KatDangerous's page

KatDangerous wrote:

Oh I think I'm safe in that regard, I'm just a spectator. I guess the seven days ahead of us are a good test of professionalism for the contestants. It may be unwise to read any threads where items are being discussed for the reasons you mentioned. On the other hand, those who make it to round 2 will have to endure criticism, you'll have to grow a thick skin sooner or later.

I can take it. :)

I'm just saying that it will hurt a little, and I don't enjoy making other people feel bad. I'm hoping the criticism will be constructive (I know, wishful thinking) and people can learn from it. But I know that there are enough people out there who just don't care that will shred an item for fun to make themselves feel superior. I'm encouraging people to try and be sympathetic.

And brutally honest at the same time. I know that sounds like a contradiction, but it isn't. Good, constructive criticism pulls no punches. If people are to learn, they can't have the blow softened.

There is a tendancy in some to make it personal—"I can't believe how stupid this peron was to use rule X when rule Y was should have been used. What an idiot! LOL"

Keep it about the flaws in the item, and I'm good. Should someone come at me when I can't defend myself? I call coward.

So I hope you can see where I'm coming from, KatDangerous. I wouldn't want to be in that situation so even when I know I'm out of the competition, I'm going to tred carefully on what I say. I will definitely be posting my opinion on items, and if the creators of said items can't take it then they shouldn't be in the competition—or freelancers for that matter.

Well, I certainly hope the comments will be generally about the merits of the items at this stage. Once the top 32 have been announced and anonymity is no longer an issue, people can submit their items for public review and those who want brutally honest comments will get them.

KatDangerous wrote:

donato wrote:

Are we able to start discussing items once voting ends?

Breaking anonymity (i.e. discussing your own item) will still get you DQd, but the contest rules don't seem to forbid discussing other people's items after voting ends.

While it doesn't spell it out, it is only my personal opinion that that discussing other people's items could be in bad taste.

Oh I agree... mocking individual items would be cruel. But I'm sure people also have a lot of good things to say too. It'd be a bit cynical to assume that "discussion" only means bashing other people's designs.

KatDangerous wrote:

Breaking anonymity (i.e. discussing your own item) will still get you DQd, but the contest rules don't seem to forbid discussing other people's items after voting ends.

True, but what if you watched as people tore your item apart and couldn't defend it properly? Or as sole defender, made yourself known? Nope, too dangerous for me. I'll wait until I know I'm out of the running before I go down that road.

Oh I think I'm safe in that regard, I'm just a spectator. I guess the seven days ahead of us are a good test of professionalism for the contestants. It may be unwise to read any threads where items are being discussed for the reasons you mentioned. On the other hand, those who make it to round 2 will have to endure criticism, you'll have to grow a thick skin sooner or later.

Are we able to start discussing items once voting ends?

Breaking anonymity (i.e. discussing your own item) will still get you DQd, but the contest rules don't seem to forbid discussing other people's items after voting ends.

Lanterns that reveal stuff, tankards related to... guess which deity, items that split you in two or make you jump forward in time or otherwise allow you to flank a foe with a copy of yourself... all these were good items the first time they made the top 32. The second time, well, the judges saw something in them that I didn't. But a third time? Hell no, not voting for them. There's gotta be unused design space somewhere out there that doesn't involve these and other tired old item types, something new and innovative.

I don't remember if it's been mentioned, but I'm sick and tired of "Ghostbusters" items, i.e. items that reveal the presence of ghosts (or other undead), make them corporeal or otherwise vulnerable, suck in ghosts like a vacuum cleaner, or items that disguise you as ghosts or undead.

These items have been done to death, pun intended. :p

As someone who's used to project-oriented work where the deadlines are sometimes "two months from now", sometimes "yesterday", I'd like to offer another way to look at it. I'm sure three days is enough to write a good archetype. But since the contestants were given the details of the archetype round several weeks in advance, it wouldn't make sense to not start working if you think you have even the slightest chance of advancing. (And even if you don't, writing archetypes is good practice.)

As Neil said, when working as a freelancer, the turnaround depends on the assignment. For this particular assignment, you got lots of time. This time around, you do have the luxury of polishing your work. There's nothing unprofessional about using the resources you're given.

