|
Oh, and if one more person tells me I can play a two-weapon fighter by playing a ranger I'm going to shove their head through a brick wall. I didn't want to play a ranger that fights with two weapons, I wanted to play a fighter that fights with two weapons and actually uses them like a two weapon fighter would.
I really don't understand why this matters to so many people. Although I accept that it clearly does (got no wish to have my head shoved through a brick wall!)
I don't have the 4th edition books, and not likely to get them any time soon, but maybe someone who does could answer this for me.
Would it be very difficult to create a set of fighter powers to make an effective two weapon fighter, modelled on the ranger version but suitable for a fighter instead?
Poll Results at Kobold (63% want PRPG or 3.5):
Which edition of D&D should Kobold Quarterly support?
Pathfinder (35%, 167 Votes)
4th Edition (30%, 142 Votes)
3.5 Edition (28%, 134 Votes)
True20 (2%, 10 Votes)
Other (2%, 10 Votes)
White Box OD&D (1%, 6 Votes)
Arcana Evolved (1%, 5 Votes)
Castles & Crusades (1%, 3 Votes)
Total Voters: 477
|
|
Well, I am glad to report that your conviction is entirely wrong. Ever since the announcement of 4th edition, and especially since we announced the PFRPG, our sales have grown by leaps and bounds. The rate of customers signing up on paizo.com has tripled and the downloads of the PFRPG have been steady, with a huge increase in the last few days (hmmm, I wonder what spurred that?). While I am not delusional enough to think that our sales will rival those of Wizards and D&D, I'll take this "niche" that we have and happily make products for a long time to come. It isn't as small as you make it out to be and I truly believe that it will continue to grow for the foreseeable future. You don't stay in business in this industry for over 20 years without knowing what you are doing, and I have to say that Paizo is doing just fine.
Hooray for Paizo!!
CEO
|
Sorry Lisa, but the matter isn't settled yet (note my use of the word "ultimate"). I maintain that you will *ultimately* not see the success you would have had you made the switch. Frankly, the condition of your business right now isn't terribly useful in predicting what will happen in five years (which I suspect you understand quite well). We could debate forever; you've placed your bet. Was it a wise one? Only time will tell. In the meantime, I *know* as a 4E player I'll miss your content. :(
On the bright side, you'll know if I come crawling back in a few years, and you can bust out an extra big "I told you so". ;-)
You are right that only time will tell. However, I have more information than you do about sales in our industry and how Paizo's products are doing. I also have over 20 years of experience launching little product lines like Vampire: The Masquerade, Magic: The Gathering, and D&D 3e to name but a few. During that time, I have learned how to pretty reliably predict how my business is going to go. Could I be wrong? Sure. But I really think that I am right in this case and that PFRPG and 4e will be able to both comfortably exist in the same segment of our industry.
So I will be holding that "I told you so" for this time next year. :)
-Lisa
little product lines like Vampire: The Masquerade, Magic: The Gathering, and D&D 3e to name but a few.
Never heard of them.
Let me guess: In the first, you must dress up as a Vampire. Seems to be a hoot at helloween and with Lestat-fanboys and -girls.
The second sounds like one of those browser games: Run through a maze, find magic items and gather them together. Like Pac Man.
Only the D&D EEE is a mystery to me. I Know EEE is the Electronic Entertainment Expo, but what does that have to do with D&D Performance Exhaust? Harleys with navs?
Would it be very difficult to create a set of fighter powers to make an effective two weapon fighter, modelled on the ranger version but suitable for a fighter instead?
I don't know. I'm not good at this power creation thing. If only I had a game where I can play that right from the start.
*enter the Paizo Golem and his Sales Speech*
Actually now that I think of it, if Paizo does not buy the D&D label when 4e tanks, then either Blizzard or Microsoft will.
"Heavy Exception at Module E01 at code page 13. Please close all Doors and restart your Campaign." - damn, I didn't save it!
|
Or sitting on the shelves in the middle of the FLGS the day after "Worldwide D&D Day". From my own anecdotal evidence (and please take it as anecdotal), 4E was not the blowout sell I think WotC and the gaming stores thought it would be. Sales were lackluster (at least according to the people at my game store) and they had easily 150+ of each sourcebook sitting in various displays in store (rough estimate of 30 books per stack with five displays). I remember after 3.5 the shelves were barren, and this time they were barren too - all the 3.x books were gone, sold out, we couldn't get the copy of the Spell Compendium they had four copies of last week.
I think sales were good, but I'm not sure they were as spectacular as WotC was implying they would be.
I'm pretty familiar with the owner of our rather large and successful FLGS here, and he agrees your sentiment mirrors true there - that they didn't "fly off the shelves" - but it is not an accurate picture to the determine success of sales; for he told me that the main reason why they're not flying off the shelves is because of Amazon - who had incredibly unbeatable purchase price that most people jumped on.
