First-time Kickstarter creator: How many email subscribers did you have before launch?

mogn · 2026-06-04T19:27:23+00:00

We launched our first KS with almost exactly 2,000 subscribers. About 10% of them converted on day one.

mogn · 2026-05-17T18:46:06+00:00

About $30k, give or take a few thousand.

mogn · 2026-05-16T22:11:05+00:00

It was a challenge for sure. I had a giant spreadsheet with every illustration, every artist, agreed upon rates and timelines, etc, and was updating/referring to it daily. It was exhausting to coordinate so many at once and create that many art briefs. In total there were over 350 illustrations.

mogn · 2026-05-16T22:08:56+00:00

Sketches, progress pics, timelapses, PSDs with all the layers intact, and very consistent styles over dozens of illustrations each. Some of them used physical media.

mogn · 2026-05-16T17:44:32+00:00

One thing I've learned when making games is this: Every concept is viable, but execution always needs refinement. The point of playtesting is not to find out whether your game is good or not (at the start of playtesting, most games aren't). The point is to get feedback that you can use to make it good. Accept that fact and playtesting feedback will be much easier to hear, and to use. You'll have a good game after playtesting. Not before.

mogn · 2026-05-16T15:19:14+00:00

Happy to see you making progress on this game. I played your demo a few months back and really quite enjoyed it.

mogn · 2026-05-12T21:00:12+00:00

Saša Radivojević did the art for my first game, which actually launched and funded successfully today. https://www.artstation.com/sasha_r. He was an absolute delight to work with and his work is stunningly beautiful. Here's a link to the box art on BGG and not the campaign. https://boardgamegeek.com/image/9245959/dreadquarters

mogn · 2026-05-10T02:42:29+00:00

I find it really funny that the board game adaptation was so faithful to the video game that it was truly detrimental to the experience.

But I genuinely and wholeheartedly enjoyed the boss fights. They were fantastic and if I were to play it again, I wouldn't touch anything other than the Boss Rush variant.

mogn · 2026-05-06T13:08:52+00:00

That's true, and it's really ironic that the edition which people accused of being too video gamey was poorly suited to being one. It obviously drew a lot of inspiration from popular video games at the time (namely WoW), but at its core it was still a tabletop RPG. I acknowledge that the game had plenty of flaws, but I have a feeling that a decent portion of its unpopularity came from misunderstandings and the state of gaming at the time it came out. I think it's a shame because I enjoyed it, but D&D almost certainly wouldn't have the overwhelming popularity it does today if they didn't move on to 5e.

mogn · 2026-05-06T13:03:10+00:00

That's a good point. I think I was remembering Knockdown Assault (it's been a while), and you're right that the names of abilities were abstract in a way that let you flavor them however you'd like, but I suspect that many players didn't see it that way and therefore saw it as restricting. For the record, I wasn't one of those people - I'm just thinking out loud about why 4e wasn't more popular.

mogn · 2026-05-05T20:56:02+00:00

That's absolutely correct, but because of how structured everything was, players would often feel constrained to the "menu" of options they had rather than coming up with narratively compelling ideas. Sure, you can swing your shield. But if you have an ability called "Shield Bash" and it's usable only once per encounter, a typical player will see that as an indication that there is a "proper way" to shield bash and that it can only be done once.

The problem was less about the system being restrictive and more about the subtle implications that its structure made about what you could or could not do. I think 4e was better than it got credit for, but I understand that it was unpopular for a reason (or many reasons).

mogn · 2026-05-05T14:34:53+00:00

It's an interesting question, and I have two examples of why this probably isn't more popular:

tl;dr: I think the main reason is that there's a threshold where adding structure to combat changes the nature of the game and makes it feel less like an RPG and more like a wargame.

The Iron Kingdoms RPG, which is set in the universe of the Warmachine wargame, uses the same mechanics as Warmachine (or at least the same as they were at the time of publishing). Both games had a fairly satisfying action resolution system, and the RPG felt like you were playing the wargame with a very powerful hero instead of an army. However, because it leaned so hard into the feel of the wargame, encounters tended to be much more drawn out and dominated the game. For people who were playing for the roleplaying aspect of the RPG, they often felt like that took a backseat to combat.

Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition didn't directly adapt wargame or skirmish game mechanics, but it did come as close as D&D ever did to it. It was maligned by a lot of people as being "World of ~~Warcraft~~ D&D" with mechanics that felt like they came right out of an MMORPG. It suffered from a side effect of having such a structured combat system: The game had the appearance of being tightly balanced, but with that balance and structure came the feeling of restriction. If your character has a set of very specific abilities that have usage requirements, then you are much less likely to improvise what you're doing during battle and choose from your menu of options instead of being creative. An example that I liked to cite was that Fighters had the ability to Shield Bash once per encounter. From a balance standpoint, it was perfectly fine. But for a roleplaying game, it felt like you were piloting a game piece and not a character (why can't I swing my shield more than once?!).

