So with the release of the Alpha, any update on the submission's guidelines or anything? Are you even wanting/accepting such things at the moment?
Beyond the play-testing how can I leave my mark on the Pathfinder/GameMastery imprints.
Search Posts
Bit of a bump, but was anything like this ever worked out (I guess the same would apply to the Pathfinder stuff as well). If so can anyone gimme a handy link? Cheers
4.0, being the marketing scam that it is, won't replace 3.5 for me. I've spent too long and too much money on 3.5 to start over again. The Star Wars RPG complex is still a bitter memory to me, and this only sours my interest in WotC products. Nevertheless I feel if this contains all the tiny minor rules scattered across the hundreds of sources from vague references in background books like the Drow book, to articles from Dungeon and Dragon (RiP) I'll be happy. As the description reads, it will be give me a lot less to carry and GM's more access to the crazy rules their players keep tauting as law.
*Fidgets* I've been offline a few days, so I was a little anxious that they'd gone the whole nine yards and released everything already. Thanks for at least soothing the pain :P
Any word on the submission guidelines or email address for the above products?
Forgive my ignorance, but I've only ever written d20 material for Dungeon and Dragon magazine's, but doesn't the OGL prohibit the use or reference to WotC stuff beyond the core trio of books?
I hear ya about Mtg. The Star Wars fiasco also springs to mind. But of course Wotc, or rather Hasbro, are a buisness and I am sure this, like every other one of their previous mistakes (and sucesses) is down to simple $$'s.
I too am very saddened. Not the feeling of having been screwed by someone, rather the sad knowledge that a dear friend is going away forever. My predictions for WotC's online edition would fall somewhere in line with Mongoose's Signs and Portents magazine which, similiar to the D n D mags, used to be in print. It is now a monthly downloadable that is supposedly very successful. Personally, I much prefer reading a magazine. Anyway, with this new Pathfinder fun, with the shackles of specific restrictions cast off, is there the potential for some new material to be more adult in theme?
Add my name to the pool of people disappointed they'll never see their own Dungeon adventure. I think it would ease the pain of our iconic magazine's demise if Paizo perhaps created a submission guideline for the likes of it's Gamesmastery line and future Pathfinder publications. Heh, I don't even know what email address to use anymore.
Hehe, they'll even send their comp copy abroad. I got a few about two months after they went on sale. Not bad considering I live in the UK.
So, when is there gonna be another Campaign Setting competition? :D
Hey, don't forget to post them up in the Critique my Query thread. It's probably the best way of getting more feedback.
So is the Demonomicon articles a purely in-house thing, or are you accepting queries? :P
Hmmm, I've been warned off CA's, for the moment. Seems Mike has a massive backlog of both queries and actual finished articles. Just a headsup.
Matt....would be Matt Sprange. The guy I just emailed about Conan.... BAH! It's really just me sniping Mike because he made me cry :(
So with Matt snowed under with CA's I was thinking of spreading my wings further and querying some other area's of Dragon, specifically the feature section. How does one go about this? Is it similiar to Dungeon whereby I'd give a brief, 1000 word synopsis of the article? Or is it more akin to CA's where I just send a hella list of one or two paragraph ideas? In fact could someone remind me exactly what has to go to who as well? Thanks a bunch.
Question: Would it be considered poor form to include a drawn map as part of a query? I'm finding having to add description to simple caves as a real word count killer. However without them the query itself loses a sense of place. So would I be shooting myself in the foot, as it were? And if so, how do You go about describing the generic rooms of your dungeon within a query?
Last Post Errata: - Bah, too late to edit - Mike, I happen to know I've added a table to one of the Class Acts you've confirmed you've recieved. Do you want me to resend them unformatted, or just let you go through the pain this one time?
