It would be incredibly easy for a host to get someone out of an event after winning 2 points. "Okay doing 2 points this round, oh Linzor you already won 2 points so you can't play this round, too bad!"No, this doesn't make the most sense. If we change the rule from event points to rounds, first 3 winner events will not make sense. Then we have events where we have multiple hosts hunting or being hunted which awards 2 points per round (not necessarily that the host is hunting) and oftentimes these events only last 3 rounds, so it will not make sense if we limit amount of rounds when we should be doing points. To make things simple we will keep it as points and will not have to make custom global rules for every 3 winner event and/or events that can award multiple points per round per standard default hosting.
So why don't you just make it both. If you host smaller events that normally has more than 2 points per round then you can just clarify that for that specific event you can only win 3 points. But to kick someone out of an event because you decide to change the amount of points (bonus points) for a specific round is dumb.
If the host has already told you that you cannot win more points and then you decide to play anyways and make it first, regardless of everyone else dying or not, you shouldn't expect a point. He already told you can't win more.i won 3 rounds in a row with everyone dying and yet I would not receive the point. Take a guess: did the host try to keep rerounding? Obviously not. He would rather have no winners than give me the fourth point. Because its "unfair"? To who? When has skill become unfair?
