Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

PaizoCon 2014!

4.0: PAIZO IS STILL UNDECIDED


D&D 4th Edition (and Beyond)

1,101 to 1,150 of 1,665 << first < prev | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
DMcCoy1693 wrote:
James Todd wrote:
and then finding that they are incomplete unless I subscribe to an online service.

My understanding is is that it won't be "incomplete" but those that are online get certain content not available in the books, in the same way that Dragon has extra mystery trees for the Shadowcaster, additional vestigates for the binder, additional PrCs, etc.

Of course, that may change as time goes on.

I understand that, but I also believe that based upon what appears to be their intense desire to hit us for cash at every turn (including no clear and absolute dismissal of the rumor about collectible vmini's! Yick), they will begin to make the books far less complete (evidence: $20 price tag on a hardcover book of hints on how to survive their own modules that they sell)....so yes, the stuff online will be 'extra', but the stuff in the base product - purchased at the old 30-40 prices, will be diminished to allow them to supply the web site without paying for truly additional material. Along the same lines of downloadable maps and content for videogames priced at a meager $10 that gets miraculously released a few hours after the base game hits stores for $60.

Andoran

I just wanted to agree with you.

While the idea of 'extra content' isn't hard to accept, the idea that they'll really try to make the product complete in the long run is hard to accept. Let's use monsters as an example.

In the first monster manual they'll release there will be iconic monsters missing. We know this to be true. Now, they have a few choices about what to do with those monsters. They might very well release some of them on 'Dragon Online'. If they do so, will they also include it in the next monster manual? I don't think they will. If they begin releasing everything in the 'magazine' in book form, there won't be any 'extra content' for the subscribers. They'll start waiting until it comes out in the book. So, WotC will want to make sure that at least some of the content that's released online is never released in a book.

Now, is that content truly extra? The fact that it isn't released in book form seems to be due only to the fact that they want to be able to release it online. If I'm missing out on iconic monsters to provide that 'extra content' I don't think that is particularly fair.

So, does anyone really trust WotC to actually produce additional material on a regular basis to support books that people have already bought? I think they've made it pretty clear that once you've given them your money you're not much of a consideration.


Right now, I'm running a Savage Tide campaign. My plan is to hopefully finish that AP - which will take roughly two years, by my calculations - and by that time everyone will have enough of a solidified opinion on 4E. If it turns out to be a disaster, everyone will most likely stick with 3.5, but after Savage Tide I plan to run my own homebrew campaign.

I'll continue to purchase Paizo products regardless of edition. However if 4E proves to be an improvement mechanically from 3.5, I think Paizo should adopt it.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Failed Saving Throw wrote:

...

I'll continue to purchase Paizo products regardless of edition. However if 4E proves to be an improvement mechanically from 3.5, I think Paizo should adopt it.

Of course, assuming they could do it without harming the customer, there is also a train of thought that says that Paizo should stick with 3.5 even if 4E is a moderate success, if only A) to show that a company which produces good products can survive without the overblown WOTC, to which too much power has been given, B) to provide a series of products using 3.5 that will allow other small companies to build upon without moving to 4E, and C) to basically just stick it to WOTC.

While C sounds petty, it might make them a bit more considerate when dealing with their trade partners.


3.5 /3.75 for me and my group. We are to old to buy those new fandangled books.

I think 3.5 will live on for a long long time myself. Look around Gen Con at the D&D tables. Do you see all 20 (or younger) something gamers or an older crowd?


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Failed Saving Throw wrote:
However if 4E proves to be an improvement mechanically from 3.5, I think Paizo should adopt it.

I think 4E will probably be improved mechanically, because if it's not, then 4E will be a complete disaster.*

*Of course, I think it will be a disaster anyway, but then, I say this in every post to be consistent. ;)


I also agree it will be mechanically better in ways. I also think that many of the new mechanics (abilities per encounter/day) will have balance issues for many people. What one guy thinks is great another will believe its terrible. I think it will be kinda a no-win either way.

