Really interested to see how this comes out! The game is in very good hands. I trust you guys to do something great. It's been a long time since I've been on these boards. I really miss everyone here.
The Pipe Fox from beastiary 4 is about as cute as they come. He's tough to top. ...wait for it... ...you know it's coming... What does the Pipe Fox Say?
I heartily agree with Erik. Just in the first batch of items I've voted on this year I have seen a couple really, really good items. Yes, there have been some bad ones, but not horrible so far. I have said over and over that as a result of discussion and our item threads the general quality of submissions has gone way up. It seems to be true once again this year. I've read maybe 10 pairs of items tonight and of those 10 (so 20 items) there are at least 3 or 4 I would have put in the keep pile right away in past years. That is quite a percentage. Most of you know, I was one of those judges in that first group (Erik, Wolfgang and I) and it was a grind--and has been a grind ever year until they changed to the public screening of the first round last year. I love it, don't get me wrong. But it is a ton of work. Easily half of the submissions that first year could have been discarded out of hand. Not so this year, at least from what I am seeing. And each year there has been improvement. Keep up the good work everyone!
Now that I'm not a judge, I can perhaps offer a few ideas. Some of you, particularly in this thread, are really good at mechanics. Like, really good. This may sound strange, but I think just about everyone in this thread is good enough at mechanics to make the top 32. That is not your problem. Let me ask you this, when you design an item are you trying to do a mechanic and then picking a cool idea to fit it, or are you looking for a superstar idea and then finding the mechanic? If (1), you are doing it wrong, if (2) you are doing it right. Find the coolness. Find the superstar idea. You all have the mechanics chops to then write the item you come up with. It is two things: (1) the core idea, and (2) the name, that you guys in this thread have to work on. Find the killer idea and item. A beautifully designed ok item doesnt advance. You guys here know your mechanics good enough. Just my $0.02. Clark
Hi everyone. Just wanted to drop in and let you know that for various reasons I won't be able to serve as a main judge this year for RPG Superstar. I am very bummed to miss only my second year of this great contest as a judge of the contest. Of course, as always, I will stay plugged in to this great community and encourage and support the contestants and help in any way I can. There are many reasons why I love Superstar. First, its run by Paizo and the people who own and run Paizo have become my friends over the years. I think they are great people and they deserve my support. Second, I believe Paizo and Pathfinder to be the true successor to AD&D, a game I have played since I was 10 years old, and its creativity and outlet has been a wonderful hobby of mine for those many years. Third, I had so many great people help me when I was a new designer starting out with my d20 company that I think it only fair to return the favor and help new designers trying to break into the field. Fourth, I enjoy working with my fellow Superstar judges--Erik and Wolfgang in year 1, through Sean and Neil and Ryan as the years went by. I I have truly learned more from my time judging this contest then you likely learned from me. And fifth, all the great people I have met from this contest, not the least of whom include Neil and Jason and Boomer and some of the guys who now comprise Legendary Games. It is a great contest filled with great people from top to bottom and it has been my pleasure to be associated with it. I am proud of my work as a judge of the contest and hope to be able to resume that role, time permitting, in the future. So, without further ado...Go Team! If anyone is considering not entering, please reconsider. Though I wont be able to judge your submissions, believe me when I tell you that you will find it to be a useful and improving process. Good luck to all the contestants. And, between me you and the fence post, I am pulling for a few of the forum regulars who havent previously advanced to make it into the top 32 this year! Clark
Anthony, I do think people have come to obsess over Sean's list (which stems from my old Bad Item Stereotypes post from the first year). Bottom line: make it cool.
Yeah, Ziv, YEAH! Stand up! Fight the man! Get what I deserve! Oh wait they already gave me a forum title. Hey, uh...solid gold dice! Yeah, that's it. That's what I want! You must think I'm a joke! I ain't gonna be a part of your system! You can't buy me, hotdog man! The moral of this story is: you can't trust the system!
2 million. Wow. That is really starting to sink in. That is a ton of work. Thank goodness for the staggeringly generous stipend they pay us judges, not to mention the life time supply of Paizo products and the 4 round trip tickets to Hawaii (all inclusive) to a resort of my choosing. If I didn't get those perks, I'm not sure I'd be willing to do all that. I mean, can you imagine what an idiot someone would have to be to do that for free? Hah! What a loser!
