Lantern Thrall

[Mark Moreland]

You employ some very evocative prose here, and it's clear you can turn a phrase with the best of them, but I think the writing overshadows the content within. I like the idea of possession by something other than the typical demons, devils, and undead, but the descriptions of exactly what these spirits' motivations are is unclear, as is what they can actually do with a body once it's been possessed. I'm still going through all the entries, so I'm not sure yet how I'll vote, but however my ballot may fall, I hope to see what you can do in later rounds. Best of luck!

[Eric Morton]

My thoughts on the lantern thrall...

The Name: Slightly evocative, slightly descriptive. Nice name.

The Description: This is one of those descriptions that is dangerously close to out-of-bounds. The rules specify that monsters are to be setting-neutral, yet here we have a monster that is only created by one specific individual at one specific location, each of which imply setting. That would fit in an AP, but not in a bestiary. Beyond that, the lantern thralls are described fairly well, though the mention of mephits seems odd, and we have no idea what errands the thralls run for their mistress.

The Powers: I can see a very concise way of statting up the various powers that lantern thralls of different types grant to one another. (I won't describe it, since that might be the contestants' job in future rounds. But I do see it.) Things might get a bit complicated in play, depending upon the layout of the battlefield, but the word count required to implement the powers described would be fairly minimal. Templates and variant lantern thralls wouldn't be required. In short, I think I like what you were thinking for the lantern thrall's mechanics.

The Buzz: All of the above being said, I agree with previous posters that room is left in the description of the lantern thrall for doubt about just what the monster is. The mention of mephit possession is completely unnecessary and confusing. The same result could have been accomplish with a gloss ascribing lantern thralls to humans forever transformed by elemental energies, or some such.

The Vote: I like the implied mechanics, but have issues with the description, and with the extraneous mephit connection. I will not be voting for the lantern thrall.

[Quandary]

Tom Baumbach wrote:

Does anyone think this entry would be less template-y if instead of mephits it was some un-nameable elemental force?

No, not at all,

though as I commented before, that type of wording WOULD resolve questions about where/how the mephit continues to exist, but that has nothing to do with "template-ness".

What I wonder is why this entry gets so much "anti template" flak* while, say, the Skintaker could just as much be described as a "template", being a physically and magically modified human, yet doesn't get "template" flak. Likewise, the Rotling could be a "template", akin to Undead but 're-factoring' the flesh instead of re-animating it. Again, no "anti template" flak.

* even though that isn't at all against the rules of the contest, the judges have not disqualified it - they have said at least one of the alternates is 'very worthy', so they would have DQ'ed this entry if it broke the rules - and it is clearly a unique creation rather than a combination of existing monsters and templates.

[Tom Baumbach]

Quandary wrote:

What I wonder is why this entry gets so much "anti template" flak...

I couldn't agree more.

Quandary wrote:

...and it is clearly a unique creation rather than a combination of existing monsters and templates.

Right!? Moreover, it doesn't pander, and it's one of the few entries that doesn't re-hash a theme or concept that's been seen before. (And yes, the argument can be made that *none* of the entries cover brand-spanking-new-ideas/concepts, but some are clearly more original than others.)

[Chris Mortika]

drakkonflye, Eric, thanks for your comments and alaysis. Sorry I didn't earn your votes this time, but I hope to have an opportunity next round. And in particular, Eric, I agree with some of your criticisms.

yoda8myhead, thanks for your comments as well, and if my asking makes a difference, I'd be honored to receive your vote.

Tom, Quandary, thanks for your support!

caith wrote:

I am huge semicolon fan; a lost art, and a difficult one to master at that. Does that make us enemies?

Tom Baumbach wrote:

I don't think so; it may, however, make you rivals. Would you consider any of the following creatures to be enemies: goblins, hobgoblins, bugbears?

It's been a few years since I was all [up in arms about] grammar, but I'm pretty sure you used your semicolon wrong! Shouldn't it be a colon?

Fun with Pedantry

Spoiler:

Part of the power of language is the effective use of punctionation to get sentences to do what you want. In a case like this, where there's a strict word count, efficient punctuation helps an author compose tight sentences where every word pulls its weight.

