Link.

Some of this stuff looks really good.

Love the diversity of authors, artists and (judging from the synopses provided) content.

I think the broad spectrum of contributors is really interesting as well.

I'm having trouble wrapping my brain around the decision to do it this way, though.  As compared to a couple of compilations or something.  Have to do some thinking about which of these I'm willing to pony up for.

Spaghetti against the wall, perhaps? I think the sheer number of products will create a buzz which will draw attention to individual projects that might not have gotten as much otherwise.
It's pretty smart marketing imo.

My impression of it is that 19 authors all pushing the same general campaign will add up to more noise for each than they might get from standing alone. We'll just have to see how things turn out.

As for my own offering, I'm looking forward to seeing whether or not people are keen to have it. I've already written the 22K-word rough draft, and it's complete. What it needs now is the last 10% of polish, tightening, and GM help insertion that'll make it a good sandbox town-plus-dungeon for a group. Whether or not it'll be worth it for me to do that will be determined by the kickstarter.

If it looks like the kickstarter has a decent chance to make it, I'll go ahead and schedule time to finish it by the end of the month. That way, backers can be assured that at least one of their products is text-complete and needing only layout and art for print-readiness.

The individual modules could end up cannibalising each other really badly unless the buzz counters that. We will see. I will sign up for two or three. Poor Blighters sounds like an interesting premise.

I really dig LotFP, but the way this fundy is set up, is gonna make it stumble, I'm afraid.

The idea that you place money in one campaign, but the (big) payoff only comes if the rest of the world supports the other campaigns, that you'll have no incentive to chip into 'cause you already threw in, for example, 100$ in that first one, is a mess, in my opinion.

I can sort of understand why it's done this way, but I think it'll take far to much coordinating and planning amongst the people funding it/them, to make it a big success.

Also, I don't like the idea that you get scenarios at random at the bigger levels (100$+). There are some I'm very interested in, and some that's really not my cuppa tea.

But fingers crossed for the campaign(s) - I hope to be proven wrong and will then gladly chip in at the end of July.

I'm interesting in Vincents Baker's, Kevin Crawford's and the Sparks' but will wait to see what's getting funded before considering contributing. A few of the modules sound absolute pants.

Two or three compilations might have been better alright, they risk diluting the support among so many offerings.

Half the problems are due to Jim having to go through Indiegogo rather than kickstarter. The lack of attractive higher pledge levels is a concern. I think the best solution is just to back the ones you want. The value is very good at $20 for a print module.

Yeah, I really don't know if this is a brilliant strategy or one doomed to backfire; I can't tell.

Too bad he didn't want to try to fund the production of Dark Albion like this, though; I guess its just not his cup of tea.

RPGPundit

The current score isn't looking too good.

QuoteThe Dreaming Plague: $210
Red in Beak and Claw: $160
The Depths of Paranoia: $70
Poor Blighters: $30
Normal for Norfolk: $380
Broodmother Skyfortress: $2,160 (It's Jeff at work!)
I Hate Myself for What I Must Do: $30
Pyre: $70
The Land That Exuded Evil: $220
We Who Are Lost: $926
Horror Among Thieves: $150
Machinations of the Space Princess: $440
Of Unknown Provenance: $810
The House of Bone and Amber: $710
The Unbegotten Citadel: $490
Towers Two: $60
Strange and Sinister Shores: $230
The Seclusium of Orphone: $1,500
Escaping Leviathan: $250

The issue is, if you are on a limited budget, the best strategy to pick modules is to wait until the campaign is drawing to a close and see which modules have a good chance of winning. However, the more people who follow that strategy, the less momentum the project gathers. There is a disincentive to commit enthusiastically, while there is no incentive to add extra cash into modules because there is very little added value over the print copy (no, one page of Jim's GM advice isn't worth $10, and the rest is pure risk without tangible reward).

There are still 22 days to go, but some of these projects are already stone cold dead. If you can't raise something like $250 under the third of the funding period, you are pretty much not going to win. Then there is a tier, somewhere below $1000, where there may be enough total for a few of these modules, but the money will probably be too scattered individually to get them to fund in the end. The safe bets seem to be Jeff Rients and Vincent Baker. So (without making a judgement about the quality of the products) that's ten duds, seven very faint 'maybes', and two likely successes.

I don't think this is working out well. (For the record, I supported The Seclusium of Orphone, Poor Blighters, The House of Bone and Amber and Horror Among Thieves.)

So, the least 'LotFP-in-tone' sounding module is most likely to get funded.

Quote from: VectorSigma;555295I think the broad spectrum of contributors is really interesting as well.

The more the merrier.

Quote from: Gib;555297Spaghetti against the wall, perhaps? I think the sheer number of products will create a buzz which will draw attention to individual projects that might not have gotten as much otherwise.
It's pretty smart marketing imo.

I think it can work well for Jim even if he doesn't reach the goals.

Quote from: Sean !;558400So, the least 'LotFP-in-tone' sounding module is most likely to get funded.

Well, LotFP's tone is the least interesting thing about it.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Imperator;558402The more the merrier.


I think it can work well for Jim even if he doesn't reach the goals.

In light of how its going, I rescind my earlier optimism.