Director of Brand Strategy
|
Additionally—and of course my perspective is always from that of a PathfinderWiki administrator—making the pdf unattainable after the new version is released makes it very difficult to check the validity of references and citations to the original version of the book. While I imagine most information taken from the 3.5 version will also appear in the revised edition, James has already said that some prestige classes will not be carried over and that some flavor elements from various nations will be de-emphasized. While this content may not be deemed appropriate for the core setting book going forward, it's nonetheless part of the world continuity because it has been printed in a canon sourcebook and should be available in some form for people wishing to look at the entirety of the setting's history.
You know, customers are not always so throughout as to read the entire blurb.
Use a big font in red at the top of the page.
Yeah, so some customers will complain. EVERY business gets complaints. But people who complain about something like THAT will find some excuse to complain anyway, no matter what.
Yeah, so some customers will complain. EVERY business gets complaints. But people who complain about something like THAT will find some excuse to complain anyway, no matter what.
+1
Very true. Eventually, one has to move on. Also, there's always E-bay.
JAVIER
Another way I could imagine keeping the old PDF available for people who still actually want the old version would be removing it as an individual product, but instead making it available for download to buyers of the revised edition PDF, as some kind of "extra".
|
Why not drop the price of the old pdf to $4.99? Make it cheap so anyone feeling nostalgic or actually running a 3.5 campaign can get it, and if they like what they see, the $9.99 for the new one won't be that bad.
If it cost less than the current cost and/or less than the new one that can cause two problems as well.
1) people that bought the current one at full cost feeling cheated at the new reduced cost. Yes I know they shouldn't but you know some will.
2) That people might buy the old one instead of the new one cause it cost less. I mean they want the new one to take the place of the old one, not encourage people to buy the old one.
So I get why Paizo is leary of doing this. A final sale that last a month at a reduced cost and make sure to post it in plenty of spots before taking it down I think could work. That and what someone above suggested. Take the 3.5 crunch and put it into a small side pdf that people can buy. It wouldn't have any fluff just the old 3.5 crunch in it. That way people could get the new one and then buy the 3.5 crunch pdf as well if they wanted to. That might be the best solution at keeping it around.
I agree, also lowering the price to 4.99 trains people to wait on products so they can get them cheaper, which numerous Paizo employee's have said is against their business model.
I have no problem with it disappearing, even paizo don't need to maintain the crunch, it's open content so pfsrd or anyone alse can simply collect in in a file and post the link here.
But a paizo done free roundup of the unpreserved 3.5 crunch would be nice. And shouldn't require too much work to put into a document, even with paizo layout.
A final sale that last a month at a reduced cost and make sure to post it in plenty of spots before taking it down I think could work.
I disagree. What if someone hasn't discovered Paizo yet, and becomes a fan years from now? That fan might want to delve into the history of the development of the setting, and look at older versions. That fan could hunt for an old copy in used book stores, or obtain a PDF copy illegally, which would not benefit Paizo at all. Or (s)he could pay Paizo $34.99 for it. Which would be better for Paizo?
|
|
A final sale that last a month at a reduced cost and make sure to post it in plenty of spots before taking it down I think could work.I disagree. What if someone hasn't discovered Paizo yet, and becomes a fan years from now? That fan might want to delve into the history of the development of the setting, and look at older versions. That fan could hunt for an old copy in used book stores, or obtain a PDF copy illegally, which would not benefit Paizo at all. Or (s)he could pay Paizo $34.99 for it. Which would be better for Paizo?
Yeah but if you read my last post I also agree it would be nice if they put the 3.5 crunch in it's own pdf for sale. Then they can sell the current one and those that want the 3.5 crunch could still buy it.
Yeah but if you read my last post I also agree it would be nice if they put the 3.5 crunch in it's own pdf for sale. Then they can sell the current one and those that want the 3.5 crunch could still buy it.
I DID read your post. But editing a new crunch-only PDF - aside from being more work for the Paizo staff that I'm sure they don't have time to do - still wouldn't be the same as the actual book.
For one thing, I quote James Jacobs in this thread:
In some cases, material in the first printing might not appear in this new version, or might be less detailed.
So some Golarion enthusiasts might want to see the old version. I mean, think of all those people who buy multiple editions of their favorite movies on DVD.
