Working with WotC and Paizo


Product Discussion

1 to 50 of 445 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

Those 3PP who generated products for 3.x and now the Pathfinder RPG, is there a difference in how the two companies treat you and/or your products?

Scarab Sages

joela wrote:
Those 3PP who generated products for 3.x and now the Pathfinder RPG, is there a difference in how the two companies treat you and/or your products?

Yes.

Dreamscarred Press

1 person marked this as a favorite.
joela wrote:
Those 3PP who generated products for 3.x and now the Pathfinder RPG, is there a difference in how the two companies treat you and/or your products?

By and large, Paizo is significantly more responsive and approachable.

There were some folks at WotC who were approachable, but as a general rule of thumb, it was a lot less inviting of an environment.

At Paizo, I can contact different folks with design questions and get a response (so far, I've asked questions of Jason, James, and I think a couple others...).

At WotC, I might ask Customer Service and who knows what sort of answer I received or who I was actually asking. If I asked Bruce Cordell, for example, a direct question about psionics, I always got a fairly corporate-speak answer (as someone who works in corporate America, I know corporate-speak when I see it).

All in all, I've found Paizo to be more responsive and welcoming to WotC's more sterile communications.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
joela wrote:
Those 3PP who generated products for 3.x and now the Pathfinder RPG, is there a difference in how the two companies treat you and/or your products?

Hell yes! Paizo has always made me feel that we are "partners" in this business. They have promoted me and other 3PP directly and often by name.


jeremy.smith wrote:
If I asked Bruce Cordell, for example, a direct question about psionics, I always got a fairly corporate-speak answer (as someone who works in corporate America, I know corporate-speak when I see it).

That's just sad. Though it does help explain why WoTC is so out of touch with much of its former audience. Of course, that might just be my bias talking -- I've yet to encounter anything a big corporation couldn't screw up.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
bugleyman wrote:
jeremy.smith wrote:
If I asked Bruce Cordell, for example, a direct question about psionics, I always got a fairly corporate-speak answer (as someone who works in corporate America, I know corporate-speak when I see it).
That's just sad. Though it does help explain why WoTC is so out of touch with much of its former audience. Of course, that might just be my bias talking -- I've yet to encounter anything a big corporation couldn't screw up.

You also have to remember that since WOTC was publishing a boatload of supplements of it's own, it tended to see the 3PP's as competition they'd rather see dry up and blow away. Whereas Paizo still being a relative startup tends to see these as reinforcing Pathfinder's relatively new presence as a game in it's own right. If Paizo were to become as established as WOTC was in it's peak that might change.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

LazarX wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
jeremy.smith wrote:
If I asked Bruce Cordell, for example, a direct question about psionics, I always got a fairly corporate-speak answer (as someone who works in corporate America, I know corporate-speak when I see it).
That's just sad. Though it does help explain why WoTC is so out of touch with much of its former audience. Of course, that might just be my bias talking -- I've yet to encounter anything a big corporation couldn't screw up.
You also have to remember that since WOTC was publishing a boatload of supplements of it's own, it tended to see the 3PP's as competition they'd rather see dry up and blow away. Whereas Paizo still being a relative startup tends to see these as reinforcing Pathfinder's relatively new presence as a game in it's own right. If Paizo were to become as established as WOTC was in it's peak that might change.

You don't need to worry about that changing. We understand that more people playing Pathfinder means *more people playing Pathfinder*, and there's no way that isn't good for us.


LazarX wrote:

You also have to remember that since WOTC was publishing a boatload of supplements of it's own, it tended to see the 3PP's as competition they'd rather see dry up and blow away. Whereas Paizo still being a relative startup tends to see these as reinforcing Pathfinder's relatively new presence as a game in it's own right. If Paizo were to become as established as WOTC was in it's peak that might change.

Considering that WotC were the ones that made it possible for those 3PP productions (because of the OGL), that is not a good excuse. IF they didn't want to deal with competition, then why put out the SRD in the first place?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jeraa wrote:
LazarX wrote:

You also have to remember that since WOTC was publishing a boatload of supplements of it's own, it tended to see the 3PP's as competition they'd rather see dry up and blow away. Whereas Paizo still being a relative startup tends to see these as reinforcing Pathfinder's relatively new presence as a game in it's own right. If Paizo were to become as established as WOTC was in it's peak that might change.

