Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Radiating Gnome" data-source="post: 221627" data-attributes="member: 150">I probably should have quoted a couple of other posts -- several posters have said that Rune's final entry was too broad, too ambitious, etc.  But you've all read the thread, so I'll move on.Rune shouldn't have to defend the style of his entry -- he won, and his entry deserved it, no question there -- but the finals did seem to stretch to the limit the range of possibilities for the competition, and in the end comparing the entries seems to be like comparing apples and oranges.  It might help, in the future, to have much clearer guidelines.  After all, what I knew about the competition and what was appropriate I learned as I played, and from reading the other posts. It would help to have much clearer guidelines for entrants.  Rune and I differed, in this case, in one very fundamental way -- he was writing the outline of an adventure -- a sort of recipe he could give to other DMs, while I focused much more closely on the details of the adventure, writing it as best I could to represend the way I would DM the set of encounters myself, rather than what someone else might do with the same core ideas.  Should entrants be approaching this from the point of view of someone writing source material for other DMs or for their own game?  Is this a competition for scenario writers or DMs? Is one approach more appropriate than the other? Should it be clear in the competition whether entries should lay out encounters, interludes, full adventures, or campaign-length productions?  Should there be other guidelines as well?  Should it be permissable to morph an ingredient into something that works a little better for your story?  (As I did in the first round, morphing ghouls into Lacedons)  Are there there guidelines about the use of different game worlds and settings?  Could I, for example, have written a Call of Cthulu version of the last entry?  I'm not trying to say that if there had been strickter categories, the results would have been different.  Far from it.  But clearnly there were a variety of different expectation here, and it might help in the future if they were a bit more clearly laid out.And, Nemmerle, I want to make sure you know I'm saying this all out of respect and appreciation -- I had a great time in the competition and the only results I've ever questioned were the ones where I won.-rg</blockquote>

Verification