[ENnies] WotC on the outs

[Vocenoctum]

Hmmm. It seems the awards were targeted to those with open d20 content. Makes sense. But that means WotC wouldn't qualify for a lot of stuff. Pity.

I am surprised they didn't win best website. Their site has a ton of free downloads.

Wizards website is one of the few I visit daily to see if anything has changed. Very useful and the newer material is easy enough to find.

I am not interested in AU much, but other than weekly updates for that, Monte Cook's site doesn't have much. (I do read his articles, but I think Minds Eye is more useful than anything there in)

I may have to look at Monsternomicon, but I wasn't terribly impressed with Lock & Load or th eadventures. (Besides the great artwork that is.

Was D20 Modern eligible this year or was that last year? That would certainly qualify for a D20 Game I'd think...

I dunno, maybe Wizards shouldn't have won a bunch of things, but they really had some stuff that should have been in the running at least.

The D20 requirement really did screw Wizards over in a direct manner I would think. I wonder why that was phrased such?

 

[Staffan]

I think it's a matter of third-party publishers being able to take greater risks than WOTC. Greater risk means that things can either be really good or really bad, whereas WOTC's stuff is mostly "OK". "OK" is good for just selling stuff (especially if you're the big boy on the block already), but it won't win you awards.

Also, I agree with those that said that WOTC's stuff the last year hasn't been as "must-have" as previously. The major releases of 2002 were: Book of Vile Darkness, City of the Spider Queen, d20 Modern, Deities & Demigods, Epic-level Handbook and the MM2. In 2001, they were the Psionics Handbook, Manual of the Planes, Oriental Adventures, and Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil. 2002 certainly had more big releases, but I'd say that Manual of the Planes and Oriental Adventures were certainly far better. The only one I, personally, would give an award to from the 2002 lineup is d20 Modern (and from what I hear M&M was just better).

 

[SemperJase]

Re: Re: [ENnies] WotC on the outs

Malhavoc press has a great website, but the only place where I would think that Monte's website is clearly better than WOTC's website, is in Monte's forums, where there is more support for how a GM should run a super-module (RTTOEE) than I've seen anywhere else on the web.

The message boards are what I most dislike about his site. That is because the message boards are not actually part of MonteCook.com. They are on EZBoards.com. I hate them with a passion. Thanks to them I get huge amounts of spam everyday. At the time I registered with them, they hid their spam opt out checkbox. Then once you are registered, you can't later opt out of them selling your info or delete your account. Misleading business practices bug me.

For that reason, Monte Boards are inferior to WotC's. They administer their own boards.

I do like his graphics though.

 

[Desdichado]

I like FF for the same reason I love Monsternomicon -- it's imaginative and pushes boundaries in new ways, and has stuff that makes me say; "yeah, I can't wait to find some way to use that bugger!" MM2 didn't really do that for me much.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

So what is the deal with WotC's poor showing in the ENnies? Only three nominations and one "silver" win in a minor category.

Is WotC that bad or isit just in vogue to discount them? It seems there is a growing anti-WotC bias in this community. The ENnies seem to indicate that perception is true. WotC is obviously not a favored RPG producer this year.

As mentioned above, due to the way the eligibility requirements were restructured, WotC was limited in its ability to enter most of the categories. Personally, I hope that this is rectified next year. I certainly don't have an anti-WotC bias, and I know this is also true of the other judges. They were nominated in every category they entered.

 

[Derulbaskul]

(snip) MM2 didn't really do that for me much.

Yep and adding hit dice to an otherwise good monster idea is just lazy design... turns to... banshee (26 HD... cough, cough)... deathbringer (30 HD... and what was the base creature?)... famine spirit (hmmm, medium undead.. should be about 8HD not 32HD)... effigy...; I'll just stop at E. Strange that these are all undead, no?

Cheers
D

 

[Welverin]

Re: Re: [ENnies] WotC on the outs

As mentioned above, due to the way the eligibility requirements were restructured, WotC was limited in its ability to enter most of the categories. Personally, I hope that this is rectified next year. I certainly don't have an anti-WotC bias, and I know this is also true of the other judges. They were nominated in every category they entered.

Then the rules definitely need to change. WotC was nominated for three of eighteen categories and for the company that started everything to be ineligible for so many categories is rather ridiculous.

I will say however that it?s nice to see so many other companies get recognition, especially the smaller ones. Though with the silver award (and my proposed bronze) that can still happen.

 

[EricNoah]

This is a really good, important conversation to be having. What I'd like to do is carry it over to the Publisher's forum so the fans and the publishers can be in on the same conversation.

For reference, the "how to handle the 800lb gorrilla" conversation took place after the last ENnies (which is the first one WotC chose to enter) and the opinions ran the gammut from "find some way to keep them out completely because since they produce closed materials they don't have to play by the same rules" to "there should be no restrictions whatsoever on who participates". It should be noted that the way the rule was set up this year also kept Kenzer out of the same categories that WotC couldn't enter.

One should also consider how the voting process was different this year. This time, you weren't forced to choose between WotC and Malhavoc for Best Website, for instance -- you could rank them both. It's hard to know how that affected things.

As always, we'll have a big discussion about all of this stuff and it will help Russ make decisions for next year, so keep letting us know what you think.

-------

Now, my one added opinion: I don't think that Cartography and the Art categories should have been "restricted" categories (I don't know if that was unintentional or not).

 

[tensen]

Re: Re: Re: [ENnies] WotC on the outs

Then the rules definitely need to change. WotC was nominated for three of eighteen categories and for the company that started everything to be ineligible for so many categories is rather ridiculous.

Well at least they are eligible for some awards.
EN Publishing/Ambient/Dark Quest... and some of the products that are printed by Goodman Games and Mystic Eye Games are ineligble due to possible conflict of interest.

 

[Vocenoctum]

For reference, the "how to handle the 800lb gorrilla" conversation took place after the last ENnies (which is the first one WotC chose to enter) and the opinions ran the gammut from "find some way to keep them out completely because since they produce closed materials they don't have to play by the same rules" to "there should be no restrictions whatsoever on who participates". It should be noted that the way the rule was set up this year also kept Kenzer out of the same categories that WotC couldn't enter.

I think limiting each company to one entry in each catagory is fine, but otherwise keep it open.
Saying "you can't enter, you're too big" is pretty arbitrary.

Of course, then you have to decide if all the White Wolf companies only get one entry