Another RPG company with financial difficulties

[barsoomcore]

We gotta pay them more, especially established, well-liked (i.e., heavily-bought) authors.

Well, but you can't just say, "Pay writers more!" I'm not sure that low pay rates are primarily the result of publisher greed. I suspect that most publishers pay what they can afford based on the sales of the product. It does no good to pay $X to create a product when it's going to generate $X-1 in revenue.

Maybe a royalty-based payment system is going to work out better. I know some publishers are going with that rather than a flat fee kind of system. As a hobbyist/freelancer, I like it -- it means that if I knock something out of the park I'll get compensated accordingly, and if I don't, well, better luck next time. But since this isn't my primary income I can afford such a risky strategy. I bet people doing this full-time can't so much.

I heard once that there were more full-time astronauts than there are full-time RPG writers. I've always assumed that was more or less accurate, and this discussion is doing little to unconvince me.

 

[John Morrow]

I DO agree that reducing the number of variables for players to select from is important, but frankly I think that even rolling stats is too much work for lots of people, because then they have to work out all their bonuses and so on.

Well, you could trim that down to the basics, too.

Because, of course, the part of a character that REALLY binds them to us isn't represented on the character sheet, anyway. It's the actions they take and the successes and failures that they have in the course of the game.

I think that depends on the person.

Of course the larger problem is that the hobby needs more GMs. And if you cater to the really lazy players who don't want to do any work, they'll never grow into being GMs for other players. Without more GMs, the hobby can't grow.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

Maybe a royalty-based payment system is going to work out better. I know some publishers are going with that rather than a flat fee kind of system. As a hobbyist/freelancer, I like it -- it means that if I knock something out of the park I'll get compensated accordingly, and if I don't, well, better luck next time. But since this isn't my primary income I can afford such a risky strategy.

I've heard too many stories about artists and writers not seeing any compensation at all for me to trust the overall effeacity of a royalty system.

BARSOOMCORE: So, Biggus, how did my book do?
BIGGUS GEEKUS: Oh, um, bad. Real bad. Sorry. Hey, here's $20. No worries. Now if you'll excuse me I have to fly my gold-plated heilocopter to the Alps for skiing and sushi.
BARSOOMCORE: Sigh. Ah well. Better luck next time and all that .... HEY!!!!

Plus if it's OGC and you don't read my contract carefully, I can put snoopy clip art on the cover, doink the sales, and then re-release it. Sure, you won't work for me again, but if finances are tight, will I care?

Just playing devil's advocate (in my gold plated heliocopter!)

 

[Nikchick]

Nik, how is GR doing overall? I would assume pretty well in relation to the rest of the industry, but I'd just like to hear it from someone in the know.

For straight-up dollar sales to distribution (including the book trade) we were up 12% last year over 2003. I'm pleased with those numbers because I consider that a good sign for continuing demand for our products: in other words, we're doing a pretty good job of putting out products that people want month after month. I'm unhappy with those numbers because I think we need to see bigger percentage change to really reach that "next level" that we all want to achieve, and I want greater cash reserves to weather things like bad debts on the retailer and distributor end, unexpected book trade returns (our returns have been pretty stable at about 4%, which is outstanding, but I don't want to be blind-sided by changes in strategy on their end, so a healthy reserve against returns is mandatory) and higher printing and shipping costs.

 

[Belen]

I'll second this.

Perhaps the online-only option isn't the best way to attract new players, but we're also approaching this problem from the mindset of people (1) that knew what life was like before the information age and (2) have our perceptions colored by old trends. Three years ago I would never have considered a PDF product a viable alternative, but now I'm finding myself more and more drawn to it. It has some considerable advantages over a printed book. It never wears out, you can carry dozens of them on a single CD that fits in your pocket, and if you need hard copy references, you can print out the pages you need, and multiple copies if necessary. If you've got a laptop handy, you can even keep multiple books loaded for quick reference.

I think the bottom line is this: the tabletop RPG market isn't going away, it's changing. Companies will adapt their business model to be more in line with the needs of the RPG market of the future and continue to be viable (even if it is at scale). It may not be the same companies we know (and love) right now, but there will always be someone producing games.

Four things have to change for e-publishing to take over.

1.) Marketing- An effective way to market online. At this time, online marketing barely registers. It is not effective and does not reach a wide audience. It only reaches the audience already aware of the industry.

2.) Browsing: There has to be a central place to browse that is effective. For instance, you would need the equivalent of going to a bookstore and looking at what is there. Right now that does not exist. Until is does, then people will really only go online to get the items they already know that they want. ENWorld reviews help, but again, that only benefits people who visit such sites.

3.) E-Reading: Something has to replace PDF that allows for FREE searching. Also, we need a venue easier to read. Books are easy to read. Screens are not. Especially PDAs or laptops.

4.) PC portability. Books are big, no small screens, can be carried and thrown about in a bookbag, and passed around with ease.. Until computers can do the same, then the point is mute.

