The Upcoming Adventures thread
Tomalak
First Post
The only problem becomes when the 4-5 five approved adventures all recruit and then they end up with a handful of PC's each and not enough to run
My problem with this is that each adventurer then gets a choice of participating in whatever adventure is available now, or sitting around doing nothing, taking up a character slot while waiting for a better one.
Maybe it wouldn't bother other people. But I have seen multiple adventures crop up that would be perfect for my character, if I wasn't busy with another adventure. Now, the current situation isn't so bad. The adventure he's in is pretty appropriate for him. But I can certainly see the scenario I mentioned above being an issue, at least for me.
renau1g
First Post
That's the point of this thread right? For DM's to announce the adventures they are plannign on running in the near future. I've announced mine in the Screamer also. It will be a quest for a local chef, aiding him in his quest to be the Proximate Isles top Iron Chef.
Ben's is about Fish. I'll let the other DM's introduce their own. Mal's got something to do with demons and Velmonts is about helping Mal's PC's friend.
Ben's is about Fish. I'll let the other DM's introduce their own. Mal's got something to do with demons and Velmonts is about helping Mal's PC's friend.
covaithe
Explorer
Another problem with having multiple adventures recruiting at once is that it creates some confusion for the judges as far as reviewing adventure submissions. r1 and I have done the bulk of the adventure reviews recently, but we both have characters in the level 3-4 range who are free now or soon will be. JNC, TwoHeads, and Dunamin are in the same boat. Who's going to review the pending adventures, targeted for those levels?
ScorpiusRisk
First Post
Considering L4W only currently covers a range of about 7 levels that unfortunately means that most if not all judges are likely to have a character in range of an adventure submitted. This will be even more true if we implement 3rd characters. I think that answer must be that judges need to judge adventures they might play in.
Either that, or when adventures get submitted, judges should probably respond to the other judges wether they plan to review, plan to abstain, or simply do not have the time. That would make it clear to the other judges what's being looked at and possibly help delegate. It would be a shame if an adventure didn't get looked at by anyone because everyone had a character near that level.
Speaking of which, I know there was a call for new judges recently, but I'm not fully aware of the all the judges personal commitments. Do we think there is still a need for more?
Either that, or when adventures get submitted, judges should probably respond to the other judges wether they plan to review, plan to abstain, or simply do not have the time. That would make it clear to the other judges what's being looked at and possibly help delegate. It would be a shame if an adventure didn't get looked at by anyone because everyone had a character near that level.
Speaking of which, I know there was a call for new judges recently, but I'm not fully aware of the all the judges personal commitments. Do we think there is still a need for more?
Velmont
First Post
Yeah, I think communication will make things clear. One should sacrifice his chance to get in an adventure so the others can go in that one, but next one will be reviewed by another judge who will probably get in the first.
Also, we should asks every adventure submission to have a no-spoiler synopsis at the start of the message. That way if there is two adventure to review which fit a judge character, he could review the one who seems to fit less with his character for example.
By the way, my adventure submission have such text and I need only 1 more approval.
Also, we should asks every adventure submission to have a no-spoiler synopsis at the start of the message. That way if there is two adventure to review which fit a judge character, he could review the one who seems to fit less with his character for example.
By the way, my adventure submission have such text and I need only 1 more approval.
covaithe
Explorer
That's a good idea.
ScorpiusRisk
First Post
I'm not actually suggesting that judges who review an adventure are not allowed to play in that adventure. That seems more like a punishment to the judges, who really don't gain many (any) benefits from their position.
I know, as a DM, I would allow a judge who reviewed my adventure to then play. If it did cause problems then it would be handled. But all things considered I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt.
I know, as a DM, I would allow a judge who reviewed my adventure to then play. If it did cause problems then it would be handled. But all things considered I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Velmont
First Post
I got my second approval. I'll probably start to put things into action next week, but there will probably be some roleplay in the Inn before Charina starts to recruit.
[SBLOCK=Suggestion of way to make an adventure approval]
Name of the adventure
Level: Level of the adventure, or range character can be. Example: 3, 2-4
# of PC: Number of PC for the game: 5, 3-6
Synopsis: Quick description without any spoiler. In other word, that should be what happen in the Inn.
-= SPOILER =-
Now, we can enter in the details.[/SBLOCK]
[SBLOCK=Suggestion of way to make an adventure approval]
Name of the adventure
Level: Level of the adventure, or range character can be. Example: 3, 2-4
# of PC: Number of PC for the game: 5, 3-6
Synopsis: Quick description without any spoiler. In other word, that should be what happen in the Inn.
-= SPOILER =-
Now, we can enter in the details.[/SBLOCK]
