The Unofficial Top 32 Guildhall and Armory

[Monica Marlowe]

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

Monica Marlowe wrote:

Mikko Kallio wrote:

Hmm. Interesting map designs. Veeeery interesting.

I didn't realize this was "The Unofficial Top 32 Guildhall, Armory and Torture Chamber," did we rename it while I was out drawing a map? OMG, when did they install the rack and iron maidens? I liked it so much better when they added the filigree, can we go back to that desktop?

We'll compromise. We'll put filigree on the iron maidens.

Oh, that makes them so much more approachable, thanks Owen!

[Monica Marlowe]

Chris Shaeffer wrote:

I was repeatedly woken up last night by dreams about the map reveal and finding that I had come up way short of expectations. :/

Same deal Chris, two nights ago I dreamt I was surrounded by empty map outlines and I had to fill them all in. It was a little stressful.

[Jensen Toperzer]

I'm half hoping I make it in, but half not because it probably meams some poor soul missed the deadline :(

[R D Ramsey]

Jensen Toperzer wrote:

I'm half hoping I make it in, but half not because it probably meams some poor soul missed the deadline :(

I thought everyone made the deadline, but when I think about it I don't know where I got that idea.

[Ben Parkin]

Chris Shaeffer wrote:

I was repeatedly woken up last night by dreams about the map reveal and finding that I had come up way short of expectations. :/

Don't worry Chris. I'm pretty sure that's actually gonna be me. So it'll be fine :P

[Taylor Hubler]

Jensen Toperzer wrote:

I'm half hoping I make it in, but half not because it probably meams some poor soul missed the deadline :(

Well I am half worrying about being DQ for something overlooked on my end.

[R Pickard]

Taylor Hubler wrote:

Jensen Toperzer wrote:

I'm half hoping I make it in, but half not because it probably meams some poor soul missed the deadline :(

Well I am half worrying about being DQ for something overlooked on my end.

I am not you, and have nothing to do with your overlooking anything!

No, I will never stop with that joke. :)

[Kalervo Oikarinen]

I've been bouncing around some monster ideas but my brain keeps going to, "Is it Tuesday already? How about now?"

[Scott LaBarge]

Just saw this, and thought that the folks here might be interested: Fat Dragon Games (the 3D papercraft terrain company) is giving away its new Baba Yaga's Hut pdf for a limited time. Check it out here.

[Scott LaBarge]

And a question about Round 2: Once our maps are up and public, are we allowed to talk about them, explain what we were thinking, etc.? Or is it like Round 1 and we have to maintain radio silence about our own item? I would think that since everyone knows whose is whose, there shouldn't be any problem in speaking up (judiciously), right?

[Jeff Hazuka]

It's really awkward to have to rely on someone breaking rules or missing deadlines just to be considered.

I suppose all we can do is wait.

#KidsTable

[Taylor Hubler]

Scott LaBarge wrote:

And a question about Round 2: Once our maps are up and public, are we allowed to talk about them, explain what we were thinking, etc.? Or is it like Round 1 and we have to maintain radio silence about our own item? I would think that since everyone knows whose is whose, there shouldn't be any problem in speaking up (judiciously), right?

This is my first year, and I tended to be a light lurker in previous contests, so don't take me as an expert.

I have been told not to comment at all, and I have been discouraged from even reading comments on my items until after voting is over. From what I understand we can turn off voters easily with even innocent comments of gratitude. Certainly show gratitude, but be smart about it and do so sparingly during the contest.

I also believe we can be DQ'ed for talking about certain details or information during voting, like how we think someone should use the map or pointing out details people are missing.

[Kalervo Oikarinen]

Scott LaBarge wrote:

And a question about Round 2: Once our maps are up and public, are we allowed to talk about them, explain what we were thinking, etc.? Or is it like Round 1 and we have to maintain radio silence about our own item? I would think that since everyone knows whose is whose, there shouldn't be any problem in speaking up (judiciously), right?

You cannot make comments that could be seen as expanding upon your map design until the voting closes. So the safe bet is to be silent, so you won't DQ yourself accidentally. The idea is that the map will speak for itself, judges and voters will make up their minds based on it alone.

