Seagull

Chris_Johnston's page

42 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS


Sean K Reynolds wrote:
A Man In Black wrote:
New players can't eyeball a monk the same way, because the numbers look big and the class description says that "These warrior-artists search out methods of battle beyond swords and shields, finding weapons within themselves just as capable of crippling or killing as any blade."

Perhaps the monk is a class that new players shouldn't mess with until they're a little more experienced?

In other words, there's a reason why the fighter, cleric, wizard, and rogue are easy-to-play classes: the game needs an intro point for new players so they're not bogged down with a dozen options.

I can't really imagine a class LESS friendly to new players than the wizard, actually.

The monk, with a standard progression of abilities (all monks always get x at level y) should be simpler for a new player to pick up. In theory it should be more newbie-friendly than a class where you have an enormous choice of abilities, since a new player has no way of judging the value of such abilities against each other.


I agree with most of that, except for the first part. As far as I can tell, there are no rules saying whose CMB you use in such a situation, and you can see my thoughts on the matter here.

As far as the starting package goes, you definitely use the version in the druid entry. It's a modified version of the animal made to be on par with all the other default animal companions.


Does anyone have any idea how an overrun works during a charge? The rules specifically state that you can do it, but since a charge is a full-round action by default, there's no standard action left to use for the overrun.

My best guess is that you can attempt an overrun against anyone along the path of your charge, which would mean you can use it more than once per round. But I really have no idea.

For anyone interested, here's the relevant text from the PFSRD

Quote:
Charging is a special full-round action that allows you to move up to twice your speed and attack during the action.
Quote:
As a standard action, taken during your move or as part of a charge, you can attempt to overrun your target, moving through its square.

How do you take a standard action as part of a charge?


The Grandfather wrote:
Chris_Johnston wrote:
The Grandfather wrote:
The mount's CMB. Thus an average person will benefit from riding a mount when attempting to overrun or bull-rush a target.

Where does it say this?

EDIT: For anybody interested, I found this tucked away in the Special Attacks section of the 3.5 SRD, under Overrun.

Quote:
If you attempt an overrun while mounted, your mount makes the Strength check to determine the success or failure of the overrun attack (and applies its size modifier, rather than yours). If you have the Trample feat and attempt an overrun while mounted, your target may not choose to avoid you, and if you knock your opponent prone with the overrun, your mount may make one hoof attack against your opponent.

Note that this was in 3.5, where the overrun was simply a Strength check. In Pathfinder it's a combat maneuver, which takes Base Attack Bonus into account. This means that the mount's overrun check would probably be much worse than the rider's, as opposed to 3.5 where the mount's overrun check would probably be better both because of its mandatory larger size and presumably higher Strength score. In any case, this text was clipped away when the Overrun ability was rewritten for Pathfinder. The Trample feat remains referring to the maneuver, but the basic mechanics for it seem to have disappeared.

Anybody else have thoughts on this?

Again the rider is only as good as his mount.

Okay, but where does it actually say that?


Functionally the only limitation is the encumbrance limit of the mount and the number of squares it takes up. The only sensible way to run it would be to have one PC actually using the Ride skill to control the mount. That being said, all the other PCs would still have a full complement of actions each round, instead of having limited actions like kolokotroni indicated. I mean, even the rider of a regular mount gets a full round's worth of actions each round. It would be silly to say that people who are essentially dead weight for the mount don't get to react as fast as they do when they're standing on the ground.


The Grandfather wrote:
The mount's CMB. Thus an average person will benefit from riding a mount when attempting to overrun or bull-rush a target.

Where does it say this?

EDIT: For anybody interested, I found this tucked away in the Special Attacks section of the 3.5 SRD, under Overrun.

Quote:
If you attempt an overrun while mounted, your mount makes the Strength check to determine the success or failure of the overrun attack (and applies its size modifier, rather than yours). If you have the Trample feat and attempt an overrun while mounted, your target may not choose to avoid you, and if you knock your opponent prone with the overrun, your mount may make one hoof attack against your opponent.

Note that this was in 3.5, where the overrun was simply a Strength check. In Pathfinder it's a combat maneuver, which takes Base Attack Bonus into account. This means that the mount's overrun check would probably be much worse than the rider's, as opposed to 3.5 where the mount's overrun check would probably be better both because of its mandatory larger size and presumably higher Strength score. In any case, this text was clipped away when the Overrun ability was rewritten for Pathfinder. The Trample feat remains referring to the maneuver, but the basic mechanics for it seem to have disappeared.

