Dreamation’s nearly upon us!

Lest I be hypocritical, I want everyone to know that I’ll be at Dreamation 2006 this coming weekend, January 20, 21, and 22. I’ll be part of the Indie RPG Explosion. I’ll be running a new With Great Power… event called “They Came From Beyond!” It’s a thematic crossover with Tony Lower-Basch’s Capes tournament. We’re both dealing with world-shattering invasions from beyond. Play in both to experience the strengths of both games.

I’m also nominally in charge of the Room Party. If you’re reading this, you’re invited. If you’d like to bring something, Let Me Know!

And if they all jumped off a bridge…

It’s January and sales data is thick in the air. Here’s a smattering I’ve found:

My sales for With Great Power… since the release of the Full Edition at GenCon in August looks like this:

WGP... 2005 Sales Data

Almost half the year’s sales in the first month, but GenCon skews this pretty badly. I had no conventions in November or December, but IPR made some solid retailer orders. Online orders were up in December, but that was part of the Christmas rush.

Of course, Brennan has reminded me that I would have sold more to individuals and a good deal more to retailers if I had managed to keep the game in stock throughout December. That’s something to be certain to avoid in the future.

Sales were not nearly as bad as I was whining about last week. I originally said that I wanted to sell (and work) 10% as much as Luke. Well, Luke sold out the 1,500 copy first print run of BW Revised in about 5 months, so I’m on target so far. But keeping up will take some work.

This year’s Indie RPG Explosion

Here’s a thought on how the Indie RPG Explosion at GenCon might work:

What if, in addition to any scheduled games people want to run, we schedule an open table in each and every timeslot? We make sure there is at least someone there at the table and that they have *some* game ready to run. Then, this table becomes something of a mini-staging area. Players that show up can hand in their generic tickets and either (A) play in whatever the scheduled GM has prepped, or (B) break off into another game at a different table.

I’m even thinking that there could be a forum where interested players & GMs could coordinate their meetings.

We ask GenCon to plan for overflow from the scheduled game. We agree to collect generics from everyone playing in the room. Everbody’s happy.

I’ll be sure to talk with people about this at Dreamation, then run it past the Forge, then propose it to GenCon.

The “other” Forge model

Over in his Ronnies thread, Ron posted about mutualism and the Ronnie Awards It’s led me to some thinking about “the other side” of the Forge model.

The standard Forge model, such as I understood it, is: Design the game that you would want to play. Produce it on the cheap. Sell it direct.

All supply-side stuff. I missed the demand-side of the model: Engage in “mutualism” to generate goodwill and interest in your products.

Okay, I try to be mutualistic as I can manage. I try to be a conscientious Forge citizen. I organize the Indie RPG Explosions at Dreamation & at GenCon. I gladly pitch other people’s games at GenCon. I carry other people’s stock to the con for them. I run other people’s games at cons and post about them. So, with the power of “mutualism” on my side, With Great Power… should be one of IPR’s top sellers, right?

Wrong. Sales are lukewarm, bouyed by an unexpected Christmas rush for everybody’s stuff.

This isn’t meant to be whining, it’s meant to be “obviously I’m doing something wrong. How should I change?” Kinda like Clinton’s insights on sales back in November.

Looking at what other people are doing, and factoring in my own (mis)perceptions of who’s more successful than others, I’m looking for trends.

Who’s publicly happy with their sales? Ron, Luke, Vincent, Matt Wilson, Ben, Tony, and Paul in 2003/2004.

What do they do? Well, they post A LOT. This only makes sense. Selling over the Internet means cultivating an Internet presence. They’ve got heavily-trafficked blogs or active forums devoted to their games.

Who’s publicly unhappy with their sales? Clinton, Matt Snyder, Paul in 2005.

What do they do? Clinton runs the Forge, helps people with websites, upgrades and tweaks the software that makes the website work, creates tools like FindPlay for people to use. Matt Snyder lays out lots of peoples’ games, and published Daedelus.

What’s the difference? The things that Matt Snyder, Clinton, & I do are easy to take for granted, easy to overlook or, at least, easy to fail to attribute to a certain individual (e.g., I doubt many people come to the Forge and say “This is such a cool website! I wonder who designed it?”).

The stuff that the first group does is more public, exposes more of their personality, and promotes a recognition of their unique identity and worldview on other people.

About Paul Czege, it seemed to me that his posting fell off in 2005, and so did his sales (at least at GenCon). Maybe there’s a connection.