I actually really liked the insidious seed name -- far more than reaching tendril. It might not have been quite as descriptive, but it caught the imagination. Insidious is a great gaming word. I agree with Jacob. I think this is a good lesson. Don't let a technical rewrite (which improved the item) steal the heart of the item's mojo. I really liked that name and I liked what you were trying to do. I thought you didn't quite nail it with the first draft. That wouldnt have been a keeper for me. BUT the revised item, while still not perfect, is better and if you had kept the original name that was of a quality that I could say could easily be a keep pile item for me. But you changed the name and somehow that stole the heart from the thing. Just keep that in mind as you improve from a technical standpoint. Don't neuter your item.
I sure hope we see a massive contingent of female gamers submitting to Superstar 2014. I am getting all geeked for Superstar 2014. I've volunteered to judge again (whether they accept my offer and in what way is up to them, of course). No matter what my role, I can't wait for the contest! Ladies, get your design hats on and start polishing up some ideas. The more women the better!
It just so happens I was contacted by Paizo a week or so ago about a certain event... :) and here I am looking in the Superstar forums. Hmm. Seems I might be getting that itch again. It must be getting near Superstar time.
Friends, Romans, Countrymen, Gamers, I've seen the source material. The classic old binders with all of Bill's cribbed notes (indecipherable to the mortal eye, his writing is so hard to read). This is truly some amazing stuff. This stuff is it--it is the real deal, the original material. His stuff. His home campaign. Sure, I expanded some of it from my home campaign and that stuff made its way into some of the Necromancer cannon. But at heart it's Bill's home campaign. Particularly these adventures. I know because I've gone through them as a player. I'm just going to call it like I see it: Bill is basically a modern day Bob Bledsaw. And FGG, carrying on the spirit of Necromancer, is essentially like a modern day Judges Guild in my opinion. I can't say enough about how much you guys are going to love this content. But it's more than that. Just like the Wilderlands and the City State has a special place, or Blackmoor or Greyhawk. Bill's home campaign is epic. And I also think, given Bill's amazing role in 3E and post-3E publishing, there is an important history of gaming quality to this stuff. I think 20 years from now they may not remember me but I think Bill will be remembered for his impact on D&D/gaming. Bill I am proud of you and I am so glad this stuff is going to see the light of day. I know all of you are really going to enjoy it!
You know, seeing Bill and everyone at FGG do Tome 4 gets me all nostalgic. I could not be more proud of the work the guys at FGG do. You guys know the story. I started Necro and got Bill involved. Quickly we became one of the best third party publishers and put out a ton of old school goodness. It was an amazing run. 4E came along and life changes for me and I wasn't able to stay in the biz on a day to day basis. Bill has taken over the Necro content with my blessing and I am so happy to see it thriving. But back to my original point :) I am so glad to see Tome growing. I remember coming up with the name with Bill back in the day. I hope you all realize how this product started and what an amazing tribute it is to the Open Game movement. I was able to secure from Wizards of the Coast the rights to do ALL the "forgotten" monsters that hadnt been officially updated to 3E and to release them as open content in our original Tome of Horrors. THAT is why Pathfinder is able to have all those monsters in their game--they got them as open content from us. Which is totally awesome. I am so proud of having been able to make the original Tome of Horrors for all the gamers. It is one of the highlights of my time with Necro (along with doing a product with Gygax and going to dinner with him at GenCon, and doing the Wilderlands products with Bob Bledsaw and getting permission from the Frazetta family to use Frazetta art on the cover). I believe in the open gaming movement. Without it, we wouldnt have Pathfinder. I am so proud to see Bill and the guys and girls at FGG carry on the tradition of the Tome of Horrors. If you are sitting on the fence, please check this thing out. Not only is it an amazing book of monsters. It is also a part of the chain of one of the most important products in the Open Game movement. The Tome of Horrors as a series will long be remembered in gaming. Seriously, you are getting more than a book. You are getting a part of gaming history. And I am so happy to see Bill and the FGG crew continuing this awesome tradition. Tome has been and always will be near and dear to my heart. I just wanted to share, for those who might not know, the super cool role Tome as a series has played in the continued game tradition carried on in Pathfinder. Could you imagine Pathfinder without all those cool old school monsters? Sorry if an old guy like me waxes all nostalgic, but we were really able to achieve something great with Tome, something I am proud of and something I am overjoyed to see Bill and co. continue doing. And what comment on Tome would be complete without a big shout out to Scott Greene. If there was ever a monster guru, my friend you are it! Enjoy the monsters. Clark
Bill, I can't believe you are actually going to do this. Amazing! Guys, when I started Necro and got Bill involved, one of the reasons I did that was because of the campaign he ran when we were in college, which included Sword of Air and Hel's Temple and all the other things, some of which we were able to do as Necro and some we weren't. Bill is the best DM I've ever played with (and I've played with some guys people consider great). He is so old school it is scary. This stuff was already mapped out and filled binders and notebooks even back then. I know how Bill does stuff and if he gives his Bill-style treatment to this material, I can tell you right now it will blow you away. Bill and I talked about doing Sword of Air when we were doing Necro but it just couldn't be done. We had too many other things going on and the scope of the project just too huge. I hope you guys understand the insane scope of this project and the earth shattering coolness of the content. I played in it years back so I can tell you from experience (and also beating it, [cough cough], uh yeah that's right). Man, if you can pull this off that would be insane. Total gamer nerdgasm. D&D Nirvana. I'm so glad to see you announce this. I know we talked about it recently. I'm getting excited! You guys have no idea what you are in store for with this.