Anybody else have thoughts on this?


So I was thinking about a question that somebody else asked here, and it got me to thinking about combat maneuvers while mounted.

After scouring the pfsrd, I still don't have an answer to this question:

If a mounted character uses a combat maneuver, does he use his CMB or his mount's?

In particular I'm interested in the overrun maneuver. You're clearly supposed to be able to use this maneuver while mounted, since the Trample feat is triggered by it. In a similar vein, would you be treated as your size or your mount's size for the purpose of combat maneuvers made while mounted? I could see a rationale for it either way, so what I'm interested in is not a houserule or opinion, but textual support for one side or the other. Basically I want to know if this is ever addressed in the game.


I'm not a big fan of tier ratings, mostly because they're irrelevent in the context of the game. There are only two tiers that actually matter: classes that can contribute, and classes that can't. In 3.5, spellcasters were in the first, nonspellcasters were in the second. While Pathfinder has helped shore up the difference a little, by and large the classes have remained pretty much the same relative to each other.


paul halcott wrote:
So, I am planning on using the Cav. class as a BBEG in an upcoming adventure. I was reviewing mounted combat with a friend of mine. The question is: If the horse has the feat trample, and the Cav has ride by attack and spirited charge, do all of them apply in each charging pass the guy makes? Can the horse trample the poor schlep thats about to get knocked around by the knight?

The key is to look at what all of the feats do. Ride-By Attack lets you keep moving after a charge attack. Spirited Charge increases the damage done by the charge attack. It's fairly obvious that you can use these two at the same time when you're performing a charge.

Now, Trample makes things a bit more complicated. Basically it gives you a special benefit when you decide to overrun someone while mounted. They can't choose to avoid you, and your mount gets to make a free hoof attack (wonder what happens if your mount doesn't have hooves?). It's also worth noting that your mount isn't eligible to take Trample, since that's something that the rider takes.

Overrun is kind of weird for a combat maneuver. The first part says:

Quote:
As a standard action, taken during your move or as part of a charge, you can attempt to overrun your target, moving through its square.

So you can use overrun in conjunction with a charge attack. You're allowed to run over people while charging towards your target, and if you do well enough on the check you knock them prone. The weird thing here is that it doesn't take an action to do this if it's done as part of a charge (since a charge by default is a full-round action), which seems to mean you can try to overrun as many people as are in your way during a charge on the way to your target.

Now with Ride-By Attack, you move through the charge attack target's square to continue your movement and run away. That means you can definitely make an overrun and subsequently use Trample on the charge's target as you pass through their square.

It's also interesting to note that it seems like you can use Improved Overrun and Greater Overrun while mounted. It's not immediately clear whether you or your mount needs to have those two feats for them to be effective.

To sum it up, yes. You can use those three feats together when you make a charge. But the key here is that one leads to another. You make a Ride-By Attack, which is a hit-and-run charge. You charge up to someone, and can make overrun (and trample) attacks against anyone along the way. If any of the overruns fail, you stop your movement and your charge is interrupted. If you make it to the charge's target, you can make a Spirited Charge attack which deals double damage (triple with a lance). Then you move through the enemy's square, allowing you to make a free overrun attack (with the benefits of Trample if you have it) and can run away without provoking an attack of opportunity. Note that while Ride-By Attack says you don't provoke attacks of opportunity for moving through the space threatened by the enemy, you DO still provoke an attack of opportunity for making an overrun attack unless you or possibly your mount have the Improved Overrun feat.

You might also want to think about the Unseat feat, since it lets you toss a free bull rush on top of a mounted charge attack. Seriously, mounted combat is all about charges with lances. It's the only way to really play it. All the feats and special options do stuff with charges.


Congratulations!


I voted for Eric. It's much more interesting and exotic than fey, and I think it could be worked quite well into 32 pages.


While I agree that this entry certainly has its flaws, it's by far the most imaginative and awe-inspiring. This was the only entry this round which really wowed me. It's given me tons of ideas, and definitely gets my vote this round! Great work!


My votes go to 26 Paper Street and The Lonely Colossus.


