First Edition Replay when Second Edition Launches

[thistledown]

Huh... here's an idea. As soon as 1st ed 'dies' at gencon 2019, reset all scenarios. Every scenario becomes as if you hadn't touched it before. You can once again play and GM it. Your characters keep what they've already got.

This reopens the entire catalog for a second pass through - about 600 games. But at the same time, it offers the same limits on replays and boon fishing that we have now.

[ItsJustAce]

I think option 3 would be a good send off thank you for gming so much, or continuing to gm.

[thistledown]

If going with the #3 Heightened GM Star recharge... could we set it up so that GMing any of the 3 campaigns can be used to recharge replays? If they're intended as a reward for putting time into organized play, it shouldn't be campaign dependent. Combine that with starting a new recharge chronicle as soon as you fill out the old one, and it would keep the GM's GMing all the way through (I generally have mine full by end of December). "Hey, GM some 2nd ed for us and get more replays for your 1st ed characters". It's also a nice benefit to those who currently have 5 stars, as the number of 1st ed games they can replay stays high.

[Tash Thon]

So, I see a lot of people on here applying the wrong fix to a problem.

Problem: loot-fishing
Issue: Except when you GM, the odds of actually getting a rare item that benefits your character idea is roughly 0. By itself, this wouldn't matter. However, when you find yourself at a table next to someone carrying exactly the weird exotic compound item that you wanted and discover it is only available as a chronicle item for a quest you are 3 levels too high to run, that gets irritating.

Better fix: All items on chronicle sheets that a player has accomplished are treated as approved additional resources. Purchase limited items still have that limit for the player (so, no buying that 75gp partial CLW wand on every character in their starting gear). Items without a stated limit are simply treated as fame-limited purchases like every other strange item.

As for quest replay for the concept of quest replay, I fully favor option 4, after PF2 has had a couple seasons to either find itself or be abandoned in favor of resuming PF1. At least give it the 4e chance before making a hard stand one way or the other.

[Add Wait]

Option 7: Just keep supporting 1e with new scenarios. You get to sell the same product twice. You don't alienate the people who will stick with 1e. You don't have to alter replay rules. At most you convert new scenarios from 2e to 1e or the reverse. 2e is just a new campaign. Also lets you go back and convert seasons 1-10 to 2e so people can join see where story pieces came from if they only play 2e. Which brings up the question: Is there going to be a plot synopsis in the 2e play guide for seasons 1-10 or are you throwing new players right into the middle of a story?

[TwilightKnight]

Add Wait wrote:

Option 7

They've already said they are not producing more 1E content after 2E launches (other than maybe the softcover books being continued). That is not up for consideration. They have provided some reasons for this not the least of which is it would double their existing workload. That is well beyond the capabilities of their resources not only with the OP development team, but also the other departments that touch OP material like layout, artwork, editing, etc.

Also, if a decade of history is any indication, they are either unable or unwilling to update old scenarios and re-release them. The text/stat blocks of all the season zero scenarios have been updated and submitted, many of them numerous times. One of the reasons why it has not happened is the "log jam" in the other departments, again art, layout, editing, etc. Their focus has to be on new, revenue generating products and their calendar largely remains full of those projects with little to no "free" time for rework.

Does there need to be a plot synopsis in the Guide? The RPG/campaign line will have updates to the Golarion cannon which is the basis for OP. We've never had to have a synopsis in the first decade so, why would it be needed now? Course, there have been factional updates for how the seasonal goals are progressing.

[thistledown]

Bob Jonquet wrote:

Does there need to be a plot synopsis in the Guide? The RPG/campaign line will have updates to the Golarion cannon which is the basis for OP. We've never had to have a synopsis in the first decade so, why would it be needed now? Course, there have been factional updates for how the seasonal goals are progressing.

There's been half-page summaries available for each season too. Don't remember where they are at the moment.

[Starglim]

James Anderson wrote:

Bob Jonquet wrote:

Does there need to be a plot synopsis in the Guide? The RPG/campaign line will have updates to the Golarion cannon which is the basis for OP. We've never had to have a synopsis in the first decade so, why would it be needed now? Course, there have been factional updates for how the seasonal goals are progressing.

There's been half-page summaries available for each season too. Don't remember where they are at the moment.

The Story So Far

Also various forum posts.

[Woran]

Option 3 plus hilary's option 5 would have my vote.

