Knights & Knaves Alehouse

blackprinceofmuncie wrote:

Howling Man wrote:What is encounters?

Encounters is one of the organized play efforts that WotC started a little over one year ago. They provide short 1-2 hour scenarios (hence "Encounter") for DMs to run as open games in public places every Wednesday to draw new players into the game. The scenarios are all linked up thematically and constitute a "season", so if you play every Wednesday for the whole "season" you've essentially completed a single adventure module.

Am I the only guy who wants to vomit when I hear D&D adventures described as "scenes", "seasons", and such?

francisca wrote:

blackprinceofmuncie wrote:

Howling Man wrote:What is encounters?

Encounters is one of the organized play efforts that WotC started a little over one year ago. They provide short 1-2 hour scenarios (hence "Encounter") for DMs to run as open games in public places every Wednesday to draw new players into the game. The scenarios are all linked up thematically and constitute a "season", so if you play every Wednesday for the whole "season" you've essentially completed a single adventure module.

Am I the only guy who wants to vomit when I hear D&D adventures described as "scenes", "seasons", and such?

No, no you are not.

joe b.

francisca wrote:

blackprinceofmuncie wrote:

Howling Man wrote:What is encounters?

Encounters is one of the organized play efforts that WotC started a little over one year ago. They provide short 1-2 hour scenarios (hence "Encounter") for DMs to run as open games in public places every Wednesday to draw new players into the game. The scenarios are all linked up thematically and constitute a "season", so if you play every Wednesday for the whole "season" you've essentially completed a single adventure module.

Am I the only guy who wants to vomit when I hear D&D adventures described as "scenes", "seasons", and such?

Why, they have a new "season" coming up. How does this grab ya:

http://www.icv2.com/articles/markets/20098.html

Dungeons & Dragons: Lair Assault

"Wizards of the Coast has announced the September launch of its new highly tactical Dungeons & Dragons Lair Assault Organized Play program. The new D&D Lair Assault in-store play program features “convention-style play that challenges players on two levels, character building and tactical knowledge. The program will offer reusable, modifiable challenges, creating a different play experience every time. The first D&D Lair Assault challenge, Forge of the Dawn Titan, will run from September 1st through November at participating hobby game stores, with future challenges following a similar format.

"The D&D Lair Assault program is designed for players looking for more complex, strategic, and highly tactical challenges. The D&D Lair Assault program is tailored to groups of players who enjoy solving tactical puzzles, optimizing characters, and using rules to their advantage. Each D&D Lair Assault challenge features complex encounters prepared in advance by the Dungeon Master. Players are then pitted against their DM in an attempt to solve highly customized and creative challenges.

"Adventuring groups will often attempt a challenge several times before solving it, and will be successful only when a balance of skill and luck is achieved. The quickly changing game elements force players to reevaluate their strategies as they navigate treacherous terrain and hazards. Challenges feature an extremely difficult “super” encounter in which players must build an adventuring party to take on a perilous and highly tactical challenge. D&D Fortune Cards are featured as part of the play experience, providing a critical edge for success through special in-game effects the players can use or trade to aid them in their game."

Those "tactical challenges" don't involve the kind of problem solving rpg's feature. We're talking board game territory. Now, you can vomit!

francisca wrote:Am I the only guy who wants to vomit when I hear D&D adventures described as "scenes", "seasons", and such?

I don't like the implications of the term "scene", but I tend to think of "seasons" in the context of Encounters more as sports "seasons" (i.e. the playing field from last set of games is reset and everyone starts out at the same level again) rather than television "seasons" which indicate major shifts to some ongoing story line. There isn't much in the way of ongoing story in the Encounters adventures.

Seasons makes me think of "campaign season" so, no that doesn't induce a visceral, negative reaction from me.

And I can take or leave "scenes". Like it or not, one aspect of this game is collaborative story-telling. And even improv can be divided into scenes and beats if you want.

So...maybe I'm just not "old school" enough but neither really bothers me.