There are a number of very interesting, well-supported claims that traditional English grammar is the unworkable attempt to superimpose Latin grammar onto a language with different rules. Dr. Suzette Haden Elgin has written a series of lovely lessons on English as she sees it, to cite a premiere example. But for the purposes of this post, we'll use the traditional English grammar framework, warts (adverbs) and all.

Semicolons

There's one major use of semicolons, and a couple of special-case instances.

A clause in English is a word-group with its own subject (sometimes implied) and predicate. Some clauses (designated independent) can stand on their own as sentences:

We laughed at the gnarled old woman.

Korsovo, how we miss your gleaming spires and winsome pseudo-dragons!

Other clauses (which we call dependent) don't make complete sentences on their own:

When your colleague begins slavering.

Not even if you eat a bug.

In general, we combine two related independent clauses with a comma and a conjunction, a word that indicates what that relationship is.

I staved in his head, but he was still twitching.

I staved in his head, because he was still twitching.

If the writer thinks the relationship is obvious, she can replace the comma-conjunction pair with a semicolon:

We laughed at the gnarled old woman, but that turned out to be a mistake.
We laughed at the gnarled old woman; that turned out to be a mistake.

So, sorry, caith, but Tom is right; in your "semicolon fan" sentence, the text after the semicolon needs to be an independent clause, and it's currently lacking a verb.

On the other hand, Tom, since you use a semicolon in your first sentence, the adverb however is redundant. Imagine the sentence:
I don't think so, but it may, however, make you rivals.

The second most common use of a semicolon is in a particular type of list. Normally, items in a list are separated by commas:

Igor, please go to the store and pick up melons, artichokes, skim milk, and human organs.

But sometimes, the items in the list have commas already in them.

I made a mental note to send hookers and coke to

• Wesley Schneider, Managing Editor
• Clark Peterson, president of Necromancer Games
• Sean K Reynolds, Developer

In that case, using commas to separate the items in an inline series rather than a bulleted list would be confusing. So, we use semicolons.

I made a mental note to send hookers and coke to Wesley Schneider, Managing Editor; Clark Peterson, president of Necromancer Games; and Sean K Reynolds, Developer.

Neil tittered to himself as he released the robot armada, dooming the cities of Austin, Texas; Biloxi, Mississippi; and Chicago, Illinois.

Colons

The colon has a number of dopey little bookkeeping uses, like separating the hour and minute when writing down the time, but its major tasks are twofold. Those are separating an independent clause from its justification, and introducing a list that otherwise wouldn't belong in the sentence.

The justification can be an independent clause of its own, but that's not necessary.

The cause of the terror was obvious: caith had returned.

His nose told him the answer before his eyes did: Gulga Cench.

We don't need any words between the introduction and the list if we use a colon, but it has to be an independent clause on its own. I've read a number of papers where the author uses a colon immediately after a conjunction or transitive verb. That's no good.

If we're going to defeat the lich, we'll need three things: a holy sword, powerful magic from the gods, and a hamster.

For a colon to work, the lead-in to the second part of the sentence needs to be blatant.

Terror spread through the hamlet like wildfire: caith had returned.

In the sentence above, the colon should be a semicolon; the relationship between the two independent clauses is clear enough to skip the conjunction (probably for) but the opening clause doesn't lead inevitably to the second.

[Set]

Very evocative, and I like that it comes with a half-dozen or so variations (with each Mephit giving a different result).

In a longer write-up, I'd want to know more about this Janni's agenda, or whether or not some Lantern Thralls have their own agendas or have escaped her service, or at least, a couple of *rumored* agendas, so that I could see how these Lantern Thralls might end up working against (or, temporarily, alongside!) a party.

Alternately, the Janni could just be the only person currently known to have these sorts of servants, to have herself discovered the technique in some lost ruins, indicating that there may be others out there with the knowledge, or other sources of those techniques waiting to be discovered, or even older Lantern Thralls, having outlived their creatures, running around.

[Tom Baumbach]

Chris Mortika wrote:

Fun with Pedantry

** spoiler omitted **...

Awesome.

