Now that I've voted and can see the results so far, I would like to ask, out of curiosity and desire to improve my 'brewing, where Blazeguard's low Balance and Flavor scores and bind steed's low Flavor score came from, why they're as they are, and what I could have done to improve them.
Also, I definitely think we should implement a "don't rate yourself" policy. I'm pretty sure I can tell at least one entry whose creator voted for themselves....
Also also, good job, everyone. There were a whole lot of really good entries this time around.
Regarding Blazeguard, I actually voted considerably higher for its Balance and Formatting than for the other magical weapon Flarebrand. I think it is a pretty good magical weapon as it is. The only suggestion I have is regarding the Flavor votes, unlike Flarebrand or even my sword Galadris it just does not have a lot of flavor or backstory, it is just a shiny, glowing sword with lots of magic. I think the same issue might be why Bind Steed does have a low Flavor score, but honestly there is not much flavor you can provide with a simple spell submission unless you decide to also provide some backstory about who created the spell and why it was created for example - but for just one spell as a submission this is not really something that I would expect as a voter, and it only makes sense for arcane magic, since divine or primal spells aren't invented by people.
I like the new voting process much more than the old one and indeed we had a lot of great submissions this time!I also loved the adventure, but I am actually one of the few who voted with a 3 on Balance if I recall correctly, because I simply think it is too low level - a wizard from Candlekeep, one who has been there long enough to have an apprentice, not having access to 2nd level spells like Misty Step and thus being kidnapped by some normal goblins does not make that much sense to me. I think it would be perfect if it was around level 5 to 8, with Merridith being roughly a 5th level wizard and the goblins and hag having some means to keep him captive. Hag magic, a modified nilbog that reverses magic in addition to attacks amongst the goblins or some magic item they came across could easily provide an explanation.
I just think we maybe should clarify a bit more what the voting categories should actually be for, since things like the low formatting votes for my submission simply because I submitted multiple statblocks or the low flavor votes for your spell do not make much sense to me.
@BoringBard, your adventure was excellent! I normally dread reading adventures (and I admit I did skip a few bits) but this turned out to be something I might be interested in running! I tend to run long adventures and campaigns because I like to write a lot more than I like to read. I may make an exception for this one-shot soon...
This iteration of the competition had so many incredible entries! I felt like I wasn't being critical enough because of how well I felt they were made, turns out most of them were just that good this time!
Thank you! I worked hard on that adventure and am glad you like it:) I would love to hear any feedback you have on it if you run it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
Fellowship of Eilistraee: My own submission. I like how it worked out. I think my original version of the Sword Dancer had an action that was a bit too overloaded, but now it works out fine. I also like how the sword's aura is evolving with it, starting as the Aura of the New Moon with just immunity to fear and charm for the wielder and eventually becoming the Aura of the Full Moon that gives the full mind blank effect Singing Swords are known for; it is one of my favourite weapons I have created. Regarding formatting, since it is a submission of multiple statblocks, I had to submit it in this way; I prefer the old spellcasting system with spell slots both as a player fighting spellcasting monsters and as a DM, so I will stick with it :-)
Resplendent Couatl: That is a good, well-written/formatted monster statblock here, I like it. I think it could have had a little bit more lore about these creatures; my biggest issue was with its balancing actually. In terms of numbers it looks fine, although a bit on the weak side for its CR especially offensively (which is understandable as the creature is supposed to not really be offensive), but why is it dealing force damage with its physical attacks as a very much corporeal creature? I get that you are following MPMM's changes here as monsters that previously dealt magical b/p/s damage with their attacks got changed to dealing force damage in MPMM, but in my opinion (and in the opinion of many others) this is not a good change since it essentially negates an entire class feature for no reason - the class feature in question is the barbarian's rage, which gives resistance to all physical damage no matter whether it is magical or not.
Light Vampire. I love that one's flavor and concept, and I think you executed it quite well. Its vampire weaknesses are well thought out, it has some interesting abilities. I think it could be quite interesting to pair with creatures that are vulnerable to radiant damage to force players to decide - do they want to deal radiant damage to exploit that other creature's vulnerability at the cost of enraging and healing the light vampire or not? In terms of balancing it looks fine to me, although offensively a bit on the weak side with just its two attacks and no other offensive abilities. Regarding formatting, the statblock in general is fine as is the use of homebrewery by itself; I would suggest to stick with a narrow one-column statblock though, which works well enough for a more simple monster like this, so that it does not break for those who do not use Google Chrome.
Blazeguard: As I already wrote, I really liked that weapon. It is reasonably powerful for a legendary-tier item and has some cool abilities; it just does not has a lot of story/background. I am a big fan of allowing magical weapons to be used to cast spells in place of attacks to make them actually worth to use for martials. Personally, I might change how its retribute flare and aura work, since I think 1 minute is a bit long of a duration for a reactive feature's effect and the aura maybe could be more interesting than just dealing no-save radiant damage.
