For example: As in any home group, we've had turn-over with our players. Maybe we discover that one player really doesn't match our play-style (he likes playing evil characters and we like heroic or he likes to play uber-optimized/cheesy characters and the rest of us don't) or maybe someone moves away or maybe they get too busy with life to play D&D or whatever.
If you're playing in a home group, why do the LFR campaign rules matter? There's nothing preventing you from taking the LFR content and playing it any way you want in private play. LFR is designed for public play—most of the off-table LFR drama occurs because LFR rules have to work for conventions, clubs and public events across the world.
people will still insist on playing the older ones as long as the treasure bundle difference between newer and older low-level mods is so big. ... Maybe revamping the treasure system would help, but right now I'm just waiting for those mods to retire.
I'd love to see those old adventures errata'd. Hell, if the RPGA is listening I'll make the changes for free. While we're at it, let's design a treasure system that is balanced and absolutely inviolable except with Global Admin approval.
I'm impressed that you even do it. I'd rather do something else with my Fridays than play LFR in fast-replay mode.
It's kind of funny. A lot of the argument that people seem to have against people creating characters higher than level 1 would destroy the roleplaying aspects and storyline of LFR. But I want to allow it exactly because I want a more cohesive feel to my characters when I play. Before I start my rant, let me just make it clear that this has nothing to do with the ratio of play to judgining. The frequency with which you do both does very little to help with the problem.
I think many, if not most people would prefer to have 1 or 2 "primary" characters with maybe a couple of backups. So at most 2-4 characters. I can keep all the back stories straight, have a better chance of remembering the character's backstory and the odds are that if I sit down with another person at the table, I know what character that person is probably playing.
But that's not what's happening in LFR. We end up with a half a dozen, a dozen, or more characters. To me, they all become a blur of stats and powers ... it's difficult keeping all the voices in my head straight.
As a coordinator, I want to give people a chance to play their "primary" character on a regular basis. Ideally I can play my primary character at least every other game. If I rotate mod tiers as people have suggested people end up playing their high level character less and less as they level up and create ever more low level characters so that they can play. You start playing the same H1 character every game, then they hit H2 and it's every 2-4 games, then every 5-10 games then it becomes time to dust the cobwebs off when you finally get a chance to play. If you remember who the character was.
Up until P1 mods were released there was kind of a built-in level limiter which made it easier for a coordinator. We had to create multiple PCs if we wanted to play because of lack of mods. That's not the case any more and eventually we're going to have a whole slew of 9 tiers worth of mods. With replay options, if I have a cohesive home group or a big enough game day I'll be able to play from 1-30 while only playing 1 PC.
Can I rotate the tiers offered at a game day? Of course I can. I have little option at the moment. But that means that as people progress they are rewarded by getting to play that character less and less. Playing a character every few months isn't very rewarding to me. Gaining levels becomes self-defeating. It also seems likely that level gaps will start creeping in which are very hard to manage.
Instead I could focus on rewarding veteran players and give them a chance to play their primary characters on a regular basis, but then we develop a gap between people with low level characters and people with high level characters. People new to LFR have a hard time getting their foot in the door and will never catch up to the high level group.
So that leaves me with allowing people to create PC's at a level higher than 1 (or rules to "add levels" to an existing PC). It's something I've always supported in home campaigns and it works well. I've always given people an option to start a campaign at a higher level we always start at level 1 anyway. Is it a great option? No. I just think it's better than having a stockpile of heroic level characters stuffing my character logs while I never get a chance to play the character I really want.
There are a couple other options of course. DMG2 has "henchmen" rules (yes Thanlis I did some research )... and rules for leveling a character "down". We'd have to figure out the rewards system though. Or we could broaden tiers to be more inclusive and cover more levels but that would require significant change to the way we write mods.
Instead I could focus on rewarding veteran players and give them a chance to play their primary characters on a regular basis, but then we develop a gap between people with low level characters and people with high level characters. People new to LFR have a hard time getting their foot in the door and will never catch up to the high level group.
As long as you can form tables, I'm not sure why this is a problem. Especially if you have three or more tables. Let's say as an example that you have 15 players, 3 of whom are new. So each week, a couple of the vets play H1. That gives you 2 tables of 5 for whatever level they want to play and 1 table of 5 for the new players.
Ironically, that could even be the solution to 'not turning people away' - each 7 mods, each player is responsible for either DMing 1 table or helping fill out (6/number of tables per game day) for the newer players. The players who don't want to DM contribute, the players who don't want to play low level have an option to not do that.
Can I rotate the tiers offered at a game day? Of course I can. I have little option at the moment. But that means that as people progress they are rewarded by getting to play that character less and less. Playing a character every few months isn't very rewarding to me. Gaining levels becomes self-defeating. It also seems likely that level gaps will start creeping in which are very hard to manage.
