Learn about D&D organized play options

[CM]

I'd just like an option to buy the adventures for home campaign use without all the baggage of organized play attached, thanks.

 

[Warunsun]

I'd just like an option to buy the adventures for home campaign use without all the baggage of organized play attached, thanks.

That is very true. We haven't heard anything yet about the return of Dragon or Dungeon. At this point silence only speaks of silence. It would be a smart move for them to put the Moonsea Expeditions adventures online in either Dungeon or whatever replaces it. They could distribute a convention kit like they do with Encounters with the certificates for stores or conventions and let everyone enjoy the adventures either at home/online or at GenCon or a retail outlet if they can afford it. GenCon has always had better benefits to the players and this time it would include trade-able magic items. Why keep out the majority of your customers?

 

[MerricB]

I've just had it confirmed by Chris Tulach that the Tyranny of Dragons D&D Encounters season will run from 14-18 weeks, with a gap before the next Encounters season. Individual groups will pace it differently. "There will be more weeks than content to allow for store and player flexibility."

We seem to have entirely moved away from the idea of playing a session of Encounters at a different store each week and maintaining the story. Instead, the new Encounters is set-up more for persistent groups in store. Doesn't mean new players can't join in, but it'll work best if the DM has a core of players from week to week.

This isn't quite so surprising: the last three seasons of Encounters have allowed a great deal of freedom for groups, so that going from store to store is no longer such an option.

I'm generally happy with this change to the program. (It matches how we play it here, in any case!)

Cheers!

 

[sidonunspa]

Or to any other kind of organized play, or to DnD home campaigns. If you are only playing at home and you want the community aspect of play, and if the story arcs come out roughly once a year, then for some players having 15 levels of play (through the main story arc adventures) will be more than enough.

Not if your playing a weekly game, you will rip though the proposed story arc in 4 months of play give or take...

people who play shared campaigns are ravenous and jump into stories head on...

and commonly have more then one character....

I'm just saying that this can work out and need not be any kind of "this program is better than that one". It will take time to see how it works out. They haven't completely destroyed home play - which is different historically than times when WotC really made it difficult to grow a program (a good example is the 4E convention kit and the end of LFR which saw multiple years of LFR not being supported at PAX and ever-decreasing support at Gen Con - those were huge blows to the program).

correct, but the best way for them to do this is by allowing play anyplace.. it will bleed into stores and into conventions.

look at the numbers LG pulled.. you could play them at home or at conventions... the model was amazingly successful..

why the hell did they abandon it

 

[smerwin29]

They didn't abandon it, but they changed it because they realized what an all-consuming monster it was. They saw how it was chewing up volunteers and players alike and spitting them out. If you were on the inside and your wants and needs were being served by the program, it WAS great. And I was one on the inside, so I recognize that. However, if you were on the outside, or if you had a clear top-down view of the program, you could see its flaws. It was unsustainable, that was clear. So they went in another direction. That direction had its benefits and drawbacks, and they changed course in the middle of that. Now they are trying something new.

While I am not directly involved in OP efforts this time except for some adventure design work, I think what people need to realize is that the purpose of the D&D Adventurer's League is to do more than simply provide content--it is trying to create different and unique _experiences_. I cannot emphasize that last word enough. The game of D&D, from its very foundation, has been about experiences.

The different tiers of the D&D Adventurers League (AL) correspond to different experiences. Although there are 3 named tiers (Encounters, Expeditions, and Epics), WotC really should have given a name to a 4th tier that revolves around home play. Maybe call it "Campaigns?" This is the home play experience at the root of D&D. People can take part in the D&D AL without ever leaving home by playing the published, off-the-shelf adventures. If you follow the D&D AL guidelines (yet to be published), then the program is absolutely supporting your play experience. You are taking part in the same campaign as everyone else who participates, but you are doing so privately. Again, the Organized Play Program of WotC is supporting the experience you desire: the home play experience.

Now the next type of experience that the D&D AL is supporting is the brief, social, weekly experience. This type of experience is handled through D&D Encounters. This program serves many purposes and has many goals, but the big 2 are to provide support for game stores in order to help support sales, and to give people who want to play D&D and don't have a lot of time a means to play. The program has been going on long enough that I don't need to say much more about its purpose. Yes, it is a shame when game stores refuse to offer the program (as was my experience for the first 7 seasons even though I begged several game stores to let me run it). When the program started, none of the many game stores (all of whom ran Magic constantly) in Buffalo participated. At last count, there were now 7 stores in Buffalo running Encounters with multiple tables at each store--thanks directly to engaged community members who worked hard to show the stores that the program was wanted and valuable to both players and the stores themselves. And yes, it is a shame when a player does not have a local store to run Encounters. I personally have to drive an hour to get to the store where I run a game, so I get it.

