Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Labyrinthe Forum _ General Club Feedback and Suggestions _ Adding monster points to characters on day of monstering

Posted by: Hulud Jun 21 2013, 02:13 PM

I know the CMT don't necessarily have enough control over the space-time continuum to look at every single thread so thought I would plonk a link to this one here -


http://www.labyrinthe.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=19138


TLDR - Allowing players to add monster points to character cards on the day of monstering (rather than restricting it to the day of playing) would likely end up with more people monstering.

Posted by: Elferrick Jun 21 2013, 03:47 PM

Couldn't agree more... cool.gif cool.gif

Posted by: BBB Jun 21 2013, 04:45 PM

Sadly, that's not a very practical option, given there are limits on how many points you can put on a character how would you track those limits?

Currently its nice and simple, you go to the desk on the day you play the character and the desk can plonk them on.

This is to pervent the situation extrapolation of characters earning points without ever being played*

Also, how many people plan that carefully that when the monster they know exactly where they want their monster points to go and how they are being spent?

*Yes, this is a problem if the character is designed purely for off dungeon use... Dedicated Making characters have to carefully balance their points on dead points spent on making stuff that is typically zero use on dungeons and spending points to be able to survive and interact with dungeons to get the points to make stuff. It is for this reason that can only create new characters using ref points on the day you play them.

BBB


Posted by: DanM Jun 21 2013, 04:48 PM

QUOTE(BBB @ Jun 21 2013, 05:45 PM) *
Also, how many people plan that carefully that when the monster they know exactly where they want their monster points to go and how they are being spent?


People love points.

Posted by: Moony Jun 26 2013, 06:58 AM

Put a cap on it then. Say 10 points if you're at the level were you can only put 25 points on when you play, 15 points at the next level and 20 points the one after that. Also restrict it a little more by saying you can only do that twice in a row max before playing again. This does mean that people with only one character will have more points going on their monster cards as they're capped a bit but as they get more char's it flexible. I'd love it if something like this could be done but if it doesn't I'd still monster when I can as I like monstering as much as I like playing.

Posted by: Abel Jun 26 2013, 07:27 AM

People should be able to spend their points as they wish, I mean they earned them, if they want to put them on a making character that they don't play often for whatever reason, why is that a problem? More manufacturers? Looks like more availability to me.

If there has to be a cap it should be reasonable and simple, but allow them to be spent when people want to spend them, not just when they play, what's the worst that can really happen?

Posted by: Jasper Jun 26 2013, 09:31 AM

QUOTE(Abel @ Jun 26 2013, 08:27 AM) *
People should be able to spend their points as they wish, I mean they earned them, if they want to put them on a making character that they don't play often for whatever reason, why is that a problem? More manufacturers? Looks like more availability to me.

If there has to be a cap it should be reasonable and simple, but allow them to be spent when people want to spend them, not just when they play, what's the worst that can really happen?



If you could create characters in that way the various mechanics for manufacturing would need to be looked at. The level loss would counter most issues with magic/spirit stuff but the potions would be a problem. It would probably lead to a situation in which no-one had any potion skills but instead had a secondary character to make potions. That doesn't mean that there couldn't be a fix, or that this is a bad idea.

Personally I'm not convinced that changes to rewards will make much of a difference - it never has before - but that we need to make monstering more fun.


J

Posted by: Fenris Jun 26 2013, 12:07 PM

QUOTE(Abel @ Jun 26 2013, 08:27 AM) *
People should be able to spend their points as they wish, I mean they earned them, if they want to put them on a making character that they don't play often for whatever reason, why is that a problem? More manufacturers? Looks like more availability to me.
This.

QUOTE(Abel @ Jun 26 2013, 08:27 AM) *
If there has to be a cap it should be reasonable and simple
Not this.

QUOTE(Abel @ Jun 26 2013, 08:27 AM) *
allow them to be spent when people want to spend them, not just when they play, what's the worst that can really happen?
This.

Although, also this:
QUOTE
Personally I'm not convinced that changes to rewards will make much of a difference - it never has before - but that we need to make monstering more fun.
J

Posted by: RichardCraig Jun 26 2013, 08:33 PM

You basically just need to let people get 75pt and no credits when they monster, that they can add to any chr they want when they monster.

It's almost so simple that it won't actually happen.

As for caps and all that just think which will upset you more, somebody monstering 10 times and adding 750pts or doing 10 dungeons without a monster..

