Neil and Sean are the undisputed Kings of advice, and Clark is certainly a Duke; so sometimes I wonder what I could actually contribute to this contest other than my cheery self and some well wishes. That being said, there has been something I’ve been mulling over posting for some time now. Part of me has wondered if someone else would just post something similar anyway, so I’ve put it off. I’d start to write it, and then I’d reconsider. You see, much is made of the contestant’s conduct, but talking about the “other side” of the event is a trickier topic.
Well, the moment has come and the Top 32 have been selected. Soon I’m going to be too busy reviewing items to post anything else. I’ve decided if I’m ever to post this, now is the moment.
These are my thoughts about being a helpful, positive, and responsible member of the audience.
Be cool. It has always been said and understood that a contestant is expected to hold up under some intense public scrutiny and critique. Nothing I write here should detract or change that. A SuperStar! Freelancer has to be thick-skinned and a professional in dealing with the public. That being said, that shouldn’t be a free license for the voting public to say or write anything they want. If you don’t like an entry, by all means say it. The contestant really needs to hear the hard truth. But ya know? You can serve up some hard truth and still be both and helpful and responsible. “This really bores me, and it doesn’t seem well developed” is great feedback. “If I saw this in a store I wouldn’t use it as toilet paper” is not. And yeah, I’ve seen that done. Contestants are like animals in cages. They run a greater risk of losing votes and support by arguing with you, so don’t use that against them. This is a tough contest, but it is also supposed to be fun for the contestants. Don’t take that away from them. We all “just want to help Paizo get the best products possible” (a common justification when there is concern if a critique has been too severe), but we don’t have to be jerks (or carebears) to see that end realized.
If you’re not sure, crack a rule book first. Many of us have seen or even done this; “I think that’s wrong but I don’t have my books in front of me because I’m posting at work!!!” When you’re having a little debate in the Rules Forum, that doesn’t really matter. However, this time if you’re wrong, you could be making somebody look bad and hurting their chances. Understand this; they can't correct you! So if you get the rules wrong and everybody else assumes you actually know what you're talking about, you just screwed that contestant. They can not comment until it is too damn late. I don’t mean to suggest that you analyze every entry, or delve into minutia. That’s your decision. Just consider, if it is important enough for you to point out, isn’t it important enough to also make sure that you’re right?
Tell them about it. Last year I’d watch the exit polls and people would remark on contestants and sometimes say something like, “That person is really doing well but I’m not voting for them.” That’s fine. However, you’d be doing them a really great favor if you posted in their own thread and told them why. Of course, you’re not obligated to do so. I’m just appealing to you on behalf of this year’s contestants to thoughtfully consider it. I speak from experience, there is nothing harder than reading that someone won’t be voting for you and you have no idea why. I swear that is rougher than reading a harsh critique, because you feel so helpless and dumbfounded. After all, they made the effort to actually type out that they weren’t awarding you their vote, but you have no idea what you could do differently that might please them next time. It doesn’t have to be an epic analysis, just two or three sentences that go beyond “I didn’t like it” would be a gift.
That’s it! No more. I could probably come up with other suggestions or guidelines, but ultimately it is the contestant who is judged on their conduct, not the audience. It was my intention to be thought provoking, not lecturing. Hopefully this won’t start a distracting argument (because I won’t participate if it does), but this post comes from the heart. I was a bit of jerk the very first year of the contest; believe me when I say when you walk a mile in the Top 32’s shoes, your perspective will change forever.
People, you have some power over what they do, because they’ll be trying to make you happy. Use that power wisely.
These are really good insights, Jim. Thanks for this. It never occurred to me to ask what a contestant would appreciate and/or dislike in a forum participant, but that's obviously huge, and very relevant to us all.
These are really good insights, Jim. Thanks for this. It never occurred to me to ask what a contestant would appreciate and/or dislike in a forum participant, but that's obviously huge, and very relevant to us all.
+1
Besides, if you're thinking of having your rejected item critiqued publicly at some point...these guidelines are your friends.
listed.
There is already a ton of advice for the top 32, but this is something new. Thank you for your insights.
