09-10-2018, 07:18 AM
Speaking as a newer GM, I can tell you a few things on it from my own experience and viewpoint.
First, with respect to PF, I have not actively played since shortly before moving to GA in 2016. I feel disconnected and out of the loop, given the material that has come out is not familiar to me, and, I have never, even before moving to GA, played PF in Organized Play.
I currently have 7 tables of Starfinder that I've GM'ed, and, to echo Bart's sentiments, there is definitely competition for those slots, as it is an easier system to GM (in my estimation) than PF. Plus, it has that "new game smell" we all love, while being at least reasonably familiar, due to having played the PF system before.
I'm torn on PF2, at this point. I have yet to play in any of the playtest games (having spent a lot of time on prep for DragonCon, I opted not to even review the playtest material, even though I'd downloaded it). Will I try it? Possibly, but, with the playtests being scheduled at the same time as Starfinder games, I choose Starfinder over the playtests.
For me, specifically, venues become "problematic", as do weeknight games. The closest location to me, Titan in Smyrna, is, for all intents and purposes, a black hole right now, since nothing is going on there. Giga is my default, based on proximity. Venues on the opposite side of the perimeter from me (being in Mableton) are more difficult to get to, especially as options during the week (though Manuel's isn't terribly bad for distance). With work causing me to need to be up by 5 a.m. during the week, and being an insomniac who's extremely sensitive to sleep schedule changes, it makes it less likely I can do weeknight games other than as a one off.
Could we get more GMs if we open up more tables? It's a possibility, but, that could also be more up to the venue than to us. Going back to Bart's statement about SF GMing being a competition to see who can volunteer first, if the players were there (which was already alluded to) to demand more tables, we could easily see more GMs (at least on the SF side of the house).
First, with respect to PF, I have not actively played since shortly before moving to GA in 2016. I feel disconnected and out of the loop, given the material that has come out is not familiar to me, and, I have never, even before moving to GA, played PF in Organized Play.
I currently have 7 tables of Starfinder that I've GM'ed, and, to echo Bart's sentiments, there is definitely competition for those slots, as it is an easier system to GM (in my estimation) than PF. Plus, it has that "new game smell" we all love, while being at least reasonably familiar, due to having played the PF system before.
I'm torn on PF2, at this point. I have yet to play in any of the playtest games (having spent a lot of time on prep for DragonCon, I opted not to even review the playtest material, even though I'd downloaded it). Will I try it? Possibly, but, with the playtests being scheduled at the same time as Starfinder games, I choose Starfinder over the playtests.
For me, specifically, venues become "problematic", as do weeknight games. The closest location to me, Titan in Smyrna, is, for all intents and purposes, a black hole right now, since nothing is going on there. Giga is my default, based on proximity. Venues on the opposite side of the perimeter from me (being in Mableton) are more difficult to get to, especially as options during the week (though Manuel's isn't terribly bad for distance). With work causing me to need to be up by 5 a.m. during the week, and being an insomniac who's extremely sensitive to sleep schedule changes, it makes it less likely I can do weeknight games other than as a one off.
Could we get more GMs if we open up more tables? It's a possibility, but, that could also be more up to the venue than to us. Going back to Bart's statement about SF GMing being a competition to see who can volunteer first, if the players were there (which was already alluded to) to demand more tables, we could easily see more GMs (at least on the SF side of the house).