The FLGS's all suffered as a result. However, I have now learned that Amazon has "over-sold" their allotted amount, and they are now forced to cancel orders or find a way to obtain more - at much less profit to them - if not, a loss.
Getting back to the original intent of this thread:
I am a big-supporter of 3.PF, and I do love the 3rd edition mechanics. I was not excited about 4th at all - for many reasons including fiscal, not appreciating WotC business tactics (that we are all apprised of), and I'm not liking most of the mechanics I had read about leading up to it.
My table is split - I have two players who LOVED what they had been hearing (one is a big MMORPG fan), and a third fell in love with it the first time they playtested that fast-play 4e mod (he is even a bigger MMO fan). 3 of us have NO intention of switching and are going PF. The other three are intending to do both - but so far like PF more.
I decided to sit in and watch a playtest group run the 4E mod at the FLGS, and I have to say I am not as disappointed with it as I would have. However, my biggest dissatisfaction is a major one and that is the overall use of their mechanic and how different it is from all earlier editions. (magic, pidgeon-holed into a specific character build type, class choices, race choices - etc - all of which are similar reasons anti-4e sentiments have been espoused here). Thus, I will continue to support 3.PF without a doubt and have no intention of buying or running 4E games. I may try it occasionally as a player - but I don't appreciate the system enough to warrant spending money on it or investing my time as DM for it.
Again, however, I wasn't completely turned off by the experience. There were many aspects of it that I found quite enjoyable - however most of these are small tidbit mechanics that IMO could easily work with any number of systems (including 3.5) and it saddens me further that WotC didn't just try to facelift 3.5 with these nuances that really don't change the nature of the game - just spices it up (further alienating my loyalty to them as now I see it as even a bigger middle-finger to many long-time fans and 3rd party publishers in general - to make everything previously done by everyone have no meaning with their new product - and could have if they chose to).
Some of the highlights have been iterated here - those I found enjoyable were: I will say combat was more streamlined it appeared (but maybe thats because it was low level with far fewer of the options). I liked the scampering movement by so many of the combatants - either by their own creature abilities or by character abilities to move them around. Too often in 3.5 combat simply gets relegated to standing still - takein a 5' step and swinging. This leads to players kind of losing interest during combat when it's not their turn - as theres nothing really happening. In contrast, it appeared every player - even when it wasn't their turn - seemed to be completely tuned in to what was happening - because a lot seemed to be happening all the time - regardless of who's turn it was - someone/something was always moving - giving the notion of combat being truly chaotic and frenzied. (then again, the attention could have been a product of it being new and fascinating - and could eventually wear-off...but I'll give it the benefit of the doubt).
I like the minions - to a degree - the ideal of them is great - not sure I like the exact implementation. I liked some of the cool specific manuevers and things you can do with certain weapons. I like the notion of rituals, too. The thing I liked that stood out the most was the removal of the reliance on equipment to make the characters optimally effective.
But again - IMO - ALL of these are things that could have been implemented in a 3.75 edition if WotC wanted to still play ball. Midnight Campaign Setting taught us you can make a 3.5 version of D&D without reliance on magic items for example.
For me, I'm sticking PF, love it, love the folk here and the employees, the customer service, the feeling that we are heard and make a difference as a consumer, and they have one thing that I think WotC still can't hold a candle to, and that is the creativity in the writing/stories/adventures - which for me is 75% of the game.
In my own campaign, I am looking to adapt some of what I do like of 4E - specifically and foremost, some of the cool movement quirks and traits - it was truly the most exciting part of the combat, and I liked that it did keep everyone involved and on the edge.
Robert
|
|
But in the end it will be a loss for everyone else: Both Paizo, their fanbase, and ultimately the RPG industry as a whole. :-(
bugleyman, I think you're being a bit over-dramatic. I, too, have run several 4E games. From that experience, as well as being a 4E player, I can confidently say PfRPG and 4E will attract two different crowds that can easily co-exist with each other. To reiterate: Paizo is not trying to "challenge" D&D 4E. Instead, the company's offering an alternative path for those who are happy with the 3.5 SRD. Period. End of story.
But in the end it will be a loss for everyone else: Both Paizo, their fanbase, and ultimately the RPG industry as a whole. :-(bugleyman, I think you're being a bit over-dramatic. I, too, have run several 4E games. From that experience, as well as being a 4E player, I can confidently say PfRPG and 4E will attract two different crowds that can easily co-exist with each other. To reiterate: Paizo is not trying to "challenge" D&D 4E. Instead, the company's offering an alternative path for those who are happy with the 3.5 SRD. Period. End of story.
