Playground Tiering Obstacle Course [3.5]

[Eldan]

So, this was an idea that came up in Morph Bark's magnificent Homebrew Tier Compendium: (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=245701) create a set of challenges people can use to gauge the power and versatility of different classes.

My idea was to create 5-10 kinds of challenges, at a few different levels. For now, I am thinking:

Levels:
1 (new and squishy)
3 (a common start level, more solid than 1)
8 (coming into the oft-summoned sweet spot)
12 (the high end of the sweet spot)
15 (going into high levels)

Challenges:
These should cover a variety of situations. I am thinking, here:

Environmental challenge. A natural or magical obstacle outside of the classical dungeon that has to be overcome. A chasm or flooded river at low level. Lava. A desert. One of hte outer planes.

Travel: how fast can you get from A to B?

Trap challenge. A series of classical traps that have to be avoided or found and overcome.

Horde challenge: several lower-level enemies, to test crowd control and minion disposal.

Boss fight challenge: a powerful single monster to be killed.

Trick monster: a monster that is powerful, but has one or several specific weaknesses.

Social challenge: convincing people to act in your interest.

Information gathering: how much can you find out about what you will face, given time?


So, anyone willing to help me flesh this out? I'd rather not do it alone, too much work for one nerd.

[Welknair]

I'd love to lend a hand in this worthy endeavor.

[Lohj]

Sounds like a good way to keep me out of trouble. I'm in.

[bobthe6th]

their was a thing on D&D wiki that did this... I think. it is something I keep forgetting to book mark.

I don't have the time at the moment to help, but I will happily use the result.

also, would these be solo runs, or is the party variable being used?

[Kane0]

Sounds like fun, I'll lend a hand.

Bouncing off what you have already:
Testing at different levels: 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 or 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 20

Points arranged like so:
0 - Cant do it
1 - Can do it poorly or with lucky rolls
2 - Can do it competently
3 - Its their speciality!
Bonus Point - For going above and beyond or using alternative method

Challenges:
Killing Mooks/Crowd Control
- Kill off large amounts of weak enemies. Bonus point for slaughter or not undergoing excess risk
- Ensure group of enemies do not reach objective. Bonus point for not killing them.

Killing Large targets
- Kill or otherwise deal with powerful foe. Bonus point for total destruction or avoiding fight entirely

Buffing/debuffing & teamwork
- Lead, coordinate and/or increase power of allies. Bonus point for making them unstoppable
- Rout, demoralise and/or decrease power of foes. Bonus point for stopping them in their tracks or making them easy to kill

Traps & subtlety
- Find, disarm or avoid mundane traps/locks. Bonus point for not destroying it
- Find, disarm or avoid magical traps/locks. Bonus point for not destroying it
- Identify or avoid ambush. Bonus point for outmaneuvering the enemy

Navigation & Movement
- Find your way past a thick wall. Bonus point not leveling it
- Find your way past a chasm. Bonus point for not using magic as a crutch
- Find your way through antimagic zone. Bonus point for finishing faster
- Find your way through hostile environment. Bonus point for not using magic as a crutch

Social & deception
- Convince someone to do something they wouldn't normally do. Bonus point for making them do something extreme
- Obtain information. Bonus point for remaining anonymous
- Sow misinformation. Bonus point for gaining trust or leverage in the process

Extra: Customisability
- Change your capabilities within a week - 1 point
- Change your capabilities within a day - 2 points
- Change your capabilities within an hour - 3 points
- Change your capabilities within a round - 4 points

So the only thing left to do it get the points of the base classes to use as control numbers.

[Savannah]

It sounds like a good idea, although I'm not sure how much I could help.

Personally, I would add level 20 to the test, so you'll have a test with all of a class's abilities.

[Madara]

I say level 5/6 since its a more common point in games. Often classes start to get their best ability and things are mostly equal at this level.

And of course I'd love to help out.

I think I could work up a challenge or two.

[Eldan]

To start, how about, for level 1:

Creepy Crawlies everywhere! (EL <1, Very difficult, Swarm challenge)

Location: A square chamber of stone walls, 120 ft. on each side and 15 ft. high. The walls shine brightly, giving the entire room daylight illumination. In the middle of the north walls is a niche ten feet deep and five feet wide, ending in locked and barred iron doors. The tieree starts in the centre of the chamber.

Opponents: Three Tiny Monstrous Centipedes. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/monstrousCentipede.htm) Two of them start twenty feet south of the tieree, one thirty feet north, halfway to the niche.

Goal: Kill all three centipedes.

[Madara]

Is it going to be one character? Or a Party?

[DracoDei]

Buffing/debuffing & teamwork
Unless you are buffing NPCs this seems like a means to the other challenges, not a challenge in and of itself.

Also, I am not sure if the challenges should be revealed, before the characters are drawn up, include equipment and per-day preparations.

[Kane0]

Unless you are buffing NPCs this seems like a means to the other challenges, not a challenge in and of itself.


I had that challenge in mind to cater for Healers, Marshals and similarly inclined classes that are based on helping the party or disrupting the enemy group. The kind of role your Grace Gift would get good points in.


Also, I am not sure if the challenges should be revealed, before the characters are drawn up, include equipment and per-day preparations.