The main disgust I have with the above quoted stuff is that I don't think D&D should make an effort to challenge players with regard character building. It's the stuff that happens in-game that should matter, whether that be combat tactics or otherwise.

Also, using the rules to your advantage, screw that. Players should be encouraged to know any applicable rules, but not obsess over details. Precise spell effects come to mind as fair game.

I have told some friends that I'll play 4E if they hand me a character sheet, but I would rather not play then buy books for it.

(Oh, by the way, hello again Alehouse. I hadn't posted for quite some time until recently. I go through phases.)

Random wrote:The main disgust I have with the above quoted stuff is that I don't think D&D should make an effort to challenge players with regard character building. It's the stuff that happens in-game that should matter, whether that be combat tactics or otherwise.

I think the Dungeons & Dragons: Lair Assault program is specifically meant to appeal to two groups of people: 1) People who are into RPGs for the wargaming aspect of play; and 2) People who are into RPGs for the character building aspect of play. I don't think anyone is suggesting that the Lair Assault program is the "way D&D should be played" by everyone. It is one small part of the greater WotC organized play program, and organized play is just one tiny niche of the RPG hobby as a whole.

geezerdm wrote:Players are then pitted against their DM in an attempt to solve highly customized and creative challenges.

Bullshit. The players are pitted against a canned product, and all the DM need do is pop the top and read the directions. I'm sure customization is highly discouraged, else Billy in Buffalo may get one experience, and Sally in San Diego another.

blackprinceofmuncie wrote:I think the Dungeons & Dragons: Lair Assault program is specifically meant to appeal to two groups of people: 1) People who are into RPGs for the wargaming aspect of play; and 2) People who are into RPGs for the character building aspect of play. I don't think anyone is suggesting that the Lair Assault program is the "way D&D should be played" by everyone. It is one small part of the greater WotC organized play program, and organized play is just one tiny niche of the RPG hobby as a whole.

Well, I suppose it makes sense to have some program to cater to such a crowd. My opinion just means I'm not part of that crowd and wouldn't enjoy such a program.
I just spoke since I've been disgusted with the character building enthusiasts for a while now, all through college.

blackprinceofmuncie wrote:It is one small part of the greater WotC organized play program, and organized play is just one tiny niche of the RPG hobby as a whole.

That may be technically true, but I think it's becoming less and less true over time, and I think it's undeniable that Organized Play exerts a very large influence on what WotC does with the game (and has done with it for the past decade+) in a manner that is not necessarily compatible with, and occasionally at cross-purposes to, what would be best for the game in a non-Organized Play context. My feeling is that since most of the WotC staff seems to have come up through Organized Play (i.e. the RPGA), and because the fans who participate in Organized Play are both among the most "loyal" (as far as recurring purchases) and also the most vocal and connected to WotC (as far as interacting with the staff at events, coming to cons, interacting on their site, etc.), that the tendency is to look at them as the primary and most important audience of the game, which is self-reinforcing as doing so both tends to draw more people into Organized Play and push people who aren't interested in OP away from the game. I suspect WotC would prefer (and may eventually see) D&D existing primarily in an OP (both offline and online) context, with the idea of the self-contained "gaming group" withering into something vestigial, or even being abandoned entirely to the retro-hobbyist segment -- does WotC even want you as a customer if you're not going to subscribe to DDI and come to their public events and help "virally market" their game? I think that increasingly the answer to that is "not really." Sure, I suppose they're still happy to keep selling you books as long as you're willing to keep buying them, but you're an afterthought, and if you get disgruntled and stop buying the books they'll probably not even notice.

T. Foster wrote:My feeling is that since most of the WotC staff seems to have come up through Organized Play (i.e. the RPGA), and because the fans who participate in Organized Play are both among the most "loyal" (as far as recurring purchases) and also the most vocal and connected to WotC (as far as interacting with the staff at events, coming to cons, interacting on their site, etc.), that the tendency is to look at them as the primary and most important audience of the game

That is not the impression I got at all when I was involved with the Encounters program. My experience led me to believe that WotC sees organized play as a necessary evil for getting new people into the game or connecting gamers who might not be able to put together a group on their own, but they would prefer to invest as little time and energy in it as possible.

