Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jer" data-source="post: 6963289" data-attributes="member: 19857">I see the AL as a way to get existing gamers who are not roleplayers up to speed on what roleplaying actually is.&nbsp; They can see it at their local gamestore and even if they're there for the Pokemon tournament they can see there's this other Organized Play thing going on and hey it's once a week like Pokemon nights and it looks like a fun thing to try.&nbsp; The APs are for the next level after that.&nbsp; You've got them interested and now they're thinking &quot;hey I could run this for my friends&quot;.&nbsp; The argument that smaller adventures would be better for that is possibly correct, however after the d20 glut and then the 4e fallout many gamestores basically decided to stop stocking smaller adventures.&nbsp; I know the stores in my area all prefer having a handful of books that are evergreen over having a large number of smaller adventures that cycle in and out.&nbsp; Wizards producing a whole lot of small adventures does no good for bringing new people into the hobby if the game stores don't stock them.&nbsp; (Any discussion about what Wizards should be producing that doesn't take into account what modern gamestores are able to stock is somewhat pointless - getting retailers to give your product space when they could be using that space to sell another boardgame is crucial.&nbsp; Right now I think 5e's smaller footprint on books that retailers need to stock is helping it mend fences with retailers who felt burned by either d20 or 4e or both.&nbsp; To a large extent the AP formula is a compromise between selling lots of smaller adventures and stocking evergreen titles that retailers are able to sell at a pace that makes it worth keeping stock in their stores).I've thought of this before and I don't think that it actually would work well.&nbsp; The overlap between boardgames and RPGs is not actually that great and I don't really think that something like Wrath of Ashardalon (as much as I love it) gives a player a good idea of what a role playing experience is like.&nbsp; I personally like the idea of having more starter sets - along the lines of the &quot;How to Host a Mystery&quot; games.&nbsp; You might need to strip down the rules a bit more, but there's a lot of merit in having a game that maybe doesn't have a lot of replayability BUT is cheap enough that it doesn't matter and is easy enough to pull off the shelf and run on a whim.&nbsp;&nbsp; They could lead into a larger campaign, but they wouldn't have to.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jer, post: 6963289, member: 19857"] I see the AL as a way to get existing gamers who are not roleplayers up to speed on what roleplaying actually is. They can see it at their local gamestore and even if they're there for the Pokemon tournament they can see there's this other Organized Play thing going on and hey it's once a week like Pokemon nights and it looks like a fun thing to try. The APs are for the next level after that. You've got them interested and now they're thinking "hey I could run this for my friends". The argument that smaller adventures would be better for that is possibly correct, however after the d20 glut and then the 4e fallout many gamestores basically decided to stop stocking smaller adventures. I know the stores in my area all prefer having a handful of books that are evergreen over having a large number of smaller adventures that cycle in and out. Wizards producing a whole lot of small adventures does no good for bringing new people into the hobby if the game stores don't stock them. (Any discussion about what Wizards should be producing that doesn't take into account what modern gamestores are able to stock is somewhat pointless - getting retailers to give your product space when they could be using that space to sell another boardgame is crucial. Right now I think 5e's smaller footprint on books that retailers need to stock is helping it mend fences with retailers who felt burned by either d20 or 4e or both. To a large extent the AP formula is a compromise between selling lots of smaller adventures and stocking evergreen titles that retailers are able to sell at a pace that makes it worth keeping stock in their stores). I've thought of this before and I don't think that it actually would work well. The overlap between boardgames and RPGs is not actually that great and I don't really think that something like Wrath of Ashardalon (as much as I love it) gives a player a good idea of what a role playing experience is like. I personally like the idea of having more starter sets - along the lines of the "How to Host a Mystery" games. You might need to strip down the rules a bit more, but there's a lot of merit in having a game that maybe doesn't have a lot of replayability BUT is cheap enough that it doesn't matter and is easy enough to pull off the shelf and run on a whim. They could lead into a larger campaign, but they wouldn't have to. [/QUOTE]

Verification