Gennerik's page

Kudzu Wrap
Aura Strong Transmutation; CL 13th
Slot Armor; Price 44,100 gp; Weight 5 lbs.

Description
This suit of +3 Scale Mail looks and feels like a mass of writhing metal vines and leaves. The armor has a 10% arcane spell failure, maximum Dexterity bonus of +5, and an armor check penalty of -1 due to the constantly shifting vines that move out of the way to give better mobility but serve as a distraction to arcane casters, and counts as Light Armor. When not being worn, the Kudzu Wrap appears to be a single wooden leaf, though it is much heavier than a normal leaf.

Donning the armor is done as a move action, and requires being able to put the leaf up to the wearer's chest, and the armor will grow around the wearer. The wearer can remove the armor by touching the leaf and thinking of a wooden leaf, or can say a command word which will cause the vines to explode outward. This explosion is enough to automatically break any nonmagical bonds around the armor or to break a grapple of any creature up to one size larger than the wearer. For any creature 2 size categories or more larger than the wearer, the Kudzu Wrap gives a +10 bonus to the grapple check. After speaking the command word, the armor is no longer worn, though the leaf stays attached to the wearer's chest until removed.

Druids may wear the Kudzu Wrap without penalty.

Construction
Requirements Craft Magical Arms and Armor, plant growth, transmute metal to wood, ironwood; Cost 27,050 gp

So, having survived the cull (I was lucky enough to see my item on my 6th vote), I have to say that my thoughts on voting have changed pre- to post-cull. I think a large part of that goes back to actually thinking about what other items survived. Going by the (mostly) complete list of items that survived and looking at a number of items that I would not vote for and a number of items that I couldn't believe didn't make it, I started to think.

At first when I submitted my item, I thought it was elegant and unique, and would surely make the top 32 (I'm sure many of us thought the same). Since then, I slowly became less confident in my elegance (though I haven't seen another item like it), and realized that some of my wording is clunky, and I even missed stating something. So I probably won't get in the top 32, probably not even in the top 100, but I do feel incredibly humble at getting past the cull. I've realized just how difficult it is to design an item that will truly appeal to the masses.

Each of us has a different play style, and things that seem overpowered to me may fit perfectly in someone's campaign and seem awesomely fun, and things that seem perfectly balanced to me may be overpowered or boring to someone else. So with this change in attitude, I've decided to not have auto-down-votes, and to take the time to become familiar with rules that I'm not already. So good luck to everyone still in this year, and to those that sadly didn't make it, learn from this year, and I'll hopefully see you next year. It's hard to make such a broadly appealing item, and everyone that entered should be proud of at least taking that step.

Sadly, I lost 2 rings and 2 weapons to the cull. I'm still holding out that some of them will still be seen, but...

The cull definitely helped raise the quality of matchups. And I saw my item, so I'm pretty ecstatic about continuing on, especially since it was on my 6th vote.

Argh, why would you decide to make that a [weapon] when it has absolutely no combat powers?

I am also biased against the technology items, but that is purely because I am unfamiliar with the source material, so I don't feel I have a good grasp on how to rate them. I still don't have a big problem voting for them if the other is definitely worse, but if the two items are pretty even, I end up going for the non-technology item 9 out of 10 times.

I always feel like an item started life as a wondrous item by looking at the following:

Armors/Weapons/Shields - If the combat-related item gives non-combat related abilities only, I tend to believe it started as a wondrous item. To use the example above, casting heroism grants bonuses to combat, so I'd call it a weapon, too. Armors that grant the ability to disguise themselves I would call armor, since being able to wear armor when you shouldn't is a great advantage.

Rings - If the powers are not suitable for a slot-limited item, then I think either poor design or a wondrous item.

Rods/Staves - I can't really tell. I just assume that none of them are wondrous items, since why pick really hard items to design if you're just converting a wondrous item.

There will be a cull. I can't give you a definitive cull date, but likely once everyone's returned from the holiday traveling :)

Huzzah! Though I'm guessing that means not tomorrow (since even those people back are probably varying degrees of back), but hopefully soon. I know it will improve my thoughts, as a lot of my votes seem to be an obvious win vs obvious not.

So, I just saw a ring that helps players mitigate the effects of one of my favorite GM traps. I think this ring is awesome and well balanced. Kudos to the author. Definitely a keeper for me.

Steven Helt wrote:

Alright. Imma need Treyson and Gennerik to drop and gimme fifty. These jokes will not stand.

...run through the gauntlet.

☼
⌂۩۩⌂⌂۩⌂

♫♪ YeeaAAHHHH! ♫♪

Hopefully not a spiked gauntlet... I hear those things hurt. Especially when properly staffed.

But seriously, we need to get this thread back on track before we ring in the new year.

I also feel that if you "cleverly" use your 300 words to describe possible uses of your item, you not only insult the player's intelligence, but perhaps your item is a little narrow in purpose.

Finally, I got to see the item for the serious cornoisseur. And I liked it....

Nazard wrote:

Maybe a heavy pick gives some kind of bonus...

