Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Things to do with Downtime Days
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Pauper" data-source="post: 6820423" data-attributes="member: 17607"><p>Scorpienne's list pretty much covers my immediate ideas and then some, so I'll just comment on a few of the listed concepts:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If the campaign were planning to retire adventures after a period, then I could see adapting something cool the Waterdeep folks did during LFR -- create an adventure chain with the payoff that the party is asked to help found a new organization (the Heirs of Mirt, in LFR). Other modules can allow other characters to join the organization, but there's a slight prestige factor in being able to say that your character is a founder.</p><p></p><p>Of course, if adventures don't retire, than this is not nearly as interesting, since anyone who wants to can go back and play the old adventures to 'claim' founder status. This can maybe still be salvaged by restricting the 'founder' status to only characters from certain storyline seasons (say, Tyranny of Dragons &/or Elemental Evil), as that would not only preserve the idea that 'older' characters did these things, but also provide a reason for people to continue to create characters from those older storyline seasons.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>As long as the benefits were clearly tied to an in-game organization, and one that's separate from the existing factions, I'm OK with this. I wouldn't mind continuing to see unique faction-specific downtime activities for each new season, though.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm a little leery of this sort of 'flexible contact' system, as it can both break immersion ("How did you get ahold of Horace the gate-guard from inside Ravenloft?"), and provide easy short-cuts for combat-focused PCs to take to avoid having to deal with the consequences of not having non-combat skills like Investigation and Diplomacy. Yes, this can be mitigated somewhat with advice to DMs, but most DMs are likely going to let the PC have access to a benefit that she explicitly spend an in-game resource to get.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Should be noted that DMs can already do this -- the Player's Handbook notes that "[y]our lifestyle choice can have consequences." Though the PH doesn't specify explicit benefits or penalties, if a module notes that a particular NPC is impressed by wealthy and powerful individuals or is suspicious of them, the DM is perfectly justified in giving bonuses or penalties to the PC's interactions with that character if the lifestyle the PC is pursuing would have an impact.</p><p></p><p>The admins have always resisted making explicit rulings from vague points in the PH, so a simple alert to DMs that they can take lifestyle into account when running non-combat encounters should suffice for this.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If the campaign wanted to add the carousing table, I wouldn't complain -- but to say there should be 'more' emphasis is misguided. Currently, as a rule in the DMG not otherwise noted in the campaign documentation, carousing isn't used in AL.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not really a fan of this, as it simply serves to convert one 'currency' into another (downtime into renown, or into gold, etc.). Downtime should stay its own separate 'currency', with its own unique things it can do. For example, the rules already say how to turn downtime into money -- via the Practicing a Profession or Crafting downtime activities, both of which are allowed in AL. Just because some players don't think those are 'good enough' is not a good enough reason, IMO, to create a different, more efficient activity.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Absolutely opposed. Selling magic items isn't even supported in the core rules; the campaign shouldn't create specialized alternate rules just to address the recurring complaints of players who took magic items they no longer want.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is an interesting idea, though I agree it should be done as part of a specific event rather than made into a general 'downtime activity', so as to better facilitate record-keeping and the ability to see what changes these actions bring to the campaign world.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, absolutely opposed. Anything added to the campaign that is 'better' than something that already exists is deliberately defined power-creep. It's one thing to give those out as limited cert options in small batches; it's something else to open up such an option to the entire campaign, to the point where you're an idiot if you don't take the option.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not opposed to allowing druids to gain additional forms as additional creatures are added to the game via new monster books, but this should be done by the campaign, not left to individual power-gamers to figure out which forms they want.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm of two minds on this. On the one hand, this does sound flavorful and in-keeping with what a wizard would do with her downtime. On the other, since only wizards and other characters with spellbooks could take advantage of the activity, and would grant them access to spells beyond what their class already allows, I feel as though the benefit would largely be used by players already trying to create abusive characters (multiclass wizards who don't go up additional levels in wizard, and thus currently have to rely on scroll 'drops' in modules to gain new spells that they can use with their new spell slots, for example).