Hatin' the RPGA? (Forked Thread: The real flaw of 3E/3.5E/OGL)

[JediSoth]

I wouldn't say I hate the RPGA, but I was not impressed with the one time I participated in the D&D Open. It was the Gen Con during which the PHB2 debuted.

The description in the registration documents implied that it would be a standard 3.5 core rules game. When we arrived at the event, we were handed character sheets feature classes no one (except those who'd already purchased a PHB2 at the Con had seen). No one at my table was familiar with the PHB2 and we requested some time to get more familiar with these classes, as the character sheets didn't give a lot of details on the abilities.

Our judge informed us that he didn't have a PHB2 handy and groused a bit when we insisted on reading the class write-ups. As a result of the delay, we got a late start.

I felt very strongly that the event I paid for turned out to be a bait-and-switch. I would not have signed up for an event that was going to use classes exclusive to a book that wasn't available prior to the convention. The D&D Open itself seemed poorly organized and executed; there were a lot of people wanting more information on the classes they were going to be playing and all the RPGA officials seemed off-put that we would have the nerve to question why we weren't playing with core classes.

Needless to say, I didn't stick around when my character died with an hour to go left in the event. I walked away feeling like I'd been ripped off. I have not played in an RPGA event since.

 

[Ruined]

I'm happy to chime in that I recently joined the RPGA and I like it, even though my group of friends used to be very dismissive of the org back in the late '90s. Our firsthand experiences were limited to a few games at Origins over the years. We didn't know as much about the RPGA back then, and players we encountered were largely dismissive and not friendly in the least. Add that to some serious displays of powergaming, and we quickly lost interest.

I understand now that a few tables over a few years is not indicative of the group as a whole, but it was easy for us to make snap judgments back then.

Fast-foward to present day: I learned that they've been playing 4e games of Living Forgotten Realms at my LFGS. So I did my reconnaissance and watched the tables a few times before taking the plunge. I was leery of the RPGA overall, but I really wanted the opportunity to play 4e instead of DM it.

And I have to say, I'm glad I did. The people, especially the DMs, have been very helpful. Turnout has been surprisingly large and growing on a weekly basis. I'm scared to say it, but I might even opt to run some of the tables as time goes on.

 

[SiderisAnon]

I used to run RPGA games at my FLGS back about 2 years ago. I was not in charge of the RPGA unit here, just a DM. Based on my personal experience, I don't know that I would ever run for RPGA again.

First, the modules were of questionable quality. I had about a dozen modules all told. There were only two I would ever consider running again, and both need some work. Most were mediocre at best. Some were downright awful. (I had one that was so bad in places that I could barely run it.) The writing was awful and the editing was worse. I've seen free PDFs on the web that were better. The plots often made little or no sense. Some of the NPCs were frankly painful to read and play out (especially some of the boxed text you were supposed to read verbatim).

Second, because the modules are completely generic and you have to run them exactly as written, you cannot adapt to the party. Don't have some particular class? Sorry, you can't finish the module. Your party does not scale the way the module writers expect? TPK. The DMs are not allowed to modify the module, so you're stuck with what is written. In three months at the RPGA, I saw two TPKs, once as a player and once as a DM. Now, I admit that the party in the one TPK I DM'ed did some foolish things, but it was also a situation that clearly favored the monsters and one of those monsters was far too powerful for the PCs. (In the time as a player, we really had absolutely no chance. We lost a PC every round in the first fight of the adventure.) I also ran into one module where the final fight forced the party to flee and not be able to complete the adventure because the final pair of bad guys had more damage reduction than any of the party members could possibly do damage, outside of the occassional critical hit.

Third, the RPGA is horribly organized, at least in my experience. They have all these wonderful statements about how they want things to go, but it simply doesn't work that way. For example, the person running the local RPGA was not actually reporting any of the events. No one discovered this until I went to check my points as a DM because I was curious. The RPGA had been ignoring the fact that while he would setup events and download modules, these events apparently never happened.

Finally, I think the method of advancement is poorly set up. In the local RPGA, we always had far more tables of level one characters because the rate of death was so high for PCs in the modules that few people could survive enough modules to make it to level 2, let alone higher.

Additionally, as a personal comment on my local RPGA group, there were several people who were really awful and shouldn't have been allowed at the table. Unfortunately, we had no choice but to take them. One player was only removed from the RPGA events because I got him kicked out of the store for his behavior. (Though to be fair, this was partially the fault of the local coordinator becuase he wouldn't follow through on things and so these players never built up enough penalties with the RPGA organization to be banned from the table.)


Now, I think the RPGA is an absolutely awsome idea. I'd love to see it done right. It's just not supported well by WoTC, not provided with proper material, and not organized well across the country. What they really need is a good, solid manager with management experience and who has at least some budget and resources to use to get the job done properly, and possibly even some staff. As it stands, the RPGA is a great idea with awful implementation. I think WoTC is missing out on a great opportunity to spread the hobby and drive sales, but I can understand how the RPGA would be a hard sell in corporate culture.


I have enjoyed playing at conventions in several states. So, it's not the core concept, it's the RPGA implementation I have a problem with.