Maybe have them know the challenges, but not which order they will be in until that day and each day will have two challenges.

[rottenvenetic]

The way I could see this done:

Use Kane0's challenges and his second level array.

1 veteran DM prepares challenges based for an x point build without the knowledge of the player's build and without revealing anything to the player except the value of x (I recommend 28-32).

1 veteran player builds the characters (point buy x; all hit die rolls are averages; SRD with only the most common books and common/small house rules and the data for the custom character allowed).

The player's higher level builds must be built out of the lower level ones, to show a possible character progression. So the char sheet should show the character at all the challenged levels in succession.
However for each type of challenge a separate character may be used.

Neither the DM or the player should have participated in the creation of the class.

Another recommendation: When rolling d20s for damage, initiative, saves etc, if it's not too tedious the player could roll something like 4(d6-1), reroll a zero total, to (almost) ensure a bell curve distribution for rolls.

Note that the D&D Dice roller provided by Wizards of the Coast will not calculate results lower than 1.

In fact that just gave me a house rule idea.

[Eldan]

Hmm. I must admit, I saw this in a different way. Not as some kind of tournament we organize, more as a tool people can use themselves. I.e. we post our situations, interested people play it solo for themselves.

[DracoDei]

I had that challenge in mind to cater for Healers, Marshals and similarly inclined classes that are based on helping the party or disrupting the enemy group. The kind of role your Grace Gift would get good points in.
That should only be necessary if the obstacles will be faced individually instead of as a team. If you prefer to do that so it can't be argued who did what really, then that works. If you are going for "actual play conditions" rather than "bench test" then it seems pointless.

Both have their merits.

[T.G. Oskar]

their was a thing on D&D wiki that did this... I think. it is something I keep forgetting to book mark.

This is what you're looking at? (http://dnd-wiki.org/wiki/Same_Game_Test)

I'd like to see, or at least have people consider, the basis of the Test of Spite as a way to prevent "contamination" from overtly powerful feats or abilities into tiering. It doesn't have to include ALL the banlist, but rather some of the objectives and methodology. The Same Game Test can deliver ideas on making reasonable challenges, as well.

[Morph Bark]

I just wanted to drop in here and say I wholeheartedly support this effort.

The Same Game Test Oskar linked to is a good way of going about this, though it should be noted it very heavily aims at combat encounters.

If you wish to make this kind of like the Test of Spite, here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=150821) is one of its iterations that has plenty of info on it. Please do not post in that thread, as that would be thread necromancy.

As for level suggestions, I suggest the following:

1. The most important level, so this is pretty obvious.
3. Level 3 is the last level at which a class could be considered a dip, and it is also a common starting level.
6. The last level gained in E6 and often the level you start qualifying for PrCs or could just have gotten your first level in one.
10. The halfway point of a full 1-20 game.
16. At this level classes usually have gained their most powerful bag of tricks, barring level 9 spells/powers/maneuvers/mysteries.
20. To go all the way with a class, full power, no-holds barred.


Good luck! But more importantly, have fun!

[Eldan]

I think Morph Bark's level list makes sense. Let's go with that one. Then, we need to discuss two more things before starting:

What are we doing here, exactly?
Do we just write a set of challenges people can run on their own? Or will we run some kind of tournament, where people build a character with their homebrew and then run it through challenges they don't know beforehand? That will change the way we run things here quite a lot.

Solo or group?
Do we write these for a single character (that was many idea) or do we send one or more NPCs along? Do we, perhaps, change this from challenge to challenge? (E.g. make a mid level travel challenge where you have to get six people across an ocean in less than three days).

[Midwoka]

Solo or group?
Do we write these for a single character (that was many idea) or do we send one or more NPCs along? Do we, perhaps, change this from challenge to challenge? (E.g. make a mid level travel challenge where you have to get six people across an ocean in less than three days).

I think it's best to have set allies on certain challenges -- mainly challenges that test the class' support abilities (or getting those six people across the ocean). For example, you could have a challenge where the character has to help an archer-Ranger and a Monk while being unable to target or directly attack the enemies herself.

[Madara]

I think Morph Bark's level list makes sense. Let's go with that one. Then, we need to discuss two more things before starting:

What are we doing here, exactly?
Do we just write a set of challenges people can run on their own? Or will we run some kind of tournament, where people build a character with their homebrew and then run it through challenges they don't know beforehand? That will change the way we run things here quite a lot.

Solo or group?
Do we write these for a single character (that was many idea) or do we send one or more NPCs along? Do we, perhaps, change this from challenge to challenge? (E.g. make a mid level travel challenge where you have to get six people across an ocean in less than three days).

I say we take a vote on the first thing. Since we want the majority to participate so its easier. Although, if we did the first one, we could easily do the second as well.

I think it should vary from challenge to challenge, allowing us to get a better view of the class as a whole.


Hmm. I must admit, I saw this in a different way. Not as some kind of tournament we organize, more as a tool people can use themselves. I.e. we post our situations, interested people play it solo for themselves.

But we would need to test our own work. In order to make sure it properly determines a Tier.



