|
1 year ago ::
Mar 28, 2012 - 12:52AM
#21
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2010
|
I'd say almost the diametric opposite. We've been seeing little drop-off, and much demand - we haven't been able to fulfil it because of a lack of available play nights when all the people concerned can play - and because all the people concerned can't play what most of us can. A decent chunk of the group is ONLY playing, because we were able to create PCs at 11th, and we could fill more seats still if people were able to make characters at higher level. We're getting some slowdown now because we're running out of PCs at high paragon, and trying to carefully micromanage everyone to reach epic at the same time - and at the same time, balance some new starts at heroic. We've similarly been able to keep more tables more open due to the level banding - in particular, having a table of 18th level PCs and 1 16th level PC would not have been possible previously, and in that situation, would have cost us a player as the rest of the group left the tier without him.
I'm really not seeing the issue.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 28, 2012 - 2:03AM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Jan 26, 2005
|
With D&D Next off on the horizon somewhere, I wanted to share some observations from our local area about why LFR play has slowed down over the past year. This is not a complaint, rather intended to inform decisions as campaign administration makes decisions about what will happen "Next."
I attribute this to three significant factors: the ability to create higher-level PCs, the widening of level bands, and the shortage of new adventures released for play.
The lack of adventures is the single biggest problem with the campaign now.
I think Replay is the biggest additional problem as it reduces incentive to DM.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 28, 2012 - 2:03AM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Jan 26, 2005
|
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />You're probably right that no campaign should last more than 4 years, period. 
I assume the smiley indicates sarcasm. LG lasted 8 years, and would have
made 10, if they had not killed the campaign due to Fourth Edition release.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 28, 2012 - 2:06AM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Jan 26, 2005
|
At this point, it really seems like the only question is whether LFR will manage to make it to the finish line at Gencon 2013, panting and wheezing, or whether it will expire ignobly along the way. Sad to say, but I was more excited about Living City on the day we turned out the lights on the campaign, than I am about LFR right now.
I do hope, when things finally come to an end, that some of the globals are willing to give a brutally honest post-mortem on what went wrong. There were so many points where it seemed like LFR was headed in a bright new direction, only to have our hopes dashed yet again. I'd like to at least see the lessons that the globals have learned from this experience get passed on to future campaigns.
LG ended in 2008 after they announced Fourth Edition at Gen Con 2007.
Things slowly died off as people lost interest during 8/07 through 12/08.
Since they announced DnDNext in early 2012, with release during 2013,
we are now experiencing slow death of LFR without official announcement.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 28, 2012 - 7:44AM
#25
|
Date Joined:
Nov 23, 2003
|
The lack of adventures is the single biggest problem with the campaign now.
I think Replay is the biggest additional problem as it reduces incentive to DM.
Without replay, I couldn't play anything. Without being able to play anything, I wouldn't bother going to game days, and so I wouldn't run anything.
(I usually play one slot, and run one slot).
I'm not sure replay is a net-negative on finding DMs.
"Nice assumptions. Completely wrong assumptions, but by jove if being incorrect stopped people from making idiotic statements, we wouldn't have modern internet subculture." Kerrus
Practical gameplay runs by neither RAW or RAI, but rather "A Compromise Between The Gist Of The Rule As I Recall Getting The Impression Of It That One Time I Read It And What Jerry Says He Remembers, Whatever, We'll Look It Up Later If Any Of Us Still Give A Damn." Erachima
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 28, 2012 - 8:53AM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2010
|
The lack of adventures is the single biggest problem with the campaign now.
I think Replay is the biggest additional problem as it reduces incentive to DM.
Without replay, I couldn't play anything. Without being able to play anything, I wouldn't bother going to game days, and so I wouldn't run anything.
(I usually play one slot, and run one slot).
I'm not sure replay is a net-negative on finding DMs.
This bears repeating. Most mods I will play twice, either once as DM, once as player, or twice as player - and I'm really looking forward to playing some of the early Heroic mods which I know only by reputation and in-joke. Replay value makes LFR for me. And there's a lot of it for my money.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 28, 2012 - 9:47AM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Aug 21, 2007
|
I suspect everyone wishes LFR would produce more LFR adventures, and sustain a more regular output rate. It would be nice if we captured the forensics of why that became difficult to do, but I fear that a desire not to point fingers and just the tempo of ending a campaign may prevent an in-depth development of lessons learned. (Just saying from experience.)
