[generic] Warhorn?

#4
So, what are people's experiences with Warhorn?
It's been okay on the few occasions I have used it, both as a GM and a player. I'm sure there are some improvements which can be made but nothing has burnt itself into my consciousness.

If I remember correctly it will provide an itinerary which you can print out, might be useful.
 
#5
Every day I post an #TTRPG thought of the day on Twitter. I recently did a month long analysis of con sign up systems. My summary was:

There are three main types of sign up systems:

Micromanagement, Prebooking, Sign up on the day.

There are some combo systems - the prime example being the Garrison cons which use a bit of micromanagement backed up with sign up on the day.

None are perfect. All are gameable by unscrupulous people determined to get the game they want.

I concluded that the best one was micromanagement. Typified by the many pop-up cons being organised through Twitter these days, everyone sends their requests in to the convention organisers (via Twitter) and they personally allocate everyone to the games. Personal ,friendly, labour intensive and gets more untenable as a convention grows or lengthens.

Second best was prebooking. Allows Referees and players to know what's going on before the event so they can plan. Putting aside UKGE's bespoke system, the best of these I'm aware of is WarHorn. If you're planning a convention you need to have a good reason NOT to use WarHorn. However, you need to use it and not let it use you. Its use needs to be well managed and monitored by the convention organisers. Possibly lacks flexibility over a longer event.

Coming in last, but still popular amongst some old guard is sign-up sheets. Easy to use, social, spontaneous and the only system which can be physically dangerous to use. Additional systems required to make it functional, fair and safe - especially at larger events.
 

MartinP

Rune Priest
#6
So, what are people's experiences with Warhorn?
A bit late to the party, but here goes:
I've only used Warhorn for offering games at ConTingency, never as a player, so I can't comment on those aspects.

The most I can say about Warhorn is that it works, and has thus far failed to annoy me. Given my near constant state of irritation at almost every aspect of technological 'progress', that's no small thing (why yes, I am a software developer, does it show?)

I find the daily schedule to be a little hard to scroll through when there are a lot of games, it would be nicer if it split them by slot. I like the personal con schedule it gives you, that's handy.

On the whole, inoffensive and functional.
 
#7
My single experience was that a local game venue tried to use it for bookings for a local rpg day, but on going to the Warhorn page there was literally no control to interact with to book (nor any clue as to where it ought to be). I wound myself up good and proper looping round the interface trying to find it. Now my guess is that whoever set it up at the local venue end cocked up setting up the event (it might well have got delegated to someone inexperienced), but it left a bad taste.
 
#9
As a GM I've used it for Virtual and Physical Grogmeet, and it just does it. Given the popularity of Grogmeet I've had full games each time, even when I've missed out on the initial Conkrieg wave of sign-ups. But that's more down to organiser Chris's management skills. If I was a player I probably wouldn't like that its very easy to miss out on the more popular games since you might not be online when sign up opens.

For the Go Play Meet ups I just use web forms on the website, which give the attendee's a choice of 1st and 2nd games, and a spreadsheet at my end to allocate players. A bit more labour intensive I'd imagine than Warhorn. I should brush off my programming skills and write or source a Wordpress plugin to automate the process. But I like the fact that most people get their 1st choice, at least in one of the slots, and I can intervene and reallocate people were needed, due to various exceptions, This is just a variation on the system that the Garrisoncons came up with.
 
#10
I really have to change my previous opinion, as today I tried to simply register my online game on it so that I could allow players from outside our usual signup group to register for it. Had the game rejected twice, only to get a follow-up email from the admin which didn't exactly explain what the problem was and asking what I was attempting to achieve. When I explained "to post a game", I got another email which really didn't make anything clearer. I've come away with no idea how it's meant to work and no inclination to try using it again.
 
#11
From what I can tell, Warhorn was designed to support Living Greyhawk conventions in the early 2000s when there were lots of small dedicated LG events across the US (and a scattering elsewhere). These had peculiar characteristics - everyone attending was there to play D&D, the organiser chose the adventures which were running and recruited the DMs, often there were newly released or special adventures so the same scenario might run for multiple groups in each convention slot, and the players all understood the focus of the convention and the particular organised play set-up. I'm sure it can be useful for events which aren't anything like that, but many of its features (waitlists, signing up to DM an already-listed scenario, etc) only really make sense in the world of D&D organised play (and Pathfinder, and a few other smaller campaigns).
 
#12
From what I can tell, Warhorn was designed to support Living Greyhawk conventions in the early 2000s when there were lots of small dedicated LG events across the US (and a scattering elsewhere). These had peculiar characteristics - everyone attending was there to play D&D, the organiser chose the adventures which were running and recruited the DMs, often there were newly released or special adventures so the same scenario might run for multiple groups in each convention slot, and the players all understood the focus of the convention and the particular organised play set-up. I'm sure it can be useful for events which aren't anything like that, but many of its features (waitlists, signing up to DM an already-listed scenario, etc) only really make sense in the world of D&D organised play (and Pathfinder, and a few other smaller campaigns).
I agree with the focus of Warhorn design. It works a hoot for both Pathfinder and Starfinder Organized Play.
 

First Age

D&D h@ck3r and Hopepunk
Staff member
#14
I've never needed to use it for anything. I consider this all something of a challenge to try for an online convention.
 
#15
I’ve had various people suggest I use it for the weekly D&D Adventurers League games I organise at Patriot (in normal times) but I have resisted because our approach is to allocate people to groups based either on who we know is usually in a particular game or which games are good for new players - neither of which really fit the Warhorn approach.

I think I’d only use it if I was running an event with multiple groups running at the same time where each adventure was roughly equivalent (same length, each a one-shot) and I knew that the players would understand any restrictions (eligible characters, adventures it’s better to play before others etc) and first come first served worked for the event. It also benefits from a fixed schedule announced at least a few days ahead of sign-up. Otherwise it’s a lot of work and fiddling for not much help.

I think that if I was offering a single adventure and I wanted to let anyone sign up I’d use something like a Google form and confirm who was first to sign up by email.
 
#16
Ended up using it to book for a game at Virtual Grogmeet (which didn't work out, but that's by the by). Went round and round a bit, eventually worked out I needed to click the button to register for the event, and then could see booking links. One of those things, like some events go, that's designed for regulars who already know how to use it. (And having booked, no follow-up message, but that may not be the platform's fault.)
 
Top