A couple of people asked me to comment on what Ron Edwards wrote about comics, D&D, and what the mainstream person wants.

The comic industry and the dominance of the superhero genre is very interesting, and complex.  A few extra details to compliment what Ron wrote about the comics industry (which I generally agree with):

The term "superhero" is actually trademarked by Marvel and DC Comics.  No other company can create "superhero" comics, and even parodies get the cease-and-decist treatment.  My friend DJ's "Superhero Happy Hour" was forced to change it's title to the much less amusing "Hero Happy Hour" after the threat of litigation.  Other people have noted this trademarking of common language as a tool to legally harass indie comic companies is wrong, and have suggested referring to these characters by their alternate title: "underwear perverts."

Marvel and DC spend a lot of money on promoting their products, and a lot of money on producing slick books -- full colour, nice paper, good artwork.  In fact, if you're an indie comic creator you'd find it hard to compete with the quality Marvel and DC offer at the same price.  Very hard -- it's almost impossible to do it and turn a profit.  Marvel and DC actually run their comic dvisions at a loss -- they make their profit on the merchandising tie-ins and movie deals.  If you ever wondered how you make money with colour comics -- now you know.

Spiderman, Batman, X-Men, Superman, Hellboy -- all very popular movie franchises based on very recognizable icon characters created in the pages of actual comics.  Even comics without strong central characters are often optioned for movies -- like the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (which I just saw 2 nights ago).  The characters and stories created in comics are often much more valuable than the actual profit from the comic itself.

No doubt RPG companies would like to see some of that movie money too!  There were a couple of D&D movies, which unfortunately seemed to do a poor job with the source material.  There was also the movie Underworld, which White Wolf felt should have been their vampire/werewolf movie, and they sued the producers of the film over it.  Unfortunately "Vampires and Werewolves" isn't as easy to copyright as "Superman".

This is the big difference between RPGs and Comics.  In comics, the characters are the central element and the valuable piece of intellectual property.  RPGs on the other hand, have the players supply the characters and the stories.  Settings are great... but movies (and lunchpails, and stickers, and stuffed toys, and action figures) need great characters and stories to go with them.  Most RPGs don't really have those out of the box.

So, RPGs really have to stand on their own two feet.  You can't really run an RPG company at a loss with a realistic hope of making your money on a movie deal.  This is a really big difference between comics and RPGs and why you can't really say that D&D is like the superhero genre.

In Ron's post he said that most people don't want Superhero comics.  He's right.  Most people don't read comics of any sort, including the superhero genre.  Now, traditional comic fans tend to read what they already know - superhero comics.  The problem is that they're a shrinking market.  (Sound familiar?)  The growing market is Manga, and it's usually not bought through a comicbook store, so you need to be careful about where you get your market data from.  Go to Barnes & Nobles or Chapters/Indigo and look at the graphic novels section.  Try not to trip over the kids sitting on the floor reading the stuff.  

If you want to appeal to a more literary and/or artsy crowd, you'd be better to stay away from the supers genre and go with things like the Vertigo line (Sandman et al) or the stuff from Fantagraphics (Ghost World, Robert Crumb et al).  If you have a "comicbook store", then sure, you'd better have Spiderman and Batman in there.

I don't really see D&D being like the superhero genre, but I do think that more effort spent on bringing in new players would be a wise idea.  Traditional comic fans are male.  Manga fans include a lot more women.  Traditional RPG fans are male... So perhaps looking at widening the appeal of RPGs to attract a new, and possibly different, generation of players isn't such a bad idea.

The most important point I want to make is this -- adding new genres to a medium, whether it's movies, comics, or games doesn't mean you have to abandon the old genres, and bringing new people to any genre in the medium increases the potential audience for the other genres as well.

While I've made a point of disagreeing with the Forge theories and stressed that I find the jargon counterproductive, I disagree with the notion that the games they're producing are anything but good for the hobby. I think anything that creates a wider variety of games, with a wider range of appeals is a good thing.  Even if they're games i might not be interested in personally.  Sort of like Manga.

