First Edition Replay when Second Edition Launches

[Wei Ji the Learner]

Nosig 'got' where I was going with the concern about 'character-locking' -- I suffer from altitis, and it'd be torture to only be allowed to play one character for a year.

It's part of what burnt me out on a different organized play campaign, because every time I sat down at a table, everyone would ask if I was bringing 'Character A' because they'd had interactions with them, and they were uncomfortable playing with 'Character B' because of their background.

And in a social environment, it can be hard to say 'no' sometimes.

A GM-awarded series of replays?

This sounds like a good possibility that hadn't been raised, and is reminiscent of a few other boons floating around out there that do something along the lines.

Perhaps it can be a separate entry on an Improved Expanded Narrative Boon?

With the first 'x' boxes (with x being number of GM stars) being for GM use, and the second set being for player use?

[nosig]

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

Nosig 'got' where I was going with the concern about 'character-locking' -- I suffer from altitis, and it'd be torture to only be allowed to play one character for a year.

It's part of what burnt me out on a different organized play campaign, because every time I sat down at a table, everyone would ask if I was bringing 'Character A' because they'd had interactions with them, and they were uncomfortable playing with 'Character B' because of their background.

And in a social environment, it can be hard to say 'no' sometimes.

A GM-awarded series of replays?

This sounds like a good possibility that hadn't been raised, and is reminiscent of a few other boons floating around out there that do something along the lines.

Perhaps it can be a separate entry on an Improved Expanded Narrative Boon?

With the first 'x' boxes (with x being number of GM stars) being for GM use, and the second set being for player use?

Two nice ideas from Alex and Wei Ji - or good idea from Alex and nice expansion from Wei Ji. I like the "Improved Expanded Narrative Boon" idea with boxes to let a buddy replay with you. That would let my wife and I replay some of the really old ones we don't remember...

[Wei Ji the Learner]

They wouldn't necessarily need to be at the same time.

One of the things in a group I play with that has come up is that our 'scenarios played' almost chart 'opposite' each other (until recent seasons).

So I have a huge pile of things I can play, but everyone else already played them, and vice-versa for some of the mid-seasons.

And the ultimate goal is 'table-firing' despite 'geek sudoku', imo, but not at the point of 'Okay, Stolen Heir again?'

[MrBear]

nosig wrote:

And it appears that other posters aren't understanding our view on this.

Spoiler Warning: People can disagree with your opinion while understanding it.

Also, you're entirely against replay, a flag you're waving around proudly. I understand the potential compositional difficulties entailed but I think it doesn't much matter, especially since many of your complaints are a bigger problem without replay.

Most folks who are in the positron of having too much played have some level of regular group. If they didn't, they wouldn't have so many competed scenarios. These groups can easily coordinate if need be.

Your concern about the all barbarian table shouldn't be weighed against a normal table. It needs to be weighed against a table that didn't fire because they didn't have enough warm bodies to play. This is an attempt at letting more people sit down at the table, and that lets it happen. You might not have the ability to pick and choose whichever character but that's not what you're arguing. You're arguing against replay altogether yet claiming that this particular replay is too restrictive.

And let's say you sit down with three other strangers. If this strangers aren't locked out of the adventure they can play whatever they like. if they are, they weren't playing otherwise.

You're pretty much pointing a finger saying "This isn't perfect so we should have nothing." That's not constructive in the least.

[Terminalmancer]

Well, nosig at least is willing to consider other options besides not expanding replay at all. I suspect there's no need to specifically take him on in your quest for more replays. What sorts of options would you be interested in seeing, Bear?

==================

The separate checkboxes idea is an interesting one. I was thinking of it more as a batched thing, like getting two other people at once to reduce favoritism (so you're not always spending your replay on the same one other person) but I could be convinced otherwise.

[Wei Ji the Learner]

If one 'batches' the thing, then it essentially ensures a level of 'favoritism' because who wants to play with people they don't care for, or alternatively, people they haven't met before and they don't know anything about?

By separating them, it keeps the GM's work as being valid for themselves, and the separate checkboxes as a 'we need a table fire, break the glass'.

[nosig]

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

They wouldn't necessarily need to be at the same time.

One of the things in a group I play with that has come up is that our 'scenarios played' almost chart 'opposite' each other (until recent seasons).

So I have a huge pile of things I can play, but everyone else already played them, and vice-versa for some of the mid-seasons.

And the ultimate goal is 'table-firing' despite 'geek sudoku', imo, but not at the point of 'Okay, Stolen Heir again?'

yeah, that's one of the reasons I would like some type of "release schedule" if we get some form of Replay. With the same (limited number) of scenarios released for replay, every location world wide would be replaying basically the same things. That way, when we later get together with strangers, our list of "Scenarios Replayed" will pretty much match their list. And our list of scenarios still available to replay will sort of match up. At least they are more likely to... IMHO

[Terminalmancer]

Well, you did (accidentally?) show me that I was doing some fuzzy thinking, and had assumed that the active GM would always use a star on a GM attempt as part of this. (Why I thought that, I have no idea. I guess because I was thinking of GMs vs. players.) Assuming they do what normal people do and use the replay on a playthrough, that makes the batching a little more complicated to balance.

Your idea of separate checkboxes does solve that particular problem.

What about specifics? If we kept the same general progression of scenarios GMed vs. stars recharged as the current expanded narrative, how many "other player replays" should be given out? (I'm still thinking 2 replay boxes per star, myself. Encourage people to be generous.)

Another Thought
Would it be helpful to change up the expanded narrative progression itself? Right now a full 5 star recharge is 19 scenarios GMed. Reducing it by one game per star (for example) would get the "table cost" of five replays down to 14. If someone's GMing 14 tables a year I personally don't have any problem giving them 5 replays for it. And with PFS2 coming up we'll probably be seeing fewer tables of PFS1 starting August 2019, so the expanded narrative boon will rapidly become more difficult to complete.

