I actually agree with this. My kids play the game I have taught them, and their mates will as they grow up.True, but when his friends are playing the latest version of D&D, who is he gonna stick with?As if. They’ll all be coming over to the cool dad’s house...
I smiled at mwbeeler's quote because it's kinda fun to think that maybe someday I'll be looked at as the "cool dad" (within limits... but that's another issue). But I have no real illusions.
I remember when my brother (7 years older than me and had kids at an age 15 years younger than I did) thought that "hey, I like rock, so my kids will like the music I listen to and they'll think I'm cool". Uh-uh. His kids grew up listening to what their friends listened to, and thought that "old stuff" he listened to was crap.
We want to be "cool" but friends win out. They always do...
Greg
3.5 is done as a mainstream product, it's now a niche. It's Windows XP and Vista is coming out, good or bad...
That might be an ironically appropriate analogy, since in the time frame since the "new and improved" Vista came out (your 4E), tons of people in the know (tech writers, podcasters, technicians) have tried Vista and bailed. Many have reinstalled XP. So much so that certain companies (Dell) forced Microsoft to retain XP past the date it was due to retire it.
If only WotC gets the same response...
The handwriting is on the wall. "Marginalizing yourself" is the best description of sticking with 3.5 that I've heard.
And I fully realise that I'm marginalizing myself with 3.5. And I accept it. Don't particularly like it, but keeping up with the Joneses just takes too much dough for me to fork out right now. Got a mortgage, bills, debts, all that fun stuff.
Greg
|
Pete Apple:
I'm curious, since you mention a computer systems analogy: From your industry perspective, how much did the 'your old games may crash with this system' affect initial conversion to Windows XP as far as you know? My personal experience is that it annoyed the heck out of me to discover that my old, clunky, (but very much favourite) Warlords III, Darklords Rising didn't run too well with the new XP system, and if games playing had been my sole concern, conversion would have left me absolutely mad at Microsoft.
There are always going to be applications created for the previous OS versions that don't run quite right in the new version. Most games don't have that long of a shelf life anyway, so it's really just an assumption any more to not worry too much about the next OS version unless you happen to be releasing at the same time.
It certainly had an impact, especially in the business world. That's one of the reasons Microsoft is working harder on compatibility modes as well as giving away Virtual PC for free. ( "You've got an old app? Run it in a Virtual Machine!" )
-Pete
|
|
3.5 is done as a mainstream product, it's now a niche. It's Windows XP and Vista is coming out, good or bad...That might be an ironically appropriate analogy, since in the time frame since the "new and improved" Vista came out (your 4E), tons of people in the know (tech writers, podcasters, technicians) have tried Vista and bailed. Many have reinstalled XP. So much so that certain companies (Dell) forced Microsoft to retain XP past the date it was due to retire it.
If only WotC gets the same response...
Absolutely. The difference here is that you're talking about business customers and OEM's like Dell et al that have some leverage with Microsoft. Dell sells a ton of Microsoft licenses. In fact the majority of Microsoft's revenue is through 3rd parties, not retail.
I wouldn't think Paizo and the other 3rd parties have that same sort of leverage with WotC since there is no real dependence for a revenue channel.
-Pete
It seems to me that IF a company were to stick with supporting 3.5 that they would need to find a way to keep the rulebooks for that system available and relevant. It would be like printing CCG expansions but not keeping the core set in print. Or making miniatures for a miniatures game that doesn't have the core rulebook in print. One thing I have learned in my years in the gaming industry is that if there isn't a core rulebook available at retail, then that game and all its supplements are dead to the retailer. Nothing can get them griping more than having your core rulebook out of print. So, yes, I think anybody, including Paizo, who is serious about sticking with 3.5, would have to find a way to keep a core rulebook in print. -Lisa
Lisa,
If Paizo publishes a v.3.5 or v.Paizo core rule book, you can count me in for at least 3 copies!
