Quests Log

Filter: All Major Active Pending Completed Failed Abandoned
Expand all

Quest #1: The Mystery of the Bleeding Manuscript (Completed)

Description
Quest #1 involves solving The Mystery of the Bleeding Manuscript.

It is a self-paced quest, but should be completed before you submit the draft of your research essay.

Go the following link to begin solving the mystery:
http://writer.inklestudios.com/stories/h3d2
Quest #2: Role-Playing Guide Wiki Page (Completed)

Description
Quest #2 involves creating a wiki page on how to role-play your investigator role.

There are 4 steps involved:

Step 1: Perform secondary research on your role
Begin by completing some secondary research on your role on the internet and/or at the library.

You'll need to create an annotated bibliography for your secondary sources and submit it to me by 12:30 p.m. Jan. 17.

Step 2: Perform primary research on your role
You'll also need to perform some primary research via an interview. You should interview someone who either works in the profession related to your investigator role or who teaches in the discipline most closely related to it. You can find guidelines for conducting interviews on page 318 of The McGraw-Hill Handbook.

You'll need to submit a list of at least five preliminary interview questions to me by 12:30 p.m. Jan. 10 and the name and contact information for the person you plan to interview by 12:30 p.m. Jan. 13.

Your interview questions should be submitted via Google Drive with the filename "FirstnameLastnameQuestions" (for example, AmyPondQuestions). Make sure that you make me an editor and that you share the document with my JSU email address.

After conducting the interview, you should transcribe or summarize the interviewee's answers to your questions on the original Google document (make sure to add any additional questions that you ask during the interview).

Step 3: Write a report of your findings
After conducting your primary and secondary research, you should summarize your findings in an essay on how to role-play your investigator role. Your essay will need to include both in-text citations and a works cited list formatted according to MLA guidelines that includes both your primary and secondary sources.

You'll need to submit a rough draft of your essay to me by 12:30 p.m. Jan. 22 via Google Drive using the filename FirstnameLastnameResearch (for example, RoryWilliamsResearch). Make sure to make me an editor and share it to my JSU email address.

The final version of your essay will need to be published as a child wiki of the Game Role-Playing Guide wiki for your investigator role by 12:30 p.m. Jan. 24.

Step 4: Read and review the other guides to how to role-play your investigator role.
I will assign you three other pages on the wiki for how to role-play your role to read and evaluate. You should complete a Role-Playing Guide Peer Review form for each of the assigned pages.

Your reviews should be completed by 12:30 p.m. Jan. 27.
- Annotated Bibliography (Completed)
  Description
  An annotated bibliography is a bibliography that gives a summary of the research that has been done. In addition to bibliographic data, the bibliography includes an annotation, which contains a brief summary of content and a short analysis or evaluation of the source (“Annotated Bibliography,” Wikipedia).
  
  For each source that you think is reliable, relevant, and useful for your wiki page, you should complete the source worksheet.
  Once you have determined the sources that you will use in completing your wiki page, you should use the appropriate worksheets to compose an annotated bibliography.
  You can find guidelines for and an example of an annotated bibliography on pages 332-333 of your McGraw-Hill Handbook.
  The annotated bibliography should be submitted via Google Drive with the filename "FirstnameLastnameBib" (for example, RoseTylerBib).
  Format each page and bibliographic entry according to MLA guidelines, which can be located in your handbook.
  Alphabetize the entries by the first word in the bibliographic entry.
  The annotated bibliography should contain a minimum of five sources.
  Each annotation must be between 100-150 words.
  The same plagiarism guidelines apply to annotated bibliographies that apply to any other text. Any direct quotations must be enclosed in quotation marks and must include a parenthetical citation. Any paraphrasing of the author’s words must be indicated with a parenthetical citation. However, it is understood that the annotation is summarizing the source it is attached to, so you do not have to include a parenthetical citation for the annotation itself.
Quest #3: Case #1 (Completed)

Description
To get started on your first case, you will need to carefully read the following cases:
• "The Cask of Amontillado" (pg. 291-295)
• "A Rose for Emily" (323-327)
• "A Good Man Is Hard to Find" (pg. 493-501)
• "The Lottery" (pg. 539-543)

After consulting with your home and expert guilds, you will select one of the cases to investigate. You will analyze your selected case and present your analysis in a journal entry.

We will follow the schedule below:

Jan. 27
Home guild review and discussion of cases

Jan. 29
Expert guild consultations and home guild follow-up discussions

Jan. 31 (no class)
Rough draft of journal entry due by 12:30 p.m.

Feb. 3
Writing workshop for journal entry #1 (bring revised drafts to class)

Feb. 5 (no class)
Journal entry #1 due by 12:30 p.m.
Journal entry #1 comments due by 1:30 p.m.

Feb. 7 (no class)
Journal entry #1 responses due by 12:30 p.m.
Journal entry #1 reflection due by 1:30 p.m.
- Home Guild Discussions (Completed)
  Description
  At the start of the quest, you will meet with your Home Guild to review and discuss the assigned cases. You should use this time to address the following:
  
  • Which cases would be most applicable to your investigator role
  • What evidence can be initially gathered in the case(s)
  • What questions need to be answered during the investigation
  • Any secondary research that might need to be done to answer those questions and/or to better understand the case
  • What questions need to be asked of the other investigators during the Expert Guild consultations
  • Ideas for how to present the results of an investigation in writing
  
  At the start of this first quest meeting, members of the guild should select which Home Guild role they will take on during the quest. The roles are as follows:
  Scribe: the Scribe is responsible for taking detailed notes during each Home Guild quest meeting. These notes should be transcribed into a Google Document and shared with the rest of the guild and me by the end of the day of the meeting.
  Scholar: the Scholar is responsible for any secondary research that needs to be completed for any of the assigned cases. The research should be completed and summarized in a Google Document and shared with the rest of the guild and me before the next guild meeting.
  Curator: the Curator is responsible for keeping track of all evidence gathered in each case and its location. This information should be transcribed into a Google Document and shared with the rest of the guild and me by the end of the day of the meeting.
  Treasurer: the Treasurer is responsible for allocating payments to the guild members for their work during the quest. These payments should be based on the quality of contributions made to meetings and the effort put into fulfilling Home Guild roles during the quest.
  Clerk (optional): the Clerk is responsible for making note of questions that the Guild members need to ask during consultations with their Expert Guilds. These questions need to be transcribed into a Google Document and shared with the rest of the Guild and me by the end of the day of the meeting. If there are not enough guild members to have a Clerk, then this job should be allocated to the Scholar.
  Note: Members should rotate these roles so that no one has the same role for two consecutive quests.
  
