|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In a different thread, the point was made that with 2e, GMs would not get a reward for their prep time for tables that did not fire.
At conventions, where race boons could earned, a table not making would not lead to the lose of the race boon. But with 2e, if a table did not fire, the GM would not earn any AcP. This is also a problem for non-convention tables.
So to our Campaign Leadership, please consider something that will allow GMs to earn AcP points for tables that don't fire.
My suggest would be 1 (or 2 points for cons) to acknowledge the extra time and effort that a GM puts into prepping a table.
And if this is a topic that is already being discussed, thank you!
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm fairly sure that's not PFS1 policy but individual con organizers being charitable on their own.Was their a P1FS policy for any sort of compensation for tables-that-never-were?
There was no official policy.
As a convention organizer, I would always tie rewards to the number of tables you signed up to GM, not the tables that actually made. It’s crazy to me to penalize (not give a promised boon) a volunteer because I overestimated demand for a scenario.
In that vein, I do agree that this idea is worth further consideration. However I think it has to be tied to conventions only. There’s too much potential for chicanery in awarding points for any table that doesn’t make.
Premier Event Coordinator
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I dunno. We don't have way to gauge the actual prep time a GM invests. People who barely read the scenario once, quickly draw abstract maps during play, and used generic tokens for enemies really don't deserve the same reward as someone who spends multiple hours reading and rereading the materials, finds and uses the appropriate pawns/minis, provides the printed maps, etc. Though, I would reward the 'turds' if it means making sure the all-stars are rewarded rather than punish the all-stars because we want to punish the 'turds'.
|
Premier Event Coordinator
|
Was their a P1FS policy for any sort of compensation for tables-that-never-were?
The intention in PFS1 was always that GMs earn the same boons/rewards for a cancelled slot as a completed one. So, if you used a raffle or d20 roll to award boons and vouchers, they would still get the same chance to win even if their table didn't fire. Though I have heard of organizers not doing it. I don't think it was ever included in any rules/Guide.
Venture-Captain, Michigan—Mt. Pleasant
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've always given gm boon to GMs even if their tables didn't fire. They put in the time to prep they should get the convention reward. Even at Gencon they hand out GM boons at the start based on how many slots you signed up for. They don't wait to see how many go off and then give out your boon based on how many went off.
Cons that give out badges to GMs, do they take them away or make the GM pay if their tables don't go off? Not if they want GMs in the future they don't.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16
|
Don't get me wrong. It can be frustrating to get nothing out of so much work and preparation.
A lodge in the next state over needed GMs to run Siege of Gallowspire with each covering at least two tiers. So, I spent almost $50 on flip mats and printing a hardcopy of the scenario. A whole Sunday and several nights preparing a folder for easy reference, studying the scenario, writing an outline with careful notes, arranging miniatures for travel, and drawing maps. Then I realized one of the maps was absolutely impossible to draw on a standard blank flip mat, so I had to one-day-ship a huge roll of 1-inch grid paper. Two weeks of stress. I packed everything up in my car, drove to the next state over and...
My table did not fire. Had enough GMs for all the players.
"Oh well," I said to myself. "There's a local con next month that's also doing Gallowspire. At all that work won't go to waste!"
Six days later, the governor shut down all social gatherings.
But that's fine. It's the plight of Gamemastering. It's a lot of work on the hope you and a table full of people will have fun. I don't expect to be rewarded when things don't pan out.
|
Premier Event Coordinator
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I only know of one con that "doc'ed" me for the slots that didn't fire and I haven't been back since. Their issue was some jerks had intentionally scheduled some games that no one ever wanted to play so they would qualify for a free badge. When the games didn't fire, they not only played in their other slots, but they were able to jump in on games in the slots they were supposed to be running.
So, the con decided the solution was, everyone had to buy a badge, but if you actually ran enough tables, you'd get reimbursed the badge fee at the end of the show. It was a terrible idea, but apparently it got them the result they wanted. Course it also created a ton of complaints, so beware—sometimes you get what you want, but don't want all you're gonna get.
|
|
Even at Gencon they hand out GM boons at the start based on how many slots you signed up for.
