Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bone Mote" data-source="post: 5817597" data-attributes="member: 6689386">I wish the LFR admins had the same powers to ban/restrict content.  Oh, that might have saved LFR.  However, either they didn't or couldn't:  the end result was the same:  too much crappy, untested, and unerrata'd content.Man, if LFR *could* have created different "Constructed Tournament Rules" for their OP campaigns, that would be great:  I'd freakin' play in the Standard Format and be very happy with it.  Sadly, we're all playing in Vintage with all the jerky #@%!!ers willing to play the Power 9 and the most of us wanting some restraint/balance.(Yeah, played a lot of MTG back in the day...but comparing Magic to LFR/PFS is a stretch.  I like the analogy though.  Just wish WotC would have shown some intelligent restraint.)Yep.  This is core and key.  And not a basic function of Organized Play campaigns.    So...the question remains:  are all Organized Play that are run by the companies doomed to collapse under their own crapification?Definitely a core of the problem.   With PFS, it's happened repeatedly...most obviously with <a href="http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz575n?How-Do-We-Accomplish#31" target="_blank">White-Haired Witch. </a>   Within days, there is already errata.   And that's only the stuff that is obviously overpowered...there is still so much more power creep.The thing is that I think that Living Greyhawk *did* work.   I know it had problems...but for all it's warts, it was awesome.   So, yeah, I choose to believe it can work.  I think LG succeeded because the local admins had so much local  power...and lots of discretion about banning and limiting things that  were broken.  And a review period for new content (I think...my memory  on this is hazy).I think LFR and PFS have just freely allowed almost all content in...much to the detriment of their campaigns.And so this post.Totally tough line to walk, you are wise, Iron Wolf.I wish publishers would see that they don't need to include every crappy  supplement to make their Organized Play campaigns successful.  I wish  that they understood that a strong campaign would still lead to adequate  marketing and resultant revenues...but I don't know how to make that  argument.Most publishers are secretive about their play numbers and profits and sales and so trying to make that point is difficult.I'm left to writing awkwardly-phrased rants on awesome websites to  engage the discussion in hopes of achieving some enlightenment by the  publishers.But really, what are the chances that PFS or 5e-OP brass are going to realize the issue and make changes?To be fair, I've made tons of friends playing in OPs....I have no  complaints about that.  I just wish for something greater and something  more.I can see PFS making the same mistakes as LFR and LFR completely blind as to the root causes of their failure...and thus doomed to repeat those failures.But that's a different post.Sorry, Steel.  I love you (you have tremendous passion for the game...it's obvious from your posts and podcasts), but you've really missed the big picture with your post.  I respect your opinion so I want to give you another chance to respond.You know and I know that gamers shouldn't *have* to show self restraint  at the gaming table.  They should be allowed to explore and expand their  characters as they see fit.As you said, the Synthesist hasn't ruined any of your games. Good for you....but that's an awful answer, both by me and by you.The truth is that collective weight and bloat of all the rules leads to  both powercreep and increasing the barrier to entry for new players and  judges.  In addition, the ability of judges to scale encounters limits  their ability to 'compete'.   I know this is a losing fight in the long  run...one that will begin to eat away at PFS's growth. When will you begin to see that?  How can it be measured?  How to stop  it?  How can the community help Paizo reach its goals and protect the  PFS campaign?As to whether my claims of the Synthesist, or any particular class or  build, has ruined my experience and not yours, that's not the issue.  There are no necessary sessions to cite, no names to name. What is the  issue is whether the crapification is avoidable, and what the campaign  administration can do to avoid it.Yeah, Steel Wind...but is there a way for PFS to realize that they are  following the path of LFR?  Is there any chance that Paizo is going to  show intelligent restraint with their products?  Or is any untested, unbalancing crap going to be immediately allowed  into PFS?  Is the collective bloat and powercreep going to be allowed to  drive players and judges away?  When is PFS going to acknowledge that  the entry cost for new players and judges is higher when the amount of  content is unlimited?Sure...talk to your people at Paizo.  I bet the answer is that they  don't care.  The dollar is more important than the campaign (though I  choose to believe otherwise) to them.</blockquote>

Verification