TOPIC: Important Update! The Astral Adventure is now NEW

Let's work on designing a system that is the most fair for everyone involved.

It feels like there is a group that would like to see the top of the leaderboard never change.

I wonder if they would feel that way if they were not currently at the top?

I think a "hall of fame" where one becomes enshrined once they complete so many adventures might be a good solution. This would allow for an innaugural class, memorializing those who have done so much for TD, and create an aspirational level for newer players.

Just an idea.

Remove the Top Players page. Problem solved?

Brad Mortensen wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: My preference would still be to have the Astral Adventure at GENCON...

I believe Jeff already said that’s impossible

Dungeons are huge and the storyscape is already puny. I can’t imagine six more coaching rooms crammed into that space, let alone the dungeon

It's certainly not impossible. Even if there isn't room to add a fifth dungeon by shrinking other stuff, you could replace a second version of one of the four planned Dungeons with this one.

Wade Schwendemann wrote: Let's work on designing a system that is the most fair for everyone involved.

It feels like there is a group that would like to see the top of the leaderboard never change.

I wonder if they would feel that way if they were not currently at the top?

I think a "hall of fame" where one becomes enshrined once they complete so many adventures might be a good solution. This would allow for an innaugural class, memorializing those who have done so much for TD, and create an aspirational level for newer players.

Just an idea.

The top of the Leaderboard could certainly change, all it would take is the people at the top to miss a year or two of Dungeons, or even to not make it all the way through a Dungeon or two. I don't think anyone has ever said that the top 10 (or whatever) positions should be locked in forever.

Wade Schwendemann wrote:
I wonder if they would feel that way if they were not currently at the top?

I’m not at the top. I’m nowhere on the Top Player board at all. And I lean towards a way to let the folks ahead of me to stay there, as long as they’re still active, and as long as it doesn’t detract from newbies.

When I first started playing, I had no idea XP was even a thing. If I hadn’t been forced to create an account at the XP Desk, I probably wouldn’t have bothered. When I learned more about it, I was really glad I did. Now I’m eager to hit L9, and raising the XP cap to 6k/yr gets me there a year sooner.

But I don’t want to jump ahead of people who played much longer than me just because I live two hours from Columbus and they live on the west coast or down under.

It's not exactly the same, but the DnD and Pathfinder organized play groups allow each scenario to grant xp once per character regardless of where it is played I think. It's a policy that is easy to understand and what somebody new to TD would probably expect. Anything more complex requires explanation and periodic arguing.

Mike Steele wrote:

kurtreznor wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

jedibcg wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Jeff Martin wrote: It's been a very long day. Thanks for your feedback on this. I'll talk to the team via phone on Saturday and get their input on different ideas. We should have a final decision by Monday morning.

Thanks again.

Thanks, Jeff! One thing to consider is that far more people play True Dungeon at GENCON than at other conventions. For those that do GENCON but not other conventions and who care about XP (I'm guessing it is a significant number of people), it would be a real negative for other conventions to offer more XP than does GENCON.

Why would it be a real negative? If you want to play TD aren't you going to play were and when you can? I also wonder what you think a significant number is. This are real questions I am attempting to understand.

I think the simple fact that there are far more people that play True Dungeon at GENCON than at the other conventions shows that there are a lot of people, for whatever reason (time, money, etc.), only attend GENCON and no other conventions. So there are clearly a lot of people that enjoy True Dungeon that don't play it at every single convention it's at. Especially since Origins and GENCON are less than two months apart.

I obviously don't know an exact number of players that only play TD at GENCON and to whom XP is important. There seem to be thousands of people that only play it at GENCON, and since XP is important to a lot of people (even the more casual players that I play with), I think it's a lot of people. The counterpoint obviously to someone asserting that XP isn't important to very many people would be that, in that case, why offer exclusive XP outside of GENCON?

I do understand that if True Dungeon has exclusive XP at non-GENCON conventions that it might drive additional attendance there. That is counterbalanced by the GENCON players that won't attend those conventions and might be unhappy and disincentivized by getting less XP than those going to other conventions. I'd imagine those and other factors we haven't even considered are what Jeff and the team are discussing this weekend.

I wouldn't consider it to be Jeff being pressured to change his decision, but rather him considering some points / options that perhaps they hadn't considered before.

