For anyone interested, a good read imo about the reasons why apparently some (many?) 3rdPP leave 4th for Pathfinder:
The open letter is being discussed over in this thread.
I removed a couple posts and a reply to them. Be constructive, please.
The open letter is being discussed over in this thread.
Because this post caused some confusion in deleted posts: no, that's not the same open letter.
Maybe delete that one, too, Ross?
Why do 3pp feel that WotC should make it easier for them to compete with WotC's own products? Espesicaly after the 3e OGL bit WotC in the ass.
Why do 3pp feel that WotC should make it easier for them to compete with WotC's own products? Espesicaly after the 3e OGL bit WotC in the ass.
The idea goes that good 3pp products improve sales of the core products.
More source material and adventures availible for a game, the more people are willing to invest in the core material, because they know they will get more utility from it.
For example, if i could get and explicitely magi-punk setting for 4e, with lots of magical cybernetics, movement based powers and guns from a 3pp, it would actually give me a reason to not only to start buying 4e again, but actually go back and buy a few back dates.
3pp adventures of the same quality as pathfinder set in eberron? That would focus my attention on 4e so sharply, that i'd need to stop buying material from other systems while i caught up with 4e material, and that is a fair amount of catch up.
Beyond such hypatheticals, sales of pathfinder are growing, while sales of DnD seem to be shrinking. If you looke to paizo, atleast one of the