OKay,

So maybe I continue to web publish my own stuff and submit to the open
writer calls. God knows it's hard enough to get a good submission written on
your own.

Cheers,
Rob.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Margaret C Vining" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 1:43 PM
Subject: Re: [ogf-d20-l] Would-be d20 authors?


>
> On Mon, 12 Feb 2001 10:09:29 -0800 Dan Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> writes:
> .
> >
> > I'm looking to hear from folks that are kicking around a few ideas
> > for
> > their own d20 products.  But like myself, have been following the
> > various
> > posts the last few months and have realized that they may just be
> > out of
> > their league when it comes to publishing their own d20 products.
>
>
> No offense but listening to insecure, inexperienced, ignorant and/or
> careless people is hardly going to improve your chances of producing
> something.  : )
>
>
> >
> > If you're like myself, with a head full of ideas and volumes of
> > notes, but
> > have decided that self-publishing just isn't in your future, let's
> > talk.
> > Let's face it, it ain't easy.
>
> Same comment as above.   Regardless of how you do it either you or
> someone in your group is eventually going to have to know what they are
> doing.  I realize you might think that if you gather a bunch of people
> who don't know what they are doing, that by default, you will manage to
> cover all the lapses in experience.  It doesn't work like that, IMO. Why
> go through all of that grief when you can just educate yourself (and be
> on your way) or team up with someone who already has experience.
> Whatever you do, choose your partners carefully.
>
> >
> > Perhaps those of us that wish to create d20 products can work
> > together to
> > expand and improve or individual ideas into complete products and
> > then
> > convince those that have succeeded in publishing their own d20
> > products to
> > consider publishing our offerings.
>
>
> You could do that by yourself... right now.  Why wait?    This list gets
> submission notices at least once a week.
>
>
> >
> > I feel that there have to be others like myself that would rather
> > concentrate on creating a solid d20 product than hassle with our own
> > start-up company to publish said product.  Who wants to hassle with
> > lawyers
> > and accountants when all we want to do is create games?
>
> If you just want to write, then there is already plenty of room for you
> to do so.   Dungeon Magazine and Necromancer Games are currently taking
> d20 submissions, for example.... and I know there are more.
> Additionally, off the top of my head I can think of three on-line
> projects that would happily take your submissions and publish them on
> their web sites.  But I don't think you need to create the "Union of d20
> Writers" to pursue your dreams.  (yikes!  a Union!)
>
> Let's help each other
> > create
> > some really great d20 material that these successful publishers will
> > fight
> > over.  (We can hope, right?)
> >
> > Did any of the above make any since, or am I just talking the crazy
> > talk?
>
> I know it seems like a good idea to gather a bunch of random people and
> try to create something (believe me I know).  Sometimes it is.  But you
> clearly plan on crossing over to the professional side of things.  Think
> about these things:  What will you do if you one of the people in your
> project disappears or pulls out all of their contributions?   What will
> you do if there is a dispute over the ownership of a potential trademark?
>  What will you do if you publish your stuff on the web and someone
> decides to sue you... a conservative parent, a past participant?   What
> if you make money?
>
> My friend, it goes on and on.  I have made more mistakes in the
> development of group projects than I care to remember.  I strongly
> recommend that you either write by yourself, take the time to form a
> local group you trust, join an established group project, or take the
> time to jump through a few legal hoops before you start your own.
>
> Regards,
> Maggie
>

Reply via email to