Perhaps that would be a heavy-handed attempt at picking a creature's brains? Much less subtle, much more blood. Very popular with the murderhobo crowd.

Then maybe I was wrong and the axe was right...

Just stay there while I axe you a question...?

I feel like the twist for Round 1 really threw a lot of people for a loop (at least those familiar with the contest being wondrous items). So often I come across an item (the weapons are especially bad about it, followed by rings) that I can completely envision what type of wondrous item it was planned to be. It makes me have a hard time voting for these items, no matter how cool the idea is, because I feel trying to force a concept that would have made a good wondrous item into something else shows a lack of creativity and that superstar designer aspect.

Seriously, how many players pick a weapon based on how well it lets you gather information or an armor that alerts you to someone picking your pocket. I know I pick my weapon to leave me foes dead at my feet and my armor to keep me alive, then let my helm let me gather information and my cloak stop pickpockets. I think a lot of people really needed to go back to the drawing board and come up with new ideas for items that actually fit what the item is designed to do.

I think my voting experience boils down to three different match-ups.

Really bad item vs something else - In this case, the item I start reading is just so bad with major flaws in understanding how the game is played, I just vote for the other item. I figure in this case the other item has to be better, and if it isn't, I would probably have picked the "not a real vote" option.

Moderate item vs moderate item - For this scenario, the first item I read doesn't immediately grab me, so I read the second and then weigh my thoughts on them both. This is the most common case.

Keep item vs something else - When this happens and the first item makes me so excited that I don't care what the second item is, that says to me "Superstar!". I never end up reading the second item (at least if this is the first time the keeper item has come my way), and while I allow for the possibility that the second item could be better, I don't feel that I could properly evaluate the second item enough to get over my excitement for the first. But then I guess since I'm not a judge, I don't really need to.

Man, I must be really picky. I have 10 items so far (1 staff, 1 shield, 2 rings, 1 armor, and 5 weapons). I know I didn't start my list until after star voter, but I just haven't seen a whole lot that really gets me excited and think superstar. I'm not saying there aren't a lot of good items, just few that really make me amazed. And I guess really I only have 9, since I included my own item which probably isn't superstar either, but you have to believe in yourself, right?

And right after that, two keep items in a row. The algorithm taketh and giveth.

Wow. A "rod" that does nothing that I would consider rodly, acts like a weapon and adds a ton of damage to attacks by sacrificing your enemy's HP (because why pick the other option?). You're a tad to overpowered for me. I'm sorry, but I'm picking the stick, er staff??

Yeah, reading some of the bland staves made me think of a really awesome idea for one. Now I have to wait at least a year to enter it...

So, two new weapons for me. One has a hilarious name that is actually quite clever. The other is ok, though I am not a huge fan the mechanics. Hilarious name, you get me vote, and I'm actually not ashamed of it.

Rusty Ironpants wrote:

Woody Elliott wrote:

The black raven wrote:

If your item only benefits a single class, do not be surprised that almost everyone downvotes it.

I have to disagree with you. look at holy/unholy avengers and rods and staves and monk weapons and cleric scrolls and wizard scrolls and anything to do with channeling and magical instruments and any of a dozen items that effect sneak attack and monk robes and robe of the archmagi and any firearms and alchemist stuff and etc.... etc... etc.

Yeah, but there is some difference between an item that benefits anyone with sneak attack (still a subset, but it includes rogues, ninja, certain alchemist and bard archetypes and some prestige classes) and something that only benefits "Rogues". Why exclude the other classes?

Also don't forget we are not looking for "good enough for a book of magical items", we are looking for "wow, amazing, great job". A lot of the pre-existing items are "good enough for the book", and are "inherited non superstar but serviceable" items.

A single class item is ultra hard mode to do that because there will always be voters who don't want/won't vote for/dislike a lot the chosen class. I know this to my cost in a prior year as my item was a ranger only submission playing off the core ranger class abilities.

It isn't impossible for a single class item to make Top 32, but it will have to be something gob-smackingly awesome to get votes from everyone regardless of their feeling for that class.

If anything it is more hard mode than a hard mode staff by quite some degree.

And I think something that a lot of people don't realize is that you have to balance items that react differently in the hand of other classes/races much more expertly. The +2 item that is a +5 when X class uses it can't be priced as a +2 or else it becomes just a cheap way to overpower a character (or an item that every character of that type must have), but you can't price it as a +5, because then it's a piece of garbage to anyone that can't use it and just merchant fodder.

Too often in this competition, items aren't priced right, and that is why they seem automatically down-voted

My item gives a +1 bonus plus some features. I compared its price to other items in the same category and power level and it seemed to add up. If there is a problem it may be in the way the system determines the cost of magic.

And if you actually did your homework and found it to be a good tradeoff and well-balanced, then awesome. But I feel a lot of people didn't, and they end up tacking on the +1 because it's required, not because they actually thought it out.