As far as fluff.....to the new player....great stuff.....to the old player.....it will get a grade of an "F". For me....regardless of mechanics it's already failed. Why...spent my money...been there done that....they say 3.5 isn't compatible....no gnomes....new races....changed paladin....no frost giant....blah, blah, blah....etc. etc. etc. etc.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Something to ponder:

This was commentary from Ryan Dancey in 2006:

Ryan Dancey wrote:

With so much of the 30+ year legacy D&D game in the SRD, I believe it is impossible to ever make a game that would be accepted by the fans as "D&D" without it being possible to alter whatever is necessary to make the Open Game version of D&D compatible with whatever product is being currently sold as "D&D" by WotC. A game divergent enough to break that legacy with the SRD is simply not going to be tolerable to anyone vested in the D&D player network. Such a radical break would almost certainly result in a 3rd party version of the game, published under a new brand name, becoming the de-facto inheritor of the D&D player network externality, coming into direct competition with whatever faux "D&D" product is being marketed, and probably crushing it.

Link is here for the curious:

Dancey Commentary


Pathfinder Modules Subscriber

I expect ol' Ryan was being a bit optimistic there. Or possibly talking out of his hat. ;)

-The Gneech

Paizo Employee Publisher, Chief Creative Officer

I think leaving the door open for someone to publish a "more D&D" version of D&D called something else was part of Ryan's secret plan all along.

We'll see if it works, I guess.


Erik Mona wrote:

I think leaving the door open for someone to publish a "more D&D" version of D&D called something else was part of Ryan's secret plan all along.

We'll see if it works, I guess.

I'm not understanding you too well. Does it mean that Paizo will try it? Have you finally seen the new rules?

Not that I think that you will be announcing that decision this early. But I think that Paizo staying 3.5 will mean that some very influential company doesn't consider 4e D&D anymore. And that counts mightily because in my mind Paizo have done a superb job during 3e and their production values are some of the best of the industry. I think that the change to the 4e core rulebooks to be more magazine-like has a lot to do with the look and feel of Dungeon and Dragon during the last years.

Osirion Contributor

Erik Mona wrote:

I think leaving the door open for someone to publish a "more D&D" version of D&D called something else was part of Ryan's secret plan all along.

Gosh I doubt it. Unless he thought -he- might do it, and now it's not worth his time.

But heck, if you build it, I'll certainly play it.And buy it, which is more important.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Erik Mona wrote:

I think leaving the door open for someone to publish a "more D&D" version of D&D called something else was part of Ryan's secret plan all along.

We'll see if it works, I guess.

Interesting... does Erik mean we'll see if someone steps through the door and gives it a shot? Or does he mean we'll see if Paizo can succeed when they step through the door?


I'm about 100% sure he meant the former not the latter.

Eric Tillemans wrote:
Erik Mona wrote:

I think leaving the door open for someone to publish a "more D&D" version of D&D called something else was part of Ryan's secret plan all along.

We'll see if it works, I guess.

Interesting... does Erik mean we'll see if someone steps through the door and gives it a shot? Or does he mean we'll see if Paizo can succeed when they step through the door?

Cheliax

Yeah, Eric don't leave us hanging. Have you gotten the new rules, or have you decided to stick with 3.5? Perhaps you are leaning towards a 3.75ish project?

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Paizo is still undecided. Paizo is also still lacking rules and a copy of the OGL. And Paizo is also about to start working on our third Pathfinder Adventure path.


Vic Wertz wrote:
Paizo is still undecided. Paizo is also still lacking rules and a copy of the OGL. And Paizo is also about to start working on our third Pathfinder Adventure path.

<Tries not to sound too happy as metaphorically throws hat in air and shouts 'wa-hooo!'>


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Charles Evans 25 wrote:
Vic Wertz wrote:
Paizo is still undecided. Paizo is also still lacking rules and a copy of the OGL. And Paizo is also about to start working on our third Pathfinder Adventure path.

<Tries not to sound too happy as metaphorically throws hat in air and shouts 'wa-hooo!'>

Wa-hoo! Another cool Adventure Path from Paizo that uses Eric's RPG Rules of choice.


