Topic: Party Games
Started by: lumpley
Started on: 4/18/2002
Board: Publishing
On 4/18/2002 at 4:54pm, lumpley wrote:
Party Games
Know what I want on my game shelf? The Forge Book of Party Games. A stack of 2-5 page games that a. you can play ten minutes from now, with only one of you having read the rules and b. non-gamers might dig. "Hey, canasta's getting old," you might say, "let's play one of these instead." Like Soap, Hellcab, Sitcom, my game Matchmaker. I'm sure there are others I don't know about.
Situation 1: Now obviously I can make that very book for myself, all I gotta do is download, print, and bind. Can anybody suggest other such games that I don't know about, to add to my collection?
Situation 2: I think that if it were publically available it'd make an appealing actual book. The logistics of such a thing are beyond my immediate apprehension -- I'd start with the games' authors, natch, and but then what? -- but presumably they're surmountable. Is anybody else interested?
-Vincent
On 4/18/2002 at 4:59pm, Clinton R. Nixon wrote:
RE: Party Games
Vincent,
I once - a long time ago - thought about making the Forge into a bit of a business, selling hard-copy collections of good, small indie games that came from here.
I changed my mind on that quite a while back. Hard-copy publishing is something I really don't want to be a part of.
That said - I love this project. If this gets put together, I'll host it for download here, and talk it up. It could be given away, or it could be sold for a low cost in order to cover hosting fees.
I would be willing to help with this in layout and design, as well as the creation of a party game (I have a card game I've been working on that would probably fit well.)
- Clinton
On 4/18/2002 at 5:05pm, Jared A. Sorensen wrote:
RE: Party Games
Clinton R Nixon wrote: Vincent,
I once - a long time ago - thought about making the Forge into a bit of a business, selling hard-copy collections of good, small indie games that came from here.
I changed my mind on that quite a while back. Hard-copy publishing is something I really don't want to be a part of.
That said - I love this project. If this gets put together, I'll host it for download here, and talk it up. It could be given away, or it could be sold for a low cost in order to cover hosting fees.
I would be willing to help with this in layout and design, as well as the creation of a party game (I have a card game I've been working on that would probably fit well.)
- Clinton
I would gladly contribute Autopsy, Monster Party, Dice Castles, Superior, Hellcab, The Pitch and Happy-Lucky Chinese Restaurant Game.
On 4/18/2002 at 5:31pm, lumpley wrote:
RE: Party Games
Damn, Jared. You could put them together and be my competition, all by yourself. You kick ass.
Which is your favorite?
-Vincent
On 4/18/2002 at 6:09pm, Jared A. Sorensen wrote:
RE: Party Games
The youngest child is always the favorite, so Monster Party.
They could all use a re-write though. Except Superior. I've probably played that game at least fifty or sixty times...it's always fun. :)
On 4/18/2002 at 10:42pm, Ferry Bazelmans wrote:
RE: Party Games
Heya Vincent,
I would be happy to shove SOAP your way. Just the basic version though. I'm working on a PDF version with a lot more than just the game. More examples, a section on how to run it as a traditional rg and lots more.
The current version up on my page'll be rewritten...
Fer
On 4/18/2002 at 11:44pm, lumpley wrote:
RE: Party Games
Ferry! Terrific! I'd gathered from somewhere that you had bigger things in mind for Soap, so I wasn't counting on it, but I'm delighted. Should I grab the one that's there now, or wait for the rewrite?
There aren't any copyright issues here, are there? All the original authors keep their copyrights, this would just be using the games with their generous permission, yes? Can somebody who knows about such things comment?
So hey Zak! How about Sitcom?
That'd be all the ones I named, plus thirty or forty more by Jared. Can anybody suggest any others?
I'll go check the library now. This is fun.
Oh, Bedlam! Must track down Matt Machell. Matt? Are you there?
-Vincent
On 4/19/2002 at 3:21am, Ron Edwards wrote:
RE: Party Games
Vincent,
I am confused. Are you talking just about printing them up and putting them in a cover or a binder? You don't need permission for that, it's private use. I can't imagine it being worth a post, much less a thread.
Or are you talking about publishing them in a commercial fashion as a collection? If so, then you're going to have to get a lot more details ironed out than you've done here so far.
Best,
Ron
On 4/19/2002 at 4:28am, Zak Arntson wrote:
RE: Party Games
Good point, Ron. I for one would want to read a contract etc. before I go anywhere with publishing.
That said, I'd be willing to consider giving most of my games to something like this.
On 4/19/2002 at 4:34am, J B Bell wrote:
RE: Party Games
Perhaps I am missing something, but it seems like there's an obvious thing to do here if you contemplate print publication of such a beast. Namely, once all the appropriate rights are secured, have it be a non-profit venture to support the Forge itself.
Is that what folks are thinking already, without having explicitly said it?
--JB, who personally can hardly think of a more appropriate and painless way to support this wunnerful place.
On 4/19/2002 at 11:03am, Ferry Bazelmans wrote:
RE: Party Games
Vincent,
If you're really going through with this, I would be happy to make some kind of financial contribution (don't know where I'd find the money, but I would) to this project. I've been thinking about the same thing for a while now and I too think that it would be worthwhile.
Of course, I have as little a scope of the things that need to be settled right now as you, so perhaps Ron or anyone else who has a better understanding of the road to follow could give some pointers...
Fer
On 4/19/2002 at 1:39pm, lumpley wrote:
RE: Party Games
Hey everybody.
Ron, yes, publically available. Is that the same as commercial? Clinton hosting it here for free or for very cheap to cover hosting costs was exactly what I had in mind. (Well, I had small fantasies of it taking off! and being in print! and making the Forge and all the game contributors filthy rich! and somebody else playing Matchmaker! but those are just fantasies.)
