ENnies V - and beyond...

[Umbran]

... and I think it wise to listen to not only the fans here on ENWorld, but also the publishers as both should have their needs addressed in order to make the ENnies the best RPG awards ceremony that it can be.

I agree (and have said as much already). My thought is that having the publishers discuss things off in a forum that gets less traffic from the folks who are doing all the voting is not terribly constructive. If they have concerns, suggestions, likes and dislikes, I expect they'd get far more attention out here. Sticking their perspective back where it will go mostly unseen won't help them much, will it?

 

[jaldaen]

My thought is that having the publishers discuss things off in a forum that gets less traffic from the folks who are doing all the voting is not terribly constructive. If they have concerns, suggestions, likes and dislikes, I expect they'd get far more attention out here. Sticking their perspective back where it will go mostly unseen won't help them much, will it?

That's why I'll be pointing them to this thread Thus allowing them to make their own choice as to whether they want to just discuss the publisher related issues or get into the more general ENnies issues such as judges, voting, etc that this thread deals with.

 

[Vigilance]

Well- here's a publisher's perspective (and I am not the owner of RPGObjects but he and I have discussed this enough that I feel confident chiming in here).

Increasing the shipping costs (though my guess is only slightly) and adding an entry fee into the mix would certainly reduce the number of entries RPGObjects make in the Ennies next year possibly down to none.

Our Ennies submission cost us around 1,000 dollars in product and shipping costs this year, which, as a company with little chance to win is already more than we feel we gain in advertising by being nominated.

I understand your side of it- just giving our perspective.

Chuck

 

[Arnwyn]

Also, if I may, I think the rating system should be narrowed down to a "1 to 5" star rating. The "10" system is too wide, in my opinion. Why not follow the same rating system used in the reviews section right here on the Web site?

Because the worst thing about the reviews section at ENWorld is the extremely granular and overly-limiting 1-5 star rating system (tied with the fact that no one can agree on what the number of stars even means, and that the related FAQ is weak in giving clear guidance). That's why.

The "10" system is appropriately wide, IMO, and was a wise and far-seeing decision for whoever implemented it.

 

[Crothian]

giving 3 of the five Judge positions to Rpg.net (a place that is largely out of touch with the gaming public and has an inherent anti-d20 bias)

And what is my position to RPG.Net along with the positions of the others? :\

 

[JoeGKushner]

And what is my position to RPG.Net along with the positions of the others? :\

Guess I'd have to ask the same thing. I post over there, not quite as frequently as I do over here mind you, and have posted numerous reviews over there. I believe Psion is in the same boat.

 

[Crothian]

Because the worst thing about the reviews section at ENWorld is the extremely granular and overly-limiting 1-5 star rating system (tied with the fact that no one can agree on what the number of stars even means, and that the related FAQ is weak in giving clear guidance). That's why.

Actually, it isn't. Considering the possibility that most people only used the numbers 6-10 it makes sense to get rid of half the numbers that are never used.

 

[Umbran]

Increasing the shipping costs (though my guess is only slightly) and adding an entry fee into the mix would certainly reduce the number of entries RPGObjects make in the Ennies next year possibly down to none.

Our Ennies submission cost us around 1,000 dollars in product and shipping costs this year, which, as a company with little chance to win is already more than we feel we gain in advertising by being nominated.

Well, that's quite a chunk of change. It brings to mind a couple of questions, if you don't mind my asking...

1)How many products did you guys enter this year?

2)Why would you choose to enter none if the cost went up? Why would you not set yourself a budget, and send your top products to stay within that budget? Woudl it be the principle of the thing?

As I understand it, for the past couple of years the judges have been veritably swamped with products. Giving them each a proper review is tough. A policy that leads to publishers entering only the cream of their crop might well lead to our judges being better at their job.

 

[Crothian]

I'd hope that it would be mail directly to the publishers or an entry fee; not both. THat's also assuming that we do either.

 

[wedgeski]

I've only been a serious ENWorlder for a couple of years and, being in the UK, have had no exposure (yet!) to either GenCon or the ENnies, besides what's shown on the site. However...

What surprises me most is the underlying thread to this discussion, and I think it was actually said in not so many words in one of the earlier posts: 'If we are to be taken seriously as an award, we have to change.'

I wasn't aware that the ENnies weren't taken seriously. Most publishers who receive one prominently display it on their web site (hell, Malhavoc have had an ENnies medallion on their site for as long as I can remember). The shortlist announcements and results are met with much trepidation and excitement in all of the roleplaying circles I mix in. The very first thing I wanted to do when I found out about the Dragonlance Bestiary's silvers was mail my congrats to the authors, whom I work with regularly. There is already prestige and cachet in these awards. Unquestionably, they have become one of the most respected awards on the scene (as far as I'm concerned, the most respected), for many and varied reasons many of which are being analysed here. I just hope that 'reinventing' the ENnies doesn't detract from the very reasons why they have become so respected in the first place.

And that's all I wanted to say really.