PDA

View Full Version : [CUTE] Evaluation Methodology



belboz
2006-09-02, 07:45 PM
This thread is for planning the evaluation phase of Project CUTE (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=homebrew;action=display;num=11543005 05). Some things we need to decide:
Who will get to do the evaluation
How to avoid or handle self-evaluation
To what extent evaluation should be combined with refinement/editing of the content being evaluated
What, if anything, to do about the fact that we're evaluating in the absence of CUTE's originator
In what order we'll evaluate things
What, if anything special, to do with content by posters who can no longer be located

The content to be evaluated can be found linked from the CUTE Compendium (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=homebrew;action=display;num=11557546 98).

Once we establish a methodology, I'll create a link from this post to the evaluation thread(s).

Yuki Akuma
2006-09-02, 07:46 PM
Repeated from the main C.U.T.E. sandbox:

"Hm... For the classes, perhaps we could compare the classes against one another at every level, and see if they're balanced against one another?

They don't really need to be balanced compared to core classes, as the people using the C.U.T.E. classes won't be taking core classes (except for that one feat...).

Not sure how we'd do feats...

Edit: We should probably start be deciding which will be the "core" classes for the system. That is, core in the way that Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, Wizard is a "balanced" party in D&D.

My thoughts are Storybook Hero, Mama's Boy, Storyteller and... Scardycat?

Or possibly Storybook Hero, Dreamer, Storyteller and Scardycat, considering Dreamers are heal-machines as well. In fact, they might be better at it than the primary divine casters.

That's a scary thought."


It seems to fit better here.

belboz
2006-09-02, 08:12 PM
OK, it sounds like we're generally agreed that we should evaluate core classes first. Although I think Yuki's idea of comparing classes at each level, I'd like to differ on two other points:

1) I don't know how important getting a single set of four "balanced party" classes is. I'm not sure CUTE classes all really map onto standard core class roles very well anyway.

2) Before even comparing any classes at each level, I think we need to start out with something even more basic, and separate relatively "complete" classes out from those that don't have enough material to evaluate yet on Yuki's guidelines.

Relatively complete classes:

Animal Lover
Crybaby
Darling
Dreamer
Mama's Boy/Girl
Panlid Champion
Quiet Reader
Ratcatcher
Scaredycat
Storybook Hero
Storyteller
Tantrum Thrower
Whiner

Classes missing vital information:

Bed Time Warrior
Building Block Gadgeteer (not to be confused with the Engineer-to-Be PrC)
Li'l Slugger
Spoiled Brat

So I'd propose that the first question to answer is whether any of those five classes is important enough to flesh out before we start balancing the others. I vote "no" on this; if people want to flesh them out later, we can consider them then.

If there are no serious objections, I'd like to propose that step 2 is to pick a "starting" class--a class that we all like very much as is and want to use as a balancing standard for other classes. We might make little tweaks to that class during the balancing process, but the idea would be that it would be *fairly* constant.

This class should be one we're almost *positive* we want in the final version of CUTE, something very central to the concept of the campaign. I hesitate to name a vote, since that's sort of going beyond methodology and into actual evaluation, but I'll say that I'm leaning towards the Dreamer. It's the one class that I just plain can't imagine CUTE without, although there are a number of others that come close. But we may need to determine how we're going to handle voting before making this decision.

Step 3 would be to "balance" that class--not against anything else in particular, but to make sure we all agree that its powers at various levels are about the right level of strength for CUTE. I'd also suggest that this is an "editorial" step; the step for people to make some final (or at least semi-final) suggestions to the class' author to get it just how we like it. We have to figure out how to tell when this step is done.

Step 4 would be to go through the first list and:

a) Decide whether the class is worth evaluating in great detail, possibly making revision suggestions to the author to get it to that level, if it's not there yet
b) Compare the class to the starting class at each level, and suggest changes required for balancing.
c) "Edit" the class for quality as above.

As we go through the list, we'll probably find ourselves evaluating things other than classes. For example, some classes base many of their abilities on a skill check; we'll need to evaluate the skill as we evaluate the class. Spellcasting classes may require an evaluation of the spells in their spell lists.

