Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 RCanine Sep 01, 2014 10:49:58	I played the first three D&D Ex Adventures: 1-1 (Gauntlet), 1-2 and 1-3 this weekend at Strategicon Gateway. I noticed that none of the adventures awarded story certificates like Living Forgotten Realms did, although we seemed to have earned a complete success on all three missions. Is that expected, or was there some kind of mix-up?   The-story-between-the-story (major quests, story awards) and interactives were what made me such a huge proponent of LFR. Since interactives aren't a thing anymore, story awards seem like the only thing we have to separate D&DAL from a home campaign. I'll miss them if they are gone.
#2 Skerrit Sep 01, 2014 14:06:50	Certificates are only awarded at those stores and conventions that get the packs that contain them. Otherwise you write the story awards/items on your logsheet. Same sort of stuff as LFR, but you do not need a piece of paper to get it (though they do exist). Also interactives do still exist. They are called Epics and the first one ran at Gen Con.
#3 RCanine Sep 01, 2014 20:23:22	Skerrit wrote:
#4 Jay_Ibero_911 Sep 01, 2014 22:04:31	RCanine wrote:
#5 RCanine Sep 01, 2014 23:44:19	Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:
#6 Veleria Sep 02, 2014 1:52:58	I absolutely agree that epics should be made available to conventions that meet reasonable table criteria. there should be some attempt to have them accessable to all 50 states rather thanthe current 4. I would drive many hours to play in one but currently the closest one is on the opposite side of the country from me. I just googled the distance at 960 miles from southern californai to PAX. This is an unreasonable exclusion of players who want to engage  the campaign storyline.
#7 Pauper Sep 02, 2014 7:55:34	See, I like the 'big convention only' Epic concept:   - It's a reward for your most committed players. As such, it also serves as an 'aspirational' event that drives interest in both the campaign and in the cons those scenarios are played at. - It's a chance for the campaign staff to interact with their most committed players, thus finding out from the people who are most invested in the campaign what they're looking for. - It's a chance to quickly and immediately gather results for campaign-changing events, rather than have interminable polls and surveys with huge turn-around times.   To paraphrase The Incredibles, when everything is special, nothing is. Epics are undoubtedly special.   -- Pauper
#8 Skerrit Sep 02, 2014 7:56:57	The current distribution of Epics does have strict criteria to be on the list to recieve an Epic, and those criteria are hard to meet, but part of that has to do with our staff limitations at the moment. That may or may not change in the future as the campaign develops. However, I would say that missing one adventure a year is not "an unreasonable exclusion of players who want to engage." As RCanine said, only the "most deeply invested hardcore fans" are going to these conventions. That is specifically who the Epics are written for. The invested players are most directly responsable for growing the community and its part of why they get to determine the critical events associated with this one adventure.
#9 RCanine Sep 02, 2014 9:09:55	Thanks for the response! I disagree with Veleria that the current policy is unreasonable, but I question the strategy. The convention epics are the types of events that have helped me convinced players that don't normally attend conventions to go. They're memorable and keep players invested in a way that episodic modules do not. I think it's less about being able to affect the storyline and more about being able to see it.   All I was hoping for is that my feedback will be heard. I'm glad it was.
#10 Skerrit Sep 02, 2014 11:59:33	Pauper wrote:
(Reply to #8) Mind_Flayer_Monk	Skerrit wrote:
#12 TiaNadiezja Sep 02, 2014 14:59:49	Skerrit wrote:
#13 Kalani Sep 02, 2014 15:13:58	Veleria wrote:
#14 RCanine Sep 02, 2014 15:22:03	Mind_Flayer_Monk wrote:
(Reply to #14) Mind_Flayer_Monk	RCanine wrote:
#16 Skerrit Sep 02, 2014 16:36:45	Mind_Flayer_Monk wrote:
#17 Skerrit Sep 02, 2014 16:44:44	This is a discussion we (the DnDAL Admins and WOTC) will be having for the next season and the season after that. In the end its Wizards' call and the Admins can't change it without their say so. I definately understand the idea that Gen Con should do something you couldn't do elsewhere (especially since you have all the DnDAL volunteers there to help). We managed to expand the Epic's offering to include few other shows unlike the original plan which was Gen Con. These other very large shows include rpgs but are not specifically OP/gaming shows but instead include alot of other things, so we have the chance to expand the offering to perhaps entice new players (or those that left) as well.   Maybe in the future we might release it to even more conventions, or perhaps release it after the season ends. At the moment it is not something we can offer but its something we do discuss.
