| albadeon |
Does gaining access to, say, a +1 [uncommon weapon] also gain access to / allow me to purchase just the plain [uncommmon weapon] without the rune? Now that Michael has clarified that free shifting of runes between weapons at the Grand Lodge is available, most of us will not need that many different versions of +1 runes.
Say e.g., my fighter wants to "upgrade" his +1 striking scimitar to a +1 striking katana now that he got a chronicle giving him access to it. However, if his chronicle only gave him access to a +1 katana (instead of a plain katana), because he finished the high sub-tier of the adventure, he'd basically be forced to purchase a +1 rune that he doesn't want, because he was just going to transfer the runes from his longsword, anyway. Money wasted...
I'm hoping that we either introduce the standard that you automatically gain access to the weapon without the runes as well (or better yet, the individual parts, i.e. the plain weapon, as well as the individual runes), or that chronicles only award the actual weapons and runes seperately. If that were not the case, under current PFS2 conditions, a +1 striking [uncommon weapon] is actually the worse reward than a plain [uncommon weapon] in most cases. This is a significant change from PFS1, where runes were not transferable between items, and authors likely still think of magic weapons as more valuable and better rewards than just plain ones.
| albadeon |
Thank you for the answer, even though that seems to be more an answer to the other post I made (I split them into two separate posts, because I think the issues are somewhat different). But could you point me to where that had been asked (and answered, hopefully), because I have been unable to find that.
Let me ask it with a slightly different example, to explain the difference to my other post more clearly:
If the low subtier rewards a +1 uncommon weapon, and the high subtier rewards a +1 striking version of the same uncommon weapon, does that give me access to just the weapon with no runes, or to I have to "waste" money on runes that I don't want?
I think the answer (and PFS2 policy) *should* be "yes, you get access to just the weapon", because unlike PF1 the weapons and runes are now two completely seperate things. However, with the current PFS rules, I'm not so sure that the answer currently *is* that. Either way, it's worth discussing, imho (unless it's already been disussed and answered elsewhere, of course :) ).
Edit: This is not about the different subtiers on a chronicle sheet but about treating a weapon (and by extension, armor) and the runes on it as seperate items.
| albadeon |
That post by Michael does not answer my question in this post (which is not at all about subtiers) in the slightest.
However, I concede that somewhere hidden in that thread, a few posts after Michael's reply, OP asked the same question I did here (and also did not receive an answer). So, while I'm not the only one who feels that question has not been answered, if you want to consider it duplicate, go ahead.
Edit: and which one is it, btw: Gary's "So if you earned the high tier rewards, you also gain the low tier rewards as well", or Nefreet's "you only earn the rewards for your Subtier"?
|
Edit: and which one is it, btw: Gary's "So if you earned the high tier rewards, you also gain the low tier rewards as well", or Nefreet's "you only earn the rewards for your Subtier"?
An interesting question. PFS1e didn't have the GM crossing off low tier rewards on high tier chronicles.
I don't read that a character who earns tier items does not also earn low tier items. The Guide does not explicitly state that a GM should cross off low tier items on a chronicle that earned high tier items.
It is unfortunate that Mark did not answer the question in the other thread.
Guess it is a gray area. I believe the low tier items are available to high tier earns. And I believe the intent is that the normal uncommon item is also open to the character, thus allowing them to get items made from special materials.
|
albadeon wrote:Edit: and which one is it, btw: Gary's "So if you earned the high tier rewards, you also gain the low tier rewards as well", or Nefreet's "you only earn the rewards for your Subtier"?An interesting question. PFS1e didn't have the GM crossing off low tier rewards on high tier chronicles.
PFS v1 did, but the language never made it into the guide. Any chronicles with "All Subtiers" and than "High Tier" would both be left open at the high tier, but sheets with specific "Low Tier" and "High Tier" always see one or the other crossed off. This was originally done to combat some players buying "limit 1" items twice when they appeared at both subtiers (most often partially charged wands with different charges at each subtier).
This change in language was explained to some groups of VOs at Gen Con several years ago by OPF staff but apparently never made it into the guide. So now, it is sort of gray area for VOs/GMs who didn't hear the ruling firsthand.
|
PFS v1 did, but the language never made it into the guide. Any chronicles with "All Subtiers" and than "High Tier" would both be left open at the high tier, but sheets with specific "Low Tier" and "High Tier" always see one or the other crossed off. This was originally done to combat some players buying "limit 1" items twice when they appeared at both subtiers (most often partially charged wands with different charges at each subtier).
