Avner's Thomas Templeton
TLDR; Strong finish, but very passive outside of the last few posts.
I found it took a long time for Thomas to get up and into the action. Your first few posts were all passivity and philosophy. Even when Thomas did decide to start acting it began more of a "let's do something" than actually proposing a plan of action. His last few posts were excellent, as could be hoped, but I don't think it was enough to bring you above or even equal in total to the other characters.
There were also places, like when you conjured those illusory worlds, where your writing got stretched and confused.
Khelbiros' Rimoka
TLDR; Strong character, proving actions speak louder than words, even when the actions are just speaking.
I felt Rimoka to be strong and engaging right out of the gate, which was really good. I also liked how you interacted with the environment around you, and tried to actually take action to solve the situation at hand even from the very beginning. For instance, your metaphor about the cord unraveling was good, and the idea about there being a possible third path was a great one. I didn't get it at first, but the slow-burning series of flashbacks about the Winter King ended up being really a clever metaphor for the whole situation at hand, too.
pianoman90's Jorgum
TLDR; strong, yet contrary character was harder to enjoy than some of the others.
I liked Jorgum for the most part, but I'm not sure if I got a strong handle on his actual motives, other than rescuing his brother. I mean, he spent so much of his time being contrary, especially opposed to Ignatius (which I totally get), but also challenging the rules of the system laid out before you. Which is good, as you took action. But I'm not sure if I should applaud you spurring people to action or roll my eyes at it being because you were trying to rebel. Which I guess is the point of the character, maybe?
I don't mean to sound too negative, I did enjoy your writing and your character, but I think I found him too contrary to actually like.
wodine's Ignatius C. Hypatius III
TLDR; Built an interesting world, but the worldbuilding detracted too much from the character.
It must have been a lot of work to make all of those artistic references all the time - I just wish I enjoyed them more. And I think that's my big thing I took away from Ignatius: there was just so much fluff in your posts. A little bit, I can get, but I found myself skimming paragraphs of metaphor and global backstory. Even in your very strong final post, I skimmed six of the paragraphs talking about places and gods. Things that didn't build your character as much as they established your setting of Oerth.
Criticism out of the way, I did really enjoy your writing and Ignatius' story, especially the finale choosing to stay with the established order of things, refusing to play the Steward's game, and so on. It was very strong writing and a very strong motive, and paired with taking definitive action, too.
The ending was close. I had two characters who were okay, but not quite up to the level I was hoping for - and two characters who were playing the game I was looking forward to reading.
In the end, I very nearly voted for pianoman90 - but Khelbiros came out narrowly ahead. Congratulations.
The final butcher's bill is in, and I have to say that it was a decision by the barest of margins.
In the end, I vote for pianoman90
General Feedback:
You all did great jobs. It was quite difficult to choose who to vote for and I really could have gone several directions. All of you did stellar, and should be proud of what you accomplished here in the final round.
What you did well:
Thomas was an interesting character. I really loved how you played him true to his age in several instances. Yes, you know what I mean. You used that to you advanatage several times, from a diss here, to and argument there. I also found it interesting how you pulled in anecdotes and wisdom from the adults that had been in his life, for both good and bad. This is also true and in keeping with a young teen. They may chafe under authority but they do often listen, and a parent's words are oft found in the mouths of their children. Especially towards the end, Thomas was pushing for progress, and had seem great instances of boiling down the arguments. More over, Thomas was the first one to truly call for and take action within all of the debating back and forth. No small thing. You ended on an interesting note, with an engaging mini story of a tortured young demon child, and a suspcion of zealots that would have been interesting to see earlier. Still the illusion was a clever response and it certainly affected the end result of the round.
What you could improve on:
Grammar and typos were a bane to you this round. I am hardly the most... attentive to such things, but I did try to pay closer attention this time. I think you would have done well to run your posts through word or a similar program to look for issues in the future. Beyond that, Thomas started out in the debate a bit slow, and I think you may have been able to hit harder earlier. His first few comments felt a little derivative of Jorgum and Ignatius, who admittedly were somewhat hogging the limelight. Later on you took a more aggressive stance as I noted above.
