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.
I have no argument for this. WOTC absolutely screwed the pooch on the GSL, plain and simple.
And I admit I'm quite annoyed that I'm not getting Paizo material for 4E. Hell, that is probably clouding my judgment more than I care to admit. But I don't think it is simply bitterness over not getting my way; there is a part of me the geniunely believes Paizo could have (should have, even) made the next generation of iconic adventures for D&D, because if Keep on the Shadowfell is any indication, WoTC sure as hell isn't going to do it. And if they *had* made those adventures, then they would own part of D&D's history, and hopefully reap the corresponding financial benefits.
|
Neither irony or sarcasm is argument.
--Rufus Choate
Neither is quotation
Seriously, I followed up one sarcastic paragraph to lighten the mood with three seriously taken and arguably valid paragraphs, if you focus on only the begining then that's your choice, but that's no different then the people who wail that 4e is to MMO like when they haven't even read the ruleset, merely a preview on the wizards site.
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.
Powergamers will hate it, anyway. 8d6 for Meteor Swarm? I'm a powergamer sometimes and I don't like it. I want my 24+8d6 back!
I don't know all the powers, so I don't know whether there aren't any loopholes. But the 4e-glut of splat books is coming (and will include additional PHBs if I recall correctly - one per year), so I don't think we have to wait too long before we hear "There are too many books for 4e. It's no longer playable. The issues are too big. We need 5e".
My prediction is that it will be released 2012. At the latest.
I think the OP just wants "Paizo-quality adventures" for 4E and realizes that Wizards simply isn't going to make them.
And now he wants to panic Paizo into changing their decision.
Which will not happen.
I think he's somewhere between denial and anger. That puts him at station 1.5. It's still a long way to Stage Five (Acceptance), but I'm curious about his attempts to bargain :)
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?
I think that depends on how successful you were at making sure your adventures defined the 4E experience far more than WOTC's own. Seriously; have you *READ* Keep on the Shadowfell?
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.
Jester, you should not be so nervous. That was by far one of the better said statements of the month.
I think that depends on how successful you were at making sure your adventures defined the 4E experience far more than WOTC's own.
No, it doesn't. Because at this point, it's likely that wizards will pull all the licenses, as they did with 3e. But this time around, the license isn't just for D&D's name and logo , but for the sytem itself.
Translation: When 5e makes its appearance, and without an OGL, GSL, or similar, all those who put their faith into 4e will be hung out to dry, since they can no longer sell their stuff.
So, about the time that 5e hits the shelves, the sales will be exactly zero.
And now he wants to panic Paizo into changing their decision.Which will not happen.
I think he's somewhere between denial and anger. That puts him at station 1.5. It's still a long way to Stage Five (Acceptance), but I'm curious about his attempts to bargain :)
I *think* you are referring to me (I'm not the OP, as someone upthread seemed to suggest). I'm not trying to panic anyone into anything. I was making a point and defending it, which I have done quite well, if I do say so myself, a fact which the total lack of substance in your response only serves to underscore.
The market for Pathfinder products WILL be smaller than the market for 4E products. End of story. Maybe Paizo still made the right for Paizo and a good chunk of its customers, but that doesn't mean their decision wasn't very risky. Seriously, is everyone here so polarized into us vs. them that we can't admit the "other side" has a point without feeling that we've lost?
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.Powergamers will hate it, anyway. 8d6 for Meteor Swarm? I'm a powergamer sometimes and I don't like it. I want my 24+8d6 back!
I don't know all the powers, so I don't know whether there aren't any loopholes. But the 4e-glut of splat books is coming (and will include additional PHBs if I recall correctly - one per year), so I don't think we have to wait too long before we hear "There are too many books for 4e. It's no longer playable. The issues are too big. We need 5e".
My prediction is that it will be released 2012. At the latest.
I agree. I powergame. My fellows powergame. My monsters powergame. Those exploited too much have them turned back on them. Creating a new system and nerfing it all doesn't appeal to me because I foresee the outcome. In 2011, rules will exist in 4e that have loopholes and a new way to powerplay them. There exists no foolproof system. Its the DMs job to balance it out.
|
|
So, about the time that 5e hits the shelves, the sales will be exactly zero.
and it will have been to late to create a competing 3.5 system even though they still could because by then everyone would have moved on to 4e, whereas now their future is to be determined by their own quality and not on the generosity of a bigger corporation.
