TOPIC: my experience... not good

Brad Mortensen wrote: This may be too simple. You can't tell if people did or didn't like it because of the room, the decor, the DM, etc. unless feedback is actionable, it's not very useful.

That's why the back is for comments. I just didn't feel like mocking it up.

My thought was if there was a room getting negative feedback then the AC would spend more time "watching" that room and maybe asking players about their experiences in that room. The cards point them in the right direction.

[shrug] Maybe it is too simple.

Maybe the back could say if there's something you really didn't like, please talk to person X before you leave.

Kirk Bauer wrote:

Kirk Bauer wrote:

bpsymington wrote: I don't think we need a mystery shopper program, between ACs checking in and observing DMs and experienced players and volunteers doing runs and reporting on issues they witnessed.

Not trying to get anybody in trouble or anything, but I was a first-time DM and my AC did not observe me during combat, but did occasionally stop by at other times. This could simply be because many groups killed my monster too quickly, but still I wasn't observed doing actual combat work.

Correction: my completely not-creepy AC did check in on me, I was just too busy to notice, so I'm retracting my comment

Now, about all of the people watching me shower...

You're almost out of shampoo.

How about a line for comments after the row for each room?

Graven wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: This may be too simple. You can't tell if people did or didn't like it because of the room, the decor, the DM, etc. unless feedback is actionable, it's not very useful.

That's why the back is for comments. I just didn't feel like mocking it up.

My thought was if there was a room getting negative feedback then the AC would spend more time "watching" that room and maybe asking players about their experiences in that room. The cards point them in the right direction.

[shrug] Maybe it is too simple.

Maybe the back could say if there's something you really didn't like, please talk to person X before you leave.

Something in general that I as a volunteer know and most casual players don't is to even ask for adventure coordinator for issues. I was discussing this thread with a 2nd year player (my boss) and his immediate thought/suggestion would be to have the coach/assistant/training make it part of their spiel that if players have issues or immediate concerns to stop and ask for X either during or immediately after their run.

Matt wrote:

Graven wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: This may be too simple. You can't tell if people did or didn't like it because of the room, the decor, the DM, etc. unless feedback is actionable, it's not very useful.

That's why the back is for comments. I just didn't feel like mocking it up.

My thought was if there was a room getting negative feedback then the AC would spend more time "watching" that room and maybe asking players about their experiences in that room. The cards point them in the right direction.

[shrug] Maybe it is too simple.

Maybe the back could say if there's something you really didn't like, please talk to person X before you leave.

Something in general that I as a volunteer know and most casual players don't is to even ask for adventure coordinator for issues. I was discussing this thread with a 2nd year player (my boss) and his immediate thought/suggestion would be to have the coach/assistant/training make it part of their spiel that if players have issues or immediate concerns to stop and ask for X either during or immediately after their run.

I often have several runs in a row and the rooms quickly blur and twist as the weekend goes on.

I think the rating card is a great idea. Maybe it should be offered to anyone who wants to participate. I do however believe it should not be anonymous. There should be a place for name, email, forum name (if any), day, and time. I also think they should rate each room by content, appropriate difficulty (too easy to too difficult), and DM/NPC's. There definitely should be a line for comments on each room. The training room should also be included for the Coach and condition only. There should probably be only 1 card allowed per group as I think the writing would be distracting to the "atmosphere" of the dungeon.

I think there could be some problems with this system, though.
1. There should be no notes taken in a dungeon. People would probably take notes in the guise of comments and that would be wrong.
2. As mentioned, the note taking would be a distraction for everyone. One person would probably be missing out on a lot of the fun.
3. It is probably too dark in most of the dungeon for anyone to complete the card legibly.

We just need to encourage people to share the good and bad experiences. Maybe with someone at the treasure pull/store area. This would get people right after the event, and would mean anything that needs to be 'fixed' can be addressed quickly. It could be done in person, or on a comment card. If you felt the need to incentivize, you could ask for email/phone number and do a drawing each day for a prize.

balthasar wrote: The Boots of Lava Walking, while letting you walk on lava, don't stop the damage you take.

Text on Token:
May walk on lava as solid ground. Confers no Fire resistance

I've seen this noted a few times in various threads. This apparently was applied in various ways; for some groups (including mine) it meant no damage. For others, half damage. Perhaps the 'protection' was based on difficulty?

I (and some others, from reading various threads) took the "confers no Fire resistance) to indicate that they wouldn't help against a fireball or other heat based effect. I mean, if I have a token taking up a slot, but find out that using it means I still take damage AND lose out on the treasure for that room, is it really an option?

While you could walk to the other side, you aren't solving the puzzle at all, you are just bypassing the challenge. Should you get a stamp for not solving the puzzle?

That depends on how anal retentive one wants to be about what constitutes 'solving the puzzle'. In my group of 11 on a Normal Puzzle run, we had 2 people wearing the boots in the party (my friend and I). We were informed that using them would cost us the treasure, so we pointedly waited until the end, discussed how to tackle the problem, and helped quickly solve what needed to be done with minimal input from the DM in the room, we were pretty proud of that.

However, one member of our team was... a bit overzealous, and in the process of some trial and error, messed up twice, incurring damage. Note: we did not know about the 'three strikes and you're out' rule. Then, while people were crossing (mostly without issue), a mistake in spelling Eighth backwards led to our third strike and the treasure was lost. We (friend and I) continued to help with the ninth member crossing, and then sauntered our way across (the DM said nothing before or after about taking damage).

