How do you personally evaluate flavor text?
Flavor text needs to be interesting, comprehensive, inspiring, and also go along with the mechanics and setting. Great flavor text that is just out of place in the material as presented is almost as bad as poorly done flavor text. Ideally, flavor text should start your wheels turning, and still give you enough flexibility to adapt it to your purposes.
How do you plan to evaluate writing when applied to game mechanics?
Game mechanics should be fairly comprehensive, clear, ideally concise, and functional.
When evaluating writing, how will you approach products with a very high percentage of mechanics compared to products with a very small percentage of game mechanics?
You look at the product as a whole. Mechanics are no more or less important that flavor. The idea is how usable, well done, and inviting the text is to use.
When evaluating writing, how will word count factor in? How will you compare a 20 page PDF to a 400+ hardcover book?
Writing should be both complete and concise. A small product is only good if it's complete, and a large product shouldn't have extra unnecessary stuff in it.
What is your opinion on materials produced for OOP games?
I play several OOP games, and materials for games that are still supported by a fan base, even if the system itself has been dropped from production, can be just as meaningful to a community. Not every product stays dead.
How would you evaluate material for systems in which you have zero experience? What if any of those systems are highly complex? That is, the rulebooks are very dense and there may be many supplements. This can be the case for games with a long history, as in 15+ years.
As a kid, I used to play Advanced Squad Leader, which was perhaps one of the most complex games of all time. Understanding a game with 20 acronyms in a line of rules, and multiple rules supplements is quite possible. It's ideal in situations like this though to attempt to play test it in some fashion, as that can lead to a much greater understanding of the rules.
If you do not like a particular system, how will you evaluate supplements/adventures/whatever submitted for that system? Do you think there can be a good adventure for a bad system?
Adventures, flavor, and art are separate from the system itself. First, I would ask myself if there are merits to the system and it's just personal taste reasons I don't care for the system. Then, I would evaluate the product itself, for how it works with the system, supplements, flows as an adventure, etc. I can think of many systems which I have considered 'bad' and yet still enjoyed reading the books and supplemental material, and I would have no problems nominating a product of a system I thought was bad but the product in question was good.
What barriers are you anticipating in play testing submissions? Are you thinking ahead to come up with contingencies?
Schedules to get others to help play test can be a barrier. However, I am willing and capable of doing a "self play test" of material if need be.
What do you consider your strong point(s) as a judge? Weak point(s)?
Strong points:
I am very analytical, and good at detaching personal feelings from a product itself. I am a fast reader, and have experience as an adventure writer, mechanics writer, flavor text writer, campaign setting judge, and editor, which will help me in understanding and appreciating how a product came to be. I'm also open minded, and willing to listen to the arguments of others before making my mind up. So persuasive arguments for or against a product from other judges are something I'm willing to listen to, and would encourage.
Weak points:
My spelling is atrocious (I try to run important posts and messages through a spell checker). I also work off hours, which can cause communication problems. However, nothing much beyond problems judges from European or Asian countries might have, and I'm not off shift all week, just while I work.
What one characteristic as a judge do you bring to the table that differentiates you from the other potential judges?
Working for an RPG Tournament and on several Living Campaigns, I've basically created and worked on unpaid materials such as settings, mechanical supplements, adventures, as well as I had an active role in scoring and rating entrants into a contest. While the ENnies are not exactly like that, I think my experience will help me be an asset to the judging team.
What cultural interests do you have outside of gaming (i.e reading, comics, parenting, scuba diving, anything), that make you a better judge and why?
I've been a step-parent, was heavily involved in paintball for a while, and enjoy video games, occasional TV and movies, and working with computers. I think being well rounded helps give us perspective into the what we do, and being familiar with non-gaming activities allows us to take a break, clear our heads, and focus more on the gaming activities when we set our minds to it.
How important a factor is artwork (cover, illustrations, cartography) in your overall impression of judging products?
Cartography is a huge bonus in a setting or adventure, as it allows for an extra visual draw to aid in imagining the setting, and I would consider it core content for the most part. Artwork can add to the visualization process as well, and helps add flavor where text may not quite have everything, but it is a smaller part of a product. The cover is usually for show, and to help attract people to a product on the shelves. As long as it's sturdy, I don't think it's very influential in a products overall review or value.
One thing that must be on everyone's mind this year is the possible submission of Ptolus. Answer either if you have read Ptolus or have seen enough of it to know the relative allotment of content--If Ptolus was entered, for what categories would you consider it eligible for nomination?
I am not too familiar with Ptolus, as I haven't gotten my hands on it yet. However, by all accounts it's a very detailed setting, and should be treated as such. However, the ultimate determination will be made once the judges get their hands on it and get a chance to discuss it.