They still were doing that as of last year, but they've had problems with that--not just the boons--when I first started GMing GenCon that necessitated them being a bit more stringent in who they let GM how many slots.
I really wish they had gone with a market place system for AcP where the players earned a virtual currency and spent it from their bank like a loading up a cart and checking out of a web store. Then they could make gift certificates for fixed amount of AcP to give to convention GMs irrespective of tables firing or not, award marshals for time served, and other things like charity raffles.
|
Premier Event Coordinator
|
...they've had problems with that--not just the boons--when I first started GMing GenCon that necessitated them being a bit more stringent in who they let GM how many slots.
How so? I don't recall us ever making any operational decisions based on the GM boon availability.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16
|
I really wish they had gone with a market place system for AcP where the players earned a virtual currency and spent it from their bank like a loading up a cart and checking out of a web store. Then they could make gift certificates for fixed amount of AcP to give to convention GMs irrespective of tables firing or not, award marshals for time served, and other things like charity raffles.
There definitely should be a way to award non-GMing volunteers as well. I've seen coordinators hand out a handful of player boons to volunteers, but they can't do that with the AcP system.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I dunno. We don't have way to gauge the actual prep time a GM invests. People who barely read the scenario once, quickly draw abstract maps during play, and used generic tokens for enemies really don't deserve the same reward as someone who spends multiple hours reading and rereading the materials, finds and uses the appropriate pawns/minis, provides the printed maps, etc. Though, I would reward the 'turds' if it means making sure the all-stars are rewarded rather than punish the all-stars because we want to punish the 'turds'.
Did you REALLY just call GMs who have a different GMing style than yours "Turds"?
Shame on you.
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I dunno. We don't have way to gauge the actual prep time a GM invests. People who barely read the scenario once, quickly draw abstract maps during play, and used generic tokens for enemies really don't deserve the same reward as someone who spends multiple hours reading and rereading the materials, finds and uses the appropriate pawns/minis, provides the printed maps, etc. Though, I would reward the 'turds' if it means making sure the all-stars are rewarded rather than punish the all-stars because we want to punish the 'turds'.Did you REALLY just call GMs who have a different GMing style than yours "Turds"?
Shame on you.
I would draw a distinction between "someone who puts in effort" and "someone who puts in disposable income".
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I dunno. We don't have way to gauge the actual prep time a GM invests. People who barely read the scenario once, quickly draw abstract maps during play, and used generic tokens for enemies really don't deserve the same reward as someone who spends multiple hours reading and rereading the materials, finds and uses the appropriate pawns/minis, provides the printed maps, etc. Though, I would reward the 'turds' if it means making sure the all-stars are rewarded rather than punish the all-stars because we want to punish the 'turds'.Did you REALLY just call GMs who have a different GMing style than yours "Turds"?
Shame on you.
I would draw a distinction between "someone who puts in effort" and "someone who puts in disposable income".
Yeah, probably should have stuck to "People who barely read the scenario once" (or more obvious: always runs scenarios cold) vs. "someone who spends multiple hours reading and rereading the materials."
I am the latter, but I use generic tokens (and later paper OotS minis) for enemies.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be fair, I don't believe he was putting down people who don't use flip maps and painted minis. He was probably just recalling the awesome experiences he's had with good GMs who have used those tools to enhance the game experience when he was thinking of examples of good GMs, so that's what he described, rather than intending the description to be the definition. It just came across poorly to some of us. I'm sure there are bad GMs who use flip maps and painted minis.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is all really good discussion, but no one is commenting on the the topic of the post....
Is that any different than it always is?
But to your topic, I think it would be reasonable to reward a GM who volunteered and preped for a Con slot even if the table does not make.
|
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In the past we've always given the GM any rewards they would have earned had the table fired (and also expected the GM to be available to GM something else, such as quests, if we had a table of walk-ins looking for a game).