I still think the sensible business decision is not "whether" but "when". Supporting 4e should be a foregone conclusion, but I don't see the issue being time critical. If WotC doesn't get Paizo the new rules in time for the new core book release, so what? Finish up whatever adventure path you're working on and shoot for 4e support on the next one.

Seriously, I don't see any reason why this is a decision that needs to be made now or never. Just wait for a time when you will be able to support 4e to a level you find up to your standards. Then, go gangbusters and offer updates for previously-released product (if possible).

Qadira

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber

By reading the sheer number of responses with the attitude of stick with 3.5 or 3.75 as it were, it seems to me that Paizo has an opportunity to become the new TSR (of old) of the gaming industry. If Paizo can legally become the owner of whatever they decide to call D&D 3.75 with the strong backing they have from us consumer/players, I just don't see how they could lose.

I think this sounds like an incredible, one a lifetime opportunity for Paizo to take the reigns and become the 'go to' company for fantasy gaming.

I know I'll be there rooting them on and buying their products for the foreseeable future.

Wayne


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
buzz wrote:

I still think the sensible business decision is not "whether" but "when". Supporting 4e should be a foregone conclusion, but I don't see the issue being time critical. If WotC doesn't get Paizo the new rules in time for the new core book release, so what? Finish up whatever adventure path you're working on and shoot for 4e support on the next one.

Chances are that this is exactly what will happen.

(But, being one staying with 3.5, I can dream, eh?)

And as for Dancey, putting a big part of D&D in the public domain will allow for anyone to create their interpretation of what D&D should be, and that's pretty cool IMO.


I don't think a lot of you have a sense of just how much work would be involved in Paizo developing and releasing a "3.75" of dnd, especially in any ammount of time so that it would be available within a year or two of 4E. I'm sure keeping up Pathfinder and the gamemastery stuff is already keeping paizo fully busy. If another game company decided to do a 3.75 and Paizo thought it was superior to 4E and wouldn't hurt their sales I could see them doing it, but I don't see Paizo taking up the helm of developing such a system.


P.H. Dungeon wrote:
I don't think a lot of you have a sense of just how much work would be involved in Paizo developing and releasing a "3.75" of dnd, especially in any ammount of time so that it would be available within a year or two of 4E. I'm sure keeping up Pathfinder and the gamemastery stuff is already keeping paizo fully busy. If another game company decided to do a 3.75 and Paizo thought it was superior to 4E and wouldn't hurt their sales I could see them doing it, but I don't see Paizo taking up the helm of developing such a system.

Someone correct me if Im wrong. But I always thought the concept of 3.75 is not this whole new system.

3.75, if it were invented, would just be the 3.5 PHB reissued by another publisher that isnt WotC with little to no changes to the SRD.

What little changes would be in there would just be some "tweaks" here and there to fix the parts of the rules that 3rd edition players feel need fixing.
It really wouldnt be that different from 3.5 at all. Its not this new system you are thinking it is.

The whole point of 3.75 (I think) is so 3rd edition PHBs would still be printed and sold somewhere...Not to create a new system.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jason Grubiak wrote:

Someone correct me if Im wrong. But I always thought the concept of 3.75 is not this whole new system.

3.75, if it were invented, would just be the 3.5 PHB reissued by another publisher that isnt WotC with little to no changes to the SRD.

What little changes would be in there would just be some "tweaks" here and there to fix the parts of the rules that 3rd edition players feel need fixing.
It really wouldnt be that different from 3.5 at all. Its not this new system you are thinking it is.

The whole point of 3.75 (I think) is so 3rd edition PHBs would still be printed and sold somewhere...Not to create a new system.

This is how I understand it as well.


Jason Grubiak wrote:
3.75, if it were invented, would just be the 3.5 PHB reissued by another publisher that isnt WotC with little to no changes to the SRD. What little changes would be in there would just be some "tweaks" here and there to fix the parts of the rules that 3rd edition players feel need fixing. It really wouldnt be that different from 3.5 at all. Its not this new system you are thinking it is. The whole point of 3.75 (I think) is so 3rd edition PHBs would still be printed and sold somewhere...Not to create a new system.

