Fudge RPG - The Greed Factor

Important! This is an archived mailing list. Subscription information included in any messages is no longer current. Over the years, addresses and websites have changed. Follow offsite links at your own risk.

Fudge Guide > Archives > Mailing List > 2005 > May > Full Thread

From: CarlCravens

Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 18:17:28 GMT

Subject: The Greed Factor

I'm trying to decide what to do with my writing... I've got several 
projects that have been back-burnered while I finished school... and I'm 
trying to decide what direction to go with my writing.  Fudge Factor needs 
articles, but I think I can sell my work instead of giving it away for 
free.

So I blogged about it, and I'd like your feedback...

http://raven.phoenyx.net/mutterings/2005/05/greed-factor-school-is-over-i-now-have.html

Thanks!

-- 
Carl D Cravens (raven@phoenyx.net)                    Fudge List Owner
   [  My Roleplaying Blog -- http://raven.phoenyx.net/mutterings/  ]
* Sysop ('sih sop) n.: The guy laughing at your typing.
-- -----------------------------------------------------------
The Fudge List FAQ is at http://fudge.phoenyx.net/listfaq.html
       ** Don't start deliberately off-topic threads. **
SequenceFirst LineUsernameDate
0

Well, our slushpile is rather dry over here at Fudge Factor.

 DavidJaquith 2005-05-27 16:21:07
1

CG>Luckily, I don't think my workplace really knows that I still use mutt in CG>a terminal window.

 KarenCravens 2005-05-30 15:56:33
2

> > BTW, the Xena article was mine and I really should have known better to

No offense taken.

 TonySpallino 2005-06-03 20:28:57
3

I meant that if an article requires another work that is not available easily for free, meaning that you can not get it immediately if you do not have the resources to buy something, then it really doesn't have a whole lot to do with Fudge.

 DavidJaquith 2005-06-04 02:14:53
4

> My comment is not about the Fudge Factor not being the "shining beacon" but my fear that

While I agree that FF needs to publish the best articles available to them, I feel that it would be against the basic submission guidelines we've always had.

 DavidJaquith 2005-06-03 13:58:02
5

ER>Now wouldn't that be lovely!

 KarenCravens 2005-05-30 22:39:41
6

> OTOH in my oppinion FF shouldn't be used as an advertisement platform,

I agree completely.

 AaronClausen 2005-05-28 14:27:16
7

> but if the content of FF becomes thinly veiled

Depends on what you consider a thinly-veiled advertisement.

 TimHuntley 2005-05-27 22:15:24
8

> I do think that it would be wrong to not at least try

This is what I like about PDF publishing...

 CarlCravens 2005-05-27 19:38:31
9

> Here's a question though, Carl has mentioned that the

I don't think what I had in mind would change our standards for acceptance.

My initial question, and what I blogged about, was aimed more on the other side of the equation...

 CarlCravens 2005-05-27 18:00:03
10

> Yeah, that would suck.

 CarlCravens 2005-05-27 16:04:40
11

I doubt if publishing for Fudge would pay well enough to offer up anything for a decent compromise.

The Fudge List FAQ is at http:/fudge.phoenyx.netlistfaq.html<A>

ChrisHelton 2005-05-27 18:16:29
12

If articles produced for FF were just advertising, and weren't usable "out of the box", I wouldn't be keen.
But articles like D13, which certainly aren't full products, but are usable as is, are fine.

 DarrenHill 2005-05-26 18:54:36
13

>I'm trying to decide what to do with my writing...

 JorgeArredondo 2005-05-27 07:44:20
14

This I can agree with.

 BillHamilton 2005-05-27 12:16:36
15

Depends on which ones.

 BrettRitter 2005-05-27 15:52:21
16

> > This I can agree with.

 BradfordYounie 2005-05-27 16:00:15
17

I certainly had no problem with it and would probably use it if I had players it'd fit with.

 Chuk 2005-05-27 16:09:56
18

> This I can agree with.

 DavidJaquith 2005-05-27 16:11:04
19

I think that's always a good idea.

 ChrisHelton 2005-05-27 16:12:08
20

Yeah, that might be better.

> Here's an interesting question...

 Chuk 2005-05-27 16:13:10
21

Here's a question though, Carl has mentioned that the articles in the pipe for FF is already starting to dry up...is it really a good idea to start putting limitations on articles if that is the case?

The Fudge List FAQ is at ChrisHelton		 2005-05-27 16:15:48
22

An interesting point.

I don't think there's a real difference, and the key is how dependant it is.

 BrettRitter 2005-05-27 16:22:24
23

Sure, that's what you think, but personally I consider that to be a rather snobbish attitude to have towards potential submittors.

 ChrisHelton 2005-05-27 16:27:17
24

You got picked last for sports too, huh?

:)

 BrettRitter 2005-05-27 16:25:21
25

> Sure, that's what you think, but personally I

Fudge Factor is not the place to be advertising your product.