[R D Ramsey]

Scott LaBarge wrote:

And a question about Round 2: Once our maps are up and public, are we allowed to talk about them, explain what we were thinking, etc.? Or is it like Round 1 and we have to maintain radio silence about our own item? I would think that since everyone knows whose is whose, there shouldn't be any problem in speaking up (judiciously), right?

The rules prohibit you talking about your own entry at all until voting has ended. Don't say anything about it or you'll be disqualified. Yes, this really happens.

The rules allow discussion of other entries, but voters frown on it pretty strongly. I'd say it's not a risk worth taking, but it's not even a risk - talking about other entries will hurt you, even if you're favorable. Don't do it.

Idle chatter amongst other contestants in here is fine, but don't talk about the entries.

[Chris Shaeffer]

Scott LaBarge wrote:

And a question about Round 2: Once our maps are up and public, are we allowed to talk about them, explain what we were thinking, etc.? Or is it like Round 1 and we have to maintain radio silence about our own item? I would think that since everyone knows whose is whose, there shouldn't be any problem in speaking up (judiciously), right?

Good thing you asked! Basically, the answer is no. It is grounds for disqualification to add to or clarify your entry before voting is over. So be very careful!

Go ahead and read the comments and maybe prepare responses for later, but in the meanwhile, it is usually best to say nothing.

I made a thread on this topic a few days ago!

[R D Ramsey]

The hardest part will be when someone misinterprets something about your entry and it becomes the common wisdom. It happens. But you can't correct them or you'll be DQed. Just let it go, and stay strong! Better to let that happen than DQ yourself.

Always remember the comments don't indicate much about how the actual voting is going. It's just a handful of people talking, and there are thousands of voters not saying a word.

[Christopher Wasko]

Kalervo Oikarinen wrote:

I've been bouncing around some monster ideas but my brain keeps going to, "Is it Tuesday already? How about now?"

Just finished draft #2 of monster #3 (twist pending, of course; just practicing for now). Also sent in an item to the Flaming Crab open call.

I find that when I just sit around and wait, I become a basketcase, so I prefer to keep busy :)

[Scott LaBarge]

Ok, thanks for the quick feedback, and I'm glad I asked!

[Taylor Hubler]

I just checked the rules. What they said above.

I also discovered that everyone who made it to round two won a free PDF of a book I already have in PDF form. I am sure that is to make sure everyone has access to the campaign setting book and can use it each round for inspiration and to ensure we tie our entries into the world. Pretty cool Paizo did that for us.

[Scott LaBarge]

I thought we got a copy of the setting guide, but I've never heard anything about it. I've got a hardback copy on my shelf, so it was no big deal, but I'm surprised I never heard about it from Paizo. No big deal, though.

[Christopher Wasko]

Taylor Hubler wrote:

I just checked the rules. What they said above.

I also discovered that everyone who made it to round two won a free PDF of a book I already have in PDF form. I am sure that is to make sure everyone has access to the campaign setting book and can use it each round for inspiration and to ensure we tie our entries into the world. Pretty cool Paizo did that for us.

This is true, I was very grateful!

[R Pickard]

Thought: "Now that I'm home, I should take a nap."

Said out loud: "Now that I'm home, I should make a map."

Several days later, STILL on the brain.

Going to bed with a Bestiary...

[Ben Parkin]

Taylor Hubler wrote:

I just checked the rules. What they said above.

I also discovered that everyone who made it to round two won a free PDF of a book I already have in PDF form. I am sure that is to make sure everyone has access to the campaign setting book and can use it each round for inspiration and to ensure we tie our entries into the world. Pretty cool Paizo did that for us.

Hmm, I don't see it in mine. But then, I also bought a PDF of the Advanced Class Guide which isn't in there either...

[R Pickard]

Ben Parkin wrote:

Taylor Hubler wrote:

I just checked the rules. What they said above.

I also discovered that everyone who made it to round two won a free PDF of a book I already have in PDF form. I am sure that is to make sure everyone has access to the campaign setting book and can use it each round for inspiration and to ensure we tie our entries into the world. Pretty cool Paizo did that for us.

Hmm, I don't see it in mine. But then, I also bought a PDF of the Advanced Class Guide which isn't in there either...

That was last year, when the monster round was round 2 (because the round was design a monster appropriate to a certain region).

Presumably, if the monster round is similar this year in that specific region info is necessary to help produce a good entry, they will provide the .pdf to the Top 16.

