Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rune" data-source="post: 955277" data-attributes="member: 67">Re: Re: The Judge's apology.I never interpreted your entry as inept.  It was really quite good.  On par with many winning entries in past tournaments, even.  But it was far too ambitious for the length limit imposed upon it.  That aside, I do appeciate brevity.  The key is to be concise and still say what you need to say.Thank you.  In all honesty, I wanted to play this one <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />And I hope to see you in it!Here's where I disagree with you.  It is true that such a codified ruleset would help make things easier, especially on the judge, but, in the end, I think it would strip the tournament of one of its most fun aspects: trying to second-guess the judge.  In each of the tournaments that I played in, this was the most fun part.  Only rarely do serious differences of interpretation rise up.  In your case, you had to figure out whether I weighed strict adherance to guidelines more heavily than I weighed a superior entry.  Perhaps my adherance to the no-editing clause threw you off.  In the end, you took a gamble and lost, but it was not necessarily a foolish gamble.  Just the wrong one.I think the pressures of trying to second-guess the judge fill that niche, nicely.  You had the misfortune of being in the first match, but then, so did Nemmerle.  If he had insight into my method of thinking, it was only a slight advantage given him by paying attention to my posts elsewhere and, especially, in previous tournaments.  But I linked to those tournaments in that same first post, so I'm not counting it as much of an advantage, if any.You know my thoughts on this, what are others?And I'll go ahead and say it.  So far, all of the entries (except for anonystu's) have bordered on being too long.  While, ultimately, the length of an entry is really a subjective measure of how well it flows and is paced, I do have a short attention span and I can be overwhelmed.In all honesty, I was delighted that you were going to use a different system.  People have always shied away from it, but I think it was a good move.  What was a bad move, however, was trying to do it in so few paragraphs.  I want you to know that I judged the constistancy of your entry within itself.  What I meant by saying that I would take it with a grain of salt is that I would have to keep in mind that I knew nothing about the campaign.  I was specifically referring to what seemed like a hole in verisimilitude.  In the end, it didn't count against you at all.The burden of clarity always rests upon the author.  I can only assume so much, and the author should, likewise, only assume so much.You broke a boundary, today, and you should be commended for it.  That's always tough.  You may have lost this round, but one thing I can assure you of; you've changed the way the game will be played, henceforth.  That's a damned big accomplishment.You're right, but it's a delicate balance.  I've seen (and been in) tournaments that dragged on for way too long and it ain't pretty.  I can assure you, though, that the later rounds won't go so quickly.Thank you for the insights.  They are greatly appreciated.</blockquote>

Verification