Welcome to our final article of 2011, my twice-yearly State of the Stew rundown on our stats, milestones, and so forth for the past year. We do one of these in December and one in May (the site’s birthday), and while they don’t make for scintillating read or appeal to everyone, I’m a big believer in marking milestones, I enjoy reading these kinds of posts when other sites run them, and I think they’re useful to the Stew as an entity.
As of today, Gnome Stew has been running for over three-and-a-half years — we launched on May 12, 2008. Today marks our fourth year-end State of the Stew and our third full calendar year of stats.
The Numbers
- 4,030+ registered users, 100% growth (2010: 1,990+, 2009: 1,560+, 2008: 625+)
- 3,940+ RSS and email subscribers, 6% growth (2010: 3,700+, 2009: 2,940+, 2008: 1,230+)
- Nearly 156,000 unique visitors (33% loss) and 314,000 total visits (26% loss) (2010: 233,000 unique, 423,000 total; 2009: 182,000 unique, 345,000 total; 2008: 188,000 unique, 316,000 total)
- …of those 156,000, over 81,000 visited more than once (2010: 193,000 of 233,000; 2009: 164,000 of 182,000; 2008: 128,000 of 188,000)
- Over 583,000 pageviews, 21% loss (2010: 734,000, 2009: 680,000, 2008: 619,000)
- The gnomes have posted about 256 articles (1,075+ total; we posted around 260 in 2010, 300 in 2009, and 260 in 2008)
- …which have attracted more than 3,100 comments (13,900 total; about 3,000 in 2010, 4,800 in 2009, and 3,000 in 2008)
My Take: Ouch
First big year-end losses: This is the first time we’ve ended the year with losses, and they’re telling losses: unique visits, total visits, and pageviews are all down. Those are three huge barometers of a site’s success, and they tell me that we’re doing something wrong — I just don’t know what.
It’s not a drop in articles (256 this year vs. 260 last year) or reader engagement (3,100 comments vs. 3,000) or users (up a staggering 100%), so what is it? One other data point: comment volume went down in 2010 compared to 2009 (by 38%), and stayed flat with that number this year; that tells me that whatever we’re doing wrong, it’s likely that at least some of it began in 2010 and continued into 2011.
Not all bad news: Not everything went down: We doubled the number of registered members (and that’s not artificially raised by obvious spam registrations; I checked), which is fantastic, and the number of subscribers went up slightly. We get some single-visit members, of course: contests attract folks who may never come back, as does the urge to post a single comment and move on; that’s not a bad thing in my book. But even that can’t explain how we doubled our membership while losing so big in visits and views.
A huge archive of GMing material: The Stew remains the second-largest repository of game mastering content online. To the best of my knowledge, Johnn Four’s excellent Roleplaying Tips site (online since 1999) takes the number one spot, and my previous GMing blog, Treasure Tables, lands at number three (with over 750 GMing articles). Despite the terrible stats for this year, that still feels pretty damned good — this site is intended to be a free resource for GMs of all experience levels, and I believe it succeeds well at that.
Milestones
Our milestones in 2011 were actually pretty awesome:
- Gnome Stew won the silver Ennie Award for Best Blog: Thanks to you, our readers, the Stew won our second GenCon EN World RPG Award (ENnie) in 2011. As in 2010, we lost out to an excellent site — this year, it was Critical Hits. This feels just as amazing this year as it did in 2010, and we thank everyone who helped us win.
- We moved to a VPS: As of January 9, 2011, Gnome Stew has been hosted on a virtual private server (VPS), where previously it had been on my shared webhosting account. We made this move because we got so much traffic that it was dragging the site down, and asked readers to help pay for it by using the Amazon and DriveThruRPG links in the sidebar. On both fronts, this move was a huge success: The site runs smoothly, with no performance issues, and the cost — about $400/year — has been covered by Amazon and advertising revenue. Thank you to everyone who has helped out with this!
- Our millionth visitor: 2011 also marked our millionth unique visitor. A million people have read Gnome Stew since its inception — my mind still boggles at that.
- We published our second book: One the heels of our 2010 release, Eureka: 501 Adventure Plots to Inspire Game Masters, we published Masks: 1,000 Memoranble NPCs to Inspire Game Masters in 2011. Publishing books for GMs is part of our ongoing mission to help GMs have more fun at the gaming table, and we appreciate the preorders and subsequent orders that have helped this book gain momentum and sell well. Even after two books, being a publisher and publishing GMing books still doesn’t feel entirely real to me.
Thank You!
Gnome Stew wouldn’t exist without you, our readers. We’d probably still be writing GMing content somewhere — it’s in our blood — but not as regularly, and not with the focus that knowing people will actually read it brings to the table. We write the Stew for you.
Many, many thanks to everyone who has read, commented on, shared, and used Gnome Stew. You are, as you always have been, awesome.
