If/how to impliment OOC points

covaithe said:

One thing to address, though, is how to scale it by level. I assume you wouldn't award ten times as many DM points to a someone running an adventure for level ten characters as someone running level one characters. How would that work?

Click to expand...

I'm thinking that maybe 1 DM point per half-level's-worth of XP gained would work. That way, whatever level adventure your running, you still get comparable points.

And let me welcome you aboard as well, nerdytenor!

Apparently, my post on this didn't go through. It was long, but I'll summarize:

- DM credits were intended to reward folks for DMing games. There are always more PCs than potential players, thus the system. I have not seen anyone game the system.

- Throttling amounts of credit spent is fine. I'd base it on the level/XP of the character it being applied to.

- PC rewards are given in game; there shouldn't be PC "meta" awards. Non in-game rewards (like DM points) should only be converted to in-game rewards (XP and gold), not unbalancing things like extra powers/feats. This makes it less fun for new players.

- Just because LEW/LEB did/didn't do something, doesn't mean L4W should/shouldn't do it. But you probably should try to find any threads that discuss the matter to help further discussion here.

garyh said:

I'm thinking that maybe 1 DM point per half-level's-worth of XP gained would work. That way, whatever level adventure your running, you still get comparable points.

Click to expand...

Something that also was eaten: If you tie thing to just encounters, than this suggests RP is not important. PBP facilitates a lot of RP (which takes time---one LEB game spent its first month/month half just in characterization. This would not be rewarded to the DM in such an encounter only system).

stonegod said:

Something that also was eaten: If you tie thing to just encounters, than this suggests RP is not important. PBP facilitates a lot of RP (which takes time---one LEB game spent its first month/month half just in characterization. This would not be rewarded to the DM in such an encounter only system).

Click to expand...

Not sure if thsi is a critique of my idea or if you were just using it as a jumping off point, but I don't see a problem with RP XP, as long as it's within established norms. That's why my suggestion was to tie DM points to % of a level in XP awarded - so that all types of experience generating encounters (minons, BBEG, traps, challenges) and RP would apply towards earning DM points.

garyh said:

Not sure if thsi is a critique of my idea or if you were just using it as a jumping off point, but I don't see a problem with RP XP, as long as it's within established norms. That's why my suggestion was to tie DM points to % of a level in XP awarded - so that all types of experience generating encounters (minons, BBEG, traps, challenges) and RP would apply towards earning DM points.

Click to expand...

It was as a jumping point, but pure RP (that not tied to combat, social challenges, etc.) don't earn XP; they just take time. Under a scheme were DM points are *only* tied to PC XP earned, it penalizes that sort of behavior. It also encourages encounters w/ big XP totals (and thus DMs to DM higher level games) than lower level ones. Someone running a 20th level game (if ever) would score more DM points than one running a 1st unless there is some normalization.

I think time spent should be a part of the equation; I just don't know if it should be the only one.

Great to see everybody stepping up to talk about it.

It's funny to me that half the people want a "simple system" and half seem to want a really complex one involving ratios.

I think stonegod has a good point about rp.... one that I can't think of a good way of addressing.

My critique of the DM credits system is basically this:

Lets say there are two DMs; they're simplified examples and slightly extreme (but not, unfortunately that extreme)

DM A runs three games at once, posts once or twice a week, disappears for a week every month or so without warning. Their games aren't dead, but they don't go quickly.

DM B runs one game at a time; posts daily, pushes people to post, and finishes his short games quickly. He averages about 1 game every two months.

After six months DM A has received 3x6=18 credits.
After six months DM B has received 2x1+2x1+2x1=6 credits.

Click to expand...

Personally, I'd like to see them rewarded more equally.

But I think it's not really true to say that the current system "rewards roleplaying" and the new system won't. The current system rewards running as many games as possible for as long as possible.

It doesn't reward roleplaying because that would involve people judging other people, which is not, looking at the thread comments so far tremendously popular.

An incremental improvement in a system is, to my mind, still an improvement.

[d]--[/d]

[URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=74526" said:

nerdytenor[/url]]Furthermore, point rewards seem like the kind of thing that mostly a powergamer would really want, and from the games I've browsed, PbP doesn't seem to attract that type of player much anyway. Just my take - I suppose another poll could be run ("Would adding reward points change your PbP habits?")

Click to expand...

I struggle mightly to respond to this comment.
I can only point out WE'RE PLAYING DnD! I loves me some roleplay but DnD is basically a powergamers game.

If you're "not a powergamer" you play games like call of cthulhu, over the edge, everway, nobilis, prime time adventures or spirit of the century. You -can- do other things while playing DnD (rp while killing orcs) but it's a game about killing orcs as efficiently as possible to become more powerful.

I think the problem should be approached as "given that we're all power gamers how do we encourage the little power gamer in all of us to behave in a constructive fashion".

If some bright bulb wants to "game the system" by running games or by painstakenly checking character sheets to ensure that they're error free?
Fantastic.

He can write a book called "How to game the EnWorld system: How I tricked Graf" and I will happy write an intro to the book that says "I wuz triked, these strategies really work."

I'm not claiming that the LEB DM Point system encourages RP; I'm saying a meta-reward system only based upon encounter XP discourages it.

In the A vs. B example, B gets to use those points a lot faster than A does (DM points are only given at the end of the game). A frequency-based system has potential issues as well: A DM can artificially post small updates every day/hour/quantum to pump up the system as well. In addition, as RL has different dictates for different folks (students vs. 9-5ers vs. stay-at-homes), frequency-based posting can also be biased to others.

A final point: Judges approve games. If A is gaming the system, then the judges allowed A to run 3 games at once. In essence, under any system, some A can always game it by trying to run more games.