Perhaps so; I just think this situation presented an unprecedented opportunity for Paizo to shape the shared experience of 4th edition by blowing WoTC's adventures away, and in so doing open up a larger market than Pathfinder can ever hope to be. Basically, for Paizo to write the adventures that become to be known as iconic; the "Temple of Elemental Evil" or "Against the Giants" for 4E. As it is, I think they've limited themselves. But the horse is dead Jim! As Lisa said, you can all give me an "I told you so" if I end up coming back.
Perhaps so; I just think this situation presented an unprecedented opportunity for Paizo to shape the shared experience of 4th edition by blowing WoTC's adventures away, and in so doing open up a larger market than Pathfinder can ever hope to be. Basically, for Paizo to write the adventures that become to be known as iconic; the "Temple of Elemental Evil" or "Against the Giants" for 4E. As it is, I think they've limited themselves. But the horse is dead Jim! As Lisa said, you can all give me an "I told you so" if I end up coming back.
Well, to be fair it wasn't primarily Paizo that limited themselves. It was WotC that forced Paizo to make this decision by delaying the GSL. Now, I'm not saying that Paizo wouldn't have made the same decision even if the GSL had been released as promised, but as it where now they didn't get that choice.
That being said, I have now had a first look at 4th ed, and I'm pretty confident that it will be PRPG for me and my group in the future.
|
|
Perhaps so; I just think this situation presented an unprecedented opportunity for Paizo to shape the shared experience of 4th edition by blowing WoTC's adventures away.
I think i know how do you feel. There is a group of people that has switched to 4E that were Paizo, Pathfinder customer before. For this people I know it's a big loss to not have Pathfinder adventures for the new D&D edition. I beleive you are part of this group.
But I understand Paizo position too. The fluff part of the game has changed a lot in this edition, and this GSL situation makes to go to 4E a big risk. If this GSL can be revocable, and having the previous experience fron WOTC taking back Dungeon and Dragon magazines, makes difficult to trust in Hasbro/WOTC.So, let's see what happens next. I think this is the best solution, and there is allways room for 4e conversions!
|
In all honesty cannot imagine ANY 3rd party company accepting the GSL. Assuming what some WOTC employees have said will be in it.
Specifically, that the license can be terminated by WOTC at any time.
Would you want to run your business knowing that another company can shut you down at any time?
this is different from the license WOTC had with Paizo for publishing the magazines. WIth that license there was an end to it built into the license with an option to renew. With that end approaching a company is able to adjust and make new plans. With the GSL, will there be any warning at all?
How about waking up one morning when you have a HUGE run of 100,000 books being delivered from the press today only to find WOTC has cancelled the license and you are now stuck with 100,000 books you cannot sell?
For every company that falls in line with 4E, that is exactly what they are facing.
Meh, I voted with my wallet. Thats all that counts in the long run.
I upped my Paizo subscriptions to two (added the module line). And soon Ill be adding the Chronicles as well.
Ive been a fan of the paizo stuff since the Shackled City (and Dungeon magazine under their helm). These are some of the best designers out there, and it seems that they are like minded when it comes to what D&D is/should be (at least with my group and alot of other folks judging by these and other forums.
To be honest, I was going to possibly quit gaming after my AoW and another shot at the Savage Tide ap. I wasnt happy with the direction of 4E and I figured my gaming time (26+ years of D&D) had come and gone in favor of the crpg/anime/munchkin gamers.
Maybe im a traditionalist and I love the sacred cows, maybe im not infatuated with a cool looking demonic, dragon-esqe PC, maybe I dont feel change is needed for the sake of change, maybe I dont feel that to get a full game I will need to buy 3+ more Hardcovers, maybe I dont want to feel like Im missing out unless I pay a monthly subscription for their added content.
I do know what I like though. Some examples...
1) I like what the staff at Paizo is doing rules-wise and the Golarion world. I havent been excited about a campaign setting like this since the FR grey box. I love most of the rules/class/skill changes of the upcoming Pathfinder rpg, etc.
2) I like that I can buy what I want from Paizo and know that all the splat is optional (the way it should be).
3) I like the way Paizo handles their customers, not talking about customer service (which is excellent btw). I appreciate that they dont have the arrogance to tell us our games are all broken and they are changing everything for the sake of change or because its the game they feel we need to have. They are friendly and seem to love the game just as much as I do. This to me is enough to plant me firmly into their camp for good.
Frankly, I just can't see HOW they manage a Realms transition under the new system and keep the flavor that made it such a popular world.
They didn't. They went and cut up the Realms. I was pretty pissed for a time. But I have the Chronicles now. Let them keep their Spellplague. My new flavour of world-shattering event is called Earthfall - and it's just how I like it: 10,000 years in the past and not messing up the setting as I know it.
Let's just all pray that wizards won't get their hands on Midnight. They'd rip apart the Veil just to bring the new powers system - and Toadmean, uh, I mean Dragonborn.
