Concerning ecology submissions, I was wondering what creatures can be submitted? Obviously submitting an ecology on dragons is silly, and many of the iconic monsters have already been done. How can I know what creatures are possible?
Thanks in advance!
Magius -
Any creature from any WotC book is a potential ecology article. Most of the recent ones are out of the Monster Manual... but not all. Ecology of the Kenku (from MMIII) was recently presented, for example.
Recently presented monsters include: Green Hag, Night Hag (not completely sure on this one), Chuul, Kenku, Kraken, Behir, Kobold, Grimlock, Choker, Rakshasa, Will-o-the-wisp, and one that I can't think of off the top of my head (sorry, I keep track of these, but my notes are at home). Also note that Amber has let slip that lizardfolk will also be appearing sometime soon.
Write a query, include a few monsters you'd like to do and something about why you think they're the right monster and you're the right person to write it. Expect to hear back in about two-three months whether they are interested. In the meantime, I suggest trying queries for class acts articles.
Lizardfolk are appearing in this month's issue...they're mentioned on the "Dragon" page lest I'm mistaken.
Basically yeah, everything Koldoon said. Don't pitch anything that's appeared in the last year and just go with whatever you find interesting. Good luck!
-Amber S.
If it hasn't been done in 3e (or 3.5e), then it's probably fair game. An Ecology of the Goblin could be fun and interesting, but you'll have to show the editors that you could make it fun and interesting.
A good idea would be to select 3-5 monsters you're interested in doing and write a paragraph each on how you would handle them. Like:
"Ecology of the Goblin: To give such a standard fantasy staple an interesting slant, I'd focus on their tribal structure (including a sidebar on different tribal symbols and beliefs), such as the Six Blue Feathers goblin tribe who staple feathers onto their foreheads before going into battle. I'd also showcase several short goblin legends that illustrate their culture and will be useful tidbits for DMs to reveal with Knowledge (religion) and Knowledge (local) checks."
That sort of thing. You might want to include one or two non-standard monsters in the mix, like an aranea or xorn, if you're worried about pitching only "iconic" monsters. Then again, look at some of the recent ecologies: lizardfolk, rakashas, duergar, krakens...these are also iconic monsters, and Dragon was happy to accept proposals for them.
And remember, what's the worst that could happen? They say, "We're not interested in these, thanks anyway." You've lost absolutely nothing by pitching a proposal, and you've gained experience and placed your name in an editor's brain.
Good luck!
-Amber S.
Then again, look at some of the recent ecologies: lizardfolk, rakashas, duergar, krakens...these are also iconic monsters, and Dragon was happy to accept proposals for them.
And remember, what's the worst that could happen? They say, "We're not interested in these, thanks anyway." You've lost absolutely nothing by pitching a proposal, and you've gained experience and placed your name in an editor's brain.
Good luck!
-Amber S.
Don't forget KOBOLD, done very recently. Without actually doing dragon or goblin, it is difficult to get much more iconic than that.
- Ashavan
And remember, what's the worst that could happen? They say, "We're not interested in these, thanks anyway." You've lost absolutely nothing by pitching a proposal, and you've gained experience and placed your name in an editor's brain.
I know Amber makes it sound easy... and for a lot of us it is not... we're putting our ideas on the line and the idea that we might (and realistically very likely will) get rejected is hard to push through. Don't let that stop you. The best buffer I've found against rejection is to have more things on the editors desk that are still being considered. Preferably in separate sections of the magazine (or better, in the other magazine) so that the rejections come in at different times. The plus with this is that sometimes the editors will hedge the evil "Sorry but we can't use this" line with a "but we're happy to say you will be seeing your xxx article in issue #..."
Also, don't let the "it's been done" issue scare you... like Amber said, if it hasn't been done since 3.0, it really doesn't matter.
- Ashavan
Wise words. Heed them!
Ashavan makes it sound like I'm totally callous about rejection, which is not exactly the case. ;-) I admit I'm not as attached to my ideas as some, but I have a bad habit of taking things personally. "Sorry, we can't use this" turns into "sorry, we hate you" somewhere between the computer screen and my eyeballs.
But my only options are 'deal with it' or 'quit writing', so I've learned to deal...like Ashavan said, all you can do is push through it. And it does get easier as you get more experienced.