The next type of experience is served by the D&D Expeditions program. This is where the whole "public play" question comes to the fore. WotC has clarified (the out-of-touch customer support answer notwithstanding) that any public venue can receive and run Expedition adventures: sanctioning the event through a store is better because then the DM and players get extra perks, but the adventures are still available through non-store public play. That means any location that is open for anyone to come and participate: conventions, game days, libraries, churches, community centers, coffee shops, etc. That is because this particular program emphasizes specifically the social aspect of D&D. The point of the program is not to provide content, although it does. The point of the program is to create a community interaction between players in addition to the interconnected storytelling among the characters of those players. If you are not a social player, someone who wants to play in public with strangers, that's OK. But this program is not aimed at you then.

The Epic program, of course, is the totally unique event that is a "once-in-a-blue-moon" experience. This is for invested players willing to travel far and wide to make a totally unique mark on the setting. These only work when 100s of players are involved at once, so they can only be run at an event where hundreds of players can play at once. Every last inch of play space that WotC can get at GenCon is filled to get as many people as possible into the event.

Again, this is just all my opinion based on what I have seen at seminars (including this past weekend at Origins) and read online. And while you can argue with goals and purposes of the programs, it is hard to argue that, from what we have seen, the programs do a great deal to support those purposes and those experiences. They cannot please everyone, alas, but they can provide programs that meet the reasonable desires of the most players.

 

[sidonunspa]

They didn't abandon it, but they changed it because they realized what an all-consuming monster it was....

as someone who was on the inside and the outside I can see what you mean..

BUT, it inspired more play then any campaign before or after it, it inspired players and volunteers alike, people ran conventions and even drove out of state to play adventures....

all of it created a huge community of players who loved the game and loved the products which supported it.

to get numbers and excitement like that it takes work...

the new program will never reach the same level of fevered play LG did, which will be reflected in conventions and in game days.

Pathfinder captures some of that, but when it comes to story, they suck...

a cohesive story takes a LOT of work.. trust me, I helped craft the epic 5 year Arcanis story arc...

LG was lighting in a bottle... they could re-create that if they wanted to.. but look at Adventurers League and how they are limiting home play, I just don't see it.

look at it this way, right now in PF you can run any of the adventure paths as a PFS home page and get full credit...

I don't know anyone that has done so, but I know at least 5 tables worth of people that play every PFS adventure as soon as it comes out...

the way AL is shaping up, they seem to be forcing the adventure path method on home games, that does not bode well for the future of the campaign.

I wish they would just bring back the LC model and be done with it!

 

[smerwin29]

as someone who was on the inside and the outside I can see what you mean..

BUT, it inspired more play then any campaign before or after it, it inspired players and volunteers alike, people ran conventions and even drove out of state to play adventures....

I agree with everything said here wholeheartedly except the "more" part. I think the actual number of players might surprise people. With everything else, you are spot on.

all of it created a huge community of players who loved the game and loved the products which supported it.

Again, I agree. However, I would replace with word "huge" with "fanatical."

to get numbers and excitement like that it takes work...

the new program will never reach the same level of fevered play LG did, which will be reflected in conventions and in game days.

It does take work. An insane amount of work from very talented volunteers. Whether the new program will reach the same "levels of fevered play" depends on what you mean by "levels." Number-wise, I think it could definitely reach the numbers of players that LG had total. I would bet that Encounters has surpassed LG in the amount of people who have participated over a short time.

a cohesive story takes a LOT of work.. trust me, I helped craft the epic 5 year Arcanis story arc...

Yes it does. I worked on LG, Xen'drik Expeditions, Living Kingdoms of Kalamar, Ashes of Athas, LFR, and D&D Encounters, so I understand the workload and how it can affect people.

look at it this way, right now in PF you can run any of the adventure paths as a PFS home page and get full credit...

I don't know anyone that has done so, but I know at least 5 tables worth of people that play every PFS adventure as soon as it comes out...

the way AL is shaping up, they seem to be forcing the adventure path method on home games, that does not bode well for the future of the campaign.

I wish they would just bring back the LC model and be done with it!