Also, do they even need to wait for 4.5 to come along, can't they yank the GSL whenever they feel like after a certain period of time, granted they'd then make 4.5 so that the systems weren't compatable.
And now he wants to panic Paizo into changing their decision.Which will not happen.
I think he's somewhere between denial and anger. That puts him at station 1.5. It's still a long way to Stage Five (Acceptance), but I'm curious about his attempts to bargain :)
I *think* you are referring to me (I'm not the OP, as someone upthread seemed to suggest). I'm not trying to panic anyone into anything. I was making a point and defending it, which I have done quite well, if I do say so myself, a fact which the total lack of substance in your response only serves to underscore.
Seriously, is everyone here so divided into us vs. them camps that this is what we've come to? A number of people here seem ready to go to ridiculous lengths to avoid admitting Paizo's course of action was risky. The world isn't black and white people.
Really? You must not live in the south. :)
|
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?
I think that depends on how successful you were at making sure your adventures defined the 4E experience far more than WOTC's own. Seriously; have you *READ* Keep on the Shadowfell?
Heh.
It sounds like you're saying Paizo should make quality 4e adventures, build up a loyal fanbase and then when WotC pulls the rug out from under them and revokes the GSL they'll be in a good position to really dominate the 3rd party market with a new game.
How about this... Paizo adventures have defined the 3.5 experience for the last few years. They've built up a loyal fanbase and then some and now that WotC refuses to release a timely GSL Paizo is in a good position to dominate the 3rd party market with a new twist on an established an popular game.
I've been following the GSL debacle pretty closely and I'm pretty sure I'd hate to put any of my eggs in the WotC basket if I thought there was any possible way of making it otherwise.
WotC said the GSL would be out in January. Then it was June 6th. On the 6th it was early next week. Its now the 11th. Five days later and still no GSL.
Clark Peterson, who has been following your advice, waiting patiently for the GSL so that he can begin releasing quality 4e adventures, has produced NOTHING since last year. Clark is in the position of producing RPG adventures as a 'hobby.' He can afford to produce nothing though I wonder how long till even he grows tired of waiting. Paizo employs over 20 people. In what way is it good business for them to have ZERO income for sixth months or more while they wait on the GSL?
OK I looked at "it" today...
L.A.M.E.
It's utterly insipid...As someone else mentioned, you basically have to use the monsters from the MM as is...to build your puzzle of doom for your players...
First thing I noticed...alignments...WHAT??? if you're going to break it down to less alignments, why stop at removing LG, LN, CN and LE...why not just make it G, N, or E...
Ugh I can't even talk about it...sorry it's like a Basic-advanced-3e hybrid...
I don't like "it"
Oh and another thing....
THEY REUSED ARTWORK from previous editions!!!!!!! What THE !!!!?
Your opionios are god-like in my eyes!
Really? You must not live in the south. :)
And now he wants to panic Paizo into changing their decision.Which will not happen.
I think he's somewhere between denial and anger. That puts him at station 1.5. It's still a long way to Stage Five (Acceptance), but I'm curious about his attempts to bargain :)
I *think* you are referring to me (I'm not the OP, as someone upthread seemed to suggest). I'm not trying to panic anyone into anything. I was making a point and defending it, which I have done quite well, if I do say so myself, a fact which the total lack of substance in your response only serves to underscore.
Seriously, is everyone here so divided into us vs. them camps that this is what we've come to? A number of people here seem ready to go to ridiculous lengths to avoid admitting Paizo's course of action was risky. The world isn't black and white people.
Doh! sorry; edited after your post. No, I don't live in the south. AZ, in fact. I visited Arkansas once; that was enough (my apologies to anyone who lives there). ;)
But I don't think it is simply bitterness over not getting my way; there is a part of me the geniunely believes Paizo could have (should have, even) made the next generation of iconic adventures for D&D, because if Keep on the Shadowfell is any indication, WoTC sure as hell isn't going to do it. And if they *had* made those adventures, then they would own part of D&D's history, and hopefully reap the corresponding financial benefits.
As far as I'm concerned Paizo ARE making the next generation of iconic adventures, it's just not for 4ed.
|
|
I will probably end up playing both. Don't know if I could run both, but time will tell.
