Reviews are held to a higher standard of approval than a contribution. Reviews must:

• be free of spelling and grammatical errors
• be easy to read and understand
• follow the format listed below

Failure to meet any of the above criteria will result in a rejection of the review.

Standard format for reviews is as follows:

The Title and Leadin for a Review are the hooks to get someone to read it so be descriptive but brief.

All Reviews begin with an Introduction that sets the frame of context for the Review.

Once the context of the review is set the next step is to break down the pros and cons of the Contribution and list them in their respective sections. Be as in depth as possible when writing these. Explanations, examples and proof are important for making each point.

Finally the Conclusion should sum up the overall impressions of a contribution.

Each Review will also be rated in a number of categories. Only the Rating categories that apply should be filled in. For example, Bardic Tales are not subject to Playability or Game Mechanics so no rating should be given to them.

Additionally each Rating category also has a Summary field where you should enter a short summary of the reasons for that score.

The following Rating categories will each be given a 1 - 10 score:

• Playability is a partially subjective grade. This category determines how useable the contribution is for everyone. A score of 10 would mean that both player and GM alike would find the contribution useful. A score of 5 or less generally indicates that the contribution has a specific targeted focus or that the material is only useable by few individuals. A score of 1 would be attributed to a contribution where the audience was extremely small.
  
  
• Originality tackles the innovative nature of the contribution. Is this something we've seen before? A score of 10 means that the product contains new material not seen before or a new take on an established theme. A score of 5 would mean that much of the material is drawn from other existing sources. A score of 1 means the contribution essentially reprints material from other sources and has no original content.
  
  
• Game Mechanics measures the quality of the implementation of game mechanics. Are the rules logical, easy to use, balanced? A score of 10 indicates strong, balanced, easy to understand game mechanics. A score of 5 would be given to a contribution with complex, unbalancing or confusing game mechanics. A score of 1 would only be given if a contribution was unusable because of overly complex, woefully unbalancing or undecipherable game mechanics.
  
  
• Style represents the intangible coolness factor of a contribution. Does this contribution speak to your inner geek? Does it just ooze awesomeness? Then it deserves a 10. This category is highly subjective and could vary widely between reviewers.