Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Vivat Grendel 11-19-04, 12:09 PM	Feel free to post up any questions, concerns, misgivings, support, improvements you feel you can offer. I have been thinking around this for about two months now, and I am sure I have left stuff out. Thanks.
Sindorin 11-19-04, 12:46 PM	Make a Gladiator :)
Jindl 11-19-04, 03:14 PM	@VG - That is a very well thought out suggestion. While I don't agree with everything, I also have been considering a PWipe so that new rules could be implemented. I am very much in favor of many parts of your proposal. There are some things I would tweak a little, but overall it is pretty much in line with what I had been pondering. -Jindl
Beldin 11-30-04, 05:28 AM	Level 6 Level 7 [Cresting Sun (Magagumo) out (alone)] Level 8 [Ex Nihilo (Ashenai) out (alone)] Level 9 Rhaegar (Beldin) vs Pard Longfellow (MysticMonk2005): SnarkHunter Level 10 [Ban'zanifal (Magagumo) out (alone)] Level 11 [Cyric Tor (KerlanRayne) out (alone)] Level 12 [Octavian Cesar (Barrelmaster) out (alone)] Level 13 [Delayar (Beldin) out (alone)] we should really do something with our pairings-system! Grendal idea has merit, I believe. We could leave the first six levels as the are, but from the mid-levels on the system does not work. And one victory does not say very much about the power of a level 8 Gladiator, does it? or about a level 19 Gladiator. We all now that a Harvester is good at killing Dragon-Disciples/Assassins. I would propose: Freeze everything above level 6! until there are about 16 Gladiators. Leve the low levels as they are. mid levels: two victories against (different) opponents; bump after 4 defeats high levels: three victories against (different) opponents; bump after 6 defeats pre-epic levels: four victories against (different) opponents; bump after 5 defeats.
Snommelp 12-01-04, 12:48 AM	Not a bad idea, Beldin, but that leaves the question of what a winner recieves when he/she/it doesn't level. I believe that many people would be put off if there was no prize for winning, but the rewards right now are based off of the recommended money for each level. What would the reward be?
Sindorin 12-01-04, 01:01 AM	Simple: Divide the amount of gold per level by the amount of fights required per level, and award that amount for each fight at each level.
Beldin 12-01-04, 03:02 PM	I'd say the winner gets nothing unless he has enough victories to advance to the next level.
SnarkHunter 12-01-04, 04:14 PM	Simple: Divide the amount of gold per level by the amount of fights required per level, and award that amount for each fight at each level. I rather like that idear. Maybe it could tie in with having two fights a day for purposes of Spellcasting/psions/raging/etc.
cellardweller 12-01-04, 05:28 PM	A slightly more controversial proposal - Push the reset button every 18 months. I beleive this is the only way that the CoCo can maintain the same level of energy that was around in its heyday.
Jindl 12-01-04, 09:17 PM	I've been thinking the same thing. We need a P-Wipe to start all these new rules and to bring back the energy. After a wipe would be a good time to institute the new multiple fights per level rules.
SnarkHunter 12-01-04, 09:27 PM	Well...I must admit I do prefer playing newly made characters to the higher level somewhat degenerate ones...but I must wonder what would be lost if we did this? A number of participants migth just decide, 'its been a good run, but I don't feel like starting all the way back at the bottom again so I think I'll call it quits.' Basicly I think we need to get a lot more opinions on this. Everyones opinion if we could manage it.
Huan 12-01-04, 09:39 PM	If the new rules are going to be put into action, then I agree that a wipe is in order to start everyone off fresh and clean, with no problems. I also favor the 2 battle per day suggestion.
Beldin 12-02-04, 04:23 AM	Then make a poll. Everyone could vote... I belive it would be great to see everyone starting anew, but I do not think that everyone likes to have 2 victories to level at the lower levels where many fights are only decided by luck, the gladiators look very similar and have fewer tactical options.