As for your AClG, you should contact customer service. :)

[Christopher Wasko]

R Pickard wrote:

Ben Parkin wrote:

Taylor Hubler wrote:

I just checked the rules. What they said above.

I also discovered that everyone who made it to round two won a free PDF of a book I already have in PDF form. I am sure that is to make sure everyone has access to the campaign setting book and can use it each round for inspiration and to ensure we tie our entries into the world. Pretty cool Paizo did that for us.

Hmm, I don't see it in mine. But then, I also bought a PDF of the Advanced Class Guide which isn't in there either...

That was last year, when the monster round was round 2 (because the round was design a monster appropriate to a certain region).

Presumably, if the monster round is similar this year in that specific region info is necessary to help produce a good entry, they will provide the .pdf to the Top 16.

As for your AClG, you should contact customer service. :)

I misspoke, the pdfs went to all those who had a crack at the top 4, so they could write preliminary pitches in the preselected adventure sites. That means likely the top 8 this year.

[Ben Parkin]

Christopher Wasko wrote:

R Pickard wrote:

Ben Parkin wrote:

Taylor Hubler wrote:

I just checked the rules. What they said above.

I also discovered that everyone who made it to round two won a free PDF of a book I already have in PDF form. I am sure that is to make sure everyone has access to the campaign setting book and can use it each round for inspiration and to ensure we tie our entries into the world. Pretty cool Paizo did that for us.

Hmm, I don't see it in mine. But then, I also bought a PDF of the Advanced Class Guide which isn't in there either...

That was last year, when the monster round was round 2 (because the round was design a monster appropriate to a certain region).

Presumably, if the monster round is similar this year in that specific region info is necessary to help produce a good entry, they will provide the .pdf to the Top 16.

As for your AClG, you should contact customer service. :)

I misspoke, the pdfs went to all those who had a crack at the top 4, so they could write preliminary pitches in the preselected adventure sites. That means likely the top 8 this year.

Ahhhhhh. Not a big deal to me anyway. Already have the ISWG in hardcover :P

[Jacob W. Michaels]

Paizo's often given out a pdf that they found relevant. In 2012, everyone got the Inner Sea World Guide. Last year, everyone got Towns of the Inner Sea (and maybe Cities, too? I already had that one, so can't remember).

[Garrett Guillotte]

Jacob W. Michaels wrote:

Paizo's often given out a pdf that they found relevant. In 2012, everyone got the Inner Sea World Guide. Last year, everyone got Towns of the Inner Sea (and maybe Cities, too? I already had that one, so can't remember).

I believe the goal is to make sure everyone has what they need to submit an entry. Golarion content isn't in the PRD and while useful, PFWiki and Archives of Nethys aren't authoritative.

[Monica Marlowe]

I found my entry for next year guys! Filigree Armor

[Monica Marlowe]

Scott LaBarge wrote:

And a question about Round 2: Once our maps are up and public, are we allowed to talk about them, explain what we were thinking, etc.? Or is it like Round 1 and we have to maintain radio silence about our own item? I would think that since everyone knows whose is whose, there shouldn't be any problem in speaking up (judiciously), right?

I will say this once, because I'm nice, I like you all and I would miss you if you were gone :-(

DO NOT TALK ABOUT YOUR ENTRIES DURING THE VOTING PERIOD. YOU WILL BE DISQUALIFIED

[Scott LaBarge]

Right, got it. RPG Superstar Fight Club it is.

[Andrew Marlowe]

Scott LaBarge wrote:

Right, got it. RPG Superstar Fight Club it is.

And to be honest this is harder than it sounds. The voters are not required to maintain silence...only the contestants. Unless you are extraordinarily lucky people will make bogus assumptions and will say all sorts of things that will try your patience and tempt you to speak up...DON'T DO IT!!

You guys have this. I have no doubts.

Anyway I'm looking forward to seeing what awesomeness you have in store for us on Tuesday.

[Neil Spicer]

Andrew Marlowe wrote:

And to be honest this is harder than it sounds. The voters are not required to maintain silence...only the contestants. Unless you are extraordinarily lucky people will make bogus assumptions and will say all sorts of things that will try your patience and tempt you to speak up...DON'T DO IT!!

