Venture-Captain, Australia—NSW—Greater West
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would like to put forward a request for consideration. As multi table specials become no longer exclusive, ie after a year for most of them, would it be possible for for the table requirement to be reduced to three.
After the initial glut of convention play in the first year, it is difficult to get five or six tables together to play some of the older specials, especially for smaller regions.
|
|
Some of the table requirements are tied to the math for success. But as far as I'm aware, only Blood Under Absalom (5 tables) and Race for the Runecarved Key (4 tables) require more than 3 tables. Perhaps one of the more recent ones requires more tables.
Additionally, until I think Cosmic Captive, no special was exclusive after it ran at Gen Con.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is the information I received when I asked about offering specials at my store:
3 tables
#2-SP: Year of the Shadow Lodge
#8-99: The Solstice Scar
4 tables
#4-SP: Race for the Runecarved Key
5 tables
#3-SP: Blood Under Absalom
#5-SP: Siege of the Diamond City
#6-00: Legacy of the Stonelords
#6-97: Siege of Serpents
#7-00: The Sky Key Solution
#9-00: Assault on Absalom
6 Tables:
#8-00: Cosmic Captive
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would very much like to see a table reduction for specials, especially after 2.0 launches and it becomes even more challenging to schedule the specials.
RE: Boon / scenario requirements - I would recommend a sheet similar to the "secondary successes" sheet be generated to convert them and avail as a download containing the affected specials.
|
Venture-Captain, Australia—NSW—Greater West
|
And if this becomes the expectation moving forward, then the three table concept can be written at the same time as the larger convention only special. For example:
99.99 The Chase of the Purple Thing-a-me
Development - Developed for five tables with a three table adjustment as a separate document.
First Year - Starting at Gencon, five tables, closed play at cons only
Following Year - Three table minimum, open play, table adjustment document for play at three and four table released.
|
That is additional word count and development time that I'm sure Paizo will say they do not have time for. Personally, I think the requirements should stay as they were when the material was published, but since older season specials are offered at a much mower rate than current ones and they no longer affect the meta, if the decision is to reduce the minimum, its not a big deal. Just announce the minimum was reduced and leave it up to the organizer to recalculate the math for successes. Be mindful that the reduction could introduce some significant "wonkiness" to the success condition math.
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
I think some of the old scenarios already have wonky math to begin with. Often they're a buried in somewhat ambiguous text, where tables might be clearer.
Issuing a "scaled success conditions" document would take some design work to scale numbers in way that does justice to the original, but this is something that could be farmed out to a VO research group to draft (yes, I'm volunteering).
Actually issuing the document once approved would be as simple as issuing a PDF.
|
|
“Official” documentation is never as simple as it sounds. First, it would need to be universally applicable to all archived specials which could be problematic since they were all developed with different intentions and success math. Second, Paizo would still want it to go through the development team, art and layout, editing, etc. the normal process for any published document. They typically do not have time for such things in their busy schedule.
|
|
“Official” documentation is never as simple as it sounds. First, it would need to be universally applicable to all archived specials which could be problematic since they were all developed with different intentions and success math. Second, Paizo would still want it to go through the development team, art and layout, editing, etc. the normal process for any published document. They typically do not have time for such things in their busy schedule.
I don't understand your response to this proposal, so I believe there may be some confusion. The proposal is not "remake the scenario", the proposal is "create a generic conversion sheet akin to the 'secondary success' sheet". There is no artwork and the only layout that would be needed is to make sure that all of the text fits onto the sheet in a manner that is able to be read via both device and hard copy.
07-00: The Sky Key Solution:
*For Four Tables, the following modifiers apply
**Aid Tokens: modify the available # of aid tokens by [+/- x]. Modify the effects of [specific aid token type] by [x]. If [conditions / tiers are {x}] modify by [x]. Due to the smaller table sizes, the table GMs may wish to remind players to pass along the aid tokens at the end of any encounters in which they are used.
**Victory Points:
***For Part 2: [specify changes in Victory Points needed or accumulated by specific encounter]
***For Part 3: [specify changes in Victory Points needed or accumulated by specific encounter]
**Calculating the Outcome: [exact table calculations for Missed Opportunity, Admirable Expedition, Impressive Performance, Unrivaled Accomplishment]
**Conclusion: [enter any "failure" cost changes here {especially for lower-tier tables}]
*For Three Tables, the following modifiers apply
**Aid Tokens: modify the available # of aid tokens by [+/- x]. Modify the effects of [specific aid token type] by [x]. If [conditions / tiers are {x}] modify by [x]. Due to the smaller table sizes, the table GMs may wish to remind players to pass along the aid tokens at the end of any encounters in which they are used.
**Victory Points:
***For Part 2: [specify changes in Victory Points needed or accumulated by specific encounter]
***For Part 3: [specify changes in Victory Points needed or accumulated by specific encounter]
**Calculating the Outcome: [exact table calculations for Missed Opportunity, Admirable Expedition, Impressive Performance, Unrivaled Accomplishment]
**Conclusion: [enter any "failure" cost changes here {especially for lower-tier tables}]
*For Two Tables, the following modifiers apply
*Overseer GM change: with only two tables, rather than having an "overseer GM", the GMs should delegate between each other which will calculate points and determine conditions and which will read "overseer GM texts". Table GMs may decide to divide these responsibilities in whatever way they deem best for their run.
**Aid Tokens: modify the available # of aid tokens by [+/- x]. Modify the effects of [specific aid token type] by [x]. If [conditions / tiers are {x}] modify by [x]. Due to the smaller table sizes, the table GMs may wish to remind players to pass along the aid tokens at the end of any encounters in which they are used.
**Victory Points:
***For Part 2: [specify changes in Victory Points needed or accumulated by specific encounter]
***For Part 3: [specify changes in Victory Points needed or accumulated by specific encounter]
**Calculating the Outcome: [exact table calculations for Missed Opportunity, Admirable Expedition, Impressive Performance, Unrivaled Accomplishment]
**Conclusion: [enter any "failure" cost changes here {especially for lower-tier tables}]
Normal: The Sky Key Solution has a normal table # minimum of 5 tables.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, what Tim said. Look at the Secondary Success Conditions document. I don't think they broke the art department with that one.
What you'd get is about 1 page per Special listing the new rules for calculating %-of-tables effects.