I missed entry in to this years, do to moving at the time. Im curious when it will start for 2013? should it be December like this year?
Thanks.
I missed entry in to this years, do to moving at the time. Im curious when it will start for 2013? should it be December like this year?
Thanks.
Yes, mark it on your calendar because we have a long wait.
However, there are other contests out there. I don't have time to look them up right now, but they make good practice for RPG Superstar.
We haven't nailed down the start date for the next contest, but it almost certainly will be in December, with the deadline for R1 submissions in early January.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So here's a fun one ... what kind of challenges do people want to see between the Round 1 wondrous item and Round 5 adventure proposal?
With the Paths to Prestige coming out, I was thinking design a Golarion prestige class could be a really fun Round 4 (or 3) challenge.
I really liked the organization challenge, and have enjoyed the villain challenges in previous years.
For monster, might be interesting to have it be design a template (though perhaps that might not quite show the right design chops to be a good option).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd love to see the competitors create an encounter/challenge that isn't combat based. We spend so much time focusing on encounters that revolve around combat, but many of the published skills, feats, and spells are based on non-combat interactions. It would be nice to have an encounter that emphasized those aspects of character building and game play. These encounters would still require maps, could degenerate into conflict, and could be built to specific party levels.
For example, say you create an adventure based on the Hound of the Baskervilles (classic Sherlock Holmes). The first half of the adventure requires the party to unravel the mystery of the events around Baskerville Manor; what do the Stapletons know, what motivates the Franklins, why is a single shoe missing from Henry, is Laura Lyons honest? In this situation, characters need to utilize a variety of skills (diplomacy, bluff, knowledges, disguise, intimidate, sense motive, stealth, survival, ect..), as well as feats that complement their skills (alertness, deceitful, intimidating prowess, persuasive, self sufficient, skill focus, stealthy, ect..) and LOTS of the published spells that are often overlooked in favor of combat beneficial ones gain a new usefulness.
The trouble with these types of encounters is having a clear understanding of the particular motivations of everyone in the cast of characters, the complex interactions between each NPC, and a clear set of defined difficulty levels for what information can be obtained by what means. An encounter like this would really help display the design chops of the competitors because it would require a ton of vision to imagine all the potential angles a party would take and the resulting reactions of the NPCs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Create a town, village, or city with a map and NPCs.
Create a feat chain (2+ long).
Develop a small plane of existence or demi-plane.
Create a trap (make it higher level).
Develop a religion or cult.
Create an artifact.
Create a spell (make it a certain level)
Give them a map and make them populate it!
As above with monster.
Create an encounter where the environment is the major challenge.
I think that a social round would be awesome. Either a social encounter, or a socially focused area (like a city), or an NPC or group of NPCs...
Or heck, a social *random* encounter. See how the contestants do when they're forced to try to make an encounter that fits anywhere.
I like the "villain" type round (that I think this year's organization took the place of, in a way), but I think also having a "helpful" NPC might be a good challenge. Or even some sort of connected weal/woe, like they have in Wayfinder.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Regarding the villain vs. organization thing, it's important to note that a good, adversarial organization needs a good villain or two within it. And, most good villains have an organization of underlings that serve them. The trick is knowing which element to bring to the forefront in your writing. If it's an assignment for an organization, don't make the villain the sole focus. And, if it's an assignment for a villain, don't spend forever and a day talking about his organization. Your writing should serve the subject matter without getting side-tracked. But it's also useful to include elements of the other component (i.e., hints about the villain or organization) in your writeup for one or the other. You just need to know when you're spicing it up vs. overdoing it.
Or even some sort of connected weal/woe, like they have in Wayfinder.
Something like a loanshark who helps you out of a bind, or an enemy of your enemy who isn't quite a friend. :D
Design an NPC class.
Design/stat a witch's "Patron" not already developed.
Design a set of encounters based off the previous years winning RPGSS submission that can be used as a supplement (Congrats to Mike for Doom Comes to Dustpawn!).
Design a cursed item.
(And to grab ahold of Wild Gazebo's suggestion above)... Create a rival pantheon that travels to Golarian to take over!
Round 1 - the usual
Round 2 - Stat out a Judge as a Pathfinder NPC Adversary
Round 3 - Create the Guest Judge prestige class
Round 4 - Design a Judges domicile
Round 5 - Propose a module synopsis entitled "Judgement Day is Upon You"
Some ideas to toy with on a more serious theme
A) How about a twist on the map round, rather than an encounter , how about something more generic, a village perhaps, containing festivals, notary NPC's, plot hooks, etc
When I read your modules, quite often there are hooks to unresolved plots, so this would be a good skill perhaps for people to show.
