SCAG Thread

[Steve_MND]

It cuts me to the quick to see people post things like this. Sure, this may be how WotC views it, but who cares? OP is an intensely local thing, and is driven in massive part by the community. It's inevitable that the community will feel some amount of ownership.

Sure, it's inevitable, but it's also wrong. We don't own it in anything close to the sense that's being argued here, which was my point -- it's not a hobby club, it's a marketing campaign. And we're not members, we're consumers.

And OP is by no stretch of the imagination an "intensely local thing." Playing the actual games are intensely local, obviously, but virtually no other aspect of the OP is. We don't write the adventures at a local level. We don't create the storylines at a local level. We don't come up with the monsters or the situations, or the rules or the NPCs or the factions or anything else about OP at the local level. A few select conventions and a handful of stores that manage to run them quickly can perhaps report back on their tables to the people running the campaign about a recent mod via their QR codes and such, but even then, that's the closest thing, and that's often been so overly broad and vague in terms of what can be reported on, it's a tenuous connection to a 'local level' at best.

That's not to say that we can't create hobby clubs and form groups and make OP what we need it to be at the local level -- a potentially thriving social and fun experience. And in fact that's what we do all the time. But my point was that we shouldn't then project that local activity back up the corporate structure and expect them to play by our rules. And we certainly shouldn't get upset when said corporate structure doesn't capitulate to our expectations, when our expectations were incorrect to begin with.

The sentiment of "stop complaining and let yourself be marketed to" from people outside WotC drives me up the wall. Don't listen.

I'm in no way saying "stop complaining and let yourself be marketed to." Just that we need to make sure a) we actually have any sway over the thing we're trying to change and b) we're actually complaining to the correct people. If we're not on point with both of those counts, then it's just wasted effort and energy.

 

[skerritthegreen]

But why did the Admin team send option A for approval over option B?

That's not something we are going to disclose. When in the middle of a decision process you don't say "Well I woulda picked A because of X, but the boss choose B." You submit your request for A to the boss and tell him why and he tells you B and why and if you are allowed when you announce B, you tell the world at large why. If you are not, well, you're not.

When it comes time for a decision, is it simply a matter of "Here, WotC, are the options we came up with. Let us know which one you want to run with, or if you want us to come up with different ones, or use one you guys have."? Or is it "WotC, here's the way we want to run this. Can we have approval?" Unless that entire process is covered under an NDA

Its both. Sometimes we submit a list of possible choices, sometimes we think there is only one. Sometimes, we can't talk about it at all because NDA things are related. This has happened in the past. For example, there have been issues with the magic item system and cert distribution. We have been working on several options and some are covered under NDAs. We are not going to talk about any of it since part of the conversation is covered and you might either be able to deduce the protected part from what we tell of the unprotected part, or you might say, "Well why did you just do that one thing since its the only idea you claim to have?"

 

[Ainulindalion]

This at least generically answers a lot of questions about the process and workflow I've been trying to get answers to it feels like forever. So there's that.

It makes me kinda sad, though, and I'm not super sure why Wizards feels it is necessary to play things so close to the vest, but at least I finally know the right things to complain about. I think.

Oh well. That's rather disillusioning.

I just hope you guys are going to have some good news soon, since I feel like Adventurers' League is already dying, at least in my area.

 

[Mithreinmaethor]

This at least generically answers a lot of questions about the process and workflow I've been trying to get answers to it feels like forever. So there's that.

It makes me kinda sad, though, and I'm not super sure why Wizards feels it is necessary to play things so close to the vest, but at least I finally know the right things to complain about. I think.

Oh well. That's rather disillusioning.

I just hope you guys are going to have some good news soon, since I feel like Adventurers' League is already dying, at least in my area.

I know its just my opinion but I feel that the AL Admins are working harder to save the integrity of what has become a "sacred cow" of Story Origins, than they are to get SCAG in as an evergreen option, minus a few items to keep the continuity (no pc racial flight etc).

