It seems to me that IF a company were to stick with supporting 3.5 that they would need to find a way to keep the rulebooks for that system available and relevant. It would be like printing CCG expansions but not keeping the core set in print. Or making miniatures for a miniatures game that doesn't have the core rulebook in print. One thing I have learned in my years in the gaming industry is that if there isn't a core rulebook available at retail, then that game and all its supplements are dead to the retailer. Nothing can get them griping more than having your core rulebook out of print. So, yes, I think anybody, including Paizo, who is serious about sticking with 3.5, would have to find a way to keep a core rulebook in print.
-Lisa
This is, as they say, another kettle of fish. If Paizo were to re-brand the game as their own, I suspect they have a chance. But then, without the D&D stamp, there's still an uphill battle.
[edit]But then, can you just reprint the SRD and put your name on it? Someone needs to consult a copyright lawyer, I think.
Greg
That would definitely be my preference. I would also caution about getting too different from the 3.5 OGL (SRD). One of reasons I won't play True d20 is that it is not enough like SRD. I can't just open it up knowing those rules and start running it. I first need to look at how things changed. To me that is a turn off, even it is just minor changes. Too many minor changes = a really big change.
So, if they do make their own, sure make some changes, but make it easy enough that a D&D 3.5 DM can run it without having to look up new rules to understand how things are set up.
I'd like to step from Pres Man's quote to another recent quote on the EN World Board
That's absolutely correct. There are some things I hate about 3rd edition (why are ropers not aberrations? what's up with the rakshasa's CR? why is turning undead and grapple so clumsy and complicated? why does the wizard have to spend XP and gold and time just to keep up with every other class's abilities? etc.). Yet I still love the game, run and play the game, and work in the industry.
I sort of like what pres man is saying.
1.) You can fix 3.5 in ways that you think make it work better.
2.) You can assert Brand Identity "Pathfinder"
3.) You don't have to re-invent the wheel. Keeping "Pathfinder" close to 3.5 makes for easy crossing over for those who have large libraries of source material.
4.) In fact, if you only upgrade the components that you think need to be fixed, you can probably cheaply dual stat 3.5 SRD and "Pathfinder". Or, put your "Pathfinder" in your products, and provide 3.5 SRD cross-over notes. Like Green Ronin does for Pathfinder True 20 now. I understand that Paizo doesn't have the resources to do that for Green Ronin, but they might have the resources to do that when it's their very own brand.. especially if it's not that dissimilar from 3.5 SRD to start with.
The fact that people have a lot of money invested in 3.5 has always been the stopping / stumbing block in any debate. There simply is no good answer to it. The person who doesn't have a problem with the existing system and has enough amterial to run for a decade... doesn't need a whole new edition. A smaller rules upgrade might be an easier sell to that person.
What if Paizo frames 3.5 (or its version of it) as the "immersive" edition of D&D, or some such positive term to convey what is does better than 4E, so players feel it is something to graduate to or return to when they tire of 4E.
So why couldn't Paizo, IF we were to stay with 3.5, get a regular influx of younger gamers who got weaned into the industry by 4th edition, but got bored and started looking for a more complicated game, or perhaps heard about this amazing campaign setting called Pathfinder Chronicles? I don't really understand why everyone thinks that IF a company stuck with 3.5, that it was like they were stuck in a hermetically sealed room or something.
Given that Green Ronin uses the word "True" to describe their rules system the obvious Dungeons and Dragons trademark that can't be used a new option must be considered.
I think the game could be called Pathfinder. If it needs a tagline then use "Fantasy Role Playing Rules" or "Traditional Fantasy Role Playing System."
Well, we all know the SRD isn't complete. And really, does anyone identify the game as "SRD" or "d20"? C'mon, we all call it D&D. Isn't that the big hoopla now? That 4e isn't D&D?Is this really a nit worth picking? Pathfinder is not a rules set. The PHB is. (OK, the SRD is). Therefore it's an accessory to a rules set. Let's not get into a war of semantics, k?
Greg
Sorry. It's way too easy to get into a war over minutia on the internet. My point was this: You claimed that 4e might leave a sour taste for D&D as a whole, not simply the edition. My counterpoint was that, in that event, Paizo could make a legitimate bid for branding Pathfinder as something other than D&D.
And Pathfinder isn't an accessory to the game. It's 'Compatible with the world's most popular roleplaying game.'
There you go! :D
I sort of like what pres man is saying.
1.) You can fix 3.5 in ways that you think make it work better.
But this was recently floated around the boards as Pazio 3.75e, and didn't seem to get much traction. Are people willing to "upgrade" to 3.75e now? I'm not. I'll stick with 3.5e because all my stuff is 3.5. An upgrade to 3.75e is an upgrade to 4e in my books.
Greg
P.S. Can you tell it's a slow work day for me today? :-)
Sorry. It's way too easy to get into a war over minutia on the internet. My point was this: You claimed that 4e might leave a sour taste for D&D as a whole, not simply the edition. My counterpoint was that, in that event, Paizo could make a legitimate bid for branding Pathfinder as something other than D&D.
I agree, if they "re-brand", that's different. It's still a battle (how many RPGs are out there?) but it's a different battle, and one with a different chance of success.
