|
I just really can't see why this couldn't have been eased into. We're going to start a different system does not automatically mean that the old system has to stop before the new system is in place.
You met bob and you will slot bobs boon at a later date and do something... that can get ditched no problem. You just put the effect in in the next chronicle.
This chronicle doesn't really yell too loudly for a boon so it doesn'th have one.. ok. Not a problem.
But the special not having a boon was a real let down. It doesn't reduce the burden so much as move it (which can be important). But i don't think you'll ever be as excited about a boon as right after the game.
There's also the matter of paizo website tech. I don't think you can blame the fans for being cautious with expections relying on the website working
|
|
This isn't a problem now. I don't know why it would be a problem in the future.
Because right now you can produce the receipts (Chronicle sheet), whereas in a paperless system you can only show evidence of what has been logged.
If the GM could hand you a chit on the spot (even just a slip of paper with the scenario details and relevant sums - xp/credits etc) you would have something you could evidence in the interim.
|
|
I'm not seeing the bandwidth working for in-person venues as dozens (or hundreds) of tables try to report their results all at once when there are normally bottlenecks in the process.
Or, to put it a different way, in the unlikely event of in-person venues ever happening again, is OPF going to buy a tablet for every GM to be able to put their reporting up in real-time as an incentive to encourage reporting?
And pay for the Wifi/internet to get them reported?
Perhaps I'm just seeing the darkness here, but it's hard to see light.
Venture-Lieutenant, Indiana—Indianapolis
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For my view of this whole topic, one thing that hasn’t been said enough, if at all:
Let’s just trust Paizo. They have demonstrated time and again that they are willing to try to things to make things better for the organized play world, and they listen when things don’t go right.
So, maybe we just trust them to do right by the community.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, lately, they have been very enamored with high tech solutions to problems that do not exist. Data is fleeting, paper is eternalFor my view of this whole topic, one thing that hasn’t been said enough, if at all:
Let’s just trust Paizo. They have demonstrated time and again that they are willing to try to things to make things better for the organized play world, and they listen when things don’t go right.
So, maybe we just trust them to do right by the community.
This made me laugh. Paper is far from eternal. I lose paper things all the time. When I want to keep something forever I usually do it digitally.
I see a lot of problems with this new paperless approach. I actually think digital is a great way to manage this stuff... But Paizo's track record with software is not inspiring.
|
|
I'm not seeing the bandwidth working for in-person venues as dozens (or hundreds) of tables try to report their results all at once when there are normally bottlenecks in the process.Or, to put it a different way, in the unlikely event of in-person venues ever happening again, is OPF going to buy a tablet for every GM to be able to put their reporting up in real-time as an incentive to encourage reporting?
And pay for the Wifi/internet to get them reported?
Perhaps I'm just seeing the darkness here, but it's hard to see light.
we'll have a vaccine at some point next year and that will get life back to normalish.
|
|
Missed where I was going, BNW.
I don't make a butt-tonne of money where I work.
I'm lucky to have a job at all.
The resources I possess would not support on-line reporting at a convention or not-so-local FGS from my phone or my exceptionally outdated Fire.
Without paper, I'd be kind of sunk for keeping track of things.
I can't be the only player and GM in this position, can I?
|
I think it's a position based on invalid assumptions.
You're attaching the problem of reporting delays to some imagined inability to play two tables back-to-back.
That doesn't happen now. Why would you think it would happen in the future?
Current system: You play a game. You get a Chronicle with X rewards. You move on to the next game.
Future system: You play a game and get X rewards. You move on to the next game.
This whole idea of needing some "gaming receipt" isn't in practice now. What makes you think it will be in the future? If I sit down to Slot #1 at a Convention and that game Levels my character up, I don't need to show the GM for Slot #2 evidence that I just sat down at the table next to them. In the absolute hypothetical universe where that happens, I'd first still point out they're being silly, and then show them the Convention schedule or a picture of the sign-in sheet (that I took because I'm being a responsible player).
