Exclusive Adventures for DnDAL
skerritthegreen
Explorer
Not all the RCs are in the US, so if we expanded to them, it would likewise expand the program.
Wrathamon
Adventurer
1) depends on the Admin (and stupid question what is an Admin in this context?)
2) see above.
3) not sure ... I've never really been pulled into a convention based on an adventure, I do like getting exclusive stuff. Maybe a printed copy of the adventure for those who participated? If no one ever heard of the admin, not sure it would be a draw. Get a "named" designer/developer to show up to run stuff, then that might be more interesting.
4) any exclusivity should be 1 year. (I would prefer six months, but since I like that number, it's too short).
2) see above.
3) not sure ... I've never really been pulled into a convention based on an adventure, I do like getting exclusive stuff. Maybe a printed copy of the adventure for those who participated? If no one ever heard of the admin, not sure it would be a draw. Get a "named" designer/developer to show up to run stuff, then that might be more interesting.
4) any exclusivity should be 1 year. (I would prefer six months, but since I like that number, it's too short).
skerritthegreen
Explorer
In this case, the Admins I am referring to are the six Campaign Admins that run the DnDAL (http://dndadventurersleague.org/campaign-staff/): Alan, Bill, Claire, Greg (myself), Robert and Travis. Several of us have worked as game designers now and in the past. For example, I worked on Complete Scoundrel, Dragon Magic and City of Stormreach back in the 3.5e days. I worked on Dungeon Delve in 4e and many of the Midnight products for FFG. My most recent project was Cat and Mouse 5e with Richard Pett for Kobold Press. All that is in addition to 250+ OP adventures (and truly lots of other credits). So we're not talking about Mike Mearls or Chris Perkins running these adventures (they already make appearances and run stuff, just ask them), but these are people who have an idea what they are doing.
I seem to be in the minority here, but I strongly dislike con-exclusive adventure content in the AL in general, and creating an extra level of exclusivity is deeply unappealing to me.
If, for instance, an admin wrote and ran a four hour adventure in seven slots at a given con (which is a whole lot of work to pull off), under 50 total players would experience it. Creating a game for such a small number of players while excluding the thousands of other AL players from that content feels like the opposite of a community-building experience to me. It feels marginalizing, and it exacerbates the "pay-to-win" perception that con-exclusive content already has. I'd hate to see more of it.
There's also the fact that, from a pipeline perspective, AL content could benefit from more time and bandwidth being devoted to adventure editing, playtesting, and revision. It's hard for me to see more content getting forced into that narrow volunteer pipeline as desirable, especially when that content would only be experienced by a radically small number of players.
I think it would be cool to see more cons invite and support AL admin attendance and participation, but that shouldn't hinge on exclusive game content that affects broader AL play. I'm honestly not sure what the value proposition would be that would make sense, but I do know that (for me, at least) the notion that we'd be publishing adventure content that's even more limited than the current Epics (which I already dislike) is a big step away from the things that I find appealing about Adventurers League play.
I've always felt that exclusive adventure content is what home games are for; organized play is to offer as wide a group as possible a shared D&D experience. Every time a player sits down at an LGS table with an exclusive item or racial certificate that they got from a convention they attended and is otherwise unavailable, my interest in the AL overall is eroded.
A player's disposable income shouldn't be reflected on their character sheet.
If, for instance, an admin wrote and ran a four hour adventure in seven slots at a given con (which is a whole lot of work to pull off), under 50 total players would experience it. Creating a game for such a small number of players while excluding the thousands of other AL players from that content feels like the opposite of a community-building experience to me. It feels marginalizing, and it exacerbates the "pay-to-win" perception that con-exclusive content already has. I'd hate to see more of it.
There's also the fact that, from a pipeline perspective, AL content could benefit from more time and bandwidth being devoted to adventure editing, playtesting, and revision. It's hard for me to see more content getting forced into that narrow volunteer pipeline as desirable, especially when that content would only be experienced by a radically small number of players.
I think it would be cool to see more cons invite and support AL admin attendance and participation, but that shouldn't hinge on exclusive game content that affects broader AL play. I'm honestly not sure what the value proposition would be that would make sense, but I do know that (for me, at least) the notion that we'd be publishing adventure content that's even more limited than the current Epics (which I already dislike) is a big step away from the things that I find appealing about Adventurers League play.
