|
All of the many word processors that I have just tried, including Word, count hyphenated words, like 'evil-aligned' as one word. I would personally have counted that as two words. Could an official please give me a ruling on this?
I'd swear that I'd read somewhere that Microsoft Office was the official method, but I can't find that in the Rules or FAQ now.
Sadly, it's important :(
I assume they're using the same wordcounting software that you are, so it should be fine.
Then again, at present my entry is also exactly 300 words, so I should probably listen too.
Chief Technical Officer
|
All of the many word processors that I have just tried, including Word, count hyphenated words, like 'evil-aligned' as one word. I would personally have counted that as two words. Could an official please give me a ruling on this?
I'd swear that I'd read somewhere that Microsoft Office was the official method, but I can't find that in the Rules or FAQ now.
Sadly, it's important :(
The official counter is whatever version of Word that Clark has. I can't guarantee that all versions of Word on all OSs count the same, but we do recognize that not all word counters count the same, so you won't be rejected for being a word or two over. (You might get a stink-eye from the judges for making them check, though—especially if they think you didn't really need all those words for your item.)
|
|
The official counter is whatever version of Word that Clark has. I can't guarantee that all versions of Word on all OSs count the same, but we do recognize that not all word counters count the same, so you won't be rejected for being a word or two over. (You might get a stink-eye from the judges for making them check, though—especially if they think you didn't really need all those words for your item.)
Thanks for answering that on a Sunday Vic.
I think that I've pared every scrap of fat from my entry to get it under 300 +/- the hyphenated words. I'll leave a gap before submitting to disassociate it from my post.
|
Creative Director
|
I assume they're using the same wordcounting software that you are, so it should be fine.
Then again, at present my entry is also exactly 300 words, so I should probably listen too.
Another thing to keep in mind. This isn't a contest to see who can get the closest to 300 words; it's a contest to see who can design the coolest and most interesting magic item. If your wordcount is EXACTLY at 300 words and you're nervous that might get you in trouble (it probably won't), go back and re-edit your words to make them a bit more succinct. You can ALWAYS cut something down by 10 words or so.
Also, if you're having trouble making your concept fit in 300 words, it's probably too complex anyway and cold probably stand to lose a sentence or two as it stands...
While we're on this topic: I know the item name counts toward the word count - but it only counts once, right?
That is, you put the item name in the "item name" field, and also in the text body at the top (I notice from the old forums that this was an issue last year), but the item name field isn't included in wordcount, right?
I tend to overwrite on the first pass and then pare down until I'm happy with something.
300 is pretty generous though, and yea, I should definitely be able to trim it down past that. I was at 280 or so until I saw that I had room for a clarification (which may or may not be necessary).
I discovered this one using google docs 1/2 is two words while .5 is one word
While we're on this topic: I know the item name counts toward the word count - but it only counts once, right?
That is, you put the item name in the "item name" field, and also in the text body at the top (I notice from the old forums that this was an issue last year), but the item name field isn't included in wordcount, right?
We don't count it twice.
|
|
Also, if you're having trouble making your concept fit in 300 words, it's probably too complex anyway and cold probably stand to lose a sentence or two as it stands...
Any chance of a 'James, can you edit my item' thread this year, where you demonstrate your editor-fu on some of the items people had trouble getting down to word count? I'd love to see what you could do to reduce the count on my item - I don't doubt that it can be done, I'm just damned if I can see anywhere else left to cut words without either losing the key feel of the item, or making the mechanics less clear.
[Edit: missing comma! *hangs head in shame*]
Actually, I don't understand why the wordcount has been increased by 100 words. 200 words was more than enough for the first two years, why the change?
Actually, I don't understand why the wordcount has been increased by 100 words. 200 words was more than enough for the first two years, why the change?
It was hinted that a later round will deal with this in some way. My guess is that people who advance to that round will need to edit another contestant's item.
We don't count it twice.While we're on this topic: I know the item name counts toward the word count - but it only counts once, right?
That is, you put the item name in the "item name" field, and also in the text body at the top (I notice from the old forums that this was an issue last year), but the item name field isn't included in wordcount, right?
Thanks! Just a (perfectly understandable) paranoia on my part then.
Actually, I don't understand why the wordcount has been increased by 100 words. 200 words was more than enough for the first two years, why the change?It was hinted that a later round will deal with this in some way. My guess is that people who advance to that round will need to edit another contestant's item.
I don't think that would make much sense; if you can pick which one to edit (as with similar challenges in the past) it would be way too easy, and if you're assigned someone else's then it would be really unfair because some items are just more complex than others.
I think they're honestly just giving us more room. There were a lot of threads from previous years where a judge suggested that something should have been included or clarified and the contestant said "Yea, I was going to, but I ran out of words."
Actually, I don't understand why the wordcount has been increased by 100 words. 200 words was more than enough for the first two years, why the change?
I agree. I can not think of many published items that use that many. Perhaps with an elaborate history or an artifact. With a bit of extraneous fluff I ended up with ~150.
