Learn about D&D organized play options

[Thaumaturge]

The home play stuff doesn't serve those who primarily DM very well. I expect to be the DM for the first adventure and the Starter set at home. That leaves me with no characters to take to conventions. And my friends who play, if they wanted to take those same characters to a convention with me, would have higher level characters than mine. It's fine, they'd choose to make new characters, but that means that, effectively, home play doesn't exist.

In practice, many will want to be part of Expeditions. And for that, there is no home play. You could play the other adventures and then move over, but you might level out of many of the games. It isn't clear that you could play the Starter Set and then go to Gen Con (assuming you could play it all fast enough) and still play the Gen Con adventures as a 5th level PC. Maybe you can?

This is an important point. I'll be going to GenCon and playing in All-Access. Should I run the people I'm going with through the Starter Set quickly, so they can have higher level characters? Should I expect others to do this even if I don't? Are the modules built with mixed level parties in mind even at launch? Are the organizers prepared to muster by level?

I'm the primary caregiver for three under six. That means my evenings, after bedtime, are often free. As long as I don't leave the house. Going to a store sounds nice for the store and WotC, but it isn't logistically feasible for me on a regular basis. If that's the way it is that's fine. As I tell my kids, "you get what you get and don't throw a fit". But it would be nice if there was an online option.

Thaumaturge.

 

[Alphastream]

The home play stuff doesn't serve those who primarily DM very well. I expect to be the DM for the first adventure and the Starter set at home. That leaves me with no characters to take to conventions. And my friends who play, if they wanted to take those same characters to a convention with me, would have higher level characters than mine. It's fine, they'd choose to make new characters, but that means that, effectively, home play doesn't exist.

It is important to always consider the alternatives.

With Ashes of Athas, we published only 9 adventures a year with an entirely linear progression. The adventure and PC level was locked in, increasing as play progressed. If you came in late, you either had to find a group to catch up or you started at a higher level and began the experience at that point. For much of the time we had no home play. There were pluses and minuses.

With LFR, you had many adventures of different levels (though just low level at first). Being of different level was supported, but the adventure release schedule and lack of common level for the player base meant you tended to have many PCs of different levels. It created a lot of confusion as to what the narrative was for the campaign.

With LFR and especially LG you had reward programs that at various times really had an incentive to play a lot, including at home. Players in LG that played at home and at conventions were stronger than those that did not. That was a big problem for new and casual players. There were also incentives to travel and to attend conventions/premieres. In LG there were strong benefits from playing convention specials - a source of constant criticism for those that could not afford to attend. LG had fewer PCs per player and a stronger narrative, but a very strong sense of entitlement for established players that pushed out new players.

What AL seems to be doing is to provide different channels of play, with some incentives to be in multiple streams. But, it isn't clear whether you can jump across the streams. It may be that your home play track is really the equivalent of ordering 15 levels worth of LFR or LG adventures (which would be 45 or more adventures in some cases) via playing the two printed adventures. That's not bad, really.

If you have a store in your area, then you get even more play. (Though, again, it isn't clear if you can jump back-and-forth across the tracks)

This is an important point. I'll be going to GenCon and playing in All-Access. Should I run the people I'm going with through the Starter Set quickly, so they can have higher level characters? Should I expect others to do this even if I don't? Are the modules built with mixed level parties in mind even at launch? Are the organizers prepared to muster by level?

I doubt that. I suspect that the adventures are being written to handle only people that are playing at Gen Con. It is possible you might not be able to play through the Starter Set and still play. We just don't know, but I expect the baseline is that you are a new PC at Gen Con and play some of the Gen Con content by the time the Epic begins.

Keep in mind that WotC is a business and does need to make a profit. They spend more than $6 million on organized play a year (and spent $2M in the 90's). We keep hearing from everyone that stores are vital. That means they really need to have incentives in place for store play.

