|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not really sure where to share this. Some of this is just sorta thinking out loud. No offense is intended and hopefully this isn't breaking any sort of rule, policy, etc. Its just questions of curiosity.
I was thinking about how PFS1 is declining. I know there are still a lot of people who want to play but I'm betting a lot of it has to do with limited replays. I get it, part of that is by design for Paizo trying to push people to get onboard with PFS2. And that is great for those who enjoy it. But for those who would still like to flesh out some builds for PFS1 and never got to their options for doing so are limited.
But what if they weren't? What if replays were less limited? I know that there is no way to change the rules for PFS1. But theoretically speaking is there anything stopping a community from building an alternative organized play environment for playing Pathfinder 1? The rules could be nearly identical to current PFS1 rules but with replays made more open (but not unlimited).
Would this be ... legal? Does it go against any policy or anything? If a community wanted to create a system and environment to carry out a plan like this is it possible without running afoul of Paizo? Are scenarios, chronicles, boons, etc. legally off limits for such a concept?
Is it blasphemy to bring this up? Perhaps some kinda taboo?
And before anyone brings it up, I personally lack the time, motivation, skill and ability to accomplish anything like this myself. Consider me more of an idea man on this. If such a project were possible, legal and didn't cause any other sort of problem I would support it though. I'm guessing I wouldn't be alone. Mostly this just stems from wanting to play more PFS1 but being limited by replays.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This exact question has come up before, but I cannot find the thread right now.
(I searched for "replay" going back 4 years, if anyone else gets the idea to try something else)
The answer is "no", but you probably already guessed that. The Pathfinder Society name, Chronicles, everything is Paizo intellectual property.
You could certainly do any type of home game, but it wouldn't be compatible with actual Organized Play.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
More or less repeating myself from September
This is at least the
thirdfourth proposal I’ve seen for some form of “community takeover” of PFS1 and continuing/expanding 1st edition play. I’m not opposed to such an idea but there are significant challenges. First and foremost being getting enough players to agree on such a change. If one group accepts an updated Stay of Execution chronicle but another does not then people are going to get their PCs caught in limbo. If two or more different people put out their own competing versions it gets even worse. The more times the campaign forks the more it’s not really a consistent world-wide Campaign.What would really be needed is one person (or a small group) with: the game skills to make updates (and possibly publish new scenarios), the time to manage a huge campaign, the organizational skills for such a campaign, enough legal knowledge to avoid transgressing the OGL or CUP, good communication skills, and (most importantly) enough respect from the community to get buy-in from a majority as “the new Authority.”
I’m definitely not volunteering for such a position (and don’t meet the qualifications anyway). Maybe there is such a person, but so far no one has been willing to step forward and say “and I will lead this effort.”
|
Maybe the easiest thing to do would be for Paizo to allow a group of volunteers to finish the sanctioning left for 1e. Then allow the same volunteer group to curate new scenarios from open submissions or write internally to continue 1e campaign with Paizo blessing. Either the scenarios could be sold by Paizo or free on the organized play site?
Or even just allow the group to convert 2e to 1e. I hurts to see how much they are pushing 1e to the curb, when 2e is so different.
|
|
This exact question has come up before, but I cannot find the thread right now.
(I searched for "replay" going back 4 years, if anyone else gets the idea to try something else)
The answer is "no", but you probably already guessed that. The Pathfinder Society name, Chronicles, everything is Paizo intellectual property.
You could certainly do any type of home game, but it wouldn't be compatible with actual Organized Play.
Not sure about that.
Someone could create their own Pathfinder Society compatible Campaign using very similar rules, and create Scenarios using intellectual property such as names, locations and such and produce it, (except trade dress.) under fair use. The system as a whole is 99% in the PFSRD so mechanics wouldnt be an issue. Everything would have to comply underr Community Use.
But it would have to be free of cost of any sort, you also wouldn't be able to report the scenarios or anything else, unless the campaign creator had a website that kept track of it on their own. It also wouldn't be backward compatible unless the rules allowed it.