Astral Stream: I am not that familiar with Supernatural Regions; this one looked quite interesting though. I would like to experience it in a spelljammer game actually. I think it could have had a bit more lore to learn why these streams exist, how they can be created (as a funny idea, could they be the result of an astral dreadnought belching? :-D Regarding formatting, when you were using tooltips, you never used plural forms? You can change the text that appears in the tooltip using a semicolon: [monster]tarrasque;tiamat[/monster] would appear as tiamat for example - this can be used for plural forms too of course: tarrasques. Regarding balance, I think it geenrally works out fine; the only issue I noticed is that for the 37-45 effect of air vanishing, it takes a reaction to hold breath. I think this should not require a reaction; it does not make sense for me that a creature who already has made an attack of opportunity this round or parried someone's attack is not able to hold its breath and starts suffocating, while other creatures can actually hold their breath.
Flarebrand: I like that this sword has a lot of lore and flavor. However, it just appears too weak to me compared to some legendary weapons and of course compared to other artifacts; and has, at least in my opinion, some mechanical issues. The first mechanic (glowing blade) needs some clarification; does it actually has a blade when not activated or not? I think you can just copy the [magicitem]sunblade;sunblade's[/magicweapon] text here, since you intended to go for the same mechancis (and spells like elemental weapon cannot even be cast on it as these spells do not work on weapons that already are magical). Solar Flare has two issues. First it requires a spell slot to be used, which means a martial character without spell slots like a fighter or a barbarian (thematically, the sword could very well be used by a Zealot barbarian) just cannot use this ability at all; and second, it requires a full action and is way too weak to justify using that action over just attacking or casting more powerful spells, especially considering that a character likely is level 17 or higher when they receive an artifact like this. You could do the same thing Helmut did with Blazeguard and what I did with Galadris and allow it to be used in place of one attack when the character takes the Attack action. Another idea is restricting the sword's attunement to paladins only and changing it to be a rider effect on top of a Divine Smite, maybe limited to once per turn.
Player Options
Street Jockey: I like the background's theme a lot; in general it is a good background. I just think it could have been flavored a little bit more towards medieval times. I am missing chariot races as a possible occupation for example; and a city guard regularly involved in chases could be a good occupation too, especially as some cops like to crash the target vehicle to stop it from moving, which would fit perfectly with the feature "Crash Expert" (as a DM I would certainly allow them to PIT maneuver the baddies' carriage in a chase :-D). Maybe combine Delivery/mailman and Messenger into one to free up a spot in the table? Also, I would suggest the Mobile feat if you consider adding a feat to it.
Alfa Gnomeo: The name is perfect! Well done. Maybe it could have been a large vehicle instead of a huge one though considering how small gnomes are? As a minor note, you should add that the Alfa's speed is 0 when it is flipped, since incapacitated does not set one's speed to 0 actually.
Equestrian: Not that much to say about this, it is a pretty standard background. It fills an important niche (I am quite surprised that there is no horse-related background in the official books so far actually), and the feat fits perfectly; going along with the new way of designing backgrounds and providing feats with them certainly is fine. It is just missing tables for character traits.
Revised Mount Rules. This is the one submission I unfortunately had to vote with a 1 for. All other submissions were great so far though! These mount rules, as I pointed out already just do not work in my opinion. Melee characters are required to be able to move between their attacks to target the creatures they want to hit (maybe their first strike killed a creature and they want to engage the next one, maybe they want to apply a certain effect to multiple creatures, maybe their target used some kind of reaction to get away from them and they want to pursue it...), and that does not work if you do not allow the mount to move on the rider's turn but rather force it to take its turn right before or after the rider.
Four Horsemen Warlock: The flavor is absolutely awesome, I love that idea and also remembered me of Shadowmere from Skyrim as a summon-able harbringer of doom :-D. In terms of criticism, I am going d'accord with the feedback others already provided. Actually, that makes me think of if a new pact option "Pact of the Harbringer" that gives you a customizable mount could work.
Cloudweaver: A very interesting concept you have here! Love the idea of allowing others to ride the cloud. In regards to balance, I did not see much issues. I am not sold on the bonus action to command the cloud though, as you run into the same issue as with the PHB Beast Master and the Monster Hunter ranger - rangers already have too many bonus actions with most of their combat spells requiring one to cast and to move in case of hunter's mark and potentially dual-wielding requiring one for an off-hand attack (unless you do it like me and just houserule the offhand attack to be part of your action instead :-D), so having their subclass's main feature depend on a bonus action too does not feel good. Your Misty Threads ability very clearly is supposed to help wit that, although you need to take into account that most ranger combat spells target self except for hunter's mark, so you cannot use any of its abilities that target creatures other than yourself, most notably the one that grants advantage on attacks. I haven't had a chance to playtest the Cloudweaver, so I cannot tell how it works out in actual play, but from my experience with Gloom Stalker and Hunter rangers, I know that I barely have turns without a bonus action due to casting spells and moving hunter's marks around - which in case of my Hunter also means I only rarely get to use my GWM bonus action attack after killing someone... Also, I think you forgot to add at which level a Cloudweaver gets their various abilities.