And, we should also keep in mind that every edition has seen pretty drastic adjustments in the organized play program's incentives for store vs convention vs home play. AL is currently turning incentives for convention play back on, while turning the dial on home play down. We should expect the dials will be adjusted over time, as they always have.

 

[Thaumaturge]

I doubt that. I suspect that the adventures are being written to handle only people that are playing at Gen Con. It is possible you might not be able to play through the Starter Set and still play. We just don't know, but I expect the baseline is that you are a new PC at Gen Con and play some of the Gen Con content by the time the Epic begins.

That's almost certainly the case. But it's a question they should specifically answer. I don't want to be sat at a table with people who brought 5th level characters expecting to play them.

Keep in mind that WotC is a business and does need to make a profit. They spend more than $6 million on organized play a year (and spent $2M in the 90's). We keep hearing from everyone that stores are vital. That means they really need to have incentives in place for store play.

No doubt. And, by my LGS's accounts, they are doing good by the stores. I respect them for that. That doesn't make their decisions optimal for me, though. I also accept that as part of the deal.

And, we should also keep in mind that every edition has seen pretty drastic adjustments in the organized play program's incentives for store vs convention vs home play. AL is currently turning incentives for convention play back on, while turning the dial on home play down. We should expect the dials will be adjusted over time, as they always have.

Absolutely true. One thing I got from your overview of LG-LFR-AoA was that I was really into LG during its heyday, so it feels like the gold standard to me. I also had the time to attend frequent gamedays and the like then. I agree it was sub-optimal for introducing new blood. Convention specific stuff is nice, but other than Gencon, I don't go to many conventions.

Side note: I loved the bits of AoA I played, and I believe you DM'd me for one of my more memorable rounds, but I just couldn't get out there to play more of it.

Thaumaturge.

 

[VenomousFiligree]

I did some fairly aggressive recruiting for a Fantasy Grounds game and asked the players what experience they had of Next, the answers were:

very little. I GMed a game in its very early beta stages. 

I haven't done any extended playtests, but I've read the various rulesets, and I did all the Next games at the last Gencon, for what that's worth.

read the books

Nothing, although I have played a few sessions of 4e, it is nothing worth noting.

None. [Complete RPG noobie]

So how is this different from recruiting players in a shop?

 

[Daelkyr]

I'm an online AL evangelist. I was one of the first DM's to start running LFR on Maptools back in 2008. The four hour block with little to no commitment for players to continue from one week to the next was fantastic for me at the time. I could DM as much as I wanted/was able to. Players could jump into a game as their schedules allowed. And there was continuity between sessions.



I really want to see the options of Encounters and Expeditions to be playable online in some official capacity. Running HotDQ and RoT from cover to cover for a home game where player groups are static is great. Online is much more volatile. With players coming and going. I'd be fine with Wizards even designating a VTT as a "premier store" for running such games. My suggestion is Roll20. With free buy in for players and ease of use, it would make the most sense. But regardless, we need the quick pick-up gaming AL modules allow for online.

 

[VenomousFiligree]

I'm an online AL evangelist. I was one of the first DM's to start running LFR on Maptools back in 2008. The four hour block with little to no commitment for players to continue from one week to the next was fantastic for me at the time. I could DM as much as I wanted/was able to. Players could jump into a game as their schedules allowed. And there was continuity between sessions.



I really want to see the options of Encounters and Expeditions to be playable online in some official capacity. Running HotDQ and RoT from cover to cover for a home game where player groups are static is great. Online is much more volatile. With players coming and going. I'd be fine with Wizards even designating a VTT as a "premier store" for running such games. My suggestion is Roll20. With free buy in for players and ease of use, it would make the most sense. But regardless, we need the quick pick-up gaming AL modules allow for online.

Why restrict it to one VT, it should be the same for all if you want maximum exposure?

 

[Daelkyr]

Why restrict it to one VT, it should be the same for all if you want maximum exposure?