The handwriting is on the wall. "Marginalizing yourself" is the best description of sticking with 3.5 that I've heard.And I fully realise that I'm marginalizing myself with 3.5. And I accept it. Don't particularly like it, but keeping up with the Joneses just takes too much dough for me to fork out right now. Got a mortgage, bills, debts, all that fun stuff.
Greg
I meant Paizo would be marginalizing itself by continuing to publish 3.5 material. I totally understand why some people will want to stick with 3.5, though I think some of those reasons might fall by the wayside as 4E is rounded out and some of the resentment isn't so fresh.
It seems to me that IF a company were to stick with supporting 3.5 that they would need to find a way to keep the rulebooks for that system available and relevant. It would be like printing CCG expansions but not keeping the core set in print. Or making miniatures for a miniatures game that doesn't have the core rulebook in print. One thing I have learned in my years in the gaming industry is that if there isn't a core rulebook available at retail, then that game and all its supplements are dead to the retailer. Nothing can get them griping more than having your core rulebook out of print. So, yes, I think anybody, including Paizo, who is serious about sticking with 3.5, would have to find a way to keep a core rulebook in print. -LisaLisa,
If Paizo publishes a v.3.5 or v.Paizo core rule book, you can count me in for at least 3 copies!
Well Lisa, despite my plan to move to 4E, I might buy "new" 3.5 core books from Paizo, depending largely upon the art direction. Make something with a more classic "High-fantasy" look, and less "dungeonpunk," and I'd pick up the core 3. My current 3.5 game will be going through the end of the year at least, and my books are currently held together by packing tape.
That doesn't stop me from believing that switching to 4E is the best long-term decision.
Living Arcanis will not be moving to 4ed and in fact is to break its connections from D&D altogether. In an open letter to the Living Arcanis Yahoo Group, PCI president Henry Lopez wrote:
This brings up an interesting point.
Paizo doesn't have to stick with 3.5 or 4th Edition. I am not saying it would be the best decision. But it is an option.
As far as attracting customers no matter what game system selected... I can't think of any great outlets.
I'd start with making banner ads that people can put up on their sites. Our personal sites won't do much, but I am sure we all visit popular places that might be willing to put up the ads.
I would say try a FLGS "tour," but I am not so sure that FLGS's will fare very well after 4th Edition is released. The DDI seems like it will take its toll on them.
I don't have any great answers for Paizo. I wish I did, even if it was to take your system in a direction I don't like.
|
[
As far as attracting customers no matter what game system selected... I can't think of any great outlets.
IMHO the best way is by attracting them to the world of Golarion rather than the ruleset. Do it through Fiction (books, maybe a graphic novel even), licensing (minis, after some popularity a single player PC game perhaps), etc.
|
|
A book of Goblin songs would be great, I think, for spreading the word. You could even get creative and get volunteers to record and produce a CD.
I do like the idea of books taking place in Golarion. I’m sure that if you put out a call for short stories to put together some kind of compellation that there would be a decent response from the boards here as well as elsewhere. You could even turn it into a short story contest with the top X stories getting published in a paperback.
As for the rules themselves, printing a PHB using Golarion as the default setting for races and classes could be a lot of fun. I would recommend making it soft bound like the Pathfinder books to keep costs down. I don’t know about re-producing a MM style book though. Between the re-imagining of the monsters that Paizo already does, and the creatures added in every issue, as well as the multitude of Monster books out there, I’d say that this base is already covered enough and a new production run wouldn’t be necessary. A DMG would also be pretty good.
Living Arcanis will not be moving to 4ed and in fact is to break its connections from D&D altogether. In an open letter to the Living Arcanis Yahoo Group, PCI president Henry Lopez wrote:This brings up an interesting point.
Paizo doesn't have to stick with 3.5 or 4th Edition. I am not saying it would be the best decision. But it is an option.
As far as attracting customers no matter what game system selected... I can't think of any great outlets.
