What is Adventure League?

[Itzmatt86]

I have been forum lurking for a long time and I see it come up so often. What IS adventure league? Is it something structured done in person, is it done online?

[Nicodiemus]

You know how you can go down to the park and get a pickup game of football or basketball going?Adventurer's League is a "pickup" game for D&D usually hosted by a game or hobby store. Anyone can drop in and play but there are rules restrictions for content and character creation. It's a great way to socialize and network with other gamers, or get into D&D if you've never played.

[Millstone85]

rules restrictions for content and character creation.I often read that:
* Your character can't be made from more than two books.
* Your character can't be chaotic evil.

The first one is a bit strange. Would it be so bad, say, for a wizard to have SCAG cantrips and EE spells?

The second one is just wrong. If you are allowing evil player characters, why ban chaotic ones specifically?

[Captain Panda]

I often read that:

The second one is just wrong. If you are allowing evil player characters, why ban chaotic ones specifically?

Lawful evil characters can behave. I believe Adventure League also rules against pvp, so chaotic evil characters wouldn't play nice and would cause disruptions.

[NecroDancer]

I heard that it is customary to "tip" the DM. Is that correct?

[Nicodiemus]

Yeah, echoing Panda there. The idea is for it to be cooperative play. Also, there's table size restrictions to keep things from getting too slow. The PHB+ 1 splatbook is to prevent uber powerful unforseen synergies with abilities released in different supplements, keeping with the idea of bounded accuracy and a flattened power curve. Otherwise a munchkin could make the rest of the table feel irrelevant.

[rooneg]

The PHB+1 thing wasn't terribly important until recently, since there wasn't a big set of options for books that had player related info in them. It was basically just the Elemental Evil Player's Companion and the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide. You picked whichever one of those had the class or race or spells you wanted and you were fine. The possible conflicts were minimal ("crap, I sure wish my Eldritch Knight could learn Absorb Energy from the Elemental Evil Player's Companion and still get the Booming Blade cantrip from Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide"). Now with the release of Volo's Guide to Monsters the conflicts are becoming more common ("what do you mean my Tabaxi cat person can't be a Swashbuckler Rogue!").

[Nicodiemus]

I heard that it is customary to "tip" the DM. Is that correct?

I've seen that on forum posts, but never witnessed it. I'll buy my DM a drink now and then, but they are doing it assumedly because it's fun for them. It's not a paid position. Plus, I believe they get perks from WotC because it's an officially sanctioned thing.

[Itzmatt86]

Appreciate the responses. There is only one gaming store within an hour of me, and i know it used to be a MTG hotspot and nothing else. Thanks for the info!

[rooneg]

Also note that AL games do happen outside of stores. You can run them at home by just following the same rules that are used in stores, which allows you to take those same characters and play them in other AL games. That's really the big benefit to the system, by agreeing to use the same rules as everyone else you make it so your characters are portable and can be used anywhere anyone is running AL games. They are also run online (see the Moonsea Pub facebook group, or alonlinetools (http://www.alonlinetools.net/) for some details) and are often at gaming conventions. The whole organized play system for D&D is a descendant of the old RPGA living campaigns that were mostly run at conventions back in the day.

[SharkForce]

I've seen that on forum posts, but never witnessed it. I'll buy my DM a drink now and then, but they are doing it assumedly because it's fun for them. It's not a paid position. Plus, I believe they get perks from WotC because it's an officially sanctioned thing.

pretty sure the only perks they get are related to characters they play in AL games when they aren't DMing.

[rooneg]

pretty sure the only perks they get are related to characters they play in AL games when they aren't DMing.