I think you are correct. (Plus it'll have cool Pathfinder and GameMastery graphics and iconics, right?)

And I am glad to hear that it looks like the 3rd Pathfinder Adventure Path will turn out to be v3.5. I'm waiting for the Second Darkness with anticipation! (like the old ketchup advertisements)


Well if its just a few little tweaks you might as well stick with 3.5. However even if you do only do a few tweaks, you will still presumably need to comission new art work, rethink your layout and presentation to give it a new look, spend time play testing changes. You also need to consider whether you just release a new phb or do you release a whole new MM and DMG to go with it. The whole 3.75 doesn't make much sense to me.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
P.H. Dungeon wrote:

Well if its just a few little tweaks you might as well stick with 3.5. However even if you do only do a few tweaks, you will still presumably need to comission new art work, rethink your layout and presentation to give it a new look, spend time play testing changes. You also need to consider whether you just release a new phb or do you release a whole new MM and DMG to go with it. The whole 3.75 doesn't make much sense to me.

The point of it is to have a game "in print" so that when people buy Pathfinder adventures they can be referred to a rulebook they can still acquire. 3.5 Player's Handbooks are about to disappear from store shelves.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
P.H. Dungeon wrote:

Well if its just a few little tweaks you might as well stick with 3.5. However even if you do only do a few tweaks, you will still presumably need to comission new art work, rethink your layout and presentation to give it a new look, spend time play testing changes. You also need to consider whether you just release a new phb or do you release a whole new MM and DMG to go with it. The whole 3.75 doesn't make much sense to me.

3.75 makes sense if Paizo decides not to upgrade to 4e because 3.5 PHB, MM, and DMGs will be out of print and there will be no way for their player base to grow unless Paizo prints their own 3.5 versions of the PHB, MM, and DMG. And if you're going to go to all the trouble to reprint the PHB, MM, and DMG by commissioning new artwork and rethinking layout and presentation then you may as well apply some fixes where they're needed to the existing 3.5 rules.

Paizo Employee Publisher, Chief Creative Officer

We're still undecided, but a careful read of Vic's last post in this thread gives you a pretty good idea of our current "predicament." I haven't seen the rules or OGL yet. I don't expect to any time soon, at this point, and plans must proceed.

I layed out in the first post in this thread a scenario in which Paizo does not convert the third Pathfinder Adventure Path to 4e, and so far all of the things that would need to happen (or, more appropriately, not happen) in order for us to seriously consider that have happened. There is still a window that would allow us to convert that third Adventure Path in time, but that window is shrinking, and most of us are kind of fat. I don't want to squeeze through that window if it means all of us, in our haste, get cut by broken glass.

My "we'll see" comment above is more a statement about the industry in general. SOMEONE is going to do a 3.75, whether it's built "up" from the 3.5 OGL or reverse engineered from the new 4e version. I can't say if that someone will be Paizo, but I'm sure there are a couple of companies working on it already. Maybe we'll throw our hat into that ring eventually, but right now I'm looking at our plans in six-month Adventure Path segments. And I remain hopeful that 4e will be cool and a direction in which we want to take the company.

If we don't get the info we need for the third AP, we'll keep hoping to get it in time to plan for the fourth. All of us at Paizo are still hoping for a cool 4e that smooths out some of the mechanical problems with the game and lets us flex our creative muscles in a way that is respectful to the traditions of the game and that would appeal to our existing customers and customers who have yet to come to us. I remain hopeful that 4e will be that system, but whether or not we're ready to go at minute 1 at Gen Con is becoming less and less important to me with each passing week.

--Erik

Andoran

IDK--have you guys considered doing an ish or two of shorts to buy time between 6 issue AP's? Just a thought, IDK.

Paizo Employee Publisher, Chief Creative Officer

Not really. Pathfinder is a campaign product, not a one-shot product.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Erik Mona wrote:

We're still undecided, but a careful read of Vic's last post in this thread gives you a pretty good idea of our current "predicament." I haven't seen the rules or OGL yet. I don't expect to any time soon, at this point, and plans must proceed.