I'd start with making banner ads that people can put up on their sites. Our personal sites won't do much, but I am sure we all visit popular places that might be willing to put up the ads.
I would say try a FLGS "tour," but I am not so sure that FLGS's will fare very well after 4th Edition is released. The DDI seems like it will take its toll on them.
I don't have any great answers for Paizo. I wish I did, even if it was to take your system in a direction I don't like.
I think abandoning D&D althogether would be a terrible idea, and basically suicidial for Paizo. Ugh I hope they know better than this...
Ok, once again in this thread: ;)
Correct me, if I am wrong but, what I have seen from 4E is the following:
The new encounter format (Delve Format IIRC), seems to be restricting in itself, as it looks that the complexity of an encounter seems to be shortened, as only two, max. three different creatures could be used to be able to stick to two pages, not talking about traps or whatnot which have to be included.
The whole feeling the 4E previews gave me, make me think that 4E is all about COMBAT not ROLEPLAY! Of course, I could be wrong, but I am sure this is true.
I've tried running a couple of games set up in Delve Format, Man it sucks! It's really designs for new players, who have no idea how to run an encounter and have never seen an encounter run. For an experienced DM it's like going from a sculpting class to romper room. But, that's Wizards, shooting for the bottom of the pack.
The handwriting is on the wall. "Marginalizing yourself" is the best description of sticking with 3.5 that I've heard.
Really? Cause our group of about 8 never switched to 3.0 or 3.5, though we do buy 3.5 stuff (Though the majority of it is OGL, and not Wizards due to superior content.) I Might be Marginalized by WIzards, but I also know that I don't need WotC for my game any more than I needed TSR. I will continue to buy products that are GOOD and convert them to my lowly 2E campaign.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
]I've tried running a couple of games set up in Delve Format, Man it sucks! It's really designed for new players, who have no idea how to run an encounter and have never seen an encounter run. For an experienced DM it's like going from a sculpting class to romper room. But, that's Wizards, shooting for the bottom of the pack.
To be fair, the Delve format was designed for convention demos, where the person running the demo didn't write the encounter, and may not have had much prep time before running the encounter. In those situations, where tactical play with complicated opponents (CR 20+ dragons, moderately powerful devils, fighter/rogues with spiked chains, etc.) a well-written Delve-format explanation does a great job of giving the DM all the information she needs, fast.
Wizards' mistake, I think, has been using the format in situations where it's not appropriate, and forgetting that Delve pages still need to be well-written. I'm tempted to say that some editors use it for filler, to pad page-count. (Cormyr, Shadowdale, Anarauch, I'm looking at you!)
I meant Paizo would be marginalizing itself by continuing to publish 3.5 material.
Oh. My bad.
Yeah, I agree with you on that point.
I totally understand why some people will want to stick with 3.5, though I think some of those reasons might fall by the wayside as 4E is rounded out and some of the resentment isn't so fresh.
Can't speak for anyone else, but I can tell you that there is actually no resentment at all from me. I don't hate WotC for "killing" Dungeon or Dragon (I miss the mags, but c'est la vie...), and I don't resent them for coming out with 4e. Business is business and they have to feed their families. For me, it's purely an economical decision. I'd be throwing away hundreds of dollars in unused/barely used purchases that I would really like to use in a game if I made the jump to 4e.
So when I get my fill of all the 3.5e stuff I've got, we'll see what we will see.
Greg
I meant Paizo would be marginalizing itself by continuing to publish 3.5 material.Oh. My bad.
Yeah, I agree with you on that point.
I totally understand why some people will want to stick with 3.5, though I think some of those reasons might fall by the wayside as 4E is rounded out and some of the resentment isn't so fresh.Can't speak for anyone else, but I can tell you that there is actually no resentment at all from me. I don't hate WotC for "killing" Dungeon or Dragon (I miss the mags, but c'est la vie...), and I don't resent them for coming out with 4e. Business is business and they have to feed their families. For me, it's purely an economical decision. I'd be throwing away hundreds of dollars in unused/barely used purchases that I would really like to use in a game if I made the jump to 4e.
