Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Xath" data-source="post: 3323079" data-attributes="member: 17040">It depends.  When evaluating a product for personal purchase, I'll certainly look at the price and weigh it against the overall quality of the product and the use I think I'll get out of it.  However, when evaluating a product for an award such as the ENnies, price becomes an issue to me only if there seems to be a gross difference between the quality and effort put into the product, and the price they're asking for it.  It certainly wouldn't change my opinion on the quality of the product, but such a discrepancy would be worth mentioning on an evaluation.  I don't have a favorite system, nor do I have animosities towards a particular game.  To me, the enjoyment of a game has just as much to do with the group you play with as it does with the quality of the system.  While gaming has its serious sides, the overall goal is fun.  As long as fun is possible in a system (and seriously, when isn't it?) I have no reason to have a particular dislike of it.  I guess the only way that that would effect my ability to judge products is that I tend to try to find good qualities in everything.  So I might end up having to curb my glass-half-full outlook.  I LOVE LOVE LOVE .pdfs.  I've played in groups where I've had to take mass transit 3 hours each way, and I've played in groups where I've had to walk upwards of two miles each way.  Not having to carry twenty books on top of my minis, battlemat, etc has probably saved my shoulders from a permanent slant. I admit that for books I reference more than 10 times in a game, I prefer to have access to a paper copy, but .pdf supplements are wonderful!  When they're bookmarked to have direct access to chapters and the details within, they're just as easy to use as a hard copy.   MutantIt depends on the category.  Best Cover Design?  Certainly not.  Best Production Value?  Well, editing is a major factor in the production value of a product, so errors in mechanics and writing would certainly have to be taken into effect.  If I find one typo I will definitely not toss a product aside, but if errors begin to interfere with my understanding and enjoyment of a product, then I'll definitely have to take that into consideration.  Having worked with the ENnies as a staff member, I have a pretty good idea of how much of a time commitment the judges put into making the ENnies work.  While I do have a full-time job, I just graduated from college in December which means a few things.  One, it means that I'll have much more free time than I'm used to to devote to the Ennies.  Two, it means that I'm really good at reading hundreds and hundreds of pages of diverse texts and keeping them in my mind in an organized fashion.  I am in a long-term relationship, but my SO is also a gamer, so that's not a problem.  I have no children, my parents are perfectly healthy, and I'm not getting married for at least two more years.  I will be starting a new job soon, but it's already been established that it will take up less of my time than my current job, so that will only give me more time to work on the ENnies.  Believe me, once I've made a commitment, I see it through.  I know the effort it takes to be an ENnies judge, and I would not shirk that responsibility.  I may keep a few items for myself, but I'll probably be giving most of it back to the ENnies, to be used as swag for volunteers and as fundraising material for the awards.  Eventually.  3.5 will eventually get to the point that WotC just won't be able to publish anything new for it, and as they are not a non-profit business, they're going to want to keep making things that people will buy.  I mean, we've already gotten to the point with 3.5 where spells meant to be cast by different classes, or spells of different levels have the same name.  If there are so many published spells that they can't even have their own names, we're getting closer to that point.</blockquote>

Verification