Well from what I remember of the drunken conversation I had with my Star Wars buddy, they intend to make the Jedi classes (which were two in the original core book - Consular and Guardian, which went up to 3+ in the supplements, including sentinel etc) into one single class. Some of the other classes will be removed (I think the idea of having four or five classes is the concept they are working with). No skill points (Using True20 as the basis). Traditional Hit Points, and generally focusing their game around mini's.
From what I've read, the new Star Wars is going to be a very streamlined d20 version of it's old (not it's old old) self. Less classes, more balance (they hope). I just hope this means a revitalization of the entire range.
Alrighty. Thanks a bunch.
Are Campaign Workbooks, Wandering Monsters, and Critical Threats still done by sending in the finished article itself? Or are we now at the point where they can be pitched via a query?
Well it's certainly a quandary thats for sure. People raise the issue of lower sales, profitability, etc and many will jump to the conclusion that more books (or minis) need to be put out there to address this shift in balance. I don't think this is always the case. For one our world is changing thanks largely to the internet and the expanding possibilities of online gaming. Secondly, as a consumer of tabletop roleplay products I can say that a book has to be worthwhile to me before I buy it. Now I'm sure there will be many, many people who will buy everything that is released, but I'd estimate that the majority of people are like me whom buy whatever piques their interest or whatever books they need. In regards to new editions, just look at what happened to Star Wars: everyone got angry because of the audacity of wotc for creating new additions to coincide with each film. Of course this is predictable buisness sense, but I don't blame anyone for being angry for having to pay out $30 or whatever for a new book every year until the trilogy is complete so you can get minor rules tweaks and pretty new pictures on the inside/cover. The backlash of this stunted the Star Wars line so much so that only now is it making any forward progress. To me, 3.5 ED is still new. I'd not be too happy if all of a sudden a radical rules change came about in the guise of 4th ED. It would reak of a buisness move, and not a move to make the game more fun - which should be the only reason why we get a 4th edition in the first place.
A new Star Trek movie is in the works. Plus who needs a DnD cartoon when we have Korgoth?
If it ain't broke...
Rejection is totally part and parcel of the writing world. I 100% agree getting little or no response as to why it was rejected is frustrating, but truth be told I've always been lucky with my responses. In particular, Matt has always given me a good few words as what I can do to improve or why a certain idea wasn't appropriate or acceptable. Now this often isn't the case for Dungeon queries, where in fact I've only ever recieved a personalized (and not the robo-"Thanks for the query, but no" reponse) once or twice. You also must appreciate the amount of stuff they get sent to them. It's frustrating, yes. But you have to live with it.
I'm going to start adding subliminal messages to my queries, featuring my name. One such message will follow each paragraph of real text: Nick Thorburn is great. Nick Thorburn is your friend. You want Nick Thorburn to create your next Adventure Path. You want to make Nick Thorburn a sandwich. Nick Thorburn forever. Etc.
I sent in maybe 5 Divine Inspiration queries last year to which I got the response that they weren't planning on doing any more for a while.
Way ahead of you :D
Yeah, I found CC2 to be pretty spiffy in all the adds, demo's etc, but a tad complicated when it came to actually doing it myself. And very time consuming as you noted yourself. My advice is the good old fashioned Pen and Paper. If you need to snazz it up a bit you can always scan and alter it via Photoshop etc.
Well I resent my completed Class Acts, last week, from a new email address. Hopefully they'll reach you this time Mike ;) Third time's a charm.
That is very odd Mike, as this will be the third attempt at actually sending the finished article. It seemigly got lost in the last round too. :(
Not sure Mike. Got whose disclosure forms are dated 21st of August. One for Nov 1st. Thats perhaps a bit recent. You may well have replied; hotmail has failed me a lot recently.
Heh, any idea on my own then Zherog? :D Still got a few completed CA's in the old hole waiting to be used or shot down forever.
So is Kara-Tur still a part of Toril or it's own world again, in the eyes of wotc?
