Discussion:D&D WIki Magazine
From D&D Wiki
D&D WIki Magazine
ShadowyFigure 08:06, 8 July 2008 (MDT)
I was wandering whether anyone would be interested in say making a online Magazine by D&D Wiki, we could have say 10 articles compiled into a PDF that are developed by a team who would be put together. People could even submit articles themselves.
Lord Dhazriel 14:12, 20 September 2008 (MDT)
That would be very nice, I would be interested in such project. It would make D&D wiki even more popular!
I agree. I'd be happy to help with this Risek 10:45, 3 October 2008 (MDT)
I too love this idea, it would be a great platform, not only to promote the Wiki, but to help others get a handle on the new 4e system.
Before we get started on that, maybe we should work on fixing up a few obvious warts of the wiki before promoting it? Namely changing the featured article.
Lord Dhazriel 13:42, 3 October 2008 (MDT)
We should include 3.5e and 4e, may people are still on older editions.
ShadowyFigure 16:41, 3 October 2008 (MDT)
Yeh a collective of 4e and 3.5 stuff would be good. Stuff included could be mechanics, plot hooks, fluff articles ect...
Yeah 3.5 can be there, but it should be a minor portion given 4e is the current official edition and we should promote that more so the Wiki is presented as being something intended for the future more then just a warehouse for older material.
Lord Dhazriel 18:48, 3 October 2008 (MDT)
50%-50% is alway better, as long as there eager Wikier to do both we should be alright. And I mean there more than enough for both edition.
Hmmmm......I think, no matter what, this thing needs to feature plushies.
Green Dragon 11:19, 22 October 2008 (MDT)
I must say, I like this idea as well. Anyway, do we want it all done (the submitting of articles, etc) on D&D Wiki, or how should we make this work out?
I think if something was worked out like say, whoever wants in on it, raises their hands and calls out a position that needs to be filled, like editor, proofreader/copy-checker, layout/design and of course writers. Said volunteers can contact each other via email (or use the Tavern for real-time discussion. The Wiki Magazine team could set their own deadlines and work it however they wanted, releasing an issue every 2 months or whatever works for everyone. I'm sure our community has people who'd like to participate in such a thing, so, how about a show of hands? --Ganteka 11:36, 22 October 2008 (MDT)
I like show of hands (I wouldn't mind being a copy editor as well as writer). We can always vote if multiple people want the editor role.
I love this idea, if I'm needed, I'll help.
Lord Dhazriel 13:01, 22 October 2008 (MDT)
Im in, I love this idea.
Not that we could actually expect a large success from this, but I think if it is to apply to a wider audience we should make it both 3.5 and 4th edition compatible.
What categories of articles would we have? Just off the top of my head we could have:
- Monsters -- new monsters done in both 3.5 and 4th edition
- Critical Threat -- an NPC badass that is meant to be a tough solo encounter. This was one of my favorite articles from Dungeon.
- Prestige Classes -- Perhaps make a paragon or epic tier option for 4th edition
- Something relating to Endhaven (our house wiki campaign setting). Or we could start a new collaborative wiki campaign setting and publish an article relating to that setting each issue.
- I like a lot of these ideas, except I'm unsure of needing to present new monsters in both 3.5 and 4th ed. It should be one or the other, again with a greater slant toward 4e. And as D&D has moved on to a new edition then perhaps we should begin a new collaborative campaign setting with that cosmology in mind. -- Sepsis 00:30, 25 October 2008 (MDT)
How about 1 full adventure/quest per issue? It doesn't need to be very long and will show the creativity of our users.
I like the new quest each issue. Good idea.
As far as making monsters in both 3.5 and 4th, that is easy. Make the fluff the same, but have the stats different.
Hmmm....I feel like we should do a class thing like Dragon does, perhaps only one a month (All in favor of Warlock?). Also it should have a featured race, or convert the monster(s) of that issue(?) into race stats.