 DavidJaquith 2005-05-27 16:35:52
26

I think that's part of the reason Carl asked for input.

 BrettRitter 2005-05-27 17:33:54
27

I would agree, I was asking because it seemed to me that a person involved with Fudge Factor was trying to slip in a bias that wasn't previously there (and it is a bias that bothers me as a Fudge publisher).

 ChrisHelton 2005-05-27 17:43:47
28

I see there being a sharp divide between advertisements and what FF did for Luftwaffe.

Commercial products getting released for Fudge are newsworthy to the Fudge community.

 FredHicks 2005-05-27 17:46:24
29

And also, now that I think about it, Fudge Factor ran an unsolicited advertisment on the release of the new edition of our Luftwaffe 1946 RPG.

 ChrisHelton 2005-05-27 17:13:59
30

> So, if there are any improvements to the layout and info of my GHNE

I thought it was fine.

 CarlCravens 2005-05-27 18:01:43
31

> Ultimately, beggars can't be choosers, and Fudge Factor is

I thought of some other stuff after I sent my first response.

First off: Fudge Factor should<U> be a chooser to some extent, by enforcing a quality level on the informati

 FredHicks 2005-05-27 17:57:00
32

> venue would help keep their core product "alive".

 CarlCravens 2005-05-27 19:29:26
33

> I'd be interested to hear feedback on that issue.

 BradfordYounie 2005-05-27 16:39:51
34

Why not?

 ChrisHelton 2005-05-27 16:45:25
35

There is a difference between having an ad for a publisher, and replacing one of the weekly articles with an ad for a publisher.

 BillHamilton 2005-05-27 21:29:49
36

Not to mention the great work Fred did in getting it rolling again there for a while.

 BrettRitter 2005-05-27 19:46:51
37

> And also, now that I think about it, Fudge Factor ran

FF runs press releases and the like...

 CarlCravens 2005-05-27 18:10:13
38

> In David's defense, I don't think he's thinking more of stuff meant only

Exactly.

I don't think FF should ever put out a little article just with the sole purpose of making your purchase the full work.

 DavidJaquith 2005-05-28 00:36:33
39

That's something that its always hard to figure out, even after the fact, because you are never going to know how many you could have sold, just those numbers that you did<STRONG> sell.

 ChrisHelton 2005-05-27 18:08:16
40

Sure.

 FredHicks 2005-05-28 00:44:44
41

Hi there

I just want to add a few comments.

JorgeArredondo 2005-05-28 09:55:43
42

I'm trying to decide what to do with my writing...

 CarlCravens 2005-05-26 18:17:28
43

> I'm trying to decide what to do with my writing...

 AaronClausen 2005-05-28 14:22:49
44

> I am assuming here that the editors of FF would make sure that articles

Certainly.

 CarlCravens 2005-05-26 19:13:11
45 I'm not sure I agree with this. BillHamilton 2005-05-27 21:22:39
46

> Unfortunately I am having more a more difficulty seeing what FudgeFactor

For Fudge gamers and supporting the game, which I think can be seen as the same thing as promoting it.

 CarlCravens 2005-05-28 15:58:37
47

This thread has drifted from Carl's original question of "would you pay for an expanded version of something that is free?" My answer is yes, I have done so and would do so again.

 GmDslOnlyNet 2005-05-28 16:30:04
48

Greetings,

arrgh...

 ShaneKnysh 2005-05-28 21:15:41
49

Actually, I think we got it, check the archives.

 Chuk 2005-05-29 02:58:44
50

> Regarding the mix and quality of content in Fudge Factor, I can't really

What "has more to do with"?

 CarlCravens 2005-05-29 01:28:25
51

Quoting Carl D Cravens :

No, I'm saying that I'll tolerate some content presented in one way but find it annoying when presented another way.

> > I dislike the blog format, enough that while I have been sitting on some

I del

 GmDslOnlyNet 2005-05-29 05:55:28
52

> But since you asked, it is partly what Shane Knysh discussed in his email

This is exactly how I felt.

 DavidJaquith 2005-05-29 16:48:05
53

> I would like to see exactly what Shane described: a fudge magazine* with a Well, fudgerpg.com is a portal of sorts (with a lot of links to other Fudge sites) -- but it's woefully out of date (neither Rob Knop, webmaster, nor I have had much time fo

 GhostGames 2005-05-29 16:49:05
54

I don't really feel the same as you do, but I'm sure glad you took the time and effort to explain your opinions so well.

 Chuk 2005-05-30 15:47:53
55

> Blogs are a dime a dozen today and personally I avoid

Similar objections were made by artists when photographers first came along.

You're going to get left behind (and I sympathize; I'm getting left behind on the email front due to my o

 FredHicks 2005-05-29 16:00:32
56

Luckily, I don't think my workplace really knows that I still use mutt in a terminal window.

 Chuk 2005-05-30 15:49:58
57

Now wouldn't that be lovely!

