Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

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

It's time to eliminate the 3rd level player bonus 4 years 11 months ago #433

At this point, l'm just going to say do whatever you want, I'll adapt.

But I do want to add that no matter what is decided, some people will still be jerks and some people will still be disappointed. There is NO system that will eliminate that and you're wasting time trying to find one.

Just come up with something that seems logical and reasonable. If someone wants to be illogical or unreasonable, let them. They will be disappointed and if we're lucky they will leave the game. In the short term that may seem bad, but in the long run it will attract and retain even more people.

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

It's time to eliminate the 3rd level player bonus 4 years 11 months ago #434

  • Grekel!
  • Grekel!'s Avatar
  • Offline
  • 10th Level
  • Supporter
  • Fireballs are FUN! Tokenaholic since 2007!
  • Posts: 1258
So - I have a few questions - (if you want to skip my blather, just go to the end of my post...)

There have been a LOT of interesting and good thoughts shared on the ideas of how to address character class choice when 2 (or possibly more) want to play the same class.

Some people have intimated that it is a real problem for them in terms of not getting to play the class that they've invested much time and $$$ in building.

I'm making two assumptions - 1) that the forumites who regularly engage in these discussions, whether new or vet, are fairly excited and passionate about the game. & 2) the forum population by simple aggregation is skewed to a higher number of vets... (both of which may account for some skew in the opinions regarding this topic...)

OK - The questions...

1) How often does the conflict of character class choice come up? (I volunteered from 2008 through 2016, when my 1st daughter was born - and probably was a coach for 3 or 4 of those years - and I don't recall seeing much in the way of disputes, and never one that resulted in a roll-off. )

2) For those of you who have seen the conflict either as a coach or player - how many got resolved by discussion/mutual agreement, vs either pulling rank or having it arbitrated?

Where I'm going - is this isolated and not a broad problem? The reason I'm looking at it that way... Changes to the current system (even simply wiping the level 3 perk and making unresolved differences go to a straight roll-off) have a distinct potential to cause grief even if they resolve some other problem... I'm personally a fan of the roll-off with modifiers. I'm a level 9 player. It would tend generally to stack the odds more in my favor and it still allows some randomization in results if I'm at a loggerheads with another player on character choice.
At the same time, I feel the emphasis should be on resolving the issue (if there is one) mutually. We teach in TD-101 that the character selection process is the very first exercise in teamwork...

I don't know I'm just curious...
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.

It's time to eliminate the 3rd level player bonus 4 years 11 months ago #435

  • Picc
  • Picc's Avatar
  • Offline
  • 10th Level
  • Supporter
  • Remember when we were explorers?
  • Posts: 7119

Grekel! wrote: So - I have a few questions - (if you want to skip my blather, just go to the end of my post...)

There have been a LOT of interesting and good thoughts shared on the ideas of how to address character class choice when 2 (or possibly more) want to play the same class.

Some people have intimated that it is a real problem for them in terms of not getting to play the class that they've invested much time and $$$ in building.

I'm making two assumptions - 1) that the forumites who regularly engage in these discussions, whether new or vet, are fairly excited and passionate about the game. & 2) the forum population by simple aggregation is skewed to a higher number of vets... (both of which may account for some skew in the opinions regarding this topic...)

OK - The questions...

1) How often does the conflict of character class choice come up? (I volunteered from 2008 through 2016, when my 1st daughter was born - and probably was a coach for 3 or 4 of those years - and I don't recall seeing much in the way of disputes, and never one that resulted in a roll-off. )

2) For those of you who have seen the conflict either as a coach or player - how many got resolved by discussion/mutual agreement, vs either pulling rank or having it arbitrated?

