Question about Pathfinder's retail success


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

251 to 286 of 286 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

LilithsThrall wrote:

Some people are extraordinarily sensitive to any discussion comparing the relative merits of the two game systems. If someone says, "Pathfinder is better than 4e in X ways", there are people who are going to get into crying hysterics over it.

I keep forgetting that and I keep trying to have a rational argument about the relative merits of the two game systems. That can't be done in these boards, because, as I said, some people are going to go into crying hysterics over it. So, the best choice of action really is not to just avoid edition warring, but to stay as far away from even a rational discussion of the comparative merits of the game systems.
Unfortunate, because I think the subject certainly has content worth considering.

Well, I can certainly understand that when someone is "extraordinarily sensitive" to something there's probably a reason. I have a toothache right now and I'm extraordinarily sensitive to hot/cold beverages. There's no shame in that. What's a shame is when someone who obviously knows better shows that they are "extraordinarily IN-sensitive" towards reaction they cause intentionally or not.

I think you know better and I applaud you wanting to leave it alone as it is obvious that you are maybe sensitive (or at least tired) of the backlash caused. I'm not sure if you realize this but you are hardly coming across as someone neutral who doesn't have a horse in this race. If you were not aware of it, I'm passing the info on to you. Words like "crying hysterics" tend to put salt in wounds.

I think the truest thing in your post above is probably the phrase, "That can't be done in these boards." I agree from my short time here that there seem to be subjects better left alone unless you have a desire to irritate. When you touch the taboo you will be branded an instigator, rightly or wrongly, I think you know this. From what I have come to understand I submit that this type of "neutral" conversation would have a rough ride of it on just about any board that has a dedicated purpose. When you go where the fans are you will find yourself shouted at by challenging the fandom's focus. This board, any board.

If you are a dishonest "Troll" shame on you. If you are honestly seeking discourse you probably already know that though this subject may have merit worth considering, it's probably not going to happen here and certainly not now.

All the best, from a fellow gamer,

- Senator

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Cartigan wrote:
The stuff they made NEW for 4e is comparable in art style to Pathfinder stuff, though I think Pathfinder tries to trend more realistic (as realistic as you can with this stuff..) while WotC goes for a slightly less exact rendering.

That is one BIG difference between the two systems, I think. WOTC has the advantage of a huge supply of old art* and can pay for 'higher end' artists.** Paizo doesn't have the art cache, and relies on a wider pool of artists.

I'd also point out, for art and writing, size works to Paizo's advantage. When Paizo hires freelancers it's often seen as 'new blood' When WotC lays off people then hires freelancers, or the same people as freelancers it's seen as 'cheap'. Paizo benefits from never having hired Monte Cook to begin with as a result ;-).

Cartigan wrote:
I think you forget that the base D&D world is not aligned for a reason. Do you forget Forgotten Realms, Dark Sun, and Ebberon?

Here again, the 'non-aligned world' is the result of market setting. Remember many fans were upset that WotC blew up the Realms, and there was talk of doing the same to Eberron. Golarion while it has a history it doesn't have the canon that Faerun, Toril, Krynn and even Eberron have. (admittedly, Eberron is smaller). Also there's the backwards compatibility issue. When we get books on the different planets, any mechanics they have will be going forward. There is no need (for now) to figure out how to shoehorn characters like the Simbul into 3.x (and now 4.x) mechanics. If 4.x had a generic world created around it then it would be compatible in many ways to Golarion.

Cartigan wrote:
LillithsThrall wrote:
It's been decided by the people in this thread that comparing the two game systems is edit warring. That's what you've done in your post. Please stop.
Can you try to post something not hypocritical and holier-than-thou at least once?

He's just whining that no one is playing his game.

*

Spoiler:
Assuming they have the rights to republish the really old stuff (Dragon Magazine CD ROM issues anyone?) but even without old stuff, they've 10-15 years of TSR/WotC art at least, not to mention their Magic cards.

**
Spoiler:
Note, I said they can pay, not that they always do pay more. Also higher end != better. I can buy a Butterfrog print for less than a Wayne Reynolds because WR is much more established. Give Hugo another few years.


Matthew Morris wrote:


Here again, the 'non-aligned world' is the result of market setting. Remember many fans were upset that WotC blew up the Realms, and there was talk of doing the same to Eberron. Golarion while it has a history it doesn't have the canon that Faerun, Toril, Krynn and even Eberron have. (admittedly, Eberron is smaller). Also there's the backwards compatibility issue. When we get books on the different planets, any mechanics they have will be going forward. There is no need (for now) to figure out how to shoehorn characters like the Simbul into 3.x (and now 4.x) mechanics. If 4.x had a generic world created around it then it would be compatible in many ways to Golarion.

There is the generic D&D world, then the Realms, Ebberon, and Dark Sun. Any changes therein aren't really important to the point that those all exist as such.


Why must people resist my rationality?


Honest Trollperson wrote:
Why must people resist my rationality?