The easiest way I've found to avoid the pain of rejection, though, is to talk myself out of submitting anything. I had actually come pretty close to talking myself out of submitting a query for "Ecology of the Duergar" for the very same reason you're using - "someone else must have queried it already by now" - but my friend Zherog pestered me until I sent it. Yay for friends!
-Amber S.
But my only options are 'deal with it' or 'quit writing', so I've learned to deal...like Ashavan said, all you can do is push through it. And it does get easier as you get more experienced.
The easiest way I've found to avoid the pain of rejection, though, is to talk myself out of submitting anything. I had actually come pretty close to talking myself out of submitting a query for "Ecology of the Duergar" for the very same reason you're using - "someone else must have queried it already by now" - but my friend Zherog pestered me until I sent it. Yay for friends!
-Amber S.
oooh ... isn't that the evil out? And it is sooooooo easy to do. I almost did it with my first attempt at ecology queries - figuring surely someone has already submitted them. Finding an out is too easy.
Regrets are too easy to have. You'll never know whether that idea would have been accepted, and it will haunt you. I didn't submit for the Origins Side Trek contest. I had a submission, a good one... but I convinced myself that it needed more work. G cubed won that contest (and probably would have anyway, his idea, as I heard it described, was top notch), and I will never know how I would have done. Sure, I convinced myself it would be better as a short adventure, but that's not the point.
Don't have regrets like that. Get your queries in front of the editors.
- Ashavan
-
|
Wise words. Heed them!
Yes they are, from both of you!
... but I have a bad habit of taking things personally. "Sorry, we can't use this" turns into "sorry, we hate you" somewhere between the computer screen and my eyeballs.
One of the hardest things for a young writer to overcome is the hurdle-like thought "If my {article/manuscript/screenplay/whatever} is rejected, I'm completely useless as a writer". It is VERY difficult to divorce your ego from the acceptance/rejection process, but that is exactly what you need to do. There are sooooooo many things that are involved with the process, especially in a magazine like Dragon, that there are literally dozens of reasons for something to be rejected that have nothing to do with your pitch or abilities. Like Amber says...similar queries that got there first, doesn't fit the scope of the near future...It's not all about you, suck it up ;)
And when/if the blessed day arrives and you do get tapped, remember that the editors are there to work with you to make the finished product the best it can be before press. Don't let your ego get in the way and mistake advice, proof-reading, and corrections for critisizm of the actual product. I couldn't sleep for 4 days after getting the first draft of my thesis back... all those commments in red pointing out mistakes, incomplete thoughts, typos...I turned myself into a zombie thinking my graduate committee thought I was an moronic waste of space. Y'know what, though? They see dozens of thesis submissions and drafts a year, some better and some worse, some with better spelling and grammer, and hard to belive, some worse. They are doing their job to shape and direct the research in a way that makes thier organization and the individual student proud. The editorial process for magazines is fundamentally the same.
Perserverence.
I don't think I've ever actually pitched an ecology article, though they seem like fun so I know I will at some point :)
About doing one on an iconic monster like the beholder or the illithid. I could be wrong, but I have a sneaking suspicion that if WotC has recently come out with a book dealing with the creature (e.g. Lords of Madness) the bar might be set a bit higher until the novelty wears off. That being said, I would loooove to see an ecology of the aboleth...
On the subject of rejected pitches, boy oh boy do I get a lot of them!
(I believe the technical term is "oodles" :) )
I tend to make pitches for features and the like only a couple of times a year. Each "Halkrieg" as I call it, usually totals 20 to 30 ideas by the time I run out of gas. For instance, back in January I trotted out about 25 ideas (five to an email max!!) and got the greenlight for 5 of them which I then wrote over March/April/May. So far I've only heard back on the first of them, tentatively scheduled to appear in that oh so precise "sometime early next year" :) and the other four are still in limbo at the moment.
Ideas are everywhere once you start looking for them, it's just a matter of getting in the habit of remaining receptive.
remember that the editors are there to work with you to make the finished product the best it can be before press. Don't let your ego get in the way and mistake advice, proof-reading, and corrections for critisizm of the actual product.
SO true. One thing that really helps me is remembering what the point of all this is. The end goal is to see a magazine with a really good article in it that inspires and aids other readers. The end goal is not to inflate my ego. Whatever steps I have to take to get that good finished product out there, I just take 'em.