Bind Steed: I think the spell is fine, but I do not see why it needs concentration. I think it would be fine as a 2nd level spell without concentration too. The benefits are nice and helpful, but not that powerful actually, compared to other 3rd level spells with and without concentration. If you want to add a material component, what about ornate/decorated reins for your mount and a set of spurs for your boots worth like 50 gold?
Fellowship of Eilistraee: My own submission. I like how it worked out. I think my original version of the Sword Dancer had an action that was a bit too overloaded, but now it works out fine. I also like how the sword's aura is evolving with it, starting as the Aura of the New Moon with just immunity to fear and charm for the wielder and eventually becoming the Aura of the Full Moon that gives the full mind blank effect Singing Swords are known for; it is one of my favourite weapons I have created. Regarding formatting, since it is a submission of multiple statblocks, I had to submit it in this way; I prefer the old spellcasting system with spell slots both as a player fighting spellcasting monsters and as a DM, so I will stick with it :-)
Resplendent Couatl: That is a good, well-written/formatted monster statblock here, I like it. I think it could have had a little bit more lore about these creatures; my biggest issue was with its balancing actually. In terms of numbers it looks fine, although a bit on the weak side for its CR especially offensively (which is understandable as the creature is supposed to not really be offensive), but why is it dealing force damage with its physical attacks as a very much corporeal creature? I get that you are following MPMM's changes here as monsters that previously dealt magical b/p/s damage with their attacks got changed to dealing force damage in MPMM, but in my opinion (and in the opinion of many others) this is not a good change since it essentially negates an entire class feature for no reason - the class feature in question is the barbarian's rage, which gives resistance to all physical damage no matter whether it is magical or not.
Light Vampire. I love that one's flavor and concept, and I think you executed it quite well. Its vampire weaknesses are well thought out, it has some interesting abilities. I think it could be quite interesting to pair with creatures that are vulnerable to radiant damage to force players to decide - do they want to deal radiant damage to exploit that other creature's vulnerability at the cost of enraging and healing the light vampire or not? In terms of balancing it looks fine to me, although offensively a bit on the weak side with just its two attacks and no other offensive abilities. Regarding formatting, the statblock in general is fine as is the use of homebrewery by itself; I would suggest to stick with a narrow one-column statblock though, which works well enough for a more simple monster like this, so that it does not break for those who do not use Google Chrome.
Blazeguard: As I already wrote, I really liked that weapon. It is reasonably powerful for a legendary-tier item and has some cool abilities; it just does not has a lot of story/background. I am a big fan of allowing magical weapons to be used to cast spells in place of attacks to make them actually worth to use for martials. Personally, I might change how its retribute flare and aura work, since I think 1 minute is a bit long of a duration for a reactive feature's effect and the aura maybe could be more interesting than just dealing no-save radiant damage.
Astral Stream: I am not that familiar with Supernatural Regions; this one looked quite interesting though. I would like to experience it in a spelljammer game actually. I think it could have had a bit more lore to learn why these streams exist, how they can be created (as a funny idea, could they be the result of an astral dreadnought belching? :-D Regarding formatting, when you were using tooltips, you never used plural forms? You can change the text that appears in the tooltip using a semicolon: [monster]tarrasque;tiamat[/monster] would appear as tiamat for example - this can be used for plural forms too of course: tarrasques. Regarding balance, I think it geenrally works out fine; the only issue I noticed is that for the 37-45 effect of air vanishing, it takes a reaction to hold breath. I think this should not require a reaction; it does not make sense for me that a creature who already has made an attack of opportunity this round or parried someone's attack is not able to hold its breath and starts suffocating, while other creatures can actually hold their breath.
Flarebrand: I like that this sword has a lot of lore and flavor. However, it just appears too weak to me compared to some legendary weapons and of course compared to other artifacts; and has, at least in my opinion, some mechanical issues. The first mechanic (glowing blade) needs some clarification; does it actually has a blade when not activated or not? I think you can just copy the [magicitem]sunblade;sunblade's[/magicweapon] text here, since you intended to go for the same mechancis (and spells like elemental weapon cannot even be cast on it as these spells do not work on weapons that already are magical). Solar Flare has two issues. First it requires a spell slot to be used, which means a martial character without spell slots like a fighter or a barbarian (thematically, the sword could very well be used by a Zealot barbarian) just cannot use this ability at all; and second, it requires a full action and is way too weak to justify using that action over just attacking or casting more powerful spells, especially considering that a character likely is level 17 or higher when they receive an artifact like this. You could do the same thing Helmut did with Blazeguard and what I did with Galadris and allow it to be used in place of one attack when the character takes the Attack action. Another idea is restricting the sword's attunement to paladins only and changing it to be a rider effect on top of a Divine Smite, maybe limited to once per turn.
