|
First, let me say I am very excited to hear this news! I have been feeling less and less positive about 4E as more and more details come out. I really have always been in the camp that feels 3.5 is a pretty darn great system that needed some tweaks - not a complete overhaul. It sounds like this is EXACTLY the stance Paizo is taking. I haven't had a chance to look over the Free PDF yet, although I have downloaded it.
My question is this ...
I realize it is still early and Paizo may or may not even want to answer, but ...
Has there been any reaction from Wizards regarding the decision? Either officially or maybe on an individual basis? I'm wondering if Paizo talked this over with WOTC before hand or if they heard about this at the same time we all did. We all know that various Paizo staffers are on friendly terms with various WOTC staffers after all.
Will WOTC view this as some kind of slap in the face and adopt a more adversarial, competitor relationship with Paizo now?
I certainly welcome everyone's opinions on this, but I'm actually personally more interested in hearing from Erik, Lisa, Jason etc on this, assuming they are willing to answer ...
I doubt you will have an honnest answer on this one. Expect something of the "we are all a happy gaming family" kind.
To be honnest losing Pazio is a blow to WoTC. Not only do they lose a good third-party publisher (and they need third-party to outsource the low-margin stuff such as writing scenarios) but Paizo's products directly compete with theirs. It also send an interesting message to all the third partyy publishers out there that may still be hesitating.
From Pazio's perspective, let's face it: announcing like this a new edition while Pazio was just rolling out its Pathfinder serie and taking back the magazine was a pretty nasty move quite unwarranted given the level of support Pazio has provided to the d20 community.
For what it is worth (and it is not much), my take is that Pathfinder RPG is a bit of a pay back but getting back at WoTC is not the reason for publishing Pathfinder. Revenge is not a business model unless your work for the Mafia....
But in the end, Pazio will have to work with WoTC and WoTC (if they are any smart) with Pazio. So there is no incentive to slam publicly your partner. We will never know.
Competition has a tendency to bring out the best in both competitors. I assume it will here as well.
I imagine the worst Wizards will say is something to the effect of, "We are sorry to hear that they will not be continuing to support the new edition of Dungeons and Dragons, but we wish them luck in their new venture." Frankly, I don't expect there to be an official reaction from them. There wasn't a reaction when either Mongoose or Green Ronin officially stopped supporting d20. If there will be one, it will be as individuals and not speaking on behalf of the orginization.
But, anything less then the above would be unprofessional so I seriously doubt they won't go below that.
I doubt you will have an honnest answer on this one. Expect something of the "we are all a happy gaming family" kind.
To be honnest losing Pazio is a blow to WoTC. Not only do they lose a good third-party publisher (and they need third-party to outsource the low-margin stuff such as writing scenarios) but Paizo's products directly compete with theirs. It also send an interesting message to all the third partyy publishers out there that may still be hesitating.
From Pazio's perspective, let's face it: announcing like this a new edition while Pazio was just rolling out its Pathfinder serie and taking back the magazine was a pretty nasty move quite unwarranted given the level of support Pazio has provided to the d20 community.
For what it is worth (and it is not much), my take is that Pathfinder RPG is a bit of a pay back but getting back at WoTC is not the reason for publishing Pathfinder. Revenge is not a business model unless your work for the Mafia....
But in the end, Pazio will have to work with WoTC and WoTC (if they are any smart) with Pazio. So there is no incentive to slam publicly your partner. We will never know.
Tabula,
You have brought up some very insightful points, very good points. However, on the issue of revenge, I do not really see it as such. Granted, it could be very well percieved as revenge and would certainly work, indeed, but I think the core of the issue lies in a much more placid, friendly, and truthfully deeper explanation.Quite simply, 4e is gradually turning out to be a different beast altogether and while it will certainly open up a new perspective in many aspects of game design and writing, the new format causes a crimp on certain flavors and design approaches. From a designer perspective, sometimes you fit a certain format that works best not only for your "crunch", or game mechanics perspective, but also your flavor end, particularly with campaign settings. There's many aspects of this, some quite subtle and difficult to put into words in the whole, others very obvious. Now this particular one may not of an issue for Paizo, or it might actually... I don't know, but a certain problem I had my own self, being also a product designer on the side, is the stretch in 4th edition between a 1st level character and a common npc. If I had my way, honestly, starting out as a 1st level npc would have been a more pronounced gesture in 3.x... not required, but its optional potential more explained and promoted.
