So I was talking with Rich Forest today (since I'm currently in Hong Kong) and halfway through the conversation I realized some very important things about myself and my goals in indie publishing:

1. I'm actively uninterested in the prospects of running my own small business.
2. I'm actively uninterested in dealing with the mess of getting my products distributed.
3. I don't need to make money off my indie creations.

Honestly, while I respect the guys who go pimp their games for hours at GenCon, I was thinking about that and realized that it's just not me.  I mean, heck, I'll definitely be running my own games at conventions and stuff, but not because I want to sell more copies of them, but because I enjoy playing my stuff and running it for other people.  I understand the appeal of selling your works copy-by-copy to interested people, especially if you're the one helping them get excited about it, but there are other things I'd rather be doing with my time, like creating more stuff and playing in other people's games.  I'd rather be wandering the floor at GenCon while dealers or another publisher (meaning someone besides myself) sells my games and makes money off them.

What I want is:

A. Near complete creative control over the final products.
B. For my products to reach as large an audience as possible.
C. For me to not lose more than a few hundred dollars.

So, having realized this, my next step was to try to figure out a way to get everything that I want, without having to deal with the mess that I don't want to deal with.  With both of my on-the-burner projects, Push (a progressive roleplaying journal about to hit editing and layout) and Vesperteen (which hasn't yet seen a first draft), I've been heavily considering the benefits of contacting an existing roleplaying company to see if they'd be interested in licensing the print rights, similar to the way that Issaries has worked out a deal with Steve Jackson Games.  I'd fully prepare the files for them, ready for the printer, as if I was the head creative director working on one of their company projects (maybe even working with the printer to see the product all the way through proofs and any last-minute edits), and then they'd handle distribution and orders and whatnot.  And there'd be some sort of clause in the deal that, if they let the product go out of print, print rights would revert back to me, so I could choose to re-print or sell the rights to another company.

The biggest obstacle I see here is finding a company that'd be willing to arrange such a deal, where all the creative rights and control remained with me while they printed and distributed my work.  However, there are many models out there (Issaries, Image Comics, Nobilis @ GoO, many small music labels) of this type of thing working pretty well.  Of course, you'd always run the danger of encountering the type of behavior that Ron describes in "War Story."  No matter how good my relationship with the people at Company X, no matter how detailed the written agreements and spoken agreements, there's always the possibility that they would screw me and I'd be forced to try to resolve things and maybe even threaten legal action (just considering the worst case scenario).  This is a danger that I'd be prepared to risk, as long as I felt confident enough in the people I was working with, such that I thought the possibility of getting screwed was relatively minor.

Still, having newly arrived at these conclusions about myself, my goals in publishing, and the like, I thought (before taking a plunge into unknown waters and shopping my upcoming products around) I should make sure that there weren't any unforeseen dangers or hitherto unimagined ways of getting totally screwed that I'm overlooking.  If I do ultimately decide to "sell out" in this way, embracing the creative control goals of the recent indie game movement but not following through on the independent creator-businessman model that's been commonly practiced so far, what messes am I potentially setting myself up for?  What potholes should I be serving to avoid?  Is this middle ground even really possible?  Am I always going to be pressured to compromise total creative control for the benefits of not having to manage the down-and-dirty publishing aspects?  What would managing a creator-controlled imprint for another publisher actually be like?  I have the vision that such a thing might be just around the corner...

Jonathan--

Would another option being you hiring another person/company to handle printing/distribution/fulfillment/convention sales, etc. for you. Them working for you (even if they end up getting a lot of the money, since they're doing a lot of the work) instead of you working for them?

Just curious.

It's your "B" claim that (to my mind) makes for trouble.

It's real easy to say in legalese "You, publishing company, will not (by direct action) change a single word, picture, layout choice... NOTHING!  You have the right to use this precise file, and, okay, I'll let you change the color of the cover-stock.  Maybe."

It's very hard (maybe impossible) to say in legalese "You, publishing company, will not (through omission) fail to take advantage of opportunities that would increase the distribution and popularity of this product."

So, seriously... do you need "B"?  Because if you don't need B then life gets real easy:  Don't spend more than a few hundred dollars developing the actual files of the game (which, if you don't charge for your time and you use software-on-the-cheap, is almost trivial).  Get an ironclad contract of creative control.  Then let go.  Your goals have been accomplished.  Any popularity of the system, any checks written to you from the company, those are all pleasant bonusses if and when they occur, but are not relevant to your fulfilled goals.

But if you really need B then you've just changed your role vis-a-vis the game from "The person who personally makes sure that it's as popular as I can make it" to "The person who rides herd on someone else to make sure that it's as popular as they can make it."  I don't see how that make that either assured or fun.

>>A. Near complete creative control over the final products.
B. For my products to reach as large an audience as possible.
C. For me to not lose more than a few hundred dollars.<<

Judging by these goals and what you said about not needing to turn a profit, then you are not interested in publishing at all. Nor really in licensing. If you want complete creative control (A), for your game to reach the largest audience possible (B), and to not lose your shirt doing it (C), then...

You want to create a PDF version of your game. Then you want to give it away for free EVERYWHERE you can. We made a little 15 page "introductory" edition of one of our role playing games in that format and for over two years gave it away for free online any way we could. During that time we had over 1 million downloads. Now, that's reaching a fairly significant audience. Cost us nothing but the bandwidth, which never exceeded our web hosting plan's bandwitdh, and of course, we could release it in any creative format we wanted.

