If you collect the fountain star in the desert after dying it gives you 6 stars in the ranch section of hyrule field. 2 of these stars cannot be collected in normal gameplay, so you can now technically get 171 stars without collecting every intended star.

Here to ask about what people think about using this in 100%, and if those extra 2 stars should count towards 100% completion. Having those extra stars would let you skip all coin grinding in the run by replacing the two most expensive coin stars with these fake ones. I think getting rid of coin grinding will make the run more entertaining, and more enjoyable to play, so I'd want to come up with a way to integrate it into runs.

I it were up to me, I'd rename the 100% categories to match Any%'s RHA/No-RHA scheme: 100% Normal = 100% No-RHA 100% NSR = 100% RHA

RHA is still the main differing factor between the two categories, and it would make the leaderboards more legible and consistent. Plus it means both runs become significantly faster and less boring to complete.

Any discussion is appreciated, want to know what the consensus on this is before doing any runs with it.

Wow, that's really strange that that works. I tried dying in fountains before, but the couple I tried it on just crashed when you try to collect the star. I would personally say that 100% NSR (as it's currently named) should allow this glitch.

Yeah I'm surprised every other one just does nothing/crashes, most likely just a quirk of what memory addresses are getting overwritten? I forgot to mention it originally, but shoutouts to JARP who found this glitch and brought it up off-handedly in chat during one of Bigfoots 100% streams a while back. If it weren't for someone going through every single one and testing it it'd probably not have been found.

I agree 100% NSR is a good call regardless, I mostly suggest changing both categories to support it since it seems like it would only make 100% Normal more enjoyable to run without much change to the big difference between the categories. Watching runs start to slow down right before the run ends is always a bummer imo, and the change feels worth it.

Using this glitch as an alternate way to get stars in 100% NSR is fine in my opinion as it's like using RHA to get abilities. I don't mind either way if the two extra stars can count towards the 171 star count for this category.

I really don't think the two extra stars should be able to replace any of the intended stars for 100% Normal. I also don't think this glitch should be allowed for 100% Normal at all. I understand coin grind is brutal but I don't think this is in the spirit of a less glitched category. If abilities have to actually be collected from their original position then it should be the same for the stars in the route.

Thanks for the input, Bigfoot. I think 100% Normal makes sense staying the way it is and having it be banned is the right call for the category as it exists now. Room can likely be made for a slightly more lenient alternative to the 100% Normal category that is closer to the idea of just solely banning RHA if that's something that people want to run.

I think it's problematic to allow them for 171 Star because the idea of 100% should have priority over a fix star count, and getting those stars in a 171 Star run means that you knowingly fail on getting all stars that are in the game, in a run which intends to show how to collect every star as quickly as possible. At this point, 171 would be an arbitrary number and you just pick whichever stars you like best, in a way, even though I can sympathize with the desire to dismiss coin grinds.

This does make it hard to come up with something that's really different from the current 100% categories though. It seems most reasonable to simply turn 100% NSR into a 173 Star category that allows you to break the game however you want (if we account for this glitch at all) whereas 100% Normal remains the way it is, because that's the traditional way of how the game is meant to work.

That said, the idea to design a category that tries to be particularly enjoyable for runners at the cost of introducing arbitrary rules is fine by me although it's quite unpredecented among the whole community. This is also the concerning part of it, because the general lack of interest and collective effort make any telling on the future of such "designer categories" nearly impossible, i.e. how active they would actually be/how long their hype would last, how non-runners would view them and how they would be moderated at large, including the questions that that leads to, such as what standards the designing processes are subjected to or how conflicting ideas are dealt with etc.

All valid points to bring up, Zako. I think its fair to be concerned about the consistency of what it means for it to be a 100% run. I think new categories are possible and up for consideration, but my hesitation is that we'd be preserving the NSR category over semantics rather than adjusting for what people seem to actually want to work towards improving and doing runs of. The theory of having no coin grinding seems to excite potential interested runners who found it tedious, as well as viewers of said runs.

NSR has very little going for it without this new development and I think it would just remain dormant when there are new things giving people a reason to do runs again. The 2 other people in this thread are the only other currently present runners I've talked to who've expressed interest in NSR and they seem to agree with this definition of the run.

Normal 100% will always be there to keep authenticity to the game's intended progression and content. "No Source Requirements" by nature is a rejection of this premise, and I don't think it should be any different now. As long as you end the game with every menu item and the intended total star count after beating Final Bowser, it should be fair game imo.