| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 17 Dec 2015 : 04:11:33
I read on Facebook that Paul S Kemp left Wizards. Is this true? If so, that is saddening. I loved the Cale books, and was hope for a Godborn sequel. Does anyone else know anything about this? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Firestorm |
Posted - 12 Jan 2016 : 01:18:58
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
And your point is what? It's obvious someone at WotC doesn't think they'd sell enough books, because it hasn't happened.
I'm not defending their decision. I'm defending how they got to that decision, and saying to stop acting like there's someone at WotC gleefully twirling their mustache as they make calls like this out of pure spite.
Wizards might not have signed a bestselling author for reasons other than 'low sales.'
Nothing to go on for this theory, but it could be possible Wizards feels the Realms brand is strong enough to sustain sales with less well-known (and thus less well-paid) authors. In that way, they only have to support one big name (RAS), which in their accounting may be all they're willing to reach for (and perhaps all they need, as Ed is probably a unique case).
It could all just be a matter of cost/benefit math.
The lowball method gives Wizards a chance to test out new or established mid-tier Realms authors for much less cost. If two mid-tier authors sell enough to cover one big name release, but their pay is half, that math works out for the accounting side. This also has the potential benefit of filling up more shelf space and more opportunities to launch a new bestselling series.
The thing is, they seem to have ceased books except those by Bob, Ed and Erin.
No new authors, no word on what is going on. Just static.
They closed the WOTC forum where hundreds of complaints were being posted regularly, and they do not respond to Email or twitter except very vaguely.
|
| charger_ss24 |
Posted - 10 Jan 2016 : 17:24:55
Huge loss for them. He could very well be their go-to author once Bob ends Drizzt's story. His books are that good.
Did we ever find out who the tall, bald man with no pupils that was writing in a book was when Magadon Kest saw him outside his burning tavern in The Godborn? I think man also made an appearance in The Sentinel if I'm not mistaken. |
| Dark Wizard |
Posted - 10 Jan 2016 : 04:23:34
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
And your point is what? It's obvious someone at WotC doesn't think they'd sell enough books, because it hasn't happened.
I'm not defending their decision. I'm defending how they got to that decision, and saying to stop acting like there's someone at WotC gleefully twirling their mustache as they make calls like this out of pure spite.
Wizards might not have signed a bestselling author for reasons other than 'low sales.'
Nothing to go on for this theory, but it could be possible Wizards feels the Realms brand is strong enough to sustain sales with less well-known (and thus less well-paid) authors. In that way, they only have to support one big name (RAS), which in their accounting may be all they're willing to reach for (and perhaps all they need, as Ed is probably a unique case).
It could all just be a matter of cost/benefit math.
The lowball method gives Wizards a chance to test out new or established mid-tier Realms authors for much less cost. If two mid-tier authors sell enough to cover one big name release, but their pay is half, that math works out for the accounting side. This also has the potential benefit of filling up more shelf space and more opportunities to launch a new bestselling series. |
| Lilianviaten |
Posted - 09 Jan 2016 : 23:48:37
quote:
Originally posted by Firestorm
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
Typical big corporation wanting something for nothing.
There's a difference between wanting something for nothing and wanting to make sure you get the desired return on your investment. As I said, I think it more likely they expect that a certain number of books would be sold, and that for them to get the desired profit margin, they can only offer a certain amount to the author.
Think about it: if you had the opportunity to spend X amount of dollars for a 10% profit, or the same amount for a 5% profit, which are you going to choose?
Paul on facebook said his books more than sold their share to make it profitable for them. Cannot remember the exact verbiage used, but his books go like hotcakes.
I should hope so. Kemp is as good a writer as anyone who's ever worked for the Realms, and I say that as a huge fan of RAS and Elaine. |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 09 Jan 2016 : 06:45:35
So what if it's Wizards who have set the expectations way too high? |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 09 Jan 2016 : 05:48:21
And your point is what? It's obvious someone at WotC doesn't think they'd sell enough books, because it hasn't happened.
I'm not defending their decision. I'm defending how they got to that decision, and saying to stop acting like there's someone at WotC gleefully twirling their mustache as they make calls like this out of pure spite. |
| Firestorm |
Posted - 08 Jan 2016 : 23:46:43
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
Typical big corporation wanting something for nothing.