Player Options
Street Jockey: I like the background's theme a lot; in general it is a good background. I just think it could have been flavored a little bit more towards medieval times. I am missing chariot races as a possible occupation for example; and a city guard regularly involved in chases could be a good occupation too, especially as some cops like to crash the target vehicle to stop it from moving, which would fit perfectly with the feature "Crash Expert" (as a DM I would certainly allow them to PIT maneuver the baddies' carriage in a chase :-D). Maybe combine Delivery/mailman and Messenger into one to free up a spot in the table? Also, I would suggest the Mobile feat if you consider adding a feat to it.
Alfa Gnomeo: The name is perfect! Well done. Maybe it could have been a large vehicle instead of a huge one though considering how small gnomes are? As a minor note, you should add that the Alfa's speed is 0 when it is flipped, since incapacitated does not set one's speed to 0 actually.
Equestrian: Not that much to say about this, it is a pretty standard background. It fills an important niche (I am quite surprised that there is no horse-related background in the official books so far actually), and the feat fits perfectly; going along with the new way of designing backgrounds and providing feats with them certainly is fine. It is just missing tables for character traits.
Revised Mount Rules. This is the one submission I unfortunately had to vote with a 1 for. All other submissions were great so far though! These mount rules, as I pointed out already just do not work in my opinion. Melee characters are required to be able to move between their attacks to target the creatures they want to hit (maybe their first strike killed a creature and they want to engage the next one, maybe they want to apply a certain effect to multiple creatures, maybe their target used some kind of reaction to get away from them and they want to pursue it...), and that does not work if you do not allow the mount to move on the rider's turn but rather force it to take its turn right before or after the rider.
Four Horsemen Warlock: The flavor is absolutely awesome, I love that idea and also remembered me of Shadowmere from Skyrim as a summon-able harbringer of doom :-D. In terms of criticism, I am going d'accord with the feedback others already provided. Actually, that makes me think of if a new pact option "Pact of the Harbringer" that gives you a customizable mount could work.
Cloudweaver: A very interesting concept you have here! Love the idea of allowing others to ride the cloud. In regards to balance, I did not see much issues. I am not sold on the bonus action to command the cloud though, as you run into the same issue as with the PHB Beast Master and the Monster Hunter ranger - rangers already have too many bonus actions with most of their combat spells requiring one to cast and to move in case of hunter's mark and potentially dual-wielding requiring one for an off-hand attack (unless you do it like me and just houserule the offhand attack to be part of your action instead :-D), so having their subclass's main feature depend on a bonus action too does not feel good. Your Misty Threads ability very clearly is supposed to help wit that, although you need to take into account that most ranger combat spells target self except for hunter's mark, so you cannot use any of its abilities that target creatures other than yourself, most notably the one that grants advantage on attacks. I haven't had a chance to playtest the Cloudweaver, so I cannot tell how it works out in actual play, but from my experience with Gloom Stalker and Hunter rangers, I know that I barely have turns without a bonus action due to casting spells and moving hunter's marks around - which in case of my Hunter also means I only rarely get to use my GWM bonus action attack after killing someone... Also, I think you forgot to add at which level a Cloudweaver gets their various abilities.
Bind Steed: I think the spell is fine, but I do not see why it needs concentration. I think it would be fine as a 2nd level spell without concentration too. The benefits are nice and helpful, but not that powerful actually, compared to other 3rd level spells with and without concentration. If you want to add a material component, what about ornate/decorated reins for your mount and a set of spurs for your boots worth like 50 gold?
About the character personality tables, I was duplicating the Strixhaven backgrounds, which don't have them. Now I like more personality traits, but its hard to find ones to do with horses! Haha
Also on light vampire, thanks for the kind comments! I did originally try to make it one column but it ended up not fitting, so I had to do it double-sized.
Street Jockey: I like the background's theme a lot; in general it is a good background. I just think it could have been flavored a little bit more towards medieval times. I am missing chariot races as a possible occupation for example; and a city guard regularly involved in chases could be a good occupation too, especially as some cops like to crash the target vehicle to stop it from moving, which would fit perfectly with the feature "Crash Expert" (as a DM I would certainly allow them to PIT maneuver the baddies' carriage in a chase :-D). Maybe combine Delivery/mailman and Messenger into one to free up a spot in the table? Also, I would suggest the Mobile feat if you consider adding a feat to it.
Thanks! I like the ideas of chariot racer and city guard, they’ll be added accordingly. Also, what do you mean by adding a feat to it?