Are there other numbers or table costs you'd propose for Expanded Narrative?

[Wei Ji the Learner]

I'd give Specials a 'double' or even 'triple' checkbox benefit since they are harder to come by in most circumstances -- just like modules -- and are typically more difficult to prepare.

To prevent dozens of MoFF/ES1 'speed runs', I'd spitball and say no more than a quarter can be of a given scenario/module?

Beyond that... other ideas are welcome!

[Terminalmancer]

Some of the other similar things (like the RSP) allow multiple boxes to be checked for longer adventures. Should we just steal that idea, you think? (And add multi-table specials to it?)

Regarding speed runs: yeah, that's a problem. Maybe we should only be able to fill out the new-and-hopefully-improved Expanded Narrative with unique tables. Sure, you can speed run MoFF, ES1, and Heroes for Highdelve, but that's 3 tables out of however many you actually need.

[MrBear]

One issue I see with expanding the earned replays is that it's expanding the paperwork requisite. We want to play games, not file taxes. I honestly prefer something global for the ease of use and tracking simplicity. A full reset, an unlocked character, or even (my least favorite) releasing seasons a second time creates an easy and simple to follow system. Adding in additional paperwork on top of characters that killed a tree each already seems unnecessary.

[nosig]

MrBear wrote:

nosig wrote:

And it appears that other posters aren't understanding our view on this.

Spoiler Warning: People can disagree with your opinion while understanding it.

Also, you're entirely against replay, a flag you're waving around proudly. I understand the potential compositional difficulties entailed but I think it doesn't much matter, especially since many of your complaints are a bigger problem without replay.

Most folks who are in the positron of having too much played have some level of regular group. If they didn't, they wouldn't have so many competed scenarios. These groups can easily coordinate if need be.

Your concern about the all barbarian table shouldn't be weighed against a normal table. It needs to be weighed against a table that didn't fire because they didn't have enough warm bodies to play. This is an attempt at letting more people sit down at the table, and that lets it happen. You might not have the ability to pick and choose whichever character but that's not what you're arguing. You're arguing against replay altogether yet claiming that this particular replay is too restrictive.

And let's say you sit down with three other strangers. If this strangers aren't locked out of the adventure they can play whatever they like. if they are, they weren't playing otherwise.

You're pretty much pointing a finger saying "This isn't perfect so we should have nothing." That's not constructive in the least.

Did I offend you in some way? If so, I am sorry, I did not intend to.

"Spoiler Warning: People can disagree with your opinion while understanding it." This is something I am well aware of. I know this - I could even say "I've got the T-shirt..." I was under the impression (though I could easily be wrong on this) that I had miss-led Alex earlier... which is why my post starts with the line; "Sorry Alex, I appear to have misled you." It appeared to me that he thought I was very much in favor of a massive expansion of Replay options. I got this from his post "I disagree with you on how much replay the campaign needs, Nosig, but I agree with you on the favored character idea. I don't think it's a good one....We seem to be more comfortable here gating replay by GMing. What options could we come up with that could provide player replays to a broader group with some limit or possibly GM discretion?" So I wanted to explain that I was NOT very much in favor of a massive expansion of Replay options.

"Also, you're entirely against replay, a flag you're waving around proudly. " ah... sorry? I did state that "... BNW (and others) has persuaded me that SOME form of Expanded Replay MIGHT be required if PFS1e will continue to be available...". This is something that I am somewhat embarrassed to admit. I hate having to admit that BNW might be right... (shrugs) but it looks like he is on this point. And my original stance in this thread was not sustainable for the Campaign. In other works, I was wrong, and BNW was right.

And after thinking about how to allow some sort of Replay into the Campaign - and keeping it as simple and as similar to the "feel" of the existing Campaign I suggested the Re-Number/Re-Issue suggestion. And put it out here so other people smarter than me could improve it - and point out it's failings...

maybe I should just delete this post, as continuing it is just depressing me and wasting everyones time.

so again - sorry if I offended. It was not my intention. I guess I should have just sent Alex a PM and not posted to the thread at all...

[Terminalmancer]

I'm pretty sure I read you correctly, nosig, and I tried to clear that up earlier. It's probably just me being unclear, not you.

In any event, it doesn't bother me any. We're just here having a rational discussion about what we'd like and what we think might work and that's good enough for me. I've already said my bit to MrBear on that note. Things have calmed down a bit, which is nice, and it'd be great if we could keep it that way! At least for a little while.

Bear is suggesting that something simpler might be more to his taste. I don't disagree; I was proposing the Expanded Narrative-based approach as one that might garner more support from the old guard. One advantage of Expanded Narrative is that it doesn't actually increase the paperwork... it just makes use of paperwork we already have.

But less paperwork would be nice. Nosig's idea of a phased reset is appealing too and although it's not your favorite option, MrBear, you and nosig might be closer than you think.

Looking at your idea, nosig, what would you think if the original batch of games opened up was, say, seasons 0-3? (To be reset only once PFS2 has begun, of course.) That's more content at once than you are maybe looking for, but it also puts off the reset of Season 4.

[nosig]

Alex Wreschnig wrote:

I'm pretty sure I read you correctly, nosig, and I tried to clear that up earlier. It's probably just me being unclear, not you.

In any event, it doesn't bother me any. We're just here having a rational discussion about what we'd like and what we think might work and that's good enough for me. I've already said my bit to MrBear on that note. Things have calmed down a bit, which is nice, and it'd be great if we could keep it that way! At least for a little while.

Bear is suggesting that something simpler might be more to his taste. I don't disagree; I was proposing the Expanded Narrative-based approach as one that might garner more support from the old guard. One advantage of Expanded Narrative is that it doesn't actually increase the paperwork... it just makes use of paperwork we already have.

