Ring - The Scoring System

[iphdrunk]

Frankly I'd rather I had the ability, as a creator, to trade my scenario popularity/success for rewards I can place IN my scenarios to motivate people to play them. If my capability to produce good scenarios was rewarded with Crystals and other rewards I could place IN my RP scenarios that then provides the motivation and compensation for the players who want to do those things.

Good and interesting idea, worth considering and evaluating. The first thought that comes to mind is the risk of a snowball effect tho: the more players play your scenario, the more rewards the content creator can put in them, thus attracting more players due to the rewards.

Nice idea tho, just mentioning a possible drawback.

[grimjim]

Good and interesting idea, worth considering and evaluating. The first thought that comes to mind is the risk of a snowball effect tho: the more players play your scenario, the more rewards the content creator can put in them, thus attracting more players due to the rewards.

Nice idea tho, just mentioning a possible drawback.

Didn't stop 'em with Outposts did it?

I agree, that's also a problem but it's better than encouraging one-upmanship.

[raynes]

Ok, I just read about the RPR scoring system and I have to say it sucks. Why? Because it does nothing to take into account scenarios that are designed for any level to complete.

For example in the scenrio I built, I spent lots of time designing it so that you could either fight the level 150-250 mobs, or you could sneak around and find other ways to kill the mobs where you don't ever have to fight. In otherwords a player at level 20 can beat it just as a player at level 250 can beat it.

So according to this new system anyone who figures out how to beat the scenario without every resorting to combat, gets nothing. The reality is that if someone figures out how to beat it without combat, they should get more as they had to use their brains more than simply killing stuff. And yes, it's more than just timing things right.

[raynes]

I went back and reread it again. The more I read the more it sucks. The system is biased towards group play? The authors rating is based upon the points players earn in the scenario?

So again, if I create a really incredible scenario where I spent the time designing it really well for any level of player. Yet only one player can go through at a time, I don't get a rating? Especially if the player never resorts to combat?

So what we end up with isn't going to be players making and playing lots of great unique scenarios that tell stories. We are going to end up with a bunch of hack and slash scenarios. I'm left asking what the hell the point is of the Ring, if all you want people to create is the same crap that is in game already? Furthermore why should I bother creating puzzles and other things in game when the only thing to get rewards is killing?

Yet again I am left asking why bother with the ring at all?

[grimjim]

Yet again I am left asking why bother with the ring at all?

I'll still produce the stuff I want to produce anyway, but this is going to act as a demotivator to people to take part in it.

[calel]

Raynes, I don't usually agree with most of your posts, but you're spot on here, on both posts. There is no longer an incentive to be creative, to ponder on options; hack 'n slash get's the rewards, guile and cunning, intelligence get nothing. I could just play on the mainland if I wanted that; I get experience/rewards for defeating mobs there.

Lo and behold, even a pen and paper game as bland as Dungeons and Dragons (I'm gonna get slapped for this by Jyudas ) suggests to reward 'clever use and innovative thinking on skills'; the 'bashing-down-the-door' playstyle isn't the only one around, nor the only one to achieve goals.

I was at least hoping Ringmasters would be allowed to dispense rewards themselves or allocate ample points for rewards where they see fit. For instance if I were to create a mission to steal an object from a tribe:
*Get past the guards by slaughtering them: 1 reward point.
*Get by the guards, manipulte scenery object AND if NPC group 1 Guards is still alive: 2 reward points

And I want to create challenges for players in the right levels, not reward Avatars of whatnot to plow through; if I wanted to reward them I'd make challenging maps for their levels. They could have at least tried to use a comparable system as is used on the mainland on distributing experience; you learn less or nothing if it's below your skill. If higher level players are so worried about getting experience, why aren't they gaining it on the mainland?

Yet again I am left asking why bother with the ring at all?

It's a creative outlet to some, a means to share lore, knowledge, vision, pure entertainment and a joy you get from seeing players wrestle through your machinations. The rewards for players only come second to me; heck I can live without. If you really need to get rewarded (material, experience) for every deed you do, every action you take, why bother? I never understood.

Edit: something to set the record straight: the above is not a sneer at you Raynes, but more a general feeling I get across a lot of games. Motivations ought to be character driven, not player driven.

[raynes]

It's a creative outlet to some, a means to share lore, knowledge, vision, pure entertainment and a joy you get from seeing players wrestle through your machinations. The rewards for players only come second to me; heck I can live without. If you really need to get rewarded (material, experience) for every deed you do, every action you take, why bother? I never understood.