As an aside, this element of RPG Superstar teaches a very valuable lesson. Or, two or three actually...

Spoiler:

1) Think of it as the time during which your turnover is in the hands of your developer. Yet, the soon-to-be-published product may have already been announced and lots of people are talking about it, and, in some cases, speculating about it. They're drawing a lot of wrong conclusions and potentially undermining the product's early marketing...and the financial success/popularity of your work. Yet, you're under a Non-Disclosure Agreement to keep quiet about it...and for all kinds of very valid business reasons. It's a staple of the RPG industry. Can you withhold your natural tendency to speak up and say stuff? That's what RPG Superstar is testing you on.

2) Think of it as the time after your work has been published. Lots of people are discussing it. Some are casting aspersions on it. You have a natural tendency to get defensive. After all, they don't have the full insight into why you made certain design choices. Or, they don't realize that some of what made it into print was changed or modified from your original turnover. For better or worse, it doesn't matter. What's in print is in print. You need to own it. And, ultimately, it was your work and your choice of words within your design which led them to draw the conclusions and judgments they're making. Getting defensive about it and engaging someone to "correct" them on their hasty or erroneous opinion isn't going to put you (or the publisher who's working with you) in a very good light. You need to learn to let it go and move on to the next big thing. That's what RPG Superstar is testing you on, as well.

3) Think of it as the time after your work has been published and it's sitting on the shelves of someone's favorite local game store. They pick it up and make snap judgments about it. They may even ridicule or question it while discussing it with their friends. You'd love to be able to correct them, but you're not there. In fact, you don't even know the conversation is taking place. That's because your work stands alone. It actually needs to stand alone. Your publisher can't cram a bunch of your design notes into the product to help people understand your work...or to provide extra explanations so they won't draw incorrect conclusions. And they also can't fly you on a circuit so you can visit every game store for book signings and an hour-long presentation on what you were thinking. So, you need to learn how to write well enough so your work doesn't require extra commentary or justifications. This kind of steady, consistent, independent, writing ability is also what RPG Superstar is testing you on.

And, believe me, even veteran freelancers struggle with these situations. It's a never-ending battle with your own ego and self-doubt. So, this is the perfect opportunity to test how well you can conduct yourself as professionally as possible.

But that's just my two cents,
--Neil

[Monica Marlowe]

Neil Spicer wrote:

Andrew Marlowe wrote:

And to be honest this is harder than it sounds. The voters are not required to maintain silence...only the contestants. Unless you are extraordinarily lucky people will make bogus assumptions and will say all sorts of things that will try your patience and tempt you to speak up...DON'T DO IT!!

As an aside, this element of RPG Superstar teaches a very valuable lesson. Or, two or three actually...

** spoiler omitted **...

This is part of RPG SS that I fear I will struggle with the most.

[Jensen Toperzer]

So about my round 2 entry...

I drew a map.

Yep.

[Taylor Hubler]

Unrelated:

Anyone know any good podcasts to listen to? I just discovered how much time I have to listen to them and have caught up on the half dozen I subscribe to. Amazingly, I am having trouble finding any about Pathfinder that I consistently enjoy.

Also, only one podcast episode with RPG Superstar in the title. I would listen to it but it is in Hebrew. Kinda curious what the episode talks about now. Guess I need to learn Hebrew.

[Jacob W. Michaels]

Here, Taylor, try this: Ani rotzeh laharog et hachatool. Very useful phrase. :)

True story, that's about all I remember from my few years of Hebrew lessons, but I don't know if anyone but Ziv will be able to figure it out.

As for podcasts, have you tried Know Direction? I think that tends to be the most RPG-focused podcast I know, and they've definitely done some Superstar-related episodes.

[Taylor Hubler]

Yeah, I subscribe them. I found a few episodes to be great so far, but their last episode was before the announcement of who made it into the top 32. I am sure they will do something for RPG Superstar soon.

[Mikko Kallio]

R D Ramsey wrote:

The hardest part will be when someone misinterprets something about your entry and it becomes the common wisdom. It happens. But you can't correct them or you'll be DQed. Just let it go, and stay strong! Better to let that happen than DQ yourself.

This is one of the many reasons why it's a good idea to have a pit crew you can count on. If the misinterpretation results from the person not knowing enough about the rules of the game or the campaign setting (i.e. something that's common knowledge), give someone in your pit crew a nudge. But say nothing in public and keep smiling.

