I think its a great idea. If it drives away "players" you may find that you are better off without those "players."

Where I have been doing Fellowship First, we also have a rather cutthoat weekend culture, complete with a "as competitive as you can manage" night once a month. I think people appeciate the variety (I know I do).

We ran a "fellowship first" event at my venue a couple of weeks ago. You were "supposed" to "build a team based on a movie." A few players showed some "creativity" and stuck to teams built around superhero films like "Captain America." Other showed some serious "imagination" and built teams based "actors and actresses" that have been clixed and "appear" in non-superhero movies like "The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus" or "The Prestige."

"The" players unanimously awarded first "place" to the Doctor Parnassus team"."

"Fellowship First" can "work" in certain "situations."

I don't like the idea of getting rid of rewarding a winner, I do like the idea of focusing on fellowship. A normal tournament reward structure is good for new players to understand the basics of tournament. Fellowship is good to keep players friendly and give everyone a reason to show.

Who was Tom Waits?

I'd totally play Last Starfighter with a Richard Rider Nova and Thing as Grig! And another Nova as the clone! Oh man... now I need to run this event!

He's an American singer-songwriter, composer, and actor. He was born on December 7, 1949.

In 2011, he was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

He has won Grammy Awards for two albums, "Bone Machine" (heh-heh-heh) and "Mule Variations."

(I don't remember the exact team build but I recall it included AA Mad Hatter as Johnny Depp, Spider-Man as Andrew Garfield, Joker as Heath Ledger, and Bullseye as Colin Farrell.)

This is quite possibly the second "worst" idea I've ever heard.

I hope it works.

^Doom approved!

I thought my idea for edible diapers wasn't that bad.

Assuming this post was in response to mine, I think I got your point fine. Your point (which you re-emphasized above) is that it's okay if there's a slightly shady feel to the way Fellowship is given out, as long as there is another award given out that people feel is less subjective. My point (again) is that if your group feels that the way you are giving out even one of your awards is potentially shady (even if they feel the process as a whole is okay), then you might want to address that. There are a few ways to determine Fellowship...maybe another way would suit your group more.



I'm really not sure if this is in response to my post, as after reading my post again, I don't see where I said I thought your way couldn't be successful for your venue. I did say that you imply an environment that I'd probably avoid if I had the option to play at a venue that emphasized fun over competition. Venues can certainly have both fun and competition, but which is *emphasized* will tend to craft the atmosphere of the venue. There are plenty of players out there that prefer an emphasis on competition (and really, that's where some players GET their fun); I'm just not one of them.

Remember, I wrote: "Different venues have different play environments, and I applaud a judge that realizes that and tries his best to suit his events to his players." It sounds like the OP is doing this. It also sounds like you are doing this for your venue as well. I find that *laudable*. I just think the environment you are describing doesn't match my preferred play style. I'm a decent player. I'm also very competitive. I have a room full of trophies and ribbons for games and sporting events. Too be honest I am TOO competitive, which is why I make a concerted effort to try to avoid too much competition with this game. I find that if I don't, it reduces the fun I have with it.


That really sounds like a bad idea. The OP seems to be trying to foster an environment that emphasizes good sportmanship. Getting rid of the prize for good sportsmanship and just make it a random roll that the worst sport in the room has an equal chance to get removes any emphasis on good sportsmanship.


If it were me, I'd probably do the same. This would seem to be the best way to satisfy the most players. But of course it's not my experiment.

I think the people that are most against this are the uber-competitive player's that need their daily endorphin rush, pat's on their backs(most often done by themselves), and ego strokes. *sarcasm*

I like your idea Jackstar7.

I think it is a great idea but as others have said it should probably rotate from week to week. I get sick of seeing the same garbage teams week after week and this kind of format would get me back into constructed. I can build and play competitive but I prefer a casual environment.

REP to you sir!

Regarding the standard Fellowship prize...

What happens when everyone in your tournament is a prize shark?