PDA

View Full Version : Community Monster Class Hall of Fame Discussion Thread



Stycotl
2011-05-13, 09:26 PM
Issues to be Voted On:

Question 1: How long after a critique do you have license to submit or nominate work in the project?
Two weeks.
One week.
Other (specify).

Question 2: How many votes does it take to advance a level in the gallery (inclusion; silver star; gold star; etc)?
Three votes per category.
Five votes per category.
Other (specify).

Question 3: How do we handle homebrew monster classes (including monster classes based off of previously established homebrew material)?
Do not include it in this project.
Include, but in its own sub-gallery post.
Incorporate homebrew into the gallery as normal (listed source for material will suffice).

Question 4: How should we handle the ratings that playgrounders can leave in their addendums?
Just give it a tier ranking. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5293)
Rate it based off of a scale of 1-5.
Other (specify).

Question 5: Who do you want to index the project (based off of those that have volunteered)?
YouLostMe.
Crafty Cultist.
Other (specify).

vote now! I'll close this poll Sunday night.

Stycotl
2011-05-13, 09:27 PM
Original Post by stycotl:

Community Monster Class Hall of Fame Discussion Thread

Hey all. I want us to keep oslecamo's monster class project going. This thread is meant to be a discussion, open to anyone that wants to contribute, about how to best make the project work. I talked with some of the moderators and they OK'ed a discussion thread about the eventual Hall of Fame project thread.

There are a couple of goals that we need to identify before jumping in though.

Project Goals

Ensure that this project remains 100% open to anyone that wants to contribute, from the homebrewing to the critiquing and nominating, or any other step.


Maintain an atmosphere of cooperation and respect.


Create and archive quality monster classes, by way of in-depth analysis and critique in the appropriate forum threads.


The primary goals of the project are definitely open to discussion as well, if people think that the list needs to be added to or tweaked. Keep in mind that numbers one and two are more or less inviolate.

As per administration mandate, (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10869136&postcount=509) the next project thread will take the form of a Hall of Fame gallery, akin to the Homebrew Galleria (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=188088) that Realms of Chaos created.

Realms has already given his permission to take any part of his galleria format that we like and use as is. There will be some parts that we have to adapt though, in order to suit the needs of the project, and there will be other aspects that will have to be changed in order to follow the mandates of the site admin.

Moderator Demands

The project must be truly democratic; there can be no bosses, leads, councils, or anything else. Any playgrounder that wants to can be involved in any step of the project.


The list of accepted homebrew monster classes will be remade from scratch; none of the previously accepted monster classes will be grandfathered in to this Hall of Fame.


Monster classes will be built in their own threads and critiqued in their own threads. No part of the evaluation process will take place within the Hall of Fame project; inside, you evaluate through your votes and addendums only.


There will be only one Hall of Fame gallery thread for monster classes; multiples may be assimilated into each other at the moderators' judgment.


With those in mind, I am proposing some ideas that may get us started on accomplishing goal number three. My thoughts revolve around the concept that we can give playgrounders incentive to critique monster classes in their own thread before coming into the Hall of Fame in order to nominate or add addendums.

Monster Class Creation

A guide to monster class creation will be placed within the first page of the Hall of Fame and Hall of Fame Nomination pages, listing most or all of the tenets already decided on in previous threads. This guide is only a guide, not a mandate.


Playgrounders can choose to follow these monster class creation guidelines, or to use their own ideas for monster creation. It is not within the scope of the Hall of Fame to mandate how the homebrewers build their monsters.


That said, homebrewers need to realize that one of the goals of this project is consistency and the ability for these classes to be incorporated into real games. Further, no one has to critique a finished monster class. This means that a homebrewer is more likely to get critiqued, nominated and supported if his or her creation is within the general gameplay ideals of the other playgrounders.


Monster Class Submission

A playgrounder cannot nominate his or her own monster class for inclusion in the Hall of Fame. But he or she can submit a finished class to the thread for nomination by another playgrounder.


A playgrounder cannot submit a finished monster class until they have offered one critique of a monster class created by another playgrounder, during the same day. Multiple submissions require multiple critiques of separate monster classes during the same day.


A monster class does not have to be submitted by its author in order to be nominated by another playgrounder.

I know it adds another layer of bureaucracy and stuff-to-do, but I think this could solve a couple of things: first, people are more likely to want to nominate their own stuff than that of others. That is not a problem though, because it gives them incentive to offer critiques. It also allows newly finished material to be brought to the attention of the group at large to be nominated, which is important because with the new system of individual monster class threads, they will be easy to lose track of.

Nomination and Support

A finished monster class can be nominated for inclusion in the Hall of Fame after receiving three or more separate critiques (which can be by the same person, but each separate critique must allow for the author's response and any changes to be made accordingly).


A playgrounder can only nominate a monster class after critiquing that specific class at least once beforehand (does not need to be critiqued in the same day as the nomination).


A playgrounder has to offer one critique in any day that he or she wishes to support a nomination; one critique allows for as many supporting votes as desired throughout that day.


Once a nominated monster class receives 5 votes of support, it is added to the Hall of Fame.


Hall of Fame Rankings

Once an included monster class receives 10 votes of support, it is given a silver star.


Once an included monster class receives 15 votes of support, it is given a gold star.


A playgrounder does not need to nominate or support a monster class in order to attach an addendum.


Within a short addendum, a playgrounder can leave a rating if he or she desires, on a scale from 1-5, in the areas of balance, flavor, originality, etc).

Something along these lines would allow the idea that multiple levels of quality and control be supported, while allowing for the leniency and openness that this project needs to maintain.

If we need more levels of quality control (bronze stars, platinum stars, etc), those would be easy to incorporate.

Instead of using different rankings of stars, monster classes with different levels of support could be incorporated into different galleries in their own posts within the Hall of Fame, so as to search easily by level of support (all of the gold stars in their own post; all of the bronze stars in their own; etc).

Adding quality rankings to addendums will require specific rules in order to make sure that they do not turn into mini-critiques; there will be rules for length and content. This is not a big deal, as Realms of Chaos has similar rules for addendums in his project. But this was a specific rule by the administration, so it will need to be enforced absolutely.

Definitions and Important Terms


CRITIQUE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique; A critique is a detailed, objective evaluation or review of a monster class. A critique should cover all points of balance, flavor, formatting, etc, that the reviewer sees as noteworthy. However, a critique does not need to be large; if all of a critiquing playgrounder's honest reviews fit into two sentences, that is sufficient (especially if the monster class has already been substantially reviewed. A critique is not a statement that says, "I really like/dislike this class," or something similar, although it is more than acceptable to include an opinion like that within a critique. For the purposes of a monser class project, a critique is about explaining what is to like and not like about the work. Therefore, a critique will not be acceptable if it fails to follow the rules of an actual critique (if it does not give any actual information about what the author did right and what could be better).


More terms and definitions can be filled in later as they are brought up.

In Conclusion

Nearly all of this is still open to discussion (excepting the administration-required aspects), and I except that some of this will change drastically. In fact, all of these suggestions seem to make sense in my mind, but maybe they look ridiculous to the rest of you. I am merely trying to stimulate the creation of a workable project here, one that succeeds at meeting all of its primary goals.

I don't care who ends up volunteering as indexer of the project, so long as that person can check their biases at the door and offer a truly open thread to the rest of the playground. If no one else wants to do it, then I might take a crack at it, but I will not have sufficient time later in this semester to update the project on a daily basis. It would be better that someone with consistent time that they can dedicate to the project volunteer.

I am going to leave these first two posts for a listing of all of the aspects of the project that we decide on during the course of this thread.

Now it is your turn. Start with a critique of my ideas and a submission of your own. Take into account the primary goals of the project and the mandates as set forth by the moderators.

Have at it. Aaron.

Mystic Muse
2011-05-14, 05:47 PM
A playgrounder can only nominate a monster class after critiquing that specific class at least once beforehand (does not need to be critiqued in the same day as the nomination). I don't see why this needs to be the case. What if you get there and there's nothing for you to/can critique?

A playgrounder cannot submit a finished monster class until they have offered one critique of a monster class created by another playgrounder, during the same day. Multiple submissions require multiple critiques of separate monster classes during the same day. I see why you want there to be multiple critiques before you can submit multiple monsters, but why does the critique have to be on the same day you want to submit the monster? What purpose does that serve?

Stycotl
2011-05-15, 12:17 AM
I don't see why this needs to be the case. What if you get there and there's nothing for you to/can critique?

you are talking specifically about critiquing things that don't yet work. and i thought about that, but how often does that happen? not very often, honestly. even the most polished works in the homebrew forum receive critiques literally years after they were thought to be done.

however, there is another kind of critique that i mentioned in the first post: critiquing what does work, and why it works. if you want to nominate something, but haven't critiqued it yet and can't find anything that needs fixing, then post your praise. make sure it amounts to more than "i love it!" though; explain why it works.

that'll count.

i am still open to other suggestions, but this was specifically tailored to target nominatable monster classes with the critiques that they deserve.


