
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

I'd like to GM for PFS (or at least officially register the home games I've been running with the scenarios), but I don't know how to deal with the problems above under the guidelines as written.
Well, so, there are obviously hundreds of GMs in any given week GMing PFS2 somewhere (I count 142 this upcoming week just on Warhorn alone, and nearly as many SFS games, plus X number of PFS1 games), so perhaps your reading is a little too restrictive.
You can always feel free to asking for GMing advice in this Forum, or the individial GM Discussion threads for each adventure, if you have any questions or need advice.
GMing really isn't any different than a homegame, for the most part. Most GMs are not even strict rules lawyers, although there's usually at least one player who is ^_^

![]() ![]() ![]() |
Well, so, there are obviously hundreds of GMs in any given week GMing PFS2 somewhere (I count 142 this upcoming week just on Warhorn alone, and nearly as many SFS games, plus X number of PFS1 games), so perhaps your reading is a little too restrictive.
You can always feel free to asking for GMing advice in this Forum, or the individial GM Discussion threads for each adventure, if you have any questions or need advice.
I don't understand how the existence of GMs implies that my reading is too restrictive. My claim is that the PFS guidelines are too restrictive and impossible to obey as written, and the language should be adjusted to fix this. It doesn't require much, just a clause like "...to the greatest extent possible" or an explicit allowance to correct apparent errors, typos, and contradictions. I understand that GMs obviously already deviate from the literal wording of the PFS GM guide and do this already, as the scenarios have, in fact, been played; my suggestion is to adjust the guidelines so they don't have to be broken.
If such variance is already afforded to GMs, please let me know where.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
6 people marked this as a favorite. |

I would like to give a special thanks to the friendly Skittermanders (and honorary skittermanders) from Brazil. Thanks to their work, there is now a Portuguese translation of the guide hosted on the org play web site.
I am hopeful that in future I will get to add many more languages to the site.
I want to say in advance, that any link mistakes, broken images, or other technical foul ups are entirely my fault, as that was all me. So please let me know either here or via PM and I will get them fixed as soon as possible.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

About resurrection ritual with boons, it said you can purchase it, but to access (it's a uncommon ritual) or the price with faction / AP include the price in gold?
Cause im rebuilding my rogue at level 5, im calculating the gold and i get 440.2 gp with all my chronicles (level 5 + 1 game) so im calculating the 85% for the rebuild, i get like 374gp and now i will buy items but i check the price to resurrect just to try to save money for that and it's 75gp x level so 375gp in total.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

![]() ![]() ![]() |
Thanks for that feedback; Compton's comments are good advice, and I agree with them. However, it doesn't answer the question of what the PFS GM guide says to do about a contradiction within the scenario or within the rules.
Compton's advice concerns what to do when there's missing or ambiguous information in a game rule. Something should be there, but isn't, or there are multiple ways to interpret/read a passage that lead to different outcomes or implementations. This seems to be addressed in the first and third sentences of this passage, as the GM is filling in details for "cases not covered":
As a Pathfinder Society GM, you have the right and responsibility to make whatever judgments, within the rules, that you feel are necessary at your table to ensure everyone has a fair and fun experience. This does not mean you can contradict rules or restrictions outlined in this document, a published Pathfinder source, errata document, or official FAQ on paizo.com. What it does mean is that only you can judge what is right for your table during cases not covered in these sources.
My question (and original comment) is about what the GM guidelines say about a contradiction within the rules. That is, there is no ambiguity or missing information in the rules-- their plain English meaning is clear-- but the rules are literally self-contradictory: two (or more) passages of the CRB cannot be simultaneously obeyed.
The second sentence of the quoted passage seems to say that the GM's right to make judgments within the rules does not allow them to contradict the CRB (a published Pathfinder source). This would be problematic in a situation where any possible adjudication the GM makes would contradict the CRB. I was told that my reading of this sentence was too restrictive, so I'm asking what the correct reading of that sentence is.
I understand that in reality, the GM should make a reasonable choice, explain it to the table, and move on with the game. I get that, and I agree with it. I'm asking about what the PFS GM guidelines say/mean, not for GM advice.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

