|
1 year ago ::
May 15, 2012 - 11:53AM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2007
|
By "play with campaign staff", are you referring to getting to sit down and game with campaign staff, or having a table full of campaign staff - after Greg said we weren't allowed to attack the kraken anymore - go sit at an empty table to attack the kraken again anyway? 
Either has its own unique merits. 
Dan Anderson
@EpicUthrac
Living Forgotten Realms Calimshan Writing Director
Living Forgotten Realms Epic Writing Director
Meet me at TotalConfusion:
http://www.totalcon.com/RolePlaying.html
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 15, 2012 - 2:04PM
#12
|
Date Joined:
May 29, 2001
|
Plus, an EPIC (unlike a Heroic or Paragon adventure) is written for one particular character level. The organizer has to hope that there's going to be a sufficient number of players who are ready to play that new EPIC (i.e., they've already played the previous EPICs), and that they're free on the day that the EPIC is being run (i.e., no conflicts against other events, even non-LFR events, being run on that day).
In theory, the first part of this objection shouldn't really be an issue, since the Epic Campaign rules specifically allow a character to advance an existing Epic character to whatever level the adventure is playing at, then 'de-advance' afterward to play earlier Epic adventures. If a new Epic adventure were to be released at GenCon, I'd expect that any LFR player with an Epic character would at least consider playing it, given that rule. I'm guessing the rule exists specifically to enable convention play, and I wonder if most people prefer to play the Epic modules in sequence, which would work against that.
As for the second part of the objection, I wonder how many folks are planning to sign up to play only one or two of the three WATE modules being released at GenCon -- playing the entire series to gain the major quest award entails exactly the same length of commitment as an Epic module, albeit with the option to play the three rounds in different timeslots rather than having to sign up for three 'connected' slots to make sure you have the same characters and DM for the entire run.
From an organizer perspective, I could see where three one-round modules with a common thread would be easier to schedule than a single three-round module.
--
Pauper
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 15, 2012 - 5:33PM
#13
|
Date Joined:
Mar 17, 2005
|
As I understand it, the biggest issue is with judges. Judges have to drop out all the time for one reason or another. At DDXP where there are limited other things to do, you can sometimes find a DM to fill in. That is much harder to do at Gen Con where people to be scheduled for nearly ever slot and there is a lot less flexibility.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 16, 2012 - 2:45AM
#14
|
Date Joined:
Jan 26, 2005
|
I think it is extremely wise to avoid Epic play at GenCon.
One of the key drivers for starting higher level characters
was so people with tickets can play in any GenCon game.
Do we really want people building level 21+ characters?
|
|
|