In short it would be difficult, expensive, time-consuming and may not be fruitful.
|
|
The ever-diminishing list of PF1 scenarios that the majority of my local group can legally play together has long been cause for concern among us. Both the Core campaign and PFS2 both face quite a bit of resistance in our area, though the later has been slowly gaining ground since all of our OP gaming moved online almost a year ago. It's much easier to find or fill a table when you can look farther afield for players and GMs.
But for those of us who still want a PFS-legal way to revisit that older content, the Core campaign is looking more and more appealing. Obviously, it won't allow the gonzo diversity of builds that we're used to. But some of us are seriously considering it for starting up a sort of curated tour of past seasons, allowing characters to experience those over-arcing plotlines in a more structured way. We've very occasionally managed to schedule a themed series that's longer than your standard 2- or 3-part story (like all the Thassilonian stuff in Season 4 that leads up to the final faceoff with Krune) but that's been the exception rather than the rule. I would love to do more of that sort of thing.
|
|
We've very occasionally managed to schedule a themed series that's longer than your standard 2- or 3-part story (like all the Thassilonian stuff in Season 4 that leads up to the final faceoff with Krune) but that's been the exception rather than the rule. I would love to do more of that sort of thing.
I've done this exact thing with that specific series of season 4 scenarios added the Temple of Lissala Gencon special with maps, added/expanded some other season Thassalonian flavored scenarios and made it my version of the Return of the Runelords AP.
It's doable if your willing to put in the effort, but I did not give chronicles for it.
|
|
So judging from what was posted here and in the previous thread there is no legal issue with what I proposed? It wouldn't run afoul of some Paizo rule or policy?
I understand it couldn't be named Pathfinder Society but Nefreet indicated that "Chronicles" are IP implying that they could not be used. I couldn't find anything to indicate that. Is that true?
I guess for me it breaks down to:
1. You can play PFS scenarios, modules, etc as part of a home game and not report them as a PFS.
2. You can do the same and report them as PFS.
3. You couldn't do it as a home game and report them being played on a specific character to a different community.... why?
Again, I'm not trying to be combative. Perhaps there is an actual legal reason, policy, etc. I'm just looking for an answer.
Also, thank you Kevin for posting. I appreciate it personally. I also agree with what you say about if someone (more likely an existing community) were to pickup the torch and run with it they would need to have the respect of the community to do so. I have some ideas about who that could be but no idea if they would be interested. But the first step is knowing if it would even be possible.
|
|
3. You couldn't do it as a home game and report them being played on a specific character to a different community.... why?
Answer:
If one group accepts an updated Stay of Execution chronicle but another does not then people are going to get their PCs caught in limbo. If two or more different people put out their own competing versions it gets even worse. The more times the campaign forks the more it’s not really a consistent world-wide Campaign.
You could if that different community was on board and in sync with your home campaign. You could create "Lune's Society" and run scenarios using PFS rules + infinite replays as your home rules and document the contents of a Chronicle on a binder of notebook paper called "Lune's Tracker." If some distant community agreed to play "Lune's Society" and follow the rules the same as you and document scenario results on "Lune's Tracker" (i.e. notebook paper), your players could move back and forth between your home game and that other home game.
What you can't do is run a home "Lune's Society" and send the characters back to play other community's regular PFS (your characters would make the table "illegal" [in the reporting sense]) or to a community that, say, is using PFS + special limited replays + allows magic item crafting between sessions called "Joe's Society" or PFS + unlimited replays + 30 Point Buy "Barb's Society," none of whom have any clue to the other's existence, and expect it to note cause problems for the tables involved.
|
|
I wanted to make this a separate post as I think it is a separate topic. I do agree with what others have shared here and in other threads. I don't post as much as I used to but I still come and read some threads. I kinda wish there was a separate forum for PFS1 than PFS2. I understand some reasons why Paizo would want them in the same forum, though. But if you just look through the list of PFS1 related posts there are a number of people asking questions like "What kind of character would you have liked to play in PFS1 and never got to?" and "What scenario would you like to replay the most but can't for credit?
There are people looking for PFS1 games to play in via any method possible (roll20 or other VTT options, online games, cons, etc.) If you go to other online communities people are talking about the same things discussed here. Unfortunately those communities are devolving into listing evergreen scenarios repeatedly due to the limited replays. Some of them are having more non-PFS games, discussing options like I presented, talking about issues with the replay tracking issues and generally just looking for some way to continue playing the game they love with the community of people they enjoy.
