So when should a publisher ditch d20 and develop their own system?

[BryonD]

I've heard of more Serenity games using alternate systems than Serenity games using the installed system.

Did the people playing these games still buy Serenity? Did they buy it intending to use the rules and then changing mechanics for preference or did they buy it just to get the official setting fluff?

Or are these games examples of Serenity gamers that were lost sales?

 

[Turjan]

How much of this was because of the game itself and how much was because it was Serenity in a rather down year for the overall P&P RPG industry.

I didn't imply anything else. I said the same thing when the Origins award came out, and I didn't hear much good about the game, either. However, this was an example where a new system didn't hurt sales. Unfortunately, it's very hard to tell now whether the line died because i) it was only Firefly fans who bought the game as a fan article, never intending to play it, or ii) the subject lost popularity because of the quick end fo the TV series or iii) the crappy mechanics or (iv) some other reason, like expensive rights that don't justify a small scale game.

Edit: An example for the opposite is the game that won the real Origins "Best RPG" award. I doubt it sold well, as it wasn't backed up by a pre-existing fan base or a popular system. I'm not sure how well it would have done as a d20 game, though. I think that the momentary d20 market is mostly dead, except for small hobby publications or pdf's.

 

[Pramas]

I think this is an awesome idea. If the setting and writing are good enough to stand on thier own (which Freeport and IK are), then I can see almost no disadvantage to keeping the core releases as fluff only and then offering rules options so the players can use the setting as they see fit.

There is some danger (see below) but I think it can be overcome. I think when most folks see the Pirate's Guide to Freeport, they'll get the concept.

Chris - you need more info on your Freeport page!

Oh, indeed. We'll soon be starting a series of design diaries, art previews, and so on for the Pirate's Guide to give people of taste of the book and what's coming for the line.

The disadvantage is you'll lose a lot of customers who see they need to buy two books to get the function they expect out of one.

I'm sure there will be a few people who are this way. I think many more people will see that doing one big setting book and one complementary crunch book is a perfectly reasonable strategy. It's not like there are going to be blank pages in the Pirate's Guide to Freeport where the rules info would be. It's going to be a 256-page hardback packed with locations, characters, history, campaign advice, and tons of adventure hooks. Any halfway competent GM could use that book alone with the system of their choice. Folks who want to save time and get some nice chrome to go with the setting can pick up one of the companions but that's required to use the Pirate's Guide.

What I think would be the best thing here would be to find a way to sell the background book at one price, and throw in a free system book for that price.

Well, if you want us to go out of business because we gave away thousands and thousands of 128-160 page books, sure, we could do that. Or people could look at this and say, "Hmmm, I'm buying two big books and gettting...two big books! That seems fair." Did you expect that WotC would give you the DMG for free if you bought a Player's Handbook?

Out of curiosity, Chris, can you give comparison numbers for two similar books, one d20, one some other system? The numbers given sound like they make a point. However, if the same Sanctuary book would have sold only 25% of what it actually sold with a different system, than a different point is made. Comparing a True20 adventure and a d20 adventure you released about the same time might be a more fair comparison to the virtue of different systems.

We haven't released any True20 adventures yet. I can, however, compare the Sanctuary book to another city book, Freedom City for Mutants & Masterminds. That book sold three times as well as Shadowspawn's Guide to Sanctuary and again it's a property that we created from scratch.

 

[rgard]

Did the people playing these games still buy Serenity? Did they buy it intending to use the rules and then changing mechanics for preference or did they buy it just to get the official setting fluff?

Or are these games examples of Serenity gamers that were lost sales?

I never played Serenity, but the 4 people who bought the book at my store (sold 4 in 7 months) gave the following feedback:

Person 1: I'm adapting this to the Rokugan system.
Person 2: I'm adapting this to the D20 Modern/Future.
Person 3: Said it was unplayable, didn't have time to convert to a different system, but might use the deck plans for his Star Wars campaign.
Person 4: Liked it as is and intended to GM it for his group.

