teitan
Legend
A bit hyperbolic but what did you expect? They have to move product.
D&D (2024) New Greyhawk organized play campaign.
- Thread starter MonsterEnvy
- Start date
teitan
Legend
I do myself because it was beyond what most games call a new edition in its revisions and updates anyway. But then 2e was actually very different from 1e while still being compatible with one another because it was largely implementation of the same concepts. 3.5 made all sorts of tiny changes that resulted in a very incompatible product IF you were using older monster books and adventures. You literally had to convert to 3.5 whereas with 2e, CoC editions etc you could pick up the same character sheet and still play with minor modifications.
MGibster
Legend
I used to run quite a bit of Living Greyhawk games back before the switch to 3.5. I met some people I still game with to this day, which, wow, is a long time. My biggest drawback was feeling less like a DM and more like a rubber stamp who only existed so players could get loot and experience points. I know on more than one occasion players ran through my session and then played the same module with another DM so they could score the loot they wanted.
I once ran a group through an adventure where they got into a big fight right in front of the main villain's lair and decided afterward to take a long rest. The villain of course knew what happened and the module specifically pointed out a secret escape via an underground river with a little boat the villain could use. I could have just had the villain sit around twiddling his thumbs, but I had him get the heck out of Dodge as that seemed the most logical thing to do. When the PCs finished their rest and entered the lair they were very disappointed to find they missed out on whatever experience and loot would have been there.
I once ran a group through an adventure where they got into a big fight right in front of the main villain's lair and decided afterward to take a long rest. The villain of course knew what happened and the module specifically pointed out a secret escape via an underground river with a little boat the villain could use. I could have just had the villain sit around twiddling his thumbs, but I had him get the heck out of Dodge as that seemed the most logical thing to do. When the PCs finished their rest and entered the lair they were very disappointed to find they missed out on whatever experience and loot would have been there.
LordEntrails
Hero
Never played Living Greyhawk. Excited to see this new Greyhawk organized play. Hope it adds good setting content as well as just providing a campaign to play in. Will be a little interesting though in terms of if people will feel this is canon Greyhawk or not, esp given the stated intent of JC and the designers that Greyhawk is an outline that must be filled in and customized by the DM.
But, it will be a few years before I worry about another D&D campaign. We are finishing up one now and getting ready for a new campaign using FrontierSpace. So this will all shake out before I need worry about it.
But, it will be a few years before I worry about another D&D campaign. We are finishing up one now and getting ready for a new campaign using FrontierSpace. So this will all shake out before I need worry about it.
Came here hoping to get more info on the new campaign structure and found the same old same old "WotC is terrible". 
It would be a headache for a DM with a group of random players to have them mix and match 2014 and 2024 rules. You don't have to pay a dime for DDB, you just won't have all the options if you choose not to do so. Greyhawk is going to be a small segment of public play and I wouldn't be surprised if they're experimenting a bit with more public games being run online using Maps or Sigil so this may be a bit of an experiment to require DDB. Last, but not least, they are under no obligation to provide this experience to anyone and everyone who could potentially be interested.
It would be a headache for a DM with a group of random players to have them mix and match 2014 and 2024 rules. You don't have to pay a dime for DDB, you just won't have all the options if you choose not to do so. Greyhawk is going to be a small segment of public play and I wouldn't be surprised if they're experimenting a bit with more public games being run online using Maps or Sigil so this may be a bit of an experiment to require DDB. Last, but not least, they are under no obligation to provide this experience to anyone and everyone who could potentially be interested.
This actually sounds interesting, with key events determining the future and conventions being in-person and online. Makes me want to try to sign up for Gencon again, but last year when I tried every single D&D game on my wish list was gone when I tried to sign up 5 minutes after registration opened.
It will also be interesting to see what they're planning with "Approved convention organizers will be able to create adventures for Legends of Greyhawk." Having unique and interactive* events were some of the most enjoyable aspects of LG.
*Interactive events are those where you have multiple tables playing different aspects of the same scenario. So for example, group A is defending the gates of a city, group B is guarding the sewers and so on. In some games, there were even options for one table to help another. Could be part of what they talk about for key events.
It will also be interesting to see what they're planning with "Approved convention organizers will be able to create adventures for Legends of Greyhawk." Having unique and interactive* events were some of the most enjoyable aspects of LG.
*Interactive events are those where you have multiple tables playing different aspects of the same scenario. So for example, group A is defending the gates of a city, group B is guarding the sewers and so on. In some games, there were even options for one table to help another. Could be part of what they talk about for key events.
I might be remembering wrong, but didn't they say Adventurer's League was also moving to using the 2024 books awhile back? I know the AL Player's Guide says if a rule has been reprinted in a newer resource, you have to use that version so I'm not sure why this is surprising they're wanting to baseline on a single version of the rules for any form of official play. The DDB requirement makes sense too, it's super quick to put together a character on it and it makes it easier for a DM to ensure the PCs are all completely in line with game rules.
Sounds cool that it's targeted at convention play, it makes attending and playing more of a unique experience. I'm curious what sort of directions the changes in the overall story will emerge from "it will change based on the actions of heroes present at key in-person and online events".
Sounds cool that it's targeted at convention play, it makes attending and playing more of a unique experience. I'm curious what sort of directions the changes in the overall story will emerge from "it will change based on the actions of heroes present at key in-person and online events".
Remathilis
Legend
The only complaint I have is that if it works like I think it will, if you're not invested in D&D Beyond, (don't have the PHB) you are going to be limited to the Basic Rules for chargen, even if you own a paper PHB. Not sure how I feel about that...
Chaltab
Legend
That part is definitely a pain in the butt.
I wonder if the way they'll handle that is the DM at the convention has a campaign with content sharing enabled that newly made characters for the convention are put into, so the DM can easily view the character to make sure there's no weird homebrew being used and players can access shared rulebooks that are allowed. There's probably something I'm not thinking of, but that would make it easy to bring players in and make the DMs job easier.
Similar Threads
