Community

Feb 23, 2010 -- 8:11AM, imaginaryfriend wrote:

If you play with a group of random  gamers at a convention, do you remember their characters from the past?  How often do your realize IC whether or not that character has played  in previous adventures? Can you remember if their war stories are made  up or if they truly happened? 

If you play with a group of close  friends that like the same play-style, how often do you think they would  change to completely new PCs? Would you want them to keep playing a PC  even though they really hate it because that is the only way they can  keep gaming with your group? Do you expect they will still  rebuild/change their character even if they like it and the shared  story?

Would letting people start PC's at higher levels truly  mean a big increase in the number of people that don't know how to play  their chars? If so, why? And why do we have people like that now, while  they work their way through the levels? Do you think people don't  already speed level (or hold back) their PCs to play with certain  people?

It depends on the campaign in question.

In L5R (Heroes  of Rokugan), you create a single PC and you play that PC. You find a  person or two that create more than one PC (usually because they are  that kind of person or because they haven't really liked their  "primary"). You also see some people start to make a few PCs around  their second or third year of play because they can no longer play rank 1  adventures. But, primarily, the experience is all about playing out the  story for one PC.

Spycraft is the same way. You really just  have one PC. The rules for creating secondary PCs are there just to help  make tables for new players. DMs get XP they can apply, but it is  really just to encourage play. Play numbers are/were low enough that  there really couldn't be many issues from the rule. (If that were not  the case there would have been huge issues).

In LG, for  many/most, the experience of LG was in traversing the storyline  (especially regional, unless you had a really poor region) with one PC.  As time passed you accumulated more PCs, but your primary was THE  primary. Later, as the primary outgrew the lower adventures, you might  see that second PC develop enough identity to really start claiming  another region (if you traveled) or a core arc, or even (especially in  years 5 and beyond) an arc from the region of your primary PC.

In  LFR, the initial offerings were very strange. On one hand, you had  these very low story/setting initial adventures scattered all over the  realms. On the other, it was the default campaign and we are all ready  to play our one PC. Then you realize how quickly you level... you level  out of a band before the next one is released... and there are so many  low-level adventures plus the ability to replay that you end up with  tons of PCs. Tons of PCs, low story, no regional identity, low RP...   Now, LFR today is different than at the beginning, but the underpinnings  still define and plague player behavior.

In LG I could  absolutely tell you what most of the Northern Virginia crowd had played  and when. I could tell you stories about the other PCs and what tables  they played with. For any premiere mod I could remember which tables  failed, which ones blew it away. I still remember some of it, but I  certainly remembered it for several years. I recall the all-wizard table  at an interactive and which one died. I recall the rogue in mod X that  snuck in and did the cool thing. Etc., etc. I recall four stories about  Lamont the wizard being disintegrated even though I was only present at  two of them. There was a ton of shared memory.

In LFR, because  of the structure of 4E and the campaign, most players barely know which  PC they are playing with, let alone which mods they have played and with  whom. It is a very disposable "in-the-moment" play. You have so little  chance to be emotionally connected to the plot of any given adventure.  You have no alignment rules really shaping behavior. You have no  meta-orgs driving connections. You have very few connections to NPCs,  places, regions. You have no notable allegiances. You don't have a guess  as to where the story in any given region will go.

With no  disrespect meant, Adventuring Companies like team Wootzor are a clear  indication of this. They are known for playing hard and being loud, not  for anything they do IC. Most AdCos aren't loud, and thus have no reason  to be known. (And, really, what could the do IC?) In contrast, the  adventuring companies in LG had the capacity to reach near-legendary  levels. In Geoff the deeds of PFLOG, Boomkegs, Gryphons Wrath, etc.  these were cemented into the campaign. What they did could actually  become part of the campaign.

Even in the current LFR  environment, very few of the players I play with would change out their  PCs in a significant way. At level 1 or 2, probably. But I think most  are wanting to play out a PC. You can easily make a new one. Those that  want to can do so fairly easily, since the story isn't very PC-centric.  There are enough play opportunities in our area that it isn't so hard  for them to just start a new PC if the first doesn't work out. Also,  because you end up with so many PCs (four being a big number to me), it  is sort of expected that you will have some favorite and some not-so  favorite PCs. And, the favorite status can shift. A crappy warlock can  get an article in Dragon and suddenly be almost a striker and be fun.  There are so many rules that it is fairly hard to be on the  wrong path - you have to really build poorly.

