LFR Legal Player Options Discussion Thread

316 posts / 0 new
Last post
The list has been stickied, here. I've also copy/pasted it into the RPGA FAQ.

This thread is now the official discussion thread.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

As of October 31st, 2008, here's the current list of Classes and Races available for RPGA campaigns (including Living Forgotten Realms).

Also Genasi, Swordmage, Dark Pact Warlock, yes?
Also Genasi, Swordmage, Dark Pact Warlock, yes?

Nah. Those are only in the FRPG. What makes you think those would be legal?

I knew I was forgetting something. ^_^

I'll toss them into the list (along with Drow).

Mind you - this is only a placeholder. This will eventually get rolled into an LFR FAQ - and may yet make the RPGA FAQ as well.

I'm hesitant to list "Dark Pact" because that's just an option for an existing class that's already legal.

I'm also trying to decide what to do with "Spellscarred" as it's a Creation-Card unlock, but it's not really a class unto itself, it's a feat that unlocks a multiclass option.

Thoughts?
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

Just start a third grouping for special multi-class options.

Spellscarred - requires card.
Bola MC - Dragon
Net MC - Dragon
Whip MC - Dragon
I knew I was forgetting something. ^_^

I'll toss them into the list (along with Drow).

Yep, Drow too. Collaboration is a wonderful thing.

Mind you - this is only a placeholder. This will eventually get rolled into an LFR FAQ - and may yet make the RPGA FAQ as well.

I'm hesitant to list "Dark Pact" because that's just an option for an existing class that's already legal.

Yeah, I understood this to be sorta the discussion thread for what would get there eventually.

If the purpose of the list is to answer, 'Can I play foo' questions, Dark Pact either needs to be on the list or the page from FRPG listed along with the PHB page. I recommend the prior.

I dunno what to do with Spellscarred.

David
I would drop Orc, Shadar-Kai, and Gnome into a separate list, along with Spellscarred (Flamespeed and Sight of the Unseen traits), called "Unlockable with RPGA Rewards Cards". That way, a player scanning the list and missing the little red plus sign won't inadvertently think the race is legal and won't ask questions about other MM races.
John du Bois Living Forgotten Realms Writing Director, Netheril story area Follow me on The Twitter: @JohnduBois Follow my presence on The Intertubes: johncdubois.wordpress.com
Minotaur December 1 as a playable race as well.
Minotaur December 1 as a playable race as well.

Not going to add it until it's legal. I'll be giving this a sticky soon and editing it as new content is released.

Even adding a "coming soon" might lead to confusion.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

How's that "Special Options" section look?

I feel that's a good catch-all for "oddball" options, including Dark Pact (which, as I said before is still just a warlock) - but also gives me a place to list special Creation cards.

Note - I've no idea if I numbered the Promo Cards correctly or not. It's early morning, and I'm not braving the cold to pull my collection binder from the trunk just yet. I'll amend the cards later - either based off feedback here, or when I get back from running a game this afternoon.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

The Special Options section doesn't make the fact that you need a card for the races/spellscar as clear as it was in the original layout.

Perhaps you could do something like "Dark Pact (FRPG p42, openly available)" and "Orc (requires the use of Promo Card 3 as your creation card)"

Very useful list!

Running D&D Adventurers League events in Sheffield, UK from August. Contact me for more details.

The Special Options section doesn't make the fact that you need a card for the races/spellscar as clear as it was in the original layout.

Perhaps you could do something like "Dark Pact (FRPG p42, openly available)" and "Orc (requires the use of Promo Card 3 as your creation card)"

Very useful list!

Really? My hope was that listing the "source" as the Promo Card that would make it even more apparent that the "Dagger" note referring people to the bottom of the post (as was critiqued previously).

Perhaps if I just append "Requires" before the promo cards. . .

My goal is to keep it simple - I want people to know at a glance what is/isn't available, I'm afraid adding too many qualifiers ("Free, Unlocked, Requires," etc) will only muddle the list.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

Not going to add it until it's legal. I'll be giving this a sticky soon and editing it as new content is released.

Even adding a "coming soon" might lead to confusion.