I see why you want there to be multiple critiques before you can submit multiple monsters, but why does the critique have to be on the same day you want to submit the monster? What purpose does that serve?

the idea here was that if i didn't say that the critique had to be on the same day, it would be too easy to just say, "well, i offered some critiques last week, i think..."

still, the project will more or less be on the honor code; i'm not about to start checking every nomination or support vote to make sure that the poster has done his or her dues in the critiques, and i doubt anyone else is either. i am presuming that people will participate because they want to be a part of a quality product. making them on the same day ensures that the project is less prone to tons of nominations and support votes without a decent number of corresponding critiques.

again though, this is all being brainstormed in my narrow-minded head. i want to hear what ideas you have too.

and thanks for offering some feedback.

Mystic Muse
2011-05-15, 12:47 AM
you are talking specifically about critiquing things that don't yet work. and i thought about that, but how often does that happen? not very often, honestly. even the most polished works in the homebrew forum receive critiques literally years after they were thought to be done. While that's true, some things simply don't come to one poster's mind that come to another's. Whether this is a difference in creativity, experience, whatever it is, it happens.



however, there is another kind of critique that i mentioned in the first post: critiquing what does work, and why it works. if you want to nominate something, but haven't critiqued it yet and can't find anything that needs fixing, then post your praise. make sure it amounts to more than "i love it!" though; explain why it works.

that'll count. Okay, that's fine then. I just wanted there to be some way to be able to nominate a class even if you can't think of anything that needs changed.




the idea here was that if i didn't say that the critique had to be on the same day, it would be too easy to just say, "well, i offered some critiques last week, i think..." I see that, but I honestly don't think it'll help any. Personally, it makes me want to hold off on my critiques until I want to actually submit something. Maybe that's just me, but it seems counter to the goals of the project.


and thanks for offering some feedback. You're welcome.

I'll probably put my Styx Dragon back up for critique soon, and I'll try and finish the Silver Dragon I'm working on.

Hyudra
2011-05-15, 09:17 AM
I agree with Kyuubi's worries on the 'must submit a criticism on same day' bit. What if, instead, you just had to include a link to a previous critique, like...



I'm submitting my updated Frostwind Virago (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=197236) for critique and nomination. Any feedback is appreciated, especially on the subject of the invocations and on the viability of high level stuff.

The last critique of a monster class I did was of the Angelic Channeler (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10851601&postcount=7) (not really a monster class, but just for illustration).

You wouldn't be able to link to the same critique twice, and it should've been within a reasonable span of time (Like, a week or two).

Mystic Muse
2011-05-15, 01:04 PM
I agree with Kyuubi's worries on the 'must submit a criticism on same day' bit. What if, instead, you just had to include a link to a previous critique, like...



You wouldn't be able to link to the same critique twice, and it should've been within a reasonable span of time (Like, a week or two).

I like this solution.

Stycotl
2011-05-16, 10:20 AM
Okay, that's fine then. I just wanted there to be some way to be able to nominate a class even if you can't think of anything that needs changed.

yes, i think that would be important. specifically, i think we're all hoping that most of these classes have gone through the required changes before nomination starts.


I see that, but I honestly don't think it'll help any. Personally, it makes me want to hold off on my critiques until I want to actually submit something. Maybe that's just me, but it seems counter to the goals of the project.

hadn't thought of that.


I agree with Kyuubi's worries on the 'must submit a criticism on same day' bit. What if, instead, you just had to include a link to a previous critique, like...

...You wouldn't be able to link to the same critique twice, and it should've been within a reasonable span of time (Like, a week or two).

that looks like a great idea! ok, so just include a link to a previously unlinked critique which can be no older than two weeks. that gives people ample time to prepare their submissions, while still accomplishing in-depth critiques, and it adds to the flexibility of the project. i like it.

Hyudra
2011-05-16, 03:00 PM
The number of votes of support needed to get a certain star may need to be adjusted, depending on activity. If there's only 5-10 people active in the project, and not every one is giving a review for every monster, getting 10 reviews for a silver star may be a bit much.

Now, if I had any other issues I felt the need to address, it would be the need to have a good method for getting previously done, quality monsters up on the list. Since we're starting from scratch, there's a good dozen or more monsters that really deserve to be on the list, whose original posters may not be active anymore. Would I just say, "I nominate x, y and z to the list, from previous iterations of the monster class project?"

Stycotl
2011-05-16, 04:02 PM
The number of votes of support needed to get a certain star may need to be adjusted, depending on activity. If there's only 5-10 people active in the project, and not every one is giving a review for every monster, getting 10 reviews for a silver star may be a bit much.

of course. i just threw 5, 10, and 15 out there as placeholders. how many votes do you think is fair? the other numbers i was contemplating would be by threes, 3, 6, 9, etc.


Now, if I had any other issues I felt the need to address, it would be the need to have a good method for getting previously done, quality monsters up on the list. Since we're starting from scratch, there's a good dozen or more monsters that really deserve to be on the list, whose original posters may not be active anymore. Would I just say, "I nominate x, y and z to the list, from previous iterations of the monster class project?"

i've been wondering how we should handle all of the backlogged monsters. for that reason alone i have wondered if we shouldn't say that you have to have critiqued a monster class in order to nominate it. some of those classes were critiqued and polished before the current batch of homebrewers arrived, and their authors are not active anymore.

so maybe we ought to just replace the current nomination requirements with what we came up with for submission: that you have to have critiqued something within the last two weeks that you haven't already used for submissions or critiques.

so it doesn't matter if you offered one of the critiques for a piece that you want to nominate, so long as it seems more or less finished in the eyes of the creator and has gone through at least the three requisite critiques by other people.

how's that sound?

NineThePuma
2011-05-16, 06:42 PM
I would consider that, this being a homebrew project, you can just, you know, adopt the monster and repost it, with appropriate credits. After all, no idea is truly unique.

Mystic Muse
2011-05-16, 06:45 PM
After My Critique (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11012056&postcount=2) of the Nightwalker Class I hereby Submit the Silver Dragon (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=199321) for nomination/further critique.

Crafty Cultist
2011-05-17, 11:41 PM
This new approach looks like it could work, mostly because the increased workload needed to get your own monsters done will mean that only people really dedicated to the project as a whole will contribute. I'm busy with a lot of stuff right now, but when things settle down I'll be sure to contribute. I've been wanting to give the red dragon a try.

Stycotl
2011-05-18, 11:05 PM
I would consider that, this being a homebrew project, you can just, you know, adopt the monster and repost it, with appropriate credits. After all, no idea is truly unique.

that is something that we are already doing, and will continue doing, i would suppose.


After My Critique of the Nightwalker Class I hereby Submit the Silver Dragon for nomination/further critique.

hold up! this thread isn't quite set up for the actual nominations to begin yet. it was only meant to be the brainstorming session in order to get that going.

i take it that you are then ok with the system as is, after the changes made according to yours and hyudra's ideas?


This new approach looks like it could work, mostly because the increased workload needed to get your own monsters done will mean that only people really dedicated to the project as a whole will contribute. I'm busy with a lot of stuff right now, but when things settle down I'll be sure to contribute. I've been wanting to give the red dragon a try.

good. are there any changes you see that need to be made?

everyone

ok, since i've got kyuubi pawing the ground ready to charge, and i'm assuming that there are others of you that just want to get the project going again, make double sure you understand the system i've outlined and tell me if it needs to change.

末you're ok with submissions and how to do them?

末you're ok with critiques being required for the chance to nominate or submit?

末you're ok with the rankings (either 5 votes for a star, or 3 or something else; we still need to identify what the system will be here)?

末you're ok with allowing playgrounders to add short ratings to the addendums?

if you guys are with me this far, then we just need to figure out who is going to be the indexer. as i said, i'll set myself as the default volunteer if no one else wants to do it. but my schedule is ridiculous (wife and kids (one of which is special needs); double major; do several overnighters (if not every night) per week at school during the last month or two of every semester; run a pbp game here; etc).

so, if you guys want more consistent and timely indexing than once a week or maybe even less, then i'm not the droid you're looking for.

if it turns out that i am going to run it, i'll take a few days to write up the format, and then this thread will become the nomination thread and i'll make the hall of fame gallery in a separate thread (i didn't reserve enough posts in this one to do both, because it was meant to be primarily discussion).

aaron.

Mystic Muse
2011-05-18, 11:48 PM
hold up! this thread isn't quite set up for the actual nominations to begin yet. it was only meant to be the brainstorming session in order to get that going. *Laughs nervously* I'm kind of impatient sometimes.




i take it that you are then ok with the system as is, after the changes made according to yours and hyudra's ideas? Yeah. If we think of something we can always change the system as long as it works according to the mods ruling.



ok, since i've got kyuubi pawing the ground ready to charge, and i'm assuming that there are others of you that just want to get the project going again, make double sure you understand the system i've outlined and tell me if it needs to change. I need to double check tomorrow since I shouldn't even be on right now, but I will get back to you on this.

Will look at your review/critique of the Silver dragon tomorrow.

YouLostMe
2011-05-19, 01:43 AM
Yo, if you want an indexer, I can do that stuff. I spend most of my day in a box, and I can visit this site daily if necessary. Aside from a 3-week hiatus where I'll be out of the country this year, I should be able to do indexing.

Of course, if you don't trust me at all, that's totally legit too.

AugustNights
2011-05-19, 01:52 AM
everyone

...

末you're ok with submissions and how to do them?

末you're ok with critiques being required for the chance to nominate or submit?


