Iron dm summer champion announced!

[seasong]

stop bragging, and get back to crunching round 3.

I haven't had time yet this morning to do much of either.

 

[Rune]

thanks Rune, I really appreciate your time in this, and it has helped me grow.

I knew from the start that this thing was way way way to long. However, as I said, I'm a theology nut, and 2 of your ingredients hit on a very sore spot with me, one, in fact, I had just done several day research on, and prepared a very lengthy bible study about. I knew I was biting off more than I could chew, but decided to do it anyway.

This is where you get to decide to trade quanity for quality. Guess which one a typical judge values more? It's very difficult to edit out some really great material, but a good contestant will be able to concisely reword it to lose the excess baggage. You (hell, and I, for that matter) have got to learn not to be too much in love with your work, that you can't edit to make it better. No matter how much good material you have, it's useless, if it can't be presented well.

My original idea was to have this be much more of a moral dilemna, which of the 3 groups should I help, but that just got WAY WAY WAY to long, and I had to cut it back, which turned it from a nice moral dilemna plot into a quick trip on charlie the choo-choo, or maybe blain-the-train, hurtling down the track, with only one stop at the end

I would really have liked to see that. Cutting out the descriptive text would have been better--even if it would be more heartbreaking.

didn't think that including the links would be a problem, but it was inappropriate.

Upon reconsideration, I didn't really have a problem with their inclusion, so much as the presentation of them as background material. I would have preferred to see all necessary background material in the body of the entry.

Fortunately, that is what I saw, and the links' real purpose was to provide evidence supporting the fact that you weren't plagiarising anything. That's fine; I just wish you had been clear on the point.

Although, personally, I do wish you'd trust the judge to make their own literary and historical connections, but then again, I was an English major, and do that kind of stuff all the time. Other judges may well appreciate the links.

Good luck in future tournaments, cool hand luke!

 

[Rune]

Well, now that all entries are in, I'm going to discuss, a bit, what I think makes a good Iron DM entry, and what I think makes a good adventure, overall.

To do so, I'll respond directly to some comments:

So what am I most proud of? That I finally took the meta-game of Iron DM, and the judge's whims, into consideration. I completely whored myself out from the get-go. From the classical epic backstory (that the PCs may or may not ever discover), to the repeated use of deus ex machina-- and hey! I won!

First of all, I think you've got it backwards, Wulf. There is a meta-game invovled in the Iron DM tournaments, but writing for the judge isn't it. When submitting entries, myself, I would often play little games for my sole amusement, writing for myself, as it were. That is the metagame. And you know what? I lost every single one of those matches. I don't think it was because of the metagame, per se, but I definitely should have used the time to refine my submissions.

But, you know what else? I'll do it again. It's fun, and helps to justify the enourmous amount of time requisit in playing in the tournament. However, I've always kept in mind that the object of the game is to write for the judge, and, to a lesser extent, for the audience. It's not a meta-game.

The PCs appear to have choices, but it really doesn't matter what they do. I even went so far as to admit that right up front-- it doesn't even matter which deity is behind the "hooks" and calamaties that befall the PCs! The adventure is designed not to care. There's a lot of setup, a lot of really nothing at all for the PCs to do, and they are herded onto the stage at the end of the entry, the beginning of the real adventure-- just like the entry that bested me in the round before. The adventure is one long, protracted hook that pulls the party onto the stage at the end. The loose threads? The unanswered questions? In my opinion, the truly satisfying adventure lies in what was not addressed in my entry, in those few lines tacked onto the end.

This may be shocking, but I'm going to say it, anyway. Linear adventures are not inherently bad. If they were, time-based adventures (excluding time-travel adventures) would automatically be bad, as time is linear.

Railroading occurs when the players feel as if they have no choices. If they think they have choices, no matter whether all roads lead to the same conclusion, or not, it is not railroading.

Is it better to provide actual choices that lead to multiple conclusions? I tend to think so, but for an entirely different reason:

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. A good adventure serves as a seed for a good campaign.

One would hope that, at some point, the crafting of an actual adventure-- with a plot that actually engages the PCs with things to do: some puzzles, some fighting, some roleplay; with decisions to make and consequences that they can see and feel, etc.-- one would hope that would have some impact on the judging.

