If you are waiting for LFR, RPGA has the herald test up for those 4e DM's who wish to cert.
|
If you are waiting for LFR, RPGA has the herald test up for those 4e DM's who wish to cert.
Is it true that you are allowed to play modules [b]after/[b] you judge them and as many times as you'd like, as long as it is with a differnt character each time?
I really don't know if I like that if it is true.
Is it true that you are allowed to play modules [b]after/[b] you judge them and as many times as you'd like, as long as it is with a differnt character each time?
I really don't know if I like that if it is true.
Yes.
|
|
If you are waiting for LFR, RPGA has the herald test up for those 4e DM's who wish to cert.Is it true that you are allowed to play modules [b]after/[b] you judge them and as many times as you'd like, as long as it is with a differnt character each time?
I really don't know if I like that if it is true.
Yeah, seems kinda strange. It does solve a couple problems. I always detested having to "eat" a mod. If I sacrifice my ability to play a mod because I ran it I should get some kind of reward. Living Kalamar awarded GMs XP and GP for their characters but you could not get certs, favors, etc. Being able to play after you have run a mod is not optimal but at least it means i can get the rewards for running it before playing it.
The second problem is the "we need one more player to make a table, but everyone has played this one already" problem. This way folks that have played mods can fill out tables at cons and gamedays.
Obviously in both situations the player should not disclose details of the mod, nor should the player be involved in deep problem solving. This will reduce the "fun" factor but it does have its merits.
Is it true that you are allowed to play modules [b]after/[b] you judge them and as many times as you'd like, as long as it is with a differnt character each time?
I really don't know if I like that if it is true.
It certainly isn't the optimal solution, but then neither was having to eat the module and have your character be reduced because while you might get xp or gp, you never got magic items or in game rewards.
It's one of those problems where there just isn't a great solution. I would have chosen to import the rewards for the DM instead of allowing folks to rerun modules, but that's just me.
They've decided to go this route this time, and if it works well they'll probably still with it, and if it tanks they'll switch back.
|
|
In Blackmoor we just gave you XP for the episode and equivalent gold if you had to eat it.
What I am really worried about is sitting down at a con with a bunch of guys who have already played it, and who are in it to hunt down just the right magic item for their character. I am also worried about getting spoiled all the time at the table.
It really undercuts the focus on story. Makes it feel more like a video game. Now run your rogue through it and see how he does...
Looks like an attempt to drive up table counts to me and freeze out competing systems.
This really makes me lose respect for the RPGA.
|
|
In Blackmoor we just gave you XP for the episode and equivalent gold if you had to eat it.
What I am really worried about is sitting down at a con with a bunch of guys who have already played it, and who are in it to hunt down just the right magic item for their character. I am also worried about getting spoiled all the time at the table.
It really undercuts the focus on story. Makes it feel more like a video game. Now run your rogue through it and see how he does...
Looks like an attempt to drive up table counts to me and freeze out competing systems.
This really makes me lose respect for the RPGA.
I agree that it can and will cause problems. I am not sure i like it either but it does solve a couple sticky problems.
I just hope they monitor the change to see what impact it has, and change it if the need arisies.
As a very infrequent participant of Organized Play, if I ran through a module with my character Rogue McRoguerson then later wanted to run through with my other character Cleric McHealypants, would this not be allowed? (Under the old rules that is ... I take it this is cool under the new rules right?)
|
|
As a very infrequent participant of Organized Play, if I ran through a module with my character Rogue McRoguerson then later wanted to run through with my other character Cleric McHealypants, would this not be allowed? (Under the old rules that is ... I take it this is cool under the new rules right?)
In Living Greyhawk (and every other organized play campaign I can think of) you can only play a mod once. If you have GMed the mod before playing it then you cannot play it at all.
That system makes a great deal of sense but it does create some awkward moments like the ones I mentioned previously.
As a very infrequent participant of Organized Play, if I ran through a module with my character Rogue McRoguerson then later wanted to run through with my other character Cleric McHealypants, would this not be allowed? (Under the old rules that is ... I take it this is cool under the new rules right?)