Submissions seem like they should satisfy the rules of the boards, as well as our own aims as best we can, so, I'm down with them.

I like the nomination/submission deal, however I like the idea of expanding the time since the critique occurred to nomination time from 24 hours to, well I'd say 1 week rather than 2 weeks, but that's just my 2 bits.



末you're ok with the rankings (either 5 votes for a star, or 3 or something else; we still need to identify what the system will be here)?

末you're ok with allowing playgrounders to add short ratings to the addendums?


Rankings sounds like a good idea.

Short ratings sounds like a good idea.


indexer stuff

Dear pants alive, sir, your life is full. And yet you could still manage to actually index this thing, truly, I believe the word droid is not ill-chosen in that explanation. I would make a lousy indexer for my constant traveling and extremely slow typing/updating abilities, and my inconsistency of interest. In short, I have no idea who'd make a good indexer.

I have a question. Or rather, a curiosity. Will we remain attempting to homebrew sourced monsters, or, as a hall of fame, will we be allowing any and all monster-classes, regardless of preexisting source or officialness of the source? Would it be outside the scope of the project to narrow this Hall of Fame to such designs? Would it be outside the scope of the project's goals to do so? Whichever direction it goes, it would be nice if submissions, or even the Hall of fame list...listed sources along with each nominated and ranked addition. It also aids in the critique of the "sticking to the original idea," which I suppose may not be important for some, but again, would be nice for others.

Hope that's coherent.

Nevertheless its good to see the project making steps towards living again.

Crafty Cultist
2011-05-19, 02:10 AM
I'd like for us to bring a few monsters from the old thread over, but I'm not sure wich ones we should choose.

I think I could manage an index. I'm here at giant several times a day, so I could update things regularly.

AugustNights
2011-05-19, 08:26 AM
No offense meant, YouLostMe, but I think it may be better if Crafty Cultist takes over the indexing of the project, he's been around this project since it began, and I think he may know the ropes a bit better, but thanks for volunteering.

Stycotl
2011-05-19, 12:13 PM
*Laughs nervously* I'm kind of impatient sometimes.

me too.


Yeah. If we think of something we can always change the system as long as it works according to the mods ruling.

true. i don't think that there is any problem with an evolving project.


Submissions seem like they should satisfy the rules of the boards, as well as our own aims as best we can, so, I'm down with them.

I like the nomination/submission deal, however I like the idea of expanding the time since the critique occurred to nomination time from 24 hours to, well I'd say 1 week rather than 2 weeks, but that's just my 2 bits.

i'm thinking i'll put this to a vote and see what people think.


Rankings sounds like a good idea.

Short ratings sounds like a good idea.

good. what sounds best to you though? there are a few options here:

3 votes equals inclusion in the hall of fame; 6 votes equals silver star; 9 votes equals gold star.

or

5 votes; 10 votes; 15 votes; etc.

or something else.


Dear pants alive, sir, your life is full. And yet you could still manage to actually index this thing, truly, I believe the word droid is not ill-chosen in that explanation.

i do feel like a machine sometimes. i am flexible enough that i will run it if i have to, but it looks like others might want a chance, so i'm gonna default to last place.


I have a question. Or rather, a curiosity. Will we remain attempting to homebrew sourced monsters, or, as a hall of fame, will we be allowing any and all monster-classes, regardless of preexisting source or officialness of the source? Would it be outside the scope of the project to narrow this Hall of Fame to such designs? Would it be outside the scope of the project's goals to do so?

well, this is still open to discussion too, and it is something that i have been thinking about for a few days now, but forgot to put into the first post.

the way i read it, a completely open project means that people can post what they want.

there were two issues primarily along these lines that i know of: recurring monsters, and homebrew. others might exist as well.

recurring monsters: if the half dragon that makes it into the hall of fame and gets five gold stars is still not what you are looking for, you are more than free to do your own and submit it.

homebrew" i read this one the same, that people can submit what they want. i would prefer it this way too though, so my perspective is biased. however, there is some precedent for allowing the project to *not* include homebrew. even though it is a community project, it is one that was primarily made in anterior versions to focus on official monsters. similarly to how we're not interested in homebrewing a game setting in this thread, the earlier threads had more or less nothing to do with homebrew monsters (there were under three exceptions, if i remember right; not counting the bazillion were variants, etc).

however, what i would propose is that we do include the capacity to do homebrew monsters. for two reasons:

because some people want to do them.

because no one is forced to critique, acknowledge, vote for, or accept any single monster class if they don't want to. therefore, it shouldn't hurt those that don't want to focus on homebrew if other people are doing just that.

if we need to reach some kind of compromise, we could keep the nominations and stuff the same, but when they are added to the hall of fame, they are put in their own category. i don't think that is necessary, and just makes more work for the indexer, but i don't see it as a problem in other ways.

those are my thoughts on the matter.


Whichever direction it goes, it would be nice if submissions, or even the Hall of fame list...listed sources along with each nominated and ranked addition. It also aids in the critique of the "sticking to the original idea," which I suppose may not be important for some, but again, would be nice for others.

definitely, i think that source is something that 100% needs to be included in both the monster class entries themselves, and in the hall of fame gallery links to those classes.

whether or not i end up indexing, i am going to work on a template for some of the formats and processes and that will be included among them.

further, i think that the previous thread leads need to be acknowledged in the first post, including oslecamo. whatever our earlier differences, a lot of work has gone into this project and the earlier versions each taught us new things that we need to be aware of for the project to succeed as a whole.

also, realms of chaos needs to be acknowledged for his contributions in the way of the borrowed homebrew galleria format.


Nevertheless its good to see the project making steps towards living again.

agreed. i'd like to see this project go on for a long time.


I'd like for us to bring a few monsters from the old thread over, but I'm not sure wich ones we should choose.

that will be up to those that decide to nominate such monsters. most of them probably have the requisite three critiques already, so they are already nominatable right now. for those that don't have enough critiques, but are under consideration for nomination, there are some options: we can contact the author and ask them to repost the monster in a new thread; we can redo those monsters ourselves if the author is not responding, or if they don't want to continue with the project; there are probably other options that i am not thinking of, but this seems the most obvious pair to me.


Yo, if you want an indexer, I can do that stuff. I spend most of my day in a box, and I can visit this site daily if necessary. Aside from a 3-week hiatus where I'll be out of the country this year, I should be able to do indexing.

Of course, if you don't trust me at all, that's totally legit too.


No offense meant, YouLostMe, but I think it may be better if Crafty Cultist takes over the indexing of the project, he's been around this project since it began, and I think he may know the ropes a bit better, but thanks for volunteering.

youlostme, i suppose that it does come down to a trust issue, but it is only because you are more or less an unknown as of now.

your name is still in the running though since this is an open project, so don't worry. i say that we put this up for vote. i'm going to move the first post's content to my reserve post, and then put all unresolved issues in the first post for a series of votes. unfortunately, that will have to wait till after school today, so stay tuned...

Mystic Muse
2011-05-19, 12:17 PM
I think if we're going to include Homebrew monsters, we need something stating "You have to include fluff with this so that we can help you critique it." since it's really hard to critique something if you don't have any idea what the person is going for.

Stycotl
2011-05-19, 05:06 PM
I think if we're going to include Homebrew monsters, we need something stating "You have to include fluff with this so that we can help you critique it." since it's really hard to critique something if you don't have any idea what the person is going for.

that is more than reasonable. as far as official monsters go, we more or less assume that playgrounders have access to the source material, and therefore access to the original fluff. therefore, we haven't made it necessary to include fluff for those classes.

some web-posted homebrew monsters have sufficient fluff to allow merely a link to it, in my opinion. others that don't have sufficient (or any) flavor text will need to be written out.

we'll include that in the rules writeup.

polls are coming ASAP.

Makiru
2011-05-19, 05:11 PM
So far, everything under the rules looks good to me. I can't think of anything that is missing or needs changing, but that might be because I didn't really read between the lines for loopholes or omissions.

Like chump, I'm happy to see this project get yet another new lease on life, even if I won't be participating in it as much as I did before (which was still a negligible amount, to be sure). I'll make more of a point to critique in homebrew threads, at least, even if I don't submit any new material. Although, my OC-era classes could stand to be redesigned a bit...

Stycotl
2011-05-19, 05:42 PM
i added another question to the poll, about how to leave ratings in the addendums. at first i didn't think it mattered enough to require a concrete format for it. but we have the specific command from the admin not to conduct critiques within the project threads. therefore, i think it better to be safe than sorry and just allow a very brief rating following a predesigned format.

something like:


My Rating:
Balance: 3/5
Flavor: 2/5
Originality: 3/5
Quality: 4/5

or something along those lines.


So far, everything under the rules looks good to me. I can't think of anything that is missing or needs changing, but that might be because I didn't really read between the lines for loopholes or omissions.

Like chump, I'm happy to see this project get yet another new lease on life, even if I won't be participating in it as much as I did before (which was still a negligible amount, to be sure). I'll make more of a point to critique in homebrew threads, at least, even if I don't submit any new material. Although, my OC-era classes could stand to be redesigned a bit...

cool. if you see anything that needs changing, let us know. and still put your votes into the polls even if you're only going to be here every now and then.

thanks.