So when I get my fill of all the 3.5e stuff I've got, we'll see what we will see.
Greg
And that makes perfect sense to me. Though if you're anything like me, it is hard to resist shiny new books when I see them in person...
:D|
|
as 4E is rounded out and some of the resentment isn't so fresh.Can't speak for anyone else, but I can tell you that there is actually no resentment at all from me. I don't hate WotC for "killing" Dungeon or Dragon (I miss the mags, but c'est la vie...
I'm actually glad they dropped Dungeon/Dragon, I like Pathfinder a whole lot better. It's fun to have an active role in the birth of a new world.
And that makes perfect sense to me. Though if you're anything like me, it is hard to resist shiny new books when I see them in person...
:D
I used to be like that, when I was younger. Hell, there was an 8 or 9-year period where I bought anything with the Greyhawk logo on it, but never DMed in a single game.
But I got older, and more in debt, and with more kids...
Life is great, but you learn a little self control when there are other people depending on you having a decent bank account balance at the end of the month :-)
Greg
Wizards' mistake, I think, has been using the format in situations where it's not appropriate, and forgetting that Delve pages still need to be well-written. I'm tempted to say that some editors use it for filler, to pad page-count. (Cormyr, Shadowdale, Anarauch, I'm looking at you!)
Those were the ones that I'm running. By the second one (Which I'm running right now.) I've gutted the modual and am using the story loosely. But yeah, when the hard bound book doesn't have as much game 'meat' as a game from Dungeon, that's sad. I don't need the stat block of the same four goblins printed eight times. Once will do.
I don’t know about re-producing a MM style book though. Between the re-imagining of the monsters that Paizo already does, and the creatures added in every issue, as well as the multitude of Monster books out there, I’d say that this base is already covered enough and a new production run wouldn’t be necessary.
The thing about the 3.5 Monster Manual is that it has all the basics. I mean sure, the re-imagined 10 are nice enough, but that book has 500 critters.
Without the MM, you wouldn't have the classic dragons, zombies, vampires, many of the humanoids, animals - the whole nine yards.
Really? Cause our group of about 8 never switched to 3.0 or 3.5, though we do buy 3.5 stuff (Though the majority of it is OGL, and not Wizards due to superior content.) I Might be Marginalized by WIzards, but I also know that I don't need WotC for my game any more than I needed TSR. I will continue to buy products that are GOOD and convert them to my lowly 2E campaign.
The handwriting is on the wall. "Marginalizing yourself" is the best description of sticking with 3.5 that I've heard.
As previously noted, that comment was made specifically in regard to Paizo marginalizing itself as a publisher, not with respect to players and their choice of edition.
But I do agree with 2E being "lowly." ;)
|
Addressing the original question "What could possibly be a barrier to gaining new players?" (regardless of whether it applies to you...).
Some people may love the Virtual Tabletop, which lets them play with their friends, without needing to spend time travelling, pay for gas, miss a session for holidays or illness, beg a lift off their parents, etc.
They may believe this is a new innovation, and feel they have to buy into the DDI subscription, not realising that other such virtual tabletops exist.
Could Paizo work with an existing virtual tabletop company to advertise their setting, and create off the shelf maps, battleplans and character tokens for the APs? Maybe quote a code in the adventure book, to unlock them, to save time cutting and pasting your own.
Could they also ensure that any world-specific rules patches are available for online character generators, etc.
Could Paizo work with an existing virtual tabletop company to advertise their setting, and create off the shelf maps, battleplans and character tokens for the APs? Maybe quote a code in the adventure book, to unlock them, to save time cutting and pasting your own.
Could they also ensure that any world-specific rules patches are available for online character generators, etc.
