Kenton Abel's page

Congratulations on get three up votes from the judges!

I was a little skeptical when I first saw the map (had not previously come across a big hand in the middle of a map) and also when I saw the imposter maw. However, you really pulled this together in a way that makes me just say wow. Great scenario, great writing, great job! This really fires up the imagination.

Definitely getting my vote. I want to see more of your work.

Very creepy monster, great in the right setting. I like that I learned a new word as part of the name. Great job!

Very interesting list. It is amazing how one item I loved is not on that list, and several I thought were meh at best are on the list....

I did like several on the list.

The voter #100 item is +200 (upvotes minus downvotes). By comparison, the voter #1 item is +500. If the list cut off at 50%/50% we'd have a LOT more items.

FYI, each of the items in the voter #1–#100 was voted on about 1,000 times (some were as low as 930 or so, some got close to 1,100, but overall it's about 1,000 for each of the voter's best hundred items).

Good memory, pH unbalanced and Papasteve08. :)

Not sure if it is possible to go back in time to the statistics just before the cull, I would be curious to know how many of the final top 100 items were also in the top 100 before the cull.

For last year, I wonder if the items in the top 200 were in the top 200 at the first cull? Were the top 89 the only items with a positive vote?

If they set a cull to items close to positive, it might not make any difference to the final 32 since the judges pick those. I think I remember that an item in the top 10 votes was not selected by the judges last year. It would certainly make voting much more challenging.

Anthony Adam wrote:

I have seen two of them then, they are different in mechanics, just a similar visual theme, so well done to those designers!

But won't you just bet those designers groaned very loudly when you started your thread...

I managed to dodge an arrow with my entry this year. The idea I was thinking of submitting for 11 months is not the item I finally submitted. In voting so far, I saw one item with almost an identical name, an identical description, and very similar powers.

Plus, I saw two other close items. Whew! I am sure those designers are glad I changed my mind too.

Found mine the first night, also found format mistake I made for no apparent reason?

It can happen to the best. A friend of mine last year worked on his item for six months, and still did the same thing as you.

If the one-minute timer is such a burden to you, you are welcome to stop voting. I think the math will do its job if we only get 100,000 votes instead of 500,000 votes.

I am actually inclined to take you up on your offer. It has been an hour since I saw a new item, and my time is valuable.

If the system was set up to make sure I saw every item at least once before repeating items, I'd be happy with the one minute timer. This was discussed last year. I know a system could be designed to do with without too much difficulty, I wrote a similar algorithm in college in 1986. I appreciate that we need to give due consideration, but unfortunately I have many other things to do in my day than wait for the timer to finish just to see if I might get a new item.

One possible compromise would be to allow the "Pass" button to not have a timer (aka, the "Both items are equal" non-vote button). Thus, if I don't want to wait to vote between two SIAC/SAK items that don't have any chance, I can skip to the next pair.

If I made the rules, I'd drop the timer to 30 seconds for Star Voter and then drop again to 15 at Dedicated Vote. I'm very rarely finding two new items, and when I do, I read them both regardless of time.

If you trust us to vote for the better item, why not trust us to take our time to vote correctly. We could all just start voting for the item we like less, but you trust us not to do so.

Happy voting everyone! Too tired for now, brain hurts.

Do I vote for the Weapon of Wondrous Item or the Spell in a Can? I don't like this SIAC very much, but the weapon is bound to be disqualified.....

Kenton Abel wrote:

Hummm.... 397 word count vs 288 word count....

Got the former.

It could be up against a blank page and it would still lose my vote.

I have to agree, hard to vote for something that will be disqualified tomorrow.

Hummm.... 397 word count vs 288 word count....

Just got my first repeat. I wish I'd been counting votes so I could see how long it took...

I actually had a repeat with my second pair and third pair....

Cool, do I vote for the 300 word count or the 299 word count?

In the fourth set I saw a cool item. Still looking for another one after 100 more votes....

I've been voting for over three hours, along with someone else, and for some reason I don't yet have any tag. I know I've done at least 100 votes though. What's wrong?

You should be very close.

I have seen one item four or five times, but not my item. Was hoping to keep voting until I see my item once, but my brain is starting to hurt....

Kenton Abel wrote:

Orthos wrote:

And that's from Doctor Who.

Was it a Fez? A Bow-tie?

Fezzes are cool. Bow-ties are cool!

Wasn't clothes. Was a pretty common tool he carries around that isn't his screwdriver.

I think that showed up last year as well. Glad to know people are still watching Dr. Who.

Only way I know of counting votes is check your tag after every vote, and when you move up to the next level you know your count. I'm at 103 right now (give or take one).

