Organized Play Manager
|
This thread is for the discussion of what impact first edition boons may have in Pathfinder Society 2nd Edition launching in 2019.
For more context to this thread, visit Pathfinder Society 2: Replay, Rewards, and Rebuilds and Pathfinder Playtest and Pathfinder Society FAQ.
Venture-Captain, Minnesota
|
To aid discussion and provide a reference point, I’m reprinting the relevant sections of John Compton’s blog.
BOON OPTIONS
Option 1—No Transfer: In this model, first edition boons would apply only to first edition. Use them now while there's still a good opportunity. From the perspective of new player accessibility and ease of implementation, this option's very good. The "clean break" nature of it makes it tougher for established players.
Option 2—Boon Currency: In Season 4 there was a convention boon called Xenophobia that allowed someone to irrevocably sacrifice race boons to it in order to gain favored enemy benefits. We might be able to use this model to let players use First Edition boons—perhaps only those of certain types—gain some kind of long-term reward based on the number of boons used (for the sake of discussion, let's say 10 boons maximum). This would allow someone who doesn't want to use her remaining boons in First Edition to still enjoy some payoff in Second Edition. That's certainly nice for an established player, particularly for someone who made it to lots of conventions. It's not great for newer players, and it requires a modest amount of design work.
Option 2 Variant—Expanded Boon Currency: This is really more of a variation on the Boon Currency mechanism, not a new way to make use of first edition boons. Specifically, the Expanded Boon Currency model takes everything above and allows someone to trade in specific second edition boons to qualify for whatever rewards we would present for this system. This variant could also be applied to any of the other Boon Currency options that follow.
Option 3—Rotating Boon Trade-In: This model resembles the Boon Currency option. However, instead of being able to use a pile of boons to purchase a variety of benefits, the first year or two would have a few rotating second edition boons that one could secure by expending any one first edition boon of a similar style—most likely exchanging any race boon for an ancestry boon. This would let us keep any boon conversion limited but interesting. It seems to strike a respectable intersection between established players, newer folks, and staff resources—particularly if boons available in this way were eventually released through other channels that didn't require this exchange.
Option 4—Boons for Benefits: This model also riffs on the Boon Currency option. However, instead of opening access to options that only established players can access, this allows players to expend boons in order to secure temporary/instantaneous benefits that could benefit any number of characters at the table. Conceptually, compare it to the Retail Incentive Program, where rewards focus more on giving everyone a little boost or averting a catastrophic stroke of bad luck. The venture-captain who pitched this variant referenced the benefits of breath of life at the cost of a first edition race boon, calling it "Life for a Life." This is a pretty charming approach because it allows players to carry over some benefits to the new edition, but it does so in a way that nobody's really holding exclusive options over newer participants.
Legacy Boons: During Seasons 9 and 10, we're including some legacy boons on Chronicle sheets. Each of these presents some combination of a fun carry-over benefit and/or a lasting narrative repercussion for having done something important. You've already seen one in a Season 9 scenario, and we expect more in the coming months as appropriate.
When I presented this remark about the legacy boons to our venture-officers, I received a few remarks that the one legacy boon so far seems underwhelming. I can see where that comment's coming from; that particular boon is more a feel-good acknowledgement of selfless action than it is an awe-inspiring boost in personal power. I would keep one key thing in mind: the final Second Edition rules don't exist yet, and they won't exist until after our community's been able to playtest the system. While we're able to design some boons based on the current rules, we're cautious about laying out boons that could prove incompatible or disproportionately powerful, diminished, or even invalidated based on the Core Rulebook's final text. That means that the more rule-oriented components of legacy boons would need to appear in a supplemental document in the final days leading up to Second Edition's launch at Gen Con 2019.
Where We Are Now: As I mentioned above, folks have pitched a lot of variations on these ideas, each of which aims to balance our goals in different ways. Each one—including the No Transfer option—has merits for the short-term and long-term health of the campaign. This topic really brings another dynamic to the fore: cosmetic rewards (e.g. titles and fancy wayfinders) vs. mechanical rewards (anything granting a notable edge, such as free gear, bonus gold, or stat boosts). Just as we're examining the means by which to address first edition boons, so too are we looking to what rewards feel the most worthwhile and the impact of not having access to those rewards—either ever or at a later opportunity—as would be the case for a newer participant.
|
|
I'm one of those players/GMs that has a ton of boons that have piled up in a folder. I'm trying to use as many as I possibly can in the near future, but it seems a waste to have all of that just go away in 2nd edition. So, I really don't like option 1.
I like option 3 the most, I think. I could live with option 2 or its variant. I'm not all that enthused by option 4, to be honest. I earned these boons through playing and GMing. I'd like to be able to use them still for something for my characters in 2nd edition. In particular, I have a lot of race boons that I'm unlikely to use in the current edition. Those were mostly gained for GMing at a convention where I didn't know what race boon I would get, so some of them don't really interest me. It would be great to be able to hold onto them and trade them in for some other option for a character of mine in 2nd edition.
|
|
I have very few race boons (or boons at all), having just earned my first at GenCon 50.
Partially driven by the PFS2 announcement, when it came time for my local con, I opted to GM SF rather than PF because I figured at least SFS boons would have longevity (being the "SF person" kicked in the butt later for reasons unrelated to this discussion...)
Had there been a mechanism determined and announced to trade in race boons for something in PFS2, it would have motivated me to GM PFS scenarios too.
A trade in system would motivate me to try to GM more for the RSP reward.
I'd be grateful for options 2, 2v, or 3.