  After consultations with your Expert Guild, you will have some time for a follow-up meeting with your Home Guild. This time should be focused on the following:
  
  • Reviewing information gathered during the Expert Guild consultations; this information should be noted by the Clerk (or, in the absence of a Clerk, the Scholar)
  • Reviewing any secondary research conducted by the Scholar
  • Reviewing any additional evidence that members have gathered for cases since the first meeting; this evidence should be noted by the Curator
  • Addressing any unanswered questions about the case(s) and/or adding new questions as necessary
  • Elaborating on ideas for how to present the results of an investigation of the case(s)
  
  The appropriate guild member should add any new ideas/information discussed during the follow-up meeting to the Google Documents for the first meeting by the end of day of the follow-up meeting.
- Expert Guild Consultations (Abandoned)
  
  Description
  After an initial meeting with your Home Guild, you will have some time to consult with your Expert Guild on the assigned case(s). You should use this time to address any questions about your selected case(s) on which you feel the other investigators could offer some insights or information that would help with your own investigation(s).
  
  If your Home Guild developed a list of questions for the Expert Guilds, you should carry that with you to the consultation. You should also take detailed notes when the guild is discussing those cases selected by your Home Guild, so that you can share the other investigators’ ideas with them.
  
  In turn, you should offer your insights into questions and ideas brought up by other members of the Expert Guild.
  
  If you choose, you may pay members of your Expert Guild a small consulting fee for their help during the meeting. Fees should only be paid to those members who offer ideas and/or information that genuinely help you to better understand and/or analyze the case(s). You may pay each member no more than $15 for their help during the meeting.
- Case Journal Entry #1 (Completed)
  Description
  You should submit a rough draft of Journal Entry #1 by 12:30 p.m. Jan. 31 via Google Drive with the filename "FirstnameLastnameJournal1" (for example, JohnSmithJournal1).
  
  I will provide feedback on your draft. This feedback should be used when revising and editing your entry for publication.
  
  On Feb. 3 we will have an in-class writing workshop for Journal Entry #1. If you wish to participate, you should bring the following to class with you that day:
  A clean revised and edited copy of your journal entry for peer review; this copy should not have your name on it
  A copy of your original draft with a copy of the revised/edited version stapled to the top with all changes highlighted; this copy should have your name on it and will be submitted to me. Major revisions should include marginal notes explaining the revision (did you add, re-word, or re-organize content?); anything deleted from the original draft should be highlighted on the original with “deleted” written above it.
  
  The final version of your analysis should be published as a campaign journal entry by 12:30 p.m. Feb. 5. To do this, follow these instructions:
  
  Go to the campaign homepage on Epic Words.
  Select the Journal tab.
  Click the Record Your Glory button.
  Select your character from the list.
  Give your journal entry a title in the Subject box.
  Type your entry.
  Add any relevant tags (case title and author).
  Click “Post.”
- Journal Comments & Responses (Completed)
  
  Description
  You will need to select at least three of the other players’ journal entries to read and comment on.
  
  Your comments should be made in character and should remain authentic to your character’s viewpoint. For example, if you are a detective reading a journal entry posted by a psychologist, your comment should address those aspects of the journal entry and the case that a detective would be most interested in and expert at.
  
  Just as your journal entry should communicate your character’s analysis and understanding of a case, your comments on the other players’ journal entries should seek to do the same.
  
  The goal of your comment is to address the author’s analysis of and hypothesis regarding the case. Thus, your comment may do any of the following:
  
  • Agree with the author’s analysis of and hypothesis regarding the case, while adding your own insights that help to support the author’s claims.
  • Disagree with the author’s analysis of and hypothesis regarding the case, supporting your argument with your own analysis and hypothesis.
  • Both agree and disagree with the author’s analysis of and/or hypothesis regarding the case. Perhaps they left out a vital piece of evidence or their analysis is spot on but their hypothesis does not fit the facts; discuss the points upon which you concur and those that you think the author should reconsider.
  
  Remember to point out your character’s viewpoint and why/how it changes how the case is analyzed and the kinds of evidence selected for analysis.
  
  Your comments are due no later than 1:30 p.m. Feb. 5.
  
  In addition to commenting on other players’ journal entries, you should monitor your own entry for comments and respond to them. Your responses should demonstrate that you have carefully read and considered the commenters’ ideas and arguments.
  
  Your responses should be posted in character and should be posted no later than 12:30 p.m. Feb. 7.
- Journal Reflection (Completed)
  Description
  Once you have received my assessment of your journal entry and have read through any comments made on it by other players, you should write a reflection addressing the entry’s strengths and weaknesses.
  
  Your reflection should answer, in paragraph form, the following questions:
  What do you think is the most effective aspect of the entry?
  What do you think is the least effective aspect of the entry?
  What challenged you the most when it came to composing this entry and how did you overcome this challenge?
  What goals would you like to set for your next journal entry?
  Do you have any questions for me?
  
  Your reflection should be submitted via Google Drive using the filename “FirstnameLastnameReflection1” (for example, JohnSmithReflection1). Make sure to make me an editor and share it with my JSU email address.
  
  Your reflection should be shared with me no later than 1:30 p.m. Feb. 7.
Quest #4: Case #2 (Completed)

Description
To get started on your next case, you will need to carefully read the following cases:
• "The Yellow Wallpaper" (pg. 364-371)
• "Young Goodman Brown" (pg. 449-455)
• "Greasy Lake" (pg. 189-194)
• "What Are You Going, Where Have You Been?" (pg. 205-213)

After consulting with your home and expert guilds, you will select one of the cases to investigate. You will analyze your selected case and present your analysis in a journal entry.