And that's from Doctor Who.

Was it a Fez? A Bow-tie?

Fezzes are cool. Bow-ties are cool!

Oh, just noticed I did on that last vote....

Grats to those making it to Star Voter!

As was the case last year, I will down vote any item which causes cruelty to animals. I don't need animal cruelty in game life, enough of it happens in real life.

299 Word Count vs 296 Word Count....

When will we get the 2014 Star Voter or better tags?

Since I've already seen both items, I wish I didn't have to wait 60 seconds to vote....

Is there a voter drinking game? If not lets make one

Filigree Item: 2 drinks
Clearly not a wondrous object: 1 drink
Uses a term you had to look up in a dictionary: 1 drink

Not sure how long I'd remain conscious if I followed these rules....

So far with my almost 50 votes, one item I'd like to keep. I hope people keep submitting, but it would be great for everyone to read the rules, submit wondrous items, follow the formatting, and read Sean's advice thread.

Will the judges drop the bottom 25% sooner than later?

I think the neutral button is the mathematical equivalent to not voting. I've had several that are both very bad, but you should pick the better one anyway.

I did see a few items that were either first time entries who did not read any of the suggestions or were trying to break every suggestion possible while still being a Wondrous Item....

I cannot vote I get no link to a voting page nor do any items show up on the main page. I've logged out and back in via the link asking me to sign in after I do, it tells me to vote before the 14th.

I have the same problem, would be nice to vote a bit on my day off work....

Putting (UM) after the spell name is fine.

Thank you! Good to know.

It doesn't hurt to have (UM) listed after the spell. In their AP's for example, Paizo still lists anything not in the Core Rulebook with a superscript of the book.

If you're that low on wordcount thought I'd work on rewriting :)

Thanks!

Not a word count issue per se, more worried about the best practice for format.

If my item requires a spell from Ulitmate Magic during item creation, do I need to note that in parentheses after the spell name?

Is it: "spell name (book)" or just "spell name"?

I thought I saw the suggestion for book name if different from the core rules, but it might be outdated now.

Thanks!

Thanks! I think two others will be enough to catch glaring errors.

I have looked at my item so many times now, I am worried I'm "drinking the Kool-aid" and no longer seeing errors. Is anyone willing to have me send them a PM for a quick review of my item to make sure I'm not making blatant mistakes, format fumbles, typos, etc.?

I am more than happy to return the favor.

Thanks!

Doffing Cap

Aura faint Enchantment; CL 3
Slot head; Price You can't put a price on Swag; Weight .25 lbs.

Description
This felt cranium topper is often blue but sometimes red or yellow, and is absent of the presence of any gold or silver filigree. The hat makes the wearer improve their attitude by one level when making Charisma checks. Additionally when the wearer tips the brow, flourishes the hat at, or any way uses the hat to show gratitude, respect, or homage to another creature the wearer may target that creature with Accolades. The target of Accolades instantly feels admired, respected and puffed up and for the next 24 hours gains the following benefits: +1 competence bonus on all Charisma based checks, immunity to insults, and the ability to Pass With Swag. The wearer of the hat gains these abilities simultaneously with the target of the Accolades. The wearer can only target one creature with the accolades in a 24 hour period, the wearer may not target themselves.

Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, Charm Person, Cost You can't put a price on Swag divided by two.

I need one of these in real life!!!

Just want to say thank you for the time and effort in providing feedback for everyone. I do not think I would have made my Fort save vs. Reviewer Fatigue. You were spot on about my item being non-descript, which I also realized during voting.

I am happily surprised I made it into the top 89, and not the least surprised I did not make the top 32 + 4. The item as submitted was very boring, in part because it is supposed to be boring looking while in active use. I've made a few edits to try to make it a little more cinematic.

First, I'm showing my age by accidentally using the AD&D Illusionist level 1 spell name from 1980 (change self) instead of the 3.5 name (disguise self). Even after re-reading and proofing the item over several weeks, it took me reading the item the third time during voting to notice the mistake. I really do know that it should be disguise self....

With a few very helpful comments in PM already, here is a second try:

Thank you in advance for any feedback! If anyone wants to use this item or variants thereof, I would be honored and please feel free to do so.

I like the oathbreaker must die tie in. This is the first archetype i read, so I need to read everyone else before i have any comparison.

Very impressive!

That's a very cool idea, but I do worry about the overhead of implementing that sort of system, and I also worry about the sort of feedback it might encourage, as anonymity can encourage people to be harsher than they would when their feedback is public and attached to their forum name.