I might not have access to the free AcP Boon for that Chronicle until reporting concludes, but that, again, does not interfere with my ability to play another game.
|
|
This conversation is spread across two Forums and multiple Blogs, so for those who aren't aware, playing Part 1 of [insert series here] will be all that's required for recognition in Part 2, rather than the way series have worked previously, with Part 1 giving you a Boon and Part 2 asking if you have that Boon.
Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Turku
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Current system: You play a game. You get a Chronicle with X rewards. You move on to the next game.
I know I should get about 2200 credits for a game and that should be enough for me to buy the new thing I want which I already planned out. I check the chronicle sheet and see that it did indeed give enough credits so I purchase it, and happily brandish my new awesome-stick in the next game.
Future system: You play a game and get X rewards. You move on to the next game.
I no longer know if I got enough credits to buy that thing. I don't know if I can afford it or not. The scenario might have had a cool boon I would have slotted for the next game: I don't have it on the sheet so I don't know. The game isn't reported yet so I can't even check the AcP system if the scenario had a cool boon. The boon might have special effects for the next scenario specifically, and they are run back to back in a con because they make for a story arc - But I won't know that until a day or two after the games.
Worse, my character dies. I had 21 fame. Scenario should have given me 4 fame, making my total 25, which would be enough for a resurrection ritual.Did we get full fame? I forgot to ask the GM because I didn't realize it would be -crucial- in the next adventure, and now I'm stuck in a limbo until the GM reports our success online.
The credit example is probably less of an issue in SFS where, I believe, "full rewards" is more common. 2e has much stricter treasure bundle requirements and some scenarios easily end up giving less than the regular maximum.
Another thing I’m really excited about, is that this lets us review past scenarios. For example, it’s clear that a lot of people want 3-00 to offer a special reward. COOL, with the ACP system we can go back and add that reward post-event without having the hassle of re-issuing a Chronicle sheet and forcing a new PDF upload for a product and creating a weird discrepancy between Chronicles. Case and point, we can easily apply bonuses to as many Season 3 scenarios as we want, or even go back to some of the Season 1 or 2 scenarios that we think might need a bump. It’s a really flexible system that lets us be more in-line with the community and better able to adapt to customer feedback; just like the feedback here.
Well yes, but actually no. The boons -need- to be in some sort of easily searchable order and/or arranged in a sensible way. There -needs- to be a system in place to tell you when new boons are made available for scenarios you've already played. I think paizo vastly overestimates how often an average player visits their paizo account. The answer is probably pretty close to "once per creating a new character". There's quite literally no reason to visit your organized play page once a character has been created, unless you're a GM and report your games.
The 2e special had an empty chronicle sheet. That was disappointing.
The sheet has now been updated with a text that the sheet gives you access to a special boon in the AcP system. If I wasn't a venture officer and active user in the VO discord server, I wouldn't know about this. However, I've been visiting the organized play page daily to check if the boon is online already. It isn't.
Now imagine that the scenario wasn't a special, but just a "very special feeling regular scenario". The adventure was cool, you made impact with locals, made new friends, discovered ancient pre-gap tech or something - stuff you'd except that might end up as a boon.
But the sheet is empty.
How often, and for how long, do you (you=OP organization) expect players to regularly "check online to see if the adventure got a boon"?
EDIT: also, I gotta echo the sentiment here that FIRST ending the current practice, and THEN LATER implementing a new system, feels like madness. I think the OP really should have had the two systems overlap instead, before getting rid of the old one.
|
|
Future system: You play a game and get X rewards. You move on to the next game.I no longer know if I got enough credits to buy that thing.
Worse, my character dies. I had 21 fame. Scenario should have given me 4 fame, making my total 25, which would be enough for a resurrection ritual.
Did we get full fame? I forgot to ask the GM because I didn't realize it would be -crucial- in the next adventure, and now I'm stuck in a limbo until the GM reports our success online.
These aren't issues.