All 4 said they liked the art, pics and look of the book.

When I asked if they wanted me to get future Serenity releases in, all said no in that they either didn't have the time to convert more to their preferred system or as person 4 said, I have enough to go on with the DVDs and the book.

That's what happened.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[eyebeams]

I've heard of more Serenity games using alternate systems than Serenity games using the installed system.

Well, looking at http://www.fireflywiki.org/Firefly/FireflyGaming you can see that nonSerenity systems have no more than 1 dedicated link or group of links (like the Unknown Armies conversion), while the Serenity RPG has multiple links, including campaign reports and this:

http://wavesintheblack.aimoo.com/

an active web community for the game.

I think Farscape is an example of what I speak of in post #47.

But I don't see SG-1 as an implicit counter example you claim it is. As far as I could tell, it was pretty well implemented and received by all but the d20-hatah subset.

That interpretation of Farscape represents a kind of post-hoc confirmation bias, IMO. It bombed, so it must be the designer! As for SG-1, I can't see d20 helping AEG keep the license. " We want to make a game based on your IP that requires us to open other IP." I'm sure a licensing executive with an understanding of the industry no larger than a quick precis likes *that.*

As long as we are talking about installed fanbases, I think one needs to take into account the existing fanbase. Rokugan's d20 adaptation, unlike Farcape's, was very good. Despite this, it was a disaster, because it didn't sit well with the existing fan base. To an installed fan-base, system is not secondary.

To an *dedicated RPG fanbase*, system matters more. But Serenity is one of those rarities: a product that actually sold to its license's fans outside of gaming, rather than a product that subdivided its potential market by selling to a subset of gamers who are fans. What I find amusing is that this -- the holy grail of licensing outcomes -- is now actually being used as a basis for criticism.

It's my feeling that most of the conversions are really the product of Firefly fans who didn't have a game of their own. Now they do. From the links mentioned above:
* Dogs in the Vineyard's Firefly adaptation died in late 2005.
* The D20 Modern adaptation has been overtaken with resources for the official game.
* The GURPS Yahoo Group suffered a significant dropoff in posts over time.
* The last log entry for the HeroQuest adaptation is almost 10 months old.
* I can find no reports for games using the other linked systems, though text seems to indicate there was an active Savage Worlds Firefly game at some point.

Now apply this to the actual topic at hand. IK's pedigree lies in D20. It started out as a d20 adventure. I think Privateer would do well to take a look at what happened with L5R when they switched systems pursuing a different audience for their RPG.

What happened? The D20 bubble and 3.5 happened. Incidentally, vulnerability to revisions is another excellent reason to avoid it. As it stands now, Iron Kingdoms fans are more likely to want something that feels like Warmachine than D&D.

How's that? If you don't use the d20 logo, you only have to make Open Content what started as open content. Mongoose has used this publishing model for a while.

Well, if I had a budget that worked out to a penny a word starting for full time employees based on expected wordage and wanted to foist off equivalent freelance rates I'd go for it too. Editing and expanding existing SRD text is virtually the only way to deliver work if you're that cheap.

As it stands, though, while it's technically possible to close anything beyond existing OGC, the fact of the matter is that to be an honest participant, publishers should release coherent open content. In a tightly written game, this is impractical, and a game that clearly separates out OGC almost always looks terrible and reads badly, as multiple examples (like the first two years of the OGL) show.

 

[eyebeams]

How much of this was because of the game itself and how much was because it was Serenity in a rather down year for the overall P&P RPG industry.

Honest question there. I'm not slamming it. I haven't read it and don't have an opinion.
I'm also not claiming there was remotely a need to be ground-breaking or anything. I agree completely with the Gretzky line. The goal of this product was to make money by selling product to people who wanted to play in that setting. Clearly they solidly achieved that goal.