Having had to perform reviews as part of my job, one extra thing that you might like to consider.
When providing feedback, it actually helps to give either a balance of feedback, but at minimum always close on a pasitive note.
You can list a number of reasons why you dont like, wont use, think somethings wrong, but ending with a good try, or even a the idea is sound and the mechanics are tight for example will result in
a) the contestant knowing what needs to be improved AND more importantly what they are doing right as well
b) the sting is lessened as in reading the feedback, you end with a positive which encourages rather than discourages.
c) and everyone else taking part can also learn not only from the mistakes but also what is seen to be good as well.
So try to be balanced and try to find a positive worth commenting on to end your feedback.
It pays dividends to us all.
Hey, Jim! This is actually a very good topic to bring up. Sometimes everyone fixates on what the Top 32 are doing during the competition, but as I've often tried to point out, everyone has a role to play as the contest gets underway. And the voting public is a huge part of it.
I'll agree with Anthony above that if you're going to critique someone, try to end on a positive note. But, I'd also add that it's important to begin on one as well. Constructive criticism is easier to take if you start with the good before delving into the bad. Basically, you build someone up...and then you let them know where they could have done better (in your opinion)...and then you finish by encouraging them to do exactly that. And let me emphasize that middle part. You need to tell them what they could have done better. Don't just criticize or take shots at the designer or their design. That's not helpful and it actually reflects poorly on you if you take that road. Instead, the only way a designer is really going to grow is if you take the time to suggest things that would have made the finished product better in your eyes. Then, it's up to the designer to take and use that however they will to improve themselves.
In fact, the actual language you use can influence how well they accept your advice and feedback. If it's full of stuff like, "You did this wrong..." or "This is a bad design because of XYZ..." they'll have a hard time getting past that rejection to hear the good stuff buried somewhere in your feedback. Instead, if you come out with words like, "You did a good or decent job with X and Y, but I think it would have been stronger if you'd also considered Z..." that will go a lot farther in helping them immediately buy into what you're trying to convey. You don't have use kiddie gloves in all of your feedback and interaction, though. As a designer demonstrates their open to taking stronger feedback, you can dial it up a bit more to get your point across. Sometimes the harsh truth is harsh no matter how you try to slice it. Just be real careful when you trot it out. Or, maybe consider that if you have nothing nice to say (and that your words will only damage or detract), maybe refrain from commenting at all.
And that brings me to what I think is one more important, vital point. If you're going to get involved in commenting and critiquing these designs, be aware of your own conduct in doing so. Why? Because, presumably if you have an interest in someday participating in this contest as a competitor, you'll want to start working on your own public image right now. If you consistently show yourself to be an argumentative jerk...or an annoying, belligerent rules lawyer...or a disrespectful blowhard...or someone who actively works against others to support your own agenda...people are going to take note of that. It can hang around your neck like an albatross for the rest of your time on the messageboards. And that includes the next time RPG Superstar rolls around. And, then, even if you do make it into that year's Top 32, your chances of winning public support take a serious hit. You don't have to be the best-loved person to be a great designer. But it doesn't hurt if you want to win RPG Superstar.
I think a lot of people go into this contest without giving that much thought or consideration. Then, when they make it into the competition, they're both surprised and unprepared. So start sowing the seeds of a helpful demeanor now and it will pay dividends down the road. And, besides, isn't that the way you should conduct yourself in life anyway? Do unto others as you'd have done unto you. Live by that rule and you'll be surprised how far it takes you in terms of winning the support of everyone you meet.
My two cents,
--Neil
One extra thought just occurred to me.
"being a good audience particpant"...
That last word.
Means take part.
We the competitors can only learn the desires of our target community if you actively take the time to take part.
Yes, there will be times we all lurk, but if you have a strong reaction to something, well... this we need to know.
I've probably been more active this year than any other year on the forums.
I TRY to post helpful comments
I TRY to keep it humorous and light - but yeah, I know my jokes are pretty bad sometimes (all the time?) :D
I TRY to be informative as much as possible
I RECOGNISE I am sharing my opinions and others will disagree with what I type sometimes.