 

[jsaving]

As a longtime member who isn't a member any longer, I found a couple of things to dislike about the RPGA. First, the level of hubris was uncomfortably high as a general rule, with members frequently though not always regarding themselves as unusually skillful/knowledgeable by virtue of them having joined the organization. There are certainly some RPGA members who do know the rules quite well, and I've made a fair number of friends through RPGA events in one way or another, but I wouldn't say they're any more informed on average than the non-RPGA folks with whom I usually sit around the weekly gaming table.

I'd also say the instances where RPGA opinion shifted the core rules generally showed bad judgment, for example their insistence almost a decade ago that 3e monks and paladins needed to be barred from multiclassing in order to maintain the ancestral flavor of those classes, which seems to have been the deciding factor in those restrictions making the final cut. Admittedly some of the WotC designers enabled this kind of behavior by according a special deference to RPGA member sentiment, but it bothered me that a fair number of my fellow RPGA members viewed themselves as self-appointed standard-bearers of gaming quality against the unwashed masses who wanted to give players options they "oughtn't" be allowed to exercise.

This isn't to say the RPGA is a "bad" organization -- it isn't. Lots of well-meaning and well-informed people are RPGA members and play in RPGA events. Plus, the organization has opened up over the last year or two in a way few would have thought possible, which should over time take care of the issues identified earlier in this post. I'll probably give it another shot over the next year or two, but in the meantime, the above issues are why I personally don't view the organization as favorably as some do.

 

[Minicol]

Time constraints tend to be a problem when dealing with the RPGA. Most of the modules are designed to be played in four or six hours which limits role-playing at times depending on the amount of combat and the group you’re playing with.

The RPGA does have its advantages. You get to meet new people. .

What he said, i agree with the whole lot, but these are the two most relevants points with RPGA.

Been RPGA, loved RPGA, glad I'm finished with them.

Oh, and ever since they kicked Living Arcanis out ... never felt the need to return to them.

 

[D'karr]

I used to run RPGA games at my FLGS back about 2 years ago. I was not in charge of the RPGA unit here, just a DM. Based on my personal experience, I don't know that I would ever run for RPGA again.

First, the modules were of questionable quality. I had about a dozen modules all told. There were only two I would ever consider running again, and both need some work. Most were mediocre at best. Some were downright awful. (I had one that was so bad in places that I could barely run it.) The writing was awful and the editing was worse. I've seen free PDFs on the web that were better. The plots often made little or no sense. Some of the NPCs were frankly painful to read and play out (especially some of the boxed text you were supposed to read verbatim).

Second, because the modules are completely generic and you have to run them exactly as written, you cannot adapt to the party. Don't have some particular class? Sorry, you can't finish the module. Your party does not scale the way the module writers expect? TPK. The DMs are not allowed to modify the module, so you're stuck with what is written. In three months at the RPGA, I saw two TPKs, once as a player and once as a DM. Now, I admit that the party in the one TPK I DM'ed did some foolish things, but it was also a situation that clearly favored the monsters and one of those monsters was far too powerful for the PCs. (In the time as a player, we really had absolutely no chance. We lost a PC every round in the first fight of the adventure.) I also ran into one module where the final fight forced the party to flee and not be able to complete the adventure because the final pair of bad guys had more damage reduction than any of the party members could possibly do damage, outside of the occassional critical hit.

Third, the RPGA is horribly organized, at least in my experience. They have all these wonderful statements about how they want things to go, but it simply doesn't work that way. For example, the person running the local RPGA was not actually reporting any of the events. No one discovered this until I went to check my points as a DM because I was curious. The RPGA had been ignoring the fact that while he would setup events and download modules, these events apparently never happened.

Finally, I think the method of advancement is poorly set up. In the local RPGA, we always had far more tables of level one characters because the rate of death was so high for PCs in the modules that few people could survive enough modules to make it to level 2, let alone higher.

Additionally, as a personal comment on my local RPGA group, there were several people who were really awful and shouldn't have been allowed at the table. Unfortunately, we had no choice but to take them. One player was only removed from the RPGA events because I got him kicked out of the store for his behavior. (Though to be fair, this was partially the fault of the local coordinator becuase he wouldn't follow through on things and so these players never built up enough penalties with the RPGA organization to be banned from the table.)


Now, I think the RPGA is an absolutely awsome idea. I'd love to see it done right. It's just not supported well by WoTC, not provided with proper material, and not organized well across the country. What they really need is a good, solid manager with management experience and who has at least some budget and resources to use to get the job done properly, and possibly even some staff. As it stands, the RPGA is a great idea with awful implementation. I think WoTC is missing out on a great opportunity to spread the hobby and drive sales, but I can understand how the RPGA would be a hard sell in corporate culture.


I have enjoyed playing at conventions in several states. So, it's not the core concept, it's the RPGA implementation I have a problem with.

I was going to answer each of your points but it would take way too long. Suffice it to say that the quality of what is being provided to the RPGA from WotC has significantly increased. The implementation, as you call it, has also significantly changed. Some of your points about the RPGA might have been true 3 years ago, at your local level, but Worldwide most of those things have significantly changed.