BUT, when you step back and look at the bigger pictue of gaming, what does it really mean?
Is it a largely meaningless expection because it has everything to do with the license and next to nothing to do with game system? (Obviously a total screw-up in system would be an issue, but I think we can set that aside) Or is it completely meaningful in saying that, for now at least, license or some other setting/feel hook is a total trump over any game system considerations? Where in between do things rest right now?

Serenity was its 4th Printing in September or therabouts. Flashes in the pan don't usually get that.

One of the ironies with a successful RPG is that their communities tend to form on their own, instead of integrating with communities like ENWorld and RPGNet. For instance, the WoD has multiple active boards whose members never visit generalized RPG sites (at least as posters).

 

[eyebeams]

I never played Serenity, but the 4 people who bought the book at my store (sold 4 in 7 months) gave the following feedback:

Person 1: I'm adapting this to the Rokugan system.
Person 2: I'm adapting this to the D20 Modern/Future.
Person 3: Said it was unplayable, didn't have time to convert to a different system, but might use the deck plans for his Star Wars campaign.
Person 4: Liked it as is and intended to GM it for his group.

All 4 said they liked the art, pics and look of the book.

When I asked if they wanted me to get future Serenity releases in, all said no in that they either didn't have the time to convert more to their preferred system or as person 4 said, I have enough to go on with the DVDs and the book.

That's what happened.

Thanks,
Rich

Of the 4, I wonder which ones went on to run actualy Serenity/Firefly games. Talk is (and house rules are) cheap. Having a purpose-built physical product really does make a difference.

 

[Turjan]

* Dogs in the Vineyard's Firefly adaptation died in late 2005.

There has an "Actual Play" thread using Dogs in the Vineyard's Firefly adaptation been started on rpg.net just today .

As it stands, though, while it's technically possible to close anything beyond existing OGC, the fact of the matter is that to be an honest participant, publishers should release coherent open content. In a tightly written game, this is impractical, and a game that clearly separates out OGC almost always looks terrible and reads badly, as multiple examples (like the first two years of the OGL) show.

Well, OGC principally just considers mechanics and some D&D monsters. This doesn't touch any IP from a TV series. And there have been enough examples of OGL declarations that close nearly everything; just look at Malhavoc Press products as examples.

However, this is purely academic, as I don't think that the d20 icon helps sales in the current climate. I suspect the opposite.

 

[rgard]

Of the 4, I wonder which ones went on to run actualy Serenity/Firefly games. Talk is (and house rules are) cheap. Having a purpose-built physical product really does make a difference.

I know the 4th guy actually did run the game as is. Never got any feedback on how well that worked out. That said, he never asked about getting additional Serenity stuff in.

I don't know how far persons 1 & 2 got with their conversions. The person who intended to convert to D20, has purchased just about every D20 Future related item I've ever stocked. I have no doubt that he would buy more Serenity if he didn't have to do conversion work.

All said, it was pretty much a 4 sales dead end for the store.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[rgard]

There has an "Actual Play" thread using Dogs in the Vineyard's Firefly adaptation been started on rpg.net just today .

Well, OGC principally just considers mechanics and some D&D monsters. This doesn't touch any IP from a TV series. And there have been enough examples of OGL declarations that close nearly everything; just look at Malhavoc Press products as examples.

However, this is purely academic, as I don't think that the d20 icon helps sales in the current climate. I suspect the opposite.

I disagree. Speaking from personal experience, it is much easier to sell games with the D20 logo. OGL that is D20 based, is the second easiest to sell...you just have to let folks know that the mechanic is mostly similar.

Additionally, there isn't the volume of D20 Sci-Fi out there that there is for D20 Fantasy. Several of my Star Wars D20 players/customers would buy Sci-Fi D20 stuff to augment their Star Wars games...I sold several of the modular ship deck plans tins (Fiery Dragon, I think) as well as Mongoose Starship Troopers stuff (again D20) to the Star Wars players. When I showed them Serenity (doing my suggested sell at the counter), they turned their noses up at it.

Thanks,
Rich