|
Lesson Learned: Don't Fall In Love With Your Item
This is a balance thing, because you want to create something you can get excited about, but don't let it blind you.
My item was a SIAC, but I liked my mental image of it so much that I kept saying to myself, "But it's such a COOL Spell in a Can! They'll have to love it!"
*snip brilliant and helpful commentary*Make it AWESOME then make it perfect.
Nice. That quote is definitely going on a post-it on my workdesk somewhere.
I don't expect to see judge feedback until the top 32 archetypes are through, but after reading those 10 pages of critique and items up so far, I'm now mostly curious whether the judges bothered to note ALL my mistakes.
Glove of the Crustacean
Aura moderate transmutation; CL 7th
Slot hands; Price 23.500 gp; Weight -.
Description
This single rust-red leather glove is reinforced with chitin, encrusted with barnacles, and smells of the sea. While worn, it provides water breathing for up to 14 hours per day, which need not be contiguous.
Once per day as a standard action, the glove may transform the wearer’s arm into a monstrous crustacean pincer for up to 10 rounds, bestowing a +2 natural armor bonus. The pincer allows the wearer one natural attack per round at his full base attack bonus, using the pincer’s Strength of 25 regardless of his own. It causes 1d8 points of damage, and may grab medium or smaller creatures as the monstrous ability.
If the pincer successfully grapples a foe, the wearer may choose to detach himself from it as a swift action. He may then act normally with both hands while the pincer continues to grapple and cause damage using the same CMB (but at a -20 penalty), with a CMD based on Dexterity 10. The pincer has 50 hit points and AC 20 when detached.
The pincer cannot manipulate objects beyond simply holding them, and does not increase lifting or carrying capacity. The wearer may use his other hand freely. When the duration ends, or if the detached pincer is escaped or destroyed, the glove unerringly reappears on the wearer’s hand.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, barkskin, water breathing, summon nature’s ally IV; Cost 11.750 gp
Aaaand the personal harsh critique:
Boring item name. Monster-in-a-can. Rules violations, should have made damage and grab size dependent. Seriously, 50 hit points?? Do kraken tentacles have that much? No mojo, just a chuul claw on a pc. Yawn.
Next year, things will be different. I have set up a few personal Rules of Cool:
1. Make bloody sure that a segment of, if not all, players will DROOL over this item.
2. Build within the rules envelope, but use them in new ways, explore underdeveloped concepts, play with the class features.
3. Make sure your item does not do something that other items/feats/class abilities/spells do better or cheaper, no matter how cool you wrap it up.
4. Read up on your mechanics. Then read up on how similar stuff works. Never assume you know. A cool idea botched by poor mechanics is just a shame for a whole 'nother year.
5. Don't allow your flavor to cloud your clarity of presentation. If done right, your flavor is obvious throughout with hardly a mention beyond the first one or two lines of descriptive (never backstory) text.
6. It is possible to harvest extra attention and/or kudos for playing with newly published rules, and to a lesser extent for Golarion tie-ins, but only as topping.
Just out of curiosity Ryan, what did you think of my item "Eyes of the Past"?I didn't comment on it because it had already been rejected by the time I read it.
The item let's the wearer see the past. That's an auto-reject in my book because:
It adds too much work to the GM. Most of the time this work has no value - thus the worst of all possible worlds except...
It makes adventuring easy. Every once in a while you'll see something that utterly removes the challenge or point of a scenario. That's the absolute worst thing that can happen.
It's obvious. Looking back in time is not an original idea and you can be sure there have been other such submissions and will likely be such submissions in the present contest. The item isn't superstar because at it's core it's not unique, interesting or creative.
There were errors with presentation but that didn't matter in this case.
Thank you, that was a great help!
