Ridiculous(?) what-if & a pro-Pathfinder line in the sand


Paizo General Discussion

101 to 150 of 377 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

Matthew Morris wrote:

I was referring to CCP, the Iceland group that 'merged' with White Wolf.

While I don't think 4.5 or 5.x D&D would be the Gamma World model Cartigan fears, I could see them taking a lesson from Catalyst.
** spoiler omitted **

Completely off topic:

Thank you for the information RE: Dark Ages. As a "Clickytech" player who rode into the game thriving on the hatred that was aimed at me before(fatbeards and neckbeards who refused to let me watch their games/scowled me away from the miniature-painting/explain how the game worked to me/told me that my choice of faction was "wrong" were among my first experiences with the game outside of the occasionally interesting novel and EXCELLENT video game- MW3 4 LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!), during(I was told that *everything* that was wrong with Battletech was my fault as I loved "Clickytech"/Dark Ages and I was funding the "evil empire" which was bringing in way out and wrong ideas/art to the setting) and after(how dare I look for a Dark Ages game now that Classic Battletech is back? I should go back to playing with my toys!!!!), this explains, although not excuse, a lot of the animosity I encountered.


In the current economy everyone has taken a hit. WotC has scaled back as a simple matter of necessity, they've spent several years over producing product (often shoddy), likely due to the belief by certain managers that the OGL is a handicap to the Brand's longterm profitability. Oversaturation was an effective method to crowd out small producers in an environment where disposable income is relatively common but is a lose/lose when that loose currency becomes scarce. They risk severe overstock of their vendors as well as the painful reality that the small companies that the were elbowing out of the way may be better situated to respond to the gaming community's needs.

Paizo did something remarkable at the onset of 4e, they recast DnD into a new thing, one tat was closer to it's roots as well as being fundamentally better than it's previous incarnation. They also achieved independence from WotC. They got screwed by the 4e conversion, more than the regular 3rd party publishers. They achieved what the OGL was really designed to do, protect the hobby and it's continued growth by insulating it from arcane Buisness decisions made by a single corporate entity.

I can see no upside to takin over a failed DnD. Licensing has already bit them in the ass once. Should Greyhawk or Planescape or what have you become available, that property will have the difficulty of meshing with the current product schedule. The cosmologies of PFRPG and 4e no longer work with oldschool Planescape without significant allteration. Greyhawk has been collecting dust for years only the Paizoites have even attempted to freshen it up in the last 5 years and even should the unthinkable happen and Hasbro loses it's mind and sells off just Greyhawk for cash that's several years away at which point stagnation has really set in and it's begun to fade even from memory. That's a pet project or a labor of love not a viable Buisness model.

The acquisition of the whole IP however brings what? The back catalog, which will need a serious reedit to update to PFRPG. That's a small list of products worth the expense. The reintegration of Illithids, Beholders, Gith maybe something else, what's that really worth? Millions of dollars, I doubt it. Howabout the name Dungeons and Dragons? Once you get past nostalgia about the "Granddaddy of em' All" the name carries as much stigma as nostalgia. Two bad films, a 30 year history of questionable Buisness decisions like suing your customer base, and a name that is well known to people that make a living out of demonizing others. Not a great buy IMHO.

Pathfinder is now a recognizable brand name. Certainly not as much as Warhammer or d&d but those names are twenty plus years old. Every semi regular gamer in tis country has at least heard of Pathfinder and it's not had a fifth birthday. Pathfinder is better off being Pathfinder as Paizo is really good at Pathfinder.

Contributor

Removed a post. Keep it civil.


I'm a self affirmed plasticrack addict. I own more minis than anyone I regularly deal with. I played RPGs for ten years before my first lead mini. I played for ten more before I ever ran an encounter with actual representation of the monsters involved. Minis are not bad. They help the flow of combat which has become very complicated since my old red box starter. The complication is a result of gamers who love rules and even non rules lawyers love rules. It's what makes a gamer a gamer. But minis are not necessary on a fundamental level, they are very profitable however, so new rules (that gamers love) will often focus on minis especially when the company that writes the rules also manufacture minis. This is unavoidable.


