Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: Player Replacement Policies

Re: Player Replacement Policies 9 years 10 months ago #121

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote: there is thing search engine called google(or whatever engine you prefer)
if you would search
C'mon man
most common/popular hits come up


or if you go to wikipedia you will get this

During the show, they will each describe a play or series of plays that made them scratch their heads and say "C'Mon Man.....


Not sure exactly what you are getting at here Laz?



a person was asking about C'mon man

I didnt quote the original message (my bad)

not to be so subtle...i was saying the person should have looked it up..it was only a few clicks of a mouse (or whatever someone uses phone etc) to look up something they dont know

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by lazlo_hollyfeld1985.

Re: Player Replacement Policies 9 years 10 months ago #122

[quote="lazlo_hollyfeld1985" post=204281

]there is thing search engine called google(or whatever engine you prefer)
if you would search
C'mon man
most common/popular hits come up

or if you go to wikipedia you will get this

During the show, they will each describe a play or series of plays that made them scratch their heads and say "C'Mon Man.....


Not sure exactly what you are getting at here Laz?


a person was asking about C'mon man

I didnt quote the original message (my bad)

not to be so subtle...i was saying the person should have looked it up..it was only a few clicks of a mouse (or whatever someone uses phone etc) to look up something they dont know


Why would I look it up?

You used a narrow cultural reference that is not known to everyone.

"Come on man" (or "C'mon man") is an expression that can be used in everyday conversation.

Why would I assume that you are using a specialized usage that would require a Google search?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Incognito.

Re: Player Replacement Policies 9 years 10 months ago #123

Incognito wrote:

lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote:

as it is football season...C'mon man


What does this even mean?

Football is clearly important to you, but it may not be important to everyone else. It is always going to be the season for something. Baseball season. Basketball season. Golf season. Hockey season. Cricket season. Kaninhop (bunny hop) season. Star Craft Battle.net season.


Oh, I see now.

1. I guess I should have tagged my question "What does this even mean?" with [Rhetorical] [/Rhetorical]

2. My rhetorical question was actually referring to "as it is football season" (as my response about football might indicate) NOT about the phrase "C'mon man."

Once again this just highlights how different people think (and interpret things) differently! :cheer:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Incognito.

Re: Player Replacement Policies 9 years 10 months ago #124

  • Raven
  • Raven's Avatar
  • Offline
  • 11th Level
  • Supporter
  • Guildmaster Nightshade
  • Posts: 6704
Aright... since we've already gone *completely* off topic, I just wanna check something here...

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: +2 to hit / +2 to melee damage

is not the same as

+4 to STR

If you have access to a specific subset of tokens like the Mighty bows that add STR mod bonuses to damage, thus the suggestion of changing the gloves bonus to "+2 to hit / +2 to melee damage" would not make it equivalent to Mithral Gloves, which was the intent of the initial design point of the Underdark Gloves when Raven suggested them :)


I'm a little confused.
Are you saying "Raven's intent was to make Underdark Gauntlets the equivalent of Mithral Gauntlets"?
or
"Changing the Underdark gloves to a +2/+2 would NOT be the equivalent to Mithral Gauntlets, and that particular non-equivalency was Raven's intent with the original suggestion."

'cuz my intent (with suggesting a +3 str) was to make them deliberately weaker. I'm just not sure if that had come through.

(I know I'm not the only one who kinda glazes over when reading threads, so if it got lost, I'm not pointing fingers, just trying to clarify.)

Also, with regards to THIS THREAD...

I think several very good suggestions have been made on how to deal with the problem we experienced (the problem of Waitlist players being recruited despite a party having all 10 tickets available to hand in.)

I'm not sure exactly how it will be resolved - whether we can change when&where waivers are signed, or the flow-chart given to hostesses so they know to ask - but at least we have suggestions, and can move forward from there.

