One conversation that has been rolling around the Tavern today is the massive number of settings, and how it is getting hard to keep up with reviewing them. I agree. So, how do we solve this? One soultion, proposed by Natural20, was to assign certian people (presumably veteran members and willing newcomers) to review certian settings. While interesting, this has the problem of turning it into work, and that would be bad.
So, I came across this possible solution: Every week, we have a setting of the week.
Now, hear me out. I know it sounds like it could become a popularity contest, or whathave you, but if we do it right, it wouldn't be.
Each week, every member that wants to have their setting be in the weekly draw submits it on this thread. This will account for inactive members or people who have multiple settings and only want to focus on one (you can only submit one setting a week, and the same setting cannot be in the draw until a month has passed since it last won.) Then, someone (I'll volunteer to do this) assigns ever setting in the draw that week a number, than uses the handy dice roller to roll a dX, X being the number of settings, and the number that comes up is that weeks featured setting.
On that week, people should review that setting, write stuff about that setting, propose ideas for that setting, etc. That doesn't mean that you ignore other settings, just that if you are strapped for time, it would be good to give that setting attention first.
I know this has a lot of potential problems, but I see alot of advantages to it as well. So, what do y'all think?
I think it's a pretty good idea, although I won't put my setting up for review yet. I think it might be best to let people who need help more than I do put it up first. I can wait, to be quite honest.
Glad you like, Crit. And you prove, in my mind, that this will work: the people here are mature enough to know when to let other settings get reviewed and when they can put theirs up.
Alright people, this is a sketchy outline of the plan, i've been talking to Xathan through other channels, and this is what we came up with.
The setting of the week is an open event, just put up your setting in this thread if you want to have it reviewed. If and when your setting is chosen, a group of sneaky volunteer reviewers known as the Sable Cabal will try their darndest to give you some useful feedback on your campaign setting. if anyone wants to sign up for this volunteer review group, send Xahan or I a PM, or post on this thread. Keep in mind that a Sable Cabal member should try their best to review the setting of the week at least, although extenuating circumstances are understood.
Does this sound good to everybody? I thought it sounded good... Please keep in mind that though all of this sounds official, I'm just makin it up as I go, so tell me what you think and if this can really work?
That sounds like a great idea. I was thinking we could use something like this. It's got my vote definitely.
Also, i'll volunteer for the Sable Cabal. This should be fun. :hooray:
Just a bit to add about the Sable Cabal, members are in no way limited to reviewing the Setting of the week, it is merely expected that they review it. any other reviewing or other help provided is allowed and most certainly encouraged!
Did that come out right?
I think it's a good idea, but I definitely think that any setting that's interested should have to submit their setting for review. Just for the simple fact that, quite frankly, I (and others in my same position) wouldn't want you to review my setting right now because it's extremely incomplete, and things are changing very often. Just a thought.
Edit: I know this was already mentioned, I just wanted to add my support and reasonings.
Well, I had assumed that was how it would work, and eventually I will write up some sort of code or rule or program or something for the Sable Cabal.
Whew! For some reason I thought you were going to shut down the idea, Ish, lol. Jittery old me... I'm glad you like it though...
I find that odd, since I've never shut down a thread (that I recall) ;)
....
....
Thread Closed!
To clariy, I was referring to the idea of the sable Cabal, and not the closing of the thread itself.
I support this idea.
I've been awfully busy lately, and my posts have been scarce (though I've been reading when I can.) Maybe something like a weekly feature would give me a little direction, get me actively reviewing again.
I'm looking forward to it.
I know it sounds dumb, but I've always wanted to have a nifty title. If you want one, sig the Sable Cabal with your title. Maybe even at the woTC boards if you're feeling ambitious.
Here's a somewhat related thought:
Since we've got so many settings in various stages of development, is there any way to designate the stage of development a world is in? Some way to seperate a just-kicking-ideas-around thread from a rough-draft thread from a nearly-done thread? That way, when a reviewer just has a few minutes to spare, he can stop by a just-kicking-ideas-around thread, but if he's got an hour or two to kill, he can look for one of the more in-depth, almost-done threads.
Why Sable? Why not just The Cabal? I like to join cults and secret societies that involve virgin sacrifice, donations in blood, and other cool stuff, but it's all about the name baby. I used to drive an old mercury sable and I hated it!
I like the setting of the week idea. Seems like a good way to get a bunch of feedback from the community, rather than a couple fans or specialists who check in regularly; little other outside feedback get's frustrating. I know that I've skipped or glossed over a few settings, and I've reserved most of my feedback to a small handful. I could focus on one exclusively for a week though.
We could even post the setting of the week on the news page. hint, hint, Ishy...
How do we propose entering the lottery? I suppose we need volunteer submissions, and a means of selecting a winner randomly. We also need a way for a setting that has already been selected to get moved to the back of the line, so that it can't win for more than one week in a row. How should we do that?
-Nasty-
@ nat20 - that'd be a cool add-on to work out once the system is up and running. did you have ideas of titles already? share them with the world!
meepo my friend, that is such a good idea. not quite sure how it could be implemented, but that has possibilities. i know my threads (and most other homebrews on the site) are at very different states and the feedback given should reflect this. I guess if we work out some semi-defined level, people could just stick them in their thread titles.