[Jodi Lane]

I'm going to agree with others that it seems like like a template but it's also just a darn good idea. I think Clark was right with saying you can write, though *I* also like the name. This post is definitely one I thought about quite a bit before saying anything!

[Lief Clennon]

Ooh... now I'm actually uncertain whether the semicolon in my entry should be a second colon.

[Starglim]

How did the author respond to the challenge? Perhaps a bit overwritten. They're on the verge of being a unique encounter, though I suppose there's more than one of them.

How does it stack up

• as an opponent? Mostly relies on its human character abilities, with fairly minor effects from this monster itself.
  
• as something other than an opponent? Janni X created them (hard to say why). They do what Janni X tells them.
  
• in relation to other monsters? Human characters are common enough, humans under magical curses only relatively less so. There seem to be lots of mutually reinforcing hive-mind creatures in this round.
  
• in relation to the author's item? Seems to be connected by the idea of a container, though this doesn't mention channelling.
  
• in itself? I was prepared to like the visual appearance, but can't figure out what it has to do with having a salt mephit merged into your body. Powers and abilities are remarkably slight. Add a spell-like ability and that's basically it.
  

Honestly, it's not enough. Word count aside, this is the smallest and slimmest idea I've seen so far.

[Azmahel]

Chris Mortika wrote:

Lantern Thrall

Their boon sharing power reminds me of slivers (Magic: the gathering)

Weak alone, but vastly powerful in large numbers. This could be a problem, because it would break the normal rule for increasing CR with more creatures.

Again I like the basic premise of this monster: a mortal bound to the will of an elemental spirit, which confers some of its powers to the host.
But your lantern thrall are awfully specific, only created by one janni, that we get to know next to nothing about.
This is what kills the idea for me. I wasn't fully sold from the beginning, but now I'm giving it a pass.

I'm not considering this for a vote. Sorry.

[Jason Schimmel]

I like the writing. I really like the share abilities aspect. I can see some rules lawyer types making running these guys hell since the power share is tied to where their light falls. I also got the template vibe. I think that if their abilities had nothing to do with their host it would lose some of the template feel.

[varianor]

Chris Mortika wrote:

Lantern Thrall

cut for space

This is the twenty-ninth monster that I am looking at. I do not read the comments below the entry before posting my opinion. An apology if this duplicates someone else’s entry, in part or whole.

A second beach monster? Hm. Well, I like the evocative description. Like a human lantern. Neat. Oh wait, not a beach monster, an Arabian-themed monster! Yeah. Cool. I like it. Created by a janni. Mephits possessing humans? Clever concept. Single-mindedly going about their tasks outside the oasis. Nice flavor. Wait. What tasks? (Also, some passive voice. Please work on eliminating.) I mean, what are they doing? There’s an implication here.

Powers:
*physical qualities of host bodies (okay, probably not undead, sorta a template)
*hardy in the desert (mm-kay)
*handy with tools and weapons (What are they doing? We’re still lacking info on this.)
*fragments of their human minds (could be interesting)
*mephit grants a boon (reasonable – any other mephit qualities? That would make it very interesting)

Summary: I am quite taken with the imagery here. Intersting, interesting idea that I really like. Arabian Nights material is a niche market – that’s your big obstacle. Personally, it appeals to me (no surprise given some of the convention adventures I’ve created like Bizaar of the Bezoar), so that’s a plus. It seems like a really cool, low-level creature and that’s also a plus. It feels slightly unformed or plastic in that it’s not done yet; we don’t know what they do other than serve, but it seems like they do something important. So on that level, I would like to know a little more about it? Don't be discouraged though - I think these are going on my short list of "reread and choose between a few really good concepts".

[catmandrake]

I like these. They make jann, and also mephits I suppose, cooler by association.

I found jann kind of boring before. Jann mainly live in places other races (specifically PC races) find too inhospitable. Jann mostly ignore the rest of the world; the rest of the world mostly ignores the jann. PC adventurers rarely have cause or opportunity to interact with jann unless the jann are minions of more powerful, more interesting genies.

