Aww c'mon. Weapons and food should not mix.
I always freak out in X-Men comics or cartoons where Wolverine uses his claws to roast a marshmallow or something. Like, dude, you just killed fifty ninjas with those things. Did you even wash them?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A lot of people wanting to do ranged channel smites, I see.
Kiff what's the worst job on the ship...
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16
,
Star Voter Season 6, Dedicated Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8
aka FaxCelestis
|
Why is every warhammer of infinite smiting made of mithral and +3?possibly for the same reason that every Holy Avenger is a +2 cold iron longsword (or a +5 holy cold iron longsword in the hands of a paladin), and every dagger of venom is a back +1 dagger with a serrated edge, and mace of smiting is always a +3 adamantine heavy mace... If you tell people that they are supposed to be designing "Specific Weapons" like the ones in the core rulebook, they are going to be taking their cues from the specific weapons in the core rulebook.
I get that's how the items in the book look, but come on. Seriously? Why restrict yourself?
...and many teleportation blades. Just joined to conversation, I'm sure this has already been commented on.
To those who have not yet seen you item: don't worry.
I have yet to see my item and I have voted over three hundred times now.
:)
Wow. And right after commenting about not expecting to see it, there's my item. Hopefully it's paired with that other item because they both need votes, and not because they're on the same level because...woof.Don't over think it or try to interpret it too much a lot of it is random. in an ideal world every item gets paired with every item across as many voters as possible
I know. It's just the butterflies in the stomach. Reading over my submission again, I didn't see any glaring errors. (I'm glad of that, since I hit the preview button about three dozen times, making corrections and edits, before I finally submitted.)
And soooo many Bull Rush, Disarm, and Sunder items
Wait, it's a what made of what? But by definition, that thing has to be made out of only that stuff. That's like saying I have an icicle made out of cheese. Makes no sense...
|
Some of these spelling errors are starting to really make me laugh. I can't mention my latest run-in because it's in the name of the item.
I'm starting to get a little nervous. The ambiguity of the comments in this thread (Although absolutely necessary) is a good encouragement when I think they could be talking about my item.
But now that I hear that a bottom 25% will be pruned...it's a little nerve-wracking.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
,
Marathon Voter Season 6, Dedicated Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8
aka Jiggy
|
I get that's how the items in the book look, but come on. Seriously? Why restrict yourself?Why is every warhammer of infinite smiting made of mithral and +3?possibly for the same reason that every Holy Avenger is a +2 cold iron longsword (or a +5 holy cold iron longsword in the hands of a paladin), and every dagger of venom is a back +1 dagger with a serrated edge, and mace of smiting is always a +3 adamantine heavy mace... If you tell people that they are supposed to be designing "Specific Weapons" like the ones in the core rulebook, they are going to be taking their cues from the specific weapons in the core rulebook.
Are you saying that the Sword of Stabbocity shouldn't always have the same enhancement bonus or something? Because if that's what you're saying, you're wrong; that's not how specific weapons work.
There's a rules difference between a named magic weapon and a flat-cost weapon enhancement: the latter can be placed on any weapon, while the former is an all-or-nothing package deal. Try to let the special ability of a flametongue work on any old magic weapon, and you've changed it from a "specific magic weapon" to a "flat-price weapon enhancement". At that point, it's no longer a valid entry for the contest.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've seen some snark in this thread that may have been in reference to my item, so that's reassuring.
Wow. When I first saw a weapon with that mechanic, I said "Well, that's original." It's certainly not one I would have expected to see repeated in another item, but there it is.
That's not a ring, that's a staff masquerading as a ring.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16
,
Star Voter Season 6, Dedicated Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8
aka FaxCelestis
|
I get that's how the items in the book look, but come on. Seriously? Why restrict yourself?Why is every warhammer of infinite smiting made of mithral and +3?possibly for the same reason that every Holy Avenger is a +2 cold iron longsword (or a +5 holy cold iron longsword in the hands of a paladin), and every dagger of venom is a back +1 dagger with a serrated edge, and mace of smiting is always a +3 adamantine heavy mace... If you tell people that they are supposed to be designing "Specific Weapons" like the ones in the core rulebook, they are going to be taking their cues from the specific weapons in the core rulebook.Are you saying that the Sword of Stabbocity shouldn't always have the same enhancement bonus or something? Because if that's what you're saying, you're wrong; that's not how specific weapons work.
There's a rules difference between a named magic weapon and a flat-cost weapon enhancement: the latter can be placed on any weapon, while the former is an all-or-nothing package deal. Try to let the special ability of a flametongue work on any old magic weapon, and you've changed it from a "specific magic weapon" to a "flat-price weapon enhancement". At that point, it's no longer a valid entry for the contest.
Well, I guess I hate specific weapons then. I'm still voting on merit, don't worry: saying "This ovaltine-forged cinnamon stick +2..." hasn't affected my vote, it just rankles my hackles (or some other mixed metaphor).
|
Star Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9
|
Aww c'mon. Weapons and food should not mix.