Some stores around charge players some small amount to sit at the table (a few dollars) and pay DMs in store credit. Not all of them though. There are DM rewards from the AL itself. Each adventure comes with some amount of XP, Gold and Downtime Days that you can apply to one of your own characters. There are also what are called DM Quests, which you can complete to get more interesting rewards. For example, if you run 24 hours of adventures you can cash them in for a magical item for one of your characters (limited to items you have handed out in games, character must be of an appropriate level for the item). If you run a table that consists entirely of players 15 years old or younger you double the XP/Gold/Downtime you get for running the adventure. If you run a table with a first time AL player you get 500 extra XP. There are a bunch of them. Mostly they serve to allow DMs to maintain some sufficiently high level PCs so they can occasionally play in an adventure, even if they spend most of their time DMing.

[Tanarii]

I often read that:
* Your character can't be made from more than two books.
* Your character can't be chaotic evil.

The first one is a bit strange. Would it be so bad, say, for a wizard to have SCAG cantrips and EE spells?

The second one is just wrong. If you are allowing evil player characters, why ban chaotic ones specifically?
You can't choose chaotic evil OR neutral evil. The only Evil alignment allowed is Lawful Evil, and you must be a member of the Zhentarim or Lord's Alliance faction to play LE. And that's relevant, because factions have this rule:
No Undermining of Other Characters During Adventures.
Adventurers are brought together by common cause, and during an adventure, they’re expected to work together to overcome challenges.
Though certain factions might find others distasteful, individuals will put that aside and become a team when put in dangerous situations. In short, play nice with each other when things get deadly.

[rooneg]

The first one is a bit strange. Would it be so bad, say, for a wizard to have SCAG cantrips and EE spells?

FWIW, for that particular case it's actually not forbidden. The choice of PHB+1 other source is for character creation and stuff you pick while leveling up. Wizards can still find scrolls with EE spells, or copy them from spellbooks they find (or those of other characters they adventure with). So for wizards in particular the only hard and fast requirement is for cantrips. Since they're not learned from spellbooks or scrolls you are limited to your PHB+1 source for cantrips. Other stuff you can still potentially find in play.

That doesn't hold for other casters of course, since they mostly don't have spellbooks.

As for if it's justified, these rules are based on what people encountered during earlier editions, where there were a lot of splat books and they ended up having to ban a lot of things for being overpowered. Now you can certainly argue that 5e doesn't have that explosion of content, but they're playing the long game and WotC doesn't plan on balancing every book they release with an eye towards every other book they've ever released, they'll just try and make sure it's not broken when combined with stuff in the PHB. So in the interest of not having to eventually maintain some sprawling list of combos you're not allowed to play they're using the PHB+1 rule.

[Millstone85]

The PHB+ 1 splatbook is to prevent uber powerful unforseen synergies with abilities released in different supplements, keeping with the idea of bounded accuracy and a flattened power curve. Otherwise a munchkin could make the rest of the table feel irrelevant.
The PHB+1 thing wasn't terribly important until recently, since there wasn't a big set of options for books that had player related info in them. It was basically just the Elemental Evil Player's Companion and the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide. You picked whichever one of those had the class or race or spells you wanted and you were fine. The possible conflicts were minimal ("crap, I sure wish my Eldritch Knight could learn Absorb Energy from the Elemental Evil Player's Companion and still get the Booming Blade cantrip from Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide"). Now with the release of Volo's Guide to Monsters the conflicts are becoming more common ("what do you mean my Tabaxi cat person can't be a Swashbuckler Rogue!").But would there be any problem with a tabaxi swashbuckler rogue? Honest question, I haven't finished reading Volo's yet. If the answer is no, then the rule might be too inclusive already.


As for if it's justified, these rules are based on what people encountered during earlier editions, where there were a lot of splat books and they ended up having to ban a lot of things for being overpowered. Now you can certainly argue that 5e doesn't have that explosion of content, but they're playing the long game and WotC doesn't plan on balancing every book they release with an eye towards every other book they've ever released, they'll just try and make sure it's not broken when combined with stuff in the PHB. So in the interest of not having to eventually maintain some sprawling list of combos you're not allowed to play they're using the PHB+1 rule.Point taken. It has the appeal of simplicity.