The conversion of Monster to PC race, for those not already converted in the MMs or Dragon (maybe even feature stuff from the Wiki), sounds good. But we should not try to mirror Dragon too much, it might create redundances or conflicts with officalish material (Dragon may be non-canon, but many hobbyists hold it close to heart). We could also focus on new Feats for various Monster races, they all are lacking in that area. Also we might want to focus on updating and converting Classes, Races, Monsters, etc. from 3.5 to 4e (even some of the online Homebrew) to give back some of what folks feel they have lost. And we could even feature materail from the Wiki, perhaps expanding on Monsters, Races, Items, etc. to flesh them out more and add a different spin to some of it. Particularly how they may be added to the new 4e Wiki Campaign Setting.
Content for the Mag seems well thought out at this point, but several issues need to be addressed before we can move forward. The most important is the formation of a Staff. The Staff should focus on several areas the most important being the editing, critiquing, and playtesting of submitted material. At the moment there is too much Wiki content that is incomplete, badly written, or broken, and that is something we must not allow in the magazine. Also content should remain fantasy oriented some off our worst offenses in terms of broken material comes from things derived from sci-fi and/or cartoons being shoehorned into medievil fantasy settings, with the caviat of "its homebrew I do what I like" as the only justification. This mentality cannot creep into the Magazine. If we want this to not only be a useful aid to hobbyists, but a platform for raising intrest in submissions, we need to show that we are a valuable source of worthwhile material. Not just a place where any random thought can be vomitted up and allowed to clutter the scenery. While I'm not saying folks do not have the right to homebrew from whatever source they wish, I just believe that at least in the case of the Magazine we must insure it is well written and as balanced as possible.
Suggested Staff Positions:
- Editor-in-Chief - The guy who decided first if something is acceptable to be considered for publication. Also can veto any submission once it has been fully edited and tested. Also assigns people to other staff positions. The logical person for this is Green Dragon.
- Continuity Editor - Makes sure the submission does not overly conflict or rewrite an officially published item. Campaign Sourcebooks would be excluded from this critique (info in them is Campaign specific, and not not generally binding to standard rules), unless submission is specific to a published setting. As well Campaign based submissions (ie. for Wiki Campaign Setting,or Contributors Campaign Setting) may be exempt from this at editors descretion.
- Style Editor - Makes sure spelling and grammer is correct.
- Playtesters - 3 or 4 members who independently playtest appropriate submissions to insure balance and playablity.
At any point one of these people can return a submission to the Editor-in-Chief with their reasons for reconsideration, if the Editor-in-Chief agrees the submission is returned to contributor for requested corrections. This is only a suggestion of course and any feedback on staffing would be apprieciated.
Lord Dhazriel 16:15, 26 October 2008 (MDT)
Yeah, we also need writers (obviously), but we also need more volunteers.
I would love to be a contributor, I have an article for running Cambion PCs brewing in my head (you may want to look at my Cambion racial write up...its the "Alternate Version"). Maybe Green Dragon could put out a call for volunteer Editors and Playtesters on the Main Page. But these would all have to be long time members, who have shown an ability to create well written and balanced material. They would also have to understand this could eat into their personal time, so some sacrifice would be needed. Although each Editor should probably be allowed to make use of one or two assistants to help out if needed. Also someone (perhaps the Editor-in-Chief) will need to be in charge of doing the Magazine's Layout (just to insure it flows well from one article to the next), as well each Editor should take turns writing an Editorial each month to help provoke thought for new content, or even just discuss something that may be of general intrest to the RPG gaming community.
I'd be willing to help, especially now that I'm back from the dead and all. I've always been interested in something like this, as it strikes me that very few things on here actually get played. If we can attract more users, that'd really get the dandwiki name out there a lot more.
I have given this some thought and I realized this is not going to happen until someone decides to step up and get the ball rolling.
On that note, I am going to get this magazine going even though being the General Editor is a really bad job for me since I am not here enough to do a great job. We can figure out who wants to do what with our first run of the magazine and once everyone is more comfortable, I'm sure someone will be able to take the General Editor position and I can become a writer/copy editor (which would suit me a lot better).
Take a look at the following page and sign up: D&D Wiki Magazine. (I'm not attributing it to 3.5e or 4th edition. Eventually, we will probably have to move it to a new namespace).