Option 4, I would also appreciate, but more in appreciating a "Thank you for your service" gesture than "Man, this is great" that 2, 2v, and 3 would represent (for me).
Venture-Captain, Germany—Rhein Main South
|
I would be in favour of either V2 or V2V but my favourite would be V3, as this not only allows to stagger the rewards a bit (not all goodies at the beginning) but it alos is the only option where you can get some "equal value" for your boon (race boon for race boon etc).
Absolutely no fan of option 1 and option 4 would need to provide MASSIVE benefits to be something more than a slap in the face. Most of the time the one time boons are very lackluster and nothing even close to comparable to the permanent boons we are asked to sacrifice.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
John mentioned that any proposal needs to balance a feeling of "fair deal" for 1E players, inclusiveness for 2E newcomers and practicality/maintainability.
Here's what I'd like to see: the Rotating Fallback Boon.
It's a variant of rotating boon trade-in, with the big difference that you can also trade in 2E boons. (Ancestry boons would be comparable to Race boons etc.) For 2E players it's mostly a channel to spend boons they don't like so much, for example when you GM at two cons in the same quarter and get the same boon. For 1E players it's a way to trade their way into 2E boons.
I think this achieves the goals set out:
- 1E players have something to spend their boons on. Because they can sit out a quarter and wait for the next boon, it'll avoid sore feelings like "why should I trade my neat 1E edgelord race boon for a lame fish people boon" - if you're not into fish, wait for the next one to roll around.
- 2E newcomers are also included because these boons are also accessible to them. 1E players will have a head start but that'll gradually diminish.
- Making an extra boon every one or two quarters is maintainable. Because it's broadly accessible it's also a good way to introduce elements into wide circulation that fit the current season metaplot. If we're going to Tien Xia then Tien-speaking ancestry boons could come in handy.
|
What if PFS2 creates a handful or more of different Legacy Boons. Each boon would give you a modest bonus when interacting in certain ways with PFS2 based on what you played in PFS1.
PFS2 Legacy Boon: Of Blakros:
- Lists all Blakros Scenarios
- Gives either a onetime +1 bonus for each scenario played on the list for social interactions vs. Blakros agents, representatives and/or family members.
- or gives a +N bonus, where N = Blakros scenarios played / 2 for all social interactions vs. Blakros agents, representatives, and/or family members.
You could have boons that represent each faction, Torch, Aspis, Lissala, etc.
Additionally, one way to qualify for one of the (or extra) scenarios listed on the boon, would be to attach, irrevocably, 10 boon chronicles of any sort to the legacy boon, once only.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Minneapolis
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One thing I think will be important is that we make sure there is a way for someone in PF2 to be able to earn the rewards given for PF1 boon trade ins. When someone has something cool at the table, I would like to be able to tell the player how they could get something like that.
If the trade ins are just to get a boon that others can get via whatever means within the PF2 campaign, that is great. If it allows them to do something that is impossible to replicate in purely PF2 play or GMing, I think that would be a mistake.
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
What if PFS2 creates a handful or more of different Legacy Boons. Each boon would give you a modest bonus when interacting in certain ways with PFS2 based on what you played in PFS1.
PFS2 Legacy Boon: Of Blakros:
- Lists all Blakros Scenarios
- Gives either a onetime +1 bonus for each scenario played on the list for social interactions vs. Blakros agents, representatives and/or family members.
- or gives a +N bonus, where N = Blakros scenarios played / 2 for all social interactions vs. Blakros agents, representatives, and/or family members.
You could have boons that represent each faction, Torch, Aspis, Lissala, etc.
Additionally, one way to qualify for one of the (or extra) scenarios listed on the boon, would be to attach, irrevocably, 10 boon chronicles of any sort to the legacy boon, once only.
...why?
The players who have played a lot likely got the system mastery (and will likely require it relatively quickly in the new system) that they don't really need anything like this. Meanwhile, something that gives a distinct bonus like this will be largely unavailable to new players... and I am not a fan of that.
If this gave something like a cosmetic boon, that would be fine, but a bonus like this will feel unfair to new players.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
John mentioned that any proposal needs to balance a feeling of "fair deal" for 1E players, inclusiveness for 2E newcomers and practicality/maintainability.
Here's what I'd like to see: the Rotating Fallback Boon.
It's a variant of rotating boon trade-in, with the big difference that you can also trade in 2E boons. (Ancestry boons would be comparable to Race boons etc.) For 2E players it's mostly a channel to spend boons they don't like so much, for example when you GM at two cons in the same quarter and get the same boon. For 1E players it's a way to trade their way into 2E boons.
I think this achieves the goals set out:
- 1E players have something to spend their boons on. Because they can sit out a quarter and wait for the next boon, it'll avoid sore feelings like "why should I trade my neat 1E edgelord race boon for a lame fish people boon" - if you're not into fish, wait for the next one to roll around.
- 2E newcomers are also included because these boons are also accessible to them. 1E players will have a head start but that'll gradually diminish.
- Making an extra boon every one or two quarters is maintainable. Because it's broadly accessible it's also a good way to introduce elements into wide circulation that fit the current season metaplot. If we're going to Tien Xia then Tien-speaking ancestry boons could come in handy.
I second this suggestion
|
|
I will say that I am probably most interested in the rotating trade in (Option 3).
I don't need my PFS1 boon to be converted to something in PFS2 right now. I think if I could just trade it in for a PFS2 GM convention (or RSP boon) boon as they're released, that would be very nice for me.
This wouldn't require early design work because they were going to make those boons anyway for the quarter.
