Dedicated Voter Season 9
|
As a first time participant and voter I wish I knew what I did wrong. I have yet to see my item so I guess it was culled or DQd for some reason. Not upset (I didn't expect to make it far having never done this before) I just wish I knew where I went wrong so I would know what to have a regret about...and learn from it too. Anyway this has been really fun and I have seen a lot of interesting items.
Star Voter Season 8, Dedicated Voter Season 9
|
As a first time participant and voter I wish I knew what I did wrong. I have yet to see my item so I guess it was culled or DQd for some reason. Not upset (I didn't expect to make it far having never done this before) I just wish I knew where I went wrong so I would know what to have a regret about...and learn from it too. Anyway this has been really fun and I have seen a lot of interesting items.
A few days after the Top32 is revealed, the "Critique my item" thread is opened for those who did not make it to the Top and wish to learn why (and do better next time). It is exactly what you are looking for. Even judges often post their own reasoned opinion of the item on that thread :-)
As a first time participant and voter I wish I knew what I did wrong. I have yet to see my item so I guess it was culled or DQd for some reason. Not upset (I didn't expect to make it far having never done this before) I just wish I knew where I went wrong so I would know what to have a regret about...and learn from it too. Anyway this has been really fun and I have seen a lot of interesting items.
I have yet to see my item on my voting page either, but others have seen it and marked it so on The List. Is your item listed there?
|
Dedicated Voter Season 9
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a first time participant and voter I wish I knew what I did wrong. I have yet to see my item so I guess it was culled or DQd for some reason. Not upset (I didn't expect to make it far having never done this before) I just wish I knew where I went wrong so I would know what to have a regret about...and learn from it too. Anyway this has been really fun and I have seen a lot of interesting items.I have yet to see my item on my voting page either, but others have seen it and marked it so on The List. Is your item listed there? [/QUOTE
Yes it is on the list. Thanks.
If there is no X in the first cull column does that mean it was culled in the first round?
Lack of an X means it hasn't been seen since the first Cull, but only the Paizo judges would know for certain. Voters were still finding new items that survived the Cull as of yesterday evening, so while they odds are getting slimmer, it's still possible your item might pop up.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you've been seeing a lot of your item and then suddenly you are not seeing much of it at all after a cull - it is very likely your item was a victim. At least, that appears to be the case.
If it so happens your item didn't make it, take the lessons to heart and try again next time. I know I plan to! (unless I somehow make it to top 8, which is not very likely... but you never know.)
I regret adding something of flavor (and leaving it because my workshoppers mostly thought it was a really good idea). Based on snark thread it is really hated because there are some really specifc comments on it.
Show up for the Critique My Item thread as well, if you want direct feedback (usually opens a few days after the end of Round 1).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I should have really put a limit per day on usage. And there's an awkward sentence starter I wish I hadn't used.
EDIT: S!@#, just realized I hadn't posted this edit. Sorry about that—I guessed the original post was a bit specific the moment I put it up. Thanks to Curaigh for prompting me.
Preview is your friend. Use it on posts and it will become habit. A useful habit when it comes to submitting contest entries :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The only time I would take off for it would be if the two items were otherwise exactly dead even. This is my third year voting, and I've never done it yet.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
,
Champion Voter Season 6, Champion Voter Season 7, Champion Voter Season 8, Champion Voter Season 9
|
I regret following the template :P. It didn't have required spells italicized, so I decided against copying the prd formatting and didn't either. I'm worried that (if I get there) people will downvote for incorrect formatting.
I am not counting lack of italics as a negative this year due to provided template. Making them look like feats is another thing though...
I am counting italics, but as Ambrosia Slaad said, it tends to be a final factor. Truthfully, I find when I do have to resort to template use to break a tie, they're either both flawed in some way or both perfect. Then I'm stuck deciding whether a capitalized aura outweighs capitalized spells and end up right back where I started. :/
Will do. Thanks Petty and Raven for the heads up. All the constructive criticism I can get is appreciated.
Scott if you would like to send me your item in a PM I would be happy to check it for possible DQ reasons.
|
Dedicated Voter Season 9
|
Will do. Thanks Petty and Raven for the heads up. All the constructive criticism I can get is appreciated.Scott if you would like to send me your item in a PM I would be happy to check it for possible DQ reasons.
