Does a publisher/author's interaction here influence your purchases?

[Crothian]

I guess my point here is that the industry is too small and incestuous for that sort of policy to make much sense beyond being arbitrarily applied. Unless you're actually willing to check the credits page of everything you buy, before you buy it, I just don't see it working.

Checking the credits though is a really easy thing to do. :\

 

[Cheiromancer]

I was also pretty turned off of anything from Monte Cook...

...I sense absolutely no ill will toward him, nor do I think there ought to be....

Now I *have* bought from Monte before, but I rarely do nowadays (exception: Year's best d20). A significant part of the reason is what he releases as OGC material; more specifically, what he *doesn't* release. Spells or monsters without the names, feats that allow you to template spells but none of the templates. It seems to me that he is very ungenerous in this regard.

I can see limiting campaign specific names (whoever the Mordenkainens and Elminsters are in his world, they should stay there) and everyone limits artwork. But the beauty of the OGC, as I see it, is that each person's work contributes to the richness of the whole gaming and publishing community.

Now I am not any kind of publisher or designer, and so I have not wrestled with the issues involved. I am certainly not suggesting that he is a wicked person. And if I am being ridiculous in criticizing him for this, I hope someone tells me (in a nice way). But right now it bothers me.

And let's not get started about Sean K. Reynolds

...Sean K Reynolds falls in this category for me from watching him maul a bunch of tweens on the WotC boards.

SKR is sometimes abrasive, but to me it comes across as forceful and maybe a bit rough-hewn. And I like his charity work. So I don't have any grudges with him. Mind you, I didn't witness him in action on the WotC boards, so perhaps I am being too charitable.

And there is FFE who published some real stinkers and were quite snooty about it on their forums. I used to confuse them with FFG until I thought "FFE= evil, FFG= good". Since then there hasn't been any problems.

 

[Whisper72]

Hmmm... I definately had to go the complex route...

I think there are several issues at play here:

- if I really want something, I _may_ be put off if I happen to notice the author act as a jerk, but prolly not
- an author acting nicely, with good linkage in his/her sig will prompt me to check out their stuff, but rarely send me to buy something straight away. Only if I later find I need something, I may remember having seen it there before
- if I am browsing around looking for potential gaming goodness, then yes, it will influence me

The problem is, this is mainly so for third party publishers. With the WotC books, I rarely even check who wrote it, I simply use teh various evaluations on-line to decide my purchasing (no local FGS, so I ship everyhting in thru Amazon, WWG/Necro, Paizo etc.).

From the author's point of view though, it is important to realize that the EnWorld audience is small on the whole (when thinking of print products available in stores), and not everyone here may have noticed the bad behaviour of the author in question.

So if the POV of Phil is that sales are barely / not noticeably impacted by assine behaviour on fora such as EnWorld, I'd say he's prolly correct there. For smaller, pure PDF, sellers, it may be more of an issue (if your sales run in the tens to low hundreds in stead of hundreds to thousands, the couple dozen people put off here will have a large impact...)

 

[jaerdaph]

I don't like giving money to jerks. In my mind, buying something published by a jerk affirms their behaviour (like praising a dog after she chews up your couch). There are at least four publishers I will not buy a thing from (Alternate Reality Publications, Adamant Entertainment, Bloodstone Press, and Misfit Studios) because of their behaviour on this message board and elsewhere. I was also pretty turned off of anything from Monte Cook after his comments on the ENnies a couple years back, and even though he's ammended those comments, I'm still wary about supporting him with my dollar. And let's not get started about Sean K. Reynolds.

That's funny because by naming names like you did in that post, it's completely turned me off from ever wanting to buy anything from you now that you are a publisher, or ever taking you seriously again.

Edit: And in the end what's even funnier is I probably will buy from you anyway because you have the good sense to hook up with someone like HeapThaumaturgist.

 

[Flyspeck23]

Well, I'd guess that this explains why TOGC doesn't rock ENGS as it rocked RPGNow.com - people see me as the bastard (rat bastard too ) that I am.

I'd love to discuss my stuff on these boards, but I've learned a long time ago that it's just not for the EN World crowd - who mostly tend to stay away from rule cards (which they either don't need or don't want at their gaming table) or RPG / boardgame hybrids.

Still, I'm here, even without the intent to promote my products. Because, well, I like EN World


Hope that's still on topic. If not, how about this:

Support of products is a must, but I expect those to happen on the publisher's own board - what EN World is good at is discussion of products with people who've got experience with the product in question, but not necessarily the designers or publishers.

But if I don't like the act of a particular publisher, I tend to stay away from his products too. Gladly that doesn't happen very often, and if it does... well, so far I wouldn't have been interested in their products anyway

All in all, I consider myself an "educated customer", who judges products by a) reviews, and b) previous experiences with that publisher (if any). A publisher's actions on EN World are a distant c).

 

[HinterWelt]

Phil,
I must say, I was kind of bummed when you announced your joint effort on the Publishing 101 effort. I am very interested in what you have to say about e-publishing and publishing in general. I would have gladly paid you money for those insights.

If you did not guess, I voted yes and heartily so. The argument can be made that the industry is too "incestuous" to avoid an author but I tend to say it is very easy with the amount of duplicate work by different authors.

I understand that some people could care less about who wrote what but some of us very much do.

Bill

 

[Vigilance]

I say yes, and since I feel this way as a customer, I try to act like its true as a writer.

My basic theory is this: games are the ultimate luxury item. If you have an extra 20 bucks to spend on a game, you're going to want that money to give you as many GOOD feelings as possible.

If the very sight of the book reminds you that the author was a real snarky jerk to you, that's going to reduce its enjoyment.

