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.
Just curios, how would written feedback work? Would it be written feedback only or would it be that and a grade? And does that mean that if we tried this out that you'd have to give written feedback on every contestant when/if you vote?
PS- I really like multiple categories for voting, it means you don't have to cram all of your thoughts into one score. that being said, I didn't like that formatting accounted for 1/3 of your score.
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.
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.
Just curios, how would written feedback work? Would it be written feedback only or would it be that and a grade? And does that mean that if we tried this out that you'd have to give written feedback on every contestant when/if you vote?
PS- I really like multiple categories for voting, it means you don't have to cram all of your thoughts into one score. that being said, I didn't like that formatting accounted for 1/3 of your score.
Written feedback would be ignorable I would think.
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.
Just curios, how would written feedback work? Would it be written feedback only or would it be that and a grade? And does that mean that if we tried this out that you'd have to give written feedback on every contestant when/if you vote?
PS- I really like multiple categories for voting, it means you don't have to cram all of your thoughts into one score. that being said, I didn't like that formatting accounted for 1/3 of your score.
Written feedback would be ignorable I would think.
Ok, that makes sense. I do wonder if it would get confusing with people writing feedback on both the competition thread and in the survey. But I do find the written feedback idea interesting.
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.
Personally, I think formatting should be made a subcategory for balance. I mean, how well something would play in game is impacted somewhat by how clear it is to understand and use. Maybe we could have that and lore and just average the two scores out? IDK, just an idea.
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.
Honestly, I think the three categories were pretty good.
Balance is important, one of the most important aspects of homebrew indeed. There is a reason why dandwiki for example has such a bad reception - homebrew over there often is just not balanced and severely overpowered. On the flip side, seriously underpowered homebrew is not good either of course. I think balance should be kept as a category.
Regarding Lore/Flavor, that is a difficult one since for some types of entries, providing a lot of lore or flavor is just not really possible, but for some kinds of entries it is quite important.
Regarding formatting, I think that is an important one too. Lots of homebrew I come across is filled with typos, grammatical errors, sloppy wording... Even if it is balanced and has good lore/flavor, such a bad formatting is a big downside, it also shows that the creator did not put much effort into presenting their homebrew. In previous contests I always took bad formatting as a reason to subtract points.
I think an issue with the formatting category specifically could have been that people did not have a clear idea what it was meant for and gave entries like mine a very low formatting score simply because I had submitted a group of statblocks as a list of links in my post here. I think this is not something that should influence the formatting score, it was a technical limitation - otherwise we would have to subtract points from every submission that was created on homebrewery/GMBinder due to their issues in browsers other than Google Chrome.
What about renaming Formatting to Presentation? Then we could say it includes lore/flavor text as well and axe the lore category?
Another idea I have for a category is mechanics: how well does the homebrew work mechanically, does it have any cool unique mechanics, is it intuitive to use? Or is it rather cumbersome, confusing to use? A homebrew can be balanced, well-presented and have great lore, but maybe the mechanics it uses are just very convoluted/cumbersome.
Balance is important, one of the most important aspects of homebrew indeed. There is a reason why dandwiki for example has such a bad reception - homebrew over there often is just not balanced and severely overpowered. On the flip side, seriously underpowered homebrew is not good either of course. I think balance should be kept as a category.
Regarding Lore/Flavor, that is a difficult one since for some types of entries, providing a lot of lore or flavor is just not really possible, but for some kinds of entries it is quite important.
Yeah, I think it needs to be revised slightly.
An idea I just had is that each category could have different criteria, so that scores on PC options like spells or feats don’t get lowered just because there wasn’t lore to go with it, even though that’s pretty unreasonable. It could just be Flavor - how interesting the concept is, and how well it fits the category. For the Inspirational category, though, Lore would be a fairly big part of the score.
Regarding formatting, I think that is an important one too. Lots of homebrew I come across is filled with typos, grammatical errors, sloppy wording... Even if it is balanced and has good lore/flavor, such a bad formatting is a big downside, it also shows that the creator did not put much effort into presenting their homebrew. In previous contests I always took bad formatting as a reason to subtract points.
I think that part of the problem here is that different people place differing values on technical stuff like proper grammar and intentional, official-style wording. Implementation into the DDB system, when applicable, is another factor here, though I (unfortunately) cannot find out how well a homebrew was implemented, since I don’t have a subscription.