So, from how I see it, does "solving the puzzle" require "solving it with minimal mistakes or trial and error and flawless execution?" We did solve it, we had a few such tokens but didn't put them to use until it was a moot point.

Did the group really need to be denied a treasure token?

I get that the needs to be consistency, but what I've tried to point out (and apologies to those who have seen me tell this tale a half dozen times) is that there is a vast spectrum between "creative usage of tokens" and "brute forcing the solution with no regard for the intended way to play". As I've noted before, in a general philosophical pondering, should not a group (or members) be rewarded for being lucky and/or intelligent in their preparations? Sure, the inclusion of the Lava Boots in the token packs this year made it a pretty good chance that there'd be a room with lava, but over half the group had never played before or only been through a few times, it's not like we had run the event previously or been seeking out information to bypass the challenges within.

While we beat both the Carrion Crawler and the Spider, our missteps (literal and figurative) with the Lava Room and Mushroom Choir (along with failing the final spider table challenge) left those of us without treasure improving gear a single token apiece.

It was fun, it was something I'd try again, but even with that said, it felt like those of us who were new to the experience lost out on a lot of what little loot we could've acquired.

Speaking of treasure, out of curiosity, how many treasure tokens can a player earn in a run (without treasure enhancing effects) on Normal? Is there a bonus for Hardcore or Nightmare?

I recall seeing someone say that, for example, a Puzzle group could earn 2 from Puzzles and 1 from Combat, is that correct? Is there a bonus for surviving as well?

Forar wrote: Speaking of treasure, out of curiosity, how many treasure tokens can a player earn in a run (without treasure enhancing effects) on Normal? Is there a bonus for Hardcore or Nightmare?

I recall seeing someone say that, for example, a Puzzle group could earn 2 from Puzzles and 1 from Combat, is that correct? Is there a bonus for surviving as well?

There are a total of 3 treasure that can be earned per run, without +treasure tokens.

There have been a few exceptions (Egg in the tree room 2014 you could get a small box out as well that gave a extra treasure stamp).

There are no bonus tokens for difficulty.

Forar wrote:

balthasar wrote: The Boots of Lava Walking, while letting you walk on lava, don't stop the damage you take.

Text on Token:
May walk on lava as solid ground. Confers no Fire resistance

I've seen this noted a few times in various threads. This apparently was applied in various ways; for some groups (including mine) it meant no damage. For others, half damage. Perhaps the 'protection' was based on difficulty?

I (and some others, from reading various threads) took the "confers no Fire resistance) to indicate that they wouldn't help against a fireball or other heat based effect. I mean, if I have a token taking up a slot, but find out that using it means I still take damage AND lose out on the treasure for that room, is it really an option?

At WYC there was a fight with a Lava Elemental (or something similar) who was out in the middle of a lava pool. From what I have heard, if you were wearing the Boots of Lava Walking, you could walk out to the Elemental and melee attack him without taking any damage from the lava pool. Otherwise, you had to swim out to the elemental, taking fire damage from the pool (and also only able to attack every other round due to swimming?).

FiannaTiger wrote: There are no bonus tokens for difficulty.

Small correction. There are no bonus treasure tokens for difficulty. Hardcore gets a different (better) completion token than Normal, and Nightmare gets both of the completion tokens.

I would say that if ten people walked across the lava using the boots, the group didn't solve a puzzle.

I have not seen as much confusion about number of fails until this year. y experience had always been damage on each fail, with three fails meaning no stamp. Has there been any official proclamation from TPTB this year or in the past?

Forar wrote:

balthasar wrote: The Boots of Lava Walking, while letting you walk on lava, don't stop the damage you take.

Text on Token:
May walk on lava as solid ground. Confers no Fire resistance

I've seen this noted a few times in various threads. This apparently was applied in various ways; for some groups (including mine) it meant no damage. For others, half damage. Perhaps the 'protection' was based on difficulty?

I (and some others, from reading various threads) took the "confers no Fire resistance) to indicate that they wouldn't help against a fireball or other heat based effect. I mean, if I have a token taking up a slot, but find out that using it means I still take damage AND lose out on the treasure for that room, is it really an option?

I agree that the token can be interpreted different ways.

Some people see it and think "you can walk on lava but you will still take damage since the Boots don't provide fire resistance."

Others (like me) interpreted the "confers no fire resistance" clause as simply not providing any special protection in combat. But that you can walk on lava without taking any damage.

Milambus (Jake) wrote: At WYC there was a fight with a Lava Elemental (or something similar) who was out in the middle of a lava pool. From what I have heard, if you were wearing the Boots of Lava Walking, you could walk out to the Elemental and melee attack him without taking any damage from the lava pool. Otherwise, you had to swim out to the elemental, taking fire damage from the pool (and also only able to attack every other round due to swimming?).

At WYC Grind, there were two sides separated by a river of lava.

In order to cross to the other side, you needed to cross the lava, which resulted in hefty fire damage. Boots of Lava Walking would have helped (no damage) but no one actually wore them (which makes sense given he demographics of WYC).

There were some creative solutions. Some groups used Rope and Grappling Hooks to develop a pulley system. One Druid used Protection from Energy.

There was a Magma Elemental in the final room and it did radiate heat and had some retribution damage. But the mechanic for attacking him was not about walking through lava.