Also, there's table size restrictions to keep things from getting too slow.Another point taken. Having to juggle with three books for one character might be too much.


Lawful evil characters can behave.I was going to ask what assumptions were made about LE characters. What if it is their code of honor that demands they take the life of any opponent they defeat in battle, as well as that of any ally who shows cowardice or ineptitude? Do they have to follow the same and as many rules a LG character would? But then Tanarii brought precisions.


You can't choose chaotic evil OR neutral evil. The only Evil alignment allowed is Lawful Evil, and you must be a member of the Zhentarim or Lord's Alliance faction to play LE. And that's relevant, because factions have this rule:
No Undermining of Other Characters During Adventures.
Adventurers are brought together by common cause, and during an adventure, they’re expected to work together to overcome challenges.
Though certain factions might find others distasteful, individuals will put that aside and become a team when put in dangerous situations. In short, play nice with each other when things get deadly.
Does this have a counterpart for good characters? Do you have to be the sort of good character who won't turn on an ally once they become aware of the extent of their ally's sins?


The idea is for it to be cooperative play.Past a certain point, the cooperative play runs entirely on metagaming.

[Tanarii]

Does this have a counterpart for good characters? Do you have to be the sort of good character who won't turn on an ally once they become aware of the extent of their ally's sins?The faction "no undermining" rule applies to all faction members. Although the language of the first sentence also makes it implicitly global to all characters. So it applies to Harpers as well as Zhentarim*

If you really can't handle the sins of an evil character, don't adventure with them again. Or leave the party / adventure early if you must. Which has the added bonus of being somewhat realistic role playing, unless you've sworn to mindlessly kill all evil!


*Although I realize the zhents aren't what they used to be in terms of evilness, they're still my go-to for 'evil bastards you sometimes just have to suck it up and work with'.

[Millstone85]

If you really can't handle the sins of an evil character, don't adventure with them again. Or leave the party / adventure early if you must. Which has the added bonus of being somewhat realistic role playing, unless you've sworn to mindlessly kill all evil!It should be relatively easy for the player to leave the table or roll a different character. But it wouldn't be realistic for their character to just leave the adventuring party. They might mindfully decide to kill this monster (as in a true monster, not in the fantasy sense) or try to put them behind bars, either solution being undermining for sure. Would the Adventure League be okay with "NPCifying" the character right before they do this, thus technically avoiding PvP?

[Tanarii]

But it wouldn't be realistic for their character to just leave the adventuring party.Why not? That's how adventuring parties work in the Forgotten Realms. Exactly like classic D&D adventuring parties. Different PCs come together, go adventuring, then split up and go their ways. If they don't get along with certain individuals, they separate and don't adventure with them again.

Edit: Pretty sure this is one reason official play is set in the realms. Because it already had episodic adventuring built in to the setting as part of how the in-game setting works, ie adventuring parties actually exist as an in-game thing and form to go on short term 'adventures' together.

[rooneg]

But would there be any problem with a tabaxi swashbuckler rogue? Honest question, I haven't finished reading Volo's yet. If the answer is no, then the rule might be too inclusive already.

No, I don't think anything they've printed to date is actually a problem. Everything that's actually been printed to date that can be done with character creation or leveling up seems ok to me. Honestly, I'd really prefer if I didn't have to jump through ridiculous hoops to get my Eldritch Knight both the SCAG cantrips and Absorb Elements from Elemental Evil. It doesn't break anything, and it's just a pain to do it legally. Heck, all it really does is encourage people to fudge their log sheets, which helps nobody. Same with a Swashbuckler Tabaxi, or whatever else.