Congrats, Steven. Well done. Now the real work begins. :) And let me just remind you of the wisdom of Neil Spicer: it's not what you do during Superstar, it's what you do after Superstar. You got the shot, now it's up to you. Best of luck!
Hi everyone. As I'm sure all of you are, I'm excited for you guys to see the final 4 submissions. They are all very creative and really good. I've really been impressed with the contestants this year. Everyone did a great job. In the end, I recommended two of the four for your final consideration, and I specifically recommended one of them to be the winner. But in the end the voting is up to you. I am certain you will like them and I am just as certain you will particularly enjoy James' brilliant commentary on the four submissions. I wanted to take a second to say something that I think makes Paizo and Pathfinder great. I have long thought that it is the obligation of the publisher of D&D (and who is kidding who, I feel strongly that Pathfinder is both the moral and historical successor to D&D, but I don't want to start that debate) to teach people how to create great adventures. The old Dungeon magazine did that by example and Paizo does that now with the APs and modules. I don't know that adventure design has ever existed at a higher level than it does now under Paizo's watch. So take some time and really dig through James' comments, not only as comments on contestants, but also as thoughts of one of the pre-eminent designers/developers in the history of fantasy roleplaying. It is really a pleasure to see design in action and I hope the fans take the chance to learn about adventure design as a byproduct of this great contest. So my hat (if I wore one) is off to the contestants this year and to Paizo for this amazing contest. And I can't wait to see what all of you think. Clark
Final Analysis: Scott, I've considered all of the submissions and really thought about them relative to each other. I love so much of what you have done in this contest. You know I am a huge fan. But I'm not judging you, I'm judging your submission. Having considered all of the submissions, I can't recommend this one for a couple reasons. The writing/proofreading. James and Sean discussed it and I won't belabor it but I agree. I don't think what you show here says that you are ready for a full adventure. Doesn't mean you won't be in the future, in fact I am pretty sure you will. I expect to see quite a bit of your work in future Paizo products. Also, this submission just seemed to meander a bit and lose it's way. Some of the coolest things were not well utilized or were merely teases. I get the sense, as did the others, that this was just not up to your normal final draft standard. I understand. This is a grueling contest and as I have said before I don't think I could win it. Plus, if I'm being honest, I think once you strip away the teasing coolness, the adventure itself was just the least compelling of the group. And when you combine that with serious grammatical re-writes, I'm not excited about that as a developer/publisher. Listen, your run has been a great one. No doubt. But in comparison to the other submissions I don't think this one is as good and it shows a lack of readiness to take on a full adventure. I DO NOT RECOMMEND this submission be considered to win RPG Superstar 2013. Best of luck in the future!
Just for the record, remember how we used the top 89 items from the public vote from which to choose the top 32? Well, without naming names (and they don't necessarily relate in public ranking to judge ranking), the top 4 contestants submitted items 7, 11, 37 and 45 from the public vote. Just in case anyone was interested. Based on the judges rankings, though, of the top 32 they were items 2, 4, 22 and 28. So once again I think this shows the judge's input is valuable. Though it is clear the public does a good job of sorting the keep pile, it still really needs judicial ranking by experts of the top 32 from that pile. Lots to learn and think about. I love this contest!
