Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 biotech66 Jul 17, 2014 21:09:37	I'm liking the idea of the Adventure League more and more, but will DM's be left behind?  If I run a game as the DM, can I have a character who sat that game out get the rewards for that adventure?
#2 Alphastream Jul 17, 2014 23:15:10	I've been a fan of campaigns awarding DM experience and treasure to one PC each time they run it (never to the same PC twice). I haven't heard that AL will do that, but it would be nice.    Without that we end back where we usually have been for D&D, and that's worked okay. DMs basically have to take turns so that they are covered. Without replay it required taking turns "eating" an adventure. With replay it required finding more players willing to play (or play again, with a different character) plus a DM. There are pluses and minuses with both systems.
#3 thespaceinvader Jul 18, 2014 5:36:39	FWIW, I'd heartily support the DM getting level a character appropriately by running the module, and gain any rewards the party got.  It's been one of the best things about running Epic LFR, that I don't have to worry about my character getting behind the rest of the party when I run modules.
#4 Gunthar Jul 18, 2014 13:38:15	Yeah, it's a good way to help keep DMs engaged as a shortage of DMs is often the downfall of OP when you give up playing at times to run then end up behind everyone else in the process.
#5 Mirtek Jul 18, 2014 14:12:39	biotech66 wrote:
(Reply to #5) DavidArgall	Mirtek wrote:
(Reply to #6) Pauper	DavidArgall wrote:
(Reply to #7) DavidArgall	Pauper wrote:
#9 Noon Jul 20, 2014 21:57:57	Or the age of people who think no one else has a PC that can use an item, therefore they've come to believe it is theirs by right.
(Reply to #9) WelkerJ	Noon wrote:
#11 Alphastream Jul 21, 2014 9:14:08	Pretty much any language I've seen that applies credit for DMing does so voluntarily, if you choose. ("May" is a typical word used.)   DMs shouldn't be combatting players at the table. Any rewards to the DM should be separate, as if the DM's PC were at a separate table. Importantly, the DM should have a full pick from the adventure, rather than be confined to what the table earned... because otherwise DMs might push tables toward the result favorable to their own PC. ("Go left, because I want the sword for my PC and not the armor"). It isn't a problem if people have an incentive to DM. The trick is that advancing PCs without play isn't the great thing about D&D. The DM still missed out on playing... they just now are able to keep up with a group, making taking turns DMing and switching to DM every now and then very easy.   Again, several campaigns have had these rules without any issues at all.
(Reply to #10) DavidArgall	WelkerJ wrote:
#13 Skerrit Jul 21, 2014 11:05:11	DavidArgall wrote:
(Reply to #13) DavidArgall	Skerrit wrote:
#15 Adinell Jul 22, 2014 21:05:21	Perhaps another angle on this item is the conflict of interest perspective.   A DM, while not an advesary of the PCs, is expected to maintain a certain objectivity when running sanctioned events.  If the DM received experience that could be applied to his or her personal characters then a situation in which the party enters a room with hidden loot where the DM might not encourage the party to be observant before they leave suddenly turns into; "Are you sure you guys don't want to search the room before you leave?"  Heck, there are hundreds of ways a DM might "bend the rules" not so much to create an interesting situation for the party, but rather to maximize experience and loot to make it more profitable for his or her character who isn't even in the adventure.  Personally, I've always believed that PC awards are representative of character participation, not necessarily player participation (even though you can't have one without the other).   Also, what about DM's who prefer to organize, design and run games rather than play them?  If I prefer to DM and don't run characters, don't I lose out on the benefits that comes from a system that would award me PC experience when I don't have a PC?  Traditionally, DMs were awarded with items consistant with the role they fill in the group.  This has included free copies of adventures, DM screens, cards with pics and histories of NPCs and the like.   One other note, it states on the Adventurer's League (AL) site that Epics will primarily be used to kick off new adventures and Encounters will still be used for new and casual players.  This implies that both will likely start at or around 1st level and remain low level with Expeditions and purchased AL legal storyline adventures adventures like "Hoard of the Dragon Queen" being the avenue to progress to high levels.  To effectively play a campaign, you won't be able to "round robin" the DM's responsibilities.  Instead, that person will be making a long term commitment to being the DM.  If you're not interested in the campaign and only the low level or one shot adventures, then what does it matter what rewards the PCs get (much less the DM) since the PCs will likely never move beyond 4th or 5th level anyway?  You're best bet is to try and find someone who can enjoy being the DM for a campaign then rotate between campaigns, not individual adventures.