My main concern was that it did make GMing harder, but I didnt think a simple "flashback" type of item was that much of an issue. oh well, I now know to listen to that voice that said "no, work on and submit the other one"......lolI, for some reason, tried to go with a simple concept rather than a complex one. I should have entered my
I should also mention that in my original write-up I had writen that the user could only see what happened and not hear, interact with or change what they saw, but I edit that out as well to stay within the word count limit.
Ive come to realize I really need to work on my editing skills as I seem to edit out the info thats actually needed and end up keeping the crap thats not and "assume that what Im trying to get across is obvious" when its not. Im a dumb a*# and I know it....lol
It would not be a bad rule of thumb to excise anything that makes GMs do anything. Other than adjudicate while in use, an item that requires GM involvement is very likely to get auto rejected.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32
|
I haven't gotten any official judges' feedback on my item yet, but I've learned a lot from the gracious community members who have commented so far.
I've also picked up a few things I might have done wrong by reading the judges' comments.
My item may have been too niche. It's a bad-guy item. A bad-guy item for followers of Asmodeus. And only followers of Asmodeus. That hinders only the holy symbols of deities that aren't named Asmodeus. So just a tad specific. I liked the niche of it, but that coulda sunk my battleship.
It's kind of brutal. Almost 1st edition brutal. Maybe too brutal. Maybe broken. It's really mean to the poor clerics. Rogues are used to getting shut down, as are the poor illusionists/enchanters, but divine casters can usually skate through any encounter. And this item isn't just brutal, it's nasty. You think you solved it, and it comes back.
I also might not have answered every question. I know I should have mentioned how to turn the thing back on after it was suppressed. I assumed that you'd just follow the rules as normal for the means that suppresses it, but spelling it out would have helped. The thing is my item last year had the same problem. I never said how you'd get the darned squid back in the bottle. So next year I've gotta think about clean up. If it can get shut down, how does it turn back on?
It also probably didn't help that I made a candle. So that dropped me squarely in the middle of one of the meme categories this year. Also my item was named after a certain plane in Hell that got a lot of love this year: I've counted a couple "stygian" or "styx" items so far.
But I dunno. I don't want to learn the lesson "don't take risks" because I need to take a swing if I'm gonna compete. And I'd rather fall hard, on my face, than water down something I think is a good idea. The goal is to better know what is really a good idea, and what is a lousy idea. And I'm still struggling with that. Because with everything I've learned so far, my item still seems on-par with my item last year. Both had problems with mechanics. Both were (in my opinion) cool and interesting and flavorful. Maybe my squidship wouldn't have made it this year.
Suffice to say, I haven't learned every lesson yet. I still have a lot more to learn, but I plan to take the things I did learn this year, and apply them in future designs.
I have some questions about selecting spells in the construction requirements for items. A lot of comments from the judges (especially Mr. Spicer) were on the appropriateness (or inappropriateness) of the chosen spells - my own item also got some of this critique.
For some items, judges were looking at an item and suggesting one or two extra spells for requirements, sometimes a lot more than two. Is it a sign that if you need six or seven requirement spells, your item is perhaps a bit too complicated?
Also, what about having an item clearly aimed at a cleric, but it's wizard spells that make the most sense for what it does - is that too jarring a contradiction? What about items that require spells from different lists?
Is it a sign that if you need six or seven requirement spells, your item is perhaps a bit too complicated?
Typically? Yes. Look through the Pathfinder Core Rulebook and see how many items you find that have six or seven spells in the construction requirements. That should answer your question. And, you should also do this as your homework assignment. I'll expect it on my desk first thing tomorrow morning. ;-)
Also, what about having an item clearly aimed at a cleric, but it's wizard spells that make the most sense for what it does - is that too jarring a contradiction? What about items that require spells from different lists?