I'd pay for that kind of service. Thing is, I won't pay WotC for that service.
perhaps you could clarify why you won't pay WotC for that service,
Why wouldn't I pay WotC for it:
I read this entire thread, rather than getting ready for this afternoon's game. I'm glad I did. During the reading, I have developed a few scattered, random thoughts that I would like to throw out into the open, to either run, shrivel, or shine. Some were mentioned in the thread already.
Pathfinder Traditional Fantasy Role Playing (TFRP)
P20 system (Paizo 20)
3.Pi - use 3.5 SRD with needed updates and tweaks
-- COULD Paizo publish an "SRD expansion" for 3.P/P20 rules that cover SRD gaps and tweak SRD uglies? That way, existing 3.5 players keep their books or SRD and just use the updates.
PM - Path-Master
Pathfinder's Handbook
PMG - PathMaster's Guide
Fell Beasts
refine clunky mechanics in the srd - "grappling/sunder/trip/disarm rules" per Coridan
change up base classes - look back to old editions/OD&D?
new XP progression chart
new character generation
new deities - use Golarion's as the default
ISSUES:
advertising - "If you've played d20, you can play P20!"
minimize entry costs
minimize differences/overhauls
---"As a DM, if I'm getting new rule books, it's to add to my game, not replace it." -GregH
Get Paizo items distributed into wider markets
So anyway - that's a lot of what popped into my rabid lil brain whilst reading this thread.
(One thing I would *personally* like to see is an overhaul of the default magic system, but them diehard "I don't wanna convert my pregen modules" people wouldn't go for the wholesale replacement of such a major "loadbearing element" - witness comments made in re Monte's BoExM 20-level system. I understand the point - I just happen to disagree. Deeply. And occasionally vehemently. :D )
Okay.. we've established that if Paizo did their own branding, they would have to make sure the Core Book(s) stay in print / circulation (per Lisa).Since you and I have those, we don't need to by them. You make a good point about not wanting to buy another Core Book.
Try this on for size then:
A smaller (soft cover?) book with rules upgrades like Monte's Book of Experimental Might. Price it reasonably.. 9.99 to 12.99
Paizo puts out a Branded Pathfinder Core Book, which is basically 3.5 but with their rule upgrades. You, Greg, are told that you don't need this book. All you need is that smaller book I mentioned above and your trusty 3.5 PHB.
What would think of that?
YES - *This* is almost exactly what I was about to post.
If you're going to stay with 3.5, you gotta *stay* with 3.5. Make a Pathfinder Player's Guide (& DMG, MM, etc.), but don't go crazy with rule changes, just put in extra info, like Earthbreakers, and other stuff from the AP Player Guides.
So whenever "Core Rulebook I" is referenced in a module, the information will generally be in available in *both*.
Also, there seems to be an obvious choice of "GameMastery Guide" for the DMG...
CEO
|
Getting back towards positive things that Paizo might be able to do, is there any chance, Lisa, that you could tempt an author such as Elaine Cunningham to write fiction for Golarion, by offering her her own city or country to play around with?
Anything is possible, but not in 2008. Both Erik and I have friendships with most of the popular game-related authors, so if we decide to go that route in 2009, it wouldn't be much of a stretch to see some of them gracing a novel or two.
-Lisa
|
|
If there is a company poised to make this shift then I think Paizo is it. I don't think any other company is in the singular position in the same way. It might be a "perfect storm" situation.
I like the idea of a separately branded product. It seems to work for Castles and Crusades. While it isn't D&D, a lot of its customers associate it with the brand. To my knowledge it is successful and maintains a good customer base because it fulfills its advertised claims.
That said, creating a product that is specific to Pathfinder or Golarion does limit its viability for use by other third party publishers. I think it would have to remain fairly similar to 3.5 as well. Or at least, make the changes people are calling for but do so without creating a full 3.75 version. Ideally you want a product other publishers can point to as the official PHB for their third party product. I think too many of alternate PHBs of days past were too tied to one setting to make them viable for other companies to utilize. Some of this was by design of course.
