Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Nevvur Jun 03, 2015 21:22:54	The exchange of wealth is only permissible for spellcasting services. Can a group pay the spellcasting organization in advance, and have the spell performed at a later time? For example, a player knows he won't be able to make it to the game for a few weeks, but he wants to make sure his friends have a Raise Dead banked, in the event they can't cover the cost on their own.
#2 TheBreen Jun 03, 2015 21:35:22	Nevvur wrote:
#3 Nevvur Jun 04, 2015 9:35:48	I'm not convinced that negates the idea. The players are all present at the time of payment, just not the time of receiving the service, and there's no language (I could find) that explicitly states the service must be received at the time of payment.    I understand the intent behind the passage (and organized play in general), and realize that this plan creates an issue of character portability. Honestly, I wouldn't allow a drop-in player to bring a 'Raise Dead voucher' to my table, and I would warn the players at my table such a downpayment is not portable to other locations. However, as long as it is bought (and eventually used) only at my table, I see little good justification to deny it.
#4 imaginaryfriend Jun 04, 2015 9:39:38	Nobody is likely to stop you, just make sure you manage player expectations well.
#5 Pauper Jun 04, 2015 10:55:50	My own feeling is that such a program violates the spirit of the AL rules on sharing wealth; currently, a lower-level character might be torn between purchasing plate armor and saving up that gold for a raise dead spell in the event of an untimely death. My 14th level character (for whom the cost is relatively minimal) can't buy that character new armor so she can save her money for the spell if needed, but bankrolling the raise dead would allow the same effective result.   I feel this practice should be discouraged.   -- Pauper
(Reply to #5) QwertyAzerty	Pauper wrote:
#7 TheBreen Jun 04, 2015 13:49:21	One can rationalize it, I suppose, but it's clearly against the intent of the rule and to me it feels like cheating.
#8 Kalani Jun 04, 2015 14:17:16	There is no provision that would allow you to pre-pay for spellcasting services anywhere within the ALPG, or the FAQ. Based on conversations with the admins on similar topics - this would be disallowed. In order to pay for spellcasting services, you must be at the same table at the time the spellcasting service is required.
(Reply to #3) Coredump00	Nevvur wrote:
(Reply to #7) Coredump00	Pauper wrote:
#11 Enevhar_Aldarion Jun 04, 2015 19:12:28	Here is the problem that some people seem to be overlooking with this issue. In Organized Play, when the player is not there, none of their characters are there either. This is true even when running through the published adventures if you are doing it as AL-legal characters. Sure, it may seem weird that someone's character goes missing in the middle of a dungeon when that player is not there, but that is how OP works. It is not a home game where an absent player's character can tag along with the party as an NPC or something. No player - no character. No character - no money.
(Reply to #11) Nevvur	If I may change the direction of the conversation just a bit, let's pretend multiple players are not involved. At the heart of my original post (as per the title) lies the question, can you only receive spellcasting services at the time of payment? Or can you pay for spellcasting services in advance? I do not feel the ALPG explicitly forbids the latter.
#13 Enevhar_Aldarion Jun 04, 2015 21:33:26	Nevvur wrote:
#14 Nevvur Jun 04, 2015 22:08:50	That he should not pay in advance (for the reasons you describe) is not the question. It's whether he can or cannot due to restrictions in the ALPG.   I can describe a few scenarios where the player/character might want to do so. Most of them are based on character personality, so the metagame reasons that he should not are irrelevant. So the question again in other words, must I come up with some arbitrary reason for a temple to refuse gold in exchange for services rendered in the future?
#15 imaginaryfriend Jun 04, 2015 22:27:43	If you want to stay strictly within the rules, yes, you will need some arbitrary reason to deny gold in exchange for services rendered in the future. I hear the new god Ae El considers time to be split up in unrelated slices where it is impossible to let one slice affect another.   Of course as I said, nobody is likely to stop you and if there is a consistant party running thrugh episodic adventures with just the chance of havng someone miss a session. I fail to see how it would hurt anyone or truly damage the sanctity of the Ae El tenets.
(Reply to #14) Pauper	Nevvur wrote:
(Reply to #16) Coredump00	Pauper wrote:
(Reply to #11) Coredump00	Enevhar_Aldarion wrote:
#19 Mirtek Jun 05, 2015 9:58:52	Coredump00 wrote:
(Reply to #19) Nevvur	Mirtek wrote:
(Reply to #19) Pauper	Mirtek wrote:
(Reply to #4) Nevvur	imaginaryfriend wrote:
(Reply to #19) Coredump00	Mirtek wrote:
(Reply to #21) Coredump00	Pauper wrote:
(Reply to #22) Coredump00	Nevvur wrote:
#26 Mirtek Jun 06, 2015 1:15:32	Coredump00 wrote:
#27 Coredump00 Jun 06, 2015 17:40:10	Hey, I get it.  You believe that following every single rule every single time is more important than bending one occassionally to increase the enjoyment of the players.  You seem to believe that if you bend even one rule, (lets say not screwing over a player for car trouble by not letting him get the magic item eventhough he has been playing the adventure for months), means you might as well be handing out Vorpal Swords and +3 armor for free.   But the real world just doesn't work that way.  Most people (DMs and players included) are fully capable of making reasonable judgement decisions between tweaking or bending a rule on a rare occasion, versus ignoring Raise Dead or Storyline restrictions.  It really isn't an 'all or nothing' situation as you seem to believe.