If an item requires spells from two different class spell lists, that usually means it's constructed in cooperation between those two classes. A cleric and a bard. A cleric and a wizard/sorcerer. A druid and a wizard/sorcerer. And so on. However, another way to explain the effect is to use the miracle or wish spells instead of the base spells you'd normally expect to associate with it. At least that way you've got an explanation of how a single caster was able to craft it. But rely on miracle and wish very sparingly. They carry their own immediate cost factor because of the diamond dust involved. And, you can't go through the wondrous item list and find all that many that require those spells.
Hope that helps,
--Neil
Reviewing 32 items is very, very, easy when you focus on the truly important things. Like how pretty the item is? Or if it's any help with keeping a paladin house pet? And I'd be highly flattered if the judges adopt my criteria (and the Gollum rating) for assessing items next year...
I need more feedback.
They carry their own immediate cost factor because of the diamond dust involved. And, you can't go through the wondrous item list and find all that many that require those spells.
Hope that helps,
--Neil
While I agree with your points completely just as an fyi sort of deal I would like to point out that most miracles do not require expensive components any more. I just as point out the thought that miracle and high caster level items that would require it should probably be rather rare.
It takes a great deal of fortitude and dedication (and probably caffeine) for the judges to go through hundreds of submissions every year. It took me four days to go through 32. :P
One should never submit an item before it's ready due to the fear that it's "now or never" regardless of the reason for that perception. I did, and it cost a great deal in the clarity/agreement of the rules on my item.
Related to the above, don't not submit an item due to fear that you may not make it, lack experience, etc, etc. All of us in the Top 32 had valid reasons to think we wouldn't be picked, and we were. If nothing else, the feedback you get can only make your future designs stronger.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
,
Star Voter Season 6
|
Like Marie, it took me a while to get through the 32 items.
I think her advice is sound. Don't send too early. Send a final manuscript not a rough draft. Being a final manuscript very likely means the work will still have issues, as an editor/judge hasn't critiqued it yet. But if the manuscript seems solid and polished to the writer than it can be sent.
And I completely agree, don't not submit due to fear. Pathfinder players are a creative and intelligent bunch. Go for it.
So, to the incredible sound of Neil "98 cents" Spicer going through wondrous item entries in the critique thread at 1½ answers per minute in the background, I decided to revisit this thread before going back for more: my feedback is in! Rather than comment in-depth there, I decided to do it here.
*...I don't really like this one all that much. The extra attack thing feels half-written. I'd have appreciated some analysis around two-weapon fighting involving the claw.
D'oh! Direct hit. It WAS half-baked. I simply didn't want to, or know how to, deal with the two-weapon fighting aspect I myself had opened up for.
*...I don't see how it would instantly give you a +2 bonus to natural armor. It's not like your opponents are always just going to target that arm. If they wanted to interpret it as a shield bonus or something, I might have gone along with that.
Double d'oh! I saw this coming, but felt that a shield bonus would somehow go poorly with also making the arm a weapon, forcing the wearer to choose how to use it each round. Perhaps that had been smarter. This was a cop-out.
*...I really don't like the "once I've latched on, I can release my arm and have two hands free while the pincer keeps you pinned" ability. I imagine they felt this was innovative. It comes off more munchkin to me.
Ooooh that smarts. Yes, this was indeed my one "innovative" thing. Touché.
*...This also appears to be one of our international friends with the "." instead of "," in the numerical price and cost values. They need to break that habit if they're going to write for Paizo.
Bingo, I am Danish. And I had never noticed this on my own.
*...Leaning to Reject.
*...Agreed. Reject.
With this, my solidifying ideas of "already seeing" my main flaws have been thoroughly shattered. None of my personal points of critique were even mentioned. That'll teach me. It better, because I now realize just how lazy and half-assed this entry must have seemed.
Interestingly, and in an odd way reassuringly, several points concerned stuff I remember worrying about in the design phase, yet didn't have the chutzpah or knowledge to do right, and I think that insight is important. If something doesn't feel right, then you don't know enough. Go research until you do, or find another way. This is doubly so for round 2 I think, and shows in the incredible variety of quality and design choices in both the top 32 and unofficial entries, my own included.