Now, if you just "had to have" a few print copies to pimp and sell at cons, give to friends, etc, then you could have them printed just 24 at a time at Rapid Pod. Depending on page count that would likely run you around $200.

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

Hiya,

I think Ryan nails it. It sounds as if all you'd really want is for the game to be available, so it's easy: Picard says "make it so," and it's available, via a free PDF on the internet.

Best,
Ron

Michael S. Miller --

That is a thought, with people like Indie Revolution out there.  But in some ways, I don't see how that's much different from working WITH (not for, never for) another company.  I'd still basically be trading profits from selling the game for their work in distributing.  Still, maybe that distinction would be one worth making.

Tony LB --

Another good point.  Yeah, I guess my "not gonna pimp my game" stance does clash with the "make it as popular as possible" goal.  And, as long as it's available and the people who want it can get it, I guess massive popularity is not really the point (or, in the case of Vesperteen, even really possible or desired).  So scratch B, I guess.  What I mean instead, I guess, is that the products should be available to the people who want them, which partially explains my reaction to the "free PDF" suggestion below.

Ryan and Ron --

I'd considered the free PDF option and I'm still considering it, but more along the lines of what Clinton's chosen to do with Anvilwerks, releasing his material for free and then selling spiffy print editions.  My concerns are: the audience for PDF games is still developing, many of my products are clearly intended to be used in print form (as in you really need a physical copy to get the most out of it), and (as an addition to Tony's comments) half the audience that I'm really seeking doesn't even go to game stores or browse RPGnow, but they might take a look at the comics & games section of their neighborhood Barnes & Noble.  Part of making the game available, in my mind, is making it available in places where its audience can find it and, to me, that means bookstores, which would be another benefit of working with an existing publisher.

Still trying to process my options.

I have a lot of response to this, but let's just stick to the absolutely short.

You will not get into Borders except via concentrated, effective acts of self-promotion.

In long, see

Tony Dowler's Advice for Indie Game Designers and the referenced post by Seth Godin, particularly the parts about publishers and book marketing.

My I want to play the "Bang hot goth chicks" game and referenced posts, particularly the questions in the end about your game and society, and the comments about how that relates to marketing.

If you are happy with the amount of marketing you already do from your day to day life (like posting on the Forge, writing Push and your RPGnet column, etc.) and you're games reaching the 100-200 person audience you will get from that, you don't need to put extra effort into marketing.  Otherwise, you do.  Fundamentally, no one else will do this work for you.

yrs--
--Ben

Whoops, those links didn't work for me, Ben. If anyone else has problems, try these:

Advice for Indie Game Designers

I want to play the "Bang hot goth chicks" game

Johnathan,

As long as you're being honest with yourself about your stated goals, the "give it away by PDF" sounds like the way to go. You could also sell it through Lulu or whatever at cost for those hardcopies. I think this is what the author of, erm, Empire of Satanis is doing.

Otherwise, it sounds like you're trying to figure out how to have your cake and eat it too. I think the Issaries/SJG thing is a special case, since Glorantha casts a huge shadow across the entire hobby.

(Ben, just so you know, I'm willing to playtest "Bang Hot Goth Chicks" if you ever decide to write it. In the service of advancing game design, of course.)

Great links, Ben.  Thanks.  Also, just to keep this all together, I asked my brother (him being the smart one) what he though and he wrote:

Leigh Walton wrote: If you want to continue the comics->rpg analogy, you could try:

Wildstorm/Vertigo - a sub-imprint of creator-owned, indie-minded work
using the marketplace leverage and publishing machinery of a big
company. All you need is one passionate and right-minded editor at the
corporation with enough influence to get the company to trust him/her.

Image - bestselling creators at mainstream genre companies declare a
coup and use their massive funding and fan goodwill to set up a
third-party production machine to produce... mainstream genre work.
Only creator-owned. However, time and maturity (and a changing of the
management guard) have allowed it to become what it is now: you
produce it entirely on your own, sign a contract with Image, and pay a
fee to them, and in exchange you get the Image "i" on the cover, you
get moved to the front of the catalog with the other Image properties
(right after marvel, dc and dark horse), and you sell tons more
issues. They are publishing really innovative stuff nowadays.

self-publishing - lay out a lot of cash at the beginning, make it the
center of your universe, dedicate your life to it, market it
constantly, make lifelong fans, and sell to them directly.

Webcomics - bypass the traditional market completely. have absolutely
nothing to do with traditional "mainstream" work, in form or content.
Appeal to, mostly, a totally different audience, and even the people
who consume both will probably keep the two separate in their minds.
Do it for free, as a hobby, or find some nontraditional way to make
money off it.

Various groups - use an existing audience, either through licensing a
popular property or appealing to an existing subculture (Vertigo/WW
with goths). Approach people where they are, with something fairly
familiar, and slowly lead them into something new.

just some stuff off the top of my head.

the thing is that comics are often a serial medium - or at least, even
if your stories aren't sequential, you still keep making new comics
and you want people to keep buying them - whereas with rpgs, they buy
it once and they've got your product forever, and can continue having
new adventures with it in the future; they may not need a second game
and you may not have a second idea - at least not one anything like
the first.

I guess I don't quite understand the whole deal of "game design." Or
"selling games." I'm still in the "system doesn't matter... much"
phase, where it's all dependent on the individual group, and I don't
quite understand the need to buy/play/create specific games. Buying a
book of somebody's thoughts on roleplaying, yes. Buying a specific
game? Not so much.