Would you be interested in seeing the revival of the Adventure Building Challenge?

[Legacy_henesua]

               

Fine, then are you interested in taking the next step and making a challenge happen that you would want to participate in?

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MagicalMaster]

               

Possibly.  My main concern is that the whole appeal to me is NOT picking the topic -- to be forced into something I'm not choosing and seeing how I can do.  I don't mind coordinating it or collecting submissions, but trying to think of ways to avoid picking the topics.  Kind of want to avoid a voting system, worried that people will just pick what they want to do (which they can already do anyway, idea is to get people out of their comfort zones).

I'll think on it.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_simuseb]

               

I personally would love a limiting theme for two main reasons.


1) It forces me to try something that could possibly outside of my comfort zone, or something i probably never would have attempted otherwise.


2) It's interesting to see how different people's take on the theme differ. 


Anyway, I do have some ideas for the theme, but I'm a little busy right now so I'll post em up later. 

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_CaveGnome]

               

I second the idea of finding something less of a burden on the organiser shoulders. I think a more distributed system and a 2-3 month module making / 1 month module reviewing rythm, ofcourse paired with an ad hoc theme poll would be better suited.

 

Perhaps we could relaunch / reboot the ill-fated ABC April 2013 theme, but relaxing requirements to a "no hack module"...

 

http://forum.bioware...ding-challenge/

 

I got this "Whak-a-Hole" thing 95% done on my HDD. I could be persuaded to finish it, even if my Nwn tinkering time is currently very limited.

 

An eventual (weird?) idea would be to use the same CCC polls themes for the ABC period (ie, if the new ABC has a total time spawn of 3 months, use the last 3 voted CCC themes as a basis for ABC). I am not good at organization, but i imagine some bridges between ABC - CCC could help both.

 

<Beating is own drum>

future SpellJammer theme anyone ? :-)

<Druming off>

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_rogueknight333]

               

... I think we should do two things:

1. Define the common parameters which all Adventure Building Challenges will follow, and publish this.

   
2. Get a show of hands for a group that want to participate in the next ABC, and let them decide on the particulars of this next particular challenge: theme, custom content, start and stop dates.

I am quite busy as well, but I am willing to enable others to get this rolling again. Who is game?

 

I expect I could organize things if necessary (for this cycle anyway - I think your suggestion of having different people superintend the challenge on different occasions is promising). Any other volunteers?

 

Also, if anyone is interested in participating by making modules it would be good to speak up, since that is all important: no point in doing this if hardly anyone cares. If you are somewhat interested but do not want to commit to anything yet it is acceptable to say that. So far simuseb and CaveGnome (tentatively) have indicated a willingness to contribute modules. Anyone else?

 

As for the parameters I suggest a modified version of those for the original challenge. Participants would be expected to complete a module in a limited period of time, using a limited selection of sponsored Custom Content (though for particular challenges we could always add a twist by having all submissions be hak-free, or all using a specific hak, etc.), and all based on some predetermined theme or adventure seed. The main alteration I would propose would be increasing the time limit (one month is very tight). I suggest we set up the ABC as a 3 month sequence: 2 months to build a module, with the 3rd month devoted to review/discussion of the submissions, and generally letting participants "recharge their batteries." After that a new cycle could be started. (e.g. for this cycle, the building would be done over April and May, with modules released at the beginning of June. A new cycle could be started in July).

 

In the interests of increasing the polish and general quality of submissions, participants would be encouraged to devote the first month to the actual building of a module, leaving most of the second for them to playtest and revise it (though obviously this would not really be enforceable). They could also be encouraged to post a progress report at the end of the first month, which might give an opportunity to rethink the time frame, if more or less time seemed called for at that point.

 

Another random idea I will throw out there: in the original challenge you had "Completion prizes" for those who actually completed something on time, and "Honorable mentions" for those who submitted something a bit late. Perhaps we could expand on that and award people points on the basis of how well they observed the challenge parameters? Anyone who submitted a module would be awarded a certain amount of points. There would be penalties reducing these points for things like submitting late, not respecting the theme, submitting something with game-breaking bugs, etc., and bonuses for things like submitting early and finding a way to combine multiple themes in a single module. One advantage of this is that it would leave anyone who wants to be a "wild card" and submit something that has nothing to do with the theme free to do so: such a person could still be part of the challenge if willing to sacrifice some points. Points would be kept track of somewhere and could accumulate over multiple challenges for frequent participants. Obviously these points would in actuality be somewhat arbitrary and meaningless, but since this is all being done for fun anyway (hopefully) we could all pretend to care about them to make the challenge more interesting.

