Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Exclusive Adventures for DnDAL
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="CahPahkah" data-source="post: 6770673" data-attributes="member: 6702193"><p>I seem to be in the minority here, but I strongly dislike con-exclusive adventure content in the AL in general, and creating an extra level of exclusivity is deeply unappealing to me.</p><p></p><p>If, for instance, an admin wrote and ran a four hour adventure in seven slots at a given con (which is a whole lot of work to pull off), under 50 total players would experience it. Creating a game for such a small number of players while excluding the <em>thousands</em> of other AL players from that content feels like the opposite of a community-building experience to me. It feels marginalizing, and it exacerbates the "pay-to-win" perception that con-exclusive content already has. I'd hate to see more of it.</p><p></p><p>There's also the fact that, from a pipeline perspective, AL content could benefit from more time and bandwidth being devoted to adventure editing, playtesting, and revision. It's hard for me to see more content getting forced into that narrow volunteer pipeline as desirable, especially when that content would only be experienced by a radically small number of players.</p><p></p><p>I think it would be cool to see more cons invite and support AL admin attendance and participation, but that shouldn't hinge on exclusive game content that affects broader AL play. I'm honestly not sure what the value proposition would be that would make sense, but I do know that (for me, at least) the notion that we'd be publishing adventure content that's even <em>more</em> limited than the current Epics (which I already dislike) is a big step away from the things that I find appealing about Adventurers League play.</p><p></p><p>I've always felt that exclusive adventure content is what home games are for; organized play is to offer as wide a group as possible a shared D&D experience. Every time a player sits down at an LGS table with an exclusive item or racial certificate that they got from a convention they attended and is otherwise unavailable, my interest in the AL overall is eroded.</p><p></p><p>A player's disposable income shouldn't be reflected on their character sheet.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="CahPahkah, post: 6770673, member: 6702193"] I seem to be in the minority here, but I strongly dislike con-exclusive adventure content in the AL in general, and creating an extra level of exclusivity is deeply unappealing to me. If, for instance, an admin wrote and ran a four hour adventure in seven slots at a given con (which is a whole lot of work to pull off), under 50 total players would experience it. Creating a game for such a small number of players while excluding the [I]thousands[/I] of other AL players from that content feels like the opposite of a community-building experience to me. It feels marginalizing, and it exacerbates the "pay-to-win" perception that con-exclusive content already has. I'd hate to see more of it. There's also the fact that, from a pipeline perspective, AL content could benefit from more time and bandwidth being devoted to adventure editing, playtesting, and revision. It's hard for me to see more content getting forced into that narrow volunteer pipeline as desirable, especially when that content would only be experienced by a radically small number of players. I think it would be cool to see more cons invite and support AL admin attendance and participation, but that shouldn't hinge on exclusive game content that affects broader AL play. I'm honestly not sure what the value proposition would be that would make sense, but I do know that (for me, at least) the notion that we'd be publishing adventure content that's even [I]more[/I] limited than the current Epics (which I already dislike) is a big step away from the things that I find appealing about Adventurers League play. I've always felt that exclusive adventure content is what home games are for; organized play is to offer as wide a group as possible a shared D&D experience. Every time a player sits down at an LGS table with an exclusive item or racial certificate that they got from a convention they attended and is otherwise unavailable, my interest in the AL overall is eroded. A player's disposable income shouldn't be reflected on their character sheet. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Exclusive Adventures for DnDAL
Top