If you really want something to complain about with regard to power creep in AL, start with the availability of magic items from the various hardcover campaigns that WotC has released. Legally there's nothing to prevent you from jumping from hardcover to hardcover, cherry picking the chapters that happen to have the most broken magical items. It's certainly against the spirit of the rules, but not the letter, so from time to time you'll show up at a convention and see a table of players with the stupid intelligent greatsword from the Horde of the Dragon Queen, a different guy fighting with paired sun blades (one from Out of the Abyss, one from Curse of Strahd), another one with ridiculous ability scores from a bunch of Tomes of Whatever that he got from who knows where, a Wizard who's wearing one of those dragon masks and a Staff of Power looted from the crypts under Castle Ravenloft, etc. As you get towards Tier 3 things can get pretty stupid, and it's unreasonable to expect an adventure to scale from the low end where someone just leveled up to 11 and has a handful of low powered magic items to the high end of the tier's levels plus a crapload of magical loot. But I digress.

But then again, I also want this organized play campaign to last for the foreseeable future, and I don't want it to collapse under its own weight in 10 years (what can I say, I'm optimistic about how long I think 5e will run for). Eventually there will be more player options, and some of them will be more broken at low levels than a Moon Druid who can tank for days and people will be crying out for bans, and nobody wants that, least of all me.


It should be relatively easy for the player to leave the table or roll a different character.

Nobody wants to require someone to leave the table at a con they paid to get in to. Nobody wants to tell someone that they need to start over at level 1 because some idiot they got randomly seated next to at a con game happened to be playing chaotic jerk and backstabbed him because "it's what my character would do". When you're talking about organized play that spans the world and where people will often have to play with people they don't know at all (that's usually what happens to me, since I don't have a schedule that lets me play in a regular game, so I mostly play at cons or a random game day here and there) you need to account for that sort of thing.

[DrDinocrusher]

But would there be any problem with a tabaxi swashbuckler rogue? Honest question, I haven't finished reading Volo's yet. If the answer is no, then the rule might be too inclusive already.

It's to force players to make choices, and cut down on the thirty book dipping common in 3.5. While a Tabaxi swashbuckler on its own might not be an issue, would a Yuan-Ti green flame blade warlock be too much? A bugbear swashbuckler? And so on. While the problems might not be too pressing at the moment, the more sourcebooks we get the more pressing of an issue it will be. Because the PHB+1 makes you choose what parts of your build are the most important to you.




I was going to ask what assumptions were made about LE characters. What if it is their code of honor that demands they take the life of any opponent they defeat in battle, as well as that of any ally who shows cowardice or ineptitude? Do they have to follow the same and as many rules a LG character would? But then Tanarii brought precisions.

I haven't seen many LE characters in the AL honestly, most people who want to make chaos just go CN. I'm currently playing a LE character and it's going fine, but the metagaming code of conduct is an issue for every character. What if you're a LG character pledged to kill evil doers? Do you automatically kill a party member who commits evil acts? The alignment system has always been a little inflexible and silly when it came to the player characters.

[Millstone85]

Nobody wants to require someone to leave the table at a con they paid to get in to. Nobody wants to tell someone that they need to start over at level 1 because some idiot they got randomly seated next to at a con game happened to be playing chaotic jerk and backstabbed him because "it's what my character would do".It is still hard for me to see how being randomly seated next to the smartass playing a lawful jerk is so much better. Sure, their character might not literally stab yours in the back, but they ought at some point do something that stands against the moral core of your character. Something like handing a slave back to her owners or what have you. What does the DM say to you then? "Don't worry, this adventure will be over soon"?

[rooneg]

It is still hard for me to see how being randomly seated next to the smartass playing a lawful jerk is so much better. Sure, their character might not literally stab yours in the back, but they ought at some point do something that stands against the moral core of your character. Something like handing a slave back to her owners or what have you. What does the DM say to you then? "Don't worry, this adventure will be over soon"?

