My conscience stopped me from submitting.
- Thread starter RangerWickett
- Start date
- Status
angramainyu
Community Supporter
Storm Raven,
I asked everyone to stop the personal attacks, and you haven't. You will not get another warning.
I asked everyone to stop the personal attacks, and you haven't. You will not get another warning.
Ghostwind
First Post
Leaving the flaming arguments behind and looking back at the original topic, it seems that the predominant reason why a person didn't submit a proposal can fall into one (or more) of these categories:
*Campaign world has become a labor of love and does not wish to turn creative control over to a third party.
*Philosophical differences with Wotc or larger companies in general.
*Wants to self-publish the world (this relates to the first item).
*Creative differences would lead to conflicts.
*Realization that overwhelming number of submissions greatly reduces likelihood of being chosen as "winning" submission.
Now, all of these are valid reasons and anyone who opted not to submit should be respected for that decision and not subjected to name calling. If they cannot justify submitting a proposal then you should accept their reasons and be done with it.
I am going to make a few points about the process of working with a gaming company that should be kept in mind when reading future posts on this thread.
First off, contrary to the belief of some, Wotc is not looking to steal your one page submissions for ideas that they can use without compensation. Nearly every publishing company is guided by a code of ethics and stealing ideas is a definite no-no. Just ask any publisher other than Wotc and they will agree (right, Matt?).
The whole point of the open setting proposal was to give an individual, whether he or she is already a published author or not, a legitimate shot at becoming the creative force behind the development of a brand-new world setting for Wotc. It is going to open some serious doors for the person who is ultimately chosen (and possibly some doors for the others who were not). This open call should have been thought of as an opportunity at landing a dream job rather than winning a monetary amount. Treating it like a lottery or contest in which the winner is randomly drawn, cheapens the whole process and ultimately reflects badly on those in the gaming community who criticized the open call and Wizards.
When you work for a publisher, you must be able to conform your ideas and writing to what that publisher wants. If you cannot do that, you will never get consistent work in the business. Both Matt and Lizard made this point earlier and it is very true. If you cannot take criticism and sometimes rejection then you are wasting your time trying to write professionally. Creative differences between you and the publisher will result in your work being rejected. As soon as you are paid for your project, you no longer have creative control or any say about what happens to that product. This is standard operating procedure across the board with all publishers. You sign over all rights when you sign a contract. Again, if you never want to publish, then you are free to develop your world as you see fit and (depending on its content) even show it off to the world to see for free.
Self-publishing and forming your own company takes an enormous amount of resources, both monetary and personal in the form of time and effort. There are literally hundreds of d20 companies out there and most are doomed to eventual failure. The problem? Lack of quality product and lack of quantity. As many have claimed, the d20 market is being satured with products. Getting your product marketed on a national scale and noticed is a serious uphill battle. If you cannot get national recognition and sales, you will not succeed. These people who want to self-publish their world setting should realize the hurdles they must eventually cross if they want to become successful and actually make money selling their world to others.
Again, I think that everyone who chose not to submit should have that decision respected and not chastised. However, the foundations behind that decision may be the result of misinformation or unfounded belief. Hopefully, this post and some of the others by industry professionals will help set some of those beliefs straight...
*Campaign world has become a labor of love and does not wish to turn creative control over to a third party.
*Philosophical differences with Wotc or larger companies in general.
*Wants to self-publish the world (this relates to the first item).
*Creative differences would lead to conflicts.
*Realization that overwhelming number of submissions greatly reduces likelihood of being chosen as "winning" submission.
Now, all of these are valid reasons and anyone who opted not to submit should be respected for that decision and not subjected to name calling. If they cannot justify submitting a proposal then you should accept their reasons and be done with it.
I am going to make a few points about the process of working with a gaming company that should be kept in mind when reading future posts on this thread.
First off, contrary to the belief of some, Wotc is not looking to steal your one page submissions for ideas that they can use without compensation. Nearly every publishing company is guided by a code of ethics and stealing ideas is a definite no-no. Just ask any publisher other than Wotc and they will agree (right, Matt?).
The whole point of the open setting proposal was to give an individual, whether he or she is already a published author or not, a legitimate shot at becoming the creative force behind the development of a brand-new world setting for Wotc. It is going to open some serious doors for the person who is ultimately chosen (and possibly some doors for the others who were not). This open call should have been thought of as an opportunity at landing a dream job rather than winning a monetary amount. Treating it like a lottery or contest in which the winner is randomly drawn, cheapens the whole process and ultimately reflects badly on those in the gaming community who criticized the open call and Wizards.
When you work for a publisher, you must be able to conform your ideas and writing to what that publisher wants. If you cannot do that, you will never get consistent work in the business. Both Matt and Lizard made this point earlier and it is very true. If you cannot take criticism and sometimes rejection then you are wasting your time trying to write professionally. Creative differences between you and the publisher will result in your work being rejected. As soon as you are paid for your project, you no longer have creative control or any say about what happens to that product. This is standard operating procedure across the board with all publishers. You sign over all rights when you sign a contract. Again, if you never want to publish, then you are free to develop your world as you see fit and (depending on its content) even show it off to the world to see for free.