What you did well:
You had a lot of good, solid details in your writing. I liked how you continued to engage with the scene throughout the round. Something that I have noticed in the writing of previous Outplay winners. You made some good arguments throughout the round, including reactions to your fellow players which is always an important part of such things. I think you kind of stood things on their head when you suggested a council of heroes, which was a newish approach to what was being discussed, and that moment I felt was really a turning point for you. You started the Round off ok, but as the round progressed, you got stronger and stronger both in your writing and your role play. I am in a unique position to have watched you progress through all the rounds, and I can pretty confidently say that you continued to get better and better with Rimoka throughout the rounds as well. Your inclusions of various analogies like the spear already cast, and the parable of Rimoka hunting the dragon well all very well done. You kept on getting strong, and ended on a quite strong note.
What you could improve on:
You had a couple typos and errors early on, but they were limited and soon become non-existent as you progressed in the round. You've been doing well in the round up until now, and you've already heard a lot of the suggestions I can give you already. The only thing that really jumped out at me this time around was perhaps the overuse of pronouns in your writing. I remember at one point where I noticed that "She" had been written as the started of 3-5 sentences in a row and it really disrupted your flow a bit. Substitute a few alternate means of reference like "The burly fur clad woman", "the scarred woman", or even just a plain ol' Rimoka.
What you did well:
You had some very nice turns of phrase in your writing. I was particularly fond of your weaver at the loom analogy. Throughout you really had Jorgum in the thick of things and really pushing the debate this way and that. At first I was surprised at the hobgoblin's speach and approach, but I really started feeling both it, and Jorgum's character by proxy. I think that moment for me was when Jorgum started making wild conjecture with little fact just to upset the apple cart and see what was underneath. My exact note was: "Sudden shifts like that can really surprise and unsettle people. Its also the mark of various mental issues." However, Jorgum always maintained the benefit of his wild jabs, while maintaining himself on this side of the sanity scale. You continued to push things along right up to the end, ending with a solid recapping post to match your consistently good writing.
What you could improve on:
In your first post, you started making rolls for knowledge etc, when Aethera specifically specified no rolls, and no mechanics in the opening post. Shortly thereafter you responded to Thomas but incorrectly summarized and responded to some of his actions. Whether in DM instructions or RP, its important to keep track of the details. In both cases the issue was quite minor, but being the final round of Outplay its my job nitpick. Fortunately I did not see any further issues with this at all in the rest of the round. Again because I'm nitpicking there was a time or two that I think you could have focused Jorgum's speeches a bit. They were certainly impassioned, but they lacked some of the oomph that I saw in others you wrote. Just tighten those up around the intended message and it will help a lot in the consistent strength of Jorgum's arguments.
What you did well:
You know what I wrote in my notes after reading your first few posts? "Evokes". That's right. Your writing evokes, it is just so beautifully put together and written that it was hard for me to judge it objectively because I kept on getting drawn into your narrative. Not were you major player throughout the round, but you continued to build out additional details about your character and the world that he came from. This was appreciated since this was the first true glance at your character, and I felt like I was really able to get a feel for who you were playing. You had some interesting back and forth with the others, Jorgum particularly, and you put forth many solid points throughout. I also liked that you stuck to your guns so to speak right up to the end, and even tying it back to a statement you made at the begining of the round. It was very much in keeping with a priest sincere in his beliefs and willing to act on them. I also appreciated that you reacted to the arrival of the primal forces and the questions and implications that their words brought to the table.
What you could improve on:
There were two things that I would nitpick you on for the future. The first is that I noticed that your writing tended to become sloppier the farther along in the round we got. I suspect that this was just due to Outplay fatigue, and believe me, I sympathize. However, when you are playing with the best of the best you can't afford to give your opponents even the barest of room, and I'm affraid you may have done just that. All though in general I really enjoyed the narrative sections of your posts, your final sign off post was a bit on the excessive side. It did build some of the feeling, but it probably could have been condensed down and still had the same impact. The professional editors (not me!) always say cut until it hurts, and this may have been one of those times. If you really wanted to keep it in, it might have been nice to wrap them up in a spoiler tag with an appropriate label so that depending on the reader, they can either skip or open it up based on their preferences.
__________________
Yes, I do still exist. Sometimes.
Last edited by Ion2Atom; Aug 30th, 2016 at 11:52 PM.
Some solid role-playing this round. It really was difficult to cast a vote.
The thing about free-form RP is that you're all on a stage, you're asked to improvise and with the bare minimum, unleashed into the world. Some react to the info given and merely describe the world. Some enrich it. Others transform it. Good role-playing means telling a good story, and the way to do that is to change the world around you.
