(I posted the same thing on the wizards site, but I have added more to it because I have thought of more things to say.)
I wanted to also voice my displeasure at the conclusion of the license to publish DUNGEON and DRAGON at Paizo.
But I do ask myself: Was this a more mutual cessation between Wizards and Paizo? Are Wizards only taking it back because Paizo have had enough of DRAGON and DUNGEON or now have decided to refocus solely on Adventure Paths? (As an aside, I would prefer an Adventure Path I can hold in my hands over on-line content, so my money is with Paizo 100%)
I think that someone need to be totally upfront with the community because let's face it; people are angry at what was said about "Today the internet is where people go to get this kind of information." If that is the case, I would like to meet the vast majority of people who would rather have to lug their PCs or laptops AND their rulebooks to a game instead of a few rulebooks and a magazine.
Coupled with that Paizo have flown from the starting blocks with a new periodical also explains why there has been little DUNGEON magazine online content of late; they have been working furiously on PATHFINDER. To me it suggests that this transition has been known about for some time and strikes me as more of a business strategy on Paizo's behalf than than a contingency to the conclusion of license.
Wizards having (only) said that 'We have a plan' further says that DUNGEON and DRAGON really, well, doesn't.
Is it just me who thinks this? Just curious. I don't want to rile people up in this emotional time, I am trying to look at this from a different perspective in an attempt to make sense of it.
I very well may be wrong, and I accept that if I am.
I beleive that WotC was the one who chose to not renew Paizo's contract to produce "official D&D material". I'm sure there were some sort back and forth negotiations between Paizo and WotC, that ultimately led Paizo to give it up because WotC was asking for too much money to continue to produce the magazines (and WotC knowing full well what they were doing).
But ultimately I think WotC saw the great job Paizo was doing. Paizo has made the magazines into a great couple of magazines with great production values and awesome writing. Not to mention the "green eyes" effect: that is to say that WotC saw the money making potential that the magazines have.
In the end, it is my opinion, that it is about the Big Bad Company taking away the toys of the small company because they were jealous.
So to answer your question in a completely non-official manner: I do not believe that this was Paizo's choice. And you are certainly correct in your assumptions that both companies have known about this for at least a couple of months if not this entire year.
This is just the final straw for me with WotC. They have become what I hate. Ever heard of a company called "Games Workshop"? This is the road that WotC has decided to follow. And I am not following that road. Anyways there is a reason that Games Workshop (GW) is nicknamed "Greedy Weasels".
When this whole thing was announced I honestly felt as though Wizards of the Coast had just kicked me in the head and then stole all of my favorite toys.
Several Paizo employees have posted that, if it were up to them, they would be continuing to publish Dungeon and Dragon magazines as they have been doing, for as long as they were permitted to do so.
What is troubling to me isn't that Paizo was prepared. If I was in charge of a company whose primary product relied on the whims of an outside license, I'd have a contingency plan, and I'm sure they did - and that we're seeing some part of that plan with the Pathfinder and Gamemastery modules products.
What puzzles me is that, in having decided to take the license back, wizards was so poorly prepared on the PR end to handle the upheaval.... which they have, in my mind, completely failed to do.
I am not surprised that Paizo was prepared. Frankly I would have been surprised if they weren't. And no, I really don't think it was voluntary, though I wouldn't be surprised if there had been an intention to spin the adventure paths off as a secondary product before the license was pulled. If for no other reason than it would give them more control of the product.
- Ashavan
What puzzles me is that, in having decided to take the license back, wizards was so poorly prepared on the PR end to handle the upheaval.... which they have, in my mind, completely failed to do.
- Ashavan
That is strange. And it does suggest that the decision was made spur of the moment. I just hope that this terrible PR that WotC is having will give them more troubles than they are suspecting.
And I hope that Paizo will come out of this mess all the stronger.
What puzzles me is that, in having decided to take the license back, wizards was so poorly prepared on the PR end to handle the upheaval.... which they have, in my mind, completely failed to do.
- Ashavan
That is strange. And it does suggest that the decision was made spur of the moment. I just hope that this terrible PR that WotC is having will give them more troubles than they are suspecting.
And I hope that Paizo will come out of this mess all the stronger.
It looks like Wizards.com/dnd weren't expecting the latest outcome to the last license renewal meeting. Paizo have had the foresight to prepare for the eventuality which has caught Wizards with their pants down AND left them holding the baby, to aptly mix metaphors.
|
As I am certain many other people did, I sent an e-mail to wotc voicing my displeasure at this move. I think it was at about three A.M., because I was so upset that I couldn't sleep. From many of the messageboard posts that I saw while I was up, it was apparent that lots of folks couldn't sleep, especially several of the big Paizo people. wotc's only release to that point was a Gomer Pyle kinda, "Ayup, we did it!" The next day, I received a return e-mail from wotc saying that my disappointment was duly noted, and giving a link to their site where they had finally created some sort of damage control: mostly in the form of former Dungeon and Dragon editors who were all saying, "No, really! This is for the best! We have a plan! We just can't tell you what it is, exactly!"
