Well if you are already familiar with this stuff forgive me for bringing it up:
http://www.pdf-publishing.com/HowItWorks.htm
"If you are charging for the publication we will deduct 15% from the net receipts (i.e. after PayPal fees) with a minimum of USD $1.00, or if there is no charge for the document, we will charge a flat rate of USD $1.00/document distributed. Ordering via affliates can be supported via unique pages and reported to you in the monthly statements provided - an additional fee for this setup maybe made. A service setup charge of $100 is made per 5 titles published (for large numbers of titles a separate quotation will be provided - typically the cost falls to USD$10/book for 11+)."
So. . . . IF you could get the rights to WABII and AoA at a 'reasonable price' -- lord knows what that is.
THEN the poor soul undertaking this project would have to render the content into a .pdf format; (look on the bright side here -- all the errata could be eliminated and those 'after thought' rules in AoA could be included in WABII).
AND pay the $100 set-up fee;
THEN a .pdf version could be offered for $$$ less 15% on every sale.
You have any idea what the acquisition price might be?
JMHO but the above process is hardly simple nor is it inexpensive -- but maybe your own financial situation and availability of time is substantially different than my own.
I've done limited production runs for Watch Your Six; Yanks; and Billy's Boys. This produces a product bound with that hard plastic spiral and my inventory is never more than 10 copies. You may have a preference for a .pdf but it is my experience that a substantial majority of folks want a hard copy.
mjc
--- In WABlist@yahoogroups.com, Zero Twentythree <zerotwentythree@...> wrote:
>
> I don't follow that logic.
>
> A PDF or other digital format requires only hosting. That can be found very
> cheap or free.
>
> Printed books will require an outlay of money, plus all the expense, time
> and hassle of distribution.
>
> Irrelevent to me anyway. As I've said, I'm willing to allow WAB a dignified
> death. I will play it occassionally if the opportunity presents itself. But
> it's not as if one game cornered the market on fun - so I will continue to
> play other games as well.
>
> Thomas
> On May 30, 2012 7:26 PM, "Mike" <quidveritas@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > Well I am not one of the WAB faithful.
> >
> > That said, the present state of affairs is more than a little regrettable.
> > There's an awful lot of WAB players out there and IMHO, COA is a factor in
> > the demise of WAB -- not the alternative.
> >
> > I have no problem with Stuart making a few bucks but if Stuart can hi-jack
> > WAB, what's to stop the rest of us from doing the same?
> >
> > Call me crazy but I was more than a little happy with AoA 2.0. Everything
> > you need in two books! (OK there are a couple lists that need some review
> > but all things considered, it gets the job done for the local tournament).
> >
> > WAB isn't going to die.
> >
> > There is no reason why a number of folks on this list cannot create an
> > alternative.
> >
> > I know a lot of you think .pdf is a great way to go but if you look into
> > it, there is more than a little expense if you go that route -- to say
> > nothing of financial risk. Personally limited publication runs make more
> > sense to me.
> >
> > mjc
> >
> > --- In WABlist@yahoogroups.com, "Harold H" <haroldlhildebrand@> wrote:
> > >
> > > We'll I'm sad that WH gave up. I put on the Pied Piper hat over the last
> > couple of years to keep people playing the system in Southern California by
> > running various events and trying to generate interest. In February at the
> > local gaming convention, I had 13 players show up for an AoA 2.0
> > tournament, which I considered respectable. This weekend I ran a Chariot
> > Wars event and I had 6 players, but it did overlap with a WAB event up
> > north, so I was reasonably satisfied.
> > >
> > > But the truth is that there just isn't enough interest to keep it going
> > without some semblance of support from GW, even if it's mostly illusion. So
> > I have to think hard on what the future might be. I'm going to throw out a
> > few options that I'm thinking about to see what comments people might make.
> > >
> > > Ignore it; just keep playing and running events. There are more lists
> > than I'll ever possibly build armies for, and house rules can fix any
> > problems that are too terrible to live with. Start trying to "collect" WAB
> > 2.0 and supplements and then resell them to potential players hopefully at
> > reasonable prices. The torrent route is always there but does have a bit of
> > a moral taint for me.
> > >
> > > Switch to one of the other three most likely rulesets. There is already
> > a bit of a following for COE in Southern California, and to a lesser degree
> > HC.
> > >
> > > Create a generic rewrite of WAB 2.0. I've often thought I could write a
> > more concise, maybe twenty five page version of WAB 2.0, in my own words. I
> > don't think you can copy write the rules mechanisms, and I'm pretty sure
> > they're not patented, so as long as I stayed away from directly stealing
> > their format and wording I might be within the law. As we all know, GW
> > seems to have more lawyers than creative people, so it would probably have
> > to be a bit of an underground thing. Still I would love to be able to give
> > away a smallish PDF file that has what everybody needs. In my professional
> > world there's Linux that has some remarkable similarities to what I'm
> > talking about. I'm particularly attached to the idea of it being owned by
> > nobody but a community created endeavor.
> > >
> > > I've also considered writing some kind of "bridge" that would let you
> > play the current Fantasy Battles system with the WAB lists. This would be
> > quite a feat, but there are some strong motivations. The main recruiting
> > ground for WAB players for me, has always been FB players. I think that
> > anybody who is already an historical gamer has tried WAB or will never try
> > WAB, so that isn't a pool that has much viability. I actually like some of
> > the things about 8th edition, although I know that's not universal. But
> > still the idea of a supplement that a FB player could use and build and
> > play historical armies seems like a really good idea. To use another IT
> > metaphor, I wouldn't want to "fork" the current FB, like was done with the
> > original WAB. (in software development a "fork" is when you copy an
> > original set of source code and then modify it so you are no longer linked
> > to the original code, ie changes to the base code can't be integrated into
> > your new forked project) It would be best as a living extension that could
> > be upgraded as FB is constantly changed. One of the things that I think
> > really needs being done is to have a clearly defined point system, that
> > would encourage people to create their own Army lists. I know there was a
> > "methodology for this in WAB, but it's always been somewhat arcane and
> > shrouded. I'd like it to be open and part of the rules. Now once again I
> > think it's hard to handle situations where there are "meta" balancing
> > issues beyond the equation to determine the cost of an individual troop
> > type, but still it would be nice to have. All in all I think that creating
> > a FB supplelment would be the absolute best, but it is probably fraught
> > with compromises and danger.
> > >
> > > Stop playing ancients. An emotionally charged decision. I consider WAB
> > my main game, but I probably play less than a dozen games a year, where I
> > play a like number of other miniatures games in a single month. I guess I
> > could add a wait and see clause to this statement, to see if there is
> > another discernable current or swell that I could than follow. "follow the
> > gourd,,,no the shoe,,follow the shoe!"
> > >
> > > Well anyway, I may not be playing WAB in the future, but my single based
> > inch tall friends aren't going anywhere. Oh as a bit of bravado, the
> > Chariot Wars event I organized was entirely with my own figures, since it's
> > not a period that everybody has an army for. I broke up my Biblical forces
> > into eight roughly 1200 point armies. It was pretty cool to see them all
> > out on the table at once. The feeling it generated is what makes me not
> > want to give up.
> > >
> > > Harold Hildebrand
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Post message: WABlist@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe: WABlist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe: WABlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
List owner: WABlist-owner@yahoo.com
Shortcut URL to this page:
http://www.yahoo.com/community/WABlist
No comments:
Post a Comment