 

...Or perhaps we can work out a shared login for the Adventure Building Challenge vault entries, and a select group of people can manage it rather than just one person.

 

That could be helpful. Perhaps an admin for the new vault could advise us on the feasability of setting up such a thing? How does the CCC handle this (their entries attribute a generic "CC Makers" as author)?

 

...My main concern is that the whole appeal to me is NOT picking the topic -- to be forced into something I'm not choosing and seeing how I can do... Kind of want to avoid a voting system, worried that people will just pick what they want to do (which they can already do anyway, idea is to get people out of their comfort zones)...

 

If we wanted to do things very D&Dishly, I suppose we could generate a list of topics and then pick something on it by means of a D20 roll.  '>

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_henesua]

               

I'm fine with all of that, RogueKnight. Run with it.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MagicalMaster]

               

So far simuseb and CaveGnome (tentatively) have indicated a willingness to contribute modules. Anyone else?

 

I've mentioned (twice) that I'd be interested dependent on the "rules," mainly regarding topic choice.

 

I'm not sold on the two month period, though, instead of one -- I agree that one month is very short but I kind of thought that was the whole idea?  That someone would literally have to make and test a module within one month and thus encourage people to get into module building precisely because the time limit is so small and requires a module to be limited in scope?  Seemed to be a focus on agile programming rather than having people build "big."

 

On the flip side, while hearing two months makes me think "Wow, that sounds like more time than I want to commit" I do also recognize that some people, especially people who haven't built before, might not be able to do anything worthwhile in a month and two months would make them feel far more comfortable because they feel they could submit something that's more than just one or two areas.

 

I don't know.

 

Maybe the ABC would be better on a three month cycle but at times we could hold a "Build-a-thon" where a theme is posted Friday and submissions are due on Sunday or something -- to see what people can do in a 24 or 48 hour period or something.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_henesua]

               

i really like the idea of the weekend buildathon.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_rogueknight333]

               

I'm fine with all of that, RogueKnight. Run with it.

 

Then if my nomination is uncontested, I will plan to make a new thread formally announcing this ABC cycle, and laying out the rules for it, in several days. That will give people time to make suggestions about how to organize this thing. Or me time to figure out an organizational scheme if nothing practical is suggested: speak now or forever (well, for this cycle anyway) be subject to my arbitrary dictates. Some things to consider before then (again, just tossing out some random ideas to see what people think of them):

 

1) What theme(s) to use?

 

As CaveGnome suggests, we could just carry over the unused adventure seeds from the April 2013 challenge: here. At a minimum that could save a lot of time and trouble generating a new list. My preference would be to allow using one of those adventure seeds as one option (for the benefit of anyone who was thinking of something for those at the time, did not follow through, and wants to try again), while also picking out a single new theme as a fourth option for people who want to try something new and exciting. Going forward, I think it might be interesting to have a similar arrangement for the ABC generally: each cycle one new theme would be introduced, while one old theme from the last cycle is carried forward to give people another shot at it (for the benefit of those who were in the position of thinking, "I have a great idea for that theme, but unfortunately no time this month to build anything based on it.").

 

As for lists of possible themes to pick from, the original adventure seeds can be looked up here. MagicalMaster's suggested list can be found earlier in this thread. I suppose we could combine them, along with any other suggestions people have, and pick something off them either randomly or by voting.

 

One idea might be to generate two lists, one based on "story" ideas like "Save the Princess," "Dragon Attack," etc., and another based on more "technical" ideas like "module for characters of level X or class X," and then combine the two to get something like "Level 20 PC saves Princess" or "Shifter vs. Dragon" (hmn, that sparks a new adventure idea: Shifter infiltrates Dragons, or Drow, etc, by becoming one - but that aside one gets the general idea, I hope).

 

2) How to handle Custom Content sponsorship?