I hate to sound like I'm saying your opinions aren't valid, but how do 99% of RPG games in the world operate? You have a character sheet that you track your information on.
If you don't know how much XP, Fame or Currency you have, that's not Paizo's fault. That's poor record keeping. And that's not a new thing. It dates back to the first season of PFS1. Heck it probably dates back to the first gaming group ever.
The ONE complaint with merit, which I already addressed, is wanting the cool Boon and the AcP immediately. But even then, that's just a want. Not a need. You can, as I suggested, simply wait to play that character again after everything has been reported.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Turku
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But if I do not get a chronicle sheet, how do I know how much gold, xp, and fame I got from the adventure? "Ask the GM, And then scribble it to a piece of paper" - And how is that a better option than getting a chronicle sheet that lists the amount of gold, xp, and fame I got?
The issue here literally is that OP wants to move to digital record keeping in a system where your digital records may not be up to date, or may be updated at a delay, when the whole program currently/previously lived by the mantra "it's your papers that count, what the paizo page says doesn't matter".
we can go back and add that reward post-event without having the hassle of re-issuing a Chronicle sheet and forcing a new PDF upload for a product and creating a weird discrepancy between Chronicles.
A prime example where this *might* be beneficial:
Shattered ShieldThe scenario has a cool item that feels like it really should be on the chronicle sheet, Sayre said they were investigating the issue. Part of the issue was that it would be hard to add it to the chronicle sheets after the adventure had already been played.
How, exactly, is a "check this Organized Play page to see if the boon got added" a better solution than "check the Gm thread to see that the item got added"?
This just adds yet another page on the long list of various resources we need to keep track of to stay informed of organized play stuff and changes.
Also, if the OP previously did not have time/resources to correct issues like this (or various other chronicle sheet errors and weirdness) by simply posting a reply on a forum thread, what makes the OP think they'll have time/resources to "go back and add stuff to old adventures" in the form of AcP boons?
And it's not about wanting the cool boon immediately. It's the fact that if the cool boon isn't on the sheet, for a lot of players it might as well not exist. I've understood that you play a lot face to face and on different lodges, correct? How many of those regular players you think check their organized page daily / weekly / monthly? How many of them visit the paizo page/forums *at all*?
OR:
Old system:
"Oh, you marked my character number as 2002, it's supposed to be 2004, can you fix that?" "Sure!"
"Oh, when I got home I noticed that my character number was wrong, 2002, should be 2004. I'll just correct it on this paper sheet."
"Oh, the paper is correct but the GM reported the game to wrong number. No matter, it's the sheet that counts."
New system:
"Oh, GM reported the game to the wrong number. It's unlikely that I can successfully contact this random GM from another country/con/online game to correct the issue, so now my records are wrong. I could send an email to paizo to fix it but they already have a backlog and probably could do something better with their time than fix this simple mistake that could be corrected with a pencil in 5 seconds. Well, at least the paper is correct - Wait, now I can't access the boon with the correct character because the adventure is assigned to the wrong one."
Also, yes, a problem of poor bookkeeping. Difference is that in the old system, *I* am the one doing the bookkeeping, and if it's messed up, that's *my* fault and *my* headache.
Moving online, the bookkeeping becomes the responsibility of *other* people to correctly report everything online, and if it's messed up, it's still *my* headache even though it isn't *my* fault.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Moving online, the bookkeeping becomes the responsibility of *other* people to correctly report everything online, and if it's messed up, it's still *my* headache even though it isn't *my* fault.
This is my biggest reservation of paperless--and remains a reservation of the AcP system.
EDIT: Without a chronicle, I don't even have a GM number or Event number to reference when my credit shows up wrong or not at all.
|
|
Moving online, the bookkeeping becomes the responsibility of *other* people to correctly report everything online, and if it's messed up, it's still *my* headache even though it isn't *my* fault.This is my biggest reservation of paperless--and remains a reservation of the AcP system.
EDIT: Without a chronicle, I don't even have a GM number or Event number to reference when my credit shows up wrong or not at all.