Hyudra
2011-05-19, 06:19 PM
I think the rating system I used for a little while was:

Originality - How unique is the class. Is it interchangeable with another similar monster, or has the creator gone the extra mile to make it feel unique and different?

Balance - How balanced is the monster? What tier would it fall under, and is this problematic? Is it viable for play at both low & high levels?

Flavor - How well has the creator adhered to the flavor and spirit of the original monster? Do the abilities fit? If the creator went the extra mile to insert quality fluff and the like, it could be noted here.

Elegance - How well does the entry itself come together? Is it readable? Is the spelling and grammar solid? Does the post itself look attractive? Is there a neat picture that helps sell the monster class?

Playability - How playable is it? Does it look fun? Does it look as though it'd be fun to have another player at the table playing it? Or to have a player using the material while you DM? Do any abilities bog down play with lots of dice rolls or require constant looking up in the rules? Are any abilities so ill defined or vague that arguments could arise? Do any abilities risk harming the group or being used to make the game less fun for others?

Mystic Muse
2011-05-19, 06:25 PM
Issues to be Voted On:

Question 1: How long after a critique do you have license to submit or nominate work in the project?
Two weeks.
One week.
Other (specify).

two weeks should be sufficient




Question 2: How many votes does it take to advance a level in the gallery (inclusion; silver star; gold star; etc)?
Three votes per category.
Five votes per category.
Other (specify).

Three votes per category should be enough I think.


Question 3: How do we handle homebrew monster classes (including monster classes based off of previously established homebrew material)?
Do not include it in this project.
Include, but in its own sub-gallery post.
Incorporate homebrew into the gallery as normal (listed source for material will suffice).

I think Incorporate homebrew into the gallery as normal. If the DM doesn't want to allow a Homebrewed homebrew (There has to be some adjective for this, I just can't think of it) then all he has to do is look at the source.


Question 4: How should we handle the ratings that playgrounders can leave in their addendums?
Just give it a tier ranking. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5293)
Rate it based off of a scale of 1-5.
Other (specify).

I won't be of any help here. No comment.


Question 5: Who do you want to index the project (based off of those that have volunteered)?
YouLostMe.
Crafty Cultist.
Other (specify).


No comment here either. I just plain don't know.

EDIT: Changed my amount from one week to two weeks.

Crafty Cultist
2011-05-19, 10:07 PM
Issues to be Voted On:

Question 1: How long after a critique do you have license to submit or nominate work in the project?
Two weeks.
One week.
Other (specify).

Question 2: How many votes does it take to advance a level in the gallery (inclusion; silver star; gold star; etc)?
Three votes per category.
Five votes per category.
Other (specify).

Question 3: How do we handle homebrew monster classes (including monster classes based off of previously established homebrew material)?
Do not include it in this project.
Include, but in its own sub-gallery post.
Incorporate homebrew into the gallery as normal (listed source for material will suffice).

Question 4: How should we handle the ratings that playgrounders can leave in their addendums?
Just give it a tier ranking. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5293)
Rate it based off of a scale of 1-5.
Other (specify).

Question 5: Who do you want to index the project (based off of those that have volunteered)?
YouLostMe.
Crafty Cultist.
Other (specify).

vote now! I'll close this poll Sunday night.

Question 1: I think two weeks sounds about right.

Question 2: I think three votes per category sounds good. maybe if project numbers swell again we might move up to five, but in the meantime, three should be enough.

Question 3: I think homebrew should have its own category, but not a different thread.

Question 4: I like Hyudra's categories. they address all major points.

Question 5: If I do the indexing, I think someone else should handle the intro with the rules and whatnot. I doubt I could word them well, and I prefer the simple job of a filing monkey.

AugustNights
2011-05-20, 07:43 AM
Issues to be Voted On:

Question 1: How long after a critique do you have license to submit or nominate work in the project?


I'm sitting with Five votes per category., but that's kind of arbitrary until I have an idea of how many participants we look like we'll be having...



Question 3: How do we handle homebrew monster classes (including monster classes based off of previously established homebrew material)?

I vote somewhere between 2-3.
Actually I vote 2: Include, but in its own sub-gallery post, but would be comfortable with 3.
While not fond of brand new monster classes without a prehomebrewed monster, this is a gallery-esque thing, no reason to limit what the people want to see, as it were. This issues I don't like with "sourceless" brews should be solved in the nomination-voting process.



Question 4: How should we handle the ratings that playgrounders can leave in their addendums?


Okay... I'm actually kind of lost as to what this means.
This is not a critique... or part of the critique... or a post of some sort?
Will these be listed in the gallery, or simply mentioned at nomination/voting?
I think a 1-5 list should be fine... but I'm not certain I follow what this is or what it serves.

Let me see if I have this straight.

Bill_Somebody posts a Vermicious Knid monster class in the Homebrew section of the forums.

John_SumbuddyLs critiques Frank_isaname's Dire Hamburger monster class, then nominates Bill_Somebody's Vermicious Knid monster class to be a part of the project. (Because Bill_Somebody has not critiqued a monser class in x amount of time he cannot submit it himself)

With 0 votes the Vermicious Knid is listed, but without any color of star, or the "just submitted" star, or however.

Based on the number of votes it gains stars.

The Vermicious Knidis critiqued...in it's own post? Or is that what we cannot do? The Vermicious Knid is critiqued in the Gallery Thread?

Where comes in the addendums?



Question 5: Who do you want to index the project (based off of those that have volunteered)?


I'm thinking for now Crafty Cultist should run the indexing.

Hyudra
2011-05-20, 08:19 AM
Issues to be Voted On:

Question 1: How long after a critique do you have license to submit or nominate work in the project?
Two weeks.
One week.
Other (specify).

Thinking two weeks.


Question 2: How many votes does it take to advance a level in the gallery (inclusion; silver star; gold star; etc)?
Three votes per category.
Five votes per category.
Other (specify).

Leaning towards five, with adjustments after a few weeks, depending on how much participation we're getting.


Question 3: How do we handle homebrew monster classes (including monster classes based off of previously established homebrew material)?
Do not include it in this project.
Include, but in its own sub-gallery post.
Incorporate homebrew into the gallery as normal (listed source for material will suffice).

2, but not a separate post (not sure on what sub-gallery post refers to). A separate list of homebrew monster classes in the galleria (like how we had monster classes and prestige monster classes) would likely suffice.


Question 4: How should we handle the ratings that playgrounders can leave in their addendums?
Just give it a tier ranking. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5293)
Rate it based off of a scale of 1-5.
Other (specify).

See above for my thoughts. I'd be interested in the elaboration that ChumpLump is asking for though. Good questions, those.


Question 5: Who do you want to index the project (based off of those that have volunteered)?
YouLostMe.
Crafty Cultist.
Other (specify).

2. Crafty Cultist, if he's willing to oblige. He's been involved long enough to know what's what.

Mystic Muse
2011-05-21, 10:08 PM
I have a question. Can you re-submit a monster class of your own if you make another critique? So, as an example, say I critiqued Hyudra's Frostwind Virago, submitted my Silver dragon, and after making a lot of changes to my own class I then critiqued Stycotl's Frost giant class. Would I be allowed to re-submit the class saying "I've made a lot of changes." Or would the original submission be the limit?

I think this might come up at some point, so it's best we get it out of the way now.

NineThePuma
2011-05-21, 11:05 PM
I recommend a 'last edited' note be applied. It's more work for the indexer, but it would probably be better.

Crafty Cultist
2011-05-21, 11:48 PM
I recommend a 'last edited' note be applied. It's more work for the indexer, but it would probably be better.

I don't think I could sift through the monster classes checking for updates, but if people post on the main thread when they have made changes, I think I could keep track of those.

AugustNights
2011-05-22, 02:01 PM
I have a question. Can you re-submit a monster class of your own if you make another critique? So, as an example, say I critiqued Hyudra's Frostwind Virago, submitted my Silver dragon, and after making a lot of changes to my own class I then critiqued Stycotl's Frost giant class. Would I be allowed to re-submit the class saying "I've made a lot of changes." Or would the original submission be the limit?

I think this might come up at some point, so it's best we get it out of the way now.

I like this.
A) It encourages more critiquing.
B) It encourages listening to critiquing.
C) It helps the project know when changes have been drastic or large enough (by requiring a "purchase") to re-examine the monster.

Mystic Muse
2011-05-22, 02:25 PM
I like this.
A) It encourages more critiquing.
B) It encourages listening to critiquing.
C) It helps the project know when changes have been drastic or large enough (by requiring a "purchase") to re-examine the monster.

It would also makes things easier on Crafty Cultist.

EDIT: By which I mean, he doesn't have to keep updating when the monster was last updated.

EDIT 2: What happens if you give a critique and the poster making the class gets banned?