Sindorin 12-02-04, 05:00 AM	A wipe would be rather interesting... and I also agree w/ two fights per day.
Jindl 12-02-04, 10:06 AM	Why don't we do this: 2 fights per day. 4 fights (win or lose) to level. Start all characters at ECL 3 (helps to eliminate the luck factor at low levels, plus it makes all those ECL 2 races easier to play and eliminates the credit cost for the ECL 3 races). Since you must participate in 4 fights to level, lets require 4 credits for each ECL higher than 3. Pitlords get 1 credit for running a fight, and an additional credit if they write a good story (you don't have to be the arena bard, just give it a good effort). One other suggestion: Let's limit allies (of ANY type) to HD <= the PC's ECL. So no heavy warhorses at 3rd level (although a light warhorse is okay). This won't affect cohorts, nor will it affect most of the class feature allies (the druid's animal companion and paladin's special mount would very rarely exceed this under Core rules, so this limitation only affects them in a few instances). The main allies affected are handled animals, purchased allies, and animated dead - the three types IMHO that are the most unbalanced. Regarding the P-Wipe: Let's grant credits equal to 1/5th the level of current active gladiators (rounded down, minimum of 1 per gladiator) to the player. Current Active = was set ready in the last 8 weeks, is not retired, etc (use common sense). Thoughts? -Jindl
Huan 12-02-04, 12:03 PM	I like Jindl's packaged proposal. I'll vote for it.
T'Var 12-02-04, 12:12 PM	sounds all good to me. I'll third Jindl's proposal
SnarkHunter 12-02-04, 02:30 PM	Four fights to go up a level seems like a lot to me, I prefer 2 fights to prepare spells and 2 fights to level. But then I am an xp junky so I like my rewards coming fast and often. Jindl: would you want to apply your proposal across the board or only after 6th level like Beldin suggested. Also, how does New Years sound as a potential roll over date?
Ayatoshi 12-02-04, 02:35 PM	Wow I like this proposal especially because it makes good sense especially with Harvester 2 becoming the first epic and all I'd vote for it
T'Var 12-02-04, 02:44 PM	Four fights to go up a level seems like a lot to me, I prefer 2 fights to prepare spells and 2 fights to level. But then I am an xp junky so I like my rewards coming fast and often. Jindl: would you want to apply your proposal across the board or only after 6th level like Beldin suggested. Also, how does New Years sound as a potential roll over date? New year sounds like a perfect time for a roll over, and I think that after 6th lvl is a good point to begin the extra fights, that is about there the fights begin thining out of gladiators
Jindl 12-02-04, 06:29 PM	Jindl: would you want to apply your proposal across the board or only after 6th level like Beldin suggested. Also, how does New Years sound as a potential roll over date? New Years sounds fine to me. The proposal would apply across the board. One reason is to help eliminate the use of powerful one-shots and such at lower levels. If its going to take you 4 fights to level regardless of win/lose, then why blow your money on a CL 9 magic missile that will only help you in one fight? I think this will really help with the problems we see at low level. Since we are P-Wiping anyway, lets go ahead and keep all levels at an even pace. Level's won't thin out as easily under these new rules, because at level 8 there could be 1 character that needs 1 more fight, 1 character that needs 2 more fights to level, 1 character that needs 3 more fights, and 1 character that needs 4 fights. So instead of having 4 "empty" levels like we would under our current system, these 4 PC's would be able to fight each other. Requiring 4 fights to level (win or lose) helps prevent the problems we have seen with the higher ranks thinning out, just like it helps prevent some of the unbalancing issues of luck and powerful one-shots that we see at lower levels. I think we should use these rules across the board. -Jindl
Huan 12-02-04, 06:31 PM	New year, new start ... sounds good.
Snommelp 12-02-04, 06:35 PM	I like the idea, but one of my characters might not. Depending on how far Tara advances before then, she might have to go through the trouble of becoming an assassin all over again. She'd hate that, but I'll love it!