I'm wondering tho, if the best way to deal with things might be to wait until after Token Development, and bring up our problem & suggestions again once Event planning for 2015 starts (After Christmas)
"THERE WILL NEVER BE A TOKEN EQUAL TO A GOOD BRAIN!"- Smakdown

Check out these awesome resources:
Cranston's Character Generator for iDevices or Android
Amorgen's Excel Character Generator
And the ever-useful Token DataBase , expertly maintained by Druegar.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Player Replacement Policies 9 years 10 months ago #125

Raven wrote: I think several very good suggestions have been made on how to deal with the problem we experienced (the problem of Waitlist players being recruited despite a party having all 10 tickets available to hand in.)

I'm not sure exactly how it will be resolved - whether we can change when&where waivers are signed, or the flow-chart given to hostesses so they know to ask - but at least we have suggestions, and can move forward from there.

I'm wondering tho, if the best way to deal with things might be to wait until after Token Development, and bring up our problem & suggestions again once Event planning for 2015 starts (After Christmas)


I think you make a good point Raven.

Right now, I am sure that Jeff and friends are focused primarily on token development so they might not start dealing with the Event planning till later.

One argument I can see is that right now we are coming right out of GenCon, so people's memories are still fresh and overall participation is higher. So if we wait too long, we might not get some valuable comments or feedback. But if we can archive that feedback and then revisit it when presumably Jeff is more focused on the improvements, that could work.

And for all we know, maybe Jeff and TD already have a solution in the works!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Player Replacement Policies 9 years 10 months ago #126

Raven wrote: Aright... since we've already gone *completely* off topic, I just wanna check something here...

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: +2 to hit / +2 to melee damage

is not the same as

+4 to STR

If you have access to a specific subset of tokens like the Mighty bows that add STR mod bonuses to damage, thus the suggestion of changing the gloves bonus to "+2 to hit / +2 to melee damage" would not make it equivalent to Mithral Gloves, which was the intent of the initial design point of the Underdark Gloves when Raven suggested them :)


I'm a little confused.
Are you saying "Raven's intent was to make Underdark Gauntlets the equivalent of Mithral Gauntlets"?
or
"Changing the Underdark gloves to a +2/+2 would NOT be the equivalent to Mithral Gauntlets, and that particular non-equivalency was Raven's intent with the original suggestion."

'cuz my intent (with suggesting a +3 str) was to make them deliberately weaker. I'm just not sure if that had come through.

(I know I'm not the only one who kinda glazes over when reading threads, so if it got lost, I'm not pointing fingers, just trying to clarify.)


Ah, I guess I misinterpreted your intent then.

Honestly I don't want to see a weaker version, I want to see a version of equal strength provided in a different way.

The Gloves of +3 to hit appear to have been an attempt at making a down grade weaker version of the Mithral and how well did that do?

Aim for sidegrade items, things that don't LOSE power but provide it in a similar level, different way.

You don't fight power creep by printing weaker tokens, you fight power creep by printing new options that give power in a different way and use that to open more build options.

If changes don't happen to bring more options tokens you will either end up with unused tokens, reprinted tokens or necessary power creep in order to have UR tokens have meaning.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Player Replacement Policies 9 years 10 months ago #127

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: The Gloves of +3 to hit appear to have been an attempt at making a down grade weaker version of the Mithral and how well did that do?

Aim for sidegrade items, things that don't LOSE power but provide it in a similar level, different way.

You don't fight power creep by printing weaker tokens, you fight power creep by printing new options that give power in a different way and use that to open more build options.


Some people believe that + hit is more valuable than + damage.

IF you believe in that, you might reason that +1 to hit is worth more than +1 to damage, so in this case, you are trading +2 to damage for the extra +1 to hit.

I personally agree that the Gloves of Weapon Finesse is a bit on the weak side (or more appropriately that the Mithral Gauntlets are a bit too on the strong side). However, I do recall several people being quite excited about the +3 to hit from the Gloves of Weapon Finesse.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Player Replacement Policies 9 years 10 months ago #128

Incognito wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: The Gloves of +3 to hit appear to have been an attempt at making a down grade weaker version of the Mithral and how well did that do?

Aim for sidegrade items, things that don't LOSE power but provide it in a similar level, different way.

