RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
During GenCon this year, each table was asked to nominate a winning PC. I didn't like it, at all, but I figured it was a one-time thing. Since then, I've participated in a couple conventions, and boons were given out to the table winners. So, maybe this is a change in Pathfinder Society.
I don't like it.
Until now, there's never been a reason for the party to work as anything other than a team, with odd faction missions and personal side-tasks. Now, the players are competing against one another for a limited resource.
Maybe I'm biased because I remember the RPGA in the 90's. There was serious prize support at major conventions, and things like PFS boons available at smaller cons. And people seriously gamed the system to win them. One guy named Russel sat me down once and explained what he did: he always sat at the DM's left, so that he could always hear the DM and vice versa, and so that the DM would see him first when sweeping over the table left to right. He would be deliberately and obviously helpful to each of the other player characters once, and he would record (with a highlighter) every time he role-played one of his PC's personality schticks, so he could explain them after the session.
Russel was pretty good at it, and won a lot of TSR product.
(There was also a family that went around, always playing together, and deciding ahead of time which of them they would vote for, to be the table winner. Any other players at the same table were out of the running.)
I'm waiting for the PFS player who will sit at my table and ask how the table winner will be chosen: by my personal fiat, or by vote of the players. Just so he knows how to adjust his play.
I'm not a fan of popularity contests, personally.
-Unpopular Hogarth
|
Some year i hope i can get to Gen Con. But Chris, I agree, I dislike the idea of a "table prize". It is hard enough to get a bunch of strangers to work cohesivly together, and as much as i like the faction missions, when they were more competitive players worked at cross purposes.
If there is going to be some sort of competition, why not have it between groups? so the whole table has to work together. If one person gets a boon, why not everyone at the table?
Having one prize will only serve to strongly discourage people working together.
So while I know i don't really know what I'm talking about, not having been to larger conns, I don't like this idea of a "table prize". its a cooperative game after all.
so in short, I agree with you Chris.
|
|
I don't think this is a change in PFS, but it is something that organizers and coordinators are using to distribute boons.
I think he's talking about instances like the one at Gencon this year during the Special, where the tables were asked to vote an "MVP" and one of those throughout the whole room at random was selected to win a special prize. In my experience, tables tend to vote for MVP using in-character logic, which means support characters like bards or buffing clerics/wizards will be out of the running and the characters who do the biggest flashiest effects will be favored. That said, I don't really mind because at Gencon, the vast majority of the boons and prizes were available to all and chosen by the fickle hand of the goddess Desna (who hates me, unfortunately).
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Roll-offs are unbiased, but I'm not sure I'd call them fair.
I like the idea of giving stuff to players. (I hand out a starter pack of Heroes Hoard item cards to any new player at my table.) I think random rolls is sort of the way to go, but that's the best of several unpalatable choices.
|
I'm with Chris on this one - I don't like popularity contests, and GM fiat may be slightly less-biased but not unbiased.
Either a roll-off or a random distribution is the way to go for these boons, I think. If a boon is supposed to be achievement-based, like completing X adventures or something, that's one thing - everyone knows up front, and can "game" that if they want. Con-based prizes should be distributed fairly, though. I think I'll try and replicate in a small way the legendary GenCon treasure chest for JimCon...
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I remember the first time I nervously attended a convention. I didn't know a single other person. There were also groups of friends who laughed and joked and knew each other's characters by name. And I recall conventions where there were votes for "best player".
The lone player, quite possibly their first time at a convention, is at an immediate disadvantage in such "popularity" contests where freinds vote for each other. You won't see any votes for "best player" at conventions I run. I want to give the quiet shy player equal opportunity with the loud "look at me" player.
Last weekend at Unicon, we had Boons on offer. I asked players at each table to roll for iniative, and then line up in iniative order, and draw a gem from a bag at random. The bag contained one red "ruby" among assorted plain gems, all identical size and shape. Whoever drew the red ruby won the boon. Even having the highest initiative didn't help "cheat" the system, because of the random draw, sometimes it was the last person who drew the ruby.