Long after I got the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer, I got the 1984 World of Greyhawk boxed set, to try to get a sense of the history of the setting's development. I have four different versions of the Dragonlance campaign setting - and I never even tried to PLAY in that world! I just wanted to enhance my understanding of the novels.
I can just imagine some future Golarion fan saying "What's this 'Slor' stuff?"
What's with this 'Slor' stuff anyway?
|
Creative Director
|
Additionally—and of course my perspective is always from that of a PathfinderWiki administrator—making the pdf unattainable after the new version is released makes it very difficult to check the validity of references and citations to the original version of the book. While I imagine most information taken from the 3.5 version will also appear in the revised edition, James has already said that some prestige classes will not be carried over and that some flavor elements from various nations will be de-emphasized. While this content may not be deemed appropriate for the core setting book going forward, it's nonetheless part of the world continuity because it has been printed in a canon sourcebook and should be available in some form for people wishing to look at the entirety of the setting's history.
Well... to be honest, if something gets left behind or changed in the revision, we don't really WANT the older version to keep its traction. There are certain elements of Golarion that need to change or even go away, and perpetuating their presence in a wiki isn't necessarily in the best interest of the world going forward. I'm all for keeping the information out there, but I don't see the need to perpetuate it in continuity. Especially, in some cases, when we decide that an element DOES need to go away. There ARE some of those, after all, where keeping them in world continuity either clashes in a disruptive way or, in the worst cases, could even open us up to legal action from other companies (this last is the REAL reason why I'm not a fan of authors putting in easter eggs).
If the older book's PDF goes away, my preference would be for elements that were in there but aren't in the revised setting to be appended with something like "abandoned concept" or something in the wiki, so folks know that it's a bit of lore that we basically aren't going to support or expand upon going forward. This lets them keep using the content in their own games if they like it (or even expand on it as they see fit without fear of being contradicted by "official content" in the future), but manages expectations by letting folks know that something is done.
|
Creative Director
|
A final sale that last a month at a reduced cost and make sure to post it in plenty of spots before taking it down I think could work.I disagree. What if someone hasn't discovered Paizo yet, and becomes a fan years from now? That fan might want to delve into the history of the development of the setting, and look at older versions. That fan could hunt for an old copy in used book stores, or obtain a PDF copy illegally, which would not benefit Paizo at all. Or (s)he could pay Paizo $34.99 for it. Which would be better for Paizo?
Well... if a fan is interested enough in the history of Golarion's creation, in that case I'd rather he seek out an old print copy of the first edition of the book in a used bookstore or ebay or something. I mean, that's basically what folks have to do for other games; Chaosium, for example, doesn't still sell earlier editions of Call of Cthulhu even though there's some stuff in the earlier editions they've abandoned. Likewise for D&D; there's some content in 1st edition rulebooks that haven't carried forward into the new editions. If gamers are interested in learning about those, they can do internet research or track down copies of those books.
Keeping a PDF available is analogous to keeping multiple editions of a game in print, and that DOES cause confusion. We need to present and officially support only one version of Golarion, not multiple versions, and keeping the 1st edition PDF readily available is not good business sense from that viewpoint.
Well... if a fan is interested enough in the history of Golarion's creation, in that case I'd rather he seek out an old print copy of the first edition of the book in a used bookstore or ebay or something. I mean, that's basically what folks have to do for other games; Chaosium, for example, doesn't still sell earlier editions of Call of Cthulhu even though there's some stuff in the earlier editions they've abandoned. Likewise for D&D; there's some content in 1st edition rulebooks that haven't carried forward into the new editions.
But now you have the power to keep old books available in electronic form at negligible cost to you. I'm not suggesting REPRINTING them.
If gamers are interested in learning about those, they can do internet research or track down copies of those books.
As I have done to track down dozens and dozens of out-of-print RPG products. But some of those are too difficult or expensive to be feasible, and that's what made me start to look into PDFs. In fact, that's what first brought me to Paizo.
Keeping a PDF available is analogous to keeping multiple editions of a game in print, and that DOES cause confusion. We need to present and officially support only one version of Golarion, not multiple versions, and keeping the 1st edition PDF readily available is not good business sense from that viewpoint.
