Dragon Bone Whetstone*Interesting. Now this is the way to introduce an item that conveys special weapon properties. Rather than stacking, it temporarily replaces the property that was on the item before. I like what they did here.
*It could be worded better. And, obviously, they don't need the Item Name[/i] tag, so they misinterpreted how to use the template. They could also dispense with the material component in the construction requirements.
*I don't know. If I look beyond the item (and the excitement at seeing someone successfully consider the problems inherent in stacking weapon properties), I'm just not sure if this designer is ready yet. They might deserve a shot. Or at least a visit to the Keep pile before sorting them back out.
*Weak Keep.
*This just does WAY too much and it is so cheap and scales in relation to the weapon.
*Good idea, you are right that this is the way to deal with the weapon enhancement issue, but this designer isnt ready yet.
*Reject.
*The problem here is that the "dragon's breath" is already an "X burst" type of weapon ability. So if you use this on a +3-equivalent weapon, you could turn it into a +1 flaming burst weapon (which gets bonus fire damage on a critical hit), plus it gets the dragon's breath bonus on a critical hit, so it's a doubled, stacking effect.
*Wait, whoah, it's even better because they're talking about the dragon's breath spell, which affects a 30-foot cone or a 60-foot line, every time you crit. Broken broken broken. No-brainer for someone using a crit-heavy weapon like a rapier.
*I like the idea of temporarily transforming magic weapon bonuses. I think this one does it wrong, and is too powerful.
*Reject.
*Rejected.
Cheers Neil, much appreciated mate. I just have a few Q's for you and the other judges roaming this thread about my item and your initial review.
[b]Core Idea/Power (transforming magical properties on weapons): Is this the sort of superstar level of idea and creativity that you're looking for. From other critiques and the pre-competition podcast and threads I often hear/read you're looking for things that step outside or break the rules without destroying game balance. Is this in that ball park?
The knockout reason: From the review by the judges its pretty clear that the main reason for rejection was the Breath Weapon on a critical hit. I wonder what if the item:
* didn't have that part, how would it have faired. Would it have been strong enough without it and if so would dragon's breath still be appropriate requirement (or should it be Greater Magic Weapon in that case)
* alternatively only weapon's with a total modifier of +4 or greater got the Dragon's Breath ability. Is that more balancing since they would be losing that additional ability or high powered ability (Haste/Vorpal).
* or what if the Dragon's Breath ability could be used just once and instantly ended the effect of the Dragon Bone Whetstone on the weapon.
* Obviously (now) the Dragon's Breath bit is too powerful, but is the idea of having the breath weapon add to the theme/appeal or is it just too much and unnecessary?
I must admit I spent most of my time working on the wording for the core power which was the transforming of special abilities to ensure it was clear how it worked. Was this section clear enough or did it take a few reads to get what the item did? After submitting I wondered if it would have been better to limit it to just the one dragon type, say Red Dragon, and transforming to flaming and flaming burst (rather than all the energy types determined by dragon type).
After I submitted it I thought to myself, "why-o-why didn't you make it a claw/tooth instead of bone...". I know its a small thing but would that have made it a stronger submission. Or was it not even a factor when weighing it all up. I didn't see anything in the comments about it, but I wonder if it was something that played on the judges mind or were you all like me and just found the words "bone" and "whetstone" just worked and rolled off the tongue nicely?
And finally what tweaks would you have done with this idea?
Cheers for this.
Apologies for lack of hidden parts...I don't have the tag skills for that.
Also to Clark regarding the bluntness of some of the feedback....its all good. I'm asking for another wack so its obviously not that harsh.
Pipe of Gravitas
...It's my first go at RPG Superstar; feedback from any and all would be welcome!
Your wish is my command ;)
First, your item makes good use of the template.
Second, you visualize your item well but you are a bit long on the fluff and the title doesn't seem to be connected to age (I expected a pipe that makes things heavier or lighter).
Third, your item implies that age is somehow connected to pipes and smoking. This is a bit of a problem.
Fourth, your description is unclear about what boni do more than venerable characters receive.
Finally, one hour a day this item is a Headband of Mental Superiority +1 which is a problem because players usually avoid giving their characters ability scores that are uneven because it is a waste of points. So your item does basically nothing except letting someone look older.
Where is the superstar here?
By the way, you guys are getting it pretty raw this year.
I read somewhere that "I want an editor to be kind towards me and ruthless towards my words". It seems to me that's what you guys are doing here, and that's alright with me. You show us the mindset of someone professionally going through a huge slushpile (in this case, a pile of items) trying to quickly assess what is worth further consideration and what is not, so giving us this kind of insight is realistic. A little bluntness is good to grow some thick skin and humility; the first step to improvement is a acknowledging you're not quite there yet, and sometimes too many kind words can lead to rationalization ("well, it wasn't THAT bad..."). If it was THAT bad, I want to be called out on it so I can face it. Like Neil keeps saying, even if your own item didn't get an in-depth critique, there's still a lot o feedback material here to help you become a better game designer.
Star Voter Season 6, Dedicated Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 9
|
By the way, you guys are getting it pretty raw this year. I hope that is ok with everyone. If you have follow up questions, let us know.
I'm trying to give you "what to take away from this" comments on certain items--not all of them, but on ones that I think make for good examples of things we saw and advice that might help multiple people.
That is what we need to hear. Thank you and thank you Neil.
|
|
Time to hear the brutality. I'd love to hear the critique.
Bonds of Eternal Love
Aura faint divination, abjuration and necromancy; CL 3rd
Slot chest; Price 10,000 gp; Weight –
DESCRIPTION
These come as a pair of metal plates, each about four inches in diameter and containing a small hatched crystal window. Each plate is attached to its own slender harness with an elaborate locking mechanism. To use the bonds, two people must agree to become partners. Donning the bonds takes two full rounds by both partners and requires the partners not to wear armor. The plates are positioned over the partners’ hearts and then locked in place using a method that required both partners to lock both harnesses. The bonds fit comfortably under clothing and armor, once worn. In each window, the partners must place a small cherished memento, or a lock of hair, or something of value that represents the connection they share. Once the mementos are so ensconced, the bonds act to entwine the souls of the partners into a cohesive whole. Both partners can sense each other’s condition as if both were under the effect of a status spell. Furthermore, if the wearer becomes subject to a penalty-causing condition detectable through the status spell, his partner may choose to remove the condition from the wearer by suffering the condition herself as an immediate action at any range as long as both partners are on the same plane of existence and she is not presently suffering from the same condition. Finally, should one partner be killed, the living partner can use the bond as a part of her partner’s body for purposes of a resurrection spell, as long as she lives and wears the remaining bond.
CONSTRUCTION
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, status, shield other, gentle repose; Cost 5,000 gp
Looking forward to the judges' feedback, and would like to thank them for all their time and effort!
Bracers of Impact
Aura moderate abjuration and transmutation; CL 9th
Slot wrists; Price 8,000 gp; Weight 1 lb.
Description
These items often appear as arm guards made of quartz crystal or leaded glass. They can diffuse the force of incoming attacks, transforming potentially lethal strikes into push effects.
When struck by an attack the wearer may activate the bracers as an immediate action before damage is determined. Activating the bracers bestows upon the wearer DR 20/— against the attack, or damage reduction in an amount equal to the remaining damage limit of the bracers, whichever is lower (see below). For every 5 points of damage the bracers prevent, they push the wearer 5 feet directly away from the attacker; this movement does not provoke attacks of opportunity. If this movement is blocked due to a solid object or creature, the wearer stops in the last unoccupied square she passed through and the bracers prevent only 5 points of damage for every square of movement used. If the push effect does not meet the movement cost for a square, such as in the case of diagonal movement or difficult terrain, the full damage is prevented but she stops in the last square for which the movement cost has been met.
The bracers of impact may prevent 100 points of damage before they shatter and become useless. Their condition visibly deteriorates when used, the common crystal versions displaying an expanding spider web of chips and cracks as they near their breaking point.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, stoneskin, telekinesis; Cost 4,000 gp
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay. Time out. We're going to have to reset expectations for everyone in this thread. Again.
...As it is your comentary offers no real feedback. Not something that would encourage someone to participate in RPGSS2013.
That's because the commentary I posted for your item, Diego, isn't meant to be feedback. Not yet. Or, at least, not the type of feedback you (and many others) imagined would show up this early into the game. Instead, what I'm giving you here is just something to lend insight into how the judges discussed your item. That's all. And there's a big difference between that and the more elaborate critique you expect...and maybe even deserve.
