The Crapification of Organized Play - Unavoidable?

[exile]

I for one still really enjoy organized play, both PFS and LFR.

Sure some games are better than others, but the same holds true for my home campaigns as well: some sessions are simply more fun than others.

The original poster has some fairly valid points. I do get tired of seeing so many unusual races at LFR tables. I've also seen a synthesist summoner in play (in one of our home games), and I could see how such a character might detract from a session of PFS. That said, my barbarian/fighter (two-handed) has probably been similarly dominating (i.e. irritating).

But enough with the negatives. I enjoy organized play because it is an opportunity to meet new people who share my interests, to learn how they play the games I love. It gives me something to do alongside old friends when we meet up at conventions.

As I write this, none of it really addresses the original poster's complaints though-- as it sounds like he also enjoys organized play (or did at one time). I would actually love to find an organized play game administrated by someone other than the game's publisher. Is there anything like this out there right now?

 

[exile]

To answer my own question, yes there is. Heroes fo Rokugan. From what I understand HoR is much "better" about limiting character options. The downside is that the campaign organizers-- by accident or design-- have been particularly elitest/restrictive about who they'll send adventures to for home play. I've requested adventures twice with no response and another friend hos been rebuffed more times than that.

So, yeah, now that I think about it, having someone other than the game's publisher administer the OP campaign has some plusses, but is prone to its own dangers.

 

[Steel_Wind]

So, yeah, now that I think about it, having someone other than the game's publisher administer the OP campaign has some plusses, but is prone to its own dangers.

To be clear, LFR is not administered by WotC any longer. D&D Encounters? Yes. LFR, otoh, is now run by members of its community. WotC, through its contractor Baldman Games, still puts on aspects of the campaign at major conventions.

If the point you really meant to say was "yeah well, LFR still allowed for retroactive character rebuilding with every option under the sun in 4E, to the detriment of their overall campaign even though it wasn't run by WotC" -- I agree with you. I don't know to what degree that was an element of the Character Builder software in play, mind you. DDI changes many assumptions within 4E.

In the end, Organized Play is a marketing program. That doesn't mean it's not fun or that it's not worthwhile. It is and it is. But it IS still a marketing program just the same and one should not be surprised to discover it isn't run like somebody's home game.

That's why we call home games, home games.

 

[exile]

To be clear, LFR is not administered by WotC any longer. D&D Encounters? Yes. LFR, otoh, is now run by members of its community. WotC, through its contractor Baldman Games, still puts on aspects of the campaign at major conventions.

If the point you really meant to say was "yeah well, LFR still allowed for retroactive character rebuilding with every option under the sun in 4E, to the detriment of their overall campaign even though it wasn't run by WotC" -- I agree with you. I don't know to what degree that was an element of the Character Builder software in play, mind you. DDI changes many assumptions within 4E.

In the end, Organized Play is a marketing program. That doesn't mean it's not fun or that it's not worthwhile. It is and it is. But it IS still a marketing program just the same and one should not be surprised to discover it isn't run like somebody's home game.

That's why we call home games, home games.

You are right. My facts were wrong. I think what I was trying to say is that campaigns that are (and always have been) administered by someone other than the game's publisher are prone to problems which may or may not be the same problems that the OP sees with campaigns administered by the game's publisher.

To be clear-- and I'm not sure that I have been thus far-- I love OP!

 

[Bone Mote]

Your post really doesn't offer any sort of clues to possible fixes and just seems to go meh and be angry.

WOTC is the perfect savior of the Living X groups because, well, they have plenty of experience.

Let us look at WOTC's biggest brand: Magic the Gathering. It is approaching its 20th birthday, has an arguably larger effect on Wizard's bottom line than anything D&D has done in quite some time... But what does MTG have to do with this?

Banned lists, restrictions, errata are important to organized play when you have several hundred items coming out every couple of months.

-Loonook.

I wish the LFR admins had the same powers to ban/restrict content. Oh, that might have saved LFR. However, either they didn't or couldn't: the end result was the same: too much crappy, untested, and unerrata'd content.