21:16, 25 November 2008 (MST)
I just now saw this and would like to help in any way needed. So what is the main goal? I read earlier about 10 articles. Maybe one quest/adventure, one npc highlight, one class highlight, one setting highlight, one spell highlight, one race highlight, etc.??
Well you can read about the first issue at D&D Wiki Magazine/Issue 1. Sign up by editing the page and putting what you want to work on.
Suggestion: Make an 'adopt an article' competition. You adopt n article that isn't finished and then you work on it to make it playable, balanced and keep the same flavor. Another thing we could do is have a competition with a theme.
07:45, 26 November 2008 (MST)
Yeah, I was thinking of items to add and thought maybe an issue theme would be appropriate. I.e. issue 4 is all about Aquatic adventures, aquatic races, items, etc. That way each issue comes together some how. Just a thought. If anyone likes it and has a suggestion for Issue 1 theme then it would be easier to decide what to pick.
ooh, nice idea Hooper
The theme for idea is explosives.. well.. basically anything that goes boom.
--Cool Dude 123 (talk) 22:11, 18 May 2012 (MDT)
What happened to this?
Cool Dude 123 (talk) 18:38, 30 May 2012 (MDT)
Green Dragon (talk) 20:04, 30 May 2012 (MDT)
No one took initiative. Since this will, likely, continue to be the case I don't know if a magazine is such a good idea.
Cool Dude 123 (talk) 22:55, 7 June 2012 (MDT)
I'd be willing to make the magazine, if no one is willing.
I would also help. We probably need a few people for this to work properly.
Cool Dude 123 (talk) 16:13, 15 June 2012 (MDT)
Thanks Busterw, now we need Green Dragon to look at this.
Green Dragon (talk) 17:18, 15 June 2012 (MDT)
Do some edits to it. I can't let you know what I think and discuss where it belongs on D&D Wiki without seeing what you are talking about.
Marasmusine (talk) 01:27, 16 June 2012 (MDT)
My time is limited, but I might be able to lend a hand. I can proofread, and if the intention is to still publish it as a PDF, I can publish it on my Scribd account. I could also do some kind of editorial, like a "Wiki Tips and Tricks", or "What we Need / How you can Help" sort of article. Marasmusine (talk) 01:27, 16 June 2012 (MDT)
Cool Dude 123 (talk) 15:17, 19 June 2012 (MDT)
Maramusine can be a General Editor, I could be a writer, and Busterw could be a writer as well. I am writing this post based on what you guys wrote in your posts, I am going to make the changes to Magazine:Main Page. If you don't like your positions, write it here, and change it on the Magazine Page. I am going to try to start writing the first issue of the restarted magazine. I am also going to start writing up a campaign setting for the magazine. Due to the first issue of the original magazine being fire, I'm going to name the new one Fire Power.
Marasmusine (talk) 04:58, 4 July 2012 (MDT)
Notify me when all the submissions are ready and I'll try and mash them together into a coherent whole. Keep your eye out for wiki entries that are thematically appropriate and are of high quality.
Okay, this is a question for Green Dragon. I'm hoping to publish the magazine as a PDF on Scribd. Any illustrations I use will be either public domain or Creative Commons, and the magazine itself needs to be Creative Commons. Naturally I will be crediting all of our users that contributed to any articles we use. The Wiki is under a GNU license - is this compatable with Creative Commons? Marasmusine (talk) 05:17, 4 July 2012 (MDT)
Green Dragon (talk) 09:54, 4 July 2012 (MDT)
|“||c) By uploading User Content, You hereby warrant that Your User Content is free of any digital rights management, including any software designed to limit the number of times User Content may be copied or played.||”|
And since D&D Wiki uses the GNU FDL you should keep everything under the GNU FDL (they are compatible as you can read above). Or just upload your PDF on D&D Wiki (it should be small enough) and it can be downloaded here.
Green Dragon (talk) 15:49, 4 July 2012 (MDT)
The DRM states "Registration as a Prerequisite to Suit", pp. 3 dealing mostly with copyright.
Cool Dude 123 (talk) 01:38, 18 July 2012 (MDT)
Could someone advertise this somewhere, like on the main page so people can make submissions.