B) A fix it round - quite early I think, round 2 most likely. You provide something, you say it's unsuitable and are asking the contestants to provide an updated workable version. This would show the writer when given a seed and the soil in which it must be grown can give us the great oak tree (or in Neil's case, the forest :P)
I must admit to struggling to come up with ideas, the competition is so good as it is and works just so well, I would probably prefer no tinkering - not fixing what isn't broken.
So I'll close this post by thanking everyone at Paizo, not just the superlative judges, but all the behind the scenes people too - these boards must be a nightmare to run during superstar time - so many thanks everyone.
Hey Adam, I agree it's hard to think of many things that could improve the competition, without bringing more problems than they solve. I like your idea of a fix it round, because it tests a real aspect of freelancer life. The problem I see is that it might not leave so much room for creativity, and that is such a huge part of the competition.
A tweak might be that the contestants need to fix their own submission. For example, take the round 4 submissions. Judges give feedback as usual. The contestants then have a chance to resubmit, taking the judges' feedback into account. Voters can then see, and make their decision based on, both the creativity and execution of the original submission, and also the competitor's ability to take feedback and deliver an improved final entry.
I'm not sure this is clearly better than the existing structure. I do think it would be interesting, and would test something that we don't see now - the ability to directly apply feedback to a work in progress.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The only problem I see with having a fix-it round is that it could be perceived as "boring" by a lot of regular board-goers. I personally think it would be interesting, and useful, but many would perceive it as being "the same thing twice."
I think what the competition could use is a few more fun, quirky elements. I like the idea of statting out real-life people/judges as villains.
Another idea I became enamored with about 30 seconds ago is having a sort of "secret ingredient" on some or all rounds. Sort of like Iron Chef. You can make any encounter you'd like, but you must fit this obscure utility item into it, or it must reference a certain Kobold bard in its backstory or actual plot (preferably to humorous effect).
Or themes to play with, like "ice." Maybe someone would make an encounter on a fast-moving glacier threatening to crush a city. Another person might make you have to deal with a Gnomish inventor's experimental "icemaker" churning out dangerous ice elementals instead. I think it would be a neat creative exercise to try to keep with a theme, while making sure it was unique.
I like Chris's idea of the secret ingredient and the theme. It sets a design space that the competitors have to work in, just like a real freelancer would have to do, but it let's them define that design space with their creativity, so instead of the traditional 'box' it can be a dodecahedron with pedunculated polyps (like an inevitable beholder). Also, that would let Paizo define a design space that doesn't conflict with upcoming APs or modules, so the problem that befell Tom in the final round this year can be avoided.
I think they've done that already, Chris, with the "twists." That said, I think they could really hamper creativity if they went too far down that road. Look at the variety of choices in Round 2 this past year (or villains two years ago); if everyone had to have a theme stronger than "antagonists," I think we could get a lot more repetition.
I don't think I'd change anything major about the contest, just keep giving slightly different challenges. I could see next year, for example, having a "create your own PC race," considering the Advanced Race book is coming out (or create your own Golarion prestige class, which would tie in with a new book and show designers' mechanical chops AND Golarion knowledge at the same tiome).
Maybe an interesting take would be seeing what past rounds people have enjoyed the most? Round 1 has always been Design a Wondrous Item and Round 5 Submit a Pathfinder Module Adventure Proposal (both of which work really well), so really it's what happens in rounds 2, 3, and 4 where we get the variety.
Round 2:
2012: Create a New Organization
2011: Create an Archetype
2010: Create a Monster Concept
2009: Create a Villain Concept
2008: Design a Country
Round 3:
2012: Create a CR7 Golarion Monster
2011: Create a Villain Stat Block
2010: Create a Monster Stat Block
2009: Create a Villain Stat Block
2008: Design a Villain
Round 4:
2012: Design an Encounter with Map
2011: Design a Golarion Location with Map
2010: Design a Golarion Location with Map
2009: Design a Villain’s Lair with Map
2008: Design Three Thematically Linked Monsters
This is the first year I've followed along with RPG Superstar, so my perspective is limited, but the round I enjoyed the most this year was the encounter with map as it provided a chance for playtesting the designer's work.
Round 3 seems to always be about the monster or villain. I'd like to see the lair or headquarters be added to that round, or maybe have three tiers of one villainous group, such a cult leader, cult mystic, and cult member.
Jacob's suggestion of Design a Prestige Class would work well for round 2. Ronars' idea of a social encounter and Russell's idea of an encounter (side trek) based on the last year's winning module are both good concepts as well.
