Ash
Approvals
This world is only big enough for one loli.
Posts: 277 
|
Post by Ash on Apr 9, 2015 14:42:09 GMT -7
Pretty much every time we've gotten a wave of new people the vast majority of them make several alternate characters rather than actually getting past early levels. This causes there to be a constant slew of level 1-2 sessions, rather than any sessions for people who actually get out of this range and wish to continue playing their character. I just think there should be a higher prerequisite than level 2 where a player can literally just go through characters staying at that level. Maybe level 4 or 5, where they've gotten past the normal experience curve, and haven't been necessarily eating up slots that other, actual first time players could have been in.
|
|
|
|
Post by leary93 on Apr 9, 2015 14:55:48 GMT -7
Yeah, I kinda agree, though it works the other way too. The reason Ive heard most people make more alts is so that they dont miss out on games because they only have a lvl 3-4 char while only lvl 1-2 games are going on. I think highering the bar would be one solution. Other might be to just have a cap on how quick after their first character they can make a second. I don't think players who have been here longer will really disregard their other characters. Lastly, I think GM's should try to push for higher lvl parties a bit more often to compensate, so that the urge to make more characters becomes less. We rarely see lvl 4-6 parties
|
|
Zanos
Leadership Council
No
how did i get here i am not good with computer
Posts: 684
|
Post by Zanos on Apr 9, 2015 16:51:17 GMT -7
I agree. It seems like mostly people are just making stuff to try it out for a few games, and while I don't want to restrict people there are plenty of new players coming in to keep the low level bracket active.
3 or 4 might be a reasonable threshold for making another character.
|
|
diskelemental
Lich
Banned
A better world, whether you want it or not.
Posts: 781
|
Post by diskelemental on Apr 9, 2015 20:50:40 GMT -7
I disagree.
We need low levels in order to keep the community growing. Every new player starts at level one, if we don't have enough level ones (because, let's be honest, getting to 4 takes a fairly long time), then new players can't get in a game, which means they're not likely to stick around.
Besides, neither of you approve characters or even run low levels games, what do you guys care?
|
|
Zanos
Leadership Council
No
how did i get here i am not good with computer
Posts: 684
|
Post by Zanos on Apr 9, 2015 21:29:29 GMT -7
I disagree. We need low levels in order to keep the community growing. Every new player starts at level one, if we don't have enough level ones (because, let's be honest, getting to 4 takes a fairly long time), then new players can't get in a game, which means they're not likely to stick around. Besides, neither of you approve characters or even run low levels games, what do you guys care? It's self-propagating. There are a lot of 1-2 games because there's a lot of 1-2 characters because people keep making 1-2 characters because there's a lot of 1-2 games because... We're at the point where I've seen two 8 person level 1 sessions being run at the same time. That's considerable, and I'd like for the bracket to be smoothed out more so that there are more games for people who want to play their 3-5s or whatever. I'll also remind you that you specifically asked to do character approvals. |
|
|
|
Post by SaintYin on Apr 9, 2015 21:32:52 GMT -7
I agree with Disk.
The core of the issue I believe I'm seeing is that "there are not enough mid-level games." The proposed solution has so far been "make it harder for players to make low-level alts." While this solution could indirectly cause more mid-level games to be made, I believe negative reinforcement is rarely a good thing to introduce where there was none before.
If the solution were to improve a player's ability to change character design, such as free retraining for characters below 5 or allowing retired characters to convert a portion of their total exp/gp to another, then I would find it more agreeable. Alternatively, using the upcoming sessions subforum to collect mid-level players or running such sessions oneself would also increase the number of mid-level sessions available.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haskalah on Apr 9, 2015 22:34:03 GMT -7
I think a big part of the flood is that there is a massive influx of players and concepts. Part of my reason for a second character was that I find the concept interesting, and part is the retraining time and effects. It's more useful IMO to train up the characters that are around and help new players, especially as that should help accelerate characters getting levels. If the problem exists after new players aren't pouring in then perhaps a cap such as "you can't make a new character unless you have one at x level, where x is your number of characters". Then someone would have to level a char up to a new max rather than play 5-6 or 8-9 games to find out they don't like their concept.
|
|
Geckilian
Leadership Council
Empires Mierely require time.