In all honesty cannot imagine ANY 3rd party company accepting the GSL. Assuming what some WOTC employees have said will be in it.
Specifically, that the license can be terminated by WOTC at any time.
Would you want to run your business knowing that another company can shut you down at any time?
Maybe. If that other company wasn't wizards/hasbro, that is. I wouldn't trust that corporation with the time of day.
I can just see someone getting too successful with something like adventures and w/h yanking out the power cord as a cheap alternative to improving their own products....
Well, to be fair it wasn't primarily Paizo that limited themselves. It was WotC that forced Paizo to make this decision by delaying the GSL.
... and there's that, too. And the fact that no product line can be done in both OGL and GSL.
If there's anyone guilty of robbing 4e players of Paizo's adventures, it's w/h, not Paizo.
My new flavour of world-shattering event is called Earthfall - and it's just how I like it: 10,000 years in the past and not messing up the setting as I know it.
Death of Aroden, 102 years in the past? Although it's still not messing up the setting as we know it, since the setting is dependent on it ;)
My new flavour of world-shattering event is called Earthfall - and it's just how I like it: 10,000 years in the past and not messing up the setting as I know it.Death of Aroden, 102 years in the past? Although it's still not messing up the setting as we know it, since the setting is dependent on it ;)
That was only world-shaking. Continents didn't sink beneath the waves. Millions didn't die. Realms didn't crumble.
And, of course, it has already happened before the setting even started.
As long as Paizo doesn't start sinking Garund, killing Norgorber and Cayden (because they, say, both had the hots for Desna and killed each other over that, while she stood there, head shaking), or suddenly the Whispering Tyrant becomes a mortal once more, I'm fine.
Things like the Earthfall and the Death of Aroden are for Golarion what the fall of Netheril was to the Realms: Stuff that defined the setting long before the first player set foot in it.
Things like the Earthfall and the Death of Aroden are for Golarion what the fall of Netheril was to the Realms: Stuff that defined the setting long before the first player set foot in it.
Although a bit contrived, that was actually the point I was trying to make ;)
I'm a fan of 4th edition GURPS, does that count?
Yes, b/c it's the only 4e I give a damn about too!
Well, I am glad to report that your conviction is entirely wrong.Sorry Lisa, but the matter isn't settled yet (note my use of the word "ultimate"). I maintain that you will *ultimately* not see the success you would have had you made the switch. Frankly, the condition of your business right now isn't terribly useful in predicting what will happen in five years (which I suspect you understand quite well). We could debate forever; you've placed your bet. Was it a wise one? Only time will tell. In the meantime, I *know* as a 4E player I'll miss your content. :(
On the bright side, you'll know if I come crawling back in a few years, and you can bust out an extra big "I told you so". ;-)
I'm confused. Paizo's success isn't settled but 4e's success is?
<sarcasm> Oh, I see.... you're talking long-term success.
I call BS. The long-term success of 4e is no more established than Paizo's. All we have are current indicators. Lisa says Paizo is stronger than ever. Initial 4e sales have been high. That's ALL we know right now.
|
|
So for people who prefer 3.x to 4E, congratulations. Pathfinder RPG is a win for you. But in the end it will be a loss for everyone else: Both Paizo, their fanbase, and ultimately the RPG industry as a whole. :-(
I WIN! I WIN! I WIN!
HA HA! - Suck it WotC, you loser! And you bugleyman! I beat you!
Actually, I do think it is a win for me, but not a loss for Paizo or Paizo's fanbase. Since I'm in Paizo's fanbase, it seems like it would be hard to win and lose at the same time.
I'm not playing 4th edition, and I won't play 4th edition. Even if it is a great game, I'm not interested in switching. I have other great games that I don't play either (like d6 Deadlands). The fact that I don't play every great game that comes along is hardly surprising. I have to be somewhat picky as a consumer, and I want to play games that I think will provide more bang for the buck. So far, that has been Pathfinder. Over the last 10 months or something since 4th edition has been announced, Pathfinder has been 'supporting my game'. I fully agree that WotC can't publish a decent adventure module (except, of course, with help from the Paizo staff as freelancers). Sure, the fact that WotC basically forced companies like Paizo to create their own game system is going to be a major loss for fans of 4th edition. But WotC decided they wanted to 'split the fanbase'. I've heard rumors that they wanted to 'fire the fanbase' and start over with a brand new market demographic. Whatever they want to do, fine with me. I don't think I was ever a part of their plans, despite the fact that they told me as a DM I am certainly part of their plans - every action they've performed told me otherwise.
So, I'm pretty happy. I don't know how many people will play 4th edition, but I don't need to worry about it. I have enough people playing 3.5 (or Pathfinder) or willing to play that I should have a group at least until I next move to some place else. And when I do, I'm sure I'll find people willing to play Pathfinder as long as I'm willing to DM. And as long as we have the Adventure Paths, that won't be a problem.
