Among other things, I hope to get a little Indie-RPG Manifesto pamphlet ready for GenCon. It might be no more than a two-sided sheet; time is short.

Any suggestions for what it should say? Act fast, 'cause this is down to (say) a day of meaningful posting.

Best,
Ron

P.S. Obviously I reserve the "final cut" rights.

Well, obviously this won't speak for the entire indie RPG world, nor even everybody who regularly posts on this forum, but...

* System does matter.

* We have only begun to explore what RPGs can be & how they can work.

* The RPG "industry" is not necessary. All it takes to make an RPG is a piece of paper & something to write with. All it takes to publish an RPG is the will to do it. All it takes to play an RPG is at least 2 people. Everything else is optional.

nnnrgh... will think about this today and reply a little later -- would it be possible for the final product to be uploaded as a PDF somewhere?

there are several starting points for defining indie rpgs: which direction are you coming from? simply anything author-controlled?

obviously a section on using the web as a promotion and publishing tool would be important, likewise support for the $0 price range

not directly related, but something about the validity of "navel gazing" too -- GNS and other deconstructions of roleplaying

overall, I guess indie is about experimentation: finding alternate methods and achieving surprising results
(well, that's my take anyway)

more coherency... later

Take the choicest bits from Nuking the Apple Cart. The parts about designing games to be played rather than to move product.

Best,


Jim

What's the purpose of a manifesto other than:

a) We're independent, and
b) We design games?

In other words, what can a manifesto state other than the obvious?

_________________
---

That's just me,

John W.

[ This Message was edited by: John Wick on 2001-07-30 15:05 ]

My input:

"System Does Matter" -Ron Edwards
"Blowing Out the Nostalgia Candle" -John Wick
"GNS FAQ" -Ron Edwards, Logan
"Gettysburg Address" -Abraham Lincoln
A list of the known indie companies. -Clinton nixon, et al

(That Gettysburg Address thing, I don't really need that in the pamphlet)

Dav

Dav,

I don't know if I'd use all those documents. That might be too much information.

The FAQ is a work in progress so I definately would put it in.

"Blowing Out the Candle of Nostalgia" is a good article but I'm not sure it has bearing on the subject of independant games.

"System Does Matter" has some good ideas in it but decends into the GNS model.

I suggest taking the ideas from SDM and other ideas found around here about what we are trying to do with these tools would make a better document. I wouldn't use any of the jargon already coined since it will turn most people off. We're looking to turn people on. I suggest we tease them by giving our goals but not tell them how we do it. This way they'll have to check it out for themselves.

What are our goals?



• appropriate rules for the game in question
• no more unused/useless/stupid rules
• hooking the players
• in general, getting the most out of the role-playing experience



There are probably more such goals, but this is a good start as it's what sold me so far.

I would, naturally include the address for the Forge and listing several games but add "AND MANY MORE" in big letters at the bottom of the list.

Then again, maybe a list wouldn't be appropriate since it would seem like a advertisement or would seem exclusive.

I don't know. You're choice.

I guess I'm still wondering what the purpose of this document is?

Is it to advertise The Forge?
Is it to say, "Games should be free!"?
Is it to say, "Independant games are better than mass produced games?"

What's the purpose of such a document?

PS: Although I appreciate the desire to publish "Candle," you really shouldn't include any documents without the author's permission.

_________________
That's just me,

John W.

[ This Message was edited by: John Wick on 2001-07-31 17:08 ]

John,

My purpose is very clear in my mind: to serve the interests of people at The Forge and to advertise the philosophy that led me to found it. That philosophy is mainly contained in my two posted essays, although neither is just right for a pamphlet.

It has nothing to do with games-for-free. Don't mistake Jared for the Forge. Nor does it have to do with what any one special way a game should be played or published, except for the creator-ownership part.

As for your comment about using your essay without permission, I have sent you a private message.

Best,
Ron

I suppose what's important, then, is that supporting (and developing) creator-owned product pushes the boundaries of gaming:

indie rpgs are more likely (it would appear) to try out different methods of publishing (PDF, website, $0...) and explore different methods of play; an environment like the forge allows examination and musing about these methods and the process of developing them

[in another thread the need to throw out and change was questioned... I have obviously presented a 'revolutionary' take on what indie rpgs are about -- I guess it should also be noted that the forge also helps us identify and refine those elements of already-existing games that are useful and should be encouraged]

I think listing and briefly describing a few games would be appropraite to give a sense of the diversity of product already produced

I've been giving this a bit of thought, even though it's too late for GenCon. There's always GenCon 2002, right?

