I thought there was a similar thread. I actually thought I posted in it, but I can't find it. I want to know what the voter(not judges, but paizo board members) look for when voting for wondrous items. I will go first
First I will say I know it is hard to compete with Big 6, but I do expect for any items in the top 32 to compete for my gold pieces
1. Would I buy the item?
A. Would I buy it before any of the Big 6?
B. If I had appropriate Big six item for my current level, and had
the gold would I buy the item?
2. How much do I like the fluff?
If an item can't get past "1" then "2" does not matter. I value functionality in an item over fluff in an item I will never use.
PS:"not judges" in no way means I am against the judges voicing their opinions.
PS2:The outline was supposed to have A and B indented.
The public does not vote on Wondrous Items. The selection of the Top 32 has been made. Thee first round in which the public votes will be Round 2: Archetypes.
Then, let us move the conversation there: In interest of generating the best archetypes in round two, here are a list of things that would make it more likely for me to vote for you.
Covering an existing weakness in a class I love it when I can use a class in a new way. A dungeon-delving cavalier? A rogue that can take a hit? The list goes on, but it would be a cool thing to see an archetype geared towards fixing a hole
Descriptive Much like what made the top 32, a little fluff goes a long way. I want to see archetypes that make me envision something cool, not just a change in my numbers.
Some minor changes too Not everything needs to be an overhaul, smaller changes can be cool too. The example archetype's cooking skills is along the lines of what I mean - if you have some words left over, you can add some little things for the times we want to role-play over roll-play.
Anyone else have any suggestions that might help the archetype-writers?
Oops. I agree with Ronar. We can talk about that.
I look for something true to fantasy and the best ones are unique. Lots of books and movies have had a martial artist from exotic lands. There is only one Bruce Lee. Lots of books have wizened, bearded wizards. There is only one wizard in the Chicago Yellow Pages. There will be lots of wizards in other cities soon. So if I can relate your archetype to a book or movie or familiar fantasy setting, you have created an archetype. If you happen to be the first to create something new you will also get my votes :) I hope that helps and I am looking forward to seeing them all :)
Covering an existing weakness in a class I love it when I can use a class in a new way. A dungeon-delving cavalier? A rogue that can take a hit? The list goes on, but it would be a cool thing to see an archetype geared towards fixing a hole
This is an excellent thought, one that would definitely help me in brainstorming and thinking mechanics.
However, that said, I am a huge story buff. Definite thespian. Everything in roleplaying to me is about the story. The numbers are just a means to and end. I am happiest when my character faces and overcomes his inner demons and the ghosts of his past while the GM throws terrible setbacks and tragedy his way. I often envision entire backstories and personalities based on a piece of artwork alone.
What I am trying to say is that to please me, and those who might be like me, make sure that the abilities and fluff of your archetype work together to create a theme rife with interesting character potential. I could care less about a capstone ability to rattle the heavens if that is all the archetype is. Make the archetype explore a cool character concept, not a set of mechanics, and I'm yours.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
+1 to Correlon - character potential is a huge thing for me as well.
Here's something I found very useful in distinguishing archetypes from prestige classes. A lot of archetypes portray concepts that you can already play with the core classes. If you want a spy character or a pickpocket character, you'd have chosen a rogue even without those archetypes; if you want a druid native to a specific area, or a bard who's a researcher and a librarian, you could do that without archetypes too. It just wasn't particularly reflected in the mechanics, save in your own choices of skills and feats etc.
So you can take a concept like that - something you already can do - and then figure out how to tweak the class to reflect that concept, to focus on it, to give it mechanical representation.
What I found very helpful here is that I could stop thinking about archetypes, and start thinking about cool characters. Hope that's helpful to some :)
Cash bribes.
Barring that, flavour: Sure, the mechanics should be no better or worse than the original class, but the description need to make me excited by the archetype, and at least for me, this is not something mechanics do very often.
I shouldn't be posting at present (self-imposed exile this year to avoid another lecture from Urizen at least when it comes to serious posts... ;) ), but this isn't technically about round 2-5, so I can leave my cage for a bit...
The threads I've seen referring to things along the themes thus far of 'what are the voters looking for?' are as follows:
‘What makes a great wondrous item?’
‘A call to villainy – aka Round 3’
‘Round 5: What’s a Good Hook?’
I hope that's helpful.
*points at his lists*
There might be some things in there for you to consider
Would I keep the item after acquiring it on an adventure and possibly enjoying using it for that adventure before trading it for gold or another item with more utility at basically half the item market price?
Would I want the item enough to have someone in the party craft it or purchase the item using suggested default wealth by level guidelines? Look at comparably priced items.
IMO most of the fluff regarding items is associated with the item because of the adventures around the item as it was acquired by the party which occassionally has something to do with it's history in the campaign.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32
|
I shouldn't be posting at present (self-imposed exile this year to avoid another lecture from Urizen at least when it comes to serious posts... ;) ), but this isn't technically about round 2-5, so I can leave my cage for a bit...
Too bad about the exile. I know I valued your comments last year, and I thought they added to the contest both previous years I well.