|
I feel as the 2nd Adventure Path is drawing to a close..all subscribers should get an e-mail inviting us to go to Paizo's site and take a poll as to whether or not to convert.
If its overwhelmingly "Yes I wish to go to 4th edition"...So be it.
I haven't made up my mind on 4e yet - I'll probably buy the core books and decide after that - but Jason's ideas seems quite fair. In the end, Paizo is a business and has to continue making money to survive. Their decision to go 4e or not will be largely based on where the market is after the second adventure path and where they project it will go from there. A poll of subscribers (maybe with two votes each for charter subscribers ;) would probably give an accurate picture of what one core audiences for the adventure paths wants and where they are willing to spend their money. The other core audience is made up of non-subscribers who buy on Amazon or at book and game stores. I have no idea which audience makes up a larger share of Paizo's total market, but maybe they could put out a few 4e Gamemastery modules to test the over-the-counter market.
In the end, I will most likely go where Paizo goes. Time and time again they've earned my respect, my appreciation, and my dollars.
Oh, and ...
Long live Macs!!!!!
In the end, I will most likely go where Paizo goes. Time and time again they've earned my respect, my appreciation, and my dollars.
Amen.
One factor though is that over time the core rulebooks are going to be hard to find for new players. On the one hand most GMs running the Pathfinder scenarios will probably already have the books, but on the other hand the hobby grows all the time. The Mongoose web site makes it look like they've allowed their Pocket Player's Handbook to go out of print, and as far as I know that was the only other hardcopy of the player's rules available.
Has anyone announced doing a print version of the 3.5 PHB bits of the SRD once WotC stops printing them?
One factor though is that over time the core rulebooks are going to be hard to find for new players. On the one hand most GMs running the Pathfinder scenarios will probably already have the books, but on the other hand the hobby grows all the time. The Mongoose web site makes it look like they've allowed their Pocket Player's Handbook to go out of print, and as far as I know that was the only other hardcopy of the player's rules available.Has anyone announced doing a print version of the 3.5 PHB bits of the SRD once WotC stops printing them?
I don't think it will be hard to find 3.5 core rulebooks for a long time to come. Ebay will be flooded with people selling their used copies as 4th edition approaches and for a few years afterwards as people convert. Heck, even now you can get ahold of 1st and 2nd edition rulebooks on ebay.
As for D&D Insider, of course we'll see what the end product is - but given the following, I don't have high expectations:
- They are going Windows only when the general trend in software development has been to cross platform.
This hasn't been my experience. Most software is developed for a specific platform, be it a PC, Playstation, or what have you, and then maybe ported to something else. We're just starting into the trend of the game industry releasing high-budget titles (movie tie-ins don't count) across multiple platforms, and the rest of the software development shops will take at least a couple years to follow suit. It's still very difficult to find most PC software for the Mac, for instance.
- They are apparently going with a stand alone software model rather than a web-based service. Web-based is orders of magnitude easier to update and maintain than thousands of standalone applications on thousands of different computers.
That's no longer the case, actually. With modern compilers and coding techniques, it's very feasible to create "thick client" apps that will download the latest updates on their own. Not as transparent as web deployment, but not impossible.
- WotC is a TCG and RPG company, not a software development company and they are trying to do this all in house. I'm sure after a few iterations it can turn out great, but I don't have high expectations for the first release because there is a very steep learning curve on not just programming software, but management understanding what is needed to support it.
I really hope you're not suggesting that WotC is just going to hand its marketing drones a compiler and expect them to write the software themselves. They'll do what every business does when they have needs outside their core competency: "Go hire X people to do Y. You can spend no more than $Z/year on salaries." WotC has deep pockets, so they'll have the money to hire developers and, hopefully, project managers. Not saying it'll guarantee success, but it as least makes it possible.
So, I do hope DDI is something cool and useful. But given the points above, all signs point towards a company that isn't very experienced in software development making a lot of mistakes and going down paths that more experienced companies wouldn't. If they had hired an outside company to develop this (or even bought up an existing small web-app shop), I'd have far more confidence in the end product. But I will be quite happy to be proven wrong.
WotC is "betting the farm" on their DI, so they'll hire competent people to create it. I won't argue that their previous software attempts were abysmal, but I have faith (read: blind hope) that they've learned from their mistakes. Let's hope that WotC's recent track record is a result of them pulling their talent for 4e.
- They day they announce 4e and give details on their big digital push, their servers are overloaded and go down. For over a day.
Yeah, that didn't exactly inspire confidence in me either, lol
Especially since they used the 4dventure countdown that replaced the normal site to try and build interest in the day or so before the announcement.