Greg
I am reposting a response I had in the other thread because it is relevant here:
Would Paizo be prepared (in the hypothetical situation of Paizo remaining 3.5) to either print their own PHBs or make a pact with WotC to ensure a continuing supply of them to make sure that 4E players wanting to convert wouldn't have to look too far if they didn't have second hand bookstores in town, or regular access to online second-hand stores? That might one reason why people are seeing such a decision as being equivalent to entering a game of diminishing returns.It seems to me that IF a company were to stick with supporting 3.5 that they would need to find a way to keep the rulebooks for that system available and relevant. It would be like printing CCG expansions but not keeping the core set in print. Or making miniatures for a miniatures game that doesn't have the core rulebook in print. One thing I have learned in my years in the gaming industry is that if there isn't a core rulebook available at retail, then that game and all its supplements are dead to the retailer. Nothing can get them griping more than having your core rulebook out of print. So, yes, I think anybody, including Paizo, who is serious about sticking with 3.5, would have to find a way to keep a core rulebook in print.
-Lisa
Hi Lisa, I'm no marketing expert but I thought there might actually be a number of opportunities here for 3.zo.
As Wizards rebuilds the game to the point where many established players are despondent, isn't there the opportunity to own the category - effectively to act as if 'Paizo is DnD' and WOTC is merely publishing 4th Edition?
Before everyone says that's playing with semantics, think about it: in this digital age does Paizo actually need to print a PHB? Thanks to the OGL it can host a Pathfinder Players Guide online or make it available as a pdf, distribute free Pathfinder themed character sheets, do everything in short that you would do if you were setting out on Day 1 to market a new game called Dungeons and Dragons.
The fans are here, the best writers in the business are here, the artwork is superb and the will is here for us to enjoy the game we love with a company that loves it as much as we do.
Let's change the question from 'can it work if we don't head off to 4th edition' to 'what can we do to make 3.zo DnD the better product by far'?
Personally, I think Paizo is 90 per cent of the way there already...
|
But this was recently floated around the boards as Pazio 3.75e, and didn't seem to get much traction. Are people willing to "upgrade" to 3.75e now? I'm not. I'll stick with 3.5e because all my stuff is 3.5. An upgrade to 3.75e is an upgrade to 4e in my books.Greg
P.S. Can you tell it's a slow work day for me today? :-)
A 3.75 PHB wouldn't be an 'upgrade'. Any rules that changed wouldn't be rules that would nullify all your other books. It'd likely be simpling of the grappling/sunder/trip/disarm rules, different fluff for the Races/Classes (possibly some new ones of each), new spells mixed in with the old; and different equipment.
I think the best comparison I can make is Everquest d20 (published by S&S), which had its own PHB, DMG and MM. Their DMG DID HAVE an experience chart, though it was a different formula than D&D's. I'm sure Paizo could easily invent their own formula for XP gain.
And as I posted in the other thread; the key here is that under the OGL Paizo CAN make their own PHB/DMG using the SRD and call it the Pathfinder Player's Guide and Pathfinder [something that means Dungeon Master but isn't] Guide. 4th Edition is specifically disallowing that in the GSL from what we've been told.
I am reposting a response I had in the other thread because it is relevant here:
It seems to me that IF a company were to stick with supporting 3.5 that they would need to find a way to keep the rulebooks for that system available and relevant. It would be like printing CCG expansions but not keeping the core set in print. Or making miniatures for a miniatures game that doesn't have the core rulebook in print. One thing I have learned in my years in the gaming industry is that if there isn't a core rulebook available at retail, then that game and all its supplements are dead to the retailer. Nothing can get them griping more than having your core rulebook out of print. So, yes, I think anybody, including Paizo, who is serious about sticking with 3.5, would have to find a way to keep a core rulebook in print.
-Lisa
I'm sure I won't be able to contribute much that Paizo hasn't already thought of and discussed on their own, but here goes my attempt to be helpful.
As far as I am aware, the only thing stopping anyone from republishing the SRD is the fact that the SRD is nominally free. However, as the supply of 3.5 core books dries up, a paper copy of the SRD, in a nice binding, becomes more attractive. Especially if the flavor that was extracted from it was put back in. For instance, the SRD has no list of Gods, only a short list of planes, and hardly any monster descriptions outside of stats. If Paizo republished a Pathfinder SRD, then it would be possible to add such material back in. This would make it more desirable (to me at least), while still making it a compatible 'Core book' for other d20 derivatives.
As much as I would like to see a 3.75 or 3.P edition that fixes some of 3.5's larger flaws (grapple, turning, diplomacy, counterspelling), I doubt it would be feasible simply because many publishers may want to try the same thing, and have 5 different 3.75 versions is worse than none at all. However, if Paizo makes one, you can bet that I'll be more than happy to buy it and run it.
As far as banned material like XP tables and character generation, the Harrow deck would make an ideal 4d6 replacement for Pathfinder. XP could be taken from the 'Flat XP rewards' from Unearthed Arcana (which for some reason isn't on d20srd.org. Is there a legal restriction here I'm not aware of, or is it because the d20srd uses the d20 license, not just OGL?).
But this was recently floated around the boards as Pazio 3.75e, and didn't seem to get much traction. Are people willing to "upgrade" to 3.75e now? I'm not. I'll stick with 3.5e because all my stuff is 3.5. An upgrade to 3.75e is an upgrade to 4e in my books.
Greg
P.S. Can you tell it's a slow work day for me today? :-)
That's a legitimate point.. which I tried to head off in point #4.
