed up in the final fight and I want to get access to the cool item on the R on this PC, so I switched my sign up to be able to play it again this slot") is not my idea of PFS1... but it will be allowed, done, and even encouraged, with "expanded replay".

The Exchange 5/5

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:

I'll have to go revisit other discussions of replay to see if anyone has answered why this doesn't work.

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
You want to replay a scenario? Have a GM run it for you for no credit. Do like my wife and I did, play the scenarios with a group as a campaign free of PFS rules.

"But then I'm not getting a CR for my PC that adds to the character I have in PFS!"

"What? That would be like playing for no REWARDS?! I would have put all that effort out for nothing!"

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
pjrogers wrote:
I gotta say, I really don't understand the basis for your objection to expanded PFS1 replay if you're not going to participate in it. If you want to spend your time and energy on the limited number PFS2 scenarios that will be available post August 2019, that's fine with me. But please don't interfere with my and others' desire to continue to play PFS1 after that point.

The same could be said by those who like the campaign as it is and want to continue playing it without significant changes. We could say, "please don't interfere with my and other's desire to continue playing PFS1 by expanding replay, thereby making the gaming experience poor, and making us quit." I never said I wouldn't participate in PFS1, in fact I plan to as long as I can find a table of players. However, expanding replay is a non-starter for me.

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Oh its a challenge, rise up, do it harder... Yeah. No. That's a pile of pap. How is it remotely possible to do this without the campaign screaching to a halt? We can't KNOW isn't a very good answer

I think you may be looking at my comments from the wrong perspective. I am not saying any of your concerns are not valid. Yes, the scheduling challenges will continue to increase as people play themselves out of content. As time goes on, that is inevitable. My experience and understanding indicates the vast majority of players still have plenty of PFS1 content they can play, so there is no need to change the existing rules for the majority of players to be able to continue. That is certainly not true for everyone. The simple truth is that for people who have a strong dislike for replay it doesn't matter. We feel the harm that expanded replay does to the actual gameplay outweighs the benefit it provides. That's a philosophical difference of opinion. We would rather not participate in the campaign than continue with expanded replay. This really just boils down to one group wanting expanded replay so they can continue to play indefinitely and the other thinking expanding replay will hurt the integrity of the game to the extent that they won't play.

Keep in mind, I am not making this decision for Paizo. Like you, I am merely expressing what my preferences are for the campaign. Not everyone has the same desires or needs. It is up to Paizo to determine which ones serves the greater good. If that means I cannot play OP anymore because the "needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one," [read: more people want replay than don't] then it is what it is.

Also, let us remember that organized play is a marketing platform for Paizo. It would surprise me if they wanted PFS1 to continue any longer than it naturally will. They are unlikely to make significant rules changes to artificially force it to continue. It is not likely to bring much if any revenue since they won't be producing new content for 1E. Naturally, they are going to want everyone to switch to 2E so they can sell more product. I think few would object to people continuing with 1E if 2E isn't their "thing," but that's not the same as actively supporting the old campaign through their network of volunteer organizers. I cannot imagine they would want to throw convention support at an event that was strictly or even mostly PFS1 after the launch of 2E. There is little to no return on that investment. And over time, as the number of 2E players grows and 1E players shrinks the problem becomes more pronounced. This is not an issue of a fluffy, feel-good desire to let people do whatever they want, its simply an issue of cash and putting their marketing resources in a position to maximize their revenue. Just my perspective, of course. I would not expect Paizo to be this forthcoming, since it would certainly rub some people the wrong way and there would be yelling and gnashing of teeth. YMMV

51 to 100 of 203 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society Playtest / Request: Unlimited 1e replay All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.