| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hi everyone!
Congrats to those who made the cut. Great work!
To those who didn't, please keep in mind there were lots of good items this year.
I wanted to make this gentle request: let today be for the winners. Congratulate them. Show them and everyone else how great and supportive this community is.
Tomorrow can be for the critique my item thread.
I know there can be some hurt feelings and tender egos at this time, there is every year. That is to be expected. This community is passionate and the level of involvement is very high and people get very invested in working hard and improving. Please understand not making the cut doesnt mean we don't care. We do. And if you look at those who made it, a good number of them worked year after year to improve and get in, which proves that kind of effort pays off. I would be surprised if there weren't some bruised egos today.
But please keep this in mind. These boards are known for their amazing supportive spirit. Plus, this is a chance to support the winners with class and learn from their items.
Every year there is one guy (or gal) who kind of flames out rather spectacularly in a flurry of thread rants, denials, personal attacks on judges, etc. It's never pretty. Don't be that guy (or gal) this year.
Let today be for the winners. Tomorrow can be for dissecting and commenting on the items that didn't make it.
Great work everyone and lets keep the amazing spirit of these boards as strong as their epic reputation says they are.
So here's to those who made the cut, and here is to those who strived valiantly against them!
Yours in the spirit of friendship and cooperation,
Clark
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because you didn't submit one, you lazy bum. :)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Don't worry Mike, he didn't pick mine either. :-)
bugger I posted my thread B4 I saw this...
I believe Clark posted this thread/message about five minutes AFTER you posted your toast thread, GM_Solspiral, so you couldn't have seen it. No worries. We'll just hold off on any more toasting of the didn't-quite-make-it items for now, so that we can focus more on praising and critiquing the Top 32. I am definitely looking forward to congratulating a few more didn't-quite-make-it item creators on Friday, though, as well as asking for feedback on my own item. :) Meanwhile, big congratulations to the Top 32 (36)! Way to bring it! :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I totally want to be that flame-out guy. If only I knew how to make Hitler movie memes like Kevin (??? I'm forgetting his name...) from last year. : )
GM don't worry. It's all good. :) Just a friendly reminder from me. And the reason the reminder is necessary is that it is human nature from an enthusiastic group such as this to want to get to work right away. I appreciate that. Which is what leads me to post the gentle reminder every year (and I have done it every year I think).
Weird, but I'm kind of bummed more for a few of my favorite items than I am for my own not making the top 32. Maybe its because I know that this is just the start of me pursuing freelance work and I know I'll get better.
I hope when the rate my item thread goes up I get a chance to praise some of my favorites, I truly think you guys passed on some gems. I do not agree with some of the choices made over others that didn't make the cut (though I'll keep the specifics under my hat b/c that's just rude) but compared to other years I can see an uptick in quality this year. All the top 32 items are fairly strong items that at least made my weak keep folder (yeah I;m one of those) though I was surprised by a few I didn't even see while voting (totally jealous of the quicksand cape which is awesome.)
I'm also kind of bummed for Anthony Adam- dude works hard at this really hoped it was his year.
I hope when the rate my item thread goes up I get a chance to praise some of my favorites,
Of course you will.
I truly think you guys passed on some gems.
Of course we did. The items we were choosing from were all of the top 89 ranked items, so they were all really good or they wouldn't have been there in the first place. It's not like there were 32 items and a bunch of turds in the top 89. So by definition there are lots of good ones on the cutting room floor.
I do not agree with some of the choices made over others that didn't make the cut (though I'll keep the specifics under my hat b/c that's just rude)
Careful, this is getting close to sour grapes territory. :) Actually, it's more than rude, it's uninformed. Without straining my arm to pat myself on the back, I think I'll take my opinion, Sean's opinion and Wolf's opinion on which ones are good. Be careful with those kind of comments. Just friendly advice. I'm not saying you have to agree. Just make sure you don't do it in a "I know better" manner. That usually leads to the year's epic flameout and you don't want to be that guy. Believe me on that.
