Just discover this whole Superstar contest thing. Highly intrigued and hoping to join. Can I submit an item for critique if that's all right?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Anyone is welcome to take part. Just be aware that sometimes the critique seems harsh, but it's meant to help you improve your skills. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And remember that if you submit an item here, it can't be used IN the contest itself. If you think you have a great idea, hold on to it for now and come up with something else that you can post in this practice thread.
And remember that if you submit an item here, it can't be used IN the contest itself. If you think you have a great idea, hold on to it for now and come up with something else that you can post in this practice thread.
Oh, did not know that. Thanks for the tip. I guess I'll practice my workshop skills with new ideas.
Here's an Idea I've been toying around with, since I play so many low level campaigns, I thought it'd be nice to have more low level items. Questions I have are in the spoiler.
Traveler's Flavor Wheel
Aura moderate transmutation; CL 3rd
Slot Slotless; Price 100 gp; Weight —
Description
This rectangular canister has three sections in which the user can access, each labelled for ease of use. Each section houses five coarse pellets of differing color. By placing a single pellet in a container of water no larger than 1 gallon and cooking it over a fire or other heating source, it becomes a gruel paste with the following effects:
- Home: No mechanical effects, but the meal tastes like home and invokes fond memories.
- Savory: A delicious meal by any standard. Each consumer heals for 1 hp.
- Filling: The gruel retains its flavorlessness. Each consumer's appetite is sated for the next 24 hours as if they had eaten regularly.
Construction Requirements Create Wondrous Item, Prestidigitation; Cost 200 gp
No idea about CL or construction requirements. Also, i think my wording could use some work if any of you have suggestions.
Mask of the Huntmaster
Aura faint necromancy; CL 5th
Slot head; Price 4,500 gp; Weight 1 lb.Description
Composed of white wood pieces tied together with strings, this mask seems very fragile. Two small round holes are pierced symmetrically and allow its wielder to see but there is no opening for the mouth. Instead, a monstrous mouth is painted to replace it.The wielder gets the favored enemy: animals ability, which grants him a +2 bonus on Bluff, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive and Survival checks against animals. He also gets a +2 bonus on weapon attack and damage rolls against them. He can make Knowledge skill checks untrained when attempting to identify animals. These bonuses don't stack with those of the ranger's favored enemy class ability.
Once a day, the wielder of the Mask of the Huntmaster may cast scare by looking at a single target and using the command word. If the target's creature type is the same as the wielder's favored enemy (from the ranger's class ability or from this item's effect), the maximum HD for it to be frightened is increased to 10 and if the target fails its saving throw by at least 4 points, it is panicked instead of being frightened.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, scare; Cost 2,250 gp.I decided not to change the name, but I had some ideas, none of which seemed better than this one. I know that the "of the" part may be a problem (I noticed it when I put it down the first time): it sounds a bit odd in english... Maybe "Huntmaster's mask" would be better, but...
Hi Silverik -- template looks good; only thing I noticed was an extra period at the end of the cost.
I like the new description for the most part. I can now picture the mask much more clearly. I don't care for "seems fragile," though. I think that will lead to questions about whether it actually IS fragile and that complicates things. I think you're also toeing the line of how long a description should be -- I think you still fall on the right side of the line, but it's getting close. Typically they're no more than two sentences. Because of that, I'd probably lose "seems fragile" and just try to condense the three sentences into two.
I don't love your wording for the main power, since it doesn't feel like how Paizo would write it -- I think you could simply write, "The wearer* treats animals as a favored enemy, as the ranger class ability."
* Wearer is the proper noun for someone wearing your item; wielder would be if they're holding it.
Also, for the competition itself, be careful about simply giving a class ability as that's often frowned on. We often see lots of items that let you pick locks and finds traps -- negating the need for a rogue -- but that's not considered good design. This doesn't quite do that (and you certainly do MORE than just give a class feature here), but I did want to point it out as a bit of a Superstar/game design trap.
In the third graf, mask of the huntmaster should be lowercase and italicized. I like this kicker to the power. This is what moves you closer to being Superstar (instead of just being a class-ability-in-a-can and takes advantage of other game rules smartly. I'd probably break the last sentence into two sentences, as it's a bit of a run-on here. I'd also probably make it have to fail by 5 points instead of 4, as that's more standard threshold for an increased effect (such as with Intimidate or many combat maneuvers).
As for the name, I think this is OK. I personally don't like "of the" constructions, but I don't know that that's a widespread feeling (looks like 8 of last year's Top 32 had "of the" constructions in the name). Even so, sometimes they can still be the best choice. I think mask of the huntmaster sounds better than huntmaster's mask here, even though I'd usually lean toward the latter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here's an Idea I've been toying around with, since I play so many low level campaigns, I thought it'd be nice to have more low level items. Questions I have are in the spoiler.
Traveler's Flavor Wheel
Aura moderate transmutation; CL 3rd
Slot Slotless; Price 100 gp; Weight —
Description
This rectangular canister has three sections in which the user can access, each labelled for ease of use. Each section houses five coarse pellets of differing color. By placing a single pellet in a container of water no larger than 1 gallon and cooking it over a fire or other heating source, it becomes a gruel paste with the following effects:Only one pellet may be used per container of water. If another pellet is added to an already existing gruel, it sinks to the bottom unused. Pellets may only be bought as a set and are preserved from spoiling if kept in the original container.
- Home: No mechanical effects, but the meal tastes like home and invokes fond memories.
- Savory: A delicious meal by any standard. Each consumer heals for 1 hp.
- Filling: The gruel retains its flavorlessness. Each consumer's appetite is sated for the next 24 hours as if they had eaten regularly.