I guess this assumes that your game day is the only way these players have access to LFR. Perhaps that's true in your area, but not in mine, or most. Also, is something preventing you from asking for sign-ups early and doing a straw-poll of the characters that will be showing up? Do you use warhorn?
I feel like there are a lot of way to kill that fly, and starting characters above level 1 is the equivalent of pulling out a shotgun.
I think many, if not most people would prefer to have 1 or 2 "primary" characters with maybe a couple of backups. So at most 2-4 characters. I can keep all the back stories straight, have a better chance of remembering the character's backstory and the odds are that if I sit down with another person at the table, I know what character that person is probably playing.
But that's not what's happening in LFR. We end up with a half a dozen, a dozen, or more characters. To me, they all become a blur of stats and powers ... it's difficult keeping all the voices in my head straight.
If that's really what you want, starting characters at higher levels will only make it worse. What you would need to do to maintain regular play with at most 2-4 characters is slow down the rate of advancement by 50% or more. I've got five characters sitting at level 4 at the moment which I am avoiding playing to make sure that I can still play one H1 mod or another with them. (For one reason or another. My wizard would very much like to assist the eladrin of Myth Drannor, my palavenger is from Elturgard and I'd like to play all the Elturgard adventures with him if possible, my rogue played quite a few of the mini-campaign adventures in slot-0s so I'd like to finish it with her, my fighter is a mini-campaign character playing all of them in order, and my invoker|cleric is currently my only level 1-4 character with leadership ability). Now I probably play more than a lot of people (2 games a week at the moment, though I may have to drop one due to my new job) and there is a bit of duplication in the adventures I've played with them, but with the amount of adventures available and the rate of advancement, I'm can't see anyone playing 2-4 characters exclusively.
In fact, due to the way adventures are written for LFR, you couldn't maintain a primary/backup character structure at all if you want to play most of the adventures. Once you've leveled out of H1, you need to create a new character to be able to play 1/3 of the adventures. In order to enable a primary/backup character structure, we would need to switch to a more flexible tier structure that allowed higher level characters to play the new adventures designed for beginning characters--something like the APL system if perhaps a bit less robust. Otherwise, you'll either be ignoring the new H1, H2, H3, and later P1 and P2 adventures as they come out or creating new characters to play them.
If you play with a group of random gamers at a convention, do you remember their characters from the past? How often do your recall if a character has played in previous adventures with yours? How much do you recall?
I make a note of every character I play every adventure with on my record. While I can't claim to remember who every character was that I play with at conventions, I can look back over my notes to see that, IC, my character would remember that he has adventured with this individual before. How much about the individual depends on how well it was roleplayed.
If you havent played with them before, can you somehow tell if their war stories are made up or if they truly happened? And does it really matter?
I don't think I'd be able to tell, although there have been a few occasions where, IC, you've had to tell stories of your adventures to impress someone. In those situations I like being able to look back over my record, pull out a great adventure and tell the NPC what happened. I don't think I could actually come up with any stories as exciting as some that have actually 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? Do you expect they will still rebuild/change their character even if they like it and the shared story?
Most people I know would not change to a 'completely' new PC often, but I know plenty who would take advantage (read: borderline abuse) the rebuilds. I expect people would only completely change character if a new splatbook came out that they really wanted to use something from. After all, if you play from level 1 and after 3 or 4 adventures don't like your creation, you can bin it. I don't think I've ever seen anyone play a character for a long time that they don't like, just to keep playing. But then, my old group ran a lot of mods, so there were always play opportunities for a 1-3.
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? Would you replace a person in your group if their PC fell behind and can no longer play at the same tier as the rest? Do you think people don't already speed level (or hold back) their PCs to play with certain people?
See above. In my experience people are happy and willing to hold back, or even start new characters, in order to accommodate players who don't have high level characters. Players are a valuable resource for any group - I'd much rather start a new character to play alongside someone than boot someone for not being up-to-speed.
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?
Almost certainly. I find it hard enough sometimes keeping track of what my paragon characters can do, even though I have played them from scratch and am pretty familiar with the system. New players invariably struggle: 4e just takes a few sessions to get the hang of. Level 1 is deliberately a lot less complex to provide that learning curve for how to play a new character, and the system as a whole.
We see a lot of complaints about paragon being too easy, but I think part of the reason is that paragon players have played a lot of LFR, and understand the system and their characters well, so have a certain level of play skill. Imagine starting for the first time with seven feats, 4 encounters, 3 dailies, a bunch of magic items, plus PP abilities, class abilities etc. to track. You'd forget half the stuff and be a liability to yourself and the party. Carrying players is not the end of the world, but paragon mods take a long time as it is, and if a player has no clue how to play or what to do next, the game drags too long.