I DONT get into flame wars, I respect your opinions even if I disagree with them.
I TRY to always be polite.
I TRY to ensure my spelling is good but I do sometimes miss a word - like "pasitive" above >.< (should be positive).
and finally, when we get to comment on the winners, if I am not one I am going to continue to do all the above and additionally
TRY to give honest and fair feedback on each item
Hoping you find something of use in these comments and I hope I'm not preaching to the converted or teaching grandma's to suck eggs too much.
Thanks gentlemen! I'm glad I posted this because I really felt that planting the thought about how we review and critique BEFORE the Top 32 are released was the best time for it. When it comes in response to a specific incident, it is an uncomfortable distraction to the contestant (who might be defended by 3rd parties); all while the target of a rebuke is on the defense.
I'm not advocating rules for feedback, or censorship, or message board police. Rather, just a reminder that when you post, do so responsibly. Because you'd want that for yourself, right?
And Neil is right. What goes around, goes all the way around. Years ago when I sharpened my knives, I never imagined two years later that I would be on stage. I don't know if it actually hurt me or not, but right now is a good time to make resolution to catch yourself before posting something you might regret later. Even if you don't advance I think you'll be happier that you did.
And on a lighter note, I really mean it about telling people why you're not voting for them! They need your comment just as much or MORE than a gushing love note to your favorite. If you're serious about wanting Paizo to have the best products, then you want each and every round to be fierce. That means raising the game of the folks who are not your favorites. To do that, they need your feedback. If you only have time for a couple of posts, then spend that time giving needed feedback, rather than writing valentines to people you've already decided to vote for. Trust me, those favorites will be happy for your vote and they'll see it in the exit polls. Spend that time writing to the ones who can't seem to thrill you.
Case in point, in Round One they said my passive voice was awful. Guess what? Round Two saw me fixing it. TELL PEOPLE WHAT THEY NEED TO DO TO GET THAT VOTE.
Valentines Day is next month.
Hi Jim,
This was a great thread to start, and I for one am glad you did. It helps to point out things we should already know, but brings them into sharp relief, making them stand out or be a bit more obvious to us (all of us).
You (and Anthony, and Neil) have given me pause, and had me wondering if I had been a good member of the audience, and I think I have been (for the most part) but I know my nature (human nature) and I'm sure there were times I wasn't such a glowing representative member of good forum manners. And for those occasions I'd like to apologize right now.
We are all on pins and needles waiting (eagerly) for the results of Round One, and I am looking forward to congratulating those Top 32 contestants (and the alternates should we ever learn their identities) of jobs well done. (About as much as I am hoping to be one of them). :)
But Jim, I promise to be as good as an audience member as I can (and better than I might have been in previous years).
I'd better end this now, I'm starting to get as wordy as Neil or Jim. ;)
Regards,
Dean; The_Minstrel_Wyrm
I'd better end this now, I'm starting to get as wordy as Neil or Jim. ;)
Impossible!
|
[devil's advocate] I think you can make a strong case that actually the best audience participants simply vote and never post anything; the judges (who are the industry experts after all) usually say everything which needs to be said, and all other posts about entries end up being essentially either "I agree with at least one of the judges" or "I know nothing at all about the industry, but I think that the judges' opinions suck big-time". Do either of the latter two types of post add anything to the contest? [/devil's advocate]
Well, I disagree with that. :P While the judges are industry experts, they are not the end all experts. Now, posting "I agree with them" I feel is a little lame (your vote demonstrates that you agree with them). I think that if you have valuable, constructive criticism, then provide it. I've looked through comments from previous years and saw non-judge comments where judges came back and said "Oh, didn't think of that, good call".
[devil's advocate] I think you can make a strong case that actually the best audience participants simply vote and never post anything; the judges (who are the industry experts after all) usually say everything which needs to be said, and all other posts about entries end up being essentially either "I agree with at least one of the judges" or "I know nothing at all about the industry, but I think that the judges' opinions suck big-time". Do either of the latter two types of post add anything to the contest? [/devil's advocate]
That's not even remotely close to what I was attempting to communicate Charles.