[edit: The "prodigy" feat was assuming that CUTE classes are, on average, *slightly* less powerful than core classes. But as the author of that feat, I'll say that we should pick the power level of CUTE classes first; if that makes "prodigy" too powerful or too weak, we can just drop it. It's certainly less important to CUTE than a class list.]

Randomman413
2006-09-02, 08:30 PM
I'd second the Dreamer as the quintessence of CUTE. An imaginary friend is a staple of the traditional mythical average little kid.

EDIT: Btw, I like the [CUTE] identification.

Yuki Akuma
2006-09-02, 08:59 PM
While I'm hesitant to admit it (considering I made it and all), I, too, think the Dreamer is rather archetypal C.U.T.E....

And those guidelines look good to me. :P

Mephibosheth
2006-09-03, 02:06 AM
Step 1: I agree with Belboz on this one. While these classes could be good, there's nothing about them that screams "core" to me. They'd be great additions to "Complete C.U.T.E." though.

I also think that Belboz's guidelines would work well, and also cast my vote in favor of using the Dreamer as the archetype for C.U.T.E. classes, and using it as a guinea pig to test the evaluation process.

As to methodology, have we decided to put things up for a general vote or to establish a "review board" similar to the other projects going on at this time? Essentially, how are we going to determine what needs to be done? Are we going to seek outside assistance?

To answer my own questions, I think that having general votes wouldn't be that cumbersome, and would be best for ensuring that the process is fair. Perhaps a "vote by PM" process, similar to the one used in the design contests. Also, I think that it might be a good idea to seek advice from acknowledged "experts" in certain fields (for example, asking the Vorpal Tribble to weigh in on some of our monsters, when we reach that phase).

Those are my thoughts on the subject, at least at this moment.

Mephibosheth

Yuki Akuma
2006-09-03, 11:26 AM
Hm...

I think getting people other than C.U.T.E. contributors to help evaluate things would be a good plan.

Although getting people to help may be hard.

Randomman413
2006-09-03, 07:48 PM
There'll definitely need to be more people than just CUTE contributors. How can you really call it a vote if only 10 people have said yes or no?

Eighth_Seraph
2006-09-03, 11:04 PM
Very easily, though it won't be a terribly effective vote. I personally think that making balanced classes for CUTE will be very difficult, and that the inevitable ending will be core classes that have brick walls seperating them: a healer, a hero, a li'l mage, a 'hidden ability'-type person (possibly dreamer), etc. If anyone can disprove me, I would be very impressed.

PS: A class that's based around having a skinny little kid with a big 'imaginary friend' would be awesome.

Yuki Akuma
2006-09-04, 01:04 PM
PS: A class that's based around having a skinny little kid with a big 'imaginary friend' would be awesome.

Yes. I, too, think the Dreamer is awesome. ;)

That could make a good PrC... possibly.

Randomman413
2006-09-05, 04:48 PM
That could make a good PrC... possibly.

The skinny kid part, or the big imaginary friend part?

Yuki Akuma
2006-09-05, 05:35 PM
The skinny kid part, or the big imaginary friend part?

The big imaginary friend part.

I mean, an imaginary friend who's more than an intelligent Unseen Servant.

Anyway, this is off-topic..

belboz
2006-09-05, 05:54 PM
Well, the way you'd call it a vote if only 10 people have said yes or no is to call those 10 people a "panel of judges". I think that's pretty standard--even *3* judges make a perfectly reasonable panel--but I'm not deeply averse to having a come-one-come-all vote instead.

The advantage of having a smaller number of judges, like they do in MitP, is that, if those judges don't want to accept something as-is, but like the idea, they can jointly specify exactly what would be required to get their vote. This makes the judging process do dual duty as developmental edit and voting. It's a lot harder to do that with an essentially unknown pool of voters. If we have to do it that way, I'd *still* suggest a smallish panel of people who work with the author to do some polishing before the thing goes to a vote.

