TOPIC: Player level issues (benefits, confusion, etc.)

Harlax wrote:
This, my fifth year playing, was the first time I've heard another player attempt to invoke player level in the character selection process. Didn't work for him as the other player involved was also 3rd level. Wasn't necessarily good for the party as the second player was far better geared for the class.

Ugh, this happened in my 2nd run. This is my 2nd year of true dungeon, and my buddies and I are lowly Level 2 characters. We had 9 of the 10 slots in the run. 10th guy rolls in, claims Cleric. Says he is level 5. Takes Cleric from my friend after some protesting. Sits down and equips himself with a handful of reds. I was astonished when I saw all his empty slots. My buddy's Cleric was level 5, with a Ring of Focus, and a few other goodies. Needless to say, I didn't really feel too bad for the guy when he got turned to stone.

CJ Heintz wrote:

Harlax wrote:
This, my fifth year playing, was the first time I've heard another player attempt to invoke player level in the character selection process. Didn't work for him as the other player involved was also 3rd level. Wasn't necessarily good for the party as the second player was far better geared for the class.

Ugh, this happened in my 2nd run. This is my 2nd year of true dungeon, and my buddies and I are lowly Level 2 characters. We had 9 of the 10 slots in the run. 10th guy rolls in, claims Cleric. Says he is level 5. Takes Cleric from my friend after some protesting. Sits down and equips himself with a handful of reds. I was astonished when I saw all his empty slots. My buddy's Cleric was level 5, with a Ring of Focus, and a few other goodies. Needless to say, I didn't really feel too bad for the guy when he got turned to stone.

You would think a "veteran" would be cool about it and not take a character class from somebody that is much better geared then him. Especially if struts in late and tries to pull rank. There should be limitations on when you can take classes from others. I bet the coach had to change the information too because it was already recorded.

Assholes are assholes sad to say but things like this happen.

Honestly there should be some ruling in place that if 7/10 players rule against you taking a given class your level doesn't mean anything.

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: Assholes are assholes sad to say but things like this happen.

Honestly there should be some ruling in place that if 7/10 players rule against you taking a given class your level doesn't mean anything.

Yeah. In my first run another guy had Barbarian, but he was a little bit better geared than me. His buddy also gave me an Amulet of Wonder and CoGF on paper and I just played my monk. Thankfully our Cleric is a beast and easily memorized all the bard symbols and hit all his checks. I was floored by how well my group did on their first run. Rogue hit all 3 puzzle boxes, druid (who is an arborist in real life) his all his spells, wizard hit all his spells, Bard hit all his checks, and Monk consistently landed 2 blows. It was everyone's first time playing their class, and many of their first times in a dungeon period. I am really excited to try hardcore next year when I can snag some more gear for them. And next year we'll have enough guys to fill all 10 slots, so hopefully we don't have another bad apple like the cleric. But I did have to explain to people some things with levels. "Hopefully after this dungeon you'll have enough XP to be level 2" "I thought I was level 4..." "Well, your CHARACTER is, but your player is only level 1... It's confusing."

CJ Heintz wrote:

Harlax wrote:
This, my fifth year playing, was the first time I've heard another player attempt to invoke player level in the character selection process. Didn't work for him as the other player involved was also 3rd level. Wasn't necessarily good for the party as the second player was far better geared for the class.

Ugh, this happened in my 2nd run. This is my 2nd year of true dungeon, and my buddies and I are lowly Level 2 characters. We had 9 of the 10 slots in the run. 10th guy rolls in, claims Cleric. Says he is level 5. Takes Cleric from my friend after some protesting. Sits down and equips himself with a handful of reds. I was astonished when I saw all his empty slots. My buddy's Cleric was level 5, with a Ring of Focus, and a few other goodies. Needless to say, I didn't really feel too bad for the guy when he got turned to stone.

I was able to rearrange our builds so that everyone was accommodated and the party was well served. The good of the party should rule.