Also, I am not sure if the challenges should be revealed, before the characters are drawn up, include equipment and per-day preparations.
I agree. I nominate Eldan to be the one to put all the stuff together in the same manner Iron Chef is done. So once we complete our projects, and some people complete their sheets, then we post the challenges? Or do we run a game in PbP?

Also, would it be appropriate to go to the 3.5 forum and ask if people would be willing to use their optimization skills to build a character? Should we have the person who builds it be seperate from the person who plays it?

[DracoDei]

I think it's best to have set allies on certain challenges -- mainly challenges that test the class' support abilities (or getting those six people across the ocean). For example, you could have a challenge where the character has to help an archer-Ranger and a Monk while being unable to target or directly attack the enemies herself.
I have made a support class, the Grace-Gift.

I very much want data on it*.

I STILL think this idea makes no sense at all!

It artificially constrains the problem with the underlined portion. Remove that, and you have a much more realistic test. The buff classes can buff the NPC or PC allies, and the other classes can fight along-side them or MAYBE even send them to the back if the PC-player thinks he is high enough tier and view the whole business as the much hated "escort mission".

Buffing isn't a goal or a scenario, it is a means to a goal, and a way of approaching a scenario.

*Although as there are one or two full games that are play-testing it right now, this would be a low priority for this project. I don't want to steal review man-hours from the starving when I am merely hungry after all.


Now... if you want a scenario that covers certain types of "buffing recommended" situations and removing the underlined portion doesn't do it for you, you MIGHT try the following as a first draft:

Battle:
All NPCs have the Elite Array and maxed HP at 1st level.
Side A:
3 PCs of 5 level from 3 different homebrew classes (or just one such PC if you want to structure it that way)
3 3rd level Adepts
4 3rd level Fighters (because Fighter is weak enough it should be an NPC class)
3 3rd level Experts

Side B:
1 5th level Fighter
1 5th level Evocation Specialist Blaster-mage
1 5th level cleric loaded up on multi-target and AoE buffs
3 3rd level Adepts
4 3rd level Fighters (because Fighter is weak enough it should be an NPC class)
3 3rd level Experts

There... that is something that should allow at least SOME chance for the buffers to shine, and compare the effectiveness of buffing with those who can't/don't bother buffing but just do things themselves. It could be improved on, probably starting with tweaking the levels and classes for the non-PCs. This is off the top of my head and is based on a fundimental logical flaw I see, not prior experience in this sort of thing.

[Eldan]

I'm not opposed to playing organizer, I have the time in the next few months. I do, however, want somewhere between three to five other people who help me write, evaluate and, if necessary, run the challenges.

Also, if we run this as PbP, the challenges should be mostly easy to get through.

[Eldan]

Come on, people. No need to be that quite as soon as I ask for volunteers :smalltongue:

[NichG]

I think there's one decision which is important to make: do we want these to be only about the class, or also about the player who plays them? Because if we're using this to determine Tiers of new content, its not so good if one class has a really clever player behind it and another has someone less clever, as that will get frozen into the Tier information.

So I'd suggest that these challenges be completely open, the challenges themselves should specify whether its alone or with a specific group of allies (for instance, 'you and your five Lv1 Fighter friends go and ...'), and should be more difficult than a usual game situation. Then, the entire playground (or anyone who is interested) can debate the optimal way for the given class to solve the given problem, and the best suggestion is used to determine the score for that challenge.

Doing it with actual play or tournament style is likely to introduce variabilities that may not be at all to do with the class' content. Alternately you'd want to get three or four players to test out each class in any kind of tournament situation.

Suggested challenges (sort these to whatever level deemed appropriate):

- Given a crime scene, extract clues [bonus point for solving outright] (probably Lv<9)
- Eavesdrop on a conversation between two hostile NPCs of higher level, in their lair.
- Negate or ignore layered magical protections on an enemy (i.e.: your enemy has Stoneskin, Displacement, ... - does this shut you down or not?)
- Frame someone for a crime
- Steal something from a vault with protections X,Y,Z,...
- Earn 25000gp as fast as possible (score based on how quickly you can do it)
- A volcano is about to erupt due to the anger of a god of magma; stop it from destroying a city one way or another (high level challenge: kill the god, move the city, protect the city, directly stop the volcano, ...)
- For the buffers: You have three days and five thousand commoners. Make the best army you can to present to the king. The army is expected to show off its marksmanship, swordsmanship, and ability to siege a location. You yourself are not permitted to directly participate in these three events, but you may encourage and lead your troops. Make a single super-soldier or five thousand normal soldiers out of them, either will do so long as the demonstrations succeed.

[mrcarter11]

I'm happy to help. I'm mostly on in the early mornings, but I'm mildly creative and happy to try and design some challenges. Off the top of my head, I think a good way to go about this would be a set grouping of tasks that a homebrew would need to complete. And then have several players each use the homebrew to attempt to complete the challenge. A playtest group of let's say 4-7 people for instance would be good. And then you'd have another two or three people designing the challenges for the playtest group to go up against with out any future knowledge.

[Eldan]

I think there's one decision which is important to make: do we want these to be only about the class, or also about the player who plays them? Because if we're using this to determine Tiers of new content, its not so good if one class has a really clever player behind it and another has someone less clever, as that will get frozen into the Tier information.