---
And for the record, Blizzard has always* released their games on Mac and PC simultaneously. At least as far back as my Warcraft II Tides of Darkness C & Diablo CDs.
If this was mentioned already, my apologies for missing it...
Is the DI going to be Vista only?
|
|
If this was mentioned already, my apologies for missing it...
Is the DI going to be Vista only?
In the information I read so far the only things I've seen mentioned are Windows and DirectX. That might or might not also imply .NET.
But by stating DirectX it means there is a downloadable client side component, it's not all web based.
None of these technologies are restricted to Vista only, so I'd say no.
Pete
If its overwhelmingly "Yes I wish to go to 4th edition"...So be it.
I was think this last night. Paizo is actually in an interesting position as far as 3.5e/4e goes. If the decision is made to switch pathfinder over to 4e is made, they could still make standalone 3.5e gamemastery adventures for those that do not want to switch (at least as long as it is profitable for them to do so).
They could actually work both markets if the profit is there. Frankly, I miss the days of when TSR published a bunch of standalone modules. It made running a game when I could grab a ready-to-go module and work it into my campaign if I did not have the time to lay out an adventure myself (or need a mental break from adventure design).
Despite the addition changes, I still have the old modules B1, G1-3, D1-3, FA2, FRE 1-3, I3-5, I6, I8-9, I14, N5, S1-3, and number of planescape and other non-numbered modules (Gates of Firestorm Peak, A Hero's Tale, and many others that are boxed up.)
Damn, I feel old now.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I really hope you're not suggesting that WotC is just going to hand its marketing drones a compiler and expect them to write the software themselves. They'll do what every business does when they have needs outside their core competency: "Go hire X people to do Y. You can spend no more than $Z/year on salaries." WotC has deep pockets, so they'll have the money to hire developers and, hopefully, project managers. Not saying it'll guarantee success, but it as least makes it possible.
Yup. WotC has been pushing aggressively to expand their software group. They've been recruiting heavily in that space and even created a business unit around it. They are developing v3 of the Magic Online cilent in-house as well as other games they are working on (e.g., the Goblin Game).
One thing that I find funny in reading D&D boards is how ill-informed people are about the entirety of WotC's operations. They tend to see the D&D rpg as the flagship product and that it will make or break the company. The truth is that Magic cards, D&D minatures, Star Wars licensed products, and (less so these days) Pokemon pay their bills. If you aren't reading magicthegathering.com and following what they are doing in other arenas, you don't really understand what is going on with the company. All of the push into creating a design & development group is a result of the success of that system in Magic. The digital initiative is bigger than D&D, and is intended to be, among other things, a distribution channel for third party niche games. The DI is bigger than D&D, and given its central importance to the company, a substantial amount of resources are being devoted to it.
Now, all that being said, it is worth noting that WotC completely bungled v2 of the Magic Online client. Not all problems can be solved by throwing money at them (see also: the X-Box). But WotC has a pretty big stake in making the DI work and they have shifted focus since v2 of the Magic Online client.
I really hope you're not suggesting that WotC is just going to hand its marketing drones a compiler and expect them to write the software themselves. They'll do what every business does when they have needs outside their core competency: "Go hire X people to do Y. You can spend no more than $Z/year on salaries." WotC has deep pockets, so they'll have the money to hire developers and,...
Certainly of course not. I even reworded my post before I submitted it to include the mention of management, but I guess I should have tried rewording again. I know they've been hiring substantially for their online team (and considered applying myself except that I've had bad experiences with big corporations "cutting their losses" through smaller divisions, plus the DDI is a very big gamble). So I'm sure they are hiring perfectly competent programmers, and I figure probably perfectly competent project managers with IT experience as well.
I guess my worry is in the ranks above that. It's easy to have a great and experienced tech team, but if middle and upper management don't have the technical backgrounds, it's easy for decisions "on high" to sink even the best of teams. Not saying this will happen, and I certainly hope it doesn't. I want WotC to succeed at this and give us an awesome product. Just odds are stacked against them.
Here's an example from my own background, I worked at the headquarters for Borders bookstores in the late 90's. I clearly remember in 1997 at our company meetings listening to the CEO gleefully stating that Amazon still hadn't turned a profit and that online retail was a failed business model. Then in 1998 the same guy was gleefully announcing their new online initiative with creating an in-house group to build Borders.com. Then fast forward to 2001 and check where Borders.com redirects to. There was a great online team there, but the upper management didn't have the experience to make a successful web presence because it's a very different animal than what they were used to. I'd just hate to see WotC investing so much into developing an in-house division for their big online presence and then seeing higher management inadvertently derail those efforts from lack of IT experience*. With corporations the size of Borders and Hasbro, having this year's "great new division" changing in just 3 years into "layoffs to focus on our core business" is a very real possibility.