The online model is not going to develop these items quickly. I maintain that we will have to wait a minmum of a decade, but probably closer to 20-30 years before all the requirements are met.

And before anyone says...looks at the net and the difference between now and 1990. The internet had been in development for decades before the great revolution of the 90s. We just got to sit back and see the tech and the internet mature and come together at the same moment.

 

[Nikchick]

Well, but you can't just say, "Pay writers more!" I'm not sure that low pay rates are primarily the result of publisher greed. I suspect that most publishers pay what they can afford based on the sales of the product. It does no good to pay $X to create a product when it's going to generate $X-1 in revenue.

Thank you Barsoomcore! There have been points when we paid more than our standard to established or "name" authors and I can tell you that to a product we saw absolutely NO impact on sales. In my experience books written by unknown or little-known authors have sold exactly as well as books by any authors who felt their names or their credentials should earn them a better rate. In some cases, the authors who got the higher rates didn't even turn in design that was any better, any more timely, any more tightly designed than the next guy.

If a publisher is going to charge more for their products, they have to provide something above standard if they want the customer to purchase it instead of the game next to it on the shelf. (It has to be the best idea EVAR, or in a really beautiful package, be the biggest-baddest hardcover in history, whatever.) In the same way, if a writer is going to charge more for their words, or an artist is going to charge more for their art, it has to be better than the art or writing that their competition is selling to the same publisher. And, more than that, it might be the most brilliant piece of genius ever written or the most drop-dead beautiful piece of art in history, but I'm increasingly of the opinion that it had better damn well be ON TIME above all. Gorgeous and 9 months late? Sorry, can't run a business on that. :\

 

[Kanegrundar]

Thanks for the info, Nik. It's good to hear that at least one (I assume 2, since it sounds like Malhavoc is doing pretty good also) other company that isn't WotC or WW is doing pretty good.

As far as reaching that next level, if GR keeps putting out the quality products that you are putting out now or better, then I'll gladly do my part to help get there!

Thanks,
Kane

 

[Nikchick]

I've heard too many stories about artists and writers not seeing any compensation at all for me to trust the overall effeacity of a royalty system.

BARSOOMCORE: So, Biggus, how did my book do?
BIGGUS GEEKUS: Oh, um, bad. Real bad. Sorry. Hey, here's $20. No worries. Now if you'll excuse me I have to fly my gold-plated heilocopter to the Alps for skiing and sushi.
BARSOOMCORE: Sigh. Ah well. Better luck next time and all that .... HEY!!!!

Bwah ha hah ha ha... No gold-plated heliocopters round these parts. I think a lot of people would be surprised at the extremely modest lifestyles of even the big players in the game industry, jet-setting CCG millionaires excepted (and really, how many of those are there?). Though I will admit a fondness for sushi...

I wouldn't ever suggest anyone work for royalties only, unless they're doing a project totally for love and fun and they honestly don't want to be compensated! On the other hand, Green Ronin used a "fee plus royalty" contract with several authors, to encourage that very same attitude that barsoomcore was talking about. If you do something wicked cool and it sells like gang-busters, you share in that success. "Fee plus royalty" is how Green Ronin has structured its design house work for other companies as well: we get a fee and a stepped royalty depending on how well the work is received in the marketplace. I think that's a fair system.

 

[barsoomcore]

BARSOOMCORE: So, Biggus, how did my book do?
BIGGUS GEEKUS: Oh, um, bad. Real bad. Sorry. Hey, here's $20. No worries. Now if you'll excuse me I have to fly my gold-plated heilocopter to the Alps for skiing and sushi.
BARSOOMCORE: Sigh. Ah well. Better luck next time and all that .... HEY!!!!

You rat-bastid.



Yeah, I absolutely WOULDN'T go with pure royalty if I actually cared about my game writing income. Right now it's pure fun for me so I choose who I'm going to work with based on who I like, pretty much, and who likes me.

Which is a smaller number of people than I'm entirely comfortable with. But thanks, Mom, for hanging in there.

Nikchik: 12% growth is definitely something to be proud of. You guys do a lot of good work, I'm glad you're seeing some payoff there. I'll hope for bigger things for GR in the future!

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

I wouldn't ever suggest anyone work for royalties only, unless they're doing a project totally for love and fun and they honestly don't want to be compensated! On the other hand, Green Ronin used a "fee plus royalty" contract with several authors, to encourage that very same attitude that barsoomcore was talking about. If you do something wicked cool and it sells like gang-busters, you share in that success. "Fee plus royalty" is how Green Ronin has structured its design house work for other companies as well: we get a fee and a stepped royalty depending on how well the work is received in the marketplace. I think that's a fair system.

Do you run it flat fee + royalty, or reduced per word rate + royalty? This is just a curiosity thing, really. I've heard of publishers paying out both ways, and the writers seemed happy enough - though I've never heard if they got more with fee + royalty than they would have per word.

And I've done salary for a little while, and that was nice - well, the dependable paycheck was nice, the per word breakdown... not so much.

Patrick Y.