We will follow the schedule below:

Feb. 10
Home guild review and discussion of cases

Feb. 12
Expert guild consultations and home guild follow-up discussions

Feb. 14 (no class)
Rough draft of journal entry #2 due by 12:30 p.m.

Feb. 17
Writing workshop for journal entry #2 (bring revised drafts to class)

Feb. 19 (no class)
Journal entry #2 due by 12:30 p.m.
Journal entry #2 comments due by 1:30 p.m.

Feb. 21 (no class)
Journal entry #2 responses due by 12:30 p.m.
Journal entry #2 reflection due by 1:30 p.m.
- Home Guild Discussions (Completed)
  
  Description
  At the start of the quest, you will meet with your Home Guild to review and discuss the assigned cases. You should use this time to address the following:
  
  • Which cases would be most applicable to your investigator role
  • What evidence can be initially gathered in the case(s)
  • What questions need to be answered during the investigation
  • Any secondary research that might need to be done to answer those questions and/or to better understand the case
  • What questions need to be asked of the other investigators during the Expert Guild consultations
  • Ideas for how to present the results of an investigation in writing
  
  At the start of this first quest meeting, members of the guild should select which Home Guild role they will take on during the quest. The roles are as follows:
  Scribe: the Scribe is responsible for taking detailed notes during each Home Guild quest meeting. These notes should be transcribed into a Google Document and shared with the rest of the guild and me by the end of the day of the meeting.
  Scholar: the Scholar is responsible for any secondary research that needs to be completed for any of the assigned cases. The research should be completed and summarized in a Google Document and shared with the rest of the guild and me before the next guild meeting.
  Curator: the Curator is responsible for keeping track of all evidence gathered in each case and its location. This information should be transcribed into a Google Document and shared with the rest of the guild and me by the end of the day of the meeting.
  Treasurer: the Treasurer is responsible for allocating payments to the guild members for their work during the quest. These payments should be based on the quality of contributions made to meetings and the effort put into fulfilling Home Guild roles during the quest.
  Clerk (optional): the Clerk is responsible for making note of questions that the Guild members need to ask during consultations with their Expert Guilds. These questions need to be transcribed into a Google Document and shared with the rest of the Guild and me by the end of the day of the meeting. If there are not enough guild members to have a Clerk, then this job should be allocated to the Scholar.
  
  Note: Members should rotate these roles so that no one has the same role for two consecutive quests.
  
  After consultations with your Expert Guild, you will have some time for a follow-up meeting with your Home Guild. This time should be focused on the following:
  
  • Reviewing information gathered during the Expert Guild consultations; this information should be noted by the Clerk (or, in the absence of a Clerk, the Scholar)
  • Reviewing any secondary research conducted by the Scholar
  • Reviewing any additional evidence that members have gathered for cases since the first meeting; this evidence should be noted by the Curator
  • Addressing any unanswered questions about the case(s) and/or adding new questions as necessary
  • Elaborating on ideas for how to present the results of an investigation of the case(s)
  
  The appropriate guild member should add any new ideas/information discussed during the follow-up meeting to the Google Documents for the first meeting by the end of day of the follow-up meeting.
- Expert Guild Consultations (Completed)
  
  Description
  After an initial meeting with your Home Guild, you will have some time to consult with your Expert Guild on the assigned case(s). You should use this time to address any questions about your selected case(s) on which you feel the other investigators could offer some insights or information that would help with your own investigation(s).
  
  If your Home Guild developed a list of questions for the Expert Guilds, you should carry that with you to the consultation. You should also take detailed notes when the guild is discussing those cases selected by your Home Guild, so that you can share the other investigators’ ideas with them.
  
  In turn, you should offer your insights into questions and ideas brought up by other members of the Expert Guild.
  
  If you choose, you may pay members of your Expert Guild a small consulting fee for their help during the meeting. Fees should only be paid to those members who offer ideas and/or information that genuinely help you to better understand and/or analyze the case(s). You may pay each member no more than $15 for their help during the meeting.
- Case Journal Entry #2 (Completed)
  Description
  You should submit a rough draft of Journal Entry #2 by 12:30 p.m. Feb. 14 via Google Drive with the filename "FirstnameLastnameJournal2" (for example, JohnSmithJournal2).
  
  I will provide feedback on your draft. This feedback should be used when revising and editing your entry for publication.
  
  On Feb. 17 we will have an in-class writing workshop for Journal Entry #2. If you wish to participate, you should bring the following to class with you that day:
  
  A clean revised and edited copy of your journal entry for peer review; this copy should not have your name on it.
  A copy of your original draft with a copy of the revised/edited version stapled to the top with all changes highlighted; this copy should have your name on it and will be submitted to me. Major revisions should include marginal notes explaining the revision (did you add, re-word, or re-organize content?); anything deleted from the original draft should be highlighted on the original with “deleted” written above it.
  
  The final version of your analysis should be published as a campaign journal entry by 12:30 p.m. Feb. 19. To do this, follow these instructions:
  
  Go to the campaign homepage on Epic Words.
  Select the Journal tab.
  Click the Record Your Glory button.
  Select your character from the list.
  Give your journal entry a title in the Subject box.
  Type your entry.
  Add any relevant tags (case title and author).
  Click "Post."
- Journal Comments & Responses (Completed)
  Description
  You will need to select at least three of the other players’ journal entries to read and comment on.
  
  Your comments should be made in character and should remain authentic to your character’s viewpoint. For example, if you are a detective reading a journal entry posted by a psychologist, your comment should address those aspects of the journal entry and the case that a detective would be most interested in and expert at.
  
  Just as your journal entry should communicate your character’s analysis and understanding of a case, your comments on the other players’ journal entries should seek to do the same.
  
