Having been vocal on more than one occasion about the expansion of DS and SG
(primarily), I've been compelled to throw out a few ideas.
I completely understand the limitations that Jon has when it comes to
creating new products, being a 2-man operation and all. But I've
seen nothing but outstanding support by the players themselves that might
warrant what I have to say. There was a thread that dealt with "hiring" an
outside writer to produce some supplements. My proposition is this: why can't
WE, the players, and some very
trustworthy soul, put together a supplement package for DS/SG for
submittal and approval to Jon himself. This would take all the pressure and
expense out of it, and would only need to be
read/edited/approved for mass consumption.
I have been a Battletech player for MANY years (lost count actually) and have
created my share of "house" rules (who hasn't). But the problem with rules
like that are the acceptance of outside players, and the ONE thing that house
rules lack are official approval. If you created a rule that allowed UNIT A to
do something to UNIT B, many people would say that it's silly, or not in the
"real" rules. But if tomorrow the 2nd Edition rules came out with that rule
covered, everybody wouldn't think anything of it (within reason of course). I
have had my share of house rules show up almost exactly the way I used them in
the new "Maximum Tech" expansion for BT. Now countless thousands are using
what I deemed appropriate for my friends and I, and others scoffed at! The
editorial even says that alot of those rules had come from players like me,
that where just cleaned up and applied appropriately.
I guess my point is, we all have great ideas penned up inside our wargame
minds that could very well be the next edition to the above games. Why can't
we come up a legitimate package of
rules/supplements that would enhance our games, thus giving back what
we are ALL getting out of the hobby. I myself would love to see some of my
house rules for all the games I play, published. And it isn't
until a great rule/scenario is published, does it get the acceptance
of everybody.
Let me know what you all think, especially Jon. Thanks for your time.
> Having been vocal on more than one occasion about the expansion of DS
[...]
> I guess my point is, we all have great ideas penned up inside our
I agree with you, and have been having similar thoughts myself. But then there
comes the questions of legal stuff for Jon. And who gets the royalties,
credits, etc, etc, etc. Something I'm definitely not versed in. Now, mind you,
I'd be all for it, and would help contribute whatever little fiddly bits I
have sitting in the mire of my mind, and I'd be fine not getting royalties
from it (a mention in the credits listing would be nice, though ;-).
But again, I don't know all the intricacies and what this would all entail for
Jon, so...
Well, there's my vote (so to speak ;-), for what it's worth
Mk
> I agree with you, and have been having similar thoughts myself. But
But
> again, I don't know all the intricacies and what this would all entail
I'm sorry I wasn't more clear. What I meant by giving back what we get out of
this hobby, I meant totally free. Pooling our ideas to creat something that we
give for free to Jon. I myself would just like to see this game system grow,
and if I could (along with others) provide some quality (approved by GZG)
additions to these rule sets, then it could ONLY enhance our gameplay, and
make it more popular
(and so on). There a dozens of un-official codex's out there for GW
stuff for free. So why don't we take what we are offering for free on the WWW,
and give it to Jon for publishing. Seeing my name inside the front cover would
be gratifying enough. Hope that clarified my previous statement.
> Kevin Pavlick wrote:
> I'm sorry I wasn't more clear. What I meant by giving back what we
Are we not doing this already?Anything we put on the list can I think be used
by Jon. I know he takes the output of the list very seriously, but I think all
we should do is continue to offer suggestions and rules ideas as per normal in
list postings.What you suggest is in concept a good idea, but WHO decides
which ideas are in the final draft sent to Jon, I can't believe that we will
find it easy to reach a consensus. For instance some players want a points
system for SG2, IIRC this caused a really heated debate on the list, the
interested parties never resolved the issue, some will use point values some
won't.
If we like the ideas or rules we see published on the list daily, then we
should try and use them when we play, do we really need the 'Official
Sanction' from Jon? I know they are invalid in convention tournaments and
competitions, but for the majority of play which is in Clubs, groups and in
the Home they can be 'House Rules'.
Eventually GZG will produce the supplements we want and I'm sure they will be
influenced by the 'feedback' and ideas Jon has picked up from the list. They
will I believe be worth the wait, and until then there are loads of excellent
'Unofficial' ideas being posted all the time to this list.
I hope this was'nt seen as destructive, its just my view.
> I completely understand the limitations that Jon has when it comes to
I agree. No royalties for any of us. Just a mention in the credits and I think
we would ALL feel warm and fuzzy inside when we read it. Its a great idea.
Heck, we could even have a volunteer compile and edit a draft to send to Jon.
