|
3 years ago ::
Aug 27, 2010 - 6:09AM
#41
|
Date Joined:
Oct 17, 2005
|
Well, anyhow: I agree with Mirtek and Joshua Randall.
LFR should remain at a standard level of difficulty. And really that's not "easy"- PCs are still going to get hit and bloodied with regularity, and even killed, but at least the battles won't take so long and there will be less missing of attacks. I have to say it's annoying when you break into a new tier (let's say 7-10th, - you just hit 7th.. and the rest of the group decides to play it on high, and you find out you are missing with a 17 against a monsters weakest defense.)
The battles aren't the be-all of the experience!
For people that want things harder, they should play glory tier.
PS: I had not even realized that writers were forced to use dungeon tiles. I mean, as a DM I'm certainly not forced to use them.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 27, 2010 - 6:38AM
#42
|
Date Joined:
May 29, 2004
|
I am wondering if we can remove the requirement to use Dungeon Tiles.
I know some LG authors who have decided not to write for LFR because
they are being forced to utilize Dungeon Tiles for all of their encounters.
If you saw some of the maps I had to edit and rewrite during the LG days, you would understand why authors now use Dungeon Tiles. I'm talking combat maps with no gridlines, maps with rivers with no way to tell which is which, and the like.
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
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 27, 2010 - 8:52AM
#43
|
|
|
I am wondering if we can remove the requirement to use Dungeon Tiles.
I know some LG authors who have decided not to write for LFR because
they are being forced to utilize Dungeon Tiles for all of their encounters.
As an organizer and DM of LFR, I prefer the map tiles. It provides something that has a high quality look and when I am running in an open public location (i.e. Game Store or mixed convention) they catch the eye of people going by. I have successfully turned some of those 'curious' people into 4e players due to this.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 27, 2010 - 9:22AM
#44
|
Date Joined:
Jul 11, 2007
|
Surgebuster/Skerrit--
Admittedly, I've been trying to be patient as I've waited for a public posting of what the new agreement between the new LFR and WotC will be. I have been asking about this ever since this needed process was started and I'm really hopeful for a positive outcome.
I am hoping for something like this:
1) The Admins clearly explain the full agreement between WotC and the LFR volunteer staff for the community.
THEN
2) The community and Admins can have open and frank discussions about what kind of new LFR we want to build and how we want to build it.
Is that correct or incorrect? What would be more correct? What is the new timeline for this (you last hinted it would be after GenCon)?
I would prefer transparency and open discussion in how decisions are being made...it'll allow more people to truly get involved and, in the end, bolster the feel for this "living" campaign.
I would like to have a discussion before we say that dungeon tiles are mandatory or not, or that we need to have a 2 combat minimum or whether to allow X powers from Dragon magazine. I believe that all these things should be open for discussion or at least have a reason for mandations.
I'm not asking for answers on any of the above, but some thoughts on how you see the process happening.
Thanks.
-Pain
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 27, 2010 - 11:51AM
#45
|
Date Joined:
Mar 17, 2005
|
I am hoping for something like this:
1) The Admins clearly explain the full agreement between WotC and the LFR volunteer staff for the community.
THEN
2) The community and Admins can have open and frank discussions about what kind of new LFR we want to build and how we want to build it.
Is that correct or incorrect? What would be more correct? What is the new timeline for this (you last hinted it would be after GenCon)?
It is somewhat correct. Our Writers Guidelines and Admin Document will cover some of what you want for number one, though I am not sure it will be as extensive as many posters desire (covering absolutely every contingency on what can and cannot be done). That said it will cover most of it. Each of the documents will go up for public discussion just like the CCG did (and as the next version of it will), and give you a chance to comment. As for generic discussions about the type of LFR we want to build, that ship sailed back in January when we brought our proposal to WOTC, so while there is some room for discussion, many of the general things (the story areas, the number of adventures, what the positions do, etc...) have already been decided. Remember that we are trying to get many monthes ahead of schedule for release dates of adventures and new initiatives, so we are beginning work on Q1 releases and DDXP things now, meaning that a lot of choices had to already be made . As for a timeline, I think you have already started the discussions, so you are doing it now. As for these particular documents that seem to be asking for, they will likely start to appear for public discussion in a month or two, depending on how fast we can get Q3 and Q4 things moving out the door (and how soon we get new product, like the Essentials books, which is a factor not under our control).
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 27, 2010 - 12:22PM
#46
|
Date Joined:
Jul 11, 2007
|
Each of the documents will go up for public discussion just like the CCG did (and as the next version of it will), and give you a chance to comment. As for generic discussions about the type of LFR we want to build, that ship sailed back in January when we brought our proposal to WOTC, so while there is some room for discussion, many of the general things (the story areas, the number of adventures, what the positions do, etc...) have already been decided.
Thank you.
Excellent. Then I'll go back to my near-silent vigil and await the release.
I understand that the proposal on some items has been decided (story areas, # adventures, positions...), but still wonder what is covered in the 'etc.', but I suppose we'll see that when the document is out.
Thanks again to all the Admins responding in this thread.
-Pain
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 27, 2010 - 2:59PM
#47
|
|
|
in short, why is what i want less important than what other people want.
If what you want proves to be a minority viewpoint, or if delivering what you want seriously damages the enjoyment of a large number of other players, that's what makes it less important.
Annother reason is that if it's too easy for the particular players the only thing that happens until the DM notices it is that they have a too easy fight for some time.
However until (especially an inexperienced) DM notices that it's too tough for the players, there can be one or more dead PCs.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 27, 2010 - 5:29PM
#48
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2008
|
When LFR gets rebooted, will there be a mechanism that recognizes the accomplishments and skills of the better players?
Currently, as I perceive this campaign to be, a novice player can achieve the same accolades / story awards as the veteran / more skilled player.
I do not see a point in upping the challenge to a particular party if all parties are rewarded the same thing. In a sense why work harder for the same reward. We as people do not usually do that in real life, why have that kind of environment in the game.
LFR is great for what it is, a vehicle that brings people together and have some commonality as to the stories the players have played.
LFR is horrible for those players that are looking for a sense of accomplishment.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 28, 2010 - 2:54AM
#49
|
|
|
When LFR gets rebooted, will there be a mechanism that recognizes the accomplishments and skills of the better players?
Currently, as I perceive this campaign to be, a novice player can achieve the same accolades / story awards as the veteran / more skilled player.
I do not see a point in upping the challenge to a particular party if all parties are rewarded the same thing. In a sense why work harder for the same reward. We as people do not usually do that in real life, why have that kind of environment in the game.
LFR is great for what it is, a vehicle that brings people together and have some commonality as to the stories the players have played.
LFR is horrible for those players that are looking for a sense of accomplishment.
I think post 22 here answers that
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 28, 2010 - 10:06AM
#50
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2008
|
Since I am a short bus kid.... please elaborate why post 22 answers my question.
Thanks
|
|
|