Construction Requirements Create Wondrous Item, Prestidigitation; Cost 200 gp
Hey Inxpitter, let's take a look at what you've got. I like your initial thoughts; I love low-level consumable items.
Looking for just at your formatting, you've got a few template glitches:
* Instead of slotless, you should use "none" to indicate it has no slot.
* Construction goes on it's own line, with the Requirements and Cost on the next line
* Prestidigitation should be lowercase and in italics.
* Cost should be bold.
* Your cost is typically half the price, which is the opposite of what you have here.
You asked about CL and construction requirements. The former is based on the latter, most of the time being the level you would need to cast the spells in the construction requirements. In this case, because you have it based on a 0-level spell, the CL should be 1st.
I'm not sure what you don't know about the construction requirements. I'm guessing you were asking if you used the right spell (since it looks like you otherwise handled it fine in terms of the feat and spell); if I'm wrong about what you're asking, let me know and I'll try to explain better. :)
As for your spell selection, it can be a little tricky. The best items for Superstar AREN'T going to exactly duplicate a spell and thus you have to simply find the best choice. Most people aren't going to be too picky, though there are times you can be called out for using the wrong one. In this case, prestidigitation isn't a bad choice for a pretty minor item. You could also maybe have done create food and water. What I like to do is open up the spell list index in the prd and then try searches to find a few key terms (in your case, maybe food or hunger); often that will lead me to my best spell.
--
OK, on to the item itself.
I think your first paragraph might be sacrificing some descriptive elements for more mechanics than you want. It reminds me a bit of Anthony Adams' early effort, Proliferating Pocket Purse, which is well-critiqued here. (There are likely other comments about it on that thread, which might help.)
Unfortunately, I've found myself a bit bored before I've even gotten to the mechanics, which obviously isn't what you want.
Looking at the effects now:
* Your lead effect has no mechanical effect. Yes, it can have some role-playing potential, but my feeling is people typically want something that will have mechanic effect of some sort (oftentimes something in combat, though certainly non-combat items have advanced). I like the idea, though, so I'd probably look to add a mechanical effect here. I was thinking maybe it could restore a memory; I did a quick search on the spell list index to see what there was involving memory, and maybe allowing this power, from modify memory might work: Allow the subject to recall with perfect clarity an event it actually experienced. Or perhaps it could negate a single instance of memory loss from the last 24 hours?
I'd also be careful about simply writing "No mechanical effects." Even if you weren't going to change the mechanics, I'd start with the more evocative part of it (and always write in complete sentences) -- "This meal tastes like home and invokes fond memories, though it has no other benefits."
* Again, I'd write in complete sentences here. Also, you write each consumer heals for 1 hp, but I don't know how many people can eat one dose of the gruel. So that raises the first question. Secondly, you want to try to follow Paizo's wording style. Instead of "heals for 1 hp," I'd write "Eating savory gruel cures 1 hp of damage."
* I actually like this one. Nothing fancy, but makes sense for a low-cost item.
Smart caveat about the limit of pellets, I think, though the effects aren't really so strong that they'd stack (and if we're going with caveats, I think you might need/want some cooking times and other options. As read, I could put a single drop of water in with a pellet, heat it for 1 round, eat it and then go on. Now the effects aren't so strong that I think many players would do that, but it's always smart to try to think of how someone could use your item to try to break the game. You might not do that, but when we're doing game design, we need to try to think of worst-case possibilities.)
Hope that helps.
|
Here's an Idea I've been toying around with, since I play so many low level campaigns, I thought it'd be nice to have more low level items. Questions I have are in the spoiler.
Traveler's Flavor Wheel
Aura moderate transmutation; CL 3rd
Slot Slotless; Price 100 gp; Weight —
Description
This rectangular canister has three sections in which the user can access, each labelled for ease of use. Each section houses five coarse pellets of differing color. By placing a single pellet in a container of water no larger than 1 gallon and cooking it over a fire or other heating source, it becomes a gruel paste with the following effects:Home: No mechanical effects, but the meal tastes like home and invokes fond memories.
Savory: A delicious meal by any standard. Each consumer heals for 1 hp.
Filling: The gruel retains its flavorlessness. Each consumer's appetite is sated for the next 24 hours as if they had eaten regularly.Only one pellet may be used per container of water. If another pellet is added to an already existing gruel, it sinks to the bottom unused. Pellets may only be bought as a set and are preserved from spoiling if kept in the original container.
Construction Requirements Create Wondrous Item, Prestidigitation; Cost 200 gp
For the Home meal, you could have the Traveler's Flavor Wheel provide a bonus to will saves against mind-affecting effects.
Also, the name makes me think of an item with a circular shape, whereas the item actually has a box-like shape.
Mask of the Huntmaster
Aura faint necromancy; CL 5th
Slot head; Price 4,500 gp; Weight 1 lb.Description
Composed of white wood pieces tied together with strings, this mask seems very fragile. Two small round holes are pierced symmetrically and allow its wielder to see but there is no opening for the mouth. Instead, a monstrous mouth is painted to replace it.The wielder gets the favored enemy: animals ability, which grants him a +2 bonus on Bluff, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive and Survival checks against animals. He also gets a +2 bonus on weapon attack and damage rolls against them. He can make Knowledge skill checks untrained when attempting to identify animals. These bonuses don't stack with those of the ranger's favored enemy class ability.