"Was it the big DM with the beard or the small skinny dm...they only come in two sizes..."
|
|
But if I do not get a chronicle sheet, how do I know how much gold, xp, and fame I got from the adventure?The same way you do today, did yesterday, and did years ago with your first home game: your GM tells you.
And then you have to write it down just in case and....
It looks like on the players end you're heading towards the campaign journal idea. (Which is a less paper system which is good but not a paperless system)
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Turku
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But if I do not get a chronicle sheet, how do I know how much gold, xp, and fame I got from the adventure?The same way you do today, did yesterday, and did years ago with your first home game: your GM tells you.
Thanks for also including the next sentence and definitely not quoting me out of context:
And then I write it on a paper - and what was the benefit of this new system, again, when compared to the GM giving me the chronicle sheet?EDIT: Or are you actually trying to say that we should ignore paizo's attempt at moving recordkeeping online and just pretend it doesn't exist?
|
But if I do not get a chronicle sheet, how do I know how much gold, XP, and fame I got from the adventure?The same way you do today, did yesterday, and did years ago with your first home game: your GM tells you.Thanks for also including the next sentence and definitely not quoting me out of context:
And then I write it on a paper - and what was the benefit of this new system, again, when compared to the GM giving me the chronicle sheet?
I don't know about you, but I can probably fit gold, XP, fame, and reputation awards from at least 20 chronicles on 1 side of one sheet of paper and that is a conservative estimate accounting for my lousy handwriting. That right there is 39 fewer sheets of paper for every 40 chronicles I would have otherwise had. That seems like an improvement if I care about reducing paper waste.
That assumes I don't note it down on my printed out character sheet, which is what I would likely do and thus 0 additional pages to bring with my character sheet. Also if I am using a character sheet on my tablet or phone, then I can note the information in a document on my tablet or phone.
EDIT: Or are you actually trying to say that we should ignore Paizo's attempt at moving recordkeeping online and just pretend it doesn't exist?
This is not a sudden move to paperless, this is the first step towards a goal of paperless. They are taking time with this seeing what they can do away with and what they can't. Perhaps we/they will find that the problems of going completely paperless outweigh the gains and the process will be halted or even reversed some. Paizo has shown in playtests that they are not afraid to make major changes because something doesn't work, why would Org Play be any different.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Turku
|
Okay, so you suggest that we keep a running tally on a separate paper or backside of the character sheet.
In that case, why bother with the hassle to move the sheets and boons and rewards online? Paizo could have just told us that "in the future adventures don't include chronicle sheets. GM will tell you the amount you gain, as per the organized play guide. Keep a running tally in whatever method you find the most convenient."
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think one of the issues here is that most people seem to be equating going “paperless” with the elimination of chronicle sheets. They don’t have to be linked. We could just move to issuing chronicle sheets digitally instead of printing them out. Sure there are some challenges with that like how to get a chronicle immediately after a live game at a convention, but the challenges are not insurmountable. They require communication, cooperation, and a little less chicken little. Now is a good time to be pursuing many paperless options since there is very little live gaming going on. As we install paperless features, we can be forecasting how they would be implemented for live gaming once that option becomes a reality. This is really no different than a few years ago when the online community was launched and we had to resolve how to issue chronicles and boons, how to deal with reporting sheets, how to audit a character when necessary, etc. Let’s not pretend that these are insurmountable tasks. We probably also need to anticipate some of the rules that go into effect are not going to be universally ideal for the entire community. Just like the RSP program, the five-star rubric, etc. some outlier areas may have to adopt reasonable exceptions or accommodations in order to meet the needs of the players, GMs, and Paizo.
Our community is certainly a good example of people who resist change. It’s rarely the same people every time, but every new idea or rule is always met with some level of resistance or outrage.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
] Just like the RSP program, the five-star rubric, etc. some outlier areas may have to adopt reasonable exceptions or accommodations in order to meet the needs of the players, GMs, and Paizo.