Street Jockey: I like the background's theme a lot; in general it is a good background. I just think it could have been flavored a little bit more towards medieval times. I am missing chariot races as a possible occupation for example; and a city guard regularly involved in chases could be a good occupation too, especially as some cops like to crash the target vehicle to stop it from moving, which would fit perfectly with the feature "Crash Expert" (as a DM I would certainly allow them to PIT maneuver the baddies' carriage in a chase :-D). Maybe combine Delivery/mailman and Messenger into one to free up a spot in the table? Also, I would suggest the Mobile feat if you consider adding a feat to it.
Thanks! I like the ideas of chariot racer and city guard, they’ll be added accordingly. Also, what do you mean by adding a feat to it?
I think they're talking about the free feats that now come with backgrounds.
Street Jockey: I like the background's theme a lot; in general it is a good background. I just think it could have been flavored a little bit more towards medieval times. I am missing chariot races as a possible occupation for example; and a city guard regularly involved in chases could be a good occupation too, especially as some cops like to crash the target vehicle to stop it from moving, which would fit perfectly with the feature "Crash Expert" (as a DM I would certainly allow them to PIT maneuver the baddies' carriage in a chase :-D). Maybe combine Delivery/mailman and Messenger into one to free up a spot in the table? Also, I would suggest the Mobile feat if you consider adding a feat to it.
Thanks! I like the ideas of chariot racer and city guard, they’ll be added accordingly. Also, what do you mean by adding a feat to it?
I think they're talking about the free feats that now come with backgrounds.
Oh. I haven’t read the entire 1dnd pdf lol
Anyway you can assign the Mobile feat to it if you like. I don’t think I’ll add it to the background.
@BoringBard, your adventure was excellent! I normally dread reading adventures (and I admit I did skip a few bits) but this turned out to be something I might be interested in running! I tend to run long adventures and campaigns because I like to write a lot more than I like to read. I may make an exception for this one-shot soon...
This iteration of the competition had so many incredible entries! I felt like I wasn't being critical enough because of how well I felt they were made, turns out most of them were just that good this time!
Oh, one thing I forgot to mention. This adventure could potentially (though probably not) turn into a two-shot depending on how much time your players spend RPing & planning, or perhaps if they get lost. But you can also adjust the amount of random encounters, or pick shorter ones, to make up for that if you want. Or just change the lost DC.
In short, the random encounter table and how much you roll on it is really flexible, so it could make the adventure take shorter or longer than usual. I just wanted to say that in case you do run it as a one-shot:)
DM Options: Flarebrand: I like that this sword has a lot of lore and flavor. However, it just appears too weak to me compared to some legendary weapons and of course compared to other artifacts; and has, at least in my opinion, some mechanical issues. The first mechanic (glowing blade) needs some clarification; does it actually has a blade when not activated or not? I think you can just copy the [magicitem]sunblade;sunblade's[/magicweapon] text here, since you intended to go for the same mechancis (and spells like elemental weapon cannot even be cast on it as these spells do not work on weapons that already are magical). Solar Flare has two issues. First it requires a spell slot to be used, which means a martial character without spell slots like a fighter or a barbarian (thematically, the sword could very well be used by a Zealot barbarian) just cannot use this ability at all; and second, it requires a full action and is way too weak to justify using that action over just attacking or casting more powerful spells, especially considering that a character likely is level 17 or higher when they receive an artifact like this. You could do the same thing Helmut did with Blazeguard and what I did with Galadris and allow it to be used in place of one attack when the character takes the Attack action. Another idea is restricting the sword's attunement to paladins only and changing it to be a rider effect on top of a Divine Smite, maybe limited to once per turn.
Thanks for the feedback, Semako! Although the competition is (mostly) over and this shouldn't change my score at all, I wanted to point out a few things and acknowledge some of your critiques as well.
First, the critiques I agree with! I haven't used weapon altering spells in my games in a while so I forgot that they didn't function on magical weapons! I'll have to update the weapon to have a better example for that ability (a rogue's sneak attack or divine smite used by an evil paladin might be better examples). I also was unaware of the Sunblade, that would have been very helpful when designing this since it's so similar!
In regards to Solar Flare, I intended to increase the damage, but even then the main point of the ability is the to inflict the blinded on enemies within a massive area of effect. It affects any enemy within 120ft and spellcasters can use a 1st level slot for this effect, reserving their high level slots for their spells.
Lastly, the attunement issue. This is an artifact, not a legendary weapon and as such, it is unique and although it can be wielded by anyone who can attune to it, only spellcasters can use it to its full potential. This was a flavor decision and is actually quite similar to other artifacts, like the Axe of the Dwarvish Lords which is beneficial to all wielders, but dwarves get more perks.
That may make it seem like its not the best thing out there for a player, and that would be correct. It's only intended to be used by specific types of characters and based on the lore provided, it would be unlikely for the weapon to even be used by a non-spellcaster.
