Necromancy and AL

[Pauper]

You don't need certs for items. I don't know why you think you do.

You do not need a cert for a magic item awarded by an AL-authorized adventure, that's true. If it's true that everyone who played the Season 4 epic got a special award, then I'd expect to find that on the Organizers site or from some other official source, not hear it for the first time in a thread on EN World.

Our RC went to Winter Fantasy and ran some modules there; when he returned, he said nothing about special awards handed out as part of the Epic module. I'm sure I can ask him the next time I see him, but that would have been a good time to spread the word about these non-standard awards. Otherwise, as a DM, I have no real reason to take a hand-written cert at face value.

--
Pauper

 

[Inconnunom]

This depends a whole lot on what a reward does. If a reward is nifty and small, I wouldn't make a big deal about it. If the reward was far above what seems reasonable for the character's level (like a flying mount, or a legendary item), I'd want to know the source. If the source was shady and unverifiable (e.g. this was randomly given to me at X con), I might not allow it if I thought it would undermine the fun for the rest of the party.

This sort of thing is always a DM's judgement call, and the AL making these exclusive rewards without publishing their availability makes it hard for DMs to make that call easily. So I'd expect table variation. As a DM, I'm not going to flinch at some fancy new light source, but I'm also under no obligation to let you ruin a game because you spent a couple hundred dollars to go to a con either.

So to clarify, it's the player's responsibility to convince a DM that a completely legitimate reward is legitimate. Instead of the DM's responsibility to be properly informed? You are pretty much calling players liars and starting a session off without trust.

DM: "Sorry, you don't have certs for any of those items so you can't have them."
Player: "But.. certs aren't given at cons except for premiers!"
DM: "Too bad."

 

[Inconnunom]

You do not need a cert for a magic item awarded by an AL-authorized adventure, that's true. If it's true that everyone who played the Season 4 epic got a special award, then I'd expect to find that on the Organizers site or from some other official source, not hear it for the first time in a thread on EN World.

Our RC went to Winter Fantasy and ran some modules there; when he returned, he said nothing about special awards handed out as part of the Epic module. I'm sure I can ask him the next time I see him, but that would have been a good time to spread the word about these non-standard awards. Otherwise, as a DM, I have no real reason to take a hand-written cert at face value.

--
Pauper

See it is supposed to be a surprise and we aren't supposed to be discussing rewards for adventures. But clearly if DM's insist on taking away rewards because they can't "verifiy" them I guess everyone loses.

 

[Pauper]

Interesting.

So do you audit the players' sheets?

When I run at conventions, yes. Doesn't everyone?

Even at my FLGS, with the group I play with regularly, I'll do informal audits when something sticks out. If someone shows up for a session at level 2 when everyone else is still at level 1, I'll ask why. Often it'll end up that the player applied a DM award from running another game in the store, which is fine, because I was either there to see it or can confirm with the store organizer that the game was actually run. (This is going to get more complicated now that home play is AL-legal, but its easy enough to figure out who runs regular home games in our area.)

It's not really that hard, and not doing it opens the door to all sorts of shenanigans, so it would astonish me if a DM said they didn't audit.

Do you confirm that the judges that ran their games have valid DCI numbers?

Whether the DCI number is valid or not isn't my concern -- that's a convention or store concern, and thus up to the convention or store organizer to confirm.

The Admins have been giving out far more in "special" certs than is commonly advertised / available or even probably known. It appears to keep expanding...how will you keep up?

I expect to hear about it from my RC, or to see something announced on the Organizer site. There are numerous things that the campaign doesn't require explicitly because it would increase the 'material load' on the DM (such as using Sage Advice rulings at the table); it would be pretty amazing to me if the admins were so adamant about keeping DM cognitive load to a minimum and then set out to create a whole galaxy of secret awards that they don't tell DMs about.

Basically I assume the admins aren't jerks and that they want me to succeed as a DM, so they won't throw a lot of 'gotchas' at me in the form of things that are legal but largely unknown.

--
Pauper

 

[kalani]

Is it included in an offical campaign-approved cert? Then sure, because that way I know it was approved by the campaign admins.

If you just say 'I got a griffin at Winter Fantasy', though? Anybody can say that. Without some confirmation that it's a 'real thing', nothing in the AL rules compels me to take your word for it. Heck, I could say I got a galleon at Winter Fantasy (even though I wasn't at Winter Fantasy).

--
Pauper

IIRC, Griffins don't have certs (I could be wrong about that, as I have not yet seen the certs from Season 4 Epic) - but they are awarded in Reclamation of Phlan for completing certain tasks.

