Recently I have been reading the D&D 4th edition books, and I have been trying to put together a 1st edition adventure, and I like the new stuff. As I look at the boards I see that the initial hatred against 4th edition is passing. Therefore, I must ask: Did Paizo make a mistake by not going with the 4th edition?
As I look at it, and my hatred is passing, I am forced to say that they may have made a mistake here. I still think that DDI was a mistake, but I would be lying if I said I was not reading the new core books. I will look at Paizo's Pathfinder RPG, and I have the free download, but if I am still converting to 4th edition, I probably won't buy the official Pathfinder game in 2009.
Since the final version of the Pathfinder RPG won't be out until August of next year and since sales of the Beta were much higher than expectd (enough to warrant a second printing already, I believe), I'd say it's a bit too early to proclaim Paizo's decision a mistake.
For my part, I don't think Paizo made a mistake. Indeed I think they've positioned themselves perfectly to fill a niche market that can likely sustain their business model for years to come. This isn't really a question of "is Pathfinder better than 4e" but rather, "is Pathfinder better for Paizo right now than 4e?" They aren't trying to "beat" WotC after all, but rather field products that have a positive ROI and thus foster continued company growth. The third party market for 4e is in a shambles right now from what I can tell, and there's nothing precluding Paizo from entering the 4e market later if the environment, legal issues, et. al. are favorable to such a decision.
The vitriol may be passing, and that's a good thing. There are, however, also plenty of people for whom 4e just doesn't do it compared to previous editions. So did Paizo make a mistake? Not in the short term.
In the long term, who knows what will happen with 4e? So there's no way of knowing. 4e still isn't as complete a game as even the initial offering of 3e, shifts the D&D groove too far, and has too many gamist changes I don't agree with, as far as I'm concerned, that I'm far more likely to go with Pathfinder. The PF beta has somethings going on that I don't agree with too, but more that I do. So, it's a better fit. But again, I have no idea how 4e is really going to develop in the long term.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
As much as I wish Paizo had gone 4e, I would be hard pressed it was a mistake for them not to have done so. There is still a thriving 3e-oriented consumer base and being unshackled from any sort of licensing restrictions (which were imposed on Dragon/Dungeon) has really let Paizo reshape and reground D&D in its early pulp roots. What they've done and the quality of their products is jaw-dropping.
So, no, I can't say it was a mistake, and I think that argument can be made decisively without delving into the respective merits and flaws of the underlying systems (which is where the flames await).
|
Great. Just when the flame wars over 4E was dying down.
From Paizo's perspective, they would effectively be handing control over their business model to someone else. This is not a smart move. Additionally, the Paizo people are all very experienced with 3.5 and so can write adventures for it very quickly and exploit or provide additions to rules to make those adventures more interesting and exciting, which they could not do with 4th Ed for several months at least. For those two reasons, Paizo made the right decision for their business to not go with 4E. This decision could of course change as they gain more experience of the rules of 4E and if the license restrictions change to make things more favourable, but there is no sign of this happening just yet.
|
|
From what has been heard so far, Paizo is doing just fine with their 3.5 line. PFRPG will hopefully do well. If it doesn't, Paizo will evaluate their options. I'd envision that they will spend the final months of PFRPG selling through their stock, releasing what they have coming back from the printers, and prepare a migration to supporting 4e.
Paizo has some creative people and some good minds. They would adjust.
No.
|
As Jeremy pointed out, Paizo had (and still has) a lot invested in the 3.5 rules system when the decision was on the table. There were many, many threads discussing this very issue before, and "vitriol" toward the 4.0 system was not the only concern, and probably not near the biggest. In those old threads, you may find the many factors that contributed to Paizo's decision, including but not limited to:
-Losing an enormous amount of source material for building new products to use a new rules system
-The entire staff learning a new rules system, quickly enough to produce quality products for a burgeoning system, when WotC was dragging its feet on sending the basic rules to anyone
-The prospect of investing months of time and work making a book for 4.0 that WotC could reserve the right to reject, for any of multiple reasons
-The Paizo staff, as I understand it, really like the 3.5 system, and share that enthusiasm with their customers. As long as the niche market is profitable, I would not soon call it a mistake to make money doing the things you love.