 

I liked the arrangement in the orignial ABC where haks were limited to a selected list of sponsored content, and would like to do something similar. I thought it a good way to keep the focus of the challenge limited, while still allowing participants a reasonable set of CC options, and also giving some of the community's currently active CC makers a chance to advertise their work a bit. Again, if we want to save some time and trouble, we could, for now at least, simply use the list of sponsored content generated for the original challenge, but at some point at least it would be good to produce a more up-to-date list. One alternative way of arranging this might be, instead of having a general list of sponsors over multiple challenges, to have a particular CC maker sponsor a particular challenge cycle, which however would introduce a complication in that ideally the cycle's theme(s) would be coordinated with appropriate CC. I am open to suggestions about the best way to handle integrating CC with the ABC.

 

...I'm not sold on the two month period, though, instead of one -- I agree that one month is very short but I kind of thought that was the whole idea?  That someone would literally have to make and test a module within one month and thus encourage people to get into module building precisely because the time limit is so small and requires a module to be limited in scope?...On the flip side, while hearing two months makes me think "Wow, that sounds like more time than I want to commit" I do also recognize that some people, especially people who haven't built before, might not be able to do anything worthwhile in a month and two months would make them feel far more comfortable...

 

Ideally, as well as being fun for the builders, the challenge should also produce something players will actually be interested in, which will not happen if the submissions are routinely incomplete or seriously buggy. In the original ABC, too many submissions were, culminating in the April 2013 ABC where nothing got done at all, so it seems something needs to be done to make that less likely. The simplest and most obvious thing to do is give people more time. To be sure, that may not work: instead of using the additional time for quality assurance, it might just inspire more ambitious projects which will end up in an equally incomplete state. I think it worth a shot, however. Builders would be encouraged to plan something they think can be completed in only a single month, aiming for at least a working "rough draft" of the module at that point that can be tested and revised in the second month.

 

Also, if we introduce my earlier suggestion of doing something like awarding bonus points for early submissions, anyone who can turn out a submission in a single month will be free to do so, and be given credit for it, provided it is complete and reasonably free of bugs, while those who are "behind schedule and over-budget" will have a margin of error to work with.

 

We can always experiment with different time limits in different cycles.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_rogueknight333]

               

Not detecting a lot of interest here. If people do not care only about how this is organized that is one thing, but it would be nice to know that there is a sufficient number of likely participants for this to be worth it before moving forward.

 

Anyway, one other subject on which I thought it might be useful to solicit opinions before making a formal announcement of rules, themes, etc. would be: how should the submissions be released? Should each participant make an individual entry or should the cycle organizer put up a single combined entry, with links for such revised and expanded versions as authors may later put up included? I think there are advantages both ways. The first gives participants full control over entries and makes it simple to upload bug-fixed or otherwise revised versions as soon as these are done. As for the advantages of the latter, I will simply re-post what I said in the original ABC thread:

 

...Also, though there are some problems with it, I think there are a few advantages to having a consolidated entry:


1) It would be more convenient for players (for whom the builders are ultimately working) to be able to download all the modules in the challenge from a single page, rather than having to click through a bunch of links to do so.


2) It would avoid cluttering the vault with hordes of new entries. To give one example of why this might be worth doing, I know from my own submissions that modules typically get far more downloads while on the "New Modules" list than they do in any given period of time subsequent to getting bumped off it. It is very helpful to new authors to spend a reasonable period of time on that list, and if a bunch of new module entries are being added every month as part of the challenge, normal submissions might end up getting buried in this avalanche, rapidly bumped off the list, and being overlooked as a result.


3) It might actually be an advantage to noobish authors to have their work submitted in a context where judgment is likely to be more forgiving (since people will know that the modules in question were made in a month, and presumably adjust their expectations about the level of polish to be found accordingly) and more likely to be downloaded if it is found side by side with better known builders. By contrast, I think individual entries would have the effect of raising expectations and encouraging more selectivity about what challenge entries are downloaded.


This is not to say that there are not disadvantages to a consolidated entry as well, or necessarily that they do not outweigh these advantages, simply that, to be fair, there are arguments on both sides.

 

 

 

Also, are the submissions best released on the new vault? Old vault? Both?

 

I would appreciate knowing more about people's preferences on these matters (and on those raised in my previous post), but if no one cares to express any than I can proceed to announce my own arbitrary arrangements in a day or two.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_henesua]

               

I think people are fine with the way you propose to organize the next challenge, and are waiting you to take the lead. Three people seem to have expressed interest in participating if this happens which seems enough to me.