It may sound horribly self-righteous and elitist, but with my high level characters I feel as if I've earned their power and experiences. Now, that wouldn't change if people came in with created high-level characters, but I would find it galling to say that I've spend 18 months and 30-odd mods getting this guy up to paragon only to have an identical character created yesterday walk in. I do feel a sense of ongoing campaign narrative and character narrative, and creating high level characters (and infinite retrains) do detract from that, IMO.
With a little practice, do you think the campaign could do both-tell compelling stories and allow entry at any level? Or do you feel the character continuity loss is your decision point? If the stories were good enough, would you come back? (edit: this is too repetitive with some of imaginaryfriend's points)
and I appreciate your stories and hope we see them in Dark Sun , too.
off topic here: I can't believe the US just beat Finland in Olympic Ice Hockey. Kipursoff giving up 4 goals? Unbelievable.
(Thanks for the kind words!)
I think a campaign could allow entry at any level and compelling story, but it would have to be a huge focus to do that. For example, having a single plot line with each adventure uncovering some significant part of the story. This way, the story is really being told for the player more than the PC. It would unfold like a novel/movie rather than a campaign. But, to pull it off you really need to change everything to fit that, I think. Anything of a traditional living campaign would suffer, in my opinion, because the incentives shift away from your "living" goals.
I love the Olympics. My kids tried skiing for the first time today and loved it. I credit Olympic fever for a lot of their positive attitude... they wanted a gold medal at the end. I think I'll put a chocolate gold coin on a string for something good they do this week.
I don't think the "take a poll", "find your own group", "suck it up and be happy to play H1 mods forever more" are the best alternatives. All run into the same issues I've stated before. All gaming groups I've belonged to grow/shrink on a regular basis and consistent higher level play is not sustainable unless you have a large enough base. If you're lucky and your group is stable the current system works. If not, you get rewarded for getting a higher level character by not being able to play them on a regular basis.
The way I would like to run smaller gaming group would be to always run H1 and H2 modules for newbies. Then I would take a poll and see what levels people have. Let's say we have a table or 2 of people with P1 characters. I'd focus on P1 mods until most (if not all) of the high level group can play P2. Then I'd focus on P2 mods until we get to P3, etc. We could follow story arcs and quests with the same group of PCs and develop a real sense of a coherent gaming group. If someone misses a few game days or has to judge a lot or is new to the group but comfortable with paragon level I'd let them create a character at whatever level the "high" level group is playing, or "gain" XP/GP to keep up with the group. This is very similar to what I would and have done with every home game I've ever been involved with over the years. It's also pretty much what the DMG recommends.
To me a group of characters that continuously play together is much more "living" than having to create ever more new PCs and replaying the same mods over and over (even if you play new mods when they come out, there are still only so many H1-H3 mods). Yes, I understand how people feel rewarded by earning a higher level character. It's how WOW keeps people hooked. But getting characters to a higher level isn't practical for a lot of people under the current system.
Letting people create characters at a higher level is not a great solution. It's just the best solution I can think of.
aljergensen, ... at the risk of repeating oneself, this isn't a home campaign. But enough about that.
I had a different idea, and while it might be more "bookkeeping" I suspect it is a better idea than allowing the creation of random new PCs at arbitrary levels.
The problems aljergensen keeps describing revolve largely around players whose PCs are being left behind or can't find consistent play and thus are ... left behind. If having them play to level their PCs isn't a valid means of doing this, or seems untenable for some reason (still not really understanding this, it's like asking WoW/Blizzard to "make my 22 Drood level 80 plz") then ...
... I could suggest that there be a once a year, or maybe once a character lifetime, adjustment that could be applied that would level them up, as if they'd gained a certain amount of XP, Gold and perhaps even a magic item or two. Call it ADJU (adjustment) 1-1 or something on their record sheet, and it allows something akin to an H2 character to move to H3 or a H3 to move to P1, etc. It would not be allowed to be applied to new PCs (by whatever rules you wanted to make) and each player would either get a certain number of these or each PC gets one ... or two or whatever is needed.
In some ways it is similar to the level bumps that the LGR/MoH/XE D&D Campaigns used to provide if PCs were below the minimum level of the next set of adventures. The difference being that there isn't a target level, just a set amount of XP and/or Gold and/or items that bring the PCs up a bit.
I think it provides a compromise that solves several of the stated problems, doesn't solve all of them certainly, but then, nothing will (and no, creating new PCs does not solve all of the problems).