And the stakes couldn't be higher. You're deciding the fate of the Multiverse over supper with a weirdo that has a thing for He-Man.
That being said, there wasn't an exceptional amount of tension. There was shouting. Threatening, insulting and name-calling, sure, but where are those high stakes?
In the end, my decision came down to two major factors: a transformative journey and what I'd like to call Chekhov's mace.
Thomas had the biggest transformation. His character grew. Tommy boy became a man this scene. And I like that he even pointed that out. How out of his depth he was. Thomas went from being a shy little demon boy to becoming a hero. It's a shame the change was so abrupt. It was a little forced.
Rimoka, I felt, did not change all that much. She was a kind-hearted woman who'd seen too much. And in the end she was a kind-hearted woman who'd seen a lot more. I felt for her, and the posts captured her feelings very well along the way. Solid performance, of all those present, I felt I could relate to her the most because we knew what was going on in her mind.
Remember: show, don't tell. Rimoka probably grasped this best. The rest of ya... oy vey.
There's something they like to use in script writing: "too much black on the page". It's when you put too much information and overload those who are reading your script. It's especially obvious when dialogue is in bold, as it is here.
In the end, the choice came between the two who dominated the discussion the most: Jorgum and Ignatius.
Jorgum's an interesting character. He's loud, he's proud, he's really angry. He started that way and he ended louder, prouder and so very angry. Personally, I didn't like him as a character. And playing unlikable characters is difficult, but the piano man held his own and did it well. It's just a shame that I feel as if J-dog didn't learn anything from this experience. And when you're dealing with cosmic events, you should learn something.
Finally, Ignatius. Very well written, very well executed. The posts have a theme and the effort putting a title on all of them is commendable. It felt a bit random at times, but nevertheless, we understand where the character is coming from.
Unfortunately, he's also a bit inconsistent. He goes from polite to shouty, from haughty to sullen and silent, and it's a bit too sudden a transition each time, there's no real smooth transition from one post to the other. And the final post dragged on far too long. The editor's pen would have been bloody.
But Ignatius did learn from all this. He learned that for all his charm he can't sway a room full of people hell bent on destroying time itself. He learned what it meant to be powerless and he learned his own limits. It was a little odd to say at first that he refused to make a choice and then to go and make a pretty big choice, but, in the end, it was the tiniest of details that lead me to believe this was consistent with his character. And that was... Chekhov's mace.
Ignatius said that if he could end it by cracking his mace on the Steward's head, he would. And, sure enough, he did.
It has come to my attention that we may need a tiebreaker between Khelbiros' Ramona and pianoman90's Jorgum. Let me say that I believe both of these players are worthy of wining. As the DM of this round, I have a different perspective than the judges. Coming into this, I knew the round was going to be mostly improvisation on my part, and I didn't really know where I was going to lead the players until a few days in.
So I have to look at it from the perspective of who gave me as the DM the most to work with. Between these two players, both started out as expected questioning the Steward. Once things were played out a bit, Rimoka was kind of in a split decision mode about which way to go (and looking for a 3rd option). In the end a decision was made, but to me it felt reactionary. Jorgum on the other hand made it easy as a DM to move things along, and use as a tool in a sense to try to get the other players on board with the revolution. I was able to feed of what he did, where as with Rimoka, it almost felt as if she could be ignored, not really needing to be there.
As a result, should my vote be needed for a tiebreaker, I vote for pianoman90's Jorgum.
Congratulations to all of you for making it this far! This round was beautiful from beginning to end and the decision was not an easy one by any means. I went back and forth over the thread a couple of times reading different key posts before paring it down even to 3, much less 2 and then 1. Great job, all of you!
My style of commentary is to take notes on my thoughts as I read through, starting at the beginning. Each paragraph roughly corresponds to one post. I share all my thoughts -- positive, negative, and notes-to-self about what I think you're doing right and doing wrong. I hope it's instructive.
Beautiful and poetic writing that grows stilted in places due to over-description and small errors in tense, punctuation, and formatting. Love "ticking like some baleful metronome."
Yet more beautiful writing. No errors this time, though! I appreciated that you went through your opponents and noted your character's thoughts on them and their arguments thus far. You go out of your way to skewer Jorgum which, in truth, is a pretty decent strategy (though being the Pathfinder judge, I have seen others try and fail to fell the mighty hobgoblin) because at this point in the game he's looking to be your top competition. I expect the others to come into their own soon, though. A great post, though it's definitely set your character up as judgmental and aloof.