The fact that the servers crashed after announcing this and the fact that they are enabling "guest access only until the server traffic dies down" just reinforces my fears that there's a lack of IT experience in WotC management. They should be planning and hoping for server traffic to continually increase, not disable functionality until fewer people their visit their site as often. If you want to build a successful web presence, high traffic is something to plan for and celebrate and do your darndest to keep around, not something you have to wait out and hope it settles down soon. They haven't shown me that they are thinking like IT management yet.
-Ken
* Of course, in full disclosure, I don't know the IT backgrounds of all of WotC management. So I may be entirely off target here. But just as I wouldn't trust my bosses at any of the IT companies I've worked for to manage a RPG/TCG/creative company like WotC, I wouldn't necessarily trust any WotC management to automatically know how to pull off a major IT project and successful web presence.
If its overwhelmingly "Yes I wish to go to 4th edition"...So be it.I was think this last night. Paizo is actually in an interesting position as far as 3.5e/4e goes. If the decision is made to switch pathfinder over to 4e is made, they could still make standalone 3.5e gamemastery adventures for those that do not want to switch (at least as long as it is profitable for them to do so).
They could actually work both markets if the profit is there. Frankly, I miss the days of when TSR published a bunch of standalone modules.
Im Ok with them doing this..But in reverse..Pathfinder should remain 3.5 and GameMastery moduals should convert.
Since Pathfinder is the ongoing world it would be strange to have this world just...change.
And certain classes would pop out of existance and the way magic works would change and whatever else would happen if a campaign world changes from 3rd to 4th edition.
With individual moduals it would be OK since each one is a self contained story..Heck the 4th edition Moduals, once they are written, could take place in another new campaign world created by Paizo and leave Pathfinder's world untuched by this change.
The fact that the servers crashed after announcing this and the fact that they are enabling "guest access only until the server traffic dies down" just reinforces my fears that there's a lack of IT experience in WotC management. They should be planning and hoping for server traffic to continually increase, not disable functionality until fewer people their visit their site as often. If you want to build a successful web presence, high traffic is something to plan for and celebrate and do your darndest to keep around, not something you have to wait out and hope it settles down soon. They haven't shown me that they are thinking like IT management yet.
I very much agree. During any launch, conventional wisdom says to at least double the bandwidth and server capaticy you expect to need. I'm hoping (fingers crossed, eyes squeezed shut) that it was just a simple miscalculation in server capacity, but I fear you're right.
Everywhere I've worked, there's been a number of managers that flock to (or outright take over) projects that seem to be doing well and bury those that don't. I'm very much hoping that WotC gets out of their own way and just lets the IT professionals develop and deliver a quality product without middle and upper management trying to flex their decision-making powers and grinding it into the dirt.
I'll admit I have an ulterior motive, though: I was thinking of writing something akin to the map/battle program they debuted, and if their takes off that's much less work I'll have to do myself. ;)
So again I plead with thee that Greyhawk is gone .... Like Leia said to OBIWAN ERIK YOUR our ONLY HOPE>>>>>>
|
If the 4th ed. DMG comes out in July '08, then I can only hope the staff at Paizo continue a 6mos Pathfinder from june-dec of '08 at the very least. I certainly don't want my July '08 issue of pathfinder filled with 4th ed. stuff. I want to be able to digest the new rule set, see how it plays, before switching. While doing so, I'd like my regular gaming to continue with 3.5.
I am pretty sure that Paizo will convert to 4th edition unless it turns out to be a pile of stinking goblin doo-doo (which I doubt). I just want enough time for the masses to "beta-test" the system for bugs before Paizo makes a final decision on whether or not to convert.
I am also hoping that they deal with their server issues (and any other online problems they have) over the next few weeks. They certainly don't want to give the sceptical folk any ammunition regarding the quality or accessability of their online material.
I think Pathfinder will switch to 4e. I for one tend to separate the rules of the game from the fluff material. I don't care if the rules for clerics change just as long as the gods of Pathfinder don't suddenly disappear or something stupid like that. A change in game mechanics should have very little impact (aside from converting some NPCs and monsters) on the Pathfinder series (or the world of Golarion).
|
Sorry to be a bit behind, but can someone point me to where it says that WOTC will not be or only partially supporting Macs in its new digital iniative????
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=908272 Just search the page for macs.
