Saying Goodbye to the PH+1 Rule

[mythmonster2]

Some important news for anyone involved in Adventurer's League: The PH+1 rule is now gone (https://yawningportal.dnd.wizards.com/blog/saying-goodbye-to-the-ph1-rule/). Players are permitted to use as many books as they like, though there is a restriction based on the specific campaign.

PHB, Volo's, Xanathar's, Mordekainen's, and Tasha's are available for all campaigns.
SCAG is available in anything in the Forgotten Realms.
Eberron is only available in Oracle of War.
Genasi, aarakocra, tortles, and locathah are available in Masters and Historic campaigns
It appears that the MTG books, Ravnica and Theros, are not legal anywhere in AL.

[Greywander]

I suppose it was inevitable as more and more books were released. But I didn't expect them to just straight up abandon the rule. I would have thought that they would have just expanded the number of "free" books you get, e.g. PHB+XGtE+TCoE+1.

[Tectorman]

To paraphrase an wise Jedi master:

"At an end, that rule is. And leave soon enough, it couldn't."

[Kylar0990]

I suppose it was inevitable as more and more books were released. But I didn't expect them to just straight up abandon the rule. I would have thought that they would have just expanded the number of "free" books you get, e.g. PHB+XGtE+TCoE+1.

This way they won't have to reprint form so much from Adventure books to Source Books for something to be useful. Not saying they won't still reprint there just may not be as much need to.

[KorvinStarmast]

*sigh* Why does WoTC hate DMs? :smallyuk:

[Xervous]

*sigh* Why does WoTC hate DMs? :smallyuk:

Well I dunno, they made AL so expanding book selection is a grain of sand on top the dune.

[Tanarii]

*sigh* Why does WoTC hate DMs? :smallyuk:This will just make it even easier to find jaded ex-AL players to run a competing campaign in game stores.

[x3n0n]

This will just make it even easier to find jaded ex-AL players to run a competing campaign in game stores.

What about this change, in particular, makes you think that current or new AL players will dislike AL more and become "jaded" enough to leave?

The first-order effect is that players get to use all of the books that are "appropriate" to the setting, so I would guess that players would be happier in the short-to-medium term.

Maybe there are second-order effects in which players get disgusted with others' unreasonable PCs or DMs' struggles to keep up with additional rules?

[KorvinStarmast]

Maybe there are second-order effects in which players get disgusted with others' unreasonable PCs or DMs' struggles to keep up with additional rules? I suspect that more DM's will decline the opportunity to DM. While COVID has really hampered my second chance to AL - the first one died back when Strahd came out thanks to a spousal veto - I am in touch with a few people locally who may want to get some AL games going this summer. I had offered to DM initially, now that I have had some mor games under my belt on roll20 with a few groups.

In my case, this development is extremely unwelcome.
I will most likely withdraw that offer.

[Tanarii]

What about this change, in particular, makes you think that current or new AL players will dislike AL more and become "jaded" enough to leave?The two biggest factors I've found that drove players away from AL, or at least made them want to experience a different type of game at the same time, are:
- non-persistent world
- extreme focus on high levels of optimization

Official play attracts a lot of extreme optimizers, largely because it has such an open character building policy.

[Doug Lampert]

What about this change, in particular, makes you think that current or new AL players will dislike AL more and become "jaded" enough to leave?

The first-order effect is that players get to use all of the books that are "appropriate" to the setting, so I would guess that players would be happier in the short-to-medium term.

Maybe there are second-order effects in which players get disgusted with others' unreasonable PCs or DMs' struggles to keep up with additional rules?

Even from an immediate player effect, this has problems. If the change is as described then characters who were legal yesterday, based on Ravnica and Theros, are illegal for all settings today.

Another thing is that characters are no longer portable from AL game to AL game, which I sort of thought was supposed to be a significant advantage to AL games.