The *disadvantage* of any sort of panel, of course, is that the judges have to be picked in a way that everyone agrees is fair. Here the MitP'ers had it easy: There's a handful of people on this board who are pretty widely and uncontroversially regarded as exceptional monster-designers, and so choosing them was pretty much a matter of consensus. We can certainly try to recruit some people like that for particular phases of the project (as Mephibosheth suggested), but in general, I don't think judge selection would be a comparable "no-brainer" for what we're trying to do.

Eighth_Seraph
2006-09-05, 06:11 PM
Yeah, I mean D1 is a genius in the highly specialized field of monster designing, but I'll be de eaten alive by the closet monster before I let him make an undead sward of kitty cats for this project.

belboz
2006-09-05, 06:55 PM
Yeah, I mean D1 is a genius in the highly specialized field of monster designing, but I'll be de eaten alive by the closet monster before I let him make an undead sward of kitty cats for this project.

I won't venture an opinion on that, but I do want to stress that we're not talking about *creating* content for CUTE. That has its own thread, and it's already established as open to all comers.

This is about editing and evaluating content that already exists. Whether someone's personal monster creation style goes with the CUTE ethos and whether they'd be good at evaluating and helping to improve CUTE monsters may be related questions, but they definitely aren't the *same* question.

I'd like to shift a bit of focus to this because of issues like the one raised in your previous post. There's already at least one PrC and one feat proposed that can be used to improve the Dreamer's imaginary friend--both, in particular, grant the imaginary friend substantial combat abilities. That doesn't mean these are the best or only ways to do it (or that only one of them is), or that you shouldn't post alternative ideas on the CUTE thread, just that we've already got so much content that it's hard to keep track of potential overlap, contradiction, and fit problems. Which is why (at least, it's my reason for doing it) we're stepping back to take stock of what we already have, and rejigger it so that it's all high-quality, consistent, streamlined stuff.

belboz
2006-09-05, 07:31 PM
Sorry for the double-post, but this is a complete change of gears.

And Now for Something Completely Different

OK, sorry about all of that. I feel like, as the person who started this thread, I should be doing something to move us towards a decision, and I've been failing at that pretty seriously. So I'm going to propose a vote, by IM to me, about the question of how to conduct evaluation and voting.

The only way I'm going to limit this vote is: Please only vote if you're honestly a "stakeholder" in CUTE. This doesn't necessarily mean you've posted content, but you should at least have a real interest in the project and have followed it for some time. This is entirely on the honor system; you know if you're fairly serious about the CUTE project or not.

Step 1: I'm proposing three options:

A) When it's a feature's turn to be reviewed, we'll open a thread for any and all people to post suggestions. The author (or a surrogate, if the author can't be found) can choose which suggestions to incorporate, and then the "final" version will be put to an open up-or-down vote. Authors/surrogates will not be allowed to vote on their own features.

B) Somehow we will decide on an "editorial board" of somewhere between 4 and 10 people (details to be worked out later). When it's a feature's turn to be reviewed, we'll open a thread for suggestions. Anyone can post to the thread, but it's the editorial board's responsibility to come up with a list of non-binding but highly recommended "important changes". The author or surrogate will choose which suggestions to incorporate, and then the "final" version will be put to an open up-or-down vote. Authors/surrogates will not be allowed to vote on their own features.

C) We pick an "editorial board" as above. When it's a feature's turn to be reviewed, we'll open a thread for suggestions. Anyone can post to the thread, but in particular, members of the editorial board should post changes that would be required and sufficient to win their "yes" vote, if any. The author or surrogate will choose which suggestions to incorporate, and the editorial board will have an up-or-down vote on the "final" version. Authors/surrogates will not be allowed to vote on their own features, even if they're members of the editorial board.

Step 2: Alternative Option Nomination Phase

If you want a different option from any of these, please send it to me by Thursday, SEP 7, before midnight PDT. Feel free to post it here for discussion first, but I'll only count nominations sent to me by PM (just to make it easier on myself). Please make it at least as detailed as the options above. We need to know who the editorial pool is, who the voting pool is, what their roles are, and the process for conducting editing and voting.