To the guy who suggested two campaign settings, that'd be awful. Though I wouldn't mind Paizo putting out an occasional 3.5 module (I will afterall still have all the books) developing one world takes so much creative juice that to ask them to make two would just be cruel, and the quality of both would suffer.
Sorry to be a bit behind, but can someone point me to where it says that WOTC will not be or only partially supporting Macs in its new digital iniative????http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=908272 Just search the page for macs.
To the guy who suggested two campaign settings, that'd be awful. Though I wouldn't mind Paizo putting out an occasional 3.5 module (I will afterall still have all the books) developing one world takes so much creative juice that to ask them to make two would just be cruel, and the quality of both would suffer.
I tend to agree with this, after all, why over complicat peoples jobs when you don't have to.
I suscribe to KISS (keep it simple stupid).
I tend to agree with this, after all, why over complicat peoples jobs when you don't have to.
I suscribe to KISS (keep it simple stupid).
Which is why I suggested doing 3.5e modules under the Game Mastery line as individual adventures...if the market is there. They can maintain location names from Pathfinder for those DMs that want to use the setting info.
While I would love Pathfinder to stay 3.5e, the odds are that at some point Paizo will have to move to 4e just due to lack of 3.5e support. If WOTC no longer produces the 3.5e PH and DMG, but maintains the copyrights, then there goes access to the XP and advancement tables. Owners of existing books will have no trouble, but it will be hard to attract new gamers to systems based on 3.5e that use those XP tables from the 3.5e PH and DMG.
If there looks to be a big switch to 4e while still maintaining a sizable 3.5e following, then it would be better to switch Pathfinder over to 4e sooner rather than later, and open up submissions for freelance 3.5e adventures.
|
- They day they announce 4e and give details on their big digital push, their servers are overloaded and go down. For over a day.Yeah, that didn't exactly inspire confidence in me either, lol
Especially since they used the 4dventure countdown that replaced the normal site to try and build interest in the day or so before the announcement.
---
And for the record, Blizzard has always* released their games on Mac and PC simultaneously. At least as far back as my Warcraft II Tides of Darkness C & Diablo CDs.
Speaking of Blizzard, the crash of the WotC website rather reminded me of what happens to Blizzard's site every... WoW... patch... day...
Which is why I didn't get too worked up about it.
|
|
If its overwhelmingly "Yes I wish to go to 4th edition"...So be it.I was think this last night. Paizo is actually in an interesting position as far as 3.5e/4e goes. If the decision is made to switch pathfinder over to 4e is made, they could still make standalone 3.5e gamemastery adventures for those that do not want to switch (at least as long as it is profitable for them to do so).
They could actually work both markets if the profit is there. Frankly, I miss the days of when TSR published a bunch of standalone modules. It made running a game when I could grab a ready-to-go module and work it into my campaign if I did not have the time to lay out an adventure myself (or need a mental break from adventure design).
Despite the addition changes, I still have the old modules B1, G1-3, D1-3, FA2, FRE 1-3, I3-5, I6, I8-9, I14, N5, S1-3, and number of planescape and other non-numbered modules (Gates of Firestorm Peak, A Hero's Tale, and many others that are boxed up.)
Damn, I feel old now.
Here's what I suspect will happen on WotC's end:
Now to next May: Slow decline in 3.x module and supplement sales. We all know what's going to happen in terms of supplement production.
Next May: NO further 3.5 edition supplement production. WotC updates the SRD to D&D 4th Edition and ceases supporting the 3.5 SRD.
Next May through July: Production of existing 3.5 supplements slows to a halt except for fluff Eberron material that needs to come out to maintain interest in the setting until Eberron 4th Edition comes out in 2009.
Next July and after: No 3.5 supplements produced at all, 100% 4th edition content with the exception noted above.
I tend to agree with this, after all, why over complicat peoples jobs when you don't have to.
I suscribe to KISS (keep it simple stupid).
Which is why I suggested doing 3.5e modules under the Game Mastery line as individual adventures...if the market is there. They can maintain location names from Pathfinder for those DMs that want to use the setting info.
While I would love Pathfinder to stay 3.5e, the odds are that at some point Paizo will have to move to 4e just due to lack of 3.5e support. If WOTC no longer produces the 3.5e PH and DMG, but maintains the copyrights, then there goes access to the XP and advancement tables. Owners of existing books will have no trouble, but it will be hard to attract new gamers to systems based on 3.5e that use those XP tables from the 3.5e PH and DMG.
If there looks to be a big switch to 4e while still maintaining a sizable 3.5e following, then it would be better to switch Pathfinder over to 4e sooner rather than later, and open up submissions for freelance 3.5e adventures.