Greg, I think it depends on how big of an overhaul the so-called 3.75 Edition really is. How much money who want to charge for it. The perception (however false) that the company is trying to make a buck off of you.
And you might have a good point here. Let me toss it back to you, do you still feel the same way if they just did a relatively small upgrade?
Jim aka Watcher.
PS. Man, I wish it was slow. I should be focusing on work. Another reason to be annoyed at WOTC. I just want some darn closure so I can get something done around here. :-)
Why wouldn't kids weaned on D&D 4E move to Paizo's 3.5E?
1. Lack of core rulebook(s)
2. Lack of advertising, especially with the demise of Dungeon and Dragon magazines
3. Unwillingness of kids and retailers (is there a connection?) to go for "old stuff" when shiny new stuff is readily available
4. Changing tastes. Like it or not, I think 4E does embody changes in the way teenagers and many adults play games, and if Paizo caters to a style that is unappealing (eg: high fatality, small number of powers) to young gamers they won't go there.
5. Groupthink. People like playing what everyone else is playing, in the main. They like talking on the internet about the latest thing; everything old becomes a niche market, whether in antique cellphones or old cars.
6. Network effect: harder to play a game when there are few players/DMs for it.
You can still cater to a niche market without necessarily hitting diminishing returns for a long time. And some niche markets, like luxury goods, can be very lucrative. Paizo's customer base for 3.5E may stagnate or even shrivel and Paizo could still make a good living out of it.
Greg, I think it depends on how big of an overhaul the so-called 3.75 Edition really is. How much money who want to charge for it. The perception (however false) that the company is trying to make a buck off of you.
And you might have a good point here. Let me toss it back to you, do you still feel the same way if they just did a relatively small upgrade?
Jim,
That really depends. I know it's a cop-out answer, but I guess here is the litmus test for me:
1) If they generate a rule book which will cause me to put down my 3.5e PHB and never pick it up again, I'm not interested. This is why I'm not going to 4e.
2) If they generate a rule book which will reference my 3.5e PHB over and over again, I'll take a look.
For example, I will buy and look at Monte Cooke's Book of Experimental Might, because it's more of (2) than (1).
As to "why"? I run pre-canned adventures. Always have, always will. I don't have the time or imagination to craft adventures wholesale from nothing. If Paizo creates their own PHB, then I will be locking myself into their product line. No offense to Lisa, I like their stuff, but they aren't the only source of material for me.
Another reason, I have the Complete Book of Eldritch Might. It has variant Ranger, Sorcerer and Bard classes. I've suggested them, but none of my players will even look at them. Why? Because they aren't that interested in infinite options. They are happy and content with what the PHB has to offer, with regards to core classes.
We aren't switching to 4e for that reason alone. "Upgrading" to 3.75 is the same amount of money out of my pocket, and same number of "out of date" books gathering dust in the corner.
As a DM, if I'm getting new rule books, it's to add to my game, not replace it.
Greg
There is a player on my team that has started his RPG gaming experience with AD&D2. He is only 20 years old and played 2nd edition AD&D up until about late last year when he left his old team and joined mine. So he's about played that edition for almost as long as it was in print and didn't get started until it was almost at the end of it's run.
And when his turn to DM comes around ... we'll be playing AD&D2. At least for one adventure.
|
How dare you risk cross-pollinating crosswiredmind!?!
I’ll be teaching my son using 3.5 rules, so there’s one new gamer.
Heh, heh, heh.
But seriously - I think the key to attracting new gamers to a 3.5 based Paizo product is a great idea but I believe it would take more than a core book.
If you go to most FLGSs you'll have an easy time finding WotC and GW products, a slightly harder time finding that board game you were looking for, and a slightly harder time finding non-WotC d20 and OGL products, then the non-d20 RPGs are tucked away somewhere out of the prime shelf space.
If Paizo were to go with a 3.5 solution it would need a solid and eye catching assortment of products - books, accesories, minis, board or card games, or some mix of products to get noticed. I think it would also need to ramp up the in-store promotions. In short - the game would need to be as if not more attractive than its competition.
Furthermore, the game would need to be approachable. I was at my FLGS the other day and someone was looking at Iron Heroes. They saw a book on how to play it and said - "if i need a whole separate book on how to play why would I even try".
3.5 is a complex system. That can be good, but that can be a bad thing too. The barrier to entry for 3.5 may be worth facing now but when 4E comes along with a shallow learning curve then 3.5 may be seen as too advanced for a new gamer.
The amount of effort a person is willing to exert is proportional to the desired goal. If a person has other options available to meet that goal they tend to go with the one that causes the least friction and exertion. The reason buying a car is such a pain is that you have no real options. You must sit at the dealer and jump through all of the hoops. But gaming is not like that. There are a whole lot of options right now. For someone playing their first RPG it will need to meet their expectation and it will need to be a transition that is not too difficult.
WotC has a huge organized play engine that will bring people to 4E - actually it will bring 4E to them. Paizo would need some similar magnet if it hopes to attract new gamers - free basic rules, an in-store demo system, a living campaign, giveaways and incentives.
Basically it will take a multi-facetted approach which will take money, time, and people. But it can be done.
GregH, what if someone published a replacement PHB, containing all the same material as the PHB, except with the rules that need fixing replaced? It'd still be compatible with the rest of your collection. The only thing that would be left along the wayside is you old PHB.
Jim,That really depends. I know it's a cop-out answer, but I guess here is the litmus test for me:
All good points, Greg.
Okay.. we've established that if Paizo did their own branding, they would have to make sure the Core Book(s) stay in print / circulation (per Lisa).
Since you and I have those, we don't need to by them. You make a good point about not wanting to buy another Core Book.
Try this on for size then:
A smaller (soft cover?) book with rules upgrades like Monte's Book of Experimental Might. Price it reasonably.. 9.99 to 12.99
Paizo puts out a Branded Pathfinder Core Book, which is basically 3.5 but with their rule upgrades. You, Greg, are told that you don't need this book. All you need is that smaller book I mentioned above and your trusty 3.5 PHB.
- Now if a new player arrives, they have a product available in the new Branded Core Book.
- If someone wants all their rules under one cover, they have a product in the new Branded Core Book.
- Lastly, you have just want you need and don't feel like you've been asked to pay for something twice- because you just bought that smaller book and swapped out the relevant rules with your 3.5 PHB.
What would think of that?
I've been avoiding the whole 4E debate, but I do want to throw out two points that I haven't seen anyone else make.
First, in response to Lisa's original thought, I would say that it is possible that Paizo could see an increase in 3.5 gamers if they stick with that version. However, there is a couple of distinctions to be made here. First is the difference between the total population of 3.5 gamers, and the number of 3.5 gamers buying Paizo products. Maybe someone pointed this out in another thread, but it would seem clear that the overall number of 3.5 gamers will shrink to some extent. However, the number of suppliers of 3.5 products will also shrink. So, if Paizo sticks with that edition and keeps putting out quality products, it would be possible that the number of gamers buying from them increases.
My second thought ties into another distinction - the number of 3.5 gamers out there, short term and long term. Obviously, as others have mentioned, Paizo will need to put out some sort of core rulebooks or insure that someone else's books stay available. However, while I saw mentions of people moving from the D&D Basic to Expert to Advanced Rules (which is what I did, back in the day, learning from schoolmates) and some discussion of it being difficult to just pick and learn the 3.5 rules, I saw no suggestion that Paizo release their own set of 'basic' rules. Something akin to the OD&D or even the Mircolite D20 rules would be fantastic. It would help ease younger (and even some older) players into the game, would effectively allow Paizo to grab players before Wizards does, and would help ensure that the number of 3.5 players continues to grow.
Just some thoughts,
Bill
GregH, what if someone published a replacement PHB, containing all the same material as the PHB, except with the rules that need fixing replaced? It'd still be compatible with the rest of your collection. The only thing that would be left along the wayside is you old PHB.
More money out of my pocket. I don't want to toss away my 3.5e PHB. Pure and simple. I'm making an assumption here: a replacement 3.5ePHB (from Paizo) will cost more than a supplement (like Book of Experimental Might).
And it won't necessarily be compatible, because changes to the core rules will, by definition, invalidate some of my material. It's bound to happen.
Maybe I'm in the minority here. Maybe there are enough people willing to jump onto a 3.75e version. But my problem with 4e has always been only one thing: too soon to spend more money on another set of core rule books.
Greg
I sort of like what pres man is saying.
1.) You can fix 3.5 in ways that you think make it work better.
But this was recently floated around the boards as Pazio 3.75e, and didn't seem to get much traction. Are people willing to "upgrade" to 3.75e now? I'm not. I'll stick with 3.5e because all my stuff is 3.5. An upgrade to 3.75e is an upgrade to 4e in my books.
Greg
P.S. Can you tell it's a slow work day for me today? :-)
When I initially saw the 3.75e thread I thought that until I get some real idea about 4e I am not going to put effort into a version of 3.5 house rules. I still think this way a bit though the stuff I have seen in the last few days has tended to make me think i will keep playing 3.5 but will cherrypick some ideas from 4e.
For 3.75 or a Pathfinders Handbook (PHB?) to get traction you need
1. people to understand 4e rules but not like them
2. people to want to change some 3.5 rules
I think such a rules set could be good for Paizo as one of the complaints (and a legitimate one IMO) about 3.5 is that all the splat books (and other bits) have clogged up the system. Much of these are not OGL so in one fell swoop the Pathfinder handbook would cull a lot of this material. Further as Paizo basically makes their bucks from excellent adventures (fluff) and accessories (fruit) not from rulebooks/splatbooks (crunch) If they did go this route they would not have a 'must produce more crunch' mentality which would keep a cleaner game. Plus the 4e designers probably have some good ideas and Paizo could be influenced to come up with similar ways (or their own) to fix the main 3.5 rules gripes (like grapple IMO)
My fond memories of 1st edition are that for most of it we had 3 books- period. When the Fiend Folio came out there were no new rules. Then when Monster Manual 2 came out there were no new rules. When Unearthed Arcana came out there were a few new classes (which were shoddy) some new rules and a bunch of new spells and magic items. Sure in Dragon or white dwarf we found some spells and monsters, and the odd class but they were uncommon. In essence we happily played the same game without rule additions for over 10 years. TSR was successful in producing modules and selling the rulebooks it reprinted from time to time.
Now I know it evetually got into financial trouble and taken over etc but for mine a company that just produced an OGL players handbook with some rule changes/patches then stuck to it's core business of producing adventures maybe producing a rulebook addition every 3 years or less would do just fine.
|
I am reposting a response I had in the other thread because it is relevant here:
Would Paizo be prepared (in the hypothetical situation of Paizo remaining 3.5) to either print their own PHBs or make a pact with WotC to ensure a continuing supply of them to make sure that 4E players wanting to convert wouldn't have to look too far if they didn't have second hand bookstores in town, or regular access to online second-hand stores? That might one reason why people are seeing such a decision as being equivalent to entering a game of diminishing returns.It seems to me that IF a company were to stick with supporting 3.5 that they would need to find a way to keep the rulebooks for that system available and relevant. It would be like printing CCG expansions but not keeping the core set in print. Or making miniatures for a miniatures game that doesn't have the core rulebook in print. One thing I have learned in my years in the gaming industry is that if there isn't a core rulebook available at retail, then that game and all its supplements are dead to the retailer. Nothing can get them griping more than having your core rulebook out of print. So, yes, I think anybody, including Paizo, who is serious about sticking with 3.5, would have to find a way to keep a core rulebook in print.
-Lisa
Well again I ask...Why couldn't the Pathfinder Campaign setting book contain the rules needed to play? Mongoose did that with OGL Steampunk, Wild West, Horror etc.
A 3.75 PHB wouldn't be an 'upgrade'. Any rules that changed wouldn't be rules that would nullify all your other books. It'd likely be simpling of the grappling/sunder/trip/disarm rules, different fluff for the Races/Classes (possibly some new ones of each), new spells mixed in with the old; and different equipment.
That's an assumption you're making. You actually don't know what form a Paizo 3.75e book would look like, because it doesn't exist. 3e to 3.5e required new core rule books. (I know, I spent the money.) 3.75e may very well require new rule books. If you wrote it, it may not. But that's an assumption you're making. If you write a 3.75 which was not an "upgrade" then I may buy it.
And as I posted in the other thread; the key here is that under the OGL Paizo CAN make their own PHB/DMG using the SRD and call it the Pathfinder Player's Guide and Pathfinder [something that means Dungeon Master but isn't] Guide. 4th Edition is specifically disallowing that in the GSL from what we've been told.
Ok, I'll take your word for that.
Greg
Why wouldn't kids weaned on D&D 4E move to Paizo's 3.5E?
1. Lack of core rulebook(s)
2. Lack of advertising, especially with the demise of Dungeon and Dragon magazines
3. Unwillingness of kids and retailers (is there a connection?) to go for "old stuff" when shiny new stuff is readily available
4. Changing tastes. Like it or not, I think 4E does embody changes in the way teenagers and many adults play games, and if Paizo caters to a style that is unappealing (eg: high fatality, small number of powers) to young gamers they won't go there.
5. Groupthink. People like playing what everyone else is playing, in the main. They like talking on the internet about the latest thing; everything old becomes a niche market, whether in antique cellphones or old cars.
6. Network effect: harder to play a game when there are few players/DMs for it.You can still cater to a niche market without necessarily hitting diminishing returns for a long time. And some niche markets, like luxury goods, can be very lucrative. Paizo's customer base for 3.5E may stagnate or even shrivel and Paizo could still make a good living out of it.
#3 here is the big shining red light, at least to me. I taught myself DnD at a young age after buying a copy of the PHB at a Waldenbooks. And I would be willing to bet that many others start pretty similarly. Looking at the sparse collection of gaming books the local bookstores carry, I don't see a single 3rd party product. I just don't think the Borders or Barnes and Nobles of the world will make room for a competing 3.paizo (or whatever you want to call it). Maybe it would be their loss, or maybe not, but it would be a huge group of people who'd never see it.
As a side point, we've already seen in this very limited sample of posters in this thread a split whether Paizo should just be using 3.5 rules or tweaking them into a 3.75. When details on what exactly will be tweaked, and how, are made this split will widen, branch, and fork all over. Its sad but I think the 3.5 player base will slowly shrink and crumble away over time. Its still playable, and many will do so, but I suspect published support will be going the way of the dodo.
Well again I ask...Why couldn't the Pathfinder Campaign setting book contain the rules needed to play? Mongoose did that with OGL Steampunk, Wild West, Horror etc.
It'd be a bloody thick book, for one. Look at the combined page count for the PHB, DMG, and MM. Now add the 200+ pages of campaign setting material they were planning to put in it. A 600-800 page tome does not make an inviting starting point for a game.
This post may be deleted. I am responding before finishing the thread, so my poinys may already be covered.
I thought they were another company that did 3.5 well. I can understand them not wanting to go down the 4E route. However, abandoning 3.5 too?
Just to play Devil's Advocate, the open letter didn'y state they would drop 3.5. Although it did hint at it. The letter stated they are splitting from D&D not D20. That is a very fine hair split... But you might want to give them the benefit of the doubt, until you know for certain.
There is a new L5R edition?
Yes! L5R 3rd Edition. I think it is great!
Try this on for size then:
A smaller (soft cover?) book with rules upgrades like Monte's Book of Experimental Might. Price it reasonably.. 9.99 to 12.99...
What would think of that?
I would probably buy it. Whether I used it or not, would really depend on the content. That's how I'm approaching BoExM. I'll buy it and evaluate it. I know right off, that I won't be using the "20-level" spell system in BoExM because I cannot fathom the task of taking all the books that I have that have spells in them and trying to change them to a 20-level system.
If the Paizo book had a similar change (and remember this is Monte's 3.5 book, not even 3.75) and then all of their products with NPCs that are statted with a 20-level spell system would be useless for me. They just lost a customer.
I'm playing 3.5e and will continue. And when I'm done with all the 3.5 material I have in about 5 years, I'll probably look out and see what's there. If 4e has taken off, and there are scads of new good material, I'll consider converting. If it's at 5e or 6e, I'll take a look. I'll look at 3.Paizo if it is a go as well. But not before.
Greg
|
|
A 3.75 PHB wouldn't be an 'upgrade'. Any rules that changed wouldn't be rules that would nullify all your other books. It'd likely be simpling of the grappling/sunder/trip/disarm rules, different fluff for the Races/Classes (possibly some new ones of each), new spells mixed in with the old; and different equipment.
Not entirely true. One of the smart things GW did when they went to a new edition of 40K is they made sure that the sourcebooks in publication were 'forwards compatable' with the new edition.
Really, if developed properly and with forethough, changes to turn undead or grapple would not nullify any existing sourcebooks out there. At worst, it might make a few feats or spells make no sense, but it would be easy to replace the sub-modules of rules that need an overhaul.
I have to agree with sentiment regarding the switch from Basic to Advanced D&D. I felt like was part of a secret society and had been initiated to a whole new level of the game.
As a possible marketing strategy what about a "Living Golarion." It's a crying shame that Living Greyhawk is being shut down, because of the switch to 4E. I have to imagine that there are a lot of Grognards out there who are pretty unhappy about the end of Living Greyhawk.
Finally I would love to see Paizo's version of the DMG. I found 3.0 and 3.5 to be a disappointment. I'd like to see something akin to the old Gygax tables of gems, herbs, and governments put back in. Not to mention ideas on running different sorts of scenarios effectively, like large-scale battles and chase scenes. Paizo has a lot of experience with this sort of thing from Pathfinder and APs - like the pirate battle in Sasserine and the Stone Giant invasion of Sandpoint.
CEO
|
Hey y'all:
I just want to thank everyone for the posts in this thread and the Chris Pramas reviews 4e thread. Just so you know, I spend my days (and evenings and weekends) doing these types of thought experiments. Some of the best days in my business career came while working with Ryan Dancey on 3e at WotC. We would sit for hours at a time and dissect the gaming industry up one side and down the other. Just thinking about possible strategies and the ramifications of them is something I enjoy. Even before 4e was announced, I have been thinking about strategies for what to do when it is announced, even trying to guess when it might be announced. As soon as WotC announced their plans, I was working with Erik, Jeff, and Vic on a variety of strategies, both moving to 4e and not moving to 4e. You have to think your strategies through and keep revisiting them if you want to make good decisions. As more information becomes available, you change or drop strategies until you make a decision. Paizo still hasn't made its decision, but we are getting closer to doing so. These little "thought exercises" allow me to keep my strategies sharp and, hopefully, make the right decision going forward. So thanks again for sharing your thoughts!
-Lisa
|
CEO
|
Before everyone says that's playing with semantics, think about it: in this digital age does Paizo actually need to print a PHB? Thanks to the OGL it can host a Pathfinder Players Guide online or make it available as a pdf
I actually have to disagree with this in part. I don't think it would be good enough to just put up a PDF, like I said in one of my posts above, if the core rules aren't available in stores, then the system might as well be dead. Putting a PDF on a website IS the death spiral that some folks have mentioned. Sure, it would be fine for the customers you already have, but that is about it. To truly work, you would need a printed and supported ruleset available in stores everywhere.
-Lisa
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Before everyone says that's playing with semantics, think about it: in this digital age does Paizo actually need to print a PHB? Thanks to the OGL it can host a Pathfinder Players Guide online or make it available as a pdfI actually have to disagree with this in part. I don't think it would be good enough to just put up a PDF, like I said in one of my posts above, if the core rules aren't available in stores, then the system might as well be dead. Putting a PDF on a website IS the death spiral that some folks have mentioned. Sure, it would be fine for the customers you already have, but that is about it. To truly work, you would need a printed and supported ruleset available in stores everywhere.
-Lisa
Plus, it should look Awesome. Maybe artwork of the iconics fighting a Wizard on a shore?
PPHB- 6 iconics fighting a Wizard on a shore.
PDMG (Chronical Keepers Guide?) other 6 Iconics entering a dungon.
PMM (Mass of Monsters?) Rune Giants, Sandpoint Devil and goblins.
Before everyone says that's playing with semantics, think about it: in this digital age does Paizo actually need to print a PHB? Thanks to the OGL it can host a Pathfinder Players Guide online or make it available as a pdfI actually have to disagree with this in part. I don't think it would be good enough to just put up a PDF, like I said in one of my posts above, if the core rules aren't available in stores, then the system might as well be dead. Putting a PDF on a website IS the death spiral that some folks have mentioned. Sure, it would be fine for the customers you already have, but that is about it. To truly work, you would need a printed and supported ruleset available in stores everywhere.
-Lisa
Companies have printed out the SRD, slapped a cover on it, and put it on the shelves. I'm sure Lisa has seen these books. I have one. It is a complete PHB for D&D/d20. Could Paizo go that route?
Lisa,
Here's what I think I'd do if I were staying 3.5:
1) Repackage the 3.5 PHB, MM, and DMG as Pathfinder products (Pathfinder Player's Handbook, Pathfinder Gamemaster's Guide, and Pathfinder Monster Manual) but include rules for character creation and XP gain. Also, use Golarion gods instead of the PHB ones.
2) Produce a book with suggested alternate rules ala Unearthed Arcana (called Pathfinder Unleashed?) with possible fixes to areas people consider 'problems' with 3.5. Things like consolidating skills, new grapple and turn undead rules, rewriting some 'difficult' spells, suggestions for the '15-minute adventuring day' situation.
This way you've provided new customers with an entry window into the game without alienating existing 3.5 customers and also provided some improvements through alternate rules for those existing customers who may want that.
|
|
Companies have printed out the SRD, slapped a cover on it, and put it on the shelves. I'm sure Lisa has seen these books. I have one. It is a complete PHB for D&D/d20. Could Paizo go that route?
This is probable but I do not think this would be a proper long term marketing strategy. Ultimately, to get the full impact, you would need to have a tie in to 3.5 somehow ( as with reprinting the SRD) but also have it be directly linked to Pathfinder (would have even been better is if it was something like Greyhawk though this is not possible.) as well. Because, ultimately you want to add value to those that do pick it up as well as have those people become dedicated customers.
The best strategy that I see is to have a Pathfinder chronicles DMG/PHB type products that tweak the core (similar to the IK PHB & DMG for example). This strategy is risky but will have better long term rewards.
|
|
Lisa,
Here's what I think I'd do if I were staying 3.5:1) Repackage the 3.5 PHB, MM, and DMG as Pathfinder products (Pathfinder Player's Handbook, Pathfinder Gamemaster's Guide, and Pathfinder Monster Manual) but include rules for character creation and XP gain. Also, use Golarion gods instead of the PHB ones.
2) Produce a book with suggested alternate rules ala Unearthed Arcana (called Pathfinder Unleashed?) with possible fixes to areas people consider 'problems' with 3.5. Things like consolidating skills, new grapple and turn undead rules, rewriting some 'difficult' spells, suggestions for the '15-minute adventuring day' situation.
This way you've provided new customers with an entry window into the game without alienating existing 3.5 customers and also provided some improvements through alternate rules for those existing customers who may want that.
I would buy all of this in a heartbeat, although if they are gonna print a PHB then maybe they should do some fixes in that instead of in the Unleashed book. Just a few things minor fixes.
I would buy it either way.FH
|
Just thinking about possible strategies and the ramifications of them is something I enjoy. Even before 4e was announced, I have been thinking about strategies for what to do when it is announced, even trying to guess when it might be announced. As soon as WotC announced their plans, I was working with Erik, Jeff, and Vic on a variety of strategies, both moving to 4e and not moving to 4e. -Lisa
This, to me, illustrates perfectly why I want to stay with Paizo as long as possible. The comparison between Paizo and WotC could not be more stark, in that one company rolled with the news, to create a brand-new line of adventure paths, stand-alone modules, campaign setting guides, flip-mats, floorplans, item cards, critical decks, harrow decks, a miniatures line, a boardgame line and a fiction line, all whilst continuing to host (and appear on) one of the friendliest messageboards I have ever known.
The other company, who, let us not forget, was the instigator of the changes, and therefore had been given far more warning, indeed, had several years warning, managed to spectacularly fail to put out their promised versions of Dungeon and Dragon magazine on their website, and when they did, were a fraction of the promised articles, in formats that did not please the eye. Their releases have been a Magic Item Compendium with serious balance issues, and several non-essential collections of adverts (Dungeon Survival Guide, Races & Classes, Worlds & Monsters), which dwell on the work of people who have long been dismissed from the company, or charge the customer for information which should be given out for free as part of their marketing campaign. The GSL, which they have had several years to write, is still allegedly not ready, a situation which paralyses the whole industry.
It is irrelevant to me whether 4E is a better system or not. I simply cannot trust them to deliver products to specification, and to a deadline.
To repeat a point that I and others have raised on the thread Kruelaid linked to above, a concern for Paizo remaining 3.5 will be at what point might they produce their own version of the PHB to support the new players that they hope to bring in?
Edit:
And how much could they [Paizo] legally reproduce of the 3.5 system without coming to an agreement with WotC/Hasbro? I suspect that not quite *everything* in the 3.5 PHB is OGL.
Like others have said: There have been reprints of the SRD.
Plus, there's stuff like True20, Arcane Unearthed/Evolved, Babylon 5 d20, Mutants and Masterminds, Monte Cook's World of Darkness and many other d20 RPGs that are not released by wizards, but still are complete: You don't need the PHB at all for those, they have rules for character generation and advancement and all that.
So I don't think wizards could prevent a "d20 Fantasy" book or set of books. (Player's Guide, GameMaster's Handbook, Tome of Monsters) or something.
Anyway, this thread is heartening to those of use who are not willing to play 4e period.
Personally, I repeat the suggestion I gave a couple of months before and say they should call it "Score RPG".
There is a new L5R edition?
Yes. L5R Third Edition. I got the book and like it quite a lot.
Ok, I'll take your word for that.
Greg
No need, take WotC's.
System Reference Document: Frequently Asked Questions
[quote=]Q: Could I publish the whole thing?
A: Sure. If you think someone would be willing to pay for it, you're more than welcome to try.
|
|
True, but when his friends are playing the latest version of D&D, who is he gonna stick with?As if. They’ll all be coming over to the cool dad’s house...