If something is written in the scenario that contradicts a rule, go with the scenario version. I mean, the author/developer/Paizo staff could have just written a new rule, called it something else, and provided that same effect, right?
The spirit of the "table variation" is to not have different groups experience radically different adventures. The only way for that consistent approach across tables is to run the scenario as written.
EDIT: fixed my Canadian-ist spelling. :)

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
9 people marked this as a favorite. |

LeftHandShake, I am going to take your points out of order, but I want you to understand that you are overreading the guide.
"but then PFS takes that back and asks GMs to blindly obey RAW at any cost"
Please point me to the spot where the guide says that. I guarantee that having edited, updated, and collaborated on the guide for 7+ years, that not one of the PFS, SFS, or PFS2 guides has text resembling that anywhere in it.
The GM Basics section on Table Variation needs to specify that the GM has the power to ... resolve contradictions in the rules or scenario text.
It does. You quoted it yourself. One of the rules (which as you point out you are required to follow) says:
The CRB says on p444, "If a rule seems to have wording with problematic repercussions or doesn't work as intended, work with your group to find a good solution, rather than just playing with the rule as printed."
That right there is the license to every one of the problems you raised.
This is not a game of gotcha. This is not an adversarial system. Just do your best, see what you can do, and if you make a mistake, we will all work together to fix it.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

About resurrection ritual with boons, it said you can purchase it, but to access (it's a uncommon ritual) or the price with faction / AP include the price in gold?
Cause im rebuilding my rogue at level 5, im calculating the gold and i get 440.2 gp with all my chronicles (level 5 + 1 game) so im calculating the 85% for the rebuild, i get like 374gp and now i will buy items but i check the price to resurrect just to try to save money for that and it's 75gp x level so 375gp in total.
I am working on getting an answer to this question, but it may take a while.

![]() ![]() ![]() |
Thank you, JTT, that's what I needed to know: That the "Game conventions" sidebar on page 444 can be used in Society play to deal with problematic or contradictory rules. I was elated when I saw this in the CRB, as it seemed to solve / wash away a bunch of ticky tack wording issues.
I'll assume that this permission also extends to fixing minor wording or typesetting issues in the scenario text, even if they appear in "mechanical elements", including stat blocks. E.g. a hazard's Routine entry begins with the free action glyph, when context indicates that the author wrote "4 actions" (#1-11, p28).
My whole issue here was the phrasing, "This does not mean you can contradict rules or restrictions outlined in... a published Pathfinder source." I admit my comment about "blindly obey RAW at any cost" was hyperbole, but this is what I was referring to.
And yes, I know that the scenario text overrides the rules (in re: TwilightKnight and GM Lamplighter's responses).

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

I'll assume that this permission also extends to fixing minor wording or typesetting issues in the scenario text, even if they appear in "mechanical elements", including stat blocks. E.g. a hazard's Routine entry begins with the free action glyph, when context indicates that the author wrote "4 actions" (#1-11, p28).
I never read that to read the trap got 4 actions. Agree it is not clearly written.

CeilYurei |
Am I correct in assuming we have to own our won PDFs and stuff to play anything? I don't have a lot of money, so the books are expensive, even the PDFs. I usually use the website archives or ask people who do have the pdf. And I also would only be able to play online, through text, which i am guessing will probably end up being a problem as well. As is my preference for playing young adventurers. If I am wrong in assuming we need to actually own all the PDF documents for sources, correct me. but I been using open gaming sources and the paizo archives of nethys site to get by.
And for first edition there is so much stuff that even with playing with the small niche of friends I have buying PDFs would be way too expensive, so i use the open sources or they send me what they have if I can't find the information on something...
For clarification, nearest games on the map are a four hour drive by car from me, on the highway. I don't ahve a car and couldn't afford to travel that far if i did.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