Granted, this is not for everyone, but for campaign paths that like to emphasis the forging of heroes from simple but bold is a staple for many fantasy adventuring flavors, my own included.
Take situations such as these and you can see how quite simply some pre-existing techniques and campaigns simply would not work as well in the new addition... after all, WotC their own selves recommends starting fresh characters and a new campaign rather than a port over due to the radical changes. Some stories cannot simply be retold and maintain their core flavors.
First, let me say I am very excited to hear this news! I have been feeling less and less positive about 4E as more and more details come out. I really have always been in the camp that feels 3.5 is a pretty darn great system that needed some tweaks - not a complete overhaul. It sounds like this is EXACTLY the stance Paizo is taking. I haven't had a chance to look over the Free PDF yet, although I have downloaded it.
My question is this ...
I realize it is still early and Paizo may or may not even want to answer, but ...
Has there been any reaction from Wizards regarding the decision? Either officially or maybe on an individual basis? I'm wondering if Paizo talked this over with WOTC before hand or if they heard about this at the same time we all did. We all know that various Paizo staffers are on friendly terms with various WOTC staffers after all.
Will WOTC view this as some kind of slap in the face and adopt a more adversarial, competitor relationship with Paizo now?
I certainly welcome everyone's opinions on this, but I'm actually personally more interested in hearing from Erik, Lisa, Jason etc on this, assuming they are willing to answer ...
I think Hasbro's reaction was to can WoTC's CEO.
I know for a fact that Green Ronin is in the undecided category.
I said d20, not 4E. They made the 3.5 companion to freeport, but I can't remember the last 3.5 product they made before then. They also announced that the 3.5 companion to freeport would be their last 3.5 product.
I think it would be in WotC's best interest to not say anything. I mean really, no matter what they say it will irratate one camp or the other.
I think it would be very genteel for them to publically wish us well, though.
Also, what would they have to say? It's not really something that should concern them from an outside view. They made the OGL and the SRD and from that point it took its own way without wizard playing a part in it anymore.
Why should they comment on what other companies do with their stuff?
Yeah, I wouldn't expect WotC to say anything substantive about this new development. They already realize that a significant segment of the RPG community views them unfavorably at this point. I think they are banking on out-competing Paizo and the other 3rd party publishers by attracting more younger players to the "new and improved" game.
Paizo and WotC certainly have the possibility to coexist by catering to different segments of the market, but this move potentially puts the two companies in direct competition. As Allen Stewart noted above, this can be a good thing--resulting in better products all around. However, competition can be destructive, especially when one party has a lot more capital to bring to bear. I think Paizo doesn't need to make as much money on their game as WotC does on 4e, but it is conceivable that WotC (or the Hasbro top brass) might decide that they want the "Pathfinder Game" customers. If this happens, it seems to me that they could deploy their massive resources to drive Paizo out of business, thereby eliminating the competition.
Let's hope that doesn't happen. I don't think the D&D brand has suffered terribly due to the existence of Hackmaster, C&C, T&T, GURPS, etc., and I don't think (judging from what I've seen and heard) that 4e will suffer too much from the Pathfinder Game. At least not if WotC can provide (or solicit) quality adventures to go with their system.
If anything, that is a weak point at WotC right now. If they can get members of the Paizo stable to keep freelancing for them, and can come up with a better strategy for presenting adventures then they ought to be able to attract a significant share of current customers and bring some new young people to the game. (Frankly, the Delve format has significant problems, from a DM's point of view--it is much easier both to grasp the outline of a Paizo adventure and to find the material you need to run an encounter in Dungeon/Pathfinder.)
