one of the top 11. but no further

[tleilaxu]

how many of the finalists post here at ENworld? so far 2 of 11 have posted. (i for one am willing to believe that they are who they say they are )

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

A question: Are you allowed to reveal any of the "general guidelines" WotC provided you with for the 10-pager? And if so, did it suggest giving so much space to describing the prestige classes?

Just wondering...

 

[Gez]

Apparently the Golden Age was the golden idea.

WotC's next setting: Exalted d20 !

My brother is a bit disappointed, now. His own 1-pager was about "a new golden age", roughly. Don't even know if we still have it somewhere; there was some cool ideas in it.

 

[Krug]

A bump... Nice setting!

 

[wizardoftheplains]

A question: Are you allowed to reveal any of the "general guidelines" WotC provided you with for the 10-pager? And if so, did it suggest giving so much space to describing the prestige classes?

Just wondering...

No, can't reveal guidelines. I think the extra non-disclosures I signed still prevent that. So that's why I only put up pieces of the expanded setting. In general, it seemed like a test of both professionalism, ability, ideas, and scope of one's understanding of D and D.

I put the classes in because they are pivotal to a main story arc of my world. Only one is a prestige class, the others are new classes. I'm partial to the Tactician myself. Especially if you've never run up against one before

gary

 

[Lucent]

I have but only two comments to this...

1) Congratulations on this accomplishment, you have earned every single once of respect from me you could have.

2) The setting I proposed was nearly identical to this one, and it pains me to see that I did not make it into the running. Though, it is nice to think that there are other like-minded individuals out there.

Good luck, I sincerely hope you come out on top.

 

[sunbeam60]

Great stuff, wizardoftheplains.

I fail to see how rejection of three "similar" settings (golden age) can lead anyone to conclude that they are looking for a golden age setting.

From a logic standpoint, this is apparently what they are *not* looking for. As we don't know anything about the other settings, it could be that they had 3 golden age settings, 3 wild settings, 3 high magic post-golden age etc.

Just my €0.02

regards
Toft

 

[2WS-Steve]

I'm on the "they were looking for the Silmarillion" boat. If I walk past three farms on a road and they're all sheep farms I think the best bet is that the next farm will be a sheep farm too.

 

[sunbeam60]

I'm on the "they were looking for the Silmarillion" boat. If I walk past three farms on a road and they're all sheep farms I think the best bet is that the next farm will be a sheep farm too.

Ha ha, what an odd discussion. Never mind; me being the one who threw in the first sheep in the wolf-pen, I'll take my next bout as duty compels.

I can see your point (and you might/might now be proven right when more, pardon my badly chosen word for such fine work, rejects speak up), but following your logic, you're saying that you're betting the next reject will be a golden-age setting to.

If, and this is nothing but speculation, they have included nothing but golden-age settings in their top 11, then by logic, the final one will be a golden-age as well. True that.

But we don't know that; and I guess this is the point I was trying to explain. What it seems to me you're saying is that the three 4's you just rolled on your d6 makes it likely the next one will be a 4 as well.

I personally think this points more in the direction that they do not want a golden-age setting; you think it directly opposite. I guess we'll see.

If someone disagrees, I think it right to start a new thread; don't want to hijack this one.

regards
Toft

 

[Horacio]

But, if they didn't want a golden age setting, why did the choose three golden age setting between 11000 ?