You do need to own a copy of any books you are using rules material from (either a hard copy or a pdf).
Note that you can play a perfectly competent character using just the Core Rulebook in any of Paizo's systems. It's up to you to decide how much you want to spend.
In PF1 there is even a specific category of games called "Core" in which all characters are using only the Core Rulebook and a tiny additional selection of free materials.
Flagged post. Right forum, but needs to be in its own thread.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Am I correct in assuming we have to own our won PDFs and stuff to play anything?
Indeed! Just like everyone else, Paizo's business has been devastated by this Pandemic. $10 for the Core Rulebook would go a long way to help them stay in business.
I usually use the website archives
Archivesofnethys is actually Paizo's official SRD. It's great for quick references and especially for play-by-post games.
my preference for playing young adventurers.
Fortunately the minimum starting age for an Android is 1, and a Goblin is 3! For obvious reasons, you can't play as an actual child, but you could certainly roleplay as inexperienced (or in the case of an Android, "factory-sealed").
And for first edition there is so much stuff
We can definitely attest that all you need to play the game is the Core Rulebook. If you end up liking the game, maybe add a new PDF every few months. It will take you a while to play new material anyways.
For clarification, nearest games on the map are a four hour drive by car from me, on the highway. I don't ahve a car and couldn't afford to travel that far if i did.
You're in luck! GameDay IX starts Monday, September 1st!

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

To clarify slightly:
For PFS 2 You do not need to have proof of ownership to play using options out of the Pathfinder Core Rulebook, the Pathfinder Bestiary (for summoning spells), or the Lost Omens World Guide in Pathfinder Society play.
That will get you a pretty long way all on it's own.
And I also would only be able to play online, through text,
There are entire servers of play by post games. So this will not be a problem at all.
As is my preference for playing young adventurers.
Characters must be at least young adults (see the Physical Description section for your selected ancestry in Chapter 2 of the Core Rulebook), as particularly young characters can change the tone of some of the game’s threats.
That said, as Nefreet pointed out, Goblins become young adults at age 3, so you can play a very new to adventuring character.
PFS 1 and starfinder have many of the same answers, but discussions of that belong in their own thread.

![]() |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |

Improvement suggestion: Eliminate redundancies. While it is understandable to create a section for new players so they are not overwhelmed with all of the information, it is unproductive to have the same entries repeated over multiple pages all with slightly different information. This is extremely frustrating. My table has had multiple instances of 'I KNOW I saw that rule under XYZ heading' and then disputes occurring because we are reading under XYZ heading... but on different pages with different information. Instead keep your smaller, need-to-know guides and then make a link stating 'for full rules on XYZ, click here.'
Example: One of my players contracted zombie rot, a particularly lethal disease for low level, non-tank players even with the more generous stat distributions of 2nd ed. We were searching the rules to see if PCs can donate their downtime to treat illness of other PCs. Some of us ended up in 'Downtime' under Organized Play Basics while others ended up looking at 'Downtime' under Player basics. They have vastly different contents and the one links to the other... and neither mention dealing with afflictions which is actually under 'negative effects', it's own unique heading found only in the Player Basics' guide... but NOT the 'negative effects' header that is found under pre-gen characters which you find first on the page... It also doesn't have any of the keywords one might use with Ctrl+F to quickly find it... like 'disease' or 'affliction' or 'curse'... beyond that the section outright lies. " Most of these negative effects can be cleared by spending Fame for the appropriate service on Table 2: All-Factions Boons. " is an untrue statement. There is a resurrection plan that is tier zero and costs 25 fame... and that's it. Ultimately a boon for disease seems unnecessary however, because it seems like it falls under the catch-most of the Society taking care of it.
I guess what I'm trying to say is get it together. Decide what verbiage you want to use and stick with it, consistently, across all your materials. Create more user friendly organization of reference material. Don't publish things which are not true, even if you intend them to be true in the future.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

