Hello,

Because Malcolm has stated that non line-by-line replies are not to his liking, I'm going point by point in this one, against my better judgment.

Malcolm, you wrote,

Did I ever say, "Think of the children?" Or anything like it? I invite you to refer to something I have actually written. In fact, you'll not I've summarized my points in numbered form, Ron. Snd I will not feel offended *in the least* if you respond to them, on by one.

For the most part, your [meaning independent publishers'] ability to feed yourself and your loved ones bears no relationship whatsoever to how well you get new people gaming.

What I'm saying is pretty simple:

1) White Wolf does not work the way a lot of you think it does or, perhaps, wish it did for the sake of ideological justification.

2) One of the aspects that may surprise you is that it designs its games to be played.

3) It is apparently even more surprising that these games have to be written to have broad appeal that encompasses new gamers.

4) By contrast, Indie games never have to mandatorily sell themselves to neophytes, ever.

5) Regardless of whether or not you find the system clunky, aesthetically revolting or somehow worthy of Redefined Capitalized Terms, people do play it. New gamers play it. Lots and lots.

6) None of the above is an indicator of the relative quality of anything (WW put out WoD: Gypsies for God's sake, and I have a special hatred for the book Destiny's Price -- please do not assume I have unqualified praise for the company), since that's the faction of an individual's agenda.

7) However, if you want to get right down to it, my personal agenda is player driven, and I think extremely narrow games that try to shove the game author's creative agenda down the players' throats is horse hockey. I think Drift is the way God Himself intended us to play, and if you disagree with me fundamentally on this point, we are simply two solitudes.

Before you started chopping the ur thread up, I made a simple observation: White Wolf needs to get its ideas across in an accessible fashion t novice gamers. It doesn't have the luxury of a series of highly theory-driven essays. I am *still* curious as to how "indie" folks would write to these requirements, but apparently the answer is that indie games will rely on their innate virtue to attract newbies. Or something.

Ron? What's the topic for this thread? Are there questions you have for Malcolm? Should other people comment?

Good call, John. Thanks.

This thread is intended to address Malcolm's points, because he stated them twice in the parent thread, including his full accusation that they were being ignored.

Most of them aren't points. I wanted that to be on public record, and for people to understand why.

Regarding this thread, I guess I've had my say, and it's almost impossible for me to imagine any further dialogue that is not based on re-casting the points into discussable form. I think some of the points can't be so cast; they'd have to be re-invented.

In response to several strong private messages, and as well to Raven's and Doug's excellent points in Site Discussion, I'm done with it. Anyone who protests to me closing this thread because they have something to add, please contact me by PM; I'm leary of killing a discussion if it's there to be had.

Otherwise, let this one die.

Best,
Ron

1) Sure thing, but I won't do a big essay. I'll do a rough outline instead. Here's how it works, from my POV as a freelancer:

a) White Wolf (meaning the managerial staff) decides to put out a new game based on an idea generated by an internal or closely conected external staffer. This decision usually happens after talking it over with the other full-time creatives.

b) White Wolf assigns a developer. This developer produces an outline.

c) The other creatives and management fret over the outline and send it back, usually with less in the way of "Make it more friendly to the 18-24 crowd!" and more, "Er, it doesn't work for me. Try something else." In fact, I have *never* seen the former. Ever. I have seen after the fact crowing about how it *will* hit an audience, but usually, something is sent into revision over its perception as a creative work. Sometimes management has their own creative agenda and they butt heads with development.

d) The developer eventually produces a final outline and with it, a very rough 2 years release schedule. At this point, some rough art direction may be under way.

e) The developer hires a whack of freelancers to actually write it. They see the outline. The outline is very loose.

f) The writers usually make suggestions about the outline, which will have none to a radical effect on the final product. Essentially, at this point the writers can get away with much, if they are good and the developer is the kind of person who believes in a writer-centered process.

g) If the outline has mechanics, we start playtesting.

h) The writers produce initial drafts. This also goes into playtesting. In fact, playtesting and drafts will bounce off each other in a kind of dialogue throughout.

i) The developer redlines those drafts, asking for anything from complete rewrites to nothing at all. Some developers redline everything heavily. Others limit themselves to brief comments. At this point, if you decided to do odd things with the outline, you'll find out whether or not you were clever enough to pull it off.

i-1) Here, we might have one last haul of revisions.

i) The outline goes into editing, then production.

In short: We're talking about a chaotic process, full of second-guessing, that can ultimately be changed at any point of creative responsibility. The primary emphasis is not really on marketability; by and large, it's felt that having a satisfying result will produce something marketable. The outline is, however, informed by a structure the consists of creative and non-creative staff. The process is hugely influenced by developers, though. Working for Geoff Grabowski is sufficiently different process than working for Bill Bridges that only their title is a real indicator that they belong to the same company.