I'm also kind of bummed for Anthony Adam- dude works hard at this really hoped it was his year.
Me too. I was really hoping to see him, and some of the other forum stalwarts, in the top 32. But there is always next year.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
,
Marathon Voter Season 6, Dedicated Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8
aka Jiggy
|
I totally want to be that flame-out guy. If only I knew how to make Hitler movie memes like Kevin (??? I'm forgetting his name...) from last year. : )
Man, now I feel like re-watching that...
Anthony Adam was the forum member I was rooting for the hardest. The man has put in a huge amount of work! I can't wait to learn which item was his, I'm sure it got a lot of votes.
I rewatched it in the last month or so. Still very funny.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hitler on RPG Superstar
That wasn't a flame, I think he was making a joke. In any case, that was hilarious.
Kevin! I knew I remembered your first name name. Still brilliant, good sir.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
LOL. I can't wait. I shall be sure to heap scorn and vitriol all over your item when I see it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Man...I wasn't really following RPGSS that closely last year, so I totally missed that vid.
Thanks for the repost. Wow, I needed that laugh. XD
That aside, I was pulling for Anthony, too. :( I hope to see his item in the critique thread.
Even though the Top 32 got a few raised eyebrows out of me, I'm learning a lot going through the comments and seeing what the judges and everyone else has had to say. I'm hoping to comment on all of them before I call it a night.
Epic flameout? That sounds entertaining...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do not agree with some of the choices made over others that didn't make the cut (though I'll keep the specifics under my hat b/c that's just rude)Careful, this is getting close to sour grapes territory. :) Actually, it's more than rude, it's uninformed. Without straining my arm to pat myself on the back, I think I'll take my opinion, Sean's opinion and Wolf's opinion on which ones are good. Be careful with those kind of comments. Just friendly advice. I'm not saying you have to agree. Just make sure you don't do it in a "I know better" manner. That usually leads to the year's epic flameout and you don't want to be that guy. Believe me on that.
Yeah I've seen those from previous years. I'm far from bitter about my own submission, I saw it perfect clarity everything I did wrong in my first day of voting. I saw allot of items I judged to be worse but I also saw my own design flaws echoed over and over again, far from hard feelings there, I didn't deserve top 32.
I do find myself somewhat shocked a bit by some of the items I expected to see that aren't there and some of the items that made seem OP to me but I tend to be conservative on the power scale. I'm good with keeping the specifics to myself, none of the items I see in the top 32 are bad in fact they are all pretty darn good.
One question I find myself having is this:
Does a SuperStar Item Help Define a Character?
To me a magic item can be a signature item, but should never overshadow the character him/herself.
Take a certain Dark elf everyone loves- he has a cool figurine of wonderous power and 2 ok weapons, a set of bracers he uses as boots of speed and some baubles. His skill makes him awesome, his items have names but they don't define or overshadow him.
I'm not asking out of snark, or bitterness, I genuinely think I can learn something from your response.
One question I find myself having is this:
Does a SuperStar Item Help Define a Character?
To me a magic item can be a signature item, but should never overshadow the character him/herself.
I can speak for me that I don't consider this in any way. I can honestly say I've never asked that question. Because for a wondrous item to do that--to overshadow a character--it would really have to be an artifact (or something made by Boomer), and then it wouldn't be a wondrous item. Now there are some pimpy wondrous items, like the helm of brilliance, that is true. I've never considered whether the submitted item overshadows the character. I'll give that some thought. I would agree with you in theory (at least I believe this is what you are saying) that it should not. But I have never applied that as a judging criteria.
Bugs me that my list came out so different from the real top 32, just trying to wrap my head around it (I called only 15 of 32 there was only 1 item on the list I never saw.) I am noticing the item differences tend to be on the higher power combat utility side, which is why asked the question I did. If I received some of those items in a game I would likely build my character around using said item.
Same series of books I'd say a certain assassin from calmport that crossed swords with our dark elf was defined by a certain jeweled dagger for awhile.