That'd cut down the work he'd need to do even more rather than just sending
him a collection of mail. But I love the idea.
> At 04:15 PM 8/28/97 -0500, Mark wrote:
There's more than just that. First, there's "the vision thing." We came across
this trying to do a fantasy version of FMA. Too many people had too many good
ideas that were at cross purposes with each other. You need a firm hand at the
tiller if you want an official product full of coherent ideas. If you want an
unofficial, zine like compilation of random ideas then that's something else
entirely.
Second, someone would STILL have to edit the thing. Not just proofreading and
layout but ACTUAL EDITING for content. Someone would have to say, "sorry your
idea is not good enough." Worse, someone would have to say, "your idea is
great, but there's no room for it." I have friends that edited an anthology of
Canadian SF (Tesseracts 3, for those who are interested) and it is NOT an easy
thing to do. It's hard, long work.
Third, even assuming someone edits this, Jon will STILL want to look it over
to make sure that this supplement doesn't clash with his vision of where the
games are headed. And what if someone proposes an idea that Jon had in mind
for the future? Jon was worried about this before. If Jon rejects it this
time, but uses it later himself he could be opening himself up to a lawsuit
(or he ends up paying royalties to someone for an idea that he came up with
independantly). Sure, it's all good and fine to be altruistic right now, but
wait until real money is involved...
My feeling is that this won't work unless it's done ENTIRELY for free by the
group and Jon blesses it from the get go. I think a better idea is to
produce a zine (paper zine, web zine, e-zine, what have you) with ideas
for FT, SG2, and DS2. These would be unofficial ideas, but it would get them
into the public domain and open them up for scrutiny. If a rule gains
universal acceptance, and Jon likes it, Jon can always bless it as "official"
after the fact.
> My feeling is that this won't work unless it's done ENTIRELY for free
If I remember correctly - and feel free to correct _me_ on this - Jon
is/was open to suggestions from players, which could be sent to him and,
if he though it good and it got put into a supplement, the person got a credit
listing.
Therefore, as long as that it made clear to possible submitters to any 'zine
of this kind that the above is the way things are, everything should work out
hunky dory. Jon could say "Well, I just wont look at it" (ala JMS and B5
fiction) but hey, I wouldn't want to limit the chances of the maker of FT, SG
and DS not picking up something I've written...:)
> Second, someone would STILL have to edit the thing. Not just
and it
> is NOT an easy thing to do. It's hard, long work.
You said it.:)
---
> There's more than just that. First, there's "the vision thing." We
There is not much "vision" associated with a SG supplement regarding
vehicles, OOB's, and scenarios/campaigns.
> Second, someone would STILL have to edit the thing. Not just
and it
> is NOT an easy thing to do. It's hard, long work.
I understand that, and I'm sure you'll find MORE then one person up to the
challange.
> Third, even assuming someone edits this, Jon will STILL want to look
That's exactly what I proposed first off, Jon would always fine tune it after
the fact. But all that groundwork would be done for him, freeing up a
tremendous about of time on his part.
> Jon was worried about this before. If Jon rejects it this
I might be missing something, but how can somebody sue if the
material/content was given for FREE?
> My feeling is that this won't work unless it's done ENTIRELY for free
That's exactly what I was trying to avoid. Most people have a hard time
selling "unofficial" ideas to there gaming group or other groups, so making
them "official" is what the hobby needs to grow.
If Jon NEVER put out another rules set/supplement again, and left
it in our hands to further develop the systems "unofficially", then
it would become hodge-podge and over time completely unplayable
outside of your gaming group. Then we would be right back where we started,
and it would take an enterprising individual (Joe Average) to come along and
"publish" these rules (making them official) and start making Jon's money all
over again! I for one can not "wait" until GZG games comes out with a SG (my
personal fav) supplement, and understanding their workload, it could be over a
year. This very well be a reason why some players might stop playing in the
future. I'm in NO way trying to put pressure on anybody over at GZG, on the
contrary, I'm offering a solution. If there was always this negative
wait-and-see-attitude with every game, then this would be a
prehistoric hobby. Thus far mini-gaming has been an enterprising
dream for many creators, and the ones that are successful where developed PAST
the rules stage. AGAIN, I was ONLY suggesting that we help take these game
systems forward, with the leadership of Jon and his vision.
Allan, I respect all that you said, but suppressing ideas like this leads
nowhere. If it never get's done, then so be it. But if there is a solid core
group of people that are willing to take on this task, then I think SUPPORT is
the order of the day. And, as previousely mention, it would NEED to start with
Jon.