Once a day, the wielder of the Mask of the Huntmaster may cast scare by looking at a single target and using the command word. If the target's creature type is the same as the wielder's favored enemy (from the ranger's class ability or from this item's effect), the maximum HD for it to be frightened is increased to 10 and if the target fails its saving throw by at least 4 points, it is panicked instead of being frightened.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, scare; Cost 2,250 gp.I decided not to change the name, but I had some ideas, none of which seemed better than this one. I know that the "of the" part may be a problem (I noticed it when I put it down the first time): it sounds a bit odd in english... Maybe "Huntmaster's mask" would be better, but...
Hi Silverik -- template looks good; only thing I noticed was an extra period at the end of the cost.
I like the new description for the most part. I can now picture the mask much more clearly. I don't care for "seems fragile," though. I think that will lead to questions about whether it actually IS fragile and that complicates things. I think you're also toeing...
Thank you Jacob for all the comments!
I added a dot at the end of the cost when I checked on the pfsrd (which is a kind of reference for me...) and saw that they had dots after the weight and after the construction cost. But I will check in the core rulebook to see how it is really. (I have it in a box, but I'll take the time to find it.)Thanks about "wearer", typically a word I wouldn't have used if noone told me!
Also, I'm taking notes: no class-ability items during SuperStar. I always thought like you about these items, but on another hand, the main reason about this mask was to boost the ranger's ability. As pointed out, I added something to make it useful for anyone, hence the free favored enemy. And for a ranger, it would give him a free favored enemy (as long as he hadn't chosen animals yet). That's more things to think about when looking for a good concept.
You're totally right about the difference of 5 in the threshold. I had 4 in mind because there are often +4 bonuses (boni?) to skill checks.
About the description, I thought that I was too short, but "people don't care that much about description once you get the basic idea". But it seems that I was wrong: it's a bit too long. I'll pay more attention to that next time.
Thanks again for the nice tips!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have taken in the comments from Jacob W. Michaels, and have made a lot of changes. Let's see if the first revision is any better. The main thing I'm still confused about is how to calculate a magic item's cost from the spells used to create it and the feat...
Traveller's Carton of Flavors
Aura moderate transmutation; CL 2nd
Slot None; Price 200 gp; Weight —
Description
Inside this roughshod carton of hardened parchment lies fifteen course pellets, five of which are a deep red, another five a shiny gold, and the last five a pitch black. By placing a single pellet in a container of water 1 gallon large and cooking it over a fire or other heating source, it becomes a meal that can feed 4 people and achieves the following effects:
- Pitch Black: Using this pellet creates a black murky soup so thick that you could chew it. Its taste reminds you of home and during the next full rest the consumer takes, they experience a personal memory shared by the other consumers.
- Shiny Gold: Using this pellet creates a savory soup that brings any mouth to water. Each consumer is cured for 1 hp of damage.
- Deep Red: Using this pellet creates a reddish gruel paste that has no flavor. No amount of seasoning will improve its flavor. When eaten, the consumer's appetite is sated for the next 24 hours as if they had eaten regularly.
Only one pellet may be used per gallon of water. If another pellet is added to an already existing gruel, it sinks to the bottom unused. Pellets may only be bought as a set and are preserved from spoiling if kept in the original container.
Construction
Requirements Create Wondrous Item, create food and water, share memory;Cost 100 gp
Hey, this is only tangentially related to Blazing 9, but I'm curious to hear it from the veterans—what items would you say tend to do well?
Last season, there were a lot of items I adored that didn't win. The winners were all good, don't get me wrong, but I honestly didn't expect some of them to triumph over my personal favorites. A lot of that is personal bias, of course. Still, it makes me wonder.
Would you say there's a type of otherwise good item that is at a disadvantage in voting? Or a type of item that tends to dominate the results? For instance, do consumables generally do worse or better? Is a "must-buy" item more likely to do well? Do people favor utility items, or combat items? What do you think?
I added a dot at the end of the cost when I checked on the pfsrd (which is a kind of reference for me...) and saw that they had dots after the weight and after the construction cost. But I will check in the core rulebook to see how it is really. (I have it in a box, but I'll take the time to find it.)
I'm not sure why they have a period after the cost; there should be one after the weight if it's used as part of the abbreviation for pounds (lbs), thought you wouldn't need one if you used an em-dash to denote no weight.
I have taken in the comments from Jacob W. Michaels, and have made a lot of changes. Let's see if the first revision is any better. The main thing I'm still confused about is how to calculate a magic item's cost from the spells used to create it and the feat...
I'll look at the new draft later, but I think what you're looking for in terms of cost is here. What you need to keep in mind is it's often as much art as science, however. This formula would be great if you have an item that simply replicates a spell -- say a whistle that casts silence whenever you blow it (to use an item I created before starting to really do item design). Then you simply crunch the numbers and you have your price.
Where it becomes trickier is when you're not exactly duplicating a spell. My first item for Superstar was the haunting glass, which played with haunts. There are spells to do that now (I'd likely use entrap spirit) but there weren't in 2012. I settled on create undead as being the closest simulation but obviously my item's power wasn't really what create undead did. IIRC, the eventual price I settled on was a quarter of what it should have been "by the book." On the other hand, I think my 2014 item was exactly what it should have been "by the book" and there was a little feeling it might have been underpriced.
You want to compare your item with other magic items -- do they fall in similar ranges of power? I feel like (and I could be wrong) most people look at an item and think I would buy this for this much; I tend to think about if I got item X as a player, would I see that I could see it for 6,000 gp and not even hesitate to do that? If so, my item's probably too expensive. I'm not sure if that's a better way to look at it or not, but I think it works for me...
Now, obviously non-wondrous items are going to be factored a little differently. If you have a +2 weapon, it should cost 8,3xx, to account for the base +2 masterwork weapon. If you add a power to that, you need to figure out how much should that be. Same with armor. Staves also have a very specific funding formula that you can follow.
