I can only speak as a writer of con scenarios. One area I think people are looking at is how a new generation of writers are brought into this system. The answer is they volunteer. How do they find out about the way to write a scenario. They pick up some scenarios after a game read those and try it themselves.
So how does this help to attract new people to write. It doesn't. It just presumes people who generally are not involved in committees or organisation will get involved. I would love to be at a seminar with experienced writers showing me what they know. Telling me where I could improve, with the one I did this year as an example. The prize for the best written scenario is supposed to encourage better writing. It doesn't. Why because if I didn't happen to play that game I don't know what made it so good. I want to read that scenario and pick up some tips. I want to engage with other writers. I posted a thread on rpg.net a few weeks back about the Irish method. One of the complaints is that it standardises what you can do. To a certain extent that is true, which is why we have so many, team sent on mission type scenarios. So maybe writers need to compete a little bit to have something different or cool this year. And next year I want to do something that will show what I can do. Right now I write in a void. I send in a scenario idea, March, I may hear in June if its been accepted. It gets written, I speak to an organiser half an hour before the scenario, when its over I suggest the best player and walk away. Ironically I began writing cons because I am lazy. To lazy to write to for myself. I preferred the social contract with a con to get a scenario done. I like to give myself a problem to solve when I write a scenario. I don't do it because I enjoy writing for cons, they are just the vehicle. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
