Kvetch

[Patrick Walsh]

This thread is for folks who have entered an item in the RPG Superstar 2010 contest, only to notice a small but critical error in their entry AFTER hitting "submit".

For example:

There was one aspect of my wondrous item I debated with myself over, especially as I was having problems assigning a cost to it. After hitting "submit", I was surfing the forum and found this statement by Clark:

"Never put XXXXX in a magic item..."

The thing I was debating was, of course, XXXXX.

Farglecarp.

I find this frustrating for two reasons:
1. I should have realized the trouble associating a cost was a warning sign, not a challenge.

2. If I was working freelance, I could call Clark (for example) and say, "Clark, that thing I just sent you? Delete the first sentence of the second paragraph. Everything else is fine, but delete that sentence. In fact, let me send you a corrected version via e-mail." I can't do that here and it is frustrating.

Arggggh.

sigh.

Next person.

[Mike Welham]

I had a close call with mine. The original design gave the item a random effect, but something nagged at me about that facet. So, I went through the various threads (mostly, the Clark feedback thread), and I noticed that the judges didn't like random effects. At first I thought, "Well, it fits the concept, so it might work," but then I realized that I didn't want to give my item a chance at an auto-reject. I'm sure there will be other reasons for the judges to reject my item, why pile it on. :)

Sorry you found that out after the fact, Patrick. It might be one of those cases, though, where the item is so good that the judges are willing to look past the one indiscretion. There certainly were items in both competitions that made it into the top 32 that the judges had problems with, but they made it anyway.

So, I hope that's the case for your item, and I wish you luck!

[Jim Groves]

taig wrote:

Sorry you found that out after the fact, Patrick. It might be one of those cases, though, where the item is so good that the judges are willing to look past the one indiscretion. There certainly were items in both competitions that made it into the top 32 that the judges had problems with, but they made it anyway.

That has indeed happened. Take heart Patrick and hope for the best. Better that you try and learn, than not to try.

[varianor]

Remember though, it may not be an auto-reject. If you break or bend the rules in a cool and creative way, you might still get in. I find that I don't want to review or overanalyze my item. I did it. It was my best work. It was fun.

Now we make popcorn and do other things till 1/19/10 rolls around this place. :D

[Lilith]

varianor wrote:

Remember though, it may not be an auto-reject. If you break or bend the rules in a cool and creative way, you might still get in. I find that I don't want to review or overanalyze my item. I did it. It was my best work. It was fun.

Now we make popcorn and do other things till 1/19/10 rolls around this place. :D

I'll bring the cookies! ^_^

[varianor]

Lilith wrote:

varianor wrote:

Now we make popcorn and do other things till 1/19/10 rolls around this place. :D

I'll bring the cookies! ^_^

Shouldn't you have a custom forum title like "Queen of Cookies" or something suitable?

[Adam Daigle]

varianor wrote:

Lilith wrote:

varianor wrote:

Now we make popcorn and do other things till 1/19/10 rolls around this place. :D

I'll bring the cookies! ^_^

Shouldn't you have a custom forum title like "Queen of Cookies" or something suitable?

+1

[Murlynd]

taig wrote:

So, I went through the various threads (mostly, the Clark feedback thread), and I noticed that the judges didn't like random effects.

Well, crap ...... :(

[Carl Flaherty]

Adam Daigle wrote:

varianor wrote:

Lilith wrote:

varianor wrote:

Now we make popcorn and do other things till 1/19/10 rolls around this place. :D

I'll bring the cookies! ^_^

Shouldn't you have a custom forum title like "Queen of Cookies" or something suitable?

+1

+2

[Mike Welham]

Murlynd wrote:

taig wrote:

So, I went through the various threads (mostly, the Clark feedback thread), and I noticed that the judges didn't like random effects.

Well, crap ...... :(

Again, if your item stands out in other ways, they will overlook some of their pet peeves.

[Jeff Spencer]

Heehee! I was happy with mine, then changed it at he last minute after chatting to a few mates. Silly me then entered the item without readjusting the cost. D'oh!

[Jim Groves]

taig wrote:

Murlynd wrote:

Well, crap ...... :(

Again, if your item stands out in other ways, they will overlook some of their pet peeves.

+1

While some things are much more challenging to pull off, that doesn't mean its impossible. You could be the exception.

[Drillboss D]

Item title not in body. It was excused last year... although with the format present on the submission page, it doesn't seem like it would go over quite as well now. Here's hoping.

[Fergie]

Drillboss D wrote:

Item title not in body.

Wait. I was supposed to put what in where?

[Drillboss D]

The item title should go in both the body text and the submission line, I believe. Unless that was a joke. Tough to tell.

[Sean K Reynolds]

We had a couple entries come up with the subject name "untitled." We fixed them.

