I will Living Greyhawk no more!

[Saeviomagy]

Unfortunately LG seems to lack a really important ingredient which is necessary in a situation where the modules cannot be changed on the fly.

It lacks a system to get the characters to actually do the module.

For example: I recently heard of a module in which a poor beggar asks the party to take a month-long sea journey for basically no reward.

Are you honestly telling me that ANY DM would offer that up to his own group? That he wouldn't expect them to tell the begger to shove it, even if the group contained a paladin?

LG sounds like it needs what LD has - a unifying organisation so that the characters have some reason to be doing a module apart from "because otherwise you (the player) can leave the room and go home".

 

[Malin Genie]

My experiences in LG have also been a mixed bag - but as with any gaming, it's a combination of the adventure itself, DM and other players. You can have a 'poor' adventure that's made a lot of fun by a good DM and players; and vice versa....

Most LGers I know (and part of this may be that they are relatively mature) are into RPing their characters and solving the challenges - XP and gp are nice but secondary. But yes, you do get thrown in with people whose style is different, especially at big Cons; if your only experience has been at games where you are assigned to tables with strangers rather than playing with people you know, that may explain part of the problem ('Ah! A Wand of Cure Light Wounds...I mean, a Cleric has joined our table....')

On the subject of XP awards, the LG DMs I play with would never even consider giving fewer XP for intelligently avoiding an obstacle as for 'defeating it in combat' (the DMG section on XP basically states this as one of the basic rules of awarding XP.) If 'defeat crocodile' is listed in the XP section, then 'Ranger uses Animal Empathy to get it to back down' or 'Rogue rigs up ropes through the trees that allow the party to get past it unmolested' or 'Cleric of Ehlonna casts 'Calm Animal' so that it doesn't attack in the first place' would all get equal XP.

So to get to the point of a long ramble - don't give up on LG because of a few bad experiences - try to find a group you do enjoy playing with (or visit Perrenland!)

 

[Thorntangle]

In general it seems to me as if the RPGA takes itself waay too seriously. It is a game folks not a tax audit. I have less paperwork to do to register for classes then I do for LG. Also the people in this organization seem to take it very seriously. I have seen heated arguments (not role-playing) about if a DM was correct. It is a game and if people don't treat it as such well there is such a thing as taking the game too seriously.

Complaining about the accounting has to be about the weakest argument against LG. Given the mental power necessary to play this game in the first place, it's hardly a burden to be asked to accurately record how many GP and XP a character has. Don't you track these in a home game as well? The Adventure Record form actually makes it easier because you just fill in the blanks.

And, right, only Living Greyhawk players ever have rules arguments. That's a 10 yard penalty for gross generalization.

 

[Duncan Haldane]

Living Greyhawk is definately a mixed bag.

I don't play any more (fundamental disagreements with the rules changes, and the fact that rules changes occur rather frequently - 3.5 will mean the 2nd change of rules this year), but I do DM it a lot.

I mostly run slot-zeroes to prep DMs for our local games days. This means that I have a reasonably consistant group, most of whom know the rules fairly well (especially when they are advantageous to them ;-), playing the same mix of characters. There's probably about 10 main players in this group. and I think they all have 2nd characters now.

So, I run with a pretty good group to DM - most of them are quite experienced role-players, and most of them are pretty good at it.

That said, I've seen some pretty bad modules (and some hilarious mis-spellings and bad grammer - eg the man with lots of scars who is later referred to as "the very scared man" ;-) - weak storylines, or plots that aren't well explained, missing parts to a module (you should ALWAYS have a map for the major encounter), that sort of thing.

The games I run tend to have more roleplaying than most, I would guess. We don't have the same time limits that apply in a more constrained setting (cons, game days, etc), and so we tend to get more out of the modules.

But I wouldn't want to be trying to design the modules myself. They have to try to come up with some reason for the PCs to be together before the start, or soon into it, and they have to keep that interesting - I've seen modules where you just start on a road together.

As for the paperwork - it's a lot, and it needs to be well ordered (when you've got certs and log sheets from the first rule sets, adventure certs from the second, and the adventure certs and master logs from the third it gets a little messy) - it can be hard to remember all the special items & favours that one has at one's disposal when one has played lots and lots of LG modules. But I think it's necessary. LG has had plenty of cheats - from people faking dice rolls, to fake home play, to reading a module before playing it, to others I haven't thought of. And when cheats prosper other players complain - rightly so.

(Note: I think the RPGA should've given out large sized dice rather than battle matts -it's much harder to fake dice rolls if everyone at the table can read the values ;-)

My advice - take it all with a grain of salt, and find players you enjoy playing with. It can be a lot of fun.

Duncan

 

[MGibster]

Plus I never won tables either, gets fustrating when the person who has the best toys always win. And I played a cleric as well so I know how you fell about the Cure Light Wounds Dispensor.

I've managed to win best player 9 times out of 17 mods without having access to any of the best toys. Uh, actually I didn't have access to anything other then cure light wound potions. Of course my region is the Yeomanry and I think we get nothing compared to other regions.

As a DM I voted best player for whoever I felt contribute the most to the game. Not only does that include role playing but it also includes clever ideas, keeping focused on the game, and promoting an atmosphere were everybody can have fun. I have seen people roleplay their characters in such a way that it detracted from the experience of the game. I wouldn't vote that person best player even if he was role playing his character. Incidentally, they no longer have a vote for best player.