But where does it end? Will you make unavailable all the 3.5 Golarion material? After all, you're not supporting the 3.5 rules anymore. It's the line of reasoning that's frightening and upsetting me, more than the specific product.
However, James, I will admit that you made one point that's making me reconsider my position:
There ARE some of those, after all, where keeping them in world continuity either clashes in a disruptive way or, in the worst cases, could even open us up to legal action from other companies...
Okay, the phrase "legal action" took me by surprise. If you have legitimate concerns in THAT department, then I can understand making a product unavailable. (Which doesn't mean I'd shut up about it, mind you...)
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
I also don't see the comparison to the Alpha- and Beta- core rules. Those were MEANT to be temporary, right from the get-go. And they were FREE for goodness' sake.
Ok... how about the Core Rulebook itself? Currently, the PDF mirrors the second printing, incorporating corrections to the first printing. In the not-too-distant future, the PDF will be updated to the third printing, incorporating corrections to the second printing, and the second printing PDF will be unavailable.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Keeping a PDF available is analogous to keeping multiple editions of a game in print, and that DOES cause confusion. We need to present and officially support only one version of Golarion, not multiple versions, and keeping the 1st edition PDF readily available is not good business sense from that viewpoint.But where does it end? Will you make unavailable all the 3.5 Golarion material? After all, you're not supporting the 3.5 rules anymore. It's the line of reasoning that's frightening and upsetting me, more than the specific product.
So you're saying that if we do it to this product with reason now, what's to stop us doing it to other products *without* reason in the future? I don't think that's giving us very much credit.
I also don't see the comparison to the Alpha- and Beta- core rules. Those were MEANT to be temporary, right from the get-go. And they were FREE for goodness' sake.Ok... how about the Core Rulebook itself? Currently, the PDF mirrors the second printing, incorporating corrections to the first printing. In the not-too-distant future, the PDF will be updated to the third printing, incorporating corrections to the second printing, and the second printing PDF will be unavailable.
Sorry, I'm still not convinced. We're not talking about a little revision to the campaign setting book, with error corrections and clarifications. The Inner Sea book will be a WHOLE NEW BOOK, with new material and, apparently, a few things taken out as well.
|
Creative Director
|
But where does it end? Will you make unavailable all the 3.5 Golarion material? After all, you're not supporting the 3.5 rules anymore. It's the line of reasoning that's frightening and upsetting me, more than the specific product.
However, James, I will admit that you made one point that's making me reconsider my position:
First of all... this is an unusual situation in the first place. We DON'T normally reprint and revise our books. We've never done this with any book in the Chronicles line; this is the first time we've done it, and it's happening because we at Paizo think that we didn't provide the Best Possible Book for our campaign setting, combined with the fact that we were hobbled in preparing the book due to the fact that we didn't have a stable rules set to work with at the time.
If we decided to reprint, say, "Classic Monsters Revisited," and in so doing expanded the book by 32 pages to add a few more monsters, and while we were at it decided to fix some typos in the existing text, we probably WOULD stop selling the 1st printing of the book. It's been replaced, basically.
But we aren't going to do that, because "Classic Monsters Revisited" still does the job we want it to do, and we're pretty dang proud of it, and its contents aren't a mess and they work very well with Golarion. There's no NEED to revise it. Same goes for pretty much every other book we've done... with the exception of the Campaign Setting. Where does it end? With the Campaign Setting reprint, that's where... or at least it ends there until we do another book in the future that doesn't live up to the expectations we set for ourselves... or at least until we switch rules systems again (which, hopefully, won't be for 10 years or more).
And if it's that big of a deal... I should point out that we are still selling hardcopies of the 1st printing and the PDF is still available. Now's as good a time as any to grab up copies of this edition if you want to own a copy for historical purposes or whatever.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
And if it's that big of a deal... I should point out that we are still selling hardcopies of the 1st printing and the PDF is still available. Now's as good a time as any to grab up copies of this edition if you want to own a copy for historical purposes or...
To elaborate on that, we're down to our last few cases of the print edition, and I fully expect they'll all be gone before the new book arrives.
So you're saying that if we do it to this product with reason now, what's to stop us doing it to other products *without* reason in the future? I don't think that's giving us very much credit.
