|
In addition, what do you do when the VC knows far less about the edition than the GM? At that point you are just going through the motions.
That would make one of the (imo less important) rubrics hard to determine or just left off. A venture critter could either look the rules up afterwards, google the relevant rules, or search the forums to see how something works / or is disputed.
|
All of these things were brought up when it was announced. We never got a response. I’m pretty sure we’re stuck with needing the 3 evals at this point and going forward. It would be interesting to hear from the actual people going through the nova evaluations how those have been going, instead of the occasional blog that amounts to everything is great.
Though I do like Hmm’s interpretation of what it means to be an online GM at the moment. I’m hopeful that a good thing that might come out of this experience is allowing VCs other than the online VCs to observe games online. That seemed like a reasonable request a year ago, and seems even more reasonable now.
|
I went through the process last year. My chief complaint is that there is no process to facilitate the VC evaluations. I am fortunate in that I can travel to all 3 major summer conventions and to additional conventions around the country as well.
My journey started by posting that I needed help in last year's Paizo Blog April update (blog post April 3rd). Hilary Moon-Murphy stepped up to volunteer to evaluate one of my games at PaizoCon; that evaluation did occur.
A couple of VCs offered to evaluate me at GenCon if it could be arranged. They acknowledged that it could be a problem if their free slots didn't line up with my schedule.
After arriving at Origins, John Godek stepped up to introduce me to some VCs who were also at the convention. Fortunately, we were able to line up free slots with my schedule and we got the remaining two evaluations completed. Once the VC evaluations had been arranged, the OPF volunteers were helpful in ensuring that the VCs could be present for my games.
In the end, it all worked out for me. I obtained 3 evaluations within a month at 2 major conventions. But it feels like it could have gone another way if individual volunteers hadn't stepped up to facilitate the process.
Venture-Captain, Missouri—Columbia
|
All of these things were brought up when it was announced. We never got a response. I’m pretty sure we’re stuck with needing the 3 evals at this point and going forward. It would be interesting to hear from the actual people going through the nova evaluations how those have been going, instead of the occasional blog that amounts to everything is great.
Though I do like Hmm’s interpretation of what it means to be an online GM at the moment. I’m hopeful that a good thing that might come out of this experience is allowing VCs other than the online VCs to observe games online. That seemed like a reasonable request a year ago, and seems even more reasonable now.
Since many of us VOs were still waiting on the NDA to be made available so we could sign it and get into the officer forums, etc., we could only comment in the main forums where I definitely spoke out about and against the 3 evaluations.
|
While I understand the problem with limiting the mediums in which one can obtain an evaluation, I really don't see a problem with 3 evaluations. Yeah, it'll be a bit tougher to schedule. Which would cause it to take a little longer to achieve the 5th nova. Why is it taking longer a problem?
Also, an evaluator not knowing the edition as well might prove to be a benefit in evaluating the GM. How do you deal with peeps that don't know the rules as well?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since many of us VOs were still waiting on the NDA to be made available so we could sign it and get into the officer forums, etc., we could only comment in the main forums where I definitely spoke out about and against the 3 evaluations.All of these things were brought up when it was announced. We never got a response. I’m pretty sure we’re stuck with needing the 3 evals at this point and going forward. It would be interesting to hear from the actual people going through the nova evaluations how those have been going, instead of the occasional blog that amounts to everything is great.
Though I do like Hmm’s interpretation of what it means to be an online GM at the moment. I’m hopeful that a good thing that might come out of this experience is allowing VCs other than the online VCs to observe games online. That seemed like a reasonable request a year ago, and seems even more reasonable now.
I know you did. My faith that any of that was listened to is just very low, and at this point I don't see the 3 evaluation part of it changing unless there have been documented issues on the starfinder side. I do think there's hope for allowing more reviews online, as long as it's done in a way so as not to overburden the actual Online Region VCs. I wouldn't want them to have to handle all of the requests.
Contributor
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
After both performing evaluations and having been evaluated myself, I am personally a big fan of the system and of having a rubric.
Not to rehash years-old threads, but if the 5th star/nova/glyph is supposed to mean something "more" than just a record of table count, I'd like to know that those people have gone that extra step (or three). Inconvenient? Maybe. But having seen more than one 5-star PFS GM who left their players unhappy with either their conduct or their game management skills, I know that I am willing to go the extra mile towards earning my 5th nova or glyph.
Even when I'm not a VO any longer, having that distinction will be a responsibility to the OPF community at-large. If there are things we can do to help make sure the people there are doing their best to represent our GMs and players, it gets a big thumb's up from me.
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
I suspect that right now you could ask a lot of offline VC to evaluate you, after all we already have plenty of tables that still benefit from RSP, so evaluations should be an option. That said, ideally, contact those VCs early, they might have their own requirements when and where they might be available to evaluate.
For example, I would only evaluate if I am at least somewhat lucid, which might not apply to the 3rd slot in a row. There are some others, like: the evaluating VC should be somewhat fluent in the GMing and playing of that system and they might insist of having read the scenario first to give proper feedback.
So yeah, by all means, try to contact any VCs you can find, though be aware that you might be likely to encounter some local differences.
These days, I am pretty sure that your choice of VTT will have a relevant impact on a VC's willingness to evaluate your game.
|
|
I think GMing for a local VO on an online format given the state of things and how long that state is likely to last seems reasonable. You are no longer going online to make use of the limited Online Region VOs. Everyone is forced online, and your local VOs who might not otherwise have played online (or might not go out of their way to schedule a separate gaming session with you online because you can't physically make it to their usual game venue) might be online now if they want to play at all.
