I've been giving thought to the 'cannot share MyRe Adventures' clause in the CCGv1.9.
However, there's nothing against the writer(s)/DM(s) running for multiple groups; and to facilitate that Aglarondan character cross-pollenization I've set up the following database: Aglarondan MyRe Adventures.
The first field is the Level Range.
E.g. 1-4 or 4-7 etc. etc.
The second field is Name.
E.g. MyRe 1-1 The Hidden Kingdom.
The third field is Description.
Examples of module descriptions are found at the beginning of any standard module.
The forth field is Written by DM(s).
I'm praying that this one is self explanatory.
The fifth field is State-City.
E.g. Kentucky-Lexington; so that DMs are searchable by state & city.
The sixth field is Contact Information.
E.g. This is where the DM puts information on how to contact them to run their module for interested parties. Phone numbers &/or e-mail addresses certainly, but snail-mail addresses could go here too.
The seventh field is Guest Starring (Mod. rating 1-5 stars).
This field is where you put your character's name followed by the X number of stars (of 5) that you'd rate the module.
E.g. Wysiwyg (4 stars).
Personally, I'd love for a character to level up in mostly Aglarondan adventures. Hopefully this work-around the cannot share clause works for everyone and that there is lots of participation.
A Cormyr MyRe Adventures database would be cool too.
Cordially yours,
-Bander
“Nothing on the face of this earth --and I do mean nothing- is half so dangerous as a children's story that happens to be real, and you and I are wandering blindfolded through a myth devised by a maniac.” -- Master Li Kao (Tang Dynasty)
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/LFRSEUSA/
I did it out of respect for our Point of Contact (PoC), Michael Lee.
He seems to think that such a database of DMs who have written MyRe adventures (with their contact information so that you can get them to run their Aglarondan(/Cormyrian/Lururian et. al.) My Realms adventures for you) is a semantic loophole to get around the following: "It does not give you license to produce and distribute (for sale or for free) your own Living Forgotten Realms adventures."
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/lfrseusa/message/4534
I don't see it. I could hardly disagree more with Mike on this. Its comparing apples & oranges.
I often hear that RAW is not a "flaw" it is a design feature.
I would appreciate if Chris Tulach (or some other official WotC representative) would assure everyone that this database idea is 100% kosher, or help me see why it is not.
Thank you so much.
-Bander
“Nothing on the face of this earth --and I do mean nothing- is half so dangerous as a children's story that happens to be real, and you and I are wandering blindfolded through a myth devised by a maniac.” -- Master Li Kao (Tang Dynasty)
The DM still runs it, they aren't handing it out to folks, they aren't printing it for folks and they aren't digitally distributing the adventure (email, ftp, etc)
Does this mean that if I propose to run a MYRE for folks in my local group I can't send email on my yahoo group either? That seems silly.
He seems to think that such a database of DMs who have written MyRe adventures (with their contact information so that you can get them to run their Aglarondan(/Cormyrian/Lururian et. al.) My Realms adventures for you) is a semantic loophole to get around the following: "It does not give you license to produce and distribute (for sale or for free) your own Living Forgotten Realms adventures."
I would interpret his position as "You say that this database is about finding DMs who will come run their MyRealms adventures for you, but the database is really about finding DMs so you can ask them to just e-mail you copies of their adventures for you to run."
That strikes me as particularly cynical and imputing ill motives for no apparent reason, but if it's his Yahoo group, he certainly has the right to dictate what databases and files can be uploaded to the group.
If you don't think there's anything wrong with this database, I would feel free to put it up somewhere else.
I think the MYRE system, as designed by WotC, is based on a DM writing and running their mod a few times. The system is really not supposed to be about a lookup site where you can find players to play your mod, mods to play, etc., even if that doesn't break the non-sharing rules. The focus should be on the normal mods, with MYRE as an exercise in DM creativity for a very small scale run of that mod.
Personally, it would be awesome to share mods, post them, etc. I've done that, back when DME was undefined. But, I completely respect and understand what WotC is trying to do. This is a good first step and I think we will get a bit more license for freedom if this goes well. Several admins seem to be pressing that way, which bodes well.
I think the admin made good points on the regional Yahoo group in question. And, he comes off as a very reasonable guy. I have trouble thinking that he has anything but the interest of the players in mind.
Hey Alphastream1,
I agree, that Mike only has the interest of he hobby & players in mind, but I don't agree that his position on this issue is reasonable. (It seems as if he plays in fear of the Wrath of WotC and that's no way to game. There's something wrong with that relationship, if so.)
I thought that his issue with the database was the potential of its misuse, but he makes it clear that, that is not the case.
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/lfrseusa/message/4530
I think the MYRE system, as designed by WotC, is based on a DM writing and running their mod a few times. The system is really not supposed to be about a lookup site where you can find players to play your mod, mods to play, etc., even if that doesn't break the non-sharing rules. The focus should be on the normal mods, with MYRE as an exercise in DM creativity for a very small scale run of that mod.
Part of my issue is that your interpretation of what WotC intended (RAI) is that, that is not what WotC has written (RAW) and it has been drilled into everyone, repeatedly, to give credence to RAW.
That's why I would like an official word on this, so Michael doesn't have to be fearful that I am off, putting up an Aglarondan MyRe Adventures database somewhere else, and putting MyRe adventures at risk for everyone else because *I* am not willing to follow the rules.