I'm just not sure on this one. It's definitely up there, and the idea is sort of novel, I suppose. I like this take on rationalized insanity, that's for sure.

I do love the name, though. It's just so ludicrously out of the ordinary. It's like the Haunted Shoes from the first round; when I saw the name, I knew I would like the enty, no matter what.


There are a few problems, but it's a really really cool idea, which is more than most people had this round. I think that if you're given a bit more space to expand on her, you'll deliver on the abilities and potentials of the body parts and the possible scenarios for the PCs. This one's got my vote.


I'm going to be voting for whoever I feel is the best designer in general. That means that I'll definitely be taking the items into account, although being longer the villains will probably count for more in my estimations. :P


Definitely one of the cooler items. I love the mental image, even if there are a few mechanics bits to work out. The price does seem too high, definitely. By the time you can afford it, you aren't going to be encountering many undead under 11 HD, which means the horn has very very limitied practicality. Especially since undead scale in HD to CR faster than most other creature types. I'd probably remove the clause about it being useless after finding a 11+HD undead, but that's just me. I do like the hazardousness, though. It's like, "you wanted to find me? HERE I AM!"

Good luck from a fellow Canadian! I can't wait to see what you came up with for round 2!


NJKrosse wrote:

Tattoo Needles of the Vanja Brujak

Aura moderate evocation; CL 7th
Slot —; Price 140,000 gp; Weight

These rune etched tattoo needles are crafted of unknown materials. A closely guarded secret of the nomadic Vanja Brujak, these needles are passed down from master to apprentice. The ‘Art of the Mark’ as the tattoos are called by them is seen as a gift to be used only in times of great peace or great strife.

Creating a tattoo costs the same as creating a scroll of the same spell. The spell tattooed is of the caster’s level and takes 1 hour/level of the spell to create. This results in one point of temporary constitution damage/spell level—the effects of mystical energy infusion into the character’s body.

A tattoo can be used a number of times equal to the character’s undamaged constitution modifier. Activating a tattoo is a Swift Action and is treated as a spell-like ability. A tattoo gives a permanent +2 to the character’s Charisma score. Once the tattoo is used up, the tattoo remains, but the magic fades.

Requirements: Craft Wondrous Item, eagle’s splendor, imbue with spell ability, creator must have ranks in Profession (Tattooist); Cost 70,000 gp

Alright, I can't seem to fall asleep as my mind is swimming through the possibilities of my failed wondrous item. So Sir Peterson, at your leisure, feel free to take the gloves off and give it to me straight. I'm a 1st degree black belt and have taken hefty blows to my ego before, giving me +2 to will saves vs fear and intimidation (not that you are either, I just like thinking this). The same goes for anyone else who feels like criticizing my work of 'art'.

I have some criticisms that I came up with and chewed my lip over since submitting, but I'll wait to hear what you have to say first, as you are much more of an expert that I am.

If I had to guess, I'd say that it's not really a magic item – it's an entire new magic item system. Clark mentioned in I think the almost-ran thread that a few entries were disqualified because they did something like introducing a new spell system. While it might be cool (and they are!), it's not really the jurisdiction of a magic item. It would be a feat, like Craft Magic Tattoo or somesuch.

Not to mention that he's said he doesn't like Con damage. ;)

Just my thoughts.


It's a weird (in a good sort of way)... template? But it definitely seems rules-light. Too many unanswered questions, in the ritual itself, as well as stuff as mundane as the eyes themselves. You say they regrow if destroyed, but you don't tell us how they can be destroyed. Honestly, I can't really see any PC I've ever known making use of this. I'm afraid it's near the bottom of my list.

Congratulations on getting in, though, and I'm eager to see what you can come up with for round 2!


This is a really cool idea and I have some amazing ideas for how to use it. But the 'ethereal' bit in the title sort of throws me off. The text doesn't seem to support it being ethereal and going through walls and stuff, so I THINK it's just flavour. But otherwise it seems quite a handy tool to have around.

Congratulations!


Meds wrote:

Thanks for doing this Clark. Here's my submission. Feel free to give me the unvarnished truth.

Leech of Lethe's Bliss

Aura moderate conjuration and enchantment; CL 11th
Slot —; Price 6,600 gp; Weight 1/2 lb.