But less paperwork would be nice. Nosig's idea of a phased reset is appealing too and although it's not your favorite option, MrBear, you and nosig might be closer than you think.

Looking at your idea, nosig, what would you think if the original batch of games opened up was, say, seasons 0-3? (To be reset only once PFS2 has begun, of course.) That's more content at once than you are maybe looking for, but it also puts off the reset of Season 4.

I actually don't care if the original batch of games opened up was several seasons - the only reason I suggested making the re-issues done by season was because it was just changing the scenario Number by adding a digit on the front. So 1-31 became 10-31. And then I realized that we could work thru 10 years of scenarios that way. LOL! and then just do it again in 10 years.

And if something magical happen and we get "new" content - we could just slip it into season at the end of that season list... 10-50? or something like that.

I was just hoping they would be old enough so the memories might have faded some... it would be like re-reading a book from my collage days. I know I read it, but I don't really remember the ending...

So releasing one (or more) a week rather than each month would even be fine. The idea is to have a steady supply of "new" stuff coming out. Kind of like we have now...

And newly established gaming groups could experience what us ol'guys have had... Story lines that (sort of) slowly reveal themselves across each season ... (even if they ARE the same Story Lines we had 10 years ago...).

And I really do think this approach would require little or no input from Paizo - and thus would be taking very little away from PF2e. IMHO.

edit: In re-reading this I just realized that I may have mis-read your suggestion. I think the Re-issue should be staged over time, with small blocks of content becoming available for re-play over the course of the "Season" so that everyone has the same basic list of "new scenarios" that they are looking at. This makes it easy for Coordinators to know what to put on the list to play at this months CON - they'll go with the most "resent releases" like they do now. And they know that what they schedule has not been run ANYWHERE last month. What do you schedule next month at your store? You'll want to be sure it wasn't run last week in all the home groups, or in the other towns near by, or at the CON coming up the week after... right? It seems to me that a Staggered Release would help that... again IMHO.

[nosig]

I do want to say I like the idea that a judge can give Replays to players... even if it counted against my Star Count. I have 4 stars (reset again as I have been running a lot lately) - I would really enjoy the option to give one (or more) of them to other people. Heck, I could see giving all four to a group who wanted to re-play Blackwaters for me - with me judging the game. (yeah - I really enjoy that scenario that much). Esp. around Halloween...

And then I'd start re-building my Star Replays again.

As to the procedure for doing it? How about just writing it on the CR I give out. Say "Used Judge Star #3 for date XX/XX/XX for PFS #####) on the chronicle I give out... or something...

[Terminalmancer]

nosig wrote:

I do want to say I like the idea that a judge can give Replays to players... even if it counted against my Star Count. I have 4 stars (reset again as I have been running a lot lately) - I would really enjoy the option to give one (or more) of them to other people. Heck, I could see giving all four to a group who wanted to re-play Blackwaters for me - with me judging the game. (yeah - I really enjoy that scenario that much). Esp. around Halloween...

And then I'd start re-building my Star Replays again.

As to the procedure for doing it? How about just writing it on the CR I give out. Say "Used Judge Star #3 for date XX/XX/XX for PFS #####) on the chronicle I give out... or something...

Yeah, I was a big enough fan of the idea to forget that people actually burn their stars for playing way more often than they do for GMing.

Maybe... hmm. Combining some previous ideas. What if you could check a box to give another player a replay--or, if you're the GM, you can check the box to give two players a replay?

[Tim Schneider 908]

Having thought about this one for a bit I really like it.

• It encourages GM'ing while not locking all the rewards behind a GM barrier.
  
• Successfully alleviates scheduling problems. As a GM I can go "I'm scheduling X. I know you've played it but you can have one of my replays if you want" - if we have our stars worth of those per season that's a lot of pressure relieved.
  
• It firmly gives replay-permission to the GM's and in a way where people can't really complain if you say no (Unlike just "If GM says yes" this is actually a cost to the GM to give you a replay).
  

I kinda want to restrict using it on the same scenario repeatedly, but that does add a paperwork overhead.

As far as the regular paperwork goes, I'd just put tickboxes on the "expanded expanded narrative" sheet. Tick them as you give them out & write it on the chronicle (We already just write "GM Star" or "GM Credit", so "Gift Replay" or similar wouldn't be hard). Or just let the GM keep track of it themselves (Possibly by drawing their own boxes on their chronicle - that's what I already do for the GM ones).

[shalandar]

I swore I wouldn't post on this topic again, but I feel compelled to point out one thing on this new idea for replays....

As a player, I am now completely at the mercy of the GM and if he/she likes me or not....and then, if he/she likes me MORE than other players he/she would rather give those replays to. Areas that are very cliquey will make it so people who aren't in that clique will never get a replay. Some people just aren't good GMs (I play with a group at home that's like that....they are good players, but they are bad GMs, I've tried to teach them..it didn't go well) so they won't gain any of their own replay stars.

By limiting replays to the whim of someone else, you are saying "you better be friends already with the GMs in your area". In effect, it creates (or makes worse) an insider/outsider feeling for players. As a relatively new player in my area, I already struggle with this. I wouldn't like to see that situation made worse by a system that rewards you if you are friends with the "in group".

[Terminalmancer]

Hey, Shalandar, it's been a few pages! Things seem to have calmed down a bit. Hopefully they stay that way.

Reminding myself of what you wrote earlier in the thread, I see that you're a fan of opening up replay for players. I am too--but there are also some people who aren't really thrilled about creating more replay. That was the genesis of the latest idea, really--that I was looking for a compromise that was GM-gated. You can see I had the same concerns you do, though. I tried to mitigate them with the "two players replay, but you still need at least one more player" idea, but I think the potential for bias is still a weak point in the scheme.

