Why are we prohibited from telling people that playing scenario X will grant them access to the Y uncommon weapon?


Pathfinder Society

51 to 55 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ***** Venture-Agent, Minnesota

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I try to address the content as well, most of the time.

(Sometimes even I hit a wall and just tell people to stop sniping. As TOZ notes though, It's remarkably ineffective to do that. But we all make mistakes.)

:)

Much more effective is doing a summary of the views expressed in the thread -- but with the insults and angst mostly snipped out. That allows everyone to know that they have been heard while taking out the grar, and let's the conversation continue in a calmer matter. But that takes a lot of time. So let's address the current question.

Is it polite to tell people where to get the thing?

I believe that in the old days of 1E chronicle boons, it was important to keep the secret and the surprise of the story. Now that most chronicle boons are showing up as an ACP option, I think the matter is moot. If someone asks us where to get that katana, I think we should tell them.

Hmm

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

Hmm wrote:
Tone matters

Except it is nearly impossible to determine tone through written word. The best course is generally to assume no tone when reading, especially forum postings. If you try to interpret tone here, you will likely be wrong more often than not.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Deleting the post because I just saw Hmm posted and it's for me a sufficient response for the moment. But still won't hide that parts of what I have read in that topic didn't contribute to the thing at all. (still kept a copy of the post for good measure)

***

Just skipping the whole tone argument.

TwilightKnight wrote:
I don't need everyone to agree to be reasonable and respectful for me to do it. I'm not going to tolerate the occasional vitriol I have received or I have witnessed others receive because they asked a simply question about boons in good faith.

This sounds all good and fine until theory comes into practice.

Blake's Tiger wrote:

So if Bob asks, "I heard there's a chronicle that grants access to fire poi. What scenario is that in?"

Dan can respond, "I'm not going to tell you because I think that ruins the spirit of the game."

Dan should not respond, "That's chronicle fishing and a big No-No, you lazy little scumbucket!"

So what happens when Dan does respond like that? Will you walk off and allow him to do it unchallenged, or will you step in and try to impose your interpretation of the rules on him?

Blake's Tiger wrote:

Eric can respond, "It's the first chronicle in Extinction Curse (note I'm writing this before Extinction Curse has been sanctioned)."

Dan should not respond, "Hey! Don't tell him! He's lazy and you're ruining the game for everyone you son of a goat!"

Dan could respond, "Hey. I don't think you should be posting chronicle information in the public forum. If you think it's OK to tell people, please do it in private (PM)."

Again, what happens if Eric disagrees, and replies, "Well, all the boons are posted on the Paizo site, so they're fair game"?

Does Dan now respectfully agree to disagree and que sera, sera?

---

It is helpful if people are nice and respectful to each other. But it is necessary for Pathfinder Society to agree on certain rules. As a matter of fact, I think it's one of the only functions of Pathfinder Society, to make a uniform set of rules.

Whether the boon-scenario pairings are public information or not is a question that needs to be answered, Society can't "both sides" it or just agree that as long as everyone is nice to each other it will work out.

If we "agree to politely disagree" on this, then by default, the answer is that boon-scenario pairings are public information because someone will make it public outside of Society's control, e.g., posting a screenshot of the Paizo page on Reddit. And people who decline to give out the Google-able information are going to be viewed as "the bad guys," enforcing "non-existent rules."

3/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

My opinion: full transparency, all the time. Call it post-game chatter in the locker room, where you'll make friends with the other team and won't mind telling them where to get that hockey gear at half price.

This is a game.

51 to 55 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Why are we prohibited from telling people that playing scenario X will grant them access to the Y uncommon weapon? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.