1) The name of the item really is THAT important, the name really sets the tone of the item for me as a voter.
2) Keep it simple stupid! 8.5/10 times I end of voting for the item with the shorter word count. The items are easier to understand and generally written with more polish.
3) Formatting, SAKs and SIACs do suck, OMG they just are so uninspired...
4) Reasonable prices are really important, going too lower is definitely a deal breaker for me.
5) Know whats out there. So many items so far have resembled things I've seen in other games, I give benefit of the doubt but come on be original. First step to that is know what's out there.
6) Weird is not by any means equal to good, or for that matter original.
Agreed!!! I would drink to that.
7) If you bore me, I stop reading and don't start again. Sometimes this happens with the name or the very first paragraph.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'll give them the benefit of the doubt even if the name falls flat. Sometimes names are hard.
However...
8)If you're going to write something that involves a particular rule subset, then bone up on those rules.
9) Consider world that the item is supposed to fit in (High Fantasy) and try to pretend that you care.
Plot twist. Maybe the contest is not about the item we submitted....but the way we vote.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
11) If the item name makes me reach for a dictionary, at least pretend to have a theme that matches the word I just learned.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
10) Stop using "prized by..." phrases. I think I've seen it three times already.
Only three? Lucky you.
11) I'm going to call this "The Worn Bias." For some reason I'm about twice as likely to vote on an item that's worn vs an item that can be randomly stowed in a backpack ect. Partly I think because worn items like capes, gloves, boots have a frame of reference.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
12) Don't invent new words.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
13) If you have to include "For example" or any variation thereof, your item's mechanics are too complicated.
14) While an item that lets you do A and B and C and sometimes D might be awesome for your character, it is not necessarily a good magic item, Especially if A,B,C,D are not thematically connected.
11) I'm going to call this "The Worn Bias." For some reason I'm about twice as likely to vote on an item that's worn vs an item that can be randomly stowed in a backpack ect. Partly I think because worn items like capes, gloves, boots have a frame of reference.
A lot of slotless items aren't priced properly at all. Oh well.
15) Word Count! If you can say it in 10 words, don't say it in 20.
"17. Your item is modern technology presented as magic."
"22. Item makes adventuring safe."
I'm seeing a lot of these
A) the item that is better than something that exists for less than the current item.
B) the item that is so expensive and worthless it appears you misplaced a zero.
C) Listen to the judges, they've done this for 5 years...their advice it RELEVANT!
D) SPELL CHECK!
E) Puns...really, I love puns, but not in Superstar Design, April Fools yes.
Craft refers to a particular profession, not item. Craft (Alchemy) not Craft (Bombs)...
note: that is not the actual one I saw.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
You guys are finally starting to feel our pain :) There is a reason we say these things over and over and over.
My wife and I are both voting, so we've been discussing stuff, and laughing like crazy at some of the images we imagine when we think of what else the items can be used for. I'd say which item had us rolling, but I can't *sadface*.
I can't say how many times I've groaned at an item, growled at formatting, and had a "headdesk" moment.
You guys are finally starting to feel our pain :) There is a reason we say these things over and over and over.
Except you only have to see the horrible item once...not 3 or 4 times...
;)
Indeed, the judges who can simply crap-can an poor item and never have to look at it again have it easy :P
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, you do have several years of judging trauma to make up for... ;)
Dedicated Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 8, Dedicated Voter Season 9
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Defining an item's limitations is fine. Putting a harsh penalty for using the item is not fun design. You want people to wear an item. Don't punish them for doing so.But what if it's prized by masochists?
They already get their fix by participating in the voting process ;-)
Dedicated Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would not be surprised to see a major uptick in submission quality next year as a result of the voting process.
Even though I feel I have at least a decent item submitted, based on what I am seeing I know that I will be approaching next year with a greatly expanded perspective.
I read all the advice threads, listened to the podcasts but seeing it in action is a whole different ballgame.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Except you only have to see the horrible item once...not 3 or 4 times...
Indeed, the judges who can simply crap-can a poor item and never have to look at it again have it easy :P
However, it should also be pointed out that you guys haven't had to see the sanity-robbing items that immediately got DQ'ed for rules violations. Some of those are easily up there with the pain of having to review a mere "bad" item 3 or 4 times. Like, way up the insanity scale...
No, really. O_o
If they need actual vengeance, then maybe they need to take a break from judging and pass it on to other game pros with thicker constitutions. ;)
This kind of thing's going to have a load of chaff and a tiny bit of wheat (and if I submitted an entry, I'm sure it'd be more likely to be the former than the latter). Nature of the beast. Ya gotta be ready for it and suck it up.
I agree with the OP that the voting experience is teaching me a lot about what makes a well-designed item, and the whole thing is extensively valuable on that alone. I'll definitely put up with some poorly proofread writing and items that force you to take three lefts in order to allow you to make a slight right for that opportunity.
I know the judges still have a lot of hard work ahead of them though, that we won't even see.
ETA: I should note, I used to be a writing tutor. It really takes a lot for me to be actually shocked or frustrated at something I read, even if that's what I have to do all day. I had to develop this skill or become a drooling vegetable.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know. Names where NOT at all that important to me. It's way to much of a personal preference in my book. And I didn't mind the longer entries at all. I would rather have a long text that fully explains an item than a short one that leaves a lot of wholes or room for abuse, (way too many of those, sort of the equivelant of throwing a Folding Boat/Castle into a smaller room and killing everything in one shot old school style). So I would add
23.) Understand and think of the ramifications your idea allows outside of the box.
