I published my first old-school adventure module December 15th. Since then, I have made twenty-one sales at $2.99 each and one sale via coupon a customer had independent of my product. Twenty-six people have placed my product in their wish list, but haven’t yet confirmed a purchase. Because I signed an exclusive contract with RPGNow, I have made $43.95 before taxes. I say this because I must claim these earnings on my income tax. However, I believe I can also now enjoy additional
tax benefits. More important than the financial aspect are the conclusions at which I’ve arrived about creativity, writing, and editing in general.
Stephen King, in his fantastic book
On Writing, wrote something along the lines of, “Write with the door closed and edit with the door open.” I think this is especially applicable in RPG writing. In brainstorming and first drafts, I enjoy complete authority and seclusion to develop whatever crazy harebrained concepts I might find flittering about my cerebrum. I find particular enjoyment in playing what I call the “next step” game. I take an adventure or setting concept that I think is cool, then ask myself, “OK, what does this infer?” I continue chasing this train of thought through various rabbit holes, taking notes along the way. I don’t care how crazy or stupid the ideas seem at first, I let it flow onto paper. Sometimes I use web techniques and at others flowcharts or outlines. Sometimes I just sketch a bunch of pictures, which is how I got the idea for Ghemin Cave in
my latest publication. Later, I build these first draft components around a unifying theme or themes. Often, this building process is just as effective for generating ideas as any other. In other words, I oscillate from inductive to deductive methods to create a quality adventure.
If I get stumped with writer’s block I use a technique Robert Pirsig described in
Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. The writer focuses on a specific, small object or aspect and extrapolates from there. If, in writing about a city, for example, the writer feels blocked, they focus on a single section of the city. If the writer still feels blocked, they focus on a single building or inhabitant. If there is still blockage, the writer zooms in further to something more specific still, such as a person’s watch, or fingernail, or, to use a Pirsig example, a specific brick on a building. This method of induction is often an effective remedy for writer’s block.
Opening the door to editing requires an open mind and thick skin, but is critical to developing a quality product. Putting ideas from my head onto paper is one thing. Translating these ideas into both the English language and mechanic confines of a RPG system is another. And making sure this infrastructure of information flows smoothly into the readers mind, then other player’s minds is something else altogether. This is a very challenging objective, one which having effective editors makes far more likely to succeed.
For example, my recent publication has drawn favorable and unfavorable
reviews. The negative aspects have included my overall organization, implementation of elf spell mechanics in
Labyrinth Lord, and effectively gauging difficulty level. If I listen carefully, I hear that something rings true in all of these criticisms. On reflection, I agree with these criticisms, especially the first two.
Regarding organization, I wrote
The Blasphemous Brewery of Pilz! as a small one-shot adventure comprised of three pages. Later, I decided to expand it to seventeen pages. My thinking was to build around the core adventure. I see now that this was a bad idea because it broke the overall organization scheme. For my next project, I will take pains to organize the material into a coherent outline in my second draft, but I still won’t let it interfere with my brainstorming and first draft process as described above.
Regarding the use of elf spell mechanics, I agree that my level for
Shadow of Grass is, indeed, too high. My intent was to ensure only elf elders were able to perform this spell. This error occurred because my story-telling intent may have interfered with
Labyrinth Lord rules regarding elf spell level caps. Again, editing for both storytelling and mechanical quality will catch future errors such as these.
Regarding accurate analysis of difficulty, I have no good answer. I don’t think good editing will help this particular problem because it is far too subjective and given to the variance of referee/DM methods. I have
discussed this issue here before, and have arrived at no clear method. It, therefore, bears increased scrutiny.
A common counter-argument for editing and reviewers in general is one I hear as a teacher often. It can be summed up, “If you can’t do, you teach”. In this case, “If you can’t write, you review”. However, this is an ad hominem fallacy and one I find often in the OSR blogosphere. Furthermore, it is dangerous for writer’s to employ because it blinds them to sometimes corrective feedback.
When feeling insulted, as writers often are at the mercy of editors and reviewers, it is far easier to dismiss their criticisms, however worded, by dismissing them as a person. This is a relatively easy way to wipe away the entire set of criticisms instead of dealing with the veracity of the criticisms themselves. As I said, however, this is sometimes difficult to overcome. I think it may take time, patience, thick skin, and practice. This is something I hope to practice in the years of self-publication ahead.
In conclusion, aim for quality. If, by any standard, you don’t succeed, heed feedback and persevere. Do so, if possible, in spirit of enjoyment. And if you’re interested in purchasing the product I mention above,
click here. Maybe you can use it to both find enjoyment and provide criticisms.