  The goal of your comment is to address the author’s analysis of and hypothesis regarding the case. Thus, your comment may do any of the following:
  Agree with the author’s analysis of and hypothesis regarding the case, while adding your own insights that help to support the author’s claims.
  Disagree with the author’s analysis of and hypothesis regarding the case, supporting your argument with your own analysis and hypothesis.
  Both agree and disagree with the author’s analysis of and/or hypothesis regarding the case. Perhaps they left out a vital piece of evidence or their analysis is spot on but their hypothesis does not fit the facts; discuss the points upon which you concur and those that you think the author should reconsider.
  
  Remember to point out your character’s viewpoint and why/how it changes how the case is analyzed and the kinds of evidence selected for analysis.
  
  Your comments are due no later than 1:30 p.m. Feb. 19.
  
  In addition to commenting on other players’ journal entries, you should monitor your own entry for comments and respond to them. Your responses should demonstrate that you have carefully read and considered the commenters’ ideas and arguments.
  
  Your responses should be posted in character and should be posted no later than 12:30 p.m. Feb. 21.
- Journal Reflection (Completed)
  
  Description
  Once you have received my assessment of your journal entry and have read through any comments made on it by other players, you should write a reflection addressing the entry’s strengths and weaknesses.
  
  Your reflection should answer, in paragraph form, the following questions:
  • What do you think is the most effective aspect of the entry?
  • What do you think is the least effective aspect of the entry?
  • What challenged you the most when it came to composing this entry and how did you overcome this challenge?
  • What goals would you like to set for your next journal entry?
  • Do you have any questions for me?
  
  Your reflection should be submitted via Google Drive using the filename “FirstnameLastnameReflection2” (for example, JohnSmithReflection2). Make sure to make me an editor and share it with my JSU email address.
  
  Your reflection should be shared with me no later than 1:30 p.m. Feb. 21.
Quest #5: Case #3 (Completed)

Description
To get started on your next case, you will need to carefully read the following cases:
• Trifles (pg. 1005-1013)
• The Zoo Story (pg. 1027-1041)

After consulting with your home and expert guilds, you will select one of the cases to investigate. You will analyze your selected case and present your analysis in a journal entry.

We will follow the schedule below:

Feb. 24
Home guild review and discussion of cases

Feb. 26
Expert guild consultations and home guild follow-up discussions

Feb. 28 (no class)
Rough draft of journal entry #3 due by 12:30 p.m.

Mar. 3
Writing workshop for journal entry #3 (bring revised drafts to class)

Mar. 5 (no class)
Journal entry #3 due by 12:30 p.m.
Journal entry #3 comments due by 1:30 p.m.

Mar. 7 (no class)
Journal entry #3 responses due by 12:30 p.m.
Journal entry #3 reflection due by 1:30 p.m.
- Home Guild Discussions (Completed)
  
  Description
  At the start of the quest, you will meet with your Home Guild to review and discuss the assigned cases. You should use this time to address the following:
  
  • Which cases would be most applicable to your investigator role
  • What evidence can be initially gathered in the case(s)
  • What questions need to be answered during the investigation
  • Any secondary research that might need to be done to answer those questions and/or to better understand the case
  • What questions need to be asked of the other investigators during the Expert Guild consultations
  • Ideas for how to present the results of an investigation in writing
  
  At the start of this first quest meeting, members of the guild should select which Home Guild role they will take on during the quest. The roles are as follows:
  Scribe: the Scribe is responsible for taking detailed notes during each Home Guild quest meeting. These notes should be transcribed into a Google Document and shared with the rest of the guild and me by the end of the day of the meeting.
  Scholar: the Scholar is responsible for any secondary research that needs to be completed for any of the assigned cases. The research should be completed and summarized in a Google Document and shared with the rest of the guild and me before the next guild meeting.
  Curator: the Curator is responsible for keeping track of all evidence gathered in each case and its location. This information should be transcribed into a Google Document and shared with the rest of the guild and me by the end of the day of the meeting.
  Treasurer: the Treasurer is responsible for allocating payments to the guild members for their work during the quest. These payments should be based on the quality of contributions made to meetings and the effort put into fulfilling Home Guild roles during the quest.
  Clerk (optional): the Clerk is responsible for making note of questions that the Guild members need to ask during consultations with their Expert Guilds. These questions need to be transcribed into a Google Document and shared with the rest of the Guild and me by the end of the day of the meeting. If there are not enough guild members to have a Clerk, then this job should be allocated to the Scholar.
  
  Note: Members should rotate these roles so that no one has the same role for two consecutive quests.
  
  After consultations with your Expert Guild, you will have some time for a follow-up meeting with your Home Guild. This time should be focused on the following:
  
  • Reviewing information gathered during the Expert Guild consultations; this information should be noted by the Clerk (or, in the absence of a Clerk, the Scholar)
  • Reviewing any secondary research conducted by the Scholar
  • Reviewing any additional evidence that members have gathered for cases since the first meeting; this evidence should be noted by the Curator
  • Addressing any unanswered questions about the case(s) and/or adding new questions as necessary
  • Elaborating on ideas for how to present the results of an investigation of the case(s)
  
  The appropriate guild member should add any new ideas/information discussed during the follow-up meeting to the Google Documents for the first meeting by the end of day of the follow-up meeting.
- Expert Guild Consultations (Completed)
  
  Description
  After an initial meeting with your Home Guild, you will have some time to consult with your Expert Guild on the assigned case(s). You should use this time to address any questions about your selected case(s) on which you feel the other investigators could offer some insights or information that would help with your own investigation(s).
  
  If your Home Guild developed a list of questions for the Expert Guilds, you should carry that with you to the consultation. You should also take detailed notes when the guild is discussing those cases selected by your Home Guild, so that you can share the other investigators’ ideas with them.
  
  In turn, you should offer your insights into questions and ideas brought up by other members of the Expert Guild.
  
  If you choose, you may pay members of your Expert Guild a small consulting fee for their help during the meeting. Fees should only be paid to those members who offer ideas and/or information that genuinely help you to better understand and/or analyze the case(s). You may pay each member no more than $15 for their help during the meeting.
- Case Journal Entry #3 (Completed)
  Description
  You should submit a rough draft of Journal Entry #3 by 12:30 p.m. Feb. 28 via Google Drive with the filename "FirstnameLastnameJournal3" (for example, JohnSmithJournal3).
  
