Every 3.5 table I've seen will check out new races, classes, feats, spells and other 'improvements' to the game. These are additions that do not attempt to replace the mechanics of their game.
I'm seeing a lot of basic game replacements in Pathfinder RPG, and the feedback so far has been to keep increasing the differences.
When 3.5 came out, several publishers were upset. Suddenly many of their products were viewed as outdated. In response to this, some went their own way and made their own OGL game:
Arcana Evolved
Castles and Crusades
Conan
Everquest
Game of Thrones
Iron Heroes
World of Warcraft
True20
The list goes on. Some of these did ok and some failed, but our table didn't play any of these. Why? Because they fell into a 'too same, too different' category. If our table wanted something different we'd find something new, and if we wanted the same we'd stick with what we had. When you start messing with hit points, grapple rules, skills, basic feats, the combat system, etc, then the changes should at least be different enough that it warrants a new system.
If you stay too close, you run the risk of competing against past OGL games. A new player who sees Pathfinder and learns about d20 for the first time will have literally thousands of new and used books to choose from. Why purchase Pathfinder at all? Think of all the Dungeon modules they've missed out on!
It seems like a difficult balancing act, and I wish Paizo the best of luck with it. I hope they can succeed where others have tried before them.
Warcraft RPG didn't really change a thing, just made new races and created new classes and added some spells from the games.
Arcana Evolved changed almost everything, completely replacing races, classes and most spells.
Pathfinder attempts to improve 3.5e, that's something distinctly different. And with wizards ceasing production, it's also a completely different situation than three or four years ago.
And on top of that, Paizo is able to bring their name into the equotation. Not such a big name, bust most D&D players will have heard of them to some degree.
Pathfinder attempts to improve 3.5e, that's something distinctly different. And with wizards ceasing production, it's also a completely different situation than three or four years ago.
How so? In both scenarios we have a new edition that's the same face with a different haircut. Old books are artifically deemed'obsolete' by WotC, and soon you have the same retreads (Manual of the Planes, Draconomicon, Complete Warrior-Sword and Fist-Martial Power, etc). 4E will still be viewed as a d20 system in the eyes of the hobby.
And on top of that, Paizo is able to bring their name into the equotation. Not such a big name, bust most D&D players will have heard of them to some degree.
Paizo's name is pretty small on most store shelves I've seen, and most gaming circles. Hopefully that will change, but I don't see how the name 'Paizo' is more significant than say 'Sword and Sorcery', 'White Wolf', AEG, Mongoose, World of Warcraft, Game of Thrones, etc.
In both scenarios we have a new edition that's the same face with a different haircut.
Of the games you mentioned:
Arcana Evolved - Different races, classes, and many different rules. You can't really run Greyhawk or any other classic D&D with Arcana Evolved, while you should be able to using Pathfinder.
Castles and Crusades - A rules light system that caters to the AD&D crowd rather than Pathfinder, which is pretty definitely focused on the 3rd edition crowd.
Conan, Everquest, Game of Thrones, World of Warcraft - Takes the d20 system into different specific realms of fantasy. They are licensed games, and change the system dramatically to fit those licenses.
Iron Heroes - A very different game that yanks magic out of the game in favor of Herculean feats. An interesting concept, but not the type of thing you can bring to gamers who want to play a gnome cleric/illusionist.
True20 - Takes a lot of fiddly bits out of the system, including experience points, hit points, and other parts that are actually a draw for the 3.5 system. While that appeals to certain gamers, there's a huge reason why those things have remained with D&D and many other games so long...they're quite popular with those who like the game half of role-playing games.
Essentially, each of these games does something different than what Pathfinder's doing, which is focusing on the crowd that plays and enjoys 3rd edition D&D. The other games either target an audience that doesn't like 3rd edition to begin with, relies on licensed material, or provides an experience that is different enough from D&D to prevent any sort of compatibility.