Stycotl
2011-05-23, 04:45 PM
sorry for my absence. school and a campout with my son took me away for the weekend.

ok, to tally votes:


Question 1: How long after a critique do you have license to submit or nominate work in the project?

kyuubi: two weeks
crafty cultist: two weeks
hyudra: two weeks
stycotl: two weeks


Question 2: How many votes does it take to advance a level in the gallery (inclusion; silver star; gold star; etc)?

kyuubi: three votes
crafty cultist: three votes
stycotl: three votes

chumplump: five votes
hyudra: five votes


Question 3: How do we handle homebrew monster classes (including monster classes based off of previously established homebrew material)?

kyuubi: incorporate normally
stycotl: incorporate normally

crafty cultist: incorporate, but in its own category
chumplump: incorporate, but in its own category
hyudra: incorporate, but in its own category


Question 4: How should we handle the ratings that playgrounders can leave in their addendums?

crafty cultist: (presuming the rating part) rate from 1-5 based off of hyudra's categories
chumplump: rate from 1-5
stycotl: rate from 1-5 based off of hyudra's categories
hyudra: rate from 1-5 based off of hyudra's categories


Question 5: Who do you want to index the project (based off of those that have volunteered)?

crafty cultist: crafty cultist (i'll help draft documents and formats and stuff)
chumplump: crafty cultist
stycotl: crafty cultist
hyudra: crafty cultist


I think the rating system I used for a little while was:

that looks great to me. comprehensive and yet concise.


Okay... I'm actually kind of lost as to what this means.
This is not a critique... or part of the critique... or a post of some sort?
Will these be listed in the gallery, or simply mentioned at nomination/voting?
I think a 1-5 list should be fine... but I'm not certain I follow what this is or what it serves.

bad wording on my part. the mods specified that no critiquing is to take place on the nomination or gallery threads. only in the homebrew thread where people create their monster classes in the first place.

realms of chaos has a similar rule in his galleria, in that addendums can have a bit of info about how the homebrew plays, but shouldn't be a critique in and of itself.

so, in order to facilitate that and ensure that people don't get the thread in trouble with mini-critiques in their addendums, i figure that they can just leave a rating and then a short comment. they could even link to their critiques of the class if they want. so long as it isn't in the hall of fame threads.


Let me see if I have this straight.

Bill_Somebody posts a Vermicious Knid monster class in the Homebrew section of the forums.

John_SumbuddyLs critiques Frank_isaname's Dire Hamburger monster class, then nominates Bill_Somebody's Vermicious Knid monster class to be a part of the project. (Because Bill_Somebody has not critiqued a monser class in x amount of time he cannot submit it himself)

precisely.


With 0 votes the Vermicious Knid is listed, but without any color of star, or the "just submitted" star, or however.

with 0 votes, it would still just be nominated.


Based on the number of votes it gains stars.

with 3 votes, it becomes included in the project. with 6 votes it gets a silver star, and with 9 votes it gets a gold star.


The Vermicious Knidis critiqued...in it's own post? Or is that what we cannot do? The Vermicious Knid is critiqued in the Gallery Thread?

Where comes in the addendums?

as people post their nominations and support votes for a monster class, they can include an addendum, a little spoilered *brief* idea of how they perceive the class.

like this:

Nomination: Little Red Riding Hood's Wolfwere Class
Addendum:
This class would make a great skirmisher in a low-tiered or middle-tiered game.
Originality5; Balance3; Flavor4; Elegance3; Playability3.


I have a question. Can you re-submit a monster class of your own if you make another critique? So, as an example, say I critiqued Hyudra's Frostwind Virago, submitted my Silver dragon, and after making a lot of changes to my own class I then critiqued Stycotl's Frost giant class. Would I be allowed to re-submit the class saying "I've made a lot of changes." Or would the original submission be the limit?

that's an awesome idea. i was wondering how to deal with resubmissions, and i think that this is an elegant solution. plus, it encourages more critiques.


I recommend a 'last edited' note be applied. It's more work for the indexer, but it would probably be better.


I don't think I could sift through the monster classes checking for updates, but if people post on the main thread when they have made changes, I think I could keep track of those.

that sounds more than reasonable.


EDIT 2: What happens if you give a critique and the poster making the class gets banned?

do you mean, what happens in terms of that monster eventually being nominated, or do you mean what happens in terms of you then being able to use that in order to submit or nominate?

as far as the monster by-banned-author being nominated, if it is complete enough that you or someone else feels it ready for nomination and voting, then it can be used as normal. the author won't be able to make changes to it in the future, so we'd have to use it as is, or have someone else take it up and polish it or change it entirely.

as far as your critiques going to a poster that later gets banned, i'd say that this shouldn't matter. someone else's bad behavior shouldn't see you suffer for it. if you leave a critique and they get axed, it still counts.

but i'd wait until someone else takes over that banned poster's monster classes before offering any more critiques.

unrelated

i think that the gallery should have a listing of who voted for each monster class (kind of like how i listed who voted for what for the poll). at first it sounds like more work, but i'd be willing to bet that it will make it easier for the indexer to check and make sure he isn't duplicating votes, or that he hasn't missed anyone.

another unrelated

and next, as far as gold stars and stuff go, did we decide whether we were going to just lump them all into one group with different colored stars, or did we decide that we were going to make a different gallery list for each color of star and stuff?

Mystic Muse
2011-05-23, 05:48 PM
and next, as far as gold stars and stuff go, did we decide whether we were going to just lump them all into one group with different colored stars, or did we decide that we were going to make a different gallery list for each color of star and stuff?

I don't think we decided that. I think different sections might be best.

Hyudra
2011-05-23, 08:01 PM
So something like:

Monster Classes

http://i54.tinypic.com/25jwg9c.png Gold Star Monster Classes:
{table=head]Monster|Creator|Source|# Votes|Voters
Axe Fiend|Spongebob|Fiend Folio IV|10|Patrick, Stephanie, Ziggy, Stingy, Sportacus, Trixie, Robbie, Squidward, Cthulhu, Hastur
Black Slime|Hastur|SRD|9|Stephanie, Ziggy, Stingy, Sportacus, Trixie, Robbie, Squidward, Cthulhu, Lucifer
Poverty Devil|Stingy|Book of Vile Darkness II|10|Stephanie, Ziggy, Sportacus, Trixie, Robbie, Squidward, Cthulhu, Lucifer, Hastur, Elly
[/table]

http://i54.tinypic.com/25jwg9c.png Gold Star Prestige/Template Monster Classes:
{table=head]Monster|Creator|Source|# Votes|Voters
Ascended Creature|Lucifer|Book of Really Exalted Deeds|15|Stephanie, Ziggy, Sportacus, Trixie, Robbie, Squidward, Cthulhu, Hastur, Elly, Madoka, Charlotte, Bessie, Barney, Walpurgis, Incubator
Puella Magi|Stephanie|Complete Hero|12|Patrick, Ziggy, Stingy, Sportacus, Trixie, Robbie, Squidward, Cthulhu, Hastur, Lucifer, Barney, Elly[/table]

http://www.treelite.com/SBA/images/SilverStarBullet.gif Silver Star Monster Classes:
...

http://www.treelite.com/SBA/images/SilverStarBullet.gifSilver Star Prestige/Template Monster Classes:
...

http://i419.photobucket.com/albums/pp273/mistyblue17/whitestar-1.png Nominated Monster Classes:
...

http://i419.photobucket.com/albums/pp273/mistyblue17/whitestar-1.png Nominated Prestige/Template Monster Classes:
...

Homebrew Work

Repeat the above

?

Mystic Muse
2011-05-23, 08:23 PM
If it wouldn't be too much trouble, yes.

Crafty Cultist
2011-05-23, 09:57 PM
I think I could handle that, and it seems like a sensible format.

Hyudra
2011-05-23, 10:14 PM
Or just to simplify it, remove the # Votes column, just have a list of the names.

Stycotl
2011-05-24, 12:12 AM
ultimately, i think it would be easier to get rid of the tables, and to spoiler the names of supporting voters like we spoiler addendums, but other than that, yeah, that's pretty much what i was envisioning.

AugustNights
2011-05-24, 10:44 AM
Brief thought... Back in the project after submitting a pants ton of Therianthropes, I realized they needed a re-examination. But editing an already starred monster may change one's opinion of it, or even completely change the beast in the first place... Small chance of being a problem, but what with it being a chance how should we address it, if at all? Assuming any major changes should just be a new monster class to be re submitted and small changes should be expected and all that...

Hyudra
2011-05-24, 12:32 PM
That's a good question, Chump.

I'm wondering when we can get this project going. See if we can't get things rolling.

AugustNights
2011-05-27, 09:35 AM
Since Crafty's indexing, he'll want to make the thread, I don't see why we can't have a thread started with, what, 5 or so reserved posts for Crafty to use. Or really however we need. We can start building the frame while we figure out the fine details... I think. We just need to get some formatted stuff-things, but I don't think that should be too hard between cannibalizing the old threads, and the borrowing of RoC's stuff.

Crafty Cultist
2011-05-27, 01:33 PM
I'm not sure how to word the intro and guidlines, so if someone could provide them, I'll try to set up the thread.

Edit: or I could copy pasta the old thread guidelines then add a section about the new nomination system.

Crafty Cultist
2011-05-29, 11:21 PM
I've made a new thread to the best of my ablities. It can be found here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=201135). If anyone can think of ways to improve layout, let me know.

I'd also like to add all the classes finished so far. I was thinking of having the old council as the nominators(Gorgondantess, Hyudra and Magicyop), just to get them fitting into the new system. Thoughts?

