Post/Author/DateTime	Post
grahamdrew 02-16-06, 03:03 PM	http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ebmoh/20060210a (Note that the link on the RPGA main page is incorrect) Well, it looks like the campaign staff are restricting all ploymorph-like abilities. Great, I'm sure that will improve game ballance dramatically in march when the campaign is completely unplayable due to lack of mods. Am I the only one who feels like as valid as this issue may be, it shows a serious skew in priority on behalf of the campaign staff? Andrew Beard Pessimist Extraordinaire
Cainin 02-16-06, 03:47 PM	On the bright side, the annoucement did reference that it was part of the new ruling for the v2.0 campaign guidelines. Hopefully this will mean that they're actually go to post it some time soon. Magic of Incarnum, here I come.
grahamdrew 02-16-06, 04:14 PM	From the anouncement you've got to assume they'll post them on or before the 23rd (which lines up with the first day of Winter Fantasy 2006). Don't get me wrong, new campaign standards are a good thing, especially given the number of new source releases that haven't been addressed yet. I'm looking forward to Winter Fantasy, and being able to play Mark of Heroes there. However, for everyone NOT going to Winter Fantasy doing a level bump, throwing new option in your face, and giving you absolutely no way to use them kinda sucks. When everybody goes home next Sunday if things stay the way they are now (which is definitly possible, as it seems like the RPGA HQ gets swamped around the major consand don't have much development time) Mark of Heroes will be totally dead in the water until they release new mods. I just feel like the campaign totally lacks ballance of any form. The people at Winter Fantasy will play 4 new mods with new campaign standards and everybody else gets screwed for a while. Andrew Beard
jboerj 02-16-06, 05:01 PM	"unacceptable slow down of the play experience" Excuse me? I've played like three MoH modules and of them only one of them went over three hours and that was because it was a six hour mod written for a 4 hour slot. How in the world is Polymorph going to slow things down when games don't take that long in the first place? YMMV. As for the player's choices being too broad ... yeah, that's really a good reason for getting rid of something. While we're at it, let's disallow prestige classes entirely. Way too many choices for players to get through right there. I'm wondering "wtf" rather seriously right now.
Randall Montgomery 02-17-06, 01:08 PM	Am I the only one who feels like as valid as this issue may be, it shows a serious skew in priority on behalf of the campaign staff? Andrew Beard Pessimist Extraordinaire I was going to say EXACTLY the same thing. While I haven't had any experience of problems with polymorph spells (I play with a weekly retail group, and none of us uses them in any campaing), I can understand that their 'cart blanch' wording can be extremely problimatic. But seriously, is that more detrimental to the gaming experience than, say, not having a DMs Mark for nearly SIX MONTHS! Let's get the modules first, then maybe HQ can worry about the minor inconvienences like slowdowns in play.
Madfox11 02-18-06, 03:48 AM	You do realize that HQ of the RPGA probably has little direct impact on rules issues of game mechanics? During RPGA sessions people might note problems and inform R&D, but ultimately it is R&D that implements errata. All HQ did was decide to restrict the spells for Mark of Heroes. As for not having noticed the slow down, that is not too surprising since we are only now reaching the levels that it is going to matter. Note though that I don't think we ever finished a scenario in 3 hours...