If somebody wants to monster everyweekend for a year they will get a 52*75 = 3900pt chr.

Do you know what? I think they deserve it!

Posted by: Gordon Jun 26 2013, 08:37 PM

QUOTE(RichardCraig @ Jun 26 2013, 08:33 PM) *
You basically just need to let people get 75pt and no credits when they monster, that they can add to any chr they want when they monster.

It's almost so simple that it won't actually happen.

As for caps and all that just think which will upset you more, somebody monstering 10 times and adding 750pts or doing 10 dungeons without a monster..

If somebody wants to monster everyweekend for a year they will get a 52*75 = 3900pt chr.

Do you know what? I think they deserve it!


This

Posted by: Abel Jun 26 2013, 09:29 PM

QUOTE(RichardCraig @ Jun 26 2013, 09:33 PM) *
You basically just need to let people get 75pt and no credits when they monster, that they can add to any chr they want when they monster.


I still like and have use for credits, as I'm sure quite a few people do also, the rewards are fine as they are, but just allow the freedom of use for monster points.

Posted by: RichardCraig Jun 26 2013, 09:44 PM

That's cool but there is a section of people who don't really monster as credits mean nothing to them.

This would make them think about monstering as a realistic choice to playing.

If you want credits then have them but to be honest £12 of credits isn't an incentive to everybody, just broaden things so you can choose the thing that works for you.

Posted by: DanM Jun 27 2013, 05:58 AM

QUOTE(Abel @ Jun 26 2013, 10:29 PM) *
I still like and have use for credits, as I'm sure quite a few people do also, the rewards are fine as they are, but just allow the freedom of use for monster points.


Options are good.


Posted by: gormaden Jun 27 2013, 07:29 AM

This is all good -I like the idea of 75pts to be spent on the day - it equates to almost to a whole double lengths worth of points for helping by monstering - (and 110 for 3x length?)

but don't we need GSM feedback too?

Posted by: BBB Jun 27 2013, 07:44 AM

QUOTE(RichardCraig @ Jun 26 2013, 09:33 PM) *
You basically just need to let people get 75pt and no credits when they monster, that they can add to any chr they want when they monster.

It's almost so simple that it won't actually happen.


I like this as an idea however might that mean people rapidly build up a stockpile of monster points?

BBB

Posted by: DanM Jun 27 2013, 07:48 AM

QUOTE(BBB @ Jun 27 2013, 08:44 AM) *
I like this as an idea however might that mean people rapidly build up a stockpile of monster points?

BBB


So?

They're only imaginary numbers

Posted by: Abel Jun 27 2013, 08:05 AM

I'm guessing that is normal 40 points plus trade in your credits for an additional 35, i ok for people, then not only does it mean that more cash will flow through the caves, but also people will happily monster for freely spendable points (i.e. spend them as they want, monstering or playing up to X points). Then surely this is something everyone is happy with.

Game on?

Posted by: Flanners Jun 27 2013, 04:05 PM

Yeah great idea Rich. If someone starts a 3k character and don't know any verbals/how to do anything then they just die don't they...so may be capping how many monster points go on whatever character on whatever day wouldn't be too much of an issue. If they've monstered 15 dungeons to stick 1000points on their 11k character in order to buy a 1k multiclass or someone wants to start a 1k character, i could see that being a good incentive.

I'm pretty certain there are people out there with horde loads of credits which = many monster points.

But yes, it mostly comes down to fun. If i know i'm gonna have a good day out and monstering will compare to playing (i find this is mostly on extended events,) then i generally will be monster it.

Steve

Posted by: BBB Jun 27 2013, 06:18 PM

QUOTE(DanM @ Jun 27 2013, 08:48 AM) *
So?

They're only imaginary numbers


You miss my point, which is making them too easy to get means that they loose their value.

Which runs the risk of a short term gain that tails off and every change in monster reward has so far suffered that problem that a year / 18 months down the line people are asking why there is a shortage of monsters.

The real answer is simply not enough club members...

BBB

Posted by: Hulud Jun 27 2013, 06:26 PM

QUOTE(BBB @ Jun 27 2013, 07:18 PM) *
You miss my point, which is making them too easy to get means that they loose their value.

Which runs the risk of a short term gain that tails off and every change in monster reward has so far suffered that problem that a year / 18 months down the line people are asking why there is a shortage of monsters.

The real answer is simply not enough club members...