One thing I did notice before the announcement of 4e was the push to "brand" the OGL. Some companies did this by producing new OGL games. Others, like Paizo, produced material for D&D but did so without the albatross the d20 STL had become. I think if they were given a little more time a number of companies, independently or together, could have solidified what OGL/3.5 compatible meant to a larger audience. In other words, the OGL could become a brand of its own. It makes sense; publishing under the OGL meant greater freedom for third parties.
I don't think that time has passed. It is still possible to build the brand. I just think the strategy has to change a bit. There is nothing that says a company cannot produce a new PHB under the OGL, complete with all the material normally restricted under the d20 STL (character creation, leveling, etc.) You just need to make sure it doesn't copy the closed content of the current 3.5 PHB. The key would be to market this game in such a way that it is seen as variation /inheritor of D&D without violating copyright law.
In a perfect world, a company like Paizo would ally itself with other, well known third party publishers and agree to build this brand with adventures, supplements, settings, etc. for the benefit of all involved. This new product would have to be freely available for development I think (within reason); much in the way Green Ronin just opened True20. Multiple companies, if necessary, could share the burden of publishing and design. Though I can also see the value in allowing one company to bear the cost of producing the product with the benefit of being able to place their own stamp on it. Either way, this product should embrace the philosophy of opening gaming wholeheartedly to encourage involvement by more and more companies.
As stated, branding is absolutely integral. It must be developed in such a way that gamers understand what the game is and why it exists. The game has to have the best names in the business involved with it. And to make it work I think the marketing needs to have a slight "rebel" feel to it. There needs to be a bit of the "rightful heir" feeling without being insulting. Compatibility with all previous 3.x material is key and that needs to be made abundantly clear. If changes are made they must be easy to integrate with the thousands of dollars of merchandise the core audience will already own. Of course, if this can be done while dropping the 3.5 moniker that would be better.
This kind of product will have a built in audience. Of course, you have the people disgruntled by the edition change. You then have a large population that will probably continue to play both editions and might be even more inclined to do so if 3.x compatible material is still being produced. Both of these audiences should be more than enough to get the game going.
Building the audience will have to be done in the way the D&D audience has always been built, by word of mouth and exposure. Sure, ads in choice media outlets will be something you would want to do. But D&D is usually passed on through a mentor/student relationship. Capitalize on that by providing quick start rules, free adventures, con games (not only at the big name cons but smaller cons as well), in-store demos, and in-store promos. All of these can bring in new players.
In the end, these are my thoughts and opinions. I am far from an expert in RPG marketing and development. But I do think a reliable OGL game that sticks to the spirit of D&D could do quite well. Of course the game with the D&D name will dominate market shares. But I think the size of that share is mutable and TSR of the 90's did a good job of showing us how true that can be. Brand names mean a lot but educated customers, a moniker that applies to most RPG consumers, know that quality can be found outside of these heavy hitters.
I am not sure if I completely addressed the point of the thought exercise. Or, if I did, I achieved it in a rather round about way. In the end, I do not think staying with "3.5" is an immediate death knell. It just requires bravery, business savvy, and a strong presence in the game community. Paizo embodies all of these traits.
|
|
Addressing the original question "What could possibly be a barrier to gaining new players?" (regardless of whether it applies to you...).
Some people may love the Virtual Tabletop, which lets them play with their friends, without needing to spend time travelling, pay for gas, miss a session for holidays or illness, beg a lift off their parents, etc.
They may believe this is a new innovation, and feel they have to buy into the DDI subscription, not realising that other such virtual tabletops exist.
Could Paizo work with an existing virtual tabletop company to advertise their setting, and create off the shelf maps, battleplans and character tokens for the APs? Maybe quote a code in the adventure book, to unlock them, to save time cutting and pasting your own.
Could they also ensure that any world-specific rules patches are available for online character generators, etc.
