amendment: allowing 3 PCs

[evilbob]

With 3 yes votes and 0 no votes the proposal passes per the Charter rules at 11:21 am EST. That document will need to be updated with this new rule. I'll see if I can get to it later today.

I actually didn't notice the original thread until it was already over, but I think there's still some issues that could use discussion. I am not sure what the procedure is, so I started a new thread. (In particular, I wondered if it was worth discussing that the more active PCs a person has, the more games get into trouble when that person - for lack of a better term - flakes. More PCs per player goes further down this route. Also, and this is a bit nebulous, but simply having more characters grants players a slightly greater influence over the boards as a whole, whether intentional or not. Not sure if that really is a problem, but it's something to think about.)

Specifically, however, I would worry that there is a greater potential that someone who is just starting out could be crowded out of playing. As more long-time players create more low-level characters, they would take up more low-level adventure "slots." For this however, I have a suggestion:

I propose as a caveat that the current number of characters in an adventure one player already has be a qualifying factor for joining a new adventure. Specifically, whoever has fewer active characters get preference, and whoever has fewer characters overall get preference if this doesn't decide.

In other words: someone with no currently active characters would be taken in an adventure over someone with 1 character already in an adventure, and the 1 character person is given preference over someone with 2 characters already in an adventure, and so on. This way, someone with 3 characters would only have 3 active characters if no other players were still waiting. Additionally, if two people have the same number of active characters, preference goes to the person with fewer total approved characters. That way, someone with 3 PCs who is waiting around still doesn't get preference over someone just starting out.

This proposal is predicated on the idea that encouraging new blood trumps keeping existing players' addictions fueled; on the other hand, it could be completely misguided as the number of low-level adventures may always exceed the number of low-level PCs. Suggestions?

 

[renau1g]

We actually have that right in the Charter, added in when 2nd PC's were allowed last year. We didn't want to force the DM into anything, but I have yet to see an instance where a player with a PC (or a DM) didn't defer to the newcomer.

From the Charter:

"1) Who are the players: This can be a specific list or this can be a description of what kinds of characters are likely to fall in line with this adventure. DMs are strongly encouraged to offer openings to players that not already has a character on an adventure."

"When an adventure is approved, then the DM can begin recruiting if necessary. The Hanged Man Tavern is the usual place to go to find a party of adventurers, though the DM may arrange a different beginning by discussing it out of character in the discussion thread. The DM need not take all comers, they may choose as they see fit from among the characters who express interest. As mentioned previously, DMs are strongly encouraged to offer openings to players that not already has a character on an adventure."

 

[Mezegis]

That's pretty much the way it already is EB. Some DM's have actually put a requirement that a few of their games slots be taken up by new players. Newbies with only 1 PC will pretty much always get their spot in a game because no one wants to turn away fresh faces, it can do nothing but hurt the group if they do.

Oh, renau1g with the counter-ninja!

 

[evilbob]

Then I guess this could be shortened to an amendment suggesting they also defer to the player with the fewest number of characters, so that folks who have lots and lots don't monopolize play.

 

[stonegod]

Yep, what r1 said.

There are some few exceptions (addys designed for a specific PC), but they are rare.

 

[renau1g]

Then I guess this could be shortened to an amendment suggesting they also defer to the player with the fewest number of characters, so that folks who have lots and lots don't monopolize play.

Yeah, when I (or another judge) updates the charter, we'll need to clean up the wording. Players with 1 PC in play get first priority, then those with 2 PC's in play get second priority, then those with 3 get what's leftover (if anything)

 

[evilbob]

Actually I don't think I was clear enough; I will restate:

"also defer to the player with the fewest number of total characters"

Not just fewest playing, but fewest total. So the guy with 3 characters and none playing is still picked after the guy with 1 character and none playing.

 

[Mezegis]

I believe renau1g's use of the phrase "in play" means active in the world, be it in an adventure or in the tavern or anything else PC's might do to pass the time.

 

[Kalidrev]

Yeah, when I (or another judge) updates the charter, we'll need to clean up the wording. Players with 1 PC in play get first priority, then those with 2 PC's in play get second priority, then those with 3 get what's leftover (if anything)

Yep yep, and even though having 3 sounds like you'd never get in an adventure, it isn't specifically true. We have enough DMs (or at least close to enough DMs + a renau1g ) running games now, and I'll bet that when fresh faces come in, some of them will hop on the DMing bandwagon too! Because of this, I think that there is definitely going to be enough games to go around for everyone.

In fact, I'm kind of waiting for more PCs to come about so that the current slew of proposed addys get filled up so that I can DM a game over here in L4W game

 

[renau1g]

Actually I don't think I was clear enough; I will restate:

"also defer to the player with the fewest number of total characters"

Not just fewest playing, but fewest total. So the guy with 3 characters and none playing is still picked after the guy with 1 character and none playing.

I guess this could be discussed, but I feel it's splitting hairs a bit. The odds of someone with 3 PC's having them all in the tavern at the same time is extremely unlikely. Only way I can see that happening is if the player decides to drop off for a while (especially if done properly, like ukingsken did) and then comes back to the world.