24.) Actually study what spells do and go with the one that actually appropriate to what your item permits, AND THEN go with that regardless of if you want your item to cost x10 more (or rarely less).
25.) Check out the Zero level spells. . . (Countless apps out there for quick refernce above and beyond SRD and similar sites).
This ones (possible 26) may just be me, but an item in the 2,000 - 15,000ish range is a lot better than an item in the 75,000+ range. One will likely ever be used and enjoyed and the other will probably not.
27.) Make sure you actually state what the item ACTUALLY DOES. I've seen a few that actually forgot to put in the function of the item, caught up in the fluff. Not kidding at all.
I have yet to see an item that does nothing. Am I lucky?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Check your price compared to your caster level.
Check your price compared to what level a party of adventurers would find this item.
More things I've learned:
If the item theme ties into an established culture (real life or in game), please display a rudimentary understanding of said culture.
Transportation / Camping / Eating / Drinking are often boring aspects of the game. These items are an uphill battle because you have to first convince people to care.
Usefulness and creativity are king.
Mechanics alone cannot save an item.
Paizo judges have vast reserves of sanity.
We should be thankful that SKR's list of design traps & advice stops at 27.
I have yet to see an item that does nothing. Am I lucky?
I saw an item that wasn't so much a wondrous item as a plot device. We've been warned against those.
I saw an item that was not a wondrous item but rather another type of item altogether. It was even in the name of the item - like say a "Wand of Yapping Dogs" (the item in question was not a wand, but I don't want to give any info away unnecessarily). Isn't that an auto DQ?
I saw an item that was not a wondrous item but rather another type of item altogether. It was even in the name of the item - like say a "Wand of Yapping Dogs" (the item in question was not a wand, but I don't want to give any info away unnecessarily). Isn't that an auto DQ?
I saw an item similar to that. It used another type of magic item as part of its name, but reading the description, it was actually something else. I think the author was trying to be descriptive, but that's a bit of a faux pas, not to mention confusing.
If my wondrous item were a baton, I would not call it a "Wand of Authority," even though batons and wands are similarly shaped, because wands are already a category of magic item. If it doesn't function like a wand, it's not a wand.
I voted against one item solely on the basis that it screamed for more meta-gaming and rules lawyering.
I find I am judging more from the DM point of view than the player point.
Does the item help the DM tell great story? If yes, vote up.
Does this make the player too powerful and limit story telling? (e.g. Ball of Death hits on +10 range touch attack, no save....) If yes, vote down.
Given these new insights, I'd change some aspects of my submission if I could go back in time.
Sending a huge Thank You to SKR for pulling together his very helpful list. How did so many people who submitted either ignore his advice or not read it in the first place?
Sending a huge Thank You to SKR for pulling together his very helpful list. How did so many people who submitted either ignore his advice or not read it in the first place?
TL;DR
Sending a huge Thank You to SKR for pulling together his very helpful list. How did so many people who submitted either ignore his advice or not read it in the first place?TL;DR
Or they honestly thought their item was good enough to go against his advice. And that's ok. It's worth it to sift through all the failed attempts to find the few who pulled it off.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
TL;DR
I'm beginning to feel that way about a lot of the items I'm shown.
Star Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7
|
It's really interesting to see how many items have been created for specific 'slots', or if a non-slot item, what purpose they have. There's a pretty cool variety, and even when an item goes against the listed rules you can still usually see the flash of inspiration behind these things.
Truth is, someone felt passionate enough about their items to take the time to 'stat them out', and that alone earns my few seconds of reading.
Or they honestly thought their item was good enough to go against his advice. And that's ok. It's worth it to sift through all the failed attempts to find the few who pulled it off.Sending a huge Thank You to SKR for pulling together his very helpful list. How did so many people who submitted either ignore his advice or not read it in the first place?TL;DR
There is that possibility, yes. However, considering that several people have posted to say they didn't read the rules before submitting their item, I'm thinking there are a lot more that did the same thing. If they didn't even read the official rules, chances are they didn't bother with advice threads either.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I dislike items that make the GM's job harder with item-specific rules subsets.
Marathon Voter Season 6
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I know that everyone looks for different things, but I just want to put something out there. When I look at two items, if one is properly formatted using the wondrous item template, and one is not, then my vote automatically goes to the properly formatted one. It might be a little harsh, but the template was clearly given and intended to be used, and I don't know how many times the judges have told us to check and then re-check our times.
So I know that everyone looks for different things, but I just want to put something out there. When I look at two items, if one is properly formatted using the wondrous item template, and one is not, then my vote automatically goes to the properly formatted one. It might be a little harsh, but the template was clearly given and intended to be used, and I don't know how many times the judges have told us to check and then re-check our times.
And I'll counter that by saying once again that I'll vote up a cool and imaginative idea that makes formatting mistakes over a dull, vanilla item with perfect formatting.
I tend to use formatting as a tiebreaker, all other things being equal. Along with things like italicizing spells, using real slots, getting construction requirements right, etc. But whichever item is clearly a more interesting and well-thought out item than the other will get the vote every time.
But if they're equally great or mediocre or terrible, then yeah, whoever can follow the guidelines properly gets it.
It's best to nail both the idea and the execution, obviously. Even the best idea man who consistently gets the mechanics/formatting wrong isn't worth it. Likewise, those who can follow a template, but lack creativity just don't appeal either. Do them both passably well and you're on the right track. Do them like a Superstar and you can kick in the door.