Nope, doesn't look like any mistakes were made by Paizo. In fact, the opposite is true - not only did they not make any mistakes, their decision was a very good one.
The confusion behind the GSL ("updates" are still not finalized and are unknown) continues to reinforce the good decision Paizo made.
When and if the GSL is finalized, Paizo still has the flexibility to make a decision at that stage (since, of course, their decision is hardly permanent).
I don't think there's hatred so much any more- for my own part, I simply just don't care what Wizards publish. I'm done, in the style of a really bad breakup.
Pathfinder all the way.
The third party market for 4e is in a shambles right now from what I can tell, and there's nothing precluding Paizo from entering the 4e market later if the environment, legal issues, et. al. are favorable to such a decision.Actually, the GSL has an either/or clause within it. In basic english, it states that you may not publish an already established game system to the 4th edidtion ruleset. And, if you create someting using the 4th edition ruleset, you may not convert it to another gaming system.
because of this, Pathfinder will forever be 3.5 modified and never 4th edition.
I'm familiar with the issue, but this doesn't have it quite right. Paizo could go 4e if they wanted in the future--i.e. there is nothing in the GSL that states a publisher has to adopt the license right now or be excluded from future business, they just couldn't then continue to produce the same line as 3.X and would, perhaps, have some issues with previous in-stock/PDF products. There is nothing to prohibit them from making this move in the future if it became a profitable option, especially as WotC can enter into licensing agreements outside the GSL if they like. And indeed if the more optimistic GSL supporters are right some of the WotC restrictions may be softened in the future.
I'm not saying this will happen, or even that it would be a good idea. It would likely be more beneficial for Paizo, should they have the ability and incentive to do so in the future, to produce 4e products separate from the Pathfinder setting. This is the route mentioned by Paizo folks in the past (usually also noting that they don't currently have the staff/capacity to viably support two editions) and seems the most likely route. What I am saying is Paizo made the optimal choice considering all their options and are ideally placed to move into the future of the RPG industry via several paths.
Regardless of how sweet a cup a joe that pathfinder may or may not be, I don't think anyone would deny that 4th edition is a mucho bigger cup of joe.
While its nobel and such to try to cater to old fans, I really think paizo practically walked away from money.
business that walk away from money are making a mistake
(factor in larger audience, and remove the costs of trying to develop and brand your own game = moar profit)
L
I think this sells the business minds behind Paizo way short. Walking into 4e as an early adopter carried huge amounts of risk--good risk analysis would likely show too much compared to the risk of late entry. Let the market get established. Let folks make the mistakes for you. Then enter the market with solid products based on a good assessment of those mistakes. Early adopters run the risk of losing value of sunk costs (such as the 3.x knowledge the staff already possess, on hand materials, stock, etc). They also bear the full brunt of tackling an unknown market. This is an acceptable risk for larger entities, such as WotC/Hasbro, but becomes terribly dangerous to smaller businesses. Bet wrong and your whole company is gone--small businesses that walk toward potential money without properly assessing the risks are making a mistake. Note, for instance, that most RPG buyers do not purchase third party material. 4e has a larger audience, but that does not guarantee that Paizo's 4e products would have a larger audience than their 3.X products.
Creative Director
|
From where I'm sitting... sticking with 3.5 and transitioning into the Pathfinder RPG seems to have been a very good choice. And not only because there's a lot of folk who want to keep playing 3.5 or move to the PF RPG. If we'd have switched to 4th edition, there would have been a gap in our release schedule; we would have had to have had several months of no products releasing, I suspect, while our editors wait to get copies of the new rules, learn the new rules, and then wait for the GSL to be completed. Even if we'd have decided to accept the current GSL (which would have been madness, given its vagaries and loopholes), we probably would have missed the opportunity to get anything significant released for Gen Con. All of that lost revenue would have had to come from somewhere, and I'm relatively certain that we would have lost a fair number of employees.