2010 was the second solid year of growth in the Hobby Game Market (I suspect as a result of a "back to basics" shift in popular culture, ala. The Family Game Night campaign.
Paizo has done stellar work, solidly building on it's name for quality. By comparison, WotC feels like it's just going down the same model that blighted 3rd Edition, namely that of endless sourcebooks. While Essentials has gone a long way to rectify this (I'm sorry, but it's 4.5 in all but name),the proliferation of ephemera around the game itself feels like the company is groping towards turning D&D into a board game (something Hasbro understands), while trying to bring along the market share they didn't lose in the Edition Schism. In addition, their withdrawal from the PDF market in favor of DDI misread just how offended many people would be by the inference at they could not be trusted. I hope DDI, now it's gone to a cloud system, can regain some lost ground for D&D, but I'm not hopeful.


Matthew Morris wrote:
battletech stuff

Hrmph:
Personally I don't like the way the setting evolved. The last thing I truly welcomed was the FC Civil War. That Blakist free for all followed by united effort to make the universe a better place stinks just as it did before :( I would have been totally happy eith the successionwars. As I'm thinking about it the battletech universe went through two rebuilds that don't owe much to the scale of the reconstruction the Forgotten realms experienced upon the transfer from 3E to 4E.

Tai-i Sleeping Dragon over ^^


Quote:
My point was that a game system with vague rules adjudicated by old mystics sitting at the head of a table is not going to draw people to the game. The concrete rules and tangible system based around miniatures is significantly more likely to draw more average people to the genre.

The cynic in me states that this is occuring for the reason that Tycho mentions in this comic: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/06/06/

The optomist doesn't care what is bringing folks to the table just get em there.

edited: for complete thoughts sheesh.


zagnabbit wrote:

Howabout the name Dungeons and Dragons? Once you get past nostalgia about the "Granddaddy of em' All" the name carries as much stigma as nostalgia. Two bad films, a 30 year history of questionable Buisness decisions like suing your customer base, and a name that is well known to people that make a living out of demonizing others. Not a great buy IMHO.

Pathfinder is now a recognizable brand name. Certainly not as much as Warhammer or d&d but those names are twenty plus years old. Every semi regular gamer in tis country has at least heard of Pathfinder and it's not had a fifth birthday. Pathfinder is better off being Pathfinder as Paizo is really good at Pathfinder.

Some good points there, zagnabbit. I remember the advent of Vampire: the Masquerade to the RPG market, and the guys at WW back then managed to turn the gaming market pretty much upside down with the new game from a relatively new company. They did not even have anything they could work from (well, you could take Ars Magica as a foundation somewhat, but thats far-fetched) or that was well-known already, yet made a big story out of it for ten+ years. So, Pathfinder is gaining some brand recognition already, managed to to keep quite a portion of the 3.5 fan base (and keep them happy) and do just great, according to some recent figures.

The truth is, paizo does not even need D&D anymore. Why should they buy, even if it were available?

Stefan


Zmar wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
battletech stuff
** spoiler omitted **

More Battletech stuff

Spoiler:
Yeah I am NOT a fan of the new BT setting, which after the retcons is what it has become. It is simply not the same setting I used to play in and many of the old story lines just make no sense with some of the new retcons {i] Looks at war of 39 with dislike[/i]

And yes I hate..I mean HATE the darkage, jihad and all that it has spawned. It simply is no longer the setting I enjoyed and played.

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

Besides when has HASBRO ever sold an IP? They sit on it, bring it back out in a few years. If 4E tanks they shut the RPG line down, license out the Video game rights, t-shirts, card, minis, board game and anything else they can milk it for.

I can't recall Hasbro ever simply selling an IP they could milk or shelf and milk again 10 or 20 years later.

This. Last year, Hasbro renewed their IP hold on Jem and the Holograms, a line of dolls that lasted 2 years in the 80s. They're not going to let go of a 30 year old line of RPGs and related products (unless someone can make them a HUGE offer, which seems unlikely on Paizo's part).

I know someone mentioned them licensing it out but it seems unlikely. Licensing specific portions, maybe (an unused setting, e.g., idk... Mystara). But not licensing. And I doubt Paizo would take up that license (although who am I to say?), especially given how they were burned by WotC over the whole closing of the Dungeon/Dragon print magazine. Given that Paizo's success exploded out of leaving that behind... it would have to be a very ideal scenario for them to go back, IMO.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber

I mostly saw the delay of books as wizards realizing digest books are not a good long term strategy. The hardcovers they released before are a better format. I like the digest rules compendium, but I'd rather have most supplements in a more standard form.

