Like someone already said, you don't need DRM to protect copyright. It is just one method (albeit an efficient one) of enforcing it. You can also sell digital content without DRM and still sue people who try to sell it in an organized fashion. This is in fact how a lot of digital content is handled today. Effectively, the people supplying pirated copies are your competitors who have a huge advantage in price but suffer a similarly huge disadvantage in marketing, convenience and legal status. And the pirates actually also suffer a disadvantage in price, because they cannot get any money for the content itself (who would pay for pirated music?), although they can get some money from advertisements.
Hey, Apple sells lots of music, even though they same music is also available for free as pirated MP3's.
So, your basic formula for success is something like:
Marketing. This is the only way to reach the great masses, and pirates can't do it efficiently (well, they can send spam...). Also, since the content is free to reproduce, you can keep you customers happy by frequent bonus offers, discount clubs, monthly freebies, and the like. A nice example of taking advantage of free reproduction is the DaZ3D website which sells Poser content. You have got to admire their marketing savvy. And the success - I mean come on, their business case is so good they have created a free version of Poser (DaZ|Studio) just to sell more content! And none of the content is copy protected mind you.
Convenience. Giving the users convenience means you have to put effort into organizing the content, into web site design and management, making sure content installation is painless, etc. Effort requires money. If you are a pirate, you are likely not making enough money to do this.
Traceability. Discourage people from copying your content to each other. If all content contains a hidden watermark which identifies the original buyer, people are a lot more reluctant to copy content even to their friends (how many of your friends do you trust not to copy the content any further?).
Create as much FUD about pirated content as possible. Only legal content is virus-free. Pirate web sites install trojans which will steal your money. Etc. There is enough basis in fact to make it work. And it works in politics well enough...
Humm. Having played Ars Magica more than a few times (my favorite game too), I would say it is biased towards a historically accurate setting (with the twist that magic was real and not just superstition). With even the title being "The Art of Magic", saying it is slightly biased towards mages is like saying Linux community is slightly biased towards open source. Well, you do have all the other character types as well, but the bulk of the available source material is related to magus characters.
IMHO though, that is the strength of Ars Magica. Is has the best magic system bar none, and the setting has real depth because you can use any history book about medieval Europe for reference (and many do - there are quite a few historians among the players). Low-magic or high-magic is up to you - it depends on how common or scarce magical resources are. In our games, magical resources were more common and some of the mages became pretty powerful - and a powerful Ars Magica magus is a damn scary thing...
Oh, and if you feel curious - the previous (fourth) edition of the rulebook is available for free as a PDF, have a look at http://www.atlas-games.com/arsmagica/.
Very true. For any non-trivial map, I would start with pen and paper and only move to CC once the paper version is at final draft stage. The editing aspect is what makes using a program really worthwhile (aside from getting really nice looking maps); after a few editing cycles and a few dozen game sessions pen-and-paper maps get smudgy and hard to read, not to mention lost. For maps that you only use a few times though, pen and paper might be better (if you don't care about getting that nice professional look - maybe you can draw that well yourself, I for sure cannot). It's true that editing complex maps can be complicated. I don't see any way though that it could be less complicated while still retaining the same expressive power in the software.
CC does allow you to easily hide items from players; you need to place all secret items in a corresponding layer, and then you can show or hide that layer as you wish. Perhaps that is not simple enough for you, but I find it quite acceptable and using layers really is the way it should work.
Like someone already said, most of the other programs are bitmap-based, wherease CC is a real CAD program and thus vector-based. The difference is that there is very little you cannot do with CC (aside from the primary RPG use, I have used it e.g. to draw floorplans for selling an apartment, and plan to use it for garden design). Also, CC is professionally produced software - the UI might not be completely "Windows Standard", but it does work logically and provides all the functionality you need (I have had some bad experiences in this regard with other software where UI design has been less competent).
The tradeoff is the steeper learning curve, though the manuals are quite OK. The available extensions cover most if not all RPG illustration needs, so you can expand the software as your needs grow. A host of free content (maps and symbols) is available from the Profantasy website.
I guess it mainly depends on the quality you want to get and the time and money you are willing to invest. If all you want is to sit down and quickly create some relatively simple maps, then you are better off with a simpler and cheaper program (or pen and paper...). If, on the other hand, you want to have the ability to create beautiful and detailed maps and are willing to spend some time on it, then it is worthwhile to invest your money and time in CC. It is worth repeating that both investments are required - frequently people who have the money don't have the time, and vice versa:-(. If you e.g. wanted to create maps for illustrating a fantasy novel, CC would really be your only sensible alternative.