[pjrogers]

I'd like to see GM stars and the Expanded Narrative recharge continue to provide replays, perhaps even in an enhanced manner.

However, I also think replay opportunities should be increased for non-GMs. Maybe each PFS1 player could get a dozen replays. Local Venture people could distribute something allowing this to local players. There are lots of reasons that people don't GM or don't GM much, and I wouldn't like to see them left out of PFS1 replays.

[TimD]

I'd like to see a mix of the options and think that Hmm's "Option 5" should just be implemented in general with the caveat that I also think that some other scenarios should be explored for open replay as well (Murder on the Throaty Mermaid, to be specific - but any other scenarios that may be different each time the scenario is run, if there are any others).

I am not a supporter of true unlimited replay, however, I think that a mixture of "enhanced GM stars", a cool-down period of 2-4 years for PC chronicle sheet, and an option for "generic chronicles" to help in assisting organizers make tables would be the optimal solution.

While I understand that Paizo is not intending to support 1E via scenarios beyond GenCon 2019, I would also request that the faction sheets for season 11+ (assuming that faction sheets continue) would be pertinent to both 1E & 2E or that some other solution be put in place to allow for the faction sheets to continue for the 1E campaign.

Chronicle Cool Down & Generic Chronicle Sheets:

Cool Down: For the cool down period, I would suggest implementing a policy that any player can request to sit at a table to play and receive credit for a scenario that they have already played so long as they have not played that scenario in the last 2+ years (I'm thinking 2, but could see up to 4). The GM should have the option to NOT sit a player at a their table, per normal for "replay" / "I've GM'd this" players, but for organizer sanity the GM should probably advise if they have more extreme views for this type of replay than they do for "I've GM'd this" players.

Generic Chronicle Sheets: One of the issues I can see arising (especially for smaller lodges) is having issues seating tables. To that end, I would suggest a "generic chronicle sheet" be created that would allow a table GM to incentivize players who may have already played a game to fill a table, while preventing "chronicle farming" that was apparently prevalent in other org play campaigns. In my head, this would look like one of the "specials" sheets or one of the more recent "all quests" with a break-down of levels for slow & normal track. The chronicle would need to be completed by the GM to note the name and number of the scenario and the chronicle would either offer nothing but gold at generic-by-level rates or offer have an option similar to the quests where the GM would note the character completed a scenario and the level the character completed it at and the PC would have the option to "build up to" reward tiers on the sheet by making tables, much as the recent quests have done, in order to get a secondary reward (nothing huge, something like bonus prestige point[s] that won't go over max, ability to purchase one item as if fame were increased, discounted spell casting services, a free wayfinder upgrade, or maybe the ability to purchase some consumables at higher than base casting level).

As a bonus (and if the Paizo folks would want to do this) it could also be expanded to allow generic chronicles to be done back and forth between 1E & 2E for pre-gen play credit, which might be particularly useful as 2E is just taking off as well as CORE & Standard 1E campaigns, but might require a bit more formatting finesse.

[Red Griffyn]

I propose you use a multi-tiered approach:

Tier 1: Take the top 5 user rated scenarios from each season and make them unlimited replay (~50 scenarios).

• This allows the design team to remove the issue of chronicle/item farming by careful scenario selection. It also means that the best/most fun scenarios as viewed by the community can still remain available for new or old players. It removes some of the worst, poorly written, or otherwise unmarketable scenarios from hanging around.

Tier 2: Make all evergreen re-playable at every level (5-7 scenarios).

• This helps experienced players get a PC up to higher tiers without burning plays/replays on low level scenarios.

Tier 3: Allow unlimited replay in any scenario with one PC per player.

• This helps everyone feel like they can replay their favourite scenario at least once if it didn't somehow make it into the Tier 1 selection.

Tier 4: On a rotating basis (say once ever 3-6 months) make certain subset of metaplots repayable (e.g.,all of the Hao Jin Tapestry scenarios, or the season 8 concordance of elements, or 3 part scenarios etc.).

• This provides incentive for people to keep coming back. It maintains the subplot campaign integrity by having people play connected metaplots together within a relatively tight timeline (i.e., 3-6 months) and likely provides a better environment/story for the metaplots than originally implemented (especially for plots across multiple seasons, like blakros museum, Hao Jin Tapestry, etc.). You could even target sales for a particular subset of scenarios based on the season, certain holidays, or other product releases (e.g., particularly spooky ones near Halloween or faerie related ones during release of a new PF2e faerie companion.