Either way, when it comes to mounts - DMs do not have the authority to prohibit a mount at their table as it is something that can be purchased from the equipment section of the PHB. Players should however, expect table variation when it comes to the costs of caring for said mount. At my tables for example - I try to KIS (keep it simple) and ask players to pay the stabling costs and feed costs (as listed in the PHB) each time the player spends DT (at a cost of 0.55gp/DT day). In respect to elephants, I ask players to multiply those costs x4

During an adventure, I ask the players to care for their mount with tracked resources as well and pay those costs whenever they rest somewhere (such as at a Tavern/inn/city/homestead/etc).

I actually have a character who has an elephant. Do you know how often it comes up in an adventure?..... Almost never. Why? Most adventure locations happen within a city (in which case the elephant would be stabled), or in an indoor location. I have rode the elephant on occasion between two points of interest (making it little more than fluff) - but over the course of 13 levels, my elephant has only participated in two combats, both of which occurred in 3-7.

Elephants are little more than a fluff item honestly and almost never come up. All mine is good for is hauling my cart (as I believe in verisimilitude and use to haul treasure out of locations prior to it being split).

 

[Anthraxus]

So to clarify, it's the player's responsibility to convince a DM that a completely legitimate reward is legitimate. Instead of the DM's responsibility to be properly informed? You are pretty much calling players liars and starting a session off without trust.

This is the first time I've heard of the Photocopied, Hand-written certs from WF- so I'd probably have to look at them and consider them before allowing them, too.

As for the original theme of the thread- I don't see a problem with Necromancy in AL games, unless it's somehow disturbing the other players/DM. And if someone came into one of my games with a few zombies on his logsheet, I'd probably be ok with it. A whole bunch, probably not.

 

[Inconnunom]

When I run at conventions, yes. Doesn't everyone?

Well seeing as I've bit to several bigger cons, including the Author Only adventures by the admins. I've never once been audited. Even with characters that do not have certs for items. Your players must not be very trustworthy. I'd hate to game in that kind of atmosphere.

 

[Pauper]

See it is supposed to be a surprise and we aren't supposed to be discussing rewards for adventures. But clearly if DM's insist on taking away rewards because they can't "verifiy" them I guess everyone loses.

See, here's where we really disagree.

I'm saying that, if a DM can't verify that a cert comes from an official AL source, that DM *can* refuse to allow it at the table. She doesn't have to disallow it, if she doesn't think the item will be unbalancing or abusive (like RCanine's example of an alternative light source), but she has the authority to do so, granted explicitly by the AL itself.

You seem to be saying that *every* DM will automatically revoke those things -- because DMs are jerks, apparently? You're taking this to a false extreme to try to discredit the idea that a DM can ever refuse a player anything written in the character log.

I don't feel you're deliberately trying to be unethical here, but it's a very sketchy way to make your point. (But it's better than just resorting to calling me names, so I'll give you that much credit.)

--
Pauper

 

[Inconnunom]

This is the first time I've heard of the Photocopied, Hand-written certs from WF- so I'd probably have to look at them and consider them before allowing them, too..

I was not the one to mention them. My guess is that they are in response to DM's who don't trust their players and the players insist that at least having something on paper will allow their local DM's to use said item due to a general lack of trust. Because they aren't legal to trade with (afaik).

 

[Cascade]

This depends a whole lot on what a reward does. If a reward is nifty and small, I wouldn't make a big deal about it. If the reward was far above what seems reasonable for the character's level (like a flying mount, or a legendary item), I'd want to know the source. If the source was shady and unverifiable (e.g. this was randomly given to me at X con), I might not allow it if I thought it would undermine the fun for the rest of the party.

This sort of thing is always a DM's judgement call, and the AL making these exclusive rewards without publishing their availability makes it hard for DMs to make that call easily. So I'd expect table variation. As a DM, I'm not going to flinch at some fancy new light source, but I'm also under no obligation to let you ruin a game because you spent a couple hundred dollars to go to a con either.

Hmm, I was not expecting that reply or that take.
My personal view is to always adjust the adventure to accommodate the players, regardless of their play style; the judge supports them, all of them.

For example:
I ran table where the group had 2 casters that had worked previously together. One would cast Conjure elemental (also works with poly-morph), the other would cast Invisibility on the first one so he couldn't be targeted and break his concentration. So for the next hour of the crawl, I didn't tell the player he couldn't use it because the other players were soon to be bored...I adapted the adventure so more actions happened both in front of and behind during the loud combats. Did I circumvent the module flow pattern?...yes, a bit, but the players had fun...all of the players.

Another table had 2 fighters with Dwarven throwers and just owning the giants in the adventure. I didn't tell the players not to bring the items, I adjusted the play a bit so they had their fair share but had some work into the group without being over bearing.

It's delicate but imho, it pretty black and white- give the players the benefit of the doubt and keep everyone happy. Certainly there's table variation, but this generation of gaming is supposed to be less about "stuff" and more about play and if the judges are stuck on "stuff"...it won't change and people will get bogged down on rules.