Where I'm going - is this isolated and not a broad problem? The reason I'm looking at it that way... Changes to the current system (even simply wiping the level 3 perk and making unresolved differences go to a straight roll-off) have a distinct potential to cause grief even if they resolve some other problem... I'm personally a fan of the roll-off with modifiers. I'm a level 9 player. It would tend generally to stack the odds more in my favor and it still allows some randomization in results if I'm at a loggerheads with another player on character choice.
At the same time, I feel the emphasis should be on resolving the issue (if there is one) mutually. We teach in TD-101 that the character selection process is the very first exercise in teamwork...

I don't know I'm just curious...


I suppose it depends on how you define a dispute. I see disputes almost every run where people dont know each other, but 95% plus are settled amicably almost immediately.

Of my last 10 pugs runs I would say easily half have had a dispute between myself and someone else for first or second class choice, but I tend to let the other person have it so they would have no way to know. Not gonna lie, it's a fair part of the reason I dont pug as much anymore.

I also tend to avoid form runs where my prefered classes are taken if I dont know the people on them. It would be very interesting to know how often other vets do the same without saying anything.
Semper Gumby, Always flexible.

Sartre sits in in a coffee shop and asks for a coffee without cream. The barista apologizes “Sorry, we don't have any cream. Can I offer you a coffee without milk instead?”

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

Last edit: by Picc.

It's time to eliminate the 3rd level player bonus 4 years 11 months ago #436

Two perspectives

Coaching. I very very rarely see a dispute that requires intervention. What I do see is players who are disappointed when they don’t get their preferred class. Not angry disappointed, just disappointed. Usually because someone got there earlier and took the card.

Playing. I haven’t played in a PUG for sometime. I can only recall one situation where a roll off could have happened. But we worked it out. I do intentionally avoid PUGs. Mostly to control difficulty level. But I also like to show up in coaching with my build loaded and ready to record.
D&D teaches all the important lessons in life - the low blow, the cheap shot, the back stab, the double cross. - Jerry Marsischky

Let them trap us. We have our swords. - Elric of Melnibone.

You try to get them to play the game, but all they want to do is play the rules. - Ardak Kumerian

I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend - Faramir

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

Last edit: by Harlax.

It's time to eliminate the 3rd level player bonus 4 years 11 months ago #437

Everyone who pays $80 to run a TD event deserves an equal opportunity to play their preferred class. Any method other than straight roll-off that gives a material advantage to one group over another for class selection is not in the spirit of Gencon.

The 3rd level bonus is elitist garbage and should be removed from the game. It should be replaced with something that does not negatively affect other players.

The only thing the 3rd level bonus does is give you an advantage over other players, and therefore it should be removed.

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

It's time to eliminate the 3rd level player bonus 4 years 11 months ago #438

Considering that 3rd level can be reached in one year of play, it’s hardly elite.

In fact, it’s becoming meaningless. That a better reason to ditch it than invoking some nebulous “spirit of GenCon.”
D&D teaches all the important lessons in life - the low blow, the cheap shot, the back stab, the double cross. - Jerry Marsischky

Let them trap us. We have our swords. - Elric of Melnibone.

You try to get them to play the game, but all they want to do is play the rules. - Ardak Kumerian

I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend - Faramir

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

Last edit: by Harlax.

It's time to eliminate the 3rd level player bonus 4 years 11 months ago #439

Harlax wrote: Considering that 3rd level can be reached in one year of play, it’s hardly elite.


Does the ticket signup or followup email indicate that someone who is 3rd level can trump you for a character class?

It does come across as elitest.

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

It's time to eliminate the 3rd level player bonus 4 years 11 months ago #440

edwin wrote:

Harlax wrote: Considering that 3rd level can be reached in one year of play, it’s hardly elite.


Does the ticket signup or followup email indicate that someone who is 3rd level can trump you for a character class?

It does come across as elitest.


I’m not going to be drawn on that. I have repeatedly stated I’m in favor of eliminating it.
D&D teaches all the important lessons in life - the low blow, the cheap shot, the back stab, the double cross. - Jerry Marsischky

Let them trap us. We have our swords. - Elric of Melnibone.

