TOPIC: It's time to eliminate the 3rd level player bonus

MasterED wrote:

Incognito wrote:

MasterED wrote: So working with Lazlo's suggestion (which I also proposed) - just move the selection time to 5 minutes before the start time so that classes are selected by the people who are on time first. No going back for class selections - you lose your roll off you will have to pick a later class or what is left if it is the last class (Wizard).

I don't like the alphabetical thing either.

At this point, why don't the players just get a random number #1-#10 at check-in and then that indicates the order they get to select? Saves the hassle of die-rolling.

I am fine with it this approach as long as it is posted in the coaches room so people can be informed. Clearly, if people want to trade after they picked their class by order and the coach hasn't started the their party card numbers they could trade if they both agreed.

How would suggest implementing this so more than 1 person doesn't get the same number and keep it a very low burden on admin?

Ed

How about non-random? Just write the numbers 1-10 on the wristbands?

MasterED wrote:

Incognito wrote:

MasterED wrote: So working with Lazlo's suggestion (which I also proposed) - just move the selection time to 5 minutes before the start time so that classes are selected by the people who are on time first. No going back for class selections - you lose your roll off you will have to pick a later class or what is left if it is the last class (Wizard).

I don't like the alphabetical thing either.

At this point, why don't the players just get a random number #1-#10 at check-in and then that indicates the order they get to select? Saves the hassle of die-rolling.

I am fine with it this approach as long as it is posted in the coaches room so people can be informed. Clearly, if people want to trade after they picked their class by order and the coach hasn't started the their party card numbers they could trade if they both agreed.

How would suggest implementing this so more than 1 person doesn't get the same number and keep it a very low burden on admin?

Ed

No, I think if you go through a selection process you shouldn't allow trading afterwards.

Otherwise if there is a group of 9 people and a singleton, and there are 2 players who want Rogue (one being the singleton), then the 9 can't all claim to want Rogue and then trade it to their friend.

Fiddy wrote: How about non-random? Just write the numbers 1-10 on the wristbands?

Admin gets busy and writes two 3 on wristbands - then what? Guess your rolling off anyways.

This will also delay until everyone gets to the room. So if number 2 in the list doesn't get to the room until 6 minutes before training room then the coach can't start. Everyone's late because one person.

I think everyone should be seeing there is no perfect solution. IF there is not clear enough value to change the existing rules they shouldn't be. Also the change should provide clear improvement and really I don't see it.

What I do see is people not know and following the existing rules. They need to posted so people who don't know can easily reference them.

It should be clarified on the existing rules how roll off occur (e.g. can I request a roll off to Bard, then lose, then request Barbarian and win, then that loser start the process over with all the other classes - you could get in to an infinite loop).

Currently the only rules listed in the 2019 Coach's Guide are as follows:
If they’re still undecided, help them to make a selection. Players who are 3rd-level or higher (take their word for it… there’s no time to look it up) may select their class before 1st or 2nd-level players. E.g., if a 3rd-level player and a 2nd-level player want to play the same class, the 3rd-level player “wins”. However, this does not mean highest level chooses first. If the dilemma can’t be resolved by player level, suggest a similar class, roll a die, or rock/paper/scissors for it.
Don’t let them waste time arguing.

If you can't solve the puzzle like adults then you are allowed 1 and only 1 roll off. If you lose the roll off you must select from the remaining classes.

The more I think about this the more the existing process the more I think it is as good as we are going to get without major technology improvements so keep it as is and just post the rules for all to know. Jerks will be jerks and no rules are going to stop them.

Ed

MasterED wrote:

Fiddy wrote: How about non-random? Just write the numbers 1-10 on the wristbands?

Admin gets busy and writes two 3 on wristbands - then what? Guess your rolling off anyways.

This will also delay until everyone gets to the room. So if number 2 in the list doesn't get to the room until 6 minutes before training room then the coach can't start. Everyone's late because one person.

I think everyone should be seeing there is no perfect solution. IF there is not clear enough value to change the existing rules they shouldn't be. Also the change should provide clear improvement and really I don't see it.

What I do see is people not know and following the existing rules. They need to posted so people who don't know can easily reference them.

It should be clarified on the existing rules how roll off occur (e.g. can I request a roll off to Bard, then lose, then request Barbarian and win, then that loser start the process over with all the other classes - you could get in to an infinite loop).

Ed

I think the wristband thing wouldn’t be a horrible idea if the numbers were given out based on checking in so the first person to check in we get number one second Person gets number two etc.
It would require a clear and concise language everywhere that no check-ins can happen prior to 30 minutes before run start time. It would also adversely affect those who do back to back runs and often come into coaching rooms a few minutes before going into training.
Also I think it needs to be clarified and posted that multiple roll ups are not allowed.