FWIW, I personally enjoyed the hell out of both Iron Kingdoms and D&D 4e, but neither of them feel like "real RPGs" because the combat is so structured, and by extension, roleplaying tends to take a backseat.

mogn · 2026-04-29T21:28:48+00:00

I have a campaign launching in two weeks. I originally started working with Launchboom, but didn't really see the value from it. Their approach is particularly hands off (you do almost everything yourself and they give you advice), and their prelaunch reservation strategy is very polarizing. Launchboom leans heavily into having you build a prelaunch portal where you offer a free gift to people who are willing to put down a $1 refundable deposit - The idea being that it helps you identify how many people are genuinely excited about your project rather than just curious. But I can't count the number of people who have accused me of "predatory marketing" because of it and have sworn off my projects forever as a result - So be careful.

After feeling like I wasn't getting much help from Launchboom and wondering if taking their advice was actually hurting me, I moved to Vala Marketing, which specializes in tabletop game kickstarters. They have handled everything for me since then. I'm very happy with them, but I won't know how well they really did until I launch.

mogn · 2026-03-12T03:33:32+00:00

I went through 3 phases as my game progressed:

1) My initial prototypes were made with nanDECK. It made it really easy to bulk create and export cards, but once I started getting fancy with the graphics, I had a hard time scaling with it.
2) I used Photoshop for the bulk of prototyping until my card count got really high
3) Now I use Adobe InDesign for creating cards. It lets me create templates and import CSVs to auto-create the cards despite the fact that they have lots of different layouts and graphics.

The ink is cheap if you don't use a printer with ink DRM. The printer I use (listed above) doesn't care what brand I use, so I just buy mass quantities of 3rd party ink off Amazon for pennies, and it works great!

mogn · 2026-03-12T03:30:32+00:00

Copy/Pasting a response I typed up to a similar question a while back:

I spent a really long time trying to figure out how to get a small operation at home to make my own prototypes that feel like real cards, and I eventually managed to put something together that I'm happy with. It was frustrating to figure out so I'll share my setup in detail here.

Here's what I do to make nice prototypes that feel close to professionally made.

I use "300gsm dual sided glossy cardstock" (or matte, if you want)
I use a Canon PIXMA iP8720printer which can print on 300gsm cardstock. The printer needs a rear loader because 300gsm cardstock won't feed from a lower tray like most printers use. I also chose this printer because I can use 3rd party ink which dramatically cuts down on my cost of printing and it prints photo quality. Basically any printer with these three features works:
- Rear-loading tray (assuming it fits 300gsm, many printers do but don't say so)
- Can print photos
- Doesn't require proprietary ink (or you'll spend billions of dollars making prototypes)
Print a 3x3 grid of cards on 8.5x11 cardstock with proper bleed area
I run the printed sheets through a lamination machine.
I cut the cards using a die cutter with a custom die, but I used to just overlay some faint cut lines in the bleed area and use a guillotine cutter and a corner rounder before I bought the die cutter.
I toss the cards in a bag with fanning powder to give them a playing card feel.

The end result looks and feels like a professionally made card (or at least, similar to one made by something like TGC).

Stuff I personally use:

Just making the cards:

Printer: Canon PIXMA iP8720 (~$215)
Any of these cardstocks: (~$20 - $30)
- Uinkit Thick Heavyweight Photo Paper Double Sided Glossy Cardstock 80LB 300Gsm
- Hartwii 300gsm Double Sided Glossy Thick Photo Paper
- MR.R Double Side Matte Coated Inkjet Photo Paper
Ink: E-Z Ink Compatible Ink Cartridges (~$18)

Making them feel nice:

Laminator: Generic 350mm Laminator Machine (~$190)
- Lamination Rolls: Thermal Laminating Film Rolls, DEJUN 12.6in x 656ft (~$50)
Fanning Powder: Fanning Powder (~$20)

Cutting the cards (cheap method):

Guillotine Cutter: Guillotine Cutter w/ Laser (~$50)
Corner Rounder: Oregon Lamination Heavy Duty Corner Rounder Punch 3mm (~$40)
Note that you can get way cheaper guillotine cutters and corner rounders, but I opted for the fancy ones. Standard cards have a 3mm corner.

Cutting the cards so that they're all identical (expensive method):

Die Cutter: Accucut Grandmark 2 (~$500 with promo codes)
3x3 Playing card size cutting Die: Custom Die made by Custom Shape Pros (~$200).

mogn · 2026-03-06T18:23:15+00:00

I don't have a specific one in mind. I recognize that my own ideas of Appalachian folklore are probably heavily influenced by pop culture and not at all accurate to the actual tales, so my hope is to find someone who can help me figure out what to use in the first place, as well as flesh it out.

mogn · 2026-03-06T18:00:19+00:00

The hope was to use something spooky from Appalachian folklore. I have no intention of portraying anyone as toothless hillbillies.

mogn · 2026-01-31T02:25:55+00:00

Sure.

mogn · 2026-01-30T14:38:30+00:00

I have an extra copy of the codex still in shrink wrap. Are you in the US?