You don't fight power creep by printing weaker tokens, you fight power creep by printing new options that give power in a different way and use that to open more build options.


Some people believe that + hit is more valuable than + damage.

IF you believe in that, you might reason that +1 to hit is worth more than +1 to damage, so in this case, you are trading +2 to damage for the extra +1 to hit.

I personally agree that the Gloves of Weapon Finesse is a bit on the weak side (or more appropriately that the Mithral Gauntlets are a bit too on the strong side). However, I do recall several people being quite excited about the +3 to hit from the Gloves of Weapon Finesse.


I feel the GoWF are a good choice in the face of the cost and rarity of Mithral Gauntlets. You can't always have best in slot tokens. If you do, you make older tokens obsolete and we all end up running the same build. This is one of the many reasons I like running a few sealed runs each year.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Player Replacement Policies 9 years 10 months ago #129

Previously people mentioned moving the waivers into the coaching room but the main issue seems to be that the coaches already have tons to do.

What if we moved it to the training room (after coaching)? Now it would be right at the start of the dungeon.

A good chunk of groups are fairly autonomous in there, and there is usually a fair amount of space and plenty of tables to write on. You also have an NPC hanging around who only shows up in the last few minutes.

It could be that the training room DM has a lot to do (in which case, you can scrap this suggestion) but I would think that it is significantly less than the player coach.

And since this happens right at the start of the dungeon, you would be able to catch most (if not all) of the late arrivals.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Player Replacement Policies 9 years 10 months ago #130

I don't know why if the current policy is actually followed (I know it hasn't been always) but if the current policy is followed why it would need any change? If someone doesn't show up 18 minutes after the start time, then I have little sympathy for them. This includes my own friends. I have given away tickets to events when my friends where excessively late. I know real life sometimes gets in the way and it sucks, but is it TD's responsibility to deal with real life getting in the way of players? I feel they are already being accommodating with 18 minutes. Maybe it is just me though.
You either discover a star or you don't. You arrogant punk.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Player Replacement Policies 9 years 10 months ago #131

It seems the main problem is if the group has the ticket for the missing spot and would rather run with ghosts if their friend doesn't show up they aren't given that chance. At 18 minutes the spot is sold regardless of the groups wishes.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re: Player Replacement Policies 9 years 10 months ago #132

  • Grekel!
  • Grekel!'s Avatar
  • Offline
  • 10th Level
  • Supporter
  • Fireballs are FUN! Tokenaholic since 2007!
  • Posts: 1258

Incognito wrote: Previously people mentioned moving the waivers into the coaching room but the main issue seems to be that the coaches already have tons to do.

What if we moved it to the training room (after coaching)? Now it would be right at the start of the dungeon.

A good chunk of groups are fairly autonomous in there, and there is usually a fair amount of space and plenty of tables to write on. You also have an NPC hanging around who only shows up in the last few minutes.

It could be that the training room DM has a lot to do (in which case, you can scrap this suggestion) but I would think that it is significantly less than the player coach.

And since this happens right at the start of the dungeon, you would be able to catch most (if not all) of the late arrivals.


As I have previously stated - it does outright solve some problems. However - in decentralizing the waiver process you create some real openings for error. And error in a liability waiver process, I would thing, is something you'd need to approach VERY carefully. Again - I'm not deadest against it - but it must be a thing approached with lots of caution, and lots of planning.

It still does not answer the question of providing good, clear training to whomever is tasked with handling this. And, as I have thought about this more... the policy needs to be spelled out in it's finalized, explicit detail, in ALL guides - and a copy of this policy should be enlarged, made in to posters and placed throughout the storyscape/training areas.

Good, clear, thorough policies & matching training will alleviate MUCH of the headache I think.
PROUD MEMBER OF THE DDA! :)
They say that the best weapon is the one you never have to use. I respectfully disagree. I prefer the weapon you only have to use once! Oh - and if you really need to think about whether you're going to use the fireball or the + umpty staff of butt-whooping - you're likely to find yourself full of arrows, or fangs, or nasty knives & swords and such. Don't think - just shoot!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.093 seconds