Hyudra
2011-05-29, 11:24 PM
Ok, some suggestions/questions, as I see the topic is up.
First off, thank you, Crafty, for getting this underway, and Stycotl, for much the same reason.
Second, I'm curious if we should have any discussion in the newly created thread or if it should go here.
Third - a suggestion. The text you copy pasted refers to council members. That should be revised.
The second question under the FAQ is misleading. People shouldn't feel they have to stick to the original type's specifics.

I would say no council or nominators - anyone can nominate, to keep with the mods' requests. Also, the mods stated we can't move any of the old monsters over. We can nominate them though, but we gotta start from scratch.

Crafty Cultist
2011-05-30, 02:34 AM
I'll try to add the classes from the old thread to the "waiting to be nominated" list

AugustNights
2011-05-30, 07:43 AM
Some recommendations


Community Monster Class Hall of Fame
The Community Monster Class Hall of Fame is a project directed towards recognizing and encouraging the creating of quality alternatives to D&D 3.5 Monsters As Races (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monstersAsRaces.htm) rules. The premise of the project is that any monster should be playable without having to pay Racial Hit Dice (RHD) or Level Adjustment (LA). Monster-races become monster-classes, behaving as base or prestige classes and races. Here we will display which monster-classes that have been nominated and ...

Gallery Terminology

Monster-class: A base class or prestige class designed to replicate the Level Adjustment and Racial Hit Dice of playing a monster.

Submit: A submission is simply the act of letting the Community Monster Class project know that one has built and finished a monster class that they would like to have reviewed, nominated, and voted on for the gallery.

Nominate: A nomination is the act of naming a monster-class that the nominator believes to be of high enough quality to be placed in the gallery. This nomination need not be a Submitted monster class, but it certainly can be. Nominating requires a critique (see below).

Critique: A detailed response to a monster class (see below). Do not post critiques in the Gallery thread, post critiques in the thread of the monster class you are critiquing.

Nomination Process
A homebrewer can submit a complete class to receive nominations or critique by posting a link to it in this thread.

In order to make a nomination monster class, a playgrounder must make a critique of one of the monster-classes that have been submitted or nominated. Only one nomination can be made per critique, and the nomination must be made within two weeks of making the critique. A playgrounder may not nominate for their own monster class.

After three nominations, a class will be added to the hall of fame list. At six nominations, it will enter the silver category. At nine nominations, the monster class will be gold.

Critique Guidelines
A proper critique should mention multiple aspects of the class, not just a single ability, few spelling errors, or the likability of the class. An addendum should be made to give a brief overview on the class, with a score ranging from one to five in each of the following categories.

Originality: How unique is the class. Is it interchangeable with another similar monster class, or has the creator gone the extra mile to make it feel unique and different?

Balance: How balanced is the monster class? What tier would it fall under, and is this problematic? Is it viable for play at both low & high levels?

Flavor: How well has the creator adhered to the flavor and spirit of the original monster? Do the abilities fit? If the creator went the extra mile to insert quality fluff and the like, it could be noted here.

Elegance: How well does the entry itself come together? Is it readable? Is the spelling and grammar solid? Does the post itself look attractive? Is there a neat picture that helps sell the monster class?

Playability: How playable is it? Does it look fun? Does it look as though it'd be fun to have another player at the table playing it? Or to have a player using the material while you DM? Do any abilities bog down play with lots of dice rolls or require constant looking up in the rules? Are its abilities active, or are they passive? Are any abilities so ill defined or vague that arguments could arise? Do any abilities risk harming the group or being used to make the game less fun for others?

Lastly, if you like an ability or mechanic, don't hesitate to say so! Positive feedback helps encourage the thread!

Please comment on the main thread if you have made significant changes to your class. This helps attract more critique and/or nominations and lets us keep track of the "last edited" date of your classes

Monster Class Guidelines
The guide Monster Class Guidelines are just that, guidelines. You need not follow them, but following them will increase your monster-class's likelihood of being nominated.

Proofread: Read over your finished work for errors. Use spell-check... Look over grammar. Are their confusing sentences, or minor punctuation errors?

Be prepared to revise: Monsters that are submitted have to go through a critique and review process to ensure the gallery is displaying quality work. You may considered revising your monster based on the critiques it has received.

Be creative: Make your own abilities, make active abilities. Nobody wants to play a monster that just full attacks all the time, even if it does have a bunch of stat bonuses and DR and the like. Make sure the player gets to make meaningful decisions during combat, rather than the same thing over and over again. If the base monster doesn't have enough abilities or active abilities, make your own. The monster class does not need have the exact same abilities as the original monster.

Scale: Scale by HD, not Monster-class specific levels. What this means is that if a monster has a breath weapon, rather than tying the damage to level, tie it to HD. 1d6 damage per HD is the standard for a true dragon. Thus, one who takes 5 levels in a dragon and 15 levels in another class will still have a decent breath weapon at level 20. Duration, DCs, and range should also all scale by HD. A common DC amongst monster class abilities is 10+1/2 HD + relevant ability bonus.

Slow ability bonuses: Heaping a bunch of ability bonuses on a monster class makes for unbalanced, or on occasion boring monster classes. Common ability bonuses scale slowly throughout the monster class. It is not necessary for a monster class to provide the exact amount of racial ability bonuses the Monster entry normally would.

Make it accessible: Does your monster class require access to non-OGL books? Can a player use your monster class with access to the Srd (http://www.d20srd.org.htm)? Is it based on your own house rules? If other playgrounders do not have access to information on your class they will be less likely to critique or nominate it.

FAQ
Q) What monsters am I allowed to submit as monster class?
A) Any. We do not restrict what types of monster classes are submitted. New homebrewers are encouraged to pick low-CR monsters (3-8), and not to attempt to tackle epic tier (20+ level) classes from the outset. Homebrew monsters may be submitted as monster classes, but we request a link to the monster the class is based on. If the monster class has no such basis, it may still be submitted, but you may consider a healthy amount of flavor text and mentioning about the background of the monster to aid in the critiquing and nomination of the monster class.

Q)When a monster class increases in size does its strength increase and its dexterity decrease? If so, by how much?
A) Size increases, or decreases, do not normally alter ability scores in this project, if the monster class mentions otherwise, follow the guidelines it presents.

Q) What's the Caster Level for the Spell-like abilities (SLA)?
A) Unless otherwise specified, the Caster Level for any SLA is equal to the character's total HD.

Q) What痴 the Save DC for this ability?
A) Unless otherwise specified the Save DC is (10+ 1/2 HD + Charisma Modifier).

Q) What's with this scaling by HD?
A) Some have questioned the reasoning and balance behind scaling abilities by HD. The reason for this is simple: multiclassing. We believe that all abilities gained by all monsters, even level 1 monsters, should be viable and balanced at all levels. However, most monster classes simply don't go to level 20, so we're believe it's best to make abilities stay relevant by scaling by HD as opposed to level.

Q) Who can nominate?
A) Anyone! More specifically anyone who has made a single critique in the past two weeks on a submitted or nominated monster class.

Q) How many nominations can I make?
A) As many as you like! More specifically you may make one nomination per critique you have submitted within the last 2 weeks. The only limitation is you!

Q) Why do I have to make a critique in order to nominate?
A) Primarily to aid in the quality of the gallery submissions. This process encourages discussion and feedback, and most everyone wants feedback for their creations!

Happy Homebrewing!

Touched on a few more suggestions, a little bit of spelling things, cleared up some language. All just suggestions of course.

Edit

I'll try to add the classes from the old thread to the "waiting to be nominated" list

That should be fine. Submission doesn't cost anything, and its not so much grandfathering the old classes inas it is simply noting that the old project monster-classes are...monster-classes that want to be considered by the project.

Crafty Cultist
2011-05-30, 12:24 PM
Thanks for your input Chumplump, changes have been made. I'll add the old monsters to the under development section in their own category

Mystic Muse
2011-05-30, 01:02 PM
Thanks for your input Chumplump, changes have been made. I'll add the old monsters to the under development section in their own category

I think we should go through them and make sure we don't have anything by a banned poster, since those would no longer qualify as "Under development"

Crafty Cultist
2011-05-30, 01:26 PM
I think we should go through them and make sure we don't have anything by a banned poster, since those would no longer qualify as "Under development"

Most of the classes from the old list were completed already. They're just awaiting nominations before they can be added to the hall of fame.

Mystic Muse
2011-05-30, 01:49 PM
Most of the classes from the old list were completed already. They're just awaiting nominations before they can be added to the hall of fame.

Ah, okay.

The language in the thread makes it sound like I can re-submit my Silver Dragon even though I haven't made any other critiques myself. Is this intentional?

Crafty Cultist
2011-05-30, 01:55 PM
Good point. I think that a class should only be resubmitted if editing has been done, or if a significant amount of time has passed since it was commented on.

Edit: Also kyubi if you could submit your dragon to the new thread to get things started, that would be great.

Mystic Muse
2011-05-30, 02:08 PM
Good point. I think that a class should only be resubmitted if editing has been done, or if a significant amount of time has passed since it was commented on.

Well, it has gone through a lot of change, and the last critique was 11 days ago. Does that count as a significant amount of time?

AugustNights
2011-05-30, 04:22 PM
Since it has undergone many changes it may be resubmitted.
Since, really, all that submitting a monster means is that you'd like people to critique or nominate it.
It's the simple act of stating "Hey guys, mine too," in order to help keep the project aware of who wants their monster-classes critiqued and added to the gallery.