For starters, the Living Forgotten Realms Campaign has, currently, well over 30 adventures spanning levels 1-10. New adventures are being put out almost on a monthly basis. Come August the campaign starts with Paragon level adventures, premiering at GenCon. In addition, there is at least one high level adventure that is not part of the LFR Campaign for 18th level characters that I'm aware of, there might be more.

On a monthly basis the WotC through the RPGA is providing the Dungeon Delve adventures. Each of the ones I've received have been very professionally done.

The RPGA is also sponsoring the D&D Worldwide Gamedays. These started in full force with the launch of 4e. There was a second one in October called "Weekend in the Realms". The adventure for that event, an exclusive, was a three part module for use with the Living Forgotten Realms campaign. This coming weekend, we have another D&D Worldwide Gameday. This time an 11th level adventure called "One Night in Weeping Briar." All of these have been very professionally done.

We have a very active gaming community, and we are very welcoming. We take care of our judges and we make sure that the players know what is going on. We are putting on a gameday, on a monthly basis, that has multiple locations. We have been growing very rapidly too. So to characterize the RPGA badly or as disorganized, as a whole, because of a few "bad apples" is disingenuous at best.

 

[Ariosto]

I'll credit RPGA for my playing 4E (albeit indirectly, via a friend already into it). I've found the participants very friendly, helpful and (with rare exceptions) well mannered.

Some factors due to the LFR setup are just bizarre from a traditional D&D perspective, which made 4E seem all the stranger to me (and it's quite novel on its own, IMO).

I do wonder about the influence of that mode of play on WotC's design. It seems to put a premium on cut-and-dried rules, and on mechanics that are "balanced" mathematically to the exclusion of simulation and verisimilitude concerns. The sessions by necessity are very linear and discreet, not forming or reflecting the interconnections of consequences and relationships so important in a campaign. They really come down to a program of tactical combat scenarios interspersed (in stereotyped fashion) with "role-playing" segments reduced to skill challenges.

One wonder "which came first," but RPGA predates 4E and there are common trends throughout the history of the similar tournament mode of D&D play (although in one period an overly "thespian" concept of role-playing may have predominated rather than combat).

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Short version I guess is the rules and regulations. If I am to join a game as a player I want to do so knowing that the DM created and/or runs his game the way he does because HE feels it's a good way to go about it - not because the organization which is not at the table says it must be so in order to be fair to other people in other cities, states, even countries - who are also not at the table. That kind of subjugation of the DM's control of the game rubs me wrong. I definitely can't see myself attempting to run a game under conditions set by an organization regardless of their benevolent intent. I can see the advantages, but it's just not quite what I want from D&D.

 

[dm4hire]

The current default party size is 5 characters not 4. I don't feel like looking up if a default size was provided for previous editions, but I do know that I rarely, if ever played in groups with 6 players.

I don't think the RPGA has quit that much influence on the rules, especially not at that fundamental of a level. Nor is it a unified voice that influences design. At most it was a good place to catch bugs in the system.

Thank you for correcting me. I was focused on RPGA and getting my numbers mixed up. Group focus in past editions was four players but RPGA often saw more than that and at one time allowed up to eight players at a table. The RPGA has since lowered the maximum to six with the minimum being four. The influence from the RPGA because of this is the inclusion of built in adjustable recommendations into modules on how to adjust for more or less players than the five player average as well as level adjustments. The RPGA for a long time has worked with the tier system allocating monsters for each given encounter in a module based on average level of the party playing the adventure. So if a module is designed for a group of 4th to 8th level adventurers there might be two two tiers with the first offering encounters designed for 4-5th and the other tier catering to 7-8th. A party average of 6 (PCs level 4+4+5+8+8=29/5=5.8 rounding to 6) would have the option of playing high or low tier depending on group dynamics and their belief in their characters/party's abilities. The tier system while not directly imported into standard modules is a clear influence on designing modules with built in adjustments for various group sizes.

 

[D'karr]

Short version I guess is the rules and regulations. If I am to join a game as a player I want to do so knowing that the DM created and/or runs his game the way he does because HE feels it's a good way to go about it - not because the organization which is not at the table says it must be so in order to be fair to other people in other cities, states, even countries - who are also not at the table. That kind of subjugation of the DM's control of the game rubs me wrong. I definitely can't see myself attempting to run a game under conditions set by an organization regardless of their benevolent intent. I can see the advantages, but it's just not quite what I want from D&D.

I don't understand how the organization subjugates the DM, according to you. The Living Forgotten Realms Campaign gives great latitude to the DM to alter the adventure scenario to fit the needs of the table that he is DMing for.

I think a lot of people are making assumptions that are not true of the organization as it stands currently. Then they are propagating these "myths" as if they were true.

The only adventure scenarios that might be "micro-managed", in a sense, might be the D&D Championship, in which what is trying to be accomplished is a competitive scenario. In that case you would want all DMs to stick to script, so to say. That way you have a more level playing field for all teams involved.