Anyone here making a living from RPGs?

[Justin D. Jacobson]

I'm not sure if this answer is helpful, but here's mine:

I don't remotely make a living at rpgs at least in part because I make no effort to make a living at rpgs. I'm an attorney; my wife's an attorney. We make a very nice wage from our "real" jobs. I don't run my business as a hobby, but I'm in the very odd position of running it to break even rather than running it to pay the bills and sock away money for retirement. I'm confident a could "make a living" at rpgs, but that would require me to vastly alter what my definition of that term is.

[Justin D. Jacobson]

Good lord, I hope that didn't come off as snobby as it sounds to me know upon reading it. I was just trying to give a picture of an alternate situation.

[Eero Tuovinen]

I make my living from rpgs, if you consider it being my largest source of income a "living". I don't, however, play by the rules: my lifestyle is geared towards minimal monetary costs (which is compensated by a significant amount of non-monetary sources of living), so for the time being my "living" is minimal. Pretty much the same situation Ben Lehman has. Personally, I consider this a phase of study in preparation for a career in content production, of which rpgs are a part. So I don't have to make a lot of money at this stage, because you don't usually make money from studying, do you?

[Ron Edwards]

Hi there,

Justin, that's a pretty solid, realizable goal that ought to be better appreciated among aspirant RPG/game designers, in my view. It's certainly identical with mine, with the minor revision that I like to do a little better than breaking even. A search using my username, "success," specifying the Publishing forum ought to turn up some interesting older threads about it. I think I've successfully debunked the classic dichotomy of hobby/career, as well as provided a real definition of "vanity press" which leaves most large RPG companies with egg on their faces.

The reason I asked Simon to explain his article a little better was to see whether the goal you're describing (and which I describe in earlier threads) was going to be articulated in any way, and as it turns out, I think he appreciates it quite well. So you can probably expect your testimony to be reported fairly, and for your goal's virtues to be outlined.

More generally, as I see it, stating this goal is the very opposite of snobby. It's practical and sound, and accessible to others. It's not our fuckin' fault if barely any RPG company in the past has managed to sustain itself as a business without constant influx of outside funds.

Best, Ron

[Valamir]

Not only is it not necessary to make a living at RPG design...I'm not sure its even all that desireable.  

Making a living is a big deal.   You may have a family with children who have needs that must be met.  You may have an entire lifestyle to support to which you're accustomed that needs to be maintained.  You have responsibilities.

This puts an enormous pressure on what your source of living income is.  We all have different motivations for why we work, but ultimately, at some level for all of us, the need to pay the bills is a constant consideration.

When I hear discussions about how professional freelancers are able to churn through thousands of words a day to meet their deadlines in order to get paid I get worried.  How many of those words were written because the author loved them?  How many were written because if they weren't the electric bill wouldn't get paid that month?  How long will that author lovingly linger over what he writes, crafting and recrafting until not only the rules, but the presentation are as perfect as its humanly possible for them to make them?  How long will they do that when there's a deadline and a paycheck on the line?

For me...I want to read, play, enjoy, and discuss games that were written as a labor of love by people who are passionate about what they're creating.  I'm not really all that interested in reading words that were written in order to collect a paycheck, because too often alot of shortcuts were made to get those words written by someones elses arbitrary deadline.

In this the indie gaming scene isn't really any different from the indie music scene, or indie comics, or indie movies (before "indie movie" meant "big studio in disguise").

I'm not sure I ever really want my favorite indie designers (myself included) to EVER be able to make a living at this.  Because as soon as it becomes all about the benjamins the entire nature of the art changes.  You have to start designing for what will sell vs. what your heart tells you to write.

Besides, for most of us, we'd be doing this anyway.  I've been designing games since I was eight.  The fact that I can do it today and make a few bucks at it is gravy.  If I'm looking for a six figure income, that's what my day job is for.

As long as RPG design is just a hobby that pays my way to GenCon I can write what I want, when I want, and how quickly I want.  And it doesn't get published until *I* say its ready...regardless of how many deadlines have passed.  That freedom is way more important to me than making my car payment off of my game sales.

So when you write your article I hope you'll keep in mind that for some of us at least its less a question of *could* we make a living at this, and more a question of "why would we want to?"

[Pelgrane]

I'm not sure I ever really want my favorite indie designers (myself included) to EVER be able to make a living at this.  Because as soon as it becomes all about the benjamins the entire nature of the art changes.  You have to start designing for what will sell vs. what your heart tells you to write.
...

So when you write your article I hope you'll keep in mind that for some of us at least its less a question of *could* we make a living at this, and more a question of "why would we want to?"