This is a system I'll be using at future cons. It builds anticipation, and everyone has an equal chance, even that shy player who still hasn't figured out which dice to roll for damage.
Cheers,
Stephen (DarkWhite)
Pathfinder Society 4-Star GM
Venture-Captain, Australia
PS: One more sleep until PaizoConOz 2011 Brisbane!
|
When I homegame I have a set of criteria where I award "winners" in certain areas every session for a minor amount of exp. I allow the players to assist in the choice, though MVP is choosen by the party exclusivly.
1) Best Roleplaying(meaning in character, ect)
2)MVP(choosen by your fellow players)
3)Best Kill(usually meaning using a unique strategy)
4)Most failed rolls(In life we learn from our mistakes the most)
5)Best use of a Skill/Spell(simular to best kill, means unique use)
This promotes competition, but also allows people from all classes to compete and does not reward min/maxers exclusivly.
In society I am not sure how to implement this, I think the Faction quests are in a way simular in that they reward the players for their actions in a session. Perhaps you could reward with Hero Points if that ever gets implemented.
|
|
I witnessed the same thing at Gen Con, but I've seen this kind of thing occur for years. I also don't like it, because the best player NEVER gets chosen, it's always the most popular player, whether that player is a new player, has friends at the table, is a woman, or a child. They get the votes. Always.
It would be more fair to allow the GM to pick, but even then you'd get GMs that pick the same way, but at least there would be more chance. There's always going to be bias.
I guess if you don't like it, the solution is to game with four of your friends, decide who gets the boon ahead of time, and then allocate it to that person.
A random roll at the end isn't bad, as long as everyone knows what to expect up front, before the session begins. Then everyone can have fun without worrying about gaming the system.
|
|
1) Best Roleplaying(meaning in character, ect)
2)MVP(choosen by your fellow players)
3)Best Kill(usually meaning using a unique strategy)
4)Most failed rolls(In life we learn from our mistakes the most)
5)Best use of a Skill/Spell(simular to best kill, means unique use)This promotes competition, but also allows people from all classes to compete and does not reward min/maxers exclusivly.
Getting a little off topic here, but I tried that for years with my old home group with different players. I found it rarely inspired anyone for long and never improved anyone's play, and the same guys always got picked week after week. Although I tried for years, that was definitely a failed experiment.
I don't think PFS needs these kind of individual rewards.
|
I think any encouragement to "play better" is a good thing; especially so when there is a prize on the line. It gets people's attention and commitment. People TRY harder.
All this talk of bias and discussions about randomd rolls... A random roll does not achieve the objective of encouraging better play through prize incentives, does it? It just rewards people for showing up. Period.
Call me old fashioned, but I have no problem with a GM picking the best player. Is it "biased"? Well, in the sense that it plays to the strengths and predispositions of the particular GM, then I suppose so. Of course, whether you get the GM that is "best for your style" is random too. But really -- so what?
In the large majority of cases, the GM is well able to pick out the best player at the table during that session without any difficulty at all. And he can probably do so in a more objective fashion than the rest of the players can.
I don't get this "too biased -- let's random roll it" impulse here. Bias isn't SO bad a thing that a random roll would be better in comparison, and I would FAR rather have a somewhat flawed but a sincere attempt to reward objective excellence than to simply encourage a warm body at the table just for being there -- even though they are not really paying attention.
A meritocracy is a good thing. Anything which tends to downplay any aspect of a meritocracy which rewards excellence, in favor of something which just rewards showing up, sounds suspiciously like a program favored by kids who always got a "B" or a "C" in a given class.
I prefer a program that wants to identify and reward the A+ players, any day.
I think any encouragement to "play better" is a good thing; especially so when there is a prize on the line. It gets people's attention and commitment. People TRY harder.
Does it actually work that way for you? I find that apathetic players remain apathetic and "freshman drama majors" become "freshman drama majors on meth" (neither of which is the desired result, I hope). Obviously our experiences differ. :-)
|
|
In the large majority of cases, the GM is well able to pick out the best player at the table during that session without any difficulty at all. And he can probably do so in a more objective fashion than the rest of the players can.
