What are people's thoughts on this?  Whether you're an RPG writer/publisher, or just a reader/player, how do you feel about the use of the Kickstarter model for getting games published? Wave of the future? Fad? Doomed to fail? Disaster?

It does seem to be a natural expansion (and somewhat more workable) of the Ransom model which some game designers had been attempting to use for several years now.

But is it kosher or unsavoury?  And more importantly, is it likely to be a model that would work?

RPGPundit

I'm out of the loop here. What is the Kickstarter model?

Kickstarter as a model that works well, but only for a select few...

As it exists now, someone who has already had a Kickstarter project must agree to sponser your new project, so it's a limited growth model.

The basic idea is sound though, Monte Cook used a similar model for his Dungeon-a-Day release schedule, and Wolfgang Bauer uses the model and calls it the Open Design Project.

It was originally done by Grant at Columbia Games many years ago he calls it Gameplan Pre-order.

I think it's awesome, but with one caveat: the publisher/designer needs to offer goods that are equal to what they're asking people to chip in.

I haven't seen any rip-offs in the rpg Kickstarters yet, but I have seen some musicians get greedy and price themselves out of contributions.  $25 for a CD?  That's unreasonable.

Quote from: jeff37923;456686I'm out of the loop here. What is the Kickstarter model?

If you don't mind links in Spanish, here's a good article from Spain and another one with the story of a Uruguayan inventor.

Personally, I used Kickstarter once, to fund Greg Stolze's Enchiridion (the rules-only version of Reign). Good experience, nothing to complain about.

Quote from: JongWK;456693Personally, I used Kickstarter once, to fund Greg Stolze's Enchiridion (the rules-only version of Reign). Good experience, nothing to complain about.

Same here. Only time I used it was regarding Reign Enchiridion. I think it's fine. As an individual, pledge money if you want, don't pledge money if you don't.

I'd previously donated to a comic project.  In that case, I was confident that it was already written, they just needed money for printing.  It was entirely positive.  I'm given to understand that Kickstarter doesn't hand over the money for three weeks after the the pledger period.  This, combined with all the other delays in publishing, could combine to delay product to the point of annoyance.

I think its great, but I could be biased.  (DungeonMorph Dice) I think there's (almost) no downside.

Here's the short description of how Kickstarter works (copied/pasted from earlier text I wrote):
It allows anyone (who has or sets up an account with Amazon) to fund projects of interest to them, safely. The project starter/coordinator describes the project, sets the financial goal and deadline and lists rewards for various pledge levels.  The financial goal and deadline may not change, nor may the pledge rewards once someone has made a pledge for that reward.  If the project doesn't meet its goal by the deadline everyone keeps their money and the project fails.  (The coordinator may re-launch the project if desired.)  But if the project meets its goal by the deadline, the project starter receives the funds a couple of weeks later.  It is then up to that person to do the project and send the rewards in a reasonable timeframe.

Kickstarter takes 5% in addition to the percentage the publisher would pay for credit card processing.  Compared to the 35-40% drivethrurpgnow takes, there's no good reason for a publisher not to put a product up on Kickstarter first.  It gives the publisher an extra time window to make a sale, it allows for early feedback on the project, it does generate some additional interest, and those sales cost a good bit less than many other channels.  (Note: I started the dice project just because I thought it was a cool idea.  Looking at the numbers behind it is an after-the-fact realization for me.)

Also as a publisher, you can also use it to very accurately gauge interest in a project.  If you meet the goal you set, you make it.  If you don't make the goal then everyone keeps their money and you know the time isn't right for that exact project.  But you can relaunch it with some changes if you think it is close or if a commenter gave you a good spin on it.