I've mentioned this difference multiple times in this very thread already, including the fact that Clark is here to give you further context around the judges' commentary. But, it takes him a lot more time to do those item by item than it does for me to copy/paste from the judges' forums the raw discussion of your item. Last year, Sean and Mark started out doing the copy/paste stuff for everyone and I was the guy doing the deep dive analysis to round out the context of everyones' item discussion. Even so, I never made it through all of them. Just like Clark won't be able to this go-around either. And, just like Clark never could in his prior "Critique My Item" threads...
Look, I've already said (again, in this very thread) that I'll circle back to do some of the deeper dive analysis like I did last year, too. Hopefully, that means we'll be able to do more of them, because both Clark and I will be at it. Additionally, with Sean offering something very similar to those who made the Keep pile, that frees Clark and I to concentrate on everyone else here in this thread. But that level of critique takes a lot more time. In fact, there's such a crush of people wanting feedback right now...any kind of feedback...that it's impossible for me or Clark or any of the judges to give everyone what they want right now. But, you know what? We're going to try...
In the meantime, we're doing what we can to at least give everyone a quick glimpse into how their item fared aside from just knowing it missed the Top 32. That much, I can do fairly quickly. I'm probably at least halfway done here. But, because I'm leading with that, many of you are getting the wrong impression and becoming way too disheartened. That's because, as Clark said, we're giving it to you pretty raw. I'm of the belief that you should be able to handle it pretty raw. If you don't have the thick skin to take this kind of medicine and understand that maybe it didn't take the judges all that long to simply Reject your item, then you may not be cut out for the real-world critiques that'll come your way as a freelancer, both from your actual developer as well as those who buy and critique your stuff.
This thread...and the experience you get in it...goes a long way towards educating people, not simply on what the judges like, didn't like, or didn't even bother to discuss about your item before they rejected it...but also what it's like to take a hit to the ego and what you'll need to summon up within yourself to bounce back from it. Those who can endure this level of raw commentary...as opposed to only waiting around for the saccharin-sweet, baby glove treatment of a line-by-line critique and workshop of their item submission...will be the ones who persevere, not only in making the Top 32 in a future competition, but also in an actual career as a freelancer.
...I am extremely disappointed....To call this thread anything with the word "critique" in it is a joke. I have been provided with absolutely NOTHING to work with. If this thread was called "judge's commentary" I would understand (maybe)....I have been told the item is poorly crafted and the only point pointed out by the judges is invalid. What gives?
What "gives" is exactly what I've tried to convey from the moment I started posting these discussions from the judges' chambers. This period between the announcement of the Top 32 and the submission of their Round 2 entries is fairly brief. However, in that brief time, everyone who missed the cut wants to know why their item didn't make it. And they want to know right away. That obviously includes you. And you know what? It included me back in 2008 when I missed the cut, too. So I know exactly how you feel.
That said, the judges don't even open this thread for people to ask for feedback until at least a day from the official announcement of Top 32. That's so we can make sure they receive the honor they deserve. As a result, that means I've basically got from Wednesday evening until Friday evening (just 2 days!) to try and answer as many folks in this "Critique" thread as I can. That's because, after Friday evening, all the Round 2 submissions come pouring in and I have to go back into the judges' chambers to bang out 34 critiques of everyone's 400-word organizations. I have just Friday night, Saturday, Sunday, and most of Monday to do that.
Let's say I get conservative (yeah, right) and just write a 400-word critique for each of the competitors. Let's do the math. That's 400 x 34 = 13,600 words in a little less than 4 days. Given that, there's no way I'll be back here in the "Critique" thread until sometime after I turn everything over to the tech team to post the Round 2 commentary for the actual competitors. That'll probably be on Tuesday.
So, knowing that, I'm trying to use these first couple of days in the "Critique" thread to quickly give you at least something that'll provide insight into why your item didn't make the Top 32. It's not always going to be pretty. And it's not always going to be fully clear or even definitive. We move very quickly when we sort the items into the Keep and Reject folders. We don't have time to treat each of these submissions like a beautiful snowflake. Not yet. But you were here last year, Diego. You saw the "Critique" thread and how we conducted it. I even gave you feedback on your previoius item, as I recall. So, you know Clark or I will get around to a higher level of critique eventually. You just have to be patient.
Apparently, however, there are also a lot of folks here who are new to the contest who don't understand what we're doing right now...and why. First, a lot of them assume we take time out to discuss their item for days on end in the judging chambers before we all agree to Reject it. I can assure everyone right now, we don't. Many also think we go through each submission line-by-line to pick out every single detail that might be wrong about it and then type all that up in our discussion forum to eventually share with folks who request feedback. But we don't do that either. Quite frankly, we don't have time. Personally, I tried to go that extra mile this year. That's why I've got some kind of additional commentary on every item that came through the submission folder. Sometimes, my commentary got rushed. Sometimes I missed something here or there in your submissions. All the judges do. But the stuff we miss is never the sole reason we overlooked your item.
Instead, we operate exactly as I've outlined above. And, when you see us make a 2-line snippet (accurate or not) and then a series of "Reject"..."Agreed, Reject"..."Rejected" comments, quite often, that's all it took for us to do our job in sorting your item. And sometimes, there are plenty of reasons behind those "Reject" comments from each judge that we just don't have the time to elaborate on. That's where Clark is going to help you in this thread. He's touching on the items here and explaining what that very sparse commentary meant in the judges' forum by going back and taking a look at your item with a mind towards critiquing it rather than just sorting it. It made sense for Clark to do the honors on this, because this whole tradition of the "Critique" thread was his brainchild all along. I'll help out where I can, but only after I finish giving everyone at least some sense of why they didn't make it.
So, people need to get that very clear in their heads. The fast commentary I'm laying down here isn't a critique of your item yet. It's very much as you described, Diego. It's the judges' commentary or discussion while they sorted your item. We're giving you that here, because this is the place where people can indicate they want feedback about their item. The fastest portion of feedback we can give you during this initial crush is the judges' discussion of your item. In the past, we never gave you this level of insight. Instead, Clark would try and wade through hundreds upon hundreds of requests in these "Critique" threads and he'd burn out. He'd never even make it through half of them...which means, many people posted here and never got any feedback at all. Instead, they were left to their own devices to glean whatever insight they could from everyone else's critique so they could apply those universal lessons to their own future designs...or, realize how their item fell into the same pitfall.
Last year, we did something completely unprecedented. Well, two things, actually. First, everyone who posted in the "Critique" thread at the very least got to see the judges' discussion of their item. We sanitized some of the commentary where we worried it wouldn't be perceived as especially supportive or encouraging to folks. But, in many instances, we left some of that in for a little bit of added entertainment value. I'm not talking about the judges ridiculing people...or even necessarily ranting about some item's shortcoming. I'm talking about Clark's Dokken reference and stuff like that.
Regardless, last year everybody who asked got something from this thread. It wasn't always the workshop level of critique and feedback they wanted. But it was something. Because I've gone through this contest before, I knew the judges' commentary from the sorting process wouldn't be enough for everyone. And, especially with Clark sitting out last year, I figured there probably wouldn't be anyone in the "Critique" thread to provide an interpretation of the judges' commentary. That's why I took on doing those deep dive critiques last year. I tried to fill in for Clark on rounding everything out for people. But even then, it's just impossible to get around to everyone. It takes too long. We burn out. And, quite frankly, a lot of what gets shared becomes repetitive once you start citing the same lesson over and over. Once I hit that point, I stopped. Just like Clark did in every year when he tried to help folks in the "Critique" threads. You pretty much have to...and I don't think everyone who posts their item here for feedback understands or appreciates that.
Could you please say why you think this item is "poorly crafted"?
Yes. Eventually. Either Clark will come along and give you a wider analysis of your item...or, once I finish cycling through the commentary from the judges' forum for everyone, I'll try and do so.
In the meantime, however, I'd really like to see folks exhibit some patience and professionalism in this thread. It's like a hit to our morale (as overworked as we are in doing this contest) to have people lash back at us, because their expectations aren't being met. I completely understand why you (and others) have these expectations. And that's why I've tried (unsuccessfully, it seems) to reset them and be as clear as possible in what we're providing here...initially, at least. The judges' discussion is the fastest piece of feedback I can give you. And, it's by no means complete. Or, in your case, it may not even be helpful...yet. But, hopefully, you'll have enough patience and a thick enough skin to wait us out until we can get back to your item for a deeper review and put the judges' comments in context for you.
Okay?
Wow. I've spent half my morning with this explanation. I hope everyone reads this...despite the wall-of-text. I think what I'm trying to convey here is very important for everyone to understand. Maybe Clark or Sean will add their own thoughts here, as well. In the meantime, let's see how many more item discussions I can get posted for everyone. I get the sense they're proving useful for the majority of folks. So, on with the show...