Yes but doesn't OGL solve that issue? How can you restrict access to something that has OGL?
As WoTC has taken fairly large strides to make painfully clear, 3.5 and 4.0 are not going to be compatible or convertible (at least not without a lot of third party work).
I, and the guys I game with, each have between $900 and $2000 a piece invested in to soon-to-be outdated and unsupported material. As you may imagine, we are -slightly- put out by 4.0 (without even getting into the aspect of why WoTC feels they need to dumb down the game) and are definitely not switching over.
While I love paizo and would like to keep supporting y'all, I'd also like to know if pathfinder is going to stay 3.5, or dual publish as 3.5 and 4.0 every month.
Because I really don't much feel like buying another 9 months to a year and a half of a campaign world that will just be more obsolete material sitting on the shelf that will never be completed, so I need to know whether I can look forward to Pathfinder for 3.5, or cancel the subscription now.
My feelings exactly. Id hate to just have 2 Adventure paths and then the campaign setting go all funny and I drop out. It would be a huge shame.
Id like the consistancy and uniformity of Pathfinder being all 3.5 so I have something to still buy, play, and love after May 2008...
..or being all 4.0 so I can be sad but save my money...Not that Im expecting it..Just wishing outloud.
I just think if 4th edition is going to be so different from 3.5 then it will be like this weird cataclysmic event will grip the Pathfinder campaign world when the dreaded swich happens.
While I love paizo and would like to keep supporting y'all, I'd also like to know if pathfinder is going to stay 3.5, or dual publish as 3.5 and 4.0 every month.
Because I really don't much feel like buying another 9 months to a year and a half of a campaign world that will just be more obsolete material sitting on the shelf that will never be completed, so I need to know whether I can look forward to Pathfinder for 3.5, or cancel the subscription now.
So to keep your buisness they need to make a snap decision on something they haven't seen? I understand the frustration but we know we will get at least 2 adventure paths. My guess is unless wizards gives them an early edition we may get 3 before they make a decision. Which is a sizable amount of information.
However, I think we need to let them see 4th edition before they make a decision on whether they will use it. Also those who follow pathfinder need to see 4th edition as well. Say 90% of the subscribers like 4th? Then they need to switch. If only a small fraction like it paizo might not change. I do think it's unrealistic a week after 4th's announcement that paizo knows what it will do a year from now.
I do think that if they do shift they shouldnt do it in the middle of an adventure path.
|
|
I just think if 4th edition is going to be so different from 3.5 then it will be like this weird cataclysmic event will grip the Pathfinder campaign world when the dreaded swich happens.
Not necessarily. Just because some publishers (TSR, really) like to pull stupid crap with their setting in the switch between editions, doesn't mean that it's necessary (or even a good idea).
There will still be fighters, wizards, cleric, rogues, dragons, orcs, etc. The only thing different will be the mechanics of the game. There's no need to explain mechanical changes in game.
Besides, being strictly OGL, Pathfinder won't have to worry about losing much in the transition outside of their own feats, PrCs, monsters, etc. and the few 3rd party OGL stuff they include.
I do think that if they do shift they shouldnt do it in the middle of an adventure path.
Well, they said they wouldn't. And it wouldn't make any sense for them to do so in the first place.
This situation does put Paizo in a difficult situation (likely other 3rd party publishers as well). I for one am definitely going to switch to 4e regardless, it is inevitable for me and my group. That being said, I will maintain an allegiance to Paizo as long as they keep up the quality work (which is highly likely given their track record), and if Paizo does not switch to 4e that means two things:
1) I have to do the conversions, no biggie.
or
2) If a 3rd party does not switch to 4e, that means 4e was likely a failure on some level . . .which in all honesty I do not see.
|
|
Yes but doesn't OGL solve that issue? How can you restrict access to something that has OGL?
By limiting access to the core rulebooks, which have critical pieces of the rules in them like experience tables and advancement rules, that are not part of the OGL.
While this is possible to work around, the workarounds aren't all that pretty, and Paizo does have to face the fact that unless Wizards totally drops the ball and 4th edition is not in fact a better game than 3.5, player interest in 3.5 will wane and 4th edition (which is also OGL) will eventually - and probably sooner than later, if the 3.0-3.5 switchover is any indication - predominate. In this business, it makes more sense to ride an edition change than to fight it.
People complained about 3.5 before it was released. And after it was released. A LOT. But they switched anyway. 3.5 was not WotC's New Coke; it's very likely that 4th Edition will not be either.
