General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
I believe (but I'm not going to assert as true) that the BG folks have established what they consider to be an objective, scientific approach to analysis of games in order to determine what makes them good or bad games. I do not believe that Meghan, Josh, or Zeke feel that their game analysis is opinion for this reason, and that judges should likewise establish this objective set of critera going forward.
Cheers,
Cam
If they want to post the methodology I'd be happy to look it over.
1. To further clarify... I haven't heard anyone talk about the ethics of requiring a submission fee to people who make little or no profit from their intended submission.
2. Neither have I heard a response about a judge's name being listed on the back of a submitted work.
3. We have heard some replies about the submission deadline issue, but how long has it been since the awards? Exactly how long did you need to formulate an announcement of the mistake which was made... isn't that the kind of transparency you're trying to achieve?
1. There is no need for ethics. If they feel a fee is out of line they do not have to submit anything. Simple. Why is ethics even an issue? Its not like anyone is being forced to submit anything. Asking for a small nominal fee to help cover costs of the awards as well as be fair to the other publishers that actually submit hundreds of dollars of product is being fair. Letting someone not have to pay anything because their product is free is what isn't fair. EVERYONE else is at the very least submitting 6 copies of their printed works. That costs money. In the case of Goodman Games it was $600.00 in product.
So to be FAIR, I think paying a small fee of what? $10? Is very fair. I think crying that you have to actually give something that financially helps out the ENnies is a problem. Even so it is not. You don't like the fee, you don't like paying something, like everyone else does in some way, don't submit and don't pay. Simple. If you don't want to give up some kind of financial fee to the ENnies, do not participate.
I know of several times items were not submitted for the ENnies, or at least seriously considered not submitting to the ENnies, because of how valuable their product was. Freedom of choice is a wonderful thing. Every time they ended up submitting, because to be nominated alone is good advertising, and winning is even better.
2. We haven't even been told who this supposed judge is, so how can we know unless we happen to own every product submitted to the ENnies. Rest assured if there was a judge who had product in the submissions, they knew they were not supposed to be a judge, and they will likely be banned from judging ever again.
Look at the requirements for running for a judge, you are to have NOTHING in print that will be up for consideration during your Judging period. I believe there is even a time requirement since the last time you had anything published.
Plus we don't even know if this judge was just a play tester for the game, or an actual writer/contributor. Let alone if a judge was indeed even guilty of such a thing. It is possible that someone with an identical name was published. If we go by that standard I have several books in publication. I never wrote, contributed, or playtested them, but my name is on them. Does that mean I shouldn't run for being Judge?
3. As has been said, they didn't catch the error until after the products nomination was announced. Should they ban Malhavoc Press for submitting something not eligible? Should the judges be banned for "X" number of years for allowing such a mistake to get by? What exactly should they have done?
Doing their best to make sure it never happens again seems to be the most reasonable response to me. Its not like we can go back and re cast votes, etc... It is done.
If you can suggest a "fix" that would be fairer and more equitable to everyone please share!
__________________ It is the spirit of the game, not the letter of the rules, which is important. NEVER hold to the letter written, nor allow some barracks room lawyer to force quotations from the rule book upon you, IF it goes against the obvious intent of the game. As you hew the line with respect to conformity to major systems and uniformity of play in general, also be certain the game is mastered by you and not by your players. Within the broad parameters give in the Advanced Dungeons and Dragons Volumes, YOU are creator and final arbiter. By ordering things as they should be, the game as a WHOLE first, your CAMPAIGN next, and your participants thereafter, you will be playing Advanced Dungeons and Dragons as it was meant to be. May you find as much pleasure in so doing as the rest of us do.
The answer to "the judges should evaluate products the way that I do" is, simply, "run for election".
If there is a good way to look at RPGs that we haven't seen we should at least look at it. There are many different approaches and I think it is unwise to dismiss someone's before hearing what it is.
2. We haven't even been told who this supposed judge is
It was mentioned a page ago that it was Zach on the back of the Epic RPG. It was a quote taken from his blog on the back cover like movie advertisements sometimes do.
It was mentioned a page ago that it was Zach on the back of the Epic RPG. It was a quote taken from his blog on the back cover like movie advertisements sometimes do.
OK, so a total non issue. Thanks! I definitely missed that post!
__________________ It is the spirit of the game, not the letter of the rules, which is important. NEVER hold to the letter written, nor allow some barracks room lawyer to force quotations from the rule book upon you, IF it goes against the obvious intent of the game. As you hew the line with respect to conformity to major systems and uniformity of play in general, also be certain the game is mastered by you and not by your players. Within the broad parameters give in the Advanced Dungeons and Dragons Volumes, YOU are creator and final arbiter. By ordering things as they should be, the game as a WHOLE first, your CAMPAIGN next, and your participants thereafter, you will be playing Advanced Dungeons and Dragons as it was meant to be. May you find as much pleasure in so doing as the rest of us do.