I appreciate the in-depth critique and I'll make sure to double check if there is published content that is similar to my design to use as a reference in the future!
Also, in regards to clarity of the voting categories, maybe 'formatting' should be split into 'formatting' and 'accessibility'? Just a thought. There were a few instances where I wanted to subtract a point from a category but I didn't feel right doing it because my issue didn't quite fall under any of the present categories.
Edit: To be clear, I much prefer the current way of voting. Categories make the whole process more objective and easier to judge over-all.
I'm not a huge fan of the multiple categories for voting. Balance is really hard to judge and even unbalanced homebrews can be interesting, and it doesn't seem like anybody is happy about the formatting category. I likewise believe that flavor is really only relevant for some types of homebrews but not for things like spells and such.
I'm not a huge fan of the multiple categories for voting. Balance is really hard to judge and even unbalanced homebrews can be interesting, and it doesn't seem like anybody is happy about the formatting category. I likewise believe that flavor is really only relevant for some types of homebrews but not for things like spells and such.
I'm not a huge fan of the multiple categories for voting. Balance is really hard to judge and even unbalanced homebrews can be interesting, and it doesn't seem like anybody is happy about the formatting category. I likewise believe that flavor is really only relevant for some types of homebrews but not for things like spells and such.
I agree with this.
I disagree haha. The multiple categories allow for more breadth of voting. But maybe we should have just three categories: written feedback, theme score, and balance.
I think voting categories make the competition more inclusive and fun for the participants (unless they're competitive perfectionists who aren't actually doing this for fun). It's impossibly hard to just judge everyone's entry on a singular 1 out of 5 scale. I think the only thing we need to implement is a solid definition for each of the categories.
In the spoiler below are some of my thoughts on the current categories.
Balance seems to be difficult for people to judge because everyone has their own experience of what is or isn't balanced and it's hard to set a specific standard for some things like class features. Spells and monsters, however, are pretty easy to compare to published content to judge their balance. I think everyone should just double check similar things if they're wondering whether their judgement is accurate/fair.
Lore/flavor is a fun category but it can be difficult to know whether you should judge something with a high or low value based on how well thought out and structured the lore/flavor is or whether you just like it. I felt that the Resplendant Couatl had excellent lore and flavor because of the link to the trip to Mexico that was mentioned. But if that wasn't in the post I might have rated it lower.
Formatting is the really odd one because it should be cut and dry and the easiest category to judge for, but people were including things like ease of access to the document(s) in their ratings for the brews and I feel that should be it's own category; ease of access ≠ ease of use.
In short, I think interested parties (myself included) should have a discussion to clearly define the categories so that it's easier to give a 'correct' rating for that category.
I'm not a huge fan of the multiple categories for voting. Balance is really hard to judge and even unbalanced homebrews can be interesting, and it doesn't seem like anybody is happy about the formatting category. I likewise believe that flavor is really only relevant for some types of homebrews but not for things like spells and such.
I agree with this.
I disagree haha. The multiple categories allow for more breadth of voting. But maybe we should have just three categories: written feedback, theme score, and balance.
I like the idea of multiple categories, however these particular ones I found cumbersome. For example balance is many situations is only a very small fraction of my voting, I care far more about other factors. Formatting again is a very small part of my considerations: If I think its awful I may deduct a point, but not usually a third of my criteria. On the other hand, one of the most important factors in my opinion is interesting mechanics, which there was not option for (I just integrated it into my balance score).
To future judges: I whole-heartidly support experimenting with different things to see what works. I think this was an excellent idea. Maybe we could try different criteria next time to see which is preferred? Then if balance, formatting, and theme remain the most popular we can always return. Maybe balance, theme, and written as Yamana suggests?
To future judges: I whole-heartidly support experimenting with different things to see what works. I think this was an excellent idea. Maybe we could try different criteria next time to see which is preferred? Then if balance, formatting, and theme remain the most popular we can always return. Maybe balance, theme, and written as Yamana suggests?
I really like this suggestion, after all... Discovery requires experimentation lol
Maybe for the next few iterations of the competitions, judges should collaborate and each choose a new criteria to replace one of the previous ones?
Regarding Blazeguard, I actually voted considerably higher for its Balance and Formatting than for the other magical weapon Flarebrand. I think it is a pretty good magical weapon as it is. The only suggestion I have is regarding the Flavor votes, unlike Flarebrand or even my sword Galadris it just does not have a lot of flavor or backstory, it is just a shiny, glowing sword with lots of magic.
I think the same issue might be why Bind Steed does have a low Flavor score, but honestly there is not much flavor you can provide with a simple spell submission unless you decide to also provide some backstory about who created the spell and why it was created for example - but for just one spell as a submission this is not really something that I would expect as a voter, and it only makes sense for arcane magic, since divine or primal spells aren't invented by people.