You try to get them to play the game, but all they want to do is play the rules. - Ardak Kumerian

I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend - Faramir

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

Last edit: by Harlax.

It's time to eliminate the 3rd level player bonus 4 years 11 months ago #441

edwin wrote:

Harlax wrote: Considering that 3rd level can be reached in one year of play, it’s hardly elite.


Does the ticket signup or followup email indicate that someone who is 3rd level can trump you for a character class?

It does come across as elitest.


I agree it should go - but come on.

Every EO who has a game with asymmetrical roles needs a procedure for deciding who gets what when everyone can’t agree - this doesn’t have to be (and practically never is) described in the event catalogue.

No one should show up to an event at gencon of this sort assuming they will get to play a certain faction / class / role.

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

Last edit: by Matthew Hayward.

It's time to eliminate the 3rd level player bonus 4 years 11 months ago #442

Yes!!!!! This is what I've been trying to say.

Honestly, stop worrying about new players that are not willing to do a little research! If the player did absolutely nothing to prepare, them not getting the v
class they wanted isnt goong to be the thing that made them not play again.

Xavon wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Xavon wrote:

Grekel! wrote:

edwin wrote:

Brokkr wrote: No experience is required to create a forum account or use the app. The player is still free to show up with out doing either.


Reminds me of an rpg I signed up for at GenCon. I showed up and GM expected me to have a character in an online application. GM said email was sent out. What email since I expected event lisrings to define everything I need to do. No cost either. Delayed the game for 15 minutes for everybody. That would be an issue for TD since they have a schedule to maintain.


THIS!


NOT THIS!

I had a big rant typed out, but it was getting too long and too personal. But long story short, I find it personally untenable not to read ALL materials associated with an event/game.


I understand what you're saying. But, at the same time, if I were running True Dungeon, I'd want as few barriers as possible to new players trying the game. It is already $80 per ticket at GENCON, which is a pretty big initial barrier. If new players were also required before the event to read and comprehend a bunch of materials, create an account and log onto the forums, figure out how to find the thread which corresponded to their run, and engaging to select a class.

Even if they can create an account and find their way to the correct thread on a forum they've never been to before, in order to pick a class they'd have to do a lot of research on the game in general (how combat is done, what puzzles are like, etc) plus research each class to figure out how each works and which they might prefer. That seems to me to be enough of a barrier that many players will either decide not to play TD at all, or decide to show up without doing all of that and be pretty unhappy that other group members have already claimed a number of the classes prior to the event.


Sorry in advance, this will be long.

Most people at GenCon are gamers. Games have rules. A no experience event is a bit more flexible/forgiving, but the rules are not completely ignored.

To wit from my own GC experience this year:
I signed up for an MHA TCG Pre-release sealed tournament. I immediately got an email telling me to go to the Jasco booth before the tournament to run a demo and receive the demo decks that the tournament would be using. Which I did. Out of the 16 players in the tournament, only 1 failed to do this. And while the organizers brought 2 sets of the demo decks, so that person was okay, they were perfectly willing to turn away anyone who didn't have a deck if they ran out.
I played in a Funkoverse board gamer prerelease and early purchase learn to play. I watched a certain yT game channel's how to play and sample game videos. Some of the people at the table hadn't. And the vids were for the Batman version while we were playing the Harry Potter version, so I still had questions. They had a person on hand to answer guide us, and we still followed the rules of the event and the game in general (though I didn't end up buying it, for various reasons).
I played in a Demon Hunters RPG event. Demon Hunters, for some reason, is listed as a FATE game (both last year and this year). It is not. It is a system inspired by FATE, but not the same. No where in the event description does it say this (though it is a No Experience type event). Both this year and last year, we had people show up (myself included last year) with FATE dice, expecting to play that system. One even left last year. But they did not change from their own system, and every who stayed still enjoyed it.
I played in a KeyForge Sealed Deck tournament. Again, No Experience event, and while I had watched games online, hadn't played it. I showed up early, and asked if any of the event runners could give me a quick demo. Because it was the first event and had time, they did. If they hadn't been able to, I wouldn't have complained, and would have done my best not to inconvenience my opponents with my inexperience. Even so I still had a few questions. And at the end, they told me I had to have the App to get my prizes. Because that is how their system worked. So I got the app (and found out I already had an account with the company from ordering a different game). If I had been unwilling/able, I would have had to forfeit my rewards.

