Adamantine and Mithral

[TwinPeaksGuy]

Point taken. The initial questions were answered. Discussions about "why" were getting badly bogged down.

There is a downside to league play. Building and playing a character with deeper and enjoyable relationships and flavor can have aspects that get in the way of keeping it portable across tables and venues.

I submit to you that the overall effect is that of a playground that is soon outgrown. AL(or at least Expeditions/Encounters) seems to be intended to provide an easy way to get people into the hobby and rolling some dice, with the league and its policies serving as a meta-DM. It more or less functions to meet that goal.

What may or may not be a problem is retention in the organization. It may simply be part of the intent that many or most people will find parts of the League structure incomplete, confining, or absurd and just go away and play home games, leaving more room at the league tables but draining on the player and DM pool at those tables. That may leave an ongoing problem of finding DMs who themselves have more than a year at it, so best of luck on solving that. I've seen more than a few DMs at my FLGS who can barely pronounce half the words in the box text, that give up on roleplaying the NPCs, and just turn the whole thing into a tactical combat game with few options or rewards. Is it any wonder I'm looking for ways to spice things up and keep myself engaged?

I've played 2 editions of D&D over the last 30 years, with three other systems in between, and it truly seems to me that my time playing at league tables is drawing to a close, after really only a few months. Given the discussion here, I doubt any of you will be sorry to see me go, so that's likely best for all concerned.

 

[kalani]

I take it that Adventurers League is your first Organized Play experience. Had you been familiar with previous OP systems (Living City, Living Greyhawk, Living Forgotten Realms or even Pathfinder Societies) you would realize several things.

• By it's very nature, OP campaigns are more restrictive than home games in the sense that DMs and Players are expected to follow the meta-rules of the campaign, and are given limits. Each OP campaign has a document which lists the campaigns "house rules" by which all tables operate, and DMs/Players are not given any flexibility in altering these rules outside of making suggestions/giving feedback.
• Adventurers League is less restrictive than previous OP campaigns, with DMs being given far more flexibility, and being given a lot of lattitude to make rulings (not to be confused with rules) at their table. Previous OP campaigns frequently tied a DMs hands to the point where they had very little (if any) power to adjust difficulty among other things.
• In a home game, the DM has the authority to make adjustments as necessary for their group - banning X or Y option (or combination) for the sake of balance. DMs lack this authority in an OP setting, relying on the rules of the OP campaign itself to help prevent abuses (see next point).
• The Story Origin mechanic may appear arbitary, until you realize that it is an attempt to pre-emptively prevent the kinds of abuses that plagued other OP campaigns. LFR in particular had a policy of "everything is legal". As more and more products are released, the potential for a broken combination increases exponentially (as new products are not balanced against all pre-existing products, and are generally only balanced internally, and with the options in the player's handbook).
  
  This resulted in character optimizers running rough-shod over the entire campaign, leading to an arms race with mod-designers, and hedging out the casual gamer in the process. It also created a toxic and hostile environment whereby many optimizers felt entitled to criticize the build-choices of their fellow players, while also creating an elitist mentality of "optimize or go home".
  
  The Story Origin mechanic was designed to help prevent these kinds of toxic enviroments from occuring. Had this mechanic been introduced in the 3.5 or 4E era, the Story Origin mechanic would have been hailed as a godsend. Unfortunately, due to the products that have been released in 5e to date - it appears (on the surface) to be an arbitary restriction, as the kinds of disruptive abuses it was designed to prevent are currently impossible (even if everything was legal). It may be several years before 5E grows to the point where the Story Origin mechanic achieves it's designed goal - but since nobody knows what might come down the pipe, the mechanic itself is designed to play it safe.
  

Organized Play is not for everyone (and that's perfectly ok).
You have obviously given AL a try, and if you find it not to your liking - we are welcome to suggestions and feedback, but ultimately - the decision is yours whether you feel the program provides the gaming experience you are looking for, or whether a different play experience is better suited to your tastes. I hate it when people get elitist on either side of the OP fence.

Many players love OP programs and prefer them to home games.... Many other players (and DMs) feel stiffled under such systems.
I get the impression you are one of the latter (and there is nothing wrong with that).

I personally enjoy a consistent set of rules and not having to deal with arbitary DM decisions, especially those decisions many DMs make because of their personal feelings (often at the expense of player feelings/wishes), rather than for balance. Some DMs take it into their head, that it is their game - and the player's are simply guests.

I prefer to come from the PoV, that everyone at the table is equal, and has an equal right and responsibility to ensure that the game is fun for everyone (regardless of whether they are a player or DM). As such, I tend to consult all my players in a session 0 in order to determine what kinds of games everyone wants, and what kinds of restrictions/rules they are willing to accept. I won't ban a race/class for example if doing so will upset my players. Other DMs are not as diplomatic, and simply say - "Like it, Lump it, or here's the door".

I have been burned by dictatoral DMs on too many occasions, to the point where I have lost trust that your average "random DM" has the maturity not to let the power go to their head. I enjoy home games, but I need to have trust in my DM and fellow players as too many games can be destroyed by one disruptive player (or DM). Organized Play programs often (but not always) limit the ability to be disruptive in this way....

IMHO, Adventurers League succeeds better than most OP programs in this regard
It is for this reason, that I joined the AL campaign staff as I want to help it grow, and have longevity.

 

[TwinPeaksGuy]

Yeah, this really isn't a good fit.

In curbing the minmax optimization(which you all probably assumed was my goal in starting this thread. It wasn't. How a +0 to a mechanic with loads of storytelling flavor potential qualifies still mystifies me.), from my PoV you've also managed to curb the ability to build a character with a meaningful story. If I was looking to only play the stats I would not have made a Deep Gnome a Fighter, that's just a silly combination.