They fear what they do not understand, brother.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

LilithsThrall wrote:
Uchawi wrote:

I typically only respond off topic in regards to 4E when someone states it can't support a concept, and I feel it does. I am not a 4E evangelist, because that system has problems just like 3.5 and pathfinder.

Art is also subjective, but Pathfinder has recieved multiple accolades for that alone, so it speaks for itself. I also think it's art work is distinct from other products (or at least consistent). But artwork from wizards is equally thought provoking. I expect others will strongly disagree, just based on related threads.

From my perspective, I believe Pathfinder's biggest strength is a single world, adventure paths, and organized play, so those are items I hope WOTC improves on. But Hasbro may have other ideas. 4E will not be 3.5 compatible so pathfinder wins there hands down.

I will also make the suggestion again that Paizo should implement a focused product for character and monster building just like WOTC (stand alone or subscription based). It would use the 4E tools as a model for ease of use.

It's been decided by the people in this thread that comparing the two game systems is edit warring. That's what you've done in your post. Please stop.

You're overreacting. There's a difference between a calm and reasonable comparison between products and over-emotional sniping and insulting. Constantly seizing upon every post that even comes close to an edition war and pointing that out is almost as annoying. There's a difference, in other words, between dropping a subject and trying to get the last word in on a dropped subject.

I see no edition warring in Uchawi's post; this post was calm, well-reasoned, and actually provided some customer feedback to us. What it didn't do was implicitly insult one game or another. This is the type of post that I would love to see more of, frankly.

Because ignoring the fact that D&D and Pathfinder both exist is not a solution. It IS possible to talk about both games without getting all annoying.


+1! Excellent post.

I'm sorry if my post causes any problems or misunderstandings. I should probably leave threads like this alone.

- Senator


Obvious Troll Is Obvious wrote:
Honest Trollperson wrote:
Why must people resist my rationality?
They fear what they do not understand, brother.

Onward, trollish soldiers!

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

I removed a couple posts. The trolling and edition warring in this thread stops now.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Uchawi wrote:
From my perspective, I believe Pathfinder's biggest strength is a single world, adventure paths, and organized play, so those are items I hope WOTC improves on. But Hasbro may have other ideas. 4E will not be 3.5 compatible so pathfinder wins there hands down.

I think this is an interesting point. From a marketing perspective, I think having a single world that is being developed keeps the company focused. On the other hand, I wonder how many Pathfinder players use the rules for other worlds. My game (now in its third year) is Planescape based. I've used Golarian stuff in adventures, and they have visited Golarian a few times in their 14 levels of adventuring, but I like the Pathfinder rules because they feel a natural extension to the gaming I've always played. I pick and choose adventure ideas from the modules and adventure paths, but I am really not a big fan of Golarian itself. That's not to say I dislike it at all. It's just that I really like how easy it is to lift things from it and use them in the worlds of my choosing. Be they adaptations of older modules or worlds of my own creating.

One thing that does set Wizards and Paizo apart is the world building focus. 4E products are about 80% rules and 20% world-building (3-5 setting specific books a year compared to tons of rulesbooks). Paizo tends to be 80% world-building and 20% rules (3 rules books compared to tons of setting books). Those are going to appeal to different people.

It is a change from the TSR days, where they produced a lot of different setting lines, probably too many. The shift sort of started in the 3.X days, as only Forgotten Realms got very much support. Ravenloft had the next largest support, but that was all licensed. Now Wizards seems to be saying, hey, here's the framework, go make your own world.

Liberty's Edge

Obvious Troll Is Obvious wrote:


Milk is better than milk?

I only drink Milk® from Cow®. :)

I hope that Wizards and Paizo both do extremely well and sell lots of books, because the competition forces them to put out better products and the fans benefit from a healthy and diverse gaming industry.

Just because my preference is for Paizo's rules system and game world, doesn't mean that I don't appreciate what Wizards produces too (me wants Gargantuan Orcus!).

Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

Uchawi wrote:
From my perspective, I believe Pathfinder's biggest strength is a single world, adventure paths, and organized play, so those are items I hope WOTC improves on.

That's 5 words. ;-)


Sebastian wrote:
Uchawi wrote:
From my perspective, I believe Pathfinder's biggest strength is a single world, adventure paths, and organized play, so those are items I hope WOTC improves on.
That's 5 words. ;-)

worLd

Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

meatrace wrote:
Sebastian wrote:
Uchawi wrote:
From my perspective, I believe Pathfinder's biggest strength is a single world, adventure paths, and organized play, so those are items I hope WOTC improves on.
That's 5 words. ;-)
worLd

Doh!

Elementary reading skills for the fail. Sorry about that...


Sebastian wrote:
meatrace wrote:
Sebastian wrote:
Uchawi wrote:
From my perspective, I believe Pathfinder's biggest strength is a single world, adventure paths, and organized play, so those are items I hope WOTC improves on.
That's 5 words. ;-)
worLd

Doh!