It would require an undefined amount of work on the OPC to design the system/tracking process.
On the variant suggested by Lau, I like it on the surface. I certainly don't oppose it if that's something the OPC would like to do. However, that particular variation could have the side effect of decreasing GM turn out at cons.
E.g. I GMed PFS2 at Con A in Quarter 1 and got PFS2 Boon A that I'm not really keen on. Con B in Quarter 3 is recruiting GMs and Quarter 3 offers PFS2 Boon B that I'd really like. Well, I'd really rather play all Con B than GM, and I can get PFS2 Boon B by trading in my PFS2 Boon A, so I'm not going to volunteer to GM even one session.
I'm not suggesting how much weight that should be given in the discussion, just pointing it out.
It might be overcome by allowing the trade in to be in addition to the boon you get for GMing. I.e. you get two Quarter 3 GM Con boons (one for GMing and one for trade in).
A similar but not the same argument could be made for allowing it at all with PFS1 boons. However, the differences I see are:
1. It will mostly be limited to the early quarters of PFS2, if at all, and then be done with as the sometimes-GMs-at-Cons people burn through their limited supply of PFS1 boons.
2. Those with enough PFS1 GM boons to never need to GM again to gain boons in PFS2 under this system are the sorts of people who like GMing so much that they'll be doing it anyway.
|
|
Reposted from here:
You'll notice a theme here; I'm all for a clean slate. First edition boons should, in my opinion, have no effect on 2nd Edition. That includes, sadly, the very cool Legacy boons that are now floating around in PFS scenarios. As much as I'd like to see that legacy carried over to give the world the illusion of persistence and our characters some illusion of agency, that also creates a situation where content for PF2S is gated behind playing PF1S. Anything that does so should be avoided like unlimited replay. New campaign, clean slate please.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
On the variant suggested by Lau, I like it on the surface. I certainly don't oppose it if that's something the OPC would like to do. However, that particular variation could have the side effect of decreasing GM turn out at cons.
E.g. I GMed PFS2 at Con A in Quarter 1 and got PFS2 Boon A that I'm not really keen on. Con B in Quarter 3 is recruiting GMs and Quarter 3 offers PFS2 Boon B that I'd really like. Well, I'd really rather play all Con B than GM, and I can get PFS2 Boon B by trading in my PFS2 Boon A, so I'm not going to volunteer to GM even one session.
I'm not sure my idea came across clearly;
Q1 has a Con Boon (C1) and a Fallback Boon (F1). You run at Con 1 and get the C1 boon but don't like it, and you also don't like the F1 boon, so you keep your C1 boon.
Q2 has a new con boon C2 and a new fallback boon F2. You happen to like F2 so you need a boon to trade for it, and you already have C1 so you don't "need" to run at Con 2. But you could, and then trade both to get F2 twice, or save one in case next quarter is inconvenient for you but there might be a neat boon then. But sure, maybe you're really content to say "I have just enough boons, I won't GM any extra".
But suppose Q3 has both a Con and a Fallback boon you really like? You're in trouble now because now you need to GM at two cons in Q3 to earn both.
---
Basically, having fallback boons means every boon is potentially desirable, because it can be traded for something shiny later on.
|
|
I will say that I am probably most interested in the rotating trade in (Option 3).
...
1. It will mostly be limited to the early quarters of PFS2, if at all, and then be done with as the sometimes-GMs-at-Cons people burn through their limited supply of PFS1 boons.
2. Those with enough PFS1 GM boons to never need to GM again to gain boons in PFS2 under this system are the sorts of people who like GMing so much that they'll be doing it anyway.I like 3 also, as it feels very friendly without being overwhelming.
I'm not sure I like Number 1 above though. Limiting it to "early" converters will draw some frustration from people who might think it's a way to force people to become early adopters.
I either typoed badly somewhere or you misread. Those weren't suggestions.
Those were predicted behaviors by player-GMs functioning in the Option 3 setting.
|
|
I'm not sure my idea came across clearly;
Q1 has a Con Boon (C1) and a Fallback Boon (F1). You run at Con 1 and get the C1 boon but don't like it, and you also don't like the F1 boon, so you keep your C1 boon.
Q2 has a new con boon C2 and a new fallback boon F2. You happen to like F2 so you need a boon to trade for it, and you already have C1 so you don't "need" to run at Con 2. But you could, and then trade both to get F2 twice, or save one in case next quarter is inconvenient for you but there might be a neat boon then. But sure, maybe you're really content to say "I have just enough boons, I won't GM any extra".
But suppose Q3 has both a Con and a Fallback boon you really like? You're in trouble now because now you need to GM at two cons in Q3 to earn both.
---
Basically, having fallback boons means every boon is potentially desirable, because it can be traded for something shiny later on.
Oh! OK. I understand now.
That's a cool idea.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
creates a situation where content for PF2S is gated behind playing PF1S.
Option 3 (and 2v) doesn't gate the content. It gives you a concurrent, extra pathway. The original pathway is available to everyone no matter their past with PFS1.
I think iOption 3 is the closest to an egalitarian solution without devaluing our GMing efforts during the coming year.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am most concerned with what the OP team has in mind for the boons obtained via the RSP program. I am also curious about the fate of race boons from PFS1. While I don't have any ideas (and honestly am capable of dealing with whatever resolution the OP team has), I do feel duty-bound to stress that there is a big difference between normal PFS1 boons and race boons.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Obviously, others may feel differently, but I'm not worried about the player boons that I recieved by rolling a dice at a Con or during our RSP days.