[TwilightKnight]

With respect to more liberal replay (up to and including unlimited), I assume we are all in agreement that a character should still be restricted from having the same chronicle applied more than once. The difference being player replay vs character replay. The latter should be a hard 'no'.

[Vendel Naughton]

Bob Jonquet wrote:

With respect to more liberal replay (up to and including unlimited), I assume we are all in agreement that a character should still be restricted from having the same chronicle applied more than once. The difference being player replay vs character replay. The latter should be a hard 'no'.

But you see, I was thinking, know what I mean? About taking a side trip to Kaer Maga and looking around for another special cookie... know what I mean? You wouldn't want your favorite real estate agent <nudge nudge> know what I mean? To go without his special cookie... would you?

[TimD]

Bob Jonquet wrote:

With respect to more liberal replay (up to and including unlimited), I assume we are all in agreement that a character should still be restricted from having the same chronicle applied more than once. The difference being player replay vs character replay. The latter should be a hard 'no'.

Barring the "checklist of 'I helped make a table'" I suggested, I concur.

I would also not care if someone had both a GM credit and a player credit on the evergreens that can be different each time.

[MrBear]

Locally, we have a store that runs three sessions every Saturday. We have players who cannot play on certain Saturdays because everything offered has been played. This situation is going to get worse with the end of new scenarios. I honestly feel that these players need an option.

I like the concept of a character who gets a fresh start. I think this also isn't going far enough. I think a fresh character yearly would be a good solution. You can retire a character playing once a week in half a year, getting a single character as a safety every year so you'll not have to pass on events seems perfectly fair, and you won't be hunting sheets on every character.

I see people throwing fits about cherry picking scenarios and all I can think is "Why care?" There's the principle, which I understand, but is a cherry picked character going to really be worse than some of the absolute nonsense already allowed? We've got characters with 40s on skills art level 6, archers soloing encounters, tetori invalidating encounters, sorcerers with dc 30 take outs, pets twice as strong as an equal level fighter, and all sorts of absurdities. Pretending like having the right chronicles on a character is more disruptive feels disingenuous.

[eddv]

Exactly, MrBear.

PFS being an enjoyable experience is pretty much already a social contract sort of thing. Most veteran players scale back on the ridiculously broken stuff for the sake of tables being fun. No one likes walking into an encounter with a Tetori, Zen Archer, and tricked out investigator/mindchymist because they know that we are basically just not going to be challenged by anything.

Opening up replay extends the scope of the contract, but not really shattering it unless you play with a bunch of problematic players to begin with in which case there are no solutions.

I would even support a flat ban on replaying Year 4 scenarios if you're THAT worried about abuse of the super powered boons.

But yeah Option 2 with the ability to declare a new favorite character every year sounds AMAZING, because it allows you to keep making new 1e characters without worrying about running too low on content.

[TwilightKnight]

Just because you/we feel some rules are OP or “absurd” does not mean we throw the “baby out with the bath water.” If that reasoning is used, then why have anything banned at all? Everyone has their own opinions on what is OP and what isn’t. IMO, we need to keep PFS1 rules in tact as much as possible to maintain the integrity of the campaign. Lots of players have already expressed concerns about certain facets and I expect to see some rules changes when PFS2 launches, but the more PFS1 changes, the less it resembles the campaign we’ve played for a decade. That will increase the number of people who will chose to quit because it feels too much like a new campaign. And if I’m gonna play a new campaign, might as well be PFS2 since it’ll have new product support. Please don’t give those of us with the intention of continuing to play PFS1 any more reasons to reaccess that decision.

[MrBear]

Bob Jonquet wrote:

Just because you/we feel some rules are OP or “absurd” does not mean we throw the “baby out with the bath water.” If that reasoning is used, then why have anything banned at all? Everyone has their own opinions on what is OP and what isn’t. IMO, we need to keep PFS1 rules in tact as much as possible to maintain the integrity of the campaign. Lots of players have already expressed concerns about certain facets and I expect to see some rules changes when PFS2 launches, but the more PFS1 changes, the less it resembles the campaign we’ve played for a decade. That will increase the number of people who will chose to quit because it feels too much like a new campaign. And if I’m gonna play a new campaign, might as well be PFS2 since it’ll have new product support. Please don’t give those of us with the intention of continuing to play PFS1 any more reasons to reaccess that decision.