Considering that WotC were the ones that made it possible for those 3PP productions (because of the OGL), that is not a good excuse. IF they didn't want to deal with competition, then why put out the SRD in the first place?

I'm sure that if you suddenly travelled in time to 2000 and told Peter Adkinson and Ryan Dancey that someday WotC will screw the transition to the next edition so badly that some OGL 3PP will be able to snatch a significant part of the market from under their nose, both gentlemen would laugh and buy you a beer for telling some good fiction.

IOW: When WotC drafted OGL, they assumed that the current scenario (an OGL standalone goes head to head with the official D&D) is so highly unlikely that it can be ignored. Calculated risks and all that. All the OGL standalone games that appeared in the next 8 years and captured tiny fractions of the market only proved them right. And then came the 4dventure...

Jon Brazer Enterprises

joela wrote:
Those 3PP who generated products for 3.x and now the Pathfinder RPG, is there a difference in how the two companies treat you and/or your products?
LMPjr007 wrote:
Hell yes! Paizo has always made me feel that we are "partners" in this business. They have promoted me and other 3PP directly and often by name.

What he said. +1

Jon Brazer Enterprises

Gorbacz wrote:
I'm sure that if you suddenly travelled in time to 2000 and told Peter Adkinson and Ryan Dancey that someday WotC will screw the transition to the next edition so badly that some OGL 3PP will be able to snatch a significant part of the market from under their nose, both gentlemen would laugh and buy you a beer for telling some good fiction.

Actually Dancey would probably be like, "Yea, I figured." He basically outlined what happened with the 4E transition back in 2000-2001.

Jeraa wrote:
Considering that WotC were the ones that made it possible for those 3PP productions (because of the OGL), that is not a good excuse. IF they didn't want to deal with competition, then why put out the SRD in the first place?

While WotC of 2000 was an awesome company, WotC of 2007 might as well be an entirely different company, esp when it comes to management. Sure WotC of 2000 created the OGL, WotC of 2007 certainly wouldn't have. The only reason WotC of 2007 created the GSL at all was because of the fan outcry. If WotC of 2007 were in charge of making D&D 3.0 back in 2000, the OGL would never have been made.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jeraa wrote:
LazarX wrote:

You also have to remember that since WOTC was publishing a boatload of supplements of it's own, it tended to see the 3PP's as competition they'd rather see dry up and blow away. Whereas Paizo still being a relative startup tends to see these as reinforcing Pathfinder's relatively new presence as a game in it's own right. If Paizo were to become as established as WOTC was in it's peak that might change.

Considering that WotC were the ones that made it possible for those 3PP productions (because of the OGL), that is not a good excuse. IF they didn't want to deal with competition, then why put out the SRD in the first place?

You have to remember that corporations aren't static they change over time. the OGL was the invention of particular WOTC personnel Ryan Dancey et. al. Once they left the company, different viewpoints were influencing policy.


Gorbacz wrote:
I'm sure that if you suddenly travelled in time to 2000 and told Peter Adkinson and Ryan Dancey that someday WotC will screw the transition to the next edition so badly that some OGL 3PP will be able to snatch a significant part of the market from under their nose, both gentlemen would laugh and buy you a beer for telling some good fiction.

This is actually what happened for the most part. Back when enWorld was still Erik Noah's webpage someone asked what was to stop a company from just using the OGL to create a agme and ignore the d20 moniker (which require you to reference the PHB). Ryan laughed and said that any company that thought it could make money doing that was free to try. Games like SpyCraft, Mutants & Masterminds and Conan all started out as d20 but switched to just OGL for their second editions and all those games are still around (except for Conan but it wasn't dropped for lack of popularity; Mongoose got caught in some kind of legal squabble and lost the liscence). WotC would banish the OGL from the annals of Time if they could.