A good generic adventure should include a variety of elements, to try to appeal to all types, but there is no hard and fast set of elements that an adventure should have (although, it would be foolish to try to sell an adventure with no combat (for instance) in it, probably.

It is important that players can feel the consequences, but I think you're assuming that consequences necessarily need to differ from potential consequences to be felt. It's nice when that happens, but it need not be requisit, depending on the situation. It does however, need to feel different from the consequences of failure. The basic point, however, is that it's all an illusion. If you are able to sell the illusion, that is all that matters.

Seems to me that some entries are better off in alsih20's Ceramic DM. That's a-what I'm sayin. If it takes you 4000 words to cough up the backstory but the portion of the adventure that the PCs can actually interface with is 5 or 6 open-ended questions, that's a problem, in my opinion.

It really depends upon what the background is used for. If it's used to explain history, it probably is wasted space, if it's too large. If, on the other hand, it's used to set up political intrigue, motives, and character (combined), then it's an excellent use of the space. I've never believed that an adventure needs to come to a nice, packaged ending. If most of the events occur as a result of conclusions that the DM (or judge) can easily infer on his (or her) own, that's not a problem. As a judge, I've frequently read between the lines.

I'm not saying whoring to the judge is bad. I agree it's an integral part of the Iron DM mystique. I just don't think it should be the primary focus-- are we here to craft adventures, or are we here to see who plays better to the judge? Which has top priority, ya know? Maybe it's me who's off base, I dunno.

I think you're overestimating the role that that little factor plays in judgement. As a judge, I've always attempted to judge a work on its own merits, factoring in style last. I've seen it matter in past tournaments, but even in the tightest matches of this tournament, it has only been a factor once (so far--I still haven't read the final two entries).

I really should take a spin at judging one of these. I'd be curious to see if I can spot the whoring or not.

I'd hope to see you do so. Maybe I could get to play again.

Originally posted by seasong I usually try to think of it as a hired hack - Rune needs a game for tomorrow, these are the things he wants to include, this is what kind of game he likes to run, what can I slap together for him? Bare bones idea or fleshed out scenario, I'm writing it for him, and how his group plays.

That's actually not a bad way to approach this. All of Seasong's former entries (excluding, possibly the last, which I've yet to read) have been distinctly Seasong's.

If I saw an entry from him that I couldn't recognize as his, because it looked too much like mine, I doubt he'd win the round. I don't think I've been too opaque about this, but I value creativity higher than all other elements in judging the tournament.

If I couldn't recognize Seasong in his entries, or anyone else in their's, I'd be supremely disappointed.

 

[Rune]

And now, the Chairman has made a decision.

Who will be IRON DM SUMMER 2003?

 

[el-remmen]

Yer killing me. . . hurry up and post it already. . .

 

[Rune]

IRON DM SUMMER 2003 JUDGMENT!

Nemmerle vs. Seasong

Well, I'm going to start by saying that I'm slightly disappointed with these submissions. I had expected better from both contestants at this point in the tournament.

That's not to say that these entries are bad, but they're certainly unpolished.

Ah well.

There is, at least, a lot of good stuff to latch onto. Take, for instance, the hooks. In Nemmerle's case, they are all varied and plausible. In Seasong's case, they are also varied, with the added bonus of being bastardly, in some cases. Getting the PCs to start the scenario by advancing the goals of someone they'll later be trying to stop is a very nice touch.

I also like the format of both works. Seasong's has an interesting "stop the bad-guy by any means at your disposal" quality to it, as well as an implied frantic rush against time. Meanwhile, Nemmerle provides an amazingly evocative saga (journey/Odyssey) format that strikes me in all the right ways.

And, most importantly, it's very creative. I love the red-herring court, the horseshoes used as a means of transport to the moon, the moral ambiguity inherent in aquiring them, all of the other means described of getting to the moon, and the wonderful character of the Empress of Dreams. Add to that the excellent tips on running the dream-city, and I'm practically ready to hand the crown over right now.

But then I read Seasong's and see the (characteristically) excellent characterization, the complex and weighty motives, the well-handled epic scope of the adventure, and I'm not so sure, anymore.