I think that there is definitely an opportunity for Paizo here. From what I have seen I think it is unfortunately an opportunity that they will squander. The way I see it if the community wants to continue to play in a PFS-like environment their options moving forward are limited. It will inevitable meet one of only a few fates.
1. Paizo will provide a way to support their community and allow for some option for these players to continue.
2. Some other community will step forward to fill the void and allow for an alternative organized play method to PFS1.
3. Sadness for all.
Personally I do not care which method is chosen. Except 3. I want to avoid 3 at all costs. Option 1 I don't see as likely. It would be nice as it would involve the least effort to create a tracking system, etc. Option 2, well... it seems as I'm not the first to ask about it that there is at least some interest in it. I'm guessing if the option existed that there would be a LOT of interest in it. From what I have seen discussed here and elsewhere and from what I know of friends and others I have played with they are looking for some option (any option!) to continue.
|
|
Had there not been a Pandemic crippling Paizo's workforce, and had these disparate groups banded together to show there was a statistically significant (and profitable) population interested in continuing some other version of PFS1, maybe you'd have support.
I imagine Paizo already did some level of research into the matter, though, and didn't find it worth the effort. They aren't some massively rich company with money to toss at pet projects.
But I still think you can't pass out Chronicles at anything other than an official game. It's the same reason I was told to cease making PFS1 APG Pregens back before there were any. I can't recall whether it was regarding "Trade Dress", or some aspect of the OGL found in Paizo's PDFs.
Even though there was absolutely no profit to be had, I was "distributing" a "product" with the Pathfinder Society logo that hadn't been created by the entity who owned the rights to that logo.
|
But I still think you can't pass out Chronicles at anything other than an official game. It's the same reason I was told to cease making PFS1 APG Pregens back before there were any. I can't recall whether it was regarding "Trade Dress", or some aspect of the OGL found in Paizo's PDFs.
My recollection was that it was a trade dress issue, and you were able to get around it by altering the format / borders enough that they couldn't be confused. I still have laminated copies of your Witch pregen floating around my papers.
|
|
Well I think we are all on the same page with the ability for this to work.
I do disagree with Nefreet about the lack of interest ("support" I'm assuming meant interest here?) during the pandemic. In fact, I think if anything that it has gained interest due to the captive audience situation. Several people (myself included) currently have little to no social contact outside of online gaming. Of course without either of us having access to hard numbers this is all just personal opinion based on anecdotal experience. It is entirely possible that our experience on this topic differs and even if hard numbers did exist they would only be based on whatever audience was sampled. In the end it doesn't matter what you or I think.
If some community wants to create a Definitely Not PFS1, track replays in whatever way they see fit and hand out Definitely Not Chronicle Sheets ... they can. If they think it is worth their time and effort it sounds like it is doable so long as no money is changing hands. Unless I missed something?
I don't mean to come across as critical or combative here. I was just looking for an answer to if it could be done legally and without violating some sort of policy of Paizo's or something.
|
|
You're at the point of probably needing to contact Pazio's licensing/legal team to make sure you understand the situation. The general layman's/external interpretation seems to have been explored pretty decently, but all these topics are much more complex than they first appear. And no amount of arm-chair lawyers/ non-paizo employees would able to give you a definitive answer.
|
|
If I wasn't clear in my original post allow me to clarify: I am not interested in doing this myself. I was just interested if it were possible. You are entirely correct that I lack the legal expertise to navigate this myself. Someone else more skilled in many aspects of leading such a community and endeavor is needed. I thank you all for your input.
|
|
Nefreet: You were referencing the first fate in my post directly before yours? I had said in that post that while I definitely see an opportunity for Paizo here that I thought that they would not take advantage of it. So I guess we agree?