I might not have come across exactly what I was wanting to say, and that's unfortunately something that happens sometimes. I'll star going off on an indirect tangent without really explaining the reasoning for the ranting. Let me try to clarify what I want to say.

I'm not trying to argue fur unlimited replay. In fact, I think it could easily become problematic. I think that the argument "Players would cherry pick adventures" isn't a good argument against unlimited replay, yet it's also the argument I see the most. I think it's a symptom of larger issues, and I feel that the more constructive discussion is to focus on other issues. Character power level is already spanning such a wide gap that I feel the difference from hand picked scenarios don't make enough of an impact to be regarded as the go to hot button issue.

Another random tangent: I tend to empathize more with people who WANT to play but CANNOT than I do with people who CAN play but CHOOSE not to. I don't want anyone to quit, so long as they are enjoying themselves. I'd like to see a solution that leaves everyone happy. If, in the end, I'm presented with an option that prevents players from continuing against an option that certain players refuse to play, assuming all else is equal I feel I have to support the inclusive model that offends over the exclusive model that doesn't. Someone upset about a change might change their mind and come back. Someone excluded from playing was never given the choice.

(Yes, I'm looking at an extreme example here, which I'm not saying is going to happen. I'm just trying to explain my thought process here.)

[Tash Thon]

MrBear wrote:

Another random tangent: I tend to empathize more with people who WANT to play but CANNOT than I do with people who CAN play but CHOOSE not to. I don't want anyone to quit, so long as they are enjoying themselves.

That's not a random tangent, that's what should be the core point of all these discussions.

[Greymist]

I think that Options 3 & 5 would both be beneficial and should be implemented. I have no desire to see the other alternatives implemented, but they won't stop me from being a GM.

[shalandar]

I realize that replays were only available to GMs in the past (and even then, it was quite limited)...however, I think keeping it to ONLY GMs for PF1 after PF2 comes out/is established would be a mistake. There are a lot of players (or GMs who prefer to play but GM because it's needed) who would like to play scenarios again. I know in my area, it's hard at times, because some players have been playing since the very beginning and have played every freak'n scenario.

It won't affect me that much, because in PFS I've only been playing/GMing for about a year....however, I'd like to see things opened up for the older players.

Without some type of enhanced replay option (and I still vote for a rolling replay of some type)...PF1 will begin to die around fall 2020. A year after a full season for PF2. There will be no new scenarios and the older players will have fully converted over to PF2 since they can't find games they haven't played in PF1 and won't want to GM a X games just to get the ability to replay one scenario.

[pjrogers]

shalandar wrote:

I realize that replays were only available to GMs in the past (and even then, it was quite limited)...however, I think keeping it to ONLY GMs for PF1 after PF2 comes out/is established would be a mistake. There are a lot of players (or GMs who prefer to play but GM because it's needed) who would like to play scenarios again. I know in my area, it's hard at times, because some players have been playing since the very beginning and have played every freak'n scenario.

It won't affect me that much, because in PFS I've only been playing/GMing for about a year....however, I'd like to see things opened up for the older players.

Without some type of enhanced replay option (and I still vote for a rolling replay of some type)...PF1 will begin to die around fall 2020. A year after a full season for PF2. There will be no new scenarios and the older players will have fully converted over to PF2 since they can't find games they haven't played in PF1 and won't want to GM a X games just to get the ability to replay one scenario.

I think this is very important. There needs to be some mechanism for enhanced non-GM replays.

[Gary Bush]

I like option 2. Hilary's option is interesting as well.

My problem with Option 3 is that we need the players for the GMs to run the tables. I don't see the lack of GMs as the possible problem.

[Brian Adams]

I would suggest a modified option 2, alongside option 3. The modified option 2 would allow you to choose one character per faction to be able to play faction related scenarios. As a relative latecomer I find myself filling out tables with a level appropriate character, but thinking I would much rather create a more coherent narrative with a faction appropriate character. This then means I need to run the scenario to get the faction Chronicle, without the enjoyment of seeing how the character would actually perform in the scenario.

[Redelia]

My suggestion would be a modified form of option 4.