A shout-out from the judge! Nice. You were the first to presume the single survival theory, which is a point in your favor.
Given the news that some of you will simply cease to exist, I'll be expecting the others to react with anger, but you kept to the cool-and-collected demeanor you've established thus far. You doubled down on the feud with Jorgum and your snark is serving you well, but I'm going to have to go back and review your previous argument because I don't recall anything about a spark of hope, it was more of a praise of the pleasures of life. I'll check it out later. Regardless, I wouldn't dock you for shifting attack strategies (good debaters and lawyers are excellent at this, after all), but I hope neither you or pianoman are staking too much on bringing the other down. The upside of this little feud is that it's those two characters that have become the focal point of the thread and you're forcing the other two players to strive all the harder to distinguish themselves.
After a flowery reaction to Qara's arrival, you brought the thunder! It's great to see Ignatius showing some real passion and putting aside the niceties, even if only for a moment. You've taken a stand, refusing to end other worlds to save your own.
A touch disappointed to see the feud with Jorgum continuing, but you managed to focus mainly on presenting theories. A few grammatical errors in this post seemed auto-correc ty. It wasn't *too* bad, but did trip me up in a few places. This was not my favorite of your posts.
A stirring and beautiful finale. The flashbacks got to be a bit much without more to tie them to his thoughts and subsequent actions, but the dramatic ending with the poetic quip was so very fitting.
All the excellence I've come to expect of you. And dice! Glorious dice. Knowledge checks here are essential, even if it's a free role-playing round. I'm glad to see this. I also love that you depicted your character as battle-worn and bloody after the encounter with the dragon. Added: gained the approval of another character (Rimoka). This is a good sign!
Profiterole! >.< For some reason this word keeps popping up in my reading. Bizarre. (Disclaimer: The preceding comment has no bearing on judgment.)
Great post, though. "Do you bleed, too?" I really like the subtle threat angle. Jorgum's been a man of peace for most of this game, but as the most obvious badass in the room (scars and what-not), he's leveraging that well here. I hope to see a pay-off from this gamble.
Wodine has it out for you! Eek. Of course, I thought Squeak had one over on you in the round prior, but you turned it around. I'm imagining Dana, though, in Jorgum's place, and how the judges and DMs would deal with a sudden outbreak of PVP combat. Heheheh.
Your response surprised me, but in a pleasant sort of way. You've chosen the path of the diplomat (after getting in a few choice barbs). I'd be surprised if Ignatius goes along with your perspective on this, but it may also be that you've effectively played peacemaker here and turned the focus back to the Steward, which would be a big feather in your cap. Wodine has the chance to snatch that from you, though, with a carefully worded retort. Oh, and the bit about the business end of the table was golden.
Post after Qara, I have to agree with you about Ignatius' attitude and it's a strong point in your favor that you are keeping the various threads of argument straight and holding his feet to the fire, so to speak. However, I'm concerned that both of you are letting this manufactured conflict take center stage. You pivot hard toward the question of the collapsing multiverse and the so-called Master of the Universe (He-Man, is that you?) and your theory is certainly interesting -- in fact, it's the sort of thing that, as a DM, I might take off on and say 'Well, isn't that just so much more interesting than what I had planned?' and run with it, but I'd be surprised if it's the case here, which is likely to leave Jorgum with a bit of egg on his face. Even so, I like that you concocted an original theory, espoused it, issued a call to action with regard to it, and are prepared to defend it.
Ha! That takes some balls, claiming responsibility for everything good happening. Dismissing Qara is a dangerous move here, but since others have laid strong claim to her attention, it makes sense for you to focus on the Steward. Still, it may come back to bite you in the end.
Solid post, but nothing jumps out at me here except to note that you dropped the feud with Ignatius. I think that was a smart move.
Once again, a fair monologue here. Nothing stands out to me.
Want to be a hero? Act like one! Great line, great summary of Jorgum's position. And closing with the silent address to Haluk? Well played.
Good, clean writing. Could have used more of an introduction to the character as the judge of another bracket, but won't dock you just for that.