I've always felt that exclusive adventure content is what home games are for; organized play is to offer as wide a group as possible a shared D&D experience. Every time a player sits down at an LGS table with an exclusive item or racial certificate that they got from a convention they attended and is otherwise unavailable, my interest in the AL overall is eroded.
A player's disposable income shouldn't be reflected on their character sheet.
skerritthegreen
Explorer
So CahPahkah, if this lead to something like the ability for DMs to do a MyRealms, would you be against that as well? (since not everyone could play them)
Tyranthraxus
Explorer
1)
Im afraid like the poster before me that too much emphasis is being placed on Convention support. AL's base home has to be the Local Store. THe place which sells the stock, where the players meet up for Expeditions and Encounters. Sure the stores might be also represented by having stalls at the convention, but its not their show or their place. I know we do promote AL via Conventions but I also think this is outdate thinking. Conventions used to be the point where companies would release their new product or their new way of doing things. People would talk and exchange ideas. People who hadnt seen each other for a whole year would meet up.
In a way it feels like this is (and Im probably dead wrong) a way for Baldman Games to shore up its paying customers for the conventions it runs. Im not going to say Cash grab but it feels like a big event thats gonna Benefit Baldman Games. I actually believe that its the stores that build communities. Conventions can move depending on the costs of the location they use.. A Convention can decide that the location is charging them too much and move on . THis could be to a different town or state. Stores really dont do that. They are a focal point where Gamers can meet and expand their gamer Networks. I just dont think a Convention can provide the same.. function at least not to the same extent as the store.
This was pre Internet age. Companies now release trailers for their products, people post invitations to others on warhorn or other such software, Facebook posts are made, Google + accounts used and so on. The Convention was the font or focal point of gaming has passed. There will always be big conventions and its on them to think up new ways to attract people (and the Big Cons are still getting bigger)
2) This would be unlikely. The RC for Asia/ Pacific, DM Fern is based outta Sydney. While he recently Went to Pax, he paid his own way to go there and I was already going there and had paid for a Con Pass myself (This was In melbourne, So I bore the brunt of the costs to stay in Melbourne and fly there plus incidentals).
Genghiscon is the only gaming convention in Perth. I have been thinking about going there to run some AL/promote it but I wanted to save up for a trip Im thinking of taking to America so dont know If I can justify some of the promo materials I would need. I would be running perhaps 1-2 tables and we might have 3 dms available. I couldnt see any justification of paying for FERN to come over (Accomodation for 3 days could run to 500 + dollars and Flights about 800). Considering the cost to enter the con is about 40 dollars, its never gonna happen.
I think the disconnect feeling Im having here is that..
A.1) All 6 Admins are in America. Im not saying this is a bad thing.. it is what it is.
A.2) Costs to fly such Admins out of America would be exorbinate for the size of the conventions in some of these other Countries. I think the UK might have a really big gaming convention RE AL but I cant think of any other place that would. Im kinda guessing to be honest already that this topic post is really directed at the American audience within AL
A.3) Because of the distance involved with my stores from other parts of Asia/Pacific we are effectively married to the Store based approach. Anything that advantages the convention over the store , impacts us.
3) I think Part 1 and 2 above and the responses, indicate my reply here. I wouldnt be willing to fly to say Winter Fantasy wherever that was held to perhaps in the offchance get a chance to play in a game run by an Admin for more 'exclusive' content. I think we have to realise the convention has limited time to run games, the Admin has limited time in this case to run THEIR game and thus spots are limited. With the sheer number of gamers attending some of these conventions the actual mathematicaly chance to get on a table becomes well... mathematically unlikely.
I had a bad experience with Paizocon in 2014 (namely the Lottery system didnt feel so much like a lottery but an African Lottery.. it seemed somewhat rigged so certain people got into certain events).
Edit: I just saw your reply Skerrit to another Poster RE the MyRealms concept. I will admit. I have been vocal in my oppositiion on Facebook to such a concept. I think it dilutes the story arcs being created, creates some ruling issues (despite best intentions) and creates some exclusivity (namely some dms who have the time to do such things and those that do not).