And I don't know as there would be profit in this unless products are continued to be made and bought. Which I'm doubting Paizo is interested. That is why I'm thinking the second fate I listed being more likely.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe I'm mistaken, but there is a subsection of the organized play discord that run, talk about, and play PFS1 still. I've also seen a consistent number of PFS1 games scheduled on warhorn. I guess I've just been wondering if the PFS1 enthusiasts are looking for such things before creating threads. While I understand that my phrasing is abrupt, I mean no offense. I am solidly confused as I've found these outlets with little to no effort. And, it would seem to me that, if one contacted aforementioned warhorn organizers, one could likely put in requests. And, given the rules of PFS1, if you didn't have enough people to complete the table, you could ask someone who has played it to replay for no credit (thus getting around the lack of replays problem). Heck, if you need someone to complete a PFS1 table for no credit, hit me up. I'm happy to help out.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You stated you "think that there is definitely an opportunity for Paizo here."
I agree that there is a non-zero population of customers interested in this, evidenced by the previous threads that Belafon mentioned, and my own recollection of those discussions, but I can't agree that there is a "statistically significant (and profitable) population" of customers interested in this, because I am unaware of any formal data.
You stated you "think it is unfortunately an opportunity that they will squander."
I can't agree with this, because "squandering" implies that there is a known benefit being actively ignored, and without any formal data, that's just conjecture.
The part of your post I was replying to, evidenced by my use of the term "support", was "Paizo will provide a way to support their community"
To which I countered with:
• A pandemic-crippled workforce unable to take on any more projects (which they themselves have continued to emphasize every month during their "Update" Blogs)
• An unknown customer base
• The hypothesis that, as a business, they already did some level of calculation about that unknown, and, given the fact that nothing has been done in the last two years, they must have determined it was not worth the effort to support.
If you find enough interest, can prove that interest to Paizo, and they support you, cool. I just think that's probably too many variables to pull off this long after PFS1 has concluded.
|
|
Sasha: While all of the things are technically true I can tell you that with limited replays that it is in decline. People are looking for other outlets to play PF1 and ways to play PFS1. I have stated this upthread already.
Nefreet: Ok, good. We agree. We both think that Paizo will not take advantage of this opportunity.
As far as squandering an opportunity goes the opportunity as stated would be to support a community. Not monetary support. I'm not slighting Paizo for being in it for the money, they have the mouths of their employee's families to feed. I get it. But there exist people who want to support their community even without money.
If you find enough interest, can prove that interest to Paizo, and they support you, cool.
Again, I am not looking to do this myself. As I stated in my original thread and several times since, I was just wondering if it was possible without legal issues or running afoul of Paizo policy. It was just an idea I had. It sounds like I am far from the first to have such an idea.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You're at the point of probably needing to contact Pazio's licensing/legal team to make sure you understand the situation. The general layman's/external interpretation seems to have been explored pretty decently, but all these topics are much more complex than they first appear. And no amount of arm-chair lawyers/ non-paizo employees would able to give you a definitive answer.
Speaking as someone who has dealt with similar circumstances with other companies in the past, my not-in-the-armchair-but-lacking-a-legal-degree advice is that you aren't going to get a response from Paizo beyond "read the Community Use Policy and CUP FAQ for details on what you can and can't do." Spending limited personnel resources answering what could be a fairly large list of "how about X? What about Y?" questions just isn't profitable. In addition, the more things a Paizo representative OKs, the stickier it becomes legally for them if they try to invoke the ultimate sanction clause in the CUP:
We reserve the right to deny the use of our IP at any time for any reason or for no reason. This includes, for example, if we think our IP is being used inappropriately (determined at our sole discretion). If we deny you the right to use our IP, you must immediately stop distributing any part of your project that uses or might use our IP.
There's simply no incentive for Paizo to be proactive in OKing a project, and many incentives to wait and say "nope, you're doing it wrong."
That's a very cynical viewpoint, I know. But it's not all bad news. Paizo's CUP is one of the most open and awesome things I've ever seen. The Community Use Package includes a ton of useful things including logos, templates, character art, and even a couple of maps. And in the past Paizo has been very gentle about people accidentally violating the CUP for non-commercial reasons. Telling people what needs changing instead of going nuclear and blacklisting them. ("That free pregen sheet looks too much like our official ones, you need to change it to make sure people know it's not a Paizo product.")
The upshot is if there is someone with the dedication, the funding, and the time (oh the time. . .) to go ahead and make "Pathfinder Society 1.5" happen they can do it. It wouldn't be a snap, but the legwork could start today.