QuoteThis is the big difference between RPGs and Comics. In comics, the characters are the central element and the valuable piece of intellectual property. RPGs on the other hand, have the players supply the characters and the stories. Settings are great... but movies (and lunchpails, and stickers, and stuffed toys, and action figures) need great characters and stories to go with them. Most RPGs don't really have those out of the box.

Not to disagree with your general principle, but there are some exceptions. Take a look, for example, at WotC's D&D product lists for 2006 and 2007.  Note that the bulk of these lists consist of novels and anthologies (along with a shitload of accessories-as a freelance rpg writer, I can tell you they must have a hellacious writing schedule. 'Course, maybe being the biggest gaming corp in the world, maybe they can afford staff writers. I'm digressing.), particularly those belonging very popular lines. While it's rare to get an RPG novel on the Best Seller's lists, books pumped out by Ed Greenwood (Elminster series), R.A. Salvatore (Drizzt), Weis and Hickman (Dragonlance Chronicles), and others are eagerly devoured by fans-and probably at a healthier profit than most D&D accessories.

QuoteWhile I've made a point of disagreeing with the Forge theories and stressed that I find the jargon counterproductive, I disagree with the notion that the games they're producing are anything but good for the hobby. I think anything that creates a wider variety of games, with a wider range of appeals is a good thing. Even if they're games i might not be interested in personally. Sort of like Manga.

A valuable point. While D&D is largely considered the "vanilla" of roleplaying (much as spandex-clad heroes are the "vanilla" of comics), the inclusion of new flavors (genres) will not normally injure the industry as a whole, and is often beneficial for it. Which is part of the reason why television and movies are sometimes optioned as roleplaying games (Buffy and Angel, Species, Men in Black [which was a comic then a movie then an RPG...then a cartoon], Warcraft, etc.).

Ah, that's right -- I'd forgotten that WotC (and formerly TSR) make lots of money from their novels.  I'm not sure if it's *more* than the RPGs themselves, but it's definitely significant.  The characters are still created in the novels though, rather than the games.   The dragonlance characters were in the modules, but you wouldn't know them if there weren't in the novels.

By contrast, you couldn't have the novels without the game setting (well, yes you could, but in this specific scenario the setting came first, then the novels, which were tied back into the setting to increase interest in the game, which spawned more novels...etcetera.)

Quote from: StuartAh, that's right -- I'd forgotten that WotC (and formerly TSR) make lots of money from their novels.  I'm not sure if it's *more* than the RPGs themselves, but it's definitely significant.  The characters are still created in the novels though, rather than the games.   The dragonlance characters were in the modules, but you wouldn't know them if there weren't in the novels.

Although I don't think it's the case today, I did hear that in the AD&D2 TSR days, the novels were the only money-makin' part of the company. I may have msinterprted this, but it was from Ryan Dancey's story of how WOTC ended up with D&D.

Stuart:  Thanks for this info.  It's ... hard to get my brain around (or maybe it's my heart, not my brain, that's giving me the trouble).  Particularly so since (while Manga certainly do a brisk and well-deserved business around me) Barnes and Nobles in my area have pretty well-stocked areas of TPB superhero comics which seem to do pretty good turnover (if indicated by the number of times I go back to pick up a title I passed over a week ago only to find it sold out).  Marvel's "Ultimate Whatever" lines, in particular, seem to get pretty solid representation and sales.

So ... I don't get the impression that you're actually disagreeing with any of that.  Check me on this:  Superhero comics do sell, right?  The reason they aren't profitable is not that they don't have gross revenues, it's that they have such high overhead in production (glossy comics) and marketing that it consumes their gross revenues and then some.

Have I got that straight?

As someone who hugely loves comics qua comics, I'm hard pressed to hear "They don't make money on their own, but rather are a money sink that helps drive other parts of the related industries" without getting defensive.  Though, intellectually, I know that the whole "money sink that drives the industry" is an honorable place, it still feels like I'm hearing "Superhero comics aren't good enough to stand on their own."  It's an interesting little emotional tangle.