Dedicated Voter Season 6
|
In the meantime, however, I'd really like to see folks exhibit some patience and professionalism in this thread. It's like a hit to our morale (as overworked as we are in doing this contest) to have people lash back at us, because their expectations aren't being met.
I for one will be glad to get the initial commentary. I think I already know how its going to go. If you all can get around to more in depth feedback, that would also be very much appreciated.
I think there is a certain level of entitlement on knowing exactly why an item didn't make it. I for one just appreciate any feedback you might give, and if you don't, I'll just try again next year looking over the feedback you give others and try to apply it to my item a well.
Thanks Neil!
Likewise, I'm thankful for the feedback I already have - and I'm looking forward to the feedback I'll receive in the future. Yes, we all want to be misunderstood, unique snowflakes; but that isn't how this works. This competition is about fun and hopefully we will have our talents discovered in due time.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hey Neil,
I hope the occasional grumble doesn't get to you too badly. I'm sure the "thanks, Neil!" snippets start running together after a while, while the gripes every now and then are immensely frustrating. It's absolutely clear to me that the vast majority of participants - and certainly of everybody whose invested enough in the contest to have read up and involved themselves in the community - have the utmost respect and appreciation for you, for all the judges, and for Paizo.
So once again, thanks for all the work. Thanks for being so insightful, and for making so much effort to share your insights with everybody. It's that effort - and similar efforts by all the judges and by so many of the community members - that makes this contest the amazing, whirlwhind, much-anticipated event that it is.
There'll always be gripes - it's the law of big numbers. Just like there'll always be joke items and over-wordcount entries. They're not stupid or wrong or misguided - they're just the uninformed edge case you get when you've got hundreds of entries.
Tell you what. I'll start compiling frequent gripes. And the responses to them. And next year, instead of writing every time, you can just give 'em a link. If you beat the rest of the community to it, that is :D
Keep up the amazing work. Don't think for a moment it's anything less than incredibly appreciated. All the best!
|
Ah, this year I managed not to misplace my item writeup. Hit me!
And thank you.
Taming Whip
Aura moderate enchantment; CL 8th
Slot —; Price 6,000 gp; Weight 1 lb.
Description
This item is a short whip made of the treated and preserved tail of a male lion, the leader of its pride. Infused with magic, it grants its wielder a measure of the king of beasts' sovereignty over the animal kingdom.
A taming whip grants its user a +5 circumstance bonus to Handle Animal checks when wielded, even if untrained. It allows the user to handle animals as a free action and push them as a move action. A druid or a ranger using the taming whip to handle their animal companion may push it as a free action.
Additionally, the wielder of a taming whip may use it to cast charm animal once per day.
When used to teach an animal tricks or train it for a general purpose, a taming whip halves the time required. While it cannot make rearing an animal go any faster, the wielder of a taming whip may rear as many as six animals of the same kind at once.
To use a taming whip, it must be wielded in one hand. It is far too lightweight to be used as an effective weapon.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, charm animal, speak with animals; Cost 3,000 gp
All the relevant things that everyone should have fgured out
I have not gotten critique yet but still thank you, and I hope I get my initial critique.
As someone that grades for a living, I know how much work is involved. My environmental science exams which I am grading now run about 2400 words each and I have 120 of those, far less than you guys have to deal with. except I only have this weekend to do it.
I was very disappointed I didn't make it, but realistically with my grading deadline, and the biochem research seminar I have, I really don't know how I would have pulled off the organization by today.
I would have by hook or by crook, but it is kind of good I didn't have too. Sleep is good.
Thank you for the work you put in, it is realized.
Neil, I think most of us realize that an actual review is not possible in most cases, and that as judges your intent was not detailed critique but to select the 32 entries that implied the strongest design talent. I'm interested to hear the reasons for the elimination of our entries, but even to cut and paste is a noteworthy amount of effort, so I have no expectation of more than that.
We do appreciate all of your collective effort. It's unfortunate that those who don't speak so loudly.
edit- I'm trying to learn from the comments given to other items, but some of the terminology is new to me. What exactly is a SAK, or a SIAC, for instance?
Any friendly non-judges want to give me their thoughts on my item? It's the murmuring lockpicks of trapped spirits; I really was very pleased with it, and I'd love to hear what others think.
Neil's comments showed some interest, but not enough to carry me through. I'd love to hear more analysis, and whether people like it as a concept.
BTW, I originally though cost/price ratio was correct, and that market price needed the extra 100gp for market price. After seeing (with the rustpicks entry) that the judges called out that consideration specifically as wrong, I checked more deeply and found that wondrous items never include item cost, even for masterwork items. My bad...
|
|
Agreed. In fact, seeing the commentary from everyone else--even when it's not much--has been very helpful in understand what it is you're looking for. There's a lot of subtlety in whether one item makes the cut and another doesn't.
So everyone here giving their commentary, and first and foremost the judges, thank you. This is a real service you're doing not only for RPG Superstar, but the hobby at large.
Neil, I think most of us realize that an actual review is not possible in most cases, and that as judges your intent was not detailed critique but to select the 32 entries that implied the strongest design talent. I'm interested to hear the reasons for the elimination of our entries, but even to cut and paste is a noteworthy amount of effort, so I have no expectation of more than that.
We do appreciate all of your collective effort. It's unfortunate that those who don't speak so loudly.
edit- I'm trying to learn from the comments given to other items, but some of the terminology is new to me. What exactly is a SAK, or a SIAC, for instance?
SAK - Swiss Army Knife
SIAC - Spell in a Can
Star Voter Season 6
|
I highly appreciate everything the judges have been doing with the 'Critique' thread. As a member of the community and one of the 'rejects', I'm disappointed with the backlash that many people are giving towards the judges because they're unable to accept the criticism. Neil is right when he states that it's people's bruised egos and lack of insight into the deeper workings of exactly what it is that the judges (and the Paizo staff) in general have on their plate. I don't know how many times it has to be said, but I'll add to the broken record that the judges don't have to provide this level of feedback at all. They are doing it because they care about us. They communicate with us at this level because they respect us, trust us, and expect, in turn, that we do the same with them.
I appreciate the analogy that the judges have made in regards to our submissions and their 'precious little snowflake' status. The judges will get to it when they can and honestly I could care less if they do or not. Looking over my item, I already see where I went wrong with it. I advise all the people who are getting upset over their reject status that they do the same. Take a step back and go over what you did. I can categorize everyone into two categories if they do. One - you take that look and see what you did wrong, and it turns out the judges noticed the same thing and maybe more. This means you're well on your way to at least being able critique your own item a bit better next time. That's at a minimum. Two - You look and don't see what you did wrong, but the judges do. Guess what? They are the professionals. Let them do their job. If you get upset over that and remain that way, I can honestly say I'd rather you never entered the contest again until you grew out of your own ego.
I will admit that this is my first time entering the contest though I've followed it since I discovered the site almost two years ago during my last deployment. Since then, I know I've grown as a designer and as a person. Most of the people on the site here are good people. The staff are all good people. Let them continue to be. They are trying to show that they listen to us and are willing to communicate with us. When a company ceases to do that, well, I won't go there. Most of you know where that path in the road forks off.
To summarize this, check yourself before you wreck yourself!
But more importantly, thank you to every 'reject' for your participation in this contest. I hope to see everyone who truly wants to grow in their aspirations next year at Superstar 2013. Actually, I hope to continue to see you on the site rather than vanishing for a year only to return for Superstar. I have learned so much from each and every one of you to include the judges and staff of Paizo.
Finally, in closing, congratulations to the Top 32! Fight strong, ladies and gentleman. I look forward to seeing what else you are able to cook up in such short notice. Your abilities continue to grow because of what you've accomplished and only serve to give you incentive to keep at it.
Peace out and rock it yo.
|
Dedicated Voter Season 6
|
In the meantime, however, I'd really like to see folks exhibit some patience and professionalism in this thread. It's like a hit to our morale (as overworked as we are in doing this contest) to have people lash back at us, because their expectations aren't being met.I for one will be glad to get the initial commentary. I think I already know how its going to go. If you all can get around to more in depth feedback, that would also be very much appreciated.
I think there is a certain level of entitlement on knowing exactly why an item didn't make it. I for one just appreciate any feedback you might give, and if you don't, I'll just try again next year looking over the feedback you give others and try to apply it to my item a well.
Thanks Neil!
Neil, one more comment.
