|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We are working on figuring out a way to let players/gms look up the text of those boons using the chronicle id code. (As especially for Adventures, GMs and players might want to decide what character to assign the chronicle to based on the boon text.)
But there are non trivial manpower and technical hurdles.
One of the technical constraints is that whatever methodology we use should not show the text of the boons unless the person has entered the correct id code, and boons should appear in searches (either by the site itself or by search engines.)
The man power constraints rely on having one or more people who can regularly add boons as they are issued *and* update them as they are changed.
|
We have a theoretical model of "this should work, with minimal coding." but to be honest, we don't even have the volunteer man hours to *test* whether our theoretical model does what we think it does, let alone fix it if it doesn't, let alone upload all the boons that would need to be uploaded...
and that isn't even thinking about what would be needed to keep it up to date...
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We have a theoretical model of "this should work, with minimal coding." but to be honest, we don't even have the volunteer man hours to *test* whether our theoretical model does what we think it does, let alone fix it if it doesn't, let alone upload all the boons that would need to be uploaded...
and that isn't even thinking about what would be needed to keep it up to date...
Honestly, at this point, can we just create a "Minimum Viable Product" to serve the community needs here!? Just collect the text in a Google drive doc or something, and add "spoilers" by making the text white and have people highlight over text it to read it.
When the OPF gets more volunteer hours they can build a more elegant system.
__________
Or… Paizo can put the boons back on the chronicles. Problem solved. There would then be no need for logins, downloads, coding, testing, site updates, etc.
A chronicle doesn't have to be anything but a preview of the boon. Paizo can still use the AcP system to require people buy and maintain their boons.
|
|
I can't speak to why Paizo took the boons of chronicles (in part because no one has come out and told me. In part because if they did it would probably be under NDA. So you will have to get Alex to talk about that. I have my own personal theories...)
One issue with the whole minimum working product thing is that spoiler tags (and white text) are not respected by search engines. So someone searching the documents for their boon is quite likely to spoilers themselves on other boons that perhaps have the same words in the text. (Or in the case of search engines, might spoiler boons just by searching the text.)
Also, without a secure, close to complete, project, I am not reasonably able to just go to Alex and ask for a data file of all the boons. Nor would I know when boons change.
Someone would need to do something on the order of make a fake account, report having GMed *everything * Download all the boons, And then do that periodically to see if any changed.
Besides being a gross violation of the paizo terms and conditions and an abuse of the reporting system, it would also be highly time intensive...
|
|
Also, since I have no idea why boons came *off* the Chronicle sheets, I have no idea what it would take to get them back *on* the Chronicle sheets. (Or at least included as (for example) handouts in the scenario / sanctioning document.
But that would certainly be the fastest, least manpower intensive solution.
|
|
One issue with the whole minimum working product thing is that spoiler tags (and white text) are not respected by search engines
An MVP is not a perfect permanent solution, it is something temporary that gets the job done.
In this case, a simple solution like a page with spoilers seems warranted: the problem is painful and widespread, and the OPF doesn't have the time to implement a more robust solution.
I am not reasonably able to just go to Alex and ask for a data file of all the boons. Nor would I know when boons change.
Seems like this is an issue for any plan the OPF could come up with, then. Including the concept for lookup ID codes.
Also why is all this on you — from broadcasting the web team's plans to talking to Alex and handling the assets? I would love to hear thoughts from others on the OPF web team taskforce. Or from an official Paizo account.
This is a serious issue that has a measurable impact on our lodge's ability to retain players.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It isn't. The only reason I am posting here is that this *is* something that the guide team (not the web team) has looked at, so I am sharing what we found when we looked at it.
Any of the other teams are welcome to weigh in. And as I said some of this can only be answered by Alex. (It is now two weeks before PaizoCon, so I would be very surprised if anyone from paizo sees this before then. I strongly recommend revisiting the thread after PaizoCon if you want a response.)
|
|
We are working on figuring out a way to let players/gms look up the text of those boons using the chronicle id code. (As especially for Adventures, GMs and players might want to decide what character to assign the chronicle to based on the boon text.)
But there are non trivial manpower and technical hurdles.
One of the technical constraints is that whatever methodology we use should not show the text of the boons unless the person has entered the correct id code, and boons should appear in searches (either by the site itself or by search engines.)
The man power constraints rely on having one or more people who can regularly add boons as they are issued *and* update them as they are changed.
It isn't. The only reason I am posting here is that this *is* something that the guide team (not the web team) has looked at, so I am sharing what we found when we looked at it.
Search engine optimization, scoping & developing new website features, and software testing — essentially project managing a webdev project — is on the Guide Team, and not the Web Team?
I'm so confused. Maybe I'm being a big dummy here but none of those those things seem to fall under the purview of the Guide Taskforce. I don't understand why the Guide Team is taking the lead on this.
|
|
Those are questions that go to how the website functions, and it would not be appropriate for me to discuss them on a public forum.
Basically anything complex that involves the wiki engine (as opposed to the web front end) typically winds up with the guide team because the guide team has the personnel with wiki knowledge.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But the solution doesn't have to be on the wiki, does it?
It could be spoilers on Paizo FaQ page. It could be a Google doc. It could be a static page on the OPF website. It could be any number of things that are not part of the Guide realm.
In other words, it may be worth asking the larger community what they need to better understand the issue before determining what the solution is, who owns it, where it lives.
