Any idea when the DMG material (such as the eladrin and aasimar) will be available in AL? Does anyone have any idea?
Other than the DMG material that is already allowed (magic items given as treasure, tactical combat, the death domain if you have the special certed cleric of kelemvor, etc...) none of it will be allowed in this season. Its possible future seasons might use material from the DMG, but you will have to wait for future updates of the DnDAL PG (which occur twice yearly at the beginning of new seasons) before I can comment on specifics.
Greg Marks
DnDAL Associate Resource Manager
Greg,
Does that include the option to Mark opponents? Is there a specific prohibition against DMs including this ability in their AL games?
Skerrit wrote:
OnlyNerdStuff wrote:
Based on the current wording of the ALPG, anything listed as a variant rule or under a header that describes 'Options' would not be usable in AL: "D&D Adventurers League play does not use any other optional or variant rules as presented in the Dungeon Master's Guide." This would include the alternate races (listed under 'Creating New Character Options'), the mark rules (listed under 'Action Options'), and basically everything in Chapter 9: Dungeon Master's Workshop ("This chapter contains optional rules that you can use to customize your campaign....")
Basically, it doesn't look like the DMG will be at all useful as a player resource, though DMs will get a good amount of use out of much in Chapter 8, including exploration rules, social interaction and NPC reaction rules, and advice on when to apply Advantage or Disadvantage or when to award Inspiration.
There is a fair amount of material in what I'd consider a 'grey area', though -- stuff that isn't obviously marked as a variant or optional rule, but doesn't look like the sort of thing an AL DM would be prepared to adjudicate, such as players buying siege equipment or poisons. As an AL DM, I'd assume that stuff isn't allowed unless specifially given guidance that it is.
--
Pauper
A positive of no optional rules is it allows a player to move from table to table and know what to expect. For my local gaming group, the DM implemented flanking before the DMG came out. It's not allowed but I'm not going to complain. The only difference was when I ran a session when he took a week off I informed the group there was no flanking as AL rules prohibited optional rules.
Our group has two DMs who are already planning on which of these optional rules to start implementing. I really want to tell them that they can't but I'll just be laughed at "What? You scared you won't be able to handle the extra challenge?" or something. Yes, they're like that.
I do like the marking rule and it, combined with the Sentinel feat, brings the 4e Defender role back into play. However, that rule doesn't get limited to any particular class, so if I have a Sorcerer with a bent for swinging swords, he'll be able to mark just as easily and well as anyone else, which is just weird.
I was wondering about this last night, as I just picked up the DMG and started reading through Rise of Tiamat.
There is (at least, so far) one place in RoT where it tells the DM to use the DMG treasure tables to add magic items to a treasure hoard.
Legal because it's in the AL-approved adventure, or not legal because the DMG is not a valid source for AL play at this time?
Edit: Re-reading the section it says to "add potions, scrolls, and magic items at your discretion." Or roll on the tables in the DMG to generate a hoard.
Not legal at this point, but it is a topic we are discussing.
Update: We recieved some guidance from Chris Tulach = "Treasure needs to be specified (in the adventure). There's no treasure for random encounters unless the adventure specifically calls it out." Thus (as an example) there is no random rolling. If an adventure said do random enocunters and for one of them give out a potion of healing, you could give that specific potion as treasure. If it says do random encounters and if you need some treasure, roll random, that is guidance for a home game and does not apply to the DnDAL.
No random rolling for loot, got that.
So for treasure "specified" in the adventure, if the adventure says "the chest contains 1000 gp, 50 pp, and two magic items" then for an AL game I just give them the coins because it doesn't specify which magic items. (argh I hate sounding nitpicky, I apologize)
Correct, unless the extra file handed out to the store specifies the 2 magic items (and then you would likely have certs for them as well).
OnlyNerdStuff wrote:
How does "other" include allowing every optional rule? It only means that the only optional rules allowed are ones clearly specified as allowed and all others are disallowed. Why not back up a sentence and read the entire paragraph.
The variant rules for “Playing on a Grid” in the D&D
basic rules and Player’s Handbook can be used if you
and your players wish. Dungeon Masters should feel
free to use the Dungeon Masters Guide to help run
games if they so choose. However, D&D Adventurers
League play does not use any other optional or variant
rules as presented in the Dungeon Master’s Guide.