BBB



In fairness (and with respect) the question was put "what would get someone who doesn't monster much to monster more" and in the case of a few people it seems the answer is allowing them to spend monster points on characters on the day of monstering and indeed broadening the table of what monster points can be used for.

If doing something like this wouldn't cause any real harm to the game and would certainly not stop people who currently monster from monstering as much then I struggle to see a compelling argument against it.

Lack of clubmembers is another discussion.

Posted by: MattWest Jun 30 2013, 02:23 PM

If people could just add monster points whenever they wanted, there would be an uncanny number of people who whenever they play a Max 250 have exactly 250 points, whenever they play a Max 500 would have exactly 500 points, whenever they play a Max 750 have exactly 750 points etc.

If you have a "secondary" "making" character, what do you get out of it? The ability to supply your mates with lots of gear? You can't keep the grulls and profit for a primary character. That would be cheating - mixing the resources of two of your characters. So what would people be doing? Planning a way around this in a you-scratch-my-back-I'll-scratch-yours sort of a way? Each of a group of mates has a secondary making character to supply their mates' primary characters and what's the end result? Item inflation. The brute warrior walking around in magic armour with magic weapon, magic shield, magic belt, magic shoelaces etc. is loving it, the monk (no items) and the paladin (max 3 items) not so much.

I can see why if you're playing a T11 character and you've fought your way through the dungeons to get there, you might think that someone parachuted in with 6,000 points added straight onto their card from nowhere hadn't earnt their stripes.

Bottom line, the mechanism of add points when you play is quite sensible. You can already swap from credits to monster points and get 64 monster points for a day's monstering which is not much different to the 75 suggested upthread. Suppose the Caves tried a short-term deal where you could swap 1 credit for 3 monster points... meaning 76 monster points for a day's monstering (double-length), would this be a reasonable experiment?

Neil in particular, when you do your four-day the ref-team might just let you add monster points in advance on the basis of the extended length of the adventure. Think that's what happened on the 3-day we did. This would seem more likely to solve your immediate issue though I would suggest that bunging all those monster points onto a character on 20% is probably not the best plan. Wait for your rebirth... then you can add 75 points first time you play and 25 each time you play after that, plus cash monster points in for grulls and items, this is plenty, what's the problem? Only if you are literally monstering twice as often as you play are you going to run out of things to spend monster points on, and the Caves doesn't need that ratio from the majority of players, and the people who monster in that ratio are probably teenagers and students doing it for the credits.

I can envisage a mechanic whereby the CMT can police how many times you add monster points when monstering instead of when playing... namely simply put solid lines around the monster points you're adding onto your card when you write them in, and/or use a special pen colour (say, red) now reserved for monster points.

Posted by: BBB Jun 30 2013, 11:17 PM

QUOTE(Hulud @ Jun 27 2013, 07:26 PM) *
In fairness (and with respect) the question was put "what would get someone who doesn't monster much to monster more" and in the case of a few people it seems the answer is allowing them to spend monster points on characters on the day of monstering and indeed broadening the table of what monster points can be used for.

If doing something like this wouldn't cause any real harm to the game and would certainly not stop people who currently monster from monstering as much then I struggle to see a compelling argument against it.


You're still missing the point: Upping the ease with which you can earn and use monster points means an initial uptake that will quickly tail off.

It's in no way a sustainable solution to the monster problem and will create further problems down the line.

This is exactly what has happened whenever the rewards for monstering have been increased.

BBB

Posted by: Nibs Jul 1 2013, 08:33 AM

QUOTE(RichardCraig @ Jun 26 2013, 09:33 PM) *
You basically just need to let people get 75pt and no credits when they monster, that they can add to any chr they want when they monster.

It's almost so simple that it won't actually happen.

As for caps and all that just think which will upset you more, somebody monstering 10 times and adding 750pts or doing 10 dungeons without a monster..

If somebody wants to monster everyweekend for a year they will get a 52*75 = 3900pt chr.

Do you know what? I think they deserve it!


Make it 7,800 if they monster both days. Then add in more for the odd themeday, extended length, mid-week adventure. Suddenly someone's got close to a 10K character.

Just sayin'.

Posted by: Hulud Jul 1 2013, 09:03 AM

QUOTE(MattWest @ Jun 30 2013, 03:23 PM) *
If people could just add monster points whenever they wanted, there would be an uncanny number of people who whenever they play a Max 250 have exactly 250 points, whenever they play a Max 500 would have exactly 500 points, whenever they play a Max 750 have exactly 750 points etc.