I admit that I was surprised over the idea that many DMs would rather replay an adventure for the N-th time rather than DM the adventure for fellow gamers. Personally, I tend to be reluctant to play an adventure a second time, much less more. But I am very story oriented, so if I know the story, then I am not all that motivated to play it again.
LG was perceived much differently based upon your context: if you were "inside," you tended to love it and if you were on the "outside," you tended to hate it.
Personally, I think there is a lot of merit of designing and implementing a campaign with a planned limited life; I would suggest 5 years being a good number. You set up a grand plan to devise several story lines with cross-links, and a mid life fresh entry point. But then again, I like a grand story. Tastes vary.
Keith
Keith Hoffman
LFR Writing Director for Waterdeep
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 28, 2012 - 10:19AM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Nov 23, 2003
|
I admit that I was surprised over the idea that many DMs would rather replay an adventure for the N-th time rather than DM the adventure for fellow gamers. Personally, I tend to be reluctant to play an adventure a second time, much less more. But I am very story oriented, so if I know the story, then I am not all that motivated to play it again.
I would rather DM the adventure for the 8th time than play it for the 8th time, that's no contest...
But the basic reason I go to a game day is to play something. I run games because that's also fun, and because that's how I pay back the community. But if there's nothing interesting to play, then I'm not gonna go to the game day, and thus I won't be running anything either.
"Nice assumptions. Completely wrong assumptions, but by jove if being incorrect stopped people from making idiotic statements, we wouldn't have modern internet subculture." Kerrus
Practical gameplay runs by neither RAW or RAI, but rather "A Compromise Between The Gist Of The Rule As I Recall Getting The Impression Of It That One Time I Read It And What Jerry Says He Remembers, Whatever, We'll Look It Up Later If Any Of Us Still Give A Damn." Erachima
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 28, 2012 - 10:46AM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Jul 22, 2008
|
I admit that I was surprised over the idea that many DMs would rather replay an adventure for the N-th time rather than DM the adventure for fellow gamers. Personally, I tend to be reluctant to play an adventure a second time, much less more. But I am very story oriented, so if I know the story, then I am not all that motivated to play it again.
I'm not surprised at all. Players have all sorts of reasons for replaying mods. From what I've seen, some of them are: a particularly good story, interesting encounters, juicy loot, the satisfaction of completing in-game quests, or just to hang out with their friends.
Personally, I think there is a lot of merit of designing and implementing a campaign with a planned limited life; I would suggest 5 years being a good number. You set up a grand plan to devise several story lines with cross-links, and a mid life fresh entry point.
This is an excellent idea.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 29, 2012 - 12:56AM
#30
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2010
|
I admit that I was surprised over the idea that many DMs would rather replay an adventure for the N-th time rather than DM the adventure for fellow gamers. Personally, I tend to be reluctant to play an adventure a second time, much less more. But I am very story oriented, so if I know the story, then I am not all that motivated to play it again.
I'm not surprised at all. Players have all sorts of reasons for replaying mods. From what I've seen, some of them are: a particularly good story, interesting encounters, juicy loot, the satisfaction of completing in-game quests, or just to hang out with their friends.
This is a big part of it, actually. D&D is a social thing for me. I'd be equally happy playing board games, or playing another living campaign under another system - anything, really, that doesn't take too much prep work.
Personally, I think there is a lot of merit of designing and implementing a campaign with a planned limited life; I would suggest 5 years being a good number. You set up a grand plan to devise several story lines with cross-links, and a mid life fresh entry point.
This is an excellent idea.
I'd actaully suggest something a little different - limited lifespan storylines. Planning, for instance, to run a campaign which has arcs that take about a real-time year, and have a beginning, middle and end (something like the Waterdeep necromancer storyline, but may 6 to 8 mods long, with some double length stuff etc) - with the intent of an overall plot arc taking longer, and drawing together the stories. I'm not sure how to handle multiple character levels under this system, but I'd assume something that involves harder adventures around similar plots for higher levels, or something. But overall, I think shorter sequential things of planned length, rather than one long thing, is less likely to fall under the edition cycle - if you plan a 5-year campaign, and the edition cycle takes 3, then where are you?
|
|
|