Step 3: Voting on the Options

I will post the complete list of nominated options by Saturday, SEP 9, before midnight PDT. Please send me your final votes by Wednesday, SEP 13, before midnight PDT. I will post the winner by Saturday, SEP 16.

belboz
2006-09-08, 01:12 PM
OK, the nomination period is now closed, and I've received no other nominations. So please send me your votes for option A, B, or C. As above, the voting period will close Wednesday, SEP 13, at midnight PDT.

BTW--I've received some votes already, but please vote if you haven't yet, because we currently have a 3-way tie between the options. If we end up with a tie, I'll withdraw my own vote and instead use it as a tiebreaker between any remaining tie, unless anyone has objections to that plan.

Yuki Akuma
2006-09-08, 01:25 PM
Only three votes?

*sigh*

Are there only three people actually interested in this project? C'mon, people, vote!

Mephibosheth
2006-09-08, 01:27 PM
I voted. I just wanted to wait until the nomination period was over.

Yuki Akuma
2006-09-08, 01:33 PM
Ah, good. Never mind, then.

belboz
2006-09-09, 12:01 AM
BTW, while the vote is going on, I was wondering if we could discuss what the final votes would be *for*, exactly.

We could just make it a "you're in or you're out" thing, but we've also talked about "core" and "non-core" cute, so I want to throw out another possibility, just for discussion.

The idea would be that, instead of just accepting or rejecting things, they'd be assigned to one of four categories:

A. Core CUTE: This category would be the center of CUTE. It would contain only interesting, well thought-out, well-balanced, compatible material, consistent with the spirit of CUTE, that the vast majority of GMs running a CUTE campaign would want to consider for use.

B. CUTE Official Supplements: This category would contain material that was as high-quality and well-balanced as Core CUTE, and that was compatible with all Core CUTE material and consistent with the spirit of CUTE, but which, for some reason unrelated to any of these, many GMs running a CUTE campaing might not want to use. Examples might include material that only makes sense if one assumes a particular time period, descriptions of unique individuals or adventure hooks, or anything that specifies more about the CUTE universe than we want to make "core."

C. CUTE Optional Supplements: This category would contain material that might be interesting or attractive source material for a substantial number of CUTE GMs, but that, as it stands, does not meet the quality, balance, and/or consistency requirements for categories A or B.

D. Not part of CUTE: This category would contain bare ideas that never got fleshed out, material deemed to be inconsistent with the CUTE vision, and other material that would not be of interest to the vast majority of CUTE GMs.

I think this is pretty definitely a descending chain, which would mean voting could still be pretty simple: Voters would vote for the *top* category they think the material would work in. The election results would be decided this way:

If a majority of votes are A, it goes in category A.
Otherwise, if a majority of votes are either A or B, it goes in category B.
Otherwise, if a majority of votes are A, b, or C, it goes in category C.
Otherwise, (i.e., only if a majority of votes are for category D), it goes in category D.

Thoughts?

Randomman413
2006-09-10, 01:04 AM
Very well thought-out.
2 things-
Are all of the votes in for how we'll be evaluating material?
and
Which category of CUTE material will be getting voted on first?

belboz
2006-09-10, 02:02 AM
Very well thought-out.
2 things-
Are all of the votes in for how we'll be evaluating material?
and
Which category of CUTE material will be getting voted on first?

Thanks.

There's still several days for people to vote on the evaluation methodology. I don't know whether we'll need that long, but that's what I promised, so I think I'd better stick to it. I can't, of course, tell whether the votes are all in before that, because I don't know who all will vote.

I believe that (by general acclaim) we decided to start with core classes.

belboz
2006-09-12, 04:39 PM
Remember: Less than 2 days left to vote!

belboz
2006-09-14, 11:39 AM
And the winner is (drum roll please)....Option B!

So, the next step is to create the review board. Perhaps, since the board doesn't have final say, we should call it the "advisory board". Here are my thoughts:

-More than about 6 people, total, would be unwieldy for an advisory board. But I doubt we'll find as *many* as 6 people. So this will be by self-nomination (you can encourage people to nominate themselves, but they need to agree) except in the unlikely event that we get more than 6 people. Then we'll have to have a vote.