I think it is also interesting to look back to round 1 to see how well the sorting process of the wondrous item does for eventual winners/top 4. This year, both the quicksand cloak and the verdant crown were strong keeps from the judges. No surprise they are in the top 4. Which shows you can have excellent execution and mojo in round 1 items even that early in the contest. Great work Scott and Steven. The reins were more of a dark horse. Both Sean and I called them a weak keep but Wolfgang saw something and he pulled for them. Looks like what he saw proved to be correct--Pedro has really come on. As for the soap, that was really an outsider item. Neither Sean nor Wolfgang felt that strongly but I thought they were clearly a keeper item and I fought for them in the top 32 and I'm glad I did since I think Matt has been fantastic. So, the moral of the story is that each year there is a contestant who comes from the "barely got in the door of the top 32" list and makes it to the top 4. This once again validates my constant comment that the issue for round 1 is NOT to design the perfect item, but it is to show us some spark as a contestant (and thus we as judges should not be overly impressed by the perfect execution in round 1). Maybe I've just been doing this for a while, but I think we judges have a pretty good eye for that contestant with mojo whose round 1 item isn't perfect. Each year one of us finds one of those persons who just squeaks in that one of us championed who winds up going real far.
Hi everyone. There is extra voting time this round to permit playtesting. Please, please, please do that. When you get right down to it, you aren't going to get better feedback or critique than what you get from Sean, Wolf and me. We do (or in my case, did) this professionally. We can tell great stuff when we see it. One thing we can't do (and didn't do) is playtest this stuff. Sometimes an encounter takes on a new dimension when it hits the table. So please play these and post your playtest reviews. Clark
Happy belated birthday, Clark. I'll have to run my regular Pathfinder gang through some Rappan Athuk in your honor! Kill as many as you can :)
Initial Impression: This round's task seems to have been missed by quite a few of you. The task was "Describe a new Location in Golarion, a Map of that location, and an Encounter for that location, all in 1,500 words or less. This location may be as large as a forest or undiscovered island, or as small as an old fort or section of a dungeon." A new LOCATION. I think too many contestants thought too small this round. This is more encounter than location. But I'll have to think about how much that affects my recommendation. I thought you stretched to make a drake encounter. Now, of course, you did that because it was really popular and you are hoping to ride on that I would imagine. But I'm not sure that was the best choice. Sure, I loved them as a monster but I'm not sure I love their use as much (which is what you are banking on). This one is on the bubble.
Don't mind if I do! Neil is certainly a great author ... Oh man that was great. I set myself up for that one :) OK maybe this thread should now be love for everyone BUT me. That's way funnier anyway.
I know, I know, I'm breaking all possible rules of etiquette. You aren't supposed to start threads about yourself. You aren't supposed to talk about yourself during Superstar because it's supposed to be about the contestants, yada yada yada. But today is my birthday and it's all about me! :) So if you have any love at all (and some of you won't) for a certain someone, bring it on!
Thanks Jacob. Like I said, someone has to be Paula :) Seriously though, it is easy for me to be supportive because I know for a fact I couldn't win this contest. That means each round the contestants, that I have the honor of judging, are doing something I likely couldn't do. So even the ones I don't recommend to advance are doing great things, things beyond my ability. It only makes sense to be supportive. Plus, we aren't really getting a totally fair picture. We are getting these freelancers under terrible pressure of competition and time. Granted, there is always time pressure. But rarely are you and 15 other freelancers racing to complete the same project to see who gets paid. That's artificial. And its round after round of bringing your A game. That's why I love to see growth and perhaps more than the other judges I reward it in my recommendations. I won't undersell my experience--running Necro, my involvement with 3E and all the licenses, etc, I definitely have the game to bring to this. But my stat-fu pales in comparison to Sean and Wolf.