However, we have to wait until October or so before 3rd party publishers can put out alternatives to WotC -style adventures (im not a big fan of the delve format. in fact, this past weekend the GM running H3 found some errors between the background and the tactical map. This isn't the first time...)
|
|
However, we have to wait until October or so before 3rd party publishers can put out alternatives to WotC -style adventures
And there wont be any real significat print products in October, either. Think about it, with all the changes and the on again off again uncertainty of things, as a publisher you might be able to do some writing (we have) but you cant really dedicate money to art and layout before you know if you can even make the product or not under the GSL.
Dont get me wrong, I'm glad 4E will allow 3P support (I'm not saying "4E is open" anymore). But I really think people will look back at this 4E launch and scratch their heads and wonder what the heck was Wizards thinking. Those who arent doing that already.
And thats from the GSL's biggest and most vocal 3rd party supporter to date.
Scratch, scratch, scratch...
Chief Technical Officer
|
...there is a part of me the geniunely believes Paizo could have (should have, even) made the next generation of iconic adventures for D&D, because if Keep on the Shadowfell is any indication, WoTC sure as hell isn't going to do it. And if they *had* made those adventures, then they would own part of D&D's history, and hopefully reap the corresponding financial benefits.
If by "own part of D&D's history," you mean "have our name on," we already do—we published Dragon and Dungeon for several years, along with a handful of nice D&D books. It worked out reasonably well for us, but we've done better by moving on.
If, on the other hand, you mean "own" in the "ownership of intellectual property sense," well, I point you at all of the folks who own IP published under the d20 license who now have warehouses full of printed books that they can no longer sell past December of this year because Wizards says so. I have no interest in that type of ownership.
...
If by "own part of D&D's history," you mean "have our name on," we already do—we published Dragon and Dungeon for several years, along with a handful of nice D&D books. It worked out reasonably well for us, but we've done better by moving on.
...
And such a wonderful time it was too. I miss my mags, although Pathfinder is an excellent replacement, I still find myself looking for my two childhood friends in the mail. :(
...there is a part of me the geniunely believes Paizo could have (should have, even) made the next generation of iconic adventures for D&D, because if Keep on the Shadowfell is any indication, WoTC sure as hell isn't going to do it. And if they *had* made those adventures, then they would own part of D&D's history, and hopefully reap the corresponding financial benefits.If by "own part of D&D's history," you mean "have our name on," we already do—we published Dragon and Dungeon for several years, along with a handful of nice D&D books. It worked out reasonably well for us, but we've done better by moving on.
If, on the other hand, you mean "own" in the "ownership of intellectual property sense," well, I point you at all of the folks who own IP published under the d20 license who now have warehouses full of printed books that they can no longer sell past December of this year because Wizards says so. I have no interest in that type of ownership.
Vic, this is a false dichotomy.
For the record, I mean own as in "we can go publish material based on a setting/series of adventures (that we originally published under the OGL) using whatever system we choose." E.g. Freeport, which I doubt would have risen to the level of popularity it currently enjoys had it not ridden on the back of D&D. D&D 4E could have been the Trojan Horse to allow Golarian to challenge Greyhawk or the Forgotten Realms. If this is specifically disallowed under the GSL, then I agree it wasn't viable. But I've not seen any indication of such yet.
In a more general sense (i.e. not directed specifically at anyone), I think I've made my point about as clearly as I can. To say one thinks Paizo will succeed in spite of this factor is certainly a reasonable position...for one to deny this factor exists at all is just starting to look silly.
|
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.
Well, that, too. I just didn't want to point out the obvious.
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.Well, that, too. I just didn't want to point out the obvious.
But they have lost sales...starting with mine. Whether other gains ultimately offsets such losses is the question, no?
|
|
because if Keep on the Shadowfell is any indication, WoTC sure as hell isn't going to do it.
Get used to it. I only recently started purchasing Pathfinder APs and modules and the difference between them and WotC stuff is amazing. To me, WotC modules are like the networks: appeal to the lowest common denominator, don't offend the FCC, etc. (e.g. Friends). Pathfinder stuff, on the other hand, is like cable: edgy, adult, willing to try something new (e.g., Sopranos). And before anyone gets their PH in a tizzy, BOTH HAVE GOOD STUFF -- it's a matter of personal taste.
because if Keep on the Shadowfell is any indication, WoTC sure as hell isn't going to do it.Get used to it. I only recently started purchasing Pathfinder APs and modules and the difference between them and WotC stuff is amazing. To me, WotC modules are like the networks: appeal to the lowest common denominator, don't offend the FCC, etc. (e.g. Friends). Pathfinder stuff, on the other hand, is like cable: edgy, adult, willing to try something new (e.g., Sopranos). And before anyone gets their PH in a tizzy, BOTH HAVE GOOD STUFF -- it's a matter of personal taste.