I.e. Responsibility not abstinence.
I know, myself, that in previous years, I did a lot of lurking, and though I voted, I often, as Charles mentioned, did so with little or no feedback. While I agree with Charles that the judges' comments usually do a better job of defining the good, the bad, and the ugly than I could, after reading the above posts, I must concur that, as an aspiring author myself (and aren't most of us, really?), the more constructive feedback I can receive the better. After all, though the judges do a wonderful job of critiquing the submissions from a professional industry point of view, I can't help but wonder what the folks who will shelling out their hard-earned moola for further Paizo products have to say about my writing.
And too, I believe (at least on my part) that the ability to take the time to not only read through, but reflect upon and offer up helpful advice to one’s fellow contestants is a good thing, especially if I’m not one of the top 32 – it lets me know that I can, on occasion, rise above the pettiness of “sour grapes” (“...gee, I don’t know why he made it in when my entry was just as good…), and genuinely root for the other talented writers and would-be game designers out there, struggling, like me, for recognition and a chance to better themselves.
Kudos to all who’ve entered, and for the thoughtfulness of posting this thread (I for one plan on, in Neil's words, adding in 'my own two cents' more often); may I be a better participant this year than in the past, no matter how well my own submission(s) fare.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
,
Star Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9
aka JoelF847
|
Jim,
Great topic. Everything you say is spot on. I did want to expand on one point though. While the contestants can't respond to what the public says about their entry, the rest of the public can. If you see someone comment and either get the rules wrong in their criticism, or simply miss the point of what the item is doing, go ahead and correct them. I'm not suggesting that you get into a heated argument that becomes a threadjack away from commenting on the entry itself, but a simple "I think you're missing that blah, blah, blah, and therefore, the entry is actually really cool because it plays with 'little known rule'" or something to that effect.
I actually think it was your item last year, the Seducer's Bane, that I did something similar to this after several people missed the fact that you were playing with the rules that normally let a caster know if their spell failed or not. I recall you being appreciative that someone spoke for your item when you couldn't.
[devil's advocate] I think you can make a strong case that actually the best audience participants simply vote and never post anything; the judges (who are the industry experts after all) usually say everything which needs to be said, and all other posts about entries end up being essentially either "I agree with at least one of the judges" or "I know nothing at all about the industry, but I think that the judges' opinions suck big-time". Do either of the latter two types of post add anything to the contest? [/devil's advocate]
The aggregate of opinions is useful too. Knowing, roughly, how many forum members agree or disagree with the judges helps.
Knowing how well the public liked your entry is a significant part of the contest. You can't gauge that, beyond the official vote tally at the end, without discussion of the entry. Even if the discussion amounts to "The judges are right, this sucks/rocks".
---
Also, Jim's advice goes for the Top 32+4 as well. 32 of those 36 will end up as observers at some point during the contest. It can be difficult to stick with the contest after you've been eliminated. I'm guilty of that last year.
I'll also add that the voting public isn't in a contest with the judges to determine who can give the most pertinent and complete critique. We're not going to cover everything. And you should certainly offer up your opinions and insights...as well as some encouragement, both for your favorites and those you want to see improve. Spend some time assessing your own individual critique...and by doing so, further reinforce, share, and develop your understanding of the rules and mechanics and art behind how someone writes and designs something for a roleplaying game. Carry on a discussion of such things with others of a like mind. It will help you improve yourself as well as the Top 32.
In my opinion, that's what everyone should do in fulfilling their role of voting and commenting on each designer's submission. It helps you as much as it helps them to go through that thought process and ensuing conversation. So, avoid crawling back into a turtle shell and wallowing in a misery of "I'm not good enough" or "I don't have the natural talent for this..." That's self-defeating. This contest is a learning exercise that accomplishes great things for the future of this industry. Not just for the one who wins it...but for all those who follow along and participate. So, avoid the sour grapes syndrome of commenting negatively on other's stuff just to pick it apart in both a vindictive way and some kind of attempt to rejustify faith in your own abilities. Because when you choose that route, people can tell. And it doesn't endear you any further to them.
Be supportive. Be cordial. And be helpful to the Top 32.