Im afraid like the poster before me that too much emphasis is being placed on Convention support. AL's base home has to be the Local Store. THe place which sells the stock, where the players meet up for Expeditions and Encounters. Sure the stores might be also represented by having stalls at the convention, but its not their show or their place. I know we do promote AL via Conventions but I also think this is outdate thinking. Conventions used to be the point where companies would release their new product or their new way of doing things. People would talk and exchange ideas. People who hadnt seen each other for a whole year would meet up.
In a way it feels like this is (and Im probably dead wrong) a way for Baldman Games to shore up its paying customers for the conventions it runs. Im not going to say Cash grab but it feels like a big event thats gonna Benefit Baldman Games. I actually believe that its the stores that build communities. Conventions can move depending on the costs of the location they use.. A Convention can decide that the location is charging them too much and move on . THis could be to a different town or state. Stores really dont do that. They are a focal point where Gamers can meet and expand their gamer Networks. I just dont think a Convention can provide the same.. function at least not to the same extent as the store.
This was pre Internet age. Companies now release trailers for their products, people post invitations to others on warhorn or other such software, Facebook posts are made, Google + accounts used and so on. The Convention was the font or focal point of gaming has passed. There will always be big conventions and its on them to think up new ways to attract people (and the Big Cons are still getting bigger)
2) This would be unlikely. The RC for Asia/ Pacific, DM Fern is based outta Sydney. While he recently Went to Pax, he paid his own way to go there and I was already going there and had paid for a Con Pass myself (This was In melbourne, So I bore the brunt of the costs to stay in Melbourne and fly there plus incidentals).
Genghiscon is the only gaming convention in Perth. I have been thinking about going there to run some AL/promote it but I wanted to save up for a trip Im thinking of taking to America so dont know If I can justify some of the promo materials I would need. I would be running perhaps 1-2 tables and we might have 3 dms available. I couldnt see any justification of paying for FERN to come over (Accomodation for 3 days could run to 500 + dollars and Flights about 800). Considering the cost to enter the con is about 40 dollars, its never gonna happen.
I think the disconnect feeling Im having here is that..
A.1) All 6 Admins are in America. Im not saying this is a bad thing.. it is what it is.
A.2) Costs to fly such Admins out of America would be exorbinate for the size of the conventions in some of these other Countries. I think the UK might have a really big gaming convention RE AL but I cant think of any other place that would. Im kinda guessing to be honest already that this topic post is really directed at the American audience within AL
A.3) Because of the distance involved with my stores from other parts of Asia/Pacific we are effectively married to the Store based approach. Anything that advantages the convention over the store , impacts us.
3) I think Part 1 and 2 above and the responses, indicate my reply here. I wouldnt be willing to fly to say Winter Fantasy wherever that was held to perhaps in the offchance get a chance to play in a game run by an Admin for more 'exclusive' content. I think we have to realise the convention has limited time to run games, the Admin has limited time in this case to run THEIR game and thus spots are limited. With the sheer number of gamers attending some of these conventions the actual mathematicaly chance to get on a table becomes well... mathematically unlikely.
I had a bad experience with Paizocon in 2014 (namely the Lottery system didnt feel so much like a lottery but an African Lottery.. it seemed somewhat rigged so certain people got into certain events).
Edit: I just saw your reply Skerrit to another Poster RE the MyRealms concept. I will admit. I have been vocal in my oppositiion on Facebook to such a concept. I think it dilutes the story arcs being created, creates some ruling issues (despite best intentions) and creates some exclusivity (namely some dms who have the time to do such things and those that do not).
Last edited:
skerritthegreen
Explorer
I can say its not related to BMG, as we have been discussing various iterations of Admin only adventures for almost 2 years now. This Winter Fantasy is just the first time we'll have them ready and the Admins would be there to give it a trial run. These adventures would be run at cons and stores all over, whether the con/store event was run by BMG or not. I know I would plan to run mine at all the cons (largely in the American Midwest since that's where I live) that I attend and at some of the stores I visit.
You are correct that if you live outside North America, it would not be as great a benefit to you, though if the program expanded you might eventually see it. I guess the questions is, If you don't get to take advantage of it but someone else does, does that mean it is automatically bad?
