WotC has ended support for Living Forgotten Realms (and the RPGA, too)

[Argyle King]

What is considered to be 'expert level' D&D 4E play?

 

[MerricB]

What is considered to be 'expert level' D&D 4E play?

If you survive the dungeon, you're probably an expert.

A bit more seriously, it means "not beginner". You're familiar with the rules and the game; you can optimize your character well and use your powers to help the group rather than trying everything solo. You probably aren't restricted to the Essentials books.

The second program of D&D Organised Play looks for people who enjoy really tough combats, as far as I can tell. (So, no, it isn't for everyone). In a lot of ways, its a throwback to the original D&D tournaments that brought us modules like the Giants and Tomb of Horrors: really good, tactical players will do well at them, especially if they've optimised their characters and tactics as much as possible.

Cheers!

 

[darjr]

Then I do misunderstand. I misunderstood the campaign guide. I thought it meant that a GM could opt out.

 

[WolfStar76]

Cards are not required to play LFR, but as a judge you must allow them to be used if presented for play. I never said they were required to play, only that they be accepted.

Another of the hallmarks of LFR (that I can't believe I forgot in my long post above) is that we support all the 4E WotC rules options (and the most current iteration of the 4E ruleset). By comparison, D&D Encounters (officially) only supports Encounters plus one additional book per season.

I'm not in charge of writing the campaign rules, so I can't speak to it having been mandated upon us or not.

What I CAN tell you is that, we want to support what people want to use. Assuming WotC didn't mandate acceptance of fortune cards - I think we would have done so as a campaign anyhow (personal opinion, I speak for none of the other admins in this - but I am making an educated guess).

Players, perhaps moving to LFR from Encounters, perhaps of the own volition, are going to have Fortune Cards and want to use them.

We want them to use the rules and options they've paid for - and we want that to be a universal standard, instead of leaving it to table variation based on DM preference or whim.

Spelling this support out clearly in the Campaign Guide is the best way to ensure that happens.

 

[Shemeska]

Another of the hallmarks of LFR (that I can't believe I forgot in my long post above) is that we support all the 4E WotC rules options (and the most current iteration of the 4E ruleset). By comparison, D&D Encounters (officially) only supports Encounters plus one additional book per season.

Hypothetical question for you:

Since WotC no longer runs LFR, does that enable LFR (should it so desire) to distribute and run organized play material for pre-Spellplague era FR (using either 4e or 3.x rules or whatever else). Are they still mandated to only use "official" WotC setting material since there's no longer active corporate oversight and checking of material, and since the setting itself has exceedingly little published "official" support (thus removing the need to use LFR to support only the current published and supported version of FR)?

 

[Steel_Wind]

Wolfstar76, I’m a little troubled with the content of your post on the first page of the thread, that would be post #21 right here.

[Message text deleted by author]

Upon reflection, I don't see how my post serves to advance this matter any further. Frankly, it's only going to make matters worse.

If Wolfstar has the original message buffered, he should feel free to post his response/rebuttal/clarification, as he sees fit.

I will leave this part of the original post in though, which was intended to be a fair and sincere comment to Wolfstar76:

Those best and most loyal fans in the world? That would be *you*.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Do I think that means that LFR and RPGA are now essentially circling the bowl? Yes. I. Do.

Ok, but you decided that long before you even made this thread.

Edit: I mean come on your whole post is just making up nits so you can pick them.

 

[Dannager]

I wasn't talking about what you and your fellow community members were doing. I was talking about how Wizards of the Coast wrongfully threw you under the bus.

I bet they super appreciate you being so outraged on their behalf.

...waaaaaaaaaaaiiit...

In terms of the LFR website, according to you, WotC:

• hosts it.
• provides general guidance to LFR admins should WotC break the rules of LFR with a new book;
• WotC will permit RPGA/LFR to use the banners they already have at conventions; and,
• WotC will let the LFR website create and distribute modules, for FREE, by LFR fans to other LFR fans, using the marks and IP of WotC

Can you please stop being the Fox News of the D&D community? Or, at the very least, maybe keep nonsense like this in the thread you started on the Paizo board (I hear the fans over there enjoy this sort of thing)? It's getting pretty tiring to have someone explain something to you in fairly straightforward terms and then see you regurgitate it with such a tremendous slant it's practically lying on its side.

There are glass-half-full ways of seeing things, and there are glass-half-empty ways of seeing things. Both of these have their time and place. But I'm pretty sure the WotC-stole-half-of-some-other-guy's-glass-and-kicked-his-puppy-so-now-I'm-angry-for-him way of looking at things is unnecessary.

 

[Tarek]

Wizards of the Coast is under severe budget pressure right now. I'm not surprised that they did, IN FACT, eliminate the RPGA as a separate entity, first folding it in under the DCI and now apparently putting the remnants of both programs into the renamed Wizards Play Network.

I have no doubt that they will keep producing adventures, specifically one shot adventures for game days, that are tied into whatever products need a boost in sales. It's a sensible business model, and it cuts away a lot of editorial overhead in terms of development time, since any encounter/adventure is standalone and does not need to reference previous adventures.

 

[Gulla]

Steel Wind, I really don't appreciate being used as an example on something when the one using me is giving me motives I don't have and assuming meanings not meant. I'm not a native speaker of English, so I suppose I might have come out wrong within the limits of an XP-comment. I never had any notion of Wolfstar76 talking for anyone but the LFR-admins as I read and rewarded his post after his clarification of this. I would assume that goes for most of the readers. I still concider his post very clearifying on the subject of "what happened to LFR?" which is (to me at least) a very reasonable way to summarise your first post.