There's a difference between wanting something for nothing and wanting to make sure you get the desired return on your investment. As I said, I think it more likely they expect that a certain number of books would be sold, and that for them to get the desired profit margin, they can only offer a certain amount to the author.
Think about it: if you had the opportunity to spend X amount of dollars for a 10% profit, or the same amount for a 5% profit, which are you going to choose?
Paul on facebook said his books more than sold their share to make it profitable for them. Cannot remember the exact verbiage used, but his books go like hotcakes. |
| Firestorm |
Posted - 08 Jan 2016 : 23:44:36
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
Wooly, the main difference I see between TSR and WOTC is that TSR was broke for years - in the end they were like 30 million in the hole or something like that. WOTC is totally solvent, and is in fact just one part of a multi billion dollar parent company (HASBRO for those of you who were not aware of all the buyouts of the late 90s :P).
That is not at all relevant to the point I was making. Again, someone was bashing WotC, and I was pointing out that WotC was not going as far as TSR did. TSR decided that if a writer wouldn't write their signature character, they'd get someone else to do so. WotC has not gone that route.
I'm not defending WotC, I'm just trying to put things into perspective -- we've got too many people here who howl for WotC's blood anytime the company does something remotely disagreeable.
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
I've worked for Hasbro in the past and let me tell ya, they throw money around like its air - 50 grand here, 300 grand there. For them to tell any writer they can't afford the going rate is one heck of a bad joke. For them to tell an established writer with a fan base that is unconscionable.
So do we then have proof that someone at Hasbro made this call, and that WotC is not just a subsidiary that is responsible for its own bottom line? Everything I've seen was that WotC was a smaller part of a large group, and that they were running themselves with only the broadest guidance from the parent company -- and that guidance was mostly focused on the bottom line, and not how that bottom line was reached. If you have proof otherwise, or that someone at Hasbro decided how much WotC could offer it's authors, I'd love to see that.
Honestly, I think this is more a case of a bean counter saying "we need this much return on our investment, and we project this many books would be sold -- so the max we can offer is this amount."
Remotely disagreeable?
Wooly, we have been relegated to reading only books by Ed, Bob and Erin. And while they are good, I miss novels by plenty of other authors and WOTC is to blame. It is not like they cut an author here and there. Nobody but those 3 write in the realms anymore. Not a sign or peep from them.
We were told the Sundering was to return the realms too the way they were. Well? Bring on 5e right? But I want the authors back. Anything less than books from 6-8 different authors a year has made the series fall more into obscurity.
Warcraft books sell more than Forgotten realms in the past 2 years. Disgraceful how the setting is basically fading away and they are doing nothing to defibrillate it after all their promises. |
| Matt James |
Posted - 05 Jan 2016 : 15:38:04
quote:
Originally posted by PaulSKemp
Hi all,
The Facebook post George mentioned above is here: https://www.facebook.com/paulskemp/posts/10152596807420830
The substance of the issue from my perspective is in my comment/response to that post, which you can read here: https://www.facebook.com/paulskemp/posts/10152596807420830?comment_id=37071777&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R9%22%7D
I hope that clarifies things. The upshot is that yes, I'd love to revisit Cale and crew, but no, I don't think that will happen, not unless something significant changes at WotC.
Keep at it, Paul. You write tremendous fiction, so I'll follow you around anywhere. |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 05 Jan 2016 : 00:59:16
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Honestly, I think this is more a case of a bean counter saying "we need this much return on our investment, and we project this many books would be sold -- so the max we can offer is this amount."
I assume its exactly that. Most likely some Jr. VP said they can only pay writers X dollars because he forgot how to read after school before his daddy got him a cushy job at his college buddies company and he doesn't want to have to explain to his superiors how investing in talent is worthwhile, even when that talent is proven and popular. :) |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 03 Jan 2016 : 16:43:17
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
Typical big corporation wanting something for nothing.
There's a difference between wanting something for nothing and wanting to make sure you get the desired return on your investment. As I said, I think it more likely they expect that a certain number of books would be sold, and that for them to get the desired profit margin, they can only offer a certain amount to the author.