For content to put in the Mag, I think it would be good to have a position to search the wiki for adequate articles, and ask the creator for permission to include the article. We would not want to rely solely on these articles for content, but it would give us a good base. As for what to include in each Mag, we could have:
- Monster (One monster, shown for both 3.5e and 4e)
- Class (2 3.5e classes, 2 4e classes)
- Race (One race, shown for both 3.5e and 4e. If the Monster can be used by PCs, you would also include the Player Race version of it here.)
- Quest (one quest idea, as proposed by GaaaaaH)
- Critical Threat (an NPC badass that is meant to be a tough solo encounter, as proposed by Aarnott, and one Optimized Character Build)
- Prestige Classes (1 3.5e PrC, and 1 4e paragon or epic tier option, as proposed by Aarnott)
- Campaign (If we manage to start a new collaborative wiki campaign setting, we would include something about it in each issue)
- Equipment (One weapon, one material, two magic enhancements (one for armor, one for weapons), and two "named" magic items)
Hooper's idea for themed issues is great; we could maybe cycle through a list of 6, and release a new issue every other month. Ideas for themes are: Steampunk/Technology, Aquatic, Psionics, Dragons, Fiery, Planes (not the flying kind), Flight based, Underground, Divine, Arcane, and Feature (special issue that has no real theme, but includes the best stuff we can find on the wiki.)
I asume this idea is pretty much dead by now?
Green Dragon (talk) 14:49, 12 February 2015 (MST)
It depends if you think that you can make it work. I think that is very difficult to create a vanilla project on a time schedule.
I see the reason behind indexes, and that indexes can always be updated without needing to come from vanilla in a schedule format is something that I appreciate in indexes. For example see also Elf.
Maybe it could be a biannual? Also, i have no skill whatsoever with coding and so on and so forth, and have only my imagination to work with (which is never going to get anything done). Maybe we could request a template from someone...
ConorOberstIsGo (talk) 12:34, 16 February 2015 (MST)
Can I ask a question? What would it really take? The final product would be a .pdf right? So I can happily piss about with Word for as long as it takes. What we need is a nice format(a good layout is easily done), a source of artwork (maybe speak to randomers at deviantart), articles (it's very easy to find people willing to contribute), features(probably even easier than articles), an editor (someone with experience in copywriting), a means of distribution (email) and a mission statement. I think that if a team of just four of us took it upon ourselves, we could make it monthly and even earn a little.
If anyone is interested, get in touch or post here. I am happy to do the layout. In fact I am off to make a concept work to get people interested in this again. Watch this space.
You are severely underestimating the magnitude of such a project.
- The first thing you need is a leader. Someone with a vision, drive, and people management skills. More importantly, since this is an online endeavor, they need to be insanely flexible and patient. Wikis don't attract many people like that. I know I'm not.
- Next you need someone who can skillfully create a blank document you can just dump collected media into and get nearly good results, reducing the amount of editing you need to do. I have NO idea how to do that.
- If you want art, you'll either need to make it yourself or pay someone appropriately. You can get people to let go of copyrights sometimes, but mass-distribution tends to scare people awaty from that, and for good reason. I would not feel good distributing someone's copyrighted work, even if they said it was ok, without adequate compensation. It is simply unethical. You can hire me to make art, but be ready to pay. My time has become quite valuable.
- As for content, you need more than just articles, you need writers and something to write about first. Most people who want to write about D&D are already doing so through their own independent blogs, and they're doing a helluva good job at it! You can only go so far with book reviews and free distribution adventures. Also, there isn't much activity going on in the hobby at the moment. They're giving us downtime to play the current season, and they're using that to buy themselves time to work out better releases for the upcoming season. What's to write about? We're all playing!
- You need more than 4 people. You need at least one person to produce each entry to be included. You need extra people making extra entries to fill in when someone gets sick or quits or gets married or any other thing in real life. You need a buffer of entries so people can work on their material for more than a month. (It took three people months to make a single race just recently! Imagine how long it could take to make multiple adventures!) You need a reason for them to keep on writing. What is the payout? Why bother? Faced with that, I'd estimate you need between 15-20 people to get something simple going on a regular basis.