Just so you guys know, it is an absolute honor to be a judge along side Sean and Wolfgang. Rounds like this really show their crazy design-fu. They are total gurus and it is a pleasure to be a judge with them. They totally outclass me. But someone has to be the Paula Abdul I guess. Gentlemen, it is an honor! And to the contestants, it has been my absolute pleasure to judge the contest again this year. This has been a great and really close contest so far and I expect it to stay that way. I'm looking forward to future rounds. You have no idea how fun it is to judge these entries. -Clark
Michael, welcome to Round 3! Now that I’ve read all 16 entries, I can say that there are some real strong entries here—more strong entries than spots, unfortunately. Some good submissions won’t make the cut. I am only going to recommend 8 of you since only 8 can advance. In close cases, I took into account your prior work. What I am looking for: I’m a big picture guy more than a minute details guy. I don’t think just seeing if you crunched out the rules properly is the right way to judge a good entry for this round. Of course you need to execute the stat block properly. Luckily, Sean and Wolfgang are way more qualified than I am to talk about the nit picks and issues with the stat block so I will leave that to them. My comments to you will be more “big picture.” For me, I want to see a monster that is fun and playable—a monster that leaps of the page and makes me find a way to incorporate it at the game table. That, to me, is a superstar monster. So here we go… You got my Initial Impressions above. I still feel the same: not one of the best but good enough to advance in a tight round. Your prior work also helped you here. Design (name, overall design choices, design niche, playability/usability, challenge): A-
Execution (quality of writing, organization, Golarion-specific, use of proper format, quality of content—description, summary of powers, rules execution, mechanics innovation): A
Tilt (did it grab me, do I want to use one in an adventure?, mojo, just plain fun factor): A
Overall: A
Final Verdict: I DO RECOMMEND this monster advance. Michael, I thought your gloves were great in Round 1 and I thought your Round 2 archetype was really good. This one had some missteps but it was good enough, particularly when viewed in light of your body of work. I hope the voters agree. Good luck!
Scott, welcome to Round 3! Congrats. Now that I’ve read all 16 entries, I can say that there are some real strong entries here—more strong entries than spots, unfortunately. Some good submissions won’t make the cut. I am only going to recommend 8 of you since only 8 can advance. In close cases, I took into account your prior work. What I am looking for: I’m a big picture guy more than a minute details guy. I don’t think just seeing if you crunched out the rules properly is the right way to judge a good entry for this round. Of course you need to execute the stat block properly. Luckily, Sean and Wolfgang are way more qualified than I am to talk about the nit picks and issues with the stat block so I will leave that to them. My comments to you will be more “big picture.” For me, I want to see a monster that is fun and playable—a monster that leaps of the page and makes me find a way to incorporate it at the game table. That, to me, is a superstar monster. So here we go… You got my Initial Impressions above. Scott, having read all the others I still feel the same: this is old school goodness in every way coupled with great modern design. Maybe it’s a personal bias, but it is this kind of stuff that I always prided Necromancer Games on—modern design with a clear link to the past. I hope you take it as praise for me to say this would have been welcome in any Necro product. Plus, as I mentioned above, it has everything D&D (and its ethical and spiritual successor, Pathfinder) should have in a monster. It doesn’t just limit itself, as 4E wrongfully does, to only those powers that see play during combat. Design (name, overall design choices, design niche, playability/usability, challenge): A+
Execution (quality of writing, organization, Golarion-specific, use of proper format, quality of content—description, summary of powers, rules execution, mechanics innovation): A
Tilt (did it grab me, do I want to use one in an adventure?, mojo, just plain fun factor): A+
Overall: A+
Final Verdict: I STRONGLY RECOMMEND this monster advance. Your crown was Neil Spicer solid (and that is a serious compliment) and your Round 2 archetype was really strong (much like our Mr. Spicer). You are starting to build a truly Superstar-worthy profile here my friend. Good luck!
Initial Impression: Holy Blackmoor, Gygax, a nasty frog monster! Right you are, Arneson, and a ravenous one at that! I love the goblin-eating mojo! This is everything a fun monster should be. It makes for a good fight, and unlike 4E, the monster text contains within it powers and power descriptions that hatch all sorts of story and adventure ideas even if the power itself doesn't see play. Great. This is a front runner for me.
Initial Impression: Cocktail? Hmm. Shimmery, addictive, vampire ooze has some mojo, but a funky name. I like how the Glob ability also throws its stench. Not clearly the best, but I think good enough to advance.