Of course, if the misinterpretation results from your uninformed design choices or lack of clarity in your entry, it's another matter.

[Brian J. Fruzen]

Jensen Toperzer wrote:

Brian -- I don't live terribly close (Around-ish to Bethesdsa, Maryland), but I do have a friend who lives in Madison, and I need more reason to get up there. I've done A LOT of volunteer work for conventions in the past (PAX, Arisia, Boskone, Worldcon, MAGFest, PhilCon)... actually, my graduate thesis was originally going to be ABOUT nerd conventions, until I realized my audience wasn't interested (dammit grad students, y u want a memoir?)

Also man I need to figure out how to find my local chapter of PFS. :\

Conventions on almost any scale present a fascinating bubble of nerd culture, but it's been very interesting to see that bubble get more inclusive over the last 5-10 years. Tabletop gaming is more popular than ever and I've had the pleasure of teaching Pathfinder to more than one person who saddled up to a table just because they walked past the room while touring a convention of things they never thought they'd be interested in. It's an exciting time to be a gamer!

If you're looking for PFS in your area, start with the regional coordinator list here. My area uses Meetup to organize events, but others prefer Facebook groups or sign-up sheets in-store. Your local Venture-Officer should be able to help you out.

[Jacob W. Michaels]

Mikko Kallio wrote:

This is one of the many reasons why it's a good idea to have a pit crew you can count on. If the misinterpretation results from the person not knowing enough about the rules of the game or the campaign setting (i.e. something that's common knowledge), give someone in your pit crew a nudge. But say nothing in public and keep smiling.

I have to admit, Mikko, I think this would be egregiously breaking the spirit of the rules. The contestants aren't supposed to say anything to defend their work, but hinting behind the scenes that they'd like their friends to do so seems like REALLY bad form. Maybe there's no way I'd ever find out if a contestant asked someone to intercede for them, but if I did, I think I'd almost certainly NOT vote for that person.

If someone's really making a mistake in rules that are common knowledge, rely on the kindness of strangers to correct the mistake. I think Monica Marlowe and Nick Wasko's examples in previous years is the better one to follow. Both IMO wisely said they would not make any comments on any entries because of their relationships with contestants. They did that in part, I suspect, so their contestant wouldn't be viewed as effectively speaking through them. Having a contestant speak through someone who can't be obviously linked to them simply isn't fair to someone who's not been part of the community and developed the relationships that those of us who've been around longer have.

Speaking as someone who has previously and currently been in "pit crews," I think it can be a tricky line to walk (especially since you're typically friendly with people who've asked you to look at their work). If I'm not in a pit crew, I wouldn't hesitate to advocate for an entry I liked. I did it last year with your module pitch, since I thought downgrading it because of complaints about the level and location were spurious when another pitch's complaints about the same were dismissed by saying both could be changed. I'm willing to do the same for someone who's pit crew I am in obviously.

That said, I think there's a difference between me doing something like that and me pointing out the answer to a question about the entry I could only know if I'd talked with the creator during the development phase, even if that person hadn't asked me to do so.

[Taylor Hubler]

I have a great pit crew in Flying Pincushion. There are elements of my map I know people are probably going to miss or see differently. I purposefully didn't tell anyone at FP the story in the map, point out subtle details, or discuss design choices because I didn't want to risk having any of them come back to the contest and say anything that made it obvious they had insider information.

I expect my pit crew to do two things. The first is to be a voice of reason and keep me from doing anything stupid. Jacob W. Michaels and Frank Gori have already done well in that area. The second is to help me polish submissions behind the scenes by providing another pair of eyes and being honest with their critiques. Jeff, Matt, Kiel, and everyone else have been amazing about this from the start. In fact, I'm in the contest because of their support.

I do not expect them say anything about my submissions in the comments. I don't even expect them to vote for me. I would appreciate it if my pit crew stood up for me if people were unfair in their comments, but I would never go to them and ask if they could deliver a comment by proxy. I see that as being unfair, and as a kind of roundabout way of commenting on your submission without breaking the rules.

[Mikko Kallio]

I agree it's bad form when a friend / pit crew member uses inside information to defend an entry. But common knowledge? I don't quite agree. I'd hate to see a contestant, any contestant to lose votes because of that.

