Outplay 2024 - Crowdsourcing Ideas

[rhaiber]

Ok, I've been thinking about it a bunch since last year, and I think my idea might actually address some of the issues that other people brought up ... well at least in part, maybe. I don't think I have all the answers, but how about this:

1. Last year we did away with scoring competitors based on mechanical rolls. Speaking as someone who was knocked out of more than one Outplay in the past by unlucky rolls, I am totally behind this idea, and it doesn't seem like anyone is really pushing for a return to scoring on luck of the roll.
2. What some people don't like about the new system is that it makes the judging very much a subjective writing contest. This can make players feel attacked and it's not totally unreasonable for them to feel this way. When someone judges one person over another based on subjective criteria, it can come off as that judge saying "I like them better than you," no matter how constructive the judge thinks they are being in their feedback. (I have a thought on this below).
3. Some people are also pointing out that the competitive nature of Outplay can create levels of toxicity for some, and this seems counter to the idea that most of us think being a good player involves collaboration. (I have a thought on this too).

Now here is my proposed solution: we actually took a step in this direction already. We introduced the idea of flags last year. Players were encouraged to interact with each other's flags, but it had no real concrete impact on the event. I say we make Flags an essential part of the event!

• If each player has one or more specific flags, then players can earn quantifiable points for engaging with another player's flags. This makes the scoring a little more objective while still favoring player choices over random rolls.
• Giving points on the rubric for interacting with flags also means that players have to shine the spotlight on one another rather than competing against each other.
• Another way to expand this even further: player's could have objectives based on character development and interactions, with points awarded for progress toward those objectives. I know in last year's Outplay I found myself way more interested in the progress of Sam and Piper's relationship than how many vehicles Sam's motorpool got built.
• If we want to further enhance interactions, some of those objectives could require getting other players to work with you. A great example of this from last year was when Wally reached out to several different people to help with his psychological trauma. If that had been a character development goal for him, then he could've earned "points" every time he reached out for help and more points every time he actually convinced another player to help him out. Also, those players who did respond to him could've gotten points for helping a teammate with their character development.
• To help prevent anyone from getting iced out, there could also be personal development goals that can be satisfied without needing someone else to respond. Like one of Sherman's best moments last year was when he spectacularly failed (sinking the sub), but he owned his failure and took responsibility for it. That feels like the sort of character development that could've been rewarded.
• If you want to still keep some element of competition, players could have some public objectives known to the other players to encourage others to interact with them, but also some private goals known only to the one player and the judges. For example, David might've had a private goal to convert some of the other players to his anti-tech, anti-corporation agenda, something he very nearly accomplished with Grissy and coudl've earned some points for his efforts toward progressing that goal.

Anyway, it's just an idea. It certainly doesn't address all the issues, like the problem of time commitment that some people brought up, and I really don't know if it would increase or decrease community engagement, but it should hopefully foster teamwork and collaboration and make the judging feel a little bit less subjective without going back to scoring players based on the random outcome of the dice roller.

Let me know what you think

[Admin Bhelogan]

Love the discussion here.

So, I think it is clear that we should keep the judges. Format to their feedback is still in the air, being tweaked a bit.

I love the Flags discussion, I do agree that they should be implemented more. With the format that I am shooting for this year (we have our general story, format for how the rounds are going to flow, what system we are using and such pretty much set at this point, and I am pretty excited for it), I'm not quite sure how to give them a mechanical impact beyond having the judges look for it in picking who is their 'winner' or 'MVP' for each separate encounter. Something to give some thought to still. We will be including them again in character creation.

I would also like to point out, that the format that we will be using this year will make it very easy for anyone who wants to participate, but say they only have time to play Week 3 of the first 4 rounds, to jump in for that round only, still have some fun, and not overburden themselves with participating every week if they don't want too.

[ridin gaijin]

Having stepped forward a bit this year to help how I may...First, the heartfelt discussion happening in this thread is so healthy and helpful. Thank you everyone for posting your thoughts--complimentary and critical.

So, it is called "Outplay." It is a competition. Myself, I avoid competitions; as some others have posted above, it brings out a side of me that's not my favorite.

At present, it's a winner-take-all proposition. Am I reading that a "best team" event might be more enjoyable? This would encourage a high level of cooperation among players.

Ever since my Admin days I've been a numbers person, and the dwindling participation and engagement is concerning. Would rooting for a team be more fun than rooting for an individual?