-One of those people, if possible, should be a rotating "expert" on the subject under review. There's nobody as widely acknowledged in class design as, say, VT or D1 are for monsters, but I do know that there are a number of "expert powergamers" (I mean powergamer in the entirely non-derogatory sense here; just people who know how strategically to make the most of the rules) over on the Gaming forum. The Logic Ninja, in particular, comes to mind as someone who's both very good at spotting brokenness and very good at evaluating the strongest use of non-broken rules.

I can PM TLN and ask him if people agree--but actually, if someone knows him better than I do (that is, at all, really), it might be better if they approach him; I'm not great at cold-calling.

Thoughts?

Yuki Akuma
2006-09-14, 11:41 AM
TLN has been banned, so I don't think PMing him would do any good.

I could IM him over AIM and get his opinion on things, though.

Also: I nominate me! ;)

Mephibosheth
2006-09-14, 01:00 PM
Strictly out of curiosity, would you mind posting the distribution of the votes, or at least the number of people who voted. I'd be interested to know how many people still follow Project C.U.T.E., especially since things have slowed down a lot after that first explosion of participation.

As to a rotating class expert/pwergamer, I remember Rei Jin used to be pretty prominent on the boards in much the same capacity as TLN. We could find out if Rei Jin's still around. Otherwise, I can't really think of anyone else whose base classes or knowledge thereof stand out from the crowd.

Also, I'll participate in the advisory board if need be.

belboz
2006-09-14, 01:59 PM
Yuki - Really? Wow. YOu sure of that? THere's someone posting under the name "The Logic Ninja, banned" now, but they're not the same person.

Mephibosheth: Rei Jin would be a good choice too. I'll look and see whether he's still active.

There were five votes total. The distribution was 1:3:1 in favor of option B.

This does, I suppose, raise a question about threshold of interest. I doubt that everyone interested in CUTE voted (in fact, I know this is false), but would people be willing to continue the project if it turned out our audience was, say, eight people on these boards (as opposed to the 20 or so who were involved earlier on)? Would you want to do it differently?

Mephibosheth
2006-09-14, 05:18 PM
I'm enjoying the process of creating this new-ish system for play, and am holding out hope that someday, our founder Shiny will return and lead us all in a glorious campaign full of squidgy, widgy, adowable content (a campaign in which I already have reserved a spot). I say continue, even if for the sole purpose of enjoying the process of creating a cohesive CUTE system. It is disappointing that people on the boards have such short attention spans, especially after those monumental first few days. *sighs wistfully* Those were good days. If only we could get to that place again...

As to the experts issue, I've PM'ed JackMann, on the off chance that he knows of someone through his work with the Compendium who would be a good choice.

Mephibosheth

Randomman413
2006-09-14, 06:44 PM
I'd be happy to be on the board.

I don't have a great deal of experience in balance issues, though. I can edit for spelling, punctuation, and word use errors like a madman, though.

belboz
2006-09-15, 02:06 PM
Cool. I'd like to on the board myself. So we've got, at least, a quorum. Now we just need an external expert.

Rei Jin last posted about 6 weeks ago, so it's possible he's still around. Would anyone like to volunteer to send him a PM, introducing him to CUTE and asking if he'd be willing to help us evaluate base classes?

Mephibosheth
2006-09-17, 09:11 PM
JackMann just got back to me with his recommendation based on content submitted to the GiantITP Compendium. He suggests contacting Fax Celestis, who has crafted more base classes than anyone else on the boards. We could also try contacting him...

Mephibosheth

belboz
2006-09-18, 12:26 AM
OK, I've sent PMs to both Rei Jin and Fax Celestis requesting their help.

Elrosth
2006-09-18, 05:48 AM
I would be interested in being involved as well. I've only recently picked up the thread (probably about 3 days worth of reading and working on stuff total) but I'm really interested in the project.

belboz
2006-09-18, 12:37 PM
Cool. Also, Fax has agreed to help us in a *limited* capacity--he'll take a look at things in his downtime, so long as we keep in mind that there's not a whole lot of it. (He's got a long commute and is already putting substantial time into MitP.) He's requested a short summary of what each class is supposed to do; perhaps the author/surrogate of each class can take on the task of including a 2-3 sentence description of the class' party role at the top of the class thread. (I'll check with him if this is sufficient or if he really wants all summaries *up front*).