So I'd suggest that these challenges be completely open, the challenges themselves should specify whether its alone or with a specific group of allies (for instance, 'you and your five Lv1 Fighter friends go and ...'), and should be more difficult than a usual game situation. Then, the entire playground (or anyone who is interested) can debate the optimal way for the given class to solve the given problem, and the best suggestion is used to determine the score for that challenge.

Doing it with actual play or tournament style is likely to introduce variabilities that may not be at all to do with the class' content. Alternately you'd want to get three or four players to test out each class in any kind of tournament situation.

I like the idea, and I honestly like it better than just the tournament. I was already thinking on how we would avoid "clever" builds (i.e. those that are somehow optimized using non-class resources) and players who have a good build, but just don't know how to use all the little tricks, or don't see the clever plan that would solve it.

So, new idea, for proceedings:

1) We make our challenges.
2) Someone submits a class and/or build.
3) The playground gets together, and debates how the class would handle the challenges in order.

Alternatively, I like Mr. Carter's solution. Here, instead, we would do it like this:

1) Challenges are built. They are kept secret.
2) Someone suggests a homebrew class.
3) Three to six players are recruited.
4) They each make a biuld with their class, submitting sheets of levels 1,3,6,10,16 and 20.
5) They attempt to go through the challenges in the order the judges give them. They submit a small text (half a page or so?) describing how they would attempt to solve it.
Optionally: the judges hand out points for how well they think the challenge was solved. This allows us to determine a "winner" of sorts.

ZThis has the advantage that it also gives the homebrewer an idea on how the class performs with different players, and what problems there are with understanding and using the mechanics.

Actually, the more I like it, the more I like this second idea.

[mrcarter11]

Another point that I think my idea covers rather well, is that it shows how difficult it is to make the class "good". As in, not just anyone can be a wizard and be tier 1, however it's quite hard to be a warblade and not function as a tier 3. I'm hoping that the mix of players we gathered would have an varied level of optimizing.

[Eldan]

Yes, that too. As I said, I quite like the idea. Shall we go with that?

That leaves some organisational details to be discussed. Then, we perhaps need another one or two volunteers and need to start cracking on challenges.

Do you people, perhaps, have access to any instant messengers (I have AIM, YIM and SKype, but I can get others) or other chat programs? That should help with development.

[Morph Bark]

I'd like to warn against disallowing players on account of not being able to use all the little things of a class. Instead using multiple playtests through the TOC (Tiering Obstacle Course) with multiple groups would not only provide more information on how often a class succeeds or fails at something, but also may provide some insight in how easy a class is to use or optimize. After all, most DnD players, prior to searching around the internet, didn't play their Wizards and Clerics in ways that make them the Tier 1s they are. Of course, for the purposes of better Tiering information, players who know all the ins and outs of a class would do far better.

I'd suggest having an amount of challenges from which a number are randomly chosen (some level-appropriate, some slightly above, some slightly below) to run a group through with it. I also suggest running both groups (of roughly 4 PCs) and solo runs to get the best idea of a class' power and versatility.

[Madara]

Yes, that too. As I said, I quite like the idea. Shall we go with that?

That leaves some organisational details to be discussed. Then, we perhaps need another one or two volunteers and need to start cracking on challenges.

Do you people, perhaps, have access to any instant messengers (I have AIM, YIM and SKype, but I can get others) or other chat programs? That should help with development.

Wow. I really need to start getting up earlier....

I can skype.


I agree with your descision. Although its hard to see the point of giving a player instructions on how to use their own character. Maybe we could have the optimizers of the forum create a small handbook for the class which the player could use?

It doesn't have to be full handbook format, just advice. Because let's admit it, if someone didn't know Clerics should Buff, or that they should take DMM:Persist, it wouldn't be T1. :smallsmile:

Ninja'd by the great Morph

[mrcarter11]

I have AIM if needed. And I think solo runs would the best test of what that classes power is.

[Zaydos]

I have skype, and I'd be willing to help make some challenges. I'd actually suggest a mix of solo and group runs, because while solo runs let you isolate the class's ability better a group run lets you see how it plays in a group which is far more common; also some strategies are much better in a group than out of it (wizards that use BC so the enemy can't fight and let party finish it while they smoke their pipe) as well as some features (sneak attack due to flanking).

[Madara]

As for which classes should be run through first, I suggest starting at either T1 and working our way down, or T3 working our way out.

T1 because its kinda easy and well established what T1 is. T3 because its the balance point that most classes strive for.

[Eldan]

I'd say we do this the way most contests are run. We pick a class that looks interesting. I'd also rather take a class with a lot of internal options, so we see some variety. Like, a spellcaster, or something that can choose class features from a long list.

How do we do group runs? Do we put up a few "standard" builds that the build is run along with? Do we recruit extra players just to be "group extras"?

[toapat]

This is what you're looking at? (http://dnd-wiki.org/wiki/Same_Game_Test)

I'd like to see, or at least have people consider, the basis of the Test of Spite as a way to prevent "contamination" from overtly powerful feats or abilities into tiering. It doesn't have to include ALL the banlist, but rather some of the objectives and methodology. The Same Game Test can deliver ideas on making reasonable challenges, as well.