Sindorin 12-02-04, 06:54 PM	New Years sounds great for a revamp of this place. Soon, but soon is good. What about the 5x consumable cost referendum that was passed and put on hold... would that come into effect after New Years as well?
Jindl 12-02-04, 09:22 PM	What about the 5x consumable cost referendum that was passed and put on hold... would that come into effect after New Years as well? I would say no. The 5x consumable rule was in place because it was 1 fight to advance a level. Since this proposal is 4 fights per level, regardless of win/lose, the 5x rule should be unnecessary. -Jindl
Pittbull 12-03-04, 02:36 AM	5x consumable rule -Jindl @All: Please disintigrate these idea from your brains, I hate it! New year, new start, but lets fix the rules before. :)
Beldin 12-03-04, 02:46 AM	4 fights at level three might not be that funny. I could be like fighting four times with nearly the same tactics. And newbies might loose the fun of doing the same four times in a row without seeing their charackter advance to next level. I suggest 2 fights until level 6 and from there on 4. And it is not fair that a wizard with half of his spells fights one with all his spells.
Pittbull 12-03-04, 05:03 AM	You are absolutely right!
Dalton Onestone 12-03-04, 08:39 AM	Here's one idea on gold, leveling, etc.: A. There's a fixed number of fights per level to level up, win or lose. B. Gold is given in purses -- 2/3 to the winner, 1/3 to the loser. Gladiators with break-even records get the same as now, ones who win a lot get more gold, ones who lose a lot get less gold. C. A gladiator with a sufficiently bad record -- say 4 more losses than wins and a winning percentage below 34% -- is thrown out permanently. The rich would get richer that way, eventually, but Rule C would take care of it getting out of hand. Other comments: As a newcomer, I have no particular objection to a reset. I definitely favor starting higher than Level 2. I hugely favor it if we go to two fights per day. Two fights per day for a 2nd-level spellcaster doesn't leave him with a lot of value in prepared spells per fight. I think the 5x price for consumables is ugly, and almost any alternative would be preferable. Has anybody considered instituting a cash cost for healing services between the first and second fight of the day? Spellcasters are going to have to spend more money if they have fewer free spells to work from; why not have the damage sponges pay a little money too? 5 gp per HP would be fair -- that's about the cost of a CL1 Cure Light Wounds, repeated as often as necessary.
Huan 12-03-04, 12:20 PM	I am in support or 2 fights a lvl until lvl 6 (where almost everyone has firm bearings by then) where there are 4 fights per lvl; let me say that first. Here's one idea on gold, leveling, etc.: C. A gladiator with a sufficiently bad record -- say 4 more losses than wins and a winning percentage below 34% -- is thrown out permanently. Ouch. A little harsh, aren't we? The rich would get richer that way, eventually, but Rule C would take care of it getting out of hand. I never like it when the rich get richer for no reason (winners getting richer, however, I am fine with ;) ). The coin purse breakup is interesting to me, though. Has anybody considered instituting a cash cost for healing services between the first and second fight of the day? Spellcasters are going to have to spend more money if they have fewer free spells to work from; why not have the damage sponges pay a little money too? 5 gp per HP would be fair -- that's about the cost of a CL1 Cure Light Wounds, repeated as often as necessary. Well, that is a good thought. With consecutive battles, obviously spells and such must be conserved, but also HP (the time in between matches obviously has to be determined... so perhaps spells with a long duration can likely continue functioning). In that respect, I think it is an appealing idea to offer a healing service, but this can also be a double-edged sword. The richer people, usually the winners, will have more available to heal their wound, while those with less money will not get that luxury. It will then be likely the winners will start the match with a greater advantage due to money, and not persay their direct skill in the last battle (winners will likely continue to be winners, and losers will likely continue to lose)... Not to mention, the varying amount of HP among classes unbalances this, making it overbearing for some classes... I dunno, this option is a debate by itself. It might be best to either let it drop, or agree to something like, after the first fight, you regain some HP as if you had a full night's rest (but you didn't really get 8 hrs).