As GM I never crossed off low tier. I know there is post somewhere about it.. guess I will have to go find it....
edit: Here is what I have found:
1)
2)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2tsan?limited-items-listed-twice-on-chronicle- sheets#28
If it is the exact same item—for example, the low subtier gives 2 doses of black lotus extract, and the higher gives 3—you can buy the amount listed in the high subtier. That is, you can buy 3 doses, not 5.
If, however, the item is different, even if it is similarly themed, you can buy the items listed in both subtiers after playing the high subtier. If low subtier has 3 +1 flaming arrows and a wand of cure light wounds with 5 charges and the high subtier has 4 +1 flaming burst arrows and a wand of cure moderate wounds with 5 charges, you can buy a total of 7 arrows and 2 wands.
...if you're running the lower subtier, always cross out all of the items listed for the higher subtier.
The guide does not say anything about crossing out lower subtier items if the adventure was ran at higher subtier.
|
Gary and I have discussed this off-line on a few occassions, and I disagree partly with him. If you go back to compare old and new chronicles, you see an evolution.
0-1 Silent Tide was the first PFS1 scenario. It is split tier 1-2/4-5 like we're familiar with. Different items in both sub-tiers. The kicker is, the story reward is in the tier 1-2 section only. These early boons probably did at some point have a guidance that high sub-tier should get rewards from both, as Gary remembers.
10-1 Oathbreakers Die is an example from the last PFS1 season. It is still split 1-2/4-5. The story boon is moved to a section that is not tier dependant. All the items listed in 1-2 are duplicated exactly in sub-tier 4-5. At some point, they started writing boons differently making the guidance Gary remembers less relevant. In PFS1, we had mostly open access based on your PCs fame. Which meant that if you played high sub-tier, you probably already had access to most of the items in the low sub-tier anyway.
SFS 2-1 Pact World Warriors shows a further evolution. Like 10-1, the story boon is in a section that's not tier dependent. But the rewards are now All Tiers and Sub-tier 4-5. A further refinement making the guidance Gary remembers irrelevant.
The trick now is that PFS2 did not copy the SFS template. They went back to listing specific sub-tiers. (1-2, 3-4). If you look at the text in the scenario, it's usually written like this: "The PCs find reward item XX (In subtier 3-4, they instead find +1 striking reward item XX." It seems like the intent is they find a different item.
The challenge, as the OP noticed, is that with uncommon items access is more restricted. From the guide we have this short GM instruction: "Cross off any items that the players did not earn during the scenario. Unless the GM Resources section says otherwise, players only lose access to an item if they did not earn the treasure bundle that corresponds to that item."
As written, someone playing high sub-tier didn't earn the reward item XX. They earned the +1 striking reward item XX. So, as GM, I should be crossing it off.
All that said, I suspect the issue with uncommon items was simply an unforseen thing. In PFS1, this wouldn't be an issue based on Fame item access. SFS boons wouldn't have this issue either. A simple addition to the Guide that access to an upgraded version of an uncommon item permits access to the basic uncommon item would be reasonable. I would not be surprised if it was already on their (long) to-do list.
| albadeon |
@John I agree with most of what you have written above, and I do hope that this is on their list to fix/clarify. It's probably a case of authors and editors still needing to get used to the system-specific issues surrounding access and transferrable runes and not an attempt to deliberately prevent high tier players from accessing the (supposedly "inferior") low tier loot.
If you look at the text in the scenario, it's usually written like this: "The PCs find reward item XX (In subtier 3-4, they instead find +1 striking reward item XX." It seems like the intent is they find a different item.
The thing is that in some adventures the text is instead specifically "The PCs find reward x (in subtier 3-4, they ALSO find y.)", with x on the low subtier rewards, but often only y (and not also x) is making it into the high subtier chronicle rewards section. In those instances, it seems that the author expects the high subtier rewards to be in addition to the low subtier.
Some cases, like 1-07, have both versions, i.e. some high-tier loot is found in addition to the accompanying low tier loot, while some is found instead of it...
It's currently confusing and I think noone, including authors, knows how it's really intended to be. That's why I brought it up.