As with so many other contests looking for "talent", RPGSS is really looking for designers who are willing and able to do the hard work that constitutes 90% of turning great ideas (the 10%) into superstar material. It is amazing how easy it is to forget this, even as one laughs at the hopeless cases in American Idol for thinking they ever stood a chance. You cannot sing like a superstar if you don't take the lessons and work the talent. You cannot design like a pro if you simply assume you know how instead of writing and failing your heart out until you actually do. /rant
Grab that opportunity to learn folks. And to quote a personal idol of mine, "Write with joy - you can do this." (Holly Lisle).
|
I learned that I wish there was a comprehensive Paizo/PFRPG style guide for contestants to reference. A lot of people got dinged for style violations (not italicizing spell names, not capitalizing skill names, etc.) While I would understand a past RPGSS contestant saying of such requests that contestants must be willing to do their homework, and I would agree in principal, I still don't think that this particular kind of homework is the best use of time. A place like Paizo certainly has to have a style manual on hand. A lot of time could be saved, and the quality of submissions improved (allowing us to focus on just following the style rules instead of trying to divine them in the first place) if they would just lay that on the table at the outset.
I learned that I wish there was a comprehensive Paizo/PFRPG style guide for contestants to reference. A lot of people got dinged for style violations (not italicizing spell names, not capitalizing skill names, etc.) While I would understand a past RPGSS contestant saying of such requests that contestants must be willing to do their homework, and I would agree in principal, I still don't think that this particular kind of homework is the best use of time. A place like Paizo certainly has to have a style manual on hand. A lot of time could be saved, and the quality of submissions improved (allowing us to focus on just following the style rules instead of trying to divine them in the first place) if they would just lay that on the table at the outset.
You were supposed to use the format they provided without adding to or taking away. They also posted a list of dont's.
They use The Chicago Manual of Style for almost all purposes. Regarding proper format all you have to do is look at existing precedent in the books. Whenever I use any game terms, particularly; class names, skill names, item names, abilities, actions, basically anything found in the common terms, I make sure to double check in my books or the srd to see how it was presented. It only takes a moment and is worth the impact to get it right. Someone who wants to win the RPG Superstar should be familiar with the game, showing you can find the correct formatting to use from existing published works is good initiative to help prove your familiarity. There is a wealth of information in these books and this applies to every round of the Superstar.
Contributor
,
Dedicated Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9
|
I wanted to comment on Neil's post about what makes an item Superstar.
#1 for me was "is this an item that would see regular use in a large number of games".
#2 for me was "is this item mechanically sound".
#3 for me was "is this a "something in a can".
This is interesting - the reason I submitted the item I did was that my other items were too "niche". My item addressed one of the problems my characters have always had - detecting invisible creatures at low levels. So I thought it's something that will be useful for most adventuring groups, but it's not too good to make it a no-brainer.
#2 and #3 were also among my design goals. I guess where I fell short was that the item wasn't terribly exciting. It's hard to make exciting and mechanically sound low-level items, but "strong mojo" shall be one of my main design goals next year, without forgetting #1, #2 and #3.
|
Contributor
,
Dedicated Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9
|
I learned that I wish there was a comprehensive Paizo/PFRPG style guide for contestants to reference. A lot of people got dinged for style violations (not italicizing spell names, not capitalizing skill names, etc.) While I would understand a past RPGSS contestant saying of such requests that contestants must be willing to do their homework, and I would agree in principal, I still don't think that this particular kind of homework is the best use of time. A place like Paizo certainly has to have a style manual on hand. A lot of time could be saved, and the quality of submissions improved (allowing us to focus on just following the style rules instead of trying to divine them in the first place) if they would just lay that on the table at the outset.
I spent a lot of time studying the template, and the wondrous items in the Core rulebook. I actually thought about compiling a checklist for formatting a wondrous item.