Think about it: if you had the opportunity to spend X amount of dollars for a 10% profit, or the same amount for a 5% profit, which are you going to choose? |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 03 Jan 2016 : 16:17:48
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
Wooly, the main difference I see between TSR and WOTC is that TSR was broke for years - in the end they were like 30 million in the hole or something like that. WOTC is totally solvent, and is in fact just one part of a multi billion dollar parent company (HASBRO for those of you who were not aware of all the buyouts of the late 90s :P).
That is not at all relevant to the point I was making. Again, someone was bashing WotC, and I was pointing out that WotC was not going as far as TSR did. TSR decided that if a writer wouldn't write their signature character, they'd get someone else to do so. WotC has not gone that route.
I'm not defending WotC, I'm just trying to put things into perspective -- we've got too many people here who howl for WotC's blood anytime the company does something remotely disagreeable.
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
I've worked for Hasbro in the past and let me tell ya, they throw money around like its air - 50 grand here, 300 grand there. For them to tell any writer they can't afford the going rate is one heck of a bad joke. For them to tell an established writer with a fan base that is unconscionable.
So do we then have proof that someone at Hasbro made this call, and that WotC is not just a subsidiary that is responsible for its own bottom line? Everything I've seen was that WotC was a smaller part of a large group, and that they were running themselves with only the broadest guidance from the parent company -- and that guidance was mostly focused on the bottom line, and not how that bottom line was reached. If you have proof otherwise, or that someone at Hasbro decided how much WotC could offer it's authors, I'd love to see that.
Honestly, I think this is more a case of a bean counter saying "we need this much return on our investment, and we project this many books would be sold -- so the max we can offer is this amount." |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 03 Jan 2016 : 15:24:45
If that is their attitude then fair play to him for leaving.
Typical big corporation wanting something for nothing. |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 03 Jan 2016 : 13:29:55
As always its about the money, and no, I can't imagine anyone thinks Paul should not insist on being paid what he is worth.
Wooly, the main difference I see between TSR and WOTC is that TSR was broke for years - in the end they were like 30 million in the hole or something like that. WOTC is totally solvent, and is in fact just one part of a multi billion dollar parent company (HASBRO for those of you who were not aware of all the buyouts of the late 90s :P).
I've worked for Hasbro in the past and let me tell ya, they throw money around like its air - 50 grand here, 300 grand there. For them to tell any writer they can't afford the going rate is one heck of a bad joke. For them to tell an established writer with a fan base that is unconscionable. |
| Fellfire |
Posted - 27 Dec 2015 : 18:57:58
Another top-tier author driven off. Will they never learn? |
| Aulduron |
Posted - 27 Dec 2015 : 18:47:23
You will be missed, as long as you're gone. |
| PaulSKemp |
Posted - 22 Dec 2015 : 14:05:49
Hi all,
The Facebook post George mentioned above is here: https://www.facebook.com/paulskemp/posts/10152596807420830
The substance of the issue from my perspective is in my comment/response to that post, which you can read here: https://www.facebook.com/paulskemp/posts/10152596807420830?comment_id=37071777&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R9%22%7D
I hope that clarifies things. The upshot is that yes, I'd love to revisit Cale and crew, but no, I don't think that will happen, not unless something significant changes at WotC. |
| Dark Wizard |
Posted - 22 Dec 2015 : 05:57:44
This blog post holds relevance to this topic, especially the comments and Paul Kemp's replies around early-mid 2014 and going on from there.
http://paulskemp.com/the-chronicles-of-erevis-cale/the-cycle-of-night/ |
| George Krashos |
Posted - 19 Dec 2015 : 00:06:50
Paul posted re writing for WotC in his Facebook post of 18/2/14.
-- George Krashos |
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 18 Dec 2015 : 20:20:13
Perhaps it was just my assumption (hope) that there would be another lol |
| Tanthalas |
Posted - 18 Dec 2015 : 20:18:08
Can't find anything on his blog about the issues between him and WotC.
As for a new Cale book, I'm almost certain that Paul S Kemp never said another book was on the way. Ever since Godborn was released he'd always only say that he was available to write more if he could reach an agreement with WotC, and he never did.
I think I remember Kemp making a post here (or somewhere else and it was reposted here) when it was likely that a deal wasn't going to be made, and that was well over a year ago. |
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 18 Dec 2015 : 20:07:08
I must have missed that discussion, and I don't follow his blog (though maybe I should).