Hey, this is only tangentially related to Blazing 9, but I'm curious to hear it from the veterans—what items would you say tend to do well?
I'm not sure I feel I have an answer to that yet with public voting. With the judges, I felt I could tell a bit more what they liked, and I thought low-cost consumables did have an edge among other things. With the newer voting methods, I'm not sure. I've seen items I've loved get into the Top 32 and items I've hated do well (I was baffled by love for the stuffed teddy bear last year, but I saw many people praise it). I've submitted low-cost consumables in two of the last three contests; one got in, one didn't.
I'd say there is definitely a bias toward items that are useful in combat; I think weapons are probably slightly over-represented compared with armor and wondrous items (and for the one year, rings and staves), though I can't find the voting stats spreadsheet from last year to try to confirm that.
Pity. I tend to prefer utility items over "kill the enemies quicker" items.
I don't think utility items are a complete no-no. The gossiper's gourd made the Top 32 in 2014, for example. And I loved the bottled map, back in I think the first year of public voting.
That said, I think encounter-level items (they can be utility, but most have to be utility in combat or in more "micro" situations) are the way to go. I think items can do OK without that, but have to be REALLY REALLY good.
Pity. I tend to prefer utility items over "kill the enemies quicker" items.
Utility items can get in (points at own Brass Helmsman from Season 9), but I have to agree with Jacob, and that it seems to be weighted in favor of combat usable items.
The thing about Utility items, at least in so far that I noticed, is that it's purpose, and it's uses must be apparent, and it must NOT be an item that makes camping safer.
Utility Items must have clear uses, clear ways it can help. I have an idea for a Utility Item that is very unique. I think it's really good; so I'm slowly working on it on the side.
Utility items when you think hard about them, and over think them, and give them far too many powers, have a tendency to fall into the Swiss-Army-Knife Syndrome.
A Combat Item has one specific role in combat. A utility Item can be used in combat and out of combat; which makes it step into that territory by it's very nature.
The Brass Helmsman is such a great example, because it just does one thing. It makes a ship easier to use. It Allows an adventuring Party have a massive boat without having a massive crew. I think the key to a good utility item is that it's a Uni-Tasker.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Traveller's Carton of Flavors
Your revisions cleaned up this item nicely. There are still a couple formatting points that could make it even better.
1) Don't capitalize "none" in the item slot.
2) Make sure to clarify the intended subjects of sentences when there are multiple possibilities. The most notable case for me is the pitch black effect. If up to four creatures can share the meal, which one has the memory everyone experiences? I assume it's the person who prepared the pellet, but you should specify that for the reader.
3) Be careful using "you" in your text. I believe Paizo reserves second person pronouns for spells, so items should use third person subjects like "the user" or "the wielder."
4) Bullet points are tricky, since on the messageboards they have a built-in space between the end of the list and the next paragraph (which may not carry over to the formatting in the display used for the open call). In your case, it looks like you added your own line break after the list, which created a big empty space in your layout. While this isn't incorrect per-se, it may turn readers away during a first glance (see my response to KC below). Always use the Preview option to look over your finalized entry before submitting, so you can correct any formatting pitfalls that may arise when transposing your text into the messageboard layout.
You also have a few opportunities to shave down your word count. Each bullet point could afford to lose the word "using" as the lead-in. The word "a" is unnecessary before each pellet's color description throughout the first sentence. Since you provide the color qualifiers in the first sentence (deep red, pitch black, etc.), you don't need them for your bullet points as well.
From a language perspective, I think paragraphs flow better when they avoid repeating the same words in back-to-back sentences. For example, "No amount of seasoning will improve its flavor" could be changed to "No amount of seasoning will make the gruel more palatable," which removes the repeated use of "flavor" in two sentences.
Hey, this is only tangentially related to Blazing 9, but I'm curious to hear it from the veterans—what items would you say tend to do well?
I think this depends on what you mean by "do well." There's no foolproof way to make the Top 32 (or even the Top 100) since voter preferences change every year. However, certain consistencies do tend to appear among items that survive the culling stages. Most of the ones I've noticed seem to arise from voter psychology as opposed to item content.
1) Shorter items fare better. This is not to say that long items are bad, or that all items that make the cut are short, but rather a long item has an uphill battle from a psychology perspective. When a voter sees two items side by side during voting, the natural tendency is to read the shorter item first. This means the first item gets the "freshest eyes," since the reader is less fatigued. The longer item needs to work a little bit harder, since the voter is already slightly more tired from reading the first item. Furthermore, the memory of the first item will inevitably frame the viewers response to the second one. If the first item was bad this context could be a boon, but as long as the shorter item was passable the longer item runs the risk of being discarded as too much work.
2) Properly formatted items fare better. Correct formatting is not technically a requirement for making the Top 32, but needing to read an item and work out the intended formatting makes the voter's job harder. Your goal as an author is to make the voter's job as easy as possible, so they need to jump over the minimal number of hurdles to find your item appealing. Poorly formatted items have done well in the past, but they need to be really outstanding to outshine the gut response of discarding the ugly entry.
3) Simply priced items fare better. Only a few voters take the time to calculate correct pricing, but everyone likes to see recognizable, intuitive numbers when reading an entry. Obviously high/low pricing, or pricing with bizarre digits (like 4,090) as opposed to 4,000) make readers concerned that they (or the author) missed something. This is not to say "round your price to the nearest 100 gp;" weapons, for example, look more intuitive when you can clearly see the price contains the 300+ gp for the masterwork weapon used in creation. Again, pricing isn't a hard & fast prerequisite, but it's a potential hurdle you want to remove from the reader's path toward liking your item.