That's not as straightforward with AcP.
Venture-Captain, Online—VTT
|
I think this is a good subject for discussion, especially with the current move of a lot of games online. I suspect a lot more GMs are now understanding just how much time and effort it can take to set up a table on Roll20 or Fantasy Grounds from scratch, creating maps, tokens, handouts, macros etc.
Given that for longer or more involved scenarios, such as the specials for example, it can easily take upwards of several hours to make a basic table that looks okay... it's worth considering if that investment should be rewarded with AcP imo.
|
Premier Event Coordinator
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Did you REALLY just call GMs who have a different GMing style than yours "Turds"?
No. Its the difference between no effort and effort. If that's a "style" than we have different systems of evaluation.
And for F#$K sake, you are missing the point. I should have know better than to use actual examples to create a larger picture because this group is more interested in nit-picking the minutia. I will rephrase...
"I dunno. We don't have a way to gauge the actual prep time a GM invests. People who do little to prep and just "wing it" thus giving a sub-par experience don't deserve the same reward as someone who invests time and effort to provide an excellent experience for their players. Though, I would reward the 'turds' if it means making sure the all-stars are rewarded rather than punish the all-stars because we want to punish the 'turds'."
|
Premier Event Coordinator
|
We need to avoid using the reporting system to award AcP for failed tables because it would artificially inflate the table total for star/glyph/nova purposes. Likewise for organizers. We've always talked about some kind of rewards system for organizers but nothing has really come of it. What reward do we actually use? What is its value? How do we track it? Who qualifies?
Organizers are kind of the "sunk cost" our business has to pay in order to operate so there has always kinda been an underlying idea of altruism.
Someone mentioned somewhere with regards to tables not firing that means when you ran it next time, you'd already be mostly prep'ed so there is an advantage to running a scenario more than once when it comes to investment and efficiency, not to mention being more comfortable with the story. We give GMs credit for every table they run towards the widget, but I dunno if running the same scenario multiple times should be rewarded with AcP or whatever like running different scenarios once each. Though, I wonder how often do tables not fire? If it happens too often, maybe we need to look at our scheduling processes for improvement. If it doesn't happen much then maybe its not worth creating an entire program for.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Someone mentioned somewhere with regards to tables not firing that means when you ran it next time, you'd already be mostly prep'ed so there is an advantage to running a scenario more than once when it comes to investment and efficiency, not to mention being more comfortable with the story. We give GMs credit for every table they run towards the widget, but I dunno if running the same scenario multiple times should be rewarded with AcP or whatever like running different scenarios once each. Though, I wonder how often do tables not fire? If it happens too often, maybe we need to look at our scheduling processes for improvement. If it doesn't happen much then maybe its not worth creating an entire program for.
The interesting thing about AcP is maybe we can now address this in a meaningful manner.
As someone who has organized small cons (I am talking 16 to 18 tables, just enough to get con support), I cringe when a table does not make because it means I didn't understand the demand for the scenarios I offered.
|
Premier Event Coordinator
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We also started using the feedback we did get to restrict "bad" GMs running at our largest events. This also helped reduce the occurrence of repeatedly bad GMs.
The second issue was somewhat tied to the issue of the hotel lottery and the year badges sold out. We got people volunteering in order to gain a hotel room and a badge. After pickup up their badge, they never showed to run their games. It was something we had never experienced before so we didn't know what to do in response. It was a mess as you could imagine. For people with no campaign experience, it was next to impossible to know if they were a reliable resource. We couldn't afford to just give away hotel spaces and badges to people who we couldn't validate.
I hope that explains our situation a bit. The GM boon was a casualty of our restrictions, but it wasn't a driving factor. To be honest, I've never placed that much value to the boons personally, so if a few people got one who shouldn't have or someone got credit for a higher level boon than they should, I don't lose any sleep over it.
|
Premier Event Coordinator
|
Maybe. Unfortunately, when I was RVC I had experience (on numerous occasions) of organizers artificially inflating their schedule to get the next tier of rewards. Thus they built tables that wouldn't fire into their schedule. I know its not the GMs fault, but I don't like the idea of rewarding those organizers. And it usually takes a few years to detect when its happening, unless it is egregious. Our leaders are generally pretty smart, so the few people out there that take advantage of the system are clever to minimize their exposure.
