Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ghostwind" data-source="post: 1037486" data-attributes="member: 3060">I had a very long answer typed in, but the database took a vacation and consumed it apparently. Here's an abbreviated version.I'm using both GR and Monsternomicon to illustrate the point of multiple "wins" (by this I mean gold and silver awards). Monsternomicon took home a win in every category they were nominated for: Best Monster Supplement, Best Graphic Design and Layout, Best Interior Art and Best Cover Art while Freedom City scored with Best Campaign Setting, Best Graphic Design and Layout, Best Interior Art and Best Cover Art (if I remember correctly). This is why I was saying that restricting a single product to a single category forces a publisher to cater to that book's strengths and focus on the category it stands the best chance of being nominated in.And this is a worthy goal to attain to. Your wins with Mutants & Masterminds along with the silver for Best Publisher shows you are on the right track. This thread isn't meant to crucify those who won, but illustrate the need for continued changes in an awards system that is still growing and learning. For two straight years the awards has been dominated by the same names (first Wotc and now GR and Privateer) which indicates a potential problem with either the nomination process or the voting process.Despite Wulf's disagreeing with me, there were many publishers (prominent ones) at the awards that I spoke with that felt they never had a chance to win after the first few announcements came through. Considering the cost incurred to the publisher to submit a product for consideration (number of copies sent to the judges, shipping, etc.), there are several who will not do it next year unless changes are made. The popularity factor was very evident (again, this is not meant to degrade the winners, only make a point) in the way the awards played out. As a publisher, if you do not feel you have a reasonable shot at being nominated and then have a reasonable shot at winning should you receive a nomination, then why go to the expense of entering at all?If you look at any awards system in other genres, such as the Academy Awards, there is a tangible benefit to being nominated and/or winning: increased revenue due to movie rentals or people going to the theater to see the movie. With the RPG industry, there is no such benefit (although GR might make a good argument that sales of M&M products at Gen Con were influenced by the ENnies). This is a key reason why larger publishers who aren't necessarily frequent visitors to this community may feel less inclined to participate. To them, it has no meaning. Let's present a hypothetical idea. Say Decipher comes out with a d20 version of Lord of the Rings. Since they do not frequent these boards or EN World at all, in general, they are already fighting a bit of an uphill battle to not only get nominated but also potentially win. What benefit would an Ennie award provide them? They already have a substantial fan base, just not on EN World. Since the voting is really a popularity contest among EN community members only, why should Decipher feel like it should enter (even if it has a book that is the greatest thing since plastic dice)? There are changes that need to be made as the award evolves and not all of them are ones that people will want to hear. However, if the ENnies are to ever gain a serious measure of respect among the RPG industry in general, and not a small group of d20 publishers that hang out here, it has to be willing to take the steps needed to earn that respect. This is the real challenge that lies ahead...</blockquote>

Verification