SJ


Sir Jolt wrote:


This is actually what happened for the most part. Back when enWorld was still Erik Noah's webpage someone asked what was to stop a company from just using the OGL to create a agme and ignore the d20 moniker (which require you to reference the PHB). Ryan laughed and said that any company that thought it could make money doing that was free to try. Games like SpyCraft, Mutants & Masterminds and Conan all started out as d20 but switched to just OGL for their second editions and all those games are still around (except for Conan but it wasn't dropped for lack of popularity; Mongoose got caught in some kind of legal squabble and lost the liscence). WotC would banish the OGL from the annals of Time if they could.

SJ

The OGL has even left the d20 system behind. Mongoose uses it for its version of Traveller. I think they renamed it the Traveller Trade License, but it is the OGL rebranded.

Jon Brazer Enterprises

Jeraa wrote:
The OGL has even left the d20 system behind. Mongoose uses it for its version of Traveller. I think they renamed it the Traveller Trade License, but it is the OGL rebranded.

As a Traveller OGL publisher, I can say that Traveller is very much OGL (and not some rebranding). Mongoose does have what they call the Traveller Logo License, but it identical in function to the d20 System Trademark License and the Pathfinder Compatibility License. It sit on top of the OGL, allowing the publisher to indicate compatibility. But it does not in and of itself allow for the use of the Traveller OGL system material.


Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
Actually Dancey would probably be like, "Yea, I figured." He basically outlined what happened with the 4E transition back in 2000-2001.

Having read all the message board chatter of that time, I can attest to this, too. In fact, one of the old original FAQs about the Open Gaming License pretty much reads like a roadmap to the split that happened - it's just that Dancey and Adkison had no idea that the future Brand Management and development would actually try what they said you shouldn't do. In fact, had WotC released 4E under the OGL, gamers being the inveterate tinkerers that they are, it probably wouldn't have been such a big deal - you would have had 4E, 3.9995E, 3.75E, 3.6E, 3.5E, and a ton of possible permutations, each tiny, all feeding back into the always evolving thing that is D&D, to satisfy everyone.

Only real worry I have is: Is the honeymoon of 2009 going to wear off yet, and if so, when? When will Paizo do something vaguely corporate-looking that will hurt the goodwill of the fanbase, and break the honeymoon? I'm betting Lisa, Erik, and James may be wondering the same thing. Or, they could realize that as long as WotC is busy making a ton of wrong moves, they could be photographed having a Tea Party with Adolf Hitler and still look good. :)


Thing is Paizo has the advantage of being more intimate. The sole leadership/ownership of the company isn't distracted by having their eye on other product lines. Also, there isn't a stockholder syndrome where each year's profits need increase by an ever-increasing amount or the division is considered to be failing. As long as Paizo is making a profit and paying the bills, I think Lisa and the gang recognize that's success. If things are slowing down, it's worthwhile investigating reasons, but eternal growth-of-market isn't demanded.

So in short I don't expect Paizo to have the same kind of trouble WotC does. I do expect them to eventually start to run dry for rules-based products, but we'll see. I suspect even when that happens, even if they elect to go PFRPG 2.0 as a "fix" that it'd stand a good chance of being compatible. They know better than to invalidate the products we already own.


@ ENHenry:

"Tea Party with Adolf Hitler"...lol.

As someone who plays both 4E and Pathfinder with two separate groups, I have to say that WOTC rubs me the wrong way as well alot of times. Paizo seems like a much kinder, gentler company, and seems to actually care what its fans want.

All the recent direction changes and confusion with 4E just makes me appreciate PF more. WOTC is always trying to chase down new fans, which isn't a bad thing, except that they seem to throw their old fans under the bus when they chase the new ones.

It's kinda like in high school, WOTC is the kid that has a core group of friends but doesn't appreciate them because he wants to make cool, NEW friends. So, he decides to neglect his old friends and distance himself from them to pursue these new friends. But young WOTC tries too hard to make them like him, and doesn't really succeed.

So, then young WOTC decides to go back to his old friends and act like nothing happened. But, his old friends are now offended and angry because he ignored them to chase after new friends. So, poor young WOTC doesn't have many new friends and his old friends don't like him anymore.