Regardless of the prize, but particularly when there's company product up for grabs, GMs/organisers are going to have to be very careful not to be seen to be awarding these promotions to their mates. I've heard examples of this in other organised play events. I think GMs/organisers need to tread a very careful line at public events in this regard, and IMHO random awards eliminate any perception, rightly or wrongly, of bias.
Cheers,
Stephen (DarkWhite)
Pathfinder Society 4-Star GM
Venture-Captain, Australia
PS: One more sleep until PaizoConOz 2011 Brisbane!
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
A meritocracy is a good thing. Anything which tends to downplay any aspect of a meritocracy which rewards excellence, in favor of something which just rewards showing up, sounds suspiciously like a program favored by kids who always got a "B" or a "C" in a given class. I prefer a program that wants to identify and reward the A+ players, any day.
And, see, I don't want to grade my players, particularly not on a curve against one another.
|
|
"Punished by Rewards", it's semi-new book exploring a semi-old concept, that awarding desired behavior ends up devaluing the behavior, and hindering the development of those good behaviors.
So, yes, one wants to show appreciation of people who play PF the way YOU (or whoever's the determiner at that time) want people to play PF, so you want to give rewards.
But do you want people to manipulate to get those awards? Do you want people to bicker over fairness? To feel unfairly treated? To judge your peers, especially when nobody plays well or everybody plays well or two people stand out so far it's a shame they sat together?
"Oh, I don't want to play with XXX, he's too good."
I vote nay.
People playing well should get reward by "having played well".
And do.
(Well, barring bad rolls/bad luck...)
There is no clear-cut statistics to determine RPG MVPs, and given all the obstacles faced by a party and all the ways they can be tackled, there shouldn't be.
|
|
I think any encouragement to "play better" is a good thing; especially so when there is a prize on the line. It gets people's attention and commitment. People TRY harder.
I prefer a program that wants to identify and reward the A+ players, any day.
What is "play better"?
"Better" at role playing? And how do you define that?
"Better" character builds?
"Better" at helping the newbs?
"Better" at gaining the GM's attention?
Really, how do you define "A+" without getting into personal bias?
Is an A+ player someone who plays their combat options better?
Is an A+ player someone who plays their skill options better?
Is an A+ player someone who makes their GM notice them more?
Is an A+ player someone who helps other players more?
Is an A+ player someone who only uses paper character sheets and never uses any electronic devices at the table?
Is an A+ player someone who brings food and/or drink for the table?
Is an A+ player someone who keeps their character paperwork in perfect order and neat?
Really, add undefined terms, or terms that can be defined differently by different people, and you wind up moving into an area that is solely by bias.
Or you require a "report card" and the GM is busy not paying as much attention as s/he should to the table they are supposed to be running...
|
|
By the way, this thread is getting a bit derailed... it isn't really about "how do we determine table winners?" It's actually, "How we do distribute special boons available at cons in a fair way without devaluing them and giving them to every player?" The boons are there, they need to be given out somehow, fairly, efficiently, without just leaving a pile at the sign-in table.
You can have a merit-based system, which rewards "good play" (however you define that) but prone to bias. You can have a random roll, which prevents bias but might reward someone who watched YouTube the whole game. Are there other methods?
Maybe Stephen's "gems in a bag", but with an extra gem or two given to deserving players by the GM or group vote? Combine the best (and worst?) of both options?
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Lamplighter, there's a complicated version of that which I ... sort of ... approve of: everybody at the table gets a d12. Every time you do something cool, like help out a new player or contribute to a good plan, or suffer a critical, you get another d12. At the end of the session, you can hand your d12s to another layer if you want. Everybody rolls their d12s, and the high roll gets the boon.