Thanks Clay. I will send it to you as soon as I get back to the computer I have it saved on. Probably be about an hour.
Preview is your friend. Use it on posts and it will become habit. A useful habit when it comes to submitting contest entries :)I should have really put a limit per day on usage. And there's an awkward sentence starter I wish I hadn't used.
EDIT: S!@#, just realized I hadn't posted this edit. Sorry about that—I guessed the original post was a bit specific the moment I put it up. Thanks to Curaigh for prompting me.
Well, I clicked edit a few seconds after. Trouble is I manage too many tabs!
EDIT: Admittedly, a Preview would have caught that "to" there.
Just saw my item, I made a small formatting error. Dammit.
Don't sweat it. The first year I entered (2013), I forgot the name in the text body—as so many have this year. It is so common to make accidental formatting errors, that no one has been completely immune.
Just seen mine for the first time. I regret only proofreading 28 times instead of 29. It's a small simple mistake.... But I can't believe I did that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pretty sure that I made the top 32 with that mistake in my entry, so breath easy.
Yeah but didn't judges go over the top items before cutting them down to just 32 when you entered? This year it's JUST the voters that choose the top 32.
Which is unfortunate because the judges seemed, to me at least, to be MUCH more forgiving of minor formatting errors than the forum goers.
Star Voter Season 6, Dedicated Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 9
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pretty sure that I made the top 32 with that mistake in my entry, so breath easy.Yeah but didn't judges go over the top items before cutting them down to just 32 when you entered? This year it's JUST the voters that choose the top 32.
Which is unfortunate because the judges seemed, to me at least, to be MUCH more forgiving of minor formatting errors than the forum goers.
I agree. The judges seem to be looking for an eye for a certain type of talent that I don't think we, as forum goers always see. They, I think recognize genius much better than we do.
Personally, I regret I had a great original cool idea, but because of the rushed nature due to the schedule change, I didn't vent it properly and thought of a great, more restrained item two days into the contest.
Basically, I should have saved the original cool idea for next year.
I agree. The judges seem to be looking for an eye for a certain type of talent that I don't think we, as forum goers always see. They, I think recognize genius much better than we do.
Exactly. This year, for the first round anyway, talent is taking a back seat to "how well can a submitter play to the forums". There is, of course, something to be said for how well-liked your item is by the playing community. But given how draconian many of the forum goers seem to be about following the template to the nth degree, it makes me wonder how much attention they're paying to the more important parts of the item: the mechanics, the writing, and the presented gameplay dynamics and how they interact with existing material.
If a submitter follows the template for the most part and does something like miss a comma or there's a typo in the pricing, that shouldn't be as much of a deal breaker as people make it out to be. Adhering to the template is a one-minute edit at worst, but an item that breaks the bank or is otherwise poisonous to the game? That's a taller order to fix, even if it adheres completely to the template and is otherwise popular.tl;dr, what is popular is not always what is good and I think the judges from RPGSS's past were a vital part of the process to recognize actual talent.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Formatting is only a deal breaker for me if it is particularly egregious.
My heirarchy is thus:
1) Imagination beats Formatting
2) imagination beats Mechanics
3) Mechanics beat Formatting
Formatting mistakes are an easy fix. You can teach someone who has little to no experience with these things in minutes.
Mechanics takes longer to teach than Formatting. Imagination is something else entirely.
Additionally, I noticed that I almost always ( at first it was subconscious) vote down the items with ~ 299 words. I realized that I admire the ability to write with an economy of words. More words don't usually mean more imagination.
More words usually muddy the whole thing and it's often easy to spot where the designer got carried away and the submission wasn't helped by everything the designer had to pack into the item.
There were definitely a couple of items I thought were pretty good that didn't make the last cull because their format wasn't correct. Not bolding things and putting in lines particularly. It was slightly harder to see which bits were important, but not much. Not having bits of white space looks like it killed things as well.
They're minor readability things, and I don't think it's fair to those items that were decent but were culled because of them. They were in with a bad crowd, and if you're not paying much attention sometimes that appearance is enough to make you immediately overlook something. I caught myself doing that once or twice, but noticed some nice ones in there, hiding. And I am annoyed that they're gone.