You could always make feedback attach to the forum name, and a person only gives feedback knowing it will not be anonymous.

For the cost, I am unfortunately not able to think of a way to make it free....

To be clear, I do not want any bar lower. I want the best product to buy and I do not care about the gender of the author. If the test to get into architect school was designing a power tool, you will have a different pool of students than if the test was something else.

Why not have a different round one next year and see what happens?

@Matthew - what if the first round was drawing a monster? I know I would never never make round 2 because I cannot draw to save my life. Would you find the best writer in later rounds? You would have a great top person, I am sure. The top 32 would be different.

If kicking is always the first round, you are still inclusive but not necessarily find all the skill sets out there.

RPG Superstar is doing exactly what it needs to do, and is doing it well.

This thread was started because RGPSS has exactly zero women in the top 32 this year. If you want to continue this record, I concede that nothing needs to change. If you want to continue to minimize the participation of half of the population in RPG, please keep doing exactly the same every year. You are indeed finding very talented freelance writers that excel at "C" and are good at A, B, D, etc.

I really hope that excluding women is not exactly what needs to be done every year.

I believe what Kenton Abel is saying (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that people who can write great modules using the building blocks of whatever's already in the rulebooks and bestiaries don't have to be great at creating brand new building blocks. I agree with this.

However, Paizo isn't looking solely for great module writers, even though that's the "prize" up for grabs. They're looking for freelancers, people they can call up and ask to write setting material, statblocks, items, monsters, archetypes, NPCs for a codex, what-have-you.

I think the fact that the "prize" is to write an adventure obscures the fact that the real goal on Paizo's part is an ongoing professional relationship which encompasses many more tasks than just coming up with a great storyline and encounters.

This is close to what I was trying to get across. I will revert to my XY genotype and use an American football example. Say I want to put together a great football team and I open up tryouts to everyone before spring training. In order to get into spring training, I have everyone try kicking a field goal from the 45 yard line. Every year, to get to spring training, you have to have to be in the top 32 for best record of making field goals.

Will I get someone in the top 32 who can play quarterback? Yes. Will they be a really good quarterback? Not likely. Will I have a good offensive line? Very unlikely. I will have a team with a lot of great kickers, but probably not a lot of winning games.

Paizo is looking for a freelance writer who can do everything. My point is that they probably should not be.

Game design is a team sport. You need players who understand all aspects of the game, but to have a really great team you need people with different skill sets. The linebacker does not need to be able to throw a 50 yard pass and have it hit a moving target, and the kicker does not need to be able to block a 300 pound defensive lineman. A mix of skill sets where each member does something extremely well makes a better team than having a team where everyone can do everything fairly well.

Just my perspective, for whatever it be worth.

having a handle on mechanics is an important part of design.

The point I am trying to get across is that item mechanics are to me only a very small part adventure design. When telling a story, the magic items are the supporting props, not the main event. Likewise, houses and cities are usually supporting props for telling the story. Without any houses, cities, fields, trees, rivers, etc., most stories will be very boring. Without magic items, the Harry Potter books would be much less interesting. It takes all of these put together to make a great story.

I do not look at wondrous items when I consider buying an adventure. I look at the plot, the setting, the flavor, etc. The magic items are icing on the cake, not the cake itself.

Is there another way of finding great cooks instead of just looking at the frosting and guessing if the cake will taste great?

This thread got me thinking about some of the different player styles within the community. I had not thought of the mechanics behind item creation specifically since I enjoy tinkering so much. There have been some very good points made here that will keep me thinking about this for a time.

When designing a new adventure, how important are the new items? For me, not much. Is round 1, by just the mechanics, reducing the talent pool significantly?

One suggestion for next year: instead of a wondrous item, round 1 is design a building for a city. Paizo provides a map of the city with building locations, with maybe maps of empty buildings by letter designation. The write up lists location on map by number "xx" with building type by letter "aa". Limit still 300 words. Write up includes everything a GM needs if the party decides to stop off at that location. The twist (if any) could be: no inns, city is a barbarian frontier town or desert trading post, etc.

Thank you very much for posting the top 89!

I have followed this contest for years, this is the first time I entered. Voting definitely shed a lot of light on what I can do better for item design. My item was the mage's battlecloak, and I happily admit it needs some polishing and a few errors fixed.

Fantastic Wonderous Item! Will definitely be using some Magic Kindling in my campaign. Now if the bundle just refreshed itself to a full number of sticks at dawn every day, and filled all quivers with 20 arrows, and backpacks with rations, and canteens with Elven water....

Of course, the price for the Magic Kindling is either 5 silver or 500,000 gold, not sure which works better yet.