  I will provide feedback on your draft. This feedback should be used when revising and editing your entry for publication.
  
  On Mar. 3 we will have an in-class writing workshop for Journal Entry #3. If you wish to participate, you should bring the following to class with you that day:
  
  A clean revised and edited copy of your journal entry for peer review; this copy should not have your name on it.
  A copy of your original draft with a copy of the revised/edited version stapled to the top with all changes highlighted; this copy should have your name on it and will be submitted to me. Major revisions should include marginal notes explaining the revision (did you add, re-word, or re-organize content?); anything deleted from the original draft should be highlighted on the original with “deleted” written above it.
  
  The final version of your analysis should be published as a campaign journal entry by 12:30 p.m. Mar. 5. To do this, follow these instructions:
  
  Go to the campaign homepage on Epic Words.
  Select the Journal tab.
  Click the Record Your Glory button.
  Select your character from the list.
  Give your journal entry a title in the Subject box.
  Type your entry.
  Add any relevant tags (case title and author).
  Click "Post."
- Journal Comments & Responses (Completed)
  Description
  You will need to select at least three of the other players’ journal entries to read and comment on.
  
  Your comments should be made in character and should remain authentic to your character’s viewpoint. For example, if you are a detective reading a journal entry posted by a psychologist, your comment should address those aspects of the journal entry and the case that a detective would be most interested in and expert at.
  
  Just as your journal entry should communicate your character’s analysis and understanding of a case, your comments on the other players’ journal entries should seek to do the same.
  
  The goal of your comment is to address the author’s analysis of and hypothesis regarding the case. Thus, your comment may do any of the following:
  Agree with the author’s analysis of and hypothesis regarding the case, while adding your own insights that help to support the author’s claims.
  Disagree with the author’s analysis of and hypothesis regarding the case, supporting your argument with your own analysis and hypothesis.
  Both agree and disagree with the author’s analysis of and/or hypothesis regarding the case. Perhaps they left out a vital piece of evidence or their analysis is spot on but their hypothesis does not fit the facts; discuss the points upon which you concur and those that you think the author should reconsider.
  
  Remember to point out your character’s viewpoint and why/how it changes how the case is analyzed and the kinds of evidence selected for analysis.
  
  Your comments are due no later than 1:30 p.m. Mar. 5.
  
  In addition to commenting on other players’ journal entries, you should monitor your own entry for comments and respond to them. Your responses should demonstrate that you have carefully read and considered the commenters’ ideas and arguments.
  
  Your responses should be posted in character and should be posted no later than 12:30 p.m. Mar. 7.
- Journal Reflection (Completed)
  
  Description
  Once you have received my assessment of your journal entry and have read through any comments made on it by other players, you should write a reflection addressing the entry’s strengths and weaknesses.
  
  Your reflection should answer, in paragraph form, the following questions:
  
  • What do you think is the most effective aspect of the entry?
  • What do you think is the least effective aspect of the entry?
  • What challenged you the most when it came to composing this entry and how did you overcome this challenge?
  • What goals would you like to set for your next journal entry?
  • Do you have any questions for me?
  
  Your reflection should be submitted via Google Drive using the filename “FirstnameLastnameReflection3” (for example, JohnSmithReflection3). Make sure to make me an editor and share it with my JSU email address.
  
  Your reflection should be shared with me no later than 1:30 p.m. Mar. 7.
Quest #6: Case #4 (Active)

Assigned to: Lucie Kingsleigh Zelda Shields Aliza Roe Clark Kent Kora Thomas L Lawliet Landeezmo Perseus Moon Boston George Masako Ishida Tyler Alec Beckham Edward Dent Ashly B Edwards Yoshiko Ishida Sampson Lucus Aang Willow Adler Elliot Brown Calvin Richmond Rich Porter
Description
To get started on your next case, you will need to carefully read the following case:
• Hamlet (pg. 1112-1193)

You may find watching the film to be helpful in helping you understand the play. I recommend watching it with the closed captioning turned on. You can watch it using your JSU ID number via the library's Films on Demand resource.

We will follow the schedule below:

Mar. 10
Lecture on Acts I-III
Home guild discussion of case

Mar. 12
Lecture on Acts IV-V
Home guild discussion of case

Mar. 14
Finish discussion of Hamlet
Home Guild meeting

Mar. 17
Expert guild consultation and home guild follow-up discussions

Mar. 19
Rough draft of journal entry #4 due by 12:30 p.m.
Writing workshop for journal entry #4 (bring draft to class)

Mar. 21
Boss Level Orientation
Journal entry #4 due by 12:30 p.m.
Journal entry #4 comments due by 1:30 p.m.
Journal entry #4 responses due by midnight
Journal entry #4 reflection due by midnight
- Home Guild Discussions (Completed)
  
  Description
  At the start of the quest, you will meet with your Home Guild to review and discuss the assigned cases. You should use this time to address the following:
  
  • Which cases would be most applicable to your investigator role
  • What evidence can be initially gathered in the case(s)
  • What questions need to be answered during the investigation
  • Any secondary research that might need to be done to answer those questions and/or to better understand the case
  • What questions need to be asked of the other investigators during the Expert Guild consultations
  • Ideas for how to present the results of an investigation in writing
  
  At the start of this first quest meeting, members of the guild should select which Home Guild role they will take on during the quest. The roles are as follows:
  Scribe: the Scribe is responsible for taking detailed notes during each Home Guild quest meeting. These notes should be transcribed into a Google Document and shared with the rest of the guild and me by the end of the day of the meeting.
  Scholar: the Scholar is responsible for any secondary research that needs to be completed for any of the assigned cases. The research should be completed and summarized in a Google Document and shared with the rest of the guild and me before the next guild meeting.
  Curator: the Curator is responsible for keeping track of all evidence gathered in each case and its location. This information should be transcribed into a Google Document and shared with the rest of the guild and me by the end of the day of the meeting.
  Treasurer: the Treasurer is responsible for allocating payments to the guild members for their work during the quest. These payments should be based on the quality of contributions made to meetings and the effort put into fulfilling Home Guild roles during the quest.
  Clerk (optional): the Clerk is responsible for making note of questions that the Guild members need to ask during consultations with their Expert Guilds. These questions need to be transcribed into a Google Document and shared with the rest of the Guild and me by the end of the day of the meeting. If there are not enough guild members to have a Clerk, then this job should be allocated to the Scholar.
  