Sure, but herein lies the problem: I *want* to watch the Paizo channel, but it is incompatible with my T.V. of choice. And, unless the market changes dramatically, with the T.V.s of most consumers. It is like Paizo is making great movies and then publishing them only on Betamax.
You made an interesting point about Apple upthread, but Apple is able to sell its hardware at a significant premium. Do you think Paizo will be able to do the same?
|
|
But they have lost sales...starting with mine. Whether other gains ultimately offsets such losses is the question, no?
I know, and I'm sorry about that. You're not the first who's canceled their subscriptions.
But Paizo will be able to write the stories that WE ALL love, run the business their way (which includes fan input ala Open Testing), and -- potentially -- dominate a vacated market. Ultimately, buyers vote with their dollars, and while they've lost yours, they've* gained mine.
*Which includes WotC. I like 4E, and will post PfRPG to 4E conversions in the near future.
|
|
You made an interesting point about Apple upthread, but Apple is able to sell its hardware at a significant premium. Do you think Paizo will be able to do the same?
Yes. Look at the quality of the paper on Paizo mods alone, never mind their AP "books". Many of us are willing to pay extra just for that alone.
My biggest concern for Pathfinder RPG is if Paizo's going to try to sell them in the mainstream outlets like B&N and Borders.
Sure, but herein lies the problem: I *want* to watch the Paizo channel, but it is incompatible with my T.V. of choice. And, unless the market changes dramatically, with the T.V.s of most consumers. It is like Paizo is making great movies and then publishing them only on Betamax.
Bugleyman, you're going to have plenty of 4E content to pick from, don't you think? I'm playing 4E as well, but I really want to continue with 3.5 or a related system, so I was quite excited to learn about what Paizo is doing.
|
|
E.g. Freeport, which I doubt would have risen to the level of popularity it currently enjoys had it not ridden on the back of D&D.
Perhaps not, but this works also in reverse: the Dungeon and Dragon magazines were ENORMOUSLY popular under Paizo. Yet WotC not only canned them, but -- as far as we know -- didn't even approach for input, providing material, etc. for DDI. That'd be like chucking the old OS of a computer, release a new one incompatible with current models, and not providing new drivers for peripherals.
Oh, wait a minute....
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
For the record, I mean own as in "we can go publish material based on a setting/series of adventures (that we originally published under the OGL) using whatever system we choose." E.g. Freeport, which I doubt would have risen to the level of popularity it currently enjoys had it not ridden on the back of D&D. D&D 4E could have been the Trojan Horse to allow Golarian to challenge Greyhawk or the Forgotten Realms. If this is specifically disallowed under the GSL, then I agree it wasn't viable. But I've not seen any indication of such yet.
You're highlighting the potential benefits without highlighting the potential risks—of course it looks good when you do that. But if we print a product with the expectation that we'll be able to sell through it in two years, and then the licensor tells that we don't have a two-year period to sell it after all... that's a pretty significant problem.
But you know, that's not even the big problem with your argument. The big problem is that you think that hitching onto the 4E bandwagon will net us a bigger audience than we'll have continuing with the current system. Well, the second-biggest fish in the biggest pond may not do as well as the biggest fish in a smaller pond.
Even so, the biggest part of our audience has clearly been telling us which way they want to go. You're choosing to believe that we're hearing from a vocal minority, but the fact that our numbers keep going *up* as they get even more exposure to 4E tells us that you're wrong.
Finally, and possibly most importantly, we still believe that the 3.5 system is the best system to tell the stories we want to tell in Pathfinder.
|
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
My biggest concern for Pathfinder RPG is if Paizo's going to try to sell them in the mainstream outlets like B&N and Borders.
The final Pathfinder RPG hardcover will be solicited to Borders and Barnes & Noble, and I expect them to carry it (assuming Borders is still around in a year's time).