Sticking with 3.5 allowed Paizo to remain in charge of its own destiny, and rather than having to have layoffs, we've been slowly but surely having to increase staff as interest in what we're doing grows and demand for more product grows. I'm pretty happy with the decision as a result, and I'm even MORE happy that the edition wars are finally cooling down. There's absolutely room in the industry for both 3.5 and 4th edition. The games play differently enough that they scratch different itches, I think, and that's a good thing for everyone.
|
Regardless of how sweet a cup a joe that pathfinder may or may not be, I don't think anyone would deny that 4th edition is a mucho bigger cup of joe.
While its nobel and such to try to cater to old fans, I really think paizo practically walked away from money.
business that walk away from money are making a mistake
(factor in larger audience, and remove the costs of trying to develop and brand your own game = moar profit)
L
You are presupposing that the core 4e audience cares about supporting 3rd party publishers. I have not seen any evidence for this.
This debate has been hashed out before but bottom line is that Paizo is doing better than they were doing a year ago and therefore they have not made a mistake.
We (a group of over 40 year old players) are all in for 3.5, and will play it the rest of our lives. Wizards can do 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 6.0, and we will still be playing PFRPG.
This is the game we are familiar with, and we have shelves full of books that will keep us busy.
|
I was in the middle of the road with 4e, thou more on the 3.5 side due to I have so much invested in 3.5 & such + I wasn't really sure about some of the changes that Wiz was going to do to "their" version of D&D (yes 3-.5 is theirs as well, but it has more ties to the older version then 4th does). So I was like we'll see. I've gotten the 4th core books now, even gotten the newer stuff & I'd like to run a 4th ed game someday, but I'll stick with 3.5 aka Pathfinder rules when it comes out. I think mainly cause the rules are familiar to me, that & Pazio puts out a awesome product.
Now I didn't get the beta rulebook, mainly cause I'd rather put the cash to something else that I'll use later down the road (beta will be replaced by the actual rules). I'm not in a sit down game now, so I can wait. I have the pdf copy (thx Paizo for doing that!)
Now, Pathfinder does have a strong of a hold on me like it did with the 1st AP release (new game, new setting wear off I guess). I'll keep with getting Paizo products, but I'll also get the 4th stuff as well. Thou, if the way the job goes these days I might not be able to get either one, but if I had to drop it'd be 4th. Not because of oooh it's 4th bla bla, but I like Pathfinder more.
So, no I don't think Paizo made a bad decision in keeping with 3.5 & not jumping aboard the 4th ed train.
While its nobel and such to try to cater to old fans, I really think paizo practically walked away from money.
Yes, they turned and walked away from a pile of money.
And walked into a vault. This vault is also full of money. Inside the vault is a printing press. That prints money. Oh, and they own the vault.
Short term gain vs. long term gain.
I just don't want to compare PF RPG with 4e anymore. I'm just thinking that Paizo went into his own RPG system and split form D&D for loyalty -and marketing- reasons. So now I just think of them as a completely different system and as a desition Paizo made to create their own stuff.
My 2 cp
So long as Paizo keeps telling stories the way they do it doesn't really matter what rules system they use because people like me will buy it. I purchased the 4e rules; I even like them quite a bit - but somehow the adventure products just come out bland. I'm not feeling very articulate today so I can't offer a good reason; maybe it's the format, maybe it's the content, maybe it's the setting... I don't know. What I do know is the Pathfinder Adventure Paths are interesting, intricate, full of great characters and background; it leaves an impression on the mind like a good book. I'm not getting that from Wizards right now. So, did they make a mistake? Not in my book. They kept doing what they were good at which is telling great stories. If 3.5 or PFRPG facilitates that process it must be the right choice.
Cheers,
C.
|
Regardless of how sweet a cup a joe that pathfinder may or may not be, I don't think anyone would deny that 4th edition is a mucho bigger cup of joe.