So to keep your buisness they need to make a snap decision on something they haven't seen?Yes, basically. Pathfinder's premise was to be an organically grown *campaign setting* similar to how greyhawk originally came about. A campaign setting that begins and then changes over to a completely different rules system is of no use to those of us staying in 3.5 who were looking forward to the fresh campaign world rather than just a (few) series of adventures.
I guess we will have to disagree. I think Id lose all respect for Paizo if without looking at 4th edition they decide to switch or not. However, unless 4th edition is a total bust they probably wont have a choice to one day change. The question probably is how long. I think any fluff world will be switched to 4th or stop having add ons (ie Ptolus).
I guess a few series of adventures is how I viewed 1st edition Greyhawk. At least that and city is what I remember. It be intresting to see a page comparison fluff and crunch of 3 adventure paths in pathfinder to 1st edition Greyhawk specific fluff/crunch containing modules/sets.
with the emphasis on online content, computer stored character sheets, etc, I will also express that when I get together with the guys to play, it's our version of poker night, hanging, being social, and telling stupid geeky jokes. I like to be able to see them, and have no desire to replace the social interaction with admiring the paint job on the back of their laptops. Or even worse, everyone deciding why leave home when we can just play online.
We already have one guy who stores everything on his laptop, and is also the only one in the group even moderately interested in 4e. However it is not uncommon to hear what sounds suspiciously like youtube videos playing and IM's popping up during the game. I can only imagine the complete lack of focus and ambiance once everyone is playing the game while surfing youtube when it's not their initiative order.
I have a player similar to the one you described but we don't allow labtops anymore. Honestly I dont think we will ever need the computer to play.
If our group decides to use the character program we will probably print out the characters. It would be great for our new players who dont like the crunch as much anyway. Then again we probably wont change to 4th edition for awhile for the same reason. As DM Im happy since I have many more plans for Ptolus and Iron Kingdoms. Plus at least 2-3 pathfinder adventure paths will assure I wont want to switch for a while.
I think if it's only two adventure paths, that Paizo should either A) Not convert at all, wait one year until Wizards no longer has any interest in 3.5, and buy it from them
or
B) Start doing the conversion work on the NPCs as soon as the rules come out and release the first two adventure paths in 4.0 if they choose that option. Supposedly, it will be less work, according to the boys at Wizards.
Here's what I'm looking at. With Ed Greenwood's participation in the Realms diminishing and Richard Baker (He whose name shall be eternally cursed in a million tongues of hungry, licking, green flame) in charge, it's likely that if the Realms continues to be so ridiculously co(s)mic that I'll be working with Golarion for a long time after Grand History of the Realms comes out.
Golarion and Varisia are fantastic, and if you guys decide not to convert, I'm there. If you guys do decide to convert, convert the two paths so I can make it as wonderful as I can with no inconsistencies.
I even love the adventure path titles. Nothing like getting to beat up the Evil Wizards of the Coast Who Used to Rule the World!
Thanks heaps.
|
|
I, and the guys I game with, each have between $900 and $2000 a piece invested in to soon-to-be outdated and unsupported material. As you may imagine, we are -slightly- put out by 4.0 (without even getting into the aspect of why WoTC feels they need to dumb down the game) and are definitely not switching over.I keep seeing this type of comment, and I really don't understand it.
If WotC waited another 5 years to release 4e, we'd have the same comments, but it would be $1800-$4000 in material instead. Using this logic, the only safe time to release 4e is before anyone can spend a nickel on 3e.
And as others have pointed out, if you've got $2000 in gaming materials, it's not like they're going to spontaneously combust next May. You'll still have $2000 in perfectly usable gaming material. These books were sufficient to run/play your game a week before the GenCon announcement. Suddenly they aren't enough a week after?
With the sheer volume of 3e material from WotC and a thousand 3rd party publishers, what's left? What else do you need for your 3e experience to be complete, either to play, or to move on to 4e? Particularly considering the outcry over the limited material in newer books - I can't count the complaints about the space wasted on example characters for prestige classes, reprinted abilities, etc.
All games have edition changes, and all edition changes obsolete some material. All things said, I'd rather WotC make sacred hamburger out of those hoary old conventions NOW than wait years and do it later.
And if you've spent $2,000 on 3.x stuff... well first, it's not going to self erase next May, and second, whose fault is that, exactly? I've seen people saying that WotC should buy back their entire libraries, that's just garbage.
It has already been said, but I would like to second it: If Paizo made a choice about 4e without first checking it out and seeing what it has to offer, as well as to see what the market trend is towards it, I would lose respect for them.
And if Paizo does go 4e, so what? You can still run 3.5 and just convert it back, OR you can pony up the $100 to have the core books.
