TOPIC: Discussion of Class Selection Process

I've never been a coach, but from my perspective as a player, I think the best way to approach it is to have a "cut-off time" where the coach hands out player cards at a specific time and lets players work it out themselves. A blurb could be sent to ticket holders with their purchase receipt and barcode that explains, "Character selection will begin 10 minutes before your start time," or at your start time, or whatever. That way people could still show up early and discuss among those present what works best for everyone involved. If you show up after that designated time, you get what's leftover.

I'd like to think that any issues beyond that could be resolved through discussion and maybe a roll-off, but people are people and there's always going to be that person who won't be satisfied with anything less than having their way. In the end, there's really nothing you can do for those sorts of people. They either resolve to have fun or they don't.

I really don't like the idea of being able to pay extra (either real $$ or GP) to reserve your class. Either way that creates a sort of play-to-win environment that always ends up edging people out of the game.

1. I agree with a time limit factor.
2. For any events sold through TD's ticketing system, build in a class preference when buying a ticket. With "no preference" being an option.

Kenban wrote: Just make sure the stacking rules prevent crazy parties, for instance a party can run 10 bards, but only gets the bonus of one song at a time.

This is exactly why it's a problem changing the rules. Because stacking bardsong is OP, there's a rule to prevent stacking but because double-fisting is not it's okay for 20 pucks of ranger/monk? Someone would have to make those decisions if any sort of new rules were created.

The current rules rein in degeneracy to some degree, even though degeneracy is rather prevalent already. But, that's not through a bunch of exceptions but through core mechanics of how things work, which is a manageable way to try to control balance.

The idea of multiples of the same class sounds good because we picture the upside. I imagine the practice would lose a lot not just in terms of balance. The game would stress more mechanics and less flavor for groups who chose classes for effectiveness or even something like humor (10x rogue with daggers - note problem with more than 1x rogue).

Beyond the internal game mechanics problems, there's the very real physical problem of running out of printed cards for players. It was... two years ago, I think-?... that a couple of classes either ran out of 5th level class cards by end of con or they couldn't find the stock. People were being asked to clean off and turn in cards if they were reusable, and I remember being given Ro7P cards when some couldn't be located at start of run.

Now imagine that, amplified by a full convention's worth of "but I wanted to play Fighter too". Unless they a) pack in, then pack out, character cards in a quantity that would let them run a full convention's worth of only that character or b) construct some way to print character cards on the spot, you're looking at disaster.

As a coach I would agree that this happens rarely where things come down to 3rd level player rank pulling or die rolls, but conflicts for specific roles come up among new players constantly at GenCon.

Allowing duplicates wouldn't bother me, but you would have to make special rules for more than one bard, cleric, paladin, rogue, dwarf fighter, probably others too but at least those.

Bardsong stacking
Restore power/spell chaining
Infinite guard chain
Dispute over Rogue box rights, Flank attack walls on the board
Infinite taunt chain

Probably others, but I can't think of them at the moment.

Party cards would need to blank. Then it would be the question of with fighter is which. Whose puck does everyone use? How does the DM know? Multiples of the same class become new problems. Sure solvable problems but it is creating new problems.

I already tried to convince Eric to let us try duplicate classes in Grind, but he wasn't too keen on it due to balance issues. But perhaps we'll try to allow up to 2 per class in the future or something like that. But mechanically I think I have it worked out:

• Party card would be 10 generic rows, numbered 1-10, and you write in the class name
• Sliders would be numbered 1-10 (instead of class name), but I guess you'd need two of each number to account for dual sliders
• Stickers with numbers 1-10 on them can be added to the front of the character card to help correlate
• Finally, we could require pre-generated stats if you want to use duplicate characters (otherwise coaching won't work as it currently does without class-specific rows on the party card)

This would be easier for the coach (because everybody would have to have pre-printed stats). This would be slightly easier for the combat board (because finding #1-#10 is easier than finding class names in my opinion). It would also be easier for the DM to roll a D20 to pick a random target.

But there are lots of balance issues. They could probably be worked out but it wouldn't be easy. Only one Bardsong can be in effect at once. Only one Monk per round can declare a Stunning Fist attack. Only one Rogue can attempt each rogue box, etc.

But others are more tricky. Is a party of 10 Rangers overpowered? A party of 10 Wizards? A party of 10 Clerics all with Restore Spell, etc.

But if we could pull it off, it would not only avoid this problem completely in the future, but it would also allow for more creativity in party creation. In other words, you could design parties with certain duplicate classes as part of your (hopefully not overpowered) strategy.