I can honestly say I've never heard Wolfgang or Sean or Mona or Neil or any of the many judges I've worked with ever really mention anything about character defining items. Now, we've said "I'd like to see that on my character sheet," but that's not the same as what you are saying. Maybe it would be valuable to figure out why you and the judges come up with different lists. That may help you understand what the judges are looking for.
Clark, thank you for your active posting and behind the thoughts! I learned a lot from just voting, but you are seriously giving me just as much in your posts to learn.
I'd actually say that for me, it does the opposite. If I looked at an item, even if it was really, really good, and found myself thinking that it would completely redefine how I'd play a character, that was a mark against it. If I could see myself using it in every battle, choosing it over various other action choices repeatedly, then it's just too 'good' to be superstar, IMO.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bugs me that my list came out so different from the real top 32, just trying to wrap my head around it (I called only 15 of 32 there was only 1 item on the list I never saw.)
I'm not sure, but it might be because you were evaluating the items moreso than the designers behind them, and thus, what the item submission tells you about their skills and possible approach to game design.
I know there were a lot of times when I was evaluating stuff as a judge and I felt I had to look beyond whether or not the item itself was something I wanted for my character, or that I could see in a book of magic items. I mean, obviously, it's still important to evaluate the item itself. But, what I'm trying to say is that's not the be-all, end-all for why someone's design submission ultimately greenlights them for inclusion in the Top 32. It's nuanced, and certainly subjective. But, at least you've always got 3 or more judges examining the submissions and coming to consensus on what they think the items are telling them about the designer's potential.
Remember, the judges aren't selecting these items for an upcoming book of magic items from Paizo. Instead, they're selecting the designers behind these submissions for who they think will make good contestants for the competition as a whole. And, as a result, who might have the potential to go on and become a true Superstar as a freelancer for Paizo. Maybe that's a hard distinction to make or understand, but I think it might be relevant to why some people's Top 32 differs from the items/designers the judges end up selecting. Maybe the average voter at home ends up becoming enamored with a certain item because of how it fits their game, playstyle, campaign, or character? Meanwhile, the judges are actually looking beyond those surface issues and past the individual item to see what the innovation and approaches within an item's design tells them about the designer's potential behind it.
Of course, another equally compelling reason is that the judges recognize a serious design flaw or game balance issue which calls the designer's skills into question too much. And, maybe the general voting public (as a whole, not as individuals) isn't yet up to speed on identifying those flaws because they lie a little deeper than what a mere surface reading would necessarily tell you. Thus, the judges (who have a tremendous amount of industry knowledge and experience) are making judgment calls which the voter playing along from home might overlook in their analysis. They then weigh those insights in comparing the various items in ways the average voter isn't really empowered to do on their own.
But who knows? Sometimes, it just comes down to different tastes. And, that's a very valid point, too. As a freelancer, you always want to set aside your personal tastes in favor of what your publisher prefers. And, given the judges represent a huge amount of experience in the RPG publishing industry, you've got to defer to them in the same way you'd have to for your actual publisher. That's why I think a lot of savvy, multi-year submitters to RPG Superstar continuously try to assess for "what the judges are looking for"...and they usually glean that not only from the Top 32 which get invited into the competition, but also from all the feedback, advice, and critique threads on items/designers that missed the cut...and why.
But, as always, that's just my two cents,
--Neil
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Remember, the judges aren't selecting these items for an upcoming book of magic items from Paizo. Instead, they're selecting the designers behind these submissions for who they think will make good contestants for the competition as a whole. And, as a result, who might have the potential to go on and become a true Superstar as a freelancer for Paizo. Maybe that's a hard distinction to make or understand, but I think it might be relevant to why some people's Top 32 differs from the items/designers the judges end up selecting.
Neil makes a point here that I say over and over every year. We aren't actually picking the best items. We are using item creation as the test for selecting the best participants in RPG Superstar, meaning the best freelancers that show skill and promise. We have chosen to use creating a wondrous item as the rubric for us to select the initial 32 contestants from among the thousand or more potential contestants. Neil does a good job saying that as judges we don't just evaluate the item, we evaluate the designer behind the item. Try to think about that for a bit and see if that helps you see what we are seeing. I think that is a really critical thing to understand.
