DCC Tourney suggestions?

[brogan_a]

One suggestion I would make it to revamp the substitution policy. Maybe somewhere where every team gets 1 sub per round for rounds 2 and 3. I saw several teams missing people, and mine was short 1 guy also. It would make the players happier, and expose more people to the Goodman Games lines if they were allowed to sub in and play.
I hate to use the RPGA as an example (cause their modules blow), but they do allow 2 subs per team for the entire tourney. Monte Cook's tourney allows mass substitutions (at least they did in 2005). I do not know how other companies that run tourney's work out those types of issues.

-Andy Brogan

[jfrenia]

I personally kind of like the keeping the team together; kind of rewards the teams that keeps their group for all 3 rounds.

[fathead]

One suggestion I would make it to revamp the substitution policy. Maybe somewhere where every team gets 1 sub per round for rounds 2 and 3.

I agree with Andy on this. If you make it the teams responsibility to fill that spot (with either other people they know, or recruit players from other tables who didn't make it), then it shouldn't be any additional hassle. Maybe only allow 1 substitution...

[fathead]

The tournament was great. It was challenging, chalked full of puzzle goodness and strategic combat. I think it takes a lot of effort to balance a good tournament adventure. Great job. I agree with Andy's comment in another thread...there isn't anyone else out there who can make a tournament like you folks do.

The unique settings truly added depth to the combats. Traversing a lake of fire and molten metal, while trying to steer a magical boat, avoid pockets of fire gas, and combat a fire elemental and electrical creature....GREAT! Very memorable.

Inclusion of a druid character was awesome. Nicol (who played the druid in our group) plays one of those at home. You seldom see druid characters in tournaments, so it was a nice addition.

I would like to see a magic user whose spell selection the player can pick. I love the idea of having 6 characters to choose from and selecting the 4 characters. It allows the group to tailor the group to their own playing style, and also provides some strategy in their selection. It would be cool to see the same in spell selection...or two PCs with different spell selections...

[jfrenia]

Yeah, if they did change this, I would hope they wouldn't allow more than 1 though, because technically you're allowing people into round 2 who didn't qualify for round 2, but at the same point other events and personal reasons come up that make you a player short and it would be nice to have a way around that.

[jfrenia]

I would like to see a magic user whose spell selection the player can pick. I love the idea of having 6 characters to choose from and selecting the 4 characters. It allows the group to tailor the group to their own playing style, and also provides some strategy in their selection. It would be cool to see the same in spell selection...or two PCs with different spell selections...

I agree with you there, one of the coolest parts of DCC vrs say the Open is you feel like you have more control of your destiny by selecting your own party, but it would be nice to allow the casters to select their spells.

[ynnen]

While I agree with the concept, I'm not sure on the spirit of the substitution... What would prevent a team that advanced to Round 2 to sub out a player they didn't think performed well or knew the rules well enough? Or to include a friend instead of a pick up player? Or to make room for someone who had failed to advance from another round?

I'm sure that nearly everyone would embrace the spirit of the tournament and not abuse this sort of system, but it would set a slippery precedent which could eventually open up some loopholes.

I know emergencies and special circumstances come up, but when the rules are clearly spelled out, despite it being disappointing, I think it's the most fair across the board to not allow substitutes.

[Jengenritz]

it would be nice to allow the casters to select their spells.

This is an interesting idea, and something we took a small, sideways step toward this year with the limited flexibility of Kaila the druid's summon nature's ally pool.

If something like that were to happen, it would probably work in much the same way:

Memorized casters would have a reduced pool of spells to fill in their slots as they see fit.
Spontaneous casters would have a reduced pool of spells to claim that they know.
All spells would be drawn from the PHB. The spells you select would become "set" at the beginning of the tournament.
The spell selection process would eat up actual tournament time.

While the idea of this degree of customization appeals to me (it's like a great Lego-kit for PCs), it would also delay the beginning of several round 1 slots. Players new to the game*, or not as intimately familiar with spellcasting, or who had not even seen the Player's Pack beforehand now have to pick spells. Especially in round 1, these things tend to occur.

Also, being married to the pre-selected spells is part of the challenge. I'm sure anyone who played Issele Filiátha (the wizard/cleric) gnashed their teeth because the idiot who designed her (me) picked less-than optimal spells (on purpose). It also allows the designers to seed useful, not-often-seen spells into the repertoire rather than seeing nothing but magic missiles and fireballs - although I imagine that much the same could still occur with the proposed spell pool.

This is an interesting possibility that merits further review.

*in one round 1 slot, we had a guy who had not played D&D since 1st Edition. His team did really, really well because they approached problems from a narrative, old school direction rather than tactical direction.

EDIT: Kaila casts summon nature's ally, not summon monster, d'oh!

[fathead]

This is an interesting idea, and something we took a small, sideways step toward this year with the limited flexibility of Kaila the druid's summon monster pool.

The druid was awesome. I thought you handled the druid well (stating which creatures she was allowed to summon). Otherwise, it could have slowed things down considerably.

Also, being married to the pre-selected spells is part of the challenge. I'm sure anyone who played Issele Filiátha (the wizard/cleric) gnashed their teeth because the idiot who designed her (me) picked less-than optimal spells (on purpose). It also allows the designers to seed useful, not-often-seen spells into the repertoire rather than seeing nothing but magic missiles and fireballs - although I imagine that much the same could still occur with the proposed spell pool.