...probably not the best example given the steadfast refusal to make any accommodation for that one whatsoever :p
|
|
How so? AFAIK, the RVCs have been given their typical permission to adjust the rules of the oversight evaluations if it is needed in their region. So an area like Australia that probably cannot support multiple live evaluations by VCs (or whatever) can still be performed. I haven’t heard the rubric being applied any differently than a multitude of other rules that govern org play under RVC oversight.
|
|
Let’s not pretend that these are insurmountable tasks.
To be fair to the unvoiced, those of us who have been a part of the Online Region and those of us currently playing in the online venue, the strategies used in the Online Region work for us.
However, those not playing in the online venue right now because they cannot are going to potentially have insurmountable obstacles to participating under virtual life rules when face-to-face gaming resumes and may be excluded.
If "we" are OK with that, well, then we're OK with that. But the people who are going to have the biggest problem with it are going to be the people least likely to have a voice right now.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Indiana—Indianapolis
|
I think one of the issues here is that most people seem to be equating going “paperless” with the elimination of chronicle sheets. They don’t have to be linked. We could just move to issuing chronicle sheets digitally instead of printing them out. Sure there are some challenges with that like how to get a chronicle immediately after a live game at a convention, but the challenges are not insurmountable. They require communication, cooperation, and a little less chicken little. Now is a good time to be pursuing many paperless options since there is very little live gaming going on. As we install paperless features, we can be forecasting how they would be implemented for live gaming once that option becomes a reality. This is really no different than a few years ago when the online community was launched and we had to resolve how to issue chronicles and boons, how to deal with reporting sheets, how to audit a character when necessary, etc. Let’s not pretend that these are insurmountable tasks. We probably also need to anticipate some of the rules that go into effect are not going to be universally ideal for the entire community. Just like the RSP program, the five-star rubric, etc. some outlier areas may have to adopt reasonable exceptions or accommodations in order to meet the needs of the players, GMs, and Paizo.
Our community is certainly a good example of people who resist change. It’s rarely the same people every time, but every new idea or rule is always met with some level of resistance or outrage.
I am glad you are the one who brought up the whole idea of challenges not being insurmountable.
I recall a time when someone, and I shan’t name names, suggested selling tickets to the multi-table specials by tier. “No way!” People cried! “That will never work!” They said.
And it worked, and we no longer needed long queues in the hall for a mustering process that took forever.
Where there is a will, there is a way. You have certainly proved that, and I agree with you on this, too.
|
|
How so? AFAIK, the RVCs have been given their typical permission to adjust the rules of the oversight evaluations if it is needed in their region.
Got some actual info on that? This is the very first time there has been any suggestion anywhere since the thing came out that there was any movement available.
Comms is not the OP strong point, and perhaps this is what is adding to the feelings about these changes.
|
|
I agree that communication has trended poorly in many instances, but if you go back and review the purpose of the VO program and how those community leaders have been used over the years, especially with regards to the RVCs, you’ll find that in nearly every case, they have been given discretion to make accommodations to administrative rules to account for the differences in regional demographics since the outset. I would always, in every case, encourage you to discuss any problems you are experiencing with the implementation of campaign rules. I wouldn’t expect deviation from game mechanical rules, but when it comes to campaign oversight and administration, I’ve never known an RVC to be unable/unwilling to help make adjustments and cooperate with their community to make the rules work for them. So before you generate too much outrage, I strongly encourage you to contact and work with your RVC to resolve your issue with the rubric. Don’t expect them to make a theoretical or region-wide ruling, so don’t waste time how the rules might not work or how they might affect you sometime in the future, but if there is some part of the expectations that is affecting you personally I’m sure they will help create a solution. Good luck and...