The new 4e setting has, I think, plenty of potential--I was actually pretty impressed when I thumbed through the customer-paid advertisement booklet in Borders. The decision to develop a setting that ditches the concept of a fixed geography that can be detailed in a gazetteer has advantages to the DM with time to be creative and put together his own campaign world. However, many customers <i>want</i> a carefully detailed campaign setting, with a gazetteer that fixes things in place. It's hard to imagine how they'll mesh the core assumptions of 4e with pre-existing worlds like FR without doing great violence to the campaign setting people know and love. So WotC is liable to lose many of those customers as well.
Basically, Paizo is using a more traditional RPG industry business model than WotC right now, and since they are producing the best adventures and have started rolling out campaign support material for Golarion, in some ways they've got a jump on the competition.
Now all they need are some Golarion novels to put up on the bookshelf at Borders, next to all those RA Salvatore and Dragonlance novels. If they could solicit something at the level of quality of the early Dragonlance books, they could get some young people into their game.
Very interesting indeed!
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
Where's the $5,000 1st look at the GSL that Paizo bought? I hope they ask for a refund.
I've seen this repeated a few places, and I wanted to step in and clear something up. No company has actually paid the $5000 up-front fee. Many of us have let Wizards know we would like to do so, but shortly after it was announced the OGL became the GSL and then vanished back on the drawing board.
So no company is out the $5000 up-front fee, because no company paid it.
--Erik
|
If anything, that is a weak point at WotC right now. If they can get members of the Paizo stable to keep freelancing for them, and can come up with a better strategy...This has always been their weak point. They put out very few modules, they cost alot and weren't that good.
I think sales of Dungeon under Paizo made WoTC look bad and their continued success with "Adventure Paths" was just more icing on Paizo's cake.
Yummm...Paizo cake
I'm out Seven Bucks! LOLOL
After the Dangergirl debacle, and when Mike Lescault offered to try and get some GSL answers.. I ponied up $7.00 bucks to EN World for 30 days of support (which allowed me to send him a private message, which is not a free feature at that website, to which he did respond that he would try to get some answers)..
But yeah, even though at one point Clark reprimanded me (and I deserved it) it was worth spending Seven Dollars to tell Mike Lescault that not knowing about the GSL was hurting our community.
I have no grudge against Mike though. I guess the answers don't really matter that much to me anymore. I'm still a Pathfinder Superscriber, and I'll still be getting the 4th Edition Core books just to look at them.
I'm pointing out that instead of Paizo being out $5000, Watcher is out 7 bucks.
|
|
Hi Erik,
Original Poster here ... (I picture myself holding a microphone in Erik's direction on the red carpet :)
I know this is a touchy thing and you may not want to comment much, but is it true you let WOTC about the decision an hour before it went public? What was the reaction? Have you guys gotten ANY kind of reaction from them yet?
Like I said, I realize that it might not be prudent to comment, but you guys have always been pretty upfront with us in the past, so you can hardly blame me for pressing the question can you? :)
Where's the $5,000 1st look at the GSL that Paizo bought? I hope they ask for a refund.
I've seen this repeated a few places, and I wanted to step in and clear something up. No company has actually paid the $5000 up-front fee. Many of us have let Wizards know we would like to do so, but shortly after it was announced the OGL became the GSL and then vanished back on the drawing board.
So no company is out the $5000 up-front fee, because no company paid it.
--Erik
|
My guess is that private communications gbetween Erik and anyone at WotC are going to stay just that. Private.
There are a lot of friends between the two companies. let's not put them on the spot by asking what the living-room-tbale conversations have been like.
Officially, Paizo has announced Pathfinder. Officially, WotC hasn't responded yet. We know important people in each company hang out together. I suspect everyone involved is best off if fans can leave it at that until some other official announcement is made.
As a confirmed 4e playtester and freelancer, all -I- can say is that I look forward to having two games to play instead of one, and I hope Paizo is keeping me in their Rolodex. :-D
While I will admit that I was caught flat-footed by Paizo going this route, they are not actually alone in this action.
Green Ronin has True 20 and Goodman Games is releasing Eldritch next month. Privateer Press has long since moved into the tabletop minatures realm with Warmachine as their mainstay.