> > There's more than just that. First, there's "the vision thing."
I don't know - I mean, I like the idea, but I do believe that it
depends upon how possesive Jon is about his baby. I believe in larger squad
sizes and mobility (which is hard to game, but that is another topic...), so
when I develop my units the smaller ones are eight men and the larger ones are
ten or twelve men. So say i create Oob's for the New Israeli's (since they
haven't been mentioned in StarGrunt). If Jon thought they had four men squads
and enough firepower to level a city, well, that could be a problem...
Does it mean I shouldn't do it? I guess it depends on my free time... If it
doesn't pass muster, well, I can always make it the Puerto Rican National
Liberation Army ("Los Macheteros" for those who
know...)
> Second, someone would STILL have to edit the thing. Not just
> I understand that, and I'm sure you'll find MORE then one person
Not me!! I don't doubt there'll be volunteers, but I ain't one!! :-)
All in all, I think this is a Good Idea (tm). Even if it isn't
edited and it is just a forty page (proof-readed, PLEASE!) document
chock-full of ideas, it is forty pages worth of ideas that Jon (or is
it John?) can cut and paste and format correctly and then send to the
printers. No idea if any/all would make it, but he would get a fair
sampling of what we like, use, and think...
My two cents on the matter...
BTW, if I do sit down and create OoB's, who do I mail these to?
> Are we not doing this already?Anything we put on the list can I think
But why can't we MAKE them "official", thereby creating more product and
grabbing more players. It was said on more than one thread that alot of games
start at the game store shelf. Is a new game going to get passed over that has
JUST a set of rules, when the games next to it has rules and multible
supplements? We all know how great the system is, but how does a newbie know
(especially considering that
they all come shrink-wrapped)? I'm not citing a revelation here.
Many before me here brought that analogy up, and I tend to agree (as MANY
others did, too).
> Eventually GZG will produce the supplements we want and I'm sure they
I wish I could sit back and be complacent, and I'm sure Jon is putting forth
110% effort into complying with all our wants. Why can't we help?
> I hope this was'nt seen as destructive, its just my view.
No. Never. I never view others comments as destructive, and I thank you for
replying. You and Allan are only trying to express concerns
I'm sure, but I'm not one to be negative/cautious about creativity
and only want to make SG (and DS) more then a passing fancy (I'm NOT implying
that it is either).
> Kevin Pavlick wrote:
I agree!
> At 10:04 29/08/97 EDT, you wrote:
8< snip snip snip >8
Boy is Jon in for a supprise when he gets back from Eurocon!!
;-)
Jon(top cat) Sprayforming Developments Ltd. [production tools]
made in
[prototype times]
'The future is now'
> Boy is Jon in for a supprise when he gets back from Eurocon!!
HEHEHEHEHEHE! Your not kidding (LOL).
> BTW, if I do sit down and create OoB's, who do I mail these to?
Nobody yet. But thanks for the vote of confidence. BTW, the mexican OoB sounds
very cool. If you do create one, at least send it to me.
> Kevin Pavlick wrote:
> > Boy is Jon in for a supprise when he gets back from Eurocon!!
I saw Jon on Thursday, I think he is quite aware that a lot of members
of the list want more OFFICIAL SG2/DS2 stuff. As for the method
proposed, well it will be interesting to see what his reaction will
be...
> Kevin Pavlick wrote:
> But why can't we MAKE them "official", thereby creating more product
I don't think the above reason is any justification for a new
supplement/s, I may be in the minority here but as a wargamer when I buy
a game it is not dependant on the amount of supplements available, (maybe with
an RPG it helps), how many people out there felt they
should'nt buy SG2/DS2because it did'nt have as many supplements as say
Battletech. I think you may be doing 'Newbies' a disservice.
Surly the only reason for new supplements is the desire by memebers of this
list (a small but representitive group of GZG players) to have some more rules
with the 'OFFICIAL' stamp on it. I have to agree with Allan Goodall in that
the best method is to produce a 'fanzine' type document which may or may not
be commented on by Jon, containing ideas from the list (God knows how you
decide which). It may be that when the OFFICIAL GZG products come out Jon may
use some of the ideas, then yes, you will get your names in the credits.
Anyway, will be interesting to see what Jons comments will be...
> At 08:38 AM 8/30/97 +0100, you wrote:
As someone who once worked in a store that sold games, and as someone who
knows people in the industry, this actually happens counter-intuitive
though it may be. There's just too much stuff out there. For some reason when
a game releases several supplements it is seen as more successful. Supplements
keep a game in the limelight. People may see something in a supplement that
catches their attention that they didn't see in the main game. And more
supplements mean a game takes up more shelf space, and is thus more noticable.