SnarkHunter 12-03-04, 04:51 PM	One thing to consider is the mode by which people are returned to life. A True Resurrection will restore all hitpoints ability damage and etc., but not spells or rage use or things like that. We're not about to start charging for those. So the loser should be fine as far as any damage done. I have no problem with the winner paying a bit of cash for cure light wounds, or a maybe a lesser restoration. They should be able to afford it. Also I think we should only divide up the purse based on how many fights are needed to level. So for 2 fights, you get half the purse for each victory. For 4 you get 1/4th. And only money for winning or bumping as before. Would that be 6 losses to up a level now? Or 12 even?
Dalton Onestone 12-04-04, 01:27 PM	Ouch. A little harsh, aren't we? I don't think so. A character who loses a lot: A. Is likely to be weak. B. Definitely, under my proposal, will be lagging in money and hence goodies. So at a certain point you boot him and have the player make a new one. It's like the "mercy rule" in little league baseball or softball or whatever ...
Dalton Onestone 12-04-04, 01:32 PM	I Well, that is a good thought. With consecutive battles, obviously spells and such must be conserved, but also HP (the time in between matches obviously has to be determined... so perhaps spells with a long duration can likely continue functioning). In that respect, I think it is an appealing idea to offer a healing service, but this can also be a double-edged sword. The richer people, usually the winners, will have more available to heal their wound, while those with less money will not get that luxury. It will then be likely the winners will start the match with a greater advantage due to money, and not persay their direct skill in the last battle (winners will likely continue to be winners, and losers will likely continue to lose)... Not to mention, the varying amount of HP among classes unbalances this, making it overbearing for some classes... I dunno, this option is a debate by itself. It might be best to either let it drop, or agree to something like, after the first fight, you regain some HP as if you had a full night's rest (but you didn't really get 8 hrs). I don't think the cost is a biggie. Indeed, they should always be able to pay for it out of the loser's share of the purse. Four fights to the level, say 1/3 to the loser So you're guaranteed to get 1/12 of the level-up amount in each fight. That's better than 200 gp even at Level 3, and you aren't going to have 40 hp to heal at that point. The disparity is much greater at higher levels, because HP go up pretty linearly, while the gold goes up geometrically.
Moherajikuyx 12-06-04, 10:29 AM	I like the Red Wipe Button idea. *disappears*
Beldin 12-06-04, 01:55 PM	Even Mo and Shadow commented, but none of our two GM. What happens with this proposal?
Jindl 12-06-04, 01:58 PM	Even Mo and Shadow commented, but none of our two GM. What happens with this proposal? Cat and Ash both told me via PM that they were thinking it over. Since there seems to be plenty of public support for the idea, I think it will probably happen. It's just a matter of defining the exact specifics. Hopefully they will comment soon. -Jindl
Caterane 12-07-04, 07:05 AM	Ash and I are here and following the thread but there is a reason why we didn't participate. I've been working on an idea for a long time now which is coincidently somewhat similar to what is proposed in this thread, but much more elaborate and complex. In my opinion it will solve a lot of our problems, and we don't have to create artificial rules about 5x items, rolls outside the arena, or spellcaster memorization. The funny thing is that Ashenai came - without knowing about my plans - up with a very similar idea on his own (it's almost like he had a Trojan Horse installed on my computer :P). And finally, there is also Tellish of Ket who is the father of the idea. I've talked to him yesterday and he will send me his updated version on which he had worked for months. Please give us a few more days as we have to coordinate things first. It will be a proposal and we'd like to have everybody participate in the upcoming discussion. I'm sure you'll all like it :)
Ashenai 12-07-04, 04:05 PM	Indeed. I have very high hopes for the changes we're about to propose. I think that they will make Gladius a hundred times as fun as it is now. Whatever your reasons for playing here (character optimization, role-playing, just messing around and having fun, just plain fighting, rules debates), I think you will be very pleased. We ask just a little bit of patience while we work out our proposal to a state where we can post it for discussion. :)