Many companies are unhitching themselves from being solely dependant on D&D (be it straight d20 or 4e).
|
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
My guess is that private communications gbetween Erik and anyone at WotC are going to stay just that. Private.
That's entirely correct. I appreciate the interest and curiosity, but I'd prefer to let the folks over at Wizards of the Coast speak for themselves.
--Erik
The decision to develop a setting that ditches the concept of a fixed geography that can be detailed in a gazetteer has advantages to the DM with time to be creative and put together his own campaign world. However, many customers <i>want</i> a carefully detailed campaign setting, with a gazetteer that fixes things in place. It's hard to imagine how they'll mesh the core assumptions of 4e with pre-existing worlds like FR without doing great violence to the campaign setting people know and love. So WotC is liable to lose many of those customers as well.
Actually, you can check out WOTC's information on FR via either their website or by checking out various blogs around the net. I don't have any that spring to mind right now, so I apologize if I am speculating. But in short, you are accurate in the use of the phrase "great violence" to the setting. My understanding is that whole areas have been wiped off the map to make room for the new parts they have added to the game; some characters and background have radically change; etc.
In short, it so far sounds like a wholesale editing of the world - moreso than in the past with any of their campaign worlds. So, I agree with you on this - I am under the impression that some customers are looking at Golarion/Pathfinder as a nice alternative to FR. It sounds more in tune with they might expect, and Paizo decision to support it without altering the rules too much is appealing.
Is it enough for them to find a successful niche? I don't know, but given the level of interest - I would think its got potenial.
Sorry if I derailed the OP's thread for a bit there.
My guess is that private communications gbetween Erik and anyone at WotC are going to stay just that. Private.
That's entirely correct. I appreciate the interest and curiosity, but I'd prefer to let the folks over at Wizards of the Coast speak for themselves.
--Erik
That's fair to say.
But now that you have said it, we know we won't receive answers and can put the questions to rest.
Thanks for the comment.
(Although I want to here about it more now. ;-) )
Many of us have let Wizards know we would like to do so, but shortly after it was announced the OGL became the GSL and then vanished back on the drawing board.
Just out of curiosity: What's GSL standing for?
Where's the $5,000 1st look at the GSL that Paizo bought? I hope they ask for a refund.
I've seen this repeated a few places, and I wanted to step in and clear something up. No company has actually paid the $5000 up-front fee. Many of us have let Wizards know we would like to do so, but shortly after it was announced the OGL became the GSL and then vanished back on the drawing board.
So no company is out the $5000 up-front fee, because no company paid it.
--Erik
And probably no company will. The whole appeal of this "early adopter" option was to allow companies to have 4e product ready to show in time for the big conventions, and now it's too late for that.
That's a lot of lost revenue for WotC. The bean counters can't be too happy about that. Or, maybe WotC simply decided they wanted the 4e spotlight all to themselves at GenCon.
How many publishers would you have expected to be interested? Maybe 10 at most. That's 25,000 to 40,000$ not made. I'd quess that wouldn't even have been shown at hasbros monthly accounts.
What's GSL standing for?
Game System License.
Its the replacement for the OGL (Open Game License)
|
How many publishers would you have expected to be interested? Maybe 10 at most. That's 25,000 to 40,000$ not made. I'd quess that wouldn't even have been shown at hasbros monthly accounts.
True, though the question (one likely impossible to answer) is whether WotC will be hurt in sales if there is not a wider variety of 4E compatible material available in the early months. My attitude toward 4E has been quite variable in the last few months, and I can certainly say that I would have been more likely to purchase the 4E books if I knew there was a 4E AP from Paizo headed for my mailbox a month or two later.
Now, as it stands, I'm much more likely to flip through it in the FLGS, glance at Keep on the Shadowfell, and only actually buy the core game if I like the sole available adventure. The long-run prospects of my purchase is still up in the air, but there's a good shot they just lost my early money.
|
|
Actually, you can check out WOTC's information on FR via either their website or by checking out various blogs around the net. I don't have any that spring to mind right now, so I apologize if I am speculating. But in short, you are accurate in the use of the phrase "great violence" to the setting. My understanding is that whole areas have been wiped off the map to make room for the new parts they have added to the game; some characters and background have radically change; etc.
