TOPIC: Newest Newletter 9/27/16

bpsymington wrote: It seemed to me that XP was just for the new adventure, not the "greatest hits" adventure. Am I making a faulty assumption?

Both runs are greatest hits adventures.

"NEW! The Underdark Awaits - This is a full two-hour adventure made up of fan-favorite rooms from TD's long past. This adventure has not been presented anywhere, and it will only be shown at Gamehole Con in 2016."

It is just Underdark Awaits hasn't been put together before. DR will just be the exact same (or really close) to the same ones at WYC.

Mike Steele wrote:

MasterED wrote:

Incognito wrote: Maybe the better implementation is that the XP from GHC cannot bring your total XP to above 10,000 XP?

I concur. See it can happen (Incognito and I agree)!

Ed

I'd agree with that also.

+1 to this as well, I guess.

I still don't get what the "compromise" is????

If you can't make it to a Con then too bad, no XP for you. If you can make it and play then you should get XP. If I sat down with my old time RPG group and said only players below a certain level would get XP for playing a session because other people that can't make it are worried about not receiving any XP I'd probably have a fair amount of sharp objects thrown at me, a bit of WTF'ing, and then a walk out. I get that some people live time zones away, but so what. A person shouldn't be robbed from a participation reward just because another person can't participate.

Of course I'm sure this was all brought up before, some heated debates were had, and hence the outcome. It just doesn't make any sense to me. Unless I'm missing something.

Dave wrote: I'm reading the newsletter again.

We are happy to announce that each player of a two-hour adventure at Gamehole Con will be able to claim experience points -- just like can be done at Gen Con. Players will be provided with a card with a unique code which can be entered at the TD website to record XP for your player account.

It just says "a two-hour adventure". This could mean that you can get credit for one run at GHC, regardless of whether you do Deeperdark Redux or Underdark Awaits. If that's the case, then you can only get a maximum of 2000 xp at GHC, not 2000 xp for each run. That interpretation would make sense and put it on par with WYC.

Because they are two different adventures, you can get separate XP for each. Sorry for the confusion.

Jeff Martin wrote:

Dave wrote: I'm reading the newsletter again.

We are happy to announce that each player of a two-hour adventure at Gamehole Con will be able to claim experience points -- just like can be done at Gen Con. Players will be provided with a card with a unique code which can be entered at the TD website to record XP for your player account.

It just says "a two-hour adventure". This could mean that you can get credit for one run at GHC, regardless of whether you do Deeperdark Redux or Underdark Awaits. If that's the case, then you can only get a maximum of 2000 xp at GHC, not 2000 xp for each run. That interpretation would make sense and put it on par with WYC.

Because they are two different adventures, you can get separate XP for each. Sorry for the confusion.

I think that is how most people interpreted it, but thank you for the clarification.

I like the idea of XP at these Con's for the lower level players. It should help encourage new players to join in and experience the fun. Also - it can help some of our friends and family that we have introduced to the game over the years "catch up" to the rest of their play group so they don't feel so far behind.

I like the idea of making the game more "inclusive" - often I think we have an "exclusive" bent here on the forums. Coming out with new Treasure Enhancers that are available to both new and old players, allowing newer players to "catch up" on an XP gap to get similar rewards to the rest of their friends, and similar ideas will help the game continue to grow in my opinion - as opposed to bringing down "the end of the game as we know it".

I personally don't get any XP from these other conventions (Like jedi I just hit 7th level) - but I'm happy some of my friends can benefit and can sooner read the Lords and Ladies Forum, get the extra treasure chip and not feel 2nd class.

Plus I'm loving the chance to play TD more and take on new puzzles and challenges - regardless of XP or treasure or anything else. The fun of the game is what I look forward to most...the rest is just gravy.

Jeff Martin wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

MasterED wrote:

Incognito wrote: Maybe the better implementation is that the XP from GHC cannot bring your total XP to above 10,000 XP?

I concur. See it can happen (Incognito and I agree)!

Ed

I'd agree with that also.

Thanks for the feedback. The issue is not just one Con in 2016. We needed a rule that would be workable for years to come at our non-Gen Con events. It needs to be something easy to understand as well as something the programmer can do -- and "checking level" mechanic seemed to fit best. I could be wrong.

I would assume then that there is already a flag that denotes if it is a side con or not so something like

If Side Con
If Current Level < 5
If Current XP + XP For Event > 10000
XP Towards Total = 10000 - Current XP
else
XP Towards Total = XP For Event
end
else
XP Towards Total = 0
end
end

versus

If Side Con
If Current Level < 5
XP Towards Total = XP For Event
else
XP Towards Total = 0
end
end

This was mostly just a thought exercise for me and i'm sure there are people here that could do it even tighter than I did, but In theory doable to cap at 10000 with one extra condition, if we are worried about a fairness imbalance somewhere.

Jeff Martin wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

MasterED wrote:

Incognito wrote: Maybe the better implementation is that the XP from GHC cannot bring your total XP to above 10,000 XP?

I concur. See it can happen (Incognito and I agree)!

Ed

I'd agree with that also.

Thanks for the feedback. The issue is not just one Con in 2016. We needed a rule that would be workable for years to come at our non-Gen Con events. It needs to be something easy to understand as well as something the programmer can do -- and "checking level" mechanic seemed to fit best. I could be wrong.