Well, in general the trend has been:
1 - wondrous item
2 - something related to a new rule Pathfinder is working with
3 - something evil and/or statblock
4 - an encounter and/or area
5 - an adventure
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've always seen the contest breaking down this way:
1) The First Impression Test - This always relies on wondrous item submssions. That's because you're just never going to find another 300-word or less submission idea that gives us such a quick feel for your creative writing ability, idea generation, mechanical rules-fu, and stat-block/template following. That tiny nugget is self-contained enough (and in a small enough word count) that we can handle the volume of submissions in our small, turn-around window. As such, I suspect the lead-off wondrous item round will stay for all future iterations of RPG Superstar.
2) The Creativity/World-Building Test - This round varies more than most. The assignment has traditionally been anything from "design a country" to "design a concept (for a monster or villain)" to "design an organization." There's really only ever been one rules-fu testing assignment during this round and that was the somewhat ill-fated "design an archetype" round wherein the concept was still so new that it caught a lot of people unprepared (including some of us judges). Regardless, I think the general thrust of this round has usually focused on testing your next big creative idea, paired with showing off your creative writing ability to inspire the reader, but all while also paying careful attention to honoring Paizo's flagship campaign setting and giving them usable world-building material for their IP.
3) The Rules/Villain Test - This is generally the round where we get a sense of how strong you are in a mechanical sense...i.e., your understanding of the rules and your ability to apply them correctly. Thus, this round typically features the "design a stat-block" test, either for a villain or a monster. In the first year, it was just a "design a villain" round, but that competiton got skewed a bit as it had one extra round overall to play with. Regardless, I think this is the round where we check to see how well the remaining contestants can adapt and apply the rules to their designs. And, we still want to make sure that these concepts fit within Paizo's IP.
4) The Game-Play/Location Test - This round is the natural building block for the eventual assignment given to the contest's winner. As such, once the voters have identified 8 candidates with a grasp on executing creative designs with proper application of the rules and consideration for Golarion canon, we can then turn to figuring out which ones are capable of thinking in terms of the actual game experience...i.e., what it's like to take those designs and see them in play...on an actual map...in an actual encounter. It's a roll-up of testing how your writing once again inspires the reader to envision the location which your encounter features, how you select and play with certain tactical setups for it, and how you weave in the various adversaries to give everyone playing the encounter some good entertainment value. The goal of this round is to move forward with those candidates you feel you can trust with pitching an adventure proposal and delivering on it.
5) The Storytelling/Plot Test - This is the final round. It's always the same. Basically, pitch an adventure proposal. The main focus here lies primarily on a credible, interesting plot. But, you also have to weigh everything you've learned in the earlier rounds of the contest. I've mentioned several times that the best adventures contain a) a memorable, compelling villain, b) an awesome, interesting location, c) a credible, entertaining plot that will motivate the PCs to get involved, d) some recurring minions the villain can rely upon to carry out his plans, and e) a decent reward the PCs obtain which can enhance their careers and live on far longer than your single adventure. If you look back across all those earlier rounds, you can see that the wondrous item round corresponds to the reward. The villain concept round applies to the adventure's villain. The encounter round corresponds to your adventure's location. And the stat-block round usually corresponds to the minions featured in an adventure. The only element that's missing is the plot. And that's the primary purpose of the final assignment given to the Top 4. We need to get a sense of how good you are at plotting and pacing an adventure. It's got to have compelling backstory, a good act/scene structure for its encounters, and a compelling mystery/situation for the PCs to experience. Hopefully, the latter is what kicks your adventure into iconic status as players get together to reminisce over and over about what your adventure allowed them to vicariously experience through their PCs.
And that, in a nutshell, is what each round of the RPG Superstar competition attempts to impart and test for anyone trying to navigate through it. Additionally, as voters, it's your responsibility to make sure you properly assess each competitor in how they measure up to the assignment. You want those Top 4 competitors every year to be up to the challenge, regardless of who takes the prize. That's what the assignments in rounds 1 thru 4 enable you to do. And then, that final round, gives you the chance to settle on which of the four's proposals you'd most like to see published so you can enjoy playing it or running it for your friends.
My two cents,
--Neil
The only problem I see with having a fix-it round is that it could be perceived as "boring" by a lot of regular board-goers. I personally think it would be interesting, and useful, but many would perceive it as being "the same thing twice."
I think the fix your own submission thing could just be a required part of one or more rounds but not its own voted round. Just require that contestants fix their previous round entry (not the one being voted on) in order to remain eligible. That becomes grist for the mill in considering the contestant overall.
That wouldn't slow down the contest at all, and in fact adds a little value to the downtime between rounds.
From a contestant's point of view, there is no downtime between rounds. If you make them fix an old entry and come up with a new entry in a week...? Well, that'd be a baptism by fire, for sure.
From a contestant's point of view, there is no downtime between rounds. If you make them fix an old entry and come up with a new entry in a week...? Well, that'd be a baptism by fire, for sure.
Amen! Trust me, contestants need ever minute they can get to work on their next assignment.