Then again, that brings up the old issue of punishing the greater community for the actions of a very few and I agree that is not the best way to manage our community. I call it "band aid" resolution theory. Meaning you don't fix a broken leg by putting a band aid on it. Example, when a player is disruptive, we don't ban their character. That only treats the symptom, not the illness. Sometimes our rules, especially when they are created in response to an individual event, have a tendency to treat the symptom not the true cause. The community winds up suffering for the action of one (or a few). We went through this with the boon "pirates" as well.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
To get back on topic, maybe there should be some way for Con organizers to award some amount of AcP for edge cases, such as:
- GMs for tables that don't fire
- Dedicated runners for a Special, that don't get a chronicle
- Overseer GMs
And there are probably some other edge cases. Maybe a practical solution is that the Con organizer can put in a certain amount of people in the Con after action report to receive some AcP that's not directly tied to a reported table. That still gives it a measure of accountability.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe. Unfortunately, when I was RVC I had experience (on numerous occasions) of organizers artificially inflating their schedule to get the next tier of rewards. Thus they built tables that wouldn't fire into their schedule.
I have seen this too, and the issues this causes are WAY bigger than just getting some extra rewards from Paizo. I’m friends with a few people who are the owner/head organizer of conventions. Scheduling tables that aren’t going to make is an easy way to get them extremely angry. They are giving up valuable space because of the PFS organizer’s greed.
In this particular case, I think it was not a case of deliberate greed, but rather misplaced optimism and a failure to think through the consequences of actions. Nevertheless the effect was devastating.
As Bob says, all you can really do is sniff out the bad apples over time. But I generally think convention organizers are trying their best.
I do think there’s room to award ACP without awarding GM glyph credit. I don’t think the system is set up to handle it, but that’s what I’d do.
|
Premier Event Coordinator
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe first we need to decide if AcP is going to be the default reward mechanism for everything. If so, then we can start talking about how we value certain activities vs the baseline value, that being a four-hour table as player or GM. If not, then we can save a lot of time and focus on what rewards we can manage to use and then how they can be valued
|
Venture-Agent, Minnesota
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
To get back on topic, maybe there should be some way for Con organizers to award some amount of AcP for edge cases, such as:
- GMs for tables that don't fire
- Dedicated runners for a Special, that don't get a chronicle
- Overseer GMsAnd there are probably some other edge cases. Maybe a practical solution is that the Con organizer can put in a certain amount of people in the Con after action report to receive some AcP that's not directly tied to a reported table. That still gives it a measure of accountability.
I would support this measure, especially if it only added to AcP rather than actual GM table count.
GM table count is oddly enough one of my biggest incentives. I love to GM, but man, I have this perverse need to see my table count go up. I would support AcP for GMs whose tables did not fire. For any given convention game, I have the tendency to prep for about 10 hours in advance. If its for a special, my prep in excess of 20 hours. When I am at the big show, I want people to come away from my table telling their friends, "Wow, that was an AMAZING game."
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Did you REALLY just call GMs who have a different GMing style than yours "Turds"?No. Its the difference between no effort and effort. If that's a "style" than we have different systems of evaluation.
And for F#$K sake, you are missing the point.
No I'm not.
There are many GMs who do a very good job with very little advance notice and very little prep.
And many GMs who do lots of prep and have lots of toys who aren't particularly good GMs.
And, of course, all combinations thereof.
Many of the GMs, the "Turd" GMs, are stepping in at the last minute because more people showed up than usual.
And many just don't have the time to do the prep that YOU think appropriate. I'd much rather have a somewhat unprepared GM than no GM at all.
Prep time doesn't equal quality.
