The Capes Dojo

[Vaxalon]

You know, if it was me...

I'd just count up the total number of story tokens earned (including those spent in play) and give that guy one trophy.

I'd count up the total value of all inspirations earned (including those spent in play) and give him another.

In the end, that shows who's playing the game.

[TonyLB]

I think the formula should count the number of overdrawn drives.

I'm pretty sure this is a thread about "What do we do, given this formula?"

If you want to start a thread about what the formula should be ... that's cool, so long as you realize that you're talking about making a new formula for your own use.  We can have multiple scoring standards, and I think that would be keen.  We could test them in play and see what types of behaviors they drive.

As for the scoring system I'll be using:  I'm already happy with the rule as it works in actual practice.  I'm pretty sure I've never come across as the kind of guy who would change a practically tested rule because someone else has theoretical objections.

In any event ... meat for another thread, I think.  Yes?

[TonyLB]

If you wanted to drive things towards the Spend-O-Rama (and why not? It sounds like the most fun) then the easiest way to do that woud be to reward the spending of debt.  You've got a "don't get stuck with debt" penalty in the score already, which is fine, but if I had to choose the better of two Capes players, with all other factors equal, the guy who generated (and thus spent) more debt is probably the better player, because he played harder and contributed more to the game.

I'd like to think that, if that were so, it would reflect in the scores.

And I'm not at all sure that it doesn't, mind you.  I think that pouring Story Tokens out into the hands of the other players may very well have a "bread upon the waters" effect, by which Story Tokens come back to you.

Y'know, I may well just have to test this, and see what happens.  All scientific-like.

[Bret Gillan]

I agree with Tony. Thanks guys.

With respect to the "is generating Debt a good thing" question Tony posed, I think J has come up with the best response so far - in a multi-table game, the benefit of spending Debt is that it's amping up play and the overall score of the table, and I think he's spot on with this. I think we can be sure that generating and spending Debt is a good thing with regards to cross-table competition as it will amp up play at your table and drive your score over the competition's.

With respect to competition at a single table, though, I'm not sure generating and spending Debt is the way to go. In my Dexcon play I was hemorrhaging Debt, and I'm not convinced it helped me at all. In fact, I suspect it's one of the reasons I didn't win. It could be, though, that I was spending Debt senselessly. I'm betting there can be good and bad applications of Debt in play. It's just a matter of sussing out which is which.