To me, there is a lesson here: BE AWESOME. Some gripe this is a "popularity contest" just because there is a public vote. I don't agree at all. I have not really seen that in my years judging Superstar. Each round works about the same: A small group of submissions are just great and everyone agrees. Popularity is irrelevant. Awesomeness rules the day. This is the group you want to be in. Then there is a group of really, really good ones, even if not the top few. These ones also usually advance, popularity be damned. Then there is "the middle"--that group of solid entries that aren't in the top and aren't in the bottom, and that usually include more good entries than there are spots for to advance. That is pretty much the only real area where popularity comes into play, where the public voting really makes a difference. Year after year the public vote has tracked, in large part, how the judges view the best submissions and worst submissions. It is the middle where voting comes into play--which of the "other really good ones" make the cut. But from a design standpoint, no one designs to be in the middle. You design to be in the top. Its either a failure of concept or a failure of execution that gets you in the middle and thus subject to vote (or the bottom, where you are likely not saveable regardless, unless I post a scathing criticism of your submission which has historically proven to be a boon, I'm looking at you Blink Dog Nation, for example). So you can't really design to take advantage of popularity. Its too much of a crap shoot. You have to shoot for awesome. And that is how it should be.
Some thoughts on round 2. While the project itself was somewhat limiting to a degree, I fully support Sean's reasoning for the task. Remember, the goal is not to give you, the readers, 32 fun things to read. It is to help Paizo winnow down the best freelancers. And, to some degree, the second round has historically been one of the hardest to judge. So you really want the submissions to be very comparable to each other. It can't be, for example, "design a monster," because then the votes will slant to the higher CR cooler monster. So the limitation on this round really helped us from a judging perspective. I also thought we got a tighter grouping of shots, so to speak. For instance, I really thought there were about 5-6 really strong submissions (ones that I just loved), about 4-5 more very, very good ones, then about 6-8 more that were very good but all lumped together and difficult to distinguish from each other, then the rest were all good--just not quite as good in my view as the rest. I can say this without reservation: There were NO BAD submissions this round. In the entire time of Superstar that I've been a judge (all but one year) I don't think I could have said that before. Even the ones at the bottom of my list of personal rankings this year were still pretty darn good, just not as good as the others. And, unfortunately, only 16 get to advance. So no matter what place you came in, no one needs to hang their head this round this year. This was a well-fought round with really good submissions all around.
This thread is like a flashback to when I was a judge with Neil. I'd go into a thread on a wondrous item and I would find that Neil had already posted a three paragraph critique. And I agreed with him. So I would post "What Neil said." I find myself doing that again with this thread. So, for old time's sake, let me do it again: "What Neil Said." Clark
I'm first going to give feedback for the top 89 that didn't make it that have requested feedback. I think that might be most helpful. Not till tomorrow night, though. I've been finishing up archetypes :)
This is hard this year because many of these items I am seeing for the first time. It's hard for me to give you a critique of an item I am reading here and considering. It's just different than the gestalt review I give to an item in the judges chambers when I am reviewing 1000 items. Using voters to trim the field has changed inherently the process of how items get kept. Not sure how that will affect the value of this process.
Oh, you crazy alchemists, how I seem to love you! Ok, salt bombs are great and so is the ability to throw bombs under water. This would be a fun archetype to play. Real good RK tie in. Good set of balanced and interesting abilities. This is an excellent submission. I DO Recommend this archetype for advancement.
Initial impression: One man's trash is another man's treasure. I think this is a bold swing for the fences. Basically, taking the cavalier's mount and making it a boat instead of a horse. That is a big swing, I'll give you that. I think, though, that like at least one other archetype this round your initial big idea refused to yield to the mechanical issues it generated and you stuck with it regardless. I like the core idea: "hey, I got it! What if a cavalier's mount was a boat and not a horse!" Very inspired. But when you try to put pencil to paper and work out the specifics it fails, for all the reasons Sean mentions. I don't think the big idea here alone is enough. But as I said in my first line, the voters may like it anyway. Chris, having gone through all the 32 submissions, I don't think there are 16 really great ones. So though I think this one has some problems, I think the boat as mount idea is such a good core concept that you deserve to be in the top 16. So while my recommendation may be hesitant, still: I DO Recommend this archetype for advancement.
Oh my gosh. 400+ Posts. Guys, I'm grinding on the 32 archetypes so I won't be able to get to these for a couple days.