1. New Guide to Organized Play. You can use the PFS logo, but the formatting will have to be different and it will have to be painfully clear that 1.5 is not officially associated with Paizo in any way.
2. Reporting system would be hosted off Paizo's site.
3. Any additional chronicles for existing (retired) scenarios would have to be in a new format.
4. Any new scenarios published are going to be the most perilous for the campaign. In addition to the formatting, there's the reputational risk requirement. "Anything that might hurt or damage Paizo" is a large and nebulous category.
5. All of it has to be free. (Donations allowed, but you can't charge anything for any portion of the campaign.)
5b. This means any new scenarios have to be completely free as well. Which extends to not paying writers, developers, editors, artists, and cartographers for their work, even out of donated money. No one can be profiting off the work.
|
|
I think it is telling as well. It would take more than a single person. It would take a community of people. Perhaps a community that already exists. As far as the list you gave I can definitely see working within those lines. In fact, that was pretty much what I had expected. Thank you again for your information, Kevin. I appreciate it greatly.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But if you were going to do this, why would you spend that much time, effort, and energy just to replay PFS1 scenarios you already played?
Why wouldn't you (for example) Break up APs into scenario sized chunks, and then when someone has played all the chunks of a given set, you can issue them a chronicle?
That is what, 20 APs at 6 books a piece? Break each books into 3 sections, provide streamlining instructions to allow each section to run in 4-6 hours.
That is an extra 360 scenarios right there. That is more than was published in all the years of PFS 1 put together. And fully 1/6 of them are replayable!
And that is not counting the various 64 page modules that can be run in campaign mode.
Adding in the various Modules, that should be something like 15 more years of content. And the whole system would *still* be compatible with the Paizo org play system.
|
|
Let's say you had unlimited replays...
Here's the thing about that. With the rules of PFS1, it is not, in fact, unlimited. One cannot replay something that they have already replayed. So, the 'unlimited' is actually limited to playing each scenario a max of 2 times. What then? What will you do when you run out of scenarios to replay? You'll essentially be back in the same boat. Will you then ask for a lift on the next restriction? At some point, even if you can replay any given scenario any number of times people aren't going to want to run the Destiny of Sand series again. What then?
I enjoy(ed) PFS1 a lot. But at some point you have to look at the writing on the wall. Either you (or someone) puts forth effort to get more material out there (likely unsanctioned), or...you're out of material. It isn't about replays.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Side note, I think it's pretty telling that among all of us saying "could this be done?" "Wouldn't it be great if this was done?" and "Someone could do this" we have yet to have anyone say "I will head up this new campaign."
I would not mind heading up something like this.
BUT....The amount of effort needed would be pretty steep.
We would need a scenario 'How-to guide', a new campaign guide, new version of allowed resources (a Make or Break item).
The 'Campaign or Alternate Society would need a website for news, a tracking system, some admins, scenario writers, editors, artists and PDF formatters. (I'm sure I'm missing a few things.)
Finally a way to successfully market the Campaign both online, in-cons (post-covid) and game stores. We need some big signal boosts. As some of us who have printed high-quality 4x6 full color gloss post cards for PFS I can tell you it gets expensive fast.
Ultimately I don't think we'd be any bigger than say Living Arcanis organized play campaign in terms of player size. [ A subset, of a subset, of a subset of gamers]. So that a lot of effort for very little, to no reward.
Many OP gamers have moved on to 5E DnD AL, PFS2E and don't plan on coming back to 1E.
|
|
I enjoy(ed) PFS1 a lot. But at some point you have to look at the writing on the wall. Either you (or someone) puts forth effort to get more material out there (likely unsanctioned), or...you're out of material. It isn't about replays.
I dont think it was ever about replays or even new material. Many players just stopped playing PFS for other reasons. PFS1E is still popular with 220+ games currently on Warhorn.
I've toured the convention circuit a lot and one of the most common reasons why people stopped playing was the steep curve in competing with others when this new insert [feat combo, class, archetypes, item] that blew everyone else out the water in a game became discouraging or just not fun for them at a table. I've seen this both as a GM and a Player.