Calling ANY GM a "Turd" because they didn't do the amount of preparation that YOU think they should do is a completely reprehensible thing to do. Its name calling of the lowest order and, I repeat, you should be ashamed of yourself.
I'm certainly ashamed of you.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Did you REALLY just call GMs who have a different GMing style than yours "Turds"?No. Its the difference between no effort and effort. If that's a "style" than we have different systems of evaluation.
And for F#$K sake, you are missing the point.
Many of the GMs, the "Turd" GMs, are stepping in at the last minute because more people showed up than usual.
You are missing the point. The discussion is about GMs who signed up to run a specific game. Not, last-minute fill-ins.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You are missing the point. The discussion is about GMs who signed up to run a specific game. Not, last-minute fill-ins.Did you REALLY just call GMs who have a different GMing style than yours "Turds"?No. Its the difference between no effort and effort. If that's a "style" than we have different systems of evaluation.
And for F#$K sake, you are missing the point.
Many of the GMs, the "Turd" GMs, are stepping in at the last minute because more people showed up than usual.
They are still not turds. Perhaps, just perhaps (but by no means certainly) they're poor GMs. They are NOT turds.
|
|
You are missing the point. The discussion is about GMs who signed up to run a specific game. Not, last-minute fill-ins.Did you REALLY just call GMs who have a different GMing style than yours "Turds"?No. Its the difference between no effort and effort. If that's a "style" than we have different systems of evaluation.
And for F#$K sake, you are missing the point.
Many of the GMs, the "Turd" GMs, are stepping in at the last minute because more people showed up than usual.
That's not how the criteria he listed reads. It makes no such distinction. Which is pretty pertinent to a discussion on who should be rewarded. Do they want to set up a system where players rate the GM and then only reward high enough scores? Of course not. So no reason to insult or insinuate that GMs without "the proper minis" are turds since they can or cannot be a turd with or without them.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Did you REALLY just call GMs who have a different GMing style than yours "Turds"?No. Its the difference between no effort and effort. If that's a "style" than we have different systems of evaluation.
And for F#$K sake, you are missing the point.
No I'm not.
Yes you are. You're pursuing an off-topic fight.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Can't we stay on topic? Let it go. I will start flagging posts that are not on topic.
To answer Bob's earlier question, I think the decision to make AcP the default reward mechanism for 2e has already been made. And I think there is a good chance it will be expanded to SFS.
So the idea to have some way to for an organizer to give AcP without table credit is good. And I recall that this very same functionality was tested on the reporting area within the last year.
|
Premier Event Coordinator
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I would rather some of reward be made for organizers, but since I do not have an idea what that would be, I cannot really object too much. However, before I get ahead of myself, I'm going to wait to hear confirmation from Tonya before I start brainstorming on how to use AcP for other things it was not originally designed for.
|
|
I'm all for generating some sort of incentive/reward for organizers and marshals. I'm not opposed to people at conventions whose tables don't make being provided something to reward them for their time.
The how is a big enough question, especially since we can't currently get rewarded for tables that we have successfully run. It's easier to add features on the front end, but are we even still on the front end of AcP development? Or are we asking to throw complications into a process that is already mired in complexity? So I'm not sure how productive it is to get people fired up for a solution that may not be technically possible.
However, if you want a discussion, the other question is what constitutes a "table that didn't fire" and who rewards it?
Some scenarios:
A convention table with six people on the sign-up sheet but only one of them shows to the table.
A convention that overestimates the interest in PFS2 and creates 4 tables, only one of which even has a few players sign up for it.
A local Game Day where Warhorn shows 6 players signed up and 2 backups but inclement weather causes the venue to close for that day.
A local Game Day where only a couple of people even show up.
A personal game that I prepared for my friends but all their spouses hijacked them for other activities that day.
|
Venture-Agent, Minnesota
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
However, if you want a discussion, the other question is what constitutes a "table that didn't fire" and who rewards it?
Good discussion clarification. In my mind, this is supposed to be for Convention no-shows. They are by far the most likely and painful of the no-shows. If a blizzard whites out a game locally, I usually just reschedule the game in a couple weeks with no prep-time lost. It still happens, it just happens later. For instance, games cancelled to Covid-19 are starting to happen again, they've just moved online.
A convention table with six people on the sign-up sheet but only one of them shows to the table.
Absolutely. The convention and the GM had every expectation the table would fire.
A convention that overestimates the interest in PFS2 and creates 4 tables, only one of which even has a few players sign up for it.
I would count this too. We cannot expand our PF2 playerbase without making tables available.
A local Game Day where Warhorn shows 6 players signed up and 2 backups but inclement weather causes the venue to close for that day.
Nope. They can reschedule for a later week.
A local Game Day where only a couple of people even show up.
Nope. They can reschedule for a later week.
A personal game that I prepared for my friends but all their spouses hijacked them for other activities that day.
Nope. You can reschedule for a later week, and this time involve the spouses in the scheduling process.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(...)
However, if you want a discussion, the other question is what constitutes a "table that didn't fire" and who rewards it?
Some scenarios:
I saw this question coming. That's why I proposed doing it in the convention after-action report. That gives both a bit more wiggle room for edge cases, and enough accountability to make that work.
A convention table with six people on the sign-up sheet but only one of them shows to the table.
Seems like a good case where "consolation" AcP is appropriate.
A convention that overestimates the interest in PFS2 and creates 4 tables, only one of which even has a few players sign up for it.
This is a good example of why I wanted it done with the after-action report. If it's a small mis-estimation, then that's not a problem. If you have a huge mismatch between what you expected and what actually happened, then that requires some explaining in the AAR.
A local Game Day where Warhorn shows 6 players signed up and 2 backups but inclement weather causes the venue to close for that day.
A local Game Day where only a couple of people even show up.
A personal game that I prepared for my friends but all their spouses hijacked them for other activities that day.
None of these things are conventions that generate after-action reports so that wouldn't work for these. They're also events that have less effort invested in them (normally) than committing to GM at a convention, so the need to make good for it is less.
|
|
Great discussion! Please keep it up!
To add more topics, what is the correct amount of AcP for a table that does not fire?
I think 2 points is reasonable. This is a set amount regardless of the "level" if the convention (Premier, Premier Plus) or the store (RSP).
What is the correct amount of AcP for organizers and other convention helpers?
I think 1 point is reasonable. The reason I say 1 is because these activities are not directly tied to the running of the table. Yes I have organized conventions. I see that as part of the job I volunteer to do as a Venture-Officer.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A local Game Day where Warhorn shows 6 players signed up and 2 backups but inclement weather causes the venue to close for that day.
Nope. They can reschedule for a later week.
I'm not disagreeing with that reasoning or disagreeing with the idea that this is something that should be limited to conventions, but here's some food for thought, if the idea that a folded table is sunk preparation cost to the GM that should be compensated (excluding games in your own house at your full leisure).
Real world example: I am contractually obligated to work 50% of weekends, so 2 out of 4 or 2.5 out of 5. I don't get much say in which weekends those are. Could be every other weekend, could be 4 weekends in a row if it's the last 2 of one month and the first 2 of the next month. My wife is stuck with two kids while I'm at work and if I go to a Game Day, so she only lets me go to 1 per month. Game Days are the 1st and 3rd Saturdays. I sign up to GM a table. I prep the table. I'm ready to go on my assigned Game Day. The venue is closed due to some unforeseen emergency.
Yes. My VL can reschedule the scenario for next Game Day. I can't run it then. Someone else runs it. When I'm next able to attend a Game Day, that scenario is not being offered (we have a small PFS population).
So, I did the work on behalf of someone else organizing PFS, but that work ended up being wasted. Why am I not being compensated?
I don't think I should. I've never been compensated for my table folding except to be able to go play at a table with a seat. But others with other variations on my scheduling difficulties may feel that they should.
I'm also fortunate that I can take my work and port it to online (PbP or virtual table), so I don't mind.
But that could also be said of most people.