4) Novel items fare better. This seems obvious (the winners have to be new magic items), but I've noticed that early in voting people seem to like items that break the mold of what they expect from fantasy RPG gear. As mentioned, combat gear like weapons and armor get a lot of entries because they are staples of the genre. As a result, early in voting the items that go against the grain stand out. I think that's why Jacob's items consistently did well, even when they didn't make the Top 32 - voters rarely see low-cost consumables during the initial voting rounds, so the ones they did see got a little extra attention. Mikko Kallio was particularly good at exploiting this feature during his runs through the RPGSS gauntlet.
Boom! Nick nails it!
Well said, Nick. (Nick Wasco, the next Neil?**)
Hey, this is only tangentially related to Blazing 9, but I'm curious to hear it from the veterans—what items would you say tend to do well?
When Wondrous items were the only option someone created a thread titled: Want to do well in RPGSS? Make gloves! (it was Chris, not once, but two time Top 32). If you look at all the Top 32* items gloves accounted for more than half. Clark** made a comment in that thread that gloves DO SOMETHING. Most item slots are passive, but the hands manipulate tools and by default become more active. Now that armor and weapons are added the numbers will be different. Weapons DO something, armor PREVENTS something so weapons become more active, at least in most reader's heads.
This is a game of adventure and daring do, so active items appeal to the readers that the game appeals to.
This is also why active voice is considered so much stronger than passive voice by gamers.
Gamers relate active voice to adventure and daring-do and consider active voice stronger than passive voice.
*
Also read SKR's** suggestions on what makes a good item linked at the top of this thread.
**for the new folks I should introduce the names. These people helped make the contest much more than a contest and have gained legendary status for their efforts.
Sean K Reynolds: Paizo developer, longtime host, freelancing guru, and all around awesome guy.
Clark Peterson: Necromancer Games developer, longtime judge, and all around awesome guy.
Neil Spicer: the RPG SuperStar, Paizo contributor, longtime judge and all around awesome guy.
Mask of the Huntmaster
Nice work. :)
Traveller's Carton of Flavors
Much improved! :)
Nice work and welcome to the thread. :)
Mask of the HuntmasterMuch better intro. :) I agree with Jacob that 'seems' should be avoided unless it is relevant to the item (if the scare effect including the wearer's face breaking into a hundred pieces or something.) The next two sentences fall back into passive voice. Coincidentally, active voice may shorten the description per Jacob's concern.
No need to rewrite the rules unless there is a change. This item says "grants him a +2 bonus on Bluff, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive and Survival checks against animals. He also gets a +2 bonus on weapon attack and damage rolls against them. He can make Knowledge skill checks untrained when attempting to identify animals." while the ranger ability favored enemy says "He gains a +2 bonus on Bluff, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive, and Survival checks against creatures of his selected type. Likewise, he gets a +2 bonus on weapon attack and damage rolls against them. A ranger may make Knowledge skill checks untrained when attempting to identify these creatures." Instead this could say "This works like the ranger..."
While this is not an attention grabbing SS item, it is a very solid and interesting item. One might find it in a book of magic items (BoMI), but superstar really needs to shine. :) Nice work. :)
Thanks for the tip! I was not sure if it was better to rewrite the rules (which I did, almost copying the ruleblock from the ranger's ability) or just say to look at the ranger's ability. I imagined that some players may be lazy, and as I had many words left (on the 300-word limit), I just added the precision. I will keep your tip in mind if I ever have to copy a class ability again... (which should not happen in SS, as I understood it is not a brilliant idea!)
Thanks for the feedback!
Contributor
,
Dedicated Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9
|
Sean K Reynolds: Paizo developer, longtime host, freelancing guru, and all around awesome guy.
Not a particularly interesting detail to most, but SKR was a designer as Paizo, not a developer. Nowadays, he has the same tag as I. ;-)
Congratulations Mikko :)
My apologies to SKR, DESIGNER extraordinaire.
I should add he was the longtime host of RPGSS while Clark was a longtime judge of RPGSS.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
On the subject of "seems" - it is basically a short form of "appears to be". Now there are times when it would be okay to use these terms, when your item has an appearance that is disguised in some way, however, the templatefu says
"Don't tell me what it is like, tell me what it IS"
Your wordcount is precious, seems and appears to be are great word wasting constructs as to me, and as a designer, they indicate the writer is unsure about what they are describing.
Be definite, let me know what things are, not what they may be. Be bold and confident - it gets you noticed.
I broke this habit at last, and I am sure it was a contributing factor in achieving Top 100 last season :)
Oh, this thread is exciting, I will have to give it a try as I'd like to enter the next RPGSS... do we have any idea when it will be? It would be good to know how much time I have to practice :D
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's no official word on it, so your guess is as good as ours. Before Season 9 it was always in winter time, but season 9 came out of the blue in August.
So yeah, who knows?
Okay! Here is my first shot.
Babbling Broadsheet
Aura strong divination; CL 6th
Slot none; Price 2000 gp; Weight —
Description
This folded sheet of newsprint is covered with indecipherable squiggles.
Once per week, as a standard action, the bearer can unfold the paper and speak the command word to hear 1d3 rumors currently circulating within a 50 mile radius from the user. These rumors may be true, false, or both. All who hear the rumors circulated by the broadsheet gain +1 competence bonus on diplomacy checks to gather information for the next 24 hours.
These talkative newspapers are often used by bards and spies entering unfamiliar territory to gain a passing familiarity with the smalltalk of the region.