I would go out on a limb and say this is doable as long as the XP stickers you create can distinguish the con and the run. The programming is trivial.

Ed

Rob F wrote:
I still don't get what the "compromise" is????

If you can't make it to a Con then too bad, no XP for you. If you can make it and play then you should get XP. If I sat down with my old time RPG group and said only players below a certain level would get XP for playing a session because other people that can't make it are worried about not receiving any XP I'd probably have a fair amount of sharp objects thrown at me, a bit of WTF'ing, and then a walk out. I get that some people live time zones away, but so what. A person shouldn't be robbed from a participation reward just because another person can't participate.

Of course I'm sure this was all brought up before, some heated debates were had, and hence the outcome. It just doesn't make any sense to me. Unless I'm missing something.

What you are missing is that to some people their spot on the leaderboard is more *gollum* precious than the one ring *gollum*.

A subset of those people have the strong belief that only Gen Con participation should count, or that you should be able to max out XP at one con a year (despite the fact that some top leaderboard people have Gen Con SoCal and True Realm XP - and even True Here's XP for crying out loud! )

Another subset of those people have the strong belief that redux/greatest hits dungeons shouldn't count (despite the fact that some people at the top of the leaderboard have redux/greatest hits dungeons in their XP).

Taking a cross section of those opinions, you'll find some folks that think GHC should not offer XP at all. Some XP is being offered, so they are not getting all they want.

Hence compromise.

For the record, I think you should get full XP for a standard length dungeon at any presentation of True Dungeon.

I'm ambivalent about whether or not there should be an annual XP cap:

• Certainly it would be nice for the folks who care about the leaderboard and are high on it to not have to "grind" con attendance to stay there
• Certainly it would be nice for the folks who care about the leaderboard and are not high on it to have the chance to catch up by playing more
• Certainly it would be nice for people trying to obtain player rewards to get them faster if they attend more true dungeon

Dave wrote: I know compromises are supposed to be win-win, but generally they do still leave some people feeling disappointed.

A good compromise is when both parties are dissatisfied
--Larry David, Curb Your Enthusiasm

A fair bargain leaves both sides unhappy.
--George R.R. Martin, A Dance with Dragons

(I'm having trouble finding the original quote. I'm pretty certain both of those are paraphrases of a much older saying. I thought it might have been Henry Clay, but not finding an attribution to him for that sentiment.)

MasterED wrote:

Incognito wrote: Maybe the better implementation is that the XP from GHC cannot bring your total XP to above 10,000 XP?

I concur. See it can happen (Incognito and I agree)!

Ed

Uh, we actually agree on a lot of things.

Some of the recent power issues with the 2017 set. Eldritch set rebalancing.

Jeff Martin wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

MasterED wrote:

Incognito wrote: Maybe the better implementation is that the XP from GHC cannot bring your total XP to above 10,000 XP?

I concur. See it can happen (Incognito and I agree)!

Ed

I'd agree with that also.

Thanks for the feedback. The issue is not just one Con in 2016. We needed a rule that would be workable for years to come at our non-Gen Con events. It needs to be something easy to understand as well as something the programmer can do -- and "checking level" mechanic seemed to fit best. I could be wrong.

1. So if a player is at 8000 XP and does both of the GHC events (2000 XP each) do they end up with 12,000 XP total? Or does the second GHC event no longer give the 2000 XP because it checks separately and once the player reaches 5th level form the first event, the second one doesn't add?

2. If a player is at 6000 XP but has not yet entered the 4000 XP from GenCon, can they do the GHC events first to get 4000 XP (reaching 10,000 XP) and then go back and enter the GenCon XP to get that 4000 XP and end up with 14,000 XP?

In other words, will the coding only check level and XP when the GHC XP is entered? Or will it be a constant conditional that checks for level/XP prior to that date?


I guess if you did just reach 5th level this GenCon, the easy fix is for you to go back into "Edit 2016 XP" and give yourself LESS XP. (So instead of completing 7 rooms on Hardcore, you could do 5 rooms on Normal). Just bring your XP threshold to right below 10,000 XP (I guess you could lose a level this way?). Then you will be able to get all the XP at GHC.

Matthew Hayward wrote:
Taking a cross section of those opinions, you'll find some folks that think GHC should not offer XP at all. Some XP is being offered, so they are not getting all they want.

Hence compromise.

You have an interesting way of defining compromise. For one thing a compromise generally requites more then one party. "Some folks don't think there should be xp as satellite cons" (as was stated would be the case when GHC was announced). Nuts to those guys, is not a compromise. You need to consider all parties when meeting in the middle not just the protected classes.

As implemented the solution also comes with the added problem of treating classes of players differently (and being a reversal of a previously stated position).

People have made the argument "its silly to go to a con potentially for years and not get xp" but that's still also very possible. Just not for all groups of players. If your in the preferred class (new business) you get XP, if you've been playing TD for a few years you still might have never seen these rooms before and gone on the run but no xp for you.

And lets not forget that in a few short years all those folks who will get used to getting their xp at satellite cons will hit 5th and have to be told the ride is over anyway.

End of the day Im firmly against two things
1) Treating players differently, you always alienate someone.
2) Reversing stated policy, it does not raise consumer confidence.

This compromise hits both those points. Next year Im all for letting any run generate XP regardless of con. This year IMO It was to late to change, but like I said its moot now, damage done, the decision has been made & publicized. Further reversals wont look any better on TD.