Similarly, people  that DM all the time have to understand the implication that they won't  be leveling as often. This is the perfect reason for them to encourage  others to DM. But, in the end, if you love DMing you DM. If you don't,  you don't. Getting free leveling doesn't really solve the DM equation.  It adds some incentive, but it also has many negatives. It is easy for  DMs to only DM an adventure they want for their PC. (Sorry, I need item  X, so I have to run this adventure on high...) It does result in players  knowing their PCs less. Skipping a level isn't horrible, but combined  with a large stable of PCs it does lessen how well a PC will be played -  especially a complex one.  When I haven't played one of my leaders in a  while I play it less effectively, especially if I leveled since last  playing... "wait what is that new power I have and what does it do?"

In  the end, the rules shape the campaign. LFR is and has been conflicted.  It wants to be disposable play so it is completely approachable. It  wants to have more plot than even the Elturgard series had. It wants to  have rich story and deeply involved and linked adventures, but also tons  of regions and lots of different writing directors. It wants to be  centralized, decentralized, and player empowered.

To me, D&D  Encounters, published modules, Dungeon, and other stuff already  provides disposable play where you can bring some PC of level X and just  play. I want a living campaign. Many things can make a living campaign.  But, what rings true to me is that the best aspects of a living  campaign involve a shared story. The story is the central bit that  everything else revolves around. That story is best when played with the  same PC and in order. It isn't that you can't do it another way but it  isn't as much fun.

If we really think DMs need to earn XP, then  they should only get XP for low, regardless of tier, and they can only  take more gold. They should earn their choice of story awards, but  cannot earn any story award that is unique (earned by only one PC at the  table). It prevents abuse. Similarly, retraining should be by core  rules, and any non-core retraining should be once per calendar year once  the PC has become third level.

But, mostly, the flagship RPGA  campaign should be all about story that immerses. If that is LFR, it  should try to make Elturgard (and better) happen on a regular basis. The  number of regions should be shrunk. The writing directors should submit  story arcs to a higher admin who works only on story and coordinates  links and pacing and it should all ensure that you aren't lost and  feeling like a mercenary (unless you want to be one).

Feb 24, 2010 -- 11:43AM, Thanlis wrote:

Feb 24, 2010 -- 11:34AM, Mind_Flayer_Monk wrote:

The existing player base will either suck it up and keep playing or they will bring some of their friends into the campaign (at the same level their current characters are at).  If you have one person from a home game that plays some LFR, he/she can invite one or two of the people at the home game to play with them for a few games at a higher level where its more fun for many. 

Or they'll quit playing, or they'll give it a try and slowly stop playing over time. If a significant portion of the player base does either of those two things, then either the influx of new players will make up for it, or it won't. I'm not sure we really know.

Two thoughts. One, that it isn't just about the on/off switch of staying or quitting. It is also about the quality of the experience. When you are having a great time, you work hard to make it better, to DM, to recruit others, to man gamedays and cons, etc. When it is lame, you stop contributing. While I really like Spycraft, when there were some changes I didn't like it took the wind out of my sails. Even with the campaign asking me to help, I couldn't motivate myself to contribute.

Second, it is all about how much someone wants something. If you DM for group A but would like to be playing with this or another group, then you have to either convince people in A to DM or recruit a new group B. When I worked in Houston there was one LG group that had played every adventure. So, I recruited a new group. A month later I was playing again. Sure, I had to post far and wide, but I totally found that second group. Anyone can do that outside of really small towns. It does take work. I'm not sure that auto-leveling is worth the cost in other areas. I also think that many of the complaints come from DMs that are not yet seeing that the people they DM will make a second round of PCs. At one area store, for example, there were complaints by the judges that they never got to play. All the play was H1 and they never played. Then some people started to reach H2. But, the casual players had not. Fast forward and now that store runs several games almost every night at different tiers of play and there is a fair amount of sharing of DMing. Everyone wins. Auto-leveling the DM's PC would not have been as good a solution, as fun, driven as much business, etc.

Feb 24, 2010 -- 3:23PM, Mind_Flayer_Monk wrote:

Feb 24, 2010 -- 2:36PM, Thanlis wrote:

This is pretty much reading tea leaves and making crap up, but so is the assumption that it's a done deal.

Hah yeah but it is really fun to talk about, and people have some great ideas and points here so it makes for interesting reading. My gut instinct is against it (for similar reasons to E_B), but a few posters have made some good points on how this could help public play in some areas. I didn't see this right away, but after thinking about it I can think of some places where this would help out.

Anyway guessing which way LFR is going to go is more fun to me than guessing the Final Four or an NFL game.

Ha! Me too. And I am pretty convinced that something needs to be done about level band problems. I'm just not sure what...