No, I was saying that the same reason that applies to the Campaign Setting would also apply to other Golarion books. Only now James Jacobs has provided some OTHER reasons, including the "legal action" one, and also:
...it's happening because we at Paizo think that we didn't provide the Best Possible Book for our campaign setting, combined with the fact that we were hobbled in preparing the book due to the fact that we didn't have a stable rules set to work with at the time.
<snip>
But we aren't going to do that, because "Classic Monsters Revisited" still does the job we want it to do, and we're pretty dang proud of it, and its contents aren't a mess and they work very well with Golarion. There's no NEED to revise it. Same goes for pretty much every other book we've done... with the exception of the Campaign Setting.
Okay, so you have ARTISTIC reasons. I'm beginnning to understand. I'm still not happy about it, but I understand. More importantly...
Where does it end? With the Campaign Setting reprint, that's where.
All right, that's a good reassurance. I'm almost mollified.
Still, I hope that the good people at Paizo take into account, when making their decision, that there are people who care about this matter.
|
If we decided to reprint, say, "Classic Monsters Revisited," and in so doing expanded the book by 32 pages to add a few more monsters, and while we were at it decided to fix some typos in the existing text, we probably WOULD stop selling the 1st printing of the book. It's been replaced, basically.
[Evil push] If Paizo were to reprint any book of Pathfinder Chronicle line, it should have been Guide to Darkmoon Vale. The book is written gold, but is full of errors, misconceptions and missing text, very bellow Paizo standards[/Evil Push]
|
Threadjack
because "Classic Monsters Revisited" still does the job we want it to do, and we're pretty dang proud of it, and its contents aren't a mess and they work very well with Golarion. There's no NEED to revise it. Same goes for pretty much every other book we've done... with the exception of the Campaign Setting. Where does it end? With the Campaign Setting reprint, that's where... or at least it ends there until we do another book in the future that doesn't live up to the expectations we set for ourselves...
Ahem...Guide to Darkmoon Vale...cough..
edit Ninja'ed Draco Bahamut
Still, I hope that the good people at Paizo take into account, when making their decision, that there are people who care about this matter.
They are giving about 6-8 months notice that the PDF will no longer be around. People who really care have plenty of time to purchase it. Those that already have it can still download it in the future.
Contrast that with other companies who have decided to pull PDFs with around 1 week of notice.
As they have said, this is a special case for them. I doubt it will happen very often in the history of Paizo's products.
I personally like the idea of just packaging the 3.5e PDF of the Campaign Setting with the purchase of the PRPG PDF of the Campaign Setting.
Then everyone buys the latest version, and people who want the old stuff get the old stuff too. There's no confusion over which version to buy either since it's only one purchase.
Nobody is hurting because the old material costs more than the new material, nobody is confused over which version to purchase, the material is still available for people who want it, and the old book isn't in competition with the new book.
So you're saying that if we do it to this product with reason now, what's to stop us doing it to other products *without* reason in the future? I don't think that's giving us very much credit.
As one of the please-keep-the-old-PDFs-available crowd, let me stress that it's not that I'm ascribing any particular motivation to Paizo, nor posting out of fear of some worrying change to future policy. I confess to struggling to see the source of your discomfort, but that's neither here nor there. I'm just making sure you hear the voice of the late-to-the-party completionists.
I was introduced to Paizo through the Shackled City hardcover - part of what I'm doing now is tracking down the original dungeon magazines which constituted that (even though there's a new, improved, expanded version available). I want to be sure you realise there's a willing cohort of customers who will pay for old, outdated stuff - if you decide to go some other route I'm sure it will be for good reason, I just don't want to regret not speaking up later.
|
Creative Director
|
So you're saying that if we do it to this product with reason now, what's to stop us doing it to other products *without* reason in the future? I don't think that's giving us very much credit.As one of the please-keep-the-old-PDFs-available crowd, let me stress that it's not that I'm ascribing any particular motivation to Paizo, nor posting out of fear of some worrying change to future policy. I confess to struggling to see the source of your discomfort, but that's neither here nor there. I'm just making sure you hear the voice of the late-to-the-party completionists.