By the way, if money and time is no object (I wish...), look into the Vue Esprit + Poser combination for creating illustrations. You can get some pretty decent results without any drawing ability, but buying both the software and the content will cost you an arm and a leg, not to mention a significant chunk of your time.
Disclaimer: I own CC and most of its extensions. I have not tried all possible pieces of mapping software that exist so there might be something better out there but I seriously doubt it. I am not in any way affiliated with Profantasy, e-on software or Curious Labs.
Slashdot Mirror
Like someone already said, you don't need DRM to protect copyright. It is just one method (albeit an efficient one) of enforcing it. You can also sell digital content without DRM and still sue people who try to sell it in an organized fashion. This is in fact how a lot of digital content is handled today. Effectively, the people supplying pirated copies are your competitors who have a huge advantage in price but suffer a similarly huge disadvantage in marketing, convenience and legal status. And the pirates actually also suffer a disadvantage in price, because they cannot get any money for the content itself (who would pay for pirated music?), although they can get some money from advertisements.
Hey, Apple sells lots of music, even though they same music is also available for free as pirated MP3's.
So, your basic formula for success is something like:
Humm. Having played Ars Magica more than a few times (my favorite game too), I would say it is biased towards a historically accurate setting (with the twist that magic was real and not just superstition). With even the title being "The Art of Magic", saying it is slightly biased towards mages is like saying Linux community is slightly biased towards open source. Well, you do have all the other character types as well, but the bulk of the available source material is related to magus characters.
IMHO though, that is the strength of Ars Magica. Is has the best magic system bar none, and the setting has real depth because you can use any history book about medieval Europe for reference (and many do - there are quite a few historians among the players). Low-magic or high-magic is up to you - it depends on how common or scarce magical resources are. In our games, magical resources were more common and some of the mages became pretty powerful - and a powerful Ars Magica magus is a damn scary thing...
Oh, and if you feel curious - the previous (fourth) edition of the rulebook is available for free as a PDF, have a look at http://www.atlas-games.com/arsmagica/.
Very true. For any non-trivial map, I would start with pen and paper and only move to CC once the paper version is at final draft stage. The editing aspect is what makes using a program really worthwhile (aside from getting really nice looking maps); after a few editing cycles and a few dozen game sessions pen-and-paper maps get smudgy and hard to read, not to mention lost. For maps that you only use a few times though, pen and paper might be better (if you don't care about getting that nice professional look - maybe you can draw that well yourself, I for sure cannot). It's true that editing complex maps can be complicated. I don't see any way though that it could be less complicated while still retaining the same expressive power in the software.
CC does allow you to easily hide items from players; you need to place all secret items in a corresponding layer, and then you can show or hide that layer as you wish. Perhaps that is not simple enough for you, but I find it quite acceptable and using layers really is the way it should work.
Like someone already said, most of the other programs are bitmap-based, wherease CC is a real CAD program and thus vector-based. The difference is that there is very little you cannot do with CC (aside from the primary RPG use, I have used it e.g. to draw floorplans for selling an apartment, and plan to use it for garden design). Also, CC is professionally produced software - the UI might not be completely "Windows Standard", but it does work logically and provides all the functionality you need (I have had some bad experiences in this regard with other software where UI design has been less competent).
The tradeoff is the steeper learning curve, though the manuals are quite OK. The available extensions cover most if not all RPG illustration needs, so you can expand the software as your needs grow. A host of free content (maps and symbols) is available from the Profantasy website.
I guess it mainly depends on the quality you want to get and the time and money you are willing to invest. If all you want is to sit down and quickly create some relatively simple maps, then you are better off with a simpler and cheaper program (or pen and paper...). If, on the other hand, you want to have the ability to create beautiful and detailed maps and are willing to spend some time on it, then it is worthwhile to invest your money and time in CC. It is worth repeating that both investments are required - frequently people who have the money don't have the time, and vice versa :-(. If you e.g. wanted to create maps for illustrating a fantasy novel, CC would really be your only sensible alternative.
By the way, if money and time is no object (I wish...), look into the Vue Esprit + Poser combination for creating illustrations. You can get some pretty decent results without any drawing ability, but buying both the software and the content will cost you an arm and a leg, not to mention a significant chunk of your time.
Disclaimer: I own CC and most of its extensions. I have not tried all possible pieces of mapping software that exist so there might be something better out there but I seriously doubt it. I am not in any way affiliated with Profantasy, e-on software or Curious Labs.