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: Assholes are assholes sad to say but things like this happen.

Honestly there should be some ruling in place that if 7/10 players rule against you taking a given class your level doesn't mean anything.

I'd be cautious about that. The newbies can be stubborn about suboptimal class choices as well.

Again, the good of the party should rule.

Harlax wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: Assholes are assholes sad to say but things like this happen.

Honestly there should be some ruling in place that if 7/10 players rule against you taking a given class your level doesn't mean anything.

I'd be cautious about that. The newbies can be stubborn about suboptimal class choices as well.

Again, the good of the party should rule.

"The greater good!"
Love Hot Fuzz!

"The greater good!"

We had 8/10 for our Thursday run and the other two players rolled in about 20 minutes after we'd sat down. They were geared for Monk/BowRanger, but we already had a Ranger. Apparently BowRanger didn't have any damage boosting tokens, just the UR bow. So even our red-melee Ranger did more damage. Then they pouted for the rest of the adventure and the ex-BowRanger, now BowRogue, failed to hit even a single monster.

I was pretty pleased we'd kept the Ranger card, considering the Rogue's failure to even hit the monster outline.

This is the second time I've had to have a discussion about who gets what class, but the first time anyone's pouted over it.

I would also suggest, though I know this is going to make people upset, that Player Rank be based on number of years played, rather than total dungeons. We could keep track of "XP" or something, but I do think that someone who has played one dungeon for ten years has demonstrated loyalty/experience equal to or more than someone who played 4 dungeons 3 years running.

Toran wrote: I would also suggest, though I know this is going to make people upset, that Player Rank be based on number of years played, rather than total dungeons. We could keep track of "XP" or something, but I do think that someone who has played one dungeon for ten years has demonstrated loyalty/experience equal to or more than someone who played 4 dungeons 3 years running.

Sorry I have to disagree with this as bad logic. Playing 1 dungeon a each is not more loyalty than someone playing more dungeons a year. The person playing 2 dungeon for 9 years shows they have bought more ticket money than the person playing only 1 dungeon over 10 years. It is also more experience as it is more dungeons. Granted if you want to reward for longest tenure then I cannot argue that 10 years is more than 9. But don't attempt to say that someone that hasn't been playing as long is not as loyal or as experienced. That may or may not be true.

I should add that I am not saying buying or playing more tickets/dungeons doesn't make you more experienced or loyal either. Just that the original logic is weak in my opinion.

jedibcg wrote:

Toran wrote: I would also suggest, though I know this is going to make people upset, that Player Rank be based on number of years played, rather than total dungeons. We could keep track of "XP" or something, but I do think that someone who has played one dungeon for ten years has demonstrated loyalty/experience equal to or more than someone who played 4 dungeons 3 years running.

Sorry I have to disagree with this as bad logic. Playing 1 dungeon a each is not more loyalty than someone playing more dungeons a year. The person playing 2 dungeon for 9 years shows they have bought more ticket money than the person playing only 1 dungeon over 10 years. It is also more experience as it is more dungeons. Granted if you want to reward for longest tenure then I cannot argue that 10 years is more than 9. But don't attempt to say that someone that hasn't been playing as long is not as loyal or as experienced. That may or may not be true.

I should add that I am not saying buying or playing more tickets/dungeons doesn't make you more experienced or loyal either. Just that the original logic is weak in my opinion.

Doesn't the xp only get recorded for each dungeon only? So if you run 5 times, you only get xp credit for the individual dungeons. Running 1 dungeon every year for 10 years will make you the same level as somebody who runs 2 dungeons a year. I think the experience system is good but should be changed to rank.

You're close on the xp per year. Each dungeon has its own XP (regardless of combat vs. puzzle). Multiple runs of the same dungeon only matter if a later run is at a higher difficulty. So, if you run only 1 dungeon a year, but someone else runs both dungeons, you would have 50% or less xp for the year (depending on difference in difficulty levels run)