Note: Most of you will find this long and boring. I'm sure there are many other threads that warrant your attention. 
I often find my opinion at odds with others in the AL forums, and I think the difference is that my expectations for D&D were shaped by TSR, while a lot of other people's were shaped by Wizards of the Coast. Looking through several past editions of the rules, and reading the excellent article "Rule Zero Over the Years" I've come to realize there's a certain difference in tone beginning with Third Edition D&D.
I don't want to start any kind of "edition wars" here. I'm not saying my preferences or expectation are any better than anyone else's, but in some ways they are fundamentally different. In early editions of the game character progress was slower. The expectation was that it would take several adventures to level up. In fact, leveling up was not assured; sometimes you'd have to actually find an NPC of a higher level to train you for a period of weeks before you could gain the new level. Magic items were presumed to be relatively few and far between. The idea that parties of 2nd-level characters would own multiple magic items was considered to be a "Monty Haul" campaign. Characters had fewer hit points and more restrictions. Survival could be tough.
With Third Edition, the character classes all began using the same xp advancement chart, and the xp needed to gain a level was essentially cut in half. Player characters became more powerful with respect to their environment. Magic items were expected to be more plentiful.
I never played version 3.5 or Fourth Edition, so my knowledge of those is second hand. However, considering the public statements from convention interviews and blogs I've read it seems like this trend—making the PCs more and more powerful and giving them more "stuff"—continued. The starkest way I've seen it summed up was a comparison for DMs between 4e PCs and 5e ones. The PCs in 5e were considered "delicate little flowers" compared to their 4e counterparts.
To me, this was shocking. Fifth Edition player characters are practically godlike in their powers compared to, say, 2nd Edition ones. They have more hit points, higher maximum ability scores, tons of free spells (cantrips) which dole out lots of damage, amazing amounts of free healing available, and comparitively few restrictions (a wizard casting spells in armor? Inconcievable!).
But this seems to be what the player base wants. Indeed, on the AL forums I'm constantly seeing players asking for even MORE. Why can't my first level spell do 40 points of healing? Why can't my druid wear ring mail? Why don't I get any magic item I want, instead of what's in the adventure? Why aren't there several magic items in each adventure? Why does my character get such small rewards when I DM instead of actually playing?
But then I realized that Adventure League play isn't campaign play. A campaign—in my opinion—is an ongoing series of adventures that can last years. I ran a home campaign for 16 years, and the RPGA's Living City campaign ran for more than a dozen years. But Adventure League story lines are built to only last six months, and then you level out and start over. Sort of the difference between a TV series with slow, careful character advancement over many seasons, and a movie where the events taking place are the most important in the character's life, and everything happens within a couple of hours of screen time.
As it turns out, I prefer the TV series model. I liked playing my Living City characters year after year. I liked that individual players and characters could make a difference (I created the Bard's Guild, and a friend created the Harpers organization). I liked that any character could play almost any adventure (each encounter was tiered, not the adventure itself). Gaining a level actually felt like an accomplishment.
I'm sure most people, especially those who learned to play after D&D came to WotC, have different tastes and expectations. They like playing characters that, to me, seem like comic book superheroes. And that's OK. It's just not what I'm looking for.
I'll probably continue to play "casual play" D&D at my FLGS, at least until I can find a home campaign. And I might go check out a regional convention—they're held in February, May and September—with a newly-minted, just for "portability" PC. But I can't imagine that organized play as currently envisioned can ever really capture my interest and imagination the way "real" campaigns do. I'm just not ADHD enough.
Alright, now get off my lawn!
TheBreen wrote:
TheBreen wrote:
Mirtek wrote:
TheBreen wrote:
Skerrit wrote:
Id be happy with a Jenny Cameo for the new season. Its rare I have so much fun playing an npc. but she was a blast.