I think an issue with the formatting category specifically could have been that people did not have a clear idea what it was meant for and gave entries like mine a very low formatting score simply because I had submitted a group of statblocks as a list of links in my post here. I think this is not something that should influence the formatting score, it was a technical limitation - otherwise we would have to subtract points from every submission that was created on homebrewery/GMBinder due to their issues in browsers other than Google Chrome.
Another idea I have for a category is mechanics: how well does the homebrew work mechanically, does it have any cool unique mechanics, is it intuitive to use? Or is it rather cumbersome, confusing to use? A homebrew can be balanced, well-presented and have great lore, but maybe the mechanics it uses are just very convoluted/cumbersome.
This, I think, is a great idea. First of all, the most important part of most homebrew are the mechanics, and so we could easily have 2 of 4 criteria be directly related to the mechanics. It would be fairly easy to define, since it’s basically just “How easy is it to understand and use, and does it have interesting, unique mechanics?”
In conclusion, I agree with pretty much everything you said. One way I think we could apply the ideas you had (and then the ideas I had as a result) are these five areas for rating:
Balance (all). How does the creation’s power level (or difficulty) compare to other similar official items of the same(ish) category? Is it effective while still being of an appropriate power level? Is it too over- or underpowered?
Presentation (all). How well was the creation worded, and is its wording effective at communicating the creation’s mechanics? Are there significant grammatical errors? Was the creation implemented in the D&D Beyond homebrew builder (if applicable), Homebrewery or GM Binder, or somehing similar, and how well? What is the quality of the creation’s flavor (not lore)?
Lore (DM and Inspirational options only). How well was the creation’s lore described and fleshed out? How original and creative is the lore?
Mechanics (all). How understandable are the creation’s mechanics? Are they clearly and concisely described? How unique and interesting are the creation’s mechanics?
Written Response (optional). Any additional feedback or explanation that a voter wants to submit. This would not have an effect on a creation’s score but could provide more clarity.
Obviously, some of these can overlap, and they honestly still need further explanation, but I think they might work a little better than the current ones. Also obviously, there are plenty of other ways this could be done just and well, and probably better. What do you all think about these?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Paladin main who spends most of his D&D time worldbuilding or DMing, not Paladin-ing.
In conclusion, I agree with pretty much everything you said. One way I think we could apply the ideas you had (and then the ideas I had as a result) are these five areas for rating:
Balance (all). How does the creation’s power level (or difficulty) compare to other similar official items of the same(ish) category? Is it effective while still being of an appropriate power level? Is it too over- or underpowered?
Presentation (all). How well was the creation worded, and is its wording effective at communicating the creation’s mechanics? Are there significant grammatical errors? Was the creation implemented in the D&D Beyond homebrew builder (if applicable), Homebrewery or GM Binder, or somehing similar, and how well? What is the quality of the creation’s flavor (not lore)?
Lore (DM and Inspirational options only). How well was the creation’s lore described and fleshed out? How original and creative is the lore?
Mechanics (all). How understandable are the creation’s mechanics? Are they clearly and concisely described? How unique and interesting are the creation’s mechanics?
Written Response (optional). Any additional feedback or explanation that a voter wants to submit. This would not have an effect on a creation’s score but could provide more clarity.
Obviously, some of these can overlap, and they honestly still need further explanation, but I think they might work a little better than the current ones. Also obviously, there are plenty of other ways this could be done just and well, and probably better. What do you all think about these?
I like this. However, maybe flavor and formatting should be split up? Flavor is extremely important when it comes to a homebrew, and definitely deserves its own category, not just one sentence of the presentation one. Flavor is what defines the entire homebrew under one theme. Alternatively, if flavor could even replace the lore category. Then lore, when its applicable, could jut be treated as part of the flavor category rather than flavor being part of the presentation.
Also, do you think it makes sense to experiment with how many points each category is worth? Like, formatting for example might only be out of three, while balance and mechanics are more important so would be out of 5.
In conclusion, I agree with pretty much everything you said. One way I think we could apply the ideas you had (and then the ideas I had as a result) are these five areas for rating:
Balance (all). How does the creation’s power level (or difficulty) compare to other similar official items of the same(ish) category? Is it effective while still being of an appropriate power level? Is it too over- or underpowered?
Presentation (all). How well was the creation worded, and is its wording effective at communicating the creation’s mechanics? Are there significant grammatical errors? Was the creation implemented in the D&D Beyond homebrew builder (if applicable), Homebrewery or GM Binder, or somehing similar, and how well? What is the quality of the creation’s flavor (not lore)?