[KorvinStarmast]

Another thing is that characters are no longer portable from AL game to AL game, which I sort of thought was supposed to be a significant advantage to AL games. It was indeed.

[king_steve]

Even from an immediate player effect, this has problems. If the change is as described then characters who were legal yesterday, based on Ravnica and Theros, are illegal for all settings today.

I didn't think that Ravnica or Theros were approved for AL +1 books, the 10.3 season only lists:



Mordenkainen’s Tome of Foes
Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything
Volo’s Guide to Monsters
Xanathar’s Guide to Everything



Doesn't this only add content for future campaigns?

[Snowbluff]

The two biggest factors I've found that drove players away from AL, or at least made them want to experience a different type of game at the same time, are:
- non-persistent world
- extreme focus on high levels of optimization

Official play attracts a lot of extreme optimizers, largely because it has such an open character building policy.

I once played a level 1 mod that one shots you for doing something you're suppose to do. It doesn't "attract" high levels of optimization, it demands it.


That being said, they work as hard as they can to make convoluted and unfriendly rules towards the players. I couldn't keep all of it straight at the end, and all of the people I play with regularly gave up due to the limited opportunities to try the new content in AL.

[Tanarii]

That being said, they work as hard as they can to make convoluted and unfriendly rules towards the players.
For sure. Season 8 was a huge change that drove a bunch of players to my tables in one go.

[KorvinStarmast]

For sure. Season 8 was a huge change that drove a bunch of players to my tables in one go. I hope they brought the pizza. :smallsmile: :smallcool:

[Keravath]

I suspect that more DM's will decline the opportunity to DM. While COVID has really hampered my second chance to AL - the first one died back when Strahd came out thanks to a spousal veto - I am in touch with a few people locally who may want to get some AL games going this summer. I had offered to DM initially, now that I have had some mor games under my belt on roll20 with a few groups.

In my case, this development is extremely unwelcome.
I will most likely withdraw that offer.

I'm just curious why you think simplifying the character creation process will drive DMs to refuse to run AL. Or why it indicates that WotC hates DMs?

----

From a player perspective, I can see folks who like to optimize playing yuan-ti pureblood/other monstrous races or variant humans more. However, if they wanted to do that they could already.

DMs still had to be aware of the rules from SCAG, Volos, PHB. XGTE, TCE etc because you could get characters at one table using various combinations of content from any of them. Volos as +1, SCAG as +1, EEPC as +1, XGTE as +1 ... you wouldn't get Yuan-ti hexblades but you could get yuan-ti warlocks and half-elf hexblades without any trouble.

----

From a DM perspective, there is less checking and validation needed when you sit down with a table and check to see if the character is AL legal. As long as they don't use Ravnica/Wildemount/Theros and stick to world relevant books, the DM no longer needs to check if the wizard accdidentally picked Toll the Dead as a cantrip without picking XGTE as their +1.

They also have three campaigns - Historical, Seasonal and "Masters". Seasonal slides into Historical at the end of the current year. Masters is Dreams of the Red Wizards, Candlekeep Mysteries and a limited collection of convention created content from some of the big conventions. Characters are associated with only one campaign though I don't understand why they need "Masters" distinct from Historical.

[Tectorman]

From a player perspective, I can see folks who like to optimize playing yuan-ti pureblood/other monstrous races or variant humans more. However, if they wanted to do that they could already.

DMs still had to be aware of the rules from SCAG, Volos, PHB. XGTE, TCE etc because you could get characters at one table using various combinations of content from any of them. Volos as +1, SCAG as +1, EEPC as +1, XGTE as +1 ... you wouldn't get Yuan-ti hexblades but you could get yuan-ti warlocks and half-elf hexblades without any trouble.

----

From a DM perspective, there is less checking and validation needed when you sit down with a table and check to see if the character is AL legal. As long as they don't use Ravnica/Wildemount/Theros and stick to world relevant books, the DM no longer needs to check if the wizard accdidentally picked Toll the Dead as a cantrip without picking XGTE as their +1.

