Entries from Alternates

[eric kiser]

I did a search and didn't find anything so here goes...

Do we get to see the entries from the alternates. If the answer is 'no' then why not?

Thanks,
Eric

[Vic Wertz]

eric kiser wrote:

I did a search and didn't find anything so here goes...

Do we get to see the entries from the alternates. If the answer is 'no' then why not?

Thanks,
Eric

If they're promoted to a finalist spot, you'll get to see them in their own thread just like anybody else in the Top 32. If they don't, they can post them in the feedback thread if they so choose, just like anybody else not in the Top 32.

There has to be a cutoff somewhere, and that number is 32.

[James Martin]

You know Vic, if the answer was 42, we'd finally know the question...

[eric kiser]

Thanks Vic.

[Mikko Kallio]

As far as I can tell, two alt items have been posted in the feedback thread so far: Whispering Watcher (Mikko Kallio <- that's me) and Smoldering Sack (Mike Kimmel). Hmm, interesting, at least two alliterative alt item names. :D

Anyway, back to designing my archetype... :)

[kwixson]

Speaking of alternates working on their archetypes, I'm having trouble finding the submission tool that I'm supposed to use at http://paizo.com/rpgsuperstar

In the place where I think I should see the submission tool I see "Come back January 25 to view this round's entries and cast your vote! " instead.

How am I supposed to make my submission as an alternate?

[Mikko Kallio]

Actually, I'm having the same problem. I was thinking I might email Ross about it.

[Mikko Kallio]

I emailed Ross Byers about it. I hope they'll get it fixed soon enough...

[Azmahel]

Serpent wrote:

As far as I can tell, two alt items have been posted in the feedback thread so far: Whispering Watcher (Mikko Kallio <- that's me) and Smoldering Sack (Mike Kimmel). Hmm, interesting, at least two alliterative alt item names. :D

Anyway, back to designing my archetype... :)

And both have Initials M.K. Don't let Sebastian see this, or he'll babble about subspace conspiracies all day. ;)

[Mikko Kallio]

Azmahel wrote:

Serpent wrote:

As far as I can tell, two alt items have been posted in the feedback thread so far: Whispering Watcher (Mikko Kallio <- that's me) and Smoldering Sack (Mike Kimmel). Hmm, interesting, at least two alliterative alt item names. :D

Anyway, back to designing my archetype... :)

And both have Initials M.K. Don't let Sebastian see this, or he'll babble about subspace conspiracies all day. ;)

Hahah, also true. Very well, I'll keep it secret from him and his ponies. :D

[Eric Stelle]

James Martin wrote:

You know Vic, if the answer was 42, we'd finally know the question...

I loved that book...

[Ross Byers]

Mikko, Kevin, check your email.

[Mikko Kallio]

Thanks Ross! It works now. =)

[Mike Kimmel]

Serpent wrote:

As far as I can tell, two alt items have been posted in the feedback thread so far: Whispering Watcher (Mikko Kallio <- that's me) and Smoldering Sack (Mike Kimmel). Hmm, interesting, at least two alliterative alt item names. :D

Anyway, back to designing my archetype... :)

Gotta love alliteration. :)

FYI, the submission button looks to be working fine for me.

[kwixson]

So as soon as we see if all the 32 got their submissions in I will post my item in the "Judges please critique my item" thread. Last time I checked, nether of the alts posted there so far had been critiqued, so I started to think that in spite of some indications to the contrary they were holding off on ours anyway. Is that still the case or have you two received feedback from the judges? In any event you'll be looking for an item called Boots of Roots from me.

[Trevor Merback]

James Martin wrote:

You know Vic, if the answer was 42, we'd finally know the question...

*Pours a 40 for Douglas Adams*

[Mikko Kallio]

kwixson wrote:

So as soon as we see if all the 32 got their submissions in I will post my item in the "Judges please critique my item" thread. Last time I checked, nether of the alts posted there so far had been critiqued, so I started to think that in spite of some indications to the contrary they were holding off on ours anyway. Is that still the case or have you two received feedback from the judges? In any event you'll be looking for an item called Boots of Roots from me.