As for this module. Did it have good XP if you finished the race first or was it all based on combat? Also what was the rational of taking the shortcut if you already won, was there a bigger prize if you finished at a faster time?

I suppose the skipper may have simply desired to make the shortest possible time. It might add to his reputation.

Marc

 

[Madfox]

In my experience the DMs and players are of vital importance to the fun you will get from a game. In many cases they are more important then the scenarios. That is true for standard campaign, but even more so for Living Greyhawk. Remember that the scenarios are written so that they can be finished in a 4 hour slot and that they need to be fun for the biggest group of people. Most scenarios will be pretty generic and apparently combat orientated. The scenarios leave a lot open to the DMs to get the most out of a scenario especially role-playing wise. I have talked with people complaining loudly about a scenario. After having listened to them, I could in many cases point out that many of the worst points of complaining had to do with the DM and the fellow players.

People should also realize that this is a world wide campaign. There is no more administration with LG as with a standard campaign, except that in a standard campaign most that work is done either by the DM or one player. You have NO idea how many cheaters are out there... and even one cheater can ruin the fun totally of other players.

Running a game at a convention which needs to be finished in 4 hours is a skill in itself. Which scenes do you rush on and which scenes the players have the time to role-play? It never hurts to talk with people before hand about what kind of gaming they prefer. In our region we allow the players to make their own tables before we start moving around a bit to get the average levels on a more equal level. Hence most people will be playing at a table with people with a more or less similar gaming style.

Complaints about differences in treasure between the various regions are weird since the guidelines for treasures and the current rules concerning buying items place this on one line worldwide. In my experience players also expand way too many resources during even the most basic scenarios. What is wrong with sleeping between combats? I pointed this out to a friend of mine who was making the same complaints and he looked at his expenditures and he did realize he used way too many scrolls and potions.

For example: I recently heard of a module in which a poor beggar asks the party to take a month-long sea journey for basically no reward.

Are you honestly telling me that ANY DM would offer that up to his own group? That he wouldn't expect them to tell the begger to shove it, even if the group contained a paladin?

Remember that one of the assumptions in Living Greyhawk is that people play heroic PCs, something that is stated within the rules. If you create a character that does not fullfill this criterea you will need to take a closer look at the blurbs before deciding to play a particular game with that character. Besides, in the end you will always be rewarded.

Anyway, some of the best LG slots I have run btw where with the scenarios with the worst reputation. I had superb players and I was willing to go beyond what was written down litterally and the result where some great games.

P.S. As for the a scenario giving more xp if the players opted for a side track, that is not entirely within the writing guidelines for LG. When you don't like a particular session, ask for the scenario, so that you can judge where the fault lay. Whatever the reason, send a mail to the local triad so that they can learn from it. If people do not send in their complaints about an adventure (and make them as specific as possible) then there is no way the Triad can make the scenarios more fun for others involved.

 

[Ysgarran]

As mentioned, LG is really a mixed bag.

What do people think about this: A large air elemental against a party of 1st level characters? Sure, it is a CR 5 creature but I don't see how any party of first level characters could ever defeat such a monster. Lots of caveats here since I have not seen the module itself. Maybe we could have avoided the encounter, maybe it was was expected that we would run away.

The only reason the group that I played in survived is that the DM thought it was stupid also and REALLY softballed the encounter. That kind of play really is unsatisfying to me.

later,
Ysgarran.

 

[Thorntangle]

For example: I recently heard of a module in which a poor beggar asks the party to take a month-long sea journey for basically no reward.

Are you honestly telling me that ANY DM would offer that up to his own group? That he wouldn't expect them to tell the begger to shove it, even if the group contained a paladin?

I'll clarify since I know this mod and this example keeps coming up.

The beggar is the first and prime plot hook. There is a second hook that players encounter that offers them a monetary reward for doing what the beggar asked. Plus this mod is the second in a series. Ideally the players will have played the first mod and their curiousity would have been piqued enough to consider the beggar's request without the offer of a reward.

 

[Madfox]

What do people think about this: A large air elemental against a party of 1st level characters? Sure, it is a CR 5 creature but I don't see how any party of first level characters could ever defeat such a monster. Lots of caveats here since I have not seen the module itself. Maybe we could have avoided the encounter, maybe it was was expected that we would run away.

The only reason the group that I played in survived is that the DM thought it was stupid also and REALLY softballed the encounter. That kind of play really is unsatisfying to me.

The downside of the APL system currently being used by LG. The lowest APL is 2, so that means that most PCs will be level 2. Which means that this encounter theoratically is survivable. Of course, both the authors and the editors did not take into account that the CR of elementals is on the low side.

 

[heirodule]

For example: I recently heard of a module in which a poor beggar asks the party to take a month-long sea journey for basically no reward.

You're supposed to be heroes.

Living City was full of "you are hired for mission X". How boring and repetive is that?

And he asks the party to take the lake journey to rescue his wife from the horrors that have befallen his land.

Also, you *CAN* refuse, and still get hired by somebody who wants to collect a sample horror. And there is background info in the module, probably dealt with in a seqel, that will show why the purely "heroic" choice would have been better.

LG sounds like it needs what LD has - a unifying organisation so that the characters have some reason to be doing a module apart from "because otherwise you (the player) can leave the room and go home".

The LG campaign documents specify that the campaign with fopcus on heroics and helping people because it is "right" not doing things for pay.

If you know that going in you have little reason to complain.