One thing I really liked about some items, is if they had a unique way of activating the item.

Totally. Command words are so 1978.

Basically, when looking at an item or indeed any ability, think "Does this get more powerful if I have a Bag O' Rats?" If the answer is "yes", then the ability has failed the Bag O' Rats test.

I don't know if the GM is very smart if he lets the PCs buy a bag of rats, though if course there are wondrous items that summon monsters you can feed to the hungry item. Anyway, looks like this test is a smart thing to do when you're designing an item. :)

So the best way to pass the test is to not let the effects to stack? And maybe also use a something that makes makes rats, weasels, chipmunks and what have you useless, such as making it dependent on HD or some other stat? Haven't seen many items in this contest that have tried something like this without failing the test, but I think there have been a few.

For example (italicizing the verbs), compare the passive voice:

Several glistening jewels are on the gold band.

To the active voice:

Several glistening jewels decorate the gold band.

Umm.. Both of these sentences are in the active voice. The passive voice requires the auxiliary verb "be" (in your example it's used as a copula) and the past participle of the main verb.

But you're right, "decorate" is a lot more dynamic than "are" and thus better.

Alright, these are a few of my favorite things I've noticed during voting:

Name: Shorter names are better. Generally, I like of the types xxx's yyy (eg. Seducer's Bane) and xxxyyy zzz (eg. Feywhisper Crown). Sadly, most items have the clumsy and long xxx of the yyy or xxx of the yyy zzz. Moreover, the name has to be descriptive, ie. it hints at the item's theme and function. And it's gotta have magic in it - but this doesn't mean you have to use big or obscure words! For example, Ghostlight Crystal would be a lot better than Stone of Ethereal Illumination even if it's a tiny wee bit more vague. (these latter examples mine) (also, note to self: there are too many items related to illumination and ghosts already, don't go there next year if you submit an item)

Description: Much like the name, the short bit of description (one or two sentences are preferable) should be alluring and have some magic in it. And maybe also hint at the item's function (thematic linking). Imagine your PC gets the item as an Xmas present. Would you prefer a "nondescript gray piece of rock" or an "clear eye-shaped crystal with a more opaque iris that emits a soft glow matching its user's eye color"? (examples mine) Well, perhaps some people would prefer the piece of rock, but you get my drift.

Function: The item should have its function(s) built around a single theme (though it may have several ways to activate or use it). Although thematic linking is better than effects arbitrarily lumped together, I think multiple effects should also build upon one another or form a cycle of some sort. For example, an item lets you cast fireball and invisibility is a the most boring SIAC and SAK you can imagine. But if the fireball only affects visible creatures, you're building upon the other effect, and you've got a slightly better item. (I cannot think of any thematical link between fireball and invisibility, though.)

And as someone mentioned above, I think scaling / usefulness over a wide range of levels is good. But it shouldn't be automatic scaling unless there is a way to scale the price as well. Instead, any kind of scaling should be the result of some kind of effort. The Poisoner's Retort is a great example of this, you actually have to kill a monster to get the benefit. Or, for example, an item that boosts all your fire spells (of any level) in some creative way. It scales with level because it also affects higher level spells, but it makes you pick a certain type of spells to get the benefit, so there is an opportunity cost beyond the price you pay in gp. Or you have to spend a point of ki/rage/whatever to get the more powerful version of the effect.

And yeah, I don't like gross items. If your item is evil, it's ok for it to be creepy or eerie (these I often like), but gross is bad.

Sorry about the wall of text. ;-)

KatDangerous wrote:

Shadowborn wrote:

Everyone forgets that the worst kind of evil is the insidious kind, the kind that sneaks up on you and has you in its clutches before its too late. I'd like to see a pretty evil item once in a while.

I could not agree more! My favorite evil items I have seen while voting are seemingly innocuous items that do not hurt anyone -- your enemy or yourself -- well, not directly, anyway. You just do your thing, fight your enemies without realizing you are doing just what the item wants you to do...

While i think this is a wonderful idea for a magic item, it would be dangerous to include it as a Superstar entry. I would think it would ride a razor fine line between a wondrous item and a cursed one.