I was introduced to Paizo through the Shackled City hardcover - part of what I'm doing now is tracking down the original dungeon magazines which constituted that (even though there's a new, improved, expanded version available). I want to be sure you realise there's a willing cohort of customers who will pay for old, outdated stuff - if you decide to go some other route I'm sure it will be for good reason, I just don't want to regret not speaking up later.
Actually, the Shackled City hardcover's a good example. That product updated and expanded the Shackled City AP that originally appeared in the magazine, and the end result in the hardcover IS the publisher's preferred version and DOES replace the magazine versions. Would there have been a good reason to keep copies of the original magazine incarnations of that AP in print even though the hardcover is cheaper and bigger and more accurate?
|
Director of Brand Strategy
|
There have been many films that received the "director's cut" treatment to better realize the creators' visions and I see this as a similar situation. In some cases, the director's cut is superior (such as Blade Runner, Brazil, or Apocalypse Now: Redux). While I prefer to watch the revised versions, I am glad that there are still ways of seeing the original cuts of each film. On the other hand, something like the original Star Wars trilogy received a facelift and since then it has been fairly difficult to find the unaltered versions of the film. The only DVD release I know of that they've received were not even the remastered versions and had exaggeratedly poor quality video and sound. While I don't expect that the World Guide will contain the Pathfinder equivalent of Greedo shooting first, knowing that the original version can still be found in something other than used-condition dead tree versions from eBay.
and the end result in the hardcover IS the publisher's preferred version and DOES replace the magazine versions.
For some of us it replaces the originals but others like me see the need to collect both versions.... I actually was introduced to the Iron Kingdoms setting through the hardcover collected edition of the Witchfire Trilogy. I then decided to purchase the rest of the Iron Kingdom books including the original three modules that made up the compiled edition. It was important to me to own all of the offerings of the setting even if the newer version was fancier and had more bells and whistles. Many rpg fans suffer from a form of rapid completionism. Yes I am making up words to describe my current affliction.
On occasion I have refused to buy into a game because a product in the game line went out of print, I could not find one for a reasonable rate, and I refuse to succumb to the price gougers marauding ebay and amazon. It is easy to say, "hey if you want an out of print book just check the secondary market," but lately it seems the moment a book goes oop the online retailers jack the price up beyond reason.
Knights of the Old Republic tripled in price....
I saw a copy of Nights Dark Masters for WFRP go for 172.00 dollars last week...
I know an rpg company cannot keep all of its books in print all the time. It just doesn't work. Palladium does probably the best job of this but their production values are not even in the same ball park as Paizo's.
Keeping a pdf available may soothe some of the fans that want and feel it is important and necessary to have the entire catalog of your books at their disposal.
Pathfinder equivalent of Greedo shooting first
I almost refrenced that when I wrote my post. Happy, I didn't as you beat me to the point.
|
|
Being the Creative Director (same role as a movie's director), I would like to think I'm more in line with Ridley Scott or Terry Gilliam than I am George Lucas.
Maybe Clint Eastwood? They say he is a great director to work with because of his own massive experience acting and working for other great directors, and his ability to take the best from all his experiences to create the film he wants.
They are giving about 6-8 months notice that the PDF will no longer be around. People who really care have plenty of time to purchase it.
Except for the people who will discover Paizo AFTER the 6-8 months are over, and who happen to lack a time machine.
Actually, the Shackled City hardcover's a good example. That product updated and expanded the Shackled City AP that originally appeared in the magazine, and the end result in the hardcover IS the publisher's preferred version and DOES replace the magazine versions. Would there have been a good reason to keep copies of the original magazine incarnations of that AP in print even though the hardcover is cheaper and bigger and more accurate?
Well yes, that's what I'm trying to persuade you of - I chased down the paper version of the magazine because I wanted both and although that might be unusual, I don't think I'm the only one. I'm not pretending it's a vital issue, nor that the demand will be huge. I just don't see any real downside if it's shunted off to some obscure corner of the website and labelled "OUT OF DATE".
Of course, I'm not thinking as a publisher who has to field complaints, or with an eye on product line cohesion (or whatever the term is). I'm merely voicing the fact that there is demand for old, superceded material - even if, as the publishers/editors of such, you consider it inferior. Your mooted possibility of a condensed "the-bits-missing-from-the-new-version" file is an excellent option - I had presumed such a thing would be more trouble than it's worth.
|
Creative Director
|
Well yes, that's what I'm trying to persuade you of - I chased down the paper version of the magazine because I wanted both and although that might be unusual, I don't think I'm the only one. I'm not pretending it's a vital issue, nor that the demand will be huge. I just don't see any real downside if it's shunted off to some obscure corner of the website and labelled "OUT OF DATE".