I just don't see Paizo making that kind of mistake.


Ugh, I wrote a big post awhile back on the OGL and all that but can't find it at the moment.

Marking a post here to edit it in if/when I do find it.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber

WotC = wholly* owned subsidiary of a massive corporation with a board of directors, always answering to "shareholders", which is to say just next quarterly profit figures. If someone makes a decision that loses the company money, they can (and probably will) be fired for it.

Paizo = company wholly* owned by Lisa and Vic. This means that they have to answer to... themselves. If they want to take a relative risk with the direction of the company and feel it's worth it because of the idea, they can just do it. They can't be fired by the shareholders for poor company performance, so they can do whatever they want to, as long as they're willing to personally incur the risk.

It's just a textbook example of big business vs. small enterprise.

*Note: not sure on entire financial structure of either company. There could easily be other owners, which might make the whole argument null and void.


jeremy.smith wrote:
If I asked Bruce Cordell, for example, a direct question about psionics, I always got a fairly corporate-speak answer

The sad part is there was a time when he was putting out some great work.


Jeraa wrote:
Considering that WotC were the ones that made it possible for those 3PP productions (because of the OGL), that is not a good excuse. IF they didn't want to deal with competition, then why put out the SRD in the first place?

It gave the d20 system market dominance, basically, the way that the 386 architecture gave the IBM PC market dominance over all of it's competition, and WotC is the source of all d20.

Problem was they didn't stick with that philosophy, and that meant that the system that made it easy for other companies to be d20 compatible and promote WotC products now meant it was easy for them to compete with WotC. Same thing happened to IBM - they are still a big name in IT, but they are not the 800lb gorilla in the PC market any more.


So besides just submitting an OGL application to Pathfinder, is there more to it to become a 3pp? I mean obviously you have to go through the hoops of legitimizing the business and creating the PDFs or published material, but is there more to it than that? Paizo seems to treat and work with their 3PP very well and seems to encourage new people to try and enter the industry (while gently reminding them that not EVERYONE can do it) but what more is there to becoming a 3PP? Maybe this isn't the right place to ask, but publishing of any kind has always been an interest of mine, especially in the RPG industry and entrepreneurial is a close second. One thing I've learned is that asking questions gets you farther than stumbling around blind.


Vistarius wrote:
So besides just submitting an OGL application to Pathfinder, is there more to it to become a 3pp? I mean obviously you have to go through the hoops of legitimizing the business and creating the PDFs or published material, but is there more to it than that? Paizo seems to treat and work with their 3PP very well and seems to encourage new people to try and enter the industry (while gently reminding them that not EVERYONE can do it) but what more is there to becoming a 3PP? Maybe this isn't the right place to ask, but publishing of any kind has always been an interest of mine, especially in the RPG industry and entrepreneurial is a close second. One thing I've learned is that asking questions gets you farther than stumbling around blind.

Well the first question is: Do you want to create RPG material OR do you want to run a RPG Publishing business? These are two completely different things. If you want to create RPG material work for a 3PP and work your way up to Paizo. If you want to deal with the formal side of running a business (writing profit loss statements, paying freelancers, acquiring artists, etc.) then start a RPG Publishing business.

Jon Brazer Enterprises

Vistarius wrote:
So besides just submitting an OGL application to Pathfinder, is there more to it to become a 3pp?

That's a great question to ask at the PaizoCon Seminar "So You Wanna Be a Publisher (Or Do You Want to be Published)" Run by myself and Owen K. C. Stephens of Super Genius Games.

Edit: oops, fixed. Sorry Owen. ;)

Scarab Sages

Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
That's a great question to ask at the PaizoCon Seminar "So You Wanna Be a Publisher (Or Do You Want to be Published)" Run by myself and Owen K. C. Stevens of Super Genius Games.

Indeed it is, Mr. McKoy! :)

-Owen K.C. Stephens

Liberty's Edge

Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
That's a great question to ask at the PaizoCon Seminar "So You Wanna Be a Publisher (Or Do You Want to be Published)" Run by myself and Owen K. C. Stephens of Super Genius Games.