My point? The event descriptions are frequently not the end all be all. Nor are the events themselves. There are things to do outside of them. And the rules don't change just because one or a few people are not aware of them. Some minor concessions can be made, but there is a limit. If TD were to choose to send the players here to set up, that would be well in keeping with what many other events are doing. And if the participants chose to ignore it, it is on them. not TD. We want new players, of course. But the new players have to want to participate, be willing to put in at least a little effort.

And if I was spending enough money on a 84 minute TD run to buy a board game or video game, you can bet I would want to put in some effort to get the most out of it. But then I did. Both with TD and other events. Maybe that makes me outside the norm, putting in a little effort and taking some person responsibility and trying to make sure I don't make things less fun for others...


Also, TD is in sort of a nebulous event space. It says No Experience, but that is a very broad category. And when I went to register an event last year, the default category. But TD is not a learn to play event, where everyone is expected to be new, and there is an extra degree of simplification and guidance. There is TD 101, but it is not mandatory. There is the sealed pack events, but even those are not the same thing as a regular 'learn to play' style event. There are not separate events for veterans. They tried that with the Nightmare events of the past, but that was just more proof that even if it is in the event description, some people won't read/care.

And frankly, even if they come here, do they really have to do research? They can sign up, find the thread and start talking. Get advice from vets and not have to look at the cards or tokens if they don't want to. They have to sign up anyway, if they want to get XP for the events. And, again, players who are willing to do that are the ones who will come back, who will support TD. They are the ones we should want.

Please check out my trade post located here!

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

It's time to eliminate the 3rd level player bonus 4 years 11 months ago #443

Yes +1

And have an email go out to them that recommends users go read the rules and coordinate groups otherwise they may not get their prefered class.

Xavon wrote:

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

Xavon wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Xavon wrote:

Grekel! wrote:

edwin wrote:

Brokkr wrote: No experience is required to create a forum account or use the app. The player is still free to show up with out doing either.


Reminds me of an rpg I signed up for at GenCon. I showed up and GM expected me to have a character in an online application. GM said email was sent out. What email since I expected event lisrings to define everything I need to do. No cost either. Delayed the game for 15 minutes for everybody. That would be an issue for TD since they have a schedule to maintain.


THIS!


NOT THIS!

I had a big rant typed out, but it was getting too long and too personal. But long story short, I find it personally untenable not to read ALL materials associated with an event/game.


I understand what you're saying. But, at the same time, if I were running True Dungeon, I'd want as few barriers as possible to new players trying the game. It is already $80 per ticket at GENCON, which is a pretty big initial barrier. If new players were also required before the event to read and comprehend a bunch of materials, create an account and log onto the forums, figure out how to find the thread which corresponded to their run, and engaging to select a class.

Even if they can create an account and find their way to the correct thread on a forum they've never been to before, in order to pick a class they'd have to do a lot of research on the game in general (how combat is done, what puzzles are like, etc) plus research each class to figure out how each works and which they might prefer. That seems to me to be enough of a barrier that many players will either decide not to play TD at all, or decide to show up without doing all of that and be pretty unhappy that other group members have already claimed a number of the classes prior to the event.


Sorry in advance, this will be long.

Most people at GenCon are gamers. Games have rules. A no experience event is a bit more flexible/forgiving, but the rules are not completely ignored.