So, lots of people play at gencon. And many care about XP. And some of those cant/wont attend other cons. There is no logical reason that the conclusion should be to cap XP at gencon unless you want to add one more premise: those few people mentioned above should receive special treatment/consideration.

I suppose you could try one other approach: if you feel that any player who only attends 1 con per year should be able to get max XP. But i would think that is a terrible restriction to place on TD.

Im sorry, mike, but TD can and should grow beyond being a gencon event that happens to also run its gencon dungeons elsewhere. Allowing non-gencon XP opens the possibilty that there could be many new dungeons and other events every year. I would love to see that, even if i couldnt make it to all of them.

I think my proposal to allow the extra XP at different cons for different Dungeons up to two levels below the top XP level, and then cap at 4K XP per year, would accomplish all of that. It would certainly allow growth of new players at different conventions, as they would get the full XP for years, as even with the extra XP it would take them years to reach Level 8 (where the 4K XP per year would currently begin) or Level 9 or more (which is where the 4K might start by the time they reach that level).

Plus, it would keep the top of the leaderboard from just reflecting who had the most money and time to go to all of the different conventions. Unless, of course, that is what True Dungeon management wants the top of the Leaderboard to look like.

Egads, no! That may be the worst 'solution' of all. First, it guarantees the top of the leader board doesnt change until we start dieing (or have to stop playing for some other unfortunate reason). So, all the players looking at XP aspiring to those levels know that they will never get to the top.
AND the problem that it is trying to fix (preventing long time players from getting passed on the leaderboard) isnt prevented at all, it is just pushed down to a different group of players.

Rob F wrote:

lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote: its F'ing XP....you get some cool perks...yay that is it

it doesnt let you buy tickets early...get better tokens...just add ons from TD


It doesn't do anything else...it can only help you

+1 to this.

It's f'ing xp. If it's that important to people then they need to make all the TD Cons. Quite trying to lobby for a system that isn't fair to everyone. You want your XP then go get it and play TD at the Cons that offer it. This argument of the vets getting the shaft is absolutely hilarious. They are no different from the newer players when it comes to the means to make the different Cons.

+1

This whole argument is petty.

I hope Jeff sticks to his original plans.

Joshua Long wrote:

Rob F wrote:

lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote: its F'ing XP....you get some cool perks...yay that is it

it doesnt let you buy tickets early...get better tokens...just add ons from TD


It doesn't do anything else...it can only help you

+1 to this.

It's f'ing xp. If it's that important to people then they need to make all the TD Cons. Quite trying to lobby for a system that isn't fair to everyone. You want your XP then go get it and play TD at the Cons that offer it. This argument of the vets getting the shaft is absolutely hilarious. They are no different from the newer players when it comes to the means to make the different Cons.

+1

This whole argument is petty.

I hope Jeff sticks to his original plans.

+infinity

Mike Steele wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote: Let's work on designing a system that is the most fair for everyone involved.

It feels like there is a group that would like to see the top of the leaderboard never change.

I wonder if they would feel that way if they were not currently at the top?

I think a "hall of fame" where one becomes enshrined once they complete so many adventures might be a good solution. This would allow for an innaugural class, memorializing those who have done so much for TD, and create an aspirational level for newer players.

Just an idea.

The top of the Leaderboard could certainly change, all it would take is the people at the top to miss a year or two of Dungeons, or even to not make it all the way through a Dungeon or two. I don't think anyone has ever said that the top 10 (or whatever) positions should be locked in forever.

Bullshit! And we all know it. Any policy that caps XP and guarantees you can earn the max at gencon is meant to keep the XP leaders at the top until they stop playing.

kurtreznor wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

kurtreznor wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

jedibcg wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Jeff Martin wrote: It's been a very long day. Thanks for your feedback on this. I'll talk to the team via phone on Saturday and get their input on different ideas. We should have a final decision by Monday morning.

Thanks again.

Thanks, Jeff! One thing to consider is that far more people play True Dungeon at GENCON than at other conventions. For those that do GENCON but not other conventions and who care about XP (I'm guessing it is a significant number of people), it would be a real negative for other conventions to offer more XP than does GENCON.