Man, if LFR *could* have created different "Constructed Tournament Rules" for their OP campaigns, that would be great: I'd freakin' play in the Standard Format and be very happy with it. Sadly, we're all playing in Vintage with all the jerky #@%!!ers willing to play the Power 9 and the most of us wanting some restraint/balance.

(Yeah, played a lot of MTG back in the day...but comparing Magic to LFR/PFS is a stretch. I like the analogy though. Just wish WotC would have shown some intelligent restraint.)

Nice rant.
I think Organised Play goes against the fundamental principle of a good RPG: The GM is in charge. All the crapification stems from that.

Yep. This is core and key. And not a basic function of Organized Play campaigns. So...the question remains: are all Organized Play that are run by the companies doomed to collapse under their own crapification?

I guess the problem is, once the initial launch of corebooks, they need to make money. So they rush them out without proper testing/editing.

Definitely a core of the problem. With PFS, it's happened repeatedly...most obviously with White-Haired Witch. Within days, there is already errata. And that's only the stuff that is obviously overpowered...there is still so much more power creep.

With no disrespect intended, could one ever expect organized play to work, period?

The thing is that I think that Living Greyhawk *did* work. I know it had problems...but for all it's warts, it was awesome.

So, yeah, I choose to believe it can work.

I think LG succeeded because the local admins had so much local power...and lots of discretion about banning and limiting things that were broken. And a review period for new content (I think...my memory on this is hazy).

I think LFR and PFS have just freely allowed almost all content in...much to the detriment of their campaigns.

And so this post.

I do think the banned list should be broader in OP to keep some of the growth problems from occurring. Not to mention as has been noted it is hard for GMs to keep up with the amount of material released leading to GMs unfamiliar with allowed classes, feats, spells, etc.

It is a tough line to walk.

Totally tough line to walk, you are wise, Iron Wolf.

I wish publishers would see that they don't need to include every crappy supplement to make their Organized Play campaigns successful. I wish that they understood that a strong campaign would still lead to adequate marketing and resultant revenues...but I don't know how to make that argument.

Most publishers are secretive about their play numbers and profits and sales and so trying to make that point is difficult.

I'm left to writing awkwardly-phrased rants on awesome websites to engage the discussion in hopes of achieving some enlightenment by the publishers.

But really, what are the chances that PFS or 5e-OP brass are going to realize the issue and make changes?

I'm sorry that your experience with organized play is lacking, but I have to say that I still love it.

::snip::

Also, as far as WOTC is concerned they have diversified the OP offerings because they realize that different gamers want different things. If you want a limited pallet, you might try encounters, where not everything is allowed (it changes from season to season).

To be fair, I've made tons of friends playing in OPs....I have no complaints about that. I just wish for something greater and something more.

I can see PFS making the same mistakes as LFR and LFR completely blind as to the root causes of their failure...and thus doomed to repeat those failures.

But that's a different post.

Frankly, self-restraint is big issue here.

Sorry, Steel. I love you (you have tremendous passion for the game...it's obvious from your posts and podcasts), but you've really missed the big picture with your post.

I respect your opinion so I want to give you another chance to respond.

You know and I know that gamers shouldn't *have* to show self restraint at the gaming table. They should be allowed to explore and expand their characters as they see fit.

As you said, the Synthesist hasn't ruined any of your games. Good for you....but that's an awful answer, both by me and by you.

The truth is that collective weight and bloat of all the rules leads to both powercreep and increasing the barrier to entry for new players and judges. In addition, the ability of judges to scale encounters limits their ability to 'compete'. I know this is a losing fight in the long run...one that will begin to eat away at PFS's growth.

When will you begin to see that? How can it be measured? How to stop it? How can the community help Paizo reach its goals and protect the PFS campaign?

As to whether my claims of the Synthesist, or any particular class or build, has ruined my experience and not yours, that's not the issue. There are no necessary sessions to cite, no names to name. What is the issue is whether the crapification is avoidable, and what the campaign administration can do to avoid it.

In the end, Organized Play is a marketing program. That doesn't mean it's not fun or that it's not worthwhile. It is and it is. But it IS still a marketing program just the same and one should not be surprised to discover it isn't run like somebody's home game.

Yeah, Steel Wind...but is there a way for PFS to realize that they are following the path of LFR? Is there any chance that Paizo is going to show intelligent restraint with their products?