Do you have any suggestions for how to adjust the idea to make it less prone to favoritism?

Alternately, was there a particular player-based replay scheme you wanted to promote over the others? Are you a fan of the reset-everything-at-once approach, or nosig's phased reset?

[nosig]

Wait, isn't the latest proposal just a modification of the way GM Star replays work?

The way I was understanding the proposal to work (from Alex I think) was to modify the way our GM Star "Replay Credits" work, allowing those of us with "GM Star Replays" to share them with other players. In effect to allow us to give our Replays away. Then this was modified to give MORE "Shareable Stars" - to allow the Judge to give other players a replay... But at first, it was to allowing those of us with "GM Star Replays" to share them with other players. So, for example, I have 4 GM Stars, and have fully charged them with an expanded narrative boon. Under this new proposal I would be able to "gift" one of my Replays to my wife, or my friend Bryan, or the new kid I just met. Currently I have to use them (or not).

So, yeah, I guess it's sort of "cliquey" - I would only give my replays to those people I want to... But I guess I'm not seeing the problem with this. IMHO - It would be like if I gave $10 to my wife, or my friend Bryan, or the new kid I just met.

It would be turning the "GM Star Replay" into a commodity I guess... And I'm not sure if I think that is a problem...

[Terminalmancer]

It sounds like you understand it just fine.

The way I think this will work, new players will be okay because new players don't really need replay, but they do need tables to happen in order to play. And I've been imagining that this would just give players a new avenue to check off that "star replay" box--in other words, it doesn't bypass the "run once, gm once, star once" limit on getting a chronicle sheet from a scenario.

But that does create a danger where less-favored players may not get to replay a game they'd like to replay while other, favored players, would get to. The incentives for GMs are to make these replays count, because you can't just give them away forever, for free.

I don't actually know how bad that would be. I'd hope that if you're at 3 or 4 or 5 stars (which is the point at which you'd have a bunch of these, in theory) you recognize the value of investing in your region (or Pathfinder Society, or tabletop in general) and you're comfortable with giving back to the community in some way. That if you see someone who would like to play but can't, you'd help out. But I know that feeling's not going to be universal.

I get worried about excluding people. A lot. I should probably keep in mind that there will be an incentive the other way, too--that GMs will want to help their tables go off and they will want to run the fun scenarios, the good scenarios. Hopefully that would encourage them to give replays to anyone who would help make the table.

[shalandar]

nosig wrote:

So, yeah, I guess it's sort of "cliquey" - I would only give my replays to those people I want to... But I guess I'm not seeing the problem with this. IMHO - It would be like if I gave $10 to my wife, or my friend Bryan, or the new kid I just met.

It would be turning the "GM Star Replay" into a commodity I guess... And I'm not sure if I think that is a problem...

It creates a system of favoritism. If you are in favor of the GM, then ya, you don't see a problem with it. However, if you aren't liked by the GM or you just aren't liked as much as his wife or friend Bryan, then you can say goodbye to ever getting a replay.

Alex Wreschnig wrote:

Alternately, was there a particular player-based replay scheme you wanted to promote over the others? Are you a fan of the reset-everything-at-once approach, or nosig's phased reset?

It has to be simple for Paizo to implement, otherwise there's no incentive for them to do it.

• The easiest, obviously, is unlimited replay...but I've never been a fan of that (like most, for one reason or another).
  
• The second easiest would be "Everyone gets 1 replay for every scenario...aka, you can play every scenario twice. GMs can run it twice as well." (don't play it twice with the same character). As a whole, I like that one, since it is simple from a player/GM perspective, and should be very simple to implement from Paizo's perspective. Personally, this is the one I like best.
  
• The third easiest would be "seasonal replay". Meaning, at the start of PF2 season 1, then PF1 season 0 gets reset. And everyone gets 1 free replay/GM on season 0. When PF2s2 comes out, PF1s1 gets reset. Etc. Not sure how difficult it would be to implement from Paizo's perspective, but it could also cause issues for players/GMs. Especially those who want rush to get the old season done before it rolls over.
  
• Next is some type of Expanded Narrative for players. I'm not entirely sure how that would work, especially for players who have played 75%+ games already. I also think there is a high possibility for cheating in this situation. "Oh, I'll just fill out this paper and get a replay real quick."
  
• After this? You get into some convoluted ways that make no sense from Paizo's perspective
  

I acknowledge that there could be a problem with boon farming. So for replays, I think a blank chronicle sheet, with only XP, PP, and Gold is the best way to go. It would be easy to implement, as Paizo would create a bunch of different tier blank sheets, and the GM would put the name of the scenario/module at the top, then fill in the rest as normal. I personally like the second option above, just give 1 replay out immediately. It's the easiest to implement, the easiest to understand, and if you give a blank boon paper, there's no problem with farming.

Alex Wreschnig wrote:

I don't actually know how bad that would be. I'd hope that if you're at 3 or 4 or 5 stars (which is the point at which you'd have a bunch of these, in theory) you recognize the value of investing in your region (or Pathfinder Society, or tabletop in general) and you're comfortable with giving back to the community in some way. That if you see someone who would like to play but can't, you'd help out. But I know that feeling's not going to be universal.

Exactly. It's human nature to like some people and not like others. I can think of 2 specific players in my local PFS group that I do not enjoy playing with. Would I give them a GM star just so they could play in the same game as me and annoy me? I highly doubt it. Then, since they couldn't play, they talk about how shalandar is an *#(@*! and their friends now don't want me in their game anymore. Now it really spirals from there as I am vindictive of them being vindictive, etc etc. All because I didn't want to give up my replay to someone I don't enjoy playing with.