Of course, I'm not thinking as a publisher who has to field complaints, or with an eye on product line cohesion (or whatever the term is). I'm merely voicing the fact that there is demand for old, superceded material - even if, as the publishers/editors of such, you consider it inferior. Your mooted possibility of a condensed "the-bits-missing-from-the-new-version" file is an excellent option - I had presumed such a thing would be more trouble than it's worth.
And what I'm saying is that there'll still be copies of the hardcover 1st printing out there for folks to chase down too. I can't imagine that the subset of folks who want copies of every printing of every book we do is that huge (however much I might want that subset to be huge!). And again... may PRIMARY concern is confusing people with multiple editions of the same book being for sale.
|
|
I see the current version of the book as the Greedo shooting first version, and that's the kind of stuff I want to fix in the new version.
As long as there are no Jar Jars in any upcoming products, that's fine with me.
Most likely my two current copies of the book and my Gazetter will go straight to the auction or used book store once the new one comes out. I personally hate holding on to out of date material. There has to be a lot of material in it that didn't get replaced before I'd keep it and I'm talking at least 30%.
The fact that the CS predates the Core Rules alone makes it a pretty obvious and appropriate choice, imo.
Sorry, but I don't follow your logic. The fact that it predates the core rules ALONE makes it an obvious choice? If that fact alone is sufficient, then the same reason applies to 20 AP volumes, 20 modules, 20 PSS scenarios, a dozen Chronicles, and a dozen Companion books.
And I'm sure many Paizo fans would LOVE to see official PFRPG conversions for those books. There have been requests for the APs in particular. Yes, I'm aware that Paizo isn't going to put out such conversions, but that isn't the point. The point is that the fans who want to see such conversions DON'T want to see the 3.5 versions disappear.
|
|
I think that we all have to realize that "3,5 compatibility" myth is dead. With the final edition of PFRPG Core Rules, Pathfinder gained enough players and 3PP support and the need to rely on 3,5 crowd is gone. I would prefer that Paizo puts all of it's efforts in designing it's own world and rules system, rather then to keep alive what is now dead game.
|
I wouldn't go as far as "the myth is gone", because PFRPG remains largely compatible with 3.5 material.
However there is a shift in the relationship between PFRPG and 3,5ed. When Pathfinder was announced, it was perceived as as alternate core rulebook trio which will still require the whole back catalog of 3.5ed material. This was because nobody was really sure how successful the book will be, how quickly will Paizo be able to bring support material to the table and how will the 3PP crowd react.
But now we can see that PFRPG is a big hit, Paizo has a full lineup of support books for 2010 (including a second monster book and a player crunch book), and Pathfinder has pretty much replaced 3.5 as the 3PP system of choice. So Pathfinder is pretty much standing on it's own legs right now. Now it needs a PFRPG campaign setting, and having two variants of one book in circulation is not a good idea IF you are trying hard to promote your own game at the same time.
Eg - Green Ronin is perfectly fine with several Freeport books for different systems, because they don't really have any interest in promoting one system over the others. Paizo on the other hand, has all the eggs in one basket and would like them to push that basket forward so that they can get resources for more PFRPG stuff done faster.
Paizo on the other hand, has all the eggs in one basket and would like them to push that basket forward so that they can get resources for more PFRPG stuff done faster.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the usual cliche is "DON'T put all your eggs in one basket."
If Paizo believed in putting all its eggs in one basket, it would have concentrated all its resources into the Dungeon and Dragon magazines. Then, when Wizards withdrew that contract, Paizo would have folded.
WotC took the saying "Don't split the party" just a little too far, in my opinion, and it was one of the reasons I turned away from Wizards and joined the Paizo fans.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting that Paizo waste resources on making products for 3.5. But they have 3.5 products ALREADY THERE, READY FOR ANYONE TO ORDER AND DOWNLOAD.