Many B&Ns carry Pathfinder already, so I see no reason why they wouldn't stock the RPG. Indeed, they seem to prefer larger hardcovers to things like modules and even Pathfinder-style products, so I suspect we will do very well with the game in that marketplace.
|
Many B&Ns carry Pathfinder already, so I see no reason why they wouldn't stock the RPG. Indeed, they seem to prefer larger hardcovers to things like modules and even Pathfinder-style products, so I suspect we will do very well with the game in that marketplace.
Yep. Just at my neighborhood B&N and it had two of your books. Chronicles and the Monsters Re-visited.
|
|
The final Pathfinder RPG hardcover will be solicited to Borders and Barnes & Noble, and I expect them to carry it (assuming Borders is still around in a year's time).
Don't count on Borders being around in a year's time. I work for B&N, and from what I understand, out higher-ups are eying Borders the way one looks at a freshly-grilled marinated steak. Borders also cleared about a third of their stock out in their last return cycle (this info courtesy of a fellow manager who has friends back at the Borders he used to work for) and they've been laying people off left & right. But don't worry. We'll be happy to carry Pathfinder. My store's got copies of the guide to Korvosa on the shelf, for instance.
Also, do they even need to wait for 4.5 to come along, can't they yank the GSL whenever they feel like after a certain period of time, granted they'd then make 4.5 so that the systems weren't compatable.They said they aren't doing 4.5. In fact, I believe them. Because I think they'll do 5e in 5 years tops.
And yes, they could probably yank the license whenever they liked, unless they give some guarantees.
Whatever the guarantees are: The license will not be perpetual, that means that sooner or later, any 4e publisher will have to stop selling his 4e stuff.
That moment might be when the next edition comes around, or when wizards thinks that said publisher is hurting heir sales more than helping them. I wouldn't count on wizards playing fair and not yanking the carpet from under your feet when you're doing too well for their tastes.
But they have lost sales...starting with mine. Whether other gains ultimately offsets such losses is the question, no?There's no option that wouldn't lose them sales. If they had gone with 4e, they'd have lost mine.
The question is: Where do they get the most sales. It seems that Paizo is convinced that the way they're going now is the best. And they have the numbers and experience to back it up.
That's really all there is to it. Pathfinder won't go 4e, end of story.
|
|
because if Keep on the Shadowfell is any indication, WoTC sure as hell isn't going to do it.Get used to it. I only recently started purchasing Pathfinder APs and modules and the difference between them and WotC stuff is amazing. To me, WotC modules are like the networks: appeal to the lowest common denominator, don't offend the FCC, etc. (e.g. Friends). Pathfinder stuff, on the other hand, is like cable: edgy, adult, willing to try something new (e.g., Sopranos). And before anyone gets their PH in a tizzy, BOTH HAVE GOOD STUFF -- it's a matter of personal taste.
Sure, but herein lies the problem: I *want* to watch the Paizo channel, but it is incompatible with my T.V. of choice. And, unless the market changes dramatically, with the T.V.s of most consumers. It is like Paizo is making great movies and then publishing them only on Betamax.
You made an interesting point about Apple upthread, but Apple is able to sell its hardware at a significant premium. Do you think Paizo will be able to do the same?
Bugley,
I'm afraid you have to make a choice. which is more important to you: 4e with it's slimlined system and new tactical play options which you enjoy, or Paizo's in-depth, well-thought-out and just sheer fun adventures.Wizards are unlikely to produce quality adventures based on past performance and Paizo are unlikely to produce many 4E adventures based on their currently stated business model (which I have to assume they understand better than either of us given that their jobs depend on getting it right). Thus, you have to choose: TV or channel? Or you could course play 4e AND Pathfinder (radical suggestion, I know) or convert Pathfinder adventures to 4e (although I admit that could well be a lot of work).
But with the limitations of the GSL and the changes to the system and the inability to produce anything for another four months, I can understand and, as a 3.5 fan, appreciate Paizo's decision. But for those who are converting and will miss the adventures, it does suck.
|
|
Does anyone actually NEED Paizo to write adventures for 4E?
This is not sniping; it's just that I got the impression that one of the stated goals of 4E was to reduce the burden on the DM.
'Exception-based design' allows a DM to simply assign powers to adversaries, within set ranges for the party level, without worrying about having to show the internal math, as in 3.5.
Redesignating many spells as rituals, which are carried out off-screen, between sessions, reduces the need to worry about them being used against the PCs.
This, and other changes, should mean less time working on statblocks, and more time to dream up creative storylines, evocative descriptions and believable motivations for the NPCs.