Basically, yeah. There's a certain amount of fudging that goes along with being at a table of random people most of whom don't actually know each other and might never play together again. If you can get past the "wait a minute, in the last slot I was in Mullmaster fighting the Elemental Evil cults, and now I'm in Phlan exploring the crypts underneath Kelemvor's temple, and in the next slot I'm off to Parnast to deal with some giants!" (which, by the way, is chronologically impossible!) thing then you can probably accept that at some point the LG paladin and the LE zhentarim mage have agreed to look the other way when each of them does something the other objects to, because right now they're working together for the greater good.

Organized play D&D (especially at a con) is not the same as an ongoing campaign where you have the same players each week and their characters have a real justification for being in the party on this adventure and you delve deeply into their interpersonal relationships and have ongoing amusing feuds over the paladin being annoyingly straight laced and the rogue picking his pocket on alternate thursdays. It's still a fun game, but it's a different kind of game. I don't want to detract from it by saying it's the World of Warcraft version of D&D, because honestly there can be plenty of fun role playing that goes on, but at some point you make your peace with the fact that some of these characters honestly should not get along.

[Millstone85]

It's still a fun game, but it's a different kind of game.I appreciate the vivid description you just gave of that other D&D.
Seems intimidating, though.

[Malifice]

http://www.movienewsguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Justice-League.png

Pretty sure...

[Ursus the Grim]

If you really want something to complain about with regard to power creep in AL, start with the availability of magic items from the various hardcover campaigns that WotC has released. Legally there's nothing to prevent you from jumping from hardcover to hardcover, cherry picking the chapters that happen to have the most broken magical items. It's certainly against the spirit of the rules, but not the letter, so from time to time you'll show up at a convention and see a table of players with the stupid intelligent greatsword from the Horde of the Dragon Queen, a different guy fighting with paired sun blades (one from Out of the Abyss, one from Curse of Strahd), another one with ridiculous ability scores from a bunch of Tomes of Whatever that he got from who knows where, a Wizard who's wearing one of those dragon masks and a Staff of Power looted from the crypts under Castle Ravenloft, etc. As you get towards Tier 3 things can get pretty stupid, and it's unreasonable to expect an adventure to scale from the low end where someone just leveled up to 11 and has a handful of low powered magic items to the high end of the tier's levels plus a crapload of magical loot. But I digress.


I think they tried to mitigate this last season when you basically got 'trapped' in Barovia and had to spend resources to exit. It's been pretty universally complained about.

There's also a natural inclination for people to prefer to play new content.

Sure, you could ask your DM to go and help you grind the best 'loot modules' but most people seem like they'd prefer to try out the new adventures that just came out.

[rooneg]

I think they tried to mitigate this last season when you basically got 'trapped' in Barovia and had to spend resources to exit. It's been pretty universally complained about.

There's also a natural inclination for people to prefer to play new content.

Sure, you could ask your DM to go and help you grind the best 'loot modules' but most people seem like they'd prefer to try out the new adventures that just came out.

I've seen plenty of people run through specific older adventures that happen to have cool magical toys in them. It's not terribly uncommon for those particular adventures to get rerun at cons or game days, often by player request. Heck, I've played in them myself and run them myself, at least partially because of the loot in them, and I don't think it's a real problem. Cherry picking chapters from hardcovers that happen to have powerful items is a different class of issue though. The hardcovers contain items that are really over the top in a lot of cases, things that the AL wouldn't let a typical adventure author get away with. It's not the sort of thing you run into with every group or at every con, but it's certainly a thing that happens and it's a pain when you encounter it.

As for the Ravenloft thing, I honestly think it was a well intentioned attempt to provide a more cohesive storytelling experience, but it conflicted intrinsically with the character portability aspects of organized play, and people reacted as you might expect. I think if they'd been clear from the beginning that there would be a downtime day based exit strategy later in the season people would have taken the whole thing better. As it is, they went out of their way to explain how you could only get a character out of Ravenloft in particular undisclosed adventures with exit points in them. People who were only going to play an unpredictable subset of the season were totally reasonably afraid of getting a beloved character trapped, so they played other things. This doesn't seem like a surprising turn of events to me at all.