I layed out in the first post in this thread a scenario in which Paizo does not convert the third Pathfinder Adventure Path to 4e, and so far all of the things that would need to happen (or, more appropriately, not happen) in order for us to seriously consider that have happened. There is still a window that would allow us to convert that third Adventure Path in time, but that window is shrinking, and most of us are kind of fat. I don't want to squeeze through that window if it means all of us, in our haste, get cut by broken glass.

My "we'll see" comment above is more a statement about the industry in general. SOMEONE is going to do a 3.75, whether it's built "up" from the 3.5 OGL or reverse engineered from the new 4e version. I can't say if that someone will be Paizo, but I'm sure there are a couple of companies working on it already. Maybe we'll throw our hat into that ring eventually, but right now I'm looking at our plans in six-month Adventure Path segments. And I remain hopeful that 4e will be cool and a direction in which we want to take the company.

If we don't get the info we need for the third AP, we'll keep hoping to get it in time to plan for the fourth. All of us at Paizo are still hoping for a cool 4e that smooths out some of the mechanical problems with the game and lets us flex our creative muscles in a way that is respectful to the traditions of the game and that would appeal to our existing customers and customers who have yet to come to us. I remain hopeful that 4e will be that system, but whether or not we're ready to go at minute 1 at Gen Con is becoming less and less important to me with each passing week.

--Erik

Despite my selfish enthusiam that the 3rd AP is looking more and more like a 3.5 product, I do feel for you guys at Paizo and hope that whatever decision you make leads to success. So far the RotRL AP is outstanding!


Point taken. Though, I tend to think that people new to the game will go for 4E and everyone else has 3.5 already and thus it wouldn't make much sense to shell out for a book they pretty much already own, which leads me to think that a 3.75 book by a third party would find it very challenging to compete with 4E. I guess there are already such books out there that have found a niche market (Iron Heroes, Arcana Evolved, Conan, Hackmaster, true d20) and are doing okay, so I won't rule it out as being viable, and with the loyal paizo folk that seem to be kicking around it would stand a much better chance of suceeding if paizo supported it. However, it seems quite apparent that the first choice for Paizo is to go 4E assuming the new system is decent.

DaveMage wrote:
P.H. Dungeon wrote:

Well if its just a few little tweaks you might as well stick with 3.5. However even if you do only do a few tweaks, you will still presumably need to comission new art work, rethink your layout and presentation to give it a new look, spend time play testing changes. You also need to consider whether you just release a new phb or do you release a whole new MM and DMG to go with it. The whole 3.75 doesn't make much sense to me.

The point of it is to have a game "in print" so that when people buy Pathfinder adventures they can be referred to a rulebook they can still acquire. 3.5 Player's Handbooks are about to disappear from store shelves.

Osirion

P.H. Dungeon wrote:
However, it seems quite apparent that the first choice for Paizo is to go 4E assuming the new system is decent.

Of course, from a business standpoint, Paizo can't afford to burn any bridges before they know what's on the other side (ie. until they actually see the 4e ruleset, they can't make a valid decision about the future of the company). I just worry that 4e is going to be such a moving target (with a new PHB coming out every year, and lots of online content) that it will be futile to try to design to take advantage of it without constantly feeling like you're an old hound sitting at the table getting nothing but scraps.

To DaveMage: As for having a game "in print" so that people can be referred to it by the Pathfinder products... as far as I know Pathfinder is only using OGL material, which means the SRD should have all the information needed... and that will be free forever. That's why 3.75 (or whatever it may turn out to be) won't need to be a full, print, book (though it's entirely possible to distribute as a PDF and a P.O.D. book).


People who want to stick with 3.5 already own the books they need. A genuinely useful "3.75" has already been released; it's called WotC's Rules Compendium. The 3.5 core rules are also permanently in the public domain via the current OGL.

