Payment of Writers

[Khan the Warlord]

I actually prefer standard paper; I like to be able to write and erase in the book and the slick paper doesn't allow that.

You... you... write in your rpg books?



I'm probably too protective of my books; I don't even write my name in them to signify ownership. If I see something I would like to add text to, I'm the type that takes the book to a copier.

 

[Orcus]

I suspect that the content you've managed to align for that book will be the envy of _any_ d20 publisher, since it has a "built-in" audience far in excess of just about anything original a d20 publisher could hope to come up with. I strongly suspect that Tome of Horrors will be one of the best selling d20 products ever.

I sure hope so. Not to mention the fact that it is all OGC and I give examples of how to reuse the content in the back of the book to help other publishers.

Here's a question for you and I guess for everyone here.

Would enough people who would pay $30 for a 400-page monster book featuring official D&D monsters from previous editions balk at paying $35 or even $40 for the same book that you would make less money overall by raising the retail price?

I dont know much about the industry as far as pricing goes. I am a newbie at this, so maybe I make newbie mistakes. I just go by what I would want as a gamer, and I have to say I hate paying over 30 for a product. I know (believe me, I know) that we SHOULD be able to charge more and that the people involved DESERVE more. But if I--as a pretty well off guy thanks to the old day job--have qualms about spending 30, I dont see Johnny college student spending it. Maybe I am wrong.

I suspect the idea behind your company is not simply to "provide the gaming goods" to as many people as possible, or you would simply be charging cost to provide such a phenomenal value to your teeming fans.

Actually, I do this as a hobby not as a primary source of income, so actually I dont always make bottom line decisions. That is definately a luxury I have, but it is a bit of a curse too. I have acquired properties that might not always make the best bottom line sense just because, frankly, I can, and because I love this game and I feel an obligation to bring stuff like Judges Guild to 3E. Goofy, I know. But I am sort of an idealist.

So I would say in fact that "delivering the gaming goods to as many people as possible" is one of our goals. Doing things at cost is just impossible, my wife would kill me but we try to keep our margins as tight as possible. Maybe thats bad business. Maybe I am screwing things up. I dont know. I just try to price things at what I would pay for them.

If more profit could be made by charging $35 or even $40 for the Tome of Horrors, don't you owe it to yourself, your contributors, and your investors to make the decision that will bring Necromancer the most money?

Nope. I am not "doing this for the money." There are publishers that are and I think it shows. I dont want that to be me. I definately do not make "bottom line first" decisions.

But I will confess it isnt all altruistic either. There is a very real worry about cost vs. sales. Making $2 per unit and selling 10,000 units is better than making $5 per unit and selling 3000 units. I dont know about you guys but the hardest thing is balancing those ideas. I tend to go with my gut.

Let me give you an example, the one product we "overpriced" (or, perhaps, "properly priced") was our Kuntz stuff. That didnt sell for crap. Perhaps there were other reasons there (I know there were so this is a bad example), but the sales were the worst for those modules of anything we have done by far. They were also overpriced to offset other costs involved in that deal. So I am a bit gunshy about trying to ofset my costs with a higher cover price. I'm not sure it works. On the flip side, Crucible of Freya (underpriced at 7.99) and Tomb of Abysthor (underpriced at 12.99) sell great. I released Crucible almost 2 years ago and I still get reorders on it. So there is evidence that underpriced products do move more units.

But it is really so hard to predict for me. Maybe people smarter than me have figured it out, but I suck at this stuff.

I think people recognize value and that drives sales, at least for some products. Its hard to say what people WOULD have bought, particularly given the d20 market and how it has changed. For example, I am pretty confident that Tome will sell very well. But there is no way it even approaches half of what the Creature Collection sold, just because CC came out real early before the MM and before the d20 glut. I hope I am wrong.

If you charged more for your products and realized significantly more profit, don't you think it'd be easier to pay more than $.02 a word to the writers of your products?

You are assuming away the very problem. You are saying that I can both (1) charge more for my products, AND (2) realize more profit. I am not sure that is true. Making more money per unit is not good if the higher cover price means fewer sales. Higher per unit profit doesnt mean greater net profit.

Actaully, I'll tell you the best way for me to be able to pay my guys more: if sales numbers picked up for d20 in general Granted, with WW distribution my distribution numbers are good, but "thangs aint what they usta was." My margins are tight these days. And I refuse to cut back on production stuff. For example, I just secured two Frank Frazetta covers for our upcoming Wilderlands stuff for Judges Guild. Why? Cause I thought it would totally rule to do it. So I did it. Will that impact my bottom line? BIG TIME. But I dont want to go on the cheap just to maximize my profit. Does that mean there is less wealth for me to spread around to my guys? Yep.

I'm not sure I want to do it differently. But I really like this discussion. I really want to hear how other people strike the balance between per unit profitability and eventual sales numbers and thus net profit.

Clark

 

[Nikchick]

I think Oathbound should have been priced at at least $45.00, or should have been a shorter book with the same price point (and I hope Jim and Chris forgive me the use of their products as examples).

