David Simcox's page

But I think the potential for creative utility does.

Oh, I thought it would be funny to characterize all four judges as PF character classes...

Ryan is the bard of RPG Superstar judges. He wants to see an exciting performance and doesn't want things to be dull. He'd rather see someone swing for the fences and make something epic and exciting than have a solid item that's dull or even average.

Clark is the paladin. He wants to find the best in everyone's item, he's showing off that shiny aura of courage to get everyone enthusiastic about the competition, but quite ready to smite any item that disregards the holy purpose of the competition--including something submitted only as a joke or to waste the judges' time.

Neil is the wizard. He'll scrutinize every item and write a lengthy scroll about its pros and cons. Given time, he can prepare an appropriate response to any competitor's submission, question, or argument, and back it up with references to one of his many spellbooks.

Sean: I'm the inquisitor. It's my job to find and eliminate problems, and by doing so, I protect the nature of the contest. I preach a lot of advice on how not to make mistakes, and get grumpy when people insist on making those mistakes anyway. Like the wizard, I have a lot of knowledge and access to a lot of books... but inquisitors aren't as forgiving as wizards are when it comes to errors.

Yes, I'm a big gamer nerd. :p

Couldn't disagree more.

Edit:

I think you are seriously miscalculating the sheer amount of time and energy (volunteered) that it takes to do something like this.

I would even suggest in the following years for the judges to do less so that they don't burn themselves out. Now that they have several threads of critiquing and general examples they could use it as reference for comments.

I don't think some people realize just how luck this community is to have the kind of feedback it receives. Let me be clear: it doesn't happen in other industries.

We are not lacking...we are over-spoiled.

Congrats to Mike and all of the other contestants! What a great showing!

And a special thanks to Paizo and all the volunteers for being gracious hosts and judges. Working weekends to go out of your way to respond to customers and contestants is beyond good form!

This company has done a lot for the community.

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.

In the end... the biggest problem with this adventure is the fact that it uses a setting that is going to be heavily featured in a product a few months before its release. That’s pretty unfortunate, since the adventure itself is pretty nifty, and if it had been submitted in a vacuum, I would be delighted to recommend it for advancement. Alas, the fact that it’s going to be “scooped” means that I cannot recommend it. Again, if this adventure wins, the Leng elements will be changed to another region in the Great Beyond. On one hand, this could be the adventure’s savior, since placing the second half in a region that we’ve already done some work developing can save us a LOT of room explaining how reality works in this new realm, leaving more room for actual adventure content. But on the other hand... we don’t know what that replacement realm is. Which means when you consider your votes for this adventure, you should keep in mind that it’s not a vote for Leng to vote for “The Scarlet God.” And frankly... I think the Leng element is the best part of the adventure... and it's hard for me to say how the plot might fare once all that stuff's cut out.

What a ridiculous thing to say.

The pretext for the use of a wondrous items in the first round is so you can discern the contestant over the item more eloquently than other potential entries. Now the release schedule is more important that the writer?

I thought you were looking for Superstar here; not, most relevant release during our fourth quarter.

Your words have real consequences here. You should be ashamed.

In a contest that has been rife with contestant slips (in terms of comments on the forums) I find it inexcusable to see a judge base a conclusion on the line-up of a product schedule--thus affecting the voting--in the final round.

They are all winners isn't an excuse.

Voters have their own right to choose isn't an excuse.

Product schedule is a fact that writers have to content with is NOT an excuse.

This is a contest!

The contestants don't have access to the information you do. They must write in a vacuum (pertaining to the future).

As a preamble to every contest you may say, in big bold letters if you want, all entries may be changed to conform to our publication standards and schedule.

or

Release it on a different date with updated info. Perhaps the year after...slip it in a bit early...anything to avoid maligning a contestant over a conflict of content.

It's pretty simple. That way you won't have to blackball a contestant on the final round...of a contest in your own house.

I hope I am overreacting, but considering the concern displayed for the contestant's posting during the contest (and comments made on other threads)...I don't think I am.

You are my hero.

There is so much more I want to say; but, I will wait for the contest to be over first.

Congrats to all who made it...good work!

Rather than just flipping the subject and object and calling it a day, a good writer would reword the sentence so it sounds better *and* make it active voice. Yes, there are times where passive voice is better or sounds better... but writing in passive voice is a trap for far too many writers, and recognizing both types and knowing when to pick one over the other is a step toward being a better writer.

The passive voice can be used to improve the flow and clarity of a body of work depending on the context.

Commonly, descriptive texts, technical manuals, and even great literature make use of nominalization, modality, and the passive voice to illustrate breadth, precision, and flow.

Now I don't mean to be especially obtuse; but, avoiding passivity for the sake of passivity is poor writing...or perhaps more accurately poor judgement.