#18 RCanine Sep 02, 2014 19:46:35	This sort of openness is really awesome, and really healthy for the hobby. Thanks for hearing us.
#19 Veleria Sep 03, 2014 1:09:57	My primary concern Is that while of these events are used to determine important moments within the campaign those events are not shared with the gaming public. In the case of the gen con epic we have no idea what events transpired and how they affect the campaign. I can understand using those larger venues to determine the flow of the campaign however if these pivotal events are intended to shift the direction of the campaign for all players would make sense that all players would have someway to understand what transpired. It's not a matter of rewards, rather it's a matter of knowing the events that shaped my characters life. I understand that currently you do not have a framework with which to share these with the majority of the campaign game in public but it would be really great if there was someway we could experience these events if only to gain an understanding of what happened this is not about special loot it's about pivotal events being completely unknown to those they affect. It is especially frustrating when these events will be referenced in later mods out of context and we will not understand what they mean. I'm not asking to drive the direction of the campaign merely to be able to follow at a safe distance.
#20 Skerrit Sep 03, 2014 7:20:44	Veleria wrote:
(Reply to #12) Pauper	TiaNadiezja wrote:
#22 Uthrac Sep 03, 2014 13:01:25	This thread has gotten a little off track (now about Epics), but I will chime in ...   GenCon had limited special certs (i.e. Play a Cleric of Kelemvor!), bonuses for wearing your faction shirt to the epic, special rolls for goodies, etc. THESE ARE ALL awesome, special, unique things to reward those hard core players who are able to make the big events. Bravo!   Multi-table events do not exist outside of the Epics. These have always been a huge draw for smaller regional conventions. They cannot be effectively played with a small group, and are exponentially more fun when you can muster many, many tables.    I understand the "need something special for the big guys," but there's a disconnect in that the little guys don't get something good to offer and draw folks out to give a public appearance of "look at all of the people playing 5e."    What I would love to see is more of the "special extras" given away at the big conventions, but the "multi-table adventures" being made available more broadly to the regional adventures. (Oversimplifying: Come to GenCon, get a bonus point with your faction and a chance at a special cookie!)   I'm not adverse for special stuff to entice big conventions. However, I'd like to see "multi-table" events be made available for more venues who can, simply put, host multi-table events.   Thanks for listening, and hopefully future story areas will include multi-table events on a broader distribution, to support the numerous regional conventions around the world.