Explore! Report! Cooperate!
|
|
...are going to potentially have insurmountable obstacles to participating under virtual life rules when face-to-face gaming resumes and may be excluded
Sorry, I disagree. None of our rules are insurmountable. There are always multiple ways to overcome a challenge. The issue usually comes down to the individual’s willingness to take advantage of them. Sorry, but that doesn’t make the problem insurmountable, that makes the player uncooperative.
|
|
...are going to potentially have insurmountable obstacles to participating under virtual life rules when face-to-face gaming resumes and may be excludedSorry, I disagree. None of our rules are insurmountable. There are always multiple ways to overcome a challenge. The issue usually comes down to the individual’s willingness to take advantage of them. Sorry, but that doesn’t make the problem insurmountable, that makes the player uncooperative.
Some combination of the two is always a possibility.
Organized Play Manager
|
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
Reading through the thread and wanted to share some thoughts/context.
-Status Update. I made a Chronicle Boon pool last night on our system. It is specifically to hold 0 cost boon items given to characters for participating in adventures. Some of you may see it on your totals now (or may not, as we found an issue and I turned it off). Scenarios were giving one award of ACP (PFS2) and one award of Chronicle Boons, but double the GM XP for each table. That is a bit of an issue. We reported it to tech and a fix is already in the works.
-Boon types. In the future, we intend to have boons that cost nothing and unlock for characters by playing scenarios, achieving recognition levels from factions (to account for the Faction slot boons) or by some other measurable parameter (membership in an order?) and boons that cost AcP and can be purchased by any character on an account. Some of the current Fame cost boons will wind up in each of the pools. That is something we are actively determining.
-Dev resources. The OP developers process 50,000+ words a month. We've also had a change in personnel (Compton leaving, James joining) and several personal crises since Aug 2019. And now a pandemic. Work from home is fraught at best. So we are looking at ways to relieve the cognitive load on our devs. One of those was to remove boons from every chronicle. Mike Sayre had a great response on this topic in another thread (can't find it now, but will link when I do) that summarizes the situation far better than I can (I think Thursty mentioned something too, in his post up thread).
-Boons return. The double dip GM issue is the ONLY thing holding back putting boons into the system. I've got PFS2 #2-00 written and ready to upload. I just can't turn it on until we fix the calculation issue. They won't be on all scenarios but will be able to make appearances once the issue is fixed.
-Going paperless. OP spends a massive amount on printing boons/chronicles every year for the sponsored cons (well over 10k). We are now in a digital age where most people have access. We made printing items optional several years ago. So now, we make that printing person dependant. Do you like binders of paper? Print away. Do you like storing items in the cloud? No problem. You don't have a computer and cannot access one anywhere in your location? We can try and come up with workarounds.
-Data. OP is just one facet of Paizo and every part of the business wants resources and support. I can't argue that we need our "fair share" when we don't know what that is. The best tools I have to determine the OP footprint are reported games and convention support data. I've got the latter on several spreadsheets. But I need the community to report their games so that we can see the former. Then I've got the tools necessary to say "OP has X members and Y games and Z growth from last year" which is far better than "I think OP makes up 25% of Paizo's player base". Asking the community to report didn't work. Tying living campaign outcomes to checkboxes had some minor success. Giving people items in exchange for reporting online? Data supports that is working and we are getting a better picture of how many games OP is supporting.
-Chronicles. I've never said we would be getting rid of chronicles. I understand our online reporting system isn't reliable at this point and taking away the player's proof of play would cause significant issues. Will we change how games are tracked? Most likely yes. As several people pointed out, you don't need a whole page of paper to log XP, Gold/Credits, Faction Awards, and GM/Event Info. If this year has taught me something, it is that completing chronicles online can be a barrier for GMs. Getting them completed between sessions and emailed to players even more so. So players this year are already responding to fixes of how to get the info and move to their next session without chronicle sheets.
Some solutions - a spreadsheet-style of tracker, with space for all the info above and GM initials? Or a form fillable generic form where the game info and rewards can be added and sent immediately. Some questions - Do we need a GM signature? Does the logo need to be on the sheet? How about the summaries? They are a fave feature. So what about quarter sheets. But that opens up the problem of"lost" papers as they are small. This is something the team has thought about, continues to think about, and will probably have more information gathering on before we get to a final decision.