I spent a lot of time studying the template, and the wondrous items in the Core rulebook. I actually thought about compiling a checklist for formatting a wondrous item.
I'm personally just saving the templates they put up as often as possible. Magic item template, archetype template, character template, etc. That way when doing something not explicitly for them I still can do it right 'by the numbers' so to speak.
After all practice, practice, practice!
I learned that I wish there was a comprehensive Paizo/PFRPG style guide for contestants to reference. A lot of people got dinged for style violations (not italicizing spell names, not capitalizing skill names, etc.) While I would understand a past RPGSS contestant saying of such requests that contestants must be willing to do their homework, and I would agree in principal, I still don't think that this particular kind of homework is the best use of time.
We do have a style manual. It is 54 pages long.
I also have an informal-tone document I give to all my freelancers that is 12 pages long.Expecting someone to read either of those for the sake of a contest is silly.
What's not silly is expecting people to actually be familiar enough with the Core Rulebook to see that skill and feat names are always capitalized and spell and magic item names are always italicized. That's just simple observation. If you've read enough of the Wondrous Items section to feel like you have a shot at making a cool item that'll get you to Round 2, I hope that you'll have noticed that spell and magic items names are always written like this and skill and feat names are always written Like This.
Of course, we're always going to have people who don't follow the rules, even simple rules like following the magic item template we provide as part of the contest rules. So it's not going to matter whether we give them 1 page of instructions or 50 pages of instructions, some people are going to "get it," and some aren't. That's life.
Chief Technical Officer
|
We do have a style manual. It is 54 pages long.
I also have an informal-tone document I give to all my freelancers that is 12 pages long.
And that 54-pager mainly just covers specific house elements—it's used in addition to (not as a replacement for) the Chicago Manual of Style.
32 entries with walls of crunch make for hard reading, even if you're ignoring a lot of the crunch.
Although I admit the scarcity of what I would consider any real details pertaining to some of the archetypes required me to formulate opinions from nearly nothing.
<retires to boudoir>
No, it's not pretty and it make scare people. It introduces complex and difficult topics like "sort topics alphabetically unless there is a good reason to do otherwise" and "spell-check your manuscript before you hand it in."
No, it's not pretty and it make scare people.
OK, now I really want to see it. I guess I'll just have to come up with an excellent PFS scenario.
|
Creative Director
|
The style guide is very much only for internal use. We already give away our rules for free. Please let us keep SOME of our mojo for ourselves!
And as Sean says, it's 54 pages of what basically amounts to a dense wall of text. It's not something that many folks would find interesting, and it'd probably cause more weird pointless arguments than it would solve, nor is it something we want to invite public feedback on.
You don't go to a fancy restaurant and ask the chef for his recipe book, the blueprints to his restaurant, his personal address book, and the list of where and how he organizes his pots and pans. You don't need to see that stuff. And asking over and over to see it is, honestly, a little creepy. :-)
EDIT: Folks who are curious as to what a style guide is should check out Wikipedia.
A style guide is NOT a "secret stash of unpublished rules and flavor content."
No, it's not pretty and it make scare people. It introduces complex and difficult topics like "sort topics alphabetically unless there is a good reason to do otherwise" and "spell-check your manuscript before you hand it in."
Don't forget that whole "you better meet your deadline or I'll stab you in the face with a salad fork" bit.
Ironically that worked like a charm with me. You were speaking a language I understood!
;)
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
,
Champion Voter Season 6, Champion Voter Season 7, Champion Voter Season 8, Champion Voter Season 9
|
And asking over and over to see it is, honestly, a little creepy. :-)
Yeah, "No means no." At least that is what we are told in our quarterly semi-annual sexual harassment training at work.
No, it's not pretty and it make scare people.
Me am writer, he have words.
Here's what I've taken away from reading wondrous item feedback:
1) Avoiding auto-reject categories and template errors is necessary, but not sufficient; most people will get this right. You need to get it right also to avoid handicapping yourself a great deal for no good reason.