Now, I should be constructive as well as destructive in my thoughts, so here's something to bang around. In LEB/LEW, part of the PC XP is also time based: You gain the normal XP plus a 50 * ECL/RL month of the game to a cap of 400XP/month): This is to reward players for staying with a game and to make up for the general slow advancement rate of PBP [rewards from DM points in LEB are similarly capped to 8th ECL, so they must not have been capped in the LEW used upthread]. I'd suggest a system as follows:
- 1 DM point for successful conclusion of an adventure (flat)
- 1/2 DM point * avg. character level for the party at start of the game. Reward based upon difficulty of the adventure (and thus its potential design/running complexity).
- 1 DM point per RL month up to some fixed number of RL months. This measure could be tied to frequency or something as well. Reward for taking the time to do the job, but try to keep things from getting inflated.
One might put a maximum cap, perhaps per tier of the adventure? The numbers could be tweaked. In general, trying to come up with a time and complexity measure that isn't too complex or too exploitable (there will always be exploits---that's what judges are for to correct).

Thoughts?

stonegod said:

It was as a jumping point, but pure RP (that not tied to combat, social challenges, etc.) don't earn XP; they just take time. Under a scheme were DM points are *only* tied to PC XP earned, it penalizes that sort of behavior. It also encourages encounters w/ big XP totals (and thus DMs to DM higher level games) than lower level ones. Someone running a 20th level game (if ever) would score more DM points than one running a 1st unless there is some normalization.

I think time spent should be a part of the equation; I just don't know if it should be the only one.

Click to expand...

I mentioned earlier tying DM points to percent of a level gained. That's specifically so that there's no inherent advantage to running level 1 or level 20 games. Since each level is supposed to take the same number even equal level encounters, % of level will remain constant - an adventure with ten encounters of party level will give the same DM points whatever the party level.

I really don't see how to address RP issues, other than to say I don't expect RP XP to form a large percentage of total XP.

EDIT:

Graf said:

Personally, I'd like to see them rewarded more equally.

Click to expand...

I think my % of level system solves this. Do you see why that wouldn't work? DM B would have gotten his players a lot more XP than DM A, I'd think.

stonegod said:

I'm not claiming that the LEB DM Point system encourages RP; I'm saying a meta-reward system only based upon encounter XP discourages it.

Click to expand...

It's not based upon encounter xp. It's based upon encounters run.
A DM who makes a challenging rp encounter can give out xp if they like. It doesn't measure what you're rewarding just that you're progressing forward.

stonegod said:

In the A vs. B example, B gets to use those points a lot faster than A does (DM points are only given at the end of the game).

Click to expand...

Great point!

stonegod said:

A frequency-based system has potential issues as well: A DM can artificially post small updates every day/hour/quantum to pump up the system as well.

Click to expand...

Not such a good point point...
Nobodys suggesting a "post frequency based system". (unless I missed it)

I've suggested not-penalizing people for running really slow games by encouraging them to complete encounters.
Posting "still here" or "update coming soon" won't change that.

I've never suggested rewarding # of posts or # of edits.
People who are pro the LEW system seem to keep trotting that out as a reason why another system might be good.

But nobody's suggesting it... sooooooo... maybe we can talk about what's being suggested?

stonegod said:

In essence, under any system, some A can always game it by trying to run more games.

Click to expand...

Unless you change the system so they can't by not rewarding them for running more games.

If you reward them for "encounters completed" then they'll try to complete encounters.
If you reward them for "completeling lots of games" then they'll try to run and complete lots of games. Then when they get too busy they drop games.

You've mentioned you're stuck with three games in LEB because people drop.

I think that's bad. I think it should be discouraged.
The judges of LEB let them start those games.... so I don't really see "judges can stop it" as being a significant barrier.

stonegod said:

[sblock=alternative proposal]
Now, I should be constructive as well as destructive in my thoughts, so here's something to bang around. In LEB/LEW, part of the PC XP is also time based: You gain the normal XP plus a 50 * ECL/RL month of the game to a cap of 400XP/month): This is to reward players for staying with a game and to make up for the general slow advancement rate of PBP [rewards from DM points in LEB are similarly capped to 8th ECL, so they must not have been capped in the LEW used upthread]. I'd suggest a system as follows:
- 1 DM point for successful conclusion of an adventure (flat)
- 1/2 DM point * avg. character level for the party at start of the game. Reward based upon difficulty of the adventure (and thus its potential design/running complexity).
- 1 DM point per RL month up to some fixed number of RL months. This measure could be tied to frequency or something as well. Reward for taking the time to do the job, but try to keep things from getting inflated.
One might put a maximum cap, perhaps per tier of the adventure? The numbers could be tweaked. In general, trying to come up with a time and complexity measure that isn't too complex or too exploitable (there will always be exploits---that's what judges are for to correct).[/sblock]

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

It's great that you've come up with a very good, concrete proporsal for discussion.

Doesn't this lead to people trying to run more high level games? I'm not sure that we want to reward that....

And...
It's really complex. It involves math and a bunch of different variables.

Aside: Why the obession with capping?

In the A vs. B example, I'd like to point out that DM B will surely be having more fun than DM A, regardless of DM points gained.

Which is part of why I think the following proposal should be seriously considered as well as the others:

DM points proposal: None at all. You only get in-game rewards for in-game activity.

Pros:

• Extremely simple. No math at all!
• One less thing for judges to do, which makes everything else they do easier.
• Cannot be exploited
• Characters of DMs advance at the same rate as those of other players, rather than outstripping them.
• DMs have one less thing to keep track of on their character sheets

Cons:

• DMs don't get any reward for running games. None, that is, besides the gratitude of their players, the admiration of their peers, and the sheer fun of playing D&D. Nothing else.