I like the new voting process much more than the old one and indeed we had a lot of great submissions this time!I also loved the adventure, but I am actually one of the few who voted with a 3 on Balance if I recall correctly, because I simply think it is too low level - a wizard from Candlekeep, one who has been there long enough to have an apprentice, not having access to 2nd level spells like Misty Step and thus being kidnapped by some normal goblins does not make that much sense to me. I think it would be perfect if it was around level 5 to 8, with Merridith being roughly a 5th level wizard and the goblins and hag having some means to keep him captive. Hag magic, a modified nilbog that reverses magic in addition to attacks amongst the goblins or some magic item they came across could easily provide an explanation.
I just think we maybe should clarify a bit more what the voting categories should actually be for, since things like the low formatting votes for my submission simply because I submitted multiple statblocks or the low flavor votes for your spell do not make much sense to me.
Thank you! I worked hard on that adventure and am glad you like it:) I would love to hear any feedback you have on it if you run it.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Then let's go through the submissions:
DM Options:
I get that you are following MPMM's changes here as monsters that previously dealt magical b/p/s damage with their attacks got changed to dealing force damage in MPMM, but in my opinion (and in the opinion of many others) this is not a good change since it essentially negates an entire class feature for no reason - the class feature in question is the barbarian's rage, which gives resistance to all physical damage no matter whether it is magical or not.
Player Options
Also, I think you forgot to add at which level a Cloudweaver gets their various abilities.
About the character personality tables, I was duplicating the Strixhaven backgrounds, which don't have them. Now I like more personality traits, but its hard to find ones to do with horses! Haha
Also on light vampire, thanks for the kind comments! I did originally try to make it one column but it ended up not fitting, so I had to do it double-sized.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
Thanks! I like the ideas of chariot racer and city guard, they’ll be added accordingly. Also, what do you mean by adding a feat to it?
Come participate in the Competition of the Finest Brews, Edition XXVIII?
My homebrew stuff:
Spells, Monsters, Magic Items, Feats, Subclasses.
I am an Archfey, but nobody seems to notice.
Extended Signature
I think they're talking about the free feats that now come with backgrounds.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
Oh. I haven’t read the entire 1dnd pdf lol
Anyway you can assign the Mobile feat to it if you like. I don’t think I’ll add it to the background.
Come participate in the Competition of the Finest Brews, Edition XXVIII?
My homebrew stuff:
Spells, Monsters, Magic Items, Feats, Subclasses.
I am an Archfey, but nobody seems to notice.
Extended Signature
Oh, one thing I forgot to mention. This adventure could potentially (though probably not) turn into a two-shot depending on how much time your players spend RPing & planning, or perhaps if they get lost. But you can also adjust the amount of random encounters, or pick shorter ones, to make up for that if you want. Or just change the lost DC.
In short, the random encounter table and how much you roll on it is really flexible, so it could make the adventure take shorter or longer than usual. I just wanted to say that in case you do run it as a one-shot:)
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.When exactly does voting end again? I couldn't find it in the competition description.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.From the “Voting” spoiler:
Voting will start September 6th and will end at noon (EST) on September
18th19th.Come participate in the Competition of the Finest Brews, Edition XXVIII?
My homebrew stuff:
Spells, Monsters, Magic Items, Feats, Subclasses.
I am an Archfey, but nobody seems to notice.
Extended Signature
Thank you very much:)
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Thanks for the feedback, Semako! Although the competition is (mostly) over and this shouldn't change my score at all, I wanted to point out a few things and acknowledge some of your critiques as well.
First, the critiques I agree with!
I haven't used weapon altering spells in my games in a while so I forgot that they didn't function on magical weapons! I'll have to update the weapon to have a better example for that ability (a rogue's sneak attack or divine smite used by an evil paladin might be better examples).
I also was unaware of the Sunblade, that would have been very helpful when designing this since it's so similar!
In regards to Solar Flare, I intended to increase the damage, but even then the main point of the ability is the to inflict the blinded on enemies within a massive area of effect. It affects any enemy within 120ft and spellcasters can use a 1st level slot for this effect, reserving their high level slots for their spells.
Lastly, the attunement issue. This is an artifact, not a legendary weapon and as such, it is unique and although it can be wielded by anyone who can attune to it, only spellcasters can use it to its full potential. This was a flavor decision and is actually quite similar to other artifacts, like the Axe of the Dwarvish Lords which is beneficial to all wielders, but dwarves get more perks.
That may make it seem like its not the best thing out there for a player, and that would be correct. It's only intended to be used by specific types of characters and based on the lore provided, it would be unlikely for the weapon to even be used by a non-spellcaster.
I appreciate the in-depth critique and I'll make sure to double check if there is published content that is similar to my design to use as a reference in the future!
Sunday DM and creator of homebrew for both DMs and players. I do lots of conversions!