It's kind of funny. A lot of the argument that people seem to have against people creating characters higher than level 1 would destroy the roleplaying aspects and storyline of LFR. But I want to allow it exactly because I want a more cohesive feel to my characters when I play. Before I start my rant, let me just make it clear that this has nothing to do with the ratio of play to judgining. The frequency with which you do both does very little to help with the problem.
I think many, if not most people would prefer to have 1 or 2 "primary" characters with maybe a couple of backups. So at most 2-4 characters. I can keep all the back stories straight, have a better chance of remembering the character's backstory and the odds are that if I sit down with another person at the table, I know what character that person is probably playing.
But that's not what's happening in LFR. We end up with a half a dozen, a dozen, or more characters. To me, they all become a blur of stats and powers ... it's difficult keeping all the voices in my head straight.
As a coordinator, I want to give people a chance to play their "primary" character on a regular basis. Ideally I can play my primary character at least every other game. If I rotate mod tiers as people have suggested people end up playing their high level character less and less as they level up and create ever more low level characters so that they can play. You start playing the same H1 character every game, then they hit H2 and it's every 2-4 games, then every 5-10 games then it becomes time to dust the cobwebs off when you finally get a chance to play. If you remember who the character was.
I agree. The biggest frustration I have with LFR right now is that to play as frequently as I do (1-4 games a week) I need to have a whole army of characters. Playing 10 different characters at once makes it hard to remember what each character can do. I think this is a much bigger problem than people playing one or two characters primarily but starting them at a higher level. (Since people have cited "people won't know how to play their characters" as a concern.)
The other huge impact of everyone needing a whole bunch of characters in order to play LFR is that the story and the personality of each character (at least in my experience) becomes almost meaningless. I actually forgot the name of one of my characters the other day because I play her so infrequently. Her name! How can I follow meaningful storylines and personalities and backstories of each and every one of the characters in my army if I have so many I don't even know their names. I play LFR with the exact same group of players almost every week and, except for our highest level primary characters, we've almost given up on using our characters names. We play with each other all the time, but most conversations go like this: "What are you bringing this week?" "My 10th level paladin." "Which one is that again? Has this character played with that one before?" "Oh, I don't remember." etc. And this is because, in order to play LFR frequently, we each have to have bunches of characters. Our small group of 6 probably has about 50-60 characters between us. No wonder no one remembers anything about anyone else's characters. Story and personality and backstories have taken a huge nose-dive because of the way LFR is set up right now. When I first started playing LFR I had a really detailed backstory and character development and personality for each character. Once I started making my 8th character I realized that it was too much work for something that was kind of meaningless (no one remembered anyone elses characters anyway, myself included). I value story/role-playing highly, but the current LFR system encourages each player to have dozens of back-up characters (just so they CAN play) at the expense of quality story and meaningful role-playing. Yes, the story continuity has gotten much better, but I feel like I'm experiencing the story, not any of my individual characters. "Yes, I know I've played Mod X, but I can't remember if this character has. Let me check."
The other big frustration I have with the current system is that I rarely get to play the characters I absolutely love. It's funny, I can tell where the breaks in new high-level mods were based solely on when I played adventures with my primary PC. I had to put her on the shelf for 4 months last year because there weren't any new mods out for her to play. I just got to play her a lot in the last month or two (YAY!!!), but now she's 16th level and has played all the P2 mods... So now I have to put her on the shelf for another who-knows-how-many-months until more mods come out. Then maybe I'll get to play her once or twice, and then have to wait some more, and then maybe play her again a few times as new high level mods trickle in. It's hard to get excited about a character and have fun with them when as soon as you start enjoying playing them again you have to wait for weeks/months for new material to be released. It's only going to get worse as the highest level characters level up even more. (To support new players/PCs starting at level 1 the new mods being released will always be a pyramid shape.)
I would love to be able to play a small handful of characters (maybe one or two) in LFR and have each of them immerse themselves in the story and become highly developed personality-wise and story-wise. (And actually get to play my primary/favorite character frequently and not sporadically/rarely.) The current LFR system does not support that style of play at all (unless you don't play very frequently).
Lori Anderson WotC Freelancer, LFR author @LittleLorika
CALI3-3 The Agony of Almraiven (co-author) NETH4-1 Containing Shadow (co-author) CALI4-1 Plain of Stone Spiders (author) QUES4-1 Liberation (co-author) EPIC5-1 Plaguewrought Prism (co-author) ADCP5-2 The Best Defense (co-author) EPIC5-3 *Untitled* (co-author)
Before I start my rant, let me just make it clear that this has nothing to do with the ratio of play to judgining. The frequency with which you do both does very little to help with the problem.
)... and rules for leveling a character "down". We'd have to figure out the rewards system though. Or we could broaden tiers to be more inclusive and cover more levels but that would require significant change to the way we write mods.