Apparatus of the Crab: 272
Bag of Holding: 375
Bag of Tricks: 275 words
Bead of Force: 219 words
Folding Boat: 250 words
Candle of Invocation: 238 words
Chime of Opening: 225 words
Crystal Ball: 243 words
Cube of Force: 328 words
Decanter of Endless Water: 215 words
Gem of Brightness: 240 words
Robe of the Archemagi: 250 words
Helm of Brilliance: 373 words
Horn of Valhalla (including the table): 231 words
Instant Fortress: 224 words
Iron Flask (including the table): 288 words
Mirror of Life Trapping: 315 words
Necklace of Fireballs: 378 words
Portable Hole: 270 words
Sovereign Glue: 225 words
Just saying.
I've skipped a lot of really long compound items (figurines, feather tokens, prayer beads, golem manuals) as well as ones that are long and boring by necessity (bracers of armor, amulet of mighty fists). That's still a long list. Some of those wouldn't make good RPG Superstar items, but others are exactly what judges have asked for: quirky items with unique and interesting effects. Effects that need to be adequately spelled out to be usable in play.
CAN you write a knock-out item in under 200 words? If you're good, then yes, absolutely. But I can totally see why they raised the wordcount.
I'm thinking they raised the word count just to punish Wes as the new judge by making him read all those extra long write-ups. ;-)
Vic or one of the judges said in another thread that the reason for the increased word limit will become apparent in a later round.
Vic or one of the judges said in another thread that the reason for the increased word limit will become apparent in a later round.
Yes. When Wes finally goes insane from having to read and judge so many 300-word submissions. ;-)
Not that he isn't insane already, mind. I'm just saying it will ratchet it up the insanity to a higher degree. But we'll have to wait until "a later round" to observe the difference. :-)
I had four full write-ups that I felt were solid contenders. Two of them were pushing hard against 300, only one was under 200. So yeah, I can see why they bumped it up.
Granted, I went with the shortest one in the end. But it was a very tough decision, and word count was not a part of it. (The one I submitted was actually third pick on average among my local group... but I figure, they're not the superstars, right?)
|
|
Actually, I don't understand why the wordcount has been increased by 100 words. 200 words was more than enough for the first two years, why the change?It was hinted that a later round will deal with this in some way. My guess is that people who advance to that round will need to edit another contestant's item.
I'd be very surprised. The purpose of this is to capture new design talent for Paizo, not editing talent. A good editor is essential, but even a great editor can only put so much of a shine on a turd.
I think that designing and editing are two entirely different skill-sets, so I doubt that they would set us an editing challenge. However, my only point of reference here is the fact that the last few days have taught me that I suck at both editing and designing in equal but entirely different ways :)
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
I had four full write-ups that I felt were solid contenders. Two of them were pushing hard against 300, only one was under 200. So yeah, I can see why they bumped it up.
We did not up the word count solely to give people more room. Clearly, designing an awesome wondrous item in 200 words is very doable, and I *know* all the judges would tell you that "more words allowed" does *not* equate to "increased potential for better items."
If anything, it equates "increased temptation to add 100 words of backstory." ;)
Heh... well, the two of mine that were pushing 300 were almost all crunch, with the "cool factor" being rolled into their effects and utility. Since they were doing things not already covered by the rules, I felt like I had to close a few obvious loopholes of function which, as a GM, I would rather not have to argue over with "clever" players; that's what drove up the word count. Honestly, I think they were all contenders based on what I've read from previous years. Initial "keep" pile at the very least. :)
The one I finally picked, though, was the one which felt to me like it exuded the most atmosphere. Like you've said: with a little hand-holding, it's easy to learn how to write cohesive rules. Superstar, baby! Show 'em you can make the players dream.
Actually, I don't understand why the wordcount has been increased by 100 words. 200 words was more than enough for the first two years, why the change?It was hinted that a later round will deal with this in some way. My guess is that people who advance to that round will need to edit another contestant's item.I'd be very surprised. The purpose of this is to capture new design talent for Paizo, not editing talent. A good editor is essential, but even a great editor can only put so much of a shine on a turd.
I think that designing and editing are two entirely different skill-sets, so I doubt that they would set us an editing challenge. However, my only point of reference here is the fact that the last few days have taught me that I suck at both editing and designing in equal but entirely different ways :)
I have to agree with you Brock! I can't see them asking potential RPG Superstars to edit another author's work for a few reasons including the one you mentioned.
I think this would lead to some people getting defensive and some might feel the need to debate which version is better. This could be a touchy subject even with a professional editor. Not only that, but its just not fun and doesn't promote creativity. I think the judges will be able to get a good idea of how well we write based on our own submissions.