About doing one on an iconic monster like the beholder or the illithid. I could be wrong, but I have a sneaking suspicion that if WotC has recently come out with a book dealing with the creature (e.g. Lords of Madness) the bar might be set a bit higher until the novelty wears off. That being said, I would loooove to see an ecology of the aboleth...
I have actually found my experience to be the opposite...Dragon/Dungeon like coordinating things with WotC releases. I think Dragon picked the will-o'-wisp and the *coughcough* out of the list of monsters I submitted precisely because Lords of Madness was just released.
Not to say that they always want to coordinate with ALL WotC releases...sometimes they like to assign these articles, sometimes they just don't have room to coordinate, whatever. The important thing is pitching something you think they'll like AND that you want to write. Don't pitch an idea you hate just because you think they'll buy it.
/rambling
-Amber S.
I have actually found my experience to be the opposite...Dragon/Dungeon like coordinating things with WotC releases. I think Dragon picked the will-o'-wisp and the *coughcough* out of the list of monsters I submitted precisely because Lords of Madness was just released.
Oooooh - this suggests that the *coughcough* is an aberration. Funky. Can't wait to see the article!
- Ashavan
On the subject of rejected pitches, boy oh boy do I get a lot of them!
(I believe the technical term is "oodles" :) )
Hal -
hey, that's a 1 in 5 acceptance rate, which is pretty exceptional.
- Ashavan
but my friend Zherog pestered me until I sent it. Yay for friends!
Especially friends who are a giant pain in the ass and don't accept no for an answer. Well, not often, anyway. :D
Recently presented monsters include: Green Hag, Night Hag (not completely sure on this one), Chuul, Kenku, Kraken, Behir, Kobold, Grimlock, Choker, Rakshasa, Will-o-the-wisp, and one that I can't think of off the top of my head (sorry, I keep track of these, but my notes are at home). Also note that Amber has let slip that lizardfolk will also be appearing sometime soon.
*looks profoundly embarrased*
The missing ecology from the past year of articles is the ecology of the duergar. Sorry Amber!
- Ashavan
You guys are onto a few of my secrets here. Being the editor in charge of Ecologies, I always try to tie them into something relevant going on or coming out in the same month. For example, in April Lords of Madness came out. The chuul is an aberration not covered extensively in that book (although their history did end up in there… a little story that we only found out about halfway through the editing process). Same way with how the “Ecology of the Kraken” came out in August, the same month Stormwrack releases. I also frequently try to tie Ecologies in with Dungeon. Like in May, Dungeon’s “Root of Evil” released featuring a green hag villain and we did the “Ecology of the Green Hag” in Dragon. Same thing with “Ecology of the Lizardfolk” and Dungeon’s lizardfolk-tastic “Encounter at Blackwall Keep” (complete with hermaphrodite lizardfolk shaman). So there is a method behind a lot of these decisions.
In the coming months Dragon has a few themes planned and Ecologies will be falling into step with these. So, if we do a demon-themed issue, expect to see something from the Abyss detailed. This does make submissions a little tricky at the moment, as we don’t commonly reveal what we’ve got planned far in advance. Every now and then I’ll commission a writer I’ve worked with to get something specific, but for newcomers, pitching four or five creatures briefly tends to be the way to go. That way I can see what works with the schedule as well as pick out what’s cool.
As for what sources we draw from for Ecologies, for a long time the idea was to only use the Monster Manual because that’s what the most people could get into (hence the run of choker, night hag, duergar, rakshasa, grimlock, will-o-wisp,--ignore the kenku--, chuul, green hag, kobold, behir, kraken, lizardfolk). That time is over. October brings a fantastically grotesque ecology of the Spawn of Kyuss (can you say “Age of Worms?) and down the line we’ve got some beasties from all over. In other words, the philosophy has changed to covering the coolest monsters out there and making them even cooler. (In this aspect and others, see this thread http://paizo.com/dragon/messageboards/generalDiscussion/laidAnEgg). So every bestiary is game. While I’m largely going leave most campaign specific stuff alone, the occasional Realms, Eberron, even Oriental Adventures monsters might slip in there. Not that I have any submissions for any of those monsters. I wonder where I could find some….
|
Is it requested that we do intensive research on the chosen creature?
If i, for example, pick a creature from the Fiend Folio it seems clear to me, that i'd have to work with the informations given there. But what about scources, that i don't know of? What if i expand the informations and this is contradictory to other scources?