I'm not sure about Mike, but I did indeed receive the judges' comments the other day! I was blown away by the amount of both the positive feedback and constructive criticism they gave me. So, I hope you'll get to see the comments about your item, too, Kevin!

[James Martin]

Trevor Merback wrote:

James Martin wrote:

You know Vic, if the answer was 42, we'd finally know the question...

*Pours a 40 for Douglas Adams*

Amen, brother. So long, and thanks for all the fish.

[Mike Kimmel]

Serpent wrote:

I'm not sure about Mike, but I did indeed receive the judges' comments the other day!

So far I haven't received any comments from the judges, but azmahel did kindly review my item when he did all the page 1 items. :)

[kwixson]

Have we cast identify on the fourth alternate yet? Do we know the link to his profile or the name of hi item yet?

[Mikko Kallio]

kwixson wrote:

Have we cast identify on the fourth alternate yet? Do we know the link to his profile or the name of hi item yet?

As far as I know, he hasn't "established his presence" here. I'm curious to see his wondrous item, too.

I'm also curious to see the alt archetypes, but it's a good idea to wait until voting is closed for round 2, as it is still possible for the Top 32 contestants to earn a DQ. ;-)

[kwixson]

A handy reference for us alternates and those that want to see what makes an item walk up to the verge of being in the top 32 but still come up short of crossing the threshold:

.
.
.

Round 1 Alternates (in announced order)

• Eric Reed - [item unknown]
  
• Kevin Wixson - Boots of Roots | judges' comments
  
• Mike Kimmel - Smoldering Sack | no judges' comments yet
  
• Mikko Kallio - Whispering Watcher | judges' comments
  

Any idea why Mike's item never got its critique?

[Neil Spicer]

kwixson wrote:

Any idea why Mike's item never got its critique?

Probably because we didn't expect alternates to start soliciting advice on the same scale as those who didn't make the Top 32 plus 4 alternates announcement. In year's past, I don't believe they typically posted to that thread right away (if at all -- though I could be wrong). It was my expectation that you'd be emailed your feedback (both for Round One and Round Two), as I recall something similar to that being done in the past. But, in their speed to respond to what was a record year of submissions, I'm guessing Sean and Mark didn't notice a couple of the requests in the feedback thread came from alternates.

By the way, I'll also note that the alternates were posted in alphabetical order (by first name) and not necessarily in the order by which they'd be pulled up if someone fell out of the Top 32 in Round Two. We do have to rank the alternates in the event of that happening.

[kwixson]

Neil Spicer wrote:

In year's past, I don't believe they typically posted to that thread right away (if at all -- though I could be wrong). It was my expectation that you'd be emailed your feedback (both for Round One and Round Two), as I recall something similar to that being done in the past.

I'd been told in email that after round 2 submissions were in that the alts would have their comments revealed, but then Sean said somewhere that alts should post their items in the "Judges, please critique my item" thread with everybody else. So we did.

I think Mike should get his comments posted up so we can link to them for future reference. For future contests, for what it's worth, I put my support behind posting all the alternates' items and judges' comments with links from the master list, once round 2 entries are in. Same for posting the alternates' round 2 entries once the voting for round 2 is over.

I mean, the alts got SO CLOSE. They should get their comments as a consolation prize.

[Mike Kimmel]

kwixson wrote:

Any idea why Mike's item never got its critique?

I'm sure it just got lost in the hugeness that is the judge critique thread. Anyway, I don't mind whatever system Paizo decides to use for alternates. It's a pretty weird place to be, for sure, but I can definitely see that it's also a difficult system for the judges to manage. Even if I don't advance, I'd love to see the feedback on my item and archetype, but I'm not in a hurry. Last round I was hoping to see the feedback on my item before submitting my archetype, in case there was anything about my writing in particular that the judges had comments about, but now that the round 2 submission has come and gone, all that won't matter unless I actually advance.

