Revolutions are Always Verbose: Effecting Change in the TTRPG Industry

[MGibster]

...it's weird, that people attribute things that are totally in our control to some sort of "economic reality."

Whatever we attribute it to, it's still the current reality. It doesn't mean it can't change though.

And, of course, Japanese and German manufacturers are, quite famously, unionized. So that's a really odd point- it's not about the products, it's about the treatment of the labor. A quality product can also mean, "A product that I know supports people that are working for a living."

t is a terrible argument, 50-60's also and are considered the best, collectors items, go price a 57 chevy or 70 hemi cuda convertible, the same exact unions made those.

I think both of you must have missed the part where I specifically mentioned that I didn't blame the unions for the terrible American cars produced during the 70s and 80s. It is however a good demonstration that a union made product isn't necessarily a good product.

I don't place that blame on the unions of course, but union labor doesn't necessarily lead to better products.

There it is. Just in case you missed.

 

[dragoner]

It is however a good demonstration that a union made product isn't necessarily a good product.

So that's a really odd point- it's not about the products, it's about the treatment of the labor. A quality product can also mean, "A product that I know supports people that are working for a living."

Or maybe quality of writing, but not like if the pages fell out of the book. Automobiles are not a good comparison. While with movies, one can still say they saw a bad movie, yet not think the actors were mistreated somehow.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Or maybe quality of writing, but not like if the pages fell out of the book. Automobiles are not a good comparison. While with movies, one can still say they saw a bad movie, yet not think the actors were mistreated somehow.

So, I'm trying not to get too sidetracked into the more abstract and political side, but unions are a but not necessarily the solution; part of the issue is the specific way that unions are implemented in America- which is to say, more adversarial (some countries tend to be more collaborative between unions and management), and with certain obligations that require them to defend "bad" workers.

When it comes to TTRPGs, my initial take would be that, at a minimum, those companies that are large and profitable (the Hasbros of the world) are not taking advantage of an antiquated system. Just because a small indie publisher might have to use a free-lance artist/writer for a specific project does not mean that Hasbro cannot bring on employees to shepherd D&D on an ongoing basis - for example.

In 1983, for example, TSR had 386 employees. Just try to put that in the context of today. Look - it's not like TSR was the best-run company, but what killed them was a lot of managerial decisions, including the killer Random House nonsense and not knowing how to utilize their assets. Say what you will about them (and their periodic purges) but at least they paid people ... for a while.

 

[dragoner]

So, I'm trying not to get too sidetracked into the more abstract and political side, but unions are a but not necessarily the solution; part of the issue is the specific way that unions are implemented in America- which is to say, more adversarial (some countries tend to be more collaborative between unions and management), and with certain obligations that require them to defend "bad" workers.

When it comes to TTRPGs, my initial take would be that, at a minimum, those companies that are large and profitable (the Hasbros of the world) are not taking advantage of an antiquated system. Just because a small indie publisher might have to use a free-lance artist/writer for a specific project does not mean that Hasbro cannot bring on employees to shepherd D&D on an ongoing basis - for example.

In 1983, for example, TSR had 386 employees. Just try to put that in the context of today. Look - it's not like TSR was the best-run company, but what killed them was a lot of managerial decisions, including the killer Random House nonsense and not knowing how to utilize their assets. Say what you will about them (and their periodic purges) but at least they paid people ... for a while.

Considering the pushback against organizing, I am pretty much convinced it is the right way to go. I mean there are arguments against, but are they good arguments against? I don't think so. I'll note that I really haven't drawn politics into it, other people have been talking communism, and where I am not a communist, nor am I anti-communist, it is that living in the US and talking communism is rather eh. A union or guild for RPG writers and creators is not actually a political stance, imo.

What I do think is that it should be it's own thing, and flexible, dynamic. Something good for everybody, including Hasbro by giving them a clear set of rules to operate by. Freelancers do not necessarily have to be excluded from that, except I would like to see them protected as well. They could also benefit from a virtual "Union Hall" where they could get employment, like a job board. Small publishers would be also protected from hiring those that didn't deliver. Also that Hall could be a place for virtual democracy, so that everyone involved could have a say in issues affecting the community, both inside and out. I mean, I am really seeing a lot of positive benefits to the idea.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

What I do think is that it should be it's own thing, and flexible, dynamic. Something good for everybody, including Hasbro by giving them a clear set of rules to operate by. Freelancers do not necessarily have to be excluded from that, except I would like to see them protected as well. They could also benefit from a virtual "Union Hall" where they could get employment, like a job board. Small publishers would be also protected from hiring those that didn't deliver. Also that Hall could be a place for virtual democracy, so that everyone involved could have a say in issues affecting the community, both inside and out. I mean, I am really seeing a lot of positive benefits to the idea.

This sounds like a good start. I know that there are similar organisations (For the Australian Film and TV industry there's: Australian Screen Editors' Guild, Producers' Guild, Writers guild, Directors' Guild.) I have found that they do good work in helping people to know their worth as employees. They also help people find work and do some advocacy for wages and conditions. In this particular example I feel they would benefit from merging into a single, larger body, but I digress.