Lantern thralls make conflicts with jann far more likely and far more interesting. They make it possible for jann to be villains in their own right. Lantern thralls give the PCs a reason to actually care what the jann are up to. That "flicker of horror" in the lantern thralls' eyes shows just how cruel a neutral creature can be.

I think a decent writer could come up with a pretty neat adventure involving lantern thralls, the villainous jann or janni who made them, and the secret of that cursed oasis.

In addition, the mechanics that this entry suggests would make for interesting encounters which could vary greatly depending on the combination of mephits found in each group of lantern thralls.

These don't set my mind on fire with ideas like skintakers do, but they be just good enough to get one of my votes. Whether I vote for you or not, I expect I'll be seeing more of you work in the next round.

[catmandrake]

Having read the comments, I feel the need to defend this entry against some of the complaints against it.

1. [gripe]It's a template.[/gripe]

SO WHAT?! I REALLY WISH PEOPLE WOULD STOP COMPLAINING ABOUT TEMPLATES. I find it mind boggling that some of you would dismiss an entry just because it seems like it would be mechanically realized as a template. Seriously, some monsters used to be people, but they are still MONSTERS. Zombies, vampires, lycanthropes, ghosts, I suppose you think all of these should be dismissed from the bestiary for being templates. Sometimes, the fact that a monster was once human makes it sympathetic. Other times it makes the monster that much more monstrous. In any case, templates are explicitly allowed by the rules of the contest. Lantern thralls deserve as much consideration as you would give any other entry. The same goes for any other entry blasted for being a template.

2. [moan]The stat block will be too complicated.[/moan]

Not any more complicated than the ghost's entry in the Pathfinder Bestiary. Every ghost has a number of abilities and characteristics common to all ghosts. In addition, each individual ghost has one or more special powers chosen from a list of options. Lantern thralls would work exactly the same way. All lantern thralls have a set of common characteristics. In addition, each lantern thrall has a single special power chosen from a list of ten (one for each kind of mephit. This is not rocket science.

3. [whine]Calculating the CR of a group of lantern thralls is too hard.[/whine]

So GMs will eyeball it like we always do. Some monsters work together better than other monsters. If I put a monster that can blind people in the same encounter as a monster with sneak attack, I increase the CR of the encounter more than the individual CRs of the two monsters would indicate. It's called synergy. Most of the time, synergy among monsters is not explicitly pointed out. You have to discover it by carefully pondering the rules (or sometimes by having a party wipe). Why are you going to punish this submission for explicitly pointing out the fact that lantern thralls are mutually synergistic?

Need I point out that the lantern thrall is not the only monster in this contest with synergy on its side? Ossuary golems release bursts of negative energy that can heal or bolster the undead released from other ossuary golems. The liesinger buffs its minions. Chaitrakhan and brown urus get smarter and more powerful the more of them there are.

I just wish I'd gotten to this thread sooner. With voting ending tomorrow afternoon, I doubt I can be much help.

[Chris Mortika]

Set, thanks for the analysis, and your kind words. (Honestly, I agree with other folks here that it might have been possible to fit some of those things in the entry, even with the word-count.)

Jodi, thanks for the kind words.

Starglim, Azmahel, and Jason, I really appreciate you taking the time to offer comments, recommendations, and encouragement. Starglim, in particular, I've found your systematic analyses of all 32 entries to be helpful and eye-opening.

Speaking of all-32-entry evaluations, Varianor, I appreciate your work here. As with Starglim's work, your analysis has highlighted both the strong and weak points of entries in a way I would have had trouble seeing otherwise. I hope I can indeed count on your vote.

Canmandrake, you have my sincere thanks, and once this round of voting is over, I'd like to comment on some of the issues that you and others have raised. Again, I hope I can count on your vote.

But in a way, I think it's useful to take to heart those criticisms that you find objectionable. In my head, I'm processing a complaint like "I would disqualify this entry as a template" to mean "I'm really not fond of templates. If I were an editor, I wouldn't hire you if you designed me a template when I asked for a monster." And that version of the criticism is useful data.

And as for whether or not a Lantern Thrall statblock would be too complicated, or the CR too messed up, I can't help but smile and hope to have an opportunity to delight my fans and astonish my critics.