Obviously I'm not Wes, but I can speak from experience that they don't mind contradicting 2e and older sources. It would be important, I think, to make sure your information doesn't conflict with any information in other 3e sources. For instance, with the Eco of the Lizardfolk I read the MM description, the description of Semuanya in Defenders of the Faith, and borrowed a copy of Serpent Kingdoms from a friend.
The editors could probably help you with that, but I think it's best to do as much as you can on your own. I find message boards like this a big help when researching articles. A simple, "Can anyone tell me where I can find info on lizardfolk?" will get you dozens of replies.
-Amber S.
Is it requested that we do intensive research on the chosen creature?
If i, for example, pick a creature from the Fiend Folio it seems clear to me, that i'd have to work with the informations given there. But what about scources, that i don't know of? What if i expand the informations and this is contradictory to other scources?
Well there are two counts here. First we can't contradict anything that Wizards says goes in any of their products. We can build of it, but no contradicting. As if that imperative wasn't strict enough, I'm a glutton for continuity and nostalgia, so if there was a great deal of 1st or 2nd edition information on something I’ll want the ecology to work with it. Or at the very least I'd like to hear about the old info in a sidebar. That's why you always see the little history lesson sidebars. On the other hand, if whatever used to go for a creature is pretty dumb, I have no problem with ignoring it. Overall though, it's best to talk to me about what's canonical and what can be ignored.
Next month you'll see a perfect example of all this with the "Ecology of the Spawn of Kyuss." While the Monster Manual II only has one page on these guys there is a great deal of info about them and Kyuss as far back as the original Fiend Folio. So this Ecology draws on all of that, picks up new info from the Age of Worms Adventure Path, and adds even more of its own stuff.
Besides everything I've been saying about covering what's cool, a lot of what's neat out there has already been done in the magazine's nearly 25 years. While we sometimes overlook old Ecologies and do new versions (like the "Ecology of the Behir" first in #156 and more recently in #333 and the "Ecology of the Greenhag" in #125 and #331), I largely prefer not to. So, here's the big (and pretty complete) list of what I would shy away from just on the basis of past coverage. While I can be compelled to ignore this if you've got a fantastic idea, I'd always rather to cover new ground.
72 - Piercer
73 - Catoblepas
74 - Bulette
75 - Mimic
76 - Beholder
77 - Unicorn
78 - Mind Flayer
79 - Treant
80 - Doppleganger
81 - Basilisk
82 - Peryton
83 - Stirge
84 - Trapper
85 - Ixitxachitl
86 - Slithering Tracker
87 - Dryad
88 - Rust Monster
91 - Leucrotta
92 - Ettin
93 - Eye of the Deep
94 - Chimera/Gorgimera
95 - Cockatrice
96 - Gulguthra
97 - Gorgon/Gorgimera
99 - Will-o-wisp/Boggart
104 - Ochre Jelly
106 - Maedar/Medusa
107 - Sea Lion
109 - Displacer Beast
114 - Remorhaz
115 - Harpy
116 - Minotaur
117 - Anhkheg
119 - Korred
120 - Gas Spore
122 - Rot Grub
123 - Leech, Giant
124 - Gelatinous Cube
125 - Greenhag
126 - Shade
127 - Yeti
131 - Aboleth
131 - Hook Horror
132 - Aurumvorax
133 - Carnivorous Ape
134 - Red Dragon
135 - Cave Fisher
137 - Carnivorous Plants
139 - Spectator
146 - Dragons (2nd Ed.)