However, I'll take back the part of my comment where I advised contestants to give their pit crew members a nudge when they see a comment might hurt their chances for the wrong reasons.

[Jacob W. Michaels]

That's fair, Mikko. I think it was the last part I objected to mostly.

I certainly don't think it's unfair if I were to point out that there are rules for steep slops in the CRB if someone were to complain they don't know what it means when one of the maps indicates it has a steep slope, regardless of whether I had given a critique to that designer. (For the record, I have no idea if any of the maps will have steep slopes or not; that example is based on something from one of my own practice maps.)

[Jensen Toperzer]

My pit crew are all deliberately people who don't come to this forum (except the esteemed Dyson Logos) for this very reason. Hell, a LOT of them don't even play Pathfinder. Many of them hate Pathfinder. In my opinion, a good entry should stand on its own, without explanation. I am still super tempted to give the backstory and explanation for the design of my magic item, to defend it in a huff... but that's not the point. A magic item should stand on its own without backstory, explanation, or clarification.

The same is true of a map. For a great map, even a map of a specific, already named Golarion location, the map should be something that anyone using any d20 / D&D / fantasy RPG system should be able to pick up and use for their home game off the bat without knowing, say, Chelaxian politics. It should be something that any cartographer could pick up and be able to turn into a fine full-page glossy map without having to have to email you and go "uh what is this symbol? is that a hallway or a wall?" It doesn't have to be super fancy for that, it just has to be clean and clear. This is why I have people who don't play Pathfinder look at my maps -- if my map could work just as well in Lamentations of the Flame Princess or D&D 4e, then I've done my job.

I neither need NOR WANT my pit crew to come in and explain anything. If someone misinterprets my map, that's on me to make it better next time.

[frank gori]

Taylor Hubler wrote:

I have a great pit crew in Flying Pincushion. There are elements of my map I know people are probably going to miss or see differently. I purposefully didn't tell anyone at FP the story in the map, point out subtle details, or discuss design choices because I didn't want to risk having any of them come back to the contest and say anything that made it obvious they had insider information.

I expect my pit crew to do two things. The first is to be a voice of reason and keep me from doing anything stupid. Jacob W. Michaels and Frank Gori have already done well in that area. The second is to help me polish submissions behind the scenes by providing another pair of eyes and being honest with their critiques. Jeff, Matt, Kiel, and everyone else have been amazing about this from the start. In fact, I'm in the contest because of their support.

I do not expect them say anything about my submissions in the comments. I don't even expect them to vote for me. I would appreciate it if my pit crew stood up for me if people were unfair in their comments, but I would never go to them and ask if they could deliver a comment by proxy. I see that as being unfair, and as a kind of roundabout way of commenting on your submission without breaking the rules.

I'll be reviewing all the maps because that's how I do. I'll be advocating for the ones that are the best even if that means not advocating for Taylor who is in my pit crew. I don't think it will be an issue because I already dig his map but if there's 16 Pedro Coelho-quality maps he is screwed.

I doubt it will be an issue but I will also disclaim my bias (though technically that extends to a few of you if we're talking folk I have communicated with outside the contest.)

[Mikko Kallio]

Jensen Toperzer wrote:

If someone misinterprets my map, that's on me to make it better next time.

I agree. I specifically mentioned that "if the misinterpretation results from your uninformed design choices or lack of clarity in your entry, it's another matter".

Of course it's up to debate whether all misinterpretations are the author's fault or not, but I'd rather not debate it; I'll gladly agree to disagree.

At any rate, I chose my words poorly and I respectfully request that we move on to the next subject. :-)

[Taylor Hubler]

If there are 16 maps of that quality I won't even vote for myself.

[R Pickard]

Remember, the judges are not looking for pro cartography, they're looking for a good sense of environment and adventure potential, combined with a good enough sense of design that a pro cartographer could easily turn your basic design into a pretty map.

Which is to say, that's a gorgeous map, but if your map does not look like that, you should not be disheartened.

In other news, reading the judges' commentary on that map/encounter (and others) is really helpful.

[Jeff Hazuka]

So, to clear up a bit of terminology for the new guy, I gather a "pit crew" is a focus group of sorts? Editors? Is that something everyone else has?