I definitely feel you should up the armor/weapon enhancement beyond a +1 at certain price breakpoints. Finding a +1 greatsword--albeit with an awesome special ability--at 15th level just feels *off*. Now, even a +2 feels much more believable, especially if it has a unique and useful power.

On the other hand, a +4 shield with a low-level spell (shield other or kings castle, for example) 1/day is equally off-putting.

Tl;dr -- balance is importance, not only in terms of in-game power, but also for asthetics and believability.

And I think this touches on my point exactly. Too often I see this amazing ability on a +1 item and I just feel the +1 is there just because it's required by the book. It's as if the author thought to themselves ”How can I get this ability for as cheap as possible?" and I just want to yell "Stop metagaming!"

Gennerik wrote:

Why does it feel like almost every item for upper mid-level characters (11-14th level), at least based on the price of the item, is a +1 with a lot of abilities tacked on? Maybe it's just me, but I always prefer to hit a target over having abilities activate when I hit.

Acquiring to-hit bonus is relatively easy, and probably the most common bonus type out there. Doing meaningful things when you hit is not only more interesting, but is a design space that isn't just "here, have some numbers".

So I agree with what you are saying, but if you're going to have a +1 weapon or armor cost 30k or more, why not make it 35k or 40k and make it a +3? I feel it shows more understanding of the game and pricing.

Why does it feel like almost every item for upper mid-level characters (11-14th level), at least based on the price of the item, is a +1 with a lot of abilities tacked on? Maybe it's just me, but I always prefer to hit a target over having abilities activate when I hit.

I'm happy with my item, though I didn't realize when I wrote it how it would be displayed (1st year rookie), so it looks like a wall of text to me. I also capitalized my construction spell names because it irritates me not to, proper formatting or not, but it seems that even that might cost me votes, so I don't know how I feel.

I'm sorry, but your casually "strung together" wondrous item that you decided to call armor does not get my vote.

I've only gotten 3 keeps, and about 3 items that seems to always win (which will probably end up as keeps, so maybe they are weak keeps).

This is my first time hearing about the competition. I just learned about Pathfinder earlier this year and bought the core rulebook. I got an email a few days before the competition ended, and have always wanted to try and get my foot in the door, so I entered an item. I definitely plan on entering in future years, too.

Ring that essentially does nothing vs weapon that basically does everything.

ITEM: This effect is just like this spell with the exception of this part, which acts like this.
ME: oh, you mean the effect acts just like the improved version of the spell? Why didn't you just say that in the first place? And require that spell for crafting...

This discussion covers my exact thoughts (and fears). For my own item, I feel it is pretty well balanced for the expected levels where it would be obtained. And it's that exact balance that I worry won't get the public vote, especially after seeing all these other items. So many people are raving about a number of items, and some I feel I know which they are referring to, and I feel so many of them are overpowered/underpriced. And it worries me about my own chances to progress in the competition.

I believe you meant to say for your construction requirements: Craft Epic Arms and Armor. And from your description, it sounds like it takes up a slot...

Lackluster item that I've seen 4 times already (and managed to vote for it all 4 times) vs obviously broken item that had such a good premise, but ultimately is just an underpriced item with possible penalties that should never affect a moderately competent player.

Lackluster item for a fifth time it is!

Why do so many of these armors that sprout wings and grant flight seem to have perfect maneuverability? It makes no sense to me. If you're going to be able to perfectly maneuver, don't give me something as clumsy as wings. Just give me a badas.. er, awesome aura, and let me zip all over the place....

Why yes, I would like a full-color illustration of your item. I need a tie-breaker factor.

If only the author had spent as much time reading the formatting requirements as they did the illustration...

Ahh munchkin sword! I was wondering where you were hiding.

I just saw one of those, too. I think the only thing it was missing was +5, but I think then it would have been that Hackmaster +12 someone was looking for just now.

Ugh. I feel like the description of this item was more like I asked the author what the item did over a frothy adult beverage.

I finally saw my item. It looks so good, except it didn't look nearly like such a wall of text when I submitted it...

I must have missed the memo on shields that are submitted must be polished to a mirror sheen.

And seriously, using HD as modifiers? That's a bit much.

I can only hope that once my item shows up for me, it continues to show up as often for me as you do, oh arch-nemesis of sense. You're like a punch in the face every time I see you, though at least you're a short punch in the face.

Gennerik wrote:

Am I the only one that gets turned off to an item when it explains basic rules to me?

Almost as much as items that spend a paragraph describing the spells they can cast that are then listed below the description.

Ah, yes. But on the bright side, that's a lot less to read...

Am I the only one that gets turned off to an item when it explains basic rules to me? Things like you get a +1 enhancement bonus, unles you are this supersecret class, then you get a +4 enhancement bonus. This bonus is in place of the +1, as these bonuses don't stack (Note: bonuses picked randomly to not point out any specific item)

But having basic rules explained to me just automatically turns me off to an item, no matter how awesome it was otherwise.

26. Take a squadie's turn in XCOM.

Also, Feros, you're my hero for appropriately quoting Flowers on th Wall for 4 thing you can do.