I don't see a game breaking issue with this...

If you have a "secondary" "making" character, what do you get out of it? The ability to supply your mates with lots of gear? You can't keep the grulls and profit for a primary character. That would be cheating - mixing the resources of two of your characters. So what would people be doing? Planning a way around this in a you-scratch-my-back-I'll-scratch-yours sort of a way? Each of a group of mates has a secondary making character to supply their mates' primary characters and what's the end result? Item inflation. The brute warrior walking around in magic armour with magic weapon, magic shield, magic belt, magic shoelaces etc. is loving it, the monk (no items) and the paladin (max 3 items) not so much.

The mutual back scratching is surely possible already?
I agree there would likely be item inflation but would it be too much inflation?, inflation isn't always bad. (I should point out that inexperience on my part makes me less confident on this particular point)
I concede that item inflation would put the monk, paladin item restrictions potentially out of whack and I have to also concede that I don't have a counter to this.


I can see why if you're playing a T11 character and you've fought your way through the dungeons to get there, you might think that someone parachuted in with 6,000 points added straight onto their card from nowhere hadn't earnt their stripes.

I would definitely argue that a person who had 6000 monster points to plonk on a character had indeed earned their stripes! moreover if someone who didn't have the necessary game knowledge/experience did such a thing they likely wouldn't last long which would make it an issue that solves itself in fairly short order.

Bottom line, the mechanism of add points when you play is quite sensible. You can already swap from credits to monster points and get 64 monster points for a day's monstering which is not much different to the 75 suggested upthread. Suppose the Caves tried a short-term deal where you could swap 1 credit for 3 monster points... meaning 76 monster points for a day's monstering (double-length), would this be a reasonable experiment?

Neil in particular, when you do your four-day the ref-team might just let you add monster points in advance on the basis of the extended length of the adventure. Think that's what happened on the 3-day we did. This would seem more likely to solve your immediate issue though I would suggest that bunging all those monster points onto a character on 20% is probably not the best plan. Wait for your rebirth... then you can add 75 points first time you play and 25 each time you play after that, plus cash monster points in for grulls and items, this is plenty, what's the problem? Only if you are literally monstering twice as often as you play are you going to run out of things to spend monster points on, and the Caves doesn't need that ratio from the majority of players, and the people who monster in that ratio are probably teenagers and students doing it for the credits.

For the avoidance of doubt, my arguing about this has no bearing on my impending 4-day (i mentioned it as an example) I couldn't benefit from a change like this at the moment anyway.

I can envisage a mechanic whereby the CMT can police how many times you add monster points when monstering instead of when playing... namely simply put solid lines around the monster points you're adding onto your card when you write them in, and/or use a special pen colour (say, red) now reserved for monster points.



Posted by: MattWest Jul 1 2013, 09:22 AM

From a certain perspective it could disrupt people's sense of disbelief. "And here we are in the Real Man's No Max of December 2017. On my left, Thor. On my right, Gimly. Over in the corner is Watching Owl, and goodness me, Marcus Blunt has made it to 7,800 points and is brave enough to give it a go. But who's that character standing in front of us, the 25,000 point monstrosity with every published ability he could get because he had never adventured before so didn't get any non-standards passed, who somehow we've never even heard of, as if he had just popped into existence out of nowhere?"

People who have played their way up to, say, Table 10 territory can't always be picky about monsters (though sometimes whinging is heard when monsters are very green indeed) but they are definitely going to go on dungeon implicitly expecting a certain standard of roleplay and competence from their fellow players. It's not just that their character's safety depends on support from other characters, it's also the roleplay thing. Characters at that level have, by necessity, a lot of history to them.

Plus, they've lost res chance and been exposed to risks. And they've had to buy things that may prove sub-optimal later on but were needed at the time. 3,510 monster points might be the only way to play a True Djinn...

The thresholds are set at fixed intervals precisely so that people are sometimes near the top of the threshold, sometimes nearer the bottom, so everyone gets a chance to shine. If people who can monster regularly always get to be at the top of the threshold, without facing any risk to get there... it might be a bit grating for the people who pay to play and thus financially support the club. Everyone's contribution is needed. I already feel more than equally valued when I monster.

