It's time to relax the table requirements a little (reporting) - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

It's time to relax the table requirements a little (reporting)

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
opskt
Jul 01, 2010 8:04:43 It's getting harder and harder to find players for RPGA events, at least in some areas. In particular, during the summer when the college populations of many gaming communities drops.

I am the sanctioner and reporter for our FLGS's Dark Sun Encounters. Due to work/summer classes, not all the of the pople can nake it every week. This sometimes leads to, interesting, complications in the reporting.

For example, just yesterday. The person GMing it so I can play for once, and 7 players. Can't split 7 into 2 even tables/sessions, because then you have a 4 person table and a 3 person table. Can't report a 3. So, rather than try that split, we just made a 'Jarvix II' this time and he ran with that.

Well, in addition to not being able to report a table of 3 people, you can't report one of 7 either.

In the end, I was forced to slot the DM as a player too, slot myself as a DM, then report it as 2 tables where we each DMed one and played in the other.

There is something wrong when one extra player forces the reporting DM to lie to the system and unless he has been banned by the store or the RPGA, as a rule I will never tell a person they can't paly that week cause the 'table math' will not allow it.

For that matter, many home games are often a player short. Why can't we report a table of 3 players + DM?

It is time to relax the requirements on number of players to report a table in any RPGA event to the range of 3-8 players. Thank you.
#2
kenobi65
Jul 01, 2010 9:35:43 I'll just note that everything you've described has been encountered by many event organizers before you, and brought up on this board any number of times in the past.

Once upon a time (say, 8 or 9 years ago), the RPGA did allow (though tried to discourage) 7-person tables. My first RPGA experiences were at GenCon 2001, and we had 7 players at every table. Not too long after that, they changed the rules, and capped a table at 6.

The RPGA has always maintained that fewer than 3, or more than 6, leads to a less-than-optimal play experience for an RPGA adventure, and, so, they haven't seemed to have any interest in changng the rule. They have acknowledged that the rule leads to some tables not going off (or people getting creative in how they report a non-legal table), but the point of view has been that they'd rather make certain that players get an optimal play experience, rather than insure that "every single person gets to play, no matter what".

And, if you allow 3-player tables, then you'd have people asking for legal 2-person tables...

Given this past history, I wouldn't hold my breath on the rule changing, but, hey, I could be surprised.
#3
Alphastream
Jul 01, 2010 15:34:05 I really hope they don't change the rules. It is a good rule. Sure, sometimes there are reasons to break it, but allowing more or fewer than 4-6 is bad for the game. 3-7 is allowed for Heroes of Rokugan/L5R and was for Spycraft - it is far from ideal. Instead, just work on recruiting more players and you end up with a win-win. There are always more players out there, though it may take work to locate them. (For example, in our area we have used Meetup, yahoo, and gaming stores to drum up an impressive DDE showing). In the past I have built up a 5-player table in Houston from an initial response of 0 interested in LG.
#4
Keith53
Jul 04, 2010 10:38:39 I don't see the rule about tables of 4-6 players changing. 4E has made the table balance even more important.

With due respect to the OP, the solution would be for one player, presumably the last person to show up or sign up, sits out the game. Problem solved legally. Saying the rules force you to break the rules, implies you will not comply with rules that limit you from what you want to do. Did you mean to imply that?

Keith
#5
gc1ceo
Jul 05, 2010 17:07:45 I wouldn't mind if there was some option for 7 player situation since thats the toughest thing I usually have to deal with (or we call it locally "The 9 Person Cellphone Scramble") versus the obvious.
#6
opskt
Jul 06, 2010 11:01:00
I wouldn't mind if there was some option for 7 player situation since thats the toughest thing I usually have to deal with (or we call it locally "The 9 Person Cellphone Scramble") versus the obvious.

Agreed. While it would be nice for home games at least to only require 4 (DM + 3 players) I can see of public play it being an issue. But a 7 player table should be allowed for both, because I don't want to ever make a single person sit out just because 'the rules' say we have to have at least 8 players to have to 4-player tables.

It's hard enough to get players in my area. Having to be a jerk because of the rules and one showing up a few minutes late because, you know, they have a job, is just pure BS.
#7
Neutronium_Dragon
Jul 12, 2010 20:02:52 > presumably the last person to show up or sign up, sits out the game.