I can, however, see the counter argument. However, it seems a little sad to postpone 5 Novas indefinitely due to the pandemic (trivially so in comparison to the actual sadness it has inflicted, but still).
EDIT: If "online" (i.e. PbP or VTT) doesn't cut it, just Zoom (or some other video chat) the game. Then it's "live."
|
Venture-Captain, Minnesota
|
Speaking of five nova evaluations, all those of us with 4 novas got a new message in My Organized Play yesterday!
You have an ongoing evaluation for the ranking "5 Nova Starfinder Society GM". 0 out 3 Reviews have been submitted.
So I wrote Tonya in an immediate panic, wondering where my previous nova evaluations went. No worries. She told me they have them on file, and they are entering all that data from the spreadsheet into an automated system. When a potential 5 nova GM reaches 3 successful evaluations, 10 specials, 50 unique scenarios and 150 tables the system automatically promotes you to 5 novas.
It will be interesting to see how this works! I am hoping that the system will also at some point give you an exact count of how many specials one is short, so one does not have to do all the combing and counting of Organized Play records to figure these things out!
Hmm
|
Venture-Captain, Isles—Online
|
I am hoping that the system will also at some point give you an exact count of how many specials one is short, so one does not have to do all the combing and counting of Organized Play records to figure these things out!
Hmm
Aww- thats like taking the fun out of your own recording spreadsheets and everything..
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On the upside, you can do one rubric online, so that’s a slight fix.
I’ll start collecting them once I hit 4 nova :)
I can lend people very easy to use roll20 tables. Click the token, click the thing you want them to do, they do the thing. I can even play along and act as your tech gremlin if you want. (gets helper dog vest)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We can only do one 'online' though, but yeah I will be hunting you guys when that comes.
I was meticulously tracking my games and dates forecast with the intent to hit 100 tables, open up 4th Nova, and begin getting qualification games done at PaizoCon South Pacific (or whatever we replace it with) but losing 7 tables with the unannounced and retroactive stealth nerf of the Free RPG games means I should now have to wait 'til end Dec/Jan to catch up.
That we have to wait until the 4th Nova for rubrics to count was not something I had noticed, but certainly makes the process worse than I had thought.
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As I understand it, the "only one online" rule has been relaxed a bit in practice this year. It was put in originally to prevent excessive load on the online region VCs. Now that a lot of previously offline VCs from various areas have been pushed online due to the pandemic, that reason isn't as compelling anymore.
|
|
It was relaxed in that we all became 'online GMs' (because it was never clarified what that meant) for the period of the pandemic. Once we go back to business as usual that concession closes.
As we went backwards (I'm having to catch up 7 table credits) with the recent nerf, that puts it into Dec for my 4th Nova.
We should be back to business as usual by then (in this country anyway).
|
|
It was relaxed in that we all became 'online GMs' (because it was never clarified what that meant) for the period of the pandemic. Once we go back to business as usual that concession closes.
As we went backwards (I'm having to catch up 7 table credits) with the recent nerf, that puts it into Dec for my 4th Nova.
We should be back to business as usual by then (in this country anyway).
Run a few online games and up your scheduel? It would probably be good to run a few online before your rubric anyway (as cursing at the computer with a hot mic isn't technically on the rubric but is both likely to cost points and be a thing your first time...)
|
|
Run a few online games and up your scheduel? It would probably be good to run a few online before your rubric anyway (as cursing at the computer with a hot mic isn't technically on the rubric but is both likely to cost points and be a thing your first time...)
Currently on deployment (domestic ops - response to Covid), so PbP has been a godsend as its hard to guarantee days off. We have been able to get back to some face to face local games, but I am getting these via the good grace of my chain of command who have been really good about local leave when we make a point of asking for particular days. Kinda throttling my fun factor.
With that said, I have been keeping my pace and tempo over the last 12 months of operational tempo and keeping things moving forward has been quite a pain, I mean, trying to get comms in a remote region battling the bushfires so you can update your games and running your sessions from a 14x14 tent in the outback is not an easy task - you can see why I would be a bit sore about a count going backwards.
That the reduction was done without notice or warning, and that we were chasing it up for ages until it was eventually confirmed as a deliberate change months later - you could see how that would be a touch annoying.
I'm expecting to be back to the 'real world' in about a month.
|
Venture-Agent, Netherlands
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Firstly, thanks for the work you do Shifty, moved away from Sydney 3 years back, so can understand all the bushfires etc keeping ya busy.
Secondly, I wanted to mention that Paizo's rule this year has been "if you were running a game in meatspace, that went online, then it's still meatspace technically."
We run our games online in the Netherlands, and still use RSP as they were from a physical location forced online, so even though we get internationals, they get access to our RSP too.
I did 2 Evaluations at GenCon because it would have been meatspace, and had 2 non-Online VCs do my evals.
We have a Convention coming up in October (humble advertising) and thinking of doing my 3rd eval somewhere near there.
I was also hit by the nerf to Free RPG day games too so I feel that, but there are still options! Australia will be back to normal before the rest of us so once you're back from Domestic duties, hop online and find some non-online VCs to do your evals. Easy done mate :)
Hope that helps explain stuff too :)