If anyone's going to be attending this seminar (or if one of you gents would be willing), I would like to record it. Unfortunately I'm in a lottery game at that time, so I'd need to hand over my Xoom recorder and show someone how to work it (it's simple). If anyone can help with this, let me know!


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
joela wrote:
Those 3PP who generated products for 3.x and now the Pathfinder RPG, is there a difference in how the two companies treat you and/or your products?

Paizo: Promotes 3PP material on their store blog.

WotC: Pretends 3PP material doesn't exist and ignores them.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
Vistarius wrote:
So besides just submitting an OGL application to Pathfinder, is there more to it to become a 3pp?

That's a great question to ask at the PaizoCon Seminar "So You Wanna Be a Publisher (Or Do You Want to be Published)" Run by myself and Owen K. C. Stephens of Super Genius Games.

Edit: oops, fixed. Sorry Owen. ;)

This brings up something I have been wondering. I would love to attend this but finances this year mean no trip to the big Cons for me. Is there a chance this will be recorded and later webcast or provided on someones web site. I am very interested in exactly this topic.

Scarab Sages

Pyrrhic Victory wrote:
This brings up something I have been wondering. I would love to attend this but finances this year mean no trip to the big Cons for me. Is there a chance this will be recorded and later webcast or provided on someones web site. I am very interested in exactly this topic.

I honestly don't know, but if not we might be able to just recreate it as a podcast.


Gorbacz wrote:


I'm sure that if you suddenly travelled in time to 2000 and told Peter Adkinson and Ryan Dancey that someday WotC will screw the transition to the next edition so badly that some OGL 3PP will be able to snatch a significant part of the market from under their nose, both gentlemen would laugh and buy you a beer for telling some good fiction.

I did that, and got nothing but disbelieving stares. Your ideas are garbage!

And when I told them what happened to the magazines, they sicced security on me!

Gorbacz wrote:


IOW: When WotC drafted OGL, they assumed that the current scenario (an OGL standalone goes head to head with the official D&D) is so highly unlikely that it can be ignored. Calculated risks and all that. All the OGL standalone games that appeared in the next 8 years and captured tiny fractions of the market only proved them right. And then came the 4dventure...

Also, the wotc from today is not the WotC from back then.


ENHenry wrote:


Only real worry I have is: Is the honeymoon of 2009 going to wear off yet, and if so, when? When will Paizo do something vaguely corporate-looking that will hurt the goodwill of the fanbase, and break the honeymoon? I'm betting Lisa, Erik, and James may be wondering the same thing. Or, they could realize that as long as WotC is busy making a ton of wrong moves, they could be photographed having a Tea Party with Adolf Hitler and still look good. :)

They'd have to blunder pretty badly to lose goodwill.

Right now, their goodwill account is well in the black. Pathfinder RPG, giving a home to those who didn't want 4e, was not the only thing they did for the community. Their attitude is quite positive. They're open and accessible and all that.

They feel like friends. You forgive friends their blunders, if they're not too big.

So unless they turn around, they're going to stay in good graces for the majority of their fans.


joela wrote:
Those 3PP who generated products for 3.x and now the Pathfinder RPG, is there a difference in how the two companies treat you and/or your products?

Does anyone even create 3PP product for 4E? I think Goodman Games was at one time but I'm sure they will stop once their own RPG is out. I can't even think of any other 3PP for 4E material.

BTW, I'm not saying, or even know, if this is a good or bad thing. I can think of both pros and cons to having 3PP working with your product.

Scarab Sages

cibet44 wrote:
Does anyone even create 3PP product for 4E? I think Goodman Games was at one time but I'm sure they will stop once their own RPG is out. I can't even think of any other 3PP for 4E material.

SGG did one, the Kobold Death Maze adventure was actually originally for 4e.

We did not do a second 4e 3pp product.

Alea Publishing Group did at least one, I own (and really like) their Nobles book. But the fact I can't put it in the character generator means no player of mine would use it.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
cibet44 wrote:

Does anyone even create 3PP product for 4E? I think Goodman Games was at one time but I'm sure they will stop once their own RPG is out. I can't even think of any other 3PP for 4E material.