[M. T. Yarnell]

I put mine in the correct box, carefully edited the BBCode until I was sure my baby had everything I could give it and edited again. And again. And again. I used preview maybe six times and hit enter; so, of course, it posted to the forums.

Three seconds: delete, double-check deletion, re-enter, correct, confirm, triple-check deletion. I think I septuple-checked in case the deletion failed.

I'm not sure how it happened, but I made it work, thank binary!

[Vic Wertz]

M. T. Yarnell wrote:

I used preview maybe six times and hit enter...

Good for you. I'll tell you this—there are a few regular clues that some folks didn't even *bother* hitting preview before submitting (my favorite is attempting to use BBCode *in the subject*, which—if you hit preview even once—will slap you hard in the face with big, obvious brokenness).

While bad BBCode won't get you autorejected, if the judges ever come down to a choice between a flawless entry and one where the submitter clearly didn't bother to verify their work before submitting, I know which one I'd bet will advance...

[Drillboss D]

Vic Wertz wrote:

M. T. Yarnell wrote:

I used preview maybe six times and hit enter...

Good for you. I'll tell you this—there are a few regular clues that some folks didn't even *bother* hitting preview before submitting (my favorite is attempting to use BBCode *in the subject*, which—if you hit preview even once—will slap you hard in the face with big, obvious brokenness).

Yea I previewed it... just thought the title only had to be in the subject. Then I was surfing the 2009 thread. Then I felt dumb.

[varianor]

Drillboss D wrote:

Yea I previewed it... just thought the title only had to be in the subject. Then I was surfing the 2009 thread. Then I felt dumb.

Ditto.

[Nicolas Quimby]

I haven't looked at my item since I submitted it, and I refuse to do so until the top 32 are announced.

Edit: this is a lie, and after thinking about it (and reading this thread) I of course had to look it over again. But it was worth a shot.

[Gasfiend]

taig wrote:

I noticed that the judges didn't like random effects.

Haha, yeah, my original concept was The Kaleidoscope of Wild Metamagic. Little quasit bouncing around in the glass made it so that any spellcaster looking into the looking-glass would have a chance at gaining a randomized metamagic feat applied to their next spell cast (if they didn't lose their mind first).

It still holds a special place with me (expecially the fluff), but after reading that the judges weren't fans of randomized effects, I went with something else that I liked less but which I felt had a better chance at making the grade.

Kicker'd be if someone like Clark reads this and gives the thumbs up to the Kaleidoscope. That'd make my day ;)

~Gasfiend

[Steven Helt]

Adam Daigle wrote:

varianor wrote:

Lilith wrote:

varianor wrote:

Now we make popcorn and do other things till 1/19/10 rolls around this place. :D

I'll bring the cookies! ^_^

Shouldn't you have a custom forum title like "Queen of Cookies" or something suitable?

+1

SHouldn't you also have a Contributor title? Or was the book I know you were in (there might be more) not a Paizo book?

[Lilith]

Steven T. Helt wrote:

SHouldn't you also have a Contributor title? Or was the book I know you were in (there might be more) not a Paizo book?

I did indeed write something for Paizo, but I never asked for the contributor tag. :)

[Mikhaila Burnett]

I'll add some kvetching.

After hitting submit, which I did early because I didn't want to overthink my entry, I realized just how much of a big part costing of the item would play. And I'm absolutely certain that I undercosted my item a LOT. Like, probably half of what it should have been. *sigh*

I think I might still stand a chance, but will be biting my nails for another 17 days.

[Sir Ophiuchus]

I feel like my item was a bit overcosted. Particularly since I think I could have worded one of its abilities a bit better - as written, it's a little awkward.

Ah well, we'll know how things go on the 19th and there's nothing to be done about anything now.

[Nicolas Quimby]

I found myself debating between two prices. One was an obvious numerical derivative (you could reach it by roughly mapping my effect to a spell level); the other was that, with an ad-hoc adjustment for an extra effect that most spells don't have. I.e, the value that the judges might make sense of, verses the value that I thought it should be.

I ended up going with the first one.

[james knowles]

My biggest problem was that i designed my item as a specific type of item, and then had to agonize over what to turn it into to fit into the wonderous item category while keeping its flavor and uniqueness.
Pricing also gave me some problems, but that seems to have been the major stumbling block for alot of others as well, so i just adhoc'ed it as best i could and will hope for the best.

[Patrick Walsh]

Watcher wrote:

taig wrote:

Sorry you found that out after the fact, Patrick. It might be one of those cases, though, where the item is so good that the judges are willing to look past the one indiscretion. There certainly were items in both competitions that made it into the top 32 that the judges had problems with, but they made it anyway.

That has indeed happened. Take heart Patrick and hope for the best. Better that you try and learn, than not to try.