Your writing went from clean to polished! Nicely done. It's a good post. A solid post. And I really like that you leverage your information-giving against the Steward in an attempt to get him to answer some of your questions. However, I see a dynamic emerging here that has me worried for you. Namely, you've sort of tied your character to another character -- Ignatius -- and allied yourself with him against Jorgum. The reason this worries me is two-fold. First, it suggests to me that your character sees Ignatius as a leader and (arguably) a superior, when you really ought to be fighting for yourself and your own perspective here. Second, it means that should Jorgum best Ignatius, your character ends up looking weak as a result. I'll be looking for Rimoka to distinguish herself in the posts that follow. I need not just a reason to like or respect her, but a reason to CHOOSE her over the others. I can see she has it in her -- the grit, the determination, the survival instinct. I just need to see it.
Another well-written post, but you remained fairly passive throughout, deferring to others instead of presenting ideas of your own. I would like to see this fiery survivor of yours take a stance and stick with it. That may still happen, but thus far I feel like you're giving too much opportunity to your opponents and not seizing enough momentum for yourself.
THERE's the Rimoka I've been waiting for! Naking tames and icking kass! This is a strong post and a great opportunity for you to swing back toward a leadership role. You called out the bickering between Ignatius and Jorgum and even likened it to a mother scolding misbehaving children. This is excellent because it (narratively speaking) places you head-and-shoulders above those two, who have been dominating the conversation thus far. There is a mature adult in the room, and her name is Rimoka. Children beware.
Hot damn, what a post! The allegory of hunting the dragon and the Steward's veiled ambition (which is something I was wondering about, myself) is beautiful and powerful. This is exceptional. I also strongly approve of asking Qara about her prior experience. There is wisdom in this, and humility. I can see Rimoka coming fast around the bend and making a break for the leaders. I hope you keep it up!
A powerful finale! You leveraged Rimoka's background very well here while acknowledging that she had lapsed toward her former, courtly self, in the earlier posts. A strong, poetic finish!
Good, clean writing with only minor errors. I got some sense of your blue demon boy, but as a judge coming from another bracket I hoped for something more evocative of his appearance to help me visualize the scene better. A minor point, but there you have it. He seems a polite lad and I like the reference to what his father said about understanding and being understood.
THINGS NEVER TO DO IN PUBLIC! Love it.
A really REALLY good post. I loved your description of Qara from your character's point of view. Exceptional. You also espoused a unique theory of your own AND engaged Qara more than the others had done thus far, sort of claiming her for your own, which is a smart move. This is your best post yet!
Change the rules, huh? An interesting idea. This is a solid post. It doesn't jump out at me as YEAH! THAT'S THE ANSWER, but it could spark some interesting conversation around the table. There were a few grammatical/spelling errors that made me stumble in reading, but it's another solid post and something to build on.
You built well on your previous assertion and I really liked the story of Thomas' parents granting him independence and how you tied it into your argument.
I enjoyed the bit with the spheres and their use in crafting your argument. I could envision it well. Other players teased, but I thought it was a good visual. I did become distracted by Thomas' tendency to refer to himself as Little Boy Blue, though. A small thing, but it broke up my reading experience more than once.
In the end, though passionate and decisive, Thomas ended up seeming more like a follower than a leader and that is regrettable. I felt he had a lot to offer and that there simply wasn't sufficient time or space (too many forceful, brash personalities in one room) for him to shine. Even so, you pulled together an excellent final hurrah with 'Let's go be heroes!' and your fierce determination to do what was right.
I really felt like two characters distinguished themselves in all the best ways this round. My decision came down to pianoman's Jorgum who set himself up as an early leader and Khelbiros' Rimoka who went from onlooker to fierce competitor in the latter half of the game.
Jorgum led early and remained consistent, but fell off a bit toward the middle and only at the very end returned to the level that Rimoka had risen to during the latter part of the game. Strong finish by both, but Rimoka managed to push herself to overtake Jorgum's early momentum. I can't help but feel that if Jorgum had taken action just one cycle sooner, he would have pushed out ahead of Rimoka in that final stretch.
For the others, I felt that Jorgum bested Ignatius in the feud that Ignatius started and Ignatius' insistence on continued condescension did not resonate with me, particularly after Jorgum stopped biting at the hook. Thomas struggled to gain acceptance as a leader and credible source of ideas, a plight understood by children everywhere. I expect that with more time, he would have begun to distinguish himself more.
My vote for Outplay Champion 2016 goes to Khelbiros, by the slimmest of margins.
__________________ A warrior struggling to remain consequential.
Aug 22nd, 2016, 04:28 PM
![Show Printable Version [DO NOT USE]](images/buttons/printer.gif)