That kind of deal would be fantastic. I think working out such a deal with Fantasy Grounds or other companies with similar programs would be an important part of making sure 3.P would have some traction.
|
|
I'd pay for that kind of service. Thing is, I won't pay WotC for that service.Could Paizo work with an existing virtual tabletop company to advertise their setting, and create off the shelf maps, battleplans and character tokens for the APs? Maybe quote a code in the adventure book, to unlock them, to save time cutting and pasting your own.
Could they also ensure that any world-specific rules patches are available for online character generators, etc.
Same here. Especially when I can buy a license to one program for a third party program and probably save a good deal of money in the long run. Sure, I would want to pay for the occasional add-on, but I think I would still save money in the course of a year long campaign.
alleynbard raises some good points here.
The new d20 Fantasy (however it ends up being called) could work as a Paizo product:
Make it 100% (or as close as it gets) compatible with D&D 3.5e, so that whatever you can do with the official core 3, you can do with Paizo's core 3: Use Complete Warrior, run Expedition to Demonweb Pits, play Midnight, use the Book of Experimental Might, and so on. (for those whose products I named here: Contact me for the details where I want the money sent to ;-))
Then allow (if it isn't already stipulated by the OGL) other companies to "use" these books free of charge, just as they can "use" the PHB, DMG, MM.
So if Necromancer Games (again, contact me about payment for my shameless plugs) keeps publishing for "3.5" (or whatever the new system is called), they could put something on their books like "Requires the Use of either Player's Handbook by wizards of the coast or d20 Player's Guide by Paizo"
Make it clear that you can still use the old D&D books if you happen to have them, but if you don't, and they're out of print and nowhere to get, you can use those new books Paizo makes.
There might be some legal pitfalls, but other than that, I can totally see that working out just fine.
I am certain that the great peeps at Paizo have enough business savy to roll with the game however it developed based on the needs of their customers. I remember the old day when Dragon magazine catered to several game systems and had adventures for such. Today so many game systems exist that that would be impractical; so as a business Paizo has to make a decision on what they will support in print based on what they gather their customers desire - not easy to ascertain to be sure - but over the years, I have seen this company caters to their public and as I have been a member of this web community for a while now; the formats they provide here to let players communicate about any game, game system, game rules, game trends, what type of players are out there; and an insight on who these people who play these much loves games are; well, that is just brilliant. What better format to peer into the hearts of your customers. I have absolutely no doubt that the fine people at Paizo will keep this ship upright and sailing smooth providing a nice deck for us to exchange ideas while presenting a wide view of the gaming industry. So, this was my thought exercise about paizo.
Plenty of bad blood created by WotC.
I remember a financial guru once saying that if you want to find out the current health of a company, look at their earnings. But if you want to find out the future health of a company, look at their customer service, because you can only piss off your customers for so long before they walk away from you and not come back.
I've past that point with Wizards. I don't care how good 4E is. I'm not following them. I'll stick with 3.5 until WotC gets sold off or whatever and another company produces D&D (hopefully Paizo).
I think the issue is that a P20 product competes for shares of the niches already taken up by True20, Castles and Crusades, and similar products. It is very hard to grow a niche product.
|
|
I think the issue is that a P20 product competes for shares of the niches already taken up by True20, Castles and Crusades, and similar products. It is very hard to grow a niche product.
Except that Paizo is already bigger than most of the little guys and has a very devoted fanbase to power them into the market, most likely placing them in a position to be the top company besides WotC.
That isn't too bad of a place to be and also they will still be selling WOTC's products and all the others via their online store. They also have Planet Stories line of products and numerous other lines that all help to shore up the company. If an idea goes south, they can pull back, re-evaluate and adjust accordingly. If, however, they thrive, then they can start competing with WotC and place themselves in a position to be able to purchase D&D if WotC finds it no longer profitable to produce in the future.I want Paizo to grow remarkably. You can't be first by following along. Eventually you need to pass the leader and Paizo has a good draft going to help power them into that position. They just gotta have the balls to put it the floor and hope.
