A fantastic article as always on the interesting and controversial changes to the Adventurers League. I, for one, am glad that the designers don’t account for AL when making a hardcover adventure. I think the designers should have as few limitations as possible. #dnd https://t.co/yP9AgIwzXu
— SlyFlourish (@SlyFlourish) August 14, 2018
Our research has shown that the way RPGs are played in RPGA-style OP programs – or at least how they are perceived to be played – is pretty unpopular with people who want to play RPGs.
— Mike Mearls (@mikemearls) August 14, 2018
Are there any details on what parts of it make it unpopular?
— SlyFlourish (@SlyFlourish) August 14, 2018
The overarching feel is that player actions don't affect the game world and DMs are bound by the rules instead of running a fun game.
— Mike Mearls (@mikemearls) August 14, 2018
That’s a real shame @mikemearls. Some of us would love to see WotC work with RPGA designers to create a “safe harbour” for old organised play content:http://www.thepiazza.org.uk/bb/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=17621 …
Try not to let the naysayers control the direction of The content is a separate issue – I believe that the contracts used back then have made it so that effectively no one can publish that material, especially the LG stuff. I might be wrong, but that's my understanding.
— Mike Mearls (@mikemearls) August 14, 2018
I know I say “in Living Greyhawk” a lot, but dang, it feels like a ton of the lessons we learned in making a pretty engaged and interactive organized play campaign were lost during the transition to LFR to AL There were two challenges we saw in copying it wholesale – it was a ton of content to monitor, and over time some regions became very hard for newbies to break into. Still, a model worth looking at.
— Mike Mearls (@mikemearls) August 15, 2018