- And, most importantly, you need an audience. An audience beyond the people who write it in the first place. People who are interested in the subject and enjoy the material you produce. If the makers of D&D can't make a profitable magazine audience, (And Dragon was an excellent magazine) how do we plan to do it from this isolated wiki?
Don't misunderstand me, I think it's a very cool idea. I just think it's a very unrealistic one given the nature of the community here, and that for it to have any chance at all, we need to approach the demands of such a project with realistic expectations. So, being realistic, this is how I'd approach it:
- Wikify it. Build a system where we can communally work on each issue through a wiki format, then publish it for public reading. It would likely resemble a campaign setting, structurally, but instead of pages about races and countries, it would have pages about... Well, actually, come to think of it, it would be almost identical to a campaign setting! Online access preserves it for public viewing, lets google searches find it, and makes the material more accessable than email distribution. People are scared of email attachments these days. It also makes material easier to submit and takes advantage of what the dandwiki community already does best.
- Approach bloggers writing about D&D and ask if you can republish select articles they write with direct reference and link back to their blog. It spreads exposure for everyone, and most blogs are free access hobbies anyways. We can then ask them to link back to us so their audience can see what else is going on. It has the added bonus of collecting many voices from different corners of the internet and putting them all together in the same room. It would be an environment unlike any other in our hobby. Bloggers who would otherwise never know about each other could suddenly find themselves writing about each others articles!
- Put out a to-do list for each issue, and have them out for several issues ahead. The to-do list should have links which start a preload edit page to make a submission. There needs to be a way for editors to look at the list of currently unused submissions so we can work together and work over time.
- Put together a final editor team who can sift through submissions and other collected material and vote on what gets in to each issue. They would also decide if old submissions are worth holding for later issues, or if they should just be moved into the wiki proper.
- Spread the word. People need to know that there is something worth reading. Expanding the readership can attract lktential editors to the wiki, the game, and the hobby in general, growing the community. It would be HUGE if the wiki got public recognition or mention from anyone at WotC, but I doubt they appreciate our homebrewed supplemental-material market-competition.
ConorOberstIsGo (talk) 16:18, 19 February 2015 (MST)
Okay, so I am being a bit flip about it and it really isn't realistic to expect to earn anything in this medium. I don't seriously disagree with most of what you are saying but here's couple of things:
WotC have a license to print money in MtG. At the same time, D&D is like the Gallup poll; it's what people know Gallup for but it makes up a microscopic part of their revenue. I believe the poor sense of business exhibited by early TSR is alive and well. Those heading up the D&D team are still hobbyists from what I can tell.
Is it that unbelievable that a fantasy artist would think their inclusion would be a win-win? I would think it could only be a plus to their resume.
Dragon was okay but I would say any publication or podcast should be stratified (you read your edition and there may even be a DM/player split edition). I personally would not care if the thing was only 10 pages long if the features were strong and the quality was good. In fact I think 20 pages is a lot for a monthly but I know that small enterprises that publish weekly do better than those of double the size do if they come out fortnightly, and then suddenly it's nothing more than a blog.
Seeing as we are talking about it right now, I am just going to throw a few dumb ideas at you all:
For Your DM's Consideration (1 page to a half-page; one new ruleset)
The Build (1 new race/class/background/etc.)
Cool Mini/Not Cool Mini (photo showcase with perhaps basic painting tips/help sourcing minis)
Letter Of The Lore (1- or 2-page article on the lore surrounding an event/race/etc.)
Side Quest (a several-page session written to be flexible for 2-4 hours and any level)
Map-sploitation (some high-res town/region/dungeon maps)
Techniques of Vile Darkness (practical advice on DMing)
Letters From The Planes (a page of players' comments/tales/suggestions brief and with an even briefer editor response)
Inquisition (a 1- or 2-page-debate written as an interview or a dualogue of commonly-held arguments in all kinds of aspects of D&D)
The Great Divide (what it means in stats and rules to be a paladin 5e vs 4e; this would be a comparison between the reader's edition and another edition on one topic)
PS Can we start calling it Homebrew? It may never happen but we all know that's what it would be called, right?