Construction Requirements Create Wondrous Item, legend lore, magic mouth Cost 1000 gp
Okay! Here is my first shot.
Cut out for brevity
Hi Cycnet,
Here's my first impressions.Please bear in mind that these are first impressions.
First the name - I like it, but not everyone loves allitterations (BB) - that can cost you votes.
Aura - a caster level of 6 with normally land you with a moderate aura, not a strong aura. A divination spell is a good choice for this sort of thing though.
Caster level - Relating to legend lore: A 4th level Bard spell can only be cast at level 10 for a bard. A wizard/sorcerer level 6 spell until level 11 for a Wizard, so the caster level is too low.
Price: prices should include commas, so this should be 2,000 gp.
Description:
Good and concise, though I don't know if there'd be newsprint in a fantasy world. Perhaps there would be in Arkhenstar, but it'd be depending on the game world and area.
And item effect: This is the big one. 1d3 rumors? Rumors are such a GM decision thing that the players and voters are going to absolutely destroy it, and never get it. - Furthermore if they don't know if they're true or not is even worse, as they might be misleading.
The next thing is "Allwho hear the rumors" - Just the sentence before, you specified that only the the bearer heard it.
"These talkative newspapers are often used by bards and spies entering unfamiliar territory to gain a passing familiarity with the smalltalk of the region. " - This is a judgement call on your behalf, and it tells the voters what to think. They don't like that, and the judges used to dislike it when it came up, back before the Round 1 votes.
Construction Requirements: They look fine, except the cost. That needs a comma too.
If I was to rewrite this item, I'd turn it upside down instead.
Have the user spend a minute inscribing a rumor on the broadsheet, to have the next person reading it, believe it to be true (Will Save DC XX) and then forget where they heard it from, having that person pass it off as their own discovery.
That said though, this really is more of a plot item, and could (with some revision) be of us as a plothook or in a private campaign, but I don't think it's for RPG Superstar.
Thanks so much for the critique! I agree this isn't really a superstar quality item but I wanted to practice getting certain things right (such as caster levels and costs etc) more than most anything else... and I wouldn't use my real superstar idea here since that would disqualify it later
:)
I am going to try to fix the issues with this one, even if it won't end up being a very excellent item, it is worth trying to at least get it better.
Gossiping Parchment
Aura moderate divination; CL 11th
Slot none; Price 2,000 gp; Weight —
Description
This folded sheet of parchment is covered with indecipherable squiggles.
Three times per week, as a standard action, the bearer can speak a command word to activate the parchment. The parchment immediately relates 1 piece of news that is currently circulating within a 50 mile radius from the user, in a loud, deadpan voice. The news related should be factual, though it may be distorted.
All who hear the news circulated by the parchment gain +5 competence bonus on diplomacy checks to gather information for the next 4 hours.
If the item is activated in an area where there is no news to report, it instead intones the current temperature and weather forecast, and no bonuses are conferred.
Construction Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, legend lore, magic mouth Cost 1,000 gp
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wouldn't expect alliteration to cost votes unless it's potentially confusing (ex. silver sliver) or long to the point of being cutesy (ex. loquacious lounger's long list).
"Babbling Broadsheet" was fine, but I think "Gossiping Parchment" is better (more informative name, sounds more useful).
|
Contributor
,
Dedicated Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Using alliteration is tricky; much like puns, it can make a heading or title more interesting to read and easier to remember, but most of the time, I'd advise against it. The name of a magic item should be evocative and descriptive, but it should also be reasonably unobtrusive. Puns and alliteration can be fun, but they sort of invite the players to come up with more wordplay, which can also be fun but is not the point of the game.
As a general rule, I usually only include alliteration or puns in GM-facing headings (e.g. encounter names, sidebars, and such). Magic items, spells, feats, archetypes, and such should be a mostly pun and alliteration-free zone.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
When used strategically, alliteration is actually a really useful writing tool. Like rhyming, it is pleasant to read, and it makes sentences interesting. Don't get cutesy or confusing with it, but do try to implement it if all other things are equal.
Then again, what do I know? I just got ninjaed by someone from nearly an hour back.
It is worth noting, though, that even the revised name has alliteration in it. "Gossiping Parchment" is actually an excellent bit of consonance. And doesn't it read better? In my opinion, the only danger is when the wish for consonance or rhyme overrides the needs of the writing itself. Also, more than one word tends to get tedious.
Handy Haversack: Good.
Mallets of Malice: Bad.
Silversheen: Good.
Silver Slivers of Sunlight: You're getting cute here.
Well of Many Worlds: Doesn't this just read nicer?
Iron Bands of Binding: Uh, I would say this is "too much", but it's an official item, so I guess it's okay? In all seriousness, I think it gets away with it because the name actually makes sense. They didn't stretch anything too much.
Orb of Storms: Pretty good assonance, though note that rhyming and assonance are generally more noticeable and therefore more rare. Alliteration and consonance are a lot easier to get away with.
Brawling Brute Boots: What the f%~!?
Having reviewed the Wondrous Items of the Core (the italicized ones are made up), I'd say that there's a lot of room for alliteration. And seriously, as long as the name is clear and doesn't sound like a joke, I don't think anybody even remotely cares about it. I stand by my initial assumption: Alliteration, consonance and assonance are better in than out.
That's great analysis Kobold! I really appreciate that!
I know this still needs a lot of polish, but I'd like to get people's thoughts on it. I found the price by treating it as a once-per-day 4th-level spell item.
Pitch Figurine
Aura moderate conjuration and illusion; CL 7th
Slot none; Price 10,080 gp; Weight 1 lb.
