New Publisher With Questions about GSL and OGL
Seamus:
Quote from: Ron Edwards on April 01, 2009, 04:05:01 AM
Hi Seamus,
I'll start with the second part first, because it's excellent news. Learning more about small businesses and how they interact with the community's economic laws is a great, great thing to do. It also illustrates my point for the first part of your post.
Given that you're seeking information regarding small business practices, isn't it reasonable also to seek information about what to publish (your own, 4E, OGL) before making decisions? You've already made a decision to launch with 4E or OGL - why be so quick about that before getting more information? "Feeling" and "hoping" isn't much of a basis for such an important decision. You can describe those feelings and hopings all day, but ultimately, a basis of information (just as with the small business practices) is a stronger foundation.
We actually haven't made any final decisions on this front yet (which is why I posted this question here). We are thinking about it. And I am trying to find more information.
Quote
You did write about a strategy based on thought instead: to begin with diversity and see what works best. That's not a bad idea at first glance. If you really want to go that route, then why not go with it? In which case, publish all three. What you're talking about, to start with one, seems like the opposite of your own strategy. OK, I now realize that I have to state very clearly where I'm coming from with this paragraph.
I guess what I am worried about with publishing all three, is focus. I have two original systems in the works, and I am confident we can handle another (we wanted to publish a line for a system that was already proven). We knew we couldn't swing the production value for something like Savage Worlds, so we decided either OGL or GSL (since we know those systems pretty well).
Quote
I want to stress that I'm not attacking you. I'm devoting time to this thread because I've seen independent publishers do well with some combination of OGL and D20 (you can tell I'm using observations from 2000-2005), and I've seen them do well with their own systems - but I have not seen a company do well by starting with the first and then shifting to the second. (If anyone has, or if they can point out a company I know but am forgetting, please speak up.) Those companies tend either to succeed with their launch and then their own game ideas wither away because they're following up on the initial success; or they fail with their launch and are now impoverished and wretched, and again, their own game ideas never see the light of day.
Don't worry. I am glad to get some honest feedback. Honestly, I am putting down a good chunk of money, and am not taking your criticism personally. Actually my initial thought was to launch our original system first; and have something in the works for OGL or GSL for later release. But our focus would be on our own system. We want to release our system, follow-up on it; and achieve success there. But I want to be open to changing direction. I having a couple of GSL or OGL products out, may help us do that. But if this is a terrible idea. I do want to know. I am researching and learning right now.
Seamus:
Quote from: Ron Edwards on April 01, 2009, 04:05:01 AM
My final point is to suggest looking into on-line sales as well, in addition to the distribution-retail presence. We have found, and all the RPG companies have found, that revenue from on-line sales is more reliable and profitable than the store-based sales. That doesn't mean it's an either-or decision, and many independent companies do both, me included. But ignoring the direct sales entirely is probably a poor strategy.
Best, Ron
We were going to do direct sales as well. But my understanding was using distributors and retailers just gives you more reach, and puts your book on the shelf with the more well known games.
Seamus:
Quote from: Eero Tuovinen on April 01, 2009, 05:07:09 AM
To supplement Ron's strategic advice from a slightly different viewpoint, one thing I've found is that successful small press rpg publishing is highly dependent on personal expertise and contact building. As Ron describes, the retail system works somewhat differently, but if you want to use grassroots marketing to your advantage or get committed fans who help your visibility in the Internet communities, it's crucial that you a) know your chosen game and gaming tradition like the back of your hand and b) know the hobbyists and other people in the subculture you're marketing to. For this reason my own strategy with 3rd edition OGL (Pathfinder?) vs. 4th edition would definitely be based on one simple question: which game do I actually like as a system, which am I passionate about?
The business is a partnership. I am a OGL guy, he is more a 4E guy. I absolutely know 3E and Pathfinder better than 4E. And I have some concerns about the 4E market--looks like some really big names are shifting their energy into it. Also I have some rule books and such published with other companies under OGL.
Quote
Now, it's possible that you don't like either flavour of D&D very much compared to your own ideas, which presents something of a problem for producing quality products. This is especially true if you'd happen to think that the rules system in general is not that important compared to the fictional ideas such as the setting or plot of the products you are planning. The audience will recognize a product made without passion and a deeper understanding of the play goals they themselves have, which means that your product will not garner an excited buzz or long-term commitment from the players. At best you'll get a lukewarm and mostly silent treatment from the jaded Internet rpg community. This has happened to most third-party D&D publishers, and no wonder: they're producing stock product for D&D with little ambition and even less originality, of course the audience won't notice it.
My rule of thumb for making anything OGL will be it needs to be revolutionary in some way. If it has already been done successfully by others, I think we are better off not duplicating what has been done.
Eero Tuovinen:
One possibility in this market (and I'm just throwing this out there as a practical consideration) would be to go with dual statted products and see which side is more open to the material - you could then continue supporting only the dominant side of your audience later on when you find out where your traction lies. This might work at this point in time simply because people are still switching back and forth between the systems, so you might garner interest from undecided buyers that way. The challenge, of course, is in the fact that the field of products that would actually be at their best in both systems is pretty narrow... my own inclination would almost be to put out a conversion guide sort of thing with interesting system conversion material and leave it at that, almost any other idea that comes to mind would be better made for one or the other system only.
Luke:
Quote from: Ron Edwards on April 01, 2009, 04:05:01 AM
Hi Seamus, (If anyone has, or if they can point out a company I know but am forgetting, please speak up.)
Hey Ron,
Green Ronin, Mongoose and even, technically, Paizo all started as D20 publishers and now publish their own systems. So if you're going for mass market, it seems like getting on the D&D gravy train can actually pay off, then you can get off and do your own thing.
Hey Seamus,
I admit that I'm cringing when I read you writing about your "novel idea" that no one can lay eyes on and that you're laying down a "chunk of change." Man, I've seen this more times than I can count just in the past six years. Not one of those companies is still around. There's no more big splashes in RPG land, my friend, unless you're devoting MILLIONS and probably have a swanky license. I doubt you're putting together a marketing campaign to crack the mass market (and if you are, shame on you, invest wisely!). All the novel ideas are out there. Devoting $10,000, $20,000 or ::gasp:: $50,000 to this is just an unnecessary risk. Make your game. Print 50 copies. Go to conventions. Play your game. If you sell all of those copies, make 100. Go back to conventions. Run your game. Sell all 100 copies. Print 200. Etc, and so on. This way you get to run your company on every level and have complete control and no risk. In fact, the greatest risk is that you'll have a rabid fan-base. And, at the end of the day, if you're still in love with you game, you love the travel and the conventions and you're selling well. Then print a whole mess of them and do a little advertising. If you discover that you've fallen out of love with the whole thing and you haven't lost anything. You've had some good times and learned some good lessons.
I'm sorry to be a wet blanket. I know you're going to prove me wrong with your novel idea. And, honestly, I hope you do.
Good Luck!
-Luke
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page