No, the facebook post was new. It was a discussion on an FR fan page. Either way, old or no, it was news to me. Last I understood, another Cale book was in the works, so I assumed Kemp was still involved *shrugs* |
| Tanthalas |
Posted - 18 Dec 2015 : 20:02:44
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
It was news to me. I hadn't heard. I thought after Godborn Kemp was going to write another.
It was something that was talked about here in Candlekeep and I think he even made a blogpost about it on his webpage.
Are you sure you didn't just read some old post on Facebook? |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 18 Dec 2015 : 14:32:47
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
Wizards of the Coast just keep getting better and better don't they?
They're not doing anything TSR didn't do. Look at the history of the vaporware novel Shores of Dusk.
Actually, WotC hasn't gone as far as TSR did, in that scenario.
Yeah but if it weren't for TSR you wouldn't have all that FR material lining your shelf.
I'm not sure what you're trying to get at... You bashed WotC for not paying well; I pointed out that not only did TSR not pay well, they also decided to go the route of having someone else write an author's signature character, when the author refused because of pay issues. WotC has not gone that far. |
| froglegg |
Posted - 18 Dec 2015 : 14:16:54
The man had to do what he needed to do I guess.
John |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 18 Dec 2015 : 06:52:09
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
Wizards of the Coast just keep getting better and better don't they?
They're not doing anything TSR didn't do. Look at the history of the vaporware novel Shores of Dusk.
Actually, WotC hasn't gone as far as TSR did, in that scenario.
Yeah but if it weren't for TSR you wouldn't have all that FR material lining your shelf. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 18 Dec 2015 : 06:00:23
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
Wizards of the Coast just keep getting better and better don't they?
They're not doing anything TSR didn't do. Look at the history of the vaporware novel Shores of Dusk.
Actually, WotC hasn't gone as far as TSR did, in that scenario. |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 17 Dec 2015 : 21:32:22
quote:
Originally posted by Mirtek
I'll hold judgement until the day I know the full story, thus probably never.
If WotC is only offering substandard payment, that definately appears to be their fault on the surface. However it could also mean that D&D novels simply make substandard profit and thus paying more is not in the picture. What "standard" rates are we talking about anyway? A "fantasy novel standard"? A "per XX,XXX books sold standard"? Is Paizo really paying more for Pathfinder novels or are we merely talking about WotC paying less for a FR novel than Disney for a Star Wars novel?
About having creative disagreements I would actually laud Wotc for doing so. In a shared world someone needs to take the reigns and not just let every author, even their star authors, run amok. You if the disagreement is like about Kemp wanting to have Mephistopheles slay and replace Asmodeus and WotC telling no, that's not how the D&D metastory will develop, then thumbs up WotC. If it's actually a overblown disagreement about some minor story arc, then it would be WotC's fault.
So without further information, I can't put the blame on either party.
Or it could be about a major story arc they wanted Kemp to partake in and he said no. |
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 17 Dec 2015 : 21:27:56
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas
This isn't exactly recent news.
We've known about this ever since Godborn was released.
I really wanted to read more Cale stories, but like Kemp wrote back then (I think!), when you have limited free time to do stuff, he expects a certain monetary return from the time he spends writing a novel.
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
Wizards of the Coast just keep getting better and better don't they?
I don't blame the man one bit.
This coming from the guy that doesn't care about novels.
It was news to me. I hadn't heard. I thought after Godborn Kemp was going to write another. |
| Mirtek |
Posted - 17 Dec 2015 : 19:58:35
I'll hold judgement until the day I know the full story, thus probably never.
If WotC is only offering substandard payment, that definately appears to be their fault on the surface. However it could also mean that D&D novels simply make substandard profit and thus paying more is not in the picture. What "standard" rates are we talking about anyway? A "fantasy novel standard"? A "per XX,XXX books sold standard"? Is Paizo really paying more for Pathfinder novels or are we merely talking about WotC paying less for a FR novel than Disney for a Star Wars novel?
About having creative disagreements I would actually laud Wotc for doing so. In a shared world someone needs to take the reigns and not just let every author, even their star authors, run amok. You if the disagreement is like about Kemp wanting to have Mephistopheles slay and replace Asmodeus and WotC telling no, that's not how the D&D metastory will develop, then thumbs up WotC. If it's actually a overblown disagreement about some minor story arc, then it would be WotC's fault.
So without further information, I can't put the blame on either party. |
|
|
