Posted by harvestmouse on 2012-11-15 21:08:07
I'm not a fan of this sort of fluff. It's the 'This is an unrealistic game mechanic, so let's think up a plausible reason why it should be included' type fluff. That said, you've done a pretty good job, so I won't vote on it. Inducements are much better than handicaps used to be, but stink a bit when added with TV.
Posted by Cavetroll on 2012-11-15 22:24:29
I really enjoyed this. I actually like trying to shoehorn a plausible explanation into an unrealistic situation, and I think you did a good job here. My only gripe is I don't like how the stadium owner is paying the players' salaries directly. But you put more thought into it than me so I'll overlook that portion. Good job!
Posted by lizvis on 2012-11-16 01:06:51
hmmmm.........i see wreckage has written a long blog. i haven't even read it yet. but all i can really think of is..................'emo'.
Posted by Randy_Moss on 2012-11-16 01:45:42
Randy_Moss approved fluff. Where can I buy a stadium?
Posted by Nelphine on 2012-11-16 07:35:05
hum.. the stadium owner makes 100k gold per game. That implies that he needs a certain number of games per year to actually cover the cost of the stadium maintenance when games are not being played, which explains why the profit 'seems' so high.
I like it! Makes lots of sense.
Posted by Garion on 2012-11-16 09:12:09
Hm - this isn't actually wteckages fluff he has just elaborated on the fluff that was in crp. Though I completely agree with you, it doesn't make sense, especially when considering the background from every edition before it. It's just more of the same - create a rule, then write up some contrived fluff so that it fits.
Handicaps were worse in some respects no doubt, but I cannot stand how the stars and wizards are inducements, they used to be what you spent money on, now there is nothing.
Posted by Underworlder on 2012-11-16 09:12:10
Nice
Posted by the_Sage on 2012-11-16 09:19:29
I like how CRP was a weird mechanic and you've crunched the numbers to make them make pseudosense within this weird mechanic.
Posted by Wang on 2012-11-16 16:51:55
This is tongue-in-cheek, right?
Posted by Garion on 2012-11-16 18:34:15
No Wang this is the actual fluff, Wreckage just embelished to make it make more sense.
Posted by Wreckage on 2012-11-16 18:59:24
The rulebook hasn't botherd with lenghty reasons for their new system, I figure they just wanted to use something they thought makes sense, balance wise.
There isn't really as much as an explanation but as far as explanations have been made and reasons are hinted I have been trying to stay close to canon of course and show that you don't have to be stuck with a mindframe that says: Fluff is out of the window.
Posted by Garion on 2012-11-16 20:07:46
what about teams that own their own stadiums?
Posted by Wreckage on 2012-11-16 21:18:29
I think if you would want to allow something like that you would have to house rule it.
Posted by bghandras on 2012-11-17 08:01:04
Error in the system: Teams with more fans should be favoured by owners, but it is missing. (Yes, this is a tongue in cheek reply.)
Posted by Wreckage on 2012-11-17 12:30:55
I'd argue the stadium owners have no way of determining if a team is favored by fans or not, ie. he doesn't have the same level of access to informations about the teams as we do and that his only way of determining a teams fame is its value.