I actually agree with this. My kids play the game I have taught them, and their mates will as they grow up. They can get all the stuff free from me and I have the cash they don't. Sure they'll try other games, I've tried loads in my time, but I always copme back to D&D because of the flavour. That'll be true for them, especially if 4E loses that flavour.
I'd add that giving it a new name would help. The kids will then see it as the PF RPG or whatever solving the problem posted about latest and greatest. Then the position is one of the better game and we all know what that'll be!
Damn! I got called out by the boss!
Lisa -
1) My line of thinking that provoked your statement was not meant to be taken as an insult. I doubt it was, but I want to be clear.
2) Yes. Paizo can bring in new people and have a profitable business by remaining 3.X
However,
3) We live in a namebrand society, and D&D is the namebrand -- It is what is going to be clogging the RPG shelves at the major distributors. I can speak for myself and most gamers I personally know when I say we played D&D for 15 years without even thinking/caring about 3rd party options or other game systems. While, this is not true for all (or even most gamers, perhaps), the point remains the same -- barring an epic collapse, Dungeons & Dragons 4e will be the most played RPG, most related to pop culture, and most hoisted on new gamers.
4) Yes. Paizo can bring in new people much like Game Workshop, but, no offense to GW, I think 4e offers a larger audience to solid, creative 3rd party publishers than going the way of GW.
5) Paizo has been doing well by being compatible with the "World's Most Popular RPG" -- will it do as well by not being compatible or is there a prevailing thought that 4e will no longer be the world's most popular game?
Lisa, this is a thought experiment for me too. I am not married to any of these objections, but I don't see how they can be brushed aside. I am not going to naysay; I am not going to argue that a viable 3.x business will exist, but I need to be shown, it needs to be proved to me that a business focusing soley on a game that competes with D&D (directly - genre, rules, marketing, same audience) is going to outdo a very creative and skilled company (i.e. Paizo) that works within the pre-existing confines.
Sorry if I rambled.
DISCLAIMER: Again, these are just my thoughts/worries. Obviously Lisa, Vic, Erik and so on have a better grasp of A)if anything I said has merit & B) if so, how it affects them.
|
|
Well, I thought a bit on the question and thought I would weigh in a bit. I don't think it will please the masses here though..
Some context: I work on the Microsoft campus, but not *for* Microsoft. I work for a 3rd party who produces products that work with Microsoft Windows. That means everytime Microsoft comes out with a new version of Windows, we ship a new version. Or else.
Soo.... if I were looking for parallels here, obviously you know who I would be comparing WotC to? :-) And truly it wouldn't be a bad comparison. WotC is the "Marketing Gorilla" when it comes to RPG. They have the largest R&D and marketing budget by far.
So, in a perfect world the best strategy would be to straddle both versions for awhile. There will obviously be people still playing 3.5, but 4E will ramp up pretty quick and grow while 3.5 declines. Of course it's tough to do 2 versions of things. (You're allowing 3rd parties to do C&C and True20 conversions. Why not do the same for 3.5 versions after you switch to 4E? You obviously have a strong enough community for that.)
From the D&D exp reports and videos two things stood out to me:
1) Most folks thought it was at the very least "OK". A number of people enjoyed it. Some gripes, but no serious ranting. I didn't get the impression of "flop".
2) The WotC folks seemed genuinely excited. They really seemed to think they're on to something and obviously have strong corporate backing.
So to me, it's not a question. Look at this link on Amazon of top selling RPG books: Amazon RPG List
1) 4E Core RuleBook collection
2) 4E PHB
3) Keep on the Shadowfell
4) 4E DMG
5) 4E MM
Let that list sink in for a minute. Whether the new game is "better" doesn't matter. These are the books that are going to be at Amazon, Barnes and Noble, and Borders.
3.5 is done as a mainstream product, it's now a niche. It's Windows XP and Vista is coming out, good or bad... Of course you could always switch to Mac's (see: Arcanis) :-)
So as the CEO I would make the call that Paizo needs to leverage this Marketing "UMPH" as much as you can, rather than marginalize yourself. You ride the wave, not fight against it.
-Pete
.....4) Yes. Paizo can bring in new people much like Game Workshop, but, no offense to GW, I think 4e offers a larger audience to solid, creative 3rd party publishers than going the way of GW......
The Last Rogue:
I am not certain if you have taken the mention of Games Workshop in Lisa's earlier post the same way as I have done; it seemed to me that she mentioned Games Workshop in the context that, after three or four years, a portion of their players drift away from GW games to be picked up by other companies, and that in the purely hypothetical situation of Paizo not converting to 4th edition, there might be a way for Paizo to pick up those who eventually drifted away from 4E, seeking other things.
Yeah, after a re-read you are probably correct.
I think Pete Apple made my point for me better in the latest post.
...Whether the new game is "better" doesn't matter. These are the books that are going to be at Amazon, Barnes and Noble, and Borders.
3.5 is done as a mainstream product, it's now a niche. It's Windows XP and Vista is coming out, good or bad... Of course you could always switch to Mac's (see: Arcanis) :-)
So as the CEO I would make the call that Paizo needs to leverage this Marketing "UMPH" as much as you can, rather than marginalize yourself. You ride the wave, not fight against it.
-Pete
The handwriting is on the wall. "Marginalizing yourself" is the best description of sticking with 3.5 that I've heard.