Oh, Erik, it's not Chris you have to worry about.

Nicole

 

[Nikchick]

Personally, I wouldn't care about having to settle with only B&W illustrations if the paper was better.

By "better" do you mean glossy paper vs. non-glossy paper? I'm only asking because Green Ronin has only used glossy paper once (early printings of the Character Record Folio) and we heard *howls* of protest from customers who really hated the glossy paper. The non-glossy paper we use as the standard stock for our books is actually pretty high quality, 60# or better (lower than that and you can get some ugly dot gain issues) so the art reproduces clearly and you can't see the printing of one page through to the next page.

I'll be bummed out to hear that such attention to detail (and swallowing the additional costs) isn't appreciated by the end user. Yikes!

Nicole

 

[Maggan]

Glossy paper

One reason that Green Ronin heard howls over their choice of glossy paper for the Character Record Folio, is the fact that character sheets are meant to be written on. And that generally rules out glossy papper.

For products NOT meant to be written on, use glossy or not glossy paper. For character sheets, go for something rougher.

My two cents

M.

 

[Orcus]

Geez, I just read my last post. How obvious is it that it is late and I just had a diet coke?

Clark

 

[2WS-Steve]

Slick paper in a character folio!!

I doubt customers consciously notice the difference between 50# and 60# paper unless they focus pretty carefully; I don't at any rate. But I do think I unconsciously notice the difference and that impacts my overall feeling about the book. BotR feels very crisp and clean and I think it's largely due to the fact you're not getting so much bleed through from text on the other side of the page and that 60# stock has a higher brightness.

Er, plus it makes a book look bigger

 

[Nikchick]

Let me give you an example, the one product we "overpriced" (or, perhaps, "properly priced") was our Kuntz stuff. That didnt sell for crap. Perhaps there were other reasons there (I know there were so this is a bad example), but the sales were the worst for those modules of anything we have done by far. They were also overpriced to offset other costs involved in that deal. So I am a bit gunshy about trying to ofset my costs with a higher cover price. I'm not sure it works. On the flip side, Crucible of Freya (underpriced at 7.99) and Tomb of Abysthor (underpriced at 12.99) sell great. I released Crucible almost 2 years ago and I still get reorders on it. So there is evidence that underpriced products do move more units.

Clark

Ok, one more post from me and then I'll go to bed. I beg forgiveness in advance if my thoughts aren't clear tonight, it's been a long day (but I know if I don't comment now I'm not going to get around to it later).

I think there are many other factors that you're not taking into account. The Kuntz stuff you released came out in a MUCH different market than Crucible, and I think you're underestimating the impact of when your early products hit the market compared to when you released the Rob Kuntz projects, if nothing else. I'm positive there are other things I'm also not considering, but that one point alone is enough to convince me you're making a bad assumption.

We still get orders for Death in Freeport, even though it's been out of print and all we have are scuffed, scratched and damaged copies left. Does that mean that we should keep putting out $7.99 32-page adventures? Hardly! Our first product has name recognition, has market penetration, has filtered out to people who have *just now* heard about it or made the decision to buy it, after a couple of years on the market!

Bah, the cold meds have kicked in, it's late, and it's been a long day. I should just give it up. But I do hope to convince you, and all my D20-publishing brothers and sisters, that we need to charge a reasonable rate in order to pay ourselves and our freelancers a reasonable rate as well! Even those of you who are not "doing it for the money".

Nicole

 

[Nikchick]

Re: Glossy paper

One reason that Green Ronin heard howls over their choice of glossy paper for the Character Record Folio, is the fact that character sheets are meant to be written on. And that generally rules out glossy papper.

For products NOT meant to be written on, use glossy or not glossy paper. For character sheets, go for something rougher.

My two cents

M.

Ok, I lied, I didn't go to bed yet.

The glossy paper in the original folio was not as bright as the non glossy paper (so the writing didn't show up with as much contrast) and I personally didn't care for the glare from the pages, but one thing I have to say is that the glossy paper definitely held up to repeated erasings. I definitely like the regular paper of the new printings better, personally, but the original did have its merits.

Anyway, just wanted to throw that out there since we had more people by far complain about the glossy paper of the folios than all the other mistakes, design choices, or topics we've ever touched put together.

Nicole

 

[tburdett]

I just want to say that as a consumer I really appreciate what Necromancer Games is doing to keep costs down.

As a husband, and father, I would never be willing to pay $40 or more for any game related book. It wouldn't matter if my favorite author hand delivered the book and read selected passages from it, that is just too much money.

I often think, as I stand in the store, about how long I'd have to work to buy something, and I've come to the conclusion that I'm not willing to spend more than what I make in 1 hour to buy a book.

Fortunately, the core books and everything else that I've really wanted (Necropolis, Tome of Horrors, etc) are being sold, or will be sold, at a price that I'm willing to pay.

Just one consumers opinion.