Sorry, Cleric McHealypants is *my* character.
But yes, you have it correct. In LG it was once only, no matter the character, and never if you judged it.
Edit: Doh! CWM already answered you...I maintain my claim of ownership over the name "McHealypants" though.
McHealypants will be missed. *sniff* :'(
Hmm, I wasn't aware of that (and seeing as how infrequently I take part of organized play, never had it come up). Thanks for the responses. :)
|
|
Dibs on Hacky McSplatter!
But seriously, allowing people to play the same episode multiple times just calls into question the integrity of the system. It actually affirms alot of what the haters says about 4.0 That is, that it is not RP focused and more about combat and hacking.
There are so many problem with this I have a hard time organizing them. I ran an international campaign for two years for David Arneson. I get organized play.
This plan points to madness. Really.
|
|
This plan points to madness. Really.
Yeah. The more I think about it the more problems I can see with it. I think they need to do something for the GMs though. Awarding XP and GP worked out OK in Living Kalamar but it often meant missing out on some really good certs. I also think allowing people to fill a seat at a mod they have already played has merit but I do not like the "play the mod as many times as you want" thing. That is starting to bug me.
Dibs on Hacky McSplatter!
But seriously, allowing people to play the same episode multiple times just calls into question the integrity of the system. It actually affirms alot of what the haters says about 4.0 That is, that it is not RP focused and more about combat and hacking.
There are so many problem with this I have a hard time organizing them. I ran an international campaign for two years for David Arneson. I get organized play.
This plan points to madness. Really.
I want Emo McCursealot, and Stabby MacSneakattack.
Nvm...
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Hmm, interesting.
As i'm jsut getting into the 'living' concept with Pathfinder, I don't mind 'eating' the modules. Heck if I'm comfortable enough I might even be able to run the 'finale' modules for Origins DMs.
I will be interested to see how this works, and how the data will impact Paizo's season one.
|
|
There are two posts on the RPGA site going into some detail on the reasoning behind putting in the ability to replay mods with different characters:
By Sean Molley: http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=16384054&postcount=17
By Shawn Merwin: http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=16393578&postcount=41The main gist of the argument is that, in LG, if someone wanted to, in advance, know what access was in a mod or what enemies were in it - or even wanted to simply get a copy of the mod itself - it was not difficult to do so. And people did so, and would talk about the mods online, and there wasn't really much they could do about it.
Since, in LFR, the specific access from each mod won't be nearly as important - and since there will be enough adventures each year, with no more regional restriction on what you can play - the vast majority of people will only end up replaying a mod if they need to. (Such as to make a table go off, or get the right group for some new players, or so forth.) Very few people are going to go to a gameday and choose to play an adventure they've already played, as long as there are plenty of other adventures available they haven't played. (Which seems likely to be the case.)
That said, I'll personally try to avoid any tables that seem to be filled with people who already know the mod inside and out - but, honestly, I already had a list of types of people in LG that I preferred not to play with. Meanwhile, I expect if I find someone replaying a mod simply to ensure the event happens, I doubt it will be a bad experience.
And if I do need to end up playing with those out to spoil or conquer a mod, it doesn't guarantee a bad experience - it is simply one factor among many. And, yes, sometimes you might get a bad table, or a bad judge, or the adventure itself might be bad - it does happen. I don't think that this change will vastly tip the balance one way or another - and it does remove some very legitimate inconveniences that existed in LG.
Shawn Merwin is one of my favorite folks. He and I have played several tables togetehr and had some great email exchanges. Sean Molley is a great author and organizer and I have a ton of respect for him. However, I think the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Hopefully this will not be corrupted. We will see.