Lore (DM and Inspirational options only). How well was the creation’s lore described and fleshed out? How original and creative is the lore?
Mechanics (all). How understandable are the creation’s mechanics? Are they clearly and concisely described? How unique and interesting are the creation’s mechanics?
Written Response (optional). Any additional feedback or explanation that a voter wants to submit. This would not have an effect on a creation’s score but could provide more clarity.
Obviously, some of these can overlap, and they honestly still need further explanation, but I think they might work a little better than the current ones. Also obviously, there are plenty of other ways this could be done just and well, and probably better. What do you all think about these?
I like this. However, maybe flavor and formatting should be split up? Flavor is extremely important when it comes to a homebrew, and definitely deserves its own category, not just one sentence of the presentation one. Flavor is what defines the entire homebrew under one theme. Alternatively, if flavor could even replace the lore category. Then lore, when its applicable, could jut be treated as part of the flavor category rather than flavor being part of the presentation.
Also, do you think it makes sense to experiment with how many points each category is worth? Like, formatting for example might only be out of three, while balance and mechanics are more important so would be out of 5.
Yeah, just replacing Lore with Flavor would probably work pretty well.
I think that making different categories be worth different amounts of points makes sense and is a good idea, but this is already getting really complicated really quickly. Maybe what we could do is try it once we decide on and try a different set of voting categories, but not for this next iteration of the competition.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Paladin main who spends most of his D&D time worldbuilding or DMing, not Paladin-ing.
I think that making different categories be worth different amounts of points makes sense and is a good idea, but this is already getting really complicated really quickly. Maybe what we could do is try it once we decide on and try a different set of voting categories, but not for this next iteration of the competition.
This hits on the biggest note from me, just like a submission should be intuitive and easy for a DM to use, the judging criteria for this competition should remain relatively intuitive as well. Maybe we could make a sub-competition for people to propose their own judging criteria that we vote on? XD
Jokes aside, we just need to make sure we don't make the categories too numerous or complex, otherwise people won't want to vote on submissions at all because of the effort required. Four could be a sweet spot, but until we try it, we won't know. The fact that Helmut_McQuack outlined/defined their suggestions for the categories is a great start and should be done regardless of what categories are chosen. The goal is to make judging the entries as easy and unambiguous as possible!
People are saying that the Lore category shouldn’t apply to Player options at all, but I disagree. Subclasses and races, for example, are crucial to the overall quality of the product. Maybe we just use different categories for different types of entries?
People are saying that the Lore category shouldn’t apply to Player options at all, but I disagree. Subclasses and races, for example, are crucial to the overall quality of the product. Maybe we just use different categories for different types of entries?
Yeah, I guess pretty much only feats and spells wouldn’t have some kind of lore attached to them. Races especially need good lore, and good subclasses should have them too. Maybe whoever the judge is should decide whether a submission should be subject to the Lore category, based on what type of creation it is. Or I guess we could also have it so the person who submits the creation can decide whether or not their submission gets rated on Lore, but choosing not to means your score could be slightly lower.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Paladin main who spends most of his D&D time worldbuilding or DMing, not Paladin-ing.
I mean we're hovering around the problem which is that for some of us, lore/formatting/flavor doesn't matter. If we're insistent on having multiple categories, we could have a few that don't matter for judgement and one "overall" score that is used for determining the winner.
I reviewed the categories and have a slight change to my previous proposal: I think we should have two categories, balance/playability, and idea/creativity.
1. Balance/playability: This score is about how well the entry would run in game. If this entry is overpowered or underpowered, consider subtracting points. Also, consider subtracting points if it is poorly written or unclear, since that would make it a lot harder to run/use in game.
2. Idea/creativity: This score is about cool, interesting and unique the entry is. If someone's idea does not fit well into the contest category it is submitted for, consider subtracting points.
These two scores would be averaged out. We could also add an optional written in. I like this system because it's not very complicated, and it means you'd don't have to cram all your thoughts into one score. It will also help avoid ties, which we had way too much of last competition.
For things like this, especially when people might not have a lot of time to judge every submission, simpler is better. I think we should have a simple 1/5 rating for each submission, with an optional spot for more focused feedback. That way, people that can go above and beyond can do so, and people that don’t have the time to can still participate.
