Help over at rpg.net

[zedturtle]

So in this thread, http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?748 ... -they-play, Claire Redfield is asking lots of great questions. But I'm a bit swamped at the moment (plus I'm not any sort of definitive rules expert). If anyone has time to help her out, I'm sure she'd appreciate it!

[Majestic]

No problem, sir. Thanks for the heads up!

[Hermes Serpent]

You know this thread raises questions that I find difficult to understand. TOR has a forum that is very active and people get swift and accurate answers often from the people who wrote the material and yet someone is asking a random bunch of folks on the Internet for answers to often quite complex game questions.

I wonder why she chose to post not to the publisher's forum but a random bunch of geeks who may or may not have a clue.

[zedturtle]

You know this thread raises questions that I find difficult to understand. TOR has a forum that is very active and people get swift and accurate answers often from the people who wrote the material and yet someone is asking a random bunch of folks on the Internet for answers to often quite complex game questions.

I wonder why she chose to post not to the publisher's forum but a random bunch of geeks who may or may not have a clue.

You know what, that is completely offensive to me. RPG.net is a wide and diverse community that is not beholden to any particular publisher. It is an excellent place to ask her original question. Yes, the thread drifted and became rules related. Myself, Corvo, Skywalker, Andrew, and Majestic all responded. It's clear that Paul Tucker is at least lurking on these forums and they are all publicly viewable, meaning that Claire or others will see this post and, more likely than not, take away a negative impression of some sort of Elitism from your post.

When I'm in front of a computer, I might well expand this post.

[Majestic]

Well, to be fair, rpg.net is not just a "random bunch of geeks". It's a collection of hard-core RPG fans, and it seems most people there often GM, so it's a subgroup of a subgroup of a very niche hobby.

You'll also see some cross-over between the people there and here, so in some cases you're dealing with the same crowd, and might even get answers from the same folks.

I get what you're saying, and I too like to go directly to the source, usually. But for somebody like the poster in question, who is a game designer and appears (based on the number of posts) to be a "regular" on that forum, it is probably easier to simply ask there (as opposed to opening an account and navigating a new forum).

[Rich H]

You know what, that is completely offensive to me.

I'm not sure it's that offensive but this place can get almost too involved in some of the detail so I can see why people would post on RPGnet and not here. And yes, the thread over on RPGnet has evolved into a more detailed discussion of the rules which wasn't how it was to begin with.

Personally, if a game had an active, dedicated, community then I would post there but lots of people don't. People do stick to particular communities on the internet; RPGnet is a great place to discuss many geeky hobbies, not just RPGs but video games, board games, TV shows, films, etc etc so people are loyal to it and get what they need from it.

[Glorelendil]

I love these forums but a general-interest rpg forum might have a more, um, "objective" view of TOR.

EDIT: And from my personal viewpoint, I might very well post a question on a forum to which I already belong, where people know me, rather than create a new identity somewhere else just to ask one question.

[PST]

You know this thread raises questions that I find difficult to understand. TOR has a forum that is very active and people get swift and accurate answers often from the people who wrote the material and yet someone is asking a random bunch of folks on the Internet for answers to often quite complex game questions.

I wonder why she chose to post not to the publisher's forum but a random bunch of geeks who may or may not have a clue.

You know what, that is completely offensive to me. RPG.net is a wide and diverse community that is not beholden to any particular publisher. It is an excellent place to ask her original question. Yes, the thread drifted and became rules related. Myself, Corvo, Skywalker, Andrew, and Majestic all responded. It's clear that Paul Tucker is at least lurking on these forums and they are all publicly viewable, meaning that Claire or others will see this post and, more likely than not, take away a negative impression of some sort of Elitism from your post.

When I'm in front of a computer, I might well expand this post.

Given the sticky at the top of the forums of 'We want you for the Fellowship of the One Ring!', I'd have thought people would be happy that the game was getting discussed on the largest and most read rpg forum, rather than ignored. And yes zed, while I mostly lurk here I do post now and then.

[zedturtle]

Fortunately, I said "offensive to me", so that's always defensible.

Hermes Serpent,

I was offended by the tone and content of your post. Originally, I was thinking of writing a very long post, containing lots of rpg.net in-jokes and references. But I think my larger point would be lost if I did that, so I will just say that, just like here, there are many more people lurking and forming opinions than actively posting. And today's lurker might tomorrow's poster and new week's freelancer.

Hurting my feelings is a small thing. But I don't know if you're aware of the potential for damage to The One Ring by being dismissive of another site and its users. Some publishers find an audience for their game and generate revenue by releasing a series of supplements on a regular basis (Paizo and Sine Nomine both come to mind for this approach; their goals are to always have something new to sell). It's safe to say that Cubicle7 is not taking this approach with TOR; they have opted for a slower release schedule, with each product being a big deal when it launches.

This matters to Cubicle7 and to us because it means that us die-hard fans are of limited utility. Sure, we pre-order the book as soon as it becomes available (come on Ruins of the North!), but during long stretches of development time we are not generating any revenue for C7 and not helping them pay licence fees. I want the TOR licence to stay with C7, so what can I do to help them succeed?

The answer is pretty simple. We need more people to become players (and fans) of The One Ring (because they will be buying materiel that is old hat to us). The good news is that there's plenty of room to grow (The Lord of the Rings is ranked #429 in all books on Amazon, The One Ring rulebook is #69,712). So we need new players. We need people to find The One Ring, to ask questions (where they are comfortable asking) and get good answers that make them feel welcome and included (not 'you should have searched the archive, newb!'). That's why I've focused my efforts on gaining new players (my introductory adventure, for example). We need them to become customers, players and then fans. That won't happen if we are dismissive or rude to new people who come here or that we find elsewhere.

And rpg.net, like it or not, is a bit part of that push. As I write this, there are 1432 registered users on rpg.net and 967 guests (and that is a quiet time); in comparison there are 3 registered users on all of the C7 forums and 13 guests. There have been 3,163 views on Claire's thread (and those are unique views, based on IP addresses/username). In comparison, the non-stickied thread with the most views on the front page is my 'An Introductory Adventure' with 6,714 views (which are non-unique; every time I update the thread or even go to look at it, the count goes up). Claire's thread has been around for about a week, mine has been around for five months. Which one is having a bigger impression on potential new players?

Like it or not, our opinions, ideas, and disagreements are publicly visible. They form the first impressions for brand new players (or interested potential players) and 99/100 of those folks will never register, never tell us if we are helping the brand or hurting it. I try hard to come down on the helping side, as much as I can.

Zed.

EDIT: Added some parentheticals for clarity/expanded information.

[thegiffman]

Fortunately, I said "offensive to me", so that's always defensible.

I might challenge this. I think far too many people, particularly in contemporary American society see taking offense almost as some sort of virtue. I might point out that assuming the worst about someone's motives, and needlessly escalating a discussion bears more of the marks of a vice. But you being needlessly offended doesn't offend me - it only mildly irritates me.

Having said that, the content of what you're saying is right on!