 

As far as posting modules for the challenge goes, I think allowing people to post their module to their own vault page for review and uploading changes as they get comments, is a good way to go. Maintaining links to the challenge entries somewhere, like in the ABC thread can work. What I was doing when this started was to post all of the entries as they were received to an ABC challenge vault page. I think there were pluses to doing it that way, but if the goal is to go with a longer development period and then a review period where the module gets polished it would be better to allow people to post to their own vault page. Otherwise updating the module becomes difficult.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_simuseb]

               

 

Not detecting a lot of interest here. If people do not care only about how this is organized that is one thing, but it would be nice to know that there is a sufficient number of likely participants for this to be worth it before moving forward.

 

 

How many people are you expecting? It's a twelve year old game '> Since this thread has become a base to discuss the ABC, should I rename the title? 

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_meaglyn]

               

I enjoyed the first one. I got a lot out of it and it remains the only actual module I've released. It was fun to have other people play it and the feedback was useful. That said, it took _way_ too much time.  If it is a 3+ month thing then I might do it again.

 

I like the idea of a real theme.

 

Not sure I can get behind the weekend buildathon idea, for one I don't have time for marathon sessions (I get to spend maybe an hour or two a day on this) and two I'm not sure I'd want to spend time playing anything someone cooked up over a weekend. My playing time is even more limited these days than building. But don't let my non-participation stop you '>

 

Anyway, not much to add, just wanted to say I'm here and paying attention (if not commiting)...

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_rogueknight333]

               

This cycle's themes have been determined. I generated two lists, one based on technical concepts like the level or type of PC, and the other based on more story oriented ideas. Most of these latter were derived from the unused ideas from the original challenge (found here, but I addded in several more derived from Magical Master's list earlier in this thread (#16-18), and several more I thought up myself (#19-21).

 

1st List ("technical") - note levels should be considered approximate (e.g., if one got "Level 10 PC", one could make a module for Level 10, or Lvl. 9, or 11, or a scaleable module for Lvls. 8-12, etc.):

 

 Make a module for a...

 

1) Warrior PC (meaning primarily the classes with full BAB progression, fighters, barbarians, weapon masters, Dwarven Defenders, etc.).

2) Level 5 PC

3) Healer PC (primarily Cleric or Druid, but Bard or Paladin might work too)

4) Level 10 PC

5) Arcane Caster PC

6) Level 15 PC

7) Thief PC (one requiring stealth or other roguish skills, probably but not necessarily an actual rogue)

Level 20 PC

9) Druid or Ranger PC, or at least a wilderness themed adventure suitable for such classes

10) Level 25 PC

11) Shapechanger (probably a Shifter, but a caster with access to polymorph spells might work too)

12) Level 30 PC

13) Assassin (meaning a PC whose primary occupation is terminating high-value targets, not necessarily limited only to PCs who are Assassins in the sense of having taken levels in that class)

14) Level 35 PC

15) Bounty Hunter (I already did this, but I hardly exhausted the possibilities for this type of character)

16) Level 40 PC

17) PC who is a member of an order or organization with a distinctive code or ideology (I thought this up with monks or paladins in mind, but other class possibilities exist)

 

...or make a module with

 

18) no haks or other CC

19) only one hak

20) a Time Limit - must complete the adventure before time runs out.

 

2nd List ("story"):

 

1) Weather or Not - Weather plays a pivotal role in the adventure

2) Disastrously Yours - Similar to the above, a disaster, natural or otherwise, plays a pivotal role in the adventure

3) A2B - A simple journey from point A to point B. What could go wrong? A lot, actually.

4) Trading Places - an adventure set in some alternate mirror universe, for example one where evil has triumphed and lives in the over-dark while the remnants of good huddle in the under-light.

5) Stop Frodo - Either the PC or an NPC has been charged with taking some artifact to the one place where it can be destroyed. Unfortuantely this quest was assigned by someone who was actually an agent of Evil, and this artifact is actually necessary to prevent said Evil from triumphing. The bearer of the artifact must somehow be stopped without being killed.

6) A Plague on You - The PC is tasked with the seemingly simple task of eliminating a plague of vermin, but in the process stumbles on a much greater plot.

7) Meddling Kids - The PC comes across a town where all sorts of strange things are happening, and a group of teenagers and a talking dog are the only people with a clue as to the cause (more generally, a Scooby Doo inspired adventure, even if one that does not correspond to it that exactly).