Personally if they make the coversion, I will still use my 3.5 material... just make it fit within the mechanics of 4e.
My personal hopes of Paizo staying 3e has everything to do with the fact that I don't want to give WotC any more money....
I keep seeing this type of comment, and I really don't understand it.
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that either you are young - with little commitments, or very well off - by society standards.
Let me explain what I mean.
There are very few people that enjoy making a "major purchase,"* and then are "required"* to upgrade within a few years.
These people are looking to get their monies worth out of their purchase.
It could be compared to the Home Game Console market. (Of which, Sony grabbed a lot of fans with the decision to make the PS2 and PS3 backwards compatible.)
A person who can't afford to pick up every console released makes a decision on which console they want. Each additional game is an optional purchase.
When that console is made "obsolete"** in a shorter time than is felt appropriate, the consumer feels ripped off. (Imagine how people would feel if they shelled out $600 for a PS3, only to hear that the PS4 is being released two years latter.)
If each edition is the console, and each supplement is another game, you get a close approximation to what some consumers are feeling.
* Granted, a new D&D Edition isn't necessarily a major purchase, nor is anyone required to upgrade. But, a new edition might be a substantial investment of discretionary cash, and in order to keep up with the hobby, a consumer would need to upgrade.
** Again, the release of a new console / RPG edition doesn't make the previous edition unusable... But it does qualify as obsolete.
|
|
If each edition is the console, and each supplement is another game, you get a close approximation to what some consumers are feeling.
Your comparison is flawed. Each sourcebook for D&D is not the equivalent of a game for a console. For one, you don't need any supplement to play D&D--you don't need to buy sourcebooks at all. Secondly, console games typically have finite replayability. D&D sourcebooks, OTOH, typically have infinite replayability (along with the core books' infinite replayability). So, if you decided not to upgrade you can still play D&D to your heart's content and never have to play the same type of character, adventure, plot, story, etc. (you're only limited by your imagination).
So, the core books are like a console with an infinite assortment of games already crammed in. Sourcebooks are just ways to "trick-out" the infinite assortment of games that already exist in your console. Sure, they add more options, but are completely unnecessary to the enjoyment of the console and its infinite games.
You're absolutely right. My comparison is flawed. I bet you feel better now that you pointed that out.
Except...
I wasn't actually trying to compare D&D to a game console.
I was trying to help illustrate why some people feel ripped off by WoTC releasing 4th Edition "so soon."
And your correction of my comparison neither helps, nor hinders that illustration.
|
|
You're absolutely right. My comparison is flawed. I bet you feel better now that you pointed that out.
Except...
I wasn't actually trying to compare D&D to a game console.
I was trying to help illustrate why some people feel ripped off by WoTC releasing 4th Edition "so soon."
And your correction of my comparison neither helps, nor hinders that illustration.
You might not have been trying to make that comparison, but you did anyway.
If somebody's not interested in organized play, why, they could continue to play 3E as long as their group is still interested in playing 3E. Nothing's stopping them but peer pressure. There's certainly enough books for it.
I'm still not sure why announcing that a new edition's coming out eight years after the last edition and five years after the last major revision counts as too soon, though. I mean, yes, it's shorter than the time between 2nd and 3rd edition, but on the other hand, if TSR had bit the bullet and made its 2nd Edition revision in 1996 actually mean something instead of just screwing everything up worse, why, they might still be a going concern today.
*shrug* Some people just aren't going to be happy no matter when a new edition comes out. There were people complaining that the old World of Darkness ended too soon when White Wolf finally pulled the plug on that cancerous mass in 2003.
|
|
Caution: Threadjack
There were people complaining that the old World of Darkness ended too soon when White Wolf finally pulled the plug on that cancerous mass in 2003.
How would you feel if they "reimagined" Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms and gotten rid of everything that was good about it? Don't get me wrong, nWoD has some things right (easier cross-compatibility for one) but otherwise it's garbage.
Except Changeling the Lost, that was a ton of fun at Dexcon.
On-Topic:
What you're buying 4E for is the set of mechanics. If you like the 3.5 mechanics don't bother, most people though would like to be able to solve bull rush/overrun/grapple attempts swifter. Or have sorcerers with a reason to take more than one level of the class.
>> What else do you need for your 3e experience to be complete
A monthly, print Dungeon & Dragon magazine. A Living Greyhawk campaign.
You're absolutely right. My comparison is flawed. I bet you feel better now that you pointed that out.
Except...
I wasn't actually trying to compare D&D to a game console.
I was trying to help illustrate why some people feel ripped off by WoTC releasing 4th Edition "so soon."
