The Actual Play’s the Thing
Mar 28th, 2008 by Matt Snyder
This blog’s seen unusual activity and content in the last couple weeks. I think, amid the criticism from me and from others, it’s worth re-stating what it is I’m positive about, and what I do all this stuff for.
For me, participating in this thing called role-playing games is about one thing, and that one thing’s main consequence.
It’s all about actual play.
If the actual play goes away, there is — for me — no hobby. It’s about an activity that’s really fun to do — play games.
I publish my own role-playing games. I do this for one reason. I want other people — friends and strangers — to actually play the games I create and enjoy doing it. That’s it; that’s the primary purpose here.
The main consequence of that is that people tend to enjoy each other more as human beings. In my case, it means the consequence is that I gain new friendships and colleagues. That’s the primary benefit.
Now, my games are profitable. They give me some extra spending cash. It’s not a lot — a couple thousand bucks. I couldn’t even consider making a living on it as this point. Not even a part time job, at least not at my current sales and profit levels.
The money is a funny thing. I’ve experienced directly, and observed indirectly, that the best, most reliable means to get a role-playing game you designed into the hands of people who actually play it is to have them buy it first. Free games are great! I like them. I can’t recall that I’ve ever played one, though. People do play them, certainly. But, mostly, people download them (assuming they’re free PDFs or similar format), maybe read them, and simply have them. Play them? Not really.
When a person buys my games, they’re invested. They’re interested! They’re saying they are so willing to check this thing out that they’ll put up cash for it. They demand them. Now, it’s clear that even then only a fraction of my customers become my fellow players. That’s inevitable. And, given my meager resources for support and marketing, that’s something I’m not able to improve as much as I’d like.
This philosophy, by the way, is the core behind the Ashcan Front, which I co-founded with Paul Czege. There’s been some criticism that with the Aschan Front we’re getting (that is, scamming) people to pay for playtesting. I don’t think that’s what’s happening. I think that what’s happening is that people are engaging in mutual support. A buyer of an ashcan is saying “I appreciate your work and see such promise in it, that I’m willing to support you financially and also do what I can to interact with you and make this game as amazing as possible.” Guess what the absolute best thing that buyer can do to interact and make the game better? Yep, you guessed it — actually play the game.
I digress. Indeed, I digress from the goal when I write blog posts here. Much of them are about all kinds of junk that aren’t directly about actual play. Things like my comments on the subculture, on publishing, when I dip my toe in theory (which, really, isn’t very often — I never have been much of a theory wonk) are not about actually playing games, and playing games I publish especially.
This is why I say changes are ahead for this web site. Instead of a blog about my thoughts, I really need to focus on the activity of role-playing. And, obviously, I’m very interested in people playing games I’ve published.
I’ve got a new one nearly completed and soon to publish. 44: A Game of Automatic Fear will debut this summer. As a game, it’s tested and complete. Now, I need to revise the text and publish the thing. I’m really excited about it.
I’ve also got a couple other games lined up after that. What designer doesn’t! One that I’m excited about I haven’t talked about before. But, I’ve never played it. No one has. No point talking about stuff when they’re stuff to do. Like play games.

The play is indeed the thing, though some also enjoy analysing it and sharing the general trends they see in it. Some further enjoy discussing roleplaying in context of random fields of interest, but, in the end, that musing is provoked by actual play, even if a clear connection is not possible.
Have you ever checked the correlation between number of people who play non-free games and the number of people who play free games?
Obviously, there will be more people who OWN free games, but the playerbase may not be smaller, and in fact might be bigger as well. It’s worth a look, if you’ve got the ability to run those numbers.
Hi, Eric. That is an interesting question. I have never checked that information. I’m not sure how I could do so with any confidence. I’m not aware of any data, nor any attempts to gather such data. I definitely do not have the ability to run those numbers.
I still remain pretty convinced that the number people actually playing free games is far fewer than the number of people playing purchased games. But, you’re right, there’s no way to verify. It’s just a hunch.