How about a "Not legal at this time" group?
Personally, it would be a help if the list was alphabetical.
This little signature is my official and insignificant protest to the (not so new now) community redesign. The layout is lousy. The colour scheme burns the eyes. The wiki is a crippled monstrosity. So many posters have abandoned this site that some major forums are going days without posts. The 4e General Discussion board regularly has posts on the front page from two or even three days ago. This is pathetic. Since I have to assume Wizards has a vested interest in an active community I wish someone in charge would fix this mess.
Really? My hope was that listing the "source" as the Promo Card that would make it even more apparent that the "Dagger" note referring people to the bottom of the post (as was critiqued previously).

Perhaps if I just append "Requires" before the promo cards. . .

My goal is to keep it simple - I want people to know at a glance what is/isn't available, I'm afraid adding too many qualifiers ("Free, Unlocked, Requires," etc) will only muddle the list.

I agree that LG got caught up in categories and terminology (open, limited, closed, core, etc) so trying to avoid that is very sensible, even if my first reaction would be to do something just along those lines!

'Requires' would be a good addition in my opinion, though, and not leave any confusion. Alternatively, indent "Dark Pact Warlock (FRPG p42)" below Warlock in the Classes list, and retitle "Special Options" something like "Character options available via RPGA Reward Cards"

Running D&D Adventurers League events in Sheffield, UK from August. Contact me for more details.

How about a "Not legal at this time" group?

That's the group consisting of everything not on the list. ;)

Personally, it would be a help if the list was alphabetical.

Worth considering. I've got the list structured chronoligically at the moment - my hopes being that people who are looking for the latest innovation(s) need only check the bottom of the list.

I also like that this makes the list that teensy bit easier to update - just tack new options onto the bottom of the list. Though, that may just be me being lazy.

I agree that LG got caught up in categories and terminology (open, limited, closed, core, etc) so trying to avoid that is very sensible, even if my first reaction would be to do something just along those lines!

'Requires' would be a good addition in my opinion, though, and not leave any confusion. Alternatively, indent "Dark Pact Warlock (FRPG p42)" below Warlock in the Classes list, and retitle "Special Options" something like "Character options available via RPGA Reward Cards"

Hmmm. Good suggestions. I confess I'm not that happy with "Special Options" as a title regardless. Lemme tack "Requires" on there and see how it looks.

Oh, and for the record - I was a bit creeped out to find that I apparently have all the promo card numbers right. From memory. Sure, there's only 5 - but I wasn't TRYING to be right. I just tacked 'em on there "at random".

My geekdom scares me sometimes.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

Alphabetised would make it easier to read.

Having all the Races in one place, and all the Classes in one place would be better.

Groups seem to be:

Races
Classes (Basic Classes)
Class Options (New things like Dark Pact, Beastmaster, Tempest Fighter etc)
Multi-Class Options (Things like Spellscars, and the special Weapon MC paths from October Dragon)
Paragon Paths
Epic Destinies

The fact no one can obtain the last two yet doesn't remove the need to track them, Dragon for example has introduced a number of both already.
I've got the list structured chronoligically at the moment - my hopes being that people who are looking for the latest innovation(s) need only check the bottom of the list.

That works if most people are going to use this list to see what the latest thing added is. However, I think most of the time people are going to be looking if *insert race/class here* is legal, and it's easier to locate a specific thing if it is organized in some manner.

I, for one, kept missing the Drow listing even after you said you had added it because I kept looking between Dragonborn and Dwarf.

Also, I agree that the 'special options' header doesn't really scan well. How about 'Restricted Options' and put Dark Pact as a bullet or indent under the first Warlock listing? After all, its isn't any more special or restricted or odd than Swordmage or Genasi. Also a header for the multi-class options from Dragon, or else include them in the class header with a note?
This little signature is my official and insignificant protest to the (not so new now) community redesign. The layout is lousy. The colour scheme burns the eyes. The wiki is a crippled monstrosity. So many posters have abandoned this site that some major forums are going days without posts. The 4e General Discussion board regularly has posts on the front page from two or even three days ago. This is pathetic. Since I have to assume Wizards has a vested interest in an active community I wish someone in charge would fix this mess.
I usually avoid the "me too" posts, but I think alphabetical would work better.

Thanks for creating the list!

Allen.
Would it be worth including listings of Feats and Powers that are legal or would that quickly end up being unmanageable?