See my thread ”I feel like I’m in Bizzaro World and I think you might see where some of the entitlement or backlash is coming from. A lot of this raw commentary that you are posting here (which is much appreciated—please don’t stop) looks very similar to the commentary that was presented with the top 32 items. So I’m sure along with the usual angry, “why did this make it over my item” thoughts, you are now getting that times 100 because folks see the same commentary and wonder, “how did that make it and not mine, the comments are the same.” I think the judge presentation of the top 32 was poorly done and was a mistake to do it the way it was done. Just my two cents.
Capt'n, ask and ye shall receive:
Boots, Battle
Aura ZZfaint ZZevocation; CL 3rd
Slot ZZfeet; Price ZZ5,000 gp (+1), 20,000 gp (+2), 45,000 gp (+3); Weight ZZ2 lbs.
Description
ZZThe wearer of these fine boots gains a luck bonous to both reflex saving throws and armor class as long as he or she has a alignment within one of chaotic good. A wearer whose alignment is chaotic good gains the additional benefit of a reduction in damage done by variable damage dice. ie for each die rolled subtract the luck bonous, minimum 1 per die ( you loose this reduction anytime you are flatfooted). Three times a day a wearer may activate the boots as a free action to use whirlwind attack. A character of neutral alignment who wears these boots in combat niether gains or suffers any bonouses or penalties. If the wearers alignment is lawful neutral they gain no bonous and suffer a increase of one to terrain modifiers above zero, in combat situations. If the wearers alignment is lawful evil. They gain no bonous and suffer the terrain modifer and a reduction to movement by 10 feet in any combat. These boots are not cursed and maybe removed at anytime so long as combat is ended or has not started.
Construction
Requirements ZZCraft Wondrous Item ZZWhirlwind Attack, either the caster or craftsman making the boots must posess the this feat ZZDivine Favor, caster level must be at least 3 times the level of the luck bonous, ZZChaotic Good Alignment; Cost ZZ2,250 gp (+1), 10,000 gp (+2), 22,500 gp (+3)
You also, as the judges pointed out, misspelled "bonus" as "bonous". That's a simple error that is caught by any English spell-checker, so even if you're not a native speaker, that also shows a lack of polish and careful preparation of the finished product. You also misspell, according to my browser's spell-check alone, "niether" (neither), "modifer" (modifier), and "posess" (possess), and mis-capitalize "Alignment" (alignment), include no spells in the creation requirement, differentiate between the crafter and the caster, and your cost isn't exactly half your price (5,000 / 2,250). Any one of these alone could jeopardize your item, and you made eight that I picked out alone.
As to the effect of your item, it is basically a numeric bonus with a variety of effects based on alignment. Which is okay (but not fantastic - superstar items generally don't do flat numeric bonuses), but the writing isn't terribly clear, so it pulls it down.
My recommendation of a first step to get better? Template. Go read the PRD, and the top 32. See how their items are formatted, and write a few practice items like that. We've got a practice thread for next year already up, and I know I'll be hanging around there (as will probably a dozen others) if you want more help.
Finally,
Rasterfragit! You kids get off of my feedback! :-)
So, people need to get that very clear in their heads. The fast commentary I'm laying down here isn't a critique of your item yet.
Emphasis mine.
But the important thing is to read all the item reviews. You'll learn a lot from it. And, if you're lucky and patient, someone like me or Azamhel or, later in the process Neil and/or Clark will give you an in depth review of your item.
So, be patient. The judges didn't review your item when they first got it, they judged it. And for now, they're posting their judgements, which in some cases contain reviews and discussions.
If you ask nicely, and be a little bit more patient, you'll get all the feedback you could ever want.
Bath of Dawn Infusion
*So, your Superstar item idea is a magic bath tub which extends potions for an entire day? Yeah, that's completely borked.
*Vote to Reject.
*This is a plot device/site, not a wondrous item.
*Reject.
*Rejected.
Satchel of the Green Forest
*::frown::
*This one seems kind of niche. For 39,600 gp you get the ability to do plant growth 3 times/day or wall of thorns 1/day or essentially a single feather token (tree) effect every 1d4 days that can deal damage to structures with its growth.
*Who would buy this item? That's a lot of gold to throw down on something that only gives you those specific effects...most of which are just SIAC effects with little innovation to them.
*I can certainly appreciate the designer's attention to detail on using the provided template and reaching for a new spell like grove of respite from the APG (very cool). This clearly isn't a SIAC for that effect, since grove of respite doesn't damage anything. It's just a druid's version of a tiny hut. But, despite all these choices...and the connection to the Green Faith...I'm not feeling the mojo of the overall idea behind this item.
*Weak Reject.
*Your last leaves of the autumn dryad was a neat item because it had several themed powers, but they were all tied to one item. This item creates magical dirt that has various plant-based SIAC powers.
*If I put these three spells in a staff, you'd say, "yeah, I can see someone finding that useful." But staffs aren't exciting... and this is a staff-like wondrous item that likewise isn't exciting. (Yes, I know, staves have charges and this doesn't, but the staff recharge mechanic and this item's recharge mechanic mean you can use them over and over, so same net effect.)
*Reject.
*Rejected.
Witchbinder's Shackles
*Hrrmmm. I don't know about this one. I see where they're going. Is this really a wondrous item? It's very similar to the earlier one I called out as a cursed item masquerading as a wondrous item. That's because there's not a whole lot of "wondrous" in these shackles. Just an affliction placed upon anyone who wears them. Normally, we call those cursed items like the ring of clumsiness, gauntlets of fumbling, or bracers of defenselessness--all of which could just as easily be slapped on someone like these shackles.
*Setting that aside, there are several other things I don't like in this design. Other than the presentation problems (i.e., spell names should be lowercase, they should also be italicized in the descriptive text along with references to other magic items, same goes for your item name if you use it the descriptive text, and you need a space between the price/cost and "gp"), I'm not all that certain that Hellknights are tasked overly much with being witch hunters. Are they?
*I'm also not keen on the item being impervious to a chime of opening or knock spell. I mean, if knock can bypass arcane lock, why can't it affect a magic item like this? And shouldn't arcane lock be part of the construction requirements for this thing? I see we've got arcane mark, but I'm not sure why that's even applicable.
*In addition, I don't like the automatic tracking of the last person locked into the shackles...which can't ever be fooled. We're dealing in absolutes now. And I'm not a fan of that. Regardless, to get that effect, wouldn't you also want to include locate creature or find the path in the item's construction requirements, as well?
*As-is, I can see what the designer was shooting for...and I can understand why they saw this as a potentially innovative place to play around in...but the item isn't Superstar-caliber in my book. Also, 56,000 gp...just to shackle a spellcaster so they can't use spells. Seems like it'd be so much easier to just maim them. And regular old rope and a gag normally does the trick for anyone who doesn't have the Silent Spell, Still Spell, and Eschew Materials feats.
*Vote to Reject.
*I suspect the author is not a primary English speaker, just from the spelling and construction issues. Again, these types of restraint devices aren't really the kind of devices players use. These are more like GM devices for the bad guys. Not saying those can't be Superstar items, but they better be awesome and these aren't.
*Reject.
*I'm the owner of this item, though I haven't touched it in ten years. Where is the prisoner right now?
*Reject.
*Rejected.
Gloves of Steadfast Aim
*Nah. Not feeling this one. I started out liking the name, then it let me down. From the melody-invoking wind through the fingers to the seemingly cumulative attack bonus for delaying your action in the initiative order, it's just poor flavor on top of poor design. They also forgot to lowercase spellnames and class abilities are never italicized. So, that's poor presentation to boot. Strike three and you're out.
*Vote to Reject.
*I kind of like the idea, but the description in terms of the mechanics is off. Basically, if you delay or ready you get a bump (up to +5) for every creature that acts between your original initiative and when you eventually act. I don't like "goes before him" and "between the start of the action and the attack." I dont think these use the proper terms from ready or delay. Its crucial to use the proper terms. Plus, I dont understand the damage bonus. If the wearer is damaged he deals out a damage bonus? Huh? Now this is going from poorly worded but kind of neat to just sort of munchkin.
*I have to admit, I like that someone is playing with the delay and/or ready mechanic. I don't know of many items that do that. So that is original. But the poor wording and the munchkin-y damage add on make this one troubling to me.
*Weak REJECT. I could be swayed if others like it.
*I'm keeping this one around to see if anyone champions it or sways Clark away from the Reject button. Personally, I'm still voting to Reject.
*The mechanics are clunky--it's metagaming, you want a bunch of minions to damage you so you get a big damage bonus against the boss.
*Heck, you want to delay every round so your allies go after you so you get a free attack bonus--the item doesn't specify enemies for the attack bonus ability.