A few thoughts:

-online signups arent a final answer. Even if you do a first-come selection (which i dislike), there will still be times where multiple people didnt sign up ahead and want the same class...which then still needs another resolution.

-random class and allow trades would be insane. You couldnt plan ahead...unless you were allowed to swap with an unclaimed class. But in that case, as lomg as you buy and swap quickly, this is just first come at time of purchase (which is another option).

-classes attached to the ticket purchase. This would work if the tech can allow. It requires listing 12 (or more*) tickets for each event, but only allowing 10 to be bought.
*if this listing style can work, i suggest also including a 'last pick' option, so people who will play whatever is left can buy a ticket without locking in a class.

-time cutoff: this doesnt actually solve the problem as both players can be on time and still want the same class, and i strongly dislike the idea of first to arrive gets choice. The time cutoff can be used along with the full rule if it is needed to get the party card done in time.

-pay extra? No. Just no.

-fleshing out the current 3rd+ rule. So, first point here, this can never be the final decider. There could always be two players with exact same XP who want the same class. If you want to expand the rule to allow selection in level order, i guess i wont complain, but eventually a die roll will be needed.
When a die roll is needed, please have the entire party involved in the selection process. It is not fair to force one of the conflicting players to choose from the last classes while everyone else gets their first choice without a roll-off. This would actually be an argument for fully level tiered system. Anyone higher level than the conflict is locked in, then everyone AT the conflict level rolls off and selects, then on down the line.

-duplicate classes. I really like this option, but as mentioned, there would be concern with some groups using many of the same class. So, perhaps implement a disencentive to duplicating a class? Something like -5hp for every other player with the same class. So, if 2 players want to play druid, go ahead and you each have -5hp. Want your group to be all 10 druids? Well, you can, but you will all be -45hp...good luck. Or maybe -1 treasure for duplicate class? Basically, something where if you really care about playing that class you will take the penalty happily, but it doesnt make it easy/desirable to abuse.

I will say me and my friends were the players who were not signed up for the particular TrueRaid session online (I just plain forgot about it). To be clear, it wasn't a big deal, and we worked it out fine and I think no feelings were hurt. But there was a moment where we questioned whether we should honor the forum signup for players who weren't there on time. I at least didn't know who was late nor why they were late. It was admittedly a very confusing situation with effectively a party of 20 and I think at least one person switching sides, etc. In the end the forum signups were honored, we figured out alternative classes for ourselves, and we all died anyways. Again, no ill will held by me or my friends and hopefully no offense taken. And it wasn't the players' faults that they were late either.

But it does bring up some interesting questions, not just about this situation, and not just about pre-arranging on forums, but in general, even back to the basic dungeon run with a mix of newbie and Lv3+ players. Here is a scenario that has probably never happened, but it might happen. In my line of work we always design for these edge cases so it's the kind of thing I think about.

• 5 brand new players arrive 30min early, pick their classes, etc
• coach has recorded all of their stats
• say 20min after the start time, 5 veterans show up, and want to use their Lv3+ ability to steal the five classes that were already chosen

Based on the current rules as I understand them, the veterans should be allowed to take those classes an the newbies would then have to choose different ones. But obviously if I was a newbie I'd be very upset about the situation. I arrived on time and then somebody else comes in and takes my class. And causes a bunch of disruption likely causing the coaching to eat into training time.

But if the coach doesn't allow the change, the veterans might be upset that they couldn't use their Lv3 ability.

I have always disliked the Lv3 class selection rule, and I have never used it personally, and likely never will. But in the scenario above it is ever more problematic. If we wanted to keep that ability then I think there should be a cutoff that requires the person to be in the coaching room on time in order to claim the privilege of taking somebody else's class.

Again, this is all independent from the TrueRaid situation, it just made me think about it. Nothing I discussed here is about how to handle forum signups either.

James J Krot wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: I’m curious what other coaches think about how routine of a problem this is.

In 10+ years of playing I’ve never seen it get to a die roll or level based priority selection (but that’s only ~30 dungeons probably).

I think it could be very reasonable To have a time based cutoff like:

Everyone who is in the room when the coach arrives is entitled to a class before anyone who arrives later. This can be justified by difficulty in swapping builds/tokens around.

The “you get a random class and then can trade” approach might generate less conflict than the way it’s done today - but if we went that way we should eliminate the player level bonus because “I got lucky and got my favorite class and then a VIP player stole it because he spent a lot of money” is not a narrative we need to create.