Additionally, Seasong's scenario allows for a follow-up campaign, much, much better than Nemmerle's, which relies mostly on the curriosity of PCs to explore the unknown, especially if the PCs fail stop Ing from becoming a goddess. Suddenly, there's a totally new evil goddess up there, with a totally new porfolio--and she's out to get the other gods!

Okay, so how were the ingredients handled?

Well, neither entrant fell for the "leach/leech" trap. I very much like the way Nemmerle's leach (the verb form) drains the wisdom and sanity of folk through dreams. Very cthuloid. On the other hand, using the noun version of the word gets Seasong extra points, even if it isn't overly intrigal to the story.

I think both entries used the Horn of Valhalla paricularly well. I especially liked seeing a well-fleshed out artifact version in Seasong's entry, but the link to the dream-city in Nemmerle's is also exceptionally good.

Both entries use the Dark side of the moon effectively. It's nice to see it as the source of dreams in Nemm's entry--quite creative. On the other hand, using it, not only as an encounter location, but also as a "reward" for failure (that is the domain of the new, evil goddess) is very nice.

I loved both Wuxia cats, even while I was disappointed with them. Their characterization was excellent, and both were quite evocative, but neither needed to be a cat and both looked like they were cats, merely because cat was part of the ingredient. Seasong's partial explanation for the form went a little ways toward solving the problem, but not far enough. Another problem with the ingredient use is that Seasong's character is way too heavy-handed, so much so that he smacks of railroading. Meanwhile, it doesn't make any sense whatsoever for the Emperess of Dreams in Nemm's entry to duel anybody, and telling me that it's a dream and shouldn't make sense won't help the players warm up to the idea any better.

The use of the lost vault wasn't particularly special in either scenario, but I did like the writhing nature of Nemm's version.

As for other ingredients, they are mostly good, and don't count against the players (I love, for instance, Nemm's Spider Monkey and Seasong's Eyes), but Seasong does include a poor one, which I can't let slide. I really think calling Asgard and other mythological locations a "fairy-tale land" is just stretching it too far. You wouldn't call them that if I hadn't included it as an ingredient, would you?

Okay. Neither of these entries is perfect, but with work, both would be excellent to run. Seasong, I really like the form of this one, and the epic scope could be unwieldy, but isn't. If you had submitted something of the quality of your last entry, I probably wouldn't even have bothered reading an opponent's (that's hyperbole, by the way).

Nemmerle's got a scenario that shines with creative inspiration and a format that works well for it. It's pretty sloppy--but the meat of it is all good.

Seasong, you are the Secondary Champion of Iron DM Summer 2003.

Which means, Nemmerle is the IRON DM SUMMER 2003!

Congratulations!

 

[el-remmen]

wow.

I was certain I had lost. . .

but. . . anyway. . .. WOO-HOO!

Seasong, congrats on a great entry. I think Rune is right - neither of these were our best - but even your worst is still pretty friggin' amazing.

And Rune, thanks for taking the time to run this.

Exposition to follow. . .

 

[Rune]

Re: wow.

I was certain I had lost. . .

...And I was certain I had beaten Vaxalon, but it simply wasn't the case.

 

[cool hand luke]

comments from the peanut gallery

congrats to the deserving winner


now, looking back over the entire competition, what were things that everyone really liked?

favorite overall submission (I think there were actually better ones in earlier rounds)

favorite use of an item?

scenario you are most likely to use?

most rat bastardly submission?

others?

 

[seasong]

Re: IRON DM SUMMER 2003 JUDGMENT!

Which means, Nemmerle is the IRON DM SUMMER 2003!

And well earned!

Now I'm going to nitpick a few things that bothered me (and sincere apologies for the nitpicking).

I think both entries used the Horn of Valhalla paricularly well. I especially liked seeing a well-fleshed out artifact version in Seasong's entry, but the link to the dream-city in Nemmerle's is also exceptionally good.

I am unhappy with this ingredient, both its inclusion and the judgement rendered on it. I know I screwed up enough things in my scenario that this doesn't really affect the judgement, which is why I call it a nitpick.