*Why is it transmutation if it's based on true strike? Why do these gloves weigh 6 lbs.? What does the wind-melody have to do with the item's name, concept, or sylph hair ingredient?
*Reject.
*Sylph...wind...I thought those two things went together. I just didn't care for including either of them as flavor for the item. Agree on the weight, aura, etc. I wondered about the 6 lbs. when I saw that, too. These weren't described as heavy gauntlets. And, you'd think something with a sylph/wind connection would be relatively light. With true strike and retribution in the spell requirements, the aura really ought to be divination or necromancy.
*All those are minor in comparison to what the item does, though. It encourages players to think in metagame terms of purposefully delaying to pile on extra benefits. I get the implication that it's because you're aiming, but you could wrap a house rule around that moreso than a wondrous item.
*Rejected.
Veil of the Final Redemption
*We already have a precedent for adding to positive channeling, and it doesn't work this way.
*We already have Cha-boost items in the headband slot, no need to move your booster slot to the head slot so you can use something else as your headband.
*Plus it's a great way to slap Cha drain on a captured enemy bad guy! Meh.
*Reject.
*I get the theme the designer was going for...I think they just overdid it and didn't think through everything. If you boil it down, it grants a bonus to positive energy channeling (which uses a different mechanic than has been done before), a sunburst SIAC, and a +4 Charisma bonus courtesy of a different item slot than you'd normally expect. That's not Superstar thinking in terms of the design, despite the somewhat innovative theme, overall flavor, and professional presentation.
*Vote to Reject.
*Rejected.
Twine of Projectiles
*Isn't this just a weapon masquerading as a wondrous item? I mean, regardless of the flavor, it's a bunch of string you can turn into weapons that last for an hour (though they can be reused indefinitely?). Also, last I checked, thrown weapons aren't actually projectile weapons. So the item's name is a bit of a misnomer. I'm not really won over by the novelty of hiding your weapons in a ball of string anyway.
*Vote to Reject.
*Ugh I havent even read it all and it looks like too much work for the GM.
*"Projectus"? Really?
*It's just a spool of ammo and thrown weapons.
*[redacted]
*Reject.
*Twine that turns into arrows is not Superstar.
*Having different lengths for arrows and bolts is needlessly complicated. And 1.5 feet (bolt) doesn't even divide evenly into the original 25-foot length, so if you made nothing but bolts you'd have a useless 1-foot length left over.
*(I think the "reused indefinitely" part refers to it still being twine, and can be used just like regular twine. But it's not clear.)
*Reject.
*Rejected.
Calistria's Gem
*Meh. This is basically a weapon enhancement item...which means it might as well be a weapon rather than a wondrous item. The abilities that aren't weapon enhancing (i.e., throwing the stone to get a copycat and master's illusion pretty much poaches the class abilities of the cleric, bestowing them upon anyone who has this item. That's not wise design.
*Vote to Reject.
*What Neil said. Plus the capitalizing of the spells annoys me.
*Reject
*Rejected.
Marathon Voter Season 7
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I admit a bit of conflict when I read things such as, “If this is how the judges are going to be I just won't enter next year.” The selfish bit of me is glad – less competition and all that. But the rest of me, the bit normally in control, thinks such an attitude is awful shortsighted. Each man (and women too) should strive for greatness and pursue dreams. If one of your dreams is to produce RPG material, the RPG Superstar contest is a good way to gauge your current abilities in the field. It is made even better by the fact that the judges are willing to provide feedback on what kept you from being in the top tier. You get the benefit of seeing what you did wrong (or right) but also, and even better, you get to see how everyone else did and therefore you have a hundred critiques to learn from instead of just one.
I do think that those who are complaining about the judges feedback being too short, or not enough, are wrong. Or, rather, you are looking at it in absolutely the wrong way. Think of it in terms of roofing. Some people seem to want instructions on how to better swing the hammer, but they are having problems climbing the ladder. To make it worse, they are getting frustrated by the teacher's fixation on the ladder. But the teacher has it right: the hammer does you no good if you can't first learn how to get on the roof. Two illustrations.
Say your item was disqualified. You do not need to know anything else about your submission. You instead need to go back and figure out why it was disqualified and fix that problem. Our beloved Mr. Reynolds has stressed this for some time now: If you can't follow instructions he doesn't want to work with you. It doesn't matter how creative your ideas are, how flowery your prose. A disqualification means you need to work on one of the most fundamental of skills for a writer: reading comprehension. “But!” you exclaim, “It doesn't tell me what else was wrong with my entry, or how to improve.” But here you are wrong. It doesn't matter what else was wrong. If you can't climb up the first rung of the ladder, you have no business working on the roof.
I also notice, and its not unique to this year (and we all are prey to the temptation) complaints that the judges misunderstood something about your entry and that their feedback is therefore insufficient to help you improve. But regardless of whether they did misunderstand you, and even assuming you understand the rules and how your submission conforms to the rules better than the judges, it doesn't matter for you have a deeper, more fundamental flaw. Your writing was not good enough to convey your ideas. End of story. That sounds harsh but it is not (because I'm not saying your writing can't improve). Its a simple truth and you need to admit it before you can improve. Consider this: if the judges, with their expertise, did not understand the nuances of your submission, you are pretty much guaranteed that the average reader will mess it up too. This is due to the inherent cheapness, in my opinion, of the Paizo Accounting department. They have refused to include a cloned copy of the writer in every book they sell. Until such time as the bean counters see fit to adapt with the times, the writers have to write in such a way as to allow everyone to understand their work the first time through, everytime, without the benefit of their presence at the table. That's not always easy, but the sooner and better you can accomplish this, the better for you. So don't argue with the judges about how they misunderstood you. Learn to write in a way where there is no doubt as to what's what. Once you have mastered those rungs, you can start to worry more about the whole hammer and nail aspect of the business.
Satchel of the Green Forest
Yep, all makes perfect sense.
As always, thank you for the feedback! Hard to move forward without understanding where you've been.
Perhaps one of these years I'll run out of lessons to learn :)
Edit: Now to move on and join the rest of the contest.
I would appreciate the judges' feedback on the Sluggard's Coffer (which is not a gag item) ;)
Sluggard’s Coffer
Aura Moderate transmutation; CL 11th
Slot -; Price 7,000 gp; Weight 50 lbs.
Description
This large bronze plated wooden coffer is engraved with avian imagery and feathery patters its lid decorated with the long necked head of a heron. It can hold 400 lbs. or a volume of 50 cubic feet. The coffer’s key grants anyone carrying it the ability to verbally command the coffer as a move action (see below). On command the coffer animates as a medium size animated object (see the Pathfinder RPG Bestiary) extending a pair of long birdlike legs. The coffer can be commanded to animate, to revert to its inanimate state, to move to a destination within line of sight of the key bearer, to follow the key bearer, to stop in place and to pick up an object within line of sight of the key bearer. The coffer can pick up unattended objects of up to 50 lbs. using the heron head on its lid. Items picked up in this way are immediately deposited inside the coffer as the heron swallows it. If the key bearer is adjacent to the coffer he can drop an item into the coffer as a swift action (the coffer automatically opens its lid to catch the item). If the coffer is ever more than 60 feet from it’s key it immediately reverts to its inanimate state.
The coffer has the properties of a medium animated object with the following exceptions: AC 16, hardness 10, speed 20 ft. (cannot run) and cannot attack.
Opening the coffer without the key requires a Disable Device skill check or a Strength check (both DC 30) or a knock spell or similar effect.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, animate objects; Cost 3,500 gp.
Because Neil gave you a drive-by review and you expected more let me give you a few pointers. I am a harsh critic, or so people tell me.
MS Word tells me your item has 293 words
thesaurus.com tells me that a sluggard is an idle slothful person.
So we've got a chest for an idle person. How exciting or superstar is that?
I like your first sentence, it describes the item accurately. Next you give me the impression of "Baggage" from the Discworld novels.
Basically your entry is a walking chest that you can keep stuff in.
Now answer me this: why is this superstar? For 7000 gp this item is beaten by almost everything in the book, explain to me why I want this, why is it cool (based solely on the description offered, not on what may exist in your mind)?
I look forward to your thoughts on the matter.
The pricing of the item looks very iffy to me, with a caster level of 11 and being a slotless item is should cost way more than what you give. The coffer is not a true animated object but that still won't explain the price disparity.
Conclusion:
The good: description is ok, good use of the template
the bad: price is way off
the ugly: not really superstar
My advice: ask a fellow player if he wants this at the suggested price or an item of equivalent value, ask yourself the same question. RPG Superstar requires that you submit something so awesome that everyone asks why didn't someone design this earlier.......does your coffer do that?