If possible, and when time permits, could you post how you got into the gaming industry? I personally am looking for a career change, and am hoping to do something that I have a passion for. Duskrunner, I just started a game company when Wizards announced it was going to open the content of D&D. I was one of the first to jump on and I started Necromancer Games. I subsequently got my old friend Bill Webb involved and he and I ran Necro for years. I got hooked up early on with White Wolf who were my print partner and distributor. That was a great relationship. Basically, I just did it. As for being "in the industry," I was for a while. I have since gotten out of Necro and my buddy Bill has continued with Frog God games. But even when I was in, I was only partly in. I am and have been an attorney and I am actually a sitting judge (like, guy in robe in court). So gaming was always a passion but never a full time career for me. It remains a passion and I have many good friends in gaming, the vast majority of which all are either at Paizo or have some connection to Paizo. Another good friend of mine, who I met through gaming, is Steve Wieck (former head of White Wolf) and he had a theory that life is too short to work with people you don't like. What great advice that is. That's why I love dealing with Paizo because in addition to being a great company, they are great people. So my advice to you is just start a game company. Write. Create. Publish. These days with pdf publishing it is even easier than when I started. If I can do it, you can do it.
Joana, that is a very interesting post. I have always been the DM (or GM as is the vogue these days). And like you my favorite part is creating new elements to permit the players to do the things they want to do. I like to work cooperatively like that. I agree that there is not much about this contest that values that approach, and in fact modern design from 3E on has really in large part been against the "DM fiat" style that you are talking about and that I really like. I am a rule 0 kind of guy--the rules are here to help us, if you don't need them then change them or ignore them or use them as you see fit. That is real old school gaming there. The problem is, as a publisher for 3E/pathfinder you simply cannot embrace those ideas in published works since the system is so rules intensive. So the question I am taking away from your post (whether you intended it or not :) ) is whether that skill, that flexible creativity which is so vital to being a good DM in my view, needs to find a way to be incorporate into RPG Superstar because I am not sure that it is in proportion to its value. Maybe that's why I was so fond of some of the first year's tasks, such as Christine's great Chase on Charred Ground. I thought she really took DM fiat and created a mini-system, much like the ones you describe, to create a great encounter. Your post has really got me thinking. Thanks.
Was that a dig at me, Clark? Was it? ;) No :) I think the "sufficiently awesome" bit also trips people up. Voters and judges agree that SIAC items are bad, BUT it seems like at least one gets in every year. I saw a few items that maybe tread close to that line or otherwise come off as unoriginal/overdone in their very core concept, but they were presented in a neat way that made me like them anyway. Is there any sort of litmus test for this on the judging end, or is it just gut feelings (or, more probably, honed intuition)? Not really. That is one of the reasons I push so hard to make this decision process so open and why I was so happy to permit those first "critique my item" thread back for the first RPGS. We have long acknowledged that there is a subjective element to the judging. The best way to help people understand that subjectivity is to let people see the process. I have distilled a few things, though. 1. Inspired design. A fresh approach to an old problem, creativity, showing an understanding of the design space you are in and how to work with the rules, originality. 2. Cinematic. I actually just figured that one out this year, thanks to help from some of the guest judges. I found that I was really drawn to items that had a strong cinematic component--not just the description, but that I could actually see the item in play and how it would work. I noticed the guest judges kept calling the various really good items "cinematic" and I don't know why I never put that together before but I agree with them. I have used that word in later rounds before but I guess I never consciously tied my preference to this component. Go read the top 32 items and see what I mean. 3. Just darn good writing. In the end, freelancers and designers are going to be writers. I am certainly drawn to evocative, well written items. And I don't mean backstory or silly descriptions. I mean good, tight, concise yet still evocative writing. Remember, this process is a learning experience for all of us, too. OK, well, for me. Sean and Wolfgang's design-fu is way better than mine. They could win this contest. I couldn't. :)
...since crowd pleasing is really he first part of the contest, as it really should be with a community this great. Well said. I think you are right on the money, and that is one of the reasons I didn't have much hesitation* in the use of a public vote to help sort items. It's not like the voters are the unwashed clueless masses. We're not asking people to randomly sample the new Pepsi flavor. The voters here are members of this very informed and motivated community. So, as you say, pleasing this crowd is an appropriate thing to aim for since the community is that great. Clark *Not that any hesitation I might have had would make a difference, this is Paizo's decision not mine. But I like to think they would have listened to my concerns.
Please don't thank me, thank Paizo and thank yourselves. It was my idea to do this, but they were the ones that gave me permission to post this information. For those of you who participate in contests of any kind, you probably know that it is extremely rare to have this level of transparency. Most contests don't reveal the "close but not quite" entries, at least that is my experience. That says a lot about not only how cool Lisa and Vic and all the people at Paizo are, it also says a lot about how Paizo feels about the quality of this community that you can receive such information and not have it cause hurt feelings and other negative reactions.