Anthony Adam was the forum member I was rooting for the hardest. The man has put in a huge amount of work! I can't wait to learn which item was his, I'm sure it got a lot of votes.
Thanks for these kind words. I would normally wait till the critique thread, but as you asked so wonderfully, I wrote the Circlet of Malevolent Eyes. I have my copy ready for posting for you all to see when the critique thread opens, so please, for now, concentrate on the winners.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
,
Champion Voter Season 6, Champion Voter Season 7, Champion Voter Season 8, Champion Voter Season 9
|
Anthony Adam was the forum member I was rooting for the hardest. The man has put in a huge amount of work! I can't wait to learn which item was his, I'm sure it got a lot of votes.Thanks for these kind words. I would normally wait till the critique thread, but as you asked so wonderfully, I wrote the Circlet of Malevolent Eyes. I have my copy ready for posting for you all to see when the critique thread opens, so please, for now, concentrate on the winners.
HAHA! I knew it! After seeing so many of your items during the 9 Months thread that just felt like your item. I know I guessed 1 other item correctly. And when the critique thread opens up, I will see if my final guess was correct, assuming they post their item.
@ Clark and Neil- Thanks, that makes sense to me. Explains why some of the items with more solid function but lacking some pizazz would fail against an item the has potential for abuse but well written and has allot of flair.
HAHA! I knew it! After seeing so many of your items during the 9 Months thread that just felt like your item. I know I guessed 1 other item correctly. And when the critique thread opens up, I will see if my final guess was correct, assuming they post their item.Anthony Adam was the forum member I was rooting for the hardest. The man has put in a huge amount of work! I can't wait to learn which item was his, I'm sure it got a lot of votes.Thanks for these kind words. I would normally wait till the critique thread, but as you asked so wonderfully, I wrote the Circlet of Malevolent Eyes. I have my copy ready for posting for you all to see when the critique thread opens, so please, for now, concentrate on the winners.
If I continue next year, you wont spot it so easy, working on the archetype I had prepared has really helped hone a much more slimline writing style :)
Haven't decided what to do with that yet, should I post it on the forums or keep it as a potential Wayfinder submission (yeah, I think it just may be that good!).
Maybe it would be valuable to figure out why you and the judges come up with different lists. That may help you understand what the judges are looking for.
Yes, pwease. :)
You struck the cord I was looking for, Clark. I'm doing my best to wait for a number of reasons, but I'd like to understand better what the judges are looking for as well. What resonates. I've had 3 goes at this and thought I learned a lot from the feedback on my 2nd item. 1st item was a SIAC (with SPAM) so I learned quick the error of my ways on that one.
Thanks for bringing this up.
Neil and Clark, thanks for that last feedback.
One thing that stands out this year in the favor of those who voted is that we were able to see a significant number of items that were out there for judgment to compare to the Top 32. I realize I could have looked at old posts to look at what didn't make it, but having us vote this year has created some understanding of what works vs what doesn't.
Again, thank you for that last bit. It really starts the noggin a thinkin.
Remember, the judges aren't selecting these items for an upcoming book of magic items from Paizo. Instead, they're selecting the designers behind these submissions for who they think will make good contestants for the competition as a whole. And, as a result, who might have the potential to go on and become a true Superstar as a freelancer for Paizo. Maybe that's a hard distinction to make or understand, but I think it might be relevant to why some people's Top 32 differs from the items/designers the judges end up selecting. Maybe the average voter at home ends up becoming enamored with a certain item because of how it fits their game, playstyle, campaign, or character? Meanwhile, the judges are actually looking beyond those surface issues and past the individual item to see what the innovation and approaches within an item's design tells them about the designer's potential behind it.