If WotC's goal is to have lots of people playing every piece of content they publish at home as soon as it comes out, then obviously not allowing home play with every bit of content they create is a misstep. If, however, their goal is to help game stores and other public places grow a community of gamers--not necessarily the rabid communities that LG spawned (and I mean that in both a good and bad way)--but a sustained community of D&D fans that will embrace the entire brand, then maybe not allowing every bit of content into the hands of every player all the time is a good thing.

Or not.

Shawn

 

[exile]

as someone who was on the inside and the outside I can see what you mean..

BUT, it inspired more play then any campaign before or after it, it inspired players and volunteers alike, people ran conventions and even drove out of state to play adventures....

all of it created a huge community of players who loved the game and loved the products which supported it.

to get numbers and excitement like that it takes work...

the new program will never reach the same level of fevered play LG did, which will be reflected in conventions and in game days.

Pathfinder captures some of that, but when it comes to story, they suck...

a cohesive story takes a LOT of work.. trust me, I helped craft the epic 5 year Arcanis story arc...

LG was lighting in a bottle... they could re-create that if they wanted to.. but look at Adventurers League and how they are limiting home play, I just don't see it.

look at it this way, right now in PF you can run any of the adventure paths as a PFS home page and get full credit...

I don't know anyone that has done so, but I know at least 5 tables worth of people that play every PFS adventure as soon as it comes out...

the way AL is shaping up, they seem to be forcing the adventure path method on home games, that does not bode well for the future of the campaign.

I wish they would just bring back the LC model and be done with it!

It is perhaps a little harsh to say that Pathfinder sucks at story. They do, after all, release two adventure paths each year that are usually fairly well received. If you are talking strictly about PFS, I'm actually quite fond of the stories those scenarios tell as well-- individually and as part of a year long arc.

On a different note, what I'm not fond of (and I am in no way accusing you or anyone on enworld of this) is elitism within the organized play community. I remember being in medical school and wanting to play LG at one of the local stores. A guy who worked at the store and his flunkies did their best to exclude me from playing. That's fine if the game were in his home and I were trying to barge in (under those circumstances in ky he could even probably get away with shooting me). In a store though, that's not cool. No great loss. Shortly thereafter, I left for surgical residency and my LG days were done. Surgical residency, I like to think, is a lot like prison.

So, the pertinence of this now? If certain types of games can only be played in stores; and a gamer like me back then shows up to play, but is frozen out; then that poor chump is just out of luck. A lot of good the grand gaming community did him. Now, if those same games are available for home play, Mr. Unpopular must only gather up a few of his similarly unpopular friends and they can play together, have a good time, and keep buying product.

In all fairness, I must also say that I have been on the other end of that situation. I tried running some of the early seasons of Encounters at a game store in rural ky (the town I moved away from just last year). The inane antics of the high school kids drove me to want to pull hair out (or choke them). I think were I a teacher (and not a surgeon) I would have been more comfortable with this behavior. Good on me, I never ran any of those kids away from the game, but I did have to quit to protect my own sanity.

 

[sidonunspa]

It is perhaps a little harsh to say that Pathfinder sucks at story. They do, after all, release two adventure paths each year that are usually fairly well received. If you are talking strictly about PFS, I'm actually quite fond of the stories those scenarios tell as well-- individually and as part of a year long arc.

I meant PFS... Their adventure paths are down right amazing, as well as their published adventures (midnight mirror comes to mind as a gem)

but the campaign lacks any real sub-plot and, in my experiences, makes the players feel more like mercs then heroes.

And I'm so sorry you had that experience with LG, I know that the Miami crew went out of it's way to invite and bring in new players...

If WotC's goal is to have lots of people playing every piece of content they publish at home as soon as it comes out, then obviously not allowing home play with every bit of content they create is a misstep. If, however, their goal is to help game stores and other public places grow a community of gamers--not necessarily the rabid communities that LG spawned (and I mean that in both a good and bad way)--but a sustained community of D&D fans that will embrace the entire brand, then maybe not allowing every bit of content into the hands of every player all the time is a good thing.

sadly I know a few stores that stopped running encounters and refused to even look at Murder in Baldur's Gate which I hear was a damn good adventure.

 

[RealAlHazred]

The different tiers of the D&D Adventurers League (AL) correspond to different experiences. Although there are 3 named tiers (Encounters, Expeditions, and Epics), WotC really should have given a name to a 4th tier that revolves around home play. Maybe call it "Campaigns?" This is the home play experience at the root of D&D.

If I might suggest: "D&D Engagements" in keeping with the "D&D E" style. And the whole thing is the "D&D Experience."

Looking forward to your contributions to D&D Encounters in the future! Against the Cult of Chaos is still talked about at our store!