So, I feel like I did win. And maybe some people lost. Them's the breaks. I think Paizo won big, though, and that is clear just by browsing these boards. They've made a lot of people very happy.
The Realms has always been far more than the magic and the trinkets.
Agreed. But then again, most of the things that made the Realms what they were have been butchered as well.
When all is said and done, I would not be surprised to see some of the same thing happen with 4th Edition. It looks a lot more approachable to the gaming newbie that it's predecessor.
It's lost most of its advantages over WoW. That's why those new gamers who would be attracted to it will probably go the WoW-route, anyway.
It's not about "spliting the fanbase" there are lot of factors behind Hasbro/Wotc's decision making process.
Yes, and splitting the fanbase, is just one of them. Of course, they could also be incredible dumb to not have seen that one coming, but too much of what they're doing seems like they went out of their way to split the fanbase.
But look at the population on these boards. Most of them are older gamers set in thier ways and they pretty much have thier copies of Wizards 3.5 books and have bought everything they were going to buy.
I'm 26. Okay, nearly 27. I started with 3e and didn't like 2e at all, even though I played it out of necessity for some time.
And I would have bought 4e stuff (and minis, and tiles, and who-knows-what-else) if they hadn't made clear that they don't want my money.
For a company to stay in buisness and a game to thrive they have to continually attract new customers, not just please in the old.
The smart ones try to do both. They don't go out of their way to drive away old customers.
And it may be very well that d20 has it was was simply too old in the tooth, too burdened with a ton of supplements that you had to have in order to play the game.
d20 is less than 8 years old and all you have to have in order to play is the core rules, no matter what wizards may wanted to make you believe. d20 Is complete without the Complete books.
4e, of course, isn't complete.
Paizo will do well with Pathfinder as it is a small company that can survive quite nicely on the new niche group, those older gamers that are looking for a hedge against change, but something that will continue to grow in it's own direction.
They will have that small niche group, and a considerably larger one that doesn't abhor change in general, but only change for the worse.
I call BS. The long-term success of 4e is no more established than Paizo's. All we have are current indicators. Lisa says Paizo is stronger than ever. Initial 4e sales have been high. That's ALL we know right now.
Call it whatever you like. The *fact* is that D&D is the undisputed industry leader with commanding market share. Even a half-hearted search will uncover dozens of posts from industry insiders confirming this. Like it or not, D&D brings with it a huge installed base. To suggest that we should assume Pathfinder and 4E are on equal footing until proven otherwise is, frankly, ridiculous.
|
|
Call it whatever you like. The *fact* is that D&D is the undisputed industry leader with commanding market share. Even a half-hearted search will uncover dozens of posts from industry insiders confirming this. Like it or not, D&D brings with it a huge installed base. To suggest that we should assume Pathfinder and 4E are on equal footing until proven otherwise is, frankly, ridiculous.
That is true; they're not on equal footing yet - Pathfinder does not benefit from the logo and does not have the NAME D&D on it - Hasbro paid a lot of money to have the rights to that logo because it alone is marketable, recognizable and sellable. And of course they're taking advantage of that fact and using that clout well.
However even as renown and good as Ghiradeli Chocolate is, if they suddenly started wrapping up dog-turds and simply putting their label on it, it won't take long before those with life-long love of it will simply wretch at the mere thought of having some.
Anyone here think Kiss was still "Kiss" when they lost the face paint? I think the name still fooled people....for a while....then they were forced to wear the paint again.
Robert
Anyone here think Kiss was still "Kiss" when they lost the face paint? I think the name still fooled people....for a while....then they were forced to wear the paint again.
Robert
Actually I always thought Revenge was one of the best albums they put out, and I think the group had really hit its stride, but when Eric Carr died, I think the drive to make a go of the "new" lineup kind of died and they fell back into playing out the old gimmicks . . . but that's just me.
I call BS. The long-term success of 4e is no more established than Paizo's. All we have are current indicators. Lisa says Paizo is stronger than ever. Initial 4e sales have been high. That's ALL we know right now.
Call it whatever you like. The *fact* is that D&D is the undisputed industry leader with commanding market share. Even a half-hearted search will uncover dozens of posts from industry insiders confirming this. Like it or not, D&D brings with it a huge installed base. To suggest that we should assume Pathfinder and 4E are on equal footing until proven otherwise is, frankly, ridiculous.
Exactly.
Which is why Paizo ISNT DIRECTLY COMPETING WITH D&D / WOTC.
IN the latest Green Ronin Podcast Erik Mona says something that I think alot of people (especially the Pro-4e crowd / anti Pathfinder crowd) need to hear.
To paraphrase: IF Paizo sells 10,000 copies of a book that's a huge success. If WOTC sells 10,000 copies of a book that's a failure.