PrinceoftheAngels (talk) ???, 19 February 2015 (MST)
I think we should try compiling one and see how it works out. For this would we make a webpage or grind Word (or openoffice, whatever) half to death? (PrinceoftheAngels)
Edit: For this time would not be an issue, we would see how long it takes.
Let me just reiterate my point about art. I did not say nobody would let you use their art. I said that actually using their art without adequate compensation is unethical.
"Exposure" is not payment, certainly not in the medium that is being proposed here, and additions to a portfolio are even less so- the artist still gets both even if they get paid. Artists are professionals with unique skills nobody else has. It takes a certain amount of intrinsic talent just to begin, and then takes a lifetime of practice to develop. Many artists pay good money (in the tens of thousands of dollars range) and years of their lives for professional instruction as well. A single work of art can take anywhere from hours to years to complete. Do not minimize the value of them or their work.
Let me also inform you that most artists on deviantart are not career artists. They are hobby artists. They have no portfolio to which exposure or additions would be meaningful. They create for their own reasons. Additionally, a good many of the artists on deviantart- some of the most impressive even- are children or young teenagers. In either case, few of these people have a firm understanding of the laws in regards to their work, or the market surrounding it, and taking advantage of them is just plain wrong.
You want free art? Make your own. Can't draw? That's just further evidence of why artists deserve compensation. Any other way is simply disrespectful, whether the artist realizes it or not.
My one exception to this would be where a hobby artist, such as myself for instance, made a work of art intentionally as a submission to this project without concern for compensation- getting the art into the finished product was part of the objecgive, not payment. In this case, the artist needs no further compensation, they already got what they wanted. I'd still offer compensation of some sort though, even if non-monetary, just out of professional respect.
Anyways, off my rant, I still think it's a cool idea for a wiki-derived ezine.
I also think Homebrew is a beautiful name. What if we did two; one directed at players, the other at DMs, like what you said. For players would be called Homebrew, and then the DM edition would be called Houserule.
The types of features I can think of:
- RPG theory discussion and debate on the subject of D&D
- A "monster of the month" or "creature feature" where a new monster is built and fleshed out in ecological detail.
- Model and set building and painting articles.
- An ongoing campaign from which stories of their exploits are related, possibly an online AL table? I'd be happy to run that, since my own table has recently finished what we were doing.
- Alternatively, we could steal an idea from Penthouse magazine, and have players submit stories from their home tables as content.
- A periodic adventure feature, maybe biannually? Good adventures take time to write.
- Reviews of published materials. Maybe done in a good cop bad cop style, where one person just raves about the good stuff while the other rants about the bad?
- Interviews if we can manage it.
- Reports from major D&D events. For example, the upcoming AL epic for the second season of adventures!
- Polls. Because people like voting on stuff.
- Small contests. For example, a figure painting contest with the prise being a set that was built for an article. Or an NPC contest, with the winner's NPC making it into the next adventure transcript.
- An ongoing campaign setting construction process, each month featuring a different stage of development.
Green Dragon (talk) 10:22, 20 February 2015 (MST)
It seems like there are users who are interested and committed to making a magazine work. Lets give it another try.
We need to fulfill some positions for the magazine to work.
- Who wants to be the director?
- Who wants to be an editor?
- Who wants to be a writer (/homebrew compilation)?
- Who wants to be an artist?
- Who wants to integrate users (polls/news/etc)?
I will likely make submissions of art when I have the time to produce such, or when it is necessary, such as if we need a logo design. I also have a pretty decent grasp of Canadian and US copyright law wherever that may be useful.
I am most interested in integrating users though. The audience is the lifeblood of any serialized medium, and cultivating that audience is essential to the work's continued survival. RPGs are a work of art which incorporate the audience as an element, anything related to them would need to appeal to the sensibilities and values of that audience- and they value involvement.
