RPG Ability Scores, Part III: Fantasy Draft

For the last installment on ability scores, a fun way to create an entire party, borrowing from the fantasy draft feature in Baseball Mogul.

Step 1: Everyone Rolls Up One Character
Each player generates one set of stats, rolling 4d6 and keeping the best 3, and recording the stats in the order rolled. The GM does the same.

Here's an example with 4 players:

Table Cell

Alex

Beth

Clay

Daryl

GM

STR	10	18	12	14	17
INT	14	11	11	11	17
WIS	11	9	7	12	11
DEX	12	12	10	11	14
CON	15	16	13	9	7
CHA	15	18	11	11	13

We see that Clay rolled a pretty bad character. But that's OK because he's going to pool his rolls with everyone else before divvying them up.

Step 2: Re-Rolls
Each player picks one of the stats that they rolled and re-rolls it, keeping the highest score. We are trying to build the best party, not the best character. So, Alex chooses to re-roll her WIS score, in hopes of having at least one high Wisdom score to choose from. Here are the scores after the re-rolls (shown in [bold]):

Table Cell

Alex

Beth

Clay

Daryl

GM

STR	10	18	12	14	17
INT	14	11	11	11	17
WIS	[12]	[16]	7	12	11
DEX	12	8	[13]	[16]	14
CON	15	16	13	9	8
CHA	15	18	11	11	13

Step 3: Throw Out The Boring Scores
To keep things interesting, remove the *middle* score from each row. This preserves the interesting scores (the high rolls and low rolls), but also keeps the average score near 12.2 (the average result of rolling 4d6 and keeping the best 3).

The remaining scores are the ones that players will "draft" from (shown here, sorted from high to low):

STR	18	17	12	10
INT	17	14	11	11
WIS	16	12	11	7
DEX	16	14	12	8
CON	16	15	9	8
CHA	18	15	11	11

Step 4: "Draft" The Scores
Player #1 ("Alex") picks first. She can pick any score in the table, but she can't change what stat it applies to. If she picks the '18' in the STR row, she has to use it for Strength.

Alex wants to play a thief/rogue, so she picks the 16 DEX. Here are the characters after Round 1 of the draft:

Table Cell

Alex (Thief)

Beth (Cleric)

Clay (Fighter)

Daryl (Mage)

STR			[18]
INT				[17]
WIS		[16]
DEX	[16]
CON
CHA

For the 2nd round, we reverse the draft order, so that Player #1 doesn't get to pick first in every round:

Table Cell

Alex (Thief)

Beth (Cleric)

Clay (Fighter)

Daryl (Mage)

STR		[17]	18
INT				17
WIS		16
DEX	16
CON			[15]	[16]
CHA	[18]

And here's the completed set of characters (before racial adjustments):

Table Cell

Alex (Thief)

Beth (Cleric)

Clay (Fighter)

Daryl (Mage)

STR	12	17	18	10
INT	11	14	11	17
WIS	11	16	7	12
DEX	16	8	12	14
CON	8	9	15	16
CHA	18	11	15	11

Summary: Each character gets a very good score in their primary attribute. But unlike systems that let players arrange stats as they like, they can't dump their low rolls in their least favorite stats (usually some combination of INT, WIS and CHA -- depending on character class). So you end up with some high stats in places where you wouldn't expect them (like the Thief with an 18 Charisma) and some potential weaknesses (such as the Cleric with an 8 Dexterity)

Fixing Overtime In The NFL (Revisited)

We already have a great solution to the problem of the coin flip in overtime games. Nevertheless, it has been almost four years, and we're still stuck with the old system.

After the Vikings-Saints NFC Championship game (and the Colts' failed attempt to go 16-0) the argument for this change to the rules is even more compelling. If this rule had been implemented, both the Saints and the Colts would have still had something to play for in the last month of the season.

To summarize, we can fix the following two problems with one rule change:

1) The coin-flip winner has an unfair advantage in overtime.
2) Teams like the 13-0 Saints and 14-0 Colts have no incentive to win after they have clinched the top playoff spot.

The solution is elegantly simple: automatically award the coin flip to the home team.

In addition to eliminating the coin flip, there are a number of other positive effects:

1) This increases the importance of home field advantage in the playoffs. If a team like the Colts go 14-2, they get an edge if a playoff game goes to overtime (just as the home team in baseball has a strategic advantage).

2) We now know who the "home team" is in the Super Bowl. And it matters. This would have been pivotal this season: the Colts and Saints would continue to play hard, knowing that if they met in the Super Bowl, home-field advantage would be determined by their regular-season record. Instead, we got five unwatchable games by two teams that had nothing to play for.

3) It adds drama to the final minutes of a game, and clarifies strategy for coaches. If you're the away team, and you're up against a good offense, you want to play for the win, not the tie, in any last-minute play calls. You go for two if you have the chance. And you go for the touchdown instead of the field goal on 4th down. More excitement, and less overtime (which tends to run into the next game, which doesn't make most football fans happy).

4) It increases attendance. As the NFL becomes more fun to watch on TV, ticket sales are suffering. Giving the home team a bigger advantage increases the likelihood that a home-team fan will have a great experience at the stadium (by getting to see his or her team win).

Over-Active Game Design

Photo by Bari D

It's not surprising that everybody wants to be a game designer. What's bad is that everyone thinks they can be a good game designer.

Probably the most telling aspect of bad game design is "over-active" game design: the desire to "improve" games by adding complexity.