Chuck

 

[Eosin the Red]

Generally, an publisher can only turn me off when he/she is a complete moron. I guess to some degree that includes mean spirited but it really has more to do with demonstration of a lack of knowledge about their subject. I would say professionalism but that ain't quite it. Posts are bound to be filled with errors and such, but the junk-monkeys who post crap and then get mad when it is pointed out that they just posted crap really, REALLY turn me off to their products.

OTOH - I bought 3 or 4 products from Ronin Arts just because I had seen you around and saw how quickly you responed to posters who had issues. Other purchases have been motivated by much the same reasons (Magic Medieval Society, CMG stuff, Game Mechanics stuff). These are purchases that I would not have otherwise made. Maybe a total of $100.00 to 200.00

 

[Flyspeck23]

So if the POV of Phil is that sales are barely / not noticeably impacted by assine behaviour on fora such as EnWorld, I'd say he's prolly correct there. For smaller, pure PDF, sellers, it may be more of an issue (if your sales run in the tens to low hundreds in stead of hundreds to thousands, the couple dozen people put off here will have a large impact...)

If your sales are that low, you still won't notice. Not really, anyway.

Example:
Publisher A publishes book "Cry Wolf", a book about animal companions. Sales: 80.
Publisher A talkes bad about Publisher B, people on the boards are offended.
Publisher A publishes book "Cry Cow", a book about domestic animals. Sales: 3.

I don't see Publisher A relating the flop that's "Cry Cow" to his behavior on message boards. He rather will blame it on the bad reviews.

Publishers don't know for sure why people do or don't buy their stuff, or at least they don't know all the reasons. And I guess that that's the reason why Phil asked the question in the first place


(Btw, why has everybody started to use the latin fora instead of forums? Didn't see that as often until a few days ago... granted, it's probably correct, but it's also uncool (IMHO).)

 

[WayneLigon]

I am complex....

Well, not all that complex. I haven't seen anything here specifically that would make me less likely to buy something.

I generally don't let an author's personal life or opinions influence my purchases but really... I can't think of a gaming author having posted something that raised my ire to the point that it would make me put down something he's written sight unseen and prejudge works that came after, or look at his past works in a different light.

I rarely seek out every utterance a person has written or said. Seldom do I watch DVD extras where the actors participate. Even though there are several actors and actresses whose portrayals I like, I try not to find out too much about them personally. In general it could be said I am a fan of the work, not the creator. Having myself written things and put words in characters mouths that I do not personally beleive in, I try to give every creator the benefit of the doubt. For the most part, really, I feel I'm better off not knowing.

I can only think of a couple examples.

Orson Scott Card is about the only person I can think of that I have misgivings about supporting by purchasing his work. Now, I'm perfectly aware that the only difference between him and some other authors whose work I greatly enjoy is probably only that he has chosen to be very outspoken in other outlets and I happen to have had my attention directed to those things.

I'm pretty conflicted and I really don't know how I feel about the issue. He has asserted that he beleives certain things I find silly, some I find ignorant, and some that I find very personally insulting. Yet, his work that I've read at least never addresses those things in the context of the story, not even as subtext or allusion (though it's not unusual for me to miss such things). I can read those works again and be perfectly content in them, yet I know that in purchasing them, I've aided a person whose views I cannot abide.

I feel he and others like him should be thwarted and worked against whenever possible. But I have to acknowledge that it's quite possible other authors I support with my purchases feel the same way but such news has not reached my ears. I haven't really seen much from Card recently that I'd care to get - he seems intent on revisiting the one really good thing he did until he's finally strangled all the life he can from it, but that couls imply be at the request of his publisher - but I would still check out new work from him. I wouldn't automatically give it a pass sight unseen. I might even buy it if the premise sounded good, though I would go read some reviews first, which I don't normally do. I'd be more cautious than I normally would about purchasing his work, because I haven't decided if it makes me a hypocrite or not.

The only gaming bit I can think of is Central Casting-Modern. Some assertations were made in the prologue, then in a couple sentences appeared in the body of the work that bore those out. I wasn't inclined to purchase anymore Central Casting books, but I think that was the last one anyway. It was just a handful of sentences in an otherwise useful book - excise them and virtually nothing about the work would be changed in the least. I still felt uncomfortable having given money to them, though.

Had their been more works in the series, especially works by that person, I would take the time to read them much more carefully instead of going 'Yay, another one', and buying it sight unseen.


I read a couple blogs here and there. Nikchick, Robin Laws, Pramas, Monte Cook - a handful of others - haven't seen anything that would disuade me from getting their products and lot that does make me want to see more. I see postings from people here on the boards (though it's only once in a blue moon I look on the rules board, which is where I understand some of the rancor might come from), but on the whole unless they use their real name or identify themselves in their .sig, I have no idea who they are or what their work is.

I will say this: I generally take any internet forum posting with a large grain of salt (when I calm down and think rationally). I know it's impossible to measure meaning or nuance here, and that people are likely to say things they don't really mean. Same goes for blogs, especially personal ones. If I saw some of the things said in some threads in a more 'professional' arena (especially one where there is lead time, and/or an editor that could call up the person and say 'did you really mean this?'), and those people wrote games I was thinking about buying, then I might have different thoughts on the matter. Especially if the game material itself expressed or supported those views.

I've authored a few things (The Cadre, a couple Archetype things, the character parts to First Appearance TOMCATS, as well as a couple of others), but I can't say if anyone has bought or not bought those things based on stuff I might have said here. My username is my real name and the name on those products. No-one has ever mentioned them one way or the other, in fact, which might be a good thing I've never gotten mail over the issue, so I assume no-one cares, or no-one has noticed.

It's a complex matter and I'm still not certain where I stand on the issue, or what my conclusion on the matter will be.