Once again Paizo is selling to a niche market of die hard fans and people who are not going to 4E. It's also selling to those who have no problem playing more than one system at a time. THey are also selling to groups who like their adventures and dont mind converting them to another system or not. I think, based on Lisa Stevens comments and the community here that, yeah Paizo knows what they are doing.
Now there's a band for the Cheliax Empire, lets see them drawn by Erol Otus :-)
They would have to be called KIAS, though. Or maybe KIDS. Which would be deliciously ironic.
Conversely, one could say that you seem to be a huge 4E fanboy on general principal; I'd keep the finger pointing to a minimum, it doesn't get anybody anywhere.
"If you would like to take ownership of your glass house, Mister Slanky. Oh, and we do suggest that thrown stones may reduce the lifespan of your property."
I saw the old gimmicks at the St. Paul Civic Center on their first in-makeup reunion tour, and it was one of the best concerts I have ever seen in my life.
Eh, I didn't think they were bad when they went back to the makeup, just that they were kind of heading a certain direction without it, and made a u-turn when Eric Carr died.
Plus I have an unhealthy urge to respond thusly whenever someone asks "does anyone," as rhetorical question. ;)
I saw the old gimmicks at the St. Paul Civic Center on their first in-makeup reunion tour, and it was one of the best concerts I have ever seen in my life.
Hooray for frivolous, dilatory, and off-topic discussions! I saw KISS and Aerosmith headline together at Walnut Creek in Raleigh a few years back, and the difference between the two bands could not have been more palpable. KISS acted like they were still at the peak of their career; the performance was energized, the stage presence was incredible, and it was a show to die for. Aerosmith, by contrast, seemed to just be going through the motions like they'd been doing this for weeks and were ready to go home and take their geritol. If you could read Steven Tyler's mind, it might sounded like this: "Ho hum, Joe's gonna play a guitar solo now... I sure could go for some good chicken cacciatore at the backstage party... Who's catering tonight?... Oh crap, he's almost done? Guess I better twirl my mike or do something vaguely flamboyant with a scarf." One band cared about giving us a great show; the other cared just enough to play proficiently and get the hell offstage.
Hmm. Wait a minute. Maybe this isn't as off-topic as I thought.
To Erik, Lisa, and Jason: I'll buy more products if you post pics of yourselves in KISS makeup. Bonus PDF purchases if you can get Clinton Boomer in on it.
If you love 3.5 wizards or clerics for their versatility, you're not going to be happy with 4E. 4E essentially gives the same number of options to all the classes, so wizards have just as many choices compared to fighters. More options for fighters, less options for casters.
4E may also piss off powergamers, because there aren't really loopholes in 4E yet. Powergamers love loopholes or powerful abilities that are priced too low.
I call BS. The long-term success of 4e is no more established than Paizo's. All we have are current indicators. Lisa says Paizo is stronger than ever. Initial 4e sales have been high. That's ALL we know right now.
Call it whatever you like. The *fact* is that D&D is the undisputed industry leader with commanding market share. Even a half-hearted search will uncover dozens of posts from industry insiders confirming this. Like it or not, D&D brings with it a huge installed base. To suggest that we should assume Pathfinder and 4E are on equal footing until proven otherwise is, frankly, ridiculous.
Exactly.
Which is why Paizo ISNT DIRECTLY COMPETING WITH D&D / WOTC.
IN the latest Green Ronin Podcast Erik Mona says something that I think alot of people (especially the Pro-4e crowd / anti Pathfinder crowd) need to hear.To paraphrase: IF Paizo sells 10,000 copies of a book that's a huge success. If WOTC sells 10,000 copies of a book that's a failure.
Once again Paizo is selling to a niche market of die hard fans and people who are not going to 4E. It's also selling to those who have no problem playing more than one system at a time. THey are also selling to groups who like their adventures and dont mind converting them to another system or not. I think, based on Lisa Stevens comments and the community here that, yeah Paizo knows what they are doing.
First of all, if you're selling a fantasy RPG, you are directly competing with WOTC/D&D. An inability to beat WOTC doesn't mean you "aren't competing."
In any case, I get that Paizo can succeed with Pathfinder RPG, but that isn't relevant to my point: I believe their sales will be lower than they would have if they'd embraced 4E. I never said they'd fail. The fact that people keep trying to argue against something I never said is rather telling.
First of all, if you're selling a fantasy RPG, you are directly competing with WOTC/D&D. An inability to beat WOTC doesn't mean you "aren't competing."In any case, I get that Paizo can succeed with Pathfinder RPG, but that isn't relevant to my point: I believe their sales will be lower than they would have if they'd embraced 4E. I never said they'd fail. The fact that people keep trying to argue against something I never said is rather telling.