This is the single most useful description of what the judges are (and are not) looking for in the Superstar competition that I have ever seen, ever. It makes a whole lot about this contest suddenly make a lot more sense.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is the single most useful description of what the judges are (and are not) looking for in the Superstar competition that I have ever seen, ever. It makes a whole lot about this contest suddenly make a lot more sense.
I'm glad that helped out a bit. I think many of the repeat contestants for RPG Superstar over the years have instinctually or subconsciously realized the things they need to do to make themselves stand out rather than simply make their item submission stand out. My secret was to always try to do both. You want to build up your persona as a designer and what you're capable of with the choices you make in how you craft your designs. That's super important in getting the judges to select you for the competition. And yet, at the same time, while you're doing that, you also need to make sure your actual work product...i.e., your submission...rocks from a player's perspective, too. That's going to get the voting public excited about what you're creating for them and not just who you are and what kind of game design skills you have. It's also going to excite the judges, too...who, let's be honest, are all still gamers at heart, as well. They don't separate that from their analysis. Rather, they roll it into their additional analysis from a publisher's perspective as they evaluate a designer's assumed capabilities.
It's not an easy thing to characterize or explain sometimes. I just think it's a core underpinning of the RPG Superstar contest and almost a dark secret to how it functions. I also think it mirrors real-life freelancing. When you're writing for an actual publisher, you need to make sure you're continuously coming up with innovative stuff which demonstrates you've got the skills and the polish and the creativity to enhance their brand and the marketability of their for-sale products. That's what incents them to keep turning to you as opposed to some other freelance designer out there. It continues to tell them a lot about you, as a designer. And yet, at the exact same time, you also need to appeal to the fans and make sure you're not just showing off design skills, but that you're creating really fun, entertaining, and memorable stuff for the buying consumer out there which will run really well at the gaming table. You must strive to meet the expectations of both those worlds. And it's no different with your initial submission to RPG Superstar.
This is why the judges always talk about being "awesome" and bringing the "mojo" with your item submission. That's because the awesome factor and mojo not only speak to the nature of your actual wondrous item. They also speak to who you are as a designer. So, you can stand out with really awesome flavor. You can stand out with a really creative idea behind how the item functions. Or, you can stand out with a really awesome mechanical design that bends or turns an existing rule on its ear. That's what demonstrates the potential for innovative thinking and design skills in the person behind the submission. And it's not always easy to discern either. The judges still get it wrong sometimes. There are people who make Top 32 and then quickly flame out. But, regardless, the judges also get it right often enough that the superior designers rise to the top of the class. That's why they want to see what you do with the potential they sensed in you. And, those who pull that off are the designers who help to restock Paizo's pool of freelancers. They're also the ones who go on to write stuff for everyone to buy and establish themselves as a fan-favorite. The secret is the judges are selecting the designers they think could go all the way, based on what their item submission seemingly indicates about them.
Bottom line: The process works. And it's been working really well for quite some time now. Last year, I posted a thread illustrating just how many adventures had been written by RPG Superstar alumni for Paizo over the past 5 years. It's pretty staggering, and that didn't even include all the contributions such designers have made to the rulebooks and campaign setting. And, every year, another batch of would-be freelancers gets an opportunity to join that club. For those who made the Top 32 this year, that could be you. But you've got to stand out to do it...both to the publisher and to the voting public who could someday become your fans. You also have to consistently do it...both during the competition and after it's over and you're called upon to do this kind of thing for real. In fact, that kind of consistency and dependability is what almost always elevates a novice freelancer into a Superstar freelancer in the eyes of a publisher.
Another two cents,
--Neil
One thing I wonder going forward:
If you look at 27(?) of the top 32 contenders, they all have some kind of Dedicated/Star/Marathon/Champion voter status. Only 5 contenders don't.
Should the contest preclude voting for oneself?
If you look at 27(?) of the top 32 contenders, they all have some kind of Dedicated/Star/Marathon/Champion voter status. Only 5 contenders don't....Should the contest preclude voting for oneself?