Oh, I didn't mean that, really. I guess I'm being so careful about not discussing individual items that my comments get too vague to be understood! What I meant is I saw a delightfully evil item where the evilness is umm, sort of between the lines. It doesn't drain your Con or control your mind or do anything particularly cruel or deadly. Can't go into more details. :)

Approaching this thread's topic from a slightly different angle, there's one particular criticism I've seen that's driving me bonkers.

There's nothing wrong with the criticism itself; I just get a paranoid feeling that this particular criticism is being wrongly applied to my own item.

You wrote a shadow vampire item, didn't you?!!

Seriously though, I understand your concern. I am also worried that some of the judges' advice is taken too literally or completely misunderstood. For example, an item as creative and flavorful as Neil's Last Leaves might be written off as a SIAC. Not to mention the item's a bit feminine and might be shunned by paranoid people who think it's written by a bald guy in a basement who wants the voters to think he's a she to get more votes... :D

Ehh, anyway what drives me bonkers are plain weird creatures disguised as wondrous items. They just seem like Migrus Locker rip-offs. Thankfully there have been fewer of them after the Culling.

Everyone forgets that the worst kind of evil is the insidious kind, the kind that sneaks up on you and has you in its clutches before its too late. I'd like to see a pretty evil item once in a while.

I could not agree more! My favorite evil items I have seen while voting are seemingly innocuous items that do not hurt anyone -- your enemy or yourself -- well, not directly, anyway. You just do your thing, fight your enemies without realizing you are doing just what the item wants you to do...

Jacob W. Michaels wrote:

Liquidsabre wrote:

The trick though will be picking an archetype that someone else won't also try and submit. Quite a few River Kingdom archetypes will likely occur to many based on the content.

Agreed. While there are tons of options, I'd guess we'll see more instances of parallel design this time than usual. Then it'll come down to who executes it best.

I certainly expect that to be the case, but I'm also interested in seeing what concepts people come up with to avoid the stereotypical River Kingdoms classes(Bandit, raiders and outlaws - oh my!) There must be a few, certainly...

Yes and River Pirates! I also wonder how many Daggermark Assassins and Poisoner archetypes there will be...

KatDangerous wrote:

Andrew Black wrote:

Also, a lot of words wasted on the "cinematic" of how the item looks as it is doing its magic something else that can be left to the DM.

Wasting a LOT of words is bad, but I've also noticed that not describing the effects makes an item very boring to read. Some items just don't have enough flavor.

I agree, one or two sentences at most that give a feel for what the item is and sets the thematic tone of the item is important. What is not needed is description of the magic in action, how it feels when operating, or specific generic command words.

Well, YMMV. I agree that specific command words are unnecessary and often quite silly, but a description of visual effects of the magic in action may help you bridge the gap between an otherwise arbitrarily connected mechanical effects. The excellent shadow falconer's gloves, for example would not make sense without the visuals. Shadow conjuration = steal maneuver? The fluff is necessary and makes the item memorable.

Also, a lot of words wasted on the "cinematic" of how the item looks as it is doing its magic something else that can be left to the DM.

Wasting a LOT of words is bad, but I've also noticed that not describing the effects makes an item very boring to read. Some items just don't have enough flavor.

Whenever I see an item like the OP described, I ask myself "could this be easily fixed?" and "do I want to see more from this designer?" As the judges have said many many times, it's a lot harder to teach someone to be creative than to fix minor issues. So I always vote for items with excelent ideas even if the other item is impossible to abuse (but less creative).

A co-worker told me about the contest but 'twas too late for me to have time to finish my item... well there's always next year right? And at least I'll get to vote. Anyways, I'll be rooting for all the female contestants, the best of luck to you! :)

I know I'll be slightly biased towards any items, archetypes, etc. thematically suited for female PCs. Bonus points to anyone who referred to the user of their item as "her" - why's it always his this and his that... ;-) But I guess what matters most is a name and description that makes me go "wow", and that it's something useful for my PCs and villains alike... well that's all for now I guess, holding my breath here, can't wait to see the items! I'll be sure to list my favorites if it's allowed...

Over and out,
Katerin