A. This would be gradually phased in, perhaps seasons 0 and 1 the first year.

B. Replaying is a priviledge, not a right. It is up to the GM whether to allow it. This means that GMs can set standards, such as how long it has been since last played that scenario or number of times played. This would allow them to exclude whatever level of 'boon farming' they felt uncomfortable with.

If something like this is not implemented, we are sentencing PFS1 to a slow death. Eventually, a critical mass will not have any non-evergreens left, and then they will play the evergreens until they are sick of them, and then have nothing left to play. I want to see PFS1 still thriving in another 10 years when the discussions about Pathfinder 3rd edition start. I at least plan to still be there then, if replay is generous enough to make it possible.

edit: I am assuming that if players can replay a scenario, we are also allowing GMs to apply GM credit several times.

[MrBear]

Christine Bussman wrote:

My suggestion would be a modified form of option 4.

If something like this is not implemented, we are sentencing PFS1 to a slow death. .

That's already happened. What we're trying to do here is slow that down as much as possible

[RealAlchemy]

While I'm not in favor of unlimited replay, I would be in favor of something that allows replay to get connected chronicles onto the same character for players who have outleveled the scenarios who are related to each other on the character who originally played them. Maybe allowing a handful of storyline (jeweled sage story, Valais Durant story, Grandmaster Torch story, etc) replays per character. This would allow players to see their favorite NPCs on the character which makes sense for them.

[Gary Bush]

How about this idea.

Allow replay of each scenario 1 time. This would allow a total of 2 plays of a scenario, plus 2 with core. Current policy on GM star replay remains in place. This would start once PF2.0 has been officially released in August 2019.

[shalandar]

Gary Bush wrote:

How about this idea.

Allow replay of each scenario 1 time. This would allow a total of 2 plays of a scenario, plus 2 with core. Current policy on GM star replay remains in place. This would start once PF2.0 has been officially released in August 2019.

I like this, but wouldn't this cause a problem for GMs? I mean, you can't get credit for GMing the same module twice....so if an area has a limited number of GMs, while they might have players, there wouldn't be any GMs to run the game.

If you do this, I think you need to say the same thing for GMs. "Allow replay and GM of each scenario 1 time...."

[pjrogers]

James Anderson wrote:

Huh... here's an idea. As soon as 1st ed 'dies' at gencon 2019, reset all scenarios. Every scenario becomes as if you hadn't touched it before. You can once again play and GM it. Your characters keep what they've already got.

This reopens the entire catalog for a second pass through - about 600 games. But at the same time, it offers the same limits on replays and boon fishing that we have now.

I really, really like this idea. It's simple and easy to implement. There is no need to make up any new rules. The only thing I would add is that we make sure we're retaining the rule that says no character can play the same scenario twice, not even once before GenCon 2019 and once after when the reset occurs.

[sanwah68]

pjrogers wrote:

James Anderson wrote:

Huh... here's an idea. As soon as 1st ed 'dies' at gencon 2019, reset all scenarios. Every scenario becomes as if you hadn't touched it before. You can once again play and GM it. Your characters keep what they've already got.

This reopens the entire catalog for a second pass through - about 600 games. But at the same time, it offers the same limits on replays and boon fishing that we have now.

I really, really like this idea. It's simple and easy to implement. There is no need to make up any new rules. The only thing I would add is that we make sure we're retaining the rule that says no character can play the same scenario twice, not even once before GenCon 2019 and once after when the reset occurs.

I also think this is great...stops boon farming, but allows full replay

[RealAlchemy]

shalandar wrote:

Gary Bush wrote:

How about this idea.

Allow replay of each scenario 1 time. This would allow a total of 2 plays of a scenario, plus 2 with core. Current policy on GM star replay remains in place. This would start once PF2.0 has been officially released in August 2019.

I like this, but wouldn't this cause a problem for GMs? I mean, you can't get credit for GMing the same module twice....so if an area has a limited number of GMs, while they might have players, there wouldn't be any GMs to run the game.

If you do this, I think you need to say the same thing for GMs. "Allow replay and GM of each scenario 1 time...."

YMMV, but I have several scenarios that I have GM'd 4 or 5 times anyway, regardless of GM credit.

[Lady Ladile]

Sandra Wilkinson wrote:

pjrogers wrote:

James Anderson wrote:

Huh... here's an idea. As soon as 1st ed 'dies' at gencon 2019, reset all scenarios. Every scenario becomes as if you hadn't touched it before. You can once again play and GM it. Your characters keep what they've already got.