To wit from my own GC experience this year:
I signed up for an MHA TCG Pre-release sealed tournament. I immediately got an email telling me to go to the Jasco booth before the tournament to run a demo and receive the demo decks that the tournament would be using. Which I did. Out of the 16 players in the tournament, only 1 failed to do this. And while the organizers brought 2 sets of the demo decks, so that person was okay, they were perfectly willing to turn away anyone who didn't have a deck if they ran out.
I played in a Funkoverse board gamer prerelease and early purchase learn to play. I watched a certain yT game channel's how to play and sample game videos. Some of the people at the table hadn't. And the vids were for the Batman version while we were playing the Harry Potter version, so I still had questions. They had a person on hand to answer guide us, and we still followed the rules of the event and the game in general (though I didn't end up buying it, for various reasons).
I played in a Demon Hunters RPG event. Demon Hunters, for some reason, is listed as a FATE game (both last year and this year). It is not. It is a system inspired by FATE, but not the same. No where in the event description does it say this (though it is a No Experience type event). Both this year and last year, we had people show up (myself included last year) with FATE dice, expecting to play that system. One even left last year. But they did not change from their own system, and every who stayed still enjoyed it.
I played in a KeyForge Sealed Deck tournament. Again, No Experience event, and while I had watched games online, hadn't played it. I showed up early, and asked if any of the event runners could give me a quick demo. Because it was the first event and had time, they did. If they hadn't been able to, I wouldn't have complained, and would have done my best not to inconvenience my opponents with my inexperience. Even so I still had a few questions. And at the end, they told me I had to have the App to get my prizes. Because that is how their system worked. So I got the app (and found out I already had an account with the company from ordering a different game). If I had been unwilling/able, I would have had to forfeit my rewards.

My point? The event descriptions are frequently not the end all be all. Nor are the events themselves. There are things to do outside of them. And the rules don't change just because one or a few people are not aware of them. Some minor concessions can be made, but there is a limit. If TD were to choose to send the players here to set up, that would be well in keeping with what many other events are doing. And if the participants chose to ignore it, it is on them. not TD. We want new players, of course. But the new players have to want to participate, be willing to put in at least a little effort.

And if I was spending enough money on a 84 minute TD run to buy a board game or video game, you can bet I would want to put in some effort to get the most out of it. But then I did. Both with TD and other events. Maybe that makes me outside the norm, putting in a little effort and taking some person responsibility and trying to make sure I don't make things less fun for others...


Also, TD is in sort of a nebulous event space. It says No Experience, but that is a very broad category. And when I went to register an event last year, the default category. But TD is not a learn to play event, where everyone is expected to be new, and there is an extra degree of simplification and guidance. There is TD 101, but it is not mandatory. There is the sealed pack events, but even those are not the same thing as a regular 'learn to play' style event. There are not separate events for veterans. They tried that with the Nightmare events of the past, but that was just more proof that even if it is in the event description, some people won't read/care.

And frankly, even if they come here, do they really have to do research? They can sign up, find the thread and start talking. Get advice from vets and not have to look at the cards or tokens if they don't want to. They have to sign up anyway, if they want to get XP for the events. And, again, players who are willing to do that are the ones who will come back, who will support TD. They are the ones we should want.


Personally I think if a event is no experience required then we should expect most new players to be completely unprepared.

I run a game at origins every year, I expect fully to need to teach everyone that shows up, since it’s no experience required. The game for anyone interested is Dragons Night Out.
Origins requires me to put in a game system, so I always put reaper miniatures warlord system, but it’s a slightly altered version of the old rule set that we were using when reaper used when I was on the demo team.
Point being based on my experience we should expect almost no one to read the rules before playing the first time (I didn’t read the rules until almost a year after playing my first 2 times)


And part of my point (which I forgot to add to the original post), is maybe TD101 and the Sealed packs should be 'No Experience' and the regular TDs should be 'Some Experience'. Not that most people will pay attention or that is will stop them from signing up.

Please check out my trade post located here!

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

It's time to eliminate the 3rd level player bonus 4 years 11 months ago #444

No one is starting they dont want other people to come, learn and have fun. But as for a community, I think it's fair to say that when people take some time to educate themselves on how to play and work with the community to play within the rules it makes for a better experience for all of us.