Heck of a bump here, but I just wanted to quickly add that this website truly rocks. However, one quick question, is the way psionic powers are listed correct? Basically I'm curious as to which DC I should be using in a stat block - the lowest, most basic save DC, or the most powerful, powerpoint infused DC. Thanks.
Hi Mike, Just a quick message to say I've emailed you in regards to Class Act responses (basically if you didn't respond after so much time, we should go a head and email you). Hope you get em this time. *slaps Hotmail*
*Reminds himself to send Mike a box of cookies for Christmas*
I can always email again Mike. There were two articles enclosed, and I know Hotmail can be stupid sometimes when handling attachements or replies to emails with attachements.
Holy bumpage. Anyway, whats the usual turnaround for an article to response? I've recently got the PHB2 and figured my last Class Act might not go down very well...
I know the following doesn't really pertain to this thread of discussion, but has there every been any thought of disgarding the usual standard whereby none MM monsters are given a full stat block? In my own query and adventure writing experience, I am always put off by the fact that none MM critters are such a space filler. I feel almost restricted to use any more than two or three monsters from say MM2, 3, or 4, FF etc. I also seem to add more MM "fodder" monsters (like orcs, grimlocks etc) rather than choose something more appropriate from another source. Anyone else feel this way?
I think one of the issues here is that Dungeon (and Dragon) are produced with everyone in mind. Every article I query has no specific character in mind. I design it for the everyman, and I feel that is the road Dungeon has gone down for a long time now. I don't see it as a bad thing; there is a definate need to try to appeal to as broad a spectrum of readers as possible. Unfortunately this often prevents dungeons or other articles being specifically tailored for a certain breed of players, such as over-the-top flashy (like the bucaneers), tremendously evil, stupid, or whatever other niche character styles I'm sure we've all come up with before. For example, I once ran an adventure inspired by Stan Nichol's Orcs series, where all the players resided in an orcish tribe (they were full orcs, half orcs or goblins). It was a neat little campaign arc, and very original. Would it ever see the light of day in Dungeon? I think not.
Thanks a bunch Mike (and Zherog), that definately clears it up. I'm a bit apprehensive about a CA I sent you a month or two now, but at least I won't make the same mistakes again in the upcoming few you've requested. Thanks again.
Sort of. I'm still pretty hazy about the entire concept. Taking your example, how many alternative abilities would it for that ranger to become an alternative class? Does renaming the class make it suddenly alternative?
Cheeky, but can someone be more specific on the Psionic Psicrystal Substitution article? I'm very interested.
Holy bump Batman. I'm a bit hazy on one aspect of the Class Acts (as it pertains, possibly, to one such query that Mike has Okayed from me). I'm also sure I've asked this before, but here goes... Could you define the difference between Alternative Classes and Alternative Class Abilities? Basically if I am creating a class act that is based on the statistics of an existing class (lets say paladin), and change around some of their class features, does that make it fall in the Alternative Class Abilities bracket? What exactly would I have to change in the paladin description/stats to make it the unholy Alternative Class? Name? HD?? Bueller???
Talion, I was really blown away by your query style. I've always tried to write my queries as if I'm conjuring the back page of a novel. Basically I avoid using any real world references and try to have the whole thing read more like a story (as if you were reading it from Dungeon itself). However your query just made so much sense. I don't know which style helps or is preferred more by the Gods of the Gate, but I'm definately giving my own approach a rethink. Keep up the good work.
Thats really good to hear. But in fear of becoming That whiney guy, I was curious if you've began to give any feedback again. Basically my current crux is that I liked a particular idea within an old, and rejected adventure query. I liked it so much that I've decided to use it again. However, as that query was rejected with no actual reason, I could possibly be setting myself up for fall for exactly the same reasons as last time. Maybe you guys HATED this part of the idea. I don't know. I know it's a pain and it takes time, but even a simple "too long", "crap idea", "poorly written", "CR's too whacky", "not developed enough" would help improve us even further.
Well done F2K. You deserve it. *Jealous mutterings*
|