Time to remove that Quote from your siggy.



As for level suggestions, I suggest the following:

1. The most important level, so this is pretty obvious.
3. Level 3 is the last level at which a class could be considered a dip, and it is also a common starting level.
6. The last level gained in E6 and often the level you start qualifying for PrCs or could just have gotten your first level in one.
10. The halfway point of a full 1-20 game.
16. At this level classes usually have gained their most powerful bag of tricks, barring level 9 spells/powers/maneuvers/mysteries.
20. To go all the way with a class, full power, no-holds barred.

I vote this measure


Asto means: This, being a solid and definitive measure of challenge, should also be accompanied by a MUCH more well defined Tier System. Obviously, you can convey that a T1 or 2 is already there because they already can do anything, but T3-5 are all defined with varying levels of "Being good at ONE thing, and maybe having a bit of potential on the side." T6 also is fine as "Absolute Dog****"

[Madara]

How do we do group runs? Do we put up a few "standard" builds that the build is run along with? Do we recruit extra players just to be "group extras"?

hmmm. It would probably be easier to do the standard builds, but it would be easier for the GM to do group extras.

Still, for a more accurate measurement, the first option is better. Since we don't want other characters interfering with the results...

[Zaydos]

Extras. Even if you could find some people willing to play them, you want them to be identical for each class being tested.

[Morph Bark]

hmmm. It would probably be easier to do the standard builds, but it would be easier for the GM to do group extras.

Still, for a more accurate measurement, the first option is better. Since we don't want other characters interfering with the results...

One idea could be to first do some solo runs with classes and then let them in on a party together, maybe?

[Eldan]

Actually, I think player-run party extras isn't the best idea: however we play this, including an extra three players for a certain challenge exponentially increases the effort and time required.

[Zaydos]

One option is DM run extras, and another is extras run by the same player as the tested class. I just think that for group challenges you need identical characters or else say 4 characters 3 of which will be used and one replaced based upon what role the tested class seems to overlap with most.

[Madara]

One idea could be to first do some solo runs with classes and then let them in on a party together, maybe?

This could work.

Perhaps a 3:1 ratio of solo challenges to group?

Also, I second the bell curve rolling. I would say we just take 10 on everything, but that wouldn't accurately measure anything.

[mrcarter11]

If we decide that group runs are needed, I'd vote that we use a standard 4 person party. The class in question forming the central focus while the other three take NPC classes: Warrior, Expert, Adept. That way the homebrew class has a basic dungeon crawl group plus whatever it can do itself.

For the NPC's, I say let the player control them, so they act as the entire party.

One thing that I'm thinking about though, is should we standardize the three party members, so that every homebrew class is tested with the same three allies, or let the playtester build each of the allies as well.

My current thought would be sorta both. I say we create perhaps three versions of each, and let you run through a group of group run challenges with that party. Each loadout of an NPC would be build to reflect something different. Warriors, for example, would be a two hander, a sword and board, and a TWF, maybe. Anyways, just a couple thoughts to throw around.

[Eldan]

NPCs, I'd say, work for low-level challenges. But what are you going to with a level 20 expert? Not much.

Doesn't the DMG come with tables of "standard" NPCs of the main classes, including equipment? We could use those.

Suggestion on a time plan:

How about, we have this thing take about a month? That way, we can do, say, 7 non-combat challenges, where we give players 4 days to write a proposal on their solution, and 4 combat challenges, which will take a week each and are run simultaneously.

[Sgt. Cookie]

I personaly think this is a good idea. If you want some help designing challenges, my PM box is open. I lack an IM service due to several different issues, all tech based.

Personaly, I think that would work, Eldan. It would provide different ways for each class to be tested out, and keeps the players on their toes.

[tarkisflux]

As for level suggestions, I suggest the following:
[INDENT]1. The most important level, so this is pretty obvious.
3. Level 3 is the last level at which a class could be considered a dip, and it is also a common starting level.
6. The last level gained in E6 and often the level you start qualifying for PrCs or could just have gotten your first level in one.
10. The halfway point of a full 1-20 game.
16. At this level classes usually have gained their most powerful bag of tricks, barring level 9 spells/powers/maneuvers/mysteries.
20. To go all the way with a class, full power, no-holds barred.

A bit late to they party (been a busy week), but I wanted to pop in and sort of caution against this. If they goal of a TOC is to help you put classes into a Tier, then you should pick levels where Tier differences become more obvious. 6, 10, and 16 are all well and good for that, because you can see some classes pulling well away from others at those points. But 20 is probably too late to be meaningful, as it's not going to help you much separate things. And 1 is probably too early for base classes, because the divergence is so much smaller (unless you're just doing check boxes). 3 might be ok, it's hard to say.

The other thing to be aware of is Gear and Feats. Classes will have some in these obstacles, and could well pass or fail a test based on what they bring in with them. I don't know if that's something you want to account for or not, but it's probably something you want to sort out early to avoid arguments on the back end (gear and feat specificity is a major sticking point with the SGT in discussions on the wiki).