There are still people playing 3.5. Some of those people might one day discover Paizo, and find the 3.5 material. Would it be a good idea to alienate those potential customers?
|
|
If Paizo believed in putting all its eggs in one basket, it would have concentrated all its resources into the Dungeon and Dragon magazines. Then, when Wizards withdrew that contract, Paizo would have folded.
The funny thing is, that this is exactly what happened. Back in 2006, Paizo was pretty much Dungeon and Dragon. Their attempts at doing different things were so-so (Undefeated ? Star Wars Mag ?). And there was no way that Paizo would survive on a bunch of Gamemastery accessories alone.
Then WotC pulled the plug. Lisa and Co. had just one year to completely re-invent their business in order to survive. They did that, starting up the Pathfinder APs. And then WotC pulled the plug on 3.5 and declared that 4ed isn't backwards compatible, forcing Paizo to do the flip again and come up with PFRPG.
Luckily now there's no way of that happening again, short of US government banning RPGs. OGL cannot be revoked and it's existence is independent from WotC.
Also, 3.5 is DEAD. Paizo's best interest is to channel new people into PFRPG. If they start their gaming career with a 3.5 book, they will want more 3.5 stuff before they consider Pathfinder. So, the gaming buck will go to eBay instead of Paizo.
|
Creative Director
|
Do you believe many people are buying the Pathfinder APs (and other supplements), largely as a paper replacement for Dragon and Dungeon magazines? (ie. With better print + paper quality and no cheesy ads).
I believe so, yes. At least, that was CERTAINLY the case when we started Pathfinder. The AP very much remains the spiritual successor to both Dragon AND Dungeon, in my mind.
|
|
Do you believe many people are buying the Pathfinder APs (and other supplements), largely as a paper replacement for Dragon and Dungeon magazines? (ie. With better print + paper quality and no cheesy ads).I believe so, yes. At least, that was CERTAINLY the case when we started Pathfinder. The AP very much remains the spiritual successor to both Dragon AND Dungeon, in my mind.
I do to a point. I like the adventures in them but the other articles is at least if not more of a reason that i buy them as the adventures themselves.
|
Creative Director
|
If Paizo believed in putting all its eggs in one basket, it would have concentrated all its resources into the Dungeon and Dragon magazines. Then, when Wizards withdrew that contract, Paizo would have folded.
Yup. As Gorbacz said, this was EXACTLY what happened to Paizo. Twice. We gambled pretty big that folks would still be interested in Pathfinder as a non-D&D OGL d20 product, and won that gamble. We gambled again that folks would be interested in the Pathfinder RPG when WotC moved on to do 4th edition, and we won that gamble as well. But had either of those gambles gone south, Paizo WOULD have folded and gone away.
I don't want to alienate the remaining 3.5 players, but evidence from multiple sources indicates that the number of 3.5 players is either shrinking or, at best, stagnant. While we have DIRECT evidence that Pathfinder RPG players are rising. We don't have the resources or manpower or desire to directly support both Pathfinder RPG and 3.5 OGL, but that's why we made Pathfinder RPG compatible, so 3.5 players COULD use the rules.
Now, all that said... taking the 1st edition PDF of the Campaign Setting down and no longer selling it is NOT us trying to rob content from 3.5 gamers. If we do it (and note that I said IF... it's not decided yet), it's 100% because we don't want to confuse customers and cause problems with folks buying the wrong version. Which WILL happen, even if we put big signs up.
|
Do you believe many people are buying the Pathfinder APs (and other supplements), largely as a paper replacement for Dragon and Dungeon magazines? (ie. With better print + paper quality and no cheesy ads).I believe so, yes. At least, that was CERTAINLY the case when we started Pathfinder. The AP very much remains the spiritual successor to both Dragon AND Dungeon, in my mind.
It was definitely a replacement for me. To be perfectly honest, the only reason that I started my Pathfinder AP line was because I got "free" issues of it from my remaining subscriptions. If I hadn't I probably never would have gotten the AP. Which meant I never would've subscribed to the Companions... or Chronicles... or Modules... or RPG.
I have to say it was a very very ingenious move. I loved [i]Burnt Offerings[i] enough to continue down the line for years to come. Congrats Paizo! (Yeah, bad thread for it and two 1/2 years late, but I thought I might as well put it here)