I wouldn't want it restricted. LFR was made stronger by having easy access to play online. It also increased DDI subs because each player wanted to use what was available.

I only mention Roll20 if Wizards is insistent on only ONE sanctioned online venue. Much in the same way they only sell their classic PDF's thru Drive-thru RPG. I'd rather have one source for pickup, 2/4 hr online play instead of no source.

 

[Alphastream]

Absolutely true. One thing I got from your overview of LG-LFR-AoA was that I was really into LG during its heyday, so it feels like the gold standard to me. I also had the time to attend frequent gamedays and the like then. I agree it was sub-optimal for introducing new blood. Convention specific stuff is nice, but other than Gencon, I don't go to many conventions.

It was the sweet spot for me as well, but it was also a time without kids and when I could go to more than 9 conventions a year, play a home game twice a week minimum, play in regions around the world, etc. And, even then, I could see how hard the system was on casual and new players.

No system is perfect and the trade-offs have to be guessed at based on overall program goals... but you never guess them exactly right.

Thanks for the kind words on AoA. It had serious limits, but I'm happy with how the trade-offs played out over time. At out last convention event we asked players how many had played through every chapter and it was more than 50%. That was higher than we had dared hope, especially as a convention-only program. It was also a supplemental campaign - intended to be a smaller niche program that some players would enjoy. It couldn't have been a main program for Wizards and wasn't designed that way.

There are some really tricky bits in OP campaign design. Core stuff, like the number of adventures a player can play in a year with one PC, have huge impacts on the campaign. I never envy the admins that have to make those decisions (which will always be heavily criticized no matter what they choose).

So how is this different from recruiting players in a shop?

I'm not sure that's the right framework for examining LA. The store is vital because it is a revenue source. Online play isn't, though it can indirectly create it. Bringing players into a store not only puts players near the material they can purchase, it creates a community with the store as a hub. It also advertises to people that walk in. And, as a sustained program (every Wednesday for Encounters) it creates something that people can easily join, even when they just walked in. I've done a lot of online play with LFR, but it was never those things in any way similar to a store. At a single store in Portland, OR we had more than 300 unique players in just the first two seasons of Encounters. Two seasons!!! We had players of all kinds and even those that left did so with a stronger link to the brand.

So, while online play is great and like home play should be supported, it isn't the same thing as store play. Historically, convention play has also created tremendous excitement and community, which is why it should also see focus.

 

[Alphastream]

One interesting bit for online play is the mention by the "Morningstar" team for the upcoming digital tools that "(once the tool launches) all the latest D&D adventures and content will be available to download as they are released, simultaneously with the physical versions."

It isn't clear, but that may make online play of HotDQ and similar adventures far easier. Or, maybe it just brings a pdf in from DnD Classics. Too early to tell!

 

[Plaguescarred]

I'm an online AL evangelist. I was one of the first DM's to start running LFR on Maptools back in 2008. The four hour block with little to no commitment for players to continue from one week to the next was fantastic for me at the time. I could DM as much as I wanted/was able to. Players could jump into a game as their schedules allowed. And there was continuity between sessions.



I really want to see the options of Encounters and Expeditions to be playable online in some official capacity. Running HotDQ and RoT from cover to cover for a home game where player groups are static is great. Online is much more volatile. With players coming and going. I'd be fine with Wizards even designating a VTT as a "premier store" for running such games. My suggestion is Roll20. With free buy in for players and ease of use, it would make the most sense. But regardless, we need the quick pick-up gaming AL modules allow for online.

That is soo true. I've played online and introduced many people to the game. Online play using short adventure is important for pick-up games. If they had none i'd understand, but the fact that they already pay to develop 4-hours adventures for D&D Expedition but refuse to make them available for home/online play would be a bad move IMHO.

But if public play can include online play that is advertise to the public on a first arrived first served basis that that'd be okay as most online LFR games were advertised to the public on things like forums Roll20, RPGTO etc..