TOPIC: Spolier Free Feedback for V1

bpsymington wrote: $66 (or $58) is nothing to sneeze at, but I didn't have a problem with the value of the adventure. Covering the cost of TD staff and volunteers is necessary, and I don't mind contributing to help support the existence of something that has given me years of fun and excitement and friendship. I am really glad this worked so well for True Dungeon, so that there can be more True Dungeon.

I spent less on V1 and V2 tickets that I would have on GenCon and GHC tickets. Thats a plus.

And loss of three conventions worth of revenue had to have negative impact on the business of TD.

I also noticed that only 5 GT runs were held. Were the other 10 not distributed? An indicator of low token sales perhaps?

I had fun, I supported a game I love, I will get loot. It all works for me.

Combat. 1d10 +10. A problem?

I'm not the best slider, but even ok sliders are usually not sliding really low numbers. Of course we sometimes are bumped into unhelpful places, but i don't think a d20 roll accurately captures sliding results.

1d10+10 does distort results somewhat. The 20 spots on boards have gotten pretty small recently. A 10% chance of a crit seems high to me. Though I was enjoying it when I was playing Dwarf Fighter.

Tyler Jakes wrote: Definitely have things to say but would be spoilers. Without spoilers:

• Healing was much harder due to the fact that you can't really peel off and interact between turns the way you can in a live TD run.
• The puzzles felt easier but that's because everyone had the same viewpoint so you didn't have to get people in line to the 'aha' moment. But that's not a bad thing. Overall, I think these went real well, though the group-wide damage on attempts PLUS push was a little harsh.
• The audio and text was a godsend. No more blown out speakers trying to compete with general ambiance + other groups cheers and stuff. Easier to understand the story and not waste time.
• Combat definitely felt underwhelming, for spoiler reasons and not. Some way to make combat more interesting would be great. Had a couple newbies quite upset that they only got one hit in the entire run, due to luck and the short length of combat.
• The intro video and overall production quality was great. You all did an incredible job turning this into a successful virtual version in such a short timespan. So much kudos.
• The app could definitely use some love, mostly on a UX/UI front. The backend is pretty damn good (shoutout Cranston!).

As a cleric I just listed out in chat my party heals for heal the entire part for that amount or a spot heal and let people chat me if they wanted something.

We managed all our heals in chat as well. Once we had the hang of it, it worked very well.

Shout out to DM Eric.

He did an awesome job on two of our Team Synergy runs.

Harlax wrote: I spent less on V1 and V2 tickets that I would have on GenCon and GHC tickets. Thats a plus.

Just so you are clear GHC tickets were $58 last year for E2 and E3. I looked it up. This was not LESS than GHC, GC was $80 for the enchanced E's and $58 for the sealed, again I looked it up. Origins was $58 for E1 and E2. Not making an argument just putting out the data in case anyone else forgot like I did.

jedibcg wrote:

Harlax wrote: I spent less on V1 and V2 tickets that I would have on GenCon and GHC tickets. Thats a plus.

Just so you are clear GHC tickets were $58 last year for E2 and E3. I looked it up. This was not LESS than GHC, GC was $80 for the enchanced E's and $58 for the sealed, again I looked it up. Origins was $58 for E1 and E2. Not making an argument just putting out the data in case anyone else forgot like I did.

Last year I spent $712 for tickets to GenCon and GHC. This year I'm spending $594 for V1 and V2.

I didn't forget, I just didn't show my work.

Harlax wrote: Last year I spent $712 for tickets to GenCon and GHC. This year I'm spending $594 for V1 and V2.

I didn't forget, I just didn't show my work.

Roger you were talking about together not each separately.

Harlax wrote: Combat. 1d10 +10. A problem?

I'm not the best slider, but even ok sliders are usually not sliding really low numbers. Of course we sometimes are bumped into unhelpful places, but i don't think a d20 roll accurately captures sliding results.

1d10+10 does distort results somewhat. The 20 spots on boards have gotten pretty small recently. A 10% chance of a crit seems high to me. Though I was enjoying it when I was playing Dwarf Fighter.

I think this definitely needs to change

Internally I think it would be a good idea to do a randomizer of 100 and assign values based off the randomizer

20 should be only 100
19 would be 98 99
18 would be 97 96
the remaining numbers would be divided equally.

That would greatly lower the crit rate to something much more indicative of normal TD slides

There's no way to account for the entire shuffleboard experience but a change to the attack roll such as this would at least make combat a bit more dynamic.

Combat runs VERY slowly but that's a factor of the DM gathering and recording damage one person at a time. If there was some way for players to indicate hit/miss damage and crit/not crit that could visually display for the DM I think things would run much more smoothly

Healing is the same. If we could have a small overlay that shows current/max HP per character the healers could much more efficiently heal players.


AFAIK neither of these are possible via the traditional Zoom interface at this time.

I ended up doing 3 runs, I felt it was completely worth running twice, three was a bit much.

I will continue doing two runs for each new VTD story. I hope it continues even when/if we get conventions back. It will provide further use for my token collection/habbit beyond my once a year convention. Also I just saved thousands of dollars doing this all virtual this year, some of that will go back into token purchase.

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Harlax wrote: Combat. 1d10 +10. A problem?

I'm not the best slider, but even ok sliders are usually not sliding really low numbers. Of course we sometimes are bumped into unhelpful places, but i don't think a d20 roll accurately captures sliding results.

1d10+10 does distort results somewhat. The 20 spots on boards have gotten pretty small recently. A 10% chance of a crit seems high to me. Though I was enjoying it when I was playing Dwarf Fighter.

I think this definitely needs to change

Internally I think it would be a good idea to do a randomizer of 100 and assign values based off the randomizer

20 should be only 100
19 would be 98 99
18 would be 97 96
the remaining numbers would be divided equally.

That would greatly lower the crit rate to something much more indicative of normal TD slides

There's no way to account for the entire shuffleboard experience but a change to the attack roll such as this would at least make combat a bit more dynamic.

Combat runs VERY slowly but that's a factor of the DM gathering and recording damage one person at a time. If there was some way for players to indicate hit/miss damage and crit/not crit that could visually display for the DM I think things would run much more smoothly

Healing is the same. If we could have a small overlay that shows current/max HP per character the healers could much more efficiently heal players.


AFAIK neither of these are possible via the traditional Zoom interface at this time.

1% for a 20 goes waaaaay to far in the other direction.

10% is astronomical. 5% is too high to simulate correctly.

Would 3% be a good compromise?