Forget what you thought you knew!

[Tripp Elliott]

The change in item types for this year's competition just made much of what we knew about submitting for this ancient history.

These classes of items are written quite differently from wondrous items.

They can have the "prized by," backgroundy stuff, and things like that in them.

Armor and weapons are priced differently, with price not being precisely 2X the cost.

I don't see how you can't have a bit of SIAC with a staff.

And both rods and staffs can definitely do weaponly things.

So, what is still useful? Well, make sure you template it right. Costing for the magic side of things is pretty darn close to the same.

[Mikko Kallio]

I'm quite sure most of the round 1 advice still applies. Make a SIAC even if it's a staff - it's a mistake. Write "prized by" - a mistake. In fact, I'd say very little actually changed, you just have a different selection of magic item slots this year.

Of course, these slots have different "affinities" than the wondrous item ones. And yes, some magic item types are worse / more challenging choices than others (looking at you, staves).

EDIT: Come to think of it, some item types also have a basic function based on the item type, most notably weapons and armor. Each magic weapon and armor is a bit of an SAK because the item is always also a weapon or an armor. But there are certainly ways to work around it so that the item doesn't end up being an SAK. (Something I intend to write about on my blog this coming weekend).

[Tripp Elliott]

You're the judge, so you'd know, and we can disagree, but...

From the CRB:

Life-Drinker wrote:

This +1 greataxe is favored by undead and constructs

Ring of Sustenance wrote:

reattune

I'm just saying these classes of items have examples right out of the CRB that violate "the rules" to which we have grown accustomed for wondrous items.

[Mikko Kallio]

I'm not judging the first round, but as a former contestant, I know very well that 99% of the items in the CRB are not Superstar quality. There are lots and lots of SiaCs there, for example. They weren't created with RPGSS in mind but for a very different purpose.

So, my advice as a 2-time finalist is to use the CRB only as an example for how to format your entry.

[Owen K. C. Stephens]

Certainly finding how to make a Superstar entry with a new selection of items is part of the challenge.

There is a difference between the life drinker (which is difficult for the living to use safely, so the note on who uses it is a practical matter as well as flavor), and saying (for example) drow are most likely to use a dagger of venom.

The advice on spell-in-a-can DOES apply to staves... despite them being spell-in-a-can devices. If you go for staff, make sure you have some idea that elevates it above just a collection of spell-in-a-can options. You CAN do an Superstar staff by the rules, but it won't be easy. It would, in fact, be a sign of amazing talent.

It's an opportunity to select a higher difficulty. Do so only if that appeals to you.

[Mark Seifter]

Yep, there's a reason that "Staves are hard mode" is my tip #4.

[Mikko Kallio]

I searched the PRD with the search phrase "favored by" and got 8 hits.

7 of those items are wondrous items and only 1 is a weapon (the life drinker). In other words, it's not something that's unique to non-wondrous items. Quite the opposite, actually. So I'd say SKR's advice still applies. (Besides, "favored by" is written in the passive voice! Double ding!)

[Jeff Lee]

Mikko Kallio wrote:

I searched the PRD with the search phrase "favored by" and got 8 hits.

Surprisingly, search for "attune" and you only get three pages worth of "attuning/attune/attunement/attuned." I'd say perhaps a third of the entries are magic items.

[Chris Shaeffer]

In looking through all the applicable items on the srd (and making an excel document that I intend to share) and giving everything a rating and comments on their rpgss-worthiness.

After going through half the armor, I have only one A (Equestrian Plate). A handful of B's, a lot of C's, and a few D's. The only F's would be disqualified because they aren't magical.

There's a definite bell curve within the list. And we're looking for the A's.

[Anthony Adam]

Chris Shaeffer wrote:

In looking through all the applicable items on the srd (and making an excel document that I intend to share) and giving everything a rating and comments on their rpgss-worthiness.

After going through half the armor, I have only one A (Equestrian Plate). A handful of B's, a lot of C's, and a few D's. The only F's would be disqualified because they aren't magical.

There's a definite bell curve within the list. And we're looking for the A's.

Lol, I thought that was starting letters and was about to point out Equestrian starts with an E >.<

I... am... so... tired... >.<

[Cthulhudrew]

Mark Seifter wrote:

Yep, there's a reason that "Staves are hard mode" is my tip #4.

Of course, you and Owen just guaranteed that now more than half of the submissions will be attempts at Superstar Staves! lol

[Template Fu]

Hmmm, collective term for staves... a forest of them, maybe?

[Nickolas Floyd]

Staves are hard. All they do is spells. The major exception is the Staff of Power and that is an exceptional exception. And then there is the Staff of the Woodlands that can function as a +2 quarterstaff and cast pass with out trace without spending charges. That's it in the SRD. With only those two as precedents I'm not sure I'm comfortable going too far out of this box. Thoughts?

[Jacob W. Michaels]

I think that's the toughest one to decide at this point, Nickolas. Can you do something else with them and have it be considered Superstar, or will diverging too far from the standard be considered not-a-staff, as Mikko suggests.

