Important Update - To Serve the Greater Good [Archive] - Wizards Community

Important Update - To Serve the Greater Good [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
scon40
05-26-04, 10:14 AM This article contains major spoilers for the series To Serve the Greater Good. If you do not bear any of the marks or curses from this series then do not read further.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=lg/articles/dc20040525a
grandpoobah
05-26-04, 12:01 PM Seriously, this change is a very BAD idea. I understand that under the previous description of the curses, they were actually somewhat beneficial - but the current change is a very bad decision. In fact, Curses in general are a very bad game mechanic for LG:

(more spoilers about the "Greater Good" series follow):

1 - LG is a series of 1 or 2 round modules. While it is often "recommended" that players do modules in certain orders, it is never REQUIRED. A player could easily play "a man with nothing" first THEN play "fury of a cold man's heart" and have no game mechanic means to eliminate the curse. The module desciption gives no hints / clues to the player as to what module must be played (or even if one will exist) to elimimate the curse. A player could go through 10 or 20 modules awaiting the "conclusion" module.

1a - Worse, a player could sign up to "eat" (run and never play) the second module unwittingly and then play the first. Even still, a player could play Fury in november of this year, then not get an opportunity to play " a man with nothing' before it is RETIRED from play.

2 - APL and level differences: what is an inconvenience to an 8th level character is a burden to a 5th level PC and downright impossible for a 2nd level PC. The fact that a 2nd level PC could play "fury of a Cold man's heart" but CANT play "a man with nothing" (reasonably) for several levels is inappropriate. "fury of a cold man's heart" should be ammended to be APL6+ to prevent players from "walking into" this situation

2a - this curse effectively "Kills" any PC under level 4 in LG. Period. There's no way a level 1-3 PC could afford an 8th level CLW (200 gp ????) after EVERY module. not to mention the vulnerability to fire/cold (burning hands? ray of frost?). Most players would simply abandon the PC. This is a huge turn-off to new players to LG and RPGA.

3 - LG is intended to be a "good" and "heroic" campaign. These curses are intentionally designed to PUNISH characters for doing the "right" thing. I can see the the logic in cursing (or giving an enmity / disfavor) for doing the "wrong" thing (not rescuing the princess, keeping the stolen gold, etc) - giving such a devastating curse out as PUNISHMENT for aiding someone is ludicrous.

So in conclusion, I feel the Circle needs to rescind this decision, or significantly alter it by doing at least one of the following:

a) amend "Fury of a Cold Man's Heart" to be APL 6 and up.
b) amend both "fury" and "a man with nothing" modules to WARN the players and GM about the module sequence and consequences so they can decide BEFORE running the module whether or not to run it.
c) give all level 1-4 PC's that have one of these curses the option to have it "removed" immediately.

In general, leaving these sorts of things out there for low level PC's to run into is a poor decision. It is very disheartening to new players and GM's to have to deal with this. RPGA / LG should be looking for ways to make low level modules fun and exciting to attract new players - not frustrating and unfair to turn them off.

Thanks for your consideration....
Steve_MND
05-26-04, 12:44 PM Before everyone blows a gasket on this board as well, it is under review. Dave C posted this just recently over on the main Yahoo group:

"A few things were missed in this (as some pointed out) and a wider
swath was hit with it then intended. An update will be coming out for
it here soon along with an effective date sometime after June 1st. So
sorry for any heartattacks or loss of hair involved in reading the
article but we will get it tweaked here real quick.

Dave"

So just wait a few before getting too bent out of shape. :)
Samwise
05-26-04, 01:14 PM What is wrong with a curse that sticks around for 20 modules?
What is more absurd is when someone plays an entire series in one sitting, gaining then losing a curse in a weekend without it ever affecting their play in other games.
The only problem I see with this is players who will cheat and not inform DMs who may not have seen this announcement of the change in the curse.
WCrawford
05-26-04, 10:08 PM Dave C.'s constant claim of being busy is wearing very thin with me. If he has so little time to devote to the campaign, volunteer or not, then he should step away.
Samwise
05-26-04, 10:41 PM That's interesting. These constant attacks on volunteers are long since worn completely away with me.
I always wonder why if the people who post them have so much time to do so they aren't working on something for the campaign so those other people will have more time to get everything done.
Steve_MND
05-27-04, 12:53 AM WCrawford, you have to realize that Dave's claims of "being busy" are made after he has already put in way more time than you could imagine on the game to begin with. There are, after all, only a finite number of hours in each day.

If a volunteer was not doing anything and yet was still asking for more time, you might have a valid viewpoint. But not here.
scon40
05-27-04, 10:23 AM Originally posted by WCrawford
Dave C.'s constant claim of being busy is wearing very thin with me. If he has so little time to devote to the campaign, volunteer or not, then he should step away.