The people in charge of LFR clearly did some serious thinking about which of the two options would be better for the campaign. Yes, there are potential problems that can arise when you're allowed to play an adventure with knowledge of what's in it, but as has been pointed out, that's ALWAYS been the case. Furthermore, people spoiling the adventure will generally be disliked by their adventuring companions for doing so, and they really only end up hurting their own enjoyment by stealing the excitement from the table like that. Finally, there are SO MANY adventures coming out for LFR (and no more regional restrictions) that you more than likely will never have to repeat an adventure if you don't want to.
But they cover all of this in the two (excellent) posts mentioned above.
|
|
The people in charge of LFR clearly did some serious thinking about which of the two options would be better for the campaign. Yes, there are potential problems that can arise when you're allowed to play an adventure with knowledge of what's in it, but as has been pointed out, that's ALWAYS been the case. Furthermore, people spoiling the adventure will generally be disliked by their adventuring companions for doing so, and they really only end up hurting their own enjoyment by stealing the excitement from the table like that. Finally, there are SO MANY adventures coming out for LFR (and no more regional restrictions) that you more than likely will never have to repeat an adventure if you don't want to.
But they cover all of this in the two (excellent) posts mentioned above.
Really. Hmmm. Several points.
1) Yes people have always snuck looks at adventures, but it was understood as cheating. Now it is not. "You can't kick me off this table because I've already played this and spoil. It says I can."
2) You cannot refuse to seat someone at a public event in the RPGA. If Spoily McGreedy wants to play, he must be given a seat if I have space and he has followed the registration protocols. So, it really doesn't matter if I don't want to play with one of these folks, if I am at a public event and msutered with this guy, then I have to. My only option is to stand u and walk off.
3) I don't think the concern of someone who plays something multiple times for meta-gaming reason is too deeply focused on the responses of other players. I doubt this will have the effect of censure that you envision.
4) What I see emerging is a new type of min-maxing. The power curve in 4.0 is relatively truncated. You do not have infinite combinations of feats and prestige classes to "break" the system. Acruing an AC three higher or a to hit number two higher places you on the far side of the power curve. The new RPGA power gamer can only build the most devastating character through magic items gained by the correct character.
5) I am worried about LFR tables devolving into cliques. 4.0 is built around specific characters in well defined roles. I have already been asked to join an LFR group that always plays together. It was to make certain the group had optimized tables in anticipation of the arms war that always breaks out between players and writers in RPGA games. I declined as I like to play with all sorts of folks and do not really care if I get whacked. This announcement will encourage more of this, as I know there are folks who will band together to avoid playing with more "the wrong sort." This might be folks who will only play an episode once becasue tehy are "weak". It might be to avoid playing with folks who play multiple times becasue tehy "cheat."
6) Finally, the elimination of regions and the ability to play an episode multiple times, allow increased play on DDI. It drives up table count and participation. Now, Sean and Shawn are NDA'd and cannot tell us if they were instructed to remove or eliminate any play restrictions that might drive down table counts, but this clearly is the effect if not the intention of the ruling. The RPGA is part of the overall marketing strategy of 4.0. Decisions regarding access to play should be vetted by someone at WoTC and must operate within a framework and guidelines. This looks like a strategic ploy to hang on to as much play time as possible drive up use of DDI, and encourage folks from playing other living style systems, of which there are now many. Go look at warhorn.
So, the ruling does make it easier to have tables make, it does make it easier to recruit judges, and it does allow people to play as much as they want. It also does a bunch of other things that are far from pleasant.
There are a ton of folks walking away from LFR right now as a result of this ruling. My wife is one, as is our old gaming group from Tallahassee, many of who wrote for or worked as admins for LG. Right now, out of a group 9 I used to go to cons, only me and one other are planning on playing LFR. The majority of the people I game with just roll their eyes when I mention living play and mutter stuff about munchkins. That perception, however, is the topic of another discussion.
I'm confused. Sean Molley directly addresses some of your issues with the new system. It seems like most of your problems stem from the impression that other players are jerks. Have you encountered jerk players before in such numbers that you feel the entire campaign will be destroyed by them? I personally, despite having played with probably a hundred different players in the RPGA, have never seen anyone who would consider spoiling a module just to be a jerk.