Nominations are up!!

[Arnwyn]

You mean it includes things one might expect with a good adventure module. Heck, the words "Adventure Path" in the title says it is an adventure module as opposed to a setting.

Yeah, that was a pretty weird nomination.

 

[Rasyr]

I wasn't judging, so I had no part in choosing what got nominated for what categories. However, had I been, I'd strongly disagree with that position (not that it matters - neither of us made the decision!)

IMO (and it's just my opinion), what the publisher decides to call the product is irrelevant to the category. The only important factor is the function it serves. And many products may serve more than one function, because products don't necessarily fall into narrow, arbitrary distinctions such as "adventure only", "setting only", or what-have-you. A product is a product, and is unique.

It may be that a setting book with a large monster section may fail utterly as a setting, but the monster section might be huge, beautiful and perfect. In which case it would probably get nominated in a monster book section.

I have had it brought to my attention (in a very round-about manner), that the actual category name is "Best Campaign/Campaign Supplement", not "Best Campaign Setting/Setting Supplement" as the announcement flyer states.

Given that a "Campaign" is technically a series of linked adventures, that would mean that Setting books actualy do not have a category this year, and that there are 2 (two) specific categories meant for adventures. Or, if "Best Campaign/Campaign Supplement" is meant to include both full campaigns and settings, then there is a category that overlaps with another category (Best Adventures), and you can end up with the problem where the same product ends up nominated for two different awards for the same reason (i.e. because it is both a "bunch of adventures" and a "full campaign (as in a 'series of linked adventures')").

When the submissions were being done, I was under the impression that the category was for settings, and that it did not include "a series of linked adventures" (aka a 'Campaign').

Coming along after the fact, and saying that a product is a product doesn't help if the original definitions were unclear. If a product falls into more than a single category, that is one thing. But when the categories themselves are not clearly defined, or end up allowing an entry it shouldn't because its definition overlaps with another distinct category, then there is quite likely a problem there.

Best Adventure covers adventures. Best Campaign/Campaign Supplement should NOT cover "linked adventures" in addition to covering settings. That way lies problems.

In short, the category definitions need to be clear and concise, and not overlap. If a product falls into multiple categories, great for that product! I have no issues or problems with that. However, a product should never fall into two or more categories because of a single aspect of the product (in this case Shackled City Adventure Path).

And for the record, I am proud of any mention that ICE receives in conjunction with the ENnies. However, this does not stop me from pointing out what I see as a problem. And having categories that overlap in their definition (as to what is eligible) is a serious problem.

Edit: And no, I am not expecting anything to be done about it now, but I would hope that this problem DOES get resolved before next year.

 

[buzz]

And I did.

For me, True20 wasn't simple enough if that was what it was going for and if not, it lacked enough system to move me as a reader. I was like, "Wow, these are like Bob's house notes for his game."

My faith in you is once again renewed, Joe.

 

[MonsterMash]

Congrats to all the nominees and honourable mentions. Thanks to the judges for their hard work, now just have to wait till I can vote in a horribly biased fashion.

 

[diaglo]

Congrats to all the nominees and honourable mentions. Thanks to the judges for their hard work, now just have to wait till I can vote in a horribly biased fashion.

we should compare notes.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Yes, a given product may well fit into multiple categories. But the question of whether one product should be allowed to receive multiple nominations isn't exactly clear cut. I don't think there's a clear single answer - it is more a matter of policy and what you want out of awards.

I can't even imagine this being a question. If a product has superior art and superior production values, do you punish it in one field simply because someone wants us to "spread the love" so to speak? Nonsense in my opinion.

 

[Teflon Billy]

Dude, we gave you the Honorable Mention slot! I know, it's not the same, but we do want to recognize those entries that just miss the top 5. That's why we have an HM in each category. So we did give you something that you can brag about.

Nice site, BTW. I really enjoyed it.

I liked it best

 

[Teflon Billy]

And man oh man Crooks was an awesome book. Sort of like Shackled City.

--Erik

LOL

 

[Teflon Billy]

It's the only 1st ed M&M book that I kept. (Man I wish that could get updated to 2nd ed.)

If you want the conversions Theo and I put together for M&M 2E, drop me an email.

 

[Rasyr]

I can't even imagine this being a question. If a product has superior art and superior production values, do you punish it in one field simply because someone wants us to "spread the love" so to speak? Nonsense in my opinion.

Being eligible in multiple categories is fine. Being nominated in multiple categories is just as fine and acceptable. So long as those categories do not overlap in definition.

The problem lies in when there are two categories who definitions overlap, such as with the Best Adventure category and the Best Campaign/Campaign Supplement category.

You (can) end up with the same product being nominated for two different awards for the same reason(s). There lies the problem.