Perhaps it could be as simple as having 3 spell list possibilities, and let the player choose which one. That would allow for some additional strategy and customization, while still keeping it simple (not having to pick out every spell at every level).

Either way works for me though. This was never a big concern for us.

[scrotoz]

While I agree with the concept, I'm not sure on the spirit of the substitution... What would prevent a team that advanced to Round 2 to sub out a player they didn't think performed well or knew the rules well enough? Or to include a friend instead of a pick up player? Or to make room for someone who had failed to advance from another round?

Not sure if the "swapping out for better players" concept is going to happen. A) You'd have to have 3 players who are extremely childish at best. B) What's to stop the 4th "discarded" member from showing up anyway...the DM's take everyone's name down for the first round, you just check his/her name and the sub doesn't play.

I certainly hope that you guys didn't see this kind of behavior in the first DCC tournament (when the sub rules didn't exist). If so, I just shake my head at the small minded few who ruin it for everyone.

BTW... I was a proud member of "We Flunked Flank". The tournament was outstanding again this year. Now after sampling different tournaments over three years, I can say that this is the Tournament "that rules them all, and in the darkness binds them".

Thanks for another great time!!

[scrotoz]

As far as picking your own spells....

I could see that getting very messy during the course of tournament play. One thing I've noticed from the DCC tournaments is that the modules are play tested VERY thoroughly and the character builds are always unique and cool.

Part of the tournament format is taking that character that, on the surface, looks like a dud....but then finding the strategy that maximizes them fully.

Just my two coppers

-Chris "non-flanking" Foley

[Jengenritz]

Part of the tournament format is taking that character that, on the surface, looks like a dud....but then finding the strategy that maximizes them fully.

Absolutely. Better said than I've ever been able to articulate.

[N'Haaz-aua]

We take our playtesting duties very very seriously, and I feel we have been able to "break" significant sections every year. That results in a far far superior tournament once the players see it.

My largest frustration was the 'gimped' characters, they were even MORE gimped in playtesting and the changes that were made for the final version were well done.

Having playtested all three, and GM'd winning teams from all 3, I have to say that the challenge of the characters and the players stepping up with them, is the best thing about the tournament. Even though in playtesting it makes me want to pull my hair out.

Ive seen a lot of original ideas from much less than optimal characters. We flunked flank's technique for tanking in round three (which im not going to reveal as thats not fair to them) was innovative and significant in their survival with 3 players. I will be using that trick on my players soon, very soon, bwahahahahaahaha!

[ynnen]

Part of the tournament format is taking that character that, on the surface, looks like a dud....but then finding the strategy that maximizes them fully.

Indeed. This is true even during the playtesting stages -- when we rigorously rough up each of the different PCs and use different PC combiniations to make sure all the characters are well developed and balanced. Even if they do not appear to be so on the surface.

[fathead]

Part of the tournament format is taking that character that, on the surface, looks like a dud....but then finding the strategy that maximizes them fully.

Indeed. This is true even during the playtesting stages -- when we rigorously rough up each of the different PCs and use different PC combiniations to make sure all the characters are well developed and balanced. Even if they do not appear to be so on the surface.

That's one of things we love about the tournament. Being able to choose 4 characters from the 6 available is great...it allows each group to tailor the characters to their style of play.

[Jengenritz]

they were even MORE gimped in playtesting

Yeah, if you thought the tournament teams were bad, trust us. What the playtesters had originally was just atrocious.

Writers get big-fancy credit and Judges get swag, but often the playtesters aren't recognized beyond a list of names. Ynnen (also known as Jason) and N'Haaz-aua (also known as Jeff) have got a top-notch group, and the magic they worked made the Palace a far better dungeon than it started out as.

[brogan_a]

I REALLY like Dan's idea of 2 or 3 static spell lists for one or two of the casters. Not only do you have to choose 4 of 6 characters, but does the Wizard become a damage dealer or a debuffer? Take the damage dealer then you may not need the heavy repeater fighter, hmmm the choices!

As for cheating with player substitutions, why would you not take the best 4 people from the start so you can make it to round 2? There is always a possibility of someone abusing the system, but I think the greater good is served by allowing teams a little flexibility. Just a little!

-Andy Brogan, team 'We Flunked Flank'

[jfrenia]

Yeah, I'd like some spell options, but I also like the challenge of making due with what you're given and surviving, which has been the basis for the DCC and I think that should never change.

[scrotoz]

All I know is that I really enjoyed trying to maximize the effects of the Wiz/Cleric spell list. Admittedly, it wasn't a spell list that I normally would've pick coming in, but by the end of the tournament, I gained a new understanding of the usefulness of some of the spells.....especially "Sound Burst" which ended up saving our bacon in round 3.

I just feel like a better player / DM for the experience.

[fathead]

We Flunked Flank is from Cincinnati too? Ha. We should meet up for drinks sometime and share tournament war stories.

[scrotoz]

We Flunked Flank is from Cincinnati too? Ha. We should meet up for drinks sometime and share tournament war stories.

We should definitely do that!! What part of town are you in? We live amongst the bowling alleys and beer league softball that is the West Side (Delhi, Westwood, Cheviot, etc).

Name a hangout (cause there ain't any worth going to over here) and we'll clear it with our significant others (married with kids and all).

Chris "not flanking" Foley

[fathead]

Well, we're actually on the other side of the river, in Covington. My wife and I live in the Mainstrasse area. The other couple live in Wallace Woods area.