Post by a moderator on Mar 5, 2022 20:43:37 GMT
In the event that no one wins either book, is there a 'closest to victory' bonus for each book or just for one, and there is a mechanism to decide which? Not that I have any stakes in the matter
So far there's only been the one 'closest to victory' bonus in weeks where nobody won.
Give me a bit of time to analyse the data and see if changing that would be worthwhile and practical.
ETA: Nobody won in weeks 1 and 2.
In week 1 kieran was the only player of Sky Lord to survive more than two fights, but still got less than half way through the book.
The bonus went to schlendrian, who made it to the final door in Escape from the Sorcerer but couldn't open it.
In week 2 greenspine was the only player of Fortress Throngard to kill the Dragon.
The bonus went to kieran, who made it to the final fight in Freeway Fighter.
If we're going to give 'closest to victory' bonuses for both books in win-free weeks, the rule should be backdated to the start, with belated bonuses for kieran and greenspine.
And then we start arguing about bringing in a 'closest to victory' bonus for the adventure that nobody won in weeks where only one of the adventures had a winner.
And about 'per adventure' bonuses for highest kill count.
Who wants to open those Pandora's boxes?
You said yourself that changing the rules part way through was akin to opening Pandora's Box so I'm going to vote against it because I sense it will probably do more harm than good.
I'm against the potential rule change, mostly because I think that, thus far, it's been clearly and fairly determined which attempt was closest to victory. However, I'm not strongly against the idea, and I would support it if it's what the majority want to do.
I'm in favour for two reasons:
First, until now it has been easy to decide, but there might come books where it's harder to conclude who got further in two totally different books.
Second, while I'm absolutely fine with playing the challenge as is, I'm of the opinion that it would be positive to have more options to get points for actual progress rather than rolling up stats beforehand.
I don't have a problem whatever is decided, but I think it would be a good change. I would probably even go as far as separate the books entirely, so one person winning book A wouldn't mean there wasn't a closest-to-victory prize available for book B. It's a bit of a meh week if you only have one of the two books and it's a really hard one and the other one is easy, and you're just hoping to roll 7 14 7 because that's the most profitable return. But I don't mind whatever.