Quote from: StuartThere were a couple of D&D movies, which unfortunately seemed to do a poor job with the source material.

I am of the opinion that the D&D movie did a near-perfect job with its source material.  And that is why the movie sucked.  It played out too much like a transcript from someone's basement game and not enough like an adventure story.

I have a lot of sympathy with Ron's position. Consider: I haven't bought a superhero comic in about twenty years; I hardly ever touch the few I have remaining; I have no idea what's currently big in supers; my last supers game was a deconstructive one because I can't take superheroes seriously. Nobody I know – maybe apart from some gamers – reads superhero comics. For most people I know, superheroes have camp value only.

For what it's worth, I see great potential in comics as an artform, but I don't think it's realised in the products of the US supers industry (the Japanese manga at home are much closer, though I'm not familiar with which types are big in the US). I do think that my tastes are more representative of the wide majority of people. And it's an issue. I'll say this here to Tony, for example: Capes sounds like a very interesting game, and if somebody pulls it out I'll be sure to try it. But it's not even on my to-buy list, because I can't summon enough interest in supers as a setting. Neither is With Great Power sitting up and telling me to buy it, by the way, nifty as it sounds.

I see game after game after game appear, all dealing with the same limited subject matter. I'm not knocking that – you have to follow your obsessions. I'd just like to see more games that step away from that paradigm.

Quote from: jrientsI am of the opinion that the D&D movie did a near-perfect job with its source material.  And that is why the movie sucked.  It played out too much like a transcript from someone's basement game and not enough like an adventure story.

I give a lot of credence to that. They screwed up the translation between mediums, which is a tricky business.  They forgot/didn't realize that what comes out of a D&D session is often material fit for "eye's only".

I think the FR translation from the novels back to the RPG setting, especially in the 90's era, is another example of poor medium translation. Because, as Stuart points out, RPGs are about the player's characters being kickass. When you start rolling in these NPCs in the world you seriously risk stealing the PCs spotlight.

RPG novels; the boon of RPG companys and the bane of RPGs, which makes them the bane of RPG companys.  Now that's a real pickle, huh?

Quote from: StuartThe characters are still created in the novels though, rather than the games.   The dragonlance characters were in the modules, but you wouldn't know them if there weren't in the novels.

We heard about them first in the novels. But they were, at least the original characters and trilogy, created in-game, no?  I still vaguely remember Dragons of Autumn Twilight, Winter Night, Spring Dawning. Read them back in the 80's, a roommate introduced them to me.  I hadn't played RPGs before that, that was my first exposure. My second exposure was actually playing a couple of sessions of D&D with a painfully childish person as the GM, one of the very worst I've ever seen. Fortunately I could see past that guy to the potential of RPGs themselves and that didn't deter me when the next opportunity to play [EDIT: with a different GM ] came up.

P.S.  I also haven't had any urge to pick up another TRS/WotC novel since. Screw reading a big beefy novel of someone's thinly disgused game/fan-wank, I want to create in play my own characters/fan-wank.

Quote from: StuartIf you want to appeal to a more literary and/or artsy crowd, you'd be better to stay away from the supers genre and go with things like the Vertigo line (Sandman et al) or the stuff from Fantagraphics (Ghost World, Robert Crumb et al).  If you have a "comicbook store", then sure, you'd better have Spiderman and Batman in there.

As comics fans got older ,the Vertigo stuff was made to appeal to them. Alan Moore's Swamp Thing started that ball rolling. It wasn't that these folk were literary or artsy fartsy, just that they were a bit too old for the level of superhero stuff then being written. Nowadays it has all become more sophisticated.

Quote from: StuartWhile I've made a point of disagreeing with the Forge theories and stressed that I find the jargon counterproductive, I disagree with the notion that the games they're producing are anything but good for the hobby. I think anything that creates a wider variety of games, with a wider range of appeals is a good thing.  Even if they're games i might not be interested in personally.  Sort of like Manga.