If all this sounds like a plan, let's get started. Yuki, assuming you don't want to delegate to a surrogate, would you be willing to start a thread on the Dreamer? The top post should contain class info (copied from the main CUTE thread, unless you want to do some pre-editing), and you can modify it as we go back and forth.

Again, I'm going by the assumption (there has to be *one* class like this) that we've pre-decided that the Dreamer is to be in Category A: Core CUTE. So we'll skip the "final vote" portion of the process for that one class; this is just review and editing, not evaluation.

Yuki Akuma
2006-09-18, 12:49 PM
Done (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=homebrew;action=display;num=11585981 57;start=0#0).

belboz
2006-09-19, 01:26 AM
BTW, Rei Jin got back to me as well. He'd love to help out, but RL obligations prevent him from even checking the boards with any regularity right now. If we have a question for him, or something specific we want him to look over, he'd be happy to take a look at it if we send it to him and will try to get back to us within a week or so. But he can't commit to any regular involvement in the near-term.

Fax Celestis
2006-09-19, 03:03 AM
JackMann just got back to me with his recommendation based on content submitted to the GiantITP Compendium. He suggests contacting Fax Celestis, who has crafted more base classes than anyone else on the boards.
...I have? Nifty.

Collin152
2006-09-20, 12:38 AM
Gah! A Review of material already? its just what ive been advocating! ;D Anyhow, something useful so this isnt a shameful/ useless post. While nobody (at all) knows this here, I am a master of Flavor. That is to say, I gots me a huge spread of comprehension, and non critical tastes, and the ability to alter my own mind a nd perceptions. That is, I can see from all prespectives brought up. I will help all I can, though I am not much for crunch. Consider me a fluff-O-matic. You feed in the crucnchy problems, I feed out the fluffy reasoining allowing the modifications to work well with the concept. Yay for metaphors! :P
Whats more, I noticed the whole Core/Non Core thing, and Im not sure we should refer to it as such. This is more like an expanded campaign setting then a game, so Core is not really... wait...
Upon further inspection, this is like a new game using the basics of DnD rules. So Core/NonCore to your hearts content. Oh, and I doubt that Shiny will ever be seen again. Ever. (Eat my reverse psycology, Cosmos!)

belboz
2006-09-25, 04:18 PM
BTW, Mr. CUTE himself, Shiny, has been sighted on the boards. I've PM'ed him asking him to come back to CUTE. If he wants to, and wants to resume leadership, I'll resign any administrative role that I may have inadvertantly ended up with. I also think he should have veto power over any methodology decisions we've made so far; this is, fundamentally, his idea.

----

On a different note, we just finished polishing up the Dreamer class, and so it's time to start evaluating the next class. Here are my thoughts:

1) I'd rather try to hold off spellcasting classes for a while, since they strike me as harder, but I'm open to contradiction on this.

2) I'd *really* like to hold off on looking at Shiny's own classes until we know for a fact whether he wants to rejoin our effort. I believe he reserved the right to declare one of his classes "automatically core," without voting, and I think that should be respected.

Between those two, that eliminates the following from current consideration:

Animal Lover
Darling
Mama's Boy/Girl
Panlid Champion
Quiet Reader
Ratcatcher
Storyteller
Whiner


Which leaves the remaining classes in:

Crybaby
Scaredycat
Storybook Hero
Tantrum Thrower

I think Storybook Hero would be a nice change of pace from the Dreamer. What do others think, Mephibosheth in particular?

Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick
2006-09-26, 12:01 PM
Having reviewed your notes on the evaluation process, it more than meets with my approval; and since I think I know and trust those of you likely to be on the 'editorial board', I think this'll work out great.

I like what you did with the dreamer very much, actually, and I look forward to more of the same- I think we're still going reasonably strong.