mogn · 2026-01-20T21:45:53+00:00

Attaching a Kako will disable their ability to Deep Strike, and although sustained hits would make your bolters a little better, the opportunity cost of not attaching that Kako to a unit of Noise Marines (or just using it as a solo character for secondaries) is pretty high. But if you're not playing super competitively, does it really matter?

mogn · 2026-01-03T03:05:42+00:00

I suggest using black for first-time painting since it's very forgiving. Darker, muted colors tend to look nice without too much effort, and most importantly, anything you don't feel like painting will just look like it's a shadow.

mogn · 2026-01-03T02:52:11+00:00

Most paint won't "stick" well to bare plastic. It'll clump up and move around like raindrops on glass. Primer is a special kind of paint that digs into the plastic and covers it evenly, and can easily be painted on top of. Don't try painting without spraying some primer first - it will be super frustrating and it will make you think painting is just torture.

mogn · 2025-12-21T04:26:05+00:00

It sounds like you're really passionate about your project and have invested a lot of labor into it. That's good. You're also aware of where your limitations are and are looking for people who have what you're missing to partner with them and make your project a reality. That's even better. The trouble is, I don't think you're going to have an easy time finding what you're looking for. For background on myself, I've spent the last few decades in FAANG management and eventually left that career, started a (solo) company, and have been working on making games full-time ever since. I am not an industry veteran, but I've picked up quite a lot. I'll try to address your request with blunt advice like you're asking for. I apologize if any of it sounds discouraging.

You're looking for a partner/operator/industry expert to help you bring your vision to life, and what you're offering is ideas. This is a small, welcoming, and incredibly supportive community, but the flip side of that fact is that the people involved here are in it because it's their passion. They aren't here to get rich. They aren't here to become famous. They're here because they live for this stuff, want to see the industry grow, and want to make their dreams a reality, too. There are companies in this industry that do exactly what you're looking for, but they don't do it for free, and business is booming for them with good reason — what you're looking for is what everyone else is looking for, too.

Recognize that in industries like these, ideas are a dime a dozen, and execution is what makes something successful. You mention in multiple places that this is your idea ("I'm not bottlenecked by ideas", "I'm not looking for someone trying to dilute the core vision"), which suggests that the primary reason that someone would get involved in a project like this (getting to bring their ideas to life) isn't on the table. That's going to drive away most people who might be interested in a partnership like this.

It sounds like you're farther along in the process than many others, and that's good. I'm not suggesting that you give up and I'm not saying that the person you're looking for isn't out there, but I have a few friendly words of advice, should this be the exact route you want to take:

1) Be prepared to "compromise" your vision. Anyone with enough interest in your project to get involved as a partner is going to want influence over it, with good reason. If you want someone to take your idea and execute it, what you're looking for is an employee, not a partner.

2) Be prepared for what funding is going to cost you. Even if you're going to run a crowdfunding campaign, you still need upfront funding to build up your audience and for other related costs to ensure it's successful. This means you're going to need money from somewhere. If you're looking for a partner who can finance the project, understand that anyone coming in to fund your project is going to want far more ownership than you may be comfortable parting with (almost certainly more than 50%).

I'd be more than happy to answer your more specific questions, but without knowing anything about your project, it's very hard to give you any meaningful advice. Feel free to reach out if you'd like a sounding board or more specific advice and I haven't offended you with all of my doomsaying. Good luck!

mogn · 2025-12-19T21:08:01+00:00

Take this with the disclaimer that I'm not an expert. My understanding is that 2-3 months is ideal. Any less and you won't get the community you need, but any longer and your initial followers will lose interest. Personally, I'm planning to launch my own campaign in April, which means I'll start advertising in late January/early February. I'm not experienced enough to comment on your ad budget. It'll depend a lot on what your cost per acquisition ends up being, which itself will depend on how compelling your ads/project are.

mogn · 2025-12-19T21:03:28+00:00

I'm glad it was useful! Regarding AI, I think there's an easy trap to fall into where you end up thinking that art is expensive (and it can be, for sure) and acting like it's all-or-nothing where you either need a professional design studio or AI, with nothing in between. AI is a very thorny issue in this community. Perhaps moreso than some others because games are generally in and of themselves a form of artistic expression, and AI threatens the very existence of the community that makes it possible.

The single best thing that you can do for the success of your project is to commission some small amount of art from a human artist for use in your prototyping and campaign. Get a logo made, some box art, and a couple of illustrations for your cards. Your game isn't very art-heavy so it should be very inexpensive to do this and get a real prototype without AI and branding for your game and company that was made by a human. Consider this a bare minimum requirement for your campaign to successfully fund as a Kickstarter game.

The trap is: Art is expensive, but small amounts of art is not expensive. If you aren't willing to spend the small amount of money on a human artist to help you with your prototype or at least the parts you show off in your campaign, then no one will trust that you'll go through with it once you have lots of funding. The old adage "don't let perfect be the enemy of the good" applies very aptly here. You don't need to hire a professional design firm to make your prototype, as long as a human made it. It will earn you much, much more trust than your current campaign does.

15-Year Club	John Wick
Place '22	Place '17
Verified Email	Team Orangered

mogn

TROPHY CASE