Hope that helps you get something cool in the end :-)

[Edit] - added feats to above paragraph

[Zaydos]

I will point out the DMG NPC tables have reduced WBL, but that sounds like the best suggestion (I have a tendency to try and point out all potential flaws so that they can be noted and fixed by people better at creatively fixing things).

As for the bell curve rolls, they actually have some problems. While minimizing random chance is good, it also makes raw modifiers more important and the ability to hit a foe on a 10 much more important. Finally it disrupts crit chances, and the suggested method has a 1 in 432 chance of a nat 1 and only a 1 in 1296 chance of a nat 20. So it ends up doing some pretty funny things with the numbers. It changes the other odds too, but for the most part actually averages lower than 1d20 which is not for the best. A 3d6 method might work better even though it cuts off the two highest and lowest numbers and would require some rework of how crits work (which is already done in Unearthed Arcana and possibly the SRD). It also drastically affects the viability of effects that allow for rerolls.

If we're running multiple challenges then the dice rolling should average out regardless of method in the end, and we're also observing so we can note if there were any particularly bad strings of such events.

[Eldan]

For equipment: I think at least some challenges should be done with none or only minimal equipment (like, non-magical items from the normal equipment list only).

I mean, it defeats the purpose of the challenge when we make a "Get over the ocean of Lava" challenge when someone just pulls out their boots of ocean jumping and their cloak of lava resistance.

If, instead, we say "You have 20 pounds of soap, a fist-sized emerald, a tiny-sized axe, thirty feet of rope and a mule, build us a house", it becomes much more interesting.

[tarkisflux]

I'm inclined to agree about gear Eldan (and have written the SGT guidelines to try and get that across), but it's worth getting everyone on the same page about it early on. Note that some classes need + stuff on their gear to get by, so if you're not going to give them any of that stuff you'll want to tailor your challenges appropriately.

I edited in feats above as well, since they are another place where people might take stuff that dilutes the class contribution to an obstacle. Some tweaking of "readiness" for an obstacle might also be useful too, since letting wizards or whoever pick spells specifically for the obstacle is going to give different results than making them take 2 or 3 in a row without warning (unless they can justify said warning).

Ground rules and more ground rules is what I'm suggesting I guess.

[Eldan]

Since we will probably run every round of chlalenges with everyone playing the same class, I think we can decide on a case-by-case basis.

Like, if we have mostly melee fighters, of course they will all get weapons.

[Zaydos]

Okay so we have the builds made without knowledge of the challenges. This means they won't have stuff selected specifically for the challenge. They will know 7 non-combat challenges and 4 combat challenges, but not details about either.

This limits how much gear can be tailored, but yeah I'd agree that not allowing non-combat gear is best (though it will artificially lower the results for UMD using classes, and any artificer-like classes). Also no partially charged wands for combat which would allow UMD to still be used but stop it from being abused.

Should we make it so that they face the 4 combat challenges in the same game day? How many games actually have the 4 encounters per day that the DMG talks about? Either way it would reduce nova-ing and prepping for specific encounters.

Edit: Yeah case by case works for gear. And should be fun.

[Razanir]

My idea would be this: The obstacle course is really a small world. Tests are spoilered for convenience.

Travel:
You start in one town with basic equipment. Weapon, armor, one or two relevant magic items, travelling gear, etc.. Your goal is to make it to another town pointed out to you on a map to meet a wizard.

Scoring:
No score- Well... ya got there. More than 1.5-2x expected travel time.
1 point- You're average. 1-1.5x ett
2 points- Above average. <ett
3 points- Yer a wizard, aren't ya :smallamused: Teleported or similar

Information:
Not sure how to implement/score it

Environment:
That wizard you met? He teleported you... NEAR the dungeon. Good luck getting there. 5 points max, points deducted per day of travel or death

Traps:
The entrance, first few rooms, etc. contain 5 traps. Points awarded per trap safely discharged, avoided or disabled. No points for bypassing them altogether. (I'm looking at you, wizards :smallannoyed:)

Here on out, I'm unsure of scoring.

Boss Monster:
'Nuf said. Spoils include something to help with the trick monster

Horde:
You killed their boss. Did I mention this dungeon has a self-destruct button? Yeah. Don't let them hit it!

Trick Monster:
You've almost escaped, now you need to fight the second boss. Harder, but can be easy if you know how to use the big treasure. Think Zelda games.

[Eldan]

Sounds good. Or we could make a more theoretical endurance exercise:

"You are in a non-escapable arena. Every minute, an ogre is teleported in from outside. How would you take down 200 of these ogres?"

Though that is probably quite silly.

[Madara]

We could make generic gear packages for each role

Melee
+1 sword
and
Mithril Chainshirt

Spellcaster
+2 Ability enhancing item
Wand of X


...ect

That was the gear would remain part of the equation, but it wouldn't variey.

[Lix Lorn]

Hm. If you're trying to work this as a playable 'campaign' thing for anyone to be able to pick up, I had an idea for some basic fluff for it.
Basically, a cross between gladatorial combat and a gameshow like the Crystal Maze. Different challenges, teams have to score high.
(If you wanted to tie the story in better, it could end in PVP for the grand prize: Don't die in the games!)