Elementary reading skills for the fail. Sorry about that...

Hey I'm pretty gobsmacked that a pony can read, let alone type!


LilithsThrall wrote:
And, frankly, based on my own observation, there really is a schism in the market.

Maybe I'm clueless, dumb, and naive, but does this particular anecdotal observation weigh greater than any others?

Brian: Look, you've got it all wrong! You don't need to follow me, you don't need to follow anybody! You've got to think for yourselves! You're all individuals!

The Crowd (in unison): Yes! We're all individuals!

Brian: You're all different!

The Crowd (in unison): Yes, we are all different!

Man in Crowd: I'm not.

Another Man: Shhh!


Malaclypse wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:

And, once more, I havent' said that 4e sucks. I haven't said it belongs to a group called "games that suck". I haven't denigrated 4e in any way. Fact is, it does some things better than Pathfinder does. For example, if I had to choose between the two to run a tactical sim akin to Heroclix, I'd most certainly choose 4e.

I'm only saying that while there are things that 4e does better than Pathfinder, the opposite is also true. There are things that Pathfinder does better than 4e. And some people are getting their knickers in a twist over that statement.

Obviously, the solution is to see that both systems suck, and analyze them, and then design the perfect successor and take over the world...

*sways and preens and begs for a new edition of F.A.T.A.L.*

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Sebastian wrote:
meatrace wrote:
Sebastian wrote:
Uchawi wrote:
From my perspective, I believe Pathfinder's biggest strength is a single world, adventure paths, and organized play, so those are items I hope WOTC improves on.
That's 5 words. ;-)
worLd

Doh!

Elementary reading skills for the fail. Sorry about that...

Damn, I sure wouldn't want for Sebastian to represent me in the court !

"Your Honor, just as it says in the written statement, my client is just an ordinary pederast ... *shocked looks from the jury* oh, apologies, I meant pedestrian ..."

Grand Lodge

Urizen wrote:
Malaclypse wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:

And, once more, I havent' said that 4e sucks. I haven't said it belongs to a group called "games that suck". I haven't denigrated 4e in any way. Fact is, it does some things better than Pathfinder does. For example, if I had to choose between the two to run a tactical sim akin to Heroclix, I'd most certainly choose 4e.

I'm only saying that while there are things that 4e does better than Pathfinder, the opposite is also true. There are things that Pathfinder does better than 4e. And some people are getting their knickers in a twist over that statement.

Obviously, the solution is to see that both systems suck, and analyze them, and then design the perfect successor and take over the world...
*sways and preens and begs for a new edition of F.A.T.A.L.*

I will murder your entire family.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I love the spell, but I'm not sure if my suspension of disbelief can handle equal effect on Water Elementals and Iron Golems :)


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Urizen wrote:
Malaclypse wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:

And, once more, I havent' said that 4e sucks. I haven't said it belongs to a group called "games that suck". I haven't denigrated 4e in any way. Fact is, it does some things better than Pathfinder does. For example, if I had to choose between the two to run a tactical sim akin to Heroclix, I'd most certainly choose 4e.

I'm only saying that while there are things that 4e does better than Pathfinder, the opposite is also true. There are things that Pathfinder does better than 4e. And some people are getting their knickers in a twist over that statement.

Obviously, the solution is to see that both systems suck, and analyze them, and then design the perfect successor and take over the world...
*sways and preens and begs for a new edition of F.A.T.A.L.*
I will murder your entire family.

And what you do with them postmortem is your own business. I'll just look the other way. Casually. Whistling.


Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Look a monkey!!!

EDIT: I take the brain!


Speechless...

...I am without speech....

Good thing I'm typing.

Okay, Iiiii get iiiiiit. You were having me on. This whole edition war thing is being done just for fun, eh? Like in college when we stole the other school's mascot (damn monkey) and they hit my car with tar.

Got it. I won't take it so seriously now. :D

*ahem* You're all wrong, and your game's mother. That's right, I went there.

- Senator

Grand Lodge

Justin Franklin wrote:
Look a monkey!!!

I love monkeys. PULL! *blam*


"Wait we had monkeys? This thread needs more class " Casts summon strippers and whores III

" There much better"


Demon Lord of Tribbles wrote:

"Wait we had monkeys? This thread needs more class " Casts summon strippers and whores III

" There much better"

I love Strippers! PULL! *blam*

Hmmmm. Doesn't sound right somehow

- Senator

RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

Senator wrote:
Demon Lord of Tribbles wrote:

"Wait we had monkeys? This thread needs more class " Casts summon strippers and whores III

" There much better"

I love Strippers! PULL! *blam*

Hmmmm. Doesn't sound right somehow

- Senator

Too far, man, too far.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

James Jacobs wrote:
There's a difference, in other words, between dropping a subject and trying to get the last word in on a dropped subject.

Indeed there is.

Posts have been removed. Thread is locked.

251 to 286 of 286 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Question about Pathfinder's retail success All Messageboards