Thank you all for your concerns. The ENnie Awards were very disappointed to learn of Zachary Houghton's resignation through his blog post, especially over what seems to be a misunderstanding within a private discussion. We wish to express our regret that Mr. Houghton felt it necessary to withdraw from his post as judge, as he was a valued member of the ENnies panel in the 2008 season.
I would like to encourage anyone with concerns to please address them to our ENnies Public Relations Coordinator. Until such a time as a permanant PR Coordinator can be hired, I will be functioning in that capacity, in addition to my duties as a 2009 Judge. Any concerns can be addressed to gertiebarden (at) gmail (dot) com until such a time as an official ENnies account can be created. Any individuals wishing to volunteer as a member of the ENnies staff, whether as PR Coordinator or any of our other vacant positions, please contact Business Manager Denise Robinson through the ENnies website (The ENnie Awards- About the ENnies).
Please understand that although current and former ENnies staff members and judges may be participating in the online discourse, only official statements made by the Business Manager, Public Relations Coordinater or Owner are considered representative of the awards. As these staff members are also active members of the community, please understand that only those postings marked as official ENnies responses should be considered as such.
I will check this thread as often as I can, but for those with immediate concerns, the email address above is the most reliable method of contact.
Good. He's above reproach. I was proud to be his colleague the year we were judges. If anyone thinks Jeramy would tolerate the things you claim are going on: corruption, cronyism and bias, then they know nothing about this guy.
Totally off topic, but can I just say that if you ever want to feel good about yourself you should really get on fusangite's good side.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olgar Shiverstone
A whole lump of good ideas...
I don't know that I agree with your number 1, but I certainly support the idea behind it. I believe Morrus is right in that there needs to be a cut off, but maybe combing the the "fan products" categories isn't the best solution. Personally I'm a huge fan of podcasts and listen to several, and I think that, in reality the belong under Regalia if anything (other than their own category). Websites may as well.
The reasoning is simply that there are a lot of different types of podcasts, but very few are really judged on content. People listen to most (my belief) because they are entertaining. The fact that you learn something is, in a lot of cases, a pleasant side effect. The Sons of Kryos, as a random example, has really helped me to improve my game, but I'd say that 80% or more of the reason that I listen is that I really like those guys.
If others out there are like me, and I suspect they are, then that's Regalia. It adds to the enjoyment of our game without a direct impact on the rules or what have you.
So maybe the solution is to revisit the parenting system, but I don't really think that nominating a few products just because they were the only ones entered is a perfect solution.
That said, I really appreciate your points, and more importantly the way you made a convincing argument. Other than that one little thing, I'm sold.
__________________ Blogging the ENnies Chronicling my term as an ENnies judge.
Also, in the interests of total disclosure, I should point out that I am now, officially, Zach's replacement. I don't do it out of some sense of accomplishment, because really, who wants to be the guy that got in because someone else stepped aside?
I do think it's important however to be honest about where my opinions are coming from. I just got official notice today, so regardless of how people may feel that this influences my posts I'll point out that up until the last one they were all made before I had been asked to step in. I will admit that I did know it was a possibility however.
Anywho, for those that want transparency I'll argue this much: I maintained a pretty thorough blog during my last term (2007). I'm pretty sure it was the first dedicated ENnies judging blog, and I was never asked to take down a single post or withhold any information.
So, take it for what it's worth, but I guess I'll be firing up the old blog again (Blogging the ENnies). I don't know if I warrant the "beyond reproach" title I have been so generously given, but I do my best and I'll absolutely be open with anything I feel that people should know.
I do admit right now though that I don't think that should include every off hand comment or thought someone puts on the table before it becomes official policy. I'd be glad to talk about real policy that has actually been made, but I think that the idea that every discussion should be made public would only stifle people who have good ideas that they're afraid to bring up.
Everyone should have the opportunity to float an idea by their friends and coworkers, no matter how good or bad, without opening it up to public derision. I think everyone has probably said something at one point or another that seemed stupid in hind sight, and I doubt you'd want weeks worth of debates or dozens of internet posts reminding you of it.
A person should be able to put something on the table and give others a chance to discuss it without fear of reprisal.
Now, if it becomes policy then yeah, let's complain about a stupid idea that sucks. I believe that the ENnies, like anything, can only be made better by openly discussing the way the rules, categories, or entries work. But complaining about something that never happened is counter-productive. If you hear that they are considering and you think it's a bad idea say so, maybe you will stop something before it becomes an issue, but it's not fair to vilify an idea like it's a done deal.
Has anyone actually paid such a fee yet?
Seriously, discuss your concerns. Obviously it has some effect if the judges are discussing ways to change it in light of the complaints with how it was handled last year. Don't be too upset yet that there haven't been changes that you like because if Zach's post doesn't tell you anything more then it obviously points out that they're at least thinking about it and taking peoples' concerns seriously.
