I think I am going to fine tune my categories above for use in the "Critique My Item" thread.
For your information, it may be helpful to explain a little about how we view items and rank them, and to provide three "rough groupings" for discussion of items so you can see where yours fell.
Tier I: The "Keepers"
These are the items we sorted into the initial keep file, even though all of them dont make the top 32. Your goal should be to get into this group.
For reference, in descending order, here are some of the groups that make the keep folder:
--the "Clearly Superstar" item: we judges can tell, every year there are a handful of items that really knock us out, these are generally the unanimous locks that make up part of the top 32.
--the "Potentially Superstar" item: the one that at least two of us really like and that we put in the keep folder. It is this group of items that we use our golden tickets on. They may not make the top 32 because there are usually more good items than there are slots in the top 32. May not be as mind blowing as the following, but has superior execution.
--The "Really Interesting But Flawed" item: either a super-interesting idea with some problematic execution, or an item with flaws that otherwise shows some great design mojo and creativity. These items usually get sorted into the keep folder but usually dont wind up stacking up against the above two groups.
Generally, there are about 50-60 items that get sorted into the Keep folder after all the submitted items are reviewed. We tend to "over-keep" rather than "over-cut" since it is easier to cull the bottom from the keep folder than to have to go looking back through the reject pile.
Tier II: The "Good But Not Good Enough"
This is a big group of the items submitted in the contest. It includes the following:
--The "Good execution of an average idea" item: the kind of item that might make a book of wondrous items, but not good enough to be superstar
--The "Poor execution of a above average idea" item: if it was a bit cooler, it might have made it into the keep folder as a "really interesting but flawed" item.
These are the items that just lack that "Superstar"-ness.
The above kinds of items generally are reviewed by three judges before they are kept or rejected. We often spend a good deal of time talking about some of these items. The larger this group gets, as it has, the harder our job as judges gets.
Tier III: The "Not Ready"
There are a large contingent of these every year, but as time goes on there are fewer in this group and more in the group above.
--The "Clear Reject" item: the spell in a can, the boring skill bonus item, etc. See Sean's list of bad item stereotypes.
--The "Auto-Reject" item: over word count, wrong format, gag item, other clear rules violations.
Items in this category don't require three judges to even see. Items in this category are sometimes rejected by just two judges. If there is any question that any judge might find an item worthwhile, we wait until at least 3 judges have reviewed it and if they all three reject it then it is rejected before the 4th even sees it. Auto-rejects (like over word count) get rejected sometimes by just one judge, but usually they are such glorious train wrecks that we keep them around for the other judges to see.
By the way, these arent formal rules, they are just our practice. But hopefully these "groupings" can help you understand where your item was at and help you improve. My fellow judges may want to add additional examples.
The judges and companies who put on most contests completely wash their hands of those who don't make the cut. You never hear back from them. No rejection notice. No feedback whatsoever. Instead, it's the strength and passion of the gaming community, Paizo as a whole, and their supporters which fosters this deeper level of interaction with those who miss out on the top 1%-3% of everyone submitting to RPG Superstar. That's part of what makes this contest different (among a great many other things). And that's why I'm happy to keep giving back to it.
This is why I am so devoted to Paizo, and will never go back to (that other brand that need not be mentioned). Paizo cares about the community. The way this contest is handled shows how much Paizo wants to develop the community and get the best possible writers they can, which benefits everyone... but also how much they care about improving everyone in the community, because those who didn't win are still likely players, GMs, or both, and creating better items makes the game more fun to play. Maybe your item didn't make the cut, but when you submit it in the critique thread, everyone gets to take a look, see how to make it better, and maybe that better version will show up in campaigns, making the Pathfinder game that much richer.
Last year my item was a Tier III glorious train wreck. I asked for feedback and they gave it to me. Here is a sample of what to expect.
speed66 wrote:
The Ever Seeking Compass
*...Aiyiyi...Just all kinds of messed up in this submission. Poor writing. Poor mechanics. Poor presentation. Vote to Reject.
*...Pirates of the Caribbean called, they want their gimmick back. Reject.
*...Agreed. Rejected.
:) The second comment still cracks me up. It was brutally honest and helped me improve this year's submission. I would check out last year's thread and this year's as it develops to get some ideas of what is usually culled. After Neil gave everyone feedback like this and caught himself up with the thread, you could ask him for thorough feedback. He gave me a honest and thorough review that helped me this year.
So don't take it personally, we are amateurs trying to make our way into the realm of freelancing. If it stings to get rejected or criticized then use it as a positive motivator instead of a reason to whine and give up.