Your entry is an easy reject, maybe next year you'll do better. This competition has shown me that next year's entry is always better in some way.
Peach of Youth
*I'm not really won over by this one. It's mostly a SIAC item. And, playing around with the aging rules doesn't feel all that innovative or inspiring to me. How often do they even come up in most games?
*Weak Reject.
*Agreed. Reject.
*Why use sands of time (which ages you) as a prerequisite and not age resistance (which lets you ignore the effects of an age category)?
*Reject.
*Rejected.
Gauntlet of the Beast King
*Simple, a bit confusing, and then a throwaway +4 bonus SAK
*Vote to Reject.
*Blah. Not Superstar.
*Vote to Reject.
*Rejected.
Sticks and Stones
*Lousy name.
*Cheeses out an extra charge attack on top of a full-round action. Then, we get a SAK of feats to pair with charging. Someone just really likes the charge attack for their characters.
*And then, we get Craft Wonderous Item. *sigh*
*Vote to Reject.
*Agreed. Reject.
*Agreed. Reject.
*Rejected.
Burglar’s Boon
*Who cares about what these items have done throughout history? Just tell me what it is and what it does and cut the crappy backstory.
*At its core, we get a couple of skill bonuses, a Monty Haul ant haul SIAC, and an ability that cheeses out which items are the "most valuable" to steal. Meh.
*Vote to Reject.
*Agreed. Reject.
*Agreed. Reject.
*Rejected.
Bag of Bones
*It's a familiar-in-a-can, even for non-wizards? That means it's poaching class abilities, which is never a good design choice.
*Vote to Reject.
*Item's name has nothing to do with its actual purpose/effect.
*Compared to the cost of a homunculus, this item is pointlessly overpriced.
*Reject.
*Rejected.
Hi,
thsi year I hadn't as much time to prepare for this contest as I would have liked to have, so a quick idea and writeup had to suffice. Here's what I was able to come up with on short notice :
Mask of the Iron Facade
Aura faint enchantment; CL 3rd
Slot Head; Price 2,500 gp; Weight 3 lbs.
Description
This plain iron mask covers the whole face of its wearer, modeled to only show a vague, stoic expression to the world.
It always feels chilly to the touch and gleams as if slightly oiled.
When worn, the mask grants its wearer a +4 resistance bonus on saving throws against spells and effects with the emotion descriptor and the DC to use the sense motive skill to get a hunch about the wearer is increased by 5.
However all morale bonuses are halved for the wearer as long as he wears the mask of the iron facade.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, calm emotions; Cost 1,250 gp
Hi Azmahel,
To get you started on the critiquing path I am going to give you a review ;>
I do get a King Baldwin vibe (Kingdom of Heaven movie) from your item, if you were going for that then good job. Can't say that it is a winner though.
The Good: low cost, low level. You thought about how the item affects the wearer with the morale bonuses. So that is ok.
The Bad: not really that innovative....it's just a protection item and if used in the campaign: how would the world see a user of this item?
The ugly: nothing that I can see.
So good enough mojo, mechanically uninspiring, and good template use. I hope you can spare some more time next year.
... Okay? ...
I appreciate the hard work you guys are putting into this contest and think you are doing a great job. To be frank I don't care one way or another the jargon you judges use among yourselves; and I can handle constructive criticism quite well.
I hope you can too. What I am trying to convey here is the oppinion that the raw commentary might not be very useful (at all). For my submission writing "Price is totally off. Boring idea. Seen it before." would have been more telling than "poorly crafted".
I will arm myself with patience in the hope of finding out what the shortcommings of my design are (I have never expected an in depth analysis) just something useful for RPGSS2013.
About the precious "snowflakes": It is an extremely condescending expression and I think Paizo staff should avoid it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Artumian Branding Iron
*Interesting. As the author of the Kingdom of Artume in the Guide to the River Kingdoms, I'm wondering if this was meant as an item to pander to me?
*It's just a dominate animal and dominate person SIAC, which you either need to apply with some annoying called shot or melee touch attack mechanics, or go around pinning animals and people so you can sear them with the brand. Either way, not really something I care to condone by propping this item up as Superstar. And that's too bad, because the designer actually has some pretty good attention to detail. I just wish they could have done something more with their core concept so it has more innovation and spark to it. As-written, I'm going to have to say...
*...Weak Reject.
*Agreed. Reject.
*Neil, wow, how could you resist? That was a pretty strong charm on that item directed at you. It had hyperlinked spell stuff in it, too. Nice Will save, bro!
*Reject
*Rejected.
I appreciate the hard work you guys are putting into this contest and think you are doing a great job. To be frank I don't care one way or another the jargon you judges use among yourselves; and I can handle constructive criticism quite well.
Are you sure? Because you don't really come across that way. Then again, I'm just reading words via an internet forum. So, I'll take you at your word. No problem.
I hope you can too.
Most of the time. Yes. I believe I'm taking it okay here. And elsewhere in some of the other threads.
What I am trying to convey here is the opinion that the raw commentary might not be very useful (at all).
Well, that's where I'll disagree with you. I agree that your raw commentary wasn't very useful (at all). But, for many others, it has proven to be so. They've stated as much here in this very thread, just as you've also stated that it wasn't very helpful for you. But we never promised the raw commentary would be. And, we never promised everyone would receive a full-fledged, in-depth critique either. That's been true since the contest's inception. If anything, we've provided more feedback here, this year, than ever before, because we're trying to give you the raw commentary and as many full-fledged, in-depth critiques as we possibly can. Unfortunately, you received a very sparse (and less helpful) bit of raw commentary than everyone else. It's not going to help improve you (no doubt about that) and you'll need a deeper dive from us to examine it at-length.
Additionally, I guess I have to ask...have you found none of the raw commentary here on any of the other items useful at all? Do none of their lessons not also possibly apply to your item? My fear (rightly or wrongly, so you can certainly indicate otherwise) is that you're waiting for your specific item critique and nothing else matters. Or, that it's going to matter more than anything else. It's entirely possible that your in-depth item critique, as well, might not impart very much useful information to you. If your item concept had very weak mojo, there's little we can do to assist you with finding a deeper level of creativity. But, we'll see when I cycle back around for a deeper dive.
In the meantime, I'd encourage you to continue reading all the raw commentary here as compared to their items. See if you made any missteps in the same areas and maybe some of that initial feedback will still help you.
For my submission writing "Price is totally off. Boring idea. Seen it before." would have been more telling than "poorly crafted".
It certainly would. It's too bad in the crush of reviewing hundreds upon hundreds of items that we didn't take time out to make an entire list for it. I'm going to assume there was something about your item that made three judges pass on it very quickly, without much in the way of elaboration. In the interests of moving on to the next item, that happens with a fair amount of frequency.
I will arm myself with patience in the hope of finding out what the shortcmmings of my design are (I have never expected an in depth analysis) just something useful for RPGSS2013.
Again, you should be finding plenty of useful stuff all throughout this forum and many other threads on RPG Superstar. It isn't (and never has been) all about individual item critiques. As a competitor, I know exactly how you feel...in that, you do believe you'll learn more from an assessment of your specific item. From experience, however, I can tell you that's not always the case. And, in fact, it's far more likely you'll learn more from putting aside your item (or any review for it) and studying what the Top 32 items did well...and then the variety of missteps all of these items in the "Critique" thread fell to...
About the precious "snowflakes": It is an extremely condescending expression and I think Paizo staff should avoid it.
Well, it's a good thing I'm not a Paizo staffer then. ;-)
Seriously, I don't think it's that condescending of an expression. And, if you take umbrage with it, I apologize. But I'm also not going sugarcoat things in this forum. I think I've been pretty consistent with that. I know it won't please everyone. But I'm never going to please everyone. As long as I stay consistent, though, hopefully I can still keep everyone's respect.
Sincerely,
--Neil
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Artumian Branding Iron
*Interesting. As the author of the Kingdom of Artume in the Guide to the River Kingdoms, I'm wondering if this was meant as an item to pander to me?
*It's just a dominate animal and dominate person SIAC, which you either need to apply with some annoying called shot or melee touch attack mechanics, or go around pinning animals and people so you can sear them with the brand. Either way, not really something I care to condone by propping this item up as Superstar. And that's too bad, because the designer actually has some pretty good attention to detail. I just wish they could have done something more with their core concept so it has more innovation and spark to it. As-written, I'm going to have to say...
*Neil, wow, how could you resist? That was a pretty strong charm on that item directed at you. It had hyperlinked spell stuff in it, too. Nice Will save, bro!