[Joel Flank]

I'm a bit unsure what to make of this entry. It's got a great story behind it, but feels more like a story or specific adventure background and not enough like a monster write up. Yes, every monster should have a background and origin, but for a 300 word write up, this one leave me thinking too many of those words are spent on the story, and not enough about the actual creatures.

This is pretty clearly a template, or in fact 16 template (I think that's how many mephits there are). This isn't necessarily a bad thing. What I'm finding lacking is depth to the creature's abilities. It seems that being a lantern thrall a) makes you a slave to the creator janni, and b) grants you a single bonus ability. Beyond that it's the base creature. It would be like having a vampire template that only granted gasseous form, blood drain, or DR/silver, and alone that seems just like a magic item, not a really unique blend of abilities and traits. The fact that they can share their 1 special power with each other does set them apart some, but I think would be difficult to manage. How you determine the CR of these things if they show up in groups?

[Erik Randall]

These guys have grown on me over the last week. What I'm missing is motivation. I want to know what they want - or what their mistress wants - so I can figure out how they'd fit into a campaign. Also, if the creator is unique, I want her to have a name, but that's more a personal preference than something that detracts from the creature. I don't share Sean's concern of not knowing how a jann (or jann noble) did this, much in the same way I don't ask how a wizard first created an owlbear, or how intellect devourers create skintakers.

I'd love to know what the individual creatures did to deserve this fate. Jann are quick to take insult, but they also are exceptionally hospitable to those in need.

I enjoy the visual of these creatures. I imagine the desert at night, and figures on the horizon, each flickering with what first seems to be lantern light, but is soon revealed to be a haunting inner glow from beneath their caftans.

Are they a template? I don't know. The powers imply they retain some part of their previous skills, so I'd say yes. But I don't care if they are a template, so long as they're a good one. The unique powers for each mephit type doesn't strike me as template, or even different creatures. I envision one creature with a list of ten "pick one of these powers based on mephit type," much like a ghost has a menu of possible powers. The sharing of powers sounds like an interesting challenge from the perspective of CR, but I don't think it is unsolvable.

I like them. I want to know what they or their mistress want, and how to use them in a game where she's not a factor. So I wished you'd addressed those questions. But I do like them.

[Charles Evans 25]

Warning, further idle wandering thoughts/technical questions at some length (!) with possible implications for statting lantern thralls:

Spoiler:

Assume (for the sake of argument) that lantern thralls with pink light have the ability to break tennis rackets once per day.
Assume two pink lantern thralls are out on a mission together in Taldor, and raid a shop during which one of the lantern thralls makes use of a break tennis rackets ability. Does he use his own ability first, or the ability granted to him by his fellow pink lantern thrall? If lantern thralls of the same colour do not grant additional uses of their abilities to each other, why not? If two lantern thralls shine lights on each other, use 1/day abilities granted by each other, walk out of radius of one another's illumination, then come back together, do they grant one another additional use of 1/day abilities? If not why not? (Actually, I think this one may be a good reason for not granting each other limited use per day abilities but some sort of appropriate themed continuous effect/bonus/resistance instead, which also (because of stacking rules) might deal with twenty pink lantern thralls all standing in the same room, instead of granting potentially encounter wrecking multiple uses of break tennis rackets. So the pink lantern thralls (based on mephits that loathe tennis) end up with the innate ability break tennis rackets once per day, and a continuous +1 [rhubarb bonus] to all damage dealt to tennis rackets, and any other lantern thralls that pink lantern thralls shine their lights on gain a continuous +1 [rhubarb bonus] to all damage dealt against tennis rackets whilst the pink light is shining on them.)

What effect does standing in front of a mirror which reflects their own light back at them have on a lantern thrall? What effect does standing in between two mirrors have on a lantern thrall? (Beyond questions regarding mere light effects, this one seems to me to offer interesting possibilities as they see themselves and are reminded of what they are/have become to maybe cause some sort of mental confusion a limited number of times a day or month. Sort of like the golem paralysing trigger condition in old edition Ravenloft.)