 Time Travel - Time travel is involved in the adventure in some way

9) Shakespearean - an adventure based on a Shakespeare play in some way

10) Inheritance - the PC has just inherited something that leads to adventure: could be an item, a tract of land, a title, a family curse, etc.

11) Save the Princess - A rescue mission. From Tristram to Dudley Doright, heroes for centuries have been tasked with getting the girl. (Note: if desired, object of rescue can be someone other than a literal princess, e.g. a prince).

12) Storm the Castle - Some villain's citadel needs to be assaulted

13) Fairy Godmother - the PC is assigned a dangerous but heroic task by an NPC who also provides some magical aid in its accomplishment.

14) Escape - the PC finds himself held captive, and perhaps stripped of his gear, by hostile forces, and must somehow escape.

15) Everybody Out - everyone's minions/henchmen/whatever have gone on strike, and it is not clear why. The local adventurers' guild/thieves' guild/whatever is offering a reward to whoever can resolve the matter.

16) Amnesia - the PC begins the adventure not knowing who he is or how he ended up in the circumstances in which he finds himself. Naturally answers to these questions, and the question of how he came to forget them, must be found.

17) Siege - an adventure set in a city under siege (or maybe in the besieger's camp).

18) Mysterious Artifact - An artifact has been discovered, and its purpose or some secret concerning it must be sought out.

19) Double Agent - the PC is tasked with infiltrating some nefarious group so as to undermine it from within. This could, but need not, involve a Shifter who can assume the form of kobolds, drow, dragons, or other monsters.

20) CCC Tie in - Pick one of the themes used for the monthly Custom Content Challenge, and make a module based on the same theme.

21) Blast from the Past - Pick a theme chosen for a previous cycle of the Adventure Building Challenge to be used again. For this cycle that would mean picking one of these themes from the March 2013 ABC:

 

     A) Treasure Map - the PC has come into possession of a map said to lead to treasure...

       Into the Abyss - the PC finds himself on a journey through fiend-infested planes.

     C) The Real Anti-Hero - the PC takes on the role of the goblins PCs routinely slaughter (or something along this general theme where the PC is the champion of the "Bad guys").

 

...or one of these from the April 2013 ABC:

 

     D) Pieces of Eight/All at Sea - a watery adventure set amidst an archipelago of small islands, possibly but not necessarily involving pirates.

     E) Perilous Lodgings - the PC takes refuge in an inn, house, etc. that proves to be much less safe than anticipated.

     F) Summoned - Inspired by the Summon Spell. Instead of a dire animal, elemental or planar beastie, some powerful magic wielder ends ups summoning the PC, intentionally or otherwise, to aid him.

 

The plan is to pick two themes from each list, which participants can mix and match as desired. For this cycle, I determined that #21 from List 2 ("Blast from the Past"), would automatically be included, so that anyone who was thinking about doing something based on one of those themes in the original ABC, but did not get a chance to complete it, would be given a second chance to do so. The other 3 themes I determined randomly with 3 d20 rolls (so those results were as much a surprise to me as they are to you). That gave us:

 

1) Module for a Warrior PC and 

19) Module using only one hak

 

from the first list and

 

6) A Plague on You

 

from the second list. (Plus Blast from the Past which gives a choice of 6 possible themes). Participants are expected to employ one of the four themes and are encouraged to combine as many as possible (e.g, make a module for Warriors, or a module based on the "Plague" theme, or a module for Warriors, based on the "Plague" theme, that uses only one hak, etc.).

 

No doubt both the lists and method of selection from them could use considerable refinement, but this should be good enough to get things started.

 

As for allowable CC, I intend to keep things simple by just using the original sponsors, with the addition that one is permitted to use a hak from any Custom Content Challenge Cycle, not just those listed on that page. As I said earlier, it might be good at some point to look into generating a more up-to-date list of sponsors, but I am not sure we can both do that and get this off the ground in a timely manner.

 

I think I will have participants make their own module entries, rather than there being a single consolidated one as the only opinions expressed one way or the other favored that. I still think there are some advantages to the "single entry" method, so perhaps that could be reconsidered for future challenges.

 

More info about this ABC cycle coming soon. Stay tuned.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MagicalMaster]

               

For clarification's sake, presumably "Only one hak" means "One or zero haks?"  I mention this as encouraging people to slap in a random hak simply to meet that requirement would seem a bit silly -- it would be meant as an upper bound, I think?