Or what if I'm running a game, and don't particularly like an individual (maybe I had a bad experience with that person or perhaps I just don't like their play style)...I have 3 players, we can run a pregen with those players and now I don't have to burn my GM start for someone I really don't like (for whatever reason).

My point is: Leaving replays for one person up to another person will always cause favoritism in some way....either "I like this person more than you, sorry." or "I really don't enjoy playing with you". I could probably come up with 20 different situations where I can see someone saying "Ya, no, I'm not giving you one of my previous replays" and running a table anyway.

nosig, you may be a nice person. I don't know you. But I do know there are jerks out there (myself included sometimes) who would be selfish and not use their star for someone else. That is why I don't like this option as the ONLY replay possibility.

[Terminalmancer]

shalandar wrote:

Alex Wreschnig wrote:

Alternately, was there a particular player-based replay scheme you wanted to promote over the others? Are you a fan of the reset-everything-at-once approach, or nosig's phased reset?

It has to be simple for Paizo to implement, otherwise there's no incentive for them to do it.

[...]

• The second easiest would be "Everyone gets 1 replay for every scenario...aka, you can play every scenario twice. GMs can run it twice as well." (don't play it twice with the same character). As a whole, I like that one, since it is simple from a player/GM perspective, and should be very simple to implement from Paizo's perspective. Personally, this is the one I like best.
  

[...] for replays, I think a blank chronicle sheet, with only XP, PP, and Gold is the best way to go. It would be easy to implement, as Paizo would create a bunch of different tier blank sheets, and the GM would put the name of the scenario/module at the top, then fill in the rest as normal. I personally like the second option above, just give 1 replay out immediately. It's the easiest to implement, the easiest to understand, and if you give a blank boon paper, there's no problem with farming.

Is that a good truncated summary of what you'd advocate for?

I admit, I'm not a huge fan of the blank boons. I like it when a character develops and picks up all sorts of little quirks and things from the places they've been and so on. So the blank chronicle sheet idea doesn't really resonate with me.

I don't remember actually seeing much reaction to the idea earlier in the thread, though--I think it got overwhelmed by grar, just like so many other ideas that were mentioned earlier. Is that something people would support? Does it ease concerns about opening up larger chunks of replay at a time?

[nosig]

What replay options do we have now?

GM Star Replays and... anything else?

[TimD]

nosig wrote:

What replay options do we have now?

GM Star Replays and... anything else?

Just the chronicle from doing the PFS survey.

[Terminalmancer]

The main avenue for replay is the Core Campaign and, of course, GM stars. Aside from that, the chronicle from the survey was the big one as you mention, Tim.

There was a Free RPG Day boon to let you replay a Free RPG Day module, so toss that single replay onto the pile.

I cannot confirm but have heard that replay of some specials was allowed for players who played at both Paizocon and Gencon in the distant past, when the scenario as presented at Paizocon was ruled to have changed enough to be a different scenario at Gencon.

I'm not actually sure on how play for the various EX scenarios was handled after they transitioned but I think once they got new scenario numbers, they're different scenarios. So that sort of counted. Thanks nosig!

[nosig]

Floating my concern with "a single replay across the board" back to the top of the thread - (It's only a minor concern - but I highlighted the main part below)

nosig wrote:

pjrogers wrote:

Tim Schneider wrote:

a single replay across the board does everything this idea does without negatively impacting existing core players.

Absolutely, and it's simple and easy to understand and to implement. The PFS leadership is going to be neck dip in PFS2 starting August 2019, and the last thing they probably want is some complicated PFS1 replay scheme which involves counting boons, stars, previously played adventures, etc.

I agree with everything you say... except (yeah, I'm sure you could hear the "except" coming...).

I am concerned with the release of a large number of "replays" all at one time - and this method would open up 300+ items at once.

We (and I'll be right in there taking advantage of this like everyone else) all remember certain scenarios better than others - so we will want to hit those first with replays. They will either be the favorites of the most vocal players, or the local organizer, or some privileged individual. At first this is going to be great - but everyone's list of favorites aren't the same. So after the first "Splash of Replays", unless we are only playing in the same small group of players, we are going to rapidly find the Geek Sudoku is going to get real complex again. Really fast. My list of Games Replayed is not going to be anything like the next player (again, unless we are re-playing in the same small group of players) - so anything they have Re-played and anything I have will not overlap. The reason we do not have this now is at least partly due to the staggered method that adventures have been released in the past. Each month (or year) a limited supply of adventures became available (having just been written) - and everyone on the planet has rushed to play the "new" thing. Cons know what to offer that have to greatest draw. And next month/year there will be another "new" thing that anyone can play.

With a release of the entire universe all at once- how are we going to pick what to put on the agenda to play... next year? next month? The first few Cons after the introduction of Reset Replay will be great! But then things are going to rapidly go down hill as the Sudoku sets in... organizers will have to know what was offered at all the OTHER Conventions/Game Days/Local Venues that their players are likely to have attended, so that they can offer something ELSE. Otherwise people are going to check and "...well, guess I'm not going to the Con/Gameday/Event, I've played (and replayed) almost everything they have offered. I guess I can sign up in the Open Library - and get someone to run something Cold...".

That's why I think we need to come up with some method to Release for Replay limited numbers of the adventures. Limit me on what I can play... as long as I get something! And heck... if it's something I really don't remember (and so would not pick if I could pick ANYTHING), so much the better. It'll be more like a "new" release to me...

[shalandar]

Alex Wreschnig wrote:

Is that a good truncated summary of what you'd advocate for?

I admit, I'm not a huge fan of the blank boons.

Yes, it's a good summary.

I honestly don't care about the blank boons vs regular boons. I was conceding the point to some people who said they were heavily concerned with boon farming...especially the really powerful ones.

[nosig]

Alex Wreschnig wrote:

The main avenue for replay is the Core Campaign and, of course, GM stars. Aside from that, the chronicle from the survey was the big one as you mention, Tim.