Given that Encounters is meant to encourage new people to show up and try out the game (often going out of their way to reach the venue), that's a great way to ensure that they never come back.

Signups aren't a solution either - all it takes is one person who signed up to not show up (it happens, for perfectly legitimate reasons) and you're down from 8 to 7.

Even if the rule doesn't change for RPGA events in general, I strongly feel that Encounters should allow it.
#8
Alphastream
Jul 12, 2010 23:28:11
> presumably the last person to show up or sign up, sits out the game. Given that Encounters is meant to encourage new people to show up and try out the game (often going out of their way to reach the venue), that's a great way to ensure that they never come back. Signups aren't a solution either - all it takes is one person who signed up to not show up (it happens, for perfectly legitimate reasons) and you're down from 8 to 7. Even if the rule doesn't change for RPGA events in general, I strongly feel that Encounters should allow it.

This is highly debatable.

Adding a 7th player means you water down everyone's participation. You also hurt scaling. Both factors might result in up to 7 unhappy players. "This game is boring." "I didn't get to doo much." "I didn't feel like my PC was important or heroic."

In my experience if you take the time to explain to the seventh player how they can guarantee they will play next time they come, they will come back. You have to be nice, you have to calmly and warmly greet them and help them understand the situation, and then they will come back. I have no problems with retention in these situations, either at cons or at stores. But, I do see problems with 7-person tables.
#9
Neutronium_Dragon
Jul 13, 2010 22:26:11 > Adding a 7th player means you water down everyone's participation.

I agree - which is why I'd favor the 'table of 3 and table of 4' alternative. It's much easier to scale down for the session (or just have someone run a second character if they're capable).
#10
Alphastream
Jul 14, 2010 3:30:12
> Adding a 7th player means you water down everyone's participation. I agree - which is why I'd favor the 'table of 3 and table of 4' alternative. It's much easier to scale down for the session (or just have someone run a second character if they're capable).

You're probably sick of me... ;)

