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

jedibcg wrote:

MasterED wrote: Well the cards will be redesigned. I can't say what will happen but those two stats aren't really needed for the cards (just for the data to help balance the modules).

Ed

Since you and I discussed this I think you actually cannot limit it to a one time thing. You will have 1 data point really. I think you need a couple years worth of data so you can also see if there is a trend vs just a snapshot of 2019. Just saying more data is good....lol.

This also may not have been the best year to do it since I'm not sure if every coach was recording totem paints the same and there were a lot of in print HP boosters at common.

Plus players seemed to like being told what their starting hps were so I suspect it's going to stick (but I hope it doesn't for the aforementioned time reasons). In a perfect world I actually think it's good info for the DMs to have, I'm just not sure how practice it will be to gather once the next little thing inevitably gets added.

Anyway were getting off topic, 3rd level and pulling rank.

Picc wrote:
Anyway we're getting off topic, 3rd level and pulling rank.

You are correct I am sorry.

If we are switching to first come first served ruling, it needs to be official.

Showing up to grind on time to find your class is already taken by someone who showed up 30 minutes early and the coach already writing in their character stats making you the jerk if you decide to (fairly) contest the class is not fun.

EvilJohn wrote: I think most of us agree on the setiment here - let's try to prevent hard feelings when someone dosen't get the class that they wanted.

Will a formalized system prevent hard feelings? I don't know. Jerks will still be jerks. People will still choose to get offended, wether or not it was "fair".

Being a Coach this year, I did see class contention a couple of times, but rank was never pulled, nor was the dice used. But just having that 3rd level rule in place "smells of" elitism.

Weird thought -- why not have 2 of the same class? Would it really break things that badly? Maybe dis-incentivize it so both players take a penalty, like -5hp?

+1

If the rule became...

"While we encourage players to run with only ONE of each character class in the party, if two players want to play the same class, they can do so... but each player must subtract 5 hit-points from their total for the duration of the adventure."

...I think it would prevent all of the issues Kirk described in the original post.

The point of my post about bag check is that there can be "hard feelings" about many aspects of TD and no rule will prevent jerks from being jerks. We all can only do our best to mitigate their influence, especially on newer players.

MasterED wrote: I know this has been discussed numerous times. Not sure if this idea has been thrown out before or not. Just putting it down and seeing the reaction.

Players can enter the coaching area prior to the start time by whatever admin allows (10m/30m/etc). At the start time of the ticketed event the coach arrives and any players in the room now get to pick their classes. It goes like this.

The coach goes down the party card in order asking if anyone wants to play that class. If only one person wants that class then they get it. If more than 1 then roll off (high roll wins - continue until there is no tie). After this initial round the remaining classes are chosen as the players arrive late and there is no roll off needed (order of arrival). They are not allowed to "challenge" a previously chosen class. If they want the opportunity to pick/roll for their class they will arrive early.

If a player arrives during the coach/class selection they must wait until the process is finished and if they were the first late arrival they will pick first from the remaining classes.

Thoughts?

Ed

That would be clear and simple. Other option I can think of is d20 for those on time and go high to low.

I occasionally will see an issue come up in the coaching room, but rarely results in hard feelings (but when it does, look out). I'd be fine with removing the 3rd level. I don't feel it really helps the situation. I'm definitely opposed to any structured process that occurs on every slot. 24 minutes go by fast enough as it is without adding more steps to go through. I'm in favor of letting the group work it out when possible and if not possible, a die roll make sense.

I'm in agreement that if you can't be on time, you shouldn't expect to be able to swoop in and take your preferred class. I'm also of the opinion that once a player is recorded on the party card, there should be no adjustments that aren't due to errors. No changing who has the class. No adding equipment just because a veteran came late and wants to equip everyone hoping to talk them into hardcore+.

EvilJohn wrote: I think most of us agree on the setiment here - let's try to prevent hard feelings when someone dosen't get the class that they wanted.

Will a formalized system prevent hard feelings? I don't know. Jerks will still be jerks. People will still choose to get offended, wether or not it was "fair".

Being a Coach this year, I did see class contention a couple of times, but rank was never pulled, nor was the dice used. But just having that 3rd level rule in place "smells of" elitism.