I don't necessarily agree. The only reason I even came here to check out Paizo is that they aren't embracing 4E (and for the record, I'm playing 4E but continuing with 3.5E and then Pathfinder as well).
From what I've seen online and in talking to people at gaming stores, I think there is enough interest in keeping the 3.5 system, or something more heavily tied to it, alive that Paizo made a smart decision. Embracing 4E puts them much more directly in competition with WotC than Pathfinder does. I suspect there will still be enough demand for 3.5E related material that Paizo's choice will prove to be wise.
|
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
In any case, I get that Paizo can succeed with Pathfinder RPG, but that isn't relevant to my point: I believe their sales will be lower than they would have if they'd embraced 4E. I never said they'd fail. The fact that people keep trying to argue against something I never said is rather telling.
And after we've helped convert the audience to 4e and Wizards decides to release a "4.5" or 5th edition that does not include a GSL, how strong do you figure our sales will be then?
|
|
In any case, I get that Paizo can succeed with Pathfinder RPG, but that isn't relevant to my point: I believe their sales will be lower than they would have if they'd embraced 4E. I never said they'd fail. The fact that people keep trying to argue against something I never said is rather telling.
Since you have a business degree like I do, I'm surprised you haven't dismissed the chance that Paizo's looking to dominate a niche market.
The 3.x ruleset is no longer supported by WotC. Period. Folks who enjoy the system will have to rely on their older materials or the occasional purchase from 3rd party vendors, though that'll dry up as losses mount*. Eventually they'll either drop the games due to lack of said materials or -- more importantly -- due to lack of interested players.
Enter Paizo. Already well-known for its adventures, the company offers a 3.x-based rpg as well as new materials. This includes not only adventures, but miscellaneous materials like cards, figures, and the Pathfinder Society. Third party now have a choice on whom to support AND MAKE A PROFIT.
More importantly, though, is that 3.x fans not only don't have to move to another system, but they have 1) a source for new material and 2) a game they can point to new players and say "yeah, it's supported. Want to check out the latest Pathfinder AP?" Paizo would see $$$ coming in and, in time, dominate its niche**.
Note that Paizo isn't the only company breaking away from WotC: Green Ronin is currently happy with its True20 system.
Yeah, Paizo could potentially make more money publishing 4E products. But the late rulebooks and current GSL issue revealed the flaw in the system: any company working with WotC has to dance in its gilded cage.
*By the way, I'm not dismissing them as irrelevant. I proudly own several such mods from excellent companies like Adamant, LDJ, etc..
**Since you're in IT as well, think of Apple and the desktop publishing industry. Or downloadable music.
Yeah, Paizo could potentially make more money publishing 4E products. But the late rulebooks and current GSL issue revealed the flaw in the system: any company working with WotC has to dance in its gilded cage.
I was going to bring up a few more points about how WOTC basically left a lot of the 3rd party companies (like Paizo) hanging out to dry waiting for the GSL (which STILL isnt available) so that they could have material for 4E by GenCon.
Also, and I'm pretty certain someone will step in a correct me if I'm wrong, the current rumor is that the GSL doesnt prevent a 3rd Party like Paizo from creating a separate line of products just to support 4E later down the line.
So my question is this? What's the problem? Is bugleyman annoyed that the people who want continuing 3.5 support are actually getting it or is he annoyed that he has to wait for Paizo to produce 4E material. If it's the first then there's really nothing I can say about that that wouldnt involve both middle fingers in his general direction. But if that's not the case and it's the second then he needs to vent his dissatisfaction directly at WOTC since they are soley to blame for 3rd parties like Paizo not getting the materials and the resources in time to support 4E in a timely fashon.
No offense, but I don't think the issue has anything to do with Paizo's sales.
I think the OP just wants "Paizo-quality adventures" for 4E and realizes that Wizards simply isn't going to make them. Unfortunately, he's displacing his issue by blaming Paizo for this situation (and claiming they will lose sales due to that) when it's entirely caused by WOTC.
There are no more Paizo adventures in Dungeon becuase WOTC pulled the license. And Paizo did not go 4E because of what Wizards has done with the GSL.
Ultimately, it's blaming Paizo for choices Wizards made.
If anyone wants Paizo-quality from 4E, demand it from the makers of 4E. They're the ones responsible for its existence or lack thereof.
|
In any case, I get that Paizo can succeed with Pathfinder RPG, but that isn't relevant to my point: I believe their sales will be lower than they would have if they'd embraced 4E. I never said they'd fail. The fact that people keep trying to argue against something I never said is rather telling.
"Sales" is relative, really. You seem to be talking about total sales. Total sales are important, but not as important for a smaller company. They primarily need to think about quarterly sales, cause that's what helps Lisa write the checks on Friday.
At this point, multiple representatives of the company have stated that sales have gone up since they made all their various product announcements and released products.