BTW, I'm not saying, or even know, if this is a good or bad thing. I can think of both pros and cons to having 3PP working with your product.

Open Design has several products for 4E. None of them use the GSL though. Kobold Quarterly regularly has 4E articles in it. In fact, Open Design is the only company I know of that is making quality 3PP products for 4E.


HeHateMe wrote:


@ ENHenry:

"Tea Party with Adolf Hitler"...lol.

When you guys say "tea party", do you mean the same as I do? Because I hear Americans sometimes have weird notions about tea parties, and your profiles don't list a nationality so I can't know whether you are Americans or not.

HeHateMe wrote:


It's kinda like in high school, WOTC is the kid that has a core group of friends but doesn't appreciate them because he wants to make cool, NEW friends. So, he decides to neglect his old friends and distance himself from them to pursue these new friends. But young WOTC tries too hard to make them like him, and doesn't really succeed.

So, then young WOTC decides to go back to his old friends and act like nothing happened. But, his old friends are now offended and angry because he ignored them to chase after new friends. So, poor young WOTC doesn't have many new friends and his old friends don't like him anymore.

You forgot the racial jokes wotc made about his old friends. When thy got angry, wotc refused to comment at all. No "that wasn't meant to be a racial joke, I misspoke" or anything.

(Troll is a race)

Jon Brazer Enterprises

cibet44 wrote:
Does anyone even create 3PP product for 4E?

There are a few. None of the big 5 3PP during the 3E days are producing for 4E anymore. Mongoose tried and quickly abandoned it, Goodman produced something not long ago, but have since announced plans for DCCRPG. GR produced a character record folio and that's it. Necromancer is gone. And Paizo is becoming the current champion of the RPG industry with Pathfinder RPG.

EN Publishing and Open Design are the only companies I can name off hand that publishes 4E material. There are a few others, but they are very few, and none are print and in game stores.

cibet44 wrote:
BTW, I'm not saying, or even know, if this is a good or bad thing. I can think of both pros and cons to having 3PP working with your product.

There are pros and cons, but it really comes down to attitude. If you choose to focus at the pros, the pros seem overwhelming. If you focus on the negatives, the negatives seem overwhelming. Paizo has taken the pros route while WotC has taken the cons route.

Their reasoning for abandoning the OGL was completely bogus. The BoEF was bad for them. Yea, well, as a customer and as a gamer, Bo9S was bad for my game. I got over it. Everyone has a bad experience now and again. I'm sorry it sounds like cry baby reasoning to me. They were really looking for a way to get a larger slice of the gamer money pie. It backfired on them. Now they are left with a much smaller pie. Their loss.


Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:


I honestly don't know, but if not we might be able to just recreate it as a podcast.

For those of us that are unable to attend this year, that would be most appreciated.


The OGL was dropped because of the book of erotic fantasy? Was that really one of the stated reasons?


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Cheapy wrote:
The OGL was dropped because of the book of erotic fantasy? Was that really one of the stated reasons?

No, the OGL was dropped for many reasons. Mostly because the WotC management changed and no longer considered 3PP essential to the promotion of their brand. It was a remarkable vision from a specific time in D&D's life (they were trying to resurrect it after TSR's collapse) and is a hard sell to corporate lawyers without a very strong advocate sitting in the D&D brand manager position.

Jon Brazer Enterprises

Cheapy wrote:
The OGL was dropped because of the book of erotic fantasy? Was that really one of the stated reasons?
deinol wrote:
No, the OGL was dropped for many reasons. Mostly because the WotC management changed and no longer considered 3PP essential to the promotion of their brand.

They never stated that outright. They said they want to insure that 3PP produce products that were up their standards of decency, making the game non-OGL a necessity. Fan outcry made them do something so the anti-OGL crowd agreed to the GSL. The only d20 product that did not meet WotC's decency standards was ... the Book of Erotic Fantasy. More than anything it was the anti-OGL's excuse to do what they wanted to do. While they never said it outright, it was hinted at enough to be more than obvious that it was their excuse.