You have no concept of the amount of hours the Circle spends on this campaign. We all have lives that we have to live as well, and 3/5 of the Circle have young children. Dave puts in an inordinate amount of time and should not be attacked because he can't do everything.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
scon40 05-26-04, 10:14 AM	This article contains major spoilers for the series To Serve the Greater Good. If you do not bear any of the marks or curses from this series then do not read further. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=lg/articles/dc20040525a
grandpoobah 05-26-04, 12:01 PM	Seriously, this change is a very BAD idea. I understand that under the previous description of the curses, they were actually somewhat beneficial - but the current change is a very bad decision. In fact, Curses in general are a very bad game mechanic for LG: (more spoilers about the "Greater Good" series follow): 1 - LG is a series of 1 or 2 round modules. While it is often "recommended" that players do modules in certain orders, it is never REQUIRED. A player could easily play "a man with nothing" first THEN play "fury of a cold man's heart" and have no game mechanic means to eliminate the curse. The module desciption gives no hints / clues to the player as to what module must be played (or even if one will exist) to elimimate the curse. A player could go through 10 or 20 modules awaiting the "conclusion" module. 1a - Worse, a player could sign up to "eat" (run and never play) the second module unwittingly and then play the first. Even still, a player could play Fury in november of this year, then not get an opportunity to play " a man with nothing' before it is RETIRED from play. 2 - APL and level differences: what is an inconvenience to an 8th level character is a burden to a 5th level PC and downright impossible for a 2nd level PC. The fact that a 2nd level PC could play "fury of a Cold man's heart" but CANT play "a man with nothing" (reasonably) for several levels is inappropriate. "fury of a cold man's heart" should be ammended to be APL6+ to prevent players from "walking into" this situation 2a - this curse effectively "Kills" any PC under level 4 in LG. Period. There's no way a level 1-3 PC could afford an 8th level CLW (200 gp ????) after EVERY module. not to mention the vulnerability to fire/cold (burning hands? ray of frost?). Most players would simply abandon the PC. This is a huge turn-off to new players to LG and RPGA. 3 - LG is intended to be a "good" and "heroic" campaign. These curses are intentionally designed to PUNISH characters for doing the "right" thing. I can see the the logic in cursing (or giving an enmity / disfavor) for doing the "wrong" thing (not rescuing the princess, keeping the stolen gold, etc) - giving such a devastating curse out as PUNISHMENT for aiding someone is ludicrous. So in conclusion, I feel the Circle needs to rescind this decision, or significantly alter it by doing at least one of the following: a) amend "Fury of a Cold Man's Heart" to be APL 6 and up. b) amend both "fury" and "a man with nothing" modules to WARN the players and GM about the module sequence and consequences so they can decide BEFORE running the module whether or not to run it. c) give all level 1-4 PC's that have one of these curses the option to have it "removed" immediately. In general, leaving these sorts of things out there for low level PC's to run into is a poor decision. It is very disheartening to new players and GM's to have to deal with this. RPGA / LG should be looking for ways to make low level modules fun and exciting to attract new players - not frustrating and unfair to turn them off. Thanks for your consideration....
Steve_MND 05-26-04, 12:44 PM	Before everyone blows a gasket on this board as well, it is under review. Dave C posted this just recently over on the main Yahoo group: "A few things were missed in this (as some pointed out) and a wider swath was hit with it then intended. An update will be coming out for it here soon along with an effective date sometime after June 1st. So sorry for any heartattacks or loss of hair involved in reading the article but we will get it tweaked here real quick. Dave" So just wait a few before getting too bent out of shape. :)
Samwise 05-26-04, 01:14 PM	What is wrong with a curse that sticks around for 20 modules? What is more absurd is when someone plays an entire series in one sitting, gaining then losing a curse in a weekend without it ever affecting their play in other games. The only problem I see with this is players who will cheat and not inform DMs who may not have seen this announcement of the change in the curse.
WCrawford 05-26-04, 10:08 PM	Dave C.'s constant claim of being busy is wearing very thin with me. If he has so little time to devote to the campaign, volunteer or not, then he should step away.
Samwise 05-26-04, 10:41 PM	That's interesting. These constant attacks on volunteers are long since worn completely away with me. I always wonder why if the people who post them have so much time to do so they aren't working on something for the campaign so those other people will have more time to get everything done.
Steve_MND 05-27-04, 12:53 AM	WCrawford, you have to realize that Dave's claims of "being busy" are made after he has already put in way more time than you could imagine on the game to begin with. There are, after all, only a finite number of hours in each day. If a volunteer was not doing anything and yet was still asking for more time, you might have a valid viewpoint. But not here.
scon40 05-27-04, 10:23 AM	Originally posted by WCrawford Dave C.'s constant claim of being busy is wearing very thin with me. If he has so little time to devote to the campaign, volunteer or not, then he should step away. You have no concept of the amount of hours the Circle spends on this campaign. We all have lives that we have to live as well, and 3/5 of the Circle have young children. Dave puts in an inordinate amount of time and should not be attacked because he can't do everything.