Robin Laws posts a column about the industry that's actually salient and sane

[2WS-Steve]

So, I've got this awesome RPG that I will probably only ever get to play at GenCon or when I run events at Gameday... and it's ony one of many RPGs I own that are in the same boat. This sort of ticks me off, but what can I do? RPGs, even mechanically simple ones, do require quite a bit of time and effort to master, and run smoothest once that mastery has been achieved. Where is the incentive for my players to start from scratch all the time?

Frankly, there just isn't -- not unless they have the same fondness for trying out new game systems that you do.

This is one of the problems that the OGL was trying to fix -- to keep the market from fragmenting into a bunch of groups who've each mastered a different game system and now are less willing to game with new people since they'd have to re-invest that time to learn the new rules.

 

[Hemlock Stones]

GREETINGS!

This whole article and resulting conversation is rather interesting. Perhaps even stunning. There was a time when I would roll into my local gaming outlet, peruse the shelves, and then buy something. As such I wound up with so many books I don't even use anymore. I wasted a great deal of money. Now as time has moved forward, I am uber selective in what I will purchase and can purchase.

Am I responsible for the downward spiral of the RPG industry? Nope. Let's look at the one arena that has caused the most complications-computer technology. I heard about a product that was released and it was from online news and information. I sought it out. But just wasn't sure if it would work with what I had in mind for a game scenario I was going to run. Rather than buying it sight unseen I waited. I finally saw it at one of my usual suspects on the storefront arena. It would have been a grave error for me to have bought it. If Amazon would have had it, for Amazon's 20% off deal, I would have probably bought it.

I don't buy Dragon magazine anymore, because I get all the latest and greatest news from EN World. D20 has really become 60% accounting and 40% playing. Not all gaming environments are like this. Savage Worlds is phenomenally uncomplicated. I think the reason that "tools" to make playing RPG games easier aren't as prevalent from people like Wizards of the Coast means that they would loose out on their traditonal means of income. E-Tools is a poor product at best. Believe me I wanted it to be a good thang, it just isn't.

Finally, World of Warcraft does provide to many people a suitable alternative for their role-playing game fix. World of Warcraft handles all the accounting, it lets you play the game, and it even creates a paltry means of socializing. I want nothing to do with it because it still reminds me of being a glorified arcade game console with little emphasis on the mental skills and more on the physical dexterity side of game play.

Hops off the soap box.

Alan

 

[buzz]

D20 has really become 60% accounting and 40% playing. Not all gaming environments are like this. Savage Worlds is phenomenally uncomplicated. I think the reason that "tools" to make playing RPG games easier aren't as prevalent from people like Wizards of the Coast means that they would loose out on their traditonal means of income.

I'm not a mod, but I'd like to ask that we not let this thread degenerate into any system- or company-bashing.

Also, Savage Worlds is based on the same supplement-churn model as D&D and most other systems. IIRC, the whole point of SW is selling a series of campaign supplements that you play for 6-8 sessions and then move on to the next. And as simple as it may be in comparison to a lot of RPGs, it's still 100+ pages of rules to which each supplement adds on. Ergo, I don't see it as exceptional in any way when we're talking about general RPG rends.

Okay, now I'll get off my soap box.

 

[buzz]

Frankly, there just isn't -- not unless they have the same fondness for trying out new game systems that you do.

Exactly. (I don't think I've ever found anyone as system-curious as I am.)

The interesting thing, though, is that both my die-hard D&D groups and my die-hard HERO group are more than happy to plunk down lots of cash for supplements for those games... even if the likelihood of them being used is nil. Heck, I recently cleared out a lot of books from my game shelf. Some I hadn't even read yet, much less used in a game, and I'm in three groups that meet regularly.

I guess the big lure is, "Well, at least it's a product for a system I actually play."

This is one of the problems that the OGL was trying to fix -- to keep the market from fragmenting into a bunch of groups who've each mastered a different game system and now are less willing to game with new people since they'd have to re-invest that time to learn the new rules.

Even if we could definitively say that the OGL did accomplish this, there's still more on the market than any gamers I've known besides myself feel the need for. Really, if there were only D&D and HERO to choose from, my D&D groups would ignore HERO and my HERO group would ignore D&D.

 

[Janx]

I'm a regular on a music site, as well. They complain about the same problems.

Signal to noise ratio. As in too many choices of music, most of them bad, it's hard to find the good music.

One quoted story, was a guy saying "My son has a CD", and the response "Who doesn't" The barrior to publishing is so small for music AND RPGs, news, editorials (aka blogs) that anybody can do it. The result, is a glut of content, and little means ot filter out the junk.

In the old days, the barriers to entry were high enough that publishers put some effort into what they produced, because the costs were too high to risk a flop. Now, anybody can post a new RPG or album they made at home.

Ben Lehman's comments are indicative of this problem. Yes, it's initially great to cut out the middlemen. But now, everybody's doing it, it'll be harder and harder to reach a viable market. The RPG industry IS important if you want high quality products and you want to meet people who are playing the same thing (so you can play with them).