The content of the materials for the Encounters seasons that I ran made it quite clear that WotC assumed players introduced through the program would quickly buy their own gaming materials and transition to more traditional, campaign-style play at home. That assumption seemed to be justified from my perspective. I had only one player who actually participated for an entire season. Most of the younger guys would play for a session or two and then start making plans with some of the other players they had met to get together for a "real" game of D&D on the weekend. I will also note that the Encounters materials that WotC sent out didn't include any kind of incentives of inducements for transitioning to RPGA play.

In fact, I was mildly surprised that you didn't have to sign up for the RPGA to be an Encounters DM. The store had to register to get the materials, but Encounters wasn't linked to the RPGA at the DM/player level in any way. It seems to me that if the goal was to transition people to other organized play events, there would have been a much stronger connection between the two programs.

T. Foster wrote:

blackprinceofmuncie wrote:It is one small part of the greater WotC organized play program, and organized play is just one tiny niche of the RPG hobby as a whole.

That may be technically true, but I think it's becoming less and less true over time, and I think it's undeniable that Organized Play exerts a very large influence on what WotC does with the game (and has done with it for the past decade+) in a manner that is not necessarily compatible with, and occasionally at cross-purposes to, what would be best for the game in a non-Organized Play context. My feeling is that since most of the WotC staff seems to have come up through Organized Play (i.e. the RPGA), and because the fans who participate in Organized Play are both among the most "loyal" (as far as recurring purchases) and also the most vocal and connected to WotC (as far as interacting with the staff at events, coming to cons, interacting on their site, etc.), that the tendency is to look at them as the primary and most important audience of the game, which is self-reinforcing as doing so both tends to draw more people into Organized Play and push people who aren't interested in OP away from the game. I suspect WotC would prefer (and may eventually see) D&D existing primarily in an OP (both offline and online) context, with the idea of the self-contained "gaming group" withering into something vestigial, or even being abandoned entirely to the retro-hobbyist segment -- does WotC even want you as a customer if you're not going to subscribe to DDI and come to their public events and help "virally market" their game? I think that increasingly the answer to that is "not really." Sure, I suppose they're still happy to keep selling you books as long as you're willing to keep buying them, but you're an afterthought, and if you get disgruntled and stop buying the books they'll probably not even notice.

They won't notice if the Original Play (Opie) fans are bringing in the bucks. Unfortunately Opie is really just a kid with a stick, string and bent paper clip down at the pond when it comes time to drop the box of cash over at the Hasbro goombas favorite breakfast nook wine bar and butcher shop. Keep that box of cash coming and the Hasbro bosses are happy, if not its hole in the desert time for the D&D division of WotC, and they already have the hole dug, cause, ya know, somebody comes along and ya have to dig another hole.

Random wrote:The main disgust I have with the above quoted stuff is that I don't think D&D should make an effort to challenge players with regard character building. It's the stuff that happens in-game that should matter, whether that be combat tactics or otherwise.

This is where my dislike of 3e comes from. If you only use the core books, 3e is pretty simple, but when players start mapping out their feats and skills at 1st level to get into that sweet PrC? I'm out.

I am running Temple of Elemental Evil right now, and it took a group of 5 a total of 20 minutes to make their characters, despite my allowing some fudging of ability scores (by which I mean 4d6, drop the lowest, put them in any order).

Vigilance wrote:I am running Temple of Elemental Evil right now, and it took a group of 5 a total of 20 minutes to make their characters, despite my allowing some fudging of ability scores (by which I mean 4d6, drop the lowest, put them in any order).

Then your players pick equipment faster than anyone I've ever played within 20-odd years. Kudos!

Flambeaux wrote:Then your players pick equipment faster than anyone I've ever played within 20-odd years. Kudos!

In my games, players roll up their characters, explore town a little, and only later purchase equipment from the appropriate stores.