</p><p></p><p>The campaign has done a great job of curtailing abusive options thus far; it would be a shame to let bonus options for abuse sneak in via a 'back door' intended to make a little-used activity more interesting. Or in other words, changes to downtime should make downtime more interesting, not necessarily more useful.</p><p></p><p>--</p><p>Pauper</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Pauper, post: 6820423, member: 17607"] Scorpienne's list pretty much covers my immediate ideas and then some, so I'll just comment on a few of the listed concepts: If the campaign were planning to retire adventures after a period, then I could see adapting something cool the Waterdeep folks did during LFR -- create an adventure chain with the payoff that the party is asked to help found a new organization (the Heirs of Mirt, in LFR). Other modules can allow other characters to join the organization, but there's a slight prestige factor in being able to say that your character is a founder. Of course, if adventures don't retire, than this is not nearly as interesting, since anyone who wants to can go back and play the old adventures to 'claim' founder status. This can maybe still be salvaged by restricting the 'founder' status to only characters from certain storyline seasons (say, Tyranny of Dragons &/or Elemental Evil), as that would not only preserve the idea that 'older' characters did these things, but also provide a reason for people to continue to create characters from those older storyline seasons. As long as the benefits were clearly tied to an in-game organization, and one that's separate from the existing factions, I'm OK with this. I wouldn't mind continuing to see unique faction-specific downtime activities for each new season, though. I'm a little leery of this sort of 'flexible contact' system, as it can both break immersion ("How did you get ahold of Horace the gate-guard from inside Ravenloft?"), and provide easy short-cuts for combat-focused PCs to take to avoid having to deal with the consequences of not having non-combat skills like Investigation and Diplomacy. Yes, this can be mitigated somewhat with advice to DMs, but most DMs are likely going to let the PC have access to a benefit that she explicitly spend an in-game resource to get. Should be noted that DMs can already do this -- the Player's Handbook notes that "[y]our lifestyle choice can have consequences." Though the PH doesn't specify explicit benefits or penalties, if a module notes that a particular NPC is impressed by wealthy and powerful individuals or is suspicious of them, the DM is perfectly justified in giving bonuses or penalties to the PC's interactions with that character if the lifestyle the PC is pursuing would have an impact. The admins have always resisted making explicit rulings from vague points in the PH, so a simple alert to DMs that they can take lifestyle into account when running non-combat encounters should suffice for this. If the campaign wanted to add the carousing table, I wouldn't complain -- but to say there should be 'more' emphasis is misguided. Currently, as a rule in the DMG not otherwise noted in the campaign documentation, carousing isn't used in AL. Not really a fan of this, as it simply serves to convert one 'currency' into another (downtime into renown, or into gold, etc.). Downtime should stay its own separate 'currency', with its own unique things it can do. For example, the rules already say how to turn downtime into money -- via the Practicing a Profession or Crafting downtime activities, both of which are allowed in AL. Just because some players don't think those are 'good enough' is not a good enough reason, IMO, to create a different, more efficient activity. Absolutely opposed. Selling magic items isn't even supported in the core rules; the campaign shouldn't create specialized alternate rules just to address the recurring complaints of players who took magic items they no longer want. This is an interesting idea, though I agree it should be done as part of a specific event rather than made into a general 'downtime activity', so as to better facilitate record-keeping and the ability to see what changes these actions bring to the campaign world. Again, absolutely opposed. Anything added to the campaign that is 'better' than something that already exists is deliberately defined power-creep. It's one thing to give those out as limited cert options in small batches; it's something else to open up such an option to the entire campaign, to the point where you're an idiot if you don't take the option. Not opposed to allowing druids to gain additional forms as additional creatures are added to the game via new monster books, but this should be done by the campaign, not left to individual power-gamers to figure out which forms they want. I'm of two minds on this. On the one hand, this does sound flavorful and in-keeping with what a wizard would do with her downtime. On the other, since only wizards and other characters with spellbooks could take advantage of the activity, and would grant them access to spells beyond what their class already allows, I feel as though the benefit would largely be used by players already trying to create abusive characters (multiclass wizards who don't go up additional levels in wizard, and thus currently have to rely on scroll 'drops' in modules to gain new spells that they can use with their new spell slots, for example). The campaign has done a great job of curtailing abusive options thus far; it would be a shame to let bonus options for abuse sneak in via a 'back door' intended to make a little-used activity more interesting. Or in other words, changes to downtime should make downtime more interesting, not necessarily more useful. -- Pauper [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Things to do with Downtime Days
Top