As for director, Green Dragon, it needs to be someone who people respect enough that they will follow directions from, even in the ephemeral environment of the internet. That doesn't just come from slapping a title on someone's chest. It needs to be earned. As such, I think a director is something which would need to come from the group working to produce a final product. Someone among them will likely prove instrumental, and naturally rise to the position. If they don't, the project was dead in the water to begin with.
ConorOberstIsGo (talk) 01:53, 21 February 2015 (MST)
I think we have the necessary resources but can someone throw in some ideas on distribution? RSS? Website? I would go with a Squarespace thing but I am, by profession, just a writer so do not know the details of launching something like that. Also I have a local audience to pitch to but what else do we have for publicity? Maybe we start to push it after three good issues (regardless of how long that takes) so people have a back catalog to look into? (that's how good podcasts work but maybe not applicable).
I agree with pretty much everything said but my biggest concern is that we might not find an audience.
The only other major concern is the 3.5/4e/5e crowds; as a 5e guy, will I want to read anything that deals in 3.5 mechanics? If not we will have to divide the content or rewrite the rules. I had initially thought that we could tag each piece with '5th edition' or 'Any edition' and let the audience choose to read or not but I actually don't think that's a good idea. Plenty of the content will work fine in any edition but this wiki is especially about rules so what's a good balance?
So now we have someone to integrate users, and a writer.
Green Dragon (talk) 06:03, 23 February 2015 (MST)
I would not make a blanket statement that "It would be HUGE if the wiki got public recognition or mention from anyone at WotC, but I doubt they appreciate our homebrewed supplemental-material market-competition." One could also look at D&D Wiki as a website that promotes D&D, and users can easily see that most of the pages are homebrew and thus should be considered in their own light.
D&D Wiki can create a "magazine.dandwiki.com" domain for users who are actively interested in creating a magazine from homebrew content. If this idea gets off the ground then this can be done using a website template. Of course, even more easily a magazine can be created within the wiki.
If the magazine if of a professional quality, then D&D Wiki should be able to compensate the users who create the magazine (especially artists). I am just postulating, but if the magazine is bimonthly then something like a gross $300-$400 could be split to the users who are most engaged (depending on the structure, outcome, basis, periods, etc).
Marasmusine (talk) 08:27, 23 February 2015 (MST)
I know I offered my services as editor above (and then subsequently nothing happened :) but since then I have had the birth of my second child and some other health issues that have scuppered my abiltiy to focus. I can contribute illustrations, maps, and 4e / 5e submissions specifically for the magazine if we need themed articles.
Yeah woo, go team! Good hustle. XD
What if we used the wiki to plan, organize, and build content, and then edit it into a finished product for the magazine? That way anything that makes it into the mag is also genuine content available on the wiki, sans article.
I believe having the mag's content accessible to google searches in some way would readily attract new readers at random, like shot-gun marketing, as there's a lot of D&D related searches right now. Even if we restrict full access by membership or somesuch, publishing small filler articles or article samples would do the same thing and give new readers a sample so they know what to expect.
If we do make a PDF format product, it would likely be more appealing as a direct download from a website, as opposed to email attachment distribution. That also makes back issues easily available to new readers, so if an article refers to something written three months ago, people could go back and read the original article.
If we go to the trouble of making a professional quality product, I see no reason why it would be inappropriate to charge a fee. However, I would approach this very cautiously. As soon as money gets involved, things can become very complicated very fast.
Green Dragon (talk) 11:50, 23 February 2015 (MST)
Please note that D&D Wiki uses the copyright laws of the United States of America with regard to all content having the copyright adhere with the GNU Free Documentation License 1.3 in all respects. See also D&D Wiki:Copyrights. If compensation from D&D Wiki is appealing then D&D Wiki will include a few requirements.
"D&D Wiki" is this website (www.dandwiki.com), a "Massive Multiauthor Collaboration Site" (or "MMC Site") offering a server with a public wiki that anybody can edit.
- The articles that compromise the magazine are modified on D&D Wiki to be put into the "finished" pages that the magazine brings these pages into.
- The magazine is a derivative of D&D Wiki.
- D&D Wiki is adequately acknowledged as a wiki website.
- D&D Wiki's user base is adequately acknowledged.