The media response to tonight's All Star Game is a perfect example of over-active game design. Some suggestions I've heard on T.V. and radio:

1. Anyone who pitched on Sunday should be banned from the All-Star Game.
2. The All-Star rosters should be even bigger (as if 32 players per team weren't enough).
3. Starting pitchers should be required to stay in for 4 innings.
4. Pitchers should be allowed to go back in the game, even if they were already used.
5. All pitchers on the Mets and Yankees (since they are probably already in New York) should have been available to pitch.
6. In extra innings, award a run for every hit.

All of these ideas are dumb: examples of fans thinking they can "fix" a game system by adding more rules.

Of course, the worst ever example of bad game design at the All Star Game was when Bud Selig stood up and declared a "tie" in 2002. He actually changed the rules of the game -- in the middle of the game!

Can you imagine the NFL Commissioner changing the rules for overtime of the Super Bowl?

"I just decided that for this overtime, you only need 5 yards for a first down. I know it's weird, but I'd like the game to end sooner."

It's absurd. But it's not as bad as what Selig did in 2002. Not only did he change the rules in the middle of the game, but he called a premature stop to an exciting extra-inning game. It was horrible game design and horrible showmanship, rolled together into one burrito of suck.

By now, you probably want to know what I think we should do about the problem of extra-inning All Star Games.

The answer: nothing.

When you run out of pitchers, let the position players pitch. It happens several times each year, in games that actually count. Which of the following would be more interesting to watch as a fan?

1) David Wright takes the mound in the bottom of the 16th. He gets the first two batters out but then gives up a walk-off homer to J.D. Drew.

2) Bud Selig waddles onto the field and declares a tie.

It's a no-brainer. Keep it simple. And stop trying to add rules where they aren't needed.

How You Can Fix The Wild Card!

It's been almost ten years since we came up with the right way to fix the current wild card system.
The 2007 AL East race between the Yankees and Red Sox was the closest since 1978, but I stopped watching in early September, because the current wild card system makes the division title worthless. Once the Yankees put enough space between themselves and the Tigers, the rest of the season became meaningless.

Last year could have been the most exciting playoff chase in recent memory. A chance for the Red Sox to collapse as badly as they did in 1978. Instead, we got to see a bunch of games where Terry Francona sits his best players and experiments with how best to use Eric Gagne.

It seems like calls to fix the wild card have died down. It's because the ALDS and NLDS can produce some exciting playoff baseball. That's great. I don't want to get rid of the wild card. I just want to fix it so that the division races regain some importance. In case you missed it the first time, here's the proposal again:

1) Replace the current Wild Card system with two Wild Cards. Because these are the 4th and 5th teams in each league to earn a playoff spot, we will call these teams #4 and #5.

2) As with the current system, the division winner with the best record is the #1 seed, the division winner with the next-best record is the #2 seed.

3) On the first day after the end of regular season, team #5 plays a one-game playoff at team #4.

4) The winner of this game advances to meet team #1 in a best-of-five series.

In other words, this is identical to the current system, except that each league adds a 2nd wild card team which faces off against the 1st wild card team in a one-game showdown.

Some advantages of this new system:

a) Division races gain importance. Settling for the wild card means there's close to a 50% chance you'll get eliminated in one game. Even if you do win, you have to hop a plane and go face the best team in your division, the very next day.

b) "Home field" races (such as between the 2007 American League division winners) gain added importance. Wouldn't you rather face a team that just used their best available pitcher in a one-game playoff than a team that had the ability to set their rotation?

c) This addresses the frustation that the current wild card system is "unfair" because the wild card has as good a shot (or better) at making it to the World Series. No team wants to face a 1-game elimination playoff, no matter how good their best pitcher is. Moreover, it's unlikely that a wild card team's best pitcher will be rested for this playoff game. And even if he is, and the team manages to win the one-game playoff, they have to start the division series with their #2 starter.

d) This adds to post-season excitement, and TV ratings, without lengthening the playoffs. We don't have to worry about playing November games in Boston or Cleveland.

e) The one-game playoffs create instant excitement to kick off the post-season. It's like scheduling a couple of Game 7's right at the beginning of October. Baseball needs this, because a lot of fans are losing interest in the playoffs. It's ridiculous that the Braves would have thousands of empty seats in the playoffs because "it's only the first round".

At least from Bud Selig's point of view, this system seems to be an improvement on all grounds. It restores the importance of each division race while also increasing fan interest -- because even more teams now have a shot at the post-season. In fact, although we are adding 2 teams to the playoffs, we actually increase the chance that each division winner has of reaching the World Series (because we disrupt the starting rotations of the wild card teams -- putting them at a disadvantage in the ALDS and NLDS).

But instead of actually fixing the current system, Selig has been busy making bizarre tweaks to the post-season format, like giving home-field advantage in the World Series to the team from the league that wins the All-Star Game. This year, he created a new rule that most baseball fans don't even know about: the division winner with the best regular season record gets to decide whether the ALDS will span 7 days or 8 days (the best National League team gets no such benefit, but it appears that the leagues will "trade off" this lovely privilege in future years).

Anyway, it's about time to restore the division races to prominence, while also adding some post-season excitement. It shouldn't be too hard to get baseball to stand up and notice this idea. Just print out this letter and mail it to Bud. You can probably find his e-mail address online, but I've learned that snail-mail works better for these kinds of things:

Mr. Allan H. "Bud" Selig
Commissioner of Baseball
777 E. Wisconsin Avenue
Suite 3060
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202

Thanks for your support!

Clay