One thing I just thought of. Why is WotC ending 3.5? From all the comments from those that have actually seen 4th edition, it appears to be a significantly different game. Why not market it as that? I mean does Monopoly take money away from Yahtzee? No, I don't think so, most people have both and they are significantly different as not to compete with one another. Why doesn't WotC continue making both, 3.5 and 4th? Or perhaps have a 3rd party company take over making 3.5 (with kickbacks to WotC), while they focus on 4th edition. Instead of forcing a competition, make them work beside each other. I mean, is Star Wars: Saga, in competition with D&D 3.5/4th? I wouldn't think so. It just seems like they are really caught up on this "4th edition" versus "a new D&D based game" idea.
|
|
I think the issue is that a P20 product competes for shares of the niches already taken up by True20, Castles and Crusades, and similar products. It is very hard to grow a niche product.
Of course that is a concern but not nearly as much as those games you just named face. I wouldn't consider True20 and C&C that similar to a republished version of 3.5. They each do different things than 3.5 and people prefer them for different reasons. But overall, they do a good job netting a niche market for the goals they set out to achieve. And that's what is important; they have very different goals than what 3.5 is designed to do.
To be successful P20 should be highly compatible with 3.5 in a way C&C and True20 are not. Thus they have an initially bigger share of the market. Essentially allowing people to utilize their already vast library will garner an advantage over True20 or C&C, where conversion is sometimes difficult and time consuming.
Will most D&D players move on to 4e? Of course they will. Will there still be a sizable market that objects to the new edition? I would imagine so. Is there a group of people that will play both games? Of course. And with the magic of the OGL a good company can make a nice profit producing material for that audience, even if the old game starts to operate under a new name. The important key is to educate the audience, letting them know you carrying on the traditions of 3.5.
I think P20 would have a market advantage that will generate an initial larger audience than True20 and C&C. At worst it will be a sizable niche that serves the needs of 3.5 consumers. On average it would be no more niche than NWoD or Runequest. And at best it will rank as the #2 most popular game in the industry.
Well, I suppose at worst the game would tank. But that seems highly unlikely. Just as unlikely that the game would unseat 4e D&D for dominance.
From all the comments from those that have actually seen 4th edition, it appears to be a significantly different game. Why not market it as that?
Because they couldn't sell it as D&D. D&D is the best-known RPG out there.
Even if 4e isn't really the D&D we used to know (and, in a way, isn't D&D at all), many people will not know that. They see "D&D", so they think "It's the big one, we ought to buy this."
If it was called E&E (Encounters and Enemies or something), they couldn't cash in on brand recognition. It would be a new game in name as well as in practise
I think the issue is that a P20 product competes for shares of the niches already taken up by True20, Castles and Crusades, and similar products. It is very hard to grow a niche product.
Actually, it would probably be mostly compatible with D&D 3.5e. And since the 3.5e core books will probably disappear from the shelves soon, the main competition is gone.
With P20 (or whatever), you could use all the stuff made for D&D, without too much hassle. If you want to use that stuff with C&C or True20, you'll have to convert stuff.
I think a Paizo version of 3e, with its fabulous Pathfinder support, could do very well. I can totally see it becoming one of the top 5 RPGs.
Will most D&D players move on to 4e? Of course they will.
Frankly, I'm doubting this piece of conventional wisdom anymore. Both here and ENWorld, polls are about 20-30% saying they want 4E while 50-60% saying they want 3.5. That does not bode will for Wizards. There is enough information for people to make an informed guess as to what they will do in the future. Granted, we don't know the whole story, but the basics are out there. About half or more are rejecting the game. I wonder about the health of Wizards next year.
the RPG franchise to another company is pretty much moot at this point
Doesn't mean I can't dream.
Lots of thought-provoking posts here! (Crosses fingers and hopes some of these suggestions become reality...)