There was a Free RPG Day boon to let you replay a Free RPG Day module, so toss that single replay onto the pile.

I cannot confirm but have heard that replay of some specials was allowed for players who played at both Paizocon and Gencon in the distant past, when the scenario as presented at Paizocon was ruled to have changed enough to be a different scenario at Gencon.

I'm not actually sure on how play for the various EX scenarios was handled after they transitioned but I think once they got new scenario numbers, they're different scenarios. So that sort of counted.

the various EX scenarios could only be played once as either the X-EX or the (X+1)-15 version.

For example I played #3-EX Ciphermage Dilemma, so I was not able to play #4-15 Ciphermage Dilemma. (Unless I burned a Replay for it...). And if I had run #3-EX for credit, I would not be allowed to put GM credit for #4-15 on a character.

Link..

[Terminalmancer]

nosig wrote:

the various EX scenarios could only be played once as either the X-EX or the (X+1)-15 version.

For example I played #3-EX Ciphermage Dilemma, so I was not able to play #4-15 Ciphermage Dilemma. (Unless I burned a Replay for it...).

Oh, okay. Thanks!

[thaX]

The problem for some of the old guard like me in regards to replay is that I have played most of the scenarios that are out there. (I think I counted something like 30, including season all of season 9 with the Gen Con releases included)

This limits me to playing for no credit or GMing most of the time. (GM credit is getting up there also) Having some way to replay beyond five times a year would be nice to participate with the other players.

I like the idea of the Improved Expanded Narrative boon. I think having two player replays per star would be a good metric to use, with check boxes for each star ( [ ] GM [ ] Player (PFS number) [ ] Player (PFS Number).

I would like to add that the GMing requirement should either be lessened for this, or eliminated (Perhaps lessened in Season "11" and eliminated in season "12")

I also think giving players replay options should not be dependant on if the boon carrier is GMing the game or not.

Thoughts?

[BigNorseWolf]

Any kind of points based system is going to add a dimension of points based by off system to the suduko rather than alleviate the problem

[thistledown]

nosig wrote:

organizers will have to know what was offered at all the OTHER Conventions/Game Days/Local Venues that their players are likely to have attended, so that they can offer something ELSE.

Your cons don't do this already? The 3 big Bay Area cons use a group spreadsheet to track everything that's been offered since 2013 so we can offer back-catalog along with the newest games.

[Terminalmancer]

Thanks for reposting your thought process, nosig. I'm sure I read that at some point, but I think I had lost track of why you were thinking of phasing in the reset over time. It seems like an even better idea now that I know why you were thinking that.

I also think something simple to give players more control over what they replay would help. That approach would work for me.

[Terminalmancer]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Any kind of points based system is going to add a dimension of points based by off system to the suduko rather than alleviate the problem

I don't think anything other than completely unlimited replay is going to completely solve the sudoku problem. If we accept that we're not going to get unlimited replay, though, what then?

Do you think expanding the Expanded Narrative boon plus another change (I'm leaning phased reset myself) would be enough? Would you rather avoid changing expanded narrative entirely?

[Terminalmancer]

Hillis Mallory III wrote:

I like the idea of the Improved Expanded Narrative boon. I think having two player replays per star would be a good metric to use, with check boxes for each star ( [ ] GM [ ] Player (PFS number) [ ] Player (PFS Number).

That seems elegant enough.

Hillis Mallory III wrote:

I would like to add that the GMing requirement should either be lessened for this, or eliminated (Perhaps lessened in Season "11" and eliminated in season "12")

I also think giving players replay options should not be dependant on if the boon carrier is GMing the game or not.

Thoughts?

There's been some conversation about ending the cap of one expanded narrative per season. If that was the case, we'd want some sort of "table cost" to recharge those stars. If we allow people to start on one expanded narrative after finishing a first one, would that change your thoughts on what you'd like to see from a new expanded narrative?

[BigNorseWolf]

Alex Wreschnig wrote:

Do you think expanding the Expanded Narrative boon plus another change (I'm leaning phased reset myself) would be enough? Would you rather avoid changing expanded narrative entirely?

Re releasing the season gets you two guaranteed games per month

[Terminalmancer]

James Anderson wrote:

nosig wrote:

organizers will have to know what was offered at all the OTHER Conventions/Game Days/Local Venues that their players are likely to have attended, so that they can offer something ELSE.

Your cons don't do this already? The 3 big Bay Area cons use a group spreadsheet to track everything that's been offered since 2013 so we can offer back-catalog along with the newest games.

Yeah, we cross-reference around here, too. Although... we're cross-referencing with ourselves, so it's not exactly hard to coordinate.

[Terminalmancer]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Alex Wreschnig wrote:

Do you think expanding the Expanded Narrative boon plus another change (I'm leaning phased reset myself) would be enough? Would you rather avoid changing expanded narrative entirely?

Re releasing the season gets you two guaranteed games per month

Yeah, it certainly does that. I'm trying to feel out what you're trying to get to with the Expanded Narrative stuff we were discussing.

[thaX]

Alex Wreschnig wrote:

Hillis Mallory III wrote:

I like the idea of the Improved Expanded Narrative boon. I think having two player replays per star would be a good metric to use, with check boxes for each star ( [ ] GM [ ] Player (PFS number) [ ] Player (PFS Number).

That seems elegant enough.

Hillis Mallory III wrote:

I would like to add that the GMing requirement should either be lessened for this, or eliminated (Perhaps lessened in Season "11" and eliminated in season "12")

I also think giving players replay options should not be dependant on if the boon carrier is GMing the game or not.

Thoughts?

There's been some conversation about ending the cap of one expanded narrative per season. If that was the case, we'd want some sort of "table cost" to recharge those stars. If we allow people to start on one expanded narrative after finishing a first one, would that change your thoughts on what you'd like to see from a new expanded narrative?