And here's one I can see causing potential arguements in-game. A purple lantern thrall stands on the other side of a stained glass window, shining light through the window onto a green lantern thrall on the other side. The light (because of the stained glass) comes through blue. Does the green lantern thrall gain a power/ability as if a blue lantern thrall was shining light on him, a power/ability as if a purple lantern thrall was shining light on him, or no power at all because the light has been filtered/messed with? Does it make any difference if the stained glass is magical?

Thanks for the colons/semi-colons essay, Chris. I repeat I do like your descriptive writing for lantern thralls (I think you probably topped this round for pure description), but I find their mechanical side problematic. :-?

[Chris Mortika]

Charles, I look forward to the opportunity to wow you with elegant solutions.

And thanks again for your kind words and encouragement.

[Tobias Mullen]

Does it grab me visually: Yes. Transparent humans with mephitis inside. Pretty cool mental picture there.

Would I use it in game: Yes. I like that they keep small memories of their past life. This could lead to interesting adventures where the PCs rescue friends who have been taken by the janni, leading to a final battle with the janni who started all of this.

Would my players enjoy an encounter with it: Yes. Different abilities from different mephitis mean that my players will always be on their toes with each new encounter with these. And they will have fun trying to guess what new abilities a salt mephit grants over a water mephit.

[Craig Johnston]

I really like the idea, although I'm not a huge fan of the name.
I do think it should be a Template, although as long as the creature was the same at its Base and each variety simply had one (or two)differing power(s) then I don't mind it being a Monster with a powers list similar to the actual Mephit entry in the Bestiary.
To me, the first thing I thought of when I read about their ability to 'share' was Magic the Gathering's Slivers.

Great description and I do like the Monster but I'm sorry to say it doesn't get my Vote.
Sorry and Good Luck. :)

[Chris Mortika]

Tobias, Craig, thanks for taking the time to provide your feedback, and for your kind wishes. And Tobias, I really appreciate you taking the time during this nerve-wracking week to tour the whole 32 and offer your insights.

--+--+-

And, now that the polls are closed, whew! When Clark and Sean posted that this is like a job interview, I didn't realize how seriously that applied.

I made the mistake of looking at the "exit poll" numbers after a day or two, and found myself square in the center of the pack, so I either just squeaked in, or came just this close to making the cut.

And reading the comments here has taught me that I made some rookie mistakes, leaving off important aspects of the lantern thralls, whilespending too many words on less crucial material. This has taught me one thing. If I have made it into the next round, I vow to turn around a design so strong and so well-written that I can stand or fail knowing that I will have brought my A-Game to the table.

--+--+--

Craig wrote:

To me, the first thing I thought of when I read about their ability to 'share' was Magic the Gathering's Slivers.

That was the initial spark, if you will. Coming into this round, I wanted a design and description which implied to wargamers that a combat with these critters could be fun from a tactical standpoint. As the entry developed, I was able to add aspects that I thought would appeal to people who enjoyed puzzles, and role-players who enjoyed depth of character.

Honestly, when TSR was introducing PlaneScape, it didn't appeal much to me (I thought it had a kind of "London punk" ambience, which I didn't care for). So, the push-back against mephits, on the grounds they were somehow comic relief in PlaneScape came as a complete surprise to me.

[roguerouge]

It ain't over. Eric Bailey barely squeaked through this round last year, and he ended in second place in the final round. If you survive, what are you going to learn that you apply to next round?

[Jim Groves]

Congratulations Chris!!

Glad you made it!

[Chris Mortika]

Thanks, Jim, and roguerouge, too. I'm really looking forward to this round.

