Autumn Conclave 2013 - WHW 28th September

[greenstuff_gav]

And is this accounting for Dave's and my desire to hijack a table for some playtesting at 28mm?

i haven't accounted for that at all :lol:
what did you have planned? i'd planned what was in the playerpack; 3 standard games (rotating players so everyone should play almost everyone) then 3 finales grouping players with similar scores to decide actual outcomes for hte day

Hmm. 4 players per scenario is probably going to make the timing a bit tight unless it's only two characters per player...

don't tell me that! should it be 3 players per table? the scenarios aren't mind-blowingly complicated / have much by way of rules...

[Koval]

We intended to hijack a scenario and playtest some Revised Inquisitor rules at 28mm -- Dave wants to test some new actions and close combat stuff, and I want to play about with RIPPA.

I am liable to bring some spare 28mm models in any case.

[Kaled]

don't tell me that! should it be 3 players per table? the scenarios aren't mind-blowingly complicated / have much by way of rules...

Three players plus a GM per table is my preferred format.

[TheNephew]

I've lost my Gruss.
By which I mean I put him somewhere for safe keeping and I have no idea where somewhere is.
Deeply irritating at such short notice.

And my time management has been poor enough that none of my servitors are built, let alone painted, and my tools are spread across the city.

The fallout of this being perhaps the most understaffed  AdMech investigation team in the sector.
I hope no-one minds a surprise speed-painted Liwet appearance - spray's drying now, and I've got about four free hours between now and my Saturday dawn train.

This is far too stressful.
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.
Lawd.

Otherwise, YEAAAAAAAAH!

Edit: But at least that'll lighten the character-load on scenarios I'm in. To counteract my n00bility.

[MarcoSkoll]

what did you have planned?

If possible (if it's too much of a mess, we'll have to call it quits), we're looking to basically play one of the scenarios with some of the draft 2nd edition rules and probably some of our 28mm characters.

don't tell me that! should it be 3 players per table? the scenarios aren't mind-blowingly complicated / have much by way of rules...

Events normally run two or three player games (plus a GM, but I think your number of four is four players, not three and a GM) at events, and even that's often tight for time - I'd say maybe half of games I play at events get rushed or incomplete conclusions.

[Bloodpact]

Having had no spare time to finish alternate characters, looks like Angstrom will be present again. That man gets around...

[greenstuff_gav]

Almost got the scenarios done :-)
Ill allocate one of game 2s tables to inq 2.0 if thats ok?
Who is playing that?
Also saturday can igrab a math-orientated person to help me work out how the players go?
Was gonna designate playrs to tables first 3 games toensure pople play against differentpeolel, the finales goverened by Informatoon Points...


Also, Kaled and Marco am i still ok to borrow those 4 items? :-)

[MarcoSkoll]

Ill allocate one of game 2s tables to inq 2.0 if thats ok? Who is playing that?

Just Koval and I at present.

Also saturday can igrab a math-orientated person to help me work out how the players go?

I can probably help, although most of it will probably be referring to or fudging from the allocation lists I worked out last year.

Also, Kaled and Marco am i still ok to borrow those 4 items?

Assuming I am cogent enough on Saturday morning to remember to bring my contribution with me, yes.

[Koval]

Also saturday can igrab a math-orientated person to help me work out how the players go?

I'm happy to jump in here -- I'm mathsy. All I'd need to know is what kind of criteria you want us to keep in mind.

Besides which, this is as good a time as any to learn the finer points of player allocation for future events!

[greenstuff_gav]

I can probably help, although most of it will probably be referring to or fudging from the allocation lists I worked out last year.

I'm happy to jump in here -- I'm mathsy. All I'd need to know is what kind of criteria you want us to keep in mind.

cheers!
it's however many players (looking at 12) across 4 tables, hopefully rotating so people don't face each other too often!
obviously, round 2 will be odd as the pair of you are looking to play Inq2.0 but i can grab the remaining two guys and throw something together

[Koval]

...Well, looks like I forgot to click on the link. All the leg work's already been done for us.

[greenstuff_gav]

except there's going to be only 3 players per table 

1 more scenario to write

[Koval]

The leg work has still been done.

[Kaled]

Also, Kaled and Marco am i still ok to borrow those 4 items? :-)

I can definitely bring two, but I'm not sure if I can get the third - we're looking at selling the house and some things went into storage and this may have been one.  I will check and bring it if it is here though...

Also, I can't seem to find the original file for the leaflet.  :-(  But I'm more than happy for someone to take the text and create their own version.

[MarcoSkoll]

except there's going to be only 3 players per table

You're actually in the clear. Although the solution for three tables isn't perfect (with some of the numbers swapped for neatness, I think it may be as good as is possible, although I haven't exhaustively proved that), the solution for four tables is absolutely optimal.

Put any number of people into it and it will always divide them as evenly as possible across four tables. (Well, provided nobody leaves in the middle of the day, but it just can't be that clever).
12 people? Always four tables of three. 8? Always four tables of two. 10? Always two of three and two of two.

The trick is that there's actually a fifth possible game for 16 attendees and 4 tables where no-one has previously met:
Game 5: 1,2,3,4 - 5,6,7,8 - 9,10,11,12 - 13,14,15,16

Because none of 1-4, 5-8, 9-12 or 13-16 ever meet anyone from their same cluster of four in the first four games*, mutual absences from the same cluster never meet and no game ever has more than its fair share of missing people. (Provided the list is filled from the bottom!)
*It'd be nice for everyone to meet everyone, but you can't meet 15 people in four games with three other people.

So, one trick would just be giving Koval and I the two highest numbers and our absence would just evenly divide across the remaining games.

It might be possible to shuffle the remaining players into new games, but that's a little bit trickier as far as picking numbers to make sure people don't still meet.
I do have to point out, that the three table and four table charts are not cross-compatible, so swapping between them with the same numbers won't work. Although I'm not sure it's impossible to achieve that - there may be a way to swap the numbers or the rounds on the three table chart around to fix that, although it might mean people no longer GM in numerical order.

The other alternative is if Koval and I can find a third person willing to deal with my shoddy Alpha rules and we just pick numbers that put us all together in round 2.
That might well mean not playing that game at 28mm, but while that's not ideal, it's something I can at least live with.

Also, I can't seem to find the original file for the leaflet.  :-(  But I'm more than happy for someone to take the text and create their own version.

Hoo boy. There's no way I've got the time to do that before Saturday. The best I could manage by then is a "paste over the original text" job.