GMs receive “table credits” for every table they run and report. These credits determine how many Novas a GM has. Each Scenario earns 1 table credit. Each Adventure Path volume earns 2 table credits.

GM Novas

The Starfinder Society offers a GM rank system that uses Novas to represent the activity and experience of a given GM. The novas are visible on the GM's Organized Play ID card. A GM can earn up to five Novas. Earning Novas 1-4 requires a certain number of table credits; earning a 5th Nova has additional requirements. The total number of table credits for each Nova is as follows:

Table Credits Novas earned
10 Table Credits 1 Nova
30 Table Credits 2 Novas
60 Table Credits 3 Novas
100 Table Credits 4 Novas
150 Table Credits 5 Novas
with additional requirements met

GMs receive the following rewards based on the number of GM novas they have earned:

  • For each Nova earned, GMs can apply a +1 bonus to all rerolls gained via Boons.
  • For each Nova earned, GMs receive one additional Granted Replay each January 1.
  • GMs with 4 or 5 Novas might be able to run exclusive or limited release content.
Fifth Nova Additional Requirements

A GM must accomplish the following to qualify for their fifth Nova:

  • Earn 150 GM table credits.
  • Run 50 different adventures.
  • Run 10 or more adventures from the 5 Nova Qualifying Adventures list (below). Except for multi-table interactives, a particular scenario can earn credit for a maximum of 3 of those 10.
  • Complete 3 evaluation games, each in the presence of a different Qualified Evaluator (a Venture-Captain, Regional Venture-Coordinator, or Paizo Organized Play staffer) using the Organized Play rubric.

If no Qualified Evaluator is willing or able to evaluate a GM due to unreasonable travel requirements or similar reasons, the GM can contact their Regional Venture-Coordinator. In such cases, their RVC can designate a 5-Nova GM, a Venture-Lieutenant, or other trusted community member as a Qualified Evaluator for that GM.

5-Nova Qualifying Adventures:

Organized Play Rubric

To fully experience the benefits of peer review and feedback, we recommend the following observation schedule:

  • 0–10 GM table credits: You are starting your GM adventure. Thank you for GMing!
  • 11–49 GM table credits: Use the rubric to get a feel for Organized Play best practices. Consider having a fellow GM sit at your table and give feedback.
  • 50–99 GM table credits: Ask any Venture-Officers at your tables to do a rubric evaluation to give feedback as if it were an evaluation game.
  • 100+ GM table credits: Receive 3 formal evaluations from 3 different Qualified Evaluators.

GMs need a better than average score to pass an evaluation. For example, they could have one criterion rated "exceeds expectations" and the rest "meets expectations" and qualify. They could also have one rated "does not meet expectations," two "meets expectations," and two "exceeds expectations" and qualify.

A GM cannot complete more than three evaluations in a weekend. A GM that fails to meet the criteria can wait three months and try again.

Aspect Does Not Meet Expectations Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations
The GM’s preparation allowed for smooth game flow. The GM had to check on information repeatedly throughout the session, and/or took long pauses to figure out what happens next. The GM had to check on things throughout, but the game did not experience extensive delays. The GM was able to keep the flow of the game consistent and dealt with unforeseen challenges by exercising skilled time management.
The GM had a solid understanding of the rules of the game. The GM has basic rules knowledge, but frequent breaks or questions impacted the flow of the game. GM did not know the majority of the rules. GM defaulted to arbitrary ad hoc rulings. GM confused rules between game systems consistently. GM did not allow players to question GM rulings made at the table. The GM had average rules knowledge, and questions did not impact the flow of the game. GM knew the most common rules of the game well and GM did not have confusion between game systems. GM allowed players to question GM rulings and resolved questions in a professional manner. The GM had solid rules knowledge and kept the game flowing while handling questions. GM acknowledged when a rule is unclear or when the GM made a mistake. GM did not have confusion between game systems. If a rules challenge arose, the GM handled it fairly and consistently.
The GM made efforts to make the game distinct and interesting. The GM made little attempt at tying in setting, NPCs, or imagery to convey an imaginative setting. GM did not provide opportunities for players to engage with the storyline. The GM made a reasonable effort to make the game distinct in at least one meaningful way, such as deeply roleplaying the NPCs, using setting specific terms and lore to increase immersion, or using words with imagery to describe the environment, situations, etc. The GM put in an excellent effort to make the game distinct, using multiple techniques off the “meets expectations” list.
The GM presented the scenario as written. The GM followed the gist of the storyline but adjusted content. GM did not run encounters as written. GM ran the wrong sub-tier encounters. The GM ran the adventure as written. GM did not allow for creative solutions by the PC to resolve situations. The GM stayed true to the storyline while allowing for creative solutions and player interest.
The GM understood and applied the rules of the Organized Play Program. The GM was not familiar with core Organized Play concepts. GM was unfamiliar with the contents of the Guide. The GM was familiar with the majority of Organized Play concepts and applied the rules of Organized Play consistently. GM knew where to look up general guidelines in the Guide. The GM was markedly familiar with the majority of Organized Play concepts and applied the rules of Organized Play consistently. GM knew where to find obscure corner case answers in the Guide.