Consider this, if you want an RPG in a nice hardcover with good art, layout, and editing, are you going to get that from a self-publisher who's sold 500 copies? Good physical product costs money. To pay for that, a company needs a large print-run, and lots of customers. That takes LESS fractioning of the market, with fewer competitors, so that more RPG players will see your book as a desirable product. If they're distracted by a plethora of alternatives, they are less likely to spend money on your product.

If you're just a gamer, you don't have to care greatly about the game industry, and from that perspective, Ben Lehman's lack of comprehension on the problem and focus on the gamer is great. But if you produce products, you ARE part of the industry and you should very much care about the big picturem of which customer satisfaction is merely one component of it.

 

[buzz]

Ben Lehman's comments are indicative of this problem. Yes, it's initially great to cut out the middlemen. But now, everybody's doing it, it'll be harder and harder to reach a viable market. The RPG industry IS important if you want high quality products and you want to meet people who are playing the same thing (so you can play with them).

I may be coming at this utterly uninformed, but I disagree 100%.

The odds that any FLGS would stock copies of Lehman's Polaris RPG are pretty minimal. This isn't because he's cut out the middleman; it's becasue his product isn't D&D. He's so far down the food chain behind D&D, Exalted, WoD, Palladium, GURPS, etc. that even through normal distribution channels, he'd be lucky to sell a few hundred copies of his game. None but the most hard-core FLGS are even going to stock his product.

He can sell that many, and probably more, by selling his product himself, at a fraction of the cost in time, effort, and money. Lehman is absolutely justified in avoiding the entrenched distribution model; it's not even functioning reliably for the companies that can afford to use it. Why should he?

And who knows? If his product is successful enough, it WILL end up in those same stores, and do so when it was financially viable for Lehman. That's what seems to have happened with Luke Crane's Burning Wheel.

As for meeting people, fan-created destinations like ENWord, RPG.net, and The Forge have done far more community-building in recent years than any RPG publisher. WotC is the only publisher I can think of that actually spends money on outreach... if you consider demo teams for their products "outreach". The other demo teams I'm aware of (Legion of Heroes, MIBs) are pretty much all-volunteer.

Consider this, if you want an RPG in a nice hardcover with good art, layout, and editing, are you going to get that from a self-publisher who's sold 500 copies?

Absolutely. Head on over to http://www.burningwheel.org and takle a look at the previews for Crane's upcoming Burning Empires SFRPG. Or to http://www.theknownworld.com/ for the Origins-nominated Artesia FRPG. Full-color gaming goodness.

And even though they are B&W softcovers, I would stack Burning Wheel, Polaris, or InSpectres up against any mainstream RPG product. I mean... typography. BW actually gets typography. And glorious, readable layouts! Hallelujah!

I can think of at least two big, successful mainstream publishers who regularly churn out product that looks, in the first case, like it was typeset using safety scissors and glue, or, in the second case, like Walk Disney threw up on it after being sideswiped by Iron Maiden's custom van.

And editing? Please. Big money = good editing is contra-indicated by just about every mainstream product in existence.

 

[scourger]

Also, Savage Worlds is based on the same supplement-churn model as D&D and most other systems. IIRC, the whole point of SW is selling a series of campaign supplements that you play for 6-8 sessions and then move on to the next. And as simple as it may be in comparison to a lot of RPGs, it's still 100+ pages of rules to which each supplement adds on. Ergo, I don't see it as exceptional in any way when we're talking about general RPG rends.

Savage Worlds (SW) is exceptional for its design goals, which I will detail below. It really changed the way I game. I spend about 90% less time preparing the game, and it is much, much easier to run than D&D/d20. I am currently debating whtether I want to run Warhammer using SW or WFRP as written. I surmise that the publisher learned about market saturation with Deadlands and a brief attempted foray into d20. The difference with SW plot-point books is that they actually contain adventures in the setting book. I doubt I'll ever use all 5 of the other plot points books I have, but I have used Tour of Darkness for 25 intermittent weekly sessions over the past year. And I have an old Boot Hill module I'd love to Savage. I don't mind buying one book for a campaign setting that is actually a campaign. It's the d20 style of supplement-churn that I can't do.

Shane's design goals:

As a Game Master:

1) I want a game that it's easy to make up monsters, NPCs, magic items, weapons, etc. on the fly. If I have to look up lots of charts and tables, add up points (as a GM, not a player), and so on, it's too complicated.

2) I want a game where "mooks" are either up, down, or off the table. I don't want to keep track of wounds for lesser NPCs--only important bad guys, villains, dragons, and so on.

3) I want a game that easily handles vehicles. The vehicle rules in many games require a PHD to decipher.

4) I want a game a non-gamer friend of mine can look at and understand *at a glance.* The basic rules for Savage Worlds can be described in one sentence.

5) I want a game that has a "spine" capable of gaming any genre, but allows me to insert special rules to tailor specific genres. Horror needs detailed fright tables, for instance, and a pulp heroes game needs to be less gritty and deadly than World War II.