*Rejected.
Hilarious!
Actually I had no idea that Artume was yours or anyone else's associated with the judging. I'm not as familiar with Golarion as I would like to be, but I did want to tie my item in with the campaign setting. So I just searched the Golarion wiki for "hearding" and "livestock" and other associated words and after reading all the found articles, Artume seemed the best fit. I knew the branding iron was a bit of a SIAC and a plot device item, but I hoped it was cool enough with the branding on the forehead unintended use on humanoids, the Golarion tie in, the use of the called shot rules, and the healing magic used to dispel to make it to the top 32. Oh well. I'll continue to enter this contest and work on the suggestion you gave me on the Entered All Five Years thread. Thanks to all the judges for your feedback.
|
Marathon Voter Season 7
|
For my submission writing "Price is totally off. Boring idea. Seen it before." would have been more telling than "poorly crafted".
"Poorly crafted," seems like a reasonable description to me for a judge to use and I think you would do better to consider why they used that description instead of more specific criticisms. "Poorly crafted," implies a general weakness in the design of the item and means that there is no single one thing wrong but that the whole of the item is deficient.
If you want more constructive criticism, reading your submission, I would advise you to figure out how to be more concise. Simplify your idea and your presentation of the idea. It is needlessly wordy for what is essentially a walking suitcase (and no, its not original for anyone who has read Discworld).
You also would do well to work on your actual grammar. Your first sentence alone reveals a weakness in your writing and proofing. Several of your sentences are a bit clumsy. Your last sentence, for instance, has 3 different uses of the word "or" in it.
Since this thread seems to be for non-judge feedback as well, if anybody wants to take a look over my item and critique I'd be very appreciative. (I have a thick skin so don't worry about being nice as much as being constructive please)
link should be: here
Once again a big thanks to the judges for doing what they do.
Round two! I hope my critique is useful, even if I'm not Clark. ;)
Light's Last Hope
Well, your name doesn't tell me what thje item is, and that's never a great start. Let's see... It's a magic item that is, effectively a light spell unless you worship Sarenae. Which means, you exclude 90% of players, more-less; that alone isn't superstar. And when you trigger it, the power itself is only alright. Exactly what you'd expect by a magic summoning lantern.
Boots of Trailblazing
Well, you should lowercase transmutation, and lowercase and italicize your spells... The effect is kinda boring, too, it makes paths clear. But I wonder - what do these do in town? Shift buildings? And when does the effect make it possible for a path to be cleared again? What if I was running through a jungle in these boots, and two days later someone wearing the same type of boots tracks me through - do their boots effectively have no effect? Or, do their boots blaze the trail like a flat road? Wouldn't that make making roads between cities supremely easy? 15,000gp buys all the roads!
Sponge Stone Maid
The judges hit just abiut all the major points on this already, but:
A sponge isn't a cool thing, especially when all it does is act like a sponge. If it, say, could drain a lake, maybe, but just cleaning an area? Not superstar.
Worse, you left in an older revision's name in the item. That's careless. I think you can do better next year, just take time for another revision or two.
Cloak of the North Star
First, this item is a "makes travelling easy" item that judges have said a number of times is not exciting or superstar.
Second, you include the phrase "subject to GM digression", which means you don't know what the effects of the item might be, that shows lack of forethought or carelessness, both of which are very bad.
Third, you grant free 5-foot steps, which is super powerful. Admittedly, for the price tag I kinda get it, but still. It messes action economy up. Fortunately, it does so in a kinda good way.
And last, your last ability is just a tacked on SIAC. It doesn't add anything, or fit with the theme, and make it feel amateur. If you must add in more abilities (which you should try not to anyways), they should be tightly tied to what you already do.
Stubborn Nail
I know, this item got a lot of discussion from the judges, but I'm really not impressed with it. Why? Because, it's only as cool as the user makes it. It could, potentially be cool, but it's exactly as cool as a lot of other items, like a decanter of endless water, or an immovable rod. And, as judges pointed out, it's way too expensive for what it is/does.
Glove, Phantom
The imagry is alright, but the effect has been tried over and over to death. It's just not cool. It throws a major wrench into game balance, and ultimately isn't superstar on that.
Next year, try to pick a flashier effect to go with. Read all the other items, be inspired.
Apothecary’s Atomizer
I was kinda surprised, with all the judges bashing "entropic" items that you didn't get called out for "atomizer". A very modern term for a fantasy item, best stay away from that next time. Secondly, in the body of your text, only italicize your item when you say it out in full, not just part of it's name. Quick tip for high word count items: only reference the physical part of the item.
Although this messes with action economy, I kinda like the idea of this spray-bottle-potion-thing. But the real problem is how much it messes with said action economy for such a low price. That's where your item dies, because you turn four (or up to twenty, plus up to 16,000gp) standard actions into one full round action for a mere 8,000gp. And that's not balanced.
Thieves' Guide
Welcome to the contest! Sorry if I seem harsh, but your item needs a bit a work...
Firstly, the name doesn't tell me what it is. It could be a map, or a lanten, or a tiny ball of light, or a book-on-tape, or anything. Try to include something physical in the name. (I'm going to gloss over the fact that it's an item that just shows you where treasure is for any arbitrary body, and continue onwards, because you already know about it.) And then, you're vague in how far the map will show you. "One or two dungeon levels" is a terrible description. Use a specific range increment, like 100 ft.
You should also avoid making such a complicated monster as part of an item. "animated item but X and Y and Z" is too much, it's a Monster-In-A-Can. Hope you keep on with this next year!
Assassin Eye
To put it suscintly, this is too safe an item. The judges said it, and I'll repeat it. You get to spy remotely, and then nuke it to take out any group of enemies you feel like, without ever having to get close. Your template is pretty good, but you should have had your spells lowercase, not capitalized.
Pharasmian Tomb Stone
Well, you imply an esoteric construction in your description, "crafted from a headstone" would have been more than enough. It's a good effect, but really do you think it's superstar? I could see this in a book of magic items (with a fixed description), but not in superstar. They're looking for "wow", not "yeah, alright".
Also, as has been mentioned, "tombstone" instead of "tomb stone", and you should have lower-case and italicized your spell requirements. And bolded "price" in the template. And lowercased "moderate conjuration". A lot of little template errors, really.
Shackles of the Merciful Confessor
Well, your first flaw is that these are a prisoner item. They're not terribly exciting. Your template it good, at least. (except it should be "faint enchantment, faint necromancy", I think.) I like the idea of protecting the prisoner for so long as they're worn, but they're not really good at the confessing part for their cost. You wouldn't get this until a level where most things could pass this DC most of the time. So, this is where the art of pricing comes into play - you could have cut the price almost by 75% and not been critized for it, I bet.
FIREBIRD JESSES
Bad all-caps writer. That's done by font, not by format. Also, try not to use such an obscure word as "jesses" in an item name. If it would be jargon (an unknown technical term) outside the field they're used in, save them for descriptive text. Firebird Harness would have been a much better name.
And then, as has been mentioned, the feat it gives should be Flyby Attack - Spring Attack doesn't apply while flying.
At least your effect is cool. I especially like how it attaches to one creature, but you have to activate it at your end.
Choking Jar
Give that jar the heimlich! Hmm, an item that suffocates a creature without their knowledge or a way to react, from anywhere on the same plane. That's a little overpowered. And collecting the piece of the creature is a little weird, but understandable for what you want the item to be. It's just not awesome, is all. And probably too much.
Corsair’s Dream
Wow, that's epic level gold, which isn't really a wondrous item is it? IIRC, you got disqualified for this, didn't you? Also also, you're saying that this item is weightless in your template. I could carry as many as I wanted, so long as they're empty, right? That's two serious missteps and I'm not even at your first descriptive sentance. Go read the auto-rejects and the contest rules more carefully. I promise you won't regret it.
The ship appears to be a really good sailing ship, but is actually a really good, magic ship? No way! Scratch out the "appears to be" bit. It is a masterwork sailing ship in appearance. Period. But then, it's also not really a wondrous item anyways, because it's a vehicle. I mean, props for thinking outside the box, but I think this is too far outside the box. Next time, stick to a physical thing someone might keep with them.
Gloves of the Magi
Yeah, it's hard not to draw the connection to staff of the magi with a name like that.
Your descriptive sentance starts out fine, but ends really clunkily. Remove that last bit after the last comma, and I think it flows better. After that, the contents flow rather well, too, so it's a bad opening line. I do like the whole magus touch spells, carry over effect thing. It's a neat ability, and it's written well - except that you don't clairify what happens with non-damage spells. That's a major hole.
