|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
The majority of what I'm seeing are solid concepts, definitely. Most of the issues I have are "needs a formatting pass," "missing a construction requirement that is otherwise called out in the description," "works better as a different type of item," or "has unneeded history attached." Quite a few could be tightened up with a rewrite for polish, also.
But overall - some very solid concepts in play! It's making me kinda nervous!
I tried really hard to be sure my submission followed the template. I made use of the gracious offer by Template Fu *and* ran it past two other highly-knowledgeable people. I previewed it multiple times.
All this to say, the effort it took to actually follow the template was minimal compared to creating the item and it is ... vexing to me that SO MANY DIDN'T! I am very seriously tempted to downvote every item I see that is improperly formatted.
Yes, I am a curmudgeonly old fart. At a surprisingly young age.
Is there like a "Cliff(side) Notes for Map-making?" I mean - mine look better in crayon, right. Yes, I've seen the "review past 'encounter with map entries'" advice. But I'm thinking ... in the last several years, someone has to have compiled a bullet-list of skills to make decent maps and pitfalls to avoid at all costs. Given my 14-hr-EVERY-DAY schedule, such a list would make sure I had a teensy shot at advancing, since I'd say I'm starting my map-skills from virtual scratch.
Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:
But no, there is no formal DQ notification process, at least in part because we're doing blind judging, and maybe a little because sadly that is also often part of the freelancing experience.
And there's the answer I was looking for - there is no formal notification process for DQ.
Anthony Adam wrote:
I get the feeling your worry is not any of those.
My widget is in the wind, now, and the voters shall have their way with it, regardless of my rational or irrational fears. It shall stand or fall on its own.
Or so I tell myself! ;)
I'm not worried about the *rules* for disqualification, as I compared my submission against them twice before hitting submit, and I assume my rather more-seasoned pit-crew did, as well. I'm interested in the *notification* of disqualification. Totally different animal. As such, Anthony's was the more useful answer. Long answer short - "you won't, really."
I asked, because I'd seen a few comments by submitters saying, effectively, "aaaaand, I'm DQ'd." I assumed there was an official channel by which submitters were notified if it was found they'd inadvertently breached the DQ-list and was interested in knowing what that was.
Orloff, I'd collect those, too ... but only after I glutted myself on SW. There are some *marvelous* Trek ship designs - I'm a fan of the Reliant and the "Federation tug" style, as well as the Cardassian ships, the Runabout, the Defiant, and whatever the Maquis ship from Voyager is called. Amongst others.
Then I would have them fight each other in mixed fleets...
...and it would be glorious!
Clay Clouser wrote:
My nightsbane quiver from last year for example could have been made into a bow with very minimal effort.
I get the impression that "industrial knock-offs" would be rather common in a fantasy setting - "I love that quiver, make me one!" "Hmm, I can't make wondrous items, but I *can* make a bow and make it do much the same thing." "But I like my bow..." "Give it, ya whiner..." :magicmagicmumbomagicjumbo: POOF! "Here, meet your bow, now known as Nightsbane, capable of everything that jerk's clever quiver design could do, but IN A BOW! HA!"
(Wizards ... oneupsmanship victims to a fault...)
Anthony Adam wrote:
Wow, that's ... DON'T DISTRACT ME!! MUST FOCUS ON MAP SKILLZ!
But yeah - having submitted my item for this round, this intrigues me. I may have to chase this rabbit a bit...just to see what happens...
I hate you.
And since I entered, I guess I really DO have more of a chance than I had before entering.
I still hate you. Kinda. Have a cookie.
(WHEW!! Realized I'd failed to send you hate-mail yet!! Had to fix that!)
I have allowed a significant amount of time to pass before announcing - I have submitted my item. I refuse to fret, worry, stress, second-guess ... largely because, well, I have a day-job that eats 14+ hrs of my day and needs my attention. BUT! My item has in fact spawned a plethora of thematically-linked items in my mind that I may have to pursue professionally! So that means it is already a good item.
I do blame Owen for dragging me into this. Had he not gleefully announced the 11th-hour twist of item-types, I would have stayed away. But no - with the shift from Wondrous Items to "anything but a Wondrous Item" (not really, I know, but close enough), he convinced me that I was now on equal footing with people who had spent the year prepping a plethora of Wondrous Items to select from for this competition ... we would ALL be scrambling at the last second!
So ... I'm here and it is all Owen's fault. And my wife's, who has told me for years I should try. And my players, who have told me for years how awesome I make their game-sessions. And a pair of awesome gamers who acted as my pit-crew to help me refine and polish. And YOU! Random Pathfinder gamers who are going to eventually give me feedback on my item and help me get better!
This is all y'all's fault ... let the games commence!
I did try the search-box, but didn't see answers to my question, so here we go!
So Wall Of Stone requires "adjoining rock surfaces" for the conjured wall to be anchored to. What constitutes such a surface? Can my wizard carry around a brick to use as an anchor-point? Can he cast Transmute Mud To Rock on a patch of ground to create a stone pad and then anchor the Wall of Stone to that surface? I'm not at all adverse to carrying a waterskin to make a large mud-puddle for my engineer to work from. I need a baseplate, but the wording of Wall of Stone pretty plainly requires an existing stone structure, rather than allowing my wiz to cast Wall to create a really nice horizontal slab on the ground as a foundation, thus the "carry a brick" part of the equation.
What about Rampart? It reads, "You create a massive rampart of hard-packed earth and stone 5 feet thick." Would that count and allow Wall of Stone to anchor to it?