 ErisReddoch 2005-05-30 18:26:01
58

> Why a FudgeFactor blog instead of using a Wiki with only the editors

Interesting question, considering that we do all of our pre-publishing work in a Wiki.

Originally, that was my intent.

>>From the beginning, my goal was to develop an enti

 CarlCravens 2005-05-30 19:54:41
59

I'm behind in my replies.

 CarlCravens 2005-06-02 19:30:02
60

> I deliberately avoided this out of respect for the FF editors who made the

We need the feedback, though.

 CarlCravens 2005-06-02 22:09:09
61

Greetings!

Sorry a very long reply without a lot of new content...

On Thu, 2 Jun 2005 14:30:02 CDT, Carl D Cravens wrote Glad to hear you and your mom are feeling better.

> On Sat, 28 May 2005, Shane Knysh wrote:

My comment is not about th

 ShaneKnysh 2005-06-03 13:09:14
62

> From: David Jaquith

> While I agree that FF needs to publish the best articles available to

The current guidelines allow for atricles that deal with any implementation of Fudge.

 Mitchw 2005-06-03 14:33:39
63

You're paraphrasing the submission guidelines, and leaving out a phrase that makes a big difference:

"All submissions should either relate to Fudge in some way, or be of a non-system specific nature that will still be of use to Fudg

 ChrisHelton 2005-06-03 14:36:05
64

> While I agree that FF needs to publish the best articles available to

Then the guidelines need to be rewritten.

 CarlCravens 2005-06-03 16:35:19
65

> My comment is not about the Fudge Factor not being the "shining beacon"

But I don't think you've heard me say "not this type of article" except for excerpts.

 CarlCravens 2005-06-03 17:35:14
66

On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 18:35:14 +0100, Carl D Cravens wrote:

That last bit caused a double-take :)

Darren

The Fudge List FAQ is at http:/fudge.phoenyx.netlist		 DarrenHill 2005-06-03 17:42:20
67

>> Preferred by whom?

 CarlCravens 2005-06-03 18:21:26
68

I think he meant the new "ME" as in the pronoun, not the abbreviation.

The Fudge List FAQ is at http:/fudge.phoenyx.netlistfaq.html<A>

** Don't start deliberately off-topic

 ChrisHelton 2005-06-03 18:25:22
69

I can back this up.

 TonySpallino 2005-06-03 18:26:20
70

> I can back this up.

 CarlCravens 2005-06-03 20:06:04
71

Ah.....I missed it.

 ChrisHelton 2005-06-03 20:08:18
72

Not semantics at all, particularly if you go back and read other postings of his in this thread.

 ChrisHelton 2005-06-03 15:06:54
73

I did not take what David wrote to mean that; I took it to mean that any Fudge-related submission would "require" the reader to at least be familiar with Plain Fudge; not that the submission has to be 100% compatible with Plain Fudge.

 NosfeRandu 2005-06-03 14:57:18
74

> Not semantics at all, particularly if you go back and

I am not biased against commercial products based on Fudge.

 DavidJaquith 2005-06-04 02:20:58
75

Regarding the "published world" thing.

I own several Fudge products (Terra Incognita, Fate, Gatecrasher, Magical Medley, Now Playing!) and while I haven't used them all, I think they're all pretty easy to "get" in and of themselves.

 JohnUghrin 2005-06-04 03:18:12
76

> ...you're probably going to "Fudge it" anyway.

That's my feeling on it.

 BradfordYounie 2005-06-04 12:04:48
77

I'm going to make the policy, and the reasoning behind it, clear.

 CarlCravens 2005-06-04 03:05:25
78

> What if I don't like science fiction games?

 ThomasCackler 2005-06-07 16:08:38
79

> Ooooh!

 CarlCravens 2005-06-07 16:18:35
80

> Which reminds me...

 BillHamilton 2005-06-07 16:51:02
81

BH>Oh.

 KarenCravens 2005-06-07 17:00:39
82

DJ>And yes, I was paraphrasing.

 KarenCravens 2005-06-04 02:31:31
83

>> So, who'd like to be the new me?

 CarlCravens 2005-06-03 19:55:22
84

Greetings,

On Fri, 27 May 2005 13:00:03 CDT, Carl D Cravens wrote

If you follow Cory Doctorow's (boingboing.net and craphound.com) the answer would seem to be increase sales by 50%.

 ShaneKnysh 2005-05-28 08:27:30
85

> I'm picturing things that stand well on their own.

 DavidJaquith 2005-05-27 16:17:26
86

Yeah, that would suck.

 Chuk 2005-05-27 15:41:59
87

Quoting from the blog, which I read first:

"Would you pay $3 to $12 for a 30-60 page PDF book based on a ten page article that you liked?

 MikeF 2005-05-26 18:39:38

Fudge Guide > Archives > Mailing List > 2005 > May > Full Thread

This message is Copyright 2005 Carl D Cravens

Collected messages Copyright 2008 Phoenyx PBeM Roleplaying. Used on fudgerpg.info with permission.

Site Home