New Faction Rank Document!

warfteiner

First Post

My post was already edited! ;)

As for our findings about player desires -- several years of current edition playtesting and feedback, several years of playtesting adventures, physical availability at conventions and FLGS gamedays, Fai Chen operations, social media presence. The data's there!

Numeric bonuses will always be interesting and motivating to players, and it's something that we're mindful of during the design process. We've been working to introduce new & different conflict resolution elements (magic item usage, skill choices, and so on) in the current run of adventures. This sort of pressure will need to be maintained from our side, for sure - for there is more than one way to skin a cat, or so they say.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Pauper

That guy, who does that thing.
As for our findings about player desires -- several years of current edition playtesting and feedback, several years of playtesting adventures, physical availability at conventions and FLGS gamedays, Fai Chen operations, social media presence. The data's there!

I think you're dealing with a self-selected population there, though -- folks who do care about numerical advantage are responding to things like the Fai Chen's trading options, but people who don't are opting out and not being counted.

Based on the response at GenCon 2016, I'd say you can also support adding non-combat options like non-combat animal 'pets' and other 'flair' to the game (and, to be fair, AL is also doing this -- I only wish we could have convinced the combat-monsters not to kill the tiny bear in 05-01 before my fiancee could try an Animal Handling skill on it); the difference is that adding flair does not increase the barrier to entry for those who prefer optimization, because they can simply ignore the flair and focus on what they find fun. As optimizers get more options and make use of them, the campaign needs to 'ramp up' to challenge them, either in adventure design or at the individual table level with the DM adjusting the adventure, and players who don't care to optimize must either 'get with the program' or get out, and my experience is that many will get out. That's why I believe that adding additional optimization options to AL is ultimately a bad idea.

I do appreciate that you are trying to keep the campaign fresh and interesting -- I'm just disappointed that the same old answers as from previous campaigns (let's hand out more magic items!) keep coming up, particularly when some of those old answers have already been identified as problems that helped kill those campaigns.

--
Pauper
 

darjr

I crit!
I've purchased several of the older mods to run them for AL specifically. I'm not a fan of them getting retired. Not even a little. The low level early mods of short duration also continue to be a fantastic way to intro folks to the game.
 

Serious (?) question from one of our AL players...

"If I buy 10 +1 daggers via my faction and use them in Animate Object, does the spell's attack roll and damage increase by 1 per dagger?"

:)
 

warfteiner

First Post
I don't see why not, but that player is unlikely to ever again get permanent magic treasure from an adventure (remember, faction items raise your overall total). He might want to bear that in mind!
 



Pauper

That guy, who does that thing.
I'm not a fan of them getting retired. Not even a little.

To each his own, but I feel the campaign is already on shaky ground by not retiring the Season One adventures prior to this point.

Most Season One adventures don't make narrative sense if run for characters who have already played an adventure from any other season -- Season Two presumes that the dragon has already attacked Phlan and many refugees have made their way to Mulmaster, while Season Three presumes that, after the Fall of Mulmaster, the Phlan refugees migrate toward the city of Hillsfar. The initial Season Four module presumes that the characters are sent by their faction representatives to investigate a threat to their plans to re-take the city.

I could understand managing to fit DDEX 01-11 to -15 into a character's log who also has played one of these other modules, but it simply doesn't make narrative sense for someone who's played, say, DDEX 02-11 Oubliette of Fort Iron to then go back and play DDEX 01-03 Shadow on the Moonsea -- not only does it present Phlan in a state that doesn't exist as of the time of DDEX 02-11, but it presents Elisande, a character the group interacts with in DDEX 02-11, as if the group had never seen her before.

Granted, a good DM can overcome some of these problems, but a good DM shouldn't have to -- the campaign should be presented in such a way that the DM can focus on telling the current story without having to be an expert on every previous season, otherwise it becomes challenging to recruit new DMs who aren't already experts in AL lore. And even more to the point, as AL moves away from the Moonsea and focuses more on adventures in the Sword Coast area, and as more and more convention developers use the Moonsea to develop their own stories, the disconnect between the old AL Moonsea adventures and the current state of both AL and the Moonsea becomes more and more difficult to reconcile.

Lastly, retiring the old adventures allows the rewards used in those adventures to be re-used in newer adventures, as a way of allowing players who didn't get to play the old adventures to still gain certain treasures that were only available in those modules. It also allows the campaign staff to effectively remove problematic treasures from the campaign by not renewing them in new modules, meaning only the oldest characters, who by now are high enough level that new players won't likely interact with them, have those difficult-to-balance-for magical items.

In short, there are lots of good reasons for the campaign to retire older adventures, and some good reasons for the oldest adventures to already be retired. A categorical opposition to adventure retirement seems to me to be a foolish position to hold.

--
Pauper
 

darjr

I crit!
Some good points there. However I'd say that much of what you've stated can be done without forcing a whole season into retirement. Good judgement about what modules to actually run at an event and some guidance from the campaign can work wonders without retiremen
 
Last edited:

From the spell description of Animate Objects:



The spell fails when cast on a magical object, so the question is moot.

--
Pauper

Exactly. Just showing how players will be attempting to game the system. But as was mentioned the other costs (untradable permanence, high DT, etc) will likely curb most excesses.
 

Remove ads

Top