This may seem like a small thing, but it's true; we had people who thought the
store went under when it only moved two stores down, so I never underestimate
people's lack of perception.
> Surly the only reason for new supplements is the desire by memebers of
Possibly. It's also a desire to have somethings worked out that the players
didn't have time to do themselves.
> Anyway, will be interesting to see what Jons comments will be...
Same here.
> Allan Goodall wrote:
> At 08:38 AM 8/30/97 +0100, you wrote:
Tks for the insight, I had'nt realised the importance, tis a sad thing if this
is a strong factor in people making choices.
> At 11:24 AM 8/31/97 +0100, Roger wrote:
> Tks for the insight, I had'nt realised the importance, tis a sad thing
It's human nature more than anything. It's a strong factor in choices, but
it's mostly because people HAVE a choice. In the old days (mid 70s to early
80s) all you had to do is print up a cheap manual with bad layout and grammar
and people would eat it up. Today this is no longer the case.
There's something else I didn't mention. When a supplement comes out there is
usually a review of it in the magazines, in the net zines, on the newsgroups,
etc. You just don't find people constantly "reviewing" an existing game unless
someone asks. The only time a game gets constant magazine exposure is if
people write articles and scenarios for it, or if the magazine is a house
organ for the publisher. Go into a newsgroup and you'll often find "What's
Stargrunt 2 like?" type posts. The answers will
review the game, but if you don't happen to see this post and/or thread,
you have no idea. You might see the game in the store and not have any idea of
whether or not it's a good buy. If someone doesn't have net access, they are
stuck with magazine reviews and the opinions of people in the store. A new
supplement results in a review that gives the game more exposure.
> At 20:29 31/08/97 -0400, Allan wrote:
8< snippity spip >8
Go into a newsgroup and
> you'll often find "What's Stargrunt 2 like?" type posts. The answers
So we write a SGII FAQ web site (from a players point of view) It will
obviously be biased (but then again you want the sort of players who prefer
thinking rather than being told what to think so it shouldn't matter), you
could include all the links to figures / gaming groups / other reviews
etc.
So who's got the time?
Jon (top cat)
Innovate then Deligate ;-)
Sprayforming Developments Ltd. [production tools]
made in
[prototype times]
'The future is now'
> Roger Gerrish wrote:
Or the weenie who has paupered himself buying Evil Empire merchandise and
wants to tell everyone about their dark chaos horde of Imperial space marine
orcs? It takes exposure to increase a games popularity and the blunt truth is
that shelf space rules! The more you see of a game the more likely it will be
that you will pick it up. For most people that means not only what they see on
the shelves, but what they hear from the people they game with, or meet at the
game shops. BTW: I have been thinking for a long time about doing a magazine,
either as a fan project or for $, that dealt with SF and fantasy miniature
gaming. SF&F minis have been the red-headed stepchild of both "regular"
wargaming and role-playing for way too long. If this interests anyone
out there, someone who would like to do the same thing please contact me
> Sprayform wrote:
The problem is not the people with net access, with a little patience
and a good search they can find our little secret ;-) the problem is
those still in the Paper Age. If they don't see it printed on a sheet of paper
it doesn't exist. We really need to get out the message in print somewhere, in
a magazine or (gasp) a supplement (or even a whole series of them). Full
Thrust has gotten some good press here in the states (Pyramid magazine did a
glowing review last year) but as far as articles on any of the games...
nothing. If we do nothing else we, as dedicated GZG gamers should write up our
best ideas and submit them to a magazine that will publish them. And if they
won't, we should think of starting one of our own.
> Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 20:45:57 -0500
> Sprayform wrote:
I will admit to being remiss when it comes to sending scenarios and the like
to magazines. I am readying a DSII scenario for print in MARS, a Canadian
publication that is all about scenarios and game reviews. I have contacted
some of the list members and those who have worked with me or Jeff Gulliam in
the past to write supplemental material for all three rule systems. The idea
is to put the book together, then run it by Jon for the final edit and papal
blessing!! I'm hoping to get the support and active participation of the list
members at large in this endeavor, since we will need many of you to
playtest the material before publication. I have waited until now to
write because I wanted to see how this how this thread would evolve.
> I completely understand the limitations that Jon has when it comes to
Sounds like one "H - E - double hockey sticks" of any idea...
I'm all for it.
When do we start?
CMC
PS. i'm not realy sure how big hockey is in the UK, but maybe polo sticks?