I do suspect we will see an anouncement of their new vision soon.


seekerofshadowlight wrote:

...

More Battletech stuff

** spoiler omitted **

battletech:
Needless to say I came to BT AFTER the invasion and still prefer the Sucession wars and perhaps throwing in new tech as natural evolution... I'm weird probably, but I'm still toying with my own spin-off that would have the atmosphere of the Napoleonic wars

/WWI in deep periphery.

Say, do you frequent some known battletech boards?


seekerofshadowlight wrote:
Zmar wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
battletech stuff
** spoiler omitted **

More Battletech stuff

** spoiler omitted **

Spoiler:
Indeed. Future generations will probably discover our skeletal remains with our hands wrapped firmly around each other's throats.

Sebastian wrote:
...In theory, this isn't a sign that the rpg brand is doing poorly, it's just an attempt to refocus, but I'm not a subscriber to that theory. You don't mess with success, and if anything WotC had tried to roll out for D&D before were working, they'd keep doing it. Plus, Magic is a significantly stronger product line than D&D. D&D is still being run in an erratic manner and looks more like they're throwing everything they can think of at the wall to see what sticks.

Bolded for emphasis, and a big +1. I don't think D&D is danger of tanking any time soon, but as a player who was only recently enticed to 4E by the Essentials line, I really wonder what's going on at Wizards. A lot of times it seems as though their decisions are the business equivalent of unloading a shotgun full of rock salt into their own toes.

I think, from recent developments, that they're aware that their digital model has some severe shortcomings that is damaging their ability to retain new customers who came on board with Essentials. How quickly they can manage to turn that around remains to be seen, though, and from a consumer standpoint, their track record is simply abysmal thus far.

One thing's for certain, though - Paizo has garnered success by developing their own niche. Even if they could acquire the D&D IP at some point, I sort of doubt that they'd try to play both fields at once. Why rewrite the history and cosmology of Golarion to retrofit outside IP into it when they have a good thing going with the campaign world as is?


Freehold DM wrote:

...

** spoiler omitted **

arcbattlelogy:
Not at all. I don't mind clickytech, just the universe. And the fact that it went this way doesn't mean that I can't play in the period that I liked, while you can have all the eeeeevil WoBlin terrorists and goodygoody Republican Spheroids you want. Add blackouts, Demlrization (or how the hell is the word for that abhorrent thought written) and the fun is on :)

The Magic division of Hasbro produces a lot of product, and turns a nice large profit.

The D&D division of Hasbro produces a lesser amount of product, takes more labor and time to produce a product, and turns a nice profit.

Their Corporate Masters keep saying to the D&D division, "When are you going to produce profits like Magic?"

If you look at the D&D division's actions in light of that last question, they make a lot more sense.


Which doesn't mean that it will be welcome by everyone. I personally see their hunt for profit disappointing and would of course prefer entertainment over this. Money make having fun difficult sometimes :P


Zmar wrote:
seekerofshadowlight wrote:

...

More Battletech stuff

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

Yet more BT stuff

Spoiler:
Yeah I started in 86 or 87, so was playing BT before I played D&D. And while I do like the SW era and 3025 was what I came in on, I am pretty much a clan player not for the tech but pure RP. Merc or DC are also acceptable.

I 'll play any era before 3058, SW, invasion golden age, what ever just nothing past 3058, I am not going and I am not using those retcons. I fought the clan with 3025 tech and Liked it!

I post under Hellshorsesman on the BT forums, which shows my prime faction pretty well. I have not been posting there too much due to me just hating all the changes. Clan do not even act clan,, the super friends and stupid pills are just to much for me...ugh


4e is immensely simpler than 3.5, I don't see how or where all this "moving multiple times a round" stuff is coming from. And pull, push, and slide make perfect sense in English. Pull - forced movement toward you; push - forced movement away from you; slide - forced movement anywhere

But yes, 4e combat is unbelievably and inexplicably slow and one-dimensional and that's the real problem.


seekerofshadowlight wrote:

...