-Workarounds to problems. We strive to make programs accessible by all. From reducing the burden regarding "owned resources" to signing up congoers to sessions when they couldn't navigate themselves to allowing digital resources instead of lugging books to building methods for no-con goers to get boons to making support programs that flex by region to implementing retail benefits for FLGS to encourage play. This applies to observation games too. I was not willing to flex on several points. 1) using an established set of criteria to evaluate GM performance 2) observation by more than one source or 3)engaging in speculative solutions to issues. But I don't remember conversations where I told anyone their recognition would cost thousands of dollars or be impossible to achieve. I remember saying we would answer each issue on a case by case basis. So if ANYONE is nearing their 4th recognition point (Star, Nova, Glyph) and wants to discuss viable plans, let's do it!
-Communication. The VO forums have been impossible to navigate for some time. They also excluded one of the largest groups of VOs. And finding threads (when you could get to them) were a nightmare. They also didn't keep much separation between OP and OPF (they are different things). So we set up a Discord channel early in 2020. Alex and I are in there daily answering questions, discussing topics, and conducting OP business. The conversations are engaging and much good come of them. To whit, a potential guide addition that was going to cause problems was seen, discussed, and a revision put in place that worked for both volunteer organizers and OP. This kind of collaborative environment is best for our program and one I encourage any VO not currently involved in to join. To gain access, send an email to the orgplay address and ask for admittance.
Wow, I wrote more than I intended. The bottom line is I know the team are both caretakers for the community and a part of a company whose goal is to make a profit. We strive to balance these goals and find the middle ground between them. Our inbox is always open and we look forward to working with everyone to create a campaign we all can enjoy.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This applies to observation games too. I was not willing to flex on several points. 1) using an established set of criteria to evaluate GM performance 2) observation by more than one source or 3)engaging in speculative solutions to issues. But I don't remember conversations where I told anyone their recognition would cost thousands of dollars or be impossible to achieve.
Thanks for addressing this point.
In the discussions on the Underwater forum about the (at the time) proposed rubric myself and other (European) GMs raised that the requirement for the Rubric to be 'VC only' would raise a significant barrier. We identified the ramifications would be the need to travel across significant distances - even to other countries - to play with another VC.
The discussion was raised again on the public forum where rubric was discussed openly and with more detail. Once again it was noted that the VC only piece was a significant hurdle (and the travel piece and costs involved established once more).
It has also been raised in this discussion.
It's not a theoretical issue anymore, it's an actual one - I'm about to hit my 4th Nova (of course that is now pushed back a couple of months since my table count went backwards from the retrospectively-applied Free RPG nerf) but we're pretty much here now.
Whilst we're not being told it should cost us thousands, we've been pointing out since as early as April 2019 that this will be the case.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have there been surveys about this?
Put me down for "pro boons on chronicle sheets" :)
|
|
The point Tonya is making is that their endgame is transitioning to everything electronic.
If you want a full-page still, the onus is now on you to print it. Not OP or the GM. Which I think is fine. When I first started GMing a burned a lot of paper and ink every other weekend printing scenarios and chronicles.
Then when I picked up a tablet I just had to pay out on chronicles and that made a big difference. Not having to print up to 20 of those a gameday will be even nicer for me.
And as they're talking about a spreadsheet, or a form that can fit 20 trackers of the basics like gold, xp, and fame and a little spot for items? Well that saves even more paper for everyone.
Not every chronicle has a boon, and for all the ones that don't this works great, with the few that do you just pop onto the system later to download. (Likely as the system gets used they're still include the boons in the scenario so the GM can tell you about that.)
And I also really prefer this system just for the fact now instead of having a ton of useless boons I will never remember even exist, I can just give the boons to PCs that can take advantage.
|
|
So what about quarter sheets.
Something online learned with the alien archive boon is that taking and tracking 6 files, saving them finding them, opening them, editing them, saving them again, and sending them back out all while tracking who's file is who's is an enormous pain in the tail. If there's a quarter sheet, it has to be something the DM can send out and the player can paintshop onto their journal on their end.