There are other less time consuming ways for me to have a creative outlet (like killinga tribe, taking a screenshot, and doing rp for it). Why should I spend days creating content for them and never get any sort or reward for it?

I should clarify that to me reward is simply as getting high ratings for my scenarios. With this system pretty much any scenario I choose to create will not get much of a rating at all. What's really going to happen is the exact opposite of what a ratings system should do. The really good and interesting ones will get lousy ratings, while the hack and slash combat ones witll get the best ratings.

I did think of one other question. What is to stop people from always making their scenario the lowest level type and putting low level mobs in it? Then people just killing to get scenario points? There could be no story, no logic, no planning. Yet that scenario will get mega ratings simply because people killed a lot in it.

[calel]

There are other less time consuming ways for me to have a creative outlet (like killinga tribe, taking a screenshot, and doing rp for it). Why should I spend days creating content for them and never get any sort or reward for it?

Hehe, seems I edited to late. I know what you mean, and I agree there. You're the player creating something for other players. I only meant by that statement rewards for characters and incentive for characters. Would the valorous knight save the princess if he wouldn't get some sort of reward for it? 'Tis quest sux!!! It gives no xp, no loot and the princess is fugly!! I'm off for that grail; maybe I can fence that fur sum gold.'

I should clarify that to me reward is simply as getting high ratings for my scenarios. With this system pretty much any scenario I choose to create will not get much of a rating at all. What's really going to happen is the exact opposite of what a ratings system should do. The really good and interesting ones will get lousy ratings, while the hack and slash combat ones witll get the best ratings.

I did think of one other question. What is to stop people from always making their scenario the lowest level type and putting low level mobs in it? Then people just killing to get scenario points? There could be no story, no logic, no planning. Yet that scenario will get mega ratings simply because people killed a lot in it.

Exactly, that's my biggest fear as well. I could make a map filled with kitin wave after kitin wave, npc's that stay silent, you kill the kitins and get the points, I go for diner and get the points, I come back and disconnect the scenario. Do this a couple times and everyone has heaps of points. And for what?

[vguerin]

Before they offered rewards for the Ring, I remember it being about creativity and how folks couldn't wait to put their ideas out there. Now they added the XP cats and it's just another conflict. The most popular player made content can be of any type/style if the players enjoy it, there should be no difference in rewards IF there needs to be rewards.

There does need to be some activity though, elsewise the evil empire can make a scenario where all they do is enter daily enmasse and plot their next evil schemes. I can see all the rolepaying now... plans to attack/defend against the evil Kamists. Practicing formations, feints and protecting our forces. Solving the puzzle of what the enemy will come up with next... oh the agony...

Since they'd only be gathering around, the map can be as simple or elaborate as the mapmaker was creative. Either way it'd be the go-to place for the hordes of the evil empire and would rank highly as part of their evil scheme. Why should they get more cats, they already keep most of Atys without cats by their guilds defending their OP's ?

[grimjim]

Lo and behold, even a pen and paper game as bland as Dungeons and Dragons (I'm gonna get slapped for this by Jyudas ) suggests to reward 'clever use and innovative thinking on skills'; the 'bashing-down-the-door' playstyle isn't the only one around, nor the only one to achieve goals.

No, I'm not going to slap you around. As far as RPGs go D&D is pretty bland. This will just end up with Crystal farms though and while that helps take some of the sting out of Outposts the Crystals (and other rewards?) being non-tradable harms that role.

Yeah DT, it wasn't meant to be about rewards but as 'alternate revenue stream' for Crystals etc is a bloody good idea for providing access to content for non PvP players.

In TTRPGs there is a classic and constant argument between 'System doesn't matter' and 'System matters'. Personally I fall on the side of 'System matters'. That is to say that a system that supports and encourages particular modes of play, styles, or activities is better suited to them than trying to shoehorn them in.

In something like Feng Shui or Exalted this comes out in a mechanism called 'Stunts'. Basically the more descriptive and evocative your description of your actions the bigger the bonus you get to perform those actions.

In other games different systems such as bloody and graphic critical hit tables, systems for tracking humanity or sanity all play their role in encouraging and supporting play in a certain idiom, encouraging it.

Which is a long-winded way of saying that if you want this to be successful as something more than pure hack and slash you need to find a way of encouraging its use in alternate ways.

My suggestion would go back to my original one, its abusable but I can't see a better alternative. Give the Adventure Master points based on the ratings etc of their scenario that they can cash in for rewards to offer IN their scenarios that will, in turn, encourage people to play their scenarios by providing incentive and will put control back into the hands of the AM.