Isn't that the same bullcrap that the President has been saying about the Iraq War for the last several years? I really don't trust that kind of statement any more. I admire and respect many of the former Dungeon and Dragon editors that made those statements, but I feel almost as if they were forced to in order to keep their jobs.
Right there on the ENWorld.org new page:
Scott: More than a year ago, after much discussion, WotC and Paizo mutually agreed to let the contract expire at the end of the current license. We extended that license a few months so that things like the current Adventure Path could reach a natural conclusion.
Aha!
Though I can see it is quite evident that I was wrong. WotC does apparently, have a plan and it was more important to have Paizo launch their product first to establish it.
I also wonder what is going to become of OGL and D20 licensing? Is it going the same way? It struck me as odd that this adventure path only goes to level 15 and not 20. Are we only going to see six issues of Pathfinder before the OGL license is revoked as well?
OGL can't be revoked, but there probably won't be one for 4th edition, so OGL will forever be 3.5
Scott: More than a year ago, after much discussion, WotC and Paizo mutually agreed to let the contract expire at the end of the current license. We extended that license a few months so that things like the current Adventure Path could reach a natural conclusion.
I have to wonder what 'Mutually' means in this context. I get the feeling that WotC told Paizo that the license was being pulled, and Paizo made nice, since they couldn't stop it, and fighting would hurt them even more. Like a bully claiming a kid gave up his milk money willingly (After all, he could have accepted a beating before having it taken).
I am surprised that this happened 'more than a year' ago, seeing as that would mean Savage Tide hadn't started yet and thus the extension might not have been necessary. More embellishment?
Scott: More than a year ago, after much discussion, WotC and Paizo mutually agreed to let the contract expire at the end of the current license. We extended that license a few months so that things like the current Adventure Path could reach a natural conclusion.I have to wonder what 'Mutually' means in this context. I am surprised that this happened 'more than a year' ago, seeing as that would mean Savage Tide hadn't started yet and thus the extension might not have been necessary.
While Savage Tide hadn't started, it's fairly certain that the soliciting of folks to write for the AP had already started, and probably the development of outlines as well.
It could also be that wizards intended on Paizo using up a lot of their already solicited material so that Wizards is deciding what sort of content gets put into their new initiative, rather than relying on the choices of Paizo's editors (which in my mind have been excellent, but may not be what WotC has in mind for the brand).
- ashavan
I know as little as everyone, but I have a piece of argument for vradna's hypothesis. Sorry it is late and I do not want to search for the issue, but in one editorial some time back (maybe a year or so), the editor complained, that sales of Dungeon and Dragon from newsstands were not high enough. So even if WoTC revoked the licence, maybe Paizo was not that unwilling and did not fight much for it as the two magazines did not pay off as well at they would have liked or needed to continue.
Just my 2 cp.
Suppose just for the sake of argument that we accept everything WOTC and Paizo have said is true.
This is (potentially) a good move for WOTC because they get to increase their profits by producing Dragon and Dungeon content themselves. They know from 30 years of experience that as long as they put decent pictures on the covers people will continue to buy their stuff. When 4.0 comes out, they'll be sitting pretty as the only source of 'official' material. Also, many of us (especially us old-timers) will likely follow settings like Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms no matter who the publisher is. There's a lot of loyalty out there.
Also, this is (again, potentially) a good move for Paizo since they can get out from under outside oversight and produce what they want. Given the quality of their past and current products, they stand a good chance of cornering the 3.5e market. Also, producing a 'game supplement' like Pathfinder is potentially cheaper than producing a 'magazine', since you don't have to worry about so many unsold copies. Pathfinder has continuity built in (the Adventure Path concept) which encourages customers to continue buying, and also has a high value when compared to other products on the market.
While many may have hard feelings against WOTC after this, I suspect the gaming community will continue to grow for some time and that companies will continue to produce 3.5e products long after 4.0e is released.
All this will be rendered moot in 10-15 years anyway, since everybody is going to eventually follow WOTC's lead and become completely computerized. It's just a matter of time.
With all that said, I've decided that I'll not be converting to 4.0e when it comes along. I'll stick with Paizo and other 3.5e companies until the well runs dry, and by then I shoudl be too old to care one way or the other. I've been playing D&D for 30 years now, and it's been a good run. Unfortunately, nothing lasts forever. God bless Paizo for sticking around as long as they have.