DESCRIPTION
Healer and killer alike prize this translucent leech for its ability to suck out memories from eyes that have seen too much.
Allowing the leech to attach to the eyelids of a willing or helpless subject immediately eliminates all memory of the last hour (as modify memory). In addition, it restores any decrease to Intelligence and Charisma from casting contact other plane. Finally, it ends any and all of the following conditions: confused, feebleminded, and insanity. Once the leech has been used for the third time, it dissolves into river water. Despite its superficial resemblance to mundane bloodsuckers, the leech of Lethe’s bliss is not considered to be a creature for any purpose.

CONSTRUCTION
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, heal, modify memory; Skill Profession (apothecary); Cost 3,300 gp

This is a really cool item, but I just realized that you need to be a cleric 11/bard 10 to craft it. o_O


Clark Peterson wrote:

Oh man, another good one. This one had a TON of discussion.

I think we all liked the core concept, but it was the execution that got you and the fact that the item didnt seem well thought through.

I wrote:

"Oh this was so great until the breathweapon thing. I dont want my dragons to have their breath weapons ended by a little scarab. I mean, I like that it can trap a breath weapon and I like that it can trap breath. What I dont like is that the creature then cannot breathe. I think that should only work on the bearer. If a breath weapon is trapped it shouldnt stop that...

Sigh... I guess trying to make a new template was a little too ambitious for a wondrous item. Thank you very much for the feedback, and for taking the time to do this! You RAWK!

There's always next year!


If you're opening the floodgates... I'd love to get some feedback. :)

Breathkeeping Scarab

Aura faint illusion and moderate evocation; CL 7th
Slot –; Price 63,000 gp; Weight

DESCRIPTION

This jeweled scarab can house a creature’s living breath. It opens on hidden hinges with a move (manipulation) action. A creature may transfer their breath into an opened scarab as a swift action. Alternatively, if the bearer succeeds on the saving throw offered by a breath weapon by 5 or more, he may trap it in an opened scarab as an immediate action. This negates the breath’s other effects that round. A scarab closes upon trapping a creature’s breath, but buzzes and clicks as if alive.

While a creature’s breath is trapped, it does not breathe. It is immune to suffocation, drowning and inhaled dangers, but cannot use breath weapons or the scent ability.

The victim’s breath returns immediately if the scarab is opened or destroyed. If a breath weapon was trapped, it releases in a random direction with the original range, save DC and effects.

Breathkeeping scarabs can only be destroyed by disintegrate, a rod of cancellation or negation, or a targeted dispel magic.

CONSTRUCTION

Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, ghost sound, resilient sphere; Skill Craft (gem cutting); Cost 31,500 gp


I didn't think I'd like this item, but curiously I do. It seems to have just the right mix of whimsicalness and usefulness, as well as mechanical solidity. Bravo!


My five favourites from best to least best (although still great):

• Dust of Weighty Burdens
• Boundary Chalk
• Key of Closed Doors
• Ethereal Tether
• Haunted Shoes


After careful review, this is definitely my favourite of the bunch. A cool, unique effect that has a great visual and is well thought out. Reading this answers all of my questions about it, but I can think of a ton of ways to use it. Congratulations!


Very, very cool. Time manipulation is very tough to do well with the 3.5 ruleset, and this one comes as close as anything I've seen. It does seem to be a bit lacking on interaction between the past and future self, though. I suppose that's just the nature of paradoxes.

What happens if the future self kills the past self?


Jason Rice wrote:
Assuming the hook can "run" at x4 it's base movement, it can only travel 360 feet in the 3 rounds it's active. I'm not sure why there is 500 feet of rope.

I puzzled about this too, but then realized that the hook's master could be moving at the same time – in the opposite direction.

My only question is what happens if the spider's MORE than 500ft? You put a limit, but don't give the consequence. Does the rope just not appear? Does part of it appear? Starting from which end?

But really, this is a great idea. I love the image. Congratulations!


Unfortunately, although I applaud you for your success, I can't really get behind this item. It invalidates too much material to be reasonable in play. Is it fair to have a single item that automatically wins initiative against someone who's taken prestige classes, gotten equipment and feats to boost their initiative, pumped their Dex, etc? I know my players would loathe me if I had a villain use this against them, because it feels too much like DM fiat. "I win. Period."