While its nobel and such to try to cater to old fans, I really think paizo practically walked away from money.
business that walk away from money are making a mistake
(factor in larger audience, and remove the costs of trying to develop and brand your own game = moar profit)
L
John Wick, original writer for the Legend of Five Rings CCG and RPG, wrote when he left FRPG and Alderac Publishing that writers should always ensure that they own their own work.
When I was part of NIOGA and working with the SANCTUM online CCG, one of the things I wanted to ensure when we took over the product was change it so that the artists (Lee Moyer in this instance) maintained ownership of their art. This is a common thread amongst graphic novelists as well, but usually they do NOT own their own work.
The point of this reply? Paizo owns their own works. They have the freedom to do as they see fit. In doing so, they also make enough money to ensure that they continue to do what they love. In other words, it's not all about the Benjamins, but there is plenty there regardless.
In the marketplace it's about supply and demand. There is enough demand for 3.5-friendly product, and Paizo is filling that with some amazing supply. Pure WIN. Pure AWESOME.
I'm in agreement with those that say that evaluating the merits of 3.5 vs. 4E is besides the point from the perspective of whether or not Paizo should have switched. Hence I think they made a perfectly good decision that seems to be making them money.
Beyond this I'd actually be concerned if Paizo switched despite my love of 4E. WotC looks like they are keeping a very tight grip on what kind of stories will be allowed into 4E and those stories will generally be more of a PG-14 nature. Paizo excells at doing a much more dark game with lots of...we'll call it adult orientated...content. I think WotC would shoot this stuff down without blinking. Especially considering how uptight Americans are when it comes to anything to do with sex.
I'd rather have it so that Paizo has a free hand in this regard even if I personally then have to upgrade their stuff to 4E at least if the alternative option is I get a 4E Paizo but the material then becomes so kid friendly that its tame.
I love kid friendly material and 4E needs a lot but I do want some more adult orientated content as well and WotC, for the moment, is not allowing that.
I don't think it was a mistake. Paizo can always shift to 4E later if open game stuff fades.
Slightly off topic: I would be very interested in seeing another 4.0, or whatever you would have to call it, that stayed more true to updating the 3.5 version of the game. I was ready for a new edition of the game when 4.0 was announced, I just don't really enjoy 4.0 as it turned out. So for me, its not that I hate 4.0 or want to stay 3.0-3.5 for life, just wanting something different from what we got.
D
|
|
I don't mean to pick on this post in particular, but I seriously have to admit I don't understand where questions like this come from. All of us, no matter which side of the fence we might happen to be on, really should be aware that our personal preferences do not equate to market success. Predictions of 4E's imminent collapse are, and have been from the moment of their first appearance, ludicrous. D&D will sell, if only because of the name (and there are many people for whom the game is worth buying for reasons that have nothign to do with the name). Similarly, however, deciding that 4E is good - or even just that it doesn't suck - does not mean that Pathfinder is in any way in trouble.
One of the things that really is clear, as things stand currently, is that WotC's stand on thrid party publishers is much less friendly than it used to be, for all that they are still willing to play in that arena. WotC does not want to grow the 3PP industry, and I don't think the current situation is such that there will be anything like the kind of room for outside development that we saw in the 3rd Ed era - and that is the only room Paizo could ever play in. Goodman Games is doing fine work, but I suspect we will quickly see that the 3PP market for 4E will be extremely small (not because of demand, but because of the legal forces that are restricting its growth), and the ground seems very uncertain as to how many companies that market will support. Paizo's course has freed it from having to squabble over a portion of that pie, and all the evidence we have so far suggests that they pie they have now is getting bigger, and is currently all theirs.
|
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
I will pretend to know the roleplaying industry.
We're very happy with our decision.
I haven't heard of any 4e third-party products selling in significant numbers, and Pathfinder's numbers have been significant since the beginning.
Again, we are confident we made the right decision for ourselves and for our customers.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
I will pretend to know the roleplaying industry.
We're very happy with our decision.