I think that legal changes are needed as well. Don't get me wrong - unionising is important but it's only part of a solution. There needs to be effective changes to legal codes governing employment that reflect the changes in the employment landscape. Another Australian example: no-one in this country seems to know what award film and TV employees fall under. It would be very, very hard for a (theoretical) Australian Film Workers Union (there isn't one) to make a legal argument about wages and conditions when no-one can work out what the wages and conditions actually are. Now I think about it, it might be hard to form a legal union when you don't know what award(s) you are talking about... Might have to research that.

Anyhoo, I've just stopped myself going off on a very political, albeit Australian-centric, rant. I'm gonna pop over to another thread and see if dannyalcatraz actually tried vegemite yet.

 

[dragoner]

This sounds like a good start. I know that there are similar organisations (For the Australian Film and TV industry there's: Australian Screen Editors' Guild, Producers' Guild, Writers guild, Directors' Guild.) I have found that they do good work in helping people to know their worth as employees. They also help people find work and do some advocacy for wages and conditions. In this particular example I feel they would benefit from merging into a single, larger body, but I digress.

I think that legal changes are needed as well. Don't get me wrong - unionising is important but it's only part of a solution. There needs to be effective changes to legal codes governing employment that reflect the changes in the employment landscape. Another Australian example: no-one in this country seems to know what award film and TV employees fall under. It would be very, very hard for a (theoretical) Australian Film Workers Union (there isn't one) to make a legal argument about wages and conditions when no-one can work out what the wages and conditions actually are. Now I think about it, it might be hard to form a legal union when you don't know what award(s) you are talking about... Might have to research that.

Anyhoo, I've just stopped myself going off on a very political, albeit Australian-centric, rant. I'm gonna pop over to another thread and see if dannyalcatraz actually tried vegemite yet.

Yes, this is what I am thinking of as well. I don't think it can be some universal panacea to fix every problem. It can be step towards recognizing what we can fix internally, such as general labor practices, and external issues such as public policy. There it could work within the fabric of organized labor to help promote change. In general, I think that the pendulum has swung against unions and organizing in the last 30 years or so, and it has hurt people's livelihoods, time to swing it back again. Hopefully with that, putting extra money in people's pockets, will also let them spend more on entertainment such as role playing games.

 

[pemerton]

My own experience is that it can be quite challenging to maintain a union presence even in a workplace with a high number of long-term permanent employees whose work circumstances give them ample opportunity to come together, form common lists of concerns, etc.

I've never been involved in a "creatives"-type union or guild. I think the challenges of organising would be significant. That's not to say no one should try; but expert advice from those who have experience would probably be a help.

Given that a lot of RPG production is by self-employed individuals (perhaps using a corporate structure) I think that @Yora's idea of a producers' collective also makes sense.

Re what the market will bear: yesterday my partner and I went to a film. We paid $20.50 each for tickets, and another $11 (I think it was) for choctops. That's a bit over $50.

I paid about that much for a copy of John Harper's excellent Agon 2nd ed. I think there is probably some scope to step up expectations of outlay for RPG products.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Re what the market will bear: yesterday my partner and I went to a film. We paid $20.50 each for tickets, and another $11 (I think it was) for choctops. That's a bit over $50.

I paid about that much for a copy of John Harper's excellent Agon 2nd ed. I think there is probably some scope to step up expectations of outlay for RPG products.

Points of reference:

DMG was released in 1979 at a cost of $15.
Today, that would be $61.93.

One way is to think about movies, but I'm move convinced when thinking about dining out.

A good restaurant meal, for three, is usually $100 + tip (20-30%). A truly great restaurant meal can cost between $200 - $500 (plus, you know, tip). Number can, and will, vary, depending on amount you drink (if you drink), and factors such as the type of restaurants. But still ...

 

[Yora]

I believe when the original White Box came out in 1974, it was the most expensive game on the market for $10 or something like that.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

One relevant question is if the solution is for TTRPGs to somehow move beyond 'cottage industry' status by finding ways to stabilize the necessary sales to support more companies or independent creators, or if it really is better handled by remaining mostly hobbyist-- I offer this as a real choice because I see systems designed to better distribute economic security as possible, essential, and necessary.

A world where self-driving cars are ubiquitous alone is probably sufficient to strain the credibility of 'we can employ everyone at rates that allow them to live' so at some point I think we have to own up to the possibility of economies where needs are taken care of (food, shelter, healthcare, education) collectively, and with a lot of people working a little, instead of few people working a lot. Either things get dark enough that we'll have bigger things to worry about (e.g. regular people consumers will no longer have money to sustain the RPG market at all, at best it forcibly goes hobbyist if we still have a free internet) or we go 'full star trek' or something approaching it to avert what would functionally be feudalism.

Traditionally, expectations for such a society essentially entail conditions in which people participate in the arts and take up other pursuits because they have the leisure time to do so-- personally as a writer, I think that would be a major benefits for many artists, to be able to create without having to commodify, and RPGs are absolutely something that can be produced without the engine of capitalism, though they might look different. I honestly think you only really need leisure time and a sufficiently literate population.

Less state-directed creation of RPGs, and more "In Praise of Idleness" or "The Soul of Man Under Socialism" style hobbies-in-a-post-scarcity world. A lot of people already do stuff like this, I know I got into TTRPGs in the first place because it was a space where I could design adventures and be a 'game designer' without having to devote a whole career to it, or pick up a lot of technical skills I didn't have, its still a big reason I write homebrew adventures, study up on so much game design and TTRPG culture-of-play stuff, try different games, and build out my own worlds.