I think it should still be tied to a "season," myself. If we want more than "five" replays, we should still think about the Favored Character as a possibly as an additional replay option that is available for all PFS participants. Maybe have it as a boon that is referenced in the PFS guild Guide, a print out of that at the end of the PDF along with the standard Character Sheet.

[Terminalmancer]

Hillis Mallory III wrote:

Alex Wreschnig wrote:

Hillis Mallory III wrote:

I like the idea of the Improved Expanded Narrative boon. I think having two player replays per star would be a good metric to use, with check boxes for each star ( [ ] GM [ ] Player (PFS number) [ ] Player (PFS Number).

That seems elegant enough.

Hillis Mallory III wrote:

I would like to add that the GMing requirement should either be lessened for this, or eliminated (Perhaps lessened in Season "11" and eliminated in season "12")

I also think giving players replay options should not be dependant on if the boon carrier is GMing the game or not.

Thoughts?

There's been some conversation about ending the cap of one expanded narrative per season. If that was the case, we'd want some sort of "table cost" to recharge those stars. If we allow people to start on one expanded narrative after finishing a first one, would that change your thoughts on what you'd like to see from a new expanded narrative?

I think it should still be tied to a "season," myself. If we want more than "five" replays, we should still think about the Favored Character as a possibly as an additional replay option that is available for all PFS participants. Maybe have it as a boon that is referenced in the PFS guild Guide, a print out of that at the end of the PDF along with the standard Character Sheet.

Hmm, I don't think this is what you meant, but Favored Character as a once-per-season boon is an interesting (misread of your) idea.

Separately from my brief failure of reading comprehension, could you talk a little bit about why you think more than one Expanded Narrative a season is problematic, and what problems you think a Favored Character would solve that Expanded Narrative would not?

[JohnF]

If there is to be any increase in replay, then I would like to see the minimum additional paperwork needed (but without allowing unlimited replay). Of the various proposals that have been put forward here the one I think comes closest to that is the proposal to allow exactly one additional replay (and one re-GM) for any scenario.

That should provide more than enough opportunities for almost everybody to advance their favourite characters to retirement or to run a whole bunch of new characters. It won't be enough for the outliers with 50 or more characters, but I don't think anything would.

[Tim Schneider 908]

Fair point on favoritism with GM's giving out replays. I may have been assuming more GM's were thinking more holistically of the community than is actually the case. This would be alleviated because the "new guy" is typically the guy who actually hasn't played the scenarios, but people do move & join new groups which is a big strength of PFS to let that continue over... I can conceptually see the concern. I don't think it'd apply to any group I've played in, but it's a valid concern.

One-off reset is an approach I can get behind. Nosig is right that it'll eventually run out, but it's going to be 11 seasons worth of content available to play. I think that'll last quite a few years before finding a game you can run for a group of players becomes problematic again. And quite frankly if a solution will work for multiple years it's good enough. If PFS 1 is still going strong enough multiple years into the future to reach this problem in my view the choice was already a good one.

[BigNorseWolf]

Alex Wreschnig wrote:

Yeah, it certainly does that. I'm trying to feel out what you're trying to get to with the Expanded Narrative stuff we were discussing.

That I think the expanded narrative stuff for players is a bad idea it just adds more dimensions to the geek suduko and excludes people

[thaX]

The main workings of the boon is giving a limit on the replays and is a GM based tool. If we want to lessen or eliminate the required GM sessions, keeping the boon to a seasonal renewal is the stop gag to just giving an unlimited resource for a select portion of the PFS community.

Having the Favored Character be used by all could have some of the veterans who play have an option not tied to GMing games. Having the option for a new Favored Character each season would free up some choices and have a fresh character when the original is leveling out.

[nosig]

Hillis Mallory III wrote:

The main workings of the boon is giving a limit on the replays and is a GM based tool. If we want to lessen or eliminate the required GM sessions, keeping the boon to a seasonal renewal is the stop gag to just giving an unlimited resource for a select portion of the PFS community.

Having the Favored Character be used by all could have some of the veterans who play have an option not tied to GMing games. Having the option for a new Favored Character each season would free up some choices and have a fresh character when the original is leveling out.

I fear I would not be able to use the "Favored Character" option much, as my style of play will not work well with it. Not to say it is a bad choice - just that it would not be of much use to me. But I guess I can always just drop out of a table that is too unbalanced... or switch over to running stuff. And I do have the expanded narrative boon to give me a few games each season.

The "Favored Character" option would push players to build more "Generalist" type of PCs (something a percentage of people on the boards think is a good thing) and/or encourage players to play in the same group. Building a "Team" of adventurers who almost always play together... "Yeah, he runs the Cleric, my sons' PC handles Skills, and Jo is our Tank. Along with my Wizard we've got most of the bases covered - so a "guest player" or two who sit with us can run anything they want...".

[thaX]

I can see that happening, Nosig. My overall feeling is that a lot of players new to the game can benefit from a veteran player coming back to play, no matter what character he brings to the table. I believe that the situation you talk of may come to being further down the line, after the new scenarios switch to PF2 and the newer players start to fill their played scenario roster. Perhaps five years down the line?

There also may be families and friends that play together that already do what your describing without the issue of replay being on the table. I know of one family with Ratfolk boons that play the three characters together.

[Terminalmancer]

Hillis Mallory III wrote:

The main workings of the boon is giving a limit on the replays and is a GM based tool. If we want to lessen or eliminate the required GM sessions, keeping the boon to a seasonal renewal is the stop gag to just giving an unlimited resource for a select portion of the PFS community.

Having the Favored Character be used by all could have some of the veterans who play have an option not tied to GMing games. Having the option for a new Favored Character each season would free up some choices and have a fresh character when the original is leveling out.