Kithran
Luruar POC
Would it be worth including listings of Feats and Powers that are legal or would that quickly end up being unmanageable?

Kithran
Luruar POC

I wouldn't want to be the one to manage it, I know that much, even in extremely vauge terms like "PHB - ALL, Dragon 364 - Illusionary Wizard Powers, etc"

Doesn't mean someone else couldn't pickup the reigns and run with it however.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

So... will we be adding Bard to the list in December? (10 level write up in the newest Ampersand article)
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
So... will we be adding Bard to the list in December? (10 level write up in the newest Ampersand article)

My personal suspicion is that it won't be allowed, but I've been wrong before.

My (limited) understanding is that it's up to Chris to decide. I'm sure the Admins will let us know how he rules as soon as they themselves know.

I'll work on alphabetizing this list when time allows (perhaps this evening).
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

logistical empty stub.
Cut and paste it to the top post and I'll edit this down to nothing to keep uncluttered.

David

My hero.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

You should pull off the reference to "in chronological order" and replace it with "in alphabetical order" in the introduction part of the first post. Had me confused for a bit.

How about:

"Race Options" for things like the DragonBorn addenda from the Ecology series. Should be placed directly below the "Races" section.

"Class options" for things like the Dark Pact Warlock, the Wizard Illusion powers, etc. Should be placed directly below the "Classes" section.

"Creation Card Options" for both the three creation card races, and the spellscarred options.

Just my 2 cents.
New Build: Tempest Fighter. Dragon 367 (Ampersand)
Why aren't Shifters on the list? They are defined in the back of the monster manual.
Why aren't Shifters on the list? They are defined in the back of the monster manual.

Because nowhere in the CCG does it say that they are legal. Please pay attention to the Character creation guide. There are several things in the monster manual that are not legal. The monster manual is NOT the PHB. Nowhere in the CCG does it state that the monster manual is open.

Can we add something to the list emphasising how important it is to READ the character creation guide? - Maybe adding a link to it?
Because nowhere in the CCG does it say that they are legal. Please pay attention to the Character creation guide. There are several things in the monster manual that are not legal. The monster manual is NOT the PHB. Nowhere in the CCG does it state that the monster manual is open.

Can we add something to the list emphasising how important it is to READ the character creation guide? - Maybe adding a link to it?

If you are going to have an attitude, leave me out of it.

I have the CCG printed off so don't have a heart attack over it. There is no reason for bold letters and underlined text when I just asked for information.

The Monster Manual is a core book, the Shifters are an legit race, so I don't see what your problem is. I only asked if there is a reason they are not playable. What is so bad about asking if it could be added. I asked a simple question, and there is no excuse to yell (caps) at me.
The CCG does not include the Monster Manual in the list of Player Resources, and therefore monsters in general, no matter if given a PC variant in the back of the MM, are not open for players in LFR, unless other documentation or Player Reward Cards give access.

As to why hasn't RPGA issued a Player Reward Card granting access to shifters for LFR? -- I don't know. To me, they belong in Eberron, but then I thought that about Warforged. Perhaps the orc and gnome cards were seen as more desired by players, and that was enough creation cards for the moment.

The situation may change when the Eberron Players Guide is issued if that book is included as a Player Resource for LFR.

Keith
Keith Hoffman LFR Writing Director for Waterdeep
The CCG does not include the Monster Manual in the list of Player Resources, and therefore monsters in general, no matter if given a PC variant in the back of the MM, are not open for players in LFR, unless other documentation or Player Reward Cards give access.

As to why hasn't RPGA issued a Player Reward Card granting access to shifters for LFR? -- I don't know. To me, they belong in Eberron, but then I thought that about Warforged. Perhaps the orc and gnome cards were seen as more desired by players, and that was enough creation cards for the moment.

The situation may change when the Eberron Players Guide is issued if that book is included as a Player Resource for LFR.

Keith

Thank you for answering my question, and thank you for doing it so politely.

Seeing the Warforged on the list left me wondering why did they make the cut before Shifters?
Thank you for answering my question, and thank you for doing it so politely.

Seeing the Warforged on the list left me wondering why did they make the cut before Shifters?

Simply because they were in Dragon Magazine first.