My hope would be to future-proof the value of the boons (typically race boons) that I earned by prepping and running multiple scenarios in lieu of playing as a player during Cons and my efforts to GM 6-12 local RSP games in a year.
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East
|
I like a mix of things, and think different boons should be handled differently.
Race Boons: These are the most popular boons, but hardest to convert, and the rotating boon trade-in sounds like the best way to handle it.
Meta boons: To me these seem the second most popular (in general. See below), and should be the easiest to convert. These are boons that affect your interaction with the organized play rules (as opposed to the game rules). Extra Hours is my favorite boon and is a great example: it lets you have downtime even when GMing. (Or you could just allow that in general...). Boons that let you transfer things between characters or lower the cost of rebuilds also fall under this. The nice thing for them is they are somewhat rules-independent. These at least, I would like to see continued into second ed use, either with just a statement that they still work or a 1-for-1 trade in.
Downtime boons: affect your downtime but not actual play. (Prosperity, Treasure Map, Factor, Expedition Manager - Extra Hours is both). They could be traded in for other things that affect downtime.
Other boons: This covers all the other boons, that actually affect the mechanics of your character. I suppose these could become boon currency of some sort, but I'd be fine with them not transferring at all. I'm pretty indifferent as to what happens to them.
Of note: At the convention I ran a month ago, Hang in There was by far the most popular boon. People really like not-dying.
|
|
I'm sitting on a lot of unused boons. Again, I'm all for a fresh start...but I would absolutely support Option 4: Boons for Benefits--but only if they were communal for the entire table and only one boon total could be burned (i.e. only one player could contribute their boon). I'd be more than glad to burn an old Boon to grant 1 floating re-roll to the entire table to be used by anyone at the table, 1 floating point of resonance, or other team-based benefits that don't skew the game too much in the players' favor.
|
|
I personally think everything should be reset and NO TRANSFERS. I see people like to "SIT" on their boons and try to wait for something. They shouldn't be allowed to transfer it over. If they can't use it anymore then that is their fault because they CHOSE not to use it. This may sound harsh but why should they be able to transfer it to a new system because they wanted to hold on to it? Use the boons or give it to someone who will. I have seen people who get greedy with the boons and have so many of them then expect so much. Then people like me who barely can get anything not be able to trade. I have seen it all over the forums. So now they can bring it to a new system and GET more of an advantage. Or people take advantage and then give fake boons away and sell legit boons on ebay.I think EVERYONE should start the same way in 2nd edition.
Pathfinder 2nd Edition is A NEW SYSTEM, so therefore nothing should convert over, in any sense. It should all start over as if it were a brand new game. Pathfinder 1st edition and 2nd Edition should be kept completely separate from each other.
|
Venture-Captain, Netherlands
|
I second this suggestionJohn mentioned that any proposal needs to balance a feeling of "fair deal" for 1E players, inclusiveness for 2E newcomers and practicality/maintainability.
Here's what I'd like to see: the Rotating Fallback Boon.
It's a variant of rotating boon trade-in, with the big difference that you can also trade in 2E boons. (Ancestry boons would be comparable to Race boons etc.) For 2E players it's mostly a channel to spend boons they don't like so much, for example when you GM at two cons in the same quarter and get the same boon. For 1E players it's a way to trade their way into 2E boons.
I think this achieves the goals set out:
- 1E players have something to spend their boons on. Because they can sit out a quarter and wait for the next boon, it'll avoid sore feelings like "why should I trade my neat 1E edgelord race boon for a lame fish people boon" - if you're not into fish, wait for the next one to roll around.
- 2E newcomers are also included because these boons are also accessible to them. 1E players will have a head start but that'll gradually diminish.
- Making an extra boon every one or two quarters is maintainable. Because it's broadly accessible it's also a good way to introduce elements into wide circulation that fit the current season metaplot. If we're going to Tien Xia then Tien-speaking ancestry boons could come in handy.
Thirded. I think this is a very elegant way to handle it. It gives people a choice, and wont discourage new GMs
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Rhein Main South
|
John mentioned that any proposal needs to balance a feeling of "fair deal" for 1E players, inclusiveness for 2E newcomers and practicality/maintainability.
Here's what I'd like to see: the Rotating Fallback Boon.
It's a variant of rotating boon trade-in, with the big difference that you can also trade in 2E boons. (Ancestry boons would be comparable to Race boons etc.) For 2E players it's mostly a channel to spend boons they don't like so much, for example when you GM at two cons in the same quarter and get the same boon. For 1E players it's a way to trade their way into 2E boons.
I think this achieves the goals set out:
1E players have something to spend their boons on. Because they can sit out a quarter and wait for the next boon, it'll avoid sore feelings like "why should I trade my neat 1E edgelord race boon for a lame fish people boon" - if you're not into fish, wait for the next one to roll around.
2E newcomers are also included because these boons are also accessible to them. 1E players will have a head start but that'll gradually diminish.
Making an extra boon every one or two quarters is maintainable. Because it's broadly accessible it's also a good way to introduce elements into wide circulation that fit the current season metaplot. If we're going to Tien Xia then Tien-speaking ancestry boons could come in handy.
Also agree fully to that suggestion.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I personally think everything should be reset and NO TRANSFERS. I see people like to "SIT" on their boons and try to wait for something. They shouldn't be allowed to transfer it over. If they can't use it anymore then that is their fault because they CHOSE not to use it. This may sound harsh but why should they be able to transfer it to a new system because they wanted to hold on to it? Use the boons or give it to someone who will. I have seen people who get greedy with the boons and have so many of them then expect so much. Then people like me who barely can get anything not be able to trade. I have seen it all over the forums. So now they can bring it to a new system and GET more of an advantage. Or people take advantage and then give fake boons away and sell legit boons on ebay.I think EVERYONE should start the same way in 2nd edition.