[Neil Spicer]

Chris:
First of all, congratulations on making it to the Top 16. I thought I would wait until after the voting for Round Two ended before offering any commentary or advice. And I'm going to come at it a little differently, in that I'm not going to focus primarily on your design this round. Rather, I'm going to have a go at examining your entire portfolio to this point to sort of assess what you've done well, where you could shore up a few things in your overall design and writing, and then give you some more pointed advice on stuff you could showcase in future rounds to maybe improve your chances of going all the way to the end. So, with that in mind, here goes:

Spoiler:

I really loved your sublime phial. I thought it was innovative and perfect-execution all wrapped up in one neat package. Your prose is really, really good. Your ideas are sound. But, with the Lantern Thrall, I think you took a step backwards...and no, it has nothing to do with the whole "template vs. monster" debate. I just didn't get the sense that the Lantern Thrall had everything put together yet. I could see the seed of the idea you were going for...but the writing didn't work for me this time. The description had elements of backstory to a single janni creating these things and they just came across kind of collected in a single place, rather than a monster you could encounter anywhere. Also, with all the possible variations as a result of the baseline mephit possessing someone, I think maybe you tried to grab for too much and never really refined the overall idea down to a single, crisp presentation.

In addition, from a standpoint of how you layer your information about the Lantern Thrall, I was kind of put off by the early descriptive language talking about the seemingly human things...which we only really discover are possessed by mephits once we get way down into the paragraphs on the powers and abilities. I think that's information you need to establish early on. And, so, while I really like your evocative writing, I think maybe that's getting in the way of successfully presenting the information that's most vital to your design. For instance, I think you should come out early on and establish what your design is about...whether you're talking about the Lantern Thrall or the sublime phial or anything else. Let the reader know what it is early on...and then you can look for ways to weave in the really evocative text and descriptive stuff. If you can find that perfect blend of information with awesome window-dressing with your writing skills, you'll really find yourself with a "WOW" moment that could push you way up the collective consciousness of the voting public.

Next up, I'd like to touch briefly on your mechanical execution. To me, the sublime phial really hit a lot of good notes. You had really tight design there. So, I think you really know your stuff and I'm left with expectations that you'll do well in the rules-fu stat-blocking of Round Three. So make sure you nail that and meet everyone's expectations. With regards to the descriptive, flavor text, though...make sure you get all the basics (i.e., what is it? how does it look? etc.) out of the way before you jump straight into the awesome prose. Or, as you compile that awesome prose, make sure it's serving the purpose of answering those important questions about whatever it is you're designing.

So, looking forward at the rest of the competition, I have to admit I think you've got a lot of potential. You've got mojo and you've got writing chops and I think you've got decent rules-fu. I think you just need to focus all that potential into a single, perfect blend of awesome idea, with fully accurate game mechanics, and slamming prose. If you put all those ingredients together in something, you're going to knock one of these assignments out of the park. If I have any advice for you, it would be to focus your work, polish it down to a fine finish, but make sure it serves the purpose for each assignment exactly the way Paizo would expect something to appear in a published work. Do all of that and you'll show you've got what it takes to win the RPG Superstar title.

Best of luck,
--Neil

[Charles Evans 25]

Okay, I wasn't expecting you to make it but you did, and your reward now is even more a mechanics orientated round.
So concentrate! And think of how whatever you do write might play at a table.
And congratulations on getting through. :)

[Tom Baumbach]

Heck yes. I knew you'd make it.

[caith]

Congrats, Chris. I fully expected you to make it, though I'll admit I did not vote for you this time. I selected my votes based on the rules for that round, and who has shown the most design chops. So far, your evocative writing has carried you through these two rounds. That said, out of all the contestants, I see you being the most able to create a compelling narrative that will carry a module, and beyond. So it's time to show them some, as Spicer would call it, "design-fu". Show us your design chops, Chris.

[Chris Mortika]

Thanks guys. And, caith, I aim to please.

Neil, in case I forget to mention it again later, I am gratified by your assistance here and awaed by the quality of your advice. It's clear that you want us all to avoid as many of the rookie mistakes and the mis-steps that keep us from our potential as possible. You raise the bar, and then raise us up to meet it.

[Curaigh]

Congratulations! Though you did not get my final vote, I am glad you made it to this round.

Visual: 8 Charisma
Creativity: 10 Intelligence
Would I use it: 10 Dex
Overall: 10 Strength
Without a strong visual it is hard for me to get behind the critter, and for me it was just lacking. the first sentence told me I could not visualize it and I must have never made it past that. I like the undead that are really not undead, the tie with the djinn was good. Like a willowisp for the desert.

Congratulations and good luck!