Why that is? I'd surpmise that Warforged needed more retolling than Shifters to become 4E adaptable. Shifter powers can easily be made encounter powers, and most of their other adaptations can be "houseruled" in line with 4E.

Warforged, on the other hand, needed a bit more work - including the options about them not making death saves, as well as clarification on what a living contrcut means in 4E, etc.

I'd also guess that warforged are a little more popular than shifters.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

Simply because they were in Dragon Magazine first.

Why that is? I'd surpmise that Warforged needed more retolling than Shifters to become 4E adaptable. Shifter powers can easily be made encounter powers, and most of their other adaptations can be "houseruled" in line with 4E.

Warforged, on the other hand, needed a bit more work - including the options about them not making death saves, as well as clarification on what a living contrcut means in 4E, etc.

I'd also guess that warforged are a little more popular than shifters.

Or they did it early so that people could convert their Eberron campaigns to 4th before the setting was actually released.

I personally would have preferred they released it as a separate document and not part of Dragon magazine. Still not happy with their inclusion in the Realms (and Artificers either)
The CG says:

Rules for Home Games
If you’re going to be the DM for a homebrew game, you can choose to follow any or all of the information in this guide. However, if you make your game a RPGA-sanctioned public event, meaning different players can rotate in and out of your sessions, you need to use two rules presented here: characters use Method 1 or 2 for ability scores and characters have use of RPGA Rewards cards (see below). The rest is up to you.

Does this mean the DM has the digression to allow me to play a Longtooth Shifter, because I really need that +2 Strength, +2 Wisdom?
Does this mean the DM has the digression to allow me to play a Longtooth Shifter, because I really need that +2 Strength, +2 Wisdom?

Sure, as long as it's a homebrew game. If you want to play LFR, then you have to stick to the races, classes, and options that Wolfstar listed above.
Sure. But note that the 'homebrew' section is in the general RPGA rules, not the LFR campaign rules. If you are doing a homebrew campaign you can do anything the DM wants, just like any other game you play with your buddies, and earn reward points for reporting the games. However, characters from homebrew games are not LFR legal.
This little signature is my official and insignificant protest to the (not so new now) community redesign. The layout is lousy. The colour scheme burns the eyes. The wiki is a crippled monstrosity. So many posters have abandoned this site that some major forums are going days without posts. The 4e General Discussion board regularly has posts on the front page from two or even three days ago. This is pathetic. Since I have to assume Wizards has a vested interest in an active community I wish someone in charge would fix this mess.
Then what's my options if my DM wants to do forgotten Realms.
Look at the first post on this thread.
Then what's my options if my DM wants to do forgotten Realms.

If it is a homebrew FR campaign, anything your DM allows.

If it is an LFR campaign, with the option of allowing your PCs to play at any LFR event, or allowing any other LFR player's LFR PC to play at your DM's game, then you need to follow the RPGA character creation guide, including everything in the LFR appendix.

Note, also, that in the first case your DM, if he sanctions your home game at all, will be doing so as a generic D&D game, probably D&D(FR), with active players earning 1 reward point per session. In this case, the DM can run anything, and any magic item, XP & GP caps are determined by the DM.

In the second case, your DM will be sanctioning and running the various LFR modules, gaining the players involved 4 points per session, but following the various RPGA/LFR rules for running the LFR modules, including treasure bundles and XP/GP caps.
If it is a homebrew FR campaign, anything your DM allows.

If it is an LFR campaign, with the option of allowing your PCs to play at any LFR event, or allowing any other LFR player's LFR PC to play at your DM's game, then you need to follow the RPGA character creation guide, including everything in the LFR appendix.

Note, also, that in the first case your DM, if he sanctions your home game at all, will be doing so as a generic D&D game, probably D&D(FR), with active players earning 1 reward point per session. In this case, the DM can run anything, and any magic item, XP & GP caps are determined by the DM.

In the second case, your DM will be sanctioning and running the various LFR modules, gaining the players involved 4 points per session, but following the various RPGA/LFR rules for running the LFR modules, including treasure bundles and XP/GP caps.

This is the best explained and most helpful reply that I have gotten on the Internet for as long as I can remember. (I can't say forever since I've been online since Windows 3.1, and those days are foggy now.) Thank you for detailing my options instead of passing the buck by referring me elsewhere.