Here are the few downsides:
-The publisher won't get the money until about 3 weeks after pledging is complete.  When a project takes off you might have a desire to make progress on it.  If that progress requires the funds, you need to wait a while to get your money or bridge the gap yourself.
-Project creators/starters must be US based currently. (Or at least that was the rule a month ago.)
-Setting rewards is too simple.  I would have like to let people choose multiple rewards that add up to their pledge amount (let you choose among options like: a deck of cards, a pdf, a set of dice, make int'l shipping an extra thing to choose, etc.) But Kickstarter only lets backers choose one reward.  So for the rest I just encourage people to pledge the correct amount and then we'll sort it out after pledging is complete and I can get contact info.
-I didn't see the condition that a new project creator must be sponsored by an someone who has already done a project.  Maybe that's a misunderstanding or a new rule?
-Someone could take your idea and beat you to market with it. (Albeit likely with a lower quality product.)  One could rely on the legal system to mitigate that, but unless the other product is very, very close it is difficult.  Even if it is possible to pursue, it can be costly and not have much effect in the end.
-There's a chance the project could get funded and then the creator doesn't come through with the rewards.  I think that's fairly unlikely, but Kickstarter answer to this is hold the creators accountable through their on-line presences and if you have to use the legal system.  In my case I mention my other completed/frequently updated projects and hope that reassures people that I'll come through.

Quote from: jeff37923;456686I'm out of the loop here. What is the Kickstarter model?

Kickstarter is essentially patronage for the Internet age, what the "social media" wonks these days call "crowdsourced funding" or some shit like that.

You create a Kickstarter page for your project, and post videos, pictures, and description of it, as well as setting a target needed to fund the project, and a deadline for that target.

People can then pledge X amount of dollars to support your project, and you can set up benefits that contributers get in exchange for different dollar amounts.  Usually the first one is "gets a copy of the project when it's out", especially with game projects.  Other stuff for higher amounts might be things like credits mention or incorporation into the work somehow, or original art prints, or whatever other clever bits the creator comes up with.

Once the project's target in pledges is reached, the contributions go through and the project goes under way.  I believe there's also some steps in place to make sure the project has to actually happen as well, but I'm fuzzier in my knowledge of that bit.

It's a nifty system, and so far has been used by a lot of people to make a lot of neat things that probably would never have happened otherwise.  But success does depend a fair bit on your promotional skills and connectedness with the community.

Quote from: SowelBlack;456829-Setting rewards is too simple.  I would have like to let people choose multiple rewards that add up to their pledge amount (let you choose among options like: a deck of cards, a pdf, a set of dice, make int'l shipping an extra thing to choose, etc.)

That would be a nice change to the setup.  - currently trying to decide on font, cards, or another set of dice.  

My experience with Hexographer made me willing to try the dice.  I have yet to buy in to anything on Kickstarter where I haven't had experience with the creator prior to the project.  I suspect a large number of people are like that and that there are a limited number people browsing Kickstarter looking for things to try.  I don't think someone could rely on Kickstarter alone for marketing their idea.

So I guess the overall feeling is that its positive; is it something that would be revolutionary, though?

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;457118So I guess the overall feeling is that its positive; is it something that would be revolutionary, though?

RPGPundit

Revolutionary in what sense?

Does it have the potential to upset D&D's status as the Big Dog of the rpg world?  Not at all.

Does it have the potential to move other games away from being published by smaller game companies and toward self-publication?  Possibly.

I meant in the second sense.  In the sense that PDFs were revolutionary, and Lulu was revolutionary, as means to make small-press RPG publishing far more accessible.  Will Kickstarter be another jump on that level, or does it lack something the others had that lead to their success?

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;457240I meant in the second sense.  In the sense that PDFs were revolutionary, and Lulu was revolutionary, as means to make small-press RPG publishing far more accessible.  Will Kickstarter be another jump on that level, or does it lack something the others had that lead to their success?

RPGPundit

I definitely think that, properly utilized, Kickstarter could be a boon for small press game makers, allowing them to get the kind of funding they need to put out a professional level project, without mortgaging the house to do it. I've considered using it myself.

However, RPGs have been pretty slow to get with the times lately.  Yeah, they jumped on PDFs early, but what about social networks? What about the iDevices?

It just seems like technological development in the field is pretty behind these days.

Don't know if Kickstarter will be revolutionary, but it's definitely another useful tool for small-press game designers.

I've only followed two projects...Chill 3rd Edition, which failed, and Eldritch Skies.