Oh it's much worse then that. They killed characters off, not backgrounds. They destroyed countries. They altered their own 3e canon to fit their own needs even if it contracts everything, and they're wiping out pantheons.
Oh. Elminster is also afraid of casting spells because apparently he's inherited the memories of mutliple superbeings that threat to take over his sanity if he does. So basically Elminster is a walking time capsule just waiting to be cracked open to allow the Realms to be restored to it's former glory in 5E should sales take a dive... and they will.
|
Saved me a shed load of cash on FR novels and other gumph. I have a very large FR collection (almost everything generally available and a few things that aren't) so I consider myself a FR fan. But that's gone now. FR is dead for me which is a hell of a hard step. The cash is going Paizo's way instead.
There are rumors that all the toilets were out of order over there, because so many people locked themselves in there to cry ;-)
To be honnest losing Pazio is a blow to WoTC.
Without trying to sound snarky or anything: They had it coming. What witht he pulling of the license a couple of months ago, and the withholding of the GSL (intentionally or not, doesn't matter), they weren't exactly kissing Paizo's backside to continue supporting wizards.
Not only do they lose a good third-party publisher (and they need third-party to outsource the low-margin stuff such as writing scenarios)
I don't know whether they still think that: I'd say that the 5000 early entry fee will discourage those who want to do low-margin stuff.
but Paizo's products directly compete with theirs. It also send an interesting message to all the third partyy publishers out there that may still be hesitating.
I do think it's not unlikely that several other publishers will use PFRPG to base their products on.
For what it is worth (and it is not much), my take is that Pathfinder RPG is a bit of a pay back but getting back at WoTC is not the reason for publishing Pathfinder. Revenge is not a business model unless your work for the Mafia....
I don't see it that way. It was not to get back at wotc, it was to be able to keep doing the products they want, how they want, and when they want.
I guess the time had come when they had to decide on an edition for upcoming products like the third adventure path and whatever small part of the Campaign Setting will contain game rules.
Since wizards hasn't provided them with enough information (in fact, they haven't got any), the only possibility was to stick to 3e.
And from there, it wasn't such a long way to keep independant, since wizards doesn't have a good track record of properly supporting 3rd-party publishers these days.
No spite involved.
But in the end, Pazio will have to work with WoTC and WoTC (if they are any smart) with Pazio.
I don't see why. Paizo is doing their own thing now. wotc cannot do anything about PFRPG. They can't take back the OGL.
I do think it's not unlikely that several other publishers will use PFRPG to base their products on.
Guess: In 24 months, most of the current d20 PDF publishers will be writing for PF. Some will even make the leap of being a print publisher. Necromancer and Goodman games may even make some product for them.
Reason: WotC's license is more then 7 month late and they wanted to charge for the privlege of early publishing. Those that would have chosen to pay now have less then 5 months to get product out the door. Paizo is giving publishers more then 17 months notice on the core of the system, no fee is charged for a first look at the rules nor the beta rules (the PDF is free), the copyright license is already available and they're going to be discussing a trademark license soon. One of those two companies is going to be easier to work with on a 3rd party basis in the long run.
Oh it's much worse then that. They killed characters off, not backgrounds. They destroyed countries. They altered their own 3e canon to fit their own needs even if it contracts everything, and they're wiping out pantheons.Oh. Elminster is also afraid of casting spells because apparently he's inherited the memories of mutliple superbeings that threat to take over his sanity if he does. So basically Elminster is a walking time capsule just waiting to be cracked open to allow the Realms to be restored to it's former glory in 5E should sales take a dive... and they will.
Oh yes - I understand that it's a bloody mess and not very well explained (the whole replacing Mulhorand with Dragonborn thing comes to mind). Thanks for affirmation on the subject though.
My intention had been to reaffirm Peruhain's original commentary that it wasn't just that things would change with the new version, but that in fact they had completely redone FR to match the new system. And that, in my opinion, it looks to be an ugly fit.
I didn't want to ramble into it too much, though, as this doesn't seem the gist of thread and I don't want to set the discussion too far off its original track.