Self-publishing and forming your own company takes an enormous amount of resources, both monetary and personal in the form of time and effort. There are literally hundreds of d20 companies out there and most are doomed to eventual failure. The problem? Lack of quality product and lack of quantity. As many have claimed, the d20 market is being satured with products. Getting your product marketed on a national scale and noticed is a serious uphill battle. If you cannot get national recognition and sales, you will not succeed. These people who want to self-publish their world setting should realize the hurdles they must eventually cross if they want to become successful and actually make money selling their world to others.
Again, I think that everyone who chose not to submit should have that decision respected and not chastised. However, the foundations behind that decision may be the result of misinformation or unfounded belief. Hopefully, this post and some of the others by industry professionals will help set some of those beliefs straight...
Jerrid Al-Kundo
First Post
Very well said, Mr. Ghostwind.
King_Stannis
Explorer
put me in the category of folks who get a chuckle about people not wanting to "sell out" their setting. really folks, the kind of money being offered is obscene. as someone said earlier, WotC is not gonna send jack-booted thugs to your house if you are playing in violation of your own submitted world.
i also suspect that it's a subconscious cover for people lacking the necessary skills to follow a project like that through. there's no shame in that, i probably don't have them either. but i also wouldn't delude myself into thinking that i was better off for not trying.
i also suspect that it's a subconscious cover for people lacking the necessary skills to follow a project like that through. there's no shame in that, i probably don't have them either. but i also wouldn't delude myself into thinking that i was better off for not trying.
Last edited:
Henry
Autoexreginated
Amen, "Ghostwind" Steve.
While I do believe that those who DO wish to not "sully" a setting by giving it to WotC are deluding themselves a little, I respect anyone who feels that too much of themselves are in a setting to give its complete control up.
I would however, have suggested that they had submitted their settings anyway. Why?
Three reasons:
1) Creative control belongs to you completely for the entire first two-thirds of the process. You may pull out at any of that time. You could sue the pants off of them if they stole the setting verbatim or even in a derivative manner. The signed agreement states that "elements" might be similar, not the whole product. And if it's not similar enough for you to sue, it's not similar enough for them to sue.
2) If you did withdraw, I have every reason to believe they would either select another person to submit, or they would have already asked the ones they were interested in to submit their ideas anyway.
3) If you ever had any doubts about whether your setting was interesting enough for publication, this would solve it. Even if WotC said, "Hmmm - we are interested enough to see an expanded treatment", then that one statement is enough to say you have something a little better than every other would-be designer with a one-page idea.
You may disagree with these points, but my reasonings are pretty clearly laid bare, here. How will you know, unless you give yourself the chance?
Good luck to all submissions, and good luck to those who wish to make money with their ideas elsewhere. Regardless what anyone says about this job search, due to the swell of ideas, there has never been a better time to play D&D, in my opinion.
While I do believe that those who DO wish to not "sully" a setting by giving it to WotC are deluding themselves a little, I respect anyone who feels that too much of themselves are in a setting to give its complete control up.
I would however, have suggested that they had submitted their settings anyway. Why?
Three reasons:
1) Creative control belongs to you completely for the entire first two-thirds of the process. You may pull out at any of that time. You could sue the pants off of them if they stole the setting verbatim or even in a derivative manner. The signed agreement states that "elements" might be similar, not the whole product. And if it's not similar enough for you to sue, it's not similar enough for them to sue.
2) If you did withdraw, I have every reason to believe they would either select another person to submit, or they would have already asked the ones they were interested in to submit their ideas anyway.
3) If you ever had any doubts about whether your setting was interesting enough for publication, this would solve it. Even if WotC said, "Hmmm - we are interested enough to see an expanded treatment", then that one statement is enough to say you have something a little better than every other would-be designer with a one-page idea.
You may disagree with these points, but my reasonings are pretty clearly laid bare, here. How will you know, unless you give yourself the chance?
Good luck to all submissions, and good luck to those who wish to make money with their ideas elsewhere. Regardless what anyone says about this job search, due to the swell of ideas, there has never been a better time to play D&D, in my opinion.
Oracular Vision
First Post
After all these replies, "no" still seems like the definitive answer...
Will
First Post
Jerrid Al-Kundo said:
Not that it really matters, and not that I care, but... let's try a few pages back in this very thread:
Jerrid Al-Kundo said:
So no, you have not merely said that your campaign is more valuable to you at the table than as a published work. You've stated, at least twice in this thread, that if WotC touched the idea, it would be turned either luke-warm or ripped apart (I forget the phrase you used in the other case).
That is, you are claiming to be a better artist and have better discretion than what WotC would demonstrate in producing the same work.
Now, I'm not saying you are _wrong_ in that. But call a spade a spade, that is what you have claimed. If you are called on it, defend it.
-=Will
(In the interests of honest communication)
- Status
Similar Threads