Now, why did they increase the work count? Maybe its as Sean mentioned - an increased temptation to write more backstory. Maybe we will have to design a villain around somebody elses item.
|
Creative Director
|
Any chance of a 'James, can you edit my item' thread this year, where you demonstrate your editor-fu on some of the items people had trouble getting down to word count? I'd love to see what you could do to reduce the count on my item - I don't doubt that it can be done, I'm just damned if I can see anywhere else left to cut words without either losing the key feel of the item, or making the mechanics less clear.
[Edit: missing comma! *hangs head in shame*]
Absolutely no chance at all, alas.
I'll be a guest judge in the final round, but I don't have time to devote to editing individual entries and providing feedback, or justifying my feedback or mollifying hurt feelings that might arise because I savage someone's creation.
because I savage someone's creation.
... says the man with the fiendish t-rex avatar....
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
aka KissMeDarkly
|
Clearly, designing an awesome wondrous item in 200 words is very doable
I agree with you 100%, Vic. Even after I revised my Spell-Catch Guantlet to deal with some of the issues/flaws it had. It still only has 200 words.
Look, I finally posted something (kinda) relating to this years contest. hangs head in shame.
I'd be very surprised. The purpose of this is to capture new design talent for Paizo, not editing talent. A good editor is essential, but even a great editor can only put so much of a shine on a turd.
I doubt it would be editing. More likely tiered progression of scenario development. Write an encounter using your item. Use the encounter for a setting piece. Use the setting piece in an adventure. Something like that would not surprise me at all.
If anything, it equates "increased temptation to add 100 words of backstory." ;)
AAAAhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!! NNNNNOoooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!
Sean, stop it! Don;t encourage them. [He's evil. He knows backstory is my pet peeve; as does anyone else who reads the boards].
The thing is.. if the item really needs 300 words, and all 300 words are relevant and meaningful.. it won't feel like 300 words when you read it.
The thing is.. if the item really needs 300 words, and all 300 words are relevant and meaningful.. it won't feel like 300 words when you read it.
This is true.
The thing is.. if the item really needs 300 words, and all 300 words are relevant and meaningful.. it won't feel like 300 words when you read it.
That was really the point when I felt like my submission was ready to be turned in. I grappled with the design for a week, swinging from 150 to 300 and back over and over. I finally brought it to my sister, who is a very casual gamer, and she told me it barely read like English anymore. I had gotten so obsessed with covering my bases and avoiding some of the flaws and loopholes in previous entries that I had completely forgotten readability.
I sat down last night and rewrote the whole thing from the ground, reading each sentence and then each paragraph out loud until the whole thing flowed organically. I think my final word count was around 270, but more importantly to me, it actually read like human writing.
Advice to my fellow contestants: don't get so caught up in trying to be a WINNER that you forget to be a writer. :)
...and then each paragraph ...
*ack*
Sounds busy.
... says the man with the fiendish t-rex avatar....
It still say it looks like a felldrake.
...and then each paragraph ...*ack*
Sounds busy.
It's not too complex, I'm just addicted to line breaks. I like to separate description out and then give each power its own little section. Been doing that in my houserules work for a long time :)
Yea, I assumed "paragraph" was just a pacing tool. You could just make it a 200-something word wall of text, but it would read a lot better if you divided the information up between line breaks. Even the core rules do this when appropriate.
I think it is also indicative of how ambitious your entry is.
For example, some items have fairly straight forward mechanics that can be explained quite briefly. That's awesome, except there is a risk that you just have a 'pretty good' item instead of a spectacular one.
Or you could be really innovative and make something no one has seen prior to this, or is otherwise clever with the mechanics in a way no one has attempted before. Likewise you run the risk of having to not only explain it clearly, cover all your bases, and keep it in word count.
Real genius would probably be a simple item that is very innovative.
Not always as easy as it sounds.
That was really the point when I felt like my submission was ready to be turned in. I grappled with the design for a week, swinging from 150 to 300 and back over and over. I finally brought it to my sister, who is a very casual gamer, and she told me it barely read like English anymore. I had gotten so obsessed with covering my bases and avoiding some of the flaws and loopholes in previous entries that I had completely forgotten readability.
Actually, I had a similar experience. I ran it by my friend who's played a lot of RPGs but never anything like D&D and see if he could understand it. Of course he had to make certain assumptions like "So you get Attacks of Opportunity when your foe does something stupid, right?". But I think it really helped me state some things more clearly.
I got to agree that you can often cut a lot of words if you really want (I did that roughly 50 times on my item), or if you find something else you really have to include (curse me for writing spells needed for creation etc. as some of the latest things).
Happy to hear some of the things in this thread... I can't say how many times I was wondering if i should cut some extra words off to be SURE I didn't hit 301 for some stupid reason. Maybe I should have.
But really, once you start making cuts that require entire sentences to be rewritten to check if they're one little word shorter, you don't feel like getting too far below the 300.
I for one could have used 400 fairly quickly without feeling my item got too big at all. I removed some effects to make it 300. Maybe that 300 restictment is good after all. It should make the temptation to make WAY too many effects items much lesser. But then, maybe not.
Too much thinking about this already. Double-checking an item now won't change the submitted.