Orsino Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 White Wolf announced a new policy that requires licensing for any group charging for play--some of whom must be Camarilla members (US$20 fee--but six-month trials are free). I could see this lowering the number of WW games available at a convention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelcore Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 Yeah, I saw this over the weekend. At one time I was an avid LARPer, and was planning on running one again sometime in the near future. I may still. But this does leave a sour taste in my mouth. I'll keep my mouth shut with how I really feel about it here. And just mumble "I don't like it". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erion Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 meh. I mean, if someone is charging fees to play a White Wolf game, why shouldn't WW get a piece of the pie. It alos looks like you'll be getting a cartload of goodies to back up your games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orsino Posted July 13, 2005 Author Share Posted July 13, 2005 I mean, if someone is charging fees to play a White Wolf game, why shouldn't WW get a piece of the pie. I can see it strangling convention play. If I wanted to run a session at DragonCon, for example, the con would charge a three-dollar entry fee per person, of which I'd receive exactly nothing. I don't imagine that the convention organizers are going to want to buy a Camarilla membership so that I can run games, and I certainly wouldn't buy the membership when I'm not charging anything. I don't like this idea, much, either. The justification, if any, would seem to be that someone running an original game session based on their settings is creating a derivative work (though it's not getting published). This is otherwise known as using the game as it was designed and sold to be used. There are a lot of questions to be answered. Has anyone charging a fee, for example, ever calculated and paid sales tax? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelcore Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 Nope. Then again, I only ever charged a buck in an attempt to recoup fees for photocopies and tokens an' stuff. That, and I have fundamental problems with the Camarilla itself. Cool free swag be hanged... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orsino Posted July 13, 2005 Author Share Posted July 13, 2005 I mean, if someone is charging fees to play a White Wolf game, why shouldn't WW get a piece of the pie. I can see it strangling convention play. If I wanted to run a session at DragonCon, for example, the con would charge a three-dollar entry fee per person, of which I'd receive exactly nothing. I don't imagine that the convention organizers are going to want to buy a Camarilla membership so that I can run games.... Strike that. Convention fees are specifically exempted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orsino Posted July 13, 2005 Author Share Posted July 13, 2005 I mean, if someone is charging fees to play a White Wolf game, why shouldn't WW get a piece of the pie. I don't see this as a given. If a bar plays music, does it owe royalties on every song? Should it have to get permission from the copyright holder? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelcore Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 I mean, if someone is charging fees to play a White Wolf game, why shouldn't WW get a piece of the pie. I don't see this as a given. If a bar plays music, does it owe royalties on every song? Should it have to get permission from the copyright holder? Nope. Those are paid when the jukebox is purchased. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orsino Posted July 13, 2005 Author Share Posted July 13, 2005 I mean, if someone is charging fees to play a White Wolf game, why shouldn't WW get a piece of the pie. I don't see this as a given. If a bar plays music, does it owe royalties on every song? Should it have to get permission from the copyright holder? Nope. Those are paid when the jukebox is purchased. I specifically didn't mention jukeboxes. While I don't frequent bars anymore, I gather that jukeboxes are not the source of most music there. I do regularly enter stores where CDs are being played. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelcore Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 Ah, true. I misunderstood. Though most of the bars I do frequent have jukebox's. Many establishments that play music actually have pre-made CD's where everything should be free and clear (and annoyingly repetative, if you ask the employees) and already "paid for". My question is: how does White Wolf intend to enforce this? Advanced Auspex? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matsumoto Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 All jukebox commentary aside: white wolf has gone intesersting places inteh last two years. they have been trying to hack into the D20 crowd with great intesnity, and have pulled stunts that not only look bad but raise odd questiosn about motives... i loved their games. now i am alien from them. when i saw the odd stuff they did to the new system, and read all the rehash they stuck in their "all new setting" i went into exile at Hinganji temple until my spirits karma was purified, then i left a new gamer. i don't boycott them, but try and convince me of their goodness. oh, and if a WW employee just happens to read this, please, respond as you feel fit to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Porsenna Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 I think it's pretty silly myself. As a hard-core gamer, while I wasn't too terrebly interested in the WW game system itself, I'm FAR less inclined to try it out (primarily at a con, since no one in my group has any interest either) because of this. It's not like anyone running a game at a con is making money hand-over-fist. Sounds more like the company is looking to "diversify" its revenue stream. Damon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hexxenhammer Posted July 14, 2005 Share Posted July 14, 2005 Sounds more like the company is looking to "diversify" its revenue stream. That, or instituting draconian IP protection policies like GW. I wouldn't pay to dress in a trenchcoat and mope around anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Snack Posted July 14, 2005 Share Posted July 14, 2005 Music royalty info for that discussion... Although I'm not involved in it, I believe there is a local LARP group that charges to play WW games. Since they specifically exclude Cons from the fee, these are the groups they are most likely going after. While it seems to be counter productive to promoting the game, maybe they just want to make sure that the games are held to some sort of standard. I doubt it, but that sounds like good corporate speak to justify it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orsino Posted July 16, 2005 Author Share Posted July 16, 2005 Well! That didn't last long, did it? White Wolf is already pulling the plug on the new policy. Sounds as though they aren't giving up on the concept, but the execution will at least be reworked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.