  Note: Members should rotate these roles so that no one has the same role for two consecutive quests.
  
  After consultations with your Expert Guild, you will have some time for a follow-up meeting with your Home Guild. This time should be focused on the following:
  
  • Reviewing information gathered during the Expert Guild consultations; this information should be noted by the Clerk (or, in the absence of a Clerk, the Scholar)
  • Reviewing any secondary research conducted by the Scholar
  • Reviewing any additional evidence that members have gathered for cases since the first meeting; this evidence should be noted by the Curator
  • Addressing any unanswered questions about the case(s) and/or adding new questions as necessary
  • Elaborating on ideas for how to present the results of an investigation of the case(s)
  
  The appropriate guild member should add any new ideas/information discussed during the follow-up meeting to the Google Documents for the first meeting by the end of day of the follow-up meeting.
- Expert Guild Consultations (Completed)
  
  Description
  After an initial meeting with your Home Guild, you will have some time to consult with your Expert Guild on the assigned case(s). You should use this time to address any questions about your selected case(s) on which you feel the other investigators could offer some insights or information that would help with your own investigation(s).
  
  If your Home Guild developed a list of questions for the Expert Guilds, you should carry that with you to the consultation. You should also take detailed notes when the guild is discussing those cases selected by your Home Guild, so that you can share the other investigators’ ideas with them.
  
  In turn, you should offer your insights into questions and ideas brought up by other members of the Expert Guild.
  
  If you choose, you may pay members of your Expert Guild a small consulting fee for their help during the meeting. Fees should only be paid to those members who offer ideas and/or information that genuinely help you to better understand and/or analyze the case(s). You may pay each member no more than $15 for their help during the meeting.
- Case Journal Entry #4 (Completed)
  Assigned to: Lucie Kingsleigh Zelda Shields Aliza Roe Clark Kent Kora Thomas L Lawliet Landeezmo Perseus Moon Boston George Masako Ishida Tyler Alec Beckham Edward Dent Ashly B Edwards Yoshiko Ishida Sampson Lucus Aang Willow Adler Elliot Brown Calvin Richmond Rich Porter
  Description
  You should submit a rough draft of Journal Entry #4 by 12:30 p.m. Mar. 19 via Google Drive with the filename "FirstnameLastnameJournal4" (for example, JohnSmithJournal4).
  
  I will provide feedback on your draft. This feedback should be used when revising and editing your entry for publication.
  
  On Mar. 19 we will also have an in-class writing workshop for Journal Entry #4. If you wish to participate, you should bring the following to class with you that day:
  A clean draft of your journal entry for peer review; this copy should not have your name on it.
  
  The final version of your analysis should be published as a campaign journal entry by 12:30 p.m. Mar. 21.
- Journal Comments & Responses (Completed)
  
  Description
  You will need to select at least three of the other players’ journal entries to read and comment on.
  
  Your comments should be made in character and should remain authentic to your character’s viewpoint. For example, if you are a detective reading a journal entry posted by a psychologist, your comment should address those aspects of the journal entry and the case that a detective would be most interested in and expert at.
  
  Just as your journal entry should communicate your character’s analysis and understanding of a case, your comments on the other players’ journal entries should seek to do the same.
  
  The goal of your comment is to address the author’s analysis of and hypothesis regarding the case. Thus, your comment may do any of the following:
  
  • Agree with the author’s analysis of and hypothesis regarding the case, while adding your own insights that help to support the author’s claims.
  • Disagree with the author’s analysis of and hypothesis regarding the case, supporting your argument with your own analysis and hypothesis.
  • Both agree and disagree with the author’s analysis of and/or hypothesis regarding the case. Perhaps they left out a vital piece of evidence or their analysis is spot on but their hypothesis does not fit the facts; discuss the points upon which you concur and those that you think the author should reconsider.
  
  Remember to point out your character’s viewpoint and why/how it changes how the case is analyzed and the kinds of evidence selected for analysis.
  
  Your comments are due no later than 1:30 p.m. Mar. 21.
  
  In addition to commenting on other players’ journal entries, you should monitor your own entry for comments and respond to them. Your responses should demonstrate that you have carefully read and considered the commenters’ ideas and arguments.
  
  Your responses should be posted in character and should be posted no later than midnight Mar. 30.
- Journal Reflection (Completed)
  
  Description
  Once you have received my assessment of your journal entry and have read through any comments made on it by other players, you should write a reflection addressing the entry’s strengths and weaknesses.
  
  Your reflection should answer, in paragraph form, the following questions:
  
  • What do you think is the most effective aspect of the entry?
  • What do you think is the least effective aspect of the entry?
  • What challenged you the most when it came to composing this entry and how did you overcome this challenge?
  • What goals would you like to set for your next journal entry?
  • Do you have any questions for me?
  
  Your reflection should be submitted via Google Drive using the filename “FirstnameLastnameReflection4” (for example, JohnSmithReflection4). Make sure to make me an editor and share it with my JSU email address.
  
  Your reflection should be shared with me no later than midnight Mar. 30.
Boss Level (Active)

Reward: XP, Cash, & Skills

Completion Conditions: Finished Text Adventure Game
Assigned to: Lucie Kingsleigh Zelda Shields Aliza Roe Clark Kent Kora Thomas L Lawliet Perseus Moon Masako Ishida Tyler Alec Beckham Edward Dent Ashly B Edwards Yoshiko Ishida Sampson Lucus Aang Willow Adler Elliot Brown Calvin Richmond Rich Porter
Description
For the boss level of Murderers and Mad(wo)men, you will work with a guild of your choosing to plan, design, and write a role-playing text adventure game based on one of the cases that we have investigated during the campaign.