If this year has taught me something, it is that completing chronicles online can be a barrier for GMs. Getting them completed between sessions and emailed to players even more so.
I know this is a perennial kerfuffle, but the assumptions of passing the sheet back and forth that make the player putting in starting cash starting XP fame spent and final fame relatively easy in meat space (and wasn't getting a heck of a lot of use in practice there) push the amount of information past what the DM can quickly get on a chronicle
Player Name character name character number faction all being on one means that thats one line to copy and past from your spreadsheet to the chronicle. (which is why i recommend collecting the data in that order)
Xp and fame are 99% of the time the same for the entire group. So that goes onto the base chronicle and gets copied over.
That leaves 2 DM items to line up and enter, the dayjob and cash earned.
Filling out the chronicle to specs gives you 8 items you need to track and line up. That doesn't sound like much, but its the difference between doing something 12 and 48 times in a 6 player group.
Its also doing it with a more unwieldy data set.
BigNorseWolf BigNorseWolfFenrir Vanguard43154-715Exoguardians 727DayJob40weirdstuff
hacking off and escorting the last two items where they belong is pretty easy (although I will say a few Androids with numbers in their names have gotten some interesting chronicle numbers)
vs
BigNorseWolfBigNorseWolfFenrir Vanguard43154-701Exoguardians458281150727401200717weird stuff
or
BigNorseWolf BigNorseWolf Fenrir Vanguard 43154-701 Exoguardians Starting xp 4 Final xp 5 Initial Fame 8 Fame Spent 2 Final Fame 8 Starting Credits 1150 credits earned 727 Dayjob 40 Credits spent 1200 Final total 717
You copy paste to the wrong sheet, you ctrl c'd but it didn't pick up the new number it got the old one, you wind up flipping back and forth between the chronicle sheet and the spreadsheet...do it six times it starts to add up.
Especially since it's the not fun paper work portion of the game. I'll spend an hours programming monsters to save 30 seconds per round during the scenario or 2 hours photoshopping a total drama island outhouse/ confession booth for a scenario because I think it gets a laugh out of the players and sets the tone but this..? Person A putting in the numbers person B tells them instead of person B putting in the numbers person B knows ? It's grating.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I only need two things (three if you count character number separately) from a player to give them a chronicle: PFS number-character number and Downtime activity information.
A. I need PFS-Character Number to make sure the chronicle goes on the correct character and Downtime activity because it's variable upon player whim and maybe a dice roll.
B. I fill in the XP, Fame, and Reputation based upon the scenario results.
C. I fill out the event name/number, date, and my GM number because they're known to me.
The rest (player name, character name, starting XP, etc.) I leave to the player to write in.
When I complete chronicles, I do them in this order: C when I get the table assignment, B immediately upon completion of the scenario, and A as I refer to my sign-in sheet and upload/pass out chronicles.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's not a theoretical issue anymore...You should discuss this issue with your RVC and see what accommodations can be made to reward your efforts.
I can do both - point out the unfairness of a ruling and its impact on others who live outside the US (and possibly within as well) AND raise the issue via the Region co-ord again.
I'd rather the problem fixed for all via the official channels than fixed just for me via my 'mates network'.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In a campaign that covers the entire world, there is no way we are going to create administrative rules that both work for everyone, everywhere and accomplishes what the Org Play leadership intends. If we could, we would have done so years ago. No one likes rules variation, but it’s inevitable and unavoidable.
|
|
I only need two things...
I think we are going to find a very wide divide on what GMs ask/expect when completing chronicle sheets. For myself I have one of two procedures depending on venue. If the event is live, I ask for your last chronicle sheet. If an online event, I ask for all the top of sheet data and starting values. I complete everything on the sheet except for the wealth section (after Downtime) and the ending value for the Fame. Both of those are left for the player to spend their wealth, either currency or fame, and total it before the next game.