And, at the same time, be smart. Be proactive in learning and sharing as much as you can about game design over the course of the contest. And, as a result, be helpful to yourself and your future chances at competing in RPG Superstar.
My two cents,
--Neil
I actually think it was your item last year, the Seducer's Bane, that I did something similar to this after several people missed the fact that you were playing with the rules that normally let a caster know if their spell failed or not. I recall you being appreciative that someone spoke for your item when you couldn't.
That's true. :)
I don't want this thread to be about me however, but yeah, I did draw upon some of my own experiences.
You're also correct about coming to the defense of an entry that is being flagged for a non-existent error. People should do that. However your point about not making it a heated argument is absolutely correct. The contestant doesn't need that negative attention either. People will check out for themselves, and then factor what that means to their vote.
***********
I should also point out that this competition is NOT ripe with this sort of behavior. These are all isolated instances through the years. I'm just put the thought out there in advance.
Please Charles, you're derailing this completely out of context.
I wrote in a relaxed conversational style. I didn't have hours to reflect on every possible way what I said could be interpreted. I suppose I didn't feel the necessity.
I have no interest or desire in a debate about what the definition of 'great' feedback is. No matter what I say or write, that ultimately will fall upon the individual. In the example I gave, I was trying to illustrate frank and honest feedback, versus feedback that is just hurtful. I chose those examples because frank and honest feedback can hurt; but the difference is in intention.
When you liken someone's work to toilet paper, there's no way to take anything from that BUT hurt. If you tell someone that you find their work boring, that also hurts, but you're telling them something hard that they might be able to use in the next round.
Obviously, if one can provide constructive positive feedback that is honest and yet does not hurt- that is what one should provide.
As a footnote aside from the to post/to not post question, I would concur with all those posters who have said things thus far to the effect of ‘if you’re going to post then be polite about it’.
That was my essential message Charles. I was the first poster to suggest that. If that did not come across clearly to you, then I didn't communicate that clearly, and I regret it. Again, perhaps I was too conversational in my language.
That being said, I respectful ask you not to take this in a direction I never intended, by soliciting a debate on what is good feedback. I was only asking people to be thoughtful in their remarks.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I'll echo the consensus to show both moderation and manners in posting - feel free to critique to the Nth degree, but don't be insulting.
I would also encourage people, if there are rules questions or ambiguities, feel free to voice them. I was certainly happy, when I was competing 3 years ago, when someone did the same for me on a couple of occasions:
1. In the countries round, my nation was ruled by evil/predatory druids. A number of people objected that druids couldn't/shouldn't/wouldn't abuse nature and be murderous bastards.
But a helpful poster or two pointed out that druids can certainly be Neutral EVIL and do all of those things, and were hardly restricted to being tree-hugging care-bears.
2. In the villain round, one of the judges (Clark I think) critiqued the fact that my villain, a nightmare, had a hand of glory and a magical ring; basically, he asked how a HORSE could use a magical hand or ring?
But a helpful poster or two pointed out that the hand of glory is actually an amulet, worn around the NECK, which allows you to put a magical ring ON the hand.
3. In the encounter round, one of the monsters was a sea hag lurking under the ice of a frozen-over lake, but a number of folks objected, why would a SEA hag live in fresh water?
But a helpful poster or two pointed out that sea hags are simply aquatic, and in the 3.5 MM description are described as living in fresh or salt water, despite their name.
In all three cases, I couldn't say anything other than "thanks for your vote, and check the rules." But the audience could, and did, and I surely appreciated it.
Did the corrections to those objections from the audience make any decisive difference in voting? Maybe, maybe not. But I'm sure it didn't hurt, especially for folks who might have at first thought I had made a sloppy rules error in my entry.
In all three cases, I couldn't say anything other than "thanks for your vote, and check the rules." But the audience could, and did, and I surely appreciated it.
Did the corrections to those objections from the audience make any decisive difference in voting? Maybe, maybe not. But I'm sure it didn't hurt, especially for folks who might have at first thought I had made a sloppy rules error in my entry.