For me, the 'fluff' part is the fun part; I can quite happily do this for myself. It's the 'crunch' that I appreciate, that would take me the time. I've often believed I have a good plot, or encounter set-up, only to be hit with the realisation that 'That's not going to work, because...he'll need X levels to qualify for that feat/he needs to be within close range, etc'. D'oh, back to the drawing board.
It's good to know I can use a published adventure as-is, or borrow a creature/NPC/spell/trap, or tactical combo from another adventure, or website. More power to Paizo to give help where it's needed to 3.5/PFRPG DMs, with their complex games, rather than 4E DMs, who, according to the designers, no longer need to worry about such things.
|
|
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.Well, that, too. I just didn't want to point out the obvious.But they have lost sales...starting with mine. Whether other gains ultimately offsets such losses is the question, no?
Ya but they got mine and a lot of my friends after telling and showing them how great it is. I used to only come here to renew my Dungeon and Dragon mag subscriptions. Now I'm hear daily reading the forums, looking (and drooling) over the new Pathfinder stuff coming out. Hell I even post on the boards (consumate lurker type) which is something I never do. The Paizo folks have giving me something, that the release of 4E should have and didn't. They gave me back that happy, it's almost Christmas anticipation back that I had thought lost long ago.
So, perhaps you have some points but it doesn't matter, I see a happy future for them and I certainly see one for my gaming as long as they are there making products for us.
And how is 4th edition actually cinematic?
Bah. Screw cinematic.
3e is futuristic! And retro! Totally immersive!! And it has Synergies!!!
:D
As a player I liked 3.x but was frustrated by the skill system and skill point allotments. As a DM I found that running a game, especially a homemade adventure in which you had to design all the npcs from scratch, a real nightmare.
I'm waiting for PFRPG release next year to start playing the AP, especially if theyu deliver a better 3.x system (and yes I'm downloading the Alpha updates, I just don't want to start introducing it at my table until it's more stable).
I also look forward to D&D 4E. To me both of them can exist and I see this new release more like BECMI D&D and PFRPG like AD&D. A different kind of play experience, maybe an easier entry point to new player for 4E, but both enjoyable.
Some times I wonder what would have happened if WotC hadn't revoked the licence for Dungeon and Dragon Magazines. Guess that matter for another thread :-)
But they have lost sales...starting with mine. Whether other gains ultimately offsets such losses is the question, no?
But they have kept mine. I fully planned on stopping all subscriptions in July 2008 for several reasons:
a) Not interested in 4E and expected Paizo to support it onlyb) Turning 61, July 2008, and have enough 3.5E "campaign" material to last 15+ years
c) Going to retire in July 2009 and needed to cut back discretionary spending
I did cancel Pathfinder Modules, and Companion (reason C), but I am keeping my Pathfinder AP & Chronicles subscriptions because it is such a good read, and I will most likely run them before some of my other 3.5E "campaign/AP" modules. Also, have pre-ordered the Pathfinder RPG beta, and will buy the hard cover book next year.
-- david
Papa.DRB
|
|
Some times I wonder what would have happened if WotC hadn't revoked the licence for Dungeon and Dragon Magazines.
The brits would have won the revolution. Leading to the civil war being fought over the dropping of tea time break, instead of slavery and state rights. Cher would be elected queen (yes i know, frightening) and we would be subservient drones to a massive corporate entity that had taken control of the world market.
|
|
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.
This is a joke right? :)
'Exception-based design' allows a DM to simply assign powers to adversaries, within set ranges for the party level, without worrying about having to show the internal math, as in 3.5.Wait. I've been doing this for years. You mean it's actually wrong or something?
If the bell rings in 10 seconds, don't bother to open the door. They break it down for you.
'Exception-based design' allows a DM to simply assign powers to adversaries, within set ranges for the party level, without worrying about having to show the internal math, as in 3.5.Wait. I've been doing this for years. You mean it's actually wrong or something?
Ummm... I plead guilty too. I rarely bothered to assign precise skill points and other stuff for NPC etc etc etc...
Guilty as charged then!
So now they tell us that what we did (employ common sense)for so many years, is actually part of the new fantastic mechanics they invented? Bright chaps! Way to go!
On another note here is a nice entry from JD Wilker's blog. I saw this on ENworld first. http://jediwiker.livejournal.com/57390.html