#23 Alphastream Sep 03, 2014 16:07:22	On the subject of Story Awards, I'm a big fan of them. I think they can help reinforce the connections PCs make with different organizations, reminding them to cash in on them (or suffer from them) when the time comes. The admins can also share the list of awards with new writers so they can trigger off of them. A certain deal with a fey prince comes to mind as a good example from the EPIC...   That isn't the only way to do it, though. The current system really is about certificates as a reward for public store/convention play by enabling trading. That doesn't fit a story award (I don't think it makes sense to trade most story awards). While you could have a handout that isn't a cert but is a story award, it could create confusion. And, while I really liked the story awards in Ashes of Athas, I also met players that felt it was too much paper to track. So, I can see it both ways.    If we don't have story award certs, I would like to see a more formal section in the Rewards for an adventure that state any messages that players should be writing down in their log sheet. For example, a player that makes the deal in the EPIC should absolutely have noted that in their log sheet.      Speaking of EPICs, I wanted to hold off on commenting until I had experienced both Gen Con and PAX. Yep, we had new players at all of these. And, that's okay. I saw some super-excited first time players that will absolutely want to come back to conventions because they could play a special con-only event. Some of those intend to go to more cons to have more ways to play the content (special and non). That's really good. It means that special events really can encourage con attendance. I also met players that came to the con just because of the EPIC, though most came because they wanted 5E and AL and the EPIC was part of the equation helping them decide to go.    It's a tough choice making EPICs exclusive. AL could decide not to have anything special. That's sort of like having everything that ran at PAX and Gen Con except the EPIC. Is the convention better for that? I am pretty sure Wizards, after Gen Con and PAX, would say "absolutely not". The convention and the AL program really seemed to benefit from the excitement and buzz around the special event. The nature of the event seemed to really heighten the experience, creating greater energy and interest.    EPICs could be convention premieres and then have some lesser way of running. For example, they could be multi-table optional but then also have a special premiere-only component (maybe rewards, maybe an interactive element, etc.) Something that still makes the premiere interesting but then allows it to still see wider play. I'm not sure it is worth the headache from an authoring perspective. I know opinions will differ, but right now I see the exclusivity of EPICs as a net positive for the AL, for Wizards, and for the RPG hobby.    One thing that I do think needs addressing is the benefits to judges. We want our best judges running these events, but judges are also often our hardcore players. At PAX many Gen Con judges and some local judges wanted to play the EPIC. They were not allowed to do so. That's tough on judges, who are actually there and are big fans. It may be worth tweaking the judge rewards for such events to be greater so that players who are great judges continue to see the benefits of judging the EPICs.
#24 CoreyartustheSecond Sep 03, 2014 21:08:27	Seems like it could be easy to include a pre-made scantron response form as a page in the Encounters and Expeditions pdfs for specific feedack regarding the results of players endeavors in their adventures.  Those mailed back before a specific date after release could have their results tallied swiftly by machine at HQ and end up helping to determine the direction of the campaign.  The adventures all expire after a specific date anyway.  That seems almost simpler than writing an epic, and engages a wider pool for player response without disaffecting players who can't participate in the Epics. All it requires is an extra page and a scantron machine.   It also seems that it would be incredibly easy to incorporate specific rewards exclusively for weekly Encounters play only, tacked into adventures themselves which cannot be awarded for play at tables at non-store Gamedays or Cons.  That's as simple as writing in a paragraph in the mod.  Sure, the characters may end up with them at a con's table in the future, but they can only acquire them by attending a specific kind of play.  What's good for the Epic's goose could be even better for the Encounter's gander.  And we have been told that certs themselves are not necessary for anything but trade anyway... (Unless that's changed for some reason regarding Epics...  Which would be contradictory to everything I think we've been told... )   There are potentially easy solutions to fix player frustration regarding lack of Epic play availability if you can empower non-Epic players with other methods for feeling as involved and not marginalized.  There are benefits to playing each type of available adventure, AL just needs to expoit what those are and thrust them into the forefront making each one's unique qualities rewarded as much as the others.  Isn't it time to stop thinking of Epics as a "top shelf play opportunity" (and rewarding them as such) and recognize them as simply another ingredient in the mix?  Perhaps the frosting to the flour, but you can't make a cake without all the ingredients.  I worry about the potential perception that the "most committed" players are the ones that play in Epics.  The most "hardcore", yes, the ones that can afford the expense, yes, but their attendance does not by default make them the most committed.  That's a matter of conjecture formed using standards that I think may be slightly colored by the nature of corporatism and pre-internet standards of the features of cons...
#25 Veleria Sep 03, 2014 23:39:41	I do believe that it is good for the premier events to have the honor of deciding the fate of the plot options. I would just like t participate in a telling of the story even on a smaller scale. even a normal single table eventthat follows the cosen path of the adventure might be interesting. Sort of you were there as the B team fighting for what not but in support of the A team. I personally am not a fan ofthe Battle interactives but I am in the minority where I game so I feel it important that those who do like tem have the opportunity to play.