[Mark Seifter]

Cthulhudrew wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

Yep, there's a reason that "Staves are hard mode" is my tip #4.

Of course, you and Owen just guaranteed that now more than half of the submissions will be attempts at Superstar Staves! lol

I doubt that. And if it's true, that's OK too. It's hard mode for a reason, and tied to that reason is that it's usually really clear and thus super fast to reject a staff entry that doesn't pull it off, so it makes our job easier.

[Sean McGowan]

Nickolas Floyd wrote:

Staves are hard. All they do is spells. The major exception is the Staff of Power and that is an exceptional exception. And then there is the Staff of the Woodlands that can function as a +2 quarterstaff and cast pass with out trace without spending charges. That's it in the SRD. With only those two as precedents I'm not sure I'm comfortable going too far out of this box. Thoughts?

There are a bunch of staves that fall into the 'swiss army knife plus one or two other effects' category. The staff of travel adds a +10 to your movement, the musical staff transforms into a musical instrument (and can cast spells while transformed), the staff of mithral might also functions as a +2 quarterstaff and adds an intelligence enhancement bonus, etc. I'd say you're not going too far over any line if your design philosophy is 'list of spells plus one other cool effect.'

Now, speaking as a voter, there's really no way I could see myself getting behind a staff that doesn't do more than cast three or four spells. (I don't say 'not vote for', because given the random pairings of this voting system there's always a weaker item that will show up...) Honestly, I don't know that any official published staves would make a list of my favorites- I find myself often just skimming that section of any books with new magic items.

A staff that would have any chance of doing well has to have three things, IMO:
1) REALLY tight theming on its spells. Not just the broad categorizations of 'oh, this has a bunch of fire spells'. A creator will need to find an interesting and as-yet unexplored niche and find some really interesting or unexpected spells to fill that niche.
2) A great description. Most published staves focus a little bit more on appearance than most magic items; that's probably mostly because, since they're just lists o' spells, they have the room to be able to do so, but it's also a strength. A staff that casts a bunch of fire spells is one thing, a staff that's hot to the touch and continuously seeping smoke and the smell of burning wood is slightly better.
3) A really cool constant/at-will effect. This is what's going to make or break most staff entries, right here. Like I've said, I'm not even sure that any of the current printed staves, even the ones that include a useful effect besides spells, would make my list of must-have items, so finding something that does make a voter say 'Oh, yeah, I'd really like to have that' is going to be key. (But it will need to not be so overwhelmingly cool that it's the only reason you want that staff, otherwise it might feel like a cheat of a wondrous item entry. Which brings us back to #1 and tight spell theming...)

[Nickolas Floyd]

Jacob W. Michaels wrote:

Can you do something else with them and have it be considered Superstar, or will diverging too far from the standard be considered not-a-staff, as Mikko suggests.

I can't imagine that a designer could simply come up with a theme and assign a list of spells and charge costs to it and expect to stand out in super star. Even if the theme was really clever. So, if the judges decided to allow staves as an option, they have to be thinking that there will be some added abilities similar to the Staff of Power, or at least the Staff of the Woodlands. Something to show that the designer can do more than create a spell list under a theme.

Does anyone know of any other staves with powers outside their list of spells that are not in the SRD?

[Nickolas Floyd]

I was writing when you posted, Sean. I figured there were more that were outside the Magic Item Index on the official SRD. Thanks for the reply. There is definitely a fine line in the staff design space. It will be interesting to see what shakes out in that department. Will I take the risk? Maybe. What's one more failed first round?

[Mark Seifter]

Just be careful, you guys. When I say hard mode, while it is certainly a way to get my attention if you succeed, that's because I believe that even if all competitors submitted staves, fewer than 32 would succeed. Maybe "nightmare mode" or "hardcore mode" or "super-challenge mode" might indicate it more accurately.

[Mikko Kallio]

Sean McGowan wrote:

A staff that would have any chance of doing well has to have three things, IMO:

Sean, long time no see. :) I agree with you on these three things. I'd like to add a fourth - or rather, elaborate on your third point:

An effect that adds synergies between the different spells, making the tight spell theming even tighter, also mechanically. Synergies and mechanical & thematic links are things that make a SAK less of a SAK.

That's how I'd do it anyway.

[The Golux]

The Staff of Power's PRD entry is also 399 words long, unless part of the entry doesn't count.

[Sean McGowan]

Mikko Kallio wrote:

Sean McGowan wrote:

A staff that would have any chance of doing well has to have three things, IMO:

Sean, long time no see. :) I agree with you on these three things. I'd like to add a fourth - or rather, elaborate on your third point:

An effect that adds synergies between the different spells, making the tight spell theming even tighter, also mechanically. Synergies and mechanical & thematic links are things that make a SAK less of a SAK.

That's how I'd do it anyway.

Agreed; now that is something that would make at me look at a staff in a whole new way.