^ absolutely seconded.
Same for character creation rules. I've been GMing for a lot of new players recently, and they simply get turned off to Society (or at least reading the Guide) when they see entire sections that duplicate the character creation guidelines in the Core Rulebook, that they already read.
This leads to them missing crucial differences, and then me wasting game time explaining those crucial differences, and then wasting more time when I'm told I'm wrong and need to find where I saw the crucial difference.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

This is exactly what the team is working on these last two weeks.
There are a lot of them, and there is a lot of work that has to go into eliminating redundancies while *not* eliminating any rules on accident.
One of the lessons we learned last time we did this (Season 5? IIRC) was that when resolving two redundant sections, it is very easy to accidentally eliminate *both* by accident.
The second lesson we learned is that if you produce a new guide, and the guide is missing a rule, a *substantial* number of PFS players will interpret that as a "stealthy attempt to remove the rule with out anyone noticing." And not as "Oops, they accidentally cut too much."

![]() ![]() ![]() |

for first edition there is so much stuff that even with playing with the small niche of friends I have buying PDFs would be way too expensive
Trying to buy everything is very expensive, yes. But you don't need to buy everything.
This is how I view it: calculate how much you pay per hour of entertainment. There used to be these things called movies :) where people spent $10 to be entertained for 2 hours. Some people will pay $100 in greens fees to play golf for a few hours.
The PFS CRB PDF costs $15 and you can play dozens to hundreds of hours on that alone.
Don't get me wrong, I remember a few years in my life where I tracked my expenses down to the dime, and $15 was a lot. But if you have any entertainment budget, a $15 CRB plus $3 set of dice (dig through the loose dice bin at a game store) has got to be one of the best values anywhere in the world.
The PFS scenarios ($5 for 4 hours) are significantly more expensive than a CRB home game, but still way cheaper than a movie.

![]() ![]() |

Here are some of my thoughts on some of the changes to the guide that were made today. Removing redundant and repeated information makes it much easier to read, but there are some issues with the layout and the changes to content.
School consumables
The Player Basics section says "At this point, you can select your free consumable item or items from the list below." indicating you could pick from any of the schools. However Character Creation says "Each Pathfinder Training (except Field Commission) also grants a bonus consumable at the beginning of each mission."
Are the consumables restricted to the faction you have chosen at character creation?
Boons
The last sentence for Promotional says "Characters may only benefit from one advanced boon during an adventure."
Front page layout
- The front page is needlessly complex, needing you to switch to different vertical tabs before you can open a link. Navigation would be much easier and clearer if the content was not split behind tabs, and every link hidden behind them was available on the front page.
- On first glance the primary links inside the tabs look like headers, not links, especially as the following links are indented to the right of the images in the Players and Game Master tabs.
- The front page defaults to the Volunteer tab, which is an odd choice.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

What is the point of this text directly under the school item chart?
Purchasing Equipment This will also often be the last opportunity your character has to purchase any needed equipment for the adventure.
Either this is unnecessary language or it’s placing a new limitation on shopping. The scenario should dictate if/when you would have access to purchasing options.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Missing word in Pathfinder Training section:
Each character should choose one of the following: Spells, Scrolls Swords, Generalist, or Field Commission. Each of these choices grants a bonus lore at first level, and a bonus skill [feat] at 5th level. Each Pathfinder Training (except Field Commission) also grants a bonus consumable at the beginning of each mission.
The text says you get an extra skill, but it's a skill feat. Obvious looking at the table, but just wanted to call it out.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

What is the point of this text directly under the school item chart?
Quote:Purchasing Equipment This will also often be the last opportunity your character has to purchase any needed equipment for the adventure.Either this is unnecessary language or it’s placing a new limitation on shopping. The scenario should dictate if/when you would have access to purchasing options.
It is there to let new players know that this is likely to be the last chance they have to freely purchase stuff.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

I have created a Feedback thread for the new guide here. Please utilize it, we're going to lock this thread shortly.
We believe all the feedback in this thread has been incorporated in the new version, but if we missed something, please repost it in the new thread.