Also, what happens if two people use it at the same time? (Answer: the universe EXPLODES!)


Clark Peterson wrote:

Chris, I see where you are going with this. But as is probably plain from some of my prior posts, what I dont like about this item is the metagame element of taking the exploration out of wilderness travel. Hidden caves and such are a part of the game. I mean, how cool would it have been for Gandalf and company to have used this chalice to find the troll hoard in the Hobbit instead of stumbling into it the way they did, and there find some killer weapons. I just think items like this, while they make sense, take out some of the heart of pen and paper D&D.

That said, I like the crushing despair twist. I do think the effects seem to go a bit beyond what comes from commune with nature. Because you change the text of the power from the text of the commune with nature spell, I think as a result there are some very vague terms for this item. For isntance, what does "significant terrain features in the area, as well as settlements, buildings, special types of terain, and significant weather" really mean? I think it is a bit unclear.

Thanks for the feedback. The reason it doesn't say something like 'gain the effects of a commune with nature spell' is mostly because I wanted to avoid simply replicating a spell. But that and some of the other points you mentioned were the reason I went with my other entry. :)

Looking at it now, I guess it's just not heroic enough, although I did like the image of someone looking into the cup to see the entire world reflected in it. Thanks again!


If I could get your feedback on this, Clark, I'd be super-grateful! (Math adjusted from earlier post in this thread)

Chalice of Worldly Reflections

Aura moderate divination; CL 9th
Slot –; Price 40,500 gp; Weight 2 lb

When this simple silver cup is filled with water, the bearer may gaze into it and see all the world reflected therein. Gazing into its limitless depths takes 1 minute, and forces the bearer to make a Will saving throw against a DC of 17 as they realize their own insignificance against such a grand scale. Failure indicates that they are affected as if by a crushing despair spell for the following 9 minutes, and gain no other benefit from the chalice.

If their saving throw is successful, they gain a +2 insight bonus on Knowledge (geography) and Survival checks for the following 24 hours. In addition, they instantly learn about the land in a 9-mile radius around them. They learn about any significant terrain features in the area, as well as settlements, buildings, special types of terain, and significant weather. This effect ignores any kind of illusion, such as hallucinatory terrain. The chalice may be used three times per day, but only once per day per person.

CONSTRUCTION

Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, commune with nature; Cost 20,250 gp


Ross Byers wrote:
Warren Hill wrote:

I find the number 4 issue rather odd. I don't really consider that point a rule of thumb but rather a matter of opinion. Grant it I am merely an observer in all this but as a successful filmmaker I find this statement flies in the face of story development. Since Rping is a story driven concept it stands to reason one might want to add that element to an item. Nothing is created from nothing. To say a wonderous item should not have a creator, which is in fact a backstory, is like saying the following should not be mentioned when discussing what they created:

Light Bulb – Thomas Edison
Automobile – Henry Ford
Camera Film – Eastman Kodak
Photocopier - Xerox

An artifact is something that cannot be dupicated, not something that can only reserve the right of having a name or backstory associated with it. No offence Mr. Peterson.

In a rulebook telling you how a car looks and functions, Mr. Ford is superfluous. Especially if this rulebook might need to be used for a world that isn't Earth.

Besides, who invented the Chariot? Cement? The grain-mill? Pasta? The futon? Lots of inventions have origins that are lost to time.

Especially in a 200-word summary of the object in question. I think you'd be more concerned with, you know, a very brief summary of what the object is or does.


Wolfgang Baur wrote:
10. Channeling items. There were a lot of items that worked with channeling mechanics. Like the augury items last year, there's nothing *wrong* with that mechanic, but seeing it fairly often means we probably set the bar higher.

Just wanted to make a quick comment about this one. I have a feeling that the reason there are so many of these items (as well as the beast shape items mentioned later, to a lesser extent) is that Channel Energy is a new mechanic that replaces a mechanic that didn't work in the original 3.5. I think a lot of people (including almost me) saw the new mechanic and got a lot of cool ideas for how to use it since it was much more flexile than the horrible Turn and Rebuke Undead mechanics.