-Bander
“Nothing on the face of this earth --and I do mean nothing- is half so dangerous as a children's story that happens to be real, and you and I are wandering blindfolded through a myth devised by a maniac.” -- Master Li Kao (Tang Dynasty)
Your proposed database troubles me and I will tell you why.
First, I don't know you (or at least under the name, Bander) and I have no way to judge if I can trust your stated intentions, not only for yourself, but on behalf of every DM who posts his or her Aglarond MyRealms Adventure in the database. How do I know you can speak on behalf the honesty and integrity of however many people that is? It is easy to type words on emails, boards, or websites, but it is deeds that count at the end of the day. Will you post a performance bond and require every DM who posts their MYRE info and contact info to also post a performance bond?
Second, what about the proposed database itself--how does it align with the proposed usage? In my D&D gaming experience, a DM might run their adventure for someone local, perhaps a neighboring town, or on-line. During Eberron MoH, a DM from Columbus came to our house in Springfield Ohio where a group of friends met monthly to play his latest DM Mark. We also ran some of published adventures as well. I don't recall anyone further away offering to bring their adventure to us. So if most gaming is local (ignoring the online gaming), but LFR is a global campaign with all regions open to all, why would not the proposed database be a compendium of all LFR MYRE that DMs in the vicinity of say Atlanta, GA, offer to run? I would only look for an Aglarond exclusive database if I had a burning desire to play only Aglarond adventures, but why would I care about Aglarond adventures written by a DM in say Oregon...when I am highly unlike to travel there, or vice versus? Perhaps, or perhaps the thought that, hey, I would like to have a Aglarond adventure or two to flesh out some home play or a game day, so I just check the database, get in contact, and there you go!
In short, your proposed database strikes me as particularly convenient to promote the forbidden distribution of My Realm adventures, you were warned off by the regional POC, and now you are appealing for someone higher in the food chain to overrule him. I will be very surprised if anyone up the food chain says, sure, go ahead, but I am no oracle.
Keith
I think Mike's primary concern here is that this is pushing the envelope of what is acceptable and has a great potential for abuse. Given this potential, it could force Wizards to take a step back from their current generosity regarding player input into the campaign, which is something none of us want to see happen.
why would not the proposed database be a compendium of all LFR MYRE that DMs in the vicinity of say Atlanta, GA, offer to run?
In which case a "location based" database should be a reasonable compromise (whether that location is city, state or online). It decreases the "temptation to secretly share mods" and fulfills some of the stated goals of what the OP wanted.
I think as a campaign we would rather see players saying, "Can someone run an MYRE for us," rather than "I have this MYRE. Who wants to play it?"
Thanks,
Shawn
I think as a campaign we would rather see players saying, "Can someone run an MYRE for us," rather than "I have this MYRE. Who wants to play it?"
That's unfortunate.
MYRE are the only thing that encourages people to travel to play D&D. Until now there has been no reason for me to travel interstate or even to another city to a convention, because I can play most of those games at home, or else I can play all of them at a local convention. People have said how they'd travel to play new adventures that could only be played in a particular city or state in LG and I'll admit I think its something that would be nice to have in LFR (although to a smaller degree of course).
Even on a smaller scale, there's little to no reason for me to go to a monthly Games Day considering I can just invite my friends over and play it at home for free. Although if someone who went to a local games day said "I just played this amazing adventure called X, except it was a MYRE so we can't play it at home" I might ask the organiser if they could run it again so I could experience it. If there was a database for a city where MYRE adventures were talked about and reviewed, I might travel to a different games day to play a particularly well reviewed MYRE.
Alol Shawn was sayign is that, while you can certainly do this, the intended purpose for them is for DMs to tailor things for their player.s For example, a friend of mine who is playign through SToS with me is playign a Dragonborn fighter. He said he wants him to grow to accept Bahamut as a legitimate deity. I could make a series of MYRE mods to help further that goal of his character. I have a series of PCs, all divine classes who worship Amaunator, who are from Luskan and are seeking to "bring the light" to that city. Someone could tailor a series of mods for that. Perhaps your group liked some story element in an LFR mod that wasn't strongly tied to the main story and wanted to follow that further. You coudl expand on it for them with the MYRE mods.
I'm sure you know all of this already, just sayin'.
2) Focus on the real world region, not the FR region. As noted elsewhere, no one really cares if a DM three states away has an adventure placed in the same region. What matters is what the MYRE options in your own neighborhood are.
3) All listing should be explicit offers to RUN the adventure for other groups, with information about how to contact the GM to set up a gaming session.
I think the 'do not distribute' clause is quite clear and it's intent is that no one other than the originating DM is permitted to run an adventure. Regardless of your intent, your announcement sounds (at first glance) like an attempt to circumvent that restriction and it is only when one reads the details that your real intent becomes (somewhat) clearer.
Personally, I'd just go about it this way.
Step One: Set up a list of Local DM's interested in DMing on request. On a global site, list them by region.
Step Two: Allow the DM's to maintain a list of adventures, perhaps in their profiles, that they are capable of running (with level information and blurbs).
Step Three: Within that list of adventures, have them list any MyRe adventures they have created (with level information and blurbs).
You end up with the same information you allegedly wanted (a list of DM's with MyRe adventures they can run) but the focus is now entirely on DMs willing to run a MyRe game on request - and as a bonus it is more generally useful to the community because it also means I can find a DM for [LFR adventure] if I need one.
Carl
Turning it into a system is where it rapidly gets mirky.
Keith