Looks like I'm going back to finish my Half-golem.

Stycotl
2011-05-31, 05:11 PM
Brief thought... Back in the project after submitting a pants ton of Therianthropes, I realized they needed a re-examination. But editing an already starred monster may change one's opinion of it, or even completely change the beast in the first place... Small chance of being a problem, but what with it being a chance how should we address it, if at all? Assuming any major changes should just be a new monster class to be re submitted and small changes should be expected and all that...

i'm not sure that i know what you are referring to specifically. editing monsters after they have been included in the gallery?

if that is the case, i don't see that it is much of a problem. addendums can be retracted, and new ones written if needed.


I've made a new thread to the best of my ablities. It can be found here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=201135). If anyone can think of ways to improve layout, let me know.

i'll take a look and make some notes. thanks for getting that started, and i'm sorry i disappeared for the rest of the week. i'm always way more busy than i want to be.


I'd also like to add all the classes finished so far. I was thinking of having the old council as the nominators(Gorgondantess, Hyudra and Magicyop), just to get them fitting into the new system. Thoughts?

no can do. one of the mods' specific demands was that there are no councils or anything like that. everyone has exactly the same authority in this project. also, no grandfathering of old monsters; they all have to go through the process from the beginning.


Ok, some suggestions/questions, as I see the topic is up.
First off, thank you, Crafty, for getting this underway, and Stycotl, for much the same reason.

you're welcome. i'm glad it is up and running again.


Second, I'm curious if we should have any discussion in the newly created thread or if it should go here.

i'd say post conversations here until this thread dies, simply because it is here and we might as well. after that, if it is going to be small points of discussion, i don't see a problem with using the nomination thread for discussion. if it is going to be a large, in-depth conversation, it should probably be taken to its own thread or a PM.

but ultimately, it will come down to what crafty cultist wants to do with it. the thread should stay as broad or focused as he wants it to remain.


Third - a suggestion. The text you copy pasted refers to council members. That should be revised.
The second question under the FAQ is misleading. People shouldn't feel they have to stick to the original type's specifics.

I would say no council or nominators - anyone can nominate, to keep with the mods' requests. Also, the mods stated we can't move any of the old monsters over. We can nominate them though, but we gotta start from scratch.

yeppers.


I'll try to add the classes from the old thread to the "waiting to be nominated" list

to save yourself some work, you might want to use that list just for monsters that have been submitted, or that look good and complete enough to be nominated if their creators aren't there to submit them.

**********

all

i just had an idea about how to maybe increase participation. i'm going to try and run a few GITP monster class competitions (a la vorpal tribble's and djinn_in_tonic's monster competitions), using the guidelines that the last few of our community monster threads have worked under.

hopefully that will increase the number of monster classes built using the active system, will encourage people to homebrew, and will encourage people to critique.

hmmm, i wonder if a vote-up-a-monster-class thread could be done too...

anyway, off to look at the hall of fame thread.

EDIT: here we are:


The Community Monster Class Hall of Fame is a project directed towards recognizing and encouraging the creating of quality alternatives to D&D 3.5 Monsters As Races rules.

i agree with chump that this should be a link to the SRD.


Critique: A detailed response to a monster class (see below). Do not post critiques in the Gallery thread, post critiques in the thread of the monster class you are critiquing.

this should probably be bolded or italicized since it is one of the moderator demands for us reopening the project.

submissions: might want a "submission process" header before the nomination process. as per our discussion thread, submission still required a critique. however, that can certainly be changed if you want to bring it up for discussion.

if we do get rid of those rules, then we won't need a "submission process" header.


A homebrewer can submit a complete class to receive nominations or critique by posting a link to it in this thread.

should define "complete class." in the discussion thread, i said one that had received at least three critiques, but that was just a starting point. i still think that would be reasonable, as it means that it has undergone some critique and revision at least.

but that would still be only the base of a "complete" monster class.

also, this seems to be mixing up submissions and nominations. and i'd not use the word "submit" for anything at all except submissions in this project, just for the sake of keeping it easy to understand.

addendums: there should be an "addendum process" heading too. look at realms of chaos' rules about addendums, and then just remember that we specifically have to make sure that people keep them brief and not turn them into critiques.


A proper critique should mention multiple aspects of the class, not just a single ability, few spelling errors, or the likability of the class. An addendum should be made to give a brief overview on the class, with a score ranging from one to five in each of the following categories.

i'd also mention that a critique doesn't have to just be about things that need to be changed. otherwise, people might ignore the more complete classes because they won't know what to suggest.

i'd also mention that a critique can be long, but doesn't have to be. the key is how you phrased it above, that it should mention multiple points of the class.


Originality: How unique is the class. Is it interchangeable with another similar monster class, or has the creator gone the extra mile to make it feel unique and different?

maybe clarify that this is a measure of how unique the mechanics are, not necessary the monster itself, since most of them will be snatched from a monster manual. although that can come into play when critiquing original homebrew.


Lastly, if you like an ability or mechanic, don't hesitate to say so! Positive feedback helps encourage the thread!

ah, looks like you did include this. i'd just put it up under the first paragraph.


The guide Monster Class Guidelines are just that, guidelines. You need not follow them, but following them will increase your monster-class's likelihood of being nominated.

i think it would be appropriate here to include a spoilered rundown of the community monster project guidelines as we used in the previous threads. specify again that they don't have to be followed, but that they make the monster classes more consistent and synergistic, and will make it more likely that a monster class will receive critiques, nominations, and supporting votes.


Be prepared to revise: Monsters that are submitted have to go through a critique and review process to ensure the gallery is displaying quality work. You may considered revising your monster based on the critiques it has received.

just a typo.


Scale: Scale by HD, not Monster-class specific levels. What this means is that if a monster has a breath weapon, rather than tying the damage to level, tie it to HD. 1d6 damage per HD is the standard for a true dragon. Thus, one who takes 5 levels in a dragon and 15 levels in another class will still have a decent breath weapon at level 20. Duration, DCs, and range should also all scale by HD. A common DC amongst monster class abilities is 10+1/2 HD + relevant ability bonus.

i'm not sure that this should be generalized. in the older project threads, some things were tied to HD and some to class levels. for instance, a big bad bruiser might have its growth tied to class levels, growing to large size at 4th level and huge size at 8th level or something, but having its natural attack damage tied to HD.

i'd specify that some things should be tied to HD instead of class level, and then maybe give a few examples.


Make it accessible: Does your monster class require access to non-OGL books? Can a player use your monster class with access to the Srd? Is it based on your own house rules? If other playgrounders do not have access to information on your class they will be less likely to critique or nominate it.

i'd specify here that it isn't a problem to use non-SRD material, so long as there is a variant given with SRD-based material. that way, if you really want to, you can make your tome of battle monsters with initiator levels and stuff, but can still post a variant that just has a few extra (Sp)s and other abilities for those that don't have that book.


FAQ

good thinking.

****************************

that's all i can think of right now. it is looking good so far!

EDIT-EDIT: ooh! we need to specify that homebrewing playgrounders need to make *one* thread for all of their monster classes, as per moderator command, so that we don't get one person with six different monster class threads floating around.

Hyudra
2011-05-31, 07:42 PM
EDIT-EDIT: ooh! we need to specify that homebrewing playgrounders need to make *one* thread for all of their monster classes, as per moderator command, so that we don't get one person with six different monster class threads floating around.

Huh. I've been following along for some time and I wasn't aware of this particular one.

Stycotl
2011-05-31, 07:47 PM
Huh. I've been following along for some time and I wasn't aware of this particular one.

yeah, they gave the command here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10869136&postcount=509)



At this point, those wishing to continue creating and critiquing monster classes have the following options:

1. Begin your own thread for your own monster projects. Each person will have their own such thread, on which you can post as many monster classes as you want. If you have more than one monster class you wish to post, please keep them on the same thread together (they'll be merged if you try to start a new thread for each one). You will not be allowed to index other monster classes by other posters or on other threads, with or without the guise of a community-approved list.
2. Begin a "Hall of Fame" type thread, in a similar manner to Realms of Chaos' Homebrew Galleria threads. However, note the following restrictions:
* The process must be truly democratic, with no favored class of poster having the final say or any greater number of votes at all. No exceptions.
* No monster classes may be "grandfathered" in from the existing list. Every class by every poster (banned or otherwise) must be nominated from scratch. This includes all "I vote for everything from the old master list!"-type shenanigans.
* No posting new classes on the Hall of Fame thread. From now on, every person has their own thread. If you need to make changes to a monster that was posted on this or another locked thread, you have blanket permission to start a single new thread for the purposes of reposting all of your monster classes. (If you start more than one, they will be merged, as above.)
* No critiquing or discussion of any given monster class on the Hall of Fame thread.
* If there are more than one similar Hall of Fame threads springing up after this announcement, the moderators may merge them.
3. Continue this project on another message board where you can make it as exclusive as you wish. Such discussions should be conducted via PM or other private communications; do not start a thread about it.

Mystic Muse
2011-05-31, 07:49 PM
I'm not going to argue with the mods or go against their wishes, but that's going to end up being a bit of a pain.

Now I need to think up a good thing to name my thread.