So, maybe, if I want better sales, I’ve got to post more. I’ve got to SAY more stuff to more people. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.

Does that mean I should pull back on the other ways I’ve been pitching in? Maybe. The Indie RPG Explosions are a hell of a lot of work for little in return. I’ve only got so many hours in the day, and I’ve already been reprimanded at work for my online time.

Okay, now it’s getting into whining. End of post.

Went to Bruce’s last night to play board games into the new year. Bruce has played a number of miniatures games. Ended up talking with him about why I want to investigate miniatures gaming as research for the kingship game (also referred to as The Game Aria Was Meant To Be). Also talked with Kat about it this morning.

Although this game is low priority at the moment, talking about it so often has helped me to express my goals for it.

This game will be able to handle Henry V, the battle of Helms’ Deep or Pelinor Fields or the climactic battle at the end of The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe just as clearly and dramatically as the recent movies have done. These battles are dramatic because: A) the story has illustrated just what’s at Stake for each side; B) we care about individual characters in these battles. We just went to see Narnia on Friday, and the final battle was very well choreographed. We were shown exactly why each action brought that side closer to victory.

For instance, at one point in the battle, the good guys fire this pheonix-arrow that cuts a swath of fire across the battlefield. We in the audience can see instantly (because of the camera angles & FX) that this cuts off the Witch’s reserves from the forces already engaged with the good guys. In this part of the battle, evil has lost its numerical superiority. We’re instantly happy because we can see what good it has done. The geography of the battle-map matters.

I want a game that does that. Without the math and analysis paralysis of traditional miniatures as I’ve observed them. Without the high-concept “make it up as you go” of role-playing games like Uni or WGP…, even. I understand the role-playing aspects, and WGP…’s conflict system could handle massive battles with just a new set of characteristics of conflict. But it wouldn’t be what I want.

Y’see, with WGP… as written, the SIS consists of a few guys beating up on each other with their superpowers. It’s simple enough for everyone to keep it straight in their heads. The Imagined Space remains “Shared” because everyone at the table understands what’s going on.

“Mudslide pummels Debris with a powerful left.” Deanna changes style to “Yes, Mudslide hits Debris, who flies back into a building, breaking through the wall. Picking up a piece of rubble, Debris slams you with it.” One thing leads into another smoothly. The SIS remains internally consistant, and the emphasis on describing things visually keeps everyone informed and on the same page.

In the Narnia example above, if I were playing it with WGP…, I could play a card and describe it as “My archer launces a pheonix arrow that cuts off your reserves.” You might not have pictured your forces with reserves at all. You might have pictured the reserves already out-flanking the archers. Suddenly, the Imagined Space is no longer Shared. Battles are so complex, I want the map back as a running sketch of the SIS—to keep everyone on the same page.

I’m thinking of stuff like putting geographical bonuses right on the map or figure. For example, the high ground might have a big “+1” on the map. If the unit of one of the characters that you care about is protecting that spot, but is facing a potent enemy force, you’ve then got a tough, interesting decision. Do I try to hold onto that +1, but possibly lose my guy that’s been great fun in the story, or do I pull him out and give up the advantage? That’s the kind of decision-making I want in the Kingship Game.

Maybe throughout gameplay each player will have some characters at each level of society, to experience the world more fully. Exactly where these guys end up in units will be a big part of battle set-up. And the whole thing will tie into the Stakes for each battle, each negotiation, each action and how it affects the game world going forward.

Kat suggested that I might meet a number of my goals without the map (and the real-world logistical hangup it brings with it) by using something like a list of Assets and Obstacles—your Assets are the opponent’s obstacles. Each round of the battle you need to decide and describe how your forces are safeguarding your assets and/or conquering your obstacles. How these are achieved, and how much they suffer for it (wounded, fallen morale, etc.) will have repercussions in the post-battle Stakes claiming.

I’m not sure I liked it. But I didn’t like the WGP… Enrichment system when she first suggested it, so I’m going to let it stew for a while.

In any case, along with putting together a release schedule of free With Great Power… support PDFs, and getting R.I.P., the game of ghost stories, into playtestable shape, I’ll be doing some military history research and looking into wargames, both table-top and electronic. I haven’t played many wargames apart from Risk and Axis & Allies, so I don’t have a gut-level understanding of the whole “game of the battlefront” thing yet. I don’t instinctively know what words like “outflank” and “counterattack” mean. How can I write a game that promotes that gut-level feeling if I don’t have it myself?

Anyway, Happy New Year to one and all!