There no success to be had producing third-party "3.75". I'm sure various publishers will try it, thus splintering the market of those few people even interested in purchasing such a product. You might as well set your money on fire. (Granted, RPG publishers have a history of doing just that, but we know Paizo is not so naive.)


hmarcbower wrote:
(with a new PHB coming out every year, and lots of online content)

It's not a new core PHB each year; it's supplemental PHBs (PHB2, PHB3, a la the Monster Manuals). No moving target.

Andoran

Erik Mona wrote:
Not really. Pathfinder is a campaign product, not a one-shot product.

Right on.


Erik Mona wrote:
I remain hopeful that 4e will be that system, but whether or not we're ready to go at minute 1 at Gen Con is becoming less and less important to me with each passing week.

And that's fine; exactly what I was saying upthread. Support 4e (and thus stay in business), but do it when you feel Paizo is in the best position to do so. If possible (i.e, profitable), offer an update for any AP that came out during the transition period.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
buzz wrote:
hmarcbower wrote:
(with a new PHB coming out every year, and lots of online content)
It's not a new core PHB each year; it's supplemental PHBs (PHB2, PHB3, a la the Monster Manuals). No moving target.

Actually, I believe WotC has stated they will be core PHB released each year. The first monster manual won't even have frost giants, but frost giants will still be core once the MM2 core rulebook is released the following year.


"As it stands there remains a chance that Paizo will not convert to 4.0 next year... "

Fine with me!

Q:"do you play D&D?"
A:"yes"
Q:"which edition"
A:"Pathfinder"

nuff said

Cheliax

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

Reading Vic & Eric's response tells me clearly that they should be going 3.5 and not 4 right now. Telling their writers to use 4E and not having them at least played a 4e gives them unexperienced 4E writers and that could be painfull as well. It is not because of the fact that they are experts in 3.5 adventures that it automatically translates into experts of 4e.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
hmarcbower wrote:

[To DaveMage: As for having a game "in print" so that people can be referred to it by the Pathfinder products... as far as I know Pathfinder is only using OGL material, which means the SRD should have all the information needed... and that will be free forever. That's why 3.75 (or whatever it may turn out to be) won't need to be a full, print, book (though it's entirely possible to distribute as a PDF and a P.O.D. book).

The problem is that the SRD does not have rules for character advancement - something that would be important to play the Pathfinder adventures, of course. Also, from a practical standpoint, if I were creating a physical product, I would not want to refer the buyers to a virtual ruleset. (Virtual rulesets are difficult to bring to the game table unless you have a laptop, which, while many of us do, many do not.) If Pathfinder were only available as a .pdf or POD, then fine, but since the physcial product will be in the store, you'd want a physical ruleset as well (I would think).

Osirion

hmarcbower wrote:

[To DaveMage: As for having a game "in print" so that people can be referred to it by the Pathfinder products... as far as I know Pathfinder is only using OGL material, which means the SRD should have all the information needed... and that will be free forever. That's why 3.75 (or whatever it may turn out to be) won't need to be a full, print, book (though it's entirely possible to distribute as a PDF and a P.O.D. book).

DaveMage wrote:
The problem is that the SRD does not have rules for character advancement - something that would be important to play the Pathfinder adventures, of course. Also, from a practical standpoint, if I were creating a physical product, I would not want to refer the buyers to a virtual ruleset. (Virtual rulesets are difficult to bring to the game table unless you have a laptop, which, while many of us do, many do not.) If Pathfinder were only available as a .pdf or POD, then fine, but since the physcial product will be in the store, you'd want a physical ruleset as well (I would think).

Oh, I agree entirely that would be the ideal... but the overhead and cost of such might be a dealbreaker. Because Paizo already has the production and distribution, though, it may not be as bad as I'm thinking. If I could go to some service like CafePress and just select the rules, click buy, and they ship me a printed copy, though, that would work for most anyone.

Hm, I'd forgotten that experience and character advancement were specifically excluded from OGL.... but it's the d20 licence that says you're not allowed to print anything to do with experience... if it isn't a d20 product, they can't really copyright a table of numbers, can they? Or perhaps just a formula (XP needed to achieve level X = 1000 x [sum of levels up to X-1])? Hm.... anyway, I'm sure there's a legal way around that. :) Or one could simply put in an NPC of each level, and have a summary chart at the end showing that NPC A is level 2 with 1000XP. NPC B is level 3 with 3000XP, etc... I dunno, I'm not a lawyer, fortunately. ;)


Count me in for Pathfinder #3 (3.5 or 3.75) as well. I also plan on getting all the Golarion sourcebooks etc.

