Sanguine Productions withdraws from Origins Awards

[Synicism]

They have not come out with anything that would qualify in that category recently: they are withdrawing on principle. The Origins awards are making an exception to their rules in favor of d20 games, which is blatantly unfair. It is an objection over the rule being changed during middle of the game. The deadline has been specifically extended to allow d20 products that would only have been eligible for best supplement to suddenly jump into the best RPG category.[/SIZE]

They have to major RPG lines. The latest one was Jadeclaw, an standalone book that would qualify.

 

[Mark CMG]

-snip-

I see your points also but ultimately any book with a d20 logo cannot have character creation rules and is by default a supplement of a WotC "Core Book" (of one kind or another.)

Even those who choose to purchase (or through some means obtain) a license to sport the D&D logo owe a huge amount of their success to being supplemental to D&D and are not stand alone games.

As sais, it is the main difference in the Origins Awards categories, at the heart of the difference and therefore not a "technicality". To suggest otherwise comes across as a way to trivialize and rationalize a huge change in the way the awards are (and have been) structured. Doing it after the fact is an incredible blunder on the part of the Origins awards people (that is, whoever was involved in that decision).

I have no doubt that the people behind the Origins awards would like to be able to recognize d20 products on an equal footing with others. It's all about the games, afterall. But until they begin an awards period with the rules outlined for everyone in advance I think it is wrong to poo poo the change and I have to salute any company that wouldn't just allow such a thing to be swept under the rolled out red carpet.

 

[Desdichado]

By default, to compete for Best RPG, a game has to stand alone. It can't require another book to play.

But it doesn't require another book to play a d20 game, you can play with the SRD which is a downloadable file from the internet. Really, nothing like the d20 situation has ever existed before. Ergo, the rules don't really cover it to anyone's satisfaction. The Origins committee tries to address this, and Sanguine pulls out crying foul. Unless I'm missing something, and from reading the responses below, I don't know what it is, then Sanguine is throwing a better tantrum than my 4-year old daughter can. Sure, technically a d20 product doesn't qualify. But technically, nothing like a d20 product existed previously. Books like T20 are clearly complete games, regardless of whether or not you need the SRD to play it.

EDIT: Although making the change after the fact is a big mistake, IMO. Should've just waited for next year.

 

[Mark CMG]

But it doesn't require another book to play a d20 game, you can play with the SRD which is a downloadable file from the internet.

-snip-

Unless I'm missing something, and from reading the responses below, I don't know what it is...

The SRD does not contain character generation rules that are in the Core Rule books and required for any d20 product thereby negating a d20 product's ability to "stand alone."

 

[reiella]

Hmm, which books specifically went in as Best RPG?

At a glance, I'm guessing, Spycraft and Mutants and Masterminds?

But from these thread it seems like Freeport may be in for Best RPG? Of course, Origin's submission list doesn't distinquish which category.

[ Edit/Add ]
Ah rereading I think I might see it.

A change was made, and the submission deadline extended. So we don't exactly know what products are being submitted under this extension until the new deadline?

 

[The Sigil]

As sais, it is the main difference in the Origins Awards categories, at the heart of the difference and therefore not a "technicality". To suggest otherwise comes across as a way to trivialize and rationalize a huge change in the way the awards are (and have been) structured. Doing it after the fact is an incredible blunder on the part of the Origins awards people (that is, whoever was involved in that decision).

I did not mean to trivialize the decision when referring to it as a technicality. The definition is indeed an important part of the "dividing line" between categories (indeed, THE dividing line) - I only am calling it a technicality because the advent of d20 has "blurred the line" on what is and what is not stand-alone.

And as I mentioned in my post ("I happen to agree"), I agree with Sanguine and you - if this is the definition in place at the time of the awards, we must adhere to it. Whether or not I think it is a "good" definition in light of the d20 license is another discussion. I don't think it is a good definition, necessarily, but I will not argue with you that it IS the definition used when the awards process started and as such should be honored throughout the process.

I have no doubt that the people behind the Origins awards would like to be able to recognize d20 products on an equal footing with others. It's all about the games, afterall. But until they begin an awards period with the rules outlined for everyone in advance I think it is wrong to poo poo the change and I have to salute any company that wouldn't just allow such a thing to be swept under the rolled out red carpet.

I'm not poo-pooing the change. I think your statement here summed things up quite nicely - as mentioned above, I personally have no problem with making the change because I think d20 mandates a paradigm shift - provided it is outlined in advance. Since it wasn't outlined in advance, it is a bad change to make.

Again, I think that in the final analysis, this is a change that needed to be made to accomodate the d20 STL... BUT "making the change now" is bad.

Saying, "next year, the rules will change to 'blah'" is good.

I think we are both arguing the same side here, so I'm just going to drop it.

--The Sigil

 

[Mark CMG]

I think we are both arguing the same side here, so I'm just going to drop it.

--The Sigil

My fault for quoting you to make my first point but then proceeding to respond more generally to the whole matter. I should have added some sort of dividing line when I switched gears. My apologies.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Let's work backwards through this one...

A "technicality" is a minor point, a detail. The point being rescinded (and not even across the board but apparently only for d20 products and after the fact) is the very heart of the difference between entry into the "Stand Alone" RPG category and the "Supplement" RPG category. As to the 'not "man" enough' accusation... ...when someone stands up for an issue of integrity, do you always question their "manhood" to deride them? That's simply foul.



See above...

Oh yeah Mark, a company that makes "furry" roleplaying games really has a lot of room to complain about changes in the competition. This is of course made even funnier by the fact that they have never won the competition and according to several people do not have ANY products that would currently qualify anyways even under the expanded ruling.

 

[Mark CMG]

Oh yeah Mark, a company that makes "furry" roleplaying games really has a lot of room to complain about changes in the competition. This is of course made even funnier by the fact that they have never won the competition and according to several people do not have ANY products that would currently qualify anyways even under the expanded ruling.

Thanks for your input. By your standard, unfortunately, anything you say about any subject is also irrelevant. I leave you to wallow in your paradox...

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

Oh yeah Mark, a company that makes "furry" roleplaying games really has a lot of room to complain about changes in the competition.

Soooooo

how exactly does their production of anthropomorphic games factor into their "room to complain"?

Patrick Y.