I always freak out in X-Men comics or cartoons where Wolverine uses his claws to roast a marshmallow or something. Like, dude, you just killed fifty ninjas with those things. Did you even wash them?
Mutant immune system, bub.
I'm really getting tired of back stories that imply the item was once mass-produced by the Great Lord So-and-So to be handed out like candy to all his Lordship's peasants/apprentices/cable repairmen, despite the 5- or even 6- figure price tags.
Especially when the backstory also indicates that said mass-produced items are "very rare".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok so here's the deal, you have a cool idea and 300 words to show me what you got as a writer. You use under 100 and you're as much a problem as the guy who can't stay under 300.
I'm with Jeff - just read at least one comment that I can see being totally about my item.
.....aaaaaaand there goes a fingernail!
Binge drinking this weekend, but don't want fall down drunk? Try this!
(Or you could, you know, elect to not binge drink.)
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
,
Marathon Voter Season 6, Dedicated Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8
aka Jiggy
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
"When you activate/don this [REDACTED], it transforms into the Wondrous Item that I originally designed, which is why I still listed a Wondrous Item slot instead of the slot for the item I'm pretending this is. Original text follows."
Ok so here's the deal, you have a cool idea and 300 words to show me what you got as a writer. You use under 100 and you're as much a problem as the guy who can't stay under 300.
+1
Inanimate objects have feelings too, it would seem.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm with Jeff - just read at least one comment that I can see being totally about my item.
.....aaaaaaand there goes a fingernail!
Relax. Last year I saw a number of snarky comments about what could have been—and in some cases WERE—about my item.
I still was in the top one hundred and considered by the judges. :)
Ok so here's the deal, you have a cool idea and 300 words to show me what you got as a writer. You use under 100 and you're as much a problem as the guy who can't stay under 300.+1
I'm not saying it to be cruel but think from the perspective of a publisher... I need X words on y subject is a common assignment. Under is better than tightly written and over but not by much. Severely under is a problem, forces an editor to either come up with more content or they have to coax you for more. Coaxing for more = managing talent no editor really wants to have to when there's so much talent out there.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Successful Freelancer = Thick Skin
Most of the good items I have seen were between 180 and 250 words.
Well, I might be one of the only ones repeatedly seeing snake/serpent/venom items, but my do I see the same of these again and again and again. To the point where they outnumber the weather (all types) items, I've seen, and there's been a fair lot of those too. Also, lava. So much lava/fire/fiery. And blood/pain/bones.
Guess I'm mostly seeing the same stuff as every one else.
I am getting more than a touch tired of items that do not have their names in the main block, only in the top. So far, none that would have gone over word count if they had, but I do not like this template breach. Also too many missing major pieces of the template or having it all but in the craziest order available.
But so far, most votes have been easy or annoying because both items wanted a downvote or and upvote, often for the same reasons. Then it comes down to: your name is annoying, yours is somewhat interesting.
But there's some truly great stuff in there. Though, those GREAT staves you're all talking about? Maybe I'm just too critical, or those are the ones I haven't seen.
Even with the snarky comments I might actual have upvoted the item, usually when I comment like that it is because I want the author to find it think it's about them and learn from it next year.
The joke items, the completely unformatted ones, the ones that go over the top with gore, the ones that clearly have drawn inspiration from an identifiable source, or the ones that just clearly never read the forum advice I'm geenrally not bothering to comment on. Those folks are already kicking themselves and will learn and maybe come back better next year.
I see a lot of potential out there this year.
I've seen a couple 275+ items that are really good.
Oh. Now I get all the popcorn references.
First time seeing an item that for no apparent reason is anti-specific class. It doesn't even fit with the rest of the item's theme
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
"At first appears to be...however, upon closer examination..."
Seriously, can we just stop using this, in any variation? I'd be happy never to see that line again in anything, ever.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
"There's only one thing worse in RPGSS than being snarked about, and that is not being snarked about at all"
Oh. Now I get all the popcorn references.
Yeah now I'm hungry!
Boring bunch of competence bonuses vs wedding rings.
And here come all the earthbreakers people have mentioned. I even had two of them paired for voting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Necromancy roulette!
Oh - the comment wasn't strictly good or bad (some of both), but it referenced some of the same thoughts I'd had about my item in language fairly close to what I used myself.
...and it gave me an idea for at least one related follow-on item...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
500 unique items! Woot!
I think I recognize this item from Bioshock Infinite.
Wait, what? That's not a weapon. Something isn't a weapon just because you say it is.
A [redacted] doesn't have that particular appendage on its body, so the name is troubling.
Nevertheless, the effect is kinda spiffy.
Jeez, I expected to come back to maybe three pages.
You guys are machines.
Last year's thread has over 6,000 posts. Of course, the voting period was a lot longer.
Have to go to a Christmas thing. See you guys later!
Poorly-formatted curing weapon vs. spell-the-author-didn't-know-existed in a can