If Paizo tosses a hat in for 3.75 or a more D&D version of 4E, ill be there as well (with my players too I might add).

Good Luck whatever route you go Eric and crew.:)


buzz wrote:
hmarcbower wrote:
(with a new PHB coming out every year, and lots of online content)
It's not a new core PHB each year; it's supplemental PHBs (PHB2, PHB3, a la the Monster Manuals). No moving target.

Now, I've got a third and distinct impression of what they've claimed that's different and, in some ways, more logical than either of these...

2008 release - "Basic" core rules for a generic setting.
2009 release - Repeat of fundamental (SRD) portion of the rules, with any fixes (previously released via DI), with new races, classes, etc. designed for a specific setting
2010+ releases - as with 2009 release, but for DIFFERENT settings each time.

The later PHBs, DMGs and MMs will contain material that can be used in a generic/core campaign (i.e., needed for tournament play), but also cover rules for a specific setting, and will PROBABLY be usable without the 2008 release, but they expect few players would be willing to NOT own them.

Maybe I'm wrong, but that's the impression I've been getting


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber
CEBrown wrote:
buzz wrote:
hmarcbower wrote:
(with a new PHB coming out every year, and lots of online content)
It's not a new core PHB each year; it's supplemental PHBs (PHB2, PHB3, a la the Monster Manuals). No moving target.

Now, I've got a third and distinct impression of what they've claimed that's different and, in some ways, more logical than either of these...

2008 release - "Basic" core rules for a generic setting.
2009 release - Repeat of fundamental (SRD) portion of the rules, with any fixes (previously released via DI), with new races, classes, etc. designed for a specific setting
2010+ releases - as with 2009 release, but for DIFFERENT settings each time.

The later PHBs, DMGs and MMs will contain material that can be used in a generic/core campaign (i.e., needed for tournament play), but also cover rules for a specific setting, and will PROBABLY be usable without the 2008 release, but they expect few players would be willing to NOT own them.

Maybe I'm wrong, but that's the impression I've been getting

Since there'll be (a) specific setting book(s) each year I don't see why they would do what you've suggested here (Forgotten Realms in 2008, Eberron in 2009, ??? in 2010).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber

There's something else that's quite critical to Paizo's decision and that's the "problem" of releasing a 3.5 product at the same time/after 4th edition has landed. I'm talking about whether Paizo can live on their online sale alone for a while, since a lot of retailers are probably going to be cautious about putting 3.5 products on their shelves with 4th edition being the game du jour (I might have skipped a couple of pages in this discussion, so I don't know if this has cropped up already).


Heathansson wrote:
Erik Mona wrote:
Not really. Pathfinder is a campaign product, not a one-shot product.

Right on.

Seconded.

Paizo Employee Publisher, Chief Creative Officer

I would classify that as a major concern. Of course, if the audience responds negatively to 4.0 all bets are off. I still don't think that's how it will shake down in the final analysis, but that's how it seems to be happening with a certain subset of the audience presently, and a lot of that subset seem to be current Paizo customers.

Business is fun!


Erik Mona wrote:
I think leaving the door open for someone to publish a "more D&D" version of D&D called something else was part of Ryan's secret plan all along.

I think that was almost certainly the plan. Or at least I think it likely that he wanted to safeguard the future of D&D by getting enough of its "DNA" out there in the public domain that, should the worst happen in the future, the game could be resurrected in its essentials rather than becoming yet another piece of IP Hasbro locks away in the vault until it can find a way to sell action figures or lawn toys based on it.

The OGL is an insurance policy.

1,101 to 1,150 of 1,665 << first < prev | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Gaming / D&D 4th Edition (and Beyond) / 4.0: PAIZO IS STILL UNDECIDED All Messageboards

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.