I thought this interesting:

QuoteSo you want to make a roleplaying game?

These comments are general in nature, and shouldn’t be taken as specifically targeted at the Relentless team; their web site was just a jumping off point.
 
If you want to make an RPG just to prove to yourself that you can, and you don’t really care if anyone other than a few friends ever plays the game, or you want to create art for the sake of art, the rest of this essay probably isn’t for you.
 
On the other hand, if you want to publish an RPG commercially for sale in the US (and possibly Europe), you’ll probably find these comments of interest, especially if you want to publish a book product for sale through the traditional 3-tier distribution system (publishers, distributors, and local game stores).
 
The first question you have to ask yourself is this:  
 
Is this a game where the players take the role of individuals, who are expected to work together (or at least as a group), and who will likely become more powerful over time?
 
If the answer to that question is “yes”, then you have a second question to ask yourself:
 
Should I use the D20 System for this game?
 
The answer to that second question may be significantly more complex than it first appears.  Let’s walk through that decision process in more detail.
 
Before the concept of Open Gaming, publishers were forced to create new RPGs when they wanted to publish a game, at minimum because TSR did not license the Dungeons & Dragons game to any 3rd party.  During those years, many people confused the need to make a new game with the value of making a new game.  In fact, many of those games were actually pretty poorly designed.  A designer with an idea for a certain effect like a different way to cast spells, or advance the power level of a character, or express super powers, or any number of other potential RPG mechanics might do a good job of creating a game system to do that thing, but when faced with the task of building all the other parts of an RPG, the designer often rushed the work, resulting in games with many flaws, omissions, and compromises.  
 
The games that created and sustained successful player networks like Storyteller and Hero evolved over many years, and had many contributors.  Some of those people belonged to a cadre of designers who grew up together and stayed in close contact as their careers took them through several publishers, and they cross pollinated ideas from game to game, and built a large reservoir of knowledge about what was working and what was not working.  Those designers, like Robin Laws, Jonathan Tweet, Greg Costikyan, Rob Heinsoo, Mark Rein•Hagen, Marc Miller,  Steve Jackson, Ed Stark, Monte Cook, Mike Pondsmith, Steve Long, Ken Hite, etc., developed and expanded on the core RPG concept of the first generation games and broadened the field into many genres and many different styles of play.
 
Before you assume that you can design a game as good as those people, especially without a thorough grounding in statistics, probability theory, gamer demographics, a good grounding in how to template rules text, and a hundred other niche fields of study uniquely applicable to RPG design, take a while to consider if it would make more sense to use an off-the-shelf system like D20, which comes with very few strings attached.
 
There are reasons not to use D20 (or another Open Game, like FUDGE), but they are very specific.  Maybe you want to try and make a game where the player’s knowledge of how the rules work is suppressed.  Maybe you want a game where the “resolution” of the action is longer/larger than individuals and discrete actions.  Perhaps you want a game where the players create the powers and abilities of their characters directly.   D20 is not a good fit for games that don’t involve conflict.  Maybe you want to go after the portion of the player community who has said “enough with D20 already!”  Perhaps you have a licensor or CEO who forbids the use of D20.
 
Here are some reasons not to avoid D20:  You think it is too complex (the complexity of D20 is wholly within the control of the designer).  You think players are burned out on D20 and most don’t like it anymore and are looking for brand new games (look at any reputable sales chart to see that statement refuted).  You feel that Hit Points, Armor Class, Vancian spellcasting, classes, levels, etc. restrict or limit, or in some other way restrict you from expressing your “vision” (all those things are designer options, not features of the system, and can be discarded, modified, or ignored once you understand how to use the whole D20 toolbox).
 
Today, what most designers want to do is make a world.  They’re much, much more interested in being Ed Greenwood than in being Gary Gygax.  Because prior to Open Gaming, one had to be both to make an RPG, and many people who are interested in making RPGs today started playing them when companies had to make RPGs to make worlds, there are all sorts of hidden assumptions tied up with the designer’s desires to create and publish an RPG that need to be questioned.
 