We will follow the schedule below:

Mar. 31
Discussion of text adventure games
Text Adventure Game Review due by 12:30 p.m.
Crafting Guild member selections due by 12:30 p.m.

Apr. 2
Crafting Guild assignment
Game brainstorming and outlining session

Apr. 4
Inklewriter tutorial
Begin drafting game

Apr. 7
Game play and revision
Continue drafting game
1st iteration of game due by midnight

Apr. 9
Review and discuss Iteration #1 feedback
Game revision
Continue drafting game
Iteration #1 Game Iteration Feedback due by 12:30 p.m.

Apr. 11
Continue drafting game

Apr. 14
Game play & revision
Continue drafting game
2nd iteration of game due by midnight

Apr. 16
Review and discuss Iteration #2 feedback
Game revision
Continue drafting game
Game Iteration #2 Peer Feedback due by 12:30 p.m.

Apr. 18
Game completion

Apr. 25
Peer Game Review due by 8:00 a.m.

You will work in a Crafting Guild to create your game. You will select those peers whom you wish to have in your Crafting Guild. Email a list of 6 peers you would most like to work with in order of preference (the first person listed is the one you would most like to work with, etc.) no later than 12:30 p.m. Mar. 31. I will try to assign you to a guild that has as many peers on your list as possible.

In addition to co-writing the game, each member of the guild will be responsible for fulfilling one of the following roles during the boss level:

• Technician: the Technician is responsible for learning the ins and outs of Inklewriter. They will be in charge of addressing any technical issues that arise and de-bugging the game. The Technician should be a guild member who is good with computers and is a good problem-solver.
• Grammarian: the Grammarian is responsible for thoroughly and carefully proofreading the game for errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, and capitalization. The Grammarian should be a guild member who is knowledgeable about correct grammar and mechanics, is a good speller, is detail oriented, and who knows where to find help with fixing writing errors.
• Cartographer: the Cartographer is responsible for drawing up and maintaining a detailed outline of the game and checking it against the game map in Inklewriter on a regular basis. They are also responsible for making sure there are no broken links and that all options are linked to the correct section of the game. The Cartographer should be a guild member who thinks/learns visually and is detail oriented. They may need to work closely with the Technician to resolve broken and incorrect links.
• Illustrator (optional): the Illustrator is responsible for locating appropriate images to add to the game. The Illustrator needs to be a guild member who is good at locating copyright-free and/or Creative Commons images or at creating original images for the game. If there are not enough guild members to have an Illustrator, then another guild member may take on this role if necessary.

Once the boss level is completed, each member of the guild will allocate cash to each other. The amount of cash you allocate to each member should be based on the effort put into fulfilling their guild role and creating the game and the quality of their work on the game. You should use the Crafting Guild Payment Book to allocate the cash. You have a total of $200 to divide among the guild members. You may allocate no more than $50 to yourself. Each member of the guild will be awarded an average of the amount allocated to them by the guild.
- Text Adventure Game Review (Active)
  
  Given by: GM
  
  Reward: XP
  
  Completion Conditions: Publish Game Review to Text Adventure Games Reviews Wiki
  Assigned to: Lucie Kingsleigh Zelda Shields Aliza Roe Clark Kent Kora Thomas L Lawliet Perseus Moon Masako Ishida Tyler Alec Beckham Edward Dent Ashly B Edwards Yoshiko Ishida Sampson Lucus Aang Willow Adler Elliot Brown Calvin Richmond Rich Porter
  Description
  To familiarize yourself with text adventure games, you will need to play a few and select one to write a review of.
  
  Step 1: Play some text adventure games
  You can find a list of text adventure games at the Inklewriter Library. If you have an iPad or iPod, there are more games located on the free Inklewriter Future Voices app. I would recommend playing as many games as possible, but no less than three, and playing some games more than once, selecting different options on subsequent plays. This will give you an idea of the different varieties of text adventure games and what you can do as an author, as well as examples of both effective and ineffective games and the craft of providing options to the player.
  
  Step 2: Select one to review
  After playing several TA games, select the one that you like the best to write a review of. Your review should focus on providing an overall assessment of the game and supporting that assessment with specific examples from the game. You should cover both effective and ineffective aspects of the game. You may also use screenshots from the game to illustrate your assessment (see me regarding how to add an image to your wiki page). You may find the article “Writing Game Reviews and Giving Feedback” to be helpful in providing some guidelines for your review.
  
  Your review should be published as a child wiki of the Boss Level: Text Adventure Games Reviews wiki on the Epic Words campaign site no later than 12:30 p.m. Mar. 31. Include a hyperlink to the game in your review.
  
  Step 3: Bring your review to class
  On Mar. 31, we’ll spend time in class discussing text adventure games and creating a list of criteria for effective ones. We will use the class members’ game reviews to create this list, discussing specific examples from the games the class played to illustrate these criteria, so bring a copy of your review to class with you that day to reference.
  
  Step 4: Play some more games
  I would highly recommend reading the other reviews on the wiki and selecting a few more TA games to play based on these reviews. The more games you play, the more familiar you will become with the genre and the more awareness you’ll have of the best practices for writing your own game.
- Crafting the Text Adventure Game (Active)
  
  Given by: GM
  
  Reward: XP and Skillsnd Skills
  
  Completion Conditions: Finished Text Adventure Game
  Assigned to: Lucie Kingsleigh Zelda Shields Aliza Roe Clark Kent Kora Thomas L Lawliet Perseus Moon Masako Ishida Tyler Alec Beckham Edward Dent Ashly B Edwards Yoshiko Ishida Sampson Lucus Aang Willow Adler Elliot Brown Calvin Richmond Rich Porter
  Description
  Your Crafting Guild will dedicate the last three weeks of class to designing, writing, and playing your TA game. You will write your game using Inklewriter, a free, internet-based interactive fiction-authoring tool. The guild should create one Inklewriter account that everyone in the guild has access to (you can create and use a throwaway email account to do so, if you wish).
  