This excellent post pre-empts a topic for a future article, which I will bring forward on the basis that it is obviously very fruitful. In contrast to your position, there are many, many freelancers who either want to, or do, make a full time living, and those that don't enjoy it quit pretty quickly. For example, Robin Laws way of working is admirable; he produces 2500 words of excellent copy, sometimes game material, sometimes fiction in a half day, knows what he will be paid for it and can spend the rest of the day on research and enjoyment.

Ron's point that many RPG companies were a net burner of money is a good one. Does anyone know of any specific examples? I know a couple, by can't really say much about them.

Simon Rogers
Pelgrane Press Ltd

[Valamir]

Oh enjoying what they do isn't the issue.  I'm sure anybody who sticks with it for any length of time must really like what they're doing.

I'm talking about the difference between a single unified vision where the only person you have to please is yourself and you have the luxury of holding yourself to the highest of standards vs. shared vision where the important choices often involve forced compromises (of everything from content to layout) and the pressures of deadlines and meeting outside standards which often are not as high as the writers own.  One only has to pick a few random splat books off the shelves to see how many times "good enough" was considered "good enough".  Not that every indie game adhers to the highest standards possible by any means.  But being indie and not trying to make a living at it means you have the luxury of making it just the way you want it.

Robin Laws is one of my favorite game designers.  He has yet to put out anything I don't like alot.

That said, I long for the day when he releases 100% his own game, 100% for himself, 100% on his own standards...

Why?  Because every game I've played of his winds up being only 80% finished

Both Feng Shui and Rune were brilliant concepts marred by insufficient polishing and finishing. 

In both Hero Wars and Pelgrane's own Dying Earth one can almost see the contrasting design philosophies fighting with each other right on the pages of the text, the end result being a sort of uneasy collaboration. 

One day I hope to see a game where Mr. Laws does a design completely his where he doesn't have to compromise with either co-designers, the goals of publishers, or the restrictions of someone else's intellectual property and where he doesn't release it until he's convinced its as close to perfect as he can make it.

I'd bet money that the result would blow me away and illustrate completely the difference between a game designed for yourself, and one designed for others.

[guildofblades]

>>It's not our fuckin' fault if barely any RPG company in the past has managed to sustain itself as a business without constant influx of outside funds.<<

Nothing any company other than our own has done is our fault. For myself, I fully intend to have my company publishing the undisputed number one role playing game eventually, and during my life time. I have the business model that is required to begin that process, but, its going to require about $500,000 to kick start, after which after one year it will become profitable in its efforts and self sustainable. In generally begins with an campaign that will eventually see more than 20 million free copies of a game given away. I can't come close to fronting that $500,000 right now, so my bid to dominate the RPG segment of the industry must wait for a while.

As publishers, weather our company even makes money or not is not really the issue. If our company is a hobby and its a hobby we can afford to spend money on, then its perfectly fine for the company to actually lose money. Just so long as the owner of the company is getting what they want out of its operation.

For a company with a goal to eventually be a full time operation, its really a two step process for all persons who don't enter the game with $500K to $1 Mil in venture capital. The first step is, start small and build a core game, a methodology of publishing and marketing, and a core fan base. In the process of establishing those three things, get the company to break even or making some kind of profit. Without the venture capital backing, this has to be done part time, as its a turkey shoot when you might be able to grow quickly enough to afford any sort of salary. If you can't count on it, you sure as hell better not be needing it. Step two, take your lessons learned from Step one, tweak your publications and marketing efforts in small ways and then go about seeking expansion either by adding more games, more expansions and more marketing endevours. Always keeping each segment of the operation scalable and profitable at whatever scale you have to operate it at (weather its $100 in annual sales or $1 mil).

The goals are own to set. If, however, you do have the goal of making a "good" living off RPG publishing and you do not achieve that, then yes, you have no one else to blame but yourself that you did not accomplish that goal. It really doesn't matter what the state of the "Industry" might be or if there are any current distributors, retailers or even RPG players for you to work with or not. Those things are merely just tools yu may opt to use when marketing your product. As well all know, there are countless other marketing options, product formats and even potential target audiences to sell to. There are no real excuses.

When I was younger I read several books about self made millionaires. The most common thing I pulled out of that reading was, the average self made millionaire that did it through business (as opposed to employment or investing) actually had two failed businesses before finding the business that succeeded for them. So why, after 10 years have I not given up on my first, one and only company and moved into another business idea? Well, because this is what I love to do, and the lesson learned is, we have to try different ideas, different approaches on how to do business, how to market, what to market, etc. That canbe done with the same business or three different businesses, it really doesn't matter. We have to give up on what clearly does not work, once we indentify what that is, then seek different business ideas and approaches to meet our goals. To bring that back to the RPG industry, just because something worked for TSR 30 years ago doesn't mean it will work for you. You have to experiement and find what will work for you.