[Madara]

Well, I think we're reaching the point were some of this can't be public knowledge. So we need to divide up the work and then find a way to send it to Eldan

[Eldan]

Okay, so, I think we should write up a vague list of challenges, so we can divide up the work.

I'd say we make 8 non-combat challenges and four combat challenges. That gives us 12 total. Since we have six levels (1,3,6,10,15,20), that makes two for each level.

I'm thinking:

Non-combat:
-Overcome an environmental challenge
-Overcome a complex, multi-stage trap
-Travel across a difficult, multi-day obstacle
-Social challenge: convince someone of something.
-Information gathering: you are given a city, find out what you need about your next quest, or find a person
-Infiltration challenge: make your way into some structure without the alarm being raised
-?
-?

Combat:
I'm thinking 2 solo, 2 in a group. Key is that they are all supposed to take place in the same day.
-Horde of weak enemies
-Tricky enemy
-?
-Boss fight


Could someone go over the thread and collect a list of volunteers? I need to go out for a while

[Zaydos]

We need more challenges than that. I'd say probably at least 2 combat per level tested and 2 non-combat challenges.

Or make the combat challenges multiple encounters each at which point we still need 1 per level tested and probably 1 or 2 non-combat challenges.

More is of course better, repetition is at the heart of test-ability; but that would make an alright minimum. Also if we have 3 to 5 people making challenges single combat encounters don't take that much time (the non-combat ones will take much more as will the trick bosses) so we ought to be able to get a good number of challenges per level. It depends upon when we want to start.

[Madara]

Could someone go over the thread and collect a list of volunteers? I need to go out for a while
Eldan
Madara
Welknair
Lohj
Kane0
Savannah
DracoDei?
rottenvenetic?
T.G. Oskar?
Midwoka?
NichG?
mrcarter11
Zaydos
toapat?
Sgt. Cookie?
tarkisflux?
Elimu Marimech
Lix Lorn

? = not officially saying they'd help, but posting info+ intrest

[Eldan]

We need more challenges than that. I'd say probably at least 2 combat per level tested and 2 non-combat challenges.


It still has to be playable in a sensible amount of time. 24 challenges is difficult to fit into a time frame short enough to keep people's interest.

[DracoDei]

Wow. I really need to start getting up earlier....

I can skype.


I agree with your descision. Although its hard to see the point of giving a player instructions on how to use their own character. Maybe we could have the optimizers of the forum create a small handbook for the class which the player could use?

It doesn't have to be full handbook format, just advice. Because let's admit it, if someone didn't know Clerics should Buff, or that they should take DMM:Persist, it wouldn't be T1. :smallsmile:

Ninja'd by the great Morph
I'm a little busy at the moment to get directly involved but here are my thoughts:

If you are offering options for the NPCs, then make sure to include at least one ranged option for the warrior/fighter. Use PC classes I suggest, since that is a better measure of the resources the homebrew will have to work with. Tier 3 PC classes of course... of course, for the arcanists that is more obscure so people may have trouble playing them.

Personally I would try to reduce burn-out on the team by having the groups comprised of all homebrew classes, but that is just me.

I would suggest allowing up to masterwork tools at the least. CONSIDER allowing flight items at later levels.

[Noctis Vigil]

I can help out, be it creating challenges or running classes through the challenges you guys make. Creating challenges is probably the better choice due to my odd schedule, though (sleep all day up all night).

[Eldan]

I can help out, be it creating challenges or running classes through the challenges you guys make. Creating challenges is probably the better choice due to my odd schedule, though (sleep all day up all night).

We have Australians and Europeans (like me). I don't think any weird sleep schedule you have will make you unavailable :smallwink:

[Madara]

I'm still on summer vacation, so I'm on at almost any point in the day.

[Noctis Vigil]

We have Australians and Europeans (like me). I don't think any weird sleep schedule you have will make you unavailable :smallwink:

Awesome. :smallsmile:

If you'd like, I can give you some ideas based off of a campaign I wrote called The Arena. It would have to be PMed, though, since even though the game is on hiatus I know my players read the homebrew threads.

[Madara]

So what should we do right now? I feel ready to do some work! :smallsmile:

[Techwarrior]

I'd be willing to do something for this, whether it be making, playing, or running challenges. Just let me know what you guys want most.

[Eldan]

So what should we do right now? I feel ready to do some work! :smallsmile:

My suggestion would be to find some place where we can discuss this a bit more secretively, then choose a class we like, divide up the levels to the challenges and get brewing!

[Madara]

My suggestion would be to find some place where we can discuss this a bit more secretively, then choose a class we like, divide up the levels to the challenges and get brewing!

Well, mythweavers has hidden threads/forums. Or we could use skype...

[Eldan]

Myth-weavers should work nicely. Everyone down for that?

[Zaydos]

Sure, it sounds worth a try.

[Eldan]

Started a Myth-weavers thread. Anyone interested in organizing, tell me your Mythweavers name.

[Avalon®]

I'd like to sign up to run classes through the challenges. There are a lot of homebrew I'd like to play but have a hard time finding games for them here. :smallfrown:

[Zaydos]

I'll organize or play and my name on myth-weavers is the same as on here... I've only ever Myth-Weavers to store sheets for PbP before after all.