[squirmonkey]

I think the idea of a team competition sounds remarkably fun, but it also seems like a pretty different competition than what Outplay is today.

It also raises an odd question of how the teams would be formed. Personally, I'm not sure I'd want to participate if I couldn't choose my own team. But letting players choose their own teams would make it effectively impossible for new members to participate - highly undesirable I think.

[Admin Bhelogan]

The Easter Egg Hunt has turned into a team competition and seemed to work fairly well last year. Maybe something we could consider for future years in Outplay, for sure.

[Wishkamon]

The flag idea sounds great, what a wonderful way for people to cooperate and develop characters and advanace plots together! (perhaps the scenarios themselves would also have flags for people to utilise for points/story progression? not sure if was already the case?)

Just a thought re participation- could we put a post up in the players seeking games board a few weeks before hand? I mean everyone looking that board is already looking for an opportunity to play in a game, and maybe it would catch some eyes who might miss it otherwise?

As for teams, I sort of feel like making it random would be the only fair way to distribute players of different levels and not end up with one or two well lubricated powerhouses vs new players who might just be curious/casual

[jbear]

I'll put in my 2 cents fwiw.

I've been involved in Outplay on 3 different occaisions. I had two fun experiences and one (the last one) that I felt was very negative, the last one being the same year Sprite was involved.

After the last experience I also decided to never involve myself with Outplay again. My main reasons for that decision stemmed from a sensation that:

-there was a general air of tension in and out of the game that was palpabale (even before the event began)
-some of the judging feedback was more damaging than constructive (some, not all. Some of the feedback was awesome)
-the scoring system made it possible for a single judge to unduly influence a players overall score, opening up the possibility of a personal dislike end a players run in the competition

Differences compared to my experience in Iron DM this year:

-there was a general air of positivity, support and friendship amongst participants which was echoed by the judges
-the feedback was overtly positive and aimed at recognising each participants efforts and building them up, not tearing them down
-the scoring system made it impossible for a single judge to unduly influence the outcome, thus creating a sense of fairness around the results

Personally, like Rhaiber, my participation was ended when the dice turned against me. I am actually okay with there being a certain element of luck involved in this type of competition. It feels worse losing points because US spellcheckers think that 'armour' is a spelling mistake and getting points deducted for poor grammar than losing to terrible dice rolls. So I guess I would lean towards 'luck or dice rolls' being involved in the competition, but perhaps not with the weight of removing the stand out player (which in all fairness I think Rhaiber was that player that year) from the competition.

More importantly, I strongly agree with each person who has expressed the competition would benefit from their being a clear cut mechanical reward for collaborative play amongst competitors. I also don't think that players picking an MVP is the answer to this--in the end that can become problematic. I wish I had the answers or an idea to put forward, but I feel that somethng more objective is needed.

I think the focus being shifted towards colloborative and away from PvP would alter the feeling of tension in and out of the game. People having fun is attractive. So the more fun people are having with the event, the more it will attract new interest.

I think you will figure out the judging/point system as Iron DM gives a good model to follow. How to use that system to point towards competitive collaborative play is the trick. Competition can be fun if it happens while we build each other up, create memorable moments together and feel like our efforts are worthwhile.

[Kaigen]

I'm definitely curious about the concepts of "Flags" that Rhaiber brought up and would be interested to hear more from them or anyone else who's familiar with the concept. Are Flags sort of character traits/goals/etc. that are always present, or is it something that a player can "raise" mid-scene to give another player an explicit opportunity to engage with their character?

[Admin Bhelogan]

Flags are one of the concepts in Saftey Tools (which we chose to implement several elements from, after a lot of what happened in Outplay 2022 that jbear is referring too of which I will NOT go into detail)

As worded in Round 0 applications, and will be used again this year under applications rules:"

• As a Saftey Tool, if you have any Lines & Veils, they should be included with part of your application and will not count against your wordcount for either section. You can choose to make these public or private to the DM. If made private to the DM, we will work to ensure that they are honored during play, without disclosing who they came from.

And specifically under the Character Writeup

• Include at least 1 Flag, which will be used by other players to help know how to interact with your character in-game. Example Flags: "talk to me about gear", "play silly word games with me", "collaborate with me in combat"

Last year we had a significantly better experience with Outplay, in part to using some of these rules, and I think they were generally appreciated by the participants, vs 2021. Overall, we had lower participation though, in part due to people choosing not to participate in the event after 2021, and partially because overall site RPGX user's activity/posts/game requests, etc is down as well (has been happening year over year for a while)

The format we are targeting this year will give players points for 1) Completing objectives as a team each encounter (the whole team gets a point if they complete the objective), and for being voted as the player (voted on by our judges, after discussion here), which they would most like to have at their table based on what happened during the encounter. So, points towards making it to the finale will be dependant on working together well in a team. The 'team' you are on may be different from round to round, and is completely up to you to choose, based on which encounter you choose to participate in.