Oh man. Those are some sour grapes. I guess you're frustrated because you see other people with nice boons while you have trouble getting any. That's annoying, but what you're saying here isn't really fair. You're accusing people who have boons of being greedy and of selling fake boons.
But let's look back at why they have boons in the first place. Because they did something important for the community: GMing.
GMing at conventions, which is really a heavier investment than doing it at your own kitchen table. You have to travel, usually have only a short few days between getting the scenario and running, probably don't get to play the scenario before you run it, have to make long hours, have little influence about what strangers show up at your table. It's fun, but it's also hard work. When you get a boon for it, you've really earned it.
Or GMing at a public location which has Regional Support Program attached to it. (If yours doesn't, you should talk with your VO about getting it.) After running 12 tables you earn a race boon for yourself - can't trade it, so you can't say people are greedy for sitting on it. When you get this boon, you've really earned it.
And what does it mean to "sit on a boon"? It means you GM too much to be able to play with all the stuff you gain as a reward. In other words, you're giving a lot to your community. You can have a couple of nice boons that you're excited to use, but don't get much chance to because you're always GMing. I think it's not fair to accuse those people of greed because they're not giving their well-earned rewards away.
Pathfinder 2nd Edition is A NEW SYSTEM, so therefore nothing should convert over, in any sense. It should all start over as if it were a brand new game. Pathfinder 1st edition and 2nd Edition should be kept completely separate from each other.
The thing is, it's a new system, not a new community. We're not going to fire all the GMs and ban all the players and start over with entirely new people. The work everyone put into the community by making sure games take place and have GMs in 1E is absolutely important to 2E. 2E will be fun and succesful only if 1E thrives until the end.
|
|
You're accusing people who have boons of being greedy and of selling fake boons.
I am saying this cause this actually happen to me. Someone gave me a fake boon. Then the one I traded, they covered up the text that showed I traded it then turn around and sold it on eBay. This was a big issue that was escalated up the chain. So I had to get the original boon I traded back. So yes I can accuse people of this.
But let's look back at why they have boons in the first place. Because they did something important for the community: GMing.
So someone like me that can't go to all of these conventions and GM, I don't get to get those boons. If I could get some of these boons then I would. When I don't have money to travel, to a lot of these other conventions, then I get screwed as I can't obtain these boons. I even tried trading for a boon that someone wanted, then he stated well I will wait, because it will be come an easy to find boon within the RSP. So he decided not to trade. REALLY. This guy had 5 times the amount of boons I had. Don't post that you have that you want that boon then pull that. I already have an issue with the boons and how they are given out. IT IS AN UNFAIR SYSTEM. It penalizes people that are unable to get to half of these conventions. I can only make it to my local conventions. Which most of them are not even that big, so support is limited. I get a few of the Race Boons and the RSP boons. Outside of that I don't even get a chance for the other boons. I do GM when I can to get what boons I can get. Then I have to get my tables off. Like I want an Aasimar or tiefling but if my tables don't go off then I don't get the boon.
Most of the boons I CAN GET no one will trade for. I see people on the forums and what they have for trade and instead of working with people that don't have a chance and those people don't get to experience any of these cool boons.
I am justified in what I said. As I have PERSONAL dealings with everything I said.
Now back to the topic at hand. 1st edition and 2nd edition should be kept separate. They are a separate game with different rules mechanics, etc. DON'T MIX the 2. Don't mix 1 thing then say I can't mix that. Like converting characters. It should be an ALL or northing situation. Don't pick an choose.
|
|
I think the above exchange indicates why this is a very tricky topic. A couple of observations...
1) Race boons seem to be the key issue. Those are generally valued much more than any other sort of boon.
2) There does seem to be a division between the "haves" and "have nots" in terms of race boons. I'm not saying this is a good or bad thing, just noting its existence.
3) I personally do feel somewhat frustrated at the extreme difficulty of getting race boons outside of going to cons. To some degree, I decided to go to GenCon this year (before PF2e was announced) with the hope of getting one or two interesting race boons. I am still going but I am a little bummed that any race boon that I might get will be potentially less useful as PFS1 draws to a close.
In terms of preferences for how PFS2 develops ...
1) I think there should be some sort of limited boon currency/trade system. Folks who have demonstrated a commitment to PFS1 should have that commitment recognized but it should be limited so that the gap between PFS1 "migrants" and new PFS2 players should not be too great.
2) There should be more recognition of GMing and otherwise supporting non-con PFS play. That's the bread and butter of PFS, but in terms of boons it appears to be overlooked in favor of con support. This will help limit the "haves"/"have not" gap in PFS2. (OK, I lied above, I do think this is a gap is a bad thing.)
|
Venture-Captain, Minnesota
|
I am saying this cause this actually happen to me. Someone gave me a fake boon. Then the one I traded, they covered up the text that showed I traded it then turn around and sold it on eBay. This was a big issue that was escalated up the chain. So I had to get the original boon I traded back. So yes I can accuse people of this.
You're accusing people who have boons of being greedy and of selling fake boons.
I am sorry this happened to you, Michael. The boon scammer was banned, though keeps showing up under alternate identities in the boon trading thread.
Note to others: Don’t trade boons with any Paizo Alias that has no GM Stars and no PFS or SFS organized play characters. It’s dangerous.