Why would it be a real negative? If you want to play TD aren't you going to play were and when you can? I also wonder what you think a significant number is. This are real questions I am attempting to understand.

I think the simple fact that there are far more people that play True Dungeon at GENCON than at the other conventions shows that there are a lot of people, for whatever reason (time, money, etc.), only attend GENCON and no other conventions. So there are clearly a lot of people that enjoy True Dungeon that don't play it at every single convention it's at. Especially since Origins and GENCON are less than two months apart.

I obviously don't know an exact number of players that only play TD at GENCON and to whom XP is important. There seem to be thousands of people that only play it at GENCON, and since XP is important to a lot of people (even the more casual players that I play with), I think it's a lot of people. The counterpoint obviously to someone asserting that XP isn't important to very many people would be that, in that case, why offer exclusive XP outside of GENCON?

I do understand that if True Dungeon has exclusive XP at non-GENCON conventions that it might drive additional attendance there. That is counterbalanced by the GENCON players that won't attend those conventions and might be unhappy and disincentivized by getting less XP than those going to other conventions. I'd imagine those and other factors we haven't even considered are what Jeff and the team are discussing this weekend.

I wouldn't consider it to be Jeff being pressured to change his decision, but rather him considering some points / options that perhaps they hadn't considered before.

So, lots of people play at gencon. And many care about XP. And some of those cant/wont attend other cons. There is no logical reason that the conclusion should be to cap XP at gencon unless you want to add one more premise: those few people mentioned above should receive special treatment/consideration.

I suppose you could try one other approach: if you feel that any player who only attends 1 con per year should be able to get max XP. But i would think that is a terrible restriction to place on TD.

Im sorry, mike, but TD can and should grow beyond being a gencon event that happens to also run its gencon dungeons elsewhere. Allowing non-gencon XP opens the possibilty that there could be many new dungeons and other events every year. I would love to see that, even if i couldnt make it to all of them.

I think my proposal to allow the extra XP at different cons for different Dungeons up to two levels below the top XP level, and then cap at 4K XP per year, would accomplish all of that. It would certainly allow growth of new players at different conventions, as they would get the full XP for years, as even with the extra XP it would take them years to reach Level 8 (where the 4K XP per year would currently begin) or Level 9 or more (which is where the 4K might start by the time they reach that level).

Plus, it would keep the top of the leaderboard from just reflecting who had the most money and time to go to all of the different conventions. Unless, of course, that is what True Dungeon management wants the top of the Leaderboard to look like.

Egads, no! That may be the worst 'solution' of all. First, it guarantees the top of the leader board doesnt change until we start dieing (or have to stop playing for some other unfortunate reason). So, all the players looking at XP aspiring to those levels know that they will never get to the top.
AND the problem that it is trying to fix (preventing long time players from getting passed on the leaderboard) isnt prevented at all, it is just pushed down to a different group of players.

I'm curious why you think that people on the XP list should be passed if they continue to play adventures at max XP. If someone, for example, is #50 on the list, and plays both Dungeons next year and earns max XP, do you think that they should be passed by others? That doesn't seem like a fair system at all to me, nor a logical one. If someone is #20 on the list, I'm not sure why you see it as a problem that they stay at #20 (or even more higher) if they earn max XP on their Dungeons.

Raven, for instance, is higher than me on the chart, and I certainly don't expect to ever pass her unless she misses a Dungeon or gets less than full XP on one. And it doesn't bother me in the slightest that I won't pass her, and I don't feel that the system is unfair somehow because I don't. To be honest, I'll be a bit sad if the day comes that I do pass her, I hope that she keeps that perfect score up for a very long time. And I would rather not have the system changed so that she has to travel from Canada for multiple conventions in order to keep the perfect XP score.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this, and see what Jeff and company come up with on Monday.

Most of us run the dungeon enough that one slip up is not going to cost us any XP.

I'm not even close to being on the Top Players board. Honestly I don't care. I do care about the extra loot I get for being 6th level. I like my purple badge holder. The pin doesn't excite me. Looking forward to 9th level, but that is a few years away even another 2K per year.


Seriously, how much time does your D&D group spend comparing your character's XP totals? Given the way lthe XP needed for new levels progresses, level compression is a part of any campaign.