Posts: 1,026
|
Post by Geckilian on Apr 10, 2015 2:13:22 GMT -7
One way to word it could be -
Players may make a new character when their lowest leveled character is a level equal to their number of current characters plus one.
Thus a player with a single level 2 can make a new character. To make a third, both the previous characters would need to be level 3. To make a 4th, they'd need 3 level 4 characters and so on.
|
|
diskelemental
Lich
Banned
A better world, whether you want it or not.
Posts: 781
|
Post by diskelemental on Apr 10, 2015 9:21:29 GMT -7
It's self-propagating. There are a lot of 1-2 games because there's a lot of 1-2 characters because people keep making 1-2 characters because there's a lot of 1-2 games because... We're at the point where I've seen two 8 person level 1 sessions being run at the same time. That's considerable, and I'd like for the bracket to be smoothed out more so that there are more games for people who want to play their 3-5s or whatever. I'll also remind you that you specifically asked to do character approvals. We're running multiple 8 person games, because we have an abundance of players, and a deficit of GMs. If I'm putting together a session, there are definitely enough people to run a 3-5 or higher, but in doing so, I'd exclude a decent number of the players currently looking for a game. When DG is only running one, maybe two, games a day, my session may be the only time those people get to play. Not going to exclude people solely for purposes of maintaining a "smooth bracket." If some of the other GMs would be willing to step up and run 3+ sessions, I guarantee that they will have the players to do so. However, as an individual, I'm trying to serve as many people as I can. If you don't like the number of 1-2s, then step up and run something higher. Restricting players isn't the answer. I appreciate the reminder, unfortunately it's completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. |
|
|
|
Post by antiinc on Apr 10, 2015 10:35:40 GMT -7
Something you might want to find out before limiting is seeing how many of these people in the 8 player parties have alts. I, for instance, have one level 2 character and haven't been able to find a game in a week. I have an alt, but I don't plan on using him until my character has been in mid levels for a while. In other words, I agree that the issue is more that there are a ton of new players and not enough GMs running low games to make up for it yet.
I do think, however, that it seems like this problem should work itself out eventually, especially if you don't get as many new players for a while, and some of the newbies become GMs. All of us new players just need some time to reach higher levels.
|
|
|
|
Post by daddya on Apr 10, 2015 15:26:58 GMT -7
One way to word it could be - Players may make a new character when their lowest leveled character is a level equal to their number of current characters plus one. Thus a player with a single level 2 can make a new character. To make a third, both the previous characters would need to be level 3. To make a 4th, they'd need 3 level 4 characters and so on. I do like this idea but maybe make it a sloped sort of thing like when you get yo the forth one maybe make it (1-2) 4 and (1-2) 3 or something that way its sort of a balance and more sloped you dont have to have all your characters that high level but you at least need them progressing towards it with at least 1 leading the pack |
|
|
|
Post by dragonus45 on Apr 10, 2015 16:17:31 GMT -7
I agree with disk 100%.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kayse on Apr 11, 2015 19:24:51 GMT -7
Personally, I am opposed to the idea of restricting new alternates further.
Most of the characters that I see in my low level games are newbies their low level characters, but I enjoy seeing more experienced players with their alternates mixed in with the sessions, because it takes some of the pressure of keeping the DG setting consistent off of me. It allows the experienced DG player with the alt to answer questions that I might have to look up (such as where key buildings are in Rook, the forms of government in Rook and such). The older players typically act as a stabilizing factor in games since they know the "unwritten" rules for how to keep a DG game rolling.
And more importantly, the older players usually act as a shared sense of community in general. If the rule were to go into place, many of the players with, say, 3 or more alts would basically be forbade from playing in 1-2 games until they can get all of their existing characters above the new cutoff line. That would effectively mean that they would stop playing low level games. Then I would foresee 1-2 games being filled with a vast majority of new characters then them getting to middle levels and finally "meeting" the rest of the community. And I think that's a bad thing for a shared community and a living campaign.
|
|