Vivat Grendel 12-08-04, 02:07 AM	Hey, me again. I work retail, and you may have heard about this period between Thanksgiving and Christmas where retail goes crazy and I work a lot more, but I have followed everything here. It is no surprise that multiple people have been working on this. A thorough examination of the Arena over time reveals certain problems that arise as a result of the current setting, and since we are the COre Arena, we can't just house rule them as you would in a campaign. I think my initial proposal provides a good base for addressing the easier problems, but some are just harder to solve in one post. I think the current crop of GMs are good, and will certainly come up with a better solution than I have offered so far. One thing I want to stress though, I feel it is very important that all leveling and reward be absolutely even. There are many reasons; for one even some spread over levels is still spread, and can get out of hand. Secondly, just as you would not be happy if I was DMing a starting group out at sixth level, and I gave you 66% of starting gold, and your one friend full starting gold, and your other one 133% starting gold. And then said 'you are all fair and even, lets fight.' I honestly feel that in the new arena, the win is it's own reward. Your character build effectiveness would be expressed by his Current Combat Record (CCR). This would be his combined win-loss record for all fights over the levels. I am totally in support of a higher starting level, or a split format where levels 3-5 are considered the minor leagues, and 6+ the majors. So, if you call for a reset at the first of the year, I will be there, and with any luck I will bring 2-5 other guys from my group and/or local gaming store. They have heard me talk about this board for what only seems like forever. When I was thinking over how to improve the Arena without changing it so much nobody would recognize it, I hit on just a few probs that I could no solve. How do you handle no shows?? Take the loss, this lowers your CCR, and we often have good real life reasons for missing a week. Fight one less fight at that tier, this raises you CCR (as a percentage) and makes pairings tougher. Delay the fight and get it back in the last overflow week, sounds good, but if we do 4 fights per tier, we now have to do 5 fights per tier to clear the level and advance that means we can advance the Arena 10 levels a year. That was problem one, problem two is how to handle dropouts and addons. You know there are competetive power gamers out there (you are shocked aren't you) who will play a build that is traditionally strong to say 10th, and then switch over to a build that just begins to hit its stride at 11th. Do you just let people switch at will?? Is that fair if I slug my Arcane Trickster through the tough levels (Rog3 Wiz5 AT2) and get him to where he is just starting to pay off, with a CCR of 15-21 (maybe not even that good) and someone drops the character they feel is about to top out, and drops in a pimptastic Trickster with a nice LA race and mad synergy. Those are tough calls, and I can make them in my game, but there are a lot of people to consider here, so I don't envy the GMs. I have some other things, but that seems like enough for now. Later.
Dalton Onestone 12-08-04, 02:32 AM	Cat, Ash, Are you familiar with the story of the thrice-married virgin?
Ashenai 12-08-04, 03:38 AM	Cat, Ash, Are you familiar with the story of the thrice-married virgin? Heh, yes. But a bit of anticipation never hurt anyone, and it's a matter of days, at most. I promise.
Caterane 12-08-04, 08:08 AM	Cat, Ash, Are you familiar with the story of the thrice-married virgin? No, never heard about that but you can surely enlight me :)
Dalton Onestone 12-15-04, 09:02 PM	No, never heard about that but you can surely enlight me :) A woman, moving to a new city, naturally went to a new doctor. During the examination, he said "I'm confused. I thought you said you had been married three times, yet you are still a virgin. How can this be?" "Sad, isn't it?" she answered. "My first husband was a young soldier. I married him as a last-moment decision, immediately before he had to go and serve. He was killed in action before he could ever come home to consummate the marriage." "As you may imagine, I was heart-broken, and as a perhaps foolish young woman thought I had lost out on all chance of love. So I married an elderly, unwell gentleman, who was very kind and generous to me. He was unable to perform sexually, but I took the best care of him I could in the remaining years of his life. He was a very nice and loving man, and I still miss him. "Healed by that marriage, and perhaps more mature as well, I again married a man about my own age -- handsome, smart, successful, with a great personality -- a highly successful computer software salesman. "Every night he sat down in the living room with me, turned the lights down low, and told me how good the lovemaking soon would be."