We'll start with the admittedly sucky definition on the main page:

What is an independent role-playing game? Our main criterion is that the game is owned by its author.

What is an independent role-playing game? Our main criterion is that the game is controled by its creator.

pblock wrote:
We'll start with the admittedly sucky definition on the main page:

What is an independent role-playing game? Our main criterion is that the game is owned by its author.

Perhaps "owned" isn't the word for it and maybe "author" isn't exactly the right word, either.

how about:

What is an independent role-playing game? Our main criterion is that the game is controlled by its creator.

Creative control is an important part of it, I think.

Or maybe this is a rather heavy direction to take the whole thing.

What is an indie role-playing game? We think the main principle is that the game’s design should remain the sole property of its author, who retains full creative control.

Folks,

Defining "indie" has nothing to do with "should." I advocate owning one's own work, and I offer resources for doing so. "Should" is your business.

Ownership means FULL control over the property and any means whatsoever of its publication and commerce.

Retaining "creative control" clauses in a contract, or royalty payments, or any other sort of compromise with a fellow-owner that did not create the game, do not qualify.

This is why Orkworld and Hero Wars are indies, because Issaries Inc IS Greg Stafford's method of getting HW into print; because Wicked Press IS John Wick's method of getting Orkworld into print. It's also why UnderWorld is not, because Synister Creative Systems is the Jaffe brothers' venture and Gareth Michael Skarka is the game's creator. As an extremist, I tend to think that because SCS carries out this practice at all, NONE of their games are indie, not even Last Exodus, which they wrote.

[Do not misunderstand - an indie company can put out more than one game. Cat, from Wicked Press, will be an indie.]
[Do not misunderstand - I am not criticizing or denouncing the Jaffe bros or GM Skarka in any way.]

There are still gray areas. When Wicked Press publishes Wyrd, what will it be?

Best,
Ron

On 2001-08-22 15:51, Ron Edwards wrote:

There are still gray areas. When Wicked Press publishes Wyrd, what will it be?

I don't necessarily think this is wrong. Going back to Wyrd, I have no inside info, but I imagine Scott will still own all rights to Wyrd, and maintain creative control, with Wicked Press just publishing the game. But that doesn't exactly mesh with the definition, just as a compilation of indie games published under one imprint wouldn't.

It's a thorny issue, and one that will have to be decided before the lines are drawn - which will eventually happen.

Of course, it's just a label for a handful of like-minded folks. Having an actual title like bands of painters throughout history, would be fun.

The discussion has me thinking about other media. WHat we're talking about seems less like "indie" RPG and more like "alternative" RPG

Like alternative music or alternative comedy.

I don't know what the hell alternative comedy is supposed to be, but "alternative comic" Andy Kindler said something profound on the subject:

"People are always asking me how we can make alternative comedy more popular. I know how to make alternative comedy more popular. Make it more mainstream."

Hi Jack,

Excluding your second guy from ATTENTION is unfair. But excluding him from "indie" is exactly my point.

This site was founded on the principle of creator ownership and control. Selling one's material into the control of others, in any way, means exclusion from the category of interest.

Now, of course, all RPGs exist in relationship to one another, indie or not. That's why our discussions about design and play can be about any RPG, because indie game design exists in one matrix of variables with everything else. But as for PUBLISHING and the resources available on the site, it's about the indie thing as defined here.

Best,
Ron

Like in PUNK MUSIC:

An indie game is any that belongs to someone who hasn’t sold out.

Earlier, this was posted:
"What if someone payed Ron $2 million to buy & mass-market Sorcerer? And he agreed? Would it still be an indie game?"

My answer: absolutely not. It would have been indie before that, and after that it would not be.

My original plan for Elfs was for it to be published by another company, for me to get 60% of all profits after print costs were recovered (we hoped), and for me to retain "retraction" privileges, i.e. the option to cancel the whole contract whenever I wanted.

Now, I regard that option as flawed, for me. It's fake-indie, and I'm happy that Elfs was and will remain mine in every possible way.

The economic-control issue is the central one for me. Please don't misunderstand. I do not think it's the One True Way to publish, and anyone can publish in any way they please. However, I do think self-publishing (ownership) has advantages that are not well-known, and that's why I advocate learning more about it and taking it very seriously as an option.

Best,
Ron

For me, "indie" means next to nothing. "Creator-owned" on the other hand is self-evident.

Everybody's got their own definition of "indie" and "sell-out." Exceptions to the "indie" definition occur multiple times per day. I don't know what an Indie game is other than "self-owned." HERO WARS is indie, ORKWORLD is indie, SORCERER is indie, but then again, so is ALL FLESH MUST BE EATEN and WITCHCRAFT.