@Nasty: As for HOW it would work, that's easy. Let's say, for the week, Dystopia, Sulos, Thaedia, Godswalk, and Convergance are up for potentials. Then I'd make a table (I'm volunteering to run this)
1) Dystopia
2) Sulos
3) Thaedia
4) Godswalk
5) Convergance
and then do [dice]1d5[/dice]. The number the dice give me is what the setting of the week is.
Oh, and the reason I didn't want to call it just The Cabal is because that's an organization in MTG. :P
@Meepo: That is a good idea. We should make it into a separeate thread: I'd definitaly work on that. :)
@Everyone Else: Glad you all like. I'm hoping this works out the way I have it envisioned. We need to draw new members. I have some other concepts at work in my twisted little head, projects far more ambitious than this one. :P
I think this is an ABSOLUTELY capitol idea!!! Every week a campaign setting (ah, they are like-a my childrens, I love-a dem all) gets the spotlight.
People give their two cents on whats done so far, no matter the stage of development! I think the idea of a dedicated group of reviewers is nice, but it's very important to get many people to add their input; that's the primary advantage to having a website like this, is the variety of ideas and feedback you could get.
If I am needed, consider me a member of the Sable Cabal! Although... I'd like to know just what this "Sable" business is all about...
QuotePeople give their two cents on whats done so far, no matter the stage of development! I think the idea of a dedicated group of reviewers is nice, but it's very important to get many people to add their input; that's the primary advantage to having a website like this, is the variety of ideas and feedback you could get.
Quoted for emphasis.
As for why Sable, Sable is a word used in heraldry for black. And it sounds cool. We were thinking of calling it the Opal Council, but we were afraid the real Opal Council would have us killed in our sleep. I had just been reading something with the word Sable in it - can't remember what - and so I pitched the name Sable Cabal, and it stuck. :)
I fully support the idea. I won't be joining the cabal because my schedule is too irregular to promise to be online each week to review a setting, but if I have time to review, I'll review the featured setting, and of course Orden's Mysteries (found on the WotC-boards here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=524560) and in unpolished form in the Hosting area of this site here (http://www.thecbg.org/settings/12)) is in as one of the potential featured settings. In light of getting people such as me (non-cabal members) to also review the featured setting rather than just a random one as we do now it might be good if you could get it up on the front page...
As for the rating-setting-development-idea, I also like that. You should open a separate thread about it (if you haven't already, this is the first thread I'm looking at today).
Also, why is this in the Cogs?
;) Túrin
Glad you like, Turin.
As for why here:
Long answer: We dont' really have any place to put information like this. We should change the name of the Cogs to "Boards Issues" or at least the discriptive text to cover this kind of thread.
Short answer: I thought I clicked "The Dragon's Den", and Wasn't paying attention.
I'm late coming into this; I too suport this idea. It has the potential to not become work, and it won't be coming off as a popularity contest. And with our still reasonable numbers, settings have the chance to get multiple weeks over a certain amount of time, and thus ever growing amounts of feedback.
If anyone hasn't said it yet, I think that a setting that "wins" setting of the week shouldn't be eligable to be put back up for 3 weeks, just to give others a chance (in case the fortunes smile upon a particular poster). I also don't think posters should be able to submit multiple settings in the same week; I know people like Nasty are putting a lot of work into their settings, but some posters wouldn't consider that fair.
[ic=Read this before you post!]To clear it up and save people from repeating this, the idea to have a single user be limited to one setting a week, and a setting that has won the review shall be ineligible to enter for some reasonable amount of time.[/ic]
Just to save you the trouble, no offense intended.
Okay, so far, it seems that this is the plan:
Every author who wants to submit a campaign submits in a thread (probably a new thread every week, I'm not worrying too terribly much about too many threads at the moment). Then, somehow (I don't think we're clear on this one yet), we narrow the campaigns down to 5, and then roll a five-sider to determine which one is presented. On the news page, I will put up some info (all author's choice, most likely), and place a link to their thread, and anyone who chooses to do so will review it.
That sound like everything thus far?
As far as Epic Meepo's suggestion goes about rating the developmental stage of the campaign, I very much like the sounds of it, but does it really have anything to do with this Cabal idea? If not, let's start discussing it in another thread so we can get it implemented.
I think when Xathan was talking about rolling a d5 he meant this as an example in which only five people submitted their setting as candidate for featured setting. Suppose I were to add Orden's Mysteries, it would simply become a list of six and we would roll a d6.
If that wasn't what Xathan meant, I suggest this as an alternative to whatever it was he did mean :P
Quote from: TúrinI think when Xathan was talking about rolling a d5 he meant this as an example in which only five people submitted their setting as candidate for featured setting. Suppose I were to add Orden's Mysteries, it would simply become a list of six and we would roll a d6.
If that wasn't what Xathan meant, I suggest this as an alternative to whatever it was he did mean :P
Nah, that's what I meant, lol. you're right, adding Orden's mysteries would make it roll a d6. Adding Eda and Islindur would make it a d8, etc.
Okay, I thought you were suggesting we only choose from 5 each week, which I wasn't really sure how to implement that ;) Good to know that's not the plan.
Yeah, that was confusing. If we have 20+ settings submitted, I would suggest we break it into to groups, roll dice for both groups, and then roll 1d2 to see which group goes...though that won't be a problem for awhile.
Why take the trouble? Our dice thingy can handle a d34 or a d876 just fine, can't it?
true. Good point, no neeed. I'm going to start a thread for next week.