My best brews: Berserker (Fire Emblem - barbarian subclass) | Swordmaster (Fire Emblem - fighter subclass) | Deserter (background) | Flame Atronach (Skyrim - monster)
My Fire Emblem Conversion Thread
General homebrew links
Spells | Monsters | Magic Items | Backgrounds | Feats | Races | Subclasses
Also, in regards to clarity of the voting categories, maybe 'formatting' should be split into 'formatting' and 'accessibility'? Just a thought.
There were a few instances where I wanted to subtract a point from a category but I didn't feel right doing it because my issue didn't quite fall under any of the present categories.
Edit: To be clear, I much prefer the current way of voting. Categories make the whole process more objective and easier to judge over-all.
Sunday DM and creator of homebrew for both DMs and players. I do lots of conversions!
My best brews: Berserker (Fire Emblem - barbarian subclass) | Swordmaster (Fire Emblem - fighter subclass) | Deserter (background) | Flame Atronach (Skyrim - monster)
My Fire Emblem Conversion Thread
General homebrew links
Spells | Monsters | Magic Items | Backgrounds | Feats | Races | Subclasses
My Street Jockey, now with City Guard and Charioteer, if anyone was interested.
Come participate in the Competition of the Finest Brews, Edition XXVIII?
My homebrew stuff:
Spells, Monsters, Magic Items, Feats, Subclasses.
I am an Archfey, but nobody seems to notice.
Extended Signature
I'm not a huge fan of the multiple categories for voting. Balance is really hard to judge and even unbalanced homebrews can be interesting, and it doesn't seem like anybody is happy about the formatting category. I likewise believe that flavor is really only relevant for some types of homebrews but not for things like spells and such.
I agree with this.
I am an average mathematics enjoyer.
>Extended Signature<
I disagree haha. The multiple categories allow for more breadth of voting. But maybe we should have just three categories: written feedback, theme score, and balance.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
I think voting categories make the competition more inclusive and fun for the participants (unless they're competitive perfectionists who aren't actually doing this for fun). It's impossibly hard to just judge everyone's entry on a singular 1 out of 5 scale. I think the only thing we need to implement is a solid definition for each of the categories.
In the spoiler below are some of my thoughts on the current categories.
Balance seems to be difficult for people to judge because everyone has their own experience of what is or isn't balanced and it's hard to set a specific standard for some things like class features. Spells and monsters, however, are pretty easy to compare to published content to judge their balance. I think everyone should just double check similar things if they're wondering whether their judgement is accurate/fair.
Lore/flavor is a fun category but it can be difficult to know whether you should judge something with a high or low value based on how well thought out and structured the lore/flavor is or whether you just like it. I felt that the Resplendant Couatl had excellent lore and flavor because of the link to the trip to Mexico that was mentioned. But if that wasn't in the post I might have rated it lower.
Formatting is the really odd one because it should be cut and dry and the easiest category to judge for, but people were including things like ease of access to the document(s) in their ratings for the brews and I feel that should be it's own category; ease of access ≠ ease of use.
In short, I think interested parties (myself included) should have a discussion to clearly define the categories so that it's easier to give a 'correct' rating for that category.
Sunday DM and creator of homebrew for both DMs and players. I do lots of conversions!
My best brews: Berserker (Fire Emblem - barbarian subclass) | Swordmaster (Fire Emblem - fighter subclass) | Deserter (background) | Flame Atronach (Skyrim - monster)
My Fire Emblem Conversion Thread
General homebrew links
Spells | Monsters | Magic Items | Backgrounds | Feats | Races | Subclasses
I like the idea of multiple categories, however these particular ones I found cumbersome. For example balance is many situations is only a very small fraction of my voting, I care far more about other factors. Formatting again is a very small part of my considerations: If I think its awful I may deduct a point, but not usually a third of my criteria. On the other hand, one of the most important factors in my opinion is interesting mechanics, which there was not option for (I just integrated it into my balance score).
To future judges: I whole-heartidly support experimenting with different things to see what works. I think this was an excellent idea. Maybe we could try different criteria next time to see which is preferred? Then if balance, formatting, and theme remain the most popular we can always return. Maybe balance, theme, and written as Yamana suggests?
I am an average mathematics enjoyer.
>Extended Signature<
I really like this suggestion, after all... Discovery requires experimentation lol
Maybe for the next few iterations of the competitions, judges should collaborate and each choose a new criteria to replace one of the previous ones?
Sunday DM and creator of homebrew for both DMs and players. I do lots of conversions!
My best brews: Berserker (Fire Emblem - barbarian subclass) | Swordmaster (Fire Emblem - fighter subclass) | Deserter (background) | Flame Atronach (Skyrim - monster)
My Fire Emblem Conversion Thread
General homebrew links
Spells | Monsters | Magic Items | Backgrounds | Feats | Races | Subclasses