For most world concepts I see, which are almost all loose variants on Middle-Earth (fantasy worlds featuring big continents of diverse, but mostly recognizable climate & terrain, mostly wilderness, with a few large cities, divided into nation-states, where several different races of humanoid struggle between and among one another for land or power, and are heirs to thousands of years of previous history which has left the hillsides riddled with ancient tombs, lost cities, and the lairs of monstrous creatures who hoard valuable items of all sorts), D20 is not only a good option, it is almost certainly the best option.
 
The following advice is for those of you who really want to be successful in this endeavor -- people who want to make enough money from sales of their game/world to quit their “real” jobs and become full time game industry professionals.
 
Make your product a book, not a box.  There are good reasons that the industry stopped making boxed games (the biggest reason is that half the RPG business is now in bookstores, and they dislike boxed sets intensely.  Boxes crush, shrinkwrap rips, and boxes don’t fit their shelves as neatly as standard size book products do.

Make creating a character the first thing people read about in your core product.  Save the expository fiction, and detailed world description for the 2nd chapter.

Have a “standard story” that is obvious to your players.  The “standard story” doesn’t have to be all you can do with the game, but it should be the thing you think most people will do with it.  The “standard story” of D&D is “explore dangerous places, kill scary monsters, take their stuff, and power up”.  The “standard story” of Vampire is “explore the challenges of life as a supernatural creature of the night in a world of constant danger”.

Put 90% of your vision for the world into the core product.  That’s the percentage of customers who will buy the core product, and nothing else.  If you “keep secrets” for later volumes, almost none of the people who trust you and buy your first product will ever learn them.  If they don’t know there are secrets, the secret, as a marketing tactic, is worthless.  In fact, it may sell less product, because gamers can sense an incomplete game with stunning accuracy.

Read, and understand, the implications of WotC’s demographic study, and its market research.  Apply that work to your own products -- maximize your offer to appeal to the most people.

Have a simple, one sentence answer to the question “why should I play this game”.  (or its close variant, “what is different about this game”).  If you can’t answer that question in one sentence, you’re doomed.  If your answer contains a non-specific term like “more fun” or “cooler” or “less complex” in relation to some other game, you’re doomed.  “My game is more fun than D&D” is worthless.  “In my game world, the orcs rule the other races and your challenge is to throw off the chains of their oppression and free your race”, you’ve got something.

Understand the difference between “my game has a cool new combat system” and “I built a whole new RPG from scratch”.
If your game world is a typical Tolkien-inspired Middle-Earth clone, make sure that it really is cool.  The bar is EXTREMELY HIGH.  Gamers don’t buy worlds because they’re just like 100 other worlds they already own, but with guns, or where the elves are furries, or whatever minor change you think makes you distinct.  Don’t confuse the forest for the trees.  Your customers will not.

Tolkien’s proper names are lyrical and endlessly fascinating because he was a professional linquist, and actually created whole languages for his characters to speak, and derive their nouns from.  Likely, the nouns in your setting are just syllables that you strung together because they sounded cool.  Trust me, they’re not that cool.  The city of “Waterdeep” is vastly more compelling a name to most players than the city of “Tess’ldrin^tch”, unless you’re M.A.R. Barker, and you’re ready to back up that noun with hundreds more that are internally consistent.  And even then, Barker is a taste that’s hard to acquire.

It's worth noting he talks about d20 primarily, but explicitly recognises that most of these arguments work for other open systems too such as Fudge.

I particularly agree with his comments on having a standard story and on being able to describe your game in one sentence.

Thoughts?

Meh.

Added: The only reason - the ONLY REASON - to publish any RPG is if it makes you happy to do so. If it makes you happy to use an open system, use one. If it makes you happy to create your own, do so. You aren't going to get rich either way.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceMeh.