It's a combination of "suck up to the GM" and "random chance". I like the way it negates the scummy tactic of a bloc of players deciding ahead of time to vote for a particular player: it doesn't affect the luck of the bloc as a whole.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
PFS is not about anything but having a blast! reward better play? nah, reward having fun! every player has fun in a different way. My room mate is quiet and introverted, does not interact often in character, and often forgets to do any of his special abilities on his character. He would never be counted a good player in anyone's book. However he has a blast and enjoys PFS scenarios and playing with new people. reward the ones that enjoy it.
PFS is about bringing in new people to rp! not about who has the biggest brightest shiny (insert references here)! when the table walks away laughing about how the barbarian fell on his hind end and then delivered the killing blow on the Kobold laughing at him. That is all the reward i need to give as a GM! because it will bring the new players back and keep the vets full of new war stories to tell over lunch!
now i do like boons they add flavor to characters. (ask me about super monk in sewer dragons when we meet) but really they are not anything to fight over getting or how to give them out. swag on the other hand... I like the idea earlier of giving some low end swag along with the PFS number to new players. I think i will look into carrying a bunch of the wiz kids mini's for this purpose. new players always need a mini!
|
Only way I like table winners is we drug players with truth serum before voting. Since this is questionable legally and would probably create more problems than it fixes, I am not in favor table winners.
At the latest Tacticon, we had prizes handed out on a d20 role with 1 and 20 giving prizes. That seemed fairer.
|
|
I used to run a ton of Living Force for the RPGA and we left it to the Judges to give out rewards. If a character did something heroic or cool, or roleplayed particularly well we handed out force points. It was a pretty good system and created some really cool moments. Some of my best gaming experiences were when some of the players came up with some really cool "feat of skill" or "great character" moment. If the table was cohesive and fun the judge might hand out 3 or 4 rewards, if they weren't they might hand out none. It really did help create a fun and easy going atmosphere.
On the flip side I used to hate it when I was in the Living City and the experienced players who knew how to play the system managed to get all of the rewards for themselves. So a reward system done wrong actually hurts a game community.
Venture-Agent, Virginia—Hampton Roads
|
During GenCon this year, each table was asked to nominate a winning PC. I didn't like it, at all, but I figured it was a one-time thing. Since then, I've participated in a couple conventions, and boons were given out to the table winners. So, maybe this is a change in Pathfinder Society.
I ran 8 tables. I was never asked to do this. Interesting.
|
|
Chris, I'm in agreement with you that I do not want to see this as a general practice for PFS.
However, as a 1 session thing for the Special at Gen Con - to narrow a field of over 300 for a few random draw prizes, I can live with it.
EDIT: And also as a way to distribute boons at other conventions. As long as it remains in limited use.
|
|
I think what the argument is against this is that the point of our games is to have fun and people can be angry or disappointed if they don't get the limited edition boons. We risk losing those players that don't get them.
However, some people really like the contest and the thrill of chance. My buddy won a boon at Gen Con this year and I was happy for him, even though he won it over me. It was a chance table and fortune favored him. Was I disappointed that I didn't get it, sure. Will I stop playing Pathfinder Society events, absolutely not.
One final note, I think they got this practice is from the RPGA. Back in the day all special events had winning items for the top two players at each table.
In the RPGA days, I found that it encouraged more ROLEplaying, as that's what people voted on. Of course, there were votes I didn't agree on and times I felt I should have won, and didn't.... it's not a perfect system.
My first game in the RPGA I won the RP award because I worked hard for it. Ironically, I didn't even know it existed at the time and thus it was the mere act of roleplaying that I was working hard for. It can happen.
That said, I'm strongly opposed to any act that turns a cooperative game into a competition. I dislike popularity contests even if I can win them. I dislike seeing people plot against each other in-character and out. I dislike seeing how low a player will go for greed (yes, there is always someone that will turn your good idea of a reward into an abusive contest). Might as well say only the first faction mission completed gets the PA reward. That's the kind of atmosphere it creates for some.
Any event that I attend that is doing such, I will definitely have a chat with the coordinator to see if there is an alternate way to reward boons. (If it were feasible, I'd say have all the players vote on whether they had fun or not. If all say yes, they all get a boon.)