May I ask what boon you were trading for when this happened to you?
Hmm
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with Lau: that's a case of sour grapes.
So yes I can accuse people of [being greedy and selling fake boons].
No, you can accuse a person of this not all people with boons. You present it as though the majority of the system is based on people scamming.
I am justified in what I said.
Your anecdotal experience does not justify your blanket statements. It only justifies you in relaying your personal bad experience (and for what it's worth, I sympathize with you that you experienced that).
If they can't use it anymore then that is their fault because they CHOSE not to use it.
That's not entirely fair, either. I earned my first race boon 7 months ago. I like Mediums. I wanted to build a Medium with it, but I saw Blood of the Ancients coming in May 2018. I hoped that might have some nice stuff for Mediums, so I was waiting until it was released and sanctioned, maybe by November 2018 if current trends hold. So in that sense, yes, I "sat" on my boon. But while I was sitting on it, Paizo went and announced PF2/PFS2. Even if I made him right this moment, I would get maybe 12 games out of him before PFS1 withered in my area.
So I would appreciate the option to recoup something in exchange for my reward for A) flying to GenCon and B) running 8 scenarios, including 2 interactive specials, 1 cold scenario, and 1 cold SFS special on 6 hours sleep per night and cold sack meals while, based on the feed back from the people at my table, providing 48 different players with a good time.
I would like an Aasimar to try, having joined well after they went away, but with the amount of free time I have, I would finish my RSP card just as PFS1 began to wither in my area. I would not have "sat" on it. I would have received it for work done over the prior year just in time for it to be devalued.
So, I can either say, as some have, "I'm not GMing again until PFS2 is out," or I can lobby to recoup something for my effort.
If I was a new PFS player who just tried his hand at GMing at some Con in June of 2019, I think that theoretical person would really appreciate some sort of trade-in option.
So, while there are bad apples in the barrel, I don't think we need to toss out the whole barrel of apples.
|
|
This will help limit the "haves"/"have not" gap in PFS2. (OK, I lied above, I do think this is a gap is a bad thing.)
Here is a philosophical difference.
Doing something extra and receiving something cosmetic (a race boon) as a thank you is not the same as doing something extra and being given more power within the system (e.g. a boon that granted/added on to any character a scaling animal companion so that you could create a paladin with all the class features plus a fully leveled lion animal companion).
So the fact that I "have" a vanara race boon and Joe Smith "has not" a vanara race boon is not a disparity that matters if the opportunity to earn that race boon is available to both of us.
Now, Joe Smith may not have the leisure time or travel money to go to a Con to GM and earn that vanara race boon where I do, but that is not a disparity that Paizo needs to control for. Both of us can still play PFS.
Furthermore, while I am sure there exist people who cannot afford Internet access let alone traveling to Cons who play PFS, for the majority of us, Internet is available and with a sanctioned Online Region that runs PbP Cons, the vast majority of people have access to GM boons.
If we were talking about "volunteer to win" scenarios where the rewards gave you extreme advantage (like the hypothetical animal companion boon), then there might be some discussion to be had.
|
|
This will help limit the "haves"/"have not" gap in PFS2. (OK, I lied above, I do think this is a gap is a bad thing.)Here is a philosophical difference.
Doing something extra and receiving something cosmetic (a race boon) as a thank you is not the same as doing something extra and being given more power within the system (e.g. a boon that granted/added on to any character a scaling animal companion so that you could create a paladin with all the class features plus a fully leveled lion animal companion).
So the fact that I "have" a vanara race boon and Joe Smith "has not" a vanara race boon is not a disparity that matters if the opportunity to earn that race boon is available to both of us.
Now, Joe Smith may not have the leisure time or travel money to go to a Con to GM and earn that vanara race boon where I do, but that is not a disparity that Paizo needs to control for. Both of us can still play PFS.
Furthermore, while I am sure there exist people who cannot afford Internet access let alone traveling to Cons who play PFS, for the majority of us, Internet is available and with a sanctioned Online Region that runs PbP Cons, the vast majority of people have access to GM boons.
If we were talking about "volunteer to win" scenarios where the rewards gave you extreme advantage (like the hypothetical animal companion boon), then there might be some discussion to be had.
I think you make some useful points here, but I still feel very strongly that non-con (whether it's physical or online cons) GMing and other support for PFS should be rewarded similarly to con GMing and support work.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My primary concern is that con GMing/support is far more heavily incentivized than non-con GMing/support. To use my experience as an anecdotal example. I've GMed twice at a Con, and from that I've earned a race boon and another lesser boon. I've earned nothing similar from the 31 non-con sessions that I've GMed. The RSP is starting to close the gap, but it just started, and it's 12 sessions to earn a race boon.
To my mind, cons and non-play are both equally important parts of Organized Play and both should be supported in a similar manner.
|
|
I am saying this cause this actually happen to me. Someone gave me a fake boon. Then the one I traded, they covered up the text that showed I traded it then turn around and sold it on eBay. This was a big issue that was escalated up the chain. So I had to get the original boon I traded back. So yes I can accuse people of this.
You're accusing people who have boons of being greedy and of selling fake boons.
I am sorry this happened to you, Michael. The boon scammer was banned, though keeps showing up under alternate identities in the boon trading thread.
Note to others: Don’t trade boons with any Paizo Alias that has no GM Stars and no PFS or SFS organized play characters. It’s dangerous.
May I ask what boon you were trading for when this happened to you?
Hmm
I traded my Aquatic Elf for a Dhampir.