While I've always maintained that the most productive method of getting new folks into the hobby, rests with the existing gamers themselves, I think, that the big publishers, could play a very important role.

I'm beginning to think, that perhaps, they are the only ones who can have a real impact here. (Okay, remember, I know fuck all about the industry, so don't go drawing your weapons, to quickly )

I mean, Vertigo was an imprint of DC comics, right? Maybe Wotc should have a speciality division devoted to promoting/creating games, other than their trad games. Really produce some thinkin' "out of the box" stuff. I mean, all the big guns, should do this...just a thought.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RI mean, Vertigo was an imprint of DC comics, right? Maybe Wotc should have a speciality division devoted to promoting/creating games, other than their trad games. Really produce some thinkin' "out of the box" stuff. I mean, all the big guns, should do this...just a thought.

Regards,
David R

It's not a bad thought, but there are a few things to keep in mind.

First, most Vertigo or Epic type titles are limited runs. They're not aimed at the usual reader/comic buyer, and a fair number tend to bomb-especially amongst the independents. On the upside, a rare few-Transmetropolitan, Sandman, Hellblazer, etc.-become extremely popular and continue to make money even after the series has ended (as shown by the continued popularity of trade paperbacks).

Most companies (game or comic) can't afford to put out lines that might fail in the hope that one will catch-especially with the current indie glut on the market. This is actually one of the benefits of WotC and the d20 SRD: by providing a template for others to base settings and adventures around, WotC doesn't have to. Yes, Wizards loses profit from any indie d20 game that actually strikes a chord and becomes popular, but it also saves money that it might have spent on a billion adventures, settings, and sourcebooks that are unpopular.

Not to say that this sort of thing hasn't been done before. The best example I can think of is Black Dog, which was used by White Wolf to publish it's more edgy, mature, and occasionally blasphemous sourcebooks, like Montreal by Night and Clanbook Baali.

Quote from: Ancient HistoryFirst, most Vertigo or Epic type titles are limited runs. They're not aimed at the usual reader/comic buyer, and a fair number tend to bomb-especially amongst the independents. On the upside, a rare few-Transmetropolitan, Sandman, Hellblazer, etc.-become extremely popular and continue to make money even after the series has ended (as shown by the continued popularity of trade paperbacks).

This is a good point. Aren't independent games, more often than not games for short term play? Perhaps the big boys could put out something like this and if it catches on, expand upon it. Now, this may not be feasible most of the time, but perhaps it could be a new starting point, for the way how some games are published and marketted.

QuoteMost companies (game or comic) can't afford to put out lines that might fail in the hope that one will catch-especially with the current indie glut on the market. This is actually one of the benefits of WotC and the d20 SRD: by providing a template for others to base settings and adventures around, WotC doesn't have to. Yes, Wizards loses profit from any indie d20 game that actually strikes a chord and becomes popular, but it also saves money that it might have spent on a billion adventures, settings, and sourcebooks that are unpopular.

Yeah, I suppose you're right. But I was thinking of relatively cheap books or perhaps in pdf form. Low cost method for untested stuff. (Not, that I think pdfs are low cost...)

QuoteNot to say that this sort of thing hasn't been done before. The best example I can think of is Black Dog, which was used by White Wolf to publish it's more edgy, mature, and occasionally blasphemous sourcebooks, like Montreal by Night and Clanbook Baali.

Is BD still in operation? Guess my idea is a pretty unsafe option for the big guns. I just thought that if they embraced this whole indie thing, and produced games that may...may...drawn in some other folks, it would be better for the hobby...but it may not be good for the industry, because as you say, the cost may no be worth it.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RMaybe Wotc should have a speciality division devoted to promoting/creating games, other than their trad games. Really produce some thinkin' "out of the box" stuff. I mean, all the big guns, should do this...just a thought.

Maybe they already are.

WotC makes Miniatures, CCGs and Boardgames, with lots of overlap with RPGs.  They're all over "out of the box" stuff -- but that means it might be out of the "what is an RPG" box for some people...