In exchange for removing some good ones because they broke the template a bit, we have some terrors that are somehow only floating because they did the template right.
My item's still around, and it's got some minor formatting mistakes, but I know I would have been annoyed if it had been culled because of that. Especially knowing it was a lot better than some of the other things still around, if I do so so myself.
tl;dr, what is popular is not always what is good and I think the judges from RPGSS's past were a vital part of the process to recognize actual talent.
The science of decision making shows that groups tend to choose the second best solution while independent judges are much more random.
I also believe it's an acknowledgement that it doesn't really matter what Paizo (or any publisher) thinks is good but what the consumer believes is good.
I think selecting the top 32 through voting is a good idea. We'll see how it goes.
I remember looking over previous top 32 and I noticed a few exceptional items, some of which A) didn't adhere to the template and B) didn't really use the language of the game properly. But the judges let them through, and why? Because the judges have an actual eye for talent.
I'm not saying that public voting to determine the top 32 was a mistake- it's way too early to say something like that. But I wouldn't be surprised if the top 32 this year aren't as good.
Actually, I've been looking at the system in a new light: as racking over wine as opposed to filtering as has been done in the past. By allowing the ones less likely to move on sink and then having the top bunch actually get compared to one another, the results shouldn't be that dissimilar.
Actually, I've been looking at the system in a new light: as racking over wine as opposed to filtering as has been done in the past. By allowing the ones less likely to move on sink and then having the top bunch actually get compared to one another, the results shouldn't be that dissimilar.
"Far more accurate" to what standard? Certainly not the actual quality of the item. It'll be a more accurate representation -of what the forum likes-, but that is not representative of the actual quality of the item, writing, or design. The current voting method isn't indicative of what is good, simply what is popular.
Actually, I've been looking at the system in a new light: as racking over wine as opposed to filtering as has been done in the past. By allowing the ones less likely to move on sink and then having the top bunch actually get compared to one another, the results shouldn't be that dissimilar."Far more accurate" to what standard? Certainly not the actual quality of the item. It'll be a more accurate representation -of what the forum likes-, but that is not representative of the actual quality of the item, writing, or design. The current voting method isn't indicative of what is good, simply what is popular.
Accurate in their overall ranking. The judges have never gone beyond the Top 100 in their selections; they didn't have to. The process worked well enough that all the selections they would have picked anyway rose to the top. But because of the way the algorithm works, those items near the top rarely were compared to each other. They were mostly compared in the voting couplets to items below the top 100.
You see once an item starts getting a significant number more up-votes than down-votes, it tends to fall out of the voting queue as its place in the rankings is fairly clear. The middle of the pack and high percentage down-votes get more screen time to give them a fair shot. If you use this method and stop early, the top 100 entries or so will be ranked by how they did against the eliminated entries, not each other. Imagine deciding the Olympics or World Cup based on the qualifying round results. Not too good an idea.
That's where the judges came in. They acted as a filter, going over the items that had rarely been compared to each other and established a top 32 ranking comparing only the top 100 entries. With repeated culls, we get to do that this time around. So it will be a far more accurate ranking than what we gave the judges in past years.
All that said it could still blow up in our faces, but it is a lot less likely than some think. We did a very good job sorting the items in past years. This year we've been given a method of being better still.
Oooooh I see, I was misunderstanding
You're saying that, previously, top-tier items rarely got coupled with each other, but now that there are more culls it's much more likely that top items will pair up and there can be definitive comparisons. Ok, yeah that makes sense. It's still a forum-based popularity contest, but at least we can be sure that the items that get through are the ones that the community want to get through.
I still think that judges should be used for round 1, even if the pool they select from is lowered significantly (say, sorting through top 50) because at least then there's opportunity for talent to be recognized above popularity.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
...You see once an item starts getting a significant number more up-votes than down-votes, it tends to fall out of the voting queue as its place in the rankings is fairly clear. The middle of the pack and high percentage down-votes get more screen time to give them a fair shot....
Ah, so that's why I haven't seen my item in my voting queue yet: it's just too darn good. {crit fails Will save and topples over under the weight of her massive ego}
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I regret going to a different place for lunch today, because they had...
...no croquettes.
