Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Alphastream" data-source="post: 6818957" data-attributes="member: 11365">The "AL experience" isn't a single thing. Organized play changes constantly, because when it doesn't (even within a single program) it becomes boring. Change is always a stress point, but the lack of change is far worse. No one program can be exactly what all people desire. We all have too many different tastes. Changing things up helps the campaign speak to more people over that time. For example, a tight storyline season is being used this time. This works really well with Ravenloft locking us in, because now we all have a mechanical reason to go through that season and not go off-track with other stories. That's one of the big goals of this season. As with all seasons, some will love that and others won't, but what we've seen over time is that change is good for the programs. It's also a necessity in order to learn. You can't learn without trying out new ideas. Your premise is, to be fully honest, off-base here. The way you perceive WotC and Hasbro to interact just isn't accurate. From all I've learned over the years, a simpler and far more accurate premise is this one: "We launched Ravenloft because we love the setting and we thought it would be awesome and excite people." That's how they choose seasons, in a nutshell. Their core belief is that great stories sell and they saw an opportunity to tell a great story with Ravenloft. It's one of Perkins' favorites, and it's great for designers to work on what excites them. They do look at how a season intersects with their other efforts, but it isn't a primary decision around AL. I think they know that the AL team can deliver great adventures on any storyline. Bigger concerns are likely how well it works with other partners, who may have a harder time. For example, Spelljammer would need a lot of work to be integrated into their video game partnerships.None of this really digs into a question about rules options. The decision of how to add rules options is largely at the AL level, but is primarily based on decades of experience dealing with these issues. Over all that time, some clear lessons emerge:- Any option will be a huge issue for some players and they will want it badly/loudly- The vast majority of players are unconcerned whether options are allowed, especially non-core book options- Players have a better experience when the play options fit the setting- Players do not like for the game to get bogged down with options- Players do not like to see overly strong options and like having limits that prevent those popping up, even if it means the loss of some non-broken options</blockquote>

Verification