It was the first time I ever traded on the forums. So that is my perception of the boon trading. SO that is my perception of the boon trading list. I have backed way off from trading as I am afraid it will happen again.
|
|
I agree with Lau: that's a case of sour grapes.
So yes I can accuse people of [being greedy and selling fake boons].No, you can accuse a person of this not all people with boons. You present it as though the majority of the system is based on people scamming.
I am justified in what I said.Your anecdotal experience does not justify your blanket statements. It only justifies you in relaying your personal bad experience (and for what it's worth, I sympathize with you that you experienced that).
If they can't use it anymore then that is their fault because they CHOSE not to use it.That's not entirely fair, either. I earned my first race boon 7 months ago. I like Mediums. I wanted to build a Medium with it, but I saw Blood of the Ancients coming in May 2018. I hoped that might have some nice stuff for Mediums, so I was waiting until it was released and sanctioned, maybe by November 2018 if current trends hold. So in that sense, yes, I "sat" on my boon. But while I was sitting on it, Paizo went and announced PF2/PFS2. Even if I made him right this moment, I would get maybe 12 games out of him before PFS1 withered in my area.
So I would appreciate the option to recoup something in exchange for my reward for A) flying to GenCon and B) running 8 scenarios, including 2 interactive specials, 1 cold scenario, and 1 cold SFS special on 6 hours sleep per night and cold sack meals while, based on the feed back from the people at my table, providing 48 different players with a good time.
I would like an Aasimar to try, having joined well after they went away, but with the amount of free time I have, I would finish my RSP card just as PFS1 began to wither in my area. I would not have "sat" on it. I would have received it for work done over the prior year just in time for it to be devalued.
So, I can either say, as some have, "I'm not GMing again until PFS2 is out," or I can lobby to recoup something for...
I am still standing by they are 2 separate systems. Keep them separate in ALL MANNERS. Why should someone get an advantage over someone else, in 2nd edition, because they played more of 1st edition or has the ability to travel more?
So I am guessing you have already played ALL scenarios up till now? See I have the issue of F1st edition dominating and not sure how well 2nd edition will be received. I have several people that already don't like 2nd edition because of how the developers release the previews. They only show half of things if that and make things more confusing. So we are going to be supporting 1st edition FOR a long time. I have only been playing since 2014, already played over 75% of the scenarios, have very little for boons. Starfinder hasn't taken off, and I can't get any of those boons other then the RSP.
The whole scamming thing, like I mentioned in the quote above. It happen the first time and that is my perception of the boon trading forum. Until, if I can, I get a boon traded properly I will continue to see it as such. As that is my only experience with it.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So I am guessing you have already played ALL scenarios up till now?
No, I haven't. If I had, I wouldn't care what happened to my boons. I've had a year and a half of once a month live PFS and about a year of Flaxseed PbP. I've barely started enjoying PFS1, and now it's going to dry up in my local setting. They have played all the scenarios up until now. They are going to move on to PFS2, and I would like my hard earned and very few, very precious GM race boons to convert into something equally cosmetic.
I believe Lau said it above: it's a new (not even new, just revised) rule system, not a new community. My recent GMing effort for the PFS1 community shouldn't be invalidated by the rules getting a revision.
You keep saying advantage. With the exception of the Aasimar-era (that I missed entirely) and some auction boons, nothing grants an advantage over another player.
1. My humanoid race granting me +2/+2/-2 and being an anthropomorphic monkey is not an advantage over anyone else's always available humanoid race granting them +2/+2/-2.
2. If you cannot travel for whatever reason, you can GM on PbP or other online sanction conventions, so the opportunity is equal to everyone.
So I argue that there is no advantage. If the trade-in is timed with the GM convention boon quarters, then it's practically seamless as all the Boon Xs are appearing at the same time.
|
|
So I am guessing you have already played ALL scenarios up till now?No, I haven't. If I had, I wouldn't care what happened to my boons. I've had a year and a half of once a month live PFS and about a year of Flaxseed PbP. I've barely started enjoying PFS1, and now it's going to dry up in my local setting. They have played all the scenarios up until now. They are going to move on to PFS2, and I would like my hard earned and very few, very precious GM race boons to convert into something equally cosmetic.
I believe Lau said it above: it's a new (not even new, just revised) rule system, not a new community. My recent GMing effort for the PFS1 community shouldn't be invalidated by the rules getting a revision.
You keep saying advantage. With the exception of the Aasimar-era (that I missed entirely) and some auction boons, nothing grants an advantage over another player.
1. My humanoid race granting me +2/+2/-2 and being an anthropomorphic monkey is not an advantage over anyone else's always available humanoid race granting them +2/+2/-2.
2. If you cannot travel for whatever reason, you can GM on PbP or other online sanction conventions, so the opportunity is equal to everyone.So I argue that there is no advantage. If the trade-in is timed with the GM convention boon quarters, then it's practically seamless as all the Boon Xs are appearing at the same time.
It is an advantage. They have access to a boon some can't get because they played 1st edition. So if someone who plays first edition doesn't get boons or someone who never played 1st edition doesn't have a chance right out the gate. Especially if that boon can only be obtained by trading in 1st edition boons. So they have an advantage that others can't get or have to figure a way to get 1st edition boons to obtain the second boon.
1. The fact that you can play something out of the normal isn't per se an advantage, but it an unfair bonus. Again to what I just posted earlier in this comment. You are getting rewarded in Game B because you played Game A. Which don't even have the same character build or rules.