The Elephant in the Room
The thing that’s nice, though sometimes also unpleasant, about numbers is that they don’t lie. I’m not an expert in statistics, or even remotely a math guy, but even I know that a website that sees the dip in visitors and pageviews we saw from from December 2010 to December 2011 is doing something wrong.
In May 2011, I posted site stats for the preceding year and noted that we had losses instead of growth in key areas. We posed an open question to readers then — “What are we doing wrong?” — and the biggest common complaint was that our posting had dropped off; we weren’t hitting every weekday, our target, nearly as often as we needed to be.
We listened to that feedback, generated our ideas for improving the state of the Stew, held conference calls, and believed that we were back in a good groove. Even though we posted the same number of articles in the latter half of 2011 as 2010, they were more regularly spaced and we hit that every-weekday target virtually every week. We also made other improvements behind the scenes.
At this point, I’m honestly at a loss what to do. I love this site, I love writing GMing advice, and I love sharing that advice with our readers. Although I speak only for myself, I know the other gnomes feel the same way — it’s why we’re here and why Gnome Stew exists. We want to keep the Stew vital, keep it growing, and keep helping GMs.
I’m writing this article today, on 12/31; it wasn’t queued up in advance. And honestly, it’s depressing the hell out of me. This wasn’t how I expected to end the year.
We had two killer milestones in 2011, but the site is clearly not as healthy as it needs to be nor on a healthy path — and I don’t know why. If I’m missing writing on the wall, be it subtle or blindingly obvious, please let me know what you think it is. If you’re not comfortable doing that publicly, that’s no problem — just drop me a line (martin gnomestew com).
Thank you again for reading, and I’ll see you in 2012.
I wonder if other RPG sites are seeing similar downturns in readership? Perhaps it’s the slump in the economy, or the lull between editions, or some other natural cycle of RPG conversation.
Personally, I’ve been reading RPG sites and GMing advice for over 10 years, so a lot of stuff isn’t new to me and I just skim over it. My favorite articles are ones that give me a concrete new technique to use in game play, such as these:
http://www.gnomestew.com/tag/prep-lite
http://www.gnomestew.com/gming-advice/improvising-dont-worry-about-beginnings-endings-focus-on-transitions
http://www.gnomestew.com/tools-for-gms/quick-and-dirty-location-template
To me, “concrete technique” is a good middle ground between purely abstract musings (endless GNS debates, anyone?) and overly-specific crunch that has a limited audience.
Interesting feedback. Personally I have found that this year there have been too many “Beginner’s RPG Rules Of The Road” repeats for my taste (though if the readership were there for them I’d shut the **** up and move on).
I found the “What’s in *your* handbag?” articles paled very quickly, more quickly for me than the Gnomes I think.
I stopped reading the “yet more uses for index cards” articles after the second one – the subject really only seemed to require a single article with perhaps a couple of paragraphs from each author.
I *loved* the “useful software” articles, but found they weren’t as detailed as I would have liked.
I dislike listening to long accounts of other people’s games. If the stories are short and not something I’ve heard before, I’m up for them, but “how my rogue beat the pit trap in only six rolls” has been done to death. Would that the rogue had been.
What I’d like to see is some articles on specific mechanics issues with published game systems. Which feats never get used and can safely be torn out of the book? Does the Savage Worlds exploding dice rule favor D4’s in everything? Should a limit be imposed on how much exploding can happen? What in Dresden’s name does “the fate point economy” actually mean, and if it means what I think it does, how do you prevent rampant inflation?
I’d like to see more articles along the lines of “this is what happened, this is how it could have been better”, but with a more neutral slant to them – the assumption in the articles is that the GM is always somehow putting one over the players and that this is the thing that needs to be fixed. While there is certainly an audience for those kinds of articles, I am well past that stage and I’d like to think most of those who participate in the comments are too. Sometimes the game system is at fault, sometimes (gasp) the players. Actual examples of play with explicit reference to the system used would be required.
And labeling articles with the system they are primarily discussing would be good too.
And more on how to enjoy playing RPGs without getting in everyone’s face from a player perspective. GS is GM-advice heavy and there are on average four times as many people on the other side of the screen who may be clueless as to their annoying munchkinism or need advice on how to break out of D&D Party Thinking.
Wow, I’m needy.
The problem is as I mentioned in my earlier post (#24)…
You guys have put faith in other blogs to deliver meatier content, while you all have stayed faithful to the more system-neutral meta slant. It would be fine if the other blogs were delivering on their end with the meat, but they are not doing it. Therefore, that need is not being filled and readers are giving up on the blogs.
That’s my take anyhow. I think its dead on the money. The approach that has been used requires balance from the others, but its not there. So, the overall content from the blogs is suffering.