Thank you. This. Precisely and exactly this.

"Sure, you can play a Tabaxi Monk. And of course, you can play a Drunken Monk. No problem with that; perish the thought. What?! Play a Tabaxi Drunken Monk? Oh, that's just too much! Beyond the pale, really!"

[KorvinStarmast]

Or why it indicates that WotC hates DMs? That was blue text. :smallwink:

And as to the snark from a different post:
I have a monk player, Tabaxi, Drunken master in a home game. She's great. The player is someone I know and trust.

[Tectorman]

That was blue text. :smallwink:

And as to the snark from a different post:
I have a monk player, Tabaxi, Drunken master in a home game. She's great. The player is someone I know and trust.

Sounds great. Why should you have to (or, as we can now happily say, "have had to") specify "a home game"?

"I have a monk player, Dwarf, Drunken master."

"In a home game?"

"Irrelevant."

"I have a monk player, Tabaxi, Drunken master."

"In a home game?"

"Still irrelevant. Why did the race changing make you think that question would suddenly matter?"

Why would that be something she has to earn by you knowing her, trusting her, and thinking she's great when that EXACT same thing but with a different race would be allowed without these hoops? Unless you mean that a new AL player would ALSO not be allowed his Dwarf Drunken monk unless you knew and trusted him too?

[KorvinStarmast]

Sounds great. Why should you have to
Your tone is a bit more aggressive than necessary. I'll not bother responding. We obviously have differing perspectives and differing experiences.

[GentlemanVoodoo]

Some important news for anyone involved in Adventurer's League: The PH+1 rule is now gone (https://yawningportal.dnd.wizards.com/blog/saying-goodbye-to-the-ph1-rule/). Players are permitted to use as many books as they like, though there is a restriction based on the specific campaign.

PHB, Volo's, Xanathar's, Mordekainen's, and Tasha's are available for all campaigns.
SCAG is available in anything in the Forgotten Realms.
Eberron is only available in Oracle of War.
Genasi, aarakocra, tortles, and locathah are available in Masters and Historic campaigns
It appears that the MTG books, Ravnica and Theros, are not legal anywhere in AL.


Hmm...this seems convoluted. It has been a while since I have done an AL game but even then there was a poor system of identifying what games were being done at a table, whether one shots or full campaigns. This just seems to make it worse. I mean a player gets put at a table with one source ready to go then to find out it is null & void for use as the table is running something else. But this also does conjure up the horror stories of live play events where players just show up with stacks of books and having to delay play time by searching through everything. Guess WOTC has yet to learn lessons of the past. The PHB +1 rule, love it or hate it, did prevent things like this. They should have just expanded the selections of the +1 sources to included everything, even the MTG books.

[Keravath]

All the places around me have already said goodbye to Adventurer's League. Before Covid. D&D was up 33% last year in profits so the lack of AL isn't exactly hurting the game at all.

AL does have some uses of course, like getting a feel for what's on the horizon for D&D. Season 10's initial AL rules drop in the middle of Spetember last year gave a bunch of insight into what was happening with Tasha's and what stuff was going to look like going forward.

For me, the motivation is the ability to play a character I create and develop in an ongoing story of THEIR life without having to commit to showing up with a group of folks on a weekly basis. I don't have to feel bad when the kids or spouse have something that needs doing and I can't make it. Having several different AL games scheduled in the same week (my local store used to run games Monday/Thursday/Friday and occasional Sundays) meant if my schedule changed, I had deadlines at work, or something else came up - I could cancel my booked slot freeing it up for someone else and still get to play my characters another day or week.

Regular D&D groups work great when you can find them. AL gives you flexibility and portability of the characters, scheduling flexibility that fits with everyone's busy lives, and a set of common expectations around how it will be run. You also get to play in group events like conventions or epics if that appeals to you.