Just my opinion though from reading stuff here and on the Facebook page.

But I guess we shall see....my FLGS is waiting to see my money as well.

 

[Z. H. Darkstar]

That sucks to hear about the DC area. My FLGS is celebrating our AL-versary this week, and we just ran Dues for the Dead on Halloween. Perhaps some kind of similar event could be run at your FLGS to reignite interest. You could change the party in DDEX2-1 to be more of a harvest festival for a Thanksgiving weekend game. I'd personally like to see Expeditions that take place on the FR holidays to tie into our real-world holidays.

 

[Mithreinmaethor]

That sucks to hear about the DC area. My FLGS is celebrating our AL-versary this week, and we just ran Dues for the Dead on Halloween. Perhaps some kind of similar event could be run at your FLGS to reignite interest. You could change the party in DDEX2-1 to be more of a harvest festival for a Thanksgiving weekend game. I'd personally like to see Expeditions that take place on the FR holidays to tie into our real-world holidays.

The Saturday Game Day modules etc were a hit during 4e.

I think its possible to have a themed Game Day every so often and one of the rewards could be a Cert saying if you would like to join into AL play you can create a character with X exps, X gold etc and join Wednesday night Encounters or Expedition at your FLGS.

 

[Mithreinmaethor]

This at least generically answers a lot of questions about the process and workflow I've been trying to get answers to it feels like forever. So there's that.

It makes me kinda sad, though, and I'm not super sure why Wizards feels it is necessary to play things so close to the vest, but at least I finally know the right things to complain about. I think.

Oh well. That's rather disillusioning.

I just hope you guys are going to have some good news soon, since I feel like Adventurers' League is already dying, at least in my area.

Just my opinion again but I truly believe that the Story Origins portion of the ALPG should just be done away with. At this point at 3 season there has only been 1 season with any real PC crunch added to the AL, the rest has all been Backgrounds.

Why not just keep an AL Backgrounds Document or appendix in the ALPG and just have everything be available for character creation?

Make it more of an inclusive "marketing arm" of WotC.

 

[Pauper]

Why not just keep an AL Backgrounds Document or appendix in the ALPG and just have everything be available for character creation?

Because then you'd be saying that power creep is simply an inevitable part of any Organized Play campaign, until the campaign organizers choose to do something reactive to address it. Look at Pathfinder Society, where they've created an entire alternate campaign structure (the Core Campaign) to address massive power creep in the standard PFS campaign structure.

Just because the storyline season concept doesn't do what *you* think it should do, doesn't mean that it's not doing what it was designed to do.

--
Pauper

 

[Mithreinmaethor]

Because then you'd be saying that power creep is simply an inevitable part of any Organized Play campaign, until the campaign organizers choose to do something reactive to address it. Look at Pathfinder Society, where they've created an entire alternate campaign structure (the Core Campaign) to address massive power creep in the standard PFS campaign structure.

Just because the storyline season concept doesn't do what *you* think it should do, doesn't mean that it's not doing what it was designed to do.

--
Pauper

Really you want to compare the 3.x/Pathfinder rules option bloat to the 5e AL campaign?

SCAG is a book specifically about the Campaign World and Region and world that the AL exists in and should be an evergreen option. Had they not released the Genasi and Goliaths in the supplement for PotA, I would be money they would have been present in this book.

So I do not consider SCAG to be considered "power creep". If WotC started to put out splat books every quarter/half year and made them all fair game with players options then....you might have a point. At this juncture your point is invalid.

 

[skerritthegreen]

For sake of your requested transparency, there will be another meeting tomorrow at WOTC to discuss the latest version of the SCAG announcement based on the write up the Admins submitted (following several rounds of discussions with Admins, RCs, WOTC, various constituencies). After that if its approved we'll announce this week. If not it will come back to the Admins again for revisions, we will make requested changes, if they are substantial we'll send it around to various people to review again, and we'll resubmit again and another meeting would have to be scheduled to seek approval.