The 1e Tournement
- Thread starter Crothian
- Start date
Crothian
First Post
In ours they got a free old school module from XRP.
jgbrowning
Hero
Luckily we did both! We picked the DMs carefully and we had a hastily put together point system.
I probably wasn't clear about what I meant when I said, "IMO, there is really no way to adjudicate equally in 1e."By that I meant that talking about the variance in DM style. The play of the game is so open (limited by the imagination of the players) that attempting to create encounters in which every DM would rule the same is impossible.
So I instead focused on having DMs that I thought were good and would be as fair as they could and I had a scoring system to apply as well. Even had modifiers for parties larger than 8.
joe b.
Crothian
First Post
That's a lot of things to keep track of as a DM. I don't like keeping track of a lot of little awards like that. It would also give certain characters advantages of other as not all characters are created equal.
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
Which would introduce an interesting, if bizarre, dynamic: the party as a whole would do better if the characters didn't get in fights with each other, but each individual character also wants to beat the rest of her party. Fascinating!
If you do the winners-of-one-stage-advance-to-the-next idea, you'll have to watch out if all the winners are playing the same few characters. For example, if you have 3 tables and your 1st-round pre-gens are:
Abbott (Hu F)
Barclay (Elf MU)
Costello (Hu R)
Donald (Hbt T)
Eberhart (Hu Cl)
Falstaffe (Dw F)
Globbo (.5-O A)
Hellena (.5-E MU/T)
Incan (Hu P)
Jasmine (.5-E F/MU)
And each table's 3 winners happen to be the ones playing Abbott, Barclay and Costello; then in round 2 you're going to have a very odd party (3 x F, 3 x MU, 3 x R). Unless, of course, you re-assign the original pre-gens for round 2, but then some people would have the advantage of playing the same character from round 1 while others would not (and I know in this situation I'd prefer to keep the same guy going regardless were I to advance, just for continuity). Tricky to manage, all this.
Lanefan
IronWolf
blank
Luckily we did both! We picked the DMs carefully and we had a hastily put together point system.
jgbrowning said:By that I meant that talking about the variance in DM style. The play of the game is so open (limited by the imagination of the players) that attempting to create encounters in which every DM would rule the same is impossible.
So I instead focused on having DMs that I thought were good and would be as fair as they could and I had a scoring system to apply as well. Even had modifiers for parties larger than 8.
Yes, I think the differing DM styles would be the hardest thing to account for in tournament play, likely making it quite important to at least start with DMs you trust. I am a little curious about the scoring system, even if it was hastily put together...
jgbrowning
Hero
Yes, I think the differing DM styles would be the hardest thing to account for in tournament play, likely making it quite important to at least start with DMs you trust. I am a little curious about the scoring system, even if it was hastily put together...
There were 4 different types of scoring.
Exploratory Scoring - the party earns a certain number of points based upon the number of areas explored (the goal was to map out a newly discovered cave in Stonesky Mountain) based upon the number of characters that survive. This was a table not that much unlike what can be found in the Slaver's series.
Time Scoring - the party was told to stay in the mountain at least 3 days but no more than 5. For every turn spent in the mountain 1 point was subtracted from the score.
Discretionary Scoring - each GM had up to 20 points per session (40 total) to provide to the party depending upon play.
Special Scoring - some areas provided additional bonus points based upon character actions.
Large Party Modification - for every party member above 8, -20 was subtracted from the score.
joe b.
Similar Threads