If someone's got a Realms thread going here on the boards, I'd take a a look to know what's the sum of the information on the changes. That may be an exercise in torture for Realms fans - but I'm curious to see what's the sum total of stuff.
this is the reaction
I don't get it.
I don't get it.
They're celebrating 4th edition. I think they could care less about Paizo's decision. More 4E cake for them.
When 3.5 came out, several third party companies took their ball and went home, making their own OGL game. Few are still supported today. I hope Paizo knows what they're doing...
They're celebrating 4th edition. I think they could care less about Paizo's decision. More 4E cake for them.
Ok, that I can see.
When 3.5 came out, several third party companies took their ball and went home, making their own OGL game. Few are still supported today. I hope Paizo knows what they're doing...
True20 is doing rather well for a company GR's size. Mongoose is currently the industry's #3 (behind WotC and White Wolf). Paizo, IMO, is in a better position then GR for a more successful game. Their game appears to be a genuine "between step" from 3.5 to 4E, as compared to GR's "rules lighter d20" of True20. Plus they have better name recognition. Not to mention Pathfinder inherited plenty of angry 3.5 customers (between Dungeon & Dragon Magazines being cancelled, plus the notable unpopularity of 4E).
True20 is doing rather well for a company GR's size. Mongoose is currently the industry's #3 (behind WotC and White Wolf). Paizo, IMO, is in a better position then GR for a more successful game. Their game appears to be a genuine "between step" from 3.5 to 4E, as compared to GR's "rules lighter d20" of True20. Plus they have better name recognition. Not to mention Pathfinder inherited plenty of angry 3.5 customers (between Dungeon & Dragon Magazines being cancelled, plus the notable unpopularity of 4E).
There's a lot of 'stick it to the Man' supporters right now, but that's what happened to a lot of companies when 3.5 came out. The groups who were pissed at buying new 3.5 books either took a break from tabletop RPGs altogether or tried non-d20 systems (or different genres). I foresee that happening when 4E comes out.
If the new D&D makes people unhappy, they're still going to associate 3.5 with D&D. They may be angry now, and it may sound like support, but I'm afraid in a year or two these people might get sick of 3.5 altogether. Time will tell.
I disagree. As long as the quality remains, so will the business. Quality always sells.
I disagree. As long as the quality remains, so will the business. Quality always sells.
Even the best quality bows down to supply and demand. We'll see what happens, but I have a strong feeling that if 4E gives people a bad taste in their mouth they're probably going to look for something completely different or at best just stick with vanilla 3.5.
If Paizo ever issued stock I'd bet my optimism in a big way.
If Paizo ever issued stock I'd bet my optimism in a big way.
You can always join the Superscriber club. :P
If Paizo ever issued stock I'd bet my optimism in a big way.You can always join the Superscriber club. :P
~wide eyed, innocent look~ We can, Takasi? Damn! I will have to figure out how to do that. ;-P
If Paizo ever issued stock I'd bet my optimism in a big way.You can always join the Superscriber club. :P
If we weren't way behind schedule with the adventure paths as it is, I'd have added the missing subscription (GameMastery/Pathfinder Modules) long ago. But we're not even done with Pathfinder #2, so I'll have to pass on the modules (but, to be honest, if they offered a deal to subscribe and then get the subscription deal - free pdfs - on older modules, I'd subscribe anyway. I'm a completionist)
If Paizo ever issued stock I'd bet my optimism in a big way.You can always join the Superscriber club. :P
I absolutely will, this month, after I finish looking after a friend financially. Count on it.
I'll bet WotC's main reaction was surprise.
Followed by fear.
None of the designers' personal blogs have said a word about it (that I have seen).
GenCon just got a lot more interesting. :)
Someone asked Rich Baker of WotC this question over at the FR section of the WotC Boards. Here's his response:
Sorry, but I feel it's sort of bad form to comment on another company's plans. I know most of the guys over at Paizo, and I wish them well.
In related news, I'm afraid I'm going to have to confiscate your 3.5 rulebooks, and force you to convert to the new edition. Where do you live?
Source here: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=702942&page=108