Kilroy's page

Oh, so it really boils down to the fact that WotC decided to protect its IP this time around. Well, cry me a river. They have the right to do that, besides there was a lot crap out there with 3.5 due the OGL.

Besides take a look at the OGL Paizo is using "The following text is the property of Wizards of the Coast, Inc...." The OGL still belongs to WotC. It is theirs to do with what they like.

Paizo is still operating under WotC's OGL, which has as part of the authority by WotC to ammend and republish the OGL at any time. They could have shut down Pathfinder at any time. It seems WotC actually still a good bit of OGL out there after all, of course that is thanks to Paizo and WotC for not adding large royalties to it, or revoking it all together.

The sorting of things in to Book A and Book B was a bit too neat to look like a response to customer feedback. I think it was the original marketing plan and at best they simply adjusted it based on customer feedback, but the plans were already in place.

Wow, you must really hate WotC. Paizo also has its marketing plan, and it is to make a profit as well. It just involves Adventure Paths not Rule Books.

Kilroy wrote:

Tanis wrote:

One of the main reasons i switched to Pathfinder (apart from the game mechanics) was my disgust with the blatant cash grab of WotC and 4e.

It should also be remembered that there is a key marketing focus difference between WotC and Paizo. WotC focus is on rules books, Paizo is on Adventure paths. If you add the AP publications into the mix you have a much more similar number of publications and cost to the consumer. Granted you do not have to buy or use the AP's to run a PF game, but neither do you have to buy the "expansion" books to play/run D&D. Both companies could be accused of making a cash grab with different products.

Which is even more pronounced since everything important in PF is OGL.

Either you missed my point or I missed yours. OGL does not allow the a product defined as "Product Identity" to be copied and distributed. Yes you can use elements from Pathfinder products to produce your own and even sale those, but if you are going to us the APs you still have to buy them. To copy and redistribute a seperate "Product Identity" (any given AP module) is still copyright violation and piracy. So I don't see where the use OGL makes this more pronounced. Both companies still have copy righted product to sale.

One of the main reasons i switched to Pathfinder (apart from the game mechanics) was my disgust with the blatant cash grab of WotC and 4e.

It should also be remembered that there is a key marketing focus difference between WotC and Paizo. WotC focus is on rules books, Paizo is on Adventure paths. If you add the AP publications into the mix you have a much more similar number of publications and cost to the consumer. Granted you do not have to buy or use the AP's to run a PF game, but neither do you have to buy the "expansion" books to play/run D&D. Both companies could be accused of making a cash grab with different products. Paizo charges for the Pathfinder Society Modules, WotC does not charge for LFR modules. That does not mean that Paizo is cash grabbing from the Society players, any more than it means that WotC is "more understanding less greedy company." it only means that each has its own market niche, and each will attempt to profit from that niche. That is called Free Enterprise.

I hope my post is coming across the way I intend. I think both companies are great and expand the growth of table top FRPG; they just have a different focus on what to produce to make a profit.