I haven't heard of any 4e third-party products selling in significant numbers, and Pathfinder's numbers have been significant since the beginning.
Again, we are confident we made the right decision for ourselves and for our customers.
Yay!
|
|
So long as Paizo keeps telling stories the way they do it doesn't really matter what rules system they use because people like me will buy it. I purchased the 4e rules; I even like them quite a bit - but somehow the adventure products just come out bland. I'm not feeling very articulate today so I can't offer a good reason; maybe it's the format, maybe it's the content, maybe it's the setting... I don't know. What I do know is the Pathfinder Adventure Paths are interesting, intricate, full of great characters and background; it leaves an impression on the mind like a good book. I'm not getting that from Wizards right now. So, did they make a mistake? Not in my book. They kept doing what they were good at which is telling great stories. If 3.5 or PFRPG facilitates that process it must be the right choice.
This sums what I really wanted to say!!
RM
|
|
The vitriol may be passing, and that's a good thing. There are, however, also plenty of people for whom 4e just doesn't do it compared to previous editions. So did Paizo make a mistake? Not in the short term.
In the long term, who knows what will happen with 4e? So there's no way of knowing. 4e still isn't as complete a game as even the initial offering of 3e, shifts the D&D groove too far, and has too many gamist changes I don't agree with, as far as I'm concerned, that I'm far more likely to go with Pathfinder. The PF beta has somethings going on that I don't agree with too, but more that I do. So, it's a better fit. But again, I have no idea how 4e is really going to develop in the long term.
Because those of us who were so mad at Wizards for 1. lying about the release date of 4e, 2. slaughter of sacred cows and 3. not caring what the community as a whole thought...have pretty muched stopped caring.
We have Paizo...We have Pathfinder...We have our game, Hasbro has theirs...I think no mistakes were made.
I will pretend to know the roleplaying industry.
We're very happy with our decision.
I haven't heard of any 4e third-party products selling in significant numbers, and Pathfinder's numbers have been significant since the beginning.
Again, we are confident we made the right decision for ourselves and for our customers.
Awesome!
I haven't heard of any 4e third-party products selling in significant numbers, and Pathfinder's numbers have been significant since the beginning.
Interesting, do publishers really share their sales numbers between themselves?
Mistakes were made, but not by Paizo ;>
I don't even want to add mine up. Not only might I be shocked, but if I have hard evidence, my wife might be able to track that number down. None of us want that to happen.
I don't know how it could be considered wrong for Paizo to go Pathfinder. To paraphrase James Jacob, it allowed them to stay being the publisher they were through the transition.
And someday, if Paizo thinks it is smart, they can still go to 4e. (James did not say this second part). I don't think bridges have been burned. Paizo just built a nice castle on their side of the river. Wait a minute, make that a Dungeon.
Wow Lanfear, that is quite the 360 change in your view of 4e and Paizo's efforts in the last 2 months. Next thing you know, Razz will show up looking to join some 4e pbp ;)
Seriously though, first I'd like to congratulate the board members for not allowing this thread to degenerate into flames; I think there is hope for us all yet.
Secondly, as a dedicated tri-editionist, I'd like to remind you that you can play more than one edition. Don't sell Pathfinder short. There is still a lot of time and energy being dedicated to the revision. Take another look at in 6 months and give it a chance just like you eventually gave to 4e.
Thirdly, the quality of Paizo's products transcend editions, and even if you don't buy the Pathfinder RPG, Golarion makes an awesome setting for 1e, 3.5e, or 4e whether you use the AP's or the modules (yea yea I just can't bother with 2e anymore). I suspect that conversions will always go much easier from 3.5/PRPG to 4e then they would have in the reverse had Paizo gone 4e.
Even with the decision to not publish under the GSL for now, Paizo remains my favorite adventure publisher for 4th Edition. I just have to do a little more work than usual to make use of them.
If you intend your company to be around five years from now, and you're prominent enough for Wizards to notice you, it is incredibly risky to go with the GSL, or go copyright, or try to stretch the OGL to cover 4e. (If you are personally an IP lawyer, like Mr. Kenzer, things are somewhat different.)