I shudder every time I show up and have to somehow justify that my character was adventuring in Mulmaster last week, but for no clear reason is suddenly in Phlan, and may be in hillsfar next week. Continuity is shot to hell. After an adventure or two and a single armor upgrade and a few additions like a grappling hook, there's nothing left worth buying and you can't build anything. Magic items that my character should have any interest in have only shown up two times, and I lost both the roll-offs. There seems to be little point in acquiring downtime or gold, and XP only in service to what feels like the cocaine addict loop mentioned earlier. "Story Origin" as currently constructed seems to be robbing my characters of anything that feels like a story arc or progression, or honestly even a coherent back story. It's not working for me. Thanks for following up and bearing with me as this realization really crystallizes.

 

[Z. H. Darkstar]

Don't forget that AL is still in its infancy. There may be changes down the road that would make a better fit for you. One thing I've noticed is that AL is taking the same approach as 5e as a whole; it's easier to add to a lean system than reduce a bloated one. If it turns out that certain restrictions are not needed a year or two from now, we may see the belts get loosened.

 

[Mirtek]

I shudder every time I show up and have to somehow justify that my character was adventuring in Mulmaster last week, but for no clear reason is suddenly in Phlan, and may be in hillsfar next week.

well, that's among the least confusing part oft OP. Since you can play in any order, the questgiver today can be the NPC you killed last week as the Main BBEG after she feel to evil. You might even carry her sword you took from her cold dead hands as the magic item of the mod.

Paradox like this are simply part of OP

 

[kalani]

And if you have an issue with Expeditions Paradox, you might instead prefer the Encounters/Home/Online play, in which case you would be restricted to playing the hardcover adventures plus 2 Expeditions (3-1, and 3-2).

 

[TwinPeaksGuy]

Continuity paradox is a concern, but so is the gutting of character motivation.

I started a new character yesterday, a wild magic sorcerer who had not yet realized he had this gift. Playing the realization moment was fun, we were doing all 5 parts of DDEX1-1. At creation(I wrote him up 2 months ago as a back-up), his goal was to get successful enough as a brewer to start his own tavern, buy a home, and marry the love of his life. Again, this now appears to be a character who will either retire before level 5 or continue on sad and bitter at the loss of the life he grew up wanting. While the latter option allows for more longevity and might provide an interesting RP for a while, the tragedy inherent in it is depressing and demotivating. Is killing progressively nastier monsters really its own reward?

So a mechanic called "Story Origin," which I would have thought placed reasonable limits on the character's build at level 1, is apparently also the issue in the way of allowing them to build anything thematic, unique, or motivating at any point thereafter. How perplexing. If my gnome kills the hook horror in "Boltsmelter's Book" he can't use the carapace to make a new shield, even if the only difference is that it can be said to have sentimental value and perhaps it's worth 100gp instead of 10 (I would have gladly forfeited my split of the gold and all the mission downtime for such a shield, had the DM been allowed to offer it). Nor can a miner, of any race, make a tunnel and artificial cave to live in (anyone who's ever played a dwarf should be offended by this IMO). This is not the D&D I played in the 1980s, and since the 5e rule set as a whole allows it, it's purely a League decision.

 

[skerritthegreen]

While you might not intend to use some of these for mechanical gain, people have done so in the past. Say you make the hook horror shield/armor for you gnome and handed it to druid friend friend to wear, potentially increasing his AC. This has been tried in the past. Maybe you don't even do that since you just want it for RP purposes, so we let you. Now the druid at the table says... oh good idea! I skin the hook horror I killed and make plate mail from it. TwinPeaksGuy got to make armor from it, so I demand the same right. Its a slippery slope.

 

[TwinPeaksGuy]

And I specifically said it had no mechanical advantage, it was RP flavor and EXTRA gold. This is not hypothetically a +1 shield (my example was a shield, not plate armor). This whole area of +0 flavor items is underexplored in the adventures I've seen.

If I went to that trouble to make a special item like that, I'm not handing it to anyone I just sat across a table from. They can make their own trophies. Beats me why anyone would given that they'd be giving up armor they need to someone who can wild shape and gain a huge bag of hit points.

If a druid buys a wooden shield, and covers it in bulette carapace but it's still only a +2 to his total AC, just like a normal wooden shield, who cares? If a druid crafts hide armor from death dog pelts he killed himself and it's still only AC 12 + up to 2 dex the numbers are impacted exactly zero vs items on the standard tables, but the bling factor and cost in gold or down time can go up. Suddenly it's just become a DM tool for limiting player resources, if you want.

You are aware that the slippery slope is one of the classic logical argumentation fallacies? It's always a fear-based set of assumptions, it's not in and of itself a reason to do or not do anything.

 

[skerritthegreen]

Except that we regularly have druids trying to make medium and heavy armors out of thinks like the hook horror carapace you mentioned. It doesn't give your character a mechanical advantage. but it would them. Why should you allowed to make armor out of it and they are not? That hardly seems fair.

The other situation you mention, buying a building or land, specifically has mechanical advantages as well. They are listed in the DMG. Rules in the DMG for the most part are off limits to AL characters for similar reasons.

Even though you say you are not, you sure seem like you are looking for a mechanical advantage. You could for example write off 500 gp and say you bought a house. You'd never get to go there as part of an adventure, but it would let RP that you had a house. If you want to actually be able to safely rest there and grab food there during an adventure, not you have an advantage no else has. But sure, you RP that you had a house. Its the Axe-Lute argument all over again.