One the book releases successfully, the developer has more solo discretion, it seems. Assuming the release schedule is approved, it's their ship to sail.

2) I'm speaking to past sentiments expressed in the original thread and others, that people aren't really playing and don't like the games, but read 'em and shelve 'em.

3) It's pretty simple. White Wolf has a network capable of bringing in new gamers and an interest in expanding the profile of their IP.

4) Spouses of ex-gamers are not neophtes.

5) Sales to distributors are not *exactly* equivalent to play, but your model of the desperate retailer, being pushed product by an evil distributor, is . . . high debatable, let's say. Plenty of games stores follow the comics model of filling customer-side orders, and many retailers actually confine themselves to what sells. Sometimes, we don't care for what sells. It would be nice if, for example, the cards and GW to RPGs ratio was reversed. But that isn't because of evil distributors. It's because gamers want to buy cards and minis, want to buy D&D and want to buy White Wolf. The claim that this bears little relationship to a gamer's desire to play any of these things is the kind of incredible claim that can only be supported through repitition and excessive recourse of Ockham's Razor.

I always wonder why people don't make the same assumption about indie games.

7) This is one of these semanatic games that gets more tiresome every round it's played, Ron.

There's another one. You raise a question, then state how we (independent publishers) would answer it, then ridicule the answer.

How does one respond to such a paragraph? There is no response. You clearly do not want a response, because you slammed the door on any possible answer to the question.

Am I supposed to guess what sort of post you're expecting in reply? I really am not into guessing this kind of stuff. Since there's no response possible, to any of what you've said, then there you go.

Heya,

Cool. Comments on the outline coming later.

You wrote,

Well, people could explain how they'd dtrsucture and explain a game for newbie friendliness instaed of claiming that they didn't need to do anything to make indie games newbie friendly. That's the "innate virtue" argument and plenty of folks, including you, are making it. My question remains: How would you write to new gamers? The answer is, so far, that it's unnecessary. Do I ridicule that idea? damn straight I do.

Malcolm, I'm not sure who's claiming they don't need to do anything in designing a game to make it newbie friendly. I've seen the opposite approach in many, many Forge-related games.

(For example, my own game, Dust Devils, has already been highlighted as a game that approaches, but doesn't quite achieve, a superb level of newbie-friendliness in both writing and design. Good. That was one of my intentions; I sure as heck wasn't hoping "innate virtue" -- whatever that means -- would get me there.)

(EDIT: By contrast, I don't consider my new game, Nine Worlds, to be especially well suited toward newbie gamers. In fact, I wrote the system and the unusual setting hoping that gamers would get all geeked out, then check out some new and interesting ways to role-play, share narration, and build on an explicit theme concerning authority. Check it out, if you're so inclined.

So, where are you seeing this claim? About which specific games? How might your observation constructively help those and other designers as they work on new games or revisions of older ones?

Matt Snyder wrote: Malcolm, I'm not sure who's claiming they don't need to do anything in designing a game to make it newbie friendly. I've seen the opposite approach in many, many Forge-related games.

Does the .pdf of Unsung have an explanation of what a character is, what an RPG is, an example of play and GM advice (including what a GM is and what kind of things they have to do before, druing and after the game)?

This is the kind of stuff I'm wondering about. I'm wondering how someone outside of the loop that has a business motive to write this stuff would write this stuff.

I wonder if there's an invisible participant being assumed by some folks here: the knowledgable gamer you grab the game from and talk to. If you were forced to assume that this person *does not exist*, how would you fill in for them?

eyebeams wrote: Does the .pdf of Unsung have an explanation of what a character is, what an RPG is, an example of play and GM advice (including what a GM is and what kind of things they have to do before, druing and after the game)?

This is the kind of stuff I'm wondering about. I'm wondering how someone outside of the loop that has a business motive to write this stuff would write this stuff.

eyebeams wrote:
This is the kind of stuff I'm wondering about. I'm wondering how someone outside of the loop that has a business motive to write this stuff would write this stuff.

Hi.

Can we continue this in Newbie-friendly Indie Games? It seems like a more appropriate thread with an actual topic.

eyebeams wrote: Does the .pdf of Unsung have an explanation of what a character is, what an RPG is, an example of play and GM advice (including what a GM is and what kind of things they have to do before, druing and after the game)?

eyebeams wrote: Does the .pdf of Unsung have an explanation of what a character is, what an RPG is, an example of play and GM advice (including what a GM is and what kind of things they have to do before, druing and after the game)?

This is the kind of stuff I'm wondering about. I'm wondering how someone outside of the loop that has a business motive to write this stuff would write this stuff.

I wonder if there's an invisible participant being assumed by some folks here: the knowledgable gamer you grab the game from and talk to. If you were forced to assume that this person *does not exist*, how would you fill in for them?