This reopens the entire catalog for a second pass through - about 600 games. But at the same time, it offers the same limits on replays and boon fishing that we have now.

I really, really like this idea. It's simple and easy to implement. There is no need to make up any new rules. The only thing I would add is that we make sure we're retaining the rule that says no character can play the same scenario twice, not even once before GenCon 2019 and once after when the reset occurs.

I also think this is great...stops boon farming, but allows full replay

I like this idea too. Sure, people would replay certain scenarios with what they deem to the be the 'right' character to receive the chronicle the second time around but is that really all that different from what happens with the Core campaign or with folks who both GM -and- play a fair amount? And in some cases it's not even a matter of cherry-picking chronicles but a matter of, in retrospect, knowing that your Character A would've had more personal ties to elements of the scenario than the Character B that you actually played. It's a second chance to enjoy a scenario that might've been a subpar experience the first time around, for any number of reasons beyond a player's control - crowded convention hall setting, disruptive tablemates, a poor/inexperienced GM, the game was rushed, etc.

But, if we're limited to the options listed in the first few posts, I'd vote for Option #3 combined with Hilary's Option #5. I'm definitely against true unlimited replay.

[Kyrie Ebonblade,]

Lady Ladile wrote:

Sandra Wilkinson wrote:

pjrogers wrote:

James Anderson wrote:

Huh... here's an idea. As soon as 1st ed 'dies' at gencon 2019, reset all scenarios. Every scenario becomes as if you hadn't touched it before. You can once again play and GM it. Your characters keep what they've already got.

This reopens the entire catalog for a second pass through - about 600 games. But at the same time, it offers the same limits on replays and boon fishing that we have now.

I really, really like this idea. It's simple and easy to implement. There is no need to make up any new rules. The only thing I would add is that we make sure we're retaining the rule that says no character can play the same scenario twice, not even once before GenCon 2019 and once after when the reset occurs.

I also think this is great...stops boon farming, but allows full replay

I like this idea too. Sure, people would replay certain scenarios with what they deem to the be the 'right' character to receive the chronicle the second time around but is that really all that different from what happens with the Core campaign or with folks who both GM -and- play a fair amount? And in some cases it's not even a matter of cherry-picking chronicles but a matter of, in retrospect, knowing that your Character A would've had more personal ties to elements of the scenario than the Character B that you actually played. It's a second chance to enjoy a scenario that might've been a subpar experience the first time around, for any number of reasons beyond a player's control - crowded convention hall setting, disruptive tablemates, a poor/inexperienced GM, the game was rushed, etc.

But, if we're limited to the options listed in the first few posts, I'd vote for Option #3 combined with Hilary's Option #5. I'm definitely against true unlimited replay.

Seems the simplest way, perhaps resetting the GM replays as well, or not

[The Masked Ferret]

I think #3 and #5 would make a good combination. My understanding of the Evergeens in PF1 would also mean that the Tier 1 and Tier 1-2 modules and Adventure Path segments would also be replayable, which would give you a wide variety of low-level content to grow characters on.
--------------
Option #1 I disagree with. I think a small expansion of Player replays (not character replays) would help the campaign.

Option #2 could be interesting.

Option #3 might also be expanded to a Play X-games, you can also replay other games, similar to how the Alien Archive race boons are handled, but for replays.

Option #4 seems interesting, but I think it is a trap. Sometimes, you have limited opportunity to do things. And scarcity adds value and meaning in many cases.

Option #5 is a great idea, and should include Evergreen scenarios as well as the Tier 1 and Tier 1-2 modules and Adventure Path segments you can currently replay, but now replayable with 2nd level characters.

Option #6, as put forth by Gary Bush, seems like an interesting variant as well.

Gary Bush wrote:

Allow replay of each scenario 1 time. This would allow a total of 2 plays of a scenario, plus 2 with core. Current policy on GM star replay remains in place. This would start once PF2.0 has been officially released in August 2019.

[Gary Bush]

shalandar wrote:

Gary Bush wrote:

How about this idea.

Allow replay of each scenario 1 time. This would allow a total of 2 plays of a scenario, plus 2 with core. Current policy on GM star replay remains in place. This would start once PF2.0 has been officially released in August 2019.

I like this, but wouldn't this cause a problem for GMs? I mean, you can't get credit for GMing the same module twice....so if an area has a limited number of GMs, while they might have players, there wouldn't be any GMs to run the game.