Weird thought -- why not have 2 of the same class? Would it really break things that badly? Maybe dis-incentivize it so both players take a penalty, like -5hp?

Let's just change the party card to be a list of 10 colors and have 2 pucks of each color (with the name of the color replacing the name of the class on the surface of the puck).

SnakeEyes (Eric) wrote:

EvilJohn wrote: I think most of us agree on the setiment here - let's try to prevent hard feelings when someone dosen't get the class that they wanted.

Will a formalized system prevent hard feelings? I don't know. Jerks will still be jerks. People will still choose to get offended, wether or not it was "fair".

Being a Coach this year, I did see class contention a couple of times, but rank was never pulled, nor was the dice used. But just having that 3rd level rule in place "smells of" elitism.

Weird thought -- why not have 2 of the same class? Would it really break things that badly? Maybe dis-incentivize it so both players take a penalty, like -5hp?

+1

If the rule became...

"While we encourage players to run with only ONE of each character class in the party, if two players want to play the same class, they can do so... but each player must subtract 5 hit-points from their total for the duration of the adventure."

...I think it would prevent all of the issues Kirk described in the original post.

The point of my post about bag check is that there can be "hard feelings" about many aspects of TD and no rule will prevent jerks from being jerks. We all can only do our best to mitigate their influence, especially on newer players.

In addition to the logistical problem of DMs telling them apart the -5 HP is likely to be more detrimental to the new player as the vet probably has several ways to increase their HP through level, CON, and straight HP boosters.

I agree with Picc and Amorgen. As a trainer this year I saw some very experienced and skilled coaches go over the 24 minutes with much greater frequency than in the past. Let’s be very very careful about adding time consuming processes. (I will be coaching at Pax West and May be doing so at GHC)

Brokkr wrote:

SnakeEyes (Eric) wrote:

EvilJohn wrote: I think most of us agree on the setiment here - let's try to prevent hard feelings when someone dosen't get the class that they wanted.

Will a formalized system prevent hard feelings? I don't know. Jerks will still be jerks. People will still choose to get offended, wether or not it was "fair".

Being a Coach this year, I did see class contention a couple of times, but rank was never pulled, nor was the dice used. But just having that 3rd level rule in place "smells of" elitism.

Weird thought -- why not have 2 of the same class? Would it really break things that badly? Maybe dis-incentivize it so both players take a penalty, like -5hp?

+1

If the rule became...

"While we encourage players to run with only ONE of each character class in the party, if two players want to play the same class, they can do so... but each player must subtract 5 hit-points from their total for the duration of the adventure."

...I think it would prevent all of the issues Kirk described in the original post.

The point of my post about bag check is that there can be "hard feelings" about many aspects of TD and no rule will prevent jerks from being jerks. We all can only do our best to mitigate their influence, especially on newer players.

In addition to the logistical problem of DMs telling them apart the -5 HP is likely to be more detrimental to the new player as the vet probably has several ways to increase their HP through level, CON, and straight HP boosters.

The Coach strikes the original class on the party card and wrights the new class above it. As long as the player remembers the class they replaced, they're easy to identify, especially because they'll use that classes slider(s).

Yes, the -5 hit point penalty will be a harder pill to swallow for newer players but it at least gives them the option to play what they want to play.

I'm not saying this system is perfect, but it's better than the first come first served system as that one introduces a host of the same problems as using seniority. What if someone arrives early and the other person arrives on time? What if they arrive at the same time?

And I agree with others who said the roll-off just wastes valuable prep time.

Change the third level bonus to the new tenth level bonus

But yes get rid of it and dice off like the gamers were are

Harlax wrote: I agree with Picc and Amorgen. As a trainer this year I saw some very experienced and skilled coaches go over the 24 minutes with much greater frequency than in the past. Let’s be very very careful about adding time consuming processes. (I will be coaching at Pax West and May be doing so at GHC)

You know something else that wastes time? Have two players 'discuss' which of them should get to play their preferred class.

If the players havent come to an agreement by the scheduled start time, rather than sit around waiting for them to decide, the coach should just have everyone roll off, and start choosing high to low.