If an item is booted for technical reasons such as word count or format can you reenter it in the next superstar when it is polished up?
Casey Smith's Maw of Urgathoa was top 32 in 2008 and in 2009. It was too long the first year (couldnae find a link) and resubmitted.
General consensus was to write something new though :)
Chief Technical Officer
|
If an item is booted for technical reasons such as word count or format can you reenter it in the next superstar when it is polished up?Casey Smith's Maw of Urgathoa was top 32 in 2008 and in 2009. It was too long the first year (couldnae find a link) and resubmitted.
General consensus was to write something new though :)
Yep... when we see items for the second time, we have to wonder if the reason is that the author is only capable of having a single idea.
I was glad to see the maw again the second year. When it was submitted the second time (this time under word count) because the first round is anonymous we asked Vic to confirm that it was the same contestant submitting it. The LAST thing we wanted was to advance an item that had been cut the year before polished up and submitted by someone else! So we considered it with all other items and, once it made the cut to top 32 (again), THEN we asked Vic to confirm. If, of course, it hadn't made the top 32 we wouldn't have needed to bother. But I think that is the exception to seeing an item a second time. Normally not a good idea.
That said, however, I've looked back across the forums of every year and many of the items that made the Keep pile, but ultimately failed to reach the Top 32 had some really creative ideas behind them. In most cases, it was the seed of a good idea. And, polished up and resubmitted after applying all the auto-reject advice given now, I bet a few of them could make a Top 32 in the future. I'd encourage people to go back and reconsider some of their own stuff and see if they can't re-design some of it to make a compelling pitch for admission into the ranks of RPG Superstar.
That said, however, I've looked back across the forums of every year and many of the items that made the Keep pile, but ultimately failed to reach the Top 32 had some really creative ideas behind them. In most cases, it was the seed of a good idea. And, polished up and resubmitted after applying all the auto-reject advice given now, I bet a few of them could make a Top 32 in the future. I'd encourage people to go back and reconsider some of their own stuff and see if they can't re-design some of it to make a compelling pitch for admission into the ranks of RPG Superstar.
Very true, I think; the only difficulty is that getting feedback from judges and peers is so useful, I think most serious returning hopefuls will ask for it. That means that both the great seed and the presumably-helpful advice on improving it are public and clearly identified with the creator; submitting the new-and-improved version seems risky on the "submissions must be anonymous" criterion. No? The maw of urgathoa case certainly seems to illustrate that a polished resubmission will be connected directly to the original item - and creator.
I seem to recall reading in previous years that submitting the same item reworked might be a bad idea as it kind of goes against the spirit of the competition.
The reasoning went something like "We want to see what you can do as a freelancer within a deadline. You wouldnt have a year to polish and shine your entry for real publication deadlines, so you need to work to the competition deadlines to simulate this environment. It would be better to submit something new each time to show what you can do given a specific time frame and requirement".
It was something like that and I guess should be considered.
If you changed enough to make it anonymous again, maybe? I would really avoid doing this. Especially since there would be an entire year to think of something new.
It's been done in the past, though I forget which item it was. Something about gaining the swallow whole ability... It might not be as superstar as creating that item from scratch the first time - but so long as it's not posted up elsewhere in the meantime it should be kosher.
If you changed enough to make it anonymous again, maybe? I would really avoid doing this. Especially since there would be an entire year to think of something new.It's been done in the past, though I forget which item it was. Something about gaining the swallow whole ability... It might not be as superstar as creating that item from scratch the first time - but so long as it's not posted up elsewhere in the meantime it should be kosher.
As mentioned above, that was the maw of Urgathoa from the first and second years of the contest. And seeing as that was an item that made it to the top 32 of the first year before being retroactively disqualified, I think it was a much safer bet on resubmitting an item the second year that had already been a proven superstar item then taking a risk on an already passed over entry.
I seem to recall reading in previous years that submitting the same item reworked might be a bad idea as it kind of goes against the spirit of the competition.
The reasoning went something like "We want to see what you can do as a freelancer within a deadline. You wouldnt have a year to polish and shine your entry for real publication deadlines, so you need to work to the competition deadlines to simulate this environment. It would be better to submit something new each time to show what you can do given a specific time frame and requirement".
It was something like that and I guess should be considered.
You are probably correct. However we have had a year to work on items and it is likely that first round will always be items. My guess is the time-lines of later rounds covers that gap.
Quick question though, once we post them on the boards (to get feedback for example) they are no longer eligible for the contest. Is this right?
|
I seem to recall reading in previous years that submitting the same item reworked might be a bad idea as it kind of goes against the spirit of the competition.
The reasoning went something like "We want to see what you can do as a freelancer within a deadline. You wouldnt have a year to polish and shine your entry for real publication deadlines, so you need to work to the competition deadlines to simulate this environment. It would be better to submit something new each time to show what you can do given a specific time frame and requirement".
It was something like that and I guess should be considered.
You are probably correct. However we have had a year to work on items and it is likely that first round will always be items. My guess is the time-lines of later rounds covers that gap.
Quick question though, once we post them on the boards (to get feedback for example) they are no longer eligible for the contest. Is this right?
I would say that is correct. The first round is supposed to be anonymous. If you post it for feedback this year and enter it next year and someone recognizes it, you'd surely be disqualified.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32
|
I would say that is correct. The first round is supposed to be anonymous. If you post it for feedback this year and enter it next year and someone recognizes it, you'd surely be disqualified.I seem to recall reading in previous years that submitting the same item reworked might be a bad idea as it kind of goes against the spirit of the competition.
The reasoning went something like "We want to see what you can do as a freelancer within a deadline. You wouldnt have a year to polish and shine your entry for real publication deadlines, so you need to work to the competition deadlines to simulate this environment. It would be better to submit something new each time to show what you can do given a specific time frame and requirement".
It was something like that and I guess should be considered.
You are probably correct. However we have had a year to work on items and it is likely that first round will always be items. My guess is the time-lines of later rounds covers that gap.
Quick question though, once we post them on the boards (to get feedback for example) they are no longer eligible for the contest. Is this right?
EDIT: hmm. . . It has to be anonymous, so that would DQ it. I thought there was something about not getting collaborative help, but I didn't see it in a cursory glance through the rules.
That said, however, I've looked back across the forums of every year and many of the items that made the Keep pile, but ultimately failed to reach the Top 32 had some really creative ideas behind them. In most cases, it was the seed of a good idea. And, polished up and resubmitted after applying all the auto-reject advice given now, I bet a few of them could make a Top 32 in the future. I'd encourage people to go back and reconsider some of their own stuff and see if they can't re-design some of it to make a compelling pitch for admission into the ranks of RPG Superstar.
I just recently started playing Pathfinder from 3.5 and didn't know about the contest until about a week before it ended.I also didn't know how to make words bold in the discussion boards and didn't read the forums until after I had already submitted my item. So I am kicking myself now.
I designed an artifact that was well received by the group of people that I game with. I tried to convert it to a wondrous item and it was a little pricey. Ended up lowering it down in power and taking away several properties to get it close to price of the wondrous items in the core rule book. Wasn't able to add all the details and mechanics into the item as I had wanted. So I have my doubts about it. Like you said though, it may evolve to something better and far more manageable.