As to what should come next in terms of evaluations: I'm going to stand behind the nomination of the Storybook Hero. It's a strong concept, and like the dreamer, quintessentially C.U.T.E.- I think it would benefit from our unflinching regard, and I think when it's polished up it will be one of the strongest aspects of our unified vision.

If you were wondering, yes, I'm going to stick around and help/lead/whatever- it's my baby, I can't just leave it....it'll never get delicious to eat if not taken care of.

I want to take a moment to thank (The academy), but seriously, to thank Belboz for his efforts with the compendium, with, it would seem, everyone's help; I'd also like to thank Fax celestis for stickin' around and being helpful, if you were to hop on board I'd be pretty psyched. Everyone has amazed me by keeping this alive, and I apologize for my long absence. Here's hoping we end up with something to be proud of; I have every confidence we will.

Fax Celestis
2006-09-26, 12:15 PM
I want to take a moment to thank (The academy), but seriously, to thank Belboz for his efforts with the compendium, with, it would seem, everyone's help; I'd also like to thank Fax celestis for stickin' around and being helpful, if you were to hop on board I'd be pretty psyched. Everyone has amazed me by keeping this alive, and I apologize for my long absence. Here's hoping we end up with something to be proud of; I have every confidence we will.
Heh. I've already pretty much signed on, so to speak. I've made a number of feats, as well as the Slingshot Master PrC.

Mephibosheth
2006-09-26, 12:19 PM
Yay! Shiny's back! And in the good old Lantern Archon form! Oh man, this is so exciting.

*takes a deep breath, calms down*

OK, I'd be more than happy to submit the Storybook Hero for evaluation. Shall I start the thread, or are we waiting for more input?

Mephibosheth

Yuki Akuma
2006-09-26, 01:00 PM
Go start the thread, Mephi, it'll be refreshing to criticise someone else... ;)

Also: I propose we make a "completed content" thread, where we can post stuff that's been evaluated fully, so there will be no confusion for people just browsing.

belboz
2006-09-26, 04:23 PM
Yay Shiny! Welcome back to CUTE! And thank you for your kind words.

A "Completed Content" thread might be a good idea. I *have* started to fivide the compendium up (into "Core" "Official Supplement" "Optional Supplement" and "Not Yet Evaluated"), although I don't yet have the Dreamer linked (since I don't know where the final version is going to be).

Yuki, would you like to start one, and post the completed Dreamer in it? After lots of "please don't post anything but reviewed content in here, post it (link) here" instead-type caveats?

BTW, if you'd like, I'll PM you the code for the Dreamer's table. I think it was Fax, in a totally separate thread, who said that those tables make things a lot more professional and easy-to-use, and I'm inclined to agree.

Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick
2006-09-26, 05:52 PM
Hooray for tables. ^^;
Remind me to find the place where it says how to do those.

Anyways....thanks for the warm welcome back guys, though I hardly deserve your praises, what with the skiving off and all. But still, thanks a million. No, two million!
Or just one thousand, but platinum.

By the by, just so I don't further extend the (now justly finished) Dreamer evaluation thread- I looked back over the thoughts you guys posted, and it turns out you were right, and I was wrong. A rare occurence, I know, but it does happen. Congratulations on producing a fabulous, flavorful, and apparently balanced class.

Fax, I noticed the slingshot master and I love it- it's like Dennis the Menace, only instead of loathing it, I adore it.

Let's see, what else..hm...well, I'll be posting my thoughts on the Storybook Hero a little later, and thanks to Meph for postin' the thread.

I think a 'completed content' thread would be a decent idea, actually...anybody can start one that wants to, or I can do it if you'd like.

Fax Celestis
2006-09-27, 05:47 PM
BTW, if you'd like, I'll PM you the code for the Dreamer's table. I think it was Fax, in a totally separate thread, who said that those tables make things a lot more professional and easy-to-use, and I'm inclined to agree.

Yup. Guide to Homebrewing thread.

Gorbash Kazdar
2006-09-27, 05:59 PM
There's also a Guide to Message Board Codes (http://tinyurl.com/ccvhs) that includes that information, along with other formatting codes and information.