Added: The only reason - the ONLY REASON - to publish any RPG is if it makes you happy to do so. If it makes you happy to use an open system, use one. If it makes you happy to create your own, do so. You aren't going to get rich either way.

-clash

The stuff from "the following advice" onwards has nothing much to do with why to purchase though and more how to, talking about stuff like not hiding setting secrets and knowing what makes your game special.  I think that's generally good advice.

I wonder how broadly he understands 'd20'.  Would it include games like True20 and C&C?

As for creating a 'real' d20 game (viz. one with a 'd20' label and that requires the 3e PHB), well, nobody is doing that anymore ... for good reason.

Quote from: BalbinusThe stuff from "the following advice" onwards has nothing much to do with why to purchase though and more how to, talking about stuff like not hiding setting secrets and knowing what makes your game special.  I think that's generally good advice.

Yes, and I agree with everything after that - good, solid practical advice. None of it new, or particularly interesting, but solid.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceYes, and I agree with everything after that - good, solid practical advice. None of it new, or particularly interesting, but solid.

-clash

I agree it ain't new, but it ain't much followed yet either.

Quote from: BalbinusI agree it ain't new, but it ain't much followed yet either.

Unfortunately true.

-clash

IOW: shoehorn everything into a clunky system and destroy any hope of evoking the feel of the setting because you can only design rules if you are a MIT graduate or Hal 9000.

Bollocks.

Quote from: signoftheserpentIOW: shoehorn everything into a clunky system and destroy any hope of evoking the feel of the setting because you can only design rules if you are a MIT graduate or Hal 9000.

Dancey's writing often has the feel of a 30 minute paid ad on TV promoting schlock combined with "OGL is the greatest thing in the world, ain't I clever?"  

OGL is actually pretty cool but I haven't seen anything useful from him since.

Quote from: signoftheserpentIOW: shoehorn everything into a clunky system and destroy any hope of evoking the feel of the setting because you can only design rules if you are a MIT graduate or Hal 9000.

Bollocks.

Umm - the "D20" OGL is as simple or as complex as you want to make it, and it is anything but clunky. I don't use it for other reasons, but it's very flexible within its range. However, since using D20 for designing a game would obviously not make you happy, then there's no reason to use it, and every reason not to.

-clash

To get away from the d20 bit of it, what did people think of these elements:

QuoteMake your product a book, not a box. There are good reasons that the industry stopped making boxed games (the biggest reason is that half the RPG business is now in bookstores, and they dislike boxed sets intensely. Boxes crush, shrinkwrap rips, and boxes don't fit their shelves as neatly as standard size book products do.

Make creating a character the first thing people read about in your core product. Save the expository fiction, and detailed world description for the 2nd chapter.

Have a "standard story" that is obvious to your players. The "standard story" doesn't have to be all you can do with the game, but it should be the thing you think most people will do with it. The "standard story" of D&D is "explore dangerous places, kill scary monsters, take their stuff, and power up". The "standard story" of Vampire is "explore the challenges of life as a supernatural creature of the night in a world of constant danger".

Put 90% of your vision for the world into the core product. That's the percentage of customers who will buy the core product, and nothing else. If you "keep secrets" for later volumes, almost none of the people who trust you and buy your first product will ever learn them. If they don't know there are secrets, the secret, as a marketing tactic, is worthless. In fact, it may sell less product, because gamers can sense an incomplete game with stunning accuracy.

Read, and understand, the implications of WotC's demographic study, and its market research. Apply that work to your own products -- maximize your offer to appeal to the most people.

Have a simple, one sentence answer to the question "why should I play this game". (or its close variant, "what is different about this game"). If you can't answer that question in one sentence, you're doomed. If your answer contains a non-specific term like "more fun" or "cooler" or "less complex" in relation to some other game, you're doomed. "My game is more fun than D&D" is worthless. "In my game world, the orcs rule the other races and your challenge is to throw off the chains of their oppression and free your race", you've got something.