Ashenai 12-15-04, 10:23 PM	Well, don't tell anybody you heard this from me, but rumour has it that if you're around on Thursday in the early afternoon (GMT), there'll be a big shiny new proposal to discuss.
SnarkHunter 12-15-04, 10:31 PM	I know a similar one, but its much raunchier. If you're of age feel free to highlight below... So there's this lawyer who marries a woman, who'd been married 3 times before. On the eve of their wedding in the bridal suite she confesses tearfully that she has never had sex before, and asks that he be gentle. "How is that possible?" The lawyer asked. "You've been married 3 times already!" His responded as follows, "My first husband was to a psychologist, and all he wanted to do was talk about it. My second marriage was to a Gynecologist, and all he wanted to do was look at it. And my last marriage was to a stamp collector. God I miss him! But now I've married a lawyer and I just know I'm going to get ****ed!" :D ;).
Caterane 12-16-04, 09:41 AM	@ALL: I want to ask all of you to follow the link below and read the new reformation suggestions for the Core Coliseum Core Coliseum - Living Gladius Edition (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=352282)
T'Var 12-21-04, 11:05 AM	am in support or 2 fights a lvl until lvl 6 (where almost everyone has firm bearings by then) where there are 4 fights per lvl Ok trying to get this thread back to what it was ment for......are we suggjesting that win or lose you level after 4 fights? that doesnt seem fair at all to the winners. the better char's should get rewarded by faster lvling, not be held back with those who lose 1/2 or even 2/3 of the time
Pittbull 12-21-04, 11:13 AM	In LG you get X-Points even, if you lose a fight, so there is no need for a bump-rule, isn't it? I liked the bump-rule and I think it's pretty necessary, to keep the fun in the game. So, if don't get any XP, if you lose, bumps are important regardless, if it's nice to winnning characters or not.
T'Var 12-21-04, 11:18 AM	In LG you get X-Points even, if you lose a fight, so there is no need for a bump-rule, isn't it? I liked the bump-rule and I think it's pretty necessary, to keep the fun in the game. So, if don't get any XP, if you lose, bumps are important regardless, if it's nice to winnning characters or not. well thats my point, if its 4 wins to level it should be 8 losses to bump or a mixture thereof, say 0 wins and 8 losses, 1 win and 6 losses, 2 wins 4 losses, 3 wins and 2 losses, 4 wins and 0 losses.
LLMadCow 12-21-04, 01:18 PM	Under the new idea, I notice that disposable items will become much more important. I predict .... Archers will make a comeback. We shall see more Rangers and Fighters with Magical Bows and Magical Arrows. Perhaps even some Arcane Archers. And no more Bane-MadCow weapons. I pulled one out of my :censored: this morning. I was not a happy camper. :hoppingma :hoppingma :hoppingma
Ashenai 12-21-04, 02:16 PM	In LG you get X-Points even, if you lose a fight, so there is no need for a bump-rule, isn't it? I liked the bump-rule and I think it's pretty necessary, to keep the fun in the game. So, if don't get any XP, if you lose, bumps are important regardless, if it's nice to winnning characters or not. The current proposed system in LG gives 1/3 xp for a loss. It's 10 losses (against equal-level gladiators) to level, or 4 wins (well, 3.3 wins, technically), or any combination of the two (2 wins and 4 losses will also do it, for instance). In fact, here are are all the win/loss numbers you need to level against equal level gladiators: 4 wins, 0 losses (this'll actually put you well over what you need to level) 3 wins, 1 loss 2 wins, 4 losses 1 win, 7 losses, 0 wins, 10 losses.