Still, I do like it - your attempt to pluralize magus killed it, though.
Chariot of the Dragonlord
Spot on template use, and a good name. Not perfect, we see a lot of "X of the Y", but it's hardly a flaw - more of a nitpick.
Your first problem is that you need to keep two diminutive animals on hand to use it. That'll either stop it's use entirely, or be handwaved away, so it should be removed entirely. It can create the dragons out of nothingness, we don't need a pumpkin-carraige-incident here.
I kinda like the flavor, though. Flying, flaming chariots are a cool thing for a player to have, but pocket-able vehicles are a little on the "makes adventuring safe" side of thing.
Constantly Morphing Bracers
Good use of the template, but the name screams "long list of random effects". I like that it's not really random, at least. Next, I dislike the whole constantly changing, but count as leather thing. The first two paragraphs could have been condensed down into "These grey leather bracers begin to change appearance the moment they are donned, though they always retain their original feel - that of rubbery leather." Leave out the controlling the appearance, they're morphing bracers, they morph. Players will deal.
Other than the action type, I also don't see a difference beyween the third and fourth paragraphs. I'd take the first all the time, because using swift actions are better than using move actions. That might be an error on your part, but that shows a lot of carelessness to not notice a duplicated paragraph.
And the last paragraph is useless fluff that should have been in the first paragraph it it was included - but it can be removed, too.
The taking your opponent's ability bit of the bracers is neat, but you should specify if it replaces or adds to your own. There's a big difference.
Gunslinger's Hat of High Noon
I think you could have left out "Gunslinger's" from the name. Doesn't really add anything - anyone reading hat of high noon probably thinks of spagetti westerns already. Pretty good template use, too.
I love the imagery of a gunslinger having his hat knocked off by a shot, instead of it hitting him, but rather than once per day, I think it would have been better if the hat took damage from the now-missed attack, so the wearer has to repair it once it breaks. Good concept choice, though.
One more thing - how do scuff marks not count as "mundane"? Because the way you phrase it suggests, "this looks like a normal hat, except it's scuffed".
Fan of Exquisite Subtlety
Nice name, if you know what I mean. And good template use too, if you know what I mean, except that you should specify "moderate" in front of each seperate aura. And put commas in your prices, if you know what I mean.
Sorry, I'll stop that now. In place, I'll tell you that you should have used paragraph breaks in your item text. And, that instead of "secret chest", your mechanics really match better to treasure stitching (APG).
Finally, I think the item would have been better if you removed the whole origami bird bit. Feels too tacked on.
Desna’s Brooch
I was about to ding you for spelling on"brooch" when I found out that's how it's actually spelled. Huh, learn new things all the time, here.
Instead, I'll ding you on having to explain to the reader how to wear one. They're not fools, even if they might not know how to spell brooch - you can leave that out. They'll wear it as they like, like any other wondrous item.
I'll continue to say that restful sleep and a bonus to perform aren't exciting or superstar. The carried by butterflies bit is, but it's all the way at the end of your item. Frankly, I'd cut out everything from the first sentance to the last paragraph and the item might be neater for it, if a little simple.
Oh, one last thing: it's "weight -", not "weight - lbs"
Traveler's Cap
So, this is a hat of disguise that you don't control, and allows you to make knowledge checks. Not really exciting. Add to that that you missed commas in your price, and make a point to call out that it will change based on the gender of the wearer, you have a clear impression of someone who is trying, but hasn't quite hit their stride. Try to veer a little further away from existing items next time.
Mask of the Deceiver
Hmm, you have an issue with Capitals, Don't You. "CL" should both be in capitals, and spell names should be all lower case. And also, you need to bold "cost", and include a space between 5 and lbs. And "gp" after the cost number.
The effect itself is... boring. It's like mirror image, but using a more powerful spell for a mostly weaker effect. And further, you apparently confuse people with no spell to justify it. I think you need a lot of work here.
Helm of the Owlbear
All the owlbears wear this thing, huh? on their capitalized Heads? Okay, just making sure of that, because when you started listing strange construction requirements in the body of the content, I wanted to know.
Sorry, that came out a lot more snobby than I meant it. But the points there are still valid. The effect itself feels a little like two spells in a can, I'm sorry to say. And, it's almost only ever useful to Barbarians. It's okay to cater more to one class, or group of classes, but I can't think of any "one class only" item that has ever made it into the top 32.
Quill of the Unfading Lore
Flawless presentation, I must say... Oh, except for the description and construction headers. They should be normal case and bold, not all upper case.
In your description, you say "anyone can activate", implying you can trigger other people's quills from across the room. And further, you require it to be active only in a place where you're already prepared to write. Just make it magically create ink and parchement and a writing table - or just write mid-air. That's way cooler than basically animating your pen to take notes.
But the real problem is that, this item will never be used. You have to take a full day to charge it, and then it can't do anything but answer questions as if it were that user. It's a bit like speak with dead, but way harder to set up. It's not really exciting, either. Sorry.
And, break for lunch. I always forget how many posts there are until I try to review them all.
As someone who doesn't have a dog in this fight, I'm loving this thread. I've never paid much attention to the Superstar contest, but the insight into the designers' midset is fantastic, and not something I would have thought I enjoyed as much as I do. I'm even getting to the point where I can look at someone's item and determine what went wrong.
Thank you for taking the time to do this.
I humbly submit my item for feedback. I am prepared for any feedback, no matter how harsh. Thank you for doing the awesome job you do as judges in this competition.
Hoard Watcher
Aura faint abjuration, divination and evocation; CL 5th
Slot None; Price 36,900 gp; Weight 2 lbs
Description
Within a hollow, octagonal prism of crystal, this fist-sized reptilian eyeball is held suspended in a clear green liquid.
Once per day a Hoard Watcher may be bound to a single magic item or valuable object (a piece of art, a gem, or other valuable with a minimum price of 250 gp) within 35'. This bond lasts until the Hoard Watcher is the subject of a dispel effect, bound to a new item, or the bonded item is destroyed.
While bound, the pupil of the Hoard Watcher unerringly points towards the bonded item as long as both objects remain on the same plane.
The Hoard Watcher can be commanded to guard its bonded item for 10 hours per day, but the duration need not be continuous. While the bonded item is within 35' of the Hoard Watcher this functions as an alarm that is triggered by an unauthorized creature touching the bonded item or moving the item outside the guarded area. In addition, when triggered the bonded item emits a 25' radius of energy that negates all forms of invisibility within it for 5 minutes.
The owner of a Hoard Watcher is allowed to scry on the holder of its bonded item as if connected through a garment or possession.
The connection between a Hoard Watcher and its bonded item can be blocked as though it were locate object. When a Hoard Watcher cannot detect its bonded item or does not have a bonded item, the liquid inside the crystal turns opaque.
Construction Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, alarm, invisibility purge, locate object, creator must have at least 5 ranks in Appraise; Cost 18,450 gp
My take:
1) Template use is incorrect (your submission may have been better)
2) 25' is old skool - and totally out of use, I guess you mean feet and ft. will indicate that quire nicely. Or would have that put you over wordcount? I guess it would have with the current 293 words.
3) It's very pricey, hunting down the fool who stole my artefact is going to be cheaper and more fun without this.
4) In the end this is just a spell in a can that solves the result of poor GM-ing: taking away the PCs toys.
5) I do like the FX of the item, eyeball in lquid
6) The item does a little bit too much, too many powers dilutes the cool.
OK description
too many powers
not something a pc should really need
reject.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hello, here is my item I posted. It was my first time ever trying out for RPG superstar and was wondering if I could have my item critiqued. I would like to know what I got wrong so I can do better in the future.
Spool of Adamantine Thread
Aura moderate transmutation; CL 3 rd
Slot ---; Price 840 gp; Weight ---
Description
This wooden spool is wound tightly by a shimmering prismatic thread of adamantine. Written on the spool is a command word that once spoken, followed by the name of a broken piece of gear, creates a needle of pure light at the end of the thread.
The needle is only able to pierce armor, a shield, or a weapon (one-handed, two-handed) with the broken status and repairs it just as the spell make whole except that the adamantine thread not only repairs the broken item back to full hit points but also by weaving the thread into the layers of the item, increases it's base hardness by 10. These effects are permanent but do not stack and will not increase the hardness of items already made of adamantine or add damage reduction gained from normal adamantine arms and armor.
Upon construction, there is enough thread created to repair one item taking 1 hour of uninterrupted sewing to complete the weaving process. At the end of this time, the needle disappears along with any left over thread leaving a empty wooden spool.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, make whole, Creator must have 2 ranks in the Craft (Clothing) Skill; Cost 420 gp