Are Cheap Ass Games "indie?" How about James Ernest Games (color versions of Cheap Ass Games)?

As far as I'm concerned, if a term isn't self-evident, I don't want it in my vocabulary. Its a little short-sighted, but it makes communicating a whole lot easier. :smile:

Carpe deum,
John

The truth is always simple. It's liars who want things complicated.
- The Tao of Zen Nihilism, a Self-Hurt Book

I think the Forge, as a whole, need to do some soul searching on this topic.
There are at least two things folks might want to talk about regarding
"indie" games. One is what Ron is talking about. Namely, games owned,
controlled, and published by their creator.

However, I think a lot of folks here are interested in talking about, for the
lack of a better term, "alternative games", games and ways of playing that
not well supported by the more mainstream roleplaying communities. There
are many games of this sort that are not creator owned. Nobilis comes to
mind.

Of course, creator owned games are a very important subset of alternative
games.

For myself, I don't care what terms folks decide to use. "Indie", "alternative",
"grassroots", whatever. They're all fine with me. I just hope we can land on
some consitent usage.

A thought that just crossed my mind for any "indie manifesto". We can
look at two subjects, 1) our interests as players of games. There is
no reason to reject games like Nobilis or the upcomming production
of Wyrd because they're not indie enough. 2) Our interests in the
production and publication of games, where the unabashed support of
true indie games is called for. After all, folks with those big rich game
companies to support them don't need our help. :smile:

There is no reason to reject games like Nobilis or the upcomming production of Wyrd because they're not indie enough.

My thoughts on the matter continue in this vein ...

1) I'm not sure what the concern with "rejection" is. Let's take Nobilis - a popular game with some Forge members, not with others, but certainly a very distinctive game. It's not a creator-owned game, so I will not review it or accept reviews of it, and it can't have a forum here.

But "reject" Nobilis? Who's rejecting it? Any discussion of its design elements, the events during playing it, its business history, or anything about the game at all as it pertains to a relevant topic, all of that is perfectly welcome at the Forge.

Hell, people, talk about d20 all you want at the Forge,IF you are discussing issues that pertain to GNS, other elements of RPG theory, actual play, design of a creator-owned game - in short, in accord with the forum titles and goals.

2) This is not going to be a popular point, but ... the Forge members do not need to come to a consensus about the issue, because NO Forge policy is determined by consensus. If people who run the Forge (I am one) practice an intolerable policy concerning which games are featured/reviewed, then I think it would be reflected in user rejection of the site. If our take on the matter is at least tolerable, then we continue as is. But that take is NOT determined by polling and summarizing the views of the Forge members.

Are we totally uninterested in Forge members' views on the matter? Of course we're interested - hence my participation on this thread. Your input may raise issues that make a big difference in the outlooks I've stated in this post. Keep in mind, though, that this is not a town meeting to decide what "we all" will do.

Best,
Ron

stimuli brought up a good point.

If we're talking indie games do we support (or The Forge supports, whatever that would entail) a game independantly published but which turns out to be little more than a D&D or GURPS clone? Or are we looking for those games that go "over the edge" and push the limits to the hobby, even if it's published by Hasbro?

I think Ron has already implied the answer. The Forge here supports indie games more-or-less in hopes that it will help games that do push the limits to be written, read and played. Supporting indie design is more playing the odds than a guarrentee of such innovation. Say what you will about WoTC or Tweet, but let's not forget that although they're responsible for this whole d20 thing, they also brought us Everyway, one of the most innovative games I have ever read.

Innovation is where you find it, but WoTC or Atlas or SJG do not need The Forge because they play the RPG publishing and distribution game and play it well.

It's the guys with his own little system (maybe big system) that's only available on his web page that we're interested in because few people may have heard of the game without The Forge.

This is the sentiment I'm reading here. Is it far off?

Jack,

Pretty close, but let me clarify again.

The Forge exists to promote and (hopefully) to service creator-owned games. At THIS level, I don't care if they're good, bad, original, or utterly cliche. At THIS level, the Forge is for anyone and everyone.

Then there's the feedback and interaction level. That's a whole different thing. If a proposed indie-RPG is, bluntly, lousy, I hope that the degree and type of response it gets here (review, discussion, whatever) can be constructive about it.

That's a hope. So far, the degree of innovation and desire to push the envelope has been very high, and so it LOOKS as if the Forge "favors" RPG design that is - for lack of a better word - alternative. But that is a SECONDARY issue, and not at all part of the baseline mission, despite the fact that I like it very much.

Best,
Ron