Understand the difference between "my game has a cool new combat system" and "I built a whole new RPG from scratch".
If your game world is a typical Tolkien-inspired Middle-Earth clone, make sure that it really is cool. The bar is EXTREMELY HIGH. Gamers don't buy worlds because they're just like 100 other worlds they already own, but with guns, or where the elves are furries, or whatever minor change you think makes you distinct. Don't confuse the forest for the trees. Your customers will not.

Tolkien's proper names are lyrical and endlessly fascinating because he was a professional linquist, and actually created whole languages for his characters to speak, and derive their nouns from. Likely, the nouns in your setting are just syllables that you strung together because they sounded cool. Trust me, they're not that cool. The city of "Waterdeep" is vastly more compelling a name to most players than the city of "Tess'ldrin^tch", unless you're M.A.R. Barker, and you're ready to back up that noun with hundreds more that are internally consistent. And even then, Barker is a taste that's hard to acquire.

Here's some more advice:

RPGers are generally both conservative and nostalgic. Don't attempt to sell a game to an established fanbase of another game. If it does what a previous, successful game does, that fanbase will have no real interest in your game even if your game does it better, even if that other game is OOP, even if your game is the coolest thing since sliced bread. It doesn't matter. A fanbase is a fanbase because they are happy with something, and getting happy gamers to try something new is an excercise in futility. Make your own fanbase.

Never argue with a reviewer. If there are factual differences, politely point them out, but everything else is a matter of taste, and people's tastes differ.

Advertising doesn't sell games. Advertising gets your name out there, but only word of mouth sells games - and that includes reviews.

Niche products are often ignored by larger press, not because they aren't profitable, but because they are niches, and thus not profitable for them. Small press can be very successful exploiting niche markets.

Always remember you don't know everything, and you can be wrong. Learn from your mistakes as well as your successes. Approach every day as an opportunity to learn something new.

Giving comp copies judiciously is spreading bread on the waters. It will come back tenfold.

Deal honestly and politely with the folks who do work for you, and expect the same from them.

Popular games are popular for a reason. If you can't see it, then you aren't looking at it properly.

Mmmf. All my opinion, anyway.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceHere's some more advice:

Advertising doesn't sell games. Advertising gets your name out there, but only word of mouth sells games - and that includes reviews.

Good stuff. I would question the above only because I think you are speaking of traditional advertising i.e. running ads in a mag, banner ads and such. I would say advertising allows people to become aware of your products as a viable choice. I would also define advertising much more broadly than traditional ads.

The most important point Clash makes, you can always learn something from a person. It may seem like I am dismissive of Dancy but I do learn from him. I just happen to think he often states what every person publishing should (and usually) know even if they do not apply it.

Bill

Quote from: flyingmiceRPGers are generally both conservative and nostalgic. Don't attempt to sell a game to an established fanbase of another game. If it does what a previous, successful game does, that fanbase will have no real interest in your game even if your game does it better, even if that other game is OOP, even if your game is the coolest thing since sliced bread. It doesn't matter. A fanbase is a fanbase because they are happy with something, and getting happy gamers to try something new is an excercise in futility. Make your own fanbase.

I think this is why all the "game X sucks, my game Y is better" promotions fail.  Players of X don't think it sucks, so they're insulted and turned off.  People who don't play X assume it's like X so don't bother to look at it.

Quote from: NicephorusI think this is why all the "game X sucks, my game Y is better" promotions fail.  Players of X don't think it sucks, so they're insulted and turned off.  People who don't play X assume it's like X so don't bother to look at it.

Bingo. It's best to just create your own fanbase. If your game is superior, those who have tried and are not happy with Game X may adopt it as a good alternative, along with those who never adopted Game X is the first place. If it isn't better in some ways, then it will fail to find a fanbase no matter what you do. The big part is getting word out that it exists. Most people have filters built into their reading which discards anything they aren't interested in, especially plugs and anything else that smacks of an ad. We're so bombarded with ads all day that it's now a survival mechanism.

-clash