Personally, I disagree. I think having multiple categories, especially if we only had two, wouldn't make it that complicated or tedious. And we could always have optional written feedback for people who wanted to do more. One score means that you have to put all your thoughts about one entry, into one score. This is especially problematic for things like adventures for the inspirational category, which could seven or eight pages. It's hard to pick a number between 1-5 to represent how you feel about that. Again, even if you do give written feedback, you have to cram all your thoughts about various aspects of the entry that you spent ages writing about, into one score.
Also, I will reiterate that multiple categories do help avoid ties. Which is nice.
If its so controversial maybe we keep these categories and just... explain what they are a bit further so no-one thinks they're different to anyone else.
For things like this, especially when people might not have a lot of time to judge every submission, simpler is better. I think we should have a simple 1/5 rating for each submission, with an optional spot for more focused feedback. That way, people that can go above and beyond can do so, and people that don’t have the time to can still participate.
Actually this might be a good idea. Then each person can grease based on their own criteria, and combine them into a score out of 5. (of if we want to avoid ties we can always make it out of 10 or 15).
Just curios, how would written feedback work? Would it be written feedback only or would it be that and a grade? And does that mean that if we tried this out that you'd have to give written feedback on every contestant when/if you vote?
PS- I really like multiple categories for voting, it means you don't have to cram all of your thoughts into one score. that being said, I didn't like that formatting accounted for 1/3 of your score.
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.Written feedback would be ignorable I would think.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
Ok, that makes sense. I do wonder if it would get confusing with people writing feedback on both the competition thread and in the survey. But I do find the written feedback idea interesting.
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.Personally, I think formatting should be made a subcategory for balance. I mean, how well something would play in game is impacted somewhat by how clear it is to understand and use. Maybe we could have that and lore and just average the two scores out? IDK, just an idea.
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.Honestly, I think the three categories were pretty good.
Balance is important, one of the most important aspects of homebrew indeed. There is a reason why dandwiki for example has such a bad reception - homebrew over there often is just not balanced and severely overpowered. On the flip side, seriously underpowered homebrew is not good either of course. I think balance should be kept as a category.
Regarding Lore/Flavor, that is a difficult one since for some types of entries, providing a lot of lore or flavor is just not really possible, but for some kinds of entries it is quite important.
Regarding formatting, I think that is an important one too. Lots of homebrew I come across is filled with typos, grammatical errors, sloppy wording... Even if it is balanced and has good lore/flavor, such a bad formatting is a big downside, it also shows that the creator did not put much effort into presenting their homebrew. In previous contests I always took bad formatting as a reason to subtract points.
I think an issue with the formatting category specifically could have been that people did not have a clear idea what it was meant for and gave entries like mine a very low formatting score simply because I had submitted a group of statblocks as a list of links in my post here. I think this is not something that should influence the formatting score, it was a technical limitation - otherwise we would have to subtract points from every submission that was created on homebrewery/GMBinder due to their issues in browsers other than Google Chrome.
What about renaming Formatting to Presentation? Then we could say it includes lore/flavor text as well and axe the lore category?
Another idea I have for a category is mechanics: how well does the homebrew work mechanically, does it have any cool unique mechanics, is it intuitive to use? Or is it rather cumbersome, confusing to use? A homebrew can be balanced, well-presented and have great lore, but maybe the mechanics it uses are just very convoluted/cumbersome.
Yes.
Yeah, I think it needs to be revised slightly.
An idea I just had is that each category could have different criteria, so that scores on PC options like spells or feats don’t get lowered just because there wasn’t lore to go with it, even though that’s pretty unreasonable. It could just be Flavor - how interesting the concept is, and how well it fits the category. For the Inspirational category, though, Lore would be a fairly big part of the score.
I think that part of the problem here is that different people place differing values on technical stuff like proper grammar and intentional, official-style wording. Implementation into the DDB system, when applicable, is another factor here, though I (unfortunately) cannot find out how well a homebrew was implemented, since I don’t have a subscription.
This, also, is true.
So it could include things like…
This, I think, is a great idea. First of all, the most important part of most homebrew are the mechanics, and so we could easily have 2 of 4 criteria be directly related to the mechanics. It would be fairly easy to define, since it’s basically just “How easy is it to understand and use, and does it have interesting, unique mechanics?”
In conclusion, I agree with pretty much everything you said. One way I think we could apply the ideas you had (and then the ideas I had as a result) are these five areas for rating:
Obviously, some of these can overlap, and they honestly still need further explanation, but I think they might work a little better than the current ones. Also obviously, there are plenty of other ways this could be done just and well, and probably better. What do you all think about these?
