I believe that one of the goals of this contest is to get a superstar that has a recognizable 'face' on the boards => they want the RPG superstar to have a personality that attracts people to the boards and the product.
Do you think we could have anonymous voting for the next Superstar?
Where we don't know that name of the person who created whatever it is we are voting on.That way people will vote for the text of the submission, not the person who wrote it.
When the voting is done for that round then we would know the author of the submission.Thoughts?
I think it would be pretty clear by this point who wrote which one anyways. Looking at the encounters, I'd be spot on for 3 the top three of them and would have a decent chance of guessing the others...
And as the judges said ahead of time, part of this IS having the people themselves out there and part of the loop.
Hear, hear!
The decision about whether to include authors' names won't matter to those of us who've "lived" on the RPG Superstar boards for months. Having read and re-read the earlier submissions, we'll know who wrote each of the four entries in the last round.
Each writer has a specific and identifiable voice.
I prefer knowing their names. If one of the ones that produces stuff that I consistently like puts out something that I don't like as much, than I'm likely to still vote for them. This round I pretty much knew that I was going to vote for Christine just because I've liked everything else she's written so far. It didn't matter if I didn't like this particular entry as much (which I do), I like her style and wanted to see her go on to the next round.
My two coppers.
Then taking off their names shouldn't matterHear, hear!
The decision about whether to include authors' names won't matter to those of us who've "lived" on the RPG Superstar boards for months. Having read and re-read the earlier submissions, we'll know who wrote each of the four entries in the last round.
Each writer has a specific and identifiable voice.
Exactly.
I'm against taking their names off for one simple reason. In the real rpg publiching world, we'll see their names.
Managing fans expectations, and their comments, in a positive way is as much an RPG Superstar's task as designing a good adventure. There are people who buy, or avoid, things by Mike Mearls, Monte Cook, Owen Stevens, Rodney thompson, Nickie Logue, James Jacobs or even Erik just because they know that name. Some authors are chided for how they respond to fans (See: Mike Mearls on these very boards).
Fair or no, fans and their reaction to your actions outside the stuff you write for adventures is as much a part of an rpg designer's success as having to draw a map for the cartographer. To remove that element is to remove part of what these people are competing to be good at.
Name seems inherent to the idea of "Superstar." In many ways, it capitalizes the persona above the talent.
And I know this is a silly nitpick, but the voting is anonymous, this would be anonymous submissions.
The only value of anonymous submissions would be encouraging writers to exaggerate or dilute their voice. I don't see that as a desired outcome.
I guess I'm wondering by this point in the competition if people are voting for what's being written or the person doing the writing?
While I obviously can't speak for anyone else, I can tell you that I was, generally, voting for entries based on the content alone until this round. By this round there were enough data point, in the form of previous entries, for me to identify the one "top sixer" who I really wanted to see future work from - Rob McCreary - and so I knew I would vote for him as my first choice, but left my second vote for "the second best" entry (or, potentially, the best entry if Rob hadn't delivered, but in my highly biased opinion I think he did, so there you go.)
There was one exception in my voting habits of the first four rounds - in the Villain round I didn't vote for my number one choice because the comments on the entry thread and among threads in the general forums convinced me that it would handily end up in the top 8, so I chose to vote for my 5th choice to give it a "hand up" into the top 8. (A calculated risk, but one that did pay off.) Note that this decision was still based entirely on the content, not the person.
Unless Rob fails to move on (doubtful, based on existing thread comments) or [i]completely]/i] botches his Adventure Proposal entry (technically possible, but, I think, unlikely) I intend to vote for him next round, regardless. For me, I think the winner of the RPG Superstar title should be the contestant who most consistently impressed me, even if his (or her) final entry is slightly less than killer awesome. Others may feel differently and will, I expect, choose to vote just on the strength of each final entry - and that's just fine. After all, the ideal situation would be for Rob to be both the most consistent and produce the best Adventure Proposal entry 'cause then he'll win hands down. :-D
:-j(enni)
|
Names are important. It is the first sign of what to expect from any given roleplaying product. In my case this is not so much an problem with Paizo Products as I've come to trust in their sense of quality, but for other publishers it can possibly be. I wouldn't even think about buying the Kobold Quarterly (to give an example) if it wasn't for Wolfgang Baur. And, though being an Eberron fan I would've never given any thought about buying the Voyage of the golden Dragon adventure if it hadn't been written by Nic Logue.
So I'm glad they stay ( and as another poster said, in the meantime I have learned to recognize my most (and least) favorite contestants by their prose, so I don't think that the name's inclusion matters much as far as my decisions are concerned).
Dedicated Voter Season 9
|
I dont think the names should be removed.....
Now I do have to rant and this is mostly at Clark, cuz I noticed this from him.
I do NOT think the judges should be saying each round(or any round for that matter), "I am pulling for you contestant X." The judges should state their opinion and thats it. Offer advice to the contestant, dont show favor or distain.
Clark did that with Boomer and that really hissed me off, because I believe that influences how people could have voted. Was that Clark intent, I dont believe it was...
Judge: "Bob you did A,B, and C very well. Area D could have been better. I am pulling for you Bob!!"
Voter: "Well Clark said he hoped Bob goes far in the competition, so I guess I will vote for Bob."
Sorry to rant, but I think it should be fair for all parties involved and free of outside influence whether it was intented or not.
EDIT
Its not a slam against Boomer either. I liked all of Boomers stuff except for one entry.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
,
Dedicated Voter Season 6
aka Eyebite
|
I can understand the requests for anonymity, but really, I think one of the main aims of this contest was to develop/discover new talent, and build a small fan base for the Superstars so people actually *buy* the adventure that's produced.
The adventure created will be based on the adventure outline submitted. I don't think removing the names of the contestants is an option at this point.
Honestly, I expect big things from all 4 of the finalists, regardless of the actual winner. I've also seen some real standouts in the other finalists, and hope to see their work published later on as well.
|
I dont think the names should be removed.....
Now I do have to rant and this is mostly at Clark, cuz I noticed this from him.
I do NOT think the judges should be saying each round(or any round for that matter), "I am pulling for you contestant X." The judges should state their opinion and thats it. Offer advice to the contestant, dont show favor or distain.
Well, while there may be a segment that looks to the judges as a way to gauge who they should vote for, i don't think the majority do.
Its like in political elections, my favorite basketball player may come out supporting a canidate, but honestly it won't sway my vote, im still going to vote for whom i like best regardless.