ENnies: Publisher feedback and suggestions sought on the future of the ENnies

[jaldaen]

This thread is a boiled down version of the following thread in the General discussion board:

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=98648&page=1&pp=20

Please feel free to join the general discussion (much encouraged) or make comments here. I’ll be keeping an eye on both of these threads and make comments as I can.

The following suggestions (none of which I can claim as my own) have been made in the above-mentioned thread that I believe need some input from the publishers (there are others in the General Forum thread, but these are the most directly linked to publishers). I provide a few comments myself, but this thread is primarily for publisher response to these ideas so feel free to make comments and suggestions on each. Also feel free to make your own suggestions on what you would like from future ENnies award ceremonies.

1. Move up the deadline date for the ENnies.

I think moving the deadline up a month to April 30th is a good idea in order to provide extra time to judges and voters (3 and 1/2 months if April 31 is chosen), though I’m not certain if a true year-by-year accounting is necessary (i.e. having two 9 month ENnies periods and have the awards line up directly with each year).

Another option is to keep the deadline date the same, but elect judges earlier (by March 31st) and allow publishers to send products directly to them as they wish (see below) allowing judges to go through the products at a more leisurely pace (as hopefully some of the companies will send things in early) and have their judgments ready sooner due to the less tidal-like flood of products we currently receive.

From a publisher’s POV what are the benefits and drawbacks (if any) of a move in entry deadline date? Is there any consensus deadline date that publishers would prefer?

2. Have publishers ship products directly to the judges.

This gets rid of a very expensive middleman for the ENnies, which are run by volunteers and on a budget that siphons off a lot of money from ENWorld. It may be slightly more expensive on the publisher’s end, but it will help cut out an unnecessary middle step between the judges and publishers and perhaps speed up the process.

Would publishers be opposed to this change? Any other ideas or suggestion in regards to the solving the expense of the middleman approach we currently have in regards sending products to the judges?

3. Entry fee, donations, or some other way to pay for the ENnies…

The ENnies need to start paying for themselves… in order to do this we must cut costs (i.e. shipping costs) and find a way to pay for the physical awards with enough left over to improve the ENnies booth and award ceremony’s appearance and awareness of the ENnies (and perhaps their nominees) through marketing.

The first option is to have a nominal entry fee (assuming publishers ship directly to the judges) of $5 per publisher for the first product submitted and $1 more for each additional product.

This will help to cover at least a good portion of the cost of the physical awards (especially if we decrease the number of categories), but will probably not cover the much need booth and marketing fund needs.

This could be addressed by a couple of different methods:

1) Increase the entry fee to $10/publishers and $2/additional product.

I don’t like this one personally, but this might just be enough to pay for all of the awards and have a little bit left over for marketing.

2) Have some kind of donation drive.

There are many options here from an ENnies mingler/gala fundraiser just before the ceremony: collect event tickets for a cocktail reception with food (keep the ceremony free, but this way people can get in early and secure good seats and hang out with the nominees)

An ENWorld sponsored book sale where participating publishers donate a portion of their sales for a certain time period to the ENnies fund, or perhaps more feasible, have publishers donate books to an ENnies fundraiser and have EN World auction them off.

If any of the publishers have another fundraising idea that we can use let us know and we will look into it post haste ;-)

4. Change from a d20 RPG awards to a general RPG awards ceremony.

There are calls to change the award categories to drop most of the d20-only categories and go to a general awards ceremony due to the ENnies relationship with Gen Con. We would like to hear your suggestions on this possible change away from a d20 focused award to a general award ceremony... also we would like suggestions on what categories you consider to be the core to the ENnies awards... The following is one of the lists presented for consideration and should not be considered the final categories by any means only an example to help focus the discussion and provide a jumping off point.

1. Best Aid or Accessory
2. Best Cartography
3. Best Art (Cover)
4. Best Art (Interior)
5. Best Graphic Design & Layout

6. Best Adventure
7. Best Setting Supplement
8. Best Campaign Setting
9. Best Rules Supplement
10. Best Monster Supplement

11. Best Free Product or Web Enhancement
12. Best Electronic Product (not free)
13. Best Fan Site

14. Best d20 Game
15. Best Publisher (Overall)
16. Peer Award

This would reduce the awards by about a half dozen categories (dropping all the d20 focused categories except best d20 Game).

I look forward to reading your responses and working with you all to make the ENnies the best they can be next year and the years beyond.

PS: Thanks to all the publishers who provided the ENnies booth volunteers with donations this year they were much appreciated.

 

[Cthulhu's Librarian]

1. Move up the deadline date for the ENnies.

I think moving the deadline up a month to May 31st is a good idea in order to provide extra time to judges and voters (2 and 1/2 months if May 31 is chosen), though I’m not certain if a true year-by-year accounting is necessary (i.e. having two 9 month ENnies periods and have the awards line up directly with each year).

Actually, this years cut off date WAS May 31. Moving it up to April 31 would allow for an extra month of reading/voting time.

 

[jaldaen]

Actually, this years cut off date WAS May 31. Moving it up to April 31 would allow for an extra month of reading/voting time.

Thanks for the catch... I've changed it to April 31st.