Last edited:
Tyranthraxus
Explorer
I guess my issue here being I would prefer some sort of scheme that covers the most people at the start, not a scheme that starts with 6 and *MAY* (or MAY NOT) Possibly get bigger. But in context of your actual question. Would I consider it automatically bad?
I would. If less people can play it than those that could play it, I consider it automatically bad. If it came a point where more than half the number of AL players could play than could not, then it would be automatically good.
At this point I can say Im really saying this for my players.. I very rarely get to play any AL. I run encounters and run expeditions out of 2 different stores.. but Im always the DM. I want them to have every opportunity to play anything that is produced by you guys.. not wanting them to tap up online and find out that they cannot because an Admin isnt local or an RC. I already have had people ask me about Epics and their playability outside of the really big conventions.
***************
Lets look at it hypothetically however taking in some variation.
6 Admins move out across the mainland US and run games at various stores and conventions of their own written scenarios.
THen lets say in a Years time, the RCs as they are are allowed to do the same thing. There are more RC's than there are Admins (lets say they are allowed to run both the Admins scenarios and their own scenarios). THis again shows the tyranny of Distance. We have Martin T in the UK as the RC there, however I believe his purview is Europe.
Thats a LOT of people spread over a big area. So he creates a scenario which he can run locally and is up to going to conventions around the place. AL might not be big at any one particular convention which means the player pool needed to generate enough $ to bring him over wont be there either... and add in the large distances there.. well the price is more than significant.
Logically this would mean to me that we would need even more RC's in Non America mainland regions. Say one for France or one for Malaysia and so on.
Then is there a demand on RC's to not only organise their region but also to produce Scenarios? What happens if one is a great organiser but a brutally bad Writer? Does that region they govern miss out on the RC produced scenario?
Finally Id like to state Im perfectly happy with the amount of content currently being Produced. I have more than enough to run, I have enough people at my tables to deliver a good game and I like where the campaign is going storywise (although I do wish things like the Cloak advancement wasnt curtailed to currently one season). I am worried that the campaign staff are paying way too much attention to the guy gaming 4 nights a week and all day Saturday and consider him reflective of the average AL gamer.
I have no objection to MyRealms as a custom adventure module template as it was implemented in the previous edition, because I know that Alice's MyRealms offered exactly the same player rewards as Zach's MyRealms, even if the specific content totally differed. That kind of standardization is pretty contrary to the way experience and other rewards are handled in existing AL modules, but if you wanted to move in that direction for a MyRealms-style format, it wouldn't bother me. (That said, I'm not particularly interested in MyRealms-style adventures...the point of the AL, as I see it, is to provide general continuity of experience and a sense of a shared campaign; if you want to be playing in custom adventures, there's no reason to place yourself under AL constraints -- just run a home game. They are two different styles of game, and there's no real reason that I'm aware of to try to shoehorn one into the other.)
I think it has a lot to do with rewards. When it comes to AL play, I have less of an issue with "These players had a great, specific D&D experience at a convention!" than with "These players went to a convention and came home with exclusive mechanical character rewards that carry over into general AL play!"
I'm not opposed to other people having fun in any format or any venue (disclosure: I am a regular attendee of big cons, and the AL Epics have left a bad taste in my mouth); I just don't like it when the corresponding feel-bad emerges from other players saying "I wish I could play an aasimar, too, but I couldn't afford the plane ticket..."
Basically, we already enforce a de facto item scarcity relative to previous editions (in that only a single PC walks away from a given module with a permanent magic item). I'm ok with that, because I find the distribution system to be basically fair, and it's something that conceptually makes sense on an in-game lore level. But I don't see any particular value in enforcing a greater scarcity of content when it comes to who's eligible to play or run a given adventure. So what bothers me is that idea that my PC is somehow more integral to the Realms than yours is, simply because I as a player got on a flight to Indianapolis. That's a pretty crappy gate to put content behind, even when I'm one of the guys on the other side of that gate.
I know why exclusive content is good for cons (it helps sell tickets), and I see why this program is good for AL admins (it helps get them sponsored to attend cons). But what I don't see is why it is good for players, when the overwhelming majority of them will only ever encounter it as "A thing I know about, but didn't get to do."
Similar Threads