If the horn is of Valhalla, that requires that Valhalla exist. You could name any old thing Valhalla, and make a horn that is from it (which is essentially what nemmerle did), but, and this is important to me, you could have called it the Horn of Vuggrematch and nothing in the scenario would change. Or, given how it was used, you could have called it the Whatsit of Vuggrematch and nothing in the scenario would have changed.

In order to use it properly, I took the Proper Noun that was part of it, and I made that part of the background. I think I did a smashing job with it (not only did it tie nicely into the entire mythology of the scenario, but someone had to blow on it to achieve their aims, thus justifying why it was a horn), and if there was one ingredient in my scenario that I thought deserved huge kudos, it was this one.

My other ingredients, I was considerably less pleased with, but I want my props for this one .

Both entries use the Dark side of the moon effectively.

Really, I didn't feel like I did. Nemmerle's use of this ingredient was needful. For my use, it made a good domain (I thought) and was cleverly inserted, but there was no reason that the domain really needed to be the "dark side of the moon". I also forgot to include any notes on what fighting there would be like.

I loved both Wuxia cats, even while I was disappointed with them. Their characterization was excellent, and both were quite evocative, but neither needed to be a cat and both looked like they were cats, merely because cat was part of the ingredient.

This ties into the horn of Valhalla issue. If it's part of the ingredient, it should be there. I toyed with a number of other ways of handling this one, but the fact is, there's not a lot of meanings for the word 'cat'. The best alternate I could come up with was a tattoo of a cat, or a cat sculpture that provided wuxia advice (or powers)... but those worked very weakly in the scenario. So I opted, as nemmerle did, to go with a cool character instead.

This was sort of like the Awakened Camel (or whatever animal it was, I forget) that incognito did as an ingredient a long time ago. When the camel seemed silly to him later, he was disappointed in the use.

The only thing I would have improved with my use, given the ingredient, would have been to work in some way in which a cat's unique traits were needful to the scenario - perhaps keen hearing, or maybe requiring the PCs to groom the obnoxious thing before it would help them.

Seasong's partial explanation for the form went a little ways toward solving the problem, but not far enough. Another problem with the ingredient use is that Seasong's character is way too heavy-handed, so much so that he smacks of railroading.

Yup, I think I even pointed it out in the text (as part of my stream of consciousness writing) that it was heavy-handed (I would have editted that out if I'd had time this morning to look at it - no use in giving the judge reasons to shoot you down). However, I will point out that heavy-handed plots are part and parcel to most wuxia film, with most things being overstated or made as obvious as possible, and that the wuxia cat was the only such element in my scenario

That was probably too subtle, though, and a bad gamble.

... Seasong does include a poor one, which I can't let slide. I really think calling Asgard and other mythological locations a "fairy-tale land" is just stretching it too far. You wouldn't call them that if I hadn't included it as an ingredient, would you?

Depends. If you'd asked me if Asgard qualified as a fairy tale land, I would have said yes. If you'd asked me what Asgard's dominant quality or descriptor was, fairy tale wouldn't have been the first word to pop to mind.

However, it is a grey area: fairy tales are not actually about fairies. Most of what we call fairy tales are Russian, and most actual tales about fairies we call Celtic Mythology. I took you to mean the word as "the cultural equivalent" - that is, the Other World for whatever culture we set things in. Since I set things in the Norse mythology, I used the Norse Other World, and I even picked the one that had dwarves and beautiful/immortal non-gods and eternal hunting and other traits in common with the Celtic Summerlands.

But I can answer your rhetorical question even better than that: I wouldn't have included Asgard if you hadn't included fairy-tale lands as an ingredient. The ingredient is what brought using it (and having Ing invade) to mind.

Seasong, I really like the form of this one, and the epic scope could be unwieldy, but isn't. If you had submitted something of the quality of your last entry, I probably wouldn't even have bothered reading an opponent's (that's hyperbole, by the way).

As I said when I posted that one, I knew I'd killed myself for round 3 when I wrote it. There's no way I'll match that again, not any time soon. If I could have saved that inspiration for last, I would have.

For the form, that's what my posts usually look like before I start editting them for clarity. Very linear, top-down list of elements as I think of them. I re-ordered a few things as I went (moved random stuff to the Miscellany section, and added the Overview and Cast & Crew sections), but reading that entry is pretty much like watching me think.