Ad-hoc certs in AL?

[kalani]

For clarification: The certs given out by Mike Mearles were given out at Winter Fantasy to those who participated in his DDAO adventure. DDAO adventures have unique rewards determined by the author. It appears however, that in this instance at least - MM did not discuss such a game-changing reward with the admins prior to including it in his adventure (a magic item is one thing, but setting a precedent is something that IMHO should have been discussed, at least to the point where the admins knew what to expect so that there were no surprises).

This particular reward however caught us by surprise. All the other DDAO rewards to date granted cool magic items, mounts, and the like. I don't even think any of the other DDAO adventures granted access to DMG classes, let alone UA material.

Unfortunately, we RCs don't know what rewards are contained in the DDAO adventures - and seeing how this particular reward offered something that had never been given before, we had no idea that this was even a thing until the conversation yesterday. I can honestly say however, that on one hand I am glad that we have proof that this is not a rumor. On the other, I am personally unhappy that MM would add something like this without consulting with the admins first (as even they were unaware of this reward until it came up).

 

[Z. H. Darkstar]

I think that real problem here is a breakdown of communication between those in charge and those of us in the field running games. I know that there's an infinitesimal chance of these certs popping up at any of our tables, so I'm not too worried about the gameplay impact they would have. My primary concern is that there was nothing said about them in the first place. The AL DMs should be made aware of anytime that certs are distributed that allow exceptions to the rules. Without official campaign documentation (besides the certs themselves) to validate the existence of such rule-bending certs, the average AL DM will find these certs to be suspect about their validity.

If the AL staff wants to maintain a modicum of consistency among the global player base, then it falls onto them to make sure that information about things that can change the rules is disseminated to the DMs in a timely manner. We should be learning about these things straight from the AL staff.

 

[Voort]

This particular reward however caught us by surprise. All the other DDAO rewards to date granted cool magic items, mounts, and the like. I don't even think any of the other DDAO adventures granted access to DMG classes, let alone UA material.

That's disturbing. Is this likely to happen again?

 

[skerritthegreen]

That's disturbing. Is this likely to happen again?

I don't think there is a way to say something will or will not ever happen.

 

[NeverLucky]

FWIW, here's Travis's word on it on FB:

Mike Mearls is not an AL official as far as I know, so unless he is, nothing he gives out is AL-legal unless the DM is willing to accept it at his/her table for that one session. Only the official AL admins and the people who write the AL Guides can make something AL-legal. Just like only Jeremy Crawford can issue official rulings, but no other rules opinions count as official, not even Mike's.

He was given the power to write an Author Only adventure and make his own certs for it.

And how would you know that what you're looking at is real?

Unless you have reason to suspect it's fraudulent, you have to permit it. There are all kinds of weird certs floating around AL that DMs not in the know wouldn't recognize. But just like everything else in D&D, you have to trust that your players are honest, unless you have specific reason to suspect otherwise.

 

[Cascade]

Unless you have reason to suspect it's fraudulent, you have to permit it. There are all kinds of weird certs floating around AL that DMs not in the know wouldn't recognize. But just like everything else in D&D, you have to trust that your players are honest, unless you have specific reason to suspect otherwise.

I'm sure it will become even more diverse when Baldman starts releasing their certs and specials...let alone more DDAOs.

 

[skerritthegreen]

I'm sure it will become even more diverse when Baldman starts releasing their certs and specials...let alone more DDAOs.

The Baldman's certs (along with anyone approved to create unique con content) all have to be approved by the Admins and WOTC.

 

[Cascade]

The Baldman's certs (along with anyone approved to create unique con content) all have to be approved by the Admins and WOTC.

I could have written that better...

I meant to point out that there are adventurers that many players and DMs may not even recognize let alone certs from them that they will question...

 

[skerritthegreen]

I meant to point out that there are adventurers that many players and DMs may not even recognize let alone certs from them that they will question...

Ah yes, our current plans will defiantly have a significant increase in AL legal adventures (possibly several multiples of what is currently released) which of course correspondingly increase the number of AL legal items.

 

[Pauper]

He was given the power to write an Author Only adventure and make his own certs for it.

If this is the kind of thing that's going to come out of the Author-Only adventures, I'd prefer they stayed Author-Only, or even disappeared.

It's one thing if AO adventures were giving out high-powered magic items, or epic boons, or other things that are already in the rules. That wouldn't make those rewards any different from, say, the Death domain cert from the Season 1 Epic. But to me, playtest material crosses a line -- it's both a sign that the high-ups in the AL WotC administration aren't taking the whole 'we've devised a system to limit power creep that might blow up the campaign' system very seriously, as well as sets a precedent that is very likely to be harmful to the campaign as a whole, even if it makes a handful of players very happy.

The volunteer admins have been very consistently pointing out that many things that would make individual players happy would have a negative impact on the campaign as a whole, and so those things aren't allowed because they help to make a greater proportion of players happy.** Letting untested material into the campaign by fiat rather than by admin consensus upsets that philosophy. That's why I'm opposed.

** - The best example I can think of is the amendment to Princes of the Apocalypse where the PC who gains possession of Orcsplitter who isn't a good-aligned dwarf, fighter, or paladin gets the option to either trade the weapon to the Harpers or suffer with a mere magical (with no bonus), silvered battleaxe.

Unless you have reason to suspect it's fraudulent, you have to permit it.

No, I really don't.

"Official documentation, such as a D&D Adventurers League certificate, might provide exceptions to the allowed rules." (ALPG, p.3)

Last I checked, things given out unilaterally by Mike Mearls at Winter Fantasy aren't 'official documentation' for Adventurers League purposes. Unless I hear otherwise from a campaign admin, I'm not going to approve any certs that allow rules items that aren't functionally similar to existing AL certs in a game I run, and if a player at a table I'm playing at has one, I'm going to appeal to the DM to disallow it as an unofficial (and thus disallowed) rules option.

--
Pauper