2. If I don't have time for PbP, then that doesn't help.
Again I am for keeping 1st edition COMPLETELY SEPARATE from 2nd Edition. If I cannot convert my characters, then I should not be able to transfer between the 2. Now if 2nd edition was just taking 1st edition making changes but was still the same system, in terms of mechanics then sure. 2nd edition so far seems to BE ALMOST a new game. New mechanics new char action options. Things that are in 1st and 2nd edition seem to be different.
That is my opinion and my vote.
|
|
While it is clear that you dislike the concept of GMs getting boons at Cons to begin with, both Option 2v and Option 3 allow new PFS2-only players and PFS1-converts to be on the same page: both groups of people can access the same boons at the same time. The options merely give the PFS1-converts a second pathway to the boon reflecting that they had already performed the first pathway (GMing at a Con or RSP).
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A comment on the idea that these campaigns are "completely separate."
This is not a situation of a new campaign being published beside PFS, like SFS was. Those were two separate campaigns: Fantasy vs. Futuristic Sci-Fantasy. The implementation on SFS had no effect on PFS.
It is not like Paizo is publishing a Wild West campaign next to PFS and SFS.
They have chosen (and I do understand why) to revise the rule set for the PFS campaign to PF2 and stop production of scenarios with the PF1 rule set. As a result, they are not separate. They are actually quite linked: same genre, same setting, same NPCs, continuation of stories from the PF1 era, same players, same GMs (they hope to gain more new players than they lose with this, obviously, but that doesn't obviate the solid player base and infrastructure they built with PFS using the PF1 rule set).
|
|
While it is clear that you dislike the concept of GMs getting boons at Cons to begin with, both Option 2v and Option 3 allow new PFS2-only players and PFS1-converts to be on the same page: both groups of people can access the same boons at the same time. The options merely give the PFS1-converts a second pathway to the boon reflecting that they had already performed the first pathway (GMing at a Con or RSP).
You completely misread me on this. I don't have a problem with that. I have a problem with some of the availability of the boons. I see people with 20+ boons. I can barely get 2-3.
A comment on the idea that these campaigns are "completely separate."
This is not a situation of a new campaign being published beside PFS, like SFS was. Those were two separate campaigns: Fantasy vs. Futuristic Sci-Fantasy. The implementation on SFS had no effect on PFS.
It is not like Paizo is publishing a Wild West campaign next to PFS and SFS.
They have chosen (and I do understand why) to revise the rule set for the PFS campaign to PF2 and stop production of scenarios with the PF1 rule set. As a result, they are not separate. They are actually quite linked: same genre, same setting, same NPCs, continuation of stories from the PF1 era, same players, same GMs (they hope to gain more new players than they lose with this, obviously, but that doesn't obviate the solid player base and infrastructure they built with PFS using the PF1 rule set).
IT IS A SEPARATE SYSTEM. They are changing the way it is played. Just because they are linked in genre setting etc. does not make it the same game. They have COMPLETELY different mechanics.
I am ALL for an updated system. 1st edition has become bloated like no other. If I cannot convert my character over, I should not be able to convert boons. Again it should be an ALL or nothing. They don't even have RACES. Ancestry may not even have the same mechanics as 1st edition. So therefore they shouldn't be allowed. Don't allow only 1/10 things. Allow 10/10 or 0/10.
|
|
I'm not trying to change your mind. I'm trying to debunk what I see as fallacies for the sake of the audience.
Honestly, from what I've seen of the playtest material so far, the rules are more the same than different. However, even if the rules changed to a d6 system with a random deck of available options, I'd be arguing that they're not completely separate.
Here's a cute little story:
I was eating a steak (PFS). A quarter of the way through my meal, the waiter offered me some tastey cococut shrip (SFS), and I purchased that to enjoy with my steak. Half way through my steak, the waiter collected my knife and fork (PF1). He informed me that I was welcome to continue eating my steak with my hands, but if I wanted a knife and fork, I would need to pay the price of the original steak to get the updated silverware (PF2).
|
|
There are no FALLACIES with what I am saying. You haven't found any fallacies, because there aren't any. THEY ARE OPINIONS. It is a matter of perception. You see what you want. I see what I want. More people I have talked to agree with my view on them being separate and boons are not transferable between editions. I have talked to plenty of people who see it one way or the other.
Your story is weak at its best. Here is a better one
You are eating Rice (Overall Setting ) with chopsticks(1st edition ruleset). You are brought Chicken (Starfinder). But you still want to eat the rice with a fork (2nd edition ruleset). This is still doesn't help your case. It just merely shows that the campaign can still be the same. But the rule sets CHANGE and thus change the very way the game, or in the case how the food is eaten, functions. I could take the Pathfinder setting and apply any system I want to it. Doesn't mean it will be the same. There is a change, so therefore it is different.
1st Edition != 2nd Edition. It is that Simple. If you think they are the same, then I think you are in for a surprise. If they are the same then I should be able to play my Fighter in 1st edition in 2nd edition with no problem. If I cannot do a 100% conversion and play it the same way, then they are not the same.
I have to buy a new book and learn a new set of rules, just to play. Some of the feats don't even function the same. Again they have different rule sets so therefore they are different. If we are doing a complete reboot of the system, then leave EVERYTHING ASSOCIATED with 1st edition out.
You earned those boons while playing 1st edition. So therefore they should ONLY be used during 1st edition. From what I have seen, they are not the same. If you allow the Boons, then why not allow feats, characters?
Do you not understand All or Nothing? You seem to skip over that. Don't pick and choose. They are starting fresh for a reason. So START COMPLETELY FRESH. So how bout you leave this alone. I though you would have gotten that earlier. You have your opinions I have mine.