And your correction of my comparison neither helps, nor hinders that illustration.
You might not have been trying to make that comparison, but you did anyway.
If somebody's not interested in organized play, why, they could continue to play 3E as long as their group is still interested in playing 3E. Nothing's stopping them but peer pressure. There's certainly enough books for it.
I'm still not sure why announcing that a new edition's coming out eight years after the last edition and five years after the last major revision counts as too soon, though. I mean, yes, it's shorter than the time between 2nd and 3rd edition, but on the other hand, if TSR had bit the bullet and made its 2nd Edition revision in 1996 actually mean something instead of just screwing everything up worse, why, they might still be a going concern today.
*shrug* Some people just aren't going to be happy no matter when a new edition comes out. There were people complaining that the old World of Darkness ended too soon when White Wolf finally pulled the plug on that cancerous mass in 2003.
Look since you REALLY REALLY *WANT* to make this comparison, or at least assert yourself over those who do....
1e is like Sega, 2e like Sega II (Genesis), 3e was a huge jump, so well call it Xbox, and 3.5 is Xbox 360 (some backwards compatibility, but not everything carried over). 4e is going to be like another version of Xbox, but it will not have any backwards compatibility.
Gamers in the console arena would be upset about that, so it is not unreasonable for people to be upset about 4e not having conversion supplements, thus making you current edition (platform) obsolete if you want to keep current. If it had any amount of "backwards compatibility" half of the complaints would go away or be kept to low grumbles of "already?!"
But since conversion means Not being able to use you book with the new edition... for those who bought a bunch of materials, it is a hard blow. Imagine having 100 games that your console no longer supports. No one else wants you to hook up the old machine because they want to play the new one... with a platform game, you could hook the old one up and play by yourself... but if you think people should play tabletop D&D by themselves.... you have more issues than creating straw-man arguments.
I'm still not sure why announcing that a new edition's coming out eight years after the last edition and five years after the last major revision counts as too soon, though.
I see you're still not grasping it.
It isn't a specific amount of time required until the announcement was not too soon.
It depends on investment compared to usage.
If someone only invested in the 3.0 core books, they are going to be more receptive, and willing to invest, in 4.0 regardless of the time that has past.
Those that have invested further, particularly if they haven't even had a chance to try some of them out, are going to be resistant to the change. To these people, it doesn't matter if 4th edition is released now, or 20 years from now. They still have a large investment in 3.5 - much of which they, probably, have hardly touched - and it annoys them that the new system is "already" coming out.
They don't feel they have received an adequate return on their investment yet.
ASIDE: This, of course, puts WoTC on a precarious balancing act. They clearly want to sell (at least) 1 book a month. How do they do this, all the way up to the release of a new edition, and still give people enough time to get the returns they are looking for?
ASIDE TO THE ASIDE: That is why I am getting the feeling that WoTC is marketing to the younger crowd, rather than the "old moneybags." They seem to be counting on the customers that have more free time (and likely less money) that have already squeezed the returns from their material.
|
|
There are a couple things to throw in for this thread I think.
The first is that the 1st rule of marketing is you follow where the 800 pound gorilla takes you. Otherwise you've got spreadsheets for Windows 98 sitting on a shelf that no one will buy. So Paizo should do what makes sense for their market and I fully support that because it keeps them in business making gud stuf.
The second is that after a few years of testing, any product can be improved upon. 3.5 certainly has flaws. The sweet spot of 4-12th level (or whatever) is that way because the other levels are hard to survive/play/balance. And Grapple? There are things to fix here.
Third thing to throw out is that no matter how much you want to deny it, Hasbro/WOTC is about generating interest in product. They need younger blood to get interested in the game. They need to get the Intraweb Tubes thingys working. A monthly subscription model is sooo much better for them then the book a month club.
Fourth is it needs to be simplier to learn/play so more people can pick it up quick and get involved. The PHB is a thick tome to someone who's never cracked it before. "I have to read all this to play this game??" It's daunting.
Pete
Brent Stroh, I think you might be missing the point of my posts.
I wasn't trying to suggest that the point of view I was presenting was my own, or the correct one.
You weren't the first person to post that they couldn't grasp what the fuss was about with "spending $xx on 3.whatever material."
I was trying to help you (and the others) understand the perspective, not trying to convince you it was correct.
And that is all I have to say on the matter. If I succeeded, or not, I have done all I can to help you see the other side - even if you don't agree with it.
I will not likely convert until the game is out for at least a year. I remember the errata that cropped up with 3.0 and lead to 3.5. I will wait and see.
Amen to that, brother.