Draken
2011-05-31, 08:18 PM
I'm not going to argue with the mods or go against their wishes, but that's going to end up being a bit of a pain.

Now I need to think up a good thing to name my thread.

How about Kyuubi's Kompendium of Kreature...

Hmm...

... Karacters?

:smalltongue:

I think I am going to retool some of my old monsters, as well as whip up a couple new ones... I have been having so many ideas.

'sides you guys have no creativity with names. "<Monster name> Body" really? Not even going to spice it up a bit? Boy... I don't think I ever went with a simple '<Monster name> Body'. It just has no flair! No presentation! It doesn't give a good feel to write in a character sheet at all! Completely bland! Almost like writing "Grimoire" in your wizard's list of class features or "Bonus feats" in your fighter's.

Mystic Muse
2011-05-31, 08:20 PM
How about Kyuubi's Kompendium of Kreature...

Hmm...

... Karacters?

:smalltongue:

I think I am going to retool some of my old monsters, as well as whip up a couple new ones... I have been having so many ideas.

I'm getting a name change at some point, at which point I'll be known as "Sunny Wonders". Otherwise, I'd have done that. I really would have.

Crafty Cultist
2011-05-31, 09:49 PM
I've updated the FAQ to mention the thread rule Stycotl brought up.

As for how much should be on thehall of fame thread, I thought that feedback on individual monster classes should go in their own threads, so the hall of fame should be for nominations, submissions, and queries and issues regarding the project as a whole.

Mystic Muse
2011-05-31, 09:53 PM
Eh, I decided to take Draken's advice on thread title anyway.:smalltongue:

Hyudra
2011-06-01, 12:47 AM
By the way, I really, really like the idea of a monster class competition. With a general theme for each (Such as Underdark, Oriental, Faces, etc), it would serve as a great inspiration to get stuff done and encourage community discussion and debate. Fantastic idea.

AugustNights
2011-06-01, 03:43 AM
By the way, I really, really like the idea of a monster class competition. With a general theme for each (Such as Underdark, Oriental, Faces, etc), it would serve as a great inspiration to get stuff done and encourage community discussion and debate. Fantastic idea.

What Hyudra said.

Draken
2011-06-01, 10:09 AM
By the way, I really, really like the idea of a monster class competition. With a general theme for each (Such as Underdark, Oriental, Faces, etc), it would serve as a great inspiration to get stuff done and encourage community discussion and debate. Fantastic idea.

This looks like a cool idea.

Mystic Muse
2011-06-06, 07:47 PM
Has the project died already or something? I haven't seen any posts in the threads for a couple days.

Hyudra
2011-06-07, 11:56 AM
I do hope it hasn't died. I suspect that all those involved are just busy or enjoying the summer.

What do we need? More monsters to critique, more critiques of the only monster posted?

Mystic Muse
2011-06-07, 12:06 PM
I do hope it hasn't died. I suspect that all those involved are just busy or enjoying the summer.

What do we need? More monsters to critique, more critiques of the only monster posted?

More monsters linked in the thread to critique, and the Silver Dragon still needs nominations or further critique. I made most of the changes you brought up.

EDIT: I'm more concerned about having more monsters to critique though.

Draken
2011-06-07, 09:00 PM
New and updated Brain in a Jar! (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=11123577#post11123577)

Critique. :smalltongue:

Working on a Neothelid class.

AugustNights
2011-06-08, 09:54 AM
Give me a few days, I just made a rather distant journey. Once I settle some personal affairs (unpacking, finding work, etc.) I'll be back on the project!

Crafty Cultist
2011-06-08, 10:55 AM
New and updated Brain in a Jar! (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=11123577#post11123577)

Critique. :smalltongue:

Working on a Neothelid class.

Could you please post your the link to your monster class in the project thread rather than the discussion thread? it could do with a few more posts.

Draken
2011-06-08, 11:13 AM
Could you please post your the link to your monster class in the project thread rather than the discussion thread? it could do with a few more posts.

I would love to. But I can't find the thread.

Mystic Muse
2011-06-08, 11:18 AM
I would love to. But I can't find the thread.

Here you go. Linky. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=201135)

Stycotl
2011-06-14, 12:08 AM
I've updated the FAQ to mention the thread rule Stycotl brought up.

As for how much should be on thehall of fame thread, I thought that feedback on individual monster classes should go in their own threads, so the hall of fame should be for nominations, submissions, and queries and issues regarding the project as a whole.

100% correct. the mods were pretty specific that this thread would not be for critiques. which is good in many ways, as it keeps this thread uncluttered, gives page views and attention to other playgrounders, and keeps the mods happy.


By the way, I really, really like the idea of a monster class competition. With a general theme for each (Such as Underdark, Oriental, Faces, etc), it would serve as a great inspiration to get stuff done and encourage community discussion and debate. Fantastic idea.


What Hyudra said.


This looks like a cool idea.

thanks! yeah, i intend to do themes and stuff.


Has the project died already or something? I haven't seen any posts in the threads for a couple days.


I do hope it hasn't died. I suspect that all those involved are just busy or enjoying the summer.

it's slow to get off of its feet. but i wouldn't worry. i don't think this project is going to actually die anytime soon. and once we get a rhythm going with critiques and contests and stuff it should pick up.


What do we need? More monsters to critique, more critiques of the only monster posted?

probably both. i'll see if i can get one of the contests off of the ground this week. i'm already going into finals again (love block schedules for summer classes). so i've been a away a bit for the last week or so. but i should still be able to post on at least a weekly or biweekly basis or something.


More monsters linked in the thread to critique, and the Silver Dragon still needs nominations or further critique. I made most of the changes you brought up.

EDIT: I'm more concerned about having more monsters to critique though.

i would suggest PMing some of the creators of monster classes that you want to nominate and have them open up their own kreature kompendium threads. if you can't get a hold of them, then open up an orphaned monster class critique thread or something, and post a link to the class you're critiquing.

or, maybe what we need to do is give one week or one month or something, where we ignore the rule about only being able to nominate something you personally have critiqued within a certain amount of time, or at all. get the ball rolling with some of those older classes whose creators aren't active anymore, and then firm up again at a reasonable time.

or maybe that rule just needs to be gone completely.

crafty cultist, what do you want to do there?


Although I'm not too sure about whether the nominations go here, or in the thread for the monster.

in crafty cultist's thread.

EDIT: crafty cultist would you be so kind as to copy the monster class regulations from one of the last community monster project threads and spoiler them into one of your first posts? you'd have to remember to specify that these are guidelines, not absolute rules.

i want to link to the rules in my contest threads, and in those threads, the rules will be rules, not guidelines. i am hoping that it will have the effect that people homebrewing for the contests get comfortable with those rules and decide to use them even when homebrewing outside of the contests.

Crafty Cultist
2011-06-14, 02:09 AM
Stycotl

I've added the old class guidelines as best I can.

I think removing the requirements to make a nomination could be good for getting things rolling, but I'll leave the issue to a vote.

Mystic Muse
2011-06-14, 02:24 AM
Stycotl

I've added the old class guidelines as best I can.

I think removing the requirements to make a nomination could be good for getting things rolling, but I'll leave the issue to a vote.

I'm all for it. At least at the start.

Hyudra
2011-06-14, 09:59 AM
I just wrapped up another project of mine, getting a web novel started, so I should have some time to devote to making monsters & commenting on others'. I've got the Ogre Mage 90% done, but I've just got to flesh out and triple check stuff in the magic system I devised for it.

Stycotl
2011-06-25, 01:01 PM
Stycotl

I've added the old class guidelines as best I can.

I think removing the requirements to make a nomination could be good for getting things rolling, but I'll leave the issue to a vote.

i think it would be a good decision. does anyone feel otherwise? if not, i'd say you have so far a unanimous vote of agreement.

also, i just noticed today that you don't have "supporting votes" guidelines listed. not a big deal, but notice that there aren't any supporting votes for the one nomination yet.

right after the "nomination" header, i'd just let them know that anyone can cast a supporting vote for a nominated class. the original idea i had in the discussion thread was that you had to make a critique in order to cast a supporting vote, but that was a horrible idea.

if that is what we decide to make it, i'll go cast a supporting vote for the silver dragon today.

Crafty Cultist
2011-06-25, 02:00 PM
I've posted about the removal of the critique requirement to the nomination process, and I've changed the first post.

Stycotl
2011-06-25, 03:15 PM
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11026705&postcount=25

crafty, would you mind linking to this post in the addendums part of the main post. make sure they know that it isn't mandatory to leave an addendum or a rating within an addendum, but it helps.

Draken
2011-06-25, 03:24 PM
Eh, it is noteworthy that we are very, very few here... So getting nominations is sort of an added problem.

Also, a "Submited" entry, under Nominated classes (sporting a list of all submited classes) would be very, very useful to everyone. Scrap that, second post.

Also. BiaJ updated with a new mechanic for ability score increases! Meldshaper AoEE (Avatar of Elemental Evil) in progress.

Crafty Cultist
2011-06-25, 03:28 PM
Hyudra's rating system is already in the critique guidelines, section, pretty much word for word.

Edit: I'm don't think I was aware of the supporting part of the system. If I understand it correctly, once a class has been nominated, people can vote for the class without making critiques. Is that about right?