In universe I could see GP bidding on classes (winning bids collected by DM) to be feasible as well. I think real money spending to get your class is likely a bad way to go for the P2W/VIP player complaints it would generate.

I could also see some kind of pre-registration being a good thing in that it could drive users to the forums or the Td website - which td might want for its own reasons. If you could come to the td website after ticket sales and register your classes after creating a forum account and getting signed up for the newsletter for instance.

At gencon it's pretty common when I coached like at least once a day for me.

How many coaches are there?

If it’s twice a day per coach, over three days with 8 coaches that would be a total of 48 runs where people can’t agree out of 800 - around 5 percent.

At that level I’m not sure any intervention can meaningfully reduce contention - other than perhaps: “everyone can play anything.”

I don’t like the “everyone can play anything” as it fundamentally changes the game, and might have serious implications for token values and hence token design and sales.

One method I can think of is to just start with what we have - we already have duplicates of every class.

Allow a 4th and 5th level of each class and that reduces the playing field quite a bit.

Two people want to be rogue and the 5th level was taken first? Then you get to be 4th level rogue or pick another class. Or flipped, two players want to be rogue and 4th level was already taken you'd have to be 5th level to take the other rogue card, etc.

Put two colors of sliders out for each class and that problem is solved too. Or number them.

Dibs on Rogue One.

Fair warning I am "Borrowing" bits and pieces of some of the most excellent comments that have come before while adding my own unique experience:
I think it could be very reasonable To have a time based cutoff like:
Everyone who is in the room when the coach arrives is entitled to a class before anyone who arrives later. This can be justified by difficulty in swapping builds/tokens around.
I have coached at nearly every con over the last 4 years so I have seen a lot. Only once has it gotten ugly with a 7th and 8th level player fighting over the same character class. It did not end well.
I don't like the bidding or forcing pre-event registration on the forums or anywhere else. I think it really inhibits the ability of new players to just enjoy the game.

As the coach, especially with newbies, I will enter the room and everyone is excited to put their tokens out on their mats. I try to get them to focus on picking a character class FIRST before arranging tokens. I then have a maybe 5-8 minute speech (more for new players) about what to expect. One of the first things I mention is that it is a timed room and once I begin writing (at the end of the speech) down peoples stat's there won't be changes since I have to process the entire room. (Don't tell anyone but I am not a monster and if there are minor changes I will get back to them when I'm done with everyone else).
Why is that important - I like the cut off time also, as long as it's communicated to all players ahead of time.
I have had people walk into my rooms late specifically after room start time as we all know you can get there early but after the room has started and then want to take a class from another player. It doesn't happen often but it does happen.
As a player, at GenCon last year, we purchased 6 of the ten tickets for a run. We had 2 people who were on time and had no conflicts with the classes my group wanted to play. I play wizard and am truly indifferent to wizard or Elf Wizard so I am versatile. Then about 5 minutes before we were to go into training 2 new and I mean NEW players arrived. Some of their friends had given them some meager tokens and told them which classes to play. Both of those classes had already been chosen and recorded on the party card. They were a little put out when the coach, not me, told them they would have to choose other classes. They really weren't happy and made it quite known but my group did our best to outfit them with spares better than what their friends had loaned them and really supported them throughout the entire adventure. In the end, at epilogue, they made comments which led me to believe they enjoyed themselves. TLDR - the situation not always clear cut and expectations are not always easy to manage.
I like this idea: from my perspective as a player, I think the best way to approach it is to have a "cut-off time" where the coach hands out player cards at a specific time and lets players work it out themselves. A blurb could be sent to ticket holders with their purchase receipt and barcode that explains, "Character selection will begin 10 minutes before your start time," or at your start time, or whatever. That way people could still show up early and discuss among those present what works best for everyone involved. If you show up after that designated time, you get what's leftover.

Allowing duplicates wouldn't bother me, but I try to diffuse the situation by discussing that although there are certain powers, essentially Barbarian, Fighter, Dwarf Fighter, and Paladin are the same and most tokens will work on all of those. Similarly, Wizard and Elfwizard as well as Cleric and Druid. This usually settles most of the issues but people are people and there's always going to be that person who won't be satisfied with anything less than having their way.

I understand the initial post and planning then not working out feels terrible but most people are adults and can USUALLY amicably work out the difference.
Lastly, I'm not sure how I feel about creating threads for each run so planning can be done before hand and then have some sort of institutionalized power to compel people to adhere to chosen character classes. I think it would be a lot of work to solve a problem that doesn't occur all that often. The only problem is that when it does occur it feels Really Really bad.