Reading a game session recap on another blog seemed like at least a once a week thing. Now, it seems more like once every 3 months or longer. That certainly isn’t GS’s problem, but it hurts anyhow, I’m sure.
I want to echo some points, and make a few of my own. The only reason I echo points is so that you know that there are more than one reader who feels this way. I am a daily reader and infrequent poster.
Echo number one: Less advertising for the books. I loved Eureka, one of the best books for GMing I’ve ever had, but Masks? A system neutral NPC is not very useful to me. There is an ad for it at the bottom of every article.
Echo Number two: I dislike listening to long accounts of other people’s games. I own a FLGS, and have to hear “Gamer War Stories” all night. I will not read them online.
And my point is about reader engagement. This is going to be very candid, so please understand that I come from a position of respect. I love this site, and appreciate all the work you do, and think the accolades you’ve earned are well deserved. BUT: Sometimes, especially in responses to comments, you guys come off as a little condescending. I am an intelligent adult, and just because I disagree with you, even in a comment, doesn’t mean one or the other is wrong. But many times you are dismissive of other opinions. That may be why your “fix” after the last survey didn’t take. If you only incorporated the ideas you wanted to, and dismissed the other ones, you may have found your fix was less than you hoped.
So, my advice is this: You cannot serve two masters.
If you want to be publishers of GMing book, good for you. Do that. But understand that where your love goes, so goes your creativity, and with it, your success. You books have been successful because they show the level of craft and enthusiasm the blog used to have. If you want the blog to be successful, make it your focus again, pour your love into that. Either one you Gnomes do, either Books or Blog, you will be successful, as you are all very talented. But I don’t think you can pull off both.
@Connallmac – We’ve talked about theme weeks/etc., and I have mixed feelings about it (as do other gnomes). On the one hand, themes are a fun way to unify disparate voices and tackle a subject some of us might not tackle on our own, but on the other end they put up a potential roadblock for readers who don’t enjoy that theme.
It also runs counter to my general approach of not telling anyone what to write. As long as it’s system-neutral and goes up twice a month, the gnomes can write whatever they want. Which, in itself, can be a two-edged sword! It’s a tough one.
On sandboxes, we definitely have room to explore that topic. Have you seen Walt’s latest take on it, though? Lots of good advice in there:
http://www.gnomestew.com/gming-advice/dynamic-sandboxes
@Volcarthe – We’re figuring out how to use G+ better. I’ve built switching from my account to the GS page into my routine now, but I don’t always have Gnome Stew-y things to say.
@Withered – Several of us are props and/or office supply/widget whores, so those types of articles crop up pretty regularly.
So far, we’ve only had one person express an interest in writing a guest article, and they haven’t submitted their pitch yet. I’d love to hear from folks who want to take a stab at this!
@bighi – We’re understanding it as “less” not “none.” (I say we because this is a big topic on our internal mailing list right now.) Good meta stuff is useful, and it’s fun to write; I won’t stop writing it, but I will be changing my personal mix of meat/meta.
@lomythica – I’m starting to see potential in structure, and I like the idea of a once-a-week something. The flipside, at least for me, is that nothing kills my enthusiasm for something I do for fun — which Gnome Stew is, albeit fun taken seriously — than having assignments.
@joltblaster – That’s a great approach to promotion that I wish I’d thought of! I also like your suggestion about examining or writing about specific games in a way that stays true to the Stew’s system-neutral mission. I think Scott’s article today does a great job of that.
http://www.gnomestew.com/gming-advice/situation-building-in-a-wicked-age
@rabalias – To reiterate, we don’t have a stake in where you read the Stew, as long as it’s not on some blog scraping our feed just to sell ads. We want you to read it where it’s convenient for you, and we appreciate every single reader.
Re: meat (eww), what’s on the table isn’t us becoming a blog that posts five new D&D monsters a week. But a post featuring five new system-neutral monsters usable with a range of games? That sounds like meat to me. Maybe not the sort of meat you personally prefer (though it’s different than what you commented about, I believe), but the type that may please other folks.
@Toldain – Speaking as a longtime blogger, it’s easy to fall into a groove where I’m not being terribly personal unintentionally. I love writing about GMing from a personal place in a way that makes my advice (hopefully) more broadly useful, but it’s easy to fall out of. Your advice is spot-on for me, though. I’ve been trying to post more from the gut and think less — like my responses here, which have been one take with no editing, sometimes probably TMI or otherwise misfiring, but coming straight from the heart and gut.
Controversy’s a tricky one. I don’t want the Stew to be known as a blog that posts controversial stuff just to get hits, though I don’t mind if the gnomes post controversial stuff that’s consistent with our mission. Not being bland, though? That’s a point well-taken!
@Maarick – How-tos can be time-consuming to write, but they’re also fun — and what you and, I believe, a lot of other readers who’ve taken the comments would like to see more of.