How much weekly sales would they have right now if they'd fully embraced 4E? With no GSL, and unable to sell anything until October?
Their actual sales of 4E products would have been 0$ until the 4th quarter of this year.
So, this week, their sales are higher. This month, their sales are higher. This quarter, their sales are higher.
Now, could it be that on 10/1 there will be this explosion of 4E sales by third parties that they miss out on. Maybe. Would they make tons more money that quarter then they did the whole rest of the year? Maybe. You want to bet your company on that? Some have.
Also, I still have yet to hear a Paizo person say they aren't (ever) doing anything with 4E. The GSL will be out "this week" ("This time for sure Rocky!") and it will outline how folks can do 4E product. Paizo are smart to hedge their bets and dominate the 3E niche while leaving open the door to do 4E stuff *when it makes sense*.
|
|
And after we've helped convert the audience to 4e and Wizards decides to release a "4.5" or 5th edition that does not include a GSL, how strong do you figure our sales will be then?
Don't you get it, the boost of sales will be so great from your switch to 4e that even if they yank the liscence you'll have allready made it rich and retired to a beach in maui. But instead you made a business decision that cannot leave you stranded in the desert and thus miss out on boost of sales that would have been so great.
As to wether they would have gotten more sales from switching to 4e, that's actually not true in my oppinion, the # of gamers who want 3rd party support of existing brands is a lot less than those who want an alternative to an existing brand. Especially with system upgrades, in the end a lot more people go with brand loyalty in order to keep up financially, I know when I started gaming with 3.5 I intentionally never bought anything other than D&D and it took me years to accept that maybe the brand stuff wasn't as good as some of the alternatives.
I know a lot of people who are loyal to one brand and only a couple who are willing to support several. What I find funny is that those people who support multiple systems tend to be the older generation gamers whom WotC appears to be trying to move past.
I think that by going for the niche market that they are going for means that Pathfinder will actually make more sales and become more prominent to gamers whereas if they had switched to 4e they would have continued to be a reliquary 3rd party publisher that only the more experienced long term gamers really knew about(which is also a niche market). That isn't to say they will become one of the big three, merely that this way they make more sales than they would have with 4e. I mean if they had switched no-one would consider them 4p where now you have people who think that 3.5 is becoming 3.p
I purchased (against my better judgment and at a 40% discount) a 4e PHB today. I'm trying to decide whether to keep it as a curiosity or just take it back and exchange it for something I'll get more use out of.
First of all: 4e is not a bad game. It's slick, fast and pretty as hell. I can imagine it would be a great way to blow a few afternoons. I might play in a 4e game, but I'll never run one, because...
...unfortunately, it doesn't even begin to hold a candle to 3.5, and can't even glint dimly around the PRPG alpha. One of the biggest joys of 3.5 for me is customizability. I can take five levels of any of the 11 core classes and make any number of different characters, and they will feel radically different. Pathfinder fosters this even more. 4e does not appear to make that possible. And then theres the loss of prestige classes. I know PrCs aren't everybody's thing, but I love 'em, and not only are they gone, there's no way to get them back. Leveling is handled SO differently in 4e, that there's no way you'd pull it off. I think, however, the biggest loss is the spells. Whether you like vancian spellcasting or something more like Midnight or GURPS, it won't matter. The spellcasting in 4e is so different as to be unrecognizable. And that's too bad, in a way. I could go on, but I'll leave it at this:
I (genuinely!) look forward to the 4e computer games, but for tabletop, I am sticking with 3.5/Pathfinder.
BLESS YOU CHILD!
I know a lot of people who are loyal to one brand and only a couple who are willing to support several. What I find funny is that those people who support multiple systems tend to be the older generation gamers whom WotC appears to be trying to move past.
This is actually exactly the boat I was in at one point. Aside from a couple of the Sword and Sorcery Creature Compendiums and such (which I wasn't particularly satisfied with and that see almost no use), I bought everything from WotC. There are still many products in the 3.5 line that I want, and I'll wait to get 'em until I can find them cheap. But, especially after coming to embrace Psionics, I discovered the option and potential of third party books (Hyperconscious and Untapped Potential, for example), and now I'm on Paizo's boards, something I never would have done had 3.5 continued and I remained in my pre-4.0 buying pattern.
I'm not sure exactly what 3rd party books I'll be buying in the future - I don't know enough about most of them, honestly, and I'm not sure where to go to find out, but Paizo's got my dollar for the Pathfinder core books (especially if they bring back Concentration, gosh darn it!).
Don't you get it, the boost of sales will be so great from your switch to 4e that even if they yank the liscence you'll have allready made it rich and retired to a beach in maui. But instead you made a business decision that cannot leave you stranded in the desert and thus miss out on boost of sales that would have been so great.
Neither irony or sarcasm is argument.
--Rufus Choate