Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="stonegod" data-source="post: 4425747" data-attributes="member: 36973">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?</blockquote>

Verification