Is a good group of friends playing together better? Likely. Is it always possible or available? No. AL gives you a game that goes on when you can play no matter whether Ahmed and Sarah, or anyone else happens to be able to make it that night or not.

As for whether AL is an important part of the promotion of D&D, I have no idea. The problem getting into this hobby has always been finding a group of like minded folks and someone who wants to DM. AL run out of stores and online provides an on ramp for individuals who don't have a group or a large enough social circle of folks who want to play to get a chance to play.

AL plays with 7 or sometimes more folks, AL tends to foster a welcoming attitude to new folks ...

I was playing at the local game store about 2 years ago with a tier 3 scheduled and a first time player had signed up not knowing they needed to play a character to level 11 before they could play a tier 3 - so the other 6 of us and the DM decided to play a tier 1 module instead and helped the new person to create a level 1 character - we had a great time ... however, if it had been a "regularly scheduled game" and not AL, it might have been much more difficult to get everyone to swap to a tier 1 adventure.

AL also provides a standardized set of rules - no house rules - no critical misses - no DM customization - no custom classes or races - no UA - everything has been at least play tested and balanced. Rando campaign at a game store? Not so much. The local game store had to ask a DM to leave because they loved their critical miss tables and other homebrew and wouldn't drop it when playing AL.

So for flexibility, consistency, RAW based rulings, character portability and many other features ... AL can really make sense for a lot of people.

That said, it isn't for everyone, and if folks don't want to play AL, no one is making them.

[Naanomi]

I found AL a good framework for convention play; and a half-way reasonable venue for new players to see what DnD is broadly about if they don’t have their own playgroup yet

That being said, the book+1 rule always seems a bit like a solution searching for a problem; most of the really ‘breakable’ (by some standards) stuff is contained within the PHB to begin with

[Arctus Tyrvar]

I was never big on the +1 rule to begin with. And was one of a few reasons that I stayed away from Adventure League. With this change (and a few others that solved my other issues), I might actually give it a try now.

[Tanarii]

That being said, the book+1 rule always seems a bit like a solution searching for a problem; most of the really ‘breakable’ (by some standards) stuff is contained within the PHB to begin with
SCAG had two cantrips on par

[stoutstien]

*sigh* Why does WoTC hate DMs? :smallyuk:

Realistically that shouldn't be blue text lol Though hate is a strong word. It's more along the lines of being treated as an after thought. Holds true even with material that you would assume was released when DMs in mind as primary buyers/readers.

[holywhippet]

I wonder if this change was due to Tasha's book listing spells that were not contained within it but rather were contained in other source books such as Xanathar's?

[KorvinStarmast]

I wonder if this change was due to Tasha's book listing spells that were not contained within it but rather were contained in other source books such as Xanathar's?
I suspect so. When each of the supplements was more of a stove pipe, the +1 wasn't as messy. With the porting in of stuff from the other books, they may have just made it 'too hard' and decided to bin the idea. I'd have been a lot less grumpy about Tasha's had the Arcana Cleric and Genasi been included in that book.

[Witty Username]

Good riddance to bad rubbish, Not being able to use a race from Volo's and the Xanthar's spells was just restrictions for restrictions sake instead of reducing complexity or power. And It reduces the possibility of the one true book problem and the frustration of being able to use part of Tasha's but not the rest of the book.

Mtg is weird anyway and I think all the subclasses are in other books at this point. Les Miserables to all who want to want to play satyrs though.

[DwarfFighter]

I would think that nixing multi classing would do wonders for party balance.

(I don't allow multi classing, but that's not AL)

-DF

[KorvinStarmast]

I would think that nixing multi classing would do wonders for party balance.

-DF
yep. Multi classing is, for my money, best done on a case by case basis. If it fits the story, if it fits the campaign, yeah, great idea.

If it's a foray into munchkinland, the DM needs to decide: am I happy with this in my campaign? if the answer is Yes, fine, and if the answer is No, fine.