One of the roles of a publisher who works with writers, I'm finding, is advising them. I wonder how those of you who manage writers handle this delicate task.

In this particular case, a guy had been inspired by a popular television series to write a rolepllaying game. fair enough. And now he wants a publisher. But the series is already taken! The basic concepts he describes in his outline are good, but I have to convince him to weed out everything that can be tied to the original base series as a trademark. The question then becomes whether there will be anything left anyone is willing to buy.

Unfortunately the list of terms I have to tell him not to use is not as exhaustive as it probably needs to be.

In another case, I'm going to have to work with a writer with a very specific vision of what he has in mind that doesn't neccesarily match the image of my company. People keep telling me I produce positive games, and this concept is rather dark, brooding and erotic. I think it's well done and deserves to be published, but I don;t know if I'm the one to do it or if I can do it justice. Maybe I'd be better off giving him a system to use (one of the OGL systems I use frequently), providing some basic services, and having him publish the game himself. Contracting myself out in this way might not pose the same problems....

But these are rather odd situations. Are there more mundane situations you guys deal with all the time?

Michael Hopcroft wrote: But these are rather odd situations. Are there more mundane situations you guys deal with all the time?

Strange topic for an Indie RPG site, Michael. I mean, we're all self-published. None of us publish other people's work. How can we comment?

Mike

I'll comment...

First and foremost, you have a dark, erotic, brooding game? Don't want it you say? Send it my way... that's kind of my bread & butter.

Next, there is only one way, I ahve found, to communicate with authors, artists, editors, anyone: bluntly. The guy with the series-based game, just let him know: it's been done, and even if it hadn't, you'd need permission from the holders of the series, and then you'd need a licensing fee (unless you work-out a nice "other" deal), and then you'd need to look over the history of licensed games and realize that they just plain don't sell as well as everyone really seems to think they will. But other than that, great idea, man! (always add the "man", as it shows a camaraderie and mutualism that writers respond to, and thus, it softens the blow(s))

The general idea I operate under is to let everyone I am contracting (for whatever service) know that I am an asshole (seriously, I can get backup for this if there is a question of veracity here). Not only am I an asshole, but I'm that peculiar style of asshole... y'know, the one that's always right. Once this is explained and put out in the open, people will be much more receptive to your critiques (or, at least, should be... they may not in practice, but, then again, you warned them).

The general idea is that it is your business, your money, and your ass on the line if it sucks. Therefore, you are entitled to say and do whatever it takes... up to and including hiring migrant workers to hide the bodies.

Dav

Mike Holmes wrote: Strange topic for an Indie RPG site, Michael. I mean, we're all self-published. None of us publish other people's work. How can we comment?

I would give it to someone else.

I know we passed up on a game that felt the same way to us, although we told him he was welcome to self-publish and we would let him use our system, no problem. He writes other stuff for us.

Anyway, whoever said the best way to talk to a writer is "bluntly" was absolutely correct. We've asked writers to put together bits and pieces for us, and we've sent it back with notes for them to self-edit. If you don't tell them directly that their work is either bad or not what you're looking for, they'll do their best to sell it to you with the minimum amount of effort.

samdowning wrote: I know we passed up on a game that felt the same way to us, although we told him he was welcome to self-publish and we would let him use our system, no problem. He writes other stuff for us.

Anyway, whoever said the best way to talk to a writer is "bluntly" was absolutely correct. We've asked writers to put together bits and pieces for us, and we've sent it back with notes for them to self-edit. If you don't tell them directly that their work is either bad or not what you're looking for, they'll do their best to sell it to you with the minimum amount of effort.

Gee Michael, sounds familiar! :)

We have one outside writer locally and three local artists, one of which worked for Todd in the video games industry a few years ago. The hardest thing to do is get someone to get their tail in gear on something when they're on the other side of the globe. We have a couple problems with that currently - like cover art that was promised as a work-in-trade and still hasn't shown up - nearly a year ago I think? I did my end of the bargain, and I'm still waiting for his.

I must say though, that our non-local writers and artists here in America have so far been worse at deadlines than our folks elsewhere. Sometimes, we have to wring stuff out of people when they were the ones that offered to do the work!

It's so much easier to do a project without outside influences. Then you don't have to bug others to get their projects finished.

You're preaching to the choir, Sam. I just got a note from one of my artists saying they;d been forced to put everything aside to finish school and they won;t have access to a computer for a month afterwards. GRRRR!

Let me throw in a quick comment from the other side of the coin. I'm not a freelance writer but my wife has been and being direct and honest is important. Neither side likes having their time wasted.

Also, when dealing with someone that is geographically separated from you also be sure to keep a constant line of communication with them. Nothing makes a writer/artist abandon a project faster than thinking that the person who comissioned them in the first place has vanished from the face of the Earth.

Oh, and lastly, if it's a paying gig be sure to pay them. Not assuring a writer/artist that they'll get paid will make it impossible for you to get any rewrites/alterations.

Finally, if payment is tied to "upon publication" then make sure that you have a date locked and that you meet it. Burn a freelancer once and you'll never get their trust back.

Just some food for thought. :)

I'll add my agreement to the "bluntly" crowd. Having been the editor and the writer in this scenario (not in the RPG industry, but the same theory applies), being vague will only lead to problems later on. Be firm but diplomatic.

-Matt

This is an endemic problem in publishing in general. One academic editor apparently has two pictures on her wall: a Madonna and Child, and Goya's Kronos Devouring His Children. The first is labeled, "How the editor sees the editing process," and the second is labeled, "How the author sees the editing process."

1. I have had trouble in the past with freelancers turning things in wildly late. Does your contract stipulate a pay cut if this happens? If you can get a rep for paying well and on time, you have leverage to renegotiate if someone can't deliver. My own book contract stipulated a delivery date for the MSS, and gave a kind of window of lateness, outside of which the contract would be renegotiated.

2. If you don't want to publish a given book, but you think it's good, it's certainly nice to pass it on to someone who would do it well. Just make sure you don't get yourself into the unpaid agent business, as you won't get any credit for it (chances are, the guy is going to think of you as that guy who wouldn't publish something even though he liked it).

clehrich wrote:
2. If you don't want to publish a given book, but you think it's good, it's certainly nice to pass it on to someone who would do it well. Just make sure you don't get yourself into the unpaid agent business, as you won't get any credit for it (chances are, the guy is going to think of you as that guy who wouldn't publish something even though he liked it).