Or is any untested, unbalancing crap going to be immediately allowed into PFS? Is the collective bloat and powercreep going to be allowed to drive players and judges away? When is PFS going to acknowledge that the entry cost for new players and judges is higher when the amount of content is unlimited?

Sure...talk to your people at Paizo. I bet the answer is that they don't care. The dollar is more important than the campaign (though I choose to believe otherwise) to them.

 

[S'mon]

Yep. This is core and key. And not a basic function of Organized Play campaigns. So...the question remains: are all Organized Play that are run by the companies doomed to collapse under their own crapification?

They would need to show a lot of self-discipline in not using it as a short-term means to push book sales. And DMs would need a lot more power to shape the game than the OP describes.

Personally I think it's a model that works great for card games, but I don't really like any system where people play the same adventures over and over. The only way I can see a 'living' world actually working for me would be something like a vast sci-fi universe where each GM has their own planet/solar system and creates & runs the adventures for that system.

 

[Mostlyjoe]

For me organized play has fallen apart at day 1 because of the complexity of entry.

WoTC for the longest time made things devilishly hard to get into a game because they didn't have RPGA registration on a website or making it easier to just walk in and play.

Premade characters, scenarios, etc are all good things but I've yet to find a local group friendly to new players outside of their clique.

There are all sorts of issues.

 

[pauljathome]

For me organized play has fallen apart at day 1 because of the complexity of entry.

WoTC for the longest time made things devilishly hard to get into a game because they didn't have RPGA registration on a website or making it easier to just walk in and play.

Premade characters, scenarios, etc are all good things but I've yet to find a local group friendly to new players outside of their clique.

There are all sorts of issues.

I can only speak for PFS in Toronto but that absolutely should NOT be a problem.

We absolutely welcome new players. We have pregens ready to play or you can play your own character. Although we request that people sign up in advance on the web site before hand we'll try as hard as we possibly can to accomodate people who just show up (as far as I know we have NEVER turned a player away).

I think that one thing to keep in mind is that the whole experience is very dependent on the local organizers and groups. Different groups seem to have very different cultures. I've found the Toronto PFS group very friendly and welcoming and not power gamers. From the paizo forums, others experiences obviously vary :-(

 

[kitsune9]

Seems more like a rant against rule bloat.

The problem with organized play is that a company can have a choice--choice A. ban everything except for the player's handbook. When LG first came out, this was pretty much it; however, it was frustrating for players who bought other books and there was no support for it in official play. choice B. allow as much play with the ruleset but deal with the problem of rule bloat/power creep/etc.

There's a couple of approaches for this:

1. Allow only the PH, but provide feats, spells, classes, and races from other sources to be given as rewards for play. In the RPGA, they did this with LGR and LG.
2. Allow the PH, but consider everything else restricted until a certain level is reached and the character is eligible to join an organization, faction, etc. In LG, we had Metaorgs in which certains feats and spells were only available if you were a member of that organization.
3. Require a GM test. RPGA had the Herald Test for GMs. You had to pass it in order to judge certain events. It tested your knowledge of the rules. I don't recommend this (gaming should be fun, not school), but it is a choice.

Organized Play shouldn't be taken seriously. It's just a bragging game. Make a character, get in a table, complete an adventure and win "points" or certs (whatever that may be). If there was ever a tournament in which money was on the line, we'd be looking at something more heavily regulated and developed to be "fair" and would face constant revision.

For me, I played Living City when it was 2nd edition. Thought it was okay except for cert and treasure spoils divsion in which the loudest most aggressive player walked away with the certs. When it went to Organized Play, I never got into that. When LG came out, I was annoyed because virtually everything was banned, but things picked up when 3.5 was rolled out and I started to really enjoy the campaign. I had more options and could join a metaorg if I wanted to. I never got to Legacy of the Green Regent or Mark of Heroes, but definitely wanted to play. Even though I play Pathfinder, I have no time for PFS because I'm married now (and soon to be a dad).

 

[saskganesh]

I've never played the game in this kind of context, but I am kinda impressed that Organised Play exists at all. It's a lot of work and effort involving thousands (?) of people on a regular basis.