We should not be concerned about making people happy that wont do it for themselves. If they dont read and then are disappointed they didnt get to play a character, oh well... they can read and learn what's required to play it next time.

Grekel! wrote:

Xavon wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Xavon wrote:

Grekel! wrote:

edwin wrote:

Brokkr wrote: No experience is required to create a forum account or use the app. The player is still free to show up with out doing either.


Reminds me of an rpg I signed up for at GenCon. I showed up and GM expected me to have a character in an online application. GM said email was sent out. What email since I expected event lisrings to define everything I need to do. No cost either. Delayed the game for 15 minutes for everybody. That would be an issue for TD since they have a schedule to maintain.


THIS!


NOT THIS!

I had a big rant typed out, but it was getting too long and too personal. But long story short, I find it personally untenable not to read ALL materials associated with an event/game.


I understand what you're saying. But, at the same time, if I were running True Dungeon, I'd want as few barriers as possible to new players trying the game. It is already $80 per ticket at GENCON, which is a pretty big initial barrier. If new players were also required before the event to read and comprehend a bunch of materials, create an account and log onto the forums, figure out how to find the thread which corresponded to their run, and engaging to select a class.

Even if they can create an account and find their way to the correct thread on a forum they've never been to before, in order to pick a class they'd have to do a lot of research on the game in general (how combat is done, what puzzles are like, etc) plus research each class to figure out how each works and which they might prefer. That seems to me to be enough of a barrier that many players will either decide not to play TD at all, or decide to show up without doing all of that and be pretty unhappy that other group members have already claimed a number of the classes prior to the event.





Also, TD is in sort of a nebulous event space. It says No Experience, but that is a very broad category.

I would say "no experience" may be sweeping, but in all fairness there is still the expectation that "no experience required" means exactly that.

And when I went to register an event last year, the default category. But TD is not a learn to play event, where everyone is expected to be new, and there is an extra degree of simplification and guidance.

TD most certainly does not expect everyone to be new. But it has always been (at least as long as I have played) a game where a brand new group of players could come and try out the game and have a reasonable expectation of enjoying it. That said when I started, the parties were smaller and for a group of new players - the coaches had a ghost of a chance to explain some of the gameplay and do a bit more than just get the party card filled. In all fairness - a lot has changed, more players and more complexity nearly guarantee that time to spend explaining the game to newcomers is all but nonexistent. But if we're saying that the game has become of a format that is not approachable to a walk-in, then we all seriously need to be having a very different discussion. I agree that we have challenges, but to grow the game, it has got to remain a thing that can be played by literally anyone who wants to give it a shot. (Again my opinion only).


There is TD 101, but it is not mandatory. There is the sealed pack events, but even those are not the same thing as a regular 'learn to play' style event.

Maybe, but it is my understanding that these were intended as good opportunities for new or newer players.


There are not separate events for veterans. They tried that with the Nightmare events of the past, but that was just more proof that even if it is in the event description, some people won't read/care.

And frankly, even if they come here, do they really have to do research? They can sign up, find the thread and start talking. Get advice from vets and not have to look at the cards or tokens if they don't want to. They have to sign up anyway, if they want to get XP for the events. And, again, players who are willing to do that are the ones who will come back, who will support TD. They are the ones we should want.


That last bit is the one that concerns me the most. This is the second time I've heard a variant of this statement in this thread...

I'm just going to say this and leave it. I have, in almost 50 years of life on this planet, never experienced, or read about a group that started out being openly welcoming of any who wanted to participate, with zero restrictions other than a willingness to be a part of the group - who then became concerned with "who we want in the group" or "who we should want" or any other variation... that didn't have all manner of negatives as a result of such a shift. By definition - that attitude is less open, and less welcoming, and can be a starting point for less pleasant attitudes.

Please check out my trade post located here!

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

Last edit: by Guedoji.
Time to create page: 0.101 seconds