7) As a GM, I want to roll *one* attack die for my bad guys to see if they hit, and I don't want to do any math to it. If three orcs gang up on a hero, I want to roll 3 dice, look for hits, and be done.

As a player I want:

1) I want a game that provides real depth for characters. I want to see my character grow, gain new special abilities, and even increase my skills and attributes.

2) I want a game that handles large battles fast. If my sergeant in World War II persuades the villagers to fight beside him, I want them on the table-top, not glossed over.

Update: After going round and round on this one a bit, what I was really after was reasonable speed--but more importantly--ease. I just don't want to do a lot of bookeeping during a fight.

3) I want my NPC allies to have names and at least a "personality" trait for each. If my Lt. in Vietnam needs to send someone to scout a hill, I want to know who's "Gung Ho," "Reliable," "Shifty," "Lazy," and so on.

4) I want a little control over the dice--like Fate Chips or bennies--so the hero I've been working on for a year doesn't drop dead because of one bad die roll. Two or three I can handle, but not one.

5) "Open ended die rolls." If I get lucky and roll that high number, I want to keep rolling and feel like I just conquered the world.

 

[buzz]

Savage Worlds (SW) is exceptional for its design goals, which I will detail below.

Remember, I'm not talking about whether SW is exceptional in quality. I'm talking about it as a product line. In that regard, it's treading on well-worn paths. "Easy to run" has been done before, and there's nothing really wacky going on in terms of its business model. PEG is hoping to sell you supplements just like any other company.

SW is fundamentally no different from True20, Unisystem, BESM, or a host of other RPGs w/r/t to what's being discussed in this thread.

Again, this is neither good or bad; it just is. That you're having such fun with SW is a testament to the "great time to be a gamer" assertion on Lehman's part.

 

[rowport]

...both my die-hard D&D groups and my die-hard HERO group are more than happy to plunk down lots of cash for supplements for those games... even if the likelihood of them being used is nil. ...I guess the big lure is, "Well, at least it's a product for a system I actually play." ...Really, if there were only D&D and HERO to choose from, my D&D groups would ignore HERO and my HERO group would ignore D&D.

Well, keeping in mind that anecodotal evidence is pretty meaningless in small piecemeal chunks... and especially so since our little group tends to buy *far* more game product than most AFAICT... a couple of years ago I bought much more loosely than I do now, even with some games I knew very little about. But, I quickly realized that I would rarely- if ever- play them, so started paring down my purchases to the systems that I knew I would play, really liked, or could at least *possibly* play. (Those three categories were D&D, HERO, and other genre d20 games, respectively.) By this year, though, I have stopped buying even the HERO or Arcana Evolved, Mutants & Masterminds, d20 Modern and some other great d20 games. Now I just buy D&D books. Some of that is because I *might* use them in-game- even if only a feat or prestige class. Some of that is because I really enjoy reading them- moreso with WOTC D&D books than most other game books (M&M being a notable exception- they are very readable books). But, just as importantly, I have far more content already without really needing any more for years, if ever. There is just no way that I could play out all the nifty character ideas I would like, even if just playing D&D with our normal group. If you add d20 Modern, Future, etc. I could have years more- and I have only actually *played* d20 Modern a few times, mostly at GameDays!

I like reading game books, so I keep buying them, but I really think there is just so much available that there is an excess of options already.

OTOH, I do *not* like pdf books. I have bought some, but end up printing them out anyway, which misses the point. I prefer a nice sturdy (HC better still) book. I also do *not* like online gaming. It is not roleplaying IMO, and really dull. I do like single player CRPGs, though, so I suspect that I am unusual that way. Anyway, none of these seem to have any impact whatsoever on my buying RPGs. Comic books used to, OTOH; I buy far more game material now than I did when I bought more comics. So, maybe your entertainment dollars do just shift around. I dunno.

EDIT: I just remembered: as an exception to my own buying patterns above, I pre-ordered "Damnation Decade" from Green Ronin, a d20 Modern setting based on 1970s apocolyptic movies. I might never get to play it, or maybe just a one-shot game, but that just sounds coolio.

 

[buzz]

Full disclosure: rowport is in one of my D&D groups.

Well, keeping in mind that anecodotal evidence is pretty meaningless in small piecemeal chunks... and especially so since our little group tends to buy *far* more game product than most AFAICT...

Possibly. We do have a lot of disposable income in our little group, and it doesn't hurt that our DM runs his own RPG/comic mail-order business, thus giving us discounts. Still, we do buy a healthy amount of stuff.

And in my HERO group, I'd say that 5 out of the 7 of us buy just about every HERO product that gets released. 4 out of 7 of us buy a lot of product in general.

And I feel like quite a few of the people I meet at Gameday buy a decent amount of product.

Hmm... I was making a point here somewhere.

Oh, that I don't think we're that far off the average, and even the ones of us who buy the least own more product than they'll ever use.