I don't think so. Based on the numbers that were coming through the public voting...as well as the judges' validation of it by going as deep into the sorted pile as possible...I don't think any of the Dedicated/Star/Marathon/Champion voters can really sway things that much. And that's doubly true considering that some of the highest voted items still fell pretty far down the judges' ranking of them...or even out of the Top 32 altogether.
Instead, what I think all those voter tags among the Top 32 tells you is that these are people who really immerse themselves in what this competition is all about. They've taken the time to get involved, do their homework, and apply themselves to learning what sets someone apart enough to be selected for the Top 32. I think that's the takeaway for anyone examining those statistics.
But that's just my two cents,
--Neil
One thing I wonder going forward:
If you look at 27(?) of the top 32 contenders, they all have some kind of Dedicated/Star/Marathon/Champion voter status. Only 5 contenders don't.
Should the contest preclude voting for oneself?
I don't think so. It is clear that the process resulted in a great pile of "Keepers," it is not as if marathon voters somehow voted their own items in. The items in the top are there because they are just better, and the judges who reviewed the submissions independently agreed. But the concern you raise--that some people can get their items in by simply voting so many more times than everyone els--is yet another reason why we as judges dont just blindly accept the voter ranking of items.
The ability to vote for one's own item has a negligible effect. As a marathon voter I logged more than a thousand votes and saw my item a total of four times. Some people voted hundreds of times and never saw their item once. There were also nearly half a million total votes. Even the person with the most votes (8000+, if I recall) only accounts for about 1.5% of the total voting.
The ability to vote for one's own item has a negligible effect. As a marathon voter I logged more than a thousand votes and saw my item a total of four times. Some people voted hundreds of times and never saw their item once. There were also nearly half a million total votes. Even the person with the most votes (8000+, if I recall) only accounts for about 1.5% of the total voting.
I agree.
I logged around a dozen hours voting over various times, and only saw my item once.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
,
Dedicated Voter Season 6, Dedicated Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9
aka Steven T. Helt
|
I voted hundreds of times, always for the item I thought was better. I only saw my item four times. So, unless I was number 89, I don't think voting myself down four times (which would be a terrible system) would have made much of a difference. I saw several items a dozen times, and even those I saw lots that made the top 32 probably didn't specifically need my votes to get there.
While I don't have numbers to back it up, my gut says that the fact several voters voted a huge number of times didnt have any impact on the final result as far as skewing it in any way. Now, that would be a lot different if voters were permitted to rank multiple items, then the impact of a small number of voters who voted in massive volume would for sure skew the results.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There probably is a cause-and-effect going on here, but you have it backwards. It's not the fact that they voted lots, putting their items top 89, but that they are designers with top 89 items because they have devoted the time and energy into the design process, making them naturally-inclined to spend lots of time voting for items.
In other words, they aren't top 89 designers because they are Marathon voters, they're Marathon voters because they're top 89 designers.
Just a gut feeling though. I have no numbers to support that hypothesis.
Pardon for being dogged here.
Even if all the replies are true - that there is no statistical contribution, and that causality is reversed etc. How does it do anything but help the competition if you are precluded from voting on your own item?
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
,
Dedicated Voter Season 6, Dedicated Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9
aka Steven T. Helt
|
Depends on your approach. Would you be presented a pairing and forced to vote against your own? That's a horrible model.
So, then, you just don't get presented your item during voting? A few voters were machines. But I bet the chance to see and support your own item drove a lot of voters to sit for longer sessions. The only flaw in that device is Paizo not selling advertising next to each pairing.
It's fun to look for your own item and nothing is hurt by allowing it. It likely contributes to more activity, and it might feel wrong to deny a contestant the chance to support his own item.
The example was thrown by Sean or Gary that politicians are allowed to vote for themselves.
I don't think it would help the competition much, because it really only stops them from voting for an item 5-10 times. Even at 10 times that is such a statistically insignificant amount that it wouldn't even qualify as an outlier. And again, its not that we are voting for items...we are ranking them in an A > B fashion. It could still be that C > A. Disallowing designers to rank their item would only serve to provide less data which is not the desired result.