There you have it. The only variant rules allowed are for "Playing on a Grid". No other optional rules allowed. It's not a tough argument at all to make that AL play doesn't allow any optional or variant rules from the DMG. It's pretty easy considering that's exactly what the English text of the rules states.
Undrhil wrote:
bgibbons wrote:
Pauper wrote:
Man, I wish I could go to your house for Christmas.
"Feel free to take something from the snack table. However, don't eat the last macaroon -- I'm saving it for Linda."
(after fifteen minutes)
"Why did you take the last macaroon?"
"You said feel free to take something from the snack table."
"But I said not to take the last macaroon!"
"You also said 'take something from the snack table'. That literally has no meaning other than, 'take whatever I want from the snack table'."
"...."
--
Pauper
Pauper wrote:
In English, words like "however" and "but" exist in order to negate or put limits on what came before. "I love you but you're a Raiders fan," means "I don't really love you. Your being a Raiders fan prevents that." (I'm sure Raiders fans hear this all the time.*) 
The plain-English meaning of the AL rules is quite clear. You cannot use any other options or variant rules from the DMG other than "playing on a grid". If you like, you may use things that are NOT listed as variant or optional rules. I find it difficult to believe that a native-English speaker could argue otherwise with a straight face.
*Fans of the silver-and-black should not be offended. I'm referring, of course, to the fictional purple-and-orange Podunk Raiders of Podunk, CT. 
bgibbons wrote:
bgibbons wrote:
I have had similar discussions at my table. I have always answered such discussions with the following statement (or a variation thereof):
"Yes, I agree. It makes a lot of sense to allow [something]. However, regardless of how logical it is, organized play strictly prohibits me from altering encounters/rules/etc and as such, no matter how much I agree with [something], I must rule against it. At least until such times as we are given instructions that [something] is now allowed".
Examples of which have been:
- Flanking granting advantage
- Swapping out monsters for weaker equivalents (replacing Assassins with Knights or guards for example)
- Allowing players to loot enemy monsters of their gear (for more than one session).
- Rolling random magic items as per the instructions in hoard of the dragon queen/rise of tyranny. In this particular situation, Skerrit has clearly stated that we should ignore those rules and as such, reduce the treasure awarded respectively.
Pauper wrote:
Interesting... I *like* DM empowerment for a local level. I can understand wanting all the DMs at a Con to be doing the exact same, but I think its good DMs at the LGS have some flexibility. I think it should be within reason (we are trying to stay simple for new players) but being able to adjust to the desires of the play group is aa pretty powerful tool. And lets not forget, the *vast majority* of AL players will never get to a Con.
And even for games at cons, or for players going to a Con, the only real effect is what state the character is in when it gets there. If we both sit down at the convention with a 7th level character; does it matter that I got there using Flanking and you did not? Heck, does it matter that I was given a ton of 'bonus' XP and should really only be 5th level?
The only thing that really matters is following the character generation rules, the magic items, and possibly the amount of gold.
Now, it *could* lead to some confusion... if I expected to get more bonus XP and be able to use flanking. But that is a matter of communication. My DM should have warned me that he is doing some 'alternate' things. Assuming I know better.... what difference does it really make?
bgibbons wrote:
Pauper wrote:
I have a ecific question about one thing in Chapter 8 of the DMG (which, the consensus seems to be, is legal for DMs in AL). Are we allowed to use the "option" for players to handle the awarding of inspiration? And if so, what about the part that allows the DM to gain inspiration?
I don't know how much more clear we can be.
With the the exception of "playing on a grid" we cannot use any of the optional or variant rules from the DMG. None, nadda, zero, zip.
If it is listed as an 'option' or a 'variant', then it isn't used in AL yet.
Much of what is in Chapter 8, however, is not listed as optional or variant rules -- setting DCs for things players come up with that aren't covered in the adventure, when to award Inspiration, the rules for social interaction, object AC and HP, and many other things. These are exactly what the ALPG is referring to when it suggests that the DM use the DMG to help run games.
--
Pauper
I'll note that there's a new blog post which is very clear and specific on this subject, as well as being pretty explicit as to what the campaign's mindset is.
I hope that the next iteration of the ALPG reflects that mindset, as the current one really doesn't.
It seems to reflect it to me....
Coredump00 wrote: