[/Krypter wrote:
seekerofshadowlight wrote:
[...] especially hidden behind a wall of subscriptionExactly. As Glenn Reynolds often points out, subscriptions to online magazines and newspapers are not passports to an exclusive club, they're the keys to an isolated ghetto. The New York Times tried subscription access with its TimesSelect service and it was a financial disaster. The NYT closed it within two years. Same thing will happen to the DI.
These days open social networks are far more valuable than closed little community ghettos. Even Facebook, a far more successful company than WotC, understood this and opened itself up.
Actually, *I* wrote that. "SeekerofShadowlight" broke the quoting. See the post immediately prior.
yep thats his i just messed up the quote would have pointed it out if i had seen it earler
This is my first post here, despite having been a Paizo fan for many years now. I'll tell you this: In their ownership of D&D, WOTC have never reached out to their supporters in the way Erik Mona did in this thread. That, in and of itself, is the reason I'll follow Paizo where ever they decide to go. And if the path they choose happens to be "3.75", then so much the better.
Again and again, Paizo have proven themselves the rightfuls heirs to the Gygaxian Throne. Paizo's vision for D&D is the D&D that I want to play. WOTC reaching out to a "new generation" of gamers is well and good, but Paizo are MY generation of gamers, and I'll play the game they make.
None of us know what 4th edition will really be, but I know that Pathfinder will lead me to a place I want to be.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Interesting phrase that 'Heirs to the Gygaxian Throne'
To be honest I think Paizo and WotC are taking two different roads.
WotC: High Powered characters doing fantastic things, everyone having their own magic, etc. While the more modern comparison is 'Anime' (Naruto, Dragonball Z) and Computer games (from what others say, I'm still enjoying Diablo II) It is also allowing pre-epic emulation of mythological characters like Heracles, some Celt myths I can't spell, and even biblical characters like Sampson (tearing the temple down with his bare hands) or Daniel (of the Lion's den fame) One of the things I keep reading in the playtest reports is that the line between caster and warrior is being blurred, with per round or per encounter actions for the casters and special abilities that last over serveal rounds for rogues and fighter types.
Paizo seems to be more 'Pulp' in their adventures. A bit more risque, more PG-13 in themes. But also more Conan than Naruto, more Doc Savage than Dragonball Z. I'd say more Thor than Balor. Both have 'points of light' feel to them. Pathfinder is fading empires, rising warlords against the backdrop of an ancient empire, parts of which rest uneasily.
And this is the strength of Pathfinder. We've not 'lived' through the Runelords fall, just as we've not lived through the Suel Imperium or saw our favourite NPCs killed by the invoked devestation. When WotC decided to 'blow up' the realms with a big RSE and a timeline jump, the fans/customers were upset because the land we've known and loved for years was being fundamentally changed in unavoidable ways. I've played my share of Cyre survivors in Eberron, but didn't have my high level artificer, with his stronghold and servants and long and loving history suddenly and unaviodably go fwoom in Metrol.
As to who the heirs are? I can't say about EGG, but I'd say Paizo has become the gaming heirs to Howard's throne, and WotC seems to be the heir to someone else.
...comparing paizo and WotC
Now that is an interesting point of view you offer there.
It sounds fitting to me. Maybe WotC really takes a shot at "anime computer action", and paizo aims more at "classic action" like Conan. I think I´m more in the classic action camp.Stefan
|
...excellent post about the nature of Paizo and WotC...
That's perfect. You accurately summarized exactly how I was feeling but I could not find the proper words.
I trust Paizo. I trust they will produce material I will like. I do not have the same trust in WotC. I wish I did. WotC of the past saved my game from oblivion. The WotC of the present and the future is still something of a mystery to me. They are sending me mixed signals.
If they succeed in this new endeavor I will be extremely happy. If they can infuse the industry with new blood, that benefits us all. More money means companies can produce the material they really want to produce. A diverse consumer base is a good thing. And as new consumers are added to the pot their tastes can change as they get exposed to new and different things.
With that said, I am cautious of 4e and will wait to do plenty of research before I dive headlong into it. I don't think it will be terrible. In fact, I am pretty certain it won't suck. I am just not sure it will suit my tastes. As such, my campaigns will remain 3.5 for a while yet. I plan on finishing my Ptolus campaign in about six to eight months and I plan on running either a homebrew game or a game set in Golarion. Either way I will depend on Paizo's fantastic material for that game.
If a 3.75 product was produced, even as a stop gap until the eventual transition to 4e, I would snap it up. I know I would get a quality product that I could continue to use in the years to come. Even if the transition to 4e occurs I know I have access to a great community that would provide conversions from 4e Paizo material to 3.p stats. I could even cook up some of those conversions myself.
And who knows, maybe Paizo will find the product will be financially and artistically more satisfying than converting to 4e.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
So I guess the question about a 3.P vs a Paizo conversion comes down to two things...
1) Will 4.0 still be able to do Conan, Fafhred and the Grey Mouser without being teased and tormened into a new rulesset by itself?
2) If not, will it be more profitable to make 3.P than grind 4.0 into the style they want?
Definitely - and much better handled, even if far less slick, then the recent "Expedition to..." modules
Except "Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk".
That one was incredible.
The only copy of that I've seen was walking out the door of our FLGS with the guy that had just paid for it when I saw it...
I've looked through:
"Expedition to Undermountain" - beautiful, slick book, but bland-feeling and lifeless.
"Expedition to Castle Ravenloft" - Looked very nice; I've considered buying it a few times; if I ran a 3.x game I would own it already and may pick it up some day
"Expedition to the Demonweb Pits" - Great graphics but... It looks like they grabbed ten pages from module H4, three pages from Q1, the last five pages of D3, tossed it all in a blender and set it to "mangle" - sadly, that's the one I was actually looking forward to picking up, too... :(
I rate the Demonweb pits a little higher, if only because I think the basic idea of Graz'zt trying to pull a fast one on everyone has merit. Otherwise, though I agree with these assessments, though I don't have Ravenloft.
"Expedition to Undermountain" - beautiful, slick book, but bland-feeling and lifeless.
"Expedition to Castle Ravenloft" - Looked very nice; I've considered buying it a few times; if I ran a 3.x game I would own it already and may pick it up some day
"Expedition to the Demonweb Pits" - Great graphics but... It looks like they grabbed ten pages from module H4, three pages from Q1, the last five pages of D3, tossed it all in a blender and set it to "mangle" - sadly, that's the one I was actually looking forward to picking up, too... :(
I agree about Expedition to Undermountain and Expedition to the Demonweb Pits, although I think they set Demonweb Pits to "mutilate" before they set it to "mangle".
I should have been more careful before I bought either one. I liked "Expedition to Ravenloft" (which I will inflict upon my children) so much I did not think that the other two could be so much worse.
I have heard nothing but good things about "Expedition to Greyhawk", which bums me out a little because my DM will be running it in his next campaign, so I cannot buy it and read it.
|
As more grist for Erik to think through, Scott Rouse has announced there won't be a d20 logo for the new OGL. I presume the old d20 trademark license will get pulled as well. So what does this mean for Paizo products?
Nothing really.
If y'all look at the back of your Pathfinder books, you'll see that, rather than a d20 logo, there's a cute 3.5*OGL Compatible logo, in an orange box. Does what the d20 logo was supposed to do, and could easily be replaced with a 4.0 version. Or not. But that's Erik's call, not Wizards'.
Well done, sir.
|
Contributor
|
Erik,
I can safely say that if Pathfinder remains a 3.5 game, you've got me for the long haul. In fact, a 3.5 Pathfinder game is probably the only line of gaming products I can see myself buying in the future. I had already made the decision not to shift to 4th edition and have notified my gamers on Roleplaymarket.com (where I'm running both a campaign starting with "Hollow's Last Hope" and "Rise of the Runelords") that I do not intend to transition to 4th Edition.
Now, although I've stated that I'd rather not learn a new game system at my age--and that I've got so many 3.5 books now that I'd prefer to be able to use those for a long time--I can say that you guys are the only publishers I'd be willing to give a chance on a new system.
I have two little girls who are almost six and I definitely plan on introducing them to RPGs when they are old enough. In my house, that will be D&D in some form or other (adjusted for their age, that is). I'd like to be able to show them new 3.5-type products instead of my old battered books.
Bottom line: I'm 100% behind Paizo, but I'm not going with 4th Edition, no matter what. Please stick with v.3.5. While I understand that you have to do what's best for the company, I'd prefer that you guys stayed with v.3.5. If so, then you'll also have my daughters as customers (I hope) when the time comes.
Whatever happens, keep up the good work. You guys are awesome and I hope you always will be.
Cheers!
Paris Crenshaw
San Diego, CA
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
As more grist for Erik to think through, Scott Rouse has announced there won't be a d20 logo for the new OGL. I presume the old d20 trademark license will get pulled as well. So what does this mean for Paizo products?
Nothing really.
If y'all look at the back of your Pathfinder books, you'll see that, rather than a d20 logo, there's a cute 3.5*OGL Compatible logo, in an orange box. Does what the d20 logo was supposed to do, and could easily be replaced with a 4.0 version. Or not. But that's Erik's call, not Wizards'.
Well done, sir.
Heh, thanks.
Some times I sort of hate it when I'm proven right! :)
Hi Eric:
You may remember me as the annoying non-industry guy who kept talking at the d20/OGL meeting at Gencon...just wanted to say you were very polite, despite clearly thinking I was off my rocker. ;-)
To answer to your original question: If the new rules are strong, then I'll probably move my groups to them a few months after they come out. If not, I'd have no problem sticking with 3.5, and would of course like Paizo to do the same. I'm selfish that way. ;-) In any case, if we do move, a few months lag while you guys get a handle on the new rules wouldn't be a big deal...I wouldn't cancel my subscriptions or anything unless you guys just flat out decided you wouldn't ever move. I the new rules don't do it for me, I would personally continue my subscriptions for the forseeable future, but I'm not sure I see that as a viable long term plan for you guys.
An OGL-derived "3.75" Pathfinder RPG is interesting, but then you would risk further reducing your potential audience...if you don't go 4, I'd stick with 3.5. It you're worried about 3.5 going out of print, put out a hardback print edition of your own, drawing upon your pool of (really good) art, and call that the Pathfinder RPG. But new rules? Then you lose people who make the 4.0 jump as well as the 3.5 "grognards."
For what it is worth, edition issues aside, I absolutely prefer Paizo's work to WOTC's. I've always been more apt to purchase adventures, setting materials, etc. over new rules, and I don't see that changing. If 4th is good, I will buy the core, but the bulk of my purchases after that will be with you guys barring some unforeseen dip in quality.
--Aaron
I'm not your core audience really. I never run published adventures so Pathfinder as currently constituted doesn't really work for my group. I have to say though that as soon as your setting books come out next year I will begin greedily buying up everything you produce.
If you do end up breaking away from Wizards of the Coast I'd just end up happily buying more core Pathfinder products. No trouble there. Frankly I would love to see the 3.75 Paizo System. I'm sure it would be good.
Can't wait till next year. I feel so behind on things. It's like I've been trapped in a locked refrigerator for the last two years. Heh.
|
|
Some times I sort of hate it when I'm proven right! :)
So I can buy the lottery ticket/sell the stock/change my own publishing, writing or gaming plans in advance, any other bits of vast, depressing wisdom you're ready to share with the masses?
Or, for that matter, anything else you'd like to know about 3.5/3.75/4.0 thoughts from we, your loyal customers?
Here, I'll pitch in a thought along these veins:
*If* you create a 3.75 rule set, try to make sure it uses the same stat blocks as 3.5. For example, even if you change how grapples work, try to make sure there is still something called a grapple bonus, used for a grapple check, and it uses the same range of bonuses. That way, people who prefer your (presumably brilliant)3.75 grapple rules can use them with old products and stuff from other publishers, and the hold-outs who don't like them can still run your monsters with the old rules.
|
|
Here are my two cents to add to the mix;
When 3.0 came out I picked up just the PHB and really like it. Most of my friends and I had been playing 1.0 and 2.0 edition for a long time, and would mix a little of the two back and forth. As the time rolled by I would pick up the new 3.0 books that I need as money allowed. Not making a great deal myself, my purchases were a little sporadic except the core rules and the FR products. I eventually got my friends involved in 3.0.
Overall we had fun, and liked the new rules.
THEN, things took a dive. After investing LOTS of money into the new 3.0 books, WOTC decided they needed to do a 3.5. which was a mixxed bag at our group. Luckily the only person in our group who had a ton of 3.0 books was me. Most of the players only had the three core books. (the vast majority of our group not only plays but DM's as well, so no one gets burned out on running adventures all the time)
SO I started over from 3.5. Most of the others were very reluctant. But after some time they too started to shift to 3.5. Generally we liked the upgrades, and if we had some old 3.0 material, it wasn't too hard to convert it. (Much easier than trying to convert 1.0 or 2.0 to 3.0 anway)
Now I know I've spent easily a couple thousand dollars on 3.5 material.
I understand Hasbro's need for profit but they are seriously muckin' up the RPG side of business. Yeah the kiddies want their MMO. But don't they realize those who want and MMO already play a game online called World of Warcrack,..er I mean warcraft? SO I wish WOTC to have fun but this is where me and my group are off the WOTC train. We might buy the PHB for 4.0 to see how it looks/what changes are made, but I don't think a single person in out group is going to make any real effort to get involved with 4.0. WOTC can go screw some other customers..we are tired of the "lets make new rules every 5 years and put out the same books but with different names."
I truly hope Paizo stays 3.5 or even does the 3.75 rules hybrid. Out group loves what Paizo has done with the adventures and support. Not to mention AWESOME customer service unlike the Hasbro whore of cash and dash.
If Paizo eventually does go 4.0 we will consider it but for now me and mine are staying 3.5. We have PLEANTY of material to cover us for years.
From the posts I've read, seems like a lot of you feel the same way.
~Tallknight
|
I have been playing D&D since the early 80's. I started out with Basic D&D (remember the red box yall :) ), I then discovered Advanced D&D and made the switch. When 2nd Ed. came along I moved forward with the game. When 3rd and 3.5 hit the market I happily moved on as they improved my beloved pass time. Now I fear dark forces are at work. WotC is trying to sell us on a tabletop mmo and tell us it is our game, nay it is our game better, improved, cleaned up and polished. look at the shine. Don't get me wrong I like mmo's I have played several, and currently play WoW. I do not want to WoW in my D&D thank you very much. What works great for my video game will not work for my campaign. (let me say yes I am speculating on what is going to happen in 4 ed. but from what I have seen I don't think it's far from the mark) They are two different things. So I am very fearful of what WotC and Hasbro have planed for my favorite hobby. I don't think we the gamer, the original Gamer way before this term got ganked by video game players, are factored to highly into their market plan. We will see how that works out for them. I do not plan on switching to 4 ed I will only consider doing this if Paizo switches and they havn't screwed up my game to much with it other wise I will be going through the task of conversion if Paizo switches to 4ed. I think this is a chance for paizo to really take the reigns and their rightful spot as the heirs of the D&D legacy. You have my support and subscription dollars good sirs I know you will let the decision be guided by the heart of the gamer that beats inside the heart of this company.
AD&D= Hackmaster. Sure it's niche, but it's still going strong as far as I'm aware from players I know.
ergo,
D&D 3.75= Pathfinder RPG. Could be a workable model, but that'll be up to Paizo's money people. The treatment of third party companies by WotC this time round is a bit of a wakeup call and reveals just how vunerable such companies can be to the whims of the "Open source Provider". Mongoose is already pushing hard to expand away from such dependency with it's OGL Conan, Runequest and Traveller, is it timely for Paizo to look at such an option?
Of course a line of 4th edition modules with dual compatability might be viable too :)
You guys can use a setting for any edition. For the most part I had used Mystara a.k.a. the Known World as the setting for our 3.x campaign here. It was the one we used for our first D&D campaign way back before there were "editions". It was the one we felt most "at home" with while playing the "new" third edition (totally skipped AD&D2Ed.)
I could take Pathfinder and run it as an AD&D setting. You could even run it as a d6 Fantasy setting if you wanted to.
|
RPG Superstar 2013
|
I have to say, and I am not much for kissing butt, Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk is awesome. I picked it as swag for running the dnd open and read it on the way home from gencon. I also read the interview with erik in KQ.
(side note: my wife is running her first adventure ever. she picked crown of the kobold king. mr baur: kobolds might be 'small yet fierce', but i still long to throw them all down the well and then follow them to their king. i hate me some kobolds.)
anyhoo, the adventure and article combined was like a religious experience for me. the reverence for the old school dungeon crawl, the great npc development and opportunity for just roleplaying. combining these two into a great campaign i think is dnd at its very best.
well, iron dugneon master is dnd at its very best. but they are both defintely what keeps me excited about this hobby.
all praise to paizo for keeping that the goal. profits will follow accordingly.
this might be heresy to some, but paizo should have its own dnd open. great authors, loyal following. if competing with the rpga wouldn't damage your relationship with wotc, you should look into that. with your stable of writers (hopefully soon to include yours truly!), you could have the biggest tourney in dnd in three years, i think.
Pathfinder is fading empires, rising warlords against the backdrop of an ancient empire, parts of which rest uneasily....
As to who the heirs are? I can't say about EGG, but I'd say Paizo has become the gaming heirs to Howard's throne, and WotC seems to be the heir to someone else.
An excellent and thoughtful post. I concur. D&D to me has always been something with lots of Conan, Leiber, Tolkein, Cooper, etc. I particularly like the fact that you set this forth without using the term "anime" as I think it made your point stronger.
|
|
But you wouldn't be competing only with the D&D Open anyway - The Dungeon Crawl Classics Open has a very strong following and you've also got the HackMaster Wurld Championship and Tournament of Champions at the two big conventions to draw the "old school" players away...
That is, presuming, there will be a 3.5 Dungeon Crawl Classics Open in 2008. Since Goodman Games has announced they will stop producing Dungeon Crawl Classics modules for 3.5 at #53(?) I would be surprised to see a brand new tournament module produced for that edition of the game. But I could be wrong. There has been no official word if Goodman intends on producing modules for 4e. I am sure, like Paizo, they are waiting to see what the OGL and the system will offer.
Hackmaster is also ending as a product line so I am unsure what the condition of any official tourneys would be.
I think the Paizo delve is a good and interesting feature of the convention environment. If they produced a tourney based on their Gamemastery line I would be there in a heartbeat. I like to play in tourneys.
|
|
There are plans through next year for HackMaster tournaments (heck, I'm half-heartedly working on writing one currently... :D); 2009 is a little hazy at the moment though.
The current edition of HackMaster "died" as of Sept. 1, 2007, in that none of the 1e/2e parody products (AKA licensed products) can be printed. They plan to get a new edition out as soon as "it's ready" - which means 2009 at the earliest AFAICT - and there are still plans to support what is already out there as much as they can.
That's cool news (at least its news to me). I am not a huge fan but I am happy hear they are producing a new edition and planning on supporting what is out there.
Wow I've been laying low around here for a while, and I don't have time to read all 18 pages, but that doesn't matter seeing as you asked for opinions. So here's my honest opinion Erik:
I would be extremely sad if it came to a choice between D&D 4th Edition and a Pathfinder game. It would feel to me as though D&D as I knew it was dead, and Paizo was carrying on the tradition under a different name, which is cool and all but not the same.
To be brutally honest I don't know if it's the game mechanics I like or the tradition, name and personal history I have associated with the D&D brand. I've loved D&D for most of my life, like many of the people here. I've flirted with other systems like Palladium and Rolemaster, but always gone back to D&D. Now it sounds as if D&D will no longer be D&D. But Pathfinder is alsonot D&D - it might have the SRD rules but the continuity and background everyone is wailing about being cut from D&D won't be in Pathfinder either.
OK as usual I'm being a bit unclear, but basically, if I've made my scrying check, this is what will happen with my group:
Everyone gets excited about 4E. We play for a bit and then pretty soon everyone starts saying:
"Hey this is a rip off. Why do we have to keep buying all this online crap? Let's go back to old school 3.5!"
I then say: "well, if we're going to play 3.5 let's just play Pathfinder, it's a quality game made by Paizo, a quality company."
Then everyone else says: "...I dunno, why should we buy more stuff? Plus, does Pathfinder have Illithids/Drow/Zuggtmoy? I can see that huge pile of 3.5 books over there right now in the bookshelf. What's wrong with them?"
Then I say: "Nothing I guess" and buy Pathfinder just in case. So what I'm saying is out of everyone in my group, I'll probably buy a Pathfinder RPG, but never use it. The others will end up playing 3.5 D&D after they've already given their money to Wizards for 4E.
That said, I'm sure you guys have the potential to be a biggish player in the RPG market (like Mongoose, or even White Wolf maybe) and I personally will support you if you decide to go for it.
I've looked through:
"Expedition to Undermountain" - beautiful, slick book, but bland-feeling and lifeless.
"Expedition to Castle Ravenloft" - Looked very nice; I've considered buying it a few times; if I ran a 3.x game I would own it already and may pick it up some day
"Expedition to the Demonweb Pits" - Great graphics but... It looks like they grabbed ten pages from module H4, three pages from Q1, the last five pages of D3, tossed it all in a blender and set it to "mangle" - sadly, that's the one I was actually looking forward to picking up, too... :(
I played through Expedition to the Demonweb Pits, I have to say I was underwhelmed. "Was that it?" Then suddenly you fight a bunch of god aspects that go down easier than a Thai hooker. Bah.
|
|
Hi all –
When I first started reading this thread it only had four pages to read, but with work getting in the way of my game-related duties (at work) it then moved to ten pages, and I started to formulate my thoughts. I began typing this out on page 12, and now as I prepare to post, we are at 18.
For the most part – with the exception of the overly long “Me Too” posts, I have read them all. I too just hope that someone other than me reads them!
I have been an Erik Mona fan since the AOL board days, and later as an Oerth Journal founder. As always, he has been opinionated and forthcoming with said opinions. For the most part, he has been granted a Gary Gygax like status to the fans of Greyhawk (Okay, those of us that have moved on past 1e). Lisa “Greyhawk MegaBabe” Stevens likewise has a cult following amongst many of us “old-timers” in Greyhawk circles.
Thus, when it comes to Greyhawk, their positions as “heralds” with Dragon and Dungeon magazines were solidified. However, with the loss of the magazines and the inability to create further Greyhawk information, their statuses will not be affected, but their presence will be lost.
I am thus far disappointed in the usefulness of Pathfinder. Being a Greyhawk culturist, I find my reading of Pathfinders' Galarion disenfranchised (someone will of course correct my misspelling of their setting). The story line is great and the flavor of the setting is excellent. However, without places like CanonFire!.com authors willing to do the work for me (the converting and placing of Pathfinder into a more Greyhawk or as termed, Pathhawk, setting) I am unlikely to use it. In fact, I received issue 3 on Saturday 2007.11.10, flipped through it and then promptly placed it in my magazine rack.
My purchases of Pathfinder will likely end after this Adventure Path. I have yet to purchase any of the Game Mastery modules, but I did buy the Critical Deck, and just purchased the Map Pack – Village. It was not what I was expecting – I was expecting something more along the lines of the DDM maps. Instead, I had to use the City of Peril town map for my needs this past weekend, instead of the Village map that I purchased just for that purpose. That does not mean it was not a good purchase, but it was not what I expected and that is both my own fault as well as Paizo’s. In both our cases the Marketing of the product wasn’t enough to inform me of what I wanted/expected as well as good enough for the store owner to explain it to me (he asked me to open it so he could see it).
Thus, I am interested in the products that can support any edition of the game (I did use mini’s in 2nd Ed, and a couple in 1st in the latter years). I however, make plenty of money to purchase a 4th Ed, but I have promised my WifeFIEND that I would rather spend the money on picking up books that I originally was not interested in, i.e. Weapons of Legacy, Planar Handbook, Expanded Psionics and so forth. I also purchase a lot of the d20/OGL books previously and currently produced. I enjoy, and as a DM, use AEG’s books (Mercenaries, Good, Feats (while 3.0), etc), Fantasy Flight Games (City Works, Dungeon Works, Wildscape, etc, {all excellent books produced long before WotC decided to do one of each of those}). Goodman Games produces excellent modules while Green Ronin utilized former and current WotC authors for their Advanced Bestiary, Players and Gamemaster Guides. Therefore, I am not moving to a 4th edition, not because of cost, or because I am upset with WotC and how they have handled things (which I believe is/has been done poorly), but because I have far too many books for an edition that I still enjoy.
I will continue to purchase 3rd party books for 3.5, and if Paizo continues with this edition and produces books that are useable to the core mechanic (vs. setting specific) I will purchase those. As it stands, the Pathfinder has more setting specific information than it does core mechanic (monsters being part of the core mechanic for me). But with seven Monster Manuals (FF and MoF included) by WotC, three Tome of Horrors, three Creature Collections, and the many other monsters listed in the back of modules, I’ve got more than a fair share to dish out. Pathfinder for this alone is not worthwhile. If Paizo stays 3.5 OGL, it sure would be easier for them if more than just Mongoose was along for the ride. Mongoose already produces tons of 3.5 OGL – and being OGL the basis is similar for/in their games, but that doesn’t mean their product is comparable to Paizo. Thus I think Paizo would need to work with a few other 3rd party publishers. Allowing for a future in which they could call themselves primary producers and not 3rd party.
Adding in cool new Core Class features (a la’ Class Features in Dragon), new Core Classes and other staples of Dragon may modify my future purchasing plans, in regards to Pathfinder. As Kobold Quarterly is now potentially the new Dragon, if Paizo had the ability to do this I believe they would already be doing so. Most likely they have a non-compete clause from their terminated contract lasting at least one year and quite possibly two years {local markets tend towards one year non-compete agreements, but with a national brand and a major corporation, WotC may have extended it}. If and when it is possible for Paizo to discuss a new magazine, for any edition, it will be very difficult to get off the ground. Pathfinder may push the automatic door openers, leaving just enough room for it to be successful. Unfortunately until a new magazine is able to take Dragon's place we have few places to look for good material, with demise of Campaign Magazine (possibly the only really independent d20 magazine that came out with any decent number of issues {8}), and the continued crap from Signs & Portents, the opening is there – just if and when is another issue.
Therefore, if a Pathfinder continues on its current path, potentially a Pathfinder OGL book may fit my needs better – but so would/do books that facilitate the grappling rules better (excellent PDF’s on the subject have been done), rules on weather, etc.
I am most interested in seeing what other people have done with their 3.5 game utilizing the potential 4e rules that are in Star Wars Saga. Arnim Thayer listed a few things he’s modified from SWS – like new class features etc. for his 3.5 D&D game. This is the type of thing that interests me the most and is most likely the only way I’ll buy a 4th Ed PHB. Many others not only have the time, but more importantly, the ability that I do not have to modify rules and setting so that I may use them to the fullest. I’d like to see those.
---------------
Along the lines that Erik has come from the ranks and went official (as the RPGA head) and then moved to a 3rd party (albeit, still official), there are those that are with D&D today – Kim Mohan, Rich Baker (like it or not), as well as a few others (is Anne Browne still with WotC?). Thus, both Kim and Rich have been with D&D since the early days, have been editors and directors of D&D for a very long time. Many people have said that 4th Edition is not D&D (from what they have been able to gather from the “official” and “unofficial-yet-official” reports). I just cannot see that these two stalwarts of the gaming industry would truly be out to destroy the game that has been their life – as much, if not more than it has been mine. I too remember Alternity (and wrote a note about signing Castle Greyhawk because I remember my “signed and numbered” Alternity that arrived and is only “numbered” – which give no proof that mine is the “real” signed number 144!). Yes, Alternity wasn’t the easiest of mechanics to use, and I also realize that Rich is head of the R&D at WotC, but with the likes of Mike “I’m gonna save D&D” Mearls, the mechanics might be useable. I am not planning on playing D&D 4th Edition, but I also do not feel that those who are in charge would recklessly drive their charge into the ground (the company, Hasbro, might).
----------------
Finally, I play Dungeons & Dragons – but as all editions so far have used that moniker, it doesn’t matter which edition you play, you still play D&D. It is to the extent that you are willing to argue a rule or a concept in one edition versus another edition. Nevertheless, I am firmly in the camp that my rule argument is most likely to stay within the Players Handbook for the 3.5 game system, and those books that support that edition of the rules. (Note: I typed this around page 12, before I had the opportunity to see The Head Gnome’s post on page 16. Interesting that we say the same thing about the D&D moniker!).
Be Well. Be Well Editioned.
Theocrat Issak
As for me personally I have been slow to adapt to new rule sets. For example I played AD&D for about four months after D&D 3 came out. I waited a year and a half before upgrading to 3.5. And I will likely wait for a few months after D&D 4 comes out. But no matter what the choices that Paizo makes I know that it is for us the fans and not for the bottom dollar like WotC.
What ever the choice I will stick with the company that I know is all about pleasing me, not taking my money.
|
RPG Superstar 2013
|
i am ok with companies making choices for dollars. i hope mona gets a greyhawk license, 4.0 rocks, and paizo rakes in record amounts of rpg cash, sufficient to pay writers very well and advertise/market the bejeezus out of my favorite hobby until video game companies are sellfing tabletop rulebooks with their MMOs just to get a piece of the action.
Paizo has my gaming buck no matter what. There are too reasons why.
1: paizo has stories with sex in them. Not pictures of chainmail bikinis 9which turn out to be uncomfortable if fun for non-combat uises), but characters that have lust and love as motivations. That's critical to my gaming group. We're adults, Wizards. We can handle a PG-13 concept.
2: Planet Stories. I am now devouring everything they print. I want more. I usually get what I want. So my money will go to paizo whenever it can, to ensure I get more of these books.
|
i am ok with companies making choices for dollars. i hope mona gets a greyhawk license, 4.0 rocks, and paizo rakes in record amounts of rpg cash, sufficient to pay writers very well and advertise/market the bejeezus out of my favorite hobby until video game companies are sellfing tabletop rulebooks with their MMOs just to get a piece of the action.
We can dream...in all honesty I don't think it's any secret that tabletop is dying a slow painful death. Which of course is why WotC is feeling this pressure to do 4e, and why they're doing it the way they are, trying to tap into the MMO group. I can't say I think it will work; the younger generation is into flashy graphics and "fast-food" stories over substance. They won't bite on D&D no matter WHAT WotC does, when they can just stay on WoW.
On the upside, if 4.0 sucks, I have enough 3.5 and other RPG stuff on my shelves to last a lifetime. I just need my friends to stop moving away. :)
|
RPG Superstar 2013
|
dungeon grrl...i think i love you.
don't anyone tell mrs ancientsensei.
fiendish dire weasel: i said i'm coming to visit. vote for me to win superstar and maybe i'll take up writing adventures right next door!
and i think agressive marketing and sticking with the vision that paizo has for dnd will keep the slow death of dnd at bay. we'll see for sure after 4.0, and if it isn't dnd anymore, then version 3.p will send all of that money paizo's way.
and i think agressive marketing and sticking with the vision that paizo has for dnd will keep the slow death of dnd at bay. we'll see for sure after 4.0, and if it isn't dnd anymore, then version 3.p will send all of that money paizo's way.
Call me blind but I don't see the tabletopRPG dying as a hobby. On D&D-Day down at the local gamestore I say quite a few younger gamers. Ones that just could not have been gaming since the eighties. A few were looking at a AD&D2 PHB on the used bookshelf like it was an antique. My old DM from the eighties team I was on regularly games with a team of five players now whose median age is less then twenty. There are two players in my team too young to buy alcohol.
Actual booksales may be down. That, imo, is more due to some scabs copying books on pdf and giving them out to their buddies. I don't know how many times I have wanted to slap some dude for telling me that paying for my books was dumb because I could've just downloaded them for free from www.freeloadingscamp.com.The industry may be in trouble. But the hobby itself is rather healthy.
Eric, as I have said before, I am sort of an old sacred cow myself. I'm of the older pen and paper school. I'm also tired of converting every 1/2 dozen years.
I've pledged my support to Paizo and will continue to do so. WotC has not seen any purchases from me in over 18 months and frankly, I've cut ties with them based on some of those reasons you've pointed out.
I am not interested in 4e; not interested in WotC except for their miniature line. I AM interested in seeing Paizo take the current 3.5 system and run with it; adding their own creative slant to the system and products.
I don't envy your decision; and unfortunately there are a lot of gamers out there with the "If WotC prints it, I will buy it." mentality.
Yes...there will be a lot of folk who will play 4e on day 1.
No, I won't be one of them.
I really do hope there will be enough of a market out there to support your products.
|
|
dungeon grrl...i think i love you.
don't anyone tell mrs ancientsensei.
You're just staring at those last two lines of pixels and wishing they'd continue down, and show the chainmail bikini she was talking about.
fiendish dire weasel: i said i'm coming to visit. vote for me to win superstar and maybe i'll take up writing adventures right next door!
I haven't seen voting yet. And yes, there are still lots available in my subdivision, including the one right next door. :)
and i think agressive marketing and sticking with the vision that paizo has for dnd will keep the slow death of dnd at bay. we'll see for sure after 4.0, and if it isn't dnd anymore, then version 3.p will send all of that money paizo's way.
Yeah, I don't think there's any real question that next year, and maybe the first half of '09, will be make or break for the pen/paper RPG industry. We'll see how it goes.
I think your situation can be made simpler, but it does require a promise. Promise that all Pathfinder issues will be have 4.0 stats provided online for free to people who buy the 3.5 version now. Yes, that may be a bit of work up front, but you keep everyone interested for now. Of course, you got to follow up and do it when possible -- but you can cancel conversions later (4th or 5th pathfinder series) when the 3.5/4.0 divide is figured out.
If 4.0 is truly better, everyone will naturally go there and the decision is made for you (barring the usual people who hate change -- I know people who still play 2nd edition too).
For those wanting to go 4.0, even if just to try it, you are providing entertaining d20 material for thousands of gamers not to mention saving plenty of game masters from having to build encounters from scratch.
Again, promise to do a 4.0 conversion, and we'll keep buying the modules now knowing our investment in Paizo is an investment in our potential change to 4.0.
We'll iron out all the 3.5 vs. 4.0 stuff later when we know what the heck it is.
(NOTE: I realize that Paizo may feel they'll deliver 4.0 conversions later than anyone likes, but I would take advantage of the online media and make the 4.0 conversions simple -- just the stat blocks, not whole new layouts).
As more grist for Erik to think through, Scott Rouse has announced there won't be a d20 logo for the new OGL. I presume the old d20 trademark license will get pulled as well. So what does this mean for Paizo products?
Nothing really.
If y'all look at the back of your Pathfinder books, you'll see that, rather than a d20 logo, there's a cute 3.5*OGL Compatible logo, in an orange box. Does what the d20 logo was supposed to do, and could easily be replaced with a 4.0 version. Or not. But that's Erik's call, not Wizards'.
Well done, sir.
Heh, thanks.
Some times I sort of hate it when I'm proven right! :)
What's the difference between OGL and d20 anyway?
I can't say I think it will work; the younger generation is into flashy graphics and "fast-food" stories over substance. They won't bite on D&D no matter WHAT WotC does, when they can just stay on WoW.
The thing about tabletop RPGs is that they have always been a niche market. Kids are not that different to grown ups - if you give them an easy option most of them will lap it up, but some will want more, and it's these ones that turn to tabletop. These ones are the sorts of kids who devour rules and want room to experiment. Even when there were no MMOs, before the internet (remmeber that?) hardly anyone played RPGs in terms of the general population. That's because it's one of those things that's hard to learn but rewarding, and most people just don't go for that. But there'll always be enough people to keep the market going for companies like Paizo, who seem to be made up of folks who don't want to be billionaires (well, no more than anyone), they just want to make a living doing what they love.
So I think D&D as a brand may die a slow and painful death, but only because it happens to be owned by a company that is looking to get rich from it, and quite frankly that ain't going to happen. No matter how well you market them, some things just aren't mainstream interests. But tabletop RPGing will never die. People don't stop re-enacting Gettysburg because XBox Live has team shooters.
|
|
I am not planning on playing D&D 4th Edition, but I also do not feel that those who are in charge would recklessly drive their charge into the ground (the company, Hasbro, might).
I think that's exactly the problem here. While Rich Baker has been villified for doing horrible things to FR (which Chris Perkins, as the boss, stepped up and took the "blame" for), neither he nor Chris are actually in control. They have to work within parameters that they are given which require Hasbro to make a profit. Hasbro isn't in this business for our benefit... they are here to make a profit, and if something doesn't make a profit they just drop it.
Unfortunately I do think 4e is the end of D&D simply because it won't make the money Hasbro thinks it should, and no amount of massaging by the designers is going to be able to change that.
Paizo, stay 3.P (an excellent version number that someone else coined - kudos to whomever that was :) ) and you will lead the way to gaming stability. The rules are all there, the books are all produced... it's finally a somewhat static scene where some actual innovation can occur that isn't overridden by next month's new $45 hardcover.
I promise to subscribe to Pathfinder the minute I hear Paizo commits to staying 3.x and not following WotC to 4e. :)
What everyones been saying about us young'uns and how WotC is pandering to our basest desires: Its not gonna work. Don't get me wrong, I like video games and flashy, mindless violence as much as the next guy. But I play D+D for a diffrent experience, and if it gets too similar to MMO's and such, theres no reason to deprive myself of graphics and play the same game with pencil and paper.
Thats not to say that I'm giving up D+D; on the contrary, I'm holding onto all my 3.5 books and considering making my lucky d20 my phylachry as soon as I get 100,000 gp and escape the planet-wide dead magic zone. But D+D can't compete with WoW or Halo 3; its the third party of gaming. Instead of simplicticy, D+D needs to offer depth. I think that WotC would have been better off taking all the time and money that went into 4e and making more adventure modules and Frostburn type setting books, not to mention starting Dungeon and Dragon up again. Downloadable content is a horrible idea, not only because not everyone has internet, but if you want to take your new book/adventure/whatever to your freinds house, the computer must come with.
I'm not going to 4e unless it becomes the industry standard, mostly because I know that WotC will release 5e as soon as I own almost all the books I want. I really resent the idea of a corperation maxing out their bottom line at our expense, and honestly, thats why I'm against 4e.
Just reminding everybody, again, that this thread is entirely academic because nobody has played 4e yet.
Feel free to continue discussing this, but please don't form opinions about something that functionally doesn't yet exist.
|
|
Just reminding everybody, again, that this thread is entirely academic because nobody has played 4e yet.
Feel free to continue discussing this, but please don't form opinions about something that functionally doesn't yet exist.
The beauty is that I can form whatever opinion I like. :) You can hold out hope as long as you want to - that is also your prerogative. Just don't ask me not to have my own opinions. It just gets tiring saying "based on the little we know at the moment" before all opinions, but it is implied.
As many people have said to those who have proclaimed their 3.xishness, nobody is coming to your house in the dead of night to take away your books... WotC gave us 3.5, and we're well equipped. 4e is going to be so different as to be an entirely separate ruleset with virtually no compatibility (they've already said this much), so why treat it like an "upgrade" to the D&D rules? Why not treat it like what it is - a totally new game just from a familiar design company. If D&D suddenly went to a fully point-based system like GURPS, and WotC developed it... would people still feel the same need to follow along? Not likely. Think of it as though the company has just stopped supporting the system, and carry on. If you're happy with 3.x then keep playing 3.x There is no expiry date on the books.
And if a company as prestigious as Paizo were the flagship for such an armada, I'd be quite happy to sail in that fleet (which I suspect will be quite substantial).
Hi all –
I am thus far disappointed in the usefulness of Pathfinder. Being a Greyhawk culturist, I find my reading of Pathfinders' Galarion disenfranchised (someone will of course correct my misspelling of their setting). The story line is great and the flavor of the setting is excellent. However, without places like CanonFire!.com authors willing to do the work for me (the converting and placing of Pathfinder into a more Greyhawk or as termed, Pathhawk, setting) I am unlikely to use it. In fact, I received issue 3 on Saturday 2007.11.10, flipped through it and then promptly placed it in my magazine rack.
My purchases of Pathfinder will likely end after this Adventure Path. I have yet to purchase any of the Game Mastery modules, but I did buy the Critical Deck, and just...
As I am in my 40s Greyhawk is synonymous to D&D for me too. I’m surprised that you received Pathfinder 3 and put it aside. Fort Rannick could easily be placed in a variety of areas. While Sterich, Geoff, Yoemanry especially lend themselves to it, it could be any overrun fort on the frontier in rough terrain. It is a great adventure that is far more than a Steading-of-the-Hill-Giant-King giant whacking. The Gamemastery line has been excellent too, Bloodsworn Vale (W1) could be placed in Geoff, Yoemanry, Perrenland, Theocarcy of the Pale, or Ratik. Gallery of Evil (U1) can be placed in any large city. Crown of the Kobold King (D1) can be placed in any lightly settled area. They’re all really very flexible. The probability that any new Greyhawk material will be created approaches zero. While you’ll likely always need to make some adjustments, I find it far easier to tweak than to create from whole cloth. If nothing else I find reading a good module inspirational, sending me down paths that I wouldn’t have gone down otherwise in the campaign.