Paladin main who spends most of his D&D time worldbuilding or DMing, not Paladin-ing.
I like this. However, maybe flavor and formatting should be split up? Flavor is extremely important when it comes to a homebrew, and definitely deserves its own category, not just one sentence of the presentation one. Flavor is what defines the entire homebrew under one theme. Alternatively, if flavor could even replace the lore category. Then lore, when its applicable, could jut be treated as part of the flavor category rather than flavor being part of the presentation.
Also, do you think it makes sense to experiment with how many points each category is worth? Like, formatting for example might only be out of three, while balance and mechanics are more important so would be out of 5.
I am an average mathematics enjoyer.
>Extended Signature<
FIVE? My brain will hurt.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
More like four plus a space for written feedback, but yeah, it is kind of a lot.
Paladin main who spends most of his D&D time worldbuilding or DMing, not Paladin-ing.
Yeah, just replacing Lore with Flavor would probably work pretty well.
I think that making different categories be worth different amounts of points makes sense and is a good idea, but this is already getting really complicated really quickly. Maybe what we could do is try it once we decide on and try a different set of voting categories, but not for this next iteration of the competition.
Paladin main who spends most of his D&D time worldbuilding or DMing, not Paladin-ing.
This hits on the biggest note from me, just like a submission should be intuitive and easy for a DM to use, the judging criteria for this competition should remain relatively intuitive as well.
Maybe we could make a sub-competition for people to propose their own judging criteria that we vote on? XD
Jokes aside, we just need to make sure we don't make the categories too numerous or complex, otherwise people won't want to vote on submissions at all because of the effort required. Four could be a sweet spot, but until we try it, we won't know. The fact that Helmut_McQuack outlined/defined their suggestions for the categories is a great start and should be done regardless of what categories are chosen. The goal is to make judging the entries as easy and unambiguous as possible!
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
People are saying that the Lore category shouldn’t apply to Player options at all, but I disagree. Subclasses and races, for example, are crucial to the overall quality of the product. Maybe we just use different categories for different types of entries?
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
Yeah, I guess pretty much only feats and spells wouldn’t have some kind of lore attached to them. Races especially need good lore, and good subclasses should have them too. Maybe whoever the judge is should decide whether a submission should be subject to the Lore category, based on what type of creation it is. Or I guess we could also have it so the person who submits the creation can decide whether or not their submission gets rated on Lore, but choosing not to means your score could be slightly lower.
Paladin main who spends most of his D&D time worldbuilding or DMing, not Paladin-ing.
I mean we're hovering around the problem which is that for some of us, lore/formatting/flavor doesn't matter. If we're insistent on having multiple categories, we could have a few that don't matter for judgement and one "overall" score that is used for determining the winner.
I reviewed the categories and have a slight change to my previous proposal: I think we should have two categories, balance/playability, and idea/creativity.
1. Balance/playability: This score is about how well the entry would run in game. If this entry is overpowered or underpowered, consider subtracting points. Also, consider subtracting points if it is poorly written or unclear, since that would make it a lot harder to run/use in game.
2. Idea/creativity: This score is about cool, interesting and unique the entry is. If someone's idea does not fit well into the contest category it is submitted for, consider subtracting points.
These two scores would be averaged out. We could also add an optional written in. I like this system because it's not very complicated, and it means you'd don't have to cram all your thoughts into one score. It will also help avoid ties, which we had way too much of last competition.
Personally, I disagree. I think having multiple categories, especially if we only had two, wouldn't make it that complicated or tedious. And we could always have optional written feedback for people who wanted to do more. One score means that you have to put all your thoughts about one entry, into one score. This is especially problematic for things like adventures for the inspirational category, which could seven or eight pages. It's hard to pick a number between 1-5 to represent how you feel about that. Again, even if you do give written feedback, you have to cram all your thoughts about various aspects of the entry that you spent ages writing about, into one score.
Also, I will reiterate that multiple categories do help avoid ties. Which is nice.
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.If its so controversial maybe we keep these categories and just... explain what they are a bit further so no-one thinks they're different to anyone else.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
Actually this might be a good idea. Then each person can grease based on their own criteria, and combine them into a score out of 5. (of if we want to avoid ties we can always make it out of 10 or 15).
I am an average mathematics enjoyer.
>Extended Signature<