Does dropping the "table cost" of a full 5-star recharge from 19 tables to 14 really provide an "unlimited resource" where one wasn't previously available? I agree on at least one point, though, I don't think a "free" Expanded Narrative would work terribly well. Part of the reason I think it works is because it has an ongoing cost that enriches the community, rather than being a sort of special dispensation based on past performance.

[Terminalmancer]

It sounds like the enhanced Expanded Narrative conversation is wrapping up. Here is an example of what an Expanded Narrative that allows granted replays might look like. I'm basing this on the conversation we've had over the past week or so, although not every change is unanimously supported and I did adjust some things to work better as a boon once I got this down on "paper."

This may also give us a better look at the text we need to add to support some of these options, and what restrictions we want to enforce.

Strengths:

• it maintains the controlled availability of replay. It doesn't dramatically open up lots of replay all over the campaign.
  
• It's consistent with past policy of granting more boons to GMs and giving experienced GMs and contributors to the campaign more control.
  
• It's built on an existing mechanism that we think is fairly well-understood.
  

Weaknesses:

• It continues the onslaught of paper (although it may not add to it, depending on how you count paperwork, it certainly doesn't reduce it).
  
• There's a concern that it would lead to exclusionary scheduling and play, with GMs being more likely to use player replays in private games and on personal friends than on the community at large.
  
• It's more complex, in a campaign that's already too complex for some players.
  
• There's concern that it doesn't solve all of the problems we see at once. It's probably best paired with another replay option.
  

The Proposed Boon: Enhanced Expanded Narrative:

Expanded Narrative Some stories are best told a dozen times, and some adventure sites benefit from a second visit. Each time you GM a Pathfinder Society scenario or other sanctioned adventure, record the adventure’s name and date of completion on the applicable number of lines below:

• 1 line for 4 hours of quests, a scenario, a 16-page module, or a chapter in a 64-page module.
  
• 2 lines for a 32-page module, a sactioned Adventure Path volume, or a multi-table special.
  

When you fill all of the lines in a section, you you regain the ability to replay an adventure for credit, or to receive a Chronicle sheet from an adventure you GM—effectively “recharging” one of your free replay opportunities earned by achieving one or more GM stars. You also may check one of the checkboxes in that section to allow another player (but not yourself) to replay an adventure for credit (but not to receive a Chronicle sheet as a GM). Each subsequent section you complete unlocks additional checkboxes. You may check more than one box at a time, but no more than two players per table may benefit from replays granted by another player. These replays cannot be used to earn credit for an adventure more than one additional time, either as a GM or as a player.

You can only have one incomplete Expanded Narrative boon at a time. Completing all 14 lines allows you to start filling out another Expanded Narrative boon. You can only “recharge” a number of replay opportunities with this boon equal to the number of GM stars you have earned, and you only gain access to checkboxes for replay opportunities you have recharged. If you later earn additional stars, you may earn additional replays from this boon provided that you have already filled out the lines in that section.

For example, a 2-star GM who GMed 3 scenarios could recharge both replay opportunities during a season, and can grant four total replays to other players. If she then GMed another three scenarios, she does not earn additional replays or gain the ability to grant extra replays until she has earned her third GM star. She cannot begin earning more replays using another copy of this boon until she completely fills out all 14 lines on this boon, even though she cannot make use of the 4 star or 5 star replays.

☐ ☐ 1 Star
[u]___Adventure Name_________[/u] [u]___Date____[/u]

☐ ☐ 2 Stars
[u]___Adventure Name_________[/u] [u]___Date____[/u]
[u]___Adventure Name_________[/u] [u]___Date____[/u]

☐ ☐ 3 Stars
[u]___Adventure Name_________[/u] [u]___Date____[/u]
[u]___Adventure Name_________[/u] [u]___Date____[/u]
[u]___Adventure Name_________[/u] [u]___Date____[/u]

☐ ☐ 4 Stars
[u]___Adventure Name_________[/u] [u]___Date____[/u]
[u]___Adventure Name_________[/u] [u]___Date____[/u]
[u]___Adventure Name_________[/u] [u]___Date____[/u]
[u]___Adventure Name_________[/u] [u]___Date____[/u]

☐ ☐ 5 Stars
[u]___Adventure Name_________[/u] [u]___Date____[/u]
[u]___Adventure Name_________[/u] [u]___Date____[/u]
[u]___Adventure Name_________[/u] [u]___Date____[/u]
[u]___Adventure Name_________[/u] [u]___Date____[/u]
[u]___Adventure Name_________[/u] [u]___Date____[/u]

[nosig]

Hillis Mallory III wrote:

I can see that happening, Nosig. My overall feeling is that a lot of players new to the game can benefit from a veteran player coming back to play, no matter what character he brings to the table. I believe that the situation you talk of may come to being further down the line, after the new scenarios switch to PF2 and the newer players start to fill their played scenario roster. Perhaps five years down the line?

There also may be families and friends that play together that already do what your describing without the issue of replay being on the table. I know of one family with Ratfolk boons that play the three characters together.

Veteran players are the ones most likely to have some flexibility with character choice. And having 1 or 2 players able to switch to a different PC gives the party a greater flexibility... If 5 Bards sit down at the same table, but two can switch to other PC types... I believe that the entire party will have more fun. And the players most able to switch to an alternate PC are ones most restricted by the "Favored Character" option.

I have a large number of PCs to choice from when I play. The "Favored Character" option will feel like I'm restricting my fighters weapon selection to only one - chosen before the scenario is even picked. "What weapon will I be using this season? I need to remember, I only get one...so I need to chose wisely."

Don't get me wrong, this option is MUCH better than some of the others suggested here... it's just not optimal for me ...and it's all about me right?