I’ve got one how-to in the queue and another one in drafts, and I may actually start a series that’s all how-tos. I need to see how many more ideas are in the wings before I pull that trigger, though.
Merging some feedback here, we could do a regular feature like How-To Thursdays, with different gnomes in the hotseat. I’m going to go propose that behind the scenes.
@Sarlax – You’re absolutely right about part of our thing being to help GMs think proactively about what they do and how they do it.
Talking about systems while staying system-neutral is a funny line to walk, but it fits our mandate — and we’ve done it from the start: Troy’s D&D Burgoo articles are always about D&D, but come from a place that invites non-D&D-players to the table as well. We could definitely do more of this.
@Sektor – I’m blown away by the interest readers are taking in this thread, and I appreciate every iota of feedback whether it’s easy or hard to hear and whether I agree with it or not. This thread warms my heart every time I come back to it.
@77IM – Ooh, “concrete techniques” is a FANTASTIC descriptor. And something I think most folks looking for more meat here would enjoy. Thanks for coining the phrase!
@Roxysteve – What did you like? 😉
I think actual play is a great avenue to explore. I’ve never done a detailed AP article, and I can’t think of too many instances where AP has come up in others’ articles here. That’s one to mull over!
Re: Providing player advice, this is a GMing advice site, not a general RPG blog. While non-GMs read the Stew, and while we may sometimes post player-oriented pieces, the Stew is and always has been a GMing resource for GMs.
@Tiorn – I don’t know that we’ve been putting faith in other blogs to deliver meatier content — we generally don’t think too much about what other blogs are posting. We DO put faith in other blogs providing game-specific crunch; that’s not something we want to do here.
But your overall point is fascinating. As much as I hate the word blogosphere, there is an ecosystem at work here and from your comments and some others it seems like the Stew is being impacted by what other RPG blogs are doing — or not doing. I’m going to have to let that one simmer for a little bit and see what bubbles up.
@Trace – I apologize if you’ve ever felt condescended to; no reader should feel like we’re talking down to, or looking down on, them. If you do feel that way, please speak up in a respectful way. We pride ourselves on being mature and keeping the signal:noise ratio here, as well as the civility level, high.
I do think a better balance could be struck between blogging and writing books, but I disagree that we can’t do both. That’s partly because after the initial design and writing phase of our last two books, the majority of the gnomes haven’t been working on the book, just those with additional roles. And it’s partly because there are lots of people out there doing a fabulous job at two things, I see no reason why we can’t be among them.
That said, again, a better balance while we’re in the thick of the next big book is definitely something we should aim for. I’ll give some thought to how to achieve that.
@Martin Ralya – I’m sorry, Martin, I thought it would be obvious – I liked everything I didn’t mention disliking.
GM Blog: Well, there’s your problem. GMs either grow or they don’t. A growing GM can only read the same “beginner” advice so many times before they stop reading at all. After all, there are only so many ways of saying “don’t phone it in”. Bo)
You asked what could be done to change the blog. In talking about player-oriented articles I was pointing out that if your current audience isn’t doing it for you (and you say it isn’t), maybe your blog needs to widen its appeal. Not only that, I would read player-oriented advice because although I reckon I’m a pretty good GM with a style that works well (mostly), I think I could be a much better player and welcome ideas on that front.
I’m also of the opinion that publishing the books has not sapped the creativity of the team, and think the books serve a great editorial purpose, stimulating thought and ideas. Some of the best articles came during and right after the books were put out.
The quality of writing isn’t dropping, but the ideas behind a couple of recent articles have been weaker than usual as can be seen from the number of commentators responding to them (though that is a pretty broad brush to draw across a complex analytical problem and I do not mean to insult anyone at GS). I put this down to a need for a period of reflection from the vantage of a canvas recliner set down on a beach where the seasons are different than the one outside the window right now, while being lulled by the sound of blue water breakers and being refreshed by the consumption of delicious beverages.
@Martin Ralya –
Well, obviously I can only speak for myself :o)
Though, reflecting on it, all the advic you get here will be from people who are not only reading the Stew but also reading the comments and clicking through with their own views. What you really need is the views of people who used to do those things but aren’t anymore…
Stupid emoticons. That should have been a 🙂
@Roxysteve – “GMs either grow or they don’t. A growing GM can only read the same “beginner†advice so many times before they stop reading at all.”
Sure, but there are new GMs coming to the hobby all the time, and players considering GMing for the first time. If our audience never changed, then there’d be no need for more articles aimed at beginners — but our audience does change.
I second the need for a Caribbean vacation, though. That sounds fantastic! Maybe some sort of gnome-themed cruise? 😉
@rabalias – True enough. I don’t have a channel to reach folks who don’t engage with the site anymore, though. The best I can do is put the word out and see what happens.