The ENnies are a committee. These things take time and discussion, and ripping apart every bad idea that may have hit the table is only going to discourage the guy who has the right solution from putting it forward. Offer advise, please, and constructive criticism, but taking one person's criticism as gospel, especially without further commentary, is a dangerous path to tread.
__________________ Blogging the ENnies Chronicling my term as an ENnies judge.
It's not pretending to be an elf for 5 hours a week that can at times make me feel embarrassed about my hobby, it's tempest in a teapot garbage like this. This is not Serious Business, nor should it be.
1. If you think the awards are stupid and biased, don't submit, don't participate.
2. Public resignations and public complaining about situations you're involved in never make you look good, no matter how right you are. It's rather Buddhist, really.
3. Judges are supposed to judge, and they're elected to boot. I don't care about the results unless there is evidence that the guidelines aren't being followed. If you don't like the choices, run for judge, but make sure to submit any of your own work or work affiliated with your own. We wouldn't want favoritism.
Furthermore, I think that some individuals are revealing more than they think they are when they refuse to trust the judgment of others without strict guidelines.
4. If you're only doing a podcast out of love, then why is this that important? Show me lost profits leading to lost livelihoods and then I'll care. It shouldn't matter anyway; sustained quality always rises to the top.
5. Morrus, and others involved in the Ennies: thank you for your time and effort. Don't let trash like this get you down.
__________________ "If your will is not strong, if your thought does not oppose injustice, you will fritter away your life stuck in the commonplace, silently submitting to the bonds of emotion, forever cowering before mediocrities, never escaping the downward flow."
--Zhuge Liang
I believe (but I'm not going to assert as true) that the BG folks have established what they consider to be an objective, scientific approach to analysis of games in order to determine what makes them good or bad games. I do not believe that Meghan, Josh, or Zeke feel that their game analysis is opinion for this reason, and that judges should likewise establish this objective set of critera going forward.
Cheers,
Cam
I can believe that. What they should be doing with their set of criteria, is try to patent it, or package it in a way so that they can use it for other fields of publishing, for they would make billions.
If it is true that they have found a way to do away with opinions when it comes to judging a game, and have a pure and scientific method, there's some sort of Nobel prize waiting in their future, for they have done what all of humanity up until now have failed to achieve!
I'm very interested in seeing their method!
/M
__________________ iAltdorf. An interactive map of the capital of the Empire in WFRP! Download today! Can be used in any fantasy campaign!
http://altdorfer.blogspot.com - Check out the Altdorf Correspondent! A WFRP blog about life in the Imperial capital.
"All editions of D&D are awesome." - Fifth Element (EN World Forums, 2008)
”The tendency to confuse personal taste with objective quality is nearly universal.” - Robin D. Laws – Robin’s Laws of Good Gamemastering (Steve Jackson Games, 2002)
I think this really bears more thinking about for the future. If a cutoff is not really a cutoff, would someone making a 10 or 20 day mistake be allowed in? I have no problem with the staff's decision, however I can see how this looks to some gamers like it's no big deal, to others that it's an accommodation to Monte since he's popular, and yet others that this may be a bit of a slippery slope but the decision to keep the award as is was fair.
An idea for the future: allow for a period of something like a week between announcing the nominees and the start of voting. If someone has a problem with any of the nominees, this would give them time to file a complaint.
I don't follow the ins and outs of the ENnies, so it's possible this is already done.
While the drama is fun and all I think it's much ado about nothing. Also I think its sad that bridges are being burned. It's kind of like a car wreck, I can't stop watching.
Ah, and another cross board turf war flames up.
"Gotta love them crazies who think certain things are important enough to blather on on the internet," he said ironically.
__________________ Bill D
"There's a fine line between a superpower and a chronic medical condition."
- Doctor Impossible
I believe (but I'm not going to assert as true) that the BG folks have established what they consider to be an objective, scientific approach to analysis of games in order to determine what makes them good or bad games.
I would expect that one might be able to do this for the game, insofar as game theory is a mathematical science, and could be applied.
I am highly skeptical that such analysis can be done for the role-playing part of the thing. Basically, if you're thinking in terms of GNS theory, you can do some objective analysis of the G, but the value of N and S are entirely subjective. You cannot objectively judge how things will mesh with people's imaginations.
Last edited by Umbran; 29th September 2008 at 04:31 PM..
I am highly skeptical that such analysis can be done for the role-playing part of the thing. Basically, if you're thinking in terms of GNS theory, you can do some objective analysis of the G, but the value of N and S are entirely subjective. You cannot objectively judge how things will mesh with people's imaginations.
Oh, I agree. And there's an element of "you're playing it wrong" that comes out of that. In fact, I think they advocate the notion that many people are having fun playing bad games when they could be having MORE fun playing good games. Games they think are good: Savage Worlds, Spirit of the Century, Burning Wheel. Games they think are bad: All White Wolf Storyteller/Storytelling games, Serenity (and other games we make ), etc.
.....
It's kind of like a car wreck, I can't stop watching.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