[Squeak]

In the past, the Outplay competition was built on 3 hallmarks. Problem solving, combat and a social round. Each round was focused on one of these things so that by the end and in the end, you only had the most rounded ones remaining.

But when we switched to a rules-lite system, combat and problem solving, by definition, evolved into a writing competition.

Earlier competitions used 3.5e, PF, 5E, Shadowrun, etcstructured systems with definitive rules. Players were expected to know and abide by the rules. Things like character building, done during round 0, had a major effect on what happens in round 3. Was your PC prepared for what the DM threw at them? Is the PC well rounded enough to contribute to the 3 hallmarks, or are they 2-dimensional?

******

I don’t think a team option would be viable.

First, if the issue is declining participation, then requiring groups of people will make it even more difficult. It would/could exacerbate things if there were players in a group that didn’t perform to expectations, which could get ugly.

Second, it becomes a completely different event. The winner wouldn’t be the one who Outrolled, Outplayed and Outlasted, it would be the one that chose the right teammates. It might be a worthwhile completion, but I would suggest it at a different time with a different name.

[Admin Bhelogan]

Originally Posted by Squeak

It might be a worthwhile completion, but I would suggest it at a different time with a different name.

I like that! We could call it 'Squeaked By'!

[Kaigen]

Originally Posted by Squeak

In the past, the Outplay competition was built on 3 hallmarks. Problem solving, combat and a social round. Each round was focused on one of these things so that by the end and in the end, you only had the most rounded ones remaining.

But when we switched to a rules-lite system, combat and problem solving, by definition, evolved into a writing competition.

Earlier competitions used 3.5e, PF, 5E, Shadowrun, etcstructured systems with definitive rules. Players were expected to know and abide by the rules. Things like character building, done during round 0, had a major effect on what happens in round 3. Was your PC prepared for what the DM threw at them? Is the PC well rounded enough to contribute to the 3 hallmarks, or are they 2-dimensional?

I think this cuts to the heart of the difficulty. There are different ideas floating around as to what makes a "good player" and it creates friction to try to incorporate all of them into a single event. System mastery, collaboration, and storytelling ("writing" in the context of PbP) are all "good player" skills, with different people putting greater emphasis on one set of skills over another. It sounds like in previous years Outplay was much more of a system mastery competition over who had the best understanding and implementation of the mechanics of whatever system was being showcased, but rules lite systems are built to de-emphasize the impact of It's a lot more difficult to judge what good character building is in a system that rewards failure instead of punishing it, for instance.system mastery in favor of narrative, which, as you point out, turns it into more of a writing competition.

I don't know what the best course of action is with that in mind. Maybe Outplay needs to go back to its system mastery roots and a new event that's more focused on team play, cooperation, and storytelling needs to be developed.

[Squeak]

Originally Posted by Bhelogan

I like that! We could call it 'Squeaked By'!

I have no problem with that as long as I get 10% of the gross proceeds and your commitment that I won't be required to run it (I'm retired )


I think the biggest recommendation I have is that you'll never make anyone happy. Stop worrying about what people think and do what you think is right for Outplay competition. If you want a poor decision, I would suggest getting advice from Admin DirkEven a poor decision is better than no decision at all.

[Kaigen]

Originally Posted by Squeak

I think the biggest recommendation I have is that you'll never make anyone happy. Stop worrying about what people think and do what you think is right for Outplay competition.

Cosigned. I'm offering my reactions in the hopes that they will point in a useful direction without any expectation that specific ideas I'm throwing at the wall will stick. I'm probably not even the target audience for an event like this!

[Admin Bhelogan]

Oh, we are set for this year, and I am pretty excited about what we have set up, both in terms of story, and format for how the event will go. I have never had a problem with making up my mind, I just like to have some discussions and generate ideas to help get a kick start. I also appreciate the chance to generate ideas for future events as well.

If we are talking about other events, The Amazing RPG Race that Fillyjonk and LostCheerio ran last year was fantastic, and something I would love to see become an official site event, as an example.