Zak, I hope you didn't and nobody did think I was asking for any kind of a commitment without a contract. I'm just asking whose games are available, in theory, pending it all somehow working out to your satisfaction.
It seems to me that whether print publication is a possibility or not, online publication is what to shoot for. What's involved in that? What copyright issues are there? What about money? Can it be a non-profit venture to support the Forge? (I'd certainly donate my game.) What does a contract even look like? If we have to hire a lawyer, let's forget about it. I don't have any money to spend on this, only time, and not a ton of that, so if it's going to be expensive, let's forget about it.
I've got this idea, I've got a few people who seem into it and willing to really contribute, and I think based on nothing much that it has a future. What do we do now? Where do we even start?
I'm gonna go reread the articles here about publishing, and see what I can find on the web at large. And please, if this is an unrealistic project, somebody tell me so I can knock it off.
-Vincent
On 4/19/2002 at 2:05pm, Ron Edwards wrote:
RE: Party Games
Vincent, you're making my head hurt.
Commercial = a person who wants it has to pay for it. A free thing is not commercial. A commercial thing is not free.
Print publishing = an actual book or solid physical item.
"Publishing" = very vague term meaning "available," includes website.
What in Sam Hill are you talking about? You seem to be making it up as you go along, in a kind of free-associative spin from whatever anyone is saying on the thread.
If you are putting a free thing on a website (on the Forge or not), all you need is the authors' permission - you're duplicating what they have available, but not for commercial use, basically giving them "another website." That also applies if you are planning to print a hard copy of the same stuff and make it available for free. (That's as if you had photocopied Soap and handed it out on street corners.)
To repeat, all of the above are no ... big ... deal, as long as you have permission.
If you are asking anyone for money in order to acquire this ... thing, whatever it is (file, book), then you are now a publisher. That opens a can of worms that you cannot possibly imagine, both in terms of ownership and in terms of logistics. The more authors/owners involved in a publishing venture, the worse the problem becomes.
At the most extreme, you might even acquire title to the games in order to cut down on those logistics problems. I caution you that such activity is antithetical to the mission of the Forge and both you and all the games involved will not be permitted to participate here.
Best,
Ron
On 4/19/2002 at 2:41pm, Matt wrote:
RE: Party Games
lumpley wrote:
Oh, Bedlam! Must track down Matt Machell. Matt? Are you there?
-Vincent
Listening, although a bit less than before due to starting a new job......
Matt
On 4/19/2002 at 2:50pm, lumpley wrote:
RE: Party Games
Ron,
Nice.
Yes, I'm free-associating on what everybody's saying.
No, I didn't know that free != commercial, necessarily. The difference between free and very cheap to cover hosting costs seemed trivial to me, in my ignorance.
No, I didn't know that photocopying Soap (eg) and handing it out on street corners is no big deal, that all I need is permission.
I have -zero- interest in acquiring title to anybody's games. For goodness sake, let the insanity stop.
So, excellent. What we're talking about is me getting permission from Zak, Jared, Ferry, and whoever else to stick their games together in one file and put it up on a website for free, and me arranging with Clinton to host it if he wants, and dumb things like that. No money = no grief. Perfect. Ideal.
Sorry to make your head ache, Ron. But thank you, you just stopped mine.
Matt,
Cool. Let me regroup a bit?
-Vincent
On 4/19/2002 at 6:03pm, Nathan wrote:
RE: Party Games
I would gladly assist in a layout/website/whatever of this sort of project. I really do like the idea of selling it for a bit of cash to keep the Forge alive -- but, that may not be exactly feasible.
If we do it for free, sounds okay too I suppose.
Thanks,
Nathan
On 4/19/2002 at 6:27pm, Ron Edwards wrote:
RE: Party Games
There's nothing wrong with including the very same Donate button that's currently available.
Best,
Ron
On 4/19/2002 at 7:20pm, Clinton R. Nixon wrote:
RE: Party Games
I agree with Ron on this one. If Vincent wants to do this project, this is the way it'd have to be for me to support it:
- All the authors agree to let someone compile their games. I don't want to see any contracts or anything like that. I want e-mails between the authors and whoever compiles this, cc'ed to webmaster@indie-rpgs.com. If the game's for sale elsewhere, I don't want to see it. All the games must either be already out there and free, or something the author did just for this project.
- The final product is a PDF - not hard copy. Maybe it'd be printed and given away at a convention - that's fine.
- It's given away here. It would, definitely, have the same donate button beside it, with a message like, "Like this? Donate some cash" but wordier.
On 4/19/2002 at 7:48pm, Jason L Blair wrote:
RE: Party Games
Clinton,
I suggest "Like our shit? Give us lots of cash!" right next to a "Buy Our Shit" button.
On 4/22/2002 at 2:41am, Henry Fitch wrote:
RE: Party Games
Just to chime in, I have a game I make people play at parties, and the rules take up maybe half a page with examples. It's totally RPG-unrelated, but I should think that's okay. You can use it if you want.
It's about drawing strange creatures, and was invented by myself when I was a wee one. I forgot about it for years, but Monster Party reminded me of it and I've had great success with it since. (thanks Jared!) The basic gist is, everybody is drawing a strange creature, but you have to include certain features. Everybody takes turns specifying features, and each person has to include every feature. Nobody can look at each other's papers. This creates a bunch of differently ugly-looking monsters and a lot of people regressing to childhood.
Yeah, that's probably too short to count. I'm going to write it up longer and put in up on the 'net when I have a place for it.