151 - Kappa
151 - Yuan-ti
152 - Umber Hulk
153 - Manticore
155 - Satyr
156 - Behir
157 - Wemic
160 - Gibbering Mouther
161 - Griffon
164 - Iron Cobra
167 - Su Monster
172 - Galeb Duhr
173 - Flind/Gnoll
187 - Dakon
190 - Actaeon
192 - Lamia
197 - Giant Scorpion
214 - Neogi
214 - Owlbear
215 - Amphisbaena
218 - Bird Maiden
219 - Black Pudding
221 - Crystal Spider
222 - Penanggalan
223 - Chitine
224 - Lammasu
227 - Osquip
232 - Roper
235 - Troglodyte
An1 - Wyvern
239 - Stirge
240 - Nymph
An2 - Shambling Mound
242 - Mongrelman
244 - Sphinx
245 - Steeder
246 - Flumph
251 - Wererat
252 - Ghoul
An3 - Steel Dragon
254 - Cyclopskin
257 - Firenewt/Giant Strider
258 - Flail Snail
260 - Aspis
261 - Dark Naga
262 - Jermlaine
An4 - Gray Ooze
266 - Xixchil
267 - Carrion Crawler
269 - Pseudodragon
270 - Gorbel
271 - Bag of Devouring
272 - Hydra
273 - Hippocampus
275 - Darkmantle
276 - Sheet Phantom
An5 - Feyr
282 - Purple Worm
300 - Mummy
301 - Troll
309 - Hobgoblin
312 - Drider
314 - Salamander
322 - Dark Ones
323 - Choker
324 - Night Hag
325 – Duergar
326 – Rakshasa
327 – Grimlock
328 – Will-o-Wisp
329 – Kenku
330 – Chuul
331 – Green Hag
332 – Kobold
333 – Behir
334 – Kraken
335 – Lizardfolk
336 – Spawn of Kyuss
Now mind you, some of these old Ecologies are CRAZY so I'm willing to ignore some or just use them as starting points. Overall, I'm most firm about not covering anything within the past hundred issues. Later than that, I get increasingly more flexible. Huh, looks like the Penanggalan and Lamia are both more than a hundred issues old... cool.
here's a question on the "What Monsters Can We Use" theme:
can an Ecology article focus on a brand new creature or a conversion that has yet to appear in 3E? :) (not that there aren't enough 3E critters to write about or anything...)
Wes....
Past 100 issues eh? You're evil. On the other hand, I think only one of the monsters among those I recently queried for falls in that range, and it was far enough back in the last 100 issues that it might still have a chance.
Thanks for the post Wes... I did some excel magic and now have a list that is alpha sortable and still lists the issue. This is very handy!!! my own list only went back 15 issues or so.
- Ashavan
Now mind you, some of these old Ecologies are CRAZY so I'm willing to ignore some or just use them as starting points.
I dunno man. As the perpetual voice of dissent around here, I feel I have to add that very little these days in D&D is CRAZY in that same way, so it might be something worth not overwriting.
My own personal favorite thing about the old Ecologies was the way that authors would take the craziest, most logic-defying Gygaxian dungeons pests and the embrace them as a sort of...challenge. Just to see if they could maybe manage to explain them in some semi-convincing way.
At the same time, another take on the same creature never really hurts. So long as it's good, that is.
I think your parenthetical statement just answered your own question, Boz.
--Erik
never hurt to ask, though. ;)
yamo, now you're putting words in my mouth! :)
Mr. Schneider,
As the "guy who handles Ecology articles," you're definitely the person I want to ask this question: Any chance that there might be a return to the old "fiction and footnote" format of old any time soon? Or perhaps, instead of having you convert the Ecology articles completely back to the "fiction and footnote" style, perhaps a better question might be: Is there any chance you would be interested in an occasional "fiction and footnote" style Ecology article if it also incorporated the specific sidebars (Knowledge tables, past appearances of the creature in question) of the current style? Perhaps featuring, oh, I don't know, a band of Monster Hunters or something?
And would it help if the individual asking the question had written more of the Ecology articles on that comprehensive list you posted than anybody else on the planet?
Johnathan
i give that idea a thumbs up. :D
Here's another thought - maybe that would work best for the April issue every year, since those issues are usually at least partly humor-based anyway. I'd take even one Monster Hunters Ecology a year over the current, well, none ever.
Johnathan
this list needs some updating. :)
I believe this should get it up to date.
337 - Shadar-Kai
338 - Spell Weaver
339 - Draconian
340 - Mooncalf
341 - Inevitable
342 - Adventurer
343 - Ettercap
344 - Dracolich
345 - Annis Hag
346 - Rust Monster
347 - Elemental Weird
348 - Wight
349 - Ogre Mage
350 - Clockwork Horror
351 - Isle of Dread
352 - Yrthak
plus the keeper, next issue. :)
The easiest way I've found to avoid the pain of rejection, though, is to talk myself out of submitting anything. I had actually come pretty close to talking myself out of submitting a query for "Ecology of the Duergar" for the very same reason you're using - "someone else must have queried it already by now" - but my friend Zherog pestered me until I sent it. Yay for friends!
-Amber S.
Wait, you're the one who wrote the duergar ecology article that showed up in, what was it, Dragon 325? I liked the work done on that one, good job.