Marathon Voter Season 9
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I remember looking over previous top 32 and I noticed a few exceptional items, some of which A) didn't adhere to the template and B) didn't really use the language of the game properly. But the judges let them through, and why? Because the judges have an actual eye for talent.
I'm not saying that public voting to determine the top 32 was a mistake- it's way too early to say something like that. But I wouldn't be surprised if the top 32 this year aren't as good.
After playing many RPG Superstar written scenarios for PFS, I can honestly say that lack of mechanical mastery completely ruined some otherwise interesting missions.
I'm glad the community at large seems to split its focus between fluff and crunch.
I regret *specifically* making an item that used Occult Adventures material and collaterally targeted a coming AP, in order to make it relevant to future material and assuming that Paizo's latest book would be part of the PRD without actually checking that it was. I worked diligently, got good peer review and advice, was template-perfect, and this year's submission was easily my best ever - only to be almost certainly ganked in the first cull. I'll be frank: it was damn disheartening.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There were definitely a couple of items I thought were pretty good that didn't make the last cull because their format wasn't correct. ...
Impossible to say why something got downvoted or not. I doubt formatting played anything more than a subliminal on the majority of those. When you send something to be published it is sitting in a pile of 100's. An editor wants to get through these as quickly as possible, so looks for reasons NOT to continue reading. The longer a writer can get the editor to keep reading the better their chances. A [simple typo] is overlooked, two are not, three and they're done reading. With no typos the editor might make it long enough to decide if the story is strong enough to continue. Not following the format makes it harder to take the author seriously. In short the first "simple typo" is actually the second, one more strike and I'm moving on.
... It's still a forum-based popularity contest, but at least we can be sure that the items that get through are the ones that the community want to get through....
Three things to add a grain of salt. Keep in mind the folks on the forums are not the only ones voting (I'd guess at any given time they make up 60%) & two judges have already chimed in with what they have seen.
Then remember anonymity precludes an item from gaining the forum user's popularity (AA & Feros would be in already! :).
Finally, most of the forum folks are not only fans of the contest, but aspiring freelancers as well. They have some game design credits to their names. They have read and studied what judges have said (and more importantly why they said it). As Fero's said the public has been pretty good at picking out the best items in the past.
Honestly, I rather doubt that fewer than 80% of the voters are on the forums, but that's just my estimate.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then remember anonymity precludes an item from gaining the forum user's popularity
"Popularity" was poor word choice. What I meant was "whatever catches the forum's fancy"- which isn't necessarily good design.
And you're right: it's a contest for amateur designers, but the input of professional judges is what makes the first round important for contestants. Even if this new voting method proves to be more efficient in letting the cream rise to the top, the opportunity to get feedback from industry professionals is incredibly vital for aspirants. Of course I don't speak for everyone, but when I realized that there wouldn't be judge input in round 1 for the top picks, I was quite disappointed.
...
Then remember anonymity precludes an item from gaining the forum user's popularity (AA & Feros would be in already! :).
...
I think you could count yourself in on that list, Curaigh! :D
Then remember anonymity precludes an item from gaining the forum user's popularity"Popularity" was poor word choice. What I meant was "whatever catches the forum's fancy"- which isn't necessarily good design.
And you're right: it's a contest for amateur designers, but the input of professional judges is what makes the first round important for contestants. Even if this new voting method proves to be more efficient in letting the cream rise to the top, the opportunity to get feedback from industry professionals is incredibly vital for aspirants. Of course I don't speak for everyone, but when I realized that there wouldn't be judge input in round 1 for the top picks, I was quite disappointed.
They may not be selecting, but they will be commenting at least. Each item that makes the Top 32 will be appraised and commented on by Owen K. C. Stephens, Neil Spicer, Amanda Hamon Kunz, and Victoria Jaczko. So we will be getting those important insights...and perhaps learning just how close the voting system worked.
Gee, I'm sure it will be a real comfort after the non-witch has drowned to learn whether the appraisal test worked or not.
Ha! Yeah, this is an experiment. But it is one that I am rather intrigued about seeing the outcome. Just how good is the statistical analysis on all this? Will it work? Or will we get a high percentage of people who shouldn't be in the contest? It's going to be very interesting to hear whatever results Paizo deems to release on that (most likely we might only realize success or failure on whether this voting system is ever used again).
