Hello, newplayer Ben here again, with some questions on writing a mini-supplement. (So sue me, I like clear subject lines.)
The Mini-Supplements page answers my question on 'what stage do you want to see it in?' and 'what sort of response do we need from you?'
("Just send your concept, draft, or final form.... It must pass my editorial approval, at all stages of development." http://www.sorcerer-rpg.com/brochure.php/minisupplements.html)
Right, now my other questions are these:
1) for the purposes of the mini-supplement the concepts and terms presented in Sorcerer can be used. (not so much a question, more just something i want affirmed.)
2) the terms and concepts presented in Sorcerer and Sword and Sorcerer's Soul can also be used?
3) the terms and concepts in the other mini-supplements cannot be used without the consent of their respective authors.
4) what ideas for mini-supplements have been done to death? I'm not sure you can answer that, what with other mini-sup. authors asking you to not spoil their surprises. Okay, maybe here's a better question - What do you (Ron Edwards, and the Sorcerer community) not want to see? Just curious.
5) how many mini-supplement ideas have you (R.E.) been sent?
6) what's more important: the element of surprise when releasing a product, or the useful criticism generated by a forum post?

I'm trying to think of a question I can be proud of, but failing. Damn.
Sincerely,
Ben

Hi Ben,

This is going to get confusing; you're Ben #3, I think. Oh well, deal with that later.

As for the questions, I'll take'em as they come:

"1) for the purposes of the mini-supplement the concepts and terms presented in Sorcerer can be used. (not so much a question, more just something i want affirmed.)"

I affirm that. In fact, I require it, as you are writing a supplement to enhance the play of Sorcerer, by definition. Even if it's all fiction, I want some system or rules concepts that it's supposed to reflect or apply to.

"2) the terms and concepts presented in Sorcerer and Sword and Sorcerer's Soul can also be used?"

Absolutely. It's good to say so, though, so people aren't seeing "Pact" and having no clue.

"3) the terms and concepts in the other mini-supplements cannot be used without the consent of their respective authors."

Incorrect, to some extent. It depends on what you mean by "use." You are free to mention and use light versions of those terms and concepts as long as you give credit to the author/title. This stops short of lifting rules modifications wholesale - ie psychogenics from Schism, the Humanity-devouring in Hellbound, etc.

"4) what ideas for mini-supplements have been done to death? I'm not sure you can answer that, what with other mini-sup. authors asking you to not spoil their surprises."

I could come up with a whole raft of things that I'd rather not see ... but I won't do that. An excellent proposal for one of them might open my eyes and override my prejudice entirely. You can't treat mini-supplement submission as trying to please me or guess what I most want to see.

"5) how many mini-supplement ideas have you (R.E.) been sent?"

In addition to the published ones, at least a dozen total. In actual production, at any given time, one to three. Of those, how many I anticipate seeing finished, probably one.

"6) what's more important: the element of surprise when releasing a product, or the useful criticism generated by a forum post?"

Important to what? Successful commerce? Think of it very much like a movie preview. You get pissed when you know too much, right? You also get pissed when you were given misleading (too vague) information, right? So find the line that makes the most sense to you and use that.

I think this question ought to be turned inward. If it is, then I think actually PLAYING your mini-supplement notions is the most valuable aspect of ensuring its quality.

Best,
Ron

[ This Message was edited by: Ron Edwards on 2001-12-07 13:30 ]

Rather than start something new, I thought it might be cool to re-surface this briny & barnacled topic.

Would it be possible...nay, of course it's possible...would it be useful to set up a private forum to discuss mini-supplements. Anyone who has written a mini-supp or is actively working on a mini-supp could join but the forum would be segregated from the public Sorcerer forum.

I ask because I'm working on a new one and although I'd like feedback, I'd rather keep said feedback limited to other mini-supp authors (for a variety of reasons).

All hail Jared.

I very much would like an open forum where I could discuss mini-sup ideas. I want very badly to e-mail Ron with tons of questions and/or ideas, but he hardly has time to respond to all of them. The feedback would be productive, and I think such a forum would be enjoyable (although determining membership might be problematic).

- Moose

Sorry guys, no private forum. Scott is right that membership would be meaningless.

Never - NEVER - hold back from emailing me about work on a mini-supplement. Fears that you'll "cut into my time" or that "maybe I won't like it" or "it's not ready yet" are groundless - and I cannot help but read them as excuses simply not to do the work. I will indeed provide hard-line criticism, suggestions, and any other feedback, as every mini-supplement writer knows, and will tell you.

If you want to get any kind of group discussion going, then just use multiple-receiver email and make sure to "reply to group."

However: I strongly recommend not even doing that. Why? Because writers' groups, bluntly, do not work. They are almost universally a means of (1) dispersing the necessary drive to get work finished and (2) reassuring everyone involved that that's OK. In my view, this is not OK.

I have a very basic and uncompromising view about creative output - ie, real output, not "ideas." That view is: if you're doing it, you're doing it, and if you're not, you're not. I do not have any interest or sympathy for so-called writer's block, for example. On the other hand, I also think everyone is free to work at his or her own pace, including necessary down-time.

Best,
Ron

P.S. See this thread for more info.