If you do this, I think you need to say the same thing for GMs. "Allow replay and GM of each scenario 1 time...."

A GM will still get table credit. I agree it is something to think about.

I am trying to come at it from the player side but could expend to the GM as well.

[TwilightKnight]

The only expansion of the replay system I would like to see, and in both campaigns, is GMs earning credit every time they run a game, not just once. It would further encourage GMing which is something we need more of and would not "punish" GMs who attend conventions and run the same scenario multiple times.

[TriOmegaZero]

I won't take any more GM credit than I already do, but I'd be fine with that concession.

[The Masked Ferret]

Bob Jonquet wrote:

The only expansion of the replay system I would like to see, and in both campaigns, is GMs earning credit every time they run a game, not just once. It would further encourage GMing which is something we need more of and would not "punish" GMs who attend conventions and run the same scenario multiple times.

I would also appreciate that. :)

[TwilightKnight]

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:

I won't take any more GM credit than I already do, but I'd be fine with that concession.

I won't either. I would rather everyone GM for altruistic reasons, but I am told that is not reality. So, if it takes expanding GM (only) replay to encourage more of it, so be it. IMO, expanding player replay would hurt our efforts for more GMs, but YMMV. It would be particularly effective for events like Gen Con that has such a huge need for GMs and because we try to limit how many different things they have to prep, at least this would allow them to earn credit for each session. I dunno, maybe

[GM Wageslave]

So we could see *yeah, right!* a hypothetical situation where there are far too many GMs and not enough players to fill tables?

It's an amusing thought-experiment, at least?

[TwilightKnight]

I suppose that is possible, but certainly a better "problem" to have than the alternative. At least then, you could have a fair rotation of GMs and those who aren't running can play. I'll take that problem any time

[GM Wageslave]

No argument here, the imagery of a bunch of GMs arm-wrestling or throwing Rock-Paper-Scissors to *get* the chance to run a table just brings a smile to my face, based on years of GMing for various campaigns...

[Sebastian Hirsch]

Bob Jonquet wrote:

The only expansion of the replay system I would like to see, and in both campaigns, is GMs earning credit every time they run a game, not just once. It would further encourage GMing which is something we need more of and would not "punish" GMs who attend conventions and run the same scenario multiple times.

This might work for some scenarios, but I really don't want to GM in a world where a substantial number of my players have a lot of season 4 chronicles and force new players into those mods so they can get another chronicle sheet.

It might work for conventions though.

[TwilightKnight]

I don't follow you. Why would that force players into anything? The organizer should be scheduling games based on the needs/wants of the players. The idea would just mean that GM who already ran said scenario 'X' would be encouraged to run it again for credit. I've heard of a lot of organizers say they often have problems getting some GMs to sign up to run if they cannot claim a chronicle for doing so.

[Sebastian Hirsch]

I have never heard that complaint - I mostly hear GMs wanting to GM something they have run already, which in combination with your suggestion would make it even harder to find GMs for new scenarios.

My worry is that when it comes to choosing which scenario to offer some GMs will prioritize getting another instance of a powerful chronicle instead of offering something for new players.
I think it makes much more sense to offer good low-level scenarios for new players instead of forcing new players to play a pregen just because the GM wants the scenario.

This is a case where I am more worried about small locations and home games (and online games), though, if the suggestion to give GMs more replays via through their stars, they could use them to gain more GM chronicles.

[eddv]

I think this largely becomes a moot point for the 1e campaign come August 2019 doesn't it?

[Sebastian Hirsch]

Douglas Edwards wrote:

I think this largely becomes a moot point for the 1e campaign come August 2019 doesn't it?

Well, this whole thread is about ways to deal with the current campaign once PFS2 launches, and at that point, we will still have plenty of players/GMs who like PFS1 and have scenarios/modules/APs to play.

If and how those players and GMs want to accept PFS2 upon release is still a big unknown, from what I have seen after the SFS launch, some people just like having lots and lots of options, and new systems tend not to have a lot of those when they release.

Also worth mentioning is that we have a number of really great scenarios, and new players might want to experience the scenarios the older players have been gushing about in a couple of years.

[eddv]

Yeah but there won't be any new scenarios anymore, so the concern that GMs will only want to run things they've already run wanes as a concern doesn't it?