Yet more BT stuff
** spoiler omitted **

moar heavy metal madness:
Heh, that place is too crowded for my tastes. I'm holed up at Mordel's B&G. A nice sleepy hole for me :)

I also liked the original grittier style better. Screw them all! DC, CC, FWL, Periphery and pirates are mine (FedRat hater). And old ComStar ruled (compared to what became of it later).


Cartigan wrote:

4e is immensely simpler than 3.5, I don't see how or where all this "moving multiple times a round" stuff is coming from. And pull, push, and slide make perfect sense in English. Pull - forced movement toward you; push - forced movement away from you; slide - forced movement anywhere

But yes, 4e combat is unbelievably and inexplicably slow and one-dimensional and that's the real problem.

Not at all, you just need to stop thinking about your powers as the only available set of options. 4E also has tools for easy assessment of improvised actions. The problem is tht improvisation is hardly a reliable way of winning combats.


Cartigan wrote:

4e is immensely simpler than 3.5, I don't see how or where all this "moving multiple times a round" stuff is coming from. And pull, push, and slide make perfect sense in English. Pull - forced movement toward you; push - forced movement away from you; slide - forced movement anywhere

But yes, 4e combat is unbelievably and inexplicably slow and one-dimensional and that's the real problem.

I agree that 4E is simpler, altough all the special abilities manage to make the game not so simple, but certainly it is making the rules more undestandable.

However movement is more important and happens more often. It is very good if you like tactical movement, but it slows down the game and not using miniatures isn't practical.

3.5: Move, attack. Sometimes a character can perform extra movements, or a monster can move you, but it is very rare.
4E: Move, sometimes perform an special attack that allows you to move again, often you can move again out of your turn using a "reaction" with one of your special abilities, and it is not rare to be moved away when pushed by an enemy or/and pulled by an ally. Everything in a single round.
My 4E Ranger drove the DM crazy, but other characters had powers related to movement too... there weren't many utility powers that were not related to movement, specially for Rangers.
I'm sure that some people is having a blast playing games like 4E but IMO it is not the kind of game that will get big numbers of new players to PnP RPGs.


Zmar wrote:
seekerofshadowlight wrote:

...

Yet more BT stuff
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **

More BT

Spoiler:
I'll check it out, the main site is to heavy into the new stuff with everything I know is just wrong, I simply can't keep up with the retcons as they simply make all my ranks in BT lore useless as they are wrong.


IkeDoe wrote:


I'm sure that some people is having a blast playing games like 4E but IMO it is not the kind of game that will get big numbers of new players to PnP RPGs.

Based on what measurement and evidence?


Cartigan wrote:
IkeDoe wrote:


I'm sure that some people is having a blast playing games like 4E but IMO it is not the kind of game that will get big numbers of new players to PnP RPGs.
Based on what measurement and evidence?

I was wondering that, too.

By all accounts 4E drew in a lot of new or lapsed gamers.


i will have to agree with OP in that Paizo does not need to purchase D&D. I love Pathfinder and i believe it is tied for the best product out there (with World of Darkness, my other favorite.) I however have to defend Golarion because it is by far my favorite setting. Why? because it is, as the OP put it, a "kitchen sink setting." no other setting since ive been playing has been put together like this. you want oriental adventures? change settings. you want more rennaissance/quasi steam punk? change settings. you want medival fantasy europe? change settings. Golarion has everything there, and i like it. i dont have to change a setting or homebrew something to incorporate multiple different diversities, which being realistic, is going to come out of a world. the fact that they take things from our world is why i love the setting. just my 2cp.


http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:HAS

Stretch it back to 2000. Does that look like a sky-is-falling scenario? Sure it's not directly related to WoTC. At worst the higher ups have been looking at how to make the brand more profitable and are getting ready to act. At best we're going to see some great new innovation come out of WoTC.

You can't really predict this stuff. Something will happen and some people will be able to say "I told you so".


Dire Mongoose wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
IkeDoe wrote:


I'm sure that some people is having a blast playing games like 4E but IMO it is not the kind of game that will get big numbers of new players to PnP RPGs.
Based on what measurement and evidence?

I was wondering that, too.

By all accounts 4E drew in a lot of new or lapsed gamers.

So many that WotC isn't getting enough profits from it. PnP RPG is still a small bussiness. In any case I would thank Blizzard for making WoW and creating 1000s of new game addicts.

