Rising VP idea

Just got an idea which may (or may not) solve some problems in the game, should write it down to not forget.

Rising number of VP gained for each oust.

So first oust provides 1 VP, second - 2, third -3, last - 4.

So you still will win by ousting 3 people and dying, but all this tricks of sitting still and then grabbing one VP will work a little differently.

Also I think it quite combines with the idea of adding time after each oust.

I don't think this is a good idea. This will probably lead to less ousts, as ousting the first prey nets you 1 VP - with the second ouster to get 2 VP and thus winning over you just for killing your prey earlier. Thus you would want your oust to be as late as possible, as long as no one else is close to three ousts. Even making the third oust after one player has gotten two ousts ties you with that player.

Yomyael wrote:

I don't think this is a good idea. This will probably lead to less ousts, as ousting the first prey nets you 1 VP - with the second ouster to get 2 VP and thus winning over you just for killing your prey earlier. Thus you would want your oust to be as late as possible, as long as no one else is close to three ousts. Even making the third oust after one player has gotten two ousts ties you with that player.

Which is exactly the goal, as early player elimination is one of the key problems of VtES.

So... You want the game to completely stall until close to the end? What problem do you see with players getting ousted early?

Yomyael wrote:

So... You want the game to completely stall until close to the end? What problem do you see with players getting ousted early?

If you don't know why early elimination is a problem in 2-hour game I don't think there is any common ground for a discussion

Hm. Reading up on things said often in this forum, I see that people view it as a problem that too many games time out. A 2 hour game without something happening isn't a good game in my opinion. A fast paced game where everyone tries to get an oust is a good game, as it allows interesting things to happen. When just everyone tries to oust as late as possible, I think most games would time out. So... Looking at the options of always needing 2 hours for a game with only one oust at the end or having people trying to win by ousting as early as possible (and when succeeding taking less than 2 hours), I think the second option is less boring - even if you sometimes are ousted after 30 minutes and then have to look at a game for the rest of the time.

If you have a different point of view on this, then maybe you have some arguments to convince me - instead of just stopping the discussion at the point, that we have no common ground.

Else just try it out in your playgroup and tell me how your games are - I'd love to hear something on this appart from theory.