Lastly, item inflation is a bad thing, because more power for one set of characters just means more of an arms race, more numbers for everyone and more complexity all round - this system has been around for 30+ years, and we want it to be around for another 30+ years, without becoming as convoluted as my typical posts.

Posted by: Hulud Jul 1 2013, 09:54 AM

QUOTE(MattWest @ Jul 1 2013, 10:22 AM) *
From a certain perspective it could disrupt people's sense of disbelief. "And here we are in the Real Man's No Max of December 2017. On my left, Thor. On my right, Gimly. Over in the corner is Watching Owl, and goodness me, Marcus Blunt has made it to 7,800 points and is brave enough to give it a go. But who's that character standing in front of us, the 25,000 point monstrosity with every published ability he could get because he had never adventured before so didn't get any non-standards passed, who somehow we've never even heard of, as if he had just popped into existence out of nowhere?"

People who have played their way up to, say, Table 10 territory can't always be picky about monsters (though sometimes whinging is heard when monsters are very green indeed) but they are definitely going to go on dungeon implicitly expecting a certain standard of roleplay and competence from their fellow players. It's not just that their character's safety depends on support from other characters, it's also the roleplay thing. Characters at that level have, by necessity, a lot of history to them.

Plus, they've lost res chance and been exposed to risks. And they've had to buy things that may prove sub-optimal later on but were needed at the time. 3,510 monster points might be the only way to play a True Djinn...

The thresholds are set at fixed intervals precisely so that people are sometimes near the top of the threshold, sometimes nearer the bottom, so everyone gets a chance to shine. If people who can monster regularly always get to be at the top of the threshold, without facing any risk to get there... it might be a bit grating for the people who pay to play and thus financially support the club. Everyone's contribution is needed. I already feel more than equally valued when I monster.

Lastly, item inflation is a bad thing, because more power for one set of characters just means more of an arms race, more numbers for everyone and more complexity all round - this system has been around for 30+ years, and we want it to be around for another 30+ years, without becoming as convoluted as my typical posts.



I'm grateful you stopped short of saying "Valentine", your point is well made although I stand by the notion that it would be self policing but don't accept that someone could get 25000 monster points ahead of knowing the system inside out and having actually played to a very high level as well. Your example is in extremis.

Think about it for a minute, if you monstered every weekend both Saturday and Sunday you could put 4000 points onto a character in a year but not actually get to play at all, it would take 5 years of monstering every Saturday and Sunday for over 6 years to make a 25k point character this way and surely rule 6 or 7 or whatever it is, applies?

The majority of players seem to go to the caves every 4-6 weeks apart from a small core and taking myself as an example the most points you are talking about are probably less than 400 a year (nevermind 4000)

I can't say I am totally convinced (although I'm forced to reconsider a bit) I struggle to accept how game breaking it is painted to be, not just by you.

I take your point about item inflation, it seems reasonable but again for items of real significance you need to be quite high on the tables and we are talking years of solid monstering to get there.

Appreciate the dialogue smile.gif

Posted by: MattWest Jul 1 2013, 10:49 AM

I honestly didn't specifically have Valentine in mind, nor do I think you would be the worst offender!

Another thought. If you had say 2000 monster points spare and you bunged 500 on a character you had ref-pointed to 8th, would the fear of death as that character be slightly less compelling than if you had literally fought your way up?

Posted by: Hulud Jul 1 2013, 11:01 AM

QUOTE(MattWest @ Jul 1 2013, 11:49 AM) *
I honestly didn't specifically have Valentine in mind, nor do I think you would be the worst offender!

Another thought. If you had say 2000 monster points spare and you bunged 500 on a character you had ref-pointed to 8th, would the fear of death as that character be slightly less compelling than if you had literally fought your way up?


No it wouldn't but I don't think (unless I've missed something) anyone is suggesting that people be able to put 'more' points on a character at a time but rather they be able to put monsters points (with the already in place limitations on numbers of points transferable) on a day where a person is monstering rather than having to wait until a day where the character is being played.

Thus, a character that is 2400 points could have 50 monster points added to it on a day where the player is monstering. Allowing significantly more points to be put on at a time is a different discussion.

This i think is where BBB's point comes in about an initial upturn that gradually dwindles to old levels. My point is that it represents a change that would have a direct and repeating impact where members who are faced with a particular choice will now find the 'monstering' choice more palatable and therefore more likely to be taken.

sorry if hadn't made that clear.