Description
In its original form, this item looks like a simple glob of tar about the size of a lemon. Once per day, it can be activated by the command word and commanded into the appearance of any Medium-sized animal for 1 hour. When in this form, the tar figurine does not move from its square, but appears fully real and alive to all except the user—the user can see that it is just a straw-and-tar dummy. The transformed figurine has an Armor Class of 5, Hardness 10, and 30 Hit Points, and weighs 200 lbs. This otherwise functions as major image, with a DC 16 Will save to disbelieve.
Any figure that hits the pitch figurine with a melee attack must immediately make a Reflex save, DC 16. On failure, their weapon is stuck in the tar and cannot be removed without making a DC 20 Strength check. If they struck with a touch or natural attack, they themselves are considered to be entangled and stuck to the figurine as though affected by a tanglefoot bag. If the attacker fails their Will save to disbelieve, they believe that the figurine has grabbed them. Again, a Strength check is required to break free.
If destroyed, the tar reconstitutes and reforms into the glob in 1 hour. Otherwise, when it is commanded to deactivate or the effect ends, the pitch figurine turns into a lemon-sized figurine depicting the previous animal it was made to resemble.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, major image, black tentacles; Cost 5,040 gp
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's a design lesson from MaRo (of MtG) that I think is particularly relevant to Superstar (which tended to have more restrictions in earlier rounds than it did in Season 9). Quoting the most relevant parts:
Lesson #18: Restrictions breed creativity
Many people believe that the more options available, the more creative a person can be. This is a myth because it contradicts what we know about how the brain works. The brain is an amazing organ. It's very smart. When asked to solve a problem, most brains check their data banks and ask "Have I solved this before?" If the answer is yes, the brain solves the problem the exact same way it solved it last time.Most of the time, this is efficient. It lets you avoid relearning tasks each time you do them, but it causes a problem with creative thought. You see, if you use the same neural pathways, you get to the same answers, and with creativity, that's not your goal. So here's the trick I've learned. If you want your brain to get to new places, start from somewhere you've never started before. That's why I make sure to begin each expansion from a new vantage point. This forces me to think in different ways and create new problems to solve, which results in new ideas and new solutions. What this means is that restrictions aren't an obstacle but rather a valuable tool. You can make use of restrictions to help you be more creative.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like it, Kobold.
Pricing seems fair. Your spells should be in alphabetical order in the requirements, however.
I'd like a more exciting description. Instead of having it be a glob of tar, why not have it be a bundle of sticks held together with tar in the rough shape of an animal?
Try to match your wording to Paizo's. For example, I'd look to the mimic to see how a similar sticky type of situation: "A weapon that strikes an adhesive-coated mimic is stuck fast unless the wielder succeeds on a DC 17 Reflex save. A successful DC 17 Strength check is needed to pry off a stuck weapon." I know if I were developing this, I'd have to rewrite that whole second paragraph. (Similarly, hardness and hit points aren't capitalized, little details that are as important as capitalizing Strength and Fort/Will/Reflex.)
One note of caution, however: I'd be a little concerned some folks might interpret it as a tar-baby, which can be considered a racist term in the States. Obviously this isn't intended to be racist, but I'd be aware of cultural issues along those lines.
--
And I agree very much with that, Isaac. Restrictions for Superstar help make it a lot easier to design, IMO.
Dang, the tar baby is racist? I was just remembering those old folk tales I grew up with. I didn't know they had a Troubled History.
*Checks*
Ah. So the stories did originate from African folklore, but they got hijacked and turned into a slur. Goddammit.
Thanks for the feedback and warning!
Dedicated Voter Season 8, Marathon Voter Season 9
aka Jayson MF Kip
|
Philosophy question:
Is it a bad idea to make an item that has dis-synergy with a particular class? Is "balancing by item-type" typically frowned upon?
Let's say I want to make an item (disregard flavor, for now) that says, say, "if no one else threatens an enemy, you are considered flanking that enemy." I imagine that would be an auto-purchase for a rogue (any sneak attacker, really). To mitigate what seems an obvious choice, I make it a heavy shield with that ability (which most rogues are not proficient in).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Jace, I'm not sure there's a ton of advice yet about that.
A few thoughts based on feedback I've seen (and I haven't really made any specific armor/weapons, so I certainly *don't* consider myself an expert):
* You don't want the bulk of your cost to be the enchantment. So, if you have a +2 weapon, you'd expect it to be 8,300+ gp as a base cost. If the special ability you're adding -- whatever it is you want to add to make it Superstar -- is only going to be worth 1,000 gp it may not be worth enough. You might be better in that case going with a +1 weapon. (One of the judges made some comments to this effect in the Critique thread, I think in the 2015 Season, that may have made it more clear but I'm afraid I can't find them right now.)
Similarly, if more than half the cost of your armor/weapon is the special Superstar ability, you might want to have it have a higher enhancement value. Otherwise it may appear you're mucking around a bit with balance -- i.e., boy, I have this really cool ability that's awesome, but I want it to be available at lower levels, so I'm going to make it worth less than it really should be by making it only a +1 weapon. If the special ability aspect of it is worth 24,000 gp, then does it become ineffective at the levels a player would have that if it's only +1 (because the wielder wouldn't be able to hit anything/would be hit by everything).
* IMO, form and function should mesh well (which sort of answers Jeff's question, maybe). We've seen lots of items that move opponents (heck, I made one myself for 2015). Now, that type of thing can fit with a shield (i.e. making a shield bash) or a hammer, but it feels a little odd for a slashing or piercing weapon. Similarly, a weapon with aquatic powers may feel more natural with a cutlass or trident than a broadsword or earthbreaker. An armor that gives you some animal attributes feels more likely to be leather-based while one that lets you remain rooted in place feels more natural as a heavier armor. Sometimes you may intentionally try to subvert these ideas, but I'd definitely be careful with that.