Ryan S. Johnson
Guild of Blades Publishing Group
http://www.guildofblades.com
http://www.1483online.com

[greyorm]

I don't make a living from my RPG writing. Then again, I don't have much in the way of product. However, what I do have has -- without any overt advertising or marketing that requires any time out of me -- consistently paid my yearly domain registration and hosting fees since 2000, often with a bit of cash left over I can blow on RPG stuff through the year. That means my means of dissemination and publishing is paying for itself, plus some. It's not putting me in the red, and it's not drawing cash from my monthly necessities. With the money I make, I'm paying for two of my own hobbies -- the whole internet domain tech-geek thing, and RPGs. I think that's pretty cool.

[Pelgrane]

One thing that does arise out of this is the difference between a person who just wants to write the best game they can, and get paid for it, and the "RPG auteur" who wants complete control over the project from start to finish, wants to do layout and also get involved in the nitty gritty of promotion, sales organising printers, travelling to conventions and generally making a big fat blob of themselves on the internet. It would take a great deal of analysis to determine which model produces the best games, or if the model even makes a difference (as a proportion of games released). Sometimes the auteur model falls down - in particular, everyone should get an experienced copy editor to run their eye over their words.

For those wishing to make a living from the RPG industry who aren't interested in self-publishing or promotion and just want to write, write, write (or draw, draw, draw) without taking too many risks with their personal finances, the conventional model works better. It isn't always that they are constrained by the publisher, that the publisher is cramping their style or appropriating their IP, it's that they don't want to take the risk - it's not a luxury they can afford.

What the indie model appears to provide is greater innovation in games design which I think is supported by the ivory tower thinkers, who are effectively their own patrons - supported by their day jobs. Whether the nitty gritty of GNS theory has helped many people to improve their RPG experience, I don't know, but it's certainly inspired many people to throw of the kooky fantasy wargame shackles and create some excellent new games without getting burnt in the process, and that alone has made it worthwhile.

[Ben Lehman]

Hey, Simon --

Maybe a little tangential to this thread, but I think we've yet to see a company that actually manages to both provide publication, layout, and promotion and still respect the writer's rights.  This is by no means a "that would never work" sort of affair, either -- basically every publishing field outside of some dinosaur-y comics works in the same way -- creator keeps rights to IP, leases them to publisher for a defined length of time (often something like "1 year after the book goes out of print") and for a specific market.  As far as I know, there is not a single RPG publisher who doesn't want to own the writer's IP.

That makes things problematic at another level.

yrs--
--Ben

[Ron Edwards]

I'd like to shoot that auteur model right in the forehead, right now. A lot of people think that the model of publishing I favor is an auteur model.

It's not.

The auteur "theory" (it's not a theory, it's a form of fandom) is one of stupidest notions ever to show up between two covers. I'll do it again, in case the bullet did one of those funky things ...

Bang! No doubts this time.

I work with copy editors, layout guys, artists, playtesters (boy do I ever), fellow publisher consultants (technically speaking), and many other influences and sources of labor.

Simon, I'd greatly appreciate it if, in your writings about this discussion, you do not ascribe auteurship pretensions to anything I've ever published or advocated. "Independent," or "self-published," is what I'm about. A lot of that means making the right decisions about which other people you work with most often.

Best, Ron

[Pelgrane]

Simon, I'd greatly appreciate it if, in your writings about this discussion, you do not ascribe auteurship pretensions to anything I've ever published or advocated. "Independent," or "self-published," is what I'm about. A lot of that means making the right decisions about which other people you work with most often.
Best, Ron

From what you've said, "auteur" has negative connotations on your side of the pond - over here it doesn't. On that basis, I won't use it. By auteurs I mean that the creator is responsible for their projects and have creative contol, and do more than one aspect of the production.

As to Ben's point - I'm hoping I will be able to announce an arrangement similar to that suggested by Ben at some stage in the next few months. I took the approach that saying "yes" to every IP-related request from the individual concerned would be the best way to get the best work.

Simon

[Pelgrane]

Maybe a little tangential to this thread, but I think we've yet to see a company that actually manages to both provide publication, layout, and promotion and still respect the writer's rights.  This is by no means a "that would never work" sort of affair, either -- basically every publishing field outside of some dinosaur-y comics works in the same way -- creator keeps rights to IP, leases them to publisher for a defined length of time (often something like "1 year after the book goes out of print") and for a specific market.  As far as I know, there is not a single RPG publisher who doesn't want to own the writer's IP.