IMO Marketing, the D&D logo and beautiful art can allow you to sell many books, specially among guys that buy pokemon cards or play warhammer; but selling core rulebooks and making a new generation of RPG fans that will buy more products in the future are two different things.

PnP RPGs weren't very popular two decades ago and it isn't very popular now. I know that the RPG bussiness goes up and down frequently, if someone has reliable sources that prove that PnP RPGs have had important increases in their customer base in the last decade I would want to see it.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

I removed some posts and replies to them. Forum drama over.


IkeDoe wrote:
So many that WotC isn't getting enough profits from it.

Again: based on what?

On Wikipedia somebody would flag this [citation needed].

Sovereign Court Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Ross Byers wrote:
I removed some posts and replies to them. Forum drama over.

Did you just scold James Jacobs? Wow, the Brain in a Jar really *is* more powerful than you would think...


Dire Mongoose wrote:
IkeDoe wrote:
So many that WotC isn't getting enough profits from it.

Again: based on what?

On Wikipedia somebody would flag this [citation needed].

I don't like debate club tricks. I'm not going to cite any source to demonstrate that PnP RPGs aren't popular an WotC employees don't drive Ferraris.

But It would be nice to have those sources that say that 4E has made PnP RPGs such a popular thing in the Western World.


Zmar wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:

...

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

Actually my response was more aimed at seeker, as he and I seem to have a love/hate thing going on, but that's okay. Strange that Hell's Horses are perhaps my favorite clan next to the ones you never ever hear from(Blood Spirit? Ice Hellions? Anyone? Anyone?). But yeah, we can all play in our favored time periods without a problem. And I genuinely liked the clickytech stuff, probably because I enjoyed heroclix so much. And the looks of utter outrage on the faces of the hard-core old schoolers...HILARIOUS!!!


LOL.

ENWorld.

The Exchange

Cartigan wrote:
IkeDoe wrote:
IMO It is killing the pen&paper RPG industry, specially nowadays, not everyone wants to spend money in minis, and many people dislike pseudo-board games that aren't really board-games.

No, the problem is Hasbro/WotC decided to super monetize miniatures and the custom miniature makers like Reaper aren't going to improve it by managing to be more expensive than D&D Miniatures.

Just wait until they turn it COMPLETELY into a CCG like Gamma World - they have already tested it out by adding (broken) powers to D&D miniature packs. They are going to hit it full bore with Gamma World then shift it to D&D. Though they might not because I expect most everyone to completely scoff at it in Gamma World, but I may be wrong from what I've heard and seen.

Another step towards this


Why would they want D&D.... They have already soiled the name.

They have already Over-Published there world settings.

They have ripped some of there world to bits, by force the setting into the new rules.

............

When all is said and done, D&D had a good life. But its time for it to Diminish into the West, and vanish from this land.

To make room for Pathfinder to grow, prosper, and flourish.

All any one can hope, is that they grow tall, prosper honorable, and flourish with Truth.


Freehold DM wrote:
Stuff

More Bt stuff

Spoiler:
Both are dead in the new timeline..but Yes, I love both those clans, I love the fact each clan is not the same. I disagree with the to many clans point of view, there are More as or many IS powers I didn't see them cut down to half and them made act unlike themselves..ugh

Most of the hate of clicky tech is the time line not the rules. Never played clickytech based off the timeline{And I didn't like having to collect minis and booster packs to play}, that is where the mass hate was and still is.


seekerofshadowlight wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Stuff

More Bt stuff

** spoiler omitted **

What? Since when are they dead? Last time I checked they were fine, just lingering on relatively unused.


Freehold DM wrote:
seekerofshadowlight wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Stuff

More Bt stuff

** spoiler omitted **

What? Since when are they dead? Last time I checked they were fine, just lingering on relatively unused.

By the darkage they are dead, as are most homeworld clans who were not kicked and and fled to the IS {Ravens, horses maybe one more} some kind of clan reaving war or some such non sense. It is a known "fact" in game the Hellions and one of the snake clans are dead.

To many clans they said, half had to go, if they are not IS clans they thought they needed to go. Was a wizkid call but catalyst kept it.

101 to 150 of 377 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / General Discussion / Ridiculous(?) what-if & a pro-Pathfinder line in the sand All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.