Liberty's Edge

Yes, Goodman does, as well as Open Design (Kobold Quarterly, enPublishing, Alea Publishing Group and a few others. Mostly pretty good material.


See an Open Letter to Paizo...

Legendary Games, Necromancer Games

Jeraa wrote:
LazarX wrote:

You also have to remember that since WOTC was publishing a boatload of supplements of it's own, it tended to see the 3PP's as competition they'd rather see dry up and blow away. Whereas Paizo still being a relative startup tends to see these as reinforcing Pathfinder's relatively new presence as a game in it's own right. If Paizo were to become as established as WOTC was in it's peak that might change.

Considering that WotC were the ones that made it possible for those 3PP productions (because of the OGL), that is not a good excuse. IF they didn't want to deal with competition, then why put out the SRD in the first place?

Bottom line: Ryan Dancey is a visionary. The OGL was his baby. Ryan is not at Wizards anymore and now you have very conservative suits that don't understand the value of open gaming making the decisions. End of story.

Contributor

If any consigner here at paizo.com needs assistance with their products in the webstore, please do not hesitate to shoot me an email!

Liberty's Edge

Shadowborn wrote:
Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:


I honestly don't know, but if not we might be able to just recreate it as a podcast.
For those of us that are unable to attend this year, that would be most appreciated.

If I can get it recorded, and if all the involved parties are OK with it, I'll get it edited, hosted, and posted. If I can't, as Owen mentions (and if Dale is amenable to the idea), I could easily get a podcast together assuming I can pry these guys away from publishing awesome products for an hour one day.


deinol wrote:
joela wrote:
Those 3PP who generated products for 3.x and now the Pathfinder RPG, is there a difference in how the two companies treat you and/or your products?

Paizo: Promotes 3PP material on their store blog.

WotC: Pretends 3PP material doesn't exist and ignores them.

Well of course Paizo markets it, they get the games niche products filled, drawing people into the game without having to invest in produce relatively low turn around product. As a retailer they get a cut once the product is produced and become a destination site for people to go for pf related material. It gets even better for Paizo if people buy 3pp PDF files from the site, Paizo gets a retail commission on the sale for handling a digital file somebody else has sunk the money into producing (and probably sells one of their own at the same time).

Which isn't meant as a slam at Paizo so much as pointing out that in publishing sometimes it is better to lead a genre than to own it.

Dreamscarred Press

The Forgotten wrote:
Well of course Paizo markets it, they get the games niche products filled, drawing people into the game without having to invest in produce relatively low turn around product. As a retailer they get a cut once the product is produced and become a destination site for people to go for pf related material. It gets even better for Paizo if people buy 3pp PDF files from the site, Paizo gets a retail commission on the sale for handling a digital file somebody else has sunk the money into producing (and probably sells one of their own at the same time).

As one of said 3PP, I don't mind that. A good chunk of our income is through sales here at the Paizo site, and their cut is better than any of the other sites... And I don't have to deal with customer service issues on those orders like I do for orders at my own store. I'm project manager, customer service, web developer, content editor, content creator, technical support, and publisher all rolled into one. Letting Paizo handle part of that for a good chunk of our sales frees up a significant amount of time for me to work on getting quality books out to the public.

Sales here at Paizo blow sales at RPGNow and DriveThruRPG combined out of the water, and I get 10% more of the cover price. I'm more than happy with that arrangement. ;)

Paizo Employee Director of Sales

jeremy.smith wrote:
And I don't have to deal with customer service issues on those orders like I do for orders at my own store.

I got your back, yo. :)

Scarab Sages

jeremy.smith wrote:
Sales here at Paizo blow sales at RPGNow and DriveThruRPG combined out of the water, and I get 10% more of the cover price. I'm more than happy with that arrangement. ;)

I'll just quote that, and for myself say we are very happy with our business relationship with Paizo, both as the custodians of Pathfinder, and as a sales venue.

1 to 50 of 445 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Third-Party Pathfinder RPG Products / Product Discussion / Working with WotC and Paizo All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.