Accordingly, the merits or demerits of 4e are completely irrelevant. 4e could have been met with universal praise, uniting all fans of OD&D, AD&D, Cyclopedia D&D, and D&D 3.x, and it still would have been a mistake for Paizo to go with 4e. And it still would be.
If and when the GSL does not constitute an at-will ability for WotC to destroy any company using it, then this question becomes worth debating. As it is, nobody knows who's going to be running WotC corporate three years from now, and the current GSL gives whomever that might be the ability to destroy any GSL-using company.
|
|
Sticking with 3.5 allowed Paizo to remain in charge of its own destiny, and rather than having to have layoffs, we've been slowly but surely having to increase staff as interest in what we're doing grows and demand for more product grows. I'm pretty happy with the decision as a result, and I'm even MORE happy that the edition wars are finally cooling down. There's absolutely room in the industry for both 3.5 and 4th edition. The games play differently enough that they scratch different itches, I think, and that's a good thing for everyone.
James Jacobs is my hero now.
I'd look into becoming a Cleric of JJ (James Jacobs) But I hear the "Editing" and "Proofing" Domains aren't very usefull in combat at lower levels. The "Remove Overpowered Encounter" is kinda cool at Higher Levels.
|
|
Recently I have been reading the D&D 4th edition books, and I have been trying to put together a 1st edition adventure, and I like the new stuff. As I look at the boards I see that the initial hatred against 4th edition is passing. Therefore, I must ask: Did Paizo make a mistake by not going with the 4th edition?
As I look at it, and my hatred is passing, I am forced to say that they may have made a mistake here. I still think that DDI was a mistake, but I would be lying if I said I was not reading the new core books. I will look at Paizo's Pathfinder RPG, and I have the free download, but if I am still converting to 4th edition, I probably won't buy the official Pathfinder game in 2009.
considering paizo has said their sales have steadily increased since the announcement of 4e, you'd be wrong.
I think the Paizo crew made some very savvy moves with their descisions. They are positioned to be the leader of OGL 3PP and they still have the option to publish 4E adventures if and when the GSL finally gets revised.
Paizo is a leading 3P publisher, a magnificent online game store (and no don't even get me started on how much dough I've sent them .. I don't even wanna tally that up), and has a top-shelf customer service division . They are smaller than WotC, but nimble, and they can give us fantastic product without being beholden to another entity.
While I probably will never play 4E, I hope that some day Paizo can make their own line of 4E adventures. I think the edition needs their skills. It would also allow Paizo to enter the larger market, allow newer gamers to become appraised of their other products, keep the 4E folks happy, and earn Paizo even more dollars.
Keep on doing what you are doing Paizo, and this old grognard will keep sending you a cut of my slender paycheck ( as long as I still have a job ...)
Recently I have been reading the D&D 4th edition books, and I have been trying to put together a 1st edition adventure, and I like the new stuff. As I look at the boards I see that the initial hatred against 4th edition is passing. Therefore, I must ask: Did Paizo make a mistake by not going with the 4th edition?
As I look at it, and my hatred is passing, I am forced to say that they may have made a mistake here. I still think that DDI was a mistake, but I would be lying if I said I was not reading the new core books. I will look at Paizo's Pathfinder RPG, and I have the free download, but if I am still converting to 4th edition, I probably won't buy the official Pathfinder game in 2009.
Simple answer is no.
The longer explanation retty much boils down to that its far more healthy for there to be competition and there will always be people who prefer one version of the game to another, for example the game I play in on Thursday's is 3.0 and I can see basic fantasy being still played.
I'm trying to run pathfinder beta, I have run 3.5 and 4e and prefer 3.0 for the less number of books involved and I'm no fan of power pts for spells let alone I life the psionic rules in 3.0 simply because i have found a way to make them use vancian rules for psi use.
I find this much more interesting and thats what they should be looking for, to keep the customer's interest otherwise no sales mean no more games and thats something none of us want to see happen!