Clark Peterson wrote:
13. Poorly-thought-through Item (aka Excessively Abusable Item). We had alot of items that the designer didnt really think through to their normal result and, had they done so, they would have seen some serious abusability in their item's future, such as a way to use it that wasnt intended but that clearly it would be put to. That is why it is good to think not just does the item do what you are designing it to, but what would a normal group of PCs do with this item whether or not it is what you intended. One of my favorite items submitted had a great name and a great power, but it had an unintended abuse. All the judges agreed that PCs would just do X with the item and abuse the power. And it was too bad, too (see!) because I liked the item alot. But it wasnt well thought through.

I fear this one. I put what you could and couldn't do with my item pretty clearly, but there are several ways to use it intelligently. I think I put the price high enough, but... who knows?


My number one nonentry:

Chalice of Worldly Reflections

Aura moderate divination; CL 7th
Slot –; Price 15,120 gp; Weight 2 lb

When this simple silver cup is filled with water, the bearer may gaze into it and see all the world reflected therein. Gazing into its limitless depths takes 1 minute, and forces the bearer to make a Will saving throw against a DC of 16 as they realize their own insignificance against such a grand scale. Failure indicates that they are affected as if by a crushing despair spell for the following 7 minutes, and gain no other benefit from the chalice.

If their saving throw is successful, they gain a +2 insight bonus on Knowledge (geography) and Survival checks for the following 24 hours. In addition, they instantly learn about the land in a 10-mile radius around them. They learn about any significant terrain features in the area, as well as settlements, buildings, special types of terrain, and significant weather. This effect ignores any kind of illusion, such as hallucinatory terrain. The chalice may be used three times per day, but only once per day per person.

CONSTRUCTION

Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, commune with nature; Cost 7,560 gp


Fraust wrote:
Wish I would have caught this thread before sending in my submission. But alas, I got here literrally two minutes after submitting. Oh well, if I get disquallified again this year for some idiocy on my part at least I know it's not as bad as my idiocy last year...I made a magic ring...

I can't really see them rejecting your entry just because your aura is slightly off. That's pretty much the smallest aspect of the item, all things considered. Just by looking through some of the items that made it last year, there are definitiely some there that have errors and mechanical goofs in them. As long as you have a strong idea and execution, I think you definitely stand a chance.


I believe that you can have two auras for a single object, as shown by the Helm of Telepathy, which is written as:

Aura faint divination and enchantment

As opposed to something like the Hand of Glory, which reads:

Aura faint varied

It seems that if you have more than two schools of magic involved, it becomes varied.


Reckless wrote:
taig wrote:
I'm going to guess 1,968 for no particular reason.
Ha! and I'll "Price is Right" bully-bid you at 1969 because I was born that year.

You are the closest without going over.


Blackdirge wrote:

Run through the list of bad item stereotypes; if any of your items come anywhere near those, chuck 'em.

If you still have a couple left after that - and this is just my own personal opinion - choose the item the does one "really" cool thing over the item that does a bunch of "pretty" cool things. I think it's easier for the judges to see your innovation with a simple item over a complex one. In other words, shoot for gloves of storing over a helm of brilliance.

However, I have absolutely no idea what the judges are going to favor; so Clark, Wolfgang, and Sean could read this and think I'm smoking the crack. Keep that in mind with any advice offered by your fellow board members. =]

BD

Exactly. I dumped those of mine that tried to do too much or which were really just a spell or two inside of an item. One thing almost all of the entries from last year had going was that they didn't just replicate a spell. They did things that couldn't be accomplished under the normal rules. While this makes the pricing and the selection of the base spell interesting, it means the item is much more original. Make sure it's simple, interesting and appealing to somebody that would be looking to spend their gp.

If you're not sure whether you're trying to do too much with one item, answer two questions:

a) Would you want it for that price?
b) Would anybody NOT want it for that price?

If the answer to both is yes, you may have a viable item.


Set wrote:

That sort of thing is, IMO, more interesting if it's worked into an item with other uses. A +1 Dwarven Forgehammer that adds to craft (armorsmith, blacksmith, weaponsmith) skills and also can Sunder items with great skill would be a neat concept, but serve more as a weapon than a Wondrous Item.

There's no reason you can't have a wondrous item that also works as a weapon though, right? There's the Maul and Mattock of the Titans in the rulebooks, and the Malleus Maleficarum that got into the contest last year that all work in battle as enchanted weapons.


Alberta. Also with snow.


I totally missed out on this last year, but I've put in a submission this time around. This could be tons of fun. :)