(Reply to #15) DavidArgall	Adinell wrote:
(Reply to #16) Solace	Shadowrun has a 'average' result award that the GM can choose to apply to his character, the first(and only the first) time he runs that Mission. Since SR doesn't really have levels, per se, this does allow his character to continue to grow.   It is completely optional. There is also a section for earning favor with contacts, and the gm gets whatever the party gets--there is a little notice that asks that the gm not influence the party to gain favor that he wants, but this is not overseen. That said, I personally have too much fun running to worry about what favor I may or may not get--I'd say due to dice rolls and/or party mishaps about half the time the generic rewards are better than what the party got anyway. Players almost never do what you expect.   As for certs, I'd imagine it'd be awfully easy to simply find a copy somewhere, print, write, sign a sloppy signature and call it good, if you really wanted to cheat. Simon got a wicked item from the epic at gen con? Sweet, copy...adjust...we all have them! Wooo!   Unless each and every game has results put into a database somewhere, which it won't, this is going to be a possibility of happening.   Or you get Kevin, who names ALL his characters the same name...
(Reply to #17) Skerrit	Solace wrote:
(Reply to #18) Pauper	Skerrit wrote:
(Reply to #18) DavidArgall	Skerrit wrote:
#21 pedr Jul 23, 2014 10:31:03	Note that certs do not seem to be a necessity for a character to have an item; the articles have indicated that they're a necessity to trade an item. I think the campaign appears to be designed on the basis that certs are pretty and so it's nice to give them out, but forging a cert is pretty pointless as the cheater could just amend their log sheet instead. Packs of certs and other bonus support material are free of charge to stores, as far as I can tell: Stores which sanction an event get sent the material from their country/region's WotC office by post. At least that's how the packs for Encounters and Lair Assault have always worked - D&D Organised Play is a marketing expense for WotC.
#22 Skerrit Jul 23, 2014 11:12:03	pedr wrote:
#23 Noon Jul 23, 2014 20:47:07	WelkerJ wrote:
#24 Jay_Ibero_911 Jul 24, 2014 4:25:33	Along with the cert issues, there is also the issue that with home play being unreported, anyone with access to a copy of the "home play legal" adventures can just whip up a log sheet with bogus info showing they "played" the adventure. This essentially becomes the go-to way of starting a character at higher levels, and with loot of the player's choosing (limited only by what shows up in those adventures). Since certs are only needed for trading, this is a much bigger vulnerability of the system then the certs are.
(Reply to #24) Skerrit	Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:
#26 Pauper Jul 24, 2014 8:39:23	I'd like to go along with Skerrit on this one and just say, 'Yep, everybody play nice and everything is going to be fine.'   Problem is, I don't believe it. What at one level seems a reasonable accomodation ultimately becomes expected operating procedure, and then starts to get pushed in various ways to be more 'effective' for the folks using the cheat.   Case in point, from the old LFR structure:   In LFR, an accomodation existed to allow characters to begin play at 1st, 5th, 8th, or 11th level. The justification for this accomodation was mainly to allow games to happen where the existing rule, that every character had to be in the correct 'level band' for the adventure as well as within a certain number of levels of one another, would otherwise prevent a game from happening.   You weren't supposed to use these rules to 'level up' an existing character, but people did it anyway because it was easier to do that than to create a new character whole cloth. Plus then they could justify keeping the items they earned in earlier play, making up for the item slots lost via the 'fast start' rules, even though you weren't supposed to do that, either. Then people started showing up with characters of levels other than the 'approved' quick-start levels, because that was what was needed for medium-to-high Paragon tables to happen. Reporting this behavior as cheating wasn't effective, because the people involved didn't see it as cheating -- they saw it as following the spirit of the rule that says, 'If a game can happen, do what you need to do to make it happen,' regardless of what that meant for overall campaign balance, whether it was fair to people who had played their characters organically, or basically any consideration other than the fact that there was no such thing as the 'LFR Police' to show up and tell us we were doing it wrong.   I tried to make the point that it wasn't reasonable to expect an organizer or store owner to enforce the rules of LFR without strong support from the campaign administration that doing so was considered a priority -- instead, the staff and the store owners seemed allied in the goal of letting whatever kind of play happened happen, simply because it benefited them both, regardless of whatever damage it was doing to the overall system.   I get that the 'don't be a dick' rule is basically in place because any more complex or structured system would require spending resources that the campaign simply doesn't have. That doesn't mean it actually works as an organizing principle -- because you can be called a 'dick' simply for trying to get everybody to play by the rules you all said you'd agree to play by.   -- Pauper
#27 tcreese Jul 27, 2014 14:51:25	WotC banned one of the players out here in Colorado Springs.  He collected/traded Living City magic item certs BIG TIME = back in the day.   Some of the 'sloppy signed' certs got him in a world of trouble.   What would be nice is for the module to contain a special DM cert = to apply to any 1 PC, and for the DM to gain the appropriate gp and xp (again for any 1 PC).  This could certainly increase the desire to DM...     And if WotC applies a rule that a traded cert can not come back into the possession of different PC for the same player = that would put a damper on cert whoring.