  There are four rules for your game:
  
  1. Everyone in the guild must help to write the game.
  
  2. The game must be about one of the cases that we have investigated during the campaign.
  
  3. The player must take on one of the investigator roles that we have used during the game.
  
  4. You may write your game in either first person (“I”) or second person (“you”) point of view, but don’t mix them.
  
  We will follow the cycle outlined below:
  
  Phase 1: Brainstorming and outlining the game (Apr. 2)
  
  Phase 2: Drafting the game (Apr. 4)
  
  Phase 3: Playing the game and revising as necessary (Apr. 7 1st half of class)
  
  Phase 4: Continue drafting the game; 1st iteration of game due (Apr. 7 2nd half of
  class)
  
  Phase 5: Review and discuss peer feedback on 1st iteration of game and revise game
  accordingly (Apr. 9)
  
  Phase 6: Present overview of game to class for troubleshooting & feedback (Apr.
  11)
  
  Phase 7: Continue drafting the game (Apr. 14 1st half of class)
  
  Phase 8: Playing the game and revising as necessary; 2nd iteration of game due (Apr.
  14 2nd half of class)
  
  Phase 9: Review and discuss peer feedback on 2nd iteration of game and revise
  game accordingly (Apr. 16 1st half of class)
  
  Phase 10: Continue drafting the game (Apr. 16 2nd half of class)
  
  Phase 11: Finish the game: final drafting, revising, proofreading, and play-through
  (Apr. 18)
  
  The 1st iteration of your game does not have to be a complete game, but it should be substantial enough that peers can provide you with substantive feedback. The 2nd iteration should be as close to complete as possible.
  
  You will need to add the link to your game to the Class Games Links Google Doc no later than 1:30 p.m. Apr. 7. You can find the link by clicking on the “Share” tab in the upper left-hand menu in your story’s dashboard and copying the link that Inklewriter provides you, then clicking the “Okay” button. DO NOT select the “Release” button; this will publish your game on the Inklewriter website and you do not want to do this (yet).
  
  I highly recommend that during the first week of work, every member of the guild read/view the materials located on the Text Adventure Games Resources wiki.
- Play-Testing Other Guilds' Games (Active)
  
  Given by: GM
  
  Reward: XP
  
  Completion Conditions: Complete play-testing reviews of the two assigned games
  Assigned to: Lucie Kingsleigh Zelda Shields Aliza Roe Clark Kent Kora Thomas L Lawliet Perseus Moon Masako Ishida Tyler Alec Beckham Edward Dent Ashly B Edwards Yoshiko Ishida Sampson Lucus Aang Willow Adler Elliot Brown Calvin Richmond Rich Porter
  Description
  Like professional game designers, your guild will follow an iteration model. This means that your game will go through multiple versions (two in your case), each of which will be play-tested by a group of players who will provide constructive feedback on the effectiveness of the game in its current state. You should use this feedback to revise and edit your game.
  
  Likewise, you will be serving as a play-tester for the other guilds’ iterations. On Apr. 7 and 14, I will email you a link to a game that you will need to play and provide feedback on. You should submit your feedback via the Game Iteration Feedback form by 12:30 p.m. Apr. 9 and 16, respectively. Take you time playing the games and provide honest, helpful feedback. You may find the article “Writing Game Reviews and Giving Feedback” to be helpful in providing some guidelines for doing so. Your feedback will be completely anonymous (I will remove your name before sharing the form with the game authors).
  
  Since the final version of each iteration is not due until midnight on the 7th and 14th, please wait until the 8th and 14th before playing your assigned games.
- Final Game Review (Active)
  
  Given by: GM
  
  Reward: XP
  
  Completion Conditions: Share your game review with the GM via Google Drive
  Assigned to: Lucie Kingsleigh Zelda Shields Aliza Roe Clark Kent Kora Thomas L Lawliet Perseus Moon Masako Ishida Tyler Alec Beckham Edward Dent Ashly B Edwards Yoshiko Ishida Sampson Lucus Aang Willow Adler Elliot Brown Calvin Richmond Rich Porter
  Description
  In order to provide your peers with an assessment of the final version of their game, you will need to play and review one of the games created by one of the other Crafting Guilds.
  
  On Apr. 18, I will email you a link to a game that you will need to play and write a review of. You should take your time playing the game and play it through several times, selecting different options each time. Your review should focus on providing an overall assessment of the game, including both effective and ineffective aspects. You should support your assessment with specific examples from the game and screenshots, if necessary. Make sure you include the title and authors of the game in your review. Again, I highly recommend using the article "Writing Game Reviews and Giving Feedback" as a guide for writing your review.
  
  You should share your review via Google Drive using the filename “FirstnameLastnamePeerReview” (for example: JohnWatsonPeerReview) no later than 8:00 a.m. Apr. 23. Make sure to make me an editor and to share it with my JSU email address.
  
  While I will share your review with the game authors, I will remove your name from the review so that it will be anonymous.
- Game Presentation and Troubleshooting (Pending)
  
  Given by: GM
  Assigned to: Lucie Kingsleigh Zelda Shields Aliza Roe Clark Kent Kora Thomas L Lawliet Perseus Moon Masako Ishida Tyler Alec Beckham Edward Dent Ashly B Edwards Yoshiko Ishida Sampson Lucus Aang Willow Adler Elliot Brown Calvin Richmond Rich Porter
  Description
  Midway through the game design and iteration process, your guild will present a brief overview of your game to the rest of the class. This will be an opportunity for you to troubleshoot your game and to receive feedback and help from the entire class.
  
  Your presentation should focus on two things: 1) providing a brief outline of your game (without giving away the ending); and 2) presenting problems and questions to the class for a general brainstorming session.
  
  Your guild should bring a list of issues and/or questions that you would like the rest of the class to help you with to that day’s class meeting. After providing a brief outline of your game, you may field these issues and/or questions and the class will be given some time to brainstorm solutions and/or answers. Each guild will be allocated approximately 10 minutes of class time for their troubleshooting session, so keep these time constraints in mind and focus on the most important problems and/or questions.