I have never ever seen a multiple rolloff situation because typically it happens when someone has a really really really good billed for one class and is unwilling to extrapolate that to other classes But I do think the policy should be at least clarified about multiple roll offs.

after all this is just a game

With any changes to a system there needs to be consideration to intended purpose of the component, what the cascading effects will be in the system, and if the opportunity costs are worth the risk.



Some questions to ponder.

With the proposed changes to class selection how do you feel the impact will be on emerging players? Do you feel they will be more secure in purchasing tokens for a build in a less stable environment?

I have listened to arguments that though people do not use their 3rd level bonus it did help them feel confident in making the next step in becoming more invested in the game financially knowing that they "could" use their perk to be one step closer to securing their class over a free for all.

If you project that new / emerging players will lack confidence in spending their $$$ in a build what cascading effect will this have for the future of PUG's and the already divisive topic of adventure difficulty?

Do you feel that these changes will promote more conflict and agitation vs the previous model or remove it?

Will these changes to player selection streamline the coaching process or hinder it?

For Vets, will this change cause more people to come to the forums to coordinate and be a benefit to the community?

I would love to know your thoughts.


My personal take

Looking at removing the 3rd Level player benefit, from an initial glance there is little to no downside for a brand new player walking into the dungeon to play TD. They have no prior knowledge or investment to the game outside of their purchased ticket. For the rest ( emerging player, vets, and vets+) their are different levels of expectations, and experiences that should also be accounted for. Though I see no posted mission statement of the TD community I feel it is our mission to create a fun, immersive, and inclusive environment that builds its community up to have a healthy stratification of adventurer levels (normal, hardcore, nitemare, and epic) so that all may be able to find friends to go on a great quest with.

MasterED wrote:

Incognito wrote:

MasterED wrote: So working with Lazlo's suggestion (which I also proposed) - just move the selection time to 5 minutes before the start time so that classes are selected by the people who are on time first. No going back for class selections - you lose your roll off you will have to pick a later class or what is left if it is the last class (Wizard).

I don't like the alphabetical thing either.

At this point, why don't the players just get a random number #1-#10 at check-in and then that indicates the order they get to select? Saves the hassle of die-rolling.

I am fine with it this approach as long as it is posted in the coaches room so people can be informed. Clearly, if people want to trade after they picked their class by order and the coach hasn't started the their party card numbers they could trade if they both agreed.

How would suggest implementing this so more than 1 person doesn't get the same number and keep it a very low burden on admin?

Ed

Getting numbers at check-in makes it too easy for people to lose them, "lose" them, forge them, etc. unless significant effort is put into preventing those things.

Low-tech alternative: perhaps the coach could carry a set of 10 standard playing cards (rather than a die) for use in conflict scenarios?

0. Coach arrives.
1. Have we all agreed amicably on class selections? Great! I'll start recording.
2. No? Remember, you'll need to work together in the dungeon in order to succeed. Okay, everybody pick a playing card. Whoever got the ace, which class do you want? Whoever got the two, which class do you want? NO TRADING once we resort to random picks.

Downside: less D&D themed than dice
Upside: 100% clear and equitable, efficiently mitigates pathological scenarios, doesn't pile _extra_ disappointment onto the already very disappointed "loser" of a contested class by forcing them to choose only from leftovers

But no matter where the rest of this discussion ends up, I agree with OP that the 3rd level bonus needs to go away: any rule that no longer takes player level into account is strictly better than the same rule with a 3rd level player bonus.

lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote: you want to make sure you get a certain class...buy out the whole run. if you cant buy the whole run, then find another or a different group.

Sometimes that's not good enough. I have had cases where I buy out a run and hand out the tickets (which is even more complicated now with GenCon's electronic ticketing system) but then one of the members of the run sells/gives away their slot to someone else.

MasterED wrote: What I do see is people not know and following the existing rules. They need to posted so people who don't know can easily reference them.

It should be clarified on the existing rules how roll off occur (e.g. can I request a roll off to Bard, then lose, then request Barbarian and win, then that loser start the process over with all the other classes - you could get in to an infinite loop).

Currently the only rules listed in the 2019 Coach's Guide are as follows:
If they’re still undecided, help them to make a selection. Players who are 3rd-level or higher (take their word for it… there’s no time to look it up) may select their class before 1st or 2nd-level players. E.g., if a 3rd-level player and a 2nd-level player want to play the same class, the 3rd-level player “wins”. However, this does not mean highest level chooses first. If the dilemma can’t be resolved by player level, suggest a similar class, roll a die, or rock/paper/scissors for it.
Don’t let them waste time arguing.

If you can't solve the puzzle like adults then you are allowed 1 and only 1 roll off. If you lose the roll off you must select from the remaining classes.

