Iron DM 2009 - FINAL MATCH - it's over!

[Radiating Gnome]

I've posted the judgement for the first round match between Wulf and Wicht. Here's the link: http://www.enworld.org/forum/plots-places/266192-iron-dm-2009-match-1-a.html#post4957190

 

[Radiating Gnome]

Now that I have posted my judgement, I'll hang around here for the ritual of abuse and second-guessing . . . . lord knows I've been doing it to myself long enough over this match. There was a whole lot to like about both entries, it was a far tougher choice that I expected.

 

[Wicht]

oof...

Knocked out in the first round.


Congragulations Wulf! I'll be cheering for you.

 

[Wicht]

Now that I have posted my judgement, I'll hang around here for the ritual of abuse...

Boo... Hiss... The ref is blind!!!

Now that I've got that out of my system I feel much better, thanks.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

oof...

Knocked out in the first round.


Congragulations Wulf! I'll be cheering for you.

holy crap! I came here first, before the judgment... let me take a look and come back for the mutual backslappin'...

Ok. Everything sblocked in case judges or others don't want to see it:

[sblock]

This is key for me:

Holy Avenger - This one should have been just about as easy to work in as the Slaad -- obvious handles to bring this into the story. But in KMD, the appearance of the holy avenger seems to be an out-of-place afterthought. The setup for the whole adventure -- that this is meant to serve as an object lesson in the "lawful" part of "lawful good" creates some serious expectations for me. I'm expecting that there will be some clear standoff between the two -- with the inevitables creating the situation where the law must be honored before the good. In that setting, the Holy Avenger almost seems like it would be the tool of the opposition. Instead, it's part of a matched set -- the holy and righteous avengers -- and we're told that the paladin PC is given "one of them" but not even which one. It's also possible to read the adventure with the Paladin serving the role of "holy avenger" -- he is called upon directly to avenge the dead guardsmen -- but I found that also very problematic in an adventure that is meant to be putting law and justice ahead of all other concerns. Revenge is not lawful, it is not judicious; it's personal and emotional and chaotic, and my sense is that the command to bring ur-Valos to justice was replaced with a commandment to avenge the slain people to create this second reading of holy avenger . . . . but I find that out of place. It's possible that with some broader explanation the role of Horatio as the voice of the people and the "good" could serve as a counterpoint to the voice of the inevitables, the law -- but I don't see that developed in this particular writeup. I think that in KMD there is ambition to reach beyond the obvious use for Holy avenger that don't pan out, while the usage in BoC is predictable but it works. Advantage BoC.

I think this is a very apt observation. I was very aware that the Holy Avenger was probably among my weakest ingredients.

First, let me see that I tried to work the ingredients into multiple places-- the Reticent Constable is certainly Claudius, but also perhaps the Kolyarut; the holy avenger is a sword but also perhaps the paladin himself, etc.

No question it was weak.

It's a really hard ingredient to get in-- there's no call for a holy avenger against (the obvious antagonists) the slaad: They ain't evil.

Barring that ingredient, I am confident that the seeds of a really good investigative, instructional adventure are here. Free from the shackles of the competition, this is an entry I can see myself blowing out later.

So... Immediately after saying that I don't pander to the proclivities of the judges, I'm left with the obvious fact that I sneaked through this round by the skin of my teeth by... getting lucky on the proclivities of the judge.

(FYI: There was no other literary "visitation of three ghosts" analogue intended.)

Despite the fact that I'm happy with the basic premise and setup of my entry, I don't have the same confidence in my use of the ingredients, and given a different judge-- particularly Phoamslinger, and his exhortation to make sure that all the ingredients are used in a unique and non-interchangeable way-- I would certainly have lost this round.

So I feel that my entry-- in addition to this mea culpa-- has really done nothing other than raise the bar on myself for the next round.

I'll do my best to carry the "Former Champion" banner high on Wicht's behalf and give these newbies wot's wot.

[/sblock]

 

[Wik]

They were both great adventures, too. And a very hard list of ingredients - particularly the Wind Skerries and Constitutional Monarchy.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I have just one more thing to say:

In my life I have entered all sorts of competitions, both physical and mental, rational and creative.

I have found that Iron DM is almost unique in its ability to engender both an intense desire to win as well as the inescapable conclusion that losing is a mercy.

(I should run for public office. I bet it feels the same.)

 

[Radiating Gnome]

I just hope, Wicht, that in 7+ years . . . oh, nevermind.

It was a real challenge to judge the two of you in my first outing as a Iron DM judge -- me, just some big-nosed git and you two such long-standing luminaries around here. I had to make it a point to refer to the name of the adventure, and not the authors, to try to keep myself steady.

Looking back at this thread, I can see that the other two judges have had a much more active hand in here than I have, and since my proclivities ended up being the deciding factor in this match, maybe a little background about me is appropriate . . .

There are a few of the early Iron DM competitions that I took part in back in the bad old days -- if you look back in the archives, you'll find that I've never won . . . you'll see me grow up a lot in the course of a few rounds of play, too. Iron DM is one of those trials by fire that really can help us grow.

I'm going to be interested in much the same things (and using the same core system to evaluate entries) as Nifft and Phoamsinger -- they're both way smarter than me, anyway. When we get down to personal tastes and leanings, I'm going to be drawn to good story, good writing, and adventures that scratch the sort of itches that I'm frequently trying to scratch in my own games -- how do we make our games about more than just beating the snot out of scaly monsters? How do we take advantage of RPGs to be more than just a complex wargame? If you can do even a little of that, in the crucible of Iron DM . . . limited time, ingredient lists on loan from Torquemada, and a supply of opponents who apparently have no need to work, sleep, eat or attend to other responsibilities . . . well, then I think you're going to go far in this thing.

-rg

 

[Wicht]

I just hope, Wicht, that in 7+ years . . . oh, nevermind.

No worries. I'm more mature than I was then.

I used to think that if I liked it, everybody must like it. But one grows to recognize that taste and opinions fluctuate wildly and while there is no accounting for some opinions, everybody has one. Which is why I stated above that one should never assume one has this particular contest in the bag before the judgement comes down. I made that mistake my first time up but I try not to anymore.

And, as Wulf said, defeat has its own rewards. I'll have more free time now for other things.

 

[Nifft]

InVinoVeritas and Pour -- let me know you've seen this, and we'll kick off your match, hopefully around 6M this evening.

Thanks, -- N