A table of 3 really is swingy. It is also exceptionally hard to scale an encounter for 3 PCs. You have to really elliminate all dominate, stun, heavy control (even slow can qualify for the right scenario), etc. because the PCs could easily be in a mode where they can't do much and get overwhelmed. You have to really be careful about focusing fire. Your skill challenges become much more difficult. Your... etc.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 opskt Jul 01, 2010 8:04:43	It's getting harder and harder to find players for RPGA events, at least in some areas. In particular, during the summer when the college populations of many gaming communities drops. I am the sanctioner and reporter for our FLGS's Dark Sun Encounters. Due to work/summer classes, not all the of the pople can nake it every week. This sometimes leads to, interesting, complications in the reporting. For example, just yesterday. The person GMing it so I can play for once, and 7 players. Can't split 7 into 2 even tables/sessions, because then you have a 4 person table and a 3 person table. Can't report a 3. So, rather than try that split, we just made a 'Jarvix II' this time and he ran with that. Well, in addition to not being able to report a table of 3 people, you can't report one of 7 either. In the end, I was forced to slot the DM as a player too, slot myself as a DM, then report it as 2 tables where we each DMed one and played in the other. There is something wrong when one extra player forces the reporting DM to lie to the system and unless he has been banned by the store or the RPGA, as a rule I will never tell a person they can't paly that week cause the 'table math' will not allow it. For that matter, many home games are often a player short. Why can't we report a table of 3 players + DM? It is time to relax the requirements on number of players to report a table in any RPGA event to the range of 3-8 players. Thank you.
#2 kenobi65 Jul 01, 2010 9:35:43	I'll just note that everything you've described has been encountered by many event organizers before you, and brought up on this board any number of times in the past. Once upon a time (say, 8 or 9 years ago), the RPGA did allow (though tried to discourage) 7-person tables. My first RPGA experiences were at GenCon 2001, and we had 7 players at every table. Not too long after that, they changed the rules, and capped a table at 6. The RPGA has always maintained that fewer than 3, or more than 6, leads to a less-than-optimal play experience for an RPGA adventure, and, so, they haven't seemed to have any interest in changng the rule. They have acknowledged that the rule leads to some tables not going off (or people getting creative in how they report a non-legal table), but the point of view has been that they'd rather make certain that players get an optimal play experience, rather than insure that "every single person gets to play, no matter what". And, if you allow 3-player tables, then you'd have people asking for legal 2-person tables... Given this past history, I wouldn't hold my breath on the rule changing, but, hey, I could be surprised.
#3 Alphastream Jul 01, 2010 15:34:05	I really hope they don't change the rules. It is a good rule. Sure, sometimes there are reasons to break it, but allowing more or fewer than 4-6 is bad for the game. 3-7 is allowed for Heroes of Rokugan/L5R and was for Spycraft - it is far from ideal. Instead, just work on recruiting more players and you end up with a win-win. There are always more players out there, though it may take work to locate them. (For example, in our area we have used Meetup, yahoo, and gaming stores to drum up an impressive DDE showing). In the past I have built up a 5-player table in Houston from an initial response of 0 interested in LG.
#4 Keith53 Jul 04, 2010 10:38:39	I don't see the rule about tables of 4-6 players changing. 4E has made the table balance even more important. With due respect to the OP, the solution would be for one player, presumably the last person to show up or sign up, sits out the game. Problem solved legally. Saying the rules force you to break the rules, implies you will not comply with rules that limit you from what you want to do. Did you mean to imply that? Keith
#5 gc1ceo Jul 05, 2010 17:07:45	I wouldn't mind if there was some option for 7 player situation since thats the toughest thing I usually have to deal with (or we call it locally "The 9 Person Cellphone Scramble") versus the obvious.
#6 opskt Jul 06, 2010 11:01:00	I wouldn't mind if there was some option for 7 player situation since thats the toughest thing I usually have to deal with (or we call it locally "The 9 Person Cellphone Scramble") versus the obvious. Agreed. While it would be nice for home games at least to only require 4 (DM + 3 players) I can see of public play it being an issue. But a 7 player table should be allowed for both, because I don't want to ever make a single person sit out just because 'the rules' say we have to have at least 8 players to have to 4-player tables. It's hard enough to get players in my area. Having to be a jerk because of the rules and one showing up a few minutes late because, you know, they have a job, is just pure BS.
#7 Neutronium_Dragon Jul 12, 2010 20:02:52	> presumably the last person to show up or sign up, sits out the game. Given that Encounters is meant to encourage new people to show up and try out the game (often going out of their way to reach the venue), that's a great way to ensure that they never come back. Signups aren't a solution either - all it takes is one person who signed up to not show up (it happens, for perfectly legitimate reasons) and you're down from 8 to 7. Even if the rule doesn't change for RPGA events in general, I strongly feel that Encounters should allow it.
#8 Alphastream Jul 12, 2010 23:28:11	> presumably the last person to show up or sign up, sits out the game. Given that Encounters is meant to encourage new people to show up and try out the game (often going out of their way to reach the venue), that's a great way to ensure that they never come back. Signups aren't a solution either - all it takes is one person who signed up to not show up (it happens, for perfectly legitimate reasons) and you're down from 8 to 7. Even if the rule doesn't change for RPGA events in general, I strongly feel that Encounters should allow it. This is highly debatable. Adding a 7th player means you water down everyone's participation. You also hurt scaling. Both factors might result in up to 7 unhappy players. "This game is boring." "I didn't get to doo much." "I didn't feel like my PC was important or heroic." In my experience if you take the time to explain to the seventh player how they can guarantee they will play next time they come, they will come back. You have to be nice, you have to calmly and warmly greet them and help them understand the situation, and then they will come back. I have no problems with retention in these situations, either at cons or at stores. But, I do see problems with 7-person tables.
#9 Neutronium_Dragon Jul 13, 2010 22:26:11	> Adding a 7th player means you water down everyone's participation. I agree - which is why I'd favor the 'table of 3 and table of 4' alternative. It's much easier to scale down for the session (or just have someone run a second character if they're capable).
#10 Alphastream Jul 14, 2010 3:30:12	> Adding a 7th player means you water down everyone's participation. I agree - which is why I'd favor the 'table of 3 and table of 4' alternative. It's much easier to scale down for the session (or just have someone run a second character if they're capable). You're probably sick of me... ;) A table of 3 really is swingy. It is also exceptionally hard to scale an encounter for 3 PCs. You have to really elliminate all dominate, stun, heavy control (even slow can qualify for the right scenario), etc. because the PCs could easily be in a mode where they can't do much and get overwhelmed. You have to really be careful about focusing fire. Your skill challenges become much more difficult. Your... etc.