[Garrett Guillotte]

Nickolas Floyd wrote:

Does anyone know of any other staves with powers outside their list of spells that are not in the SRD?

I used the Archives of Nethys to find a few staves that do more than cast spells, act as a +X quarterstaff, or provide simple bonuses, such as

* Monstrification Staff (pour potions on it to recharge it)
* Crook of Cidhureen (increases the amount of shadow produced by shadow spells; as a bonus, it's from Neil Spicer's RPGSS module Realm of the Fellnight Queen)
* Ember Staff (changes the casting point of a spell)
* Staff of Feast and Famine (produces satiating/hunger-inducing leaves)
* Drazmorg's Staff of All-Sight (topped with a portable scrying/voice projection sphere)
* Staff of the Master (trade spell charges for metamagic feat benefits)
* Musical Staff (turns into a musical instrument)
* Staff of the Avenger (turns into a lance)
* Staff of Curses (trade spell charges for curse penalties against spells cast from and attacks made with the staff)
* Animate Staff (can turn into an animated object)
* Staff of Stoneweaving (sling-staff that generates its own ammo)
* Staff of the Planes (can be permanently consumed to open a planar gate)
* Dragon Staff (grants natural armor bonus and a bite attack)
* Staff of the Hierophant (trade charge to double attack damage, can be used to smite; can permanently consume the staff to cast true resurrection)
* Winter's Reach (area-effect counterspell against fire spells)

Not to say these are necessarily superstar-worthy ideas, but they're examples of staves that do more than cast from a list of spells.

[Monica Marlowe]

Mikko Kallio wrote:

So, my advice as a 2-time finalist is to use the CRB only as an example for how to format your entry.

And only when it's correct, because trust me, the CRB has already failed me once today. :-)

[Mikko Kallio]

mamaursula wrote:

And only when it's correct

Indeed. :)

[Owen K. C. Stephens]

Mark Seifter wrote:

Just be careful, you guys. When I say hard mode, while it is certainly a way to get my attention if you succeed, that's because I believe that even if all competitors submitted staves, fewer than 32 would succeed. Maybe "nightmare mode" or "hardcore mode" or "super-challenge mode" might indicate it more accurately.

It will not surprise me if a staff makes it into the top 32.

It will not surprise me if one doesn't.
Given there are 5 broad categories (armor, shield, weapon, ring, rod, staff), it will surprise me if 1/5 of the top 32 are staves.

[Cthulhudrew]

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

Given there are 5 broad categories (armor, shield, weapon, ring, rod, staff), it will surprise me if 1/5 of the top 32 are staves.

I should think so, since that means one item would only be 2/5 of a staff. :D

[David S. McCrae]

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

Given there are 5 broad categories (armor, shield, weapon, ring, rod, staff), it will surprise me if 1/5 of the top 32 are staves.

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

Given there are 5 broad categories...

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

(armor, shield, weapon, ring, rod, staff)...

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

5 broad categories...

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

5...

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

(armor, shield, weapon, ring, rod, staff)...

Hee hee. ^.~* Just playin' around.

Seriously, though, I love the work you guys put into the contest!

[Owen K. C. Stephens]

Yep... I posted at the end of a looooong day and got basic math wrong.
Consider this a lesson. Don't post something important (like, say, a contest entry) at the end of a long day. Put it down, get some rest, go back over it the next day.

[David S. McCrae]

Most definitely! I've been toiling the detail on my entry. Still have not submitted it yet, but will probably do so by the end of the day.

This is my first year doing this and I can't emphasize enough how excited I am! ^_____^!!!

[Nickolas Floyd]

Garrett Guillotte wrote:

I used the Archives of Nethys to find a few staves that do more than cast spells, act as a +X quarterstaff, or provide simple bonuses, such as

Thanks, Garrett. I should have checked the Archives myself. There are more than I expected. I think we will see a couple good staves.

[Rose Stack]

David S. McCrae wrote:

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

Given there are 5 broad categories (armor, shield, weapon, ring, rod, staff), it will surprise me if 1/5 of the top 32 are staves.

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

Given there are 5 broad categories...

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

(armor, shield, weapon, ring, rod, staff)...

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

5 broad categories...

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

5...

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

(armor, shield, weapon, ring, rod, staff)...

Hee hee. ^.~* Just playin' around.

Seriously, though, I love the work you guys put into the contest!

To be fair, shields are basically armor. So much so that there was some question as to whether they were legal entries (originally it just said armor). It's really more like 5.5 categories. ;D

[Owen K. C. Stephens]

mechaPoet wrote:

To be fair, shields are basically armor. So much so that there was some question as to whether they were legal entries

As kind as it is of you to try to give some coverage, I don't think the person who made the official ruling that there really are 6 categories, and listed them, can really use that to cover a simple and glaringly obvious blunder.

It's okay, people make mistakes. I'm happy to point to this one, say "mea culpa," and use it as a teaching moment. :)