My thanks to you both. I think two years ago, it might have flown, but the quality of entries is higher now. We'll see. In 15 long, long days. ;-)

I have no real regrets. Each of my items has been stronger than the last and by "stronger" I mean "a better design". Magic item design is my weak spot in DM-ing and this contest has been very educational on that, plus great inspiration in other areas.

[Patrick Walsh]

james knowles wrote:

My biggest problem was that i designed my item as a specific type of item, and then had to agonize over what to turn it into to fit into the wonderous item category while keeping its flavor and uniqueness.

Pricing also gave me some problems, but that seems to have been the major stumbling block for alot of others as well, so i just adhoc'ed it as best i could and will hope for the best.

That was my problem in 2008, minus the "recognized the problem and fixed it before entering it" part. Live and learn. ;)

[Telhuine]

I think for my first entry, my formatting was pretty good. I am concerned, like some others here, that my item is not priced correctly. I had to decide whether the price should be based on casting costs or what the cost of an equivalent potion would be.

I also think the item is useful and would probably make the cut for an updated book of magical items. But, seeing the incredible creativity that others have displayed even in their rejected items, it's not going to matter too much. Someone will be kind enough to think about it for ten seconds before recommending it for the circular file. *smile*

I'm still hopeful, but mama raised a realist.

[Stuart Lean]

Being the first time for me, and knowing I couldn't reliably post closer to deadline because of work, I carefully made sure I worked out everything on a piece of paper first for mechanics, checked that, slept on it, rechecked.
Typed it up in word, spell-checked, grammar checked, word-count checked, re-read, re-wrote, etc etc till I made damn sure it was as easy to understand as possible in the word count.

One flaw: Code not counted in word count, so I, sensibly, removed it when checking. However, I also accidentally removed everything I didn't directly edit while doing so (weight, cost, aura etc) and didn't think to re-paste it all back into word and re-check before hitting preview, re-checking, re-reading and then hitting submit.

If I auto-fail on the technicality it may turn out 10-15 words over limit I'll be really sodding annoyed, but only at myself.

Next year I vow to never have a D'oh!' moment...

[caith]

I had set a price early in development, was satisfied with it, and never gave it a second glance. After I submitted I started reading through the forums and realized I had, according to some of the threads out there, grossly underpriced my item. Of all the things I double checked I never thought for a second to take another look and maybe fix the price. Dumb!

[Dissinger]

Submitting a specific armor, and forgetting armor isn't wondrous.

[Mike Welham]

Dissinger wrote:

Submitting a specific armor, and forgetting armor isn't wondrous.

Ouch. I don't think the judges will overlook that, no matter how good it is. I'm really sorry to hear that, Dissinger, and I hope you try again next year and participate in this year's Superstar conversations. I will be right there with you, most likely. :)

[Dissinger]

taig wrote:

Dissinger wrote:

Submitting a specific armor, and forgetting armor isn't wondrous.

Ouch. I don't think the judges will overlook that, no matter how good it is. I'm really sorry to hear that, Dissinger, and I hope you try again next year and participate in this year's Superstar conversations. I will be right there with you, most likely. :)

To think I could have saved myself about 350 GP and called it am amulet...

[Steven Helt]

Dissinger wrote:

taig wrote:

Dissinger wrote:

Submitting a specific armor, and forgetting armor isn't wondrous.

Ouch. I don't think the judges will overlook that, no matter how good it is. I'm really sorry to hear that, Dissinger, and I hope you try again next year and participate in this year's Superstar conversations. I will be right there with you, most likely. :)

To think I could have saved myself about 350 GP and called it am amulet...

HA! Calls to mind a band of adventurers looking at their gear and thinking "How can we move this around so it weighs less and we can fit some new stuff in?"

[Set]

Dissinger wrote:

Submitting a specific armor, and forgetting armor isn't wondrous.

I wrote up like four items, and was like, 'Oh, this is a rod.' or 'Darn, it's a mace...' Grr! Dumb items never quite turning out how I intended!

[Mortal Sword]

Biggest thing that has me losing sleep is whether it was "flashy" enough.

I really tried to approach a practical methodology to my design. I set out to design something that was functionally sound, not broken, properly costed, and not over laden with too much fluff. I fear that by doing this I may have given the impression that I didn't put any creative effort into the item, but the fact is, it grew from a flavorful concept, and I pruned it into what I would have considered an acceptable splatbook entry. I really wanted my submission to look natural if it were inserted into the Core Rulebook (for example). We shall see if that paid off.

Live and learn...

[Nicolas Quimby]

That might have served you well, if the core concept (i.e, what the thing does) speaks for itself. Occorse, we can't really discuss your item at length without breaking anonymity.

