Where I see places like the Guild Companion is this: it gives potential designers the space to develop their writing skills, progressing towards more ambitious items. Then, when they're ready to progress towards the paying publications, these same articles can be used as the basis of their early portfolio. I am, though, seeing that from my experience as a published author and poet.
That's how I had seen it as well, and I am seeing it from the point of view of someone whose writing experience is virtually nil.
I understand your reluctance to write again, and I appreciate that for you and others that feedback is essential.
Yeah, that. The closest analogue I have is the entertainment industry as an actor and musician. In that sense, I regard Guild Companion as equivalent to "open auditions." But with any audition, the critique of your performance is the most important part, it's the foundation of your insight into what worked from the initial concept, what didn't work, and how to improve what didn't work until it
does.To be sure, part of my problem with GC Magazine recently is that between RMU and the HARP revision, much of the basis for ideas are in a state of flux themselves, so it's hard to escape the concern that whatever ideas you put forth may already be obsolete before they are ever published. In fairness, a lot of the problem for my part has been a simple lack of ideas themselves. I'm fairly good at conceptualizing a rationale for why the game mechanics work as they do, and reasonably good at coming up with a mechanic to fit my conceptualizing. But it seems to me that the conceptualizing is rather useless without game mechanics to tie it to, to "put meat on the bones" so to speak, and as noted above, tying the concept to mechanics that may no longer be valid by the time the piece goes to publication rather dampens one's enthusiasm at best.
I have written two pieces for GCM. The first was a concept for a robotic AI NPC for HARP SF, written before (possibly during) the decision was made that AIs (among other things) needed to be reserved for HSF Extreme. I am still not completely sure to what degree my methods agree or fail to agree with the AI creation system the game itself will eventually have, although Nicholas was as helpful there as it was possible for him to be.
The other piece was a method of having supplementary skill knowledge support the primary skill being considered as the basis for a given skill roll, without having to have a lot of information tracking or a bunch of extra rolls. It was intended for use with HARP, but in theory would work with any system that used skill resolution based on a d100 roll and diminishing returns for skill ranks. Of course
I liked the idea or I wouldn't have submitted it, but I got so little feedback that I honestly couldn't tell you if more than half a dozen people ever read it at all, much less whether they thought it might be useful. I'm glad I came up with the idea, as I will use it even if no one else does... but if I'm the only person who cares, I could have just as well left it in the form of hen-scratch on a note pad. I'm glad I wrote it, if for no other reason for the practice of putting my ideas into a coherent narrative... but whether it qualified as
an actually productive use of my time is still very much arguable.
Mentoring sounds to me like a great
idea, the trick is in making it work. My current experience is so scant that I don't consider myself qualified to judge whether your idea is feasible or not.
I'm unsure if anyone has gotten a gig from writing GC articles? beyond my knowledge.
I think I could credibly argue that I have, as I have gone from that to working on a section of an upcoming product for which I will presumably be paid. How much influence the one had on the other, I am unable to say with any certainty. And in all honesty, I would have no problem with doing more submissions for GC Magazine, knowing it would net me nothing except practice and exposure. Right now, I suspect I need both of those things at least as badly as I need the money. Nonetheless, the problems noted above still exist.