- D&D Wiki is considered the "publisher" per D&D Wiki:Copyrights.
ConorOberstIsGo (talk) 12:41, 23 February 2015 (MST)
I think compensation is a very difficult thing and perhaps a bridge best crossed later - the wiki already uses the D&D logo. I think we'd have more chance of getting a little free stuff from WotC (or maybe even getting hired) than earning even a little cash. Right now I don't see this being a business enterprise but a labor of love. Kickstarter doesn't preserve intellectual property but does make things happen... Also does anybody expect an edited article or a play-tested mechanic to be attributed to just one person? I'm skeptical.
I agree with Kydo's last post but I think a weekly/monthly feed/email is a good way of reminding folks that there might be something for them in this edition.
I think that the means of distribution and publicity are important but I think that's for when we have a kind of pilot edition.
PS I hope that the articles 'comprise' rather than 'compromise' the magazine (just trying to prove I can proof read!). I am also creating content during these discussions and I hope everybody will bring something they're proud of to the first virtual table :)
Green Dragon (talk) 12:48, 23 February 2015 (MST)
I think that compensation is a good idea. Its a lot to ask of people to create art, bring pages up to a professional magazine quality, etc. As this discussion has shown above.
Please note that D&D Wiki uses the copyright laws of the United States of America with regard to all content having the copyright adhere with the GNU Free Documentation License 1.3 in all respects. See also D&D Wiki:Copyrights. It respects all intellectual laws, and all laws.
"Don’t break the law. Don’t take any action that infringes or violates other people’s rights, violates the law, or breaches any contract or legal duty you have toward anyone."
"Don’t offer prohibited items. Don’t offer any rewards that are illegal, violate any of Kickstarter’s policies, rules, or guidelines, or violate any applicable law, statute, ordinance, or regulation."
Anything from D&D Wiki needs to be correctly licensed. Thus, information from any magazine can be re-integrated into D&D Wiki too.
Yes! Here is something which I can actually help with. If I am creating homebrew content for me to use as a DM, and I create something which I am especially happy with/proud of, should I suggest it for the magazine here?
Ok, so that's our team for now I suppose. Well, the 5-Man-Band is a trope for a reason! Here's some practical questions:
- What should we call it? I liked Homebrew or Houserule.
- Should there be split products or a single magazine? Note that splitting the product means either each is half the size, or doubles the work load for the team.
- How many entries should there be? At maximum, one person should work on one article per release. We will always be one person short though, because someone has to edit it all together. I would prefer either multiple people working on each entry, or multiple months to work on each entry, but we don't have the manpower for that.
- What are the minimum and maximum entry sizes?
- Should it be finished as a pdf, or should it be a website?
- What medium are we going to use to make and communicate our product? (There's a big difference between a magazine-dedicated wiki compared to contributors downloading a blank template and emailing their work to the editor) What will the working environment look like?
ConorOberstIsGo (talk) 15:45, 24 February 2015 (MST)
- I vote Homebrew.
- I hope content is not too dependent on edition but I know this is a rules wiki primarily so I think we will have to wait and see. A DM/Player split is - the more I think about it - a bad idea. I think a player sneaking a peak at a dungeon they might play is not a huge issue as it is already very easy to cheat at D&D in other ways. Also an interested player might try their hand at DMing if they get curious and read the DM section which I think is a positive (The DM section is maybe the last 40% of each release or less)
- See 6.
- See 6.
- I reckon a .pdf will give the layout a chance of being stable and artwork being used properly but a website is necessary. BTW I have all the resources to put out a short podcast too so there's that for publicity...
- How many authors/entry size? I think this goes towards the final question too. I think the wiki is a good workspace; one article per discussion thread and critiques/contributions/rewrites as posts in that discussion. We then rate the articles and give 'tl;dr' suggestions. Maybe the max length is about three pages but
'tl;dr'can work for a 500 word article just as easily as for a 3000 word one. Layout, hooks and good writing help a reader through an article so length should be left to an editor's discretion IMO .
If I type an article on Openoffice should I do so as two columns? Should I save it as .pdf, .odt or another form? Any suggestions for topics?