2) A good name is important. Avoiding alliteration or naming the item for a character the judges won't be familiar with is part of that.
3) Avoid trying to design a "staple" item. Some of us are enamored with items like boots of speed, strand of prayer beads, gloves of the duelist and the like -- items that, while not necessarily overpowered, are good enough for at least one class that they're very hard to pass up. It's hard to get an item like this just right, and harder still to give it some real style at the same time. Even if someone did, I don't think it would advance. These kind of workhose items just aren't the kind of items that get the nod -- staple for a specific archetype or subset of a single class seems to be about the threshold.
4) Powerwise, less is more. I know there's some disagreement about this but I really feel like an item is more likely to get nuked for being a little too good than for being not quite good enough. That isn't to say you shouldn't aim for "just right" but when in doubt, round down.
5) A long multi-sentence description of what your item looks like is bad, but evocative prose describing what it does goes over much better.
6) The mechanics of your item don't have to be simple, but the basic concept of what it is must be. If you can't describe the gist of the item cleanly in one sentence, your concept is too complicated. Above all else in crafting the description of your item you need to make sure this core concept doesn't get lost of misunderstood. If someone can read your item and isn't able to state this essence of the item back to you in a single sentence, you need to keep working on it.
This was the hardest thing for me in reading the feedback on my item; two different judges had decided it worked in a way that a sentence near the end of the text clearly stated that it didn't. But, ultimately, that's on me -- if 2 out of 2 people don't read it the way I meant it, then that's a serious failure on my part. I realize now I should have led more strongly and clearly with my core concept, and I didn't -- I got bogged down too quickly in the nitty-gritty of the rules. (Not that my submission didn't have other problems -- but this was the most heartbreaking.) If I enter in a future year, I'll be very sure the essence of the idea is clear, concise, and front-and-center.
7) The logic behind why you picked the item creation requirements that you did should be apparent to someone who isn't you. If it's not, your item concept may be too complicated or your choice of requirements may be bad.
8) Anything you can get done early, you should; as much as is possible, the actual time of the round should be for polishing further, not creating. You never know when some life event you absolutely can't put aside will eat up one or more of those three days. (It did for me in round 2 this year; if I had made it that far, I'd have been in big trouble.)
9) It's good to write an item that people will think it great; it's better to write an item that will make people curious about what you'd write for future rounds. The latter has a real chance to save you if you stumble in one round.
No, it's not pretty and it make scare people.Me am writer, he have words.
LOL!!!
No, it's not pretty and it make scare people.Me am writer, he have words.
And now we all know that SKR is really Bizarro! ("And then we not am know SKR is really not Bizzaro!?")
(In reality I'm a big SKR fanboy. Loved Ghostwalk!)
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32
|
Be careful about posting a villain item. Not that they'll never ever pick a villain item, but it doesn't help your chances. Along the same lines, don't paint yourself into a corner with a specific narrow niche that doesn't appeal to many players.
Avoid making an item that is too similar to a trap, a hazard, a creature, etc.
I've definitely learned a thing or two about this competition. Being a new comer to this side of the hobby, I must say that the feedback I got on my item, wasn't quite what I was expecting. I would liked to have seen more emphasis on what I did right, instead of solely what I did wrong.
I was initially shocked by the feedback I got, but understand why I got those responses. Now that I know what NOT to do, hopefully I can avoid making the same mistakes next year.
|
Wow.
Looks like my item was way off target. It needed GM intervention, was useful only under specific circumstances and was mechanically unclear.
If I were to mark my submission myself based on this information I reckon it was a C or C-.
Still, it was a great learning experience reading through all the feedback. I know I can do better and I will put the effort in next year to make something more awesome. It may not make the top 32 but if I am satisfied that next years item is better than this year's item then I will be happy.
In the end the only real competition is yourself.