Let me help you a bit with the likely difference between what the public may be looking for (thus, how to get voted into the top group) and what the judges are looking for (how to make the top 32 from that group). The two groups (voters vs. judges) are, in my view, looking for different things. That, to me, explains why some items got voted into the top 89 but are not items we as judges would put in the top 32. Let me try to explain. I think it will help. Neil and I have been saying this over and over for a long time: the voters are looking purely at items, often with an "I want that item!" view of what is good or bad; the judges, on the other hand, are looking at the designer behind the item. Because in the end we are not really picking items, we are picking the best 32 contestants for RPG Superstar and the goal of RPG Superstar is not to find a great set of items, it is to find a great set of potential new designers. This explains, I think, why voters tend to like and vote in walkie-talkie items or items that are really useful to a player while the judges never really seem to advance those kinds of items. That was one of my concerns about a public vote to sort out the items. But having seen the results, my fears are allayed. I think the community of voters managed to find the best items, or at least the ones we likely would have marked as keepers. The bottom line, though, is that if it is sufficiently awesome then both groups will like it.
You guys might want to check out the new thread I just created. I just posted the names of ALL the top 89 items.
Inkwell, that just means the voting public voted against your item in the pairings more times than they voted for it. That doesnt mean it was bad :) Thus the perils of a public vote system. One of the reasons we are being so transparent in this is to see how well we think the system works.
Argent Cigarillo Case
Hi everyone. We've been having some discussion in the super secret judges chambers. I proposed I be able to post the top 89 items so that those interested can see what items were voted into the top 89 by you the voters. I thought this was important for a couple reasons: first, you know the top 32, but not the alts and not the balance of the 89. Therefore it is hard to determine where any items in your own personal top 32 list might have fallen by voter rank. Second, I think it enhances our discussion on how the judges chose what we chose and why by showing you the other items we chose between. Seeing only the top 32 and not the others that were available to us makes that conversation only half informed. Part of the judges chambers discussion was how to provide the items without revealing ranking because that isn't something we want to do yet at this part of the contest. So it was decided that an alphabetical list of the top 89 was best. Also, one of the concerns is that posting this list would lead to criticism of the judges, why we chose one over another. But the judges all felt we had reasons for our choices and that it would actually aid not hinder the discussion and that this community is a good supportive community. We also felt that as the critique my item threads were started that one by one we would mention if an item was top 89 so if the info was going to get out, why not just let it out. So, without further ado, here is your top 89 as you voted them, in alphabetical order (not by rank):
Funny, I tried the same thing with my daughter and she said because they didn't pay the French Judges enough. ;) So true, but I'm saving the real world lessons of global politics for when she's 16.
I know it hurts not to make the top 32 but let me put things in perspective. First off, I couldn't win this thing. I might not even be able to make the top 32. And yet, I was able to start and run a very successful game company. So not making the top 32 is not an indication you can't be successful in gaming. Second, let me use another example. I love the Olympics. I mean I LOVE the Olympics. They are my absolute favorite sporting even (except for when the Lakers are playing in the NBA finals which doesnt look like is happening this year). And I love watching them with my daughter who is 10. I use watching the Olympics as a teachable moment because here is what always happens. Take, say, womens gymnastics. Right before the medal ceremony, the team that takes silver or bronze is always crying and sad. I talk to my daughter about that. I tell her, look at those girls, why are they crying? And my daughter will say "because they lost." And then I encourage her to shift her perspective. I say, "no, they didn't loose, they just didn't win gold on that particular day. On another day, who knows what would have happened." I get her to see they won silver or bronze, so that day they were the second or third best in all the world. It's common to feel that only the top winner is actually a winner, but you can't define your life like that. If that was the case, I wouldnt be a good judge because someone else won the Granata award this year, not me. But that is silly. The bottom line is this: I encourage my daughter to measure your success by what you did accomplish, not by what you didn't. The same thing applies to Superstar. You may not have made the top 32, but my guess is most of your items ranked pretty darn high out of over a thousand entries. That is amazing. So on that day with that item you didn't make top 32. That doesn't mean on a different day with a different item you couldnt do it. So focus on what you did accomplish, not what you didn't accomplish. Just a few thoughts.
|