Not that Paizo can do anything about this or that this thread will have any effect, but cast my vote for 'No MVP'.
|
|
My opinion I think my whole table should of won it. Perhaps the most memorable table I have gm'd they were singing making jokes and where acting out the stage scene marvelously. It was beautiful to watch as well as seeing the neighboring tables reactions.I did not tell the players about the nomination paper till the very end, I don't think they were aware of it.
In good fun these things should be handed out though rarely at conventions and such.
|
I think what made it work fine at Gencon was that we weren't told that this would happen until the end of the scenario. That cut down on any attention hogging or sense of competition that otherwise might have resulted.
To those who say that support characters were at a disadvantage I present my creepy Chelaxian Bard armed only with a fiddle and a variety of frilly lingerie (thank you Beguiling Gift) who won the nomination at his table at Gen Con.
|
|
Lamplighter, there's a complicated version of that which I ... sort of ... approve of: everybody at the table gets a d12. Every time you do something cool, like help out a new player or contribute to a good plan, or suffer a critical, you get another d12. At the end of the session, you can hand your d12s to another layer if you want. Everybody rolls their d12s, and the high roll gets the boon.
It's a combination of "suck up to the GM" and "random chance". I like the way it negates the scummy tactic of a bloc of players deciding ahead of time to vote for a particular player: it doesn't affect the luck of the bloc as a whole.
I really like this idea Chris - I think the next time I know we'll be doing this (like at a con or such) I may just employ this idea.
|
|
I really like this idea Chris - I think the next time I know we'll be doing this (like at a con or such) I may just employ this idea.Lamplighter, there's a complicated version of that which I ... sort of ... approve of: everybody at the table gets a d12. Every time you do something cool, like help out a new player or contribute to a good plan, or suffer a critical, you get another d12. At the end of the session, you can hand your d12s to another layer if you want. Everybody rolls their d12s, and the high roll gets the boon.
It's a combination of "suck up to the GM" and "random chance". I like the way it negates the scummy tactic of a bloc of players deciding ahead of time to vote for a particular player: it doesn't affect the luck of the bloc as a whole.
I like that idea, too. Thanks, Chris!
It can be tough to figure out a fair way to distribute boons and other prizes. In the past I've tried a number of different methods, many already listed above.
One that I tried for a while (which worked best when I had two prizes to give away) was asking each player to write down, numbered 1 thru 3, their top three picks for best player (1 being first choice, 3 being last). Then I would give the prizes to the people with a combination of more votes but the two lowest numbers. That way even if people were stacking the vote, the second lowest number would be a more accurate representation of who was looked on as the best player.
It wasn't perfect, but it seemed to keep people happy. And it usually resulted in actual good players being rewarded.
|
Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau
|
At our local convention, Brewfest, we were given some of the Boon Chronicles to distribute amongst players however myself and the convention organizer saw fit.
First, we rewarded GMs with a random pull of one of the four boons offered. GMs that ran more than three slots were allowed to pick which they wanted.
Second, we raffled randomly the Racial Boon Chronicle we were given each night of the con to players only.
Lastly, each GM was given one random Chronicle Boon (but not the one granting the Race Boon) to distribute to one player per table each slot. Some allowed the players to choose who would receive it by vote, some allowed a "die roll off", and some chose which player would receive it.
By the end of the convention, the more gracious players, some of whom had been offered multiple Boons by common vote of the players, gave away their spare Boons, keeping just one for themselves. This was well appreciated... and helped alleviate some hurt feeling amongst players that had not received one.
To the best of my knowledge, there is no "hard and fast" rule for how a convention distributes these Chronicles... but I will be taking some of the suggestions here for my next convention.
|
|
I find the whole idea of a 'table winner' in pen and paper RPGs hilarious, because when I was a teenager and my mates had finished the session, someone's blissfully ignorant parent would ask "So who won?"
As spotty teenagers we would roll our eyes at the silliness of the concept of one hero winning, knowing that we all pulled together for mutual survival.
In the Game of Pathfinder, You Win or You Die.