Barring changes to allowable content, I don't see a meaningful way to grow past the initial group of players that currently play 1E content.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I dont think it was ever about replays or even new material....
...I know there are still a lot of people who want to play but I'm betting a lot of it has to do with limited replays. I get it, part of that is by design for Paizo trying to push people to get onboard with PFS2. And that is great for those who enjoy it. But for those who would still like to flesh out some builds for PFS1 and never got to their options for doing so are limited.
But what if they weren't? What if replays were less limited?...
...I'm guessing I wouldn't be alone. Mostly this just stems from wanting to play more PFS1 but being limited by replays.
The ever-diminishing list of PF1 scenarios that the majority of my local group can legally play together has long been cause for concern among us...But for those of us who still want a PFS-legal way to revisit that older content..."
There are people looking for PFS1 games to play in via any method possible (roll20 or other VTT options, online games, cons, etc.) If you go to other online communities people are talking about the same things discussed here. Unfortunately those communities are devolving into listing evergreen scenarios repeatedly due to the limited replays. Some of them are having more non-PFS games, discussing options like I presented, talking about issues with the replay tracking issues and generally just looking for some way to continue playing the game they love with the community of people they enjoy.
If some community wants to create a Definitely Not PFS1, track replays in whatever way they see fit...
Sasha: While all of the things are technically true I can tell you that with limited replays that it is in decline. People are looking for other outlets to play PF1 and ways to play PFS1. I have stated this upthread already.
Barring changes to allowable content...
Maybe not new material, but I get the feeling replays is accurate. Though, "Barring changes to allowable content..." seems to lean toward new material, but maybe that is just me.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And see I figured converting 1E Scenarios to 2E would have been easy, with the proper guidance.
Something like, Standardized DCs based on APL, only Scenarios with equivalent 2E monsters (so nothing unique, or unpublished yet), Standardized rewards, obviously no extra Faction Reputation, and perhaps only Chronicle items with 2E equivalents.
That could have really helped transition the playerbase from 1E to 2E. Heck, I probably would have gone back just to finish Season 9 and 10, which I didn't touch because I was busy doing Starfinder.
And would generate income for Paizo with minimal work on their part. Would require the website reporting to allow 1E scenarios for 2E credit, and would require a volunteer (cough, Jared, cough) to draft up a section in the Guide to Organized Play.
Hmm. Saying all this out loud actually makes me wonder if it could be a thing...
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And would generate income for Paizo with minimal work on their part. Would require the website reporting to allow 1E scenarios for 2E credit, and would require a volunteer (cough, Jared, cough) to draft up a section in the Guide to Organized Play.
Heh. You have amusing ideas about the amount of free time I have available... ;)
If I had that sort of time, a lot more guide stuff would be a lot further along. (Not to mention anything like that would have to go through Tonya and Linda and probably about half a dozen other people in Paizo.)
That said, there is nothing stopping anyone from converting those scenarios and just playing them.
|
|
Jared: I think you had some really good ideas about other things that could be allowed. Honestly, I'd love it if they were made playable in PFS1. But if they weren't being allowed in the type of alternate community I'm referring to would be interesting as well. It would probably make it more appealing to the masses as well.
Honestly, it seems like a minor adjustment on Paizo's end if they sanctioned them. I'm sure that idea has been talked about by people on the forums here if not Paizo staff themselves.
It wasn't really what I had in mind but it is a good idea. Again, not sure if I'm the best person for the job but I'd be willing to chip in some of my free time toward the endeavor if help is needed.
|
|
Are they? I never see them getting ran.
Every AP that's been sanctioned has the sanctioning document on its product page.
But since APs take more dedication and time to run and play through you're not generally going to see them publicly advertised.
They're more the thing that a close group of friends will get together for.
I don't know whether any of the PF1 Society modules were ever adapted to any of the Virtual Table Top systems, but I'm wondering whether there is any value in it, at this point, particularly in the context of the foregoing discussion (I haven't read every single post, but I have skimmed the thread.)
Or is the idea of playing remotely anathema to the PFS Ethos?
Just wondering (in the hope that there are sufficient interested parties contributing to this thread that one of them might have an opinion).
Thanks,
- s.west