Amen Jason, I had helpful posters come to my rescue on at least three different occasions. It is a wonderful gift to give someone.
And the Top 32 are in, and I'm offically too busy to continue this thread.
:D
I'll add:
In general, whether commenting on an RPG Superstar entry, or replying to this thread, or replying anywhere on the internet:
Before you hit "post," read what you're saying. Then remove your foot from your mouth and read what you're saying again. Does it still seem like a good idea? Is it a helpful contribution to the discussion? Is it a nitpick or derailment of the topic?
If the answer is "no," don't post it.
Director of Brand Strategy
|
Is it a helpful contribution to the discussion? Is it a nitpick or derailment of the topic?
If the answer is "no," don't post it.
If the answer to the first question is "no," don't post it.
If the answer to the second question is "yes," don't post it.
I get that the top 32 are encouraged to post comments about their own and other round 1 items, but what about others' archetypes in round 2 during the voting phase?
I just think it would be in really bad taste to go through the other 31 entries, pointing out everything you can find that you think is wrong, just to bring the competition down, even if it's done in a constructive and non-demeaning way.
Something that should definitely get one taken out in the proverbial dark alley behind the bar...
I confess that I have not had the opportunity to go through previous years' comments and check the time stamps of peoples' comments to see if this has been a problem in the past or not.
I just think it would be in really bad taste to go through the other 31 entries, pointing out everything you can find that you think is wrong, just to bring the competition down, even if it's done in a constructive and non-demeaning way.
I can think of nothing more likely to make people go "what a tool, I'm not voting for that guy" than doing exactly that.
Now, the opposite, offering compliments on your competitor's items, is almost as fraught with peril.
Personally, I'm for saying as little as possible until the voting's done, and even then only talking about your own item. But that's just my $0.02. Worth nowhere near as much as Neil's $0.98, I'm sure :)
But that's just my $0.02. Worth nowhere near as much as Neil's $0.98, I'm sure :)
But together you could combine your Wonder Twin powers in the form of ordering off the dollar menu at McDonalds!
(Seriously, I'd be interested to hear more thoughts on the appropriate self-imposed posting limitations or lack thereof by contestants. I get that they can't defend or explain their own entries, but beyond that?)
I get that the top 32 are encouraged to post comments about their own and other round 1 items, but what about others' archetypes in round 2 during the voting phase?
I just think it would be in really bad taste to go through the other 31 entries, pointing out everything you can find that you think is wrong, just to bring the competition down, even if it's done in a constructive and non-demeaning way.
Something that should definitely get one taken out in the proverbial dark alley behind the bar...
I confess that I have not had the opportunity to go through previous years' comments and check the time stamps of peoples' comments to see if this has been a problem in the past or not.
I've never seen that during the voting phase. There would be an unholy uproar.
I have seen it **after** the voting phase. Some of it critical. :/
On the other hand, I (and others) would post strictly positive comments after the voting phase, but I stopped doing that about 2/3rds the way through. Even that upset some voters, so we complied with their wishes. Now that I am removed from the contest, I'd say Gbonehead is right. Better to stay silent on other people's entries; even if you mean no harm and say only nice things, someone could take it poorly.
That being said, please let contestants wish each other good luck and other simple niceties in their Guildhall. They need to be able to have some cameraderie. Only they (and previous participants) can relate to what they're feeling.
Thanks for all the good advice on participating in the "voters only" side of the competition!
+1
Thanks for making that correction, Mark. Obviously I added and reversed some text and didn't follow my own advice to reread it and make sure it was correct. ;)
I'll add:
In general, whether commenting on an RPG Superstar entry, or replying to this thread, or replying anywhere on the internet:
Before you hit "post," read what you're saying. Then remove your foot from your mouth and read what you're saying again. Does it still seem like a good idea? Is it a helpful contribution to the discussion? Is it a nitpick or derailment of the topic?
If the answer is "no," don't post it.
Something I often find myself doing... not posting, when it seemed like a good idea at first.
A step further on this point though, if all your going to do is post the tenth in a sequence of the same criticism, don't. The tenth "this is flawed here" only wounds the ego, doesn't actually provide meaningful input.