You guys do SO MUCH already. It's appreciated. But there may also be legitimate overwork reasons why the Guide Team's person-power to complete these projects is lacking.
|
|
But the solution doesn't have to be on the wiki, does it?
For reasons I am not currently free to discuss on the public forum, yes, it does.
In other words, it may be worth asking the larger community what they need to better understand the issue before determining what the solution is, who owns it, where it lives.
.
These discussions occur regularly. So far I haven't been able to find anyone else internally willing to take this on.
|
That's a different Website team. There's the Paizo Website team which are Paizo employees and handle anything on the Paizo website (which includes the faction symbols, GM glyphs, all the OP reporting/boons stuff AND more important "keep the store/forum running").
There's also an volunteer Web Team that handles the non-Guide portion of the OPF website, which is what they were discussing.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to point out that Fist of the Ruby Phoenix boon #166 that took me an absurdly long time to figure out how to view (for all the reasons Doug pointed out - depending on the text, I wanted to apply to different characters; I ended up creating a dummy character to apply it to and then reassigning the credit after I downloaded the boon) ended up being absolutely spoilerless - it just said the name of the page in the book to look at.
There's no reason that that boon can't be archived by Google. I don't know how many others are like it, but is "spoilers via Google search" really a problem that needs fixing?
(To be clear, it's an honest question - I think my Fall of Plaguestone boon did contain spoilers.)
Keep in mind that Archive of Nethys - which is archived by Google - already contains a ton of spoilers. So the marginal spoilerage from putting the boon texts (which just tell you which sections are sanctioned) is super low if not zero.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like to think it's realistic assessment of capabilities (instead of age-driven conservatism) but I find myself going back to earlier technologies quite often lately. When it's even available. It's handy to carry hundreds of books on one device but frustrating when the device manufacturer updates the software and removes the ability to edit the sort fields, leaving books added earlier sorted a different way than later ones (thanks, Apple) or completely removes a book either because of error or because it turns out they goofed up a copyright (thanks, Amazon). Website chat support is quick but really annoying when you know you need to have a sustained two-way flow of information. I'll use a telephone.
Which is a long-winded way of saying: what's wrong with paper boons?
There's really no reason the boons tied to scenarios shouldn't be included with the scenarios. You play the scenario, you get the boon, you immediately know what it does. The AcP boons wouldn't work that way. So keep them online if you really want to.
Who is it benefiting? GMs have to print five or six less pages. Yes, people like to play different ancestries. But my point is that I feel the frustration factor may be outweighing the joy of extra options.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Regarding Complexity, I am in total agreement Belafon.
I have had new players trying out PFS as stores reppen post pandemic, and have had major issues onboarding and retaining them. We have experienced higher rates of player attrition, at least in part because of AcP and the complexity of Access/Boons/all these new house rules like Schools.
The whole PFS ecosystem got more complex over the last couple of years — in a way that does not serve the players. Everyone is doing their best. Its not just one thing, but many things in aggregate.
I like the idea of AcP but the website should have been made usable before making it a requirement.
As a VO I have to spend more time than ever helping players with paperwork and boons. They aren't having fun. I'm not having fun.
Didn't this used to be about fun?
|
|
I feel ACP, itself, was an improvement over the GM only convention boons AND worthwhile from a 'reporting matters/help show support for the OP systems with metrics". And the only ACP system for purchases boons is almost good enough -- we still need better filtering, and ACP boons should always have full text available before purchase.
I feel that removing chronicle boons from the sheets was multiple steps backwards, however.
The "other" sets of boons, mostly faction reputation ones, some 'regional' (any listed scenario in this region unlocks this boon) I have a harder time categorizing as good/bad. It does allow the system to be more flexible; it does allow for faster publication of new boons. It keeps boons in a similar format to the other two (and not just paragraph listings in a guide). But it also disincentives people from using them, and once you have the ACP + all the others ones in the online system, the "just get all boons in one place" argument comes into play for the chronicle boons. After writing that out, my gut instinct is that they should just move all the non-chronicle/non-ACP ones to a website/guide format. We already trust players to handle practically everything, so trusting them to obey prerequisites/tiers of reputation is fine. And guide updates do happen faster these days.
|
|
I like the idea of acp but it should not have been a requirement until the site was fixed, and/or an acceptable solution for chronicle boons at least sketched out.
Instead it seems like both Paizo and the Taskforce have to constantly scramble. Its a shame but its also a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Why putting boon text on a chronicle in the pdf is so hard is beyond my pay grade. All I can tell anyone is the result that it (along with the general complexity of Paizo’s digital implementation) hurts my community.
|
|
worthwhile from a 'reporting matters/help show support for the OP systems with metrics".
A more resilient way to drive reporting might have been to make the reporting system usable, instead of forcing everyone to use it faster by placing boons behind it.
At least by now someone fixed it… for those willing to pay for an RPG Chronicles subscription!
|
|
Maybe “workaround “ is better?
I consider it a fix because it makes things far less painful when I get bounced out of the site after doing data entry. To me it is a necessity, not a convenience — especially because players now want their acp very quickly.
All this is subjective. But I truly do not enjoy the reporting process in large part to usability and technical issues with the website, and I suspect I am not an outlier here.
We as a community emphasize how important reporting is as a census tool for Paizo, how it must be done accurately, and how it must be accomplished in a timely fashion — but it seems like no one (outside an indie developer) actually wants to help the people doing the reporting. If its truly so important, maybe the powers that be should do something to make it better… even just a tiny bit.