 

[jmucchiello]

Thanks for the catch... I've changed it to April 31st.

To be pickier still, "30 days hath September, APRIL, June and November."

 

[jmucchiello]

While I'm not much of a publisher,....

1. Move up the deadline date for the ENnies.

The only reason to move the deadlines is to make marketting of the ENnies better. It was so sad to see the ads in the GenCon convention booklet for the ENnies didn't include the list of nominees. It couldn't because the nominees were not known until after August 1 and I'm sure that booklet goes to press in early July. Unless moving up the deadline date gets the list of nominees into the GenCon programs, I don't see the point. (Yes, judge burnout is another issue but I think point 2 below could help with that. Even though I'm going to disagree with it as well. )

Moving the deadline too far up, such as the suggested March 31 or going year-to-year impacts the usefulness of the awards because the products that win could no longer be in production.

ASIDE: The fact that the ENnies booth did not have the list of nominations in it was also rather shocking to me. I understand it not making it into the program but not being on the booth was kinda silly. I think the white board was featured in the booth too prominently compared to the past winners board. Had it been on the booth, then the winners could have been highlighted on the list in the booth.

ASIDE 2: Will the ENnies ad be included in the So Cal GenCon Booklet? With the 2004 winners listed? It should if the ENnies are the GenCon RPG awards.

2. Have publishers ship products directly to the judges.

My only real problem here (beyond the obvious increased cost) is the lack of central control. Did all 5 judges receive my products? Do I have to send them all email to verify that all 5 packages arrived? If this bugged me before, I only had to check with the one receiving point. Also, what if one of the judges is somewhere odd like Singapore? Now there are international shipping and customs issues involved in sending the products. And instead of just one person dealing with these problems (Joe Kushner this year), it's every publisher dealing with them.

I understand the desire to get rid of the shipping burden, but I think this change just turns the shipping (monetary) burden into a logistics (time) burden.

3. Entry fee, donations, or some other way to pay for the ENnies…

The only idea I like here is the cocktail reception fee. All the others make no sense. Do entrants into the Origins awards pay a fee? How can you increase my out of pocket expenses (by making me ship 6 products to 6 locations) and ask for an entrance fee?

Makes me wonder just what GenCon is paying out? Do they only pay for the creation of the physical awards? Are they actually charging you for the booth?

Aside: How about an auction after the ENnies? Require that the books come signed and then auction the (signed) winning products off at the end of the awards? Could raise money I think.

4. Change from a d20 RPG awards to a general RPG awards ceremony.

This makes me wonder why the awards are called the ENnies but I don't really care one way or the other about who else is in the various categories. This year had such a great showing from the non-d20 crowd already so this isn't really much of a change to me.

 

[Psion]

Next year we will probably be changing the award categories to drop most of the d20 only categories and go to a general awards ceremony due to the ENnies relationship with Gen Con. The following are the currently suggested categories.

I would say that the following are one suggested set of categories. I think it might be a bit presumptuous to say that the motion to drop d20 categories is at the "probably" stage, especially considering that among ENworlders there is serious concern that the awards are no longer representing them. And I would have concerns about fairness if the venue stayed here with such an arrangement.

I think that lacking next years set of judges, saying what shape the awards will take is a bit premature. This is the stage where we take suggestions and debate their merits.

 

[jaldaen]

I would say that the following are one suggested set of categories...

I think that lacking next years set of judges, saying what shape the awards will take is a bit premature. This is the stage where we take suggestions and debate their merits.

Thanks for the catch... I clarified what was meant (see edited post above)...

As for the judges I agree that they should have input into the shape of the awards, but unfortunately we don't elect them for a while and definately need to have these discussions while things are fresh in the mind...

That actually makes me think that it might be a good idea to elect new judges sooner (like Sept.) rather than later... this would allow them to participate in the early discussions of the ENnies. It would be nice to have the next year's ENnies judges announced soon that way we can have these kind of discussions with the judges as opposed to hashing things out that the elected judges had very little say in and then having them deal with it after their election next year.

This would have the added benefit of allowing publishers to send things to the judges throughout the year (if we go with the direct shipping idea)... which would definately help the judges and might also address the whole need for extra time without moving back the entry deadline.

Just some food for thought...

 

[Ed Cha]

I also suggested in that thread, as I believe others did as well:

1. Limit voting to registered members of EN World.

2. Voting should be a 1-5 star rating system just like here in the reviews section.

 

[Cthulhu's Librarian]

1. Limit voting to registered members of EN World.

I seriously doubt that this is going to happen, as the ENnies are not just the ENWorld awards anymore. They are the GenCon awards as well. If we limit the voting to just ENWorld members, the non-d20 nominees will have their a$$es kicked. If we want to represent GenCon as well as EN World, then the voting needs to be open to people who are not EN World members. And as much as we might like them to become members, it's not realistic to expect them to register just to be able to vote.

 

[Cthulhu's Librarian]

Makes me wonder just what GenCon is paying out? Do they only pay for the creation of the physical awards? Are they actually charging you for the booth?

No, we are not charged for the booth. That was provided by GenCon, as are the staff and judges 4-day badges and hotel rooms. GenCon does NOT, however, pay for the awards. They are paid for by EN World.