Current rules do NOT state that losing the roll off means you have to choose from the leftover classes that no one else wants.

That would be a change / addendum / clarification of the existing rules.

Incognito wrote:

lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote: you want to make sure you get a certain class...buy out the whole run. if you cant buy the whole run, then find another or a different group.

Sometimes that's not good enough. I have had cases where I buy out a run and hand out the tickets (which is even more complicated now with GenCon's electronic ticketing system) but then one of the members of the run sells/gives away their slot to someone else.

I would never give a ticket to either of those players ever again. That's not really ok to me.

Incognito wrote:

MasterED wrote: What I do see is people not know and following the existing rules. They need to posted so people who don't know can easily reference them.

It should be clarified on the existing rules how roll off occur (e.g. can I request a roll off to Bard, then lose, then request Barbarian and win, then that loser start the process over with all the other classes - you could get in to an infinite loop).

Currently the only rules listed in the 2019 Coach's Guide are as follows:
If they’re still undecided, help them to make a selection. Players who are 3rd-level or higher (take their word for it… there’s no time to look it up) may select their class before 1st or 2nd-level players. E.g., if a 3rd-level player and a 2nd-level player want to play the same class, the 3rd-level player “wins”. However, this does not mean highest level chooses first. If the dilemma can’t be resolved by player level, suggest a similar class, roll a die, or rock/paper/scissors for it.
Don’t let them waste time arguing.

If you can't solve the puzzle like adults then you are allowed 1 and only 1 roll off. If you lose the roll off you must select from the remaining classes.

Current rules do NOT state that losing the roll off means you have to choose from the leftover classes that no one else wants.

That would be a change / addendum / clarification of the existing rules.

And one we should probably make. If people can't work it out, there should be some risk associated.

Bob Chasan wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Rob F wrote:

MasterED wrote: So working with Lazlo's suggestion (which I also proposed) - just move the selection time to 5 minutes before the start time so that classes are selected by the people who are on time first. No going back for class selections - you lose your roll off you will have to pick a later class or what is left if it is the last class (Wizard).

Class Selection Rules need to be posted on a sign in coaching room.
Class Selection Rules need to be a new card that is on top of the character cards.
The Character cards are delivered to the room near 5 minutes before the start time of the ticket.

The sign/card reads something to the following:

Class Selection Process
Please discuss among yourself and follow this selection process.

1. Class selection process begins 5 minutes prior to the ticketed time. This is to ensure classes are selected by the ticketed time.
2. Please start with the classes in alphabetic order (Bard, Barbarian, Cleric, Druid, Dwarf Fighter, Elf Wizard, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Wizard).
3. Ask if anyone wants the first class. If only one person would like it they then get to play that class. In the event more than one person wants the class roll off. Only ties continue to roll off.
4. Proceed to the next class.
5. If you lose a roll off you may not go back and attempt to roll off a previous class.
6. Continue until you are through all 12 classes or everyone in the room has selected a class.
7. Any ticketed adventure arriving after the class selection process has started can participate in the selection of the remaining classes.
8. If the class selection process has been completed but there are still missing players they get to select from the remaining classes in the order they arrive in the room.

There will be no 3rd player level pulling rank
There is no going back and saying I lost the roll of for Wizard I now want Bard. If you wanted Bard you should have rolled off for it originally.

If all 10 players have selected classes and the coach has not recorded those two players stats and if they mutually agree then they can switch classes (probably not needed to document but just calling it out for clarity).

Ed

Yes, the rules should be posted in the coaching room. I like the idea of a sign and a card on top of the character cards.

Having the rules posted and potentially an extra card on top of the pile of characters I can definitely agree with.

Not a huge fan of alphabetical order. I'd suggest going with whatever classes are most-contended on the run first. With the suggested rules, what happens in the odd case that all ten people would like to play Wizard? 9 lose the roll-off. What happens then?

Having something posted or on the tables are on top of the cards believe me as a coach none of that stuff is going to get read newer people get in there And all they can think about is getting your tokens on the mat. At Gen Con there was a sheet on the table describing things that was laminated and I can tell you I never saw anyone pick it up. They are completely focused on getting their gear on their mats are trading around or choosing the classes but not on any signage or list of things to do.

I saw a laminated sheet once at GenCon out of 6 runs.

lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote:

leave it the way it is. everybody keeps coming up with unlikely ways things can play out

I have never had a roll off in all my time coaching.

I have my pre printed party card with all classes filled out based on my tokens. So i can play whatever.

you want to make sure you get a certain class...buy out the whole run. if you cant buy the whole run, then find another or a different group.

I will always make a vet roll off with me, if you use your 3rd level status to overide the new players (then I will give the newbie the class and take whats left at the end, if I win)

after all this is just a game

+1