Disjoined thoughts:

* The voting text for 3.0 reads 'Good solid idea, nothing fancy, just a great, useable, quality submission.' If Strolen wanted to change that, he'd do it. Since he hasn't, I take that at face value. That means a 3.0 is a quality, solid submission. From the comments and posts I've read, a number of folks get bent out of shape if their average drops below 4.0, and I've seen a few get pissy the further below a freaking ‘5' they get. I don't understand that.

* A ‘5' is PERFECT. It can't be bettered, no matter how much time you lavish on it. It's professional quality, the sort of writing I'd be happy to pay for. So far I've given out exactly two. I don't figure on handing out many.

* This is a site that encourages you to vote and comment on subs. Too bad this one doesn't allow those with thin skins to disable comments or voting, but I figure people who hate negative comments or votes lower than they like should avoid posting their stuff publicly for others to review.

* Not every question needs to be answered. The abilities of that NPC are a big secret, and players aren't expected to figure it out? Great. I don't need to know either. I don't mind subs with a bit of mystery to them, and that leaves some questions for me to answer.

What I Like:

* I do gritty fantasy, supers and occasionally near-future SF. I don't do cyber/steampunk, horror, slapstick or dungeon fantasy. Low-voting a sub in a genre or style you hate or don't play is being a jerk, and I won't do it myself.

* What GMs don't need so much are broad ideas. We're usually pretty good at that. I don't need to go to a web site to decide that a mountain city quarries ornamental stone, that slavery's rife there, that it's a theocracy. Elements like those are easy to come up with. What's harder is the detail work. Does your sub have a dozen long paragraphs detailing the specific businesses of that city relating to stonecutting, quarrying and marketing? Do you detail the Slavers' Guild and its personalities, and the underground anti-slavery society and its personalities? What god rules the roost, what's its dogma and doctrine, who are the leading priests? That's the stuff I really like to see.

* Long subs. They don't offend me, and they don't intimidate me. If it's more than I can use, then I just don't use it all. Can't imagine why that'd be an issue.

* Stuff I not only could use, but am likely to use.

What I Don't Like:

* Vague, like above. Not much creativity there.

* Rotten logic. Civil courts use a 'reasonable person' test to judge the merits of a lawsuit. I use it to judge the logic of something. I find it wanting, I'll say so and my vote'll reflect it. (I don't buy into the 'it's fantasy so it can't be realistic' BS.)

* Bad grammar, spelling or punctuation. Look. This is a written medium. A typo here or there happens, sure, but if you can't be bothered to use proper English or proofread your stuff, then I can't be bothered to give you a good vote. (And c'mon. That's the real reason, isn't it? It's not that you're unable to spell, or that English is your second language, or that you're a busy bloke, is it? My wife's dyslexic, and she manages. It's that you can't be bothered.)

* Stuff that's not developed enough to be useful. If what you've put up is an incomplete rough draft, I'm gonna slam it like a trash can lid. Why not let that sub live on your computer until you've finished it?

* A lot of purple, florid prose. Fanfiction.net's where that belongs. After a certain point, flavor text gets to looking soggy.

Login or Register to Award Morningstar XP if you enjoyed the submission!