To add to my previous response, we are happy to enter into such arrangements. We expect to take a much lower level of risk, though - a lease should be less expensive, than a purchase. If we pay work-for-hire, there's a subtantial chance we won't get the money back, but the writer will still get paid. We might agree that the author gets to sell their stuff from their website and at conventions, we get all other sales channels, and we pay in printed books, author keeps IP over text on termination. Where we've suggested the game, we might share IP. We're open to suggestion on any equitable arrangement. In many cases I've offered sales or publication arrangements simply because I want a game to reach a wider audience - even if I don't make anything out of it. We've even offered to sell stuff at Dragonmeet at cost, simply because we think a game is cool.

[Valamir]

[qupte]One thing that does arise out of this is the difference between a person who just wants to write the best game they can, and get paid for it,

This is where the rubber hits the road for me.  In our dream world we can do both every time all the time.  I can both make the best game I can...AND...I can get paid a living wage for it.

In reality, more often than not, those two cannot 100% coexist 100% of the time.  At some point one or the other has to give.

If I'm hired by a company to write for them, its my job to give them what they're paying me to deliver when they're paying me to deliver it.  That very often is not the same thing as "the best game I can write".  I may have alot of ideas on how to make the game better and some of the time I can convince them to use them.  But ultimately at some point you have to make a choice.  

1) Write the game the way I want to write it.  
2) Or write the game the way the person paying me wants it written.

In the world of business the second choice is the one you have to make if you want to continue to make a living writing games.  Hopefully this choice will coincide with #1 often enough to be satisfying...but not always.

My preference is to play games written by folks who make the first choice...always.

and the "RPG auteur" who wants complete control over the project from start to finish, wants to do layout and also get involved in the nitty gritty of promotion, sales organising printers, travelling to conventions and generally making a big fat blob of themselves on the internet. It would take a great deal of analysis to determine which model produces the best games, or if the model even makes a difference (as a proportion of games released). Sometimes the auteur model falls down - in particular, everyone should get an experienced copy editor to run their eye over their words.

Here is a distinction that I think is crucial to understand when looking at indie publishing.

The Game Design Model and the Game Publishing Model are two seperate things.  They're ultimately entwined together, but they are not synonyms.

I want a game DESIGNED by 1 vision.  How you play, what you do, why you do it, etc. etc. I want a game designed by a person (or persons...its possible to have 1 vision in a partnership...although harder) with all of the passion and excitement and desire of someone bringing their own special baby to life.  That's almost never the same passion and excitement someone has bringing someone elses baby to life.


How to publish that design is a seperate but intimately related issue.  You could have an Auteur model of publishing where 1 person does everything from start to finish...heck we even have some folks that actually do their own printing and binding.  But that model is not the definition of, nor synonymous with, Indie publishing.

An indie publisher does what they're good at and gets other people to do the things they aren't good at.  Me, I can't do layout for shite...I lay my games out in MSWord for chrissake.  So I pay someone to do my layout for me.  Other indie publishers are great at layout so they do both the design and the layout.  Some are artists and will use their own artwork in the game as well.  You do what your good at.  I don't do layout, I don't do art, and I don't do editing.  That means I hire a layout guy, and artists, and editors.  I am NOT an auteur.  I AM an independent small press publisher.

What differentiates indie press from say the standard freelancer model is not "Do it Yourself vs. Hire Others".  If that's the dichotomy you've been assuming, you're way off the mark.

What differentiates indie press is simply Who Owns It.  Where does the buck stop?  I chose the words I wrote when I designed the game.  I also choose which edits suggested by my editors I will use and which I won't.  How many freelancers have the right of refusal over the edits their publishers make to the work they submit?

I'm my own art director.  I will quite often rely on knowledgeable artists for suggestions...but I choose to accept or reject the art.  I choose what goes in the book and where.  I choose what the caption says.  Is the artist a "freelancer" then?  Not really.  Because the artist I hire for my games owns all of the rights to their own art (true of most indie publishers I know).  I can use the art for my game and promotion...but they could turn around and sell the very same piece to someone else, or make a t-shirt out of it, or whatever.  They still have control over their own intellectual property, just as I have control over mine.  

Nobody can tell me what format to put my book in, how many copies to print, when (or if) to do another print run.  Nobody.  The game is 100% mine.  Full credit, appreciation, and most often payment is given to the folks who helped me bring it into existance.  But there is no doubt who owns it and who makes all decisions regarding it.

THAT'S the distinguishing feature of indie as espoused at The Forge.  Auteur or not is a red herring and completely tangental.