Neil Spicer wrote:

By the way, I'll also note that the alternates were posted in alphabetical order (by first name) and not necessarily in the order by which they'd be pulled up if someone fell out of the Top 32 in Round Two. We do have to rank the alternates in the event of that happening.

What, you mean you're not just going to roll a d4? :)

[Mikko Kallio]

Neil Spicer wrote:

By the way, I'll also note that the alternates were posted in alphabetical order (by first name) and not necessarily in the order by which they'd be pulled up if someone fell out of the Top 32 in Round Two. We do have to rank the alternates in the event of that happening.

Oh, I thought you had already ranked us when round 1 ended. But choosing the contestant with the best archetype does makes sense, although it may not be "fair" considering that the wondrous item should determine who advances, not the archetype. But none of that will matter unless someone blooped and submitted an archetype that is not an archetype. :D

[Sean McGowan]

Serpent wrote:

Neil Spicer wrote:

By the way, I'll also note that the alternates were posted in alphabetical order (by first name) and not necessarily in the order by which they'd be pulled up if someone fell out of the Top 32 in Round Two. We do have to rank the alternates in the event of that happening.

Oh, I thought you had already ranked us when round 1 ended. But choosing the contestant with the best archetype does makes sense, although it may not be "fair" considering that the wondrous item should determine who advances, not the archetype. But none of that will matter unless someone blooped and submitted an archetype that is not an archetype. :D

What I took Neil's statement as was saying that you four are pre-ranked in event of failure on the part of one of the 32. Just that the way you're listed on the main page is alphabetical, and not an indicator to the public what that ranking might be.

[Mike Kimmel]

Serpent wrote:

Neil Spicer wrote:

By the way, I'll also note that the alternates were posted in alphabetical order (by first name) and not necessarily in the order by which they'd be pulled up if someone fell out of the Top 32 in Round Two. We do have to rank the alternates in the event of that happening.

Oh, I thought you had already ranked us when round 1 ended. But choosing the contestant with the best archetype does makes sense, although it may not be "fair" considering that the wondrous item should determine who advances, not the archetype. But none of that will matter unless someone blooped and submitted an archetype that is not an archetype. :D

I don't think Neil is saying they ranked us based on our archetypes. I think he's just saying that we're ranked, presumably based on our items.

EDIT: What Sean said.

[Mikko Kallio]

Ah yeah, that's probably what he meant.

[Neil Spicer]

Indeed.

And, for Mike:

Spoiler:

1d4 ⇒ 2 ;-)

[Mike Kimmel]

Neil Spicer wrote:

Indeed.

And, for Mike:
** spoiler omitted **

Aw crap, I don't think that's me. :P

[Mikko Kallio]

Mike Kimmel wrote:

Neil Spicer wrote:

Indeed.

And, for Mike:
** spoiler omitted **

Aw crap, I don't think that's me. :P

Shall we also roll a d32? :P

[Neil Spicer]

Serpent wrote:

Shall we also roll a d32? :P

Yes. Sixteen times. For the other guys. ;-P

[Thomas LeBlanc]

Serpent wrote:

Shall we also roll a d32? :P

Where'd ya git one of those? All I gots is me d30 Pumpkin Dice of the Apocalypse Now...

[Mikko Kallio]

Thomas LeBlanc wrote:

Serpent wrote:

Shall we also roll a d32? :P

Where'd ya git one of those? All I gots is me d30 Pumpkin Dice of the Apocalypse Now...

Alas, there are no 32-sided regular polyhedrons... unless we resort to non-Euclidian geometry. I'll wait until the stars are right...

If that made no sense...

Spoiler:

Cthulhu fhtagn! 2d32 SAN damage!