[Sgt. Cookie]

Mine's: Sgt Cookie.

The lack of a "." next to "Sgt" is not an error.

[Techwarrior]

Mine's the same as on here. Techwarrior

[Eldan]

Mine's: Sgt Cookie.

The lack of a "." next to "Sgt" is not an error.

Sure? That doesn't seem to work.

[mrcarter11]

Never done anything but make sheets over there, but yeah I'm up for challenges. And the name should be the same as where.

[Kane0]

I'm now on Myth Weavers too, same name as here. Cyas there :smallsmile:

[Lix Lorn]

Started a Myth-weavers thread. Anyone interested in organizing, tell me your Mythweavers name.
LixieLorn. I think.

[Eldan]

LixieLorn. I think.

LixLorn, it seems. Or I just invted the wrong person.

[DracoDei]

I'm on Mythweavers too, although my erratic contributions may not warrant my inclusion, and I only use it for character sheets?

Tell me if I should be doing something.

[Madara]

Same name.. :smallamused:

[Noctis Vigil]

I am apparently the only volunteer here who has no idea what Mythweavers is...

Google finds me an RP forum, is that it?

[toapat]

I am apparently the only volunteer here who has no idea what Mythweavers is...

Google finds me an RP forum, is that it?

a pretty good one for gaming, if its the one i just looked up

[Eldan]

It's where I usually go to get my PbP fix (because no offence to the playground, but games here never last). It has a lot of useful features for gaming: you get a new subforum for every game, so you can organize yourself better, one person can be GM, the GM can make new threads not visible to everyone, etc.

What I probably use even more is their online character sheets, which save you a lot of work by filling out a lot of details on their own.

[Noctis Vigil]

Ah. I've always used pifro (http://pifro.com/pro/) for online character sheets.

Just to check before making an account:
This is the right place? (http://www.myth-weavers.com/forumhome.php)

[Eldan]

Yes, it is.

[Noctis Vigil]

OK, account created. User name is the same as it is here.

[Sgt. Cookie]

Sure? That doesn't seem to work.

Sorry, it's actually Sgt_Cookie. Since I keep it logged in, glancing up at the name makes it look like a space, rather then an underscore.

[Madara]

I suggest you create a thread over there. I know the game now exists, but there isn't a thread to post on yet.

Edit: Or I just can't see the thread yet...

[Sgt. Cookie]

Hey, Eldan, you find me yet?

[Morph Bark]

If he hasn't yet, it might be better for you to find him instead and send a message on Myth-Weavers. My name on Myth-Weavers is EmBark, so that one's easy.

In the meantime, y'all should check out this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=13659208#post13659208).

[Just to Browse]

So have a look at this (http://www.dnd-wiki.org/wiki/Same_Game_Test). It's exactly what you've done, but less granularity.

From my work with the Same Game Test, you should probably evaluate them without specific builds because that relies on multiple people and can be highly subject to build choices. SGT tends to succeed best with theorycraft as opposed to actual build-making.

In addition, if you have a bunch of benchmarks, you're making a lot of work for yourself. Just pick a few (The above link only has three, and I can concede that's not a lot, but you don't want more than 5 benchmarks), test at those levels, and then eyeball the gaps.

[Eldan]

Ah, sorry, sarge. I'll go add you.

[toapat]

registered, same name.

[toapat]

Because i am currently barred from posting hyperlinks on Mythweavers, because i havent posted enough times, i am quoting the feat in question i would like to use.


Measure of Conviction [Smiting]
Your capacity to channel divine power is strengthened by your measure of conviction.
Prerequisite: Smite class ability.
Benefit: Your Smite Evil, Smite Good, Smite Anarchy, Smite Undead, and Smite abilities apply to all attacks you make once activated until the beginning of your next turn.
Normal: You can only make one attack with each activation of your smite ability.
Special: Paladins may purchase this feat without using a feat slot.

The only change for the test would be to remove the special clause because the clause is only for paladins without bonus feats.

[DracoDei]

Because i am currently barred from posting hyperlinks on Mythweavers, because i havent posted enough times, i am quoting the feat in question i would like to use.



The only change for the test would be to remove the special clause because the clause is only for paladins without bonus feats.
I know it doesn't apply in this case, but doesn't that special clause give it for free to every paladin? Or is that just for duel-classed paladin/crusaders since the pre-requisite line requires "Smite" which in context would especially NOT include "Smite Evil".

[toapat]

I know it doesn't apply in this case, but doesn't that special clause give it for free to every paladin? Or is that just for duel-classed paladin/crusaders since the pre-requisite line requires "Smite" which in context would especially NOT include "Smite Evil".

The clause which doesnt apply for me (even though im using my paladin varient), is a clause for Non-Homebrewed paladins to be able to take that feat without it penalizing them a feat for what is a correction to class features.

It would have to be purchased as a feat on a paladin level with that wording.

[toapat]

Do people remember about this?
Sgt. Cookie made a subtopic to post character sheets

Again, People need to actually work on this

[DracoDei]

I am nervous about adding any more COMMITMENTS and I haven't ever been much of a scenario designer on the technical level (the plot level is something completely different), but all that is needed to get me to TRY to contribute, is for someone to ask me to do some specific thing.