Posted by: GNW Jul 1 2013, 12:00 PM

I not sure of these suggestions but food for thought.

1) Mix things up a little, current numerical limits still in force but instead of on the day you play they can only be added on a day when you monster. This means to get the benefit of monster points you need to monster and it is still limited. If you wanted to catch up your colleagues or work through a expensive multiclass it would be possible but require an extended stint at monstering. If you have been part of a campaign and get low on RL funds you can now mitigate how far you drop behind your fellow mercs by coming to monster it etc.

As monster points ammounts are still limited it shouldn't create a massive problem with makes.

2) If the club wanted to unrestrict the ammount of monster points that could be added per session and were worried about the rise in never played "Making" alts this could be dealt with by making it an opt in scheme, where to apply unlimited monster points you would have your card permenantly marked with "No Makes" and from that point on the charcter couldnt make anything (or anything that wasnt personalised to themselves).


Posted by: Ryan Jul 1 2013, 12:02 PM

I would also argue while it is important to know your character I learned more about the system monstering at 5-10K than I ever did from playing...

Posted by: marwoodbramwell Jul 1 2013, 09:45 PM

QUOTE(Ryan @ Jul 1 2013, 01:02 PM) *
I would also argue while it is important to know your character I learned more about the system monstering at 5-10K than I ever did from playing...


This.

I personally was sad to see the end of the experiment where booking on as a monster team in good time got the monsters and ARef 10 extra monster points which seemed like a good idea all round.

Also, if there is a discussion about club membership and how to increase it the LASAR players as a group have some feedback . It might be possible to reach out to other universities to see if they'd be interested? We are driving down from Cambridge for events and there are very good reasons why it is worth the trip for us (weather proof LARP that fits round university terms better than field systems, the nice fit between the size of minibuses and dungeons etc). We like to think we've done a fair share of monstering, both for credits and to learn the system as well. We can't be the only students who'd be interested in the system.

J

Posted by: SamR Jul 1 2013, 10:26 PM

I'm happy with the idea of adding monster points only when monstering - to a max of 75pts or whatever. Best idea to come out of this conversation.

Still gobsmacked thatnpeople are concerned if we increase monster point rewards people will stsrt cracking out tbl 11/12 characters - who cares if it encourages people to monster.

Bssically, there are a whole group of players who would be incentivised to monster if they got a similar reward to playing.

What is fundamentally the biggest danger to the system/future of the game?

The fact that regular monsters are potentially rewarded with some higher points characters?

Or

The fact that this weekend there are 30 players booked and 2 crew? This is sadly becoming the norm, I feel we are already seeing the impact here with overlands being regularly moved to caves.

S

Posted by: Abel Jul 1 2013, 11:43 PM

QUOTE(SamR @ Jul 1 2013, 11:26 PM) *
The fact that this weekend there are 30 players booked and 2 crew? This is sadly becoming the norm, I feel we are already seeing the impact here with overlands being regularly moved to caves.

S


To be fair there is a 3 day on this weekend, with a large number of players and monsters to boot sad.gif

Posted by: MattWest Jul 2 2013, 10:05 AM

A lot of monsters tend to turn up on the day.

Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

It obviously hinders planning, but then again some people may simply be unwilling to commit to monstering in advance, at least except on rare occasions.

There seems to me to be limited room for increasing the rewards for monstering but if there were any should it be limited to people who book in advance? (For instance, saying that if you book in advance you can opt on the day of monstering to swap all your credits from that day for points then get 3 monster points per swapped credit instead of 2, just for that swap.)

=====

If you add monster points every time you [edited] monster, there's no limit to how many monster points you can add between times you play the character. Whether you add the monster points all in one go, or every Saturday for two months, makes not much difference. You're still dodging the danger of dying while you get enough points to hit your golden zone / the top of the threshold / whatever, and also not being forced to learn more about your character and develop their non-points aspects (accomplishments, history, personality, legal problems e.g. outlawing/felonies, friends/enemies made, grulls gained/spent, armour uses crossed off, finding your own tactics for using their abilities, etc.). [Plus, less convincingly admittedly, there's the possibility of people spending hundreds of points on a spend then realising they don't like the character or can't use the abilities effectively - they haven't had the chance to find that out earlier forced upon them by having to play the character.]

=====

These people who would love to monster if only the rewards were "fairer", would that increase their overall participation at the Caves or would it come at the expense of booking onto fewer events as a paying player?

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)