---
Jeff, I'm not sure that's come up enough to have it be frowned upon. I think I'm personally always wary of items that are too class specific, though some do make the cut (Monica's item was keyed to channeled energy and she went on to win Superstar). Again, I'd probably be wary of form/function issues more than anything (looking at your shield/flanking example).
|
Star Voter Season 8, Dedicated Voter Season 9
|
Philosophy question:
Is it a bad idea to make an item that has dis-synergy with a particular class? Is "balancing by item-type" typically frowned upon?
Let's say I want to make an item (disregard flavor, for now) that says, say, "if no one else threatens an enemy, you are considered flanking that enemy." I imagine that would be an auto-purchase for a rogue (any sneak attacker, really). To mitigate what seems an obvious choice, I make it a heavy shield with that ability (which most rogues are not proficient in).
I would avoid tying balance to class features that typically go together, because as soon as some archetype or feat out there gives you a feature but not the other, your item's balance disappears.
I think the best balancing is inherent to the item's abilities.
|
Star Voter Season 8, Dedicated Voter Season 9
|
Is there any general advice people can give for designing specific magic weapons or armor?
Jacob's advice above is quite right (form and function, and price tags for enchantment vs abilities).
I tend to avoid existing abilities (such as keen, courageous, bane ...) because they add to both gp and requirements (hence wordcount). And the requirements sometimes sound strange when you forget that they are tied to the standard ability,which some voters (including myself) do forget.
I will also avoid special materials because they change the usual formula for pricing items that people use to make a quick-assessment of whether your cost/price calculation is exact. People who miss that your weapon is mithral will not understand its price/cost and may think you got it wrong. Better to avoid this confusion completely.
Take into account class proficiencies and restrictions. I remember seeing an armor that was just screaming to be used by a druid but was made of metal :-(
In a similar vein, I would avoid Exotic weapons, unless the tax feat is precisely part of the balancing factor (but then see my post above for balancing factors that are not directly linked to the item's abilities : creative munchkins just love that, as they will find a way to untie the factors and abuse your item)
Philosophy question:
Is it a bad idea to make an item that has dis-synergy with a particular class? Is "balancing by item-type" typically frowned upon?
Let's say I want to make an item (disregard flavor, for now) that says, say, "if no one else threatens an enemy, you are considered flanking that enemy." I imagine that would be an auto-purchase for a rogue (any sneak attacker, really). To mitigate what seems an obvious choice, I make it a heavy shield with that ability (which most rogues are not proficient in).
Most feedback I've seen, seems to be about not attempting to fix a particular mechanic with your time. There is a fine line between abuse-able and usable. Finding that line, knowing where it is, and making sure you never cross it is what being a good game designer is about.
In your example of that shield: A shield COULD do that, say if it was super reflective, and you could shine a light into someone's eyes with it.
The mechanics of such an ability would make or break such an item. Is it a combat maneuver check, a move action? a standard action? A full-round?
How many times can the user do this? 1/day? 2/day? 5 charges then spent forever?
Your effect is cool, and yeah rogues are going to love that item. That's clearly a niche your item will fill. Accept what classes will LOVE your item; just find the line between useable and abuse-able.
I suggest for your SUPER star items, that you make your specific magical item very specific. Clearly outline with it's power how it will be useful.
Sorry folks for being absent to much lately, but things suddenly happened very quickly.
I found myself with 2 articles for third party publisher, one long and one short, and I wanted to get a submission in to Wayfinder Magazine, which has now been sent. On top of that was a bit of being busy with home life, and I had no time to check up on the thread.
(Once the articles are published, I shall let you know which ones it is. :))
So now, it's time to return to Blazing 9. But I think that this time, I'll be making a map. Deadline will be the 8th of July for me.
The only thing I've had as the "target" this time, is that it has to be a natural feature (like a forest, cave or something similar).
|
|
Here is a specific magic weapon that I have been working on.
Snaring Bullets
Aura faint transmutation; CL 3rd
Slot none; Price 200 gp; Weight -
Description
This +1 firearm bullets is slightly longer than normal and has a faint crosshatch pattern across its surface. After the bullet is fired, it morphs into a net mid-shot. This net can entangle the target as normal. The net is normal in every way, except that it is of masterwork quality, and does not turn back into a bullet.
Construction
Requirements Craft Magic Arms and Armor, entangle; Cost 100 gp
Hey Jace,
Your templating looks good. Only thing I see is the weight should be an em-dash (ctrl-alt-hyphen on a PC), not a hyphen as you have. That's pretty minor for Superstar (most people won't worry about it), but for actual designers it would mean more work.
In the body of the text you call it a "+1 firearm bullets" and it should be bullet. Also, you should try to avoid using forms of "to be" as your verb if possible, and IMO references to normal. The description is your chance to impress readers with writing, even if sometimes that can be difficult with some items. Here, though, I might write something like "A faint crosshatch pattern covers this slightly longer than normal +1 firearm bullet." It's basically the same thing you wrote but a little more active verb and getting the interesting part of the description up to the front.
I'd probably have it be a +1 net, just to maintain consistency, though I might then have it crumble to dust if it misses or isn't entangling a target (I assume that's why you made it masterwork, so it didn't start spawning magic weapons, and maybe that works just as well, but I think keeping it consistent maintains ... er, consistency.
I also might tweak it slightly to say that when it hits a target it morphs into a net (as opposed to mid-shot) as that might eliminate some confusion over range and whether the morphing affects that at all...