I think I'm happy with the final draft of my item. What I'm REALLY trying to keep in perspective, though, is that mine was one of possibly over a thousand subjectively-judged entries, and that it doesn't mean I had a bad idea (or am a bad designer) if I don't make the top 30-something.

[Kenneth.T.Cole]

Mikhaila Burnett wrote:

I'll add some kvetching.

After hitting submit, which I did early because I didn't want to overthink my entry, I realized just how much of a big part costing of the item would play. And I'm absolutely certain that I undercosted my item a LOT. Like, probably half of what it should have been. *sigh*

I think I might still stand a chance, but will be biting my nails for another 17 days.

Honestly some of the abilities on my magic item were so unique that I couldn't figure out how to price them. In the end I just took a S.W.A.G. at it (Scientific Wild A$$ Guess).

Also, I realized too late that I left one word out that my own mind just kept inserting. I wish I could have asked folks on the boards to proof read for me. My best proof reader is overseas in Afghanistan and wasn't able to look at it before I submitted it.

Ah well, maybe they'll like it anyways :)

Ken

[Mike Kimmel]

Kenneth.T.Cole wrote:

Also, I realized too late that I left one word out that my own mind just kept inserting. I wish I could have asked folks on the boards to proof read for me. My best proof reader is overseas in Afghanistan and wasn't able to look at it before I submitted it.

Ah well, maybe they'll like it anyways :)

Ken

They've accepted entries with errors before. All hope is not lost! :)

[Patrick Walsh]

My pendulum has swung again. I went from "D'oh!" to "ooh, I have a chance" back to "what was I thinking? That's way to workman like an item".

Sigh.

[PsionicFox]

I had a formatting error that the second I submitted it, I gave myself a solid forehead smack.

It (hopefully) shouldn't hurt my chances though, but it was a rookie mistake. A mistake that should in now way detract from what I feel was a good item.

I can hardly envisage Clark (or anyone else on the panel) saying: "Now then this item is really cool — what? Formatting error XXX? DISQUALIFIED!"

Or so I hope.

[Sebastian]

I avoided these formatting issues entirely by writing my entry on unmarked 100 dollar bills.

[Clark Peterson]

PsionicFox wrote:

It (hopefully) shouldn't hurt my chances though, but it was a rookie mistake. A mistake that should in now way detract from what I feel was a good item.

I can hardly envisage Clark (or anyone else on the panel) saying: "Now then this item is really cool — what? Formatting error XXX? DISQUALIFIED!"

Or so I hope.

If it was only a good item, you might be in trouble.

If it was a great item, then you are probably fine ;)

It's a sliding scale. The better the item, the more minor mistakes I will put up with.

[Patrick Walsh]

Sebastian wrote:

I avoided these formatting issues entirely by writing my entry on unmarked 100 dollar bills.

Brilliant!

[Clark Peterson]

PsionicFox wrote:

I can hardly envisage Clark (or anyone else on the panel) saying: "Now then this item is really cool — what? Formatting error XXX? DISQUALIFIED!"

Depends on the "formatting" error (and please dont post yours and ask me to give my impression :) ).

If by formatting error you mean forgetting to include any slot info, that's pretty much an auto-reject. Or not putting requirements for creation or cost. Yeah, that will kill you. Or putting a "design notes" section that puts your item over word count. That entry just got a fork stuck in it--its done.

If by formatting error you mean putting "throat" instead of "neck," well that one might get you into trouble. If we already have a ding against your item, that might push your item over the edge. That mistake all by itself, though, you should be OK. That is a rules mistake that we expect a freelancer to get right.

If by formatting error you mean not bolding or italicizing things, that's not that big a deal.

[Clark Peterson]

Kenneth.T.Cole wrote:

Also, I realized too late that I left one word out that my own mind just kept inserting. I wish I could have asked folks on the boards to proof read for me. My best proof reader is overseas in Afghanistan and wasn't able to look at it before I submitted it.

Again, sliding scale. That is a minor editing mistake. If your item is otherwise one we want to keep that mistake probably won't get you axed. But there better not be much more.

Granted, we want the submissions proofread and edited. And no, spell checking on your word processor is NOT editing. But an omitted word--particularly if it is clear what that word is--is likely not going to be a reject. We will likely spot it and comment on it, though.

Remember, this is the open call for RPG Superstar. And while that means you have to bring your best game, it also means you guys aren't currently professional game designers. So we can't expect 100% perfection, or you would likely already be polished game designers. So that can't be our standard, and it isn't.

[Mike Kimmel]

What about submitting the entry backwards? Or in elvish? Or binary? I think I accidentally committed each of these egregious errors. Please be merciful!

In all seriousness, I think we can look at it this way: If your item is exactly the same as another item in terms of coolness, except it has 1 more error than the other item, then the other item wins.