Old books are artifically deemed'obsolete' by WotC, and soon you have the same retreads (Manual of the Planes, Draconomicon, Complete Warrior-Sword and Fist-Martial Power, etc). 4E will still be viewed as a d20 system in the eyes of the hobby.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. 4th edition D&D is a d20 system, and will almost certainly outsell anything else on the market. Paizo doesn't need to outsell D&D or anything close to it in order for the Pathfinder RPG to be a success.
Those other companies have try and succeed... You seem to think that Mongooose publishing or Green Ronin are not viable publisher... They are! True 20, Mutants and Masterminds and Conan for exemple have enough fan to publish on average one new supplement per month... It's not because they are not use at your game table that they are not valid and very interesting products for a lot of gamers...
I don't think Paizo will do worse with the Pathfinder RPG... They are targeting a similar niche of the RPG industry.
Paizo don't need to do better than those company and they don't need to try to compete with Wotc either... All they need is to attract enough customers to publish the adventures they want to write... The Alpha release show me that they can do that without any problem...
I don't expect Paizo will put out replacement 'Complete X' books or the like. Their selling point is modules and adventure paths, well written stories. Sure we'll see some class options in Pathfinder, but that will be it. They're still exploring Golarion, and that will take quite a bit of work.
After reading the Alpha Rules, I'm expecting (and hoping for) the opposite--that while Pathfinder should always easily accommodate 3e material, it also have to evolve that material with supplements of its own (like the Complete books). Ideally, those who have extensive 3e libraries can mine their out-of-print material at the same time that new fans can access currently available Pathfinder supplements.
|
I don't see it as a Reinvention, it's a continuation. In the summer D&D 3E is done. Paizo isn't reinventing anything, they're reinvigorating it IMHO.
To me, some of the changes we're seeing should have happened in 3.5 but didn't.
In any case, if Paizo can capture some of the people that don't want to go 4.0 then it's all the better to them. But I have to believe they're going with their own edition because Pathfinder is doing good enough that they feel they can part ways with mainstream D&D.
As for the "Complete" books. The Companion line will fill the needs to the complete books. Feats are a given. I suspect we may see Prestige classes now that they have the page count.
Difference #1: D&D 3.5 was inprint when the cited works were published.
Difference #2: Those works cited were designed to be a different take on 3.5. Pathfinder is designed to be way to keep the rules as similar as possible with some fixes for some common complaints.
Difference #3: Back compatability is a priority with Pathfinder (not so with the others).
Difference #3: Back compatability is a priority with Pathfinder (not so with the others).So they say, but the Alpha rules show otherwise.
Perhaps they should be calling it 'easily converted'.
|
Difference #3: Back compatability is a priority with Pathfinder (not so with the others).So they say, but the Alpha rules show otherwise.
Keep in mind that the Alpha rules are just that. They will see continued revisions for the next almost year and a half before they are made into Pathfinder RPG. I would bet that everything that people are complaining about not being backward compatible will be changed to reflect more compatibility. Just look at the 'Feat' and 'Skills' threads. EVERYONE wants them fixed so my assumption is that Paizo will comply. They want us to help create this game so instead of pointing fingers, drop them a post letting them know what you want. They listened before, why wouldn't they now?
Difference #3: Back compatability is a priority with Pathfinder (not so with the others).So they say, but the Alpha rules show otherwise.
In the Tome Show Podcast, Mona said that the Alpha release was their way of testing to see how far the customer base was willing to deviate from the 3.5 rules set. So I'd guess the Alpha release is the furthest you're probably going to see the rules from the 3.5 PHB.
I don't expect Paizo will put out replacement 'Complete X' books or the like. Their selling point is modules and adventure paths, well written stories. Sure we'll see some class options in Pathfinder, but that will be it. They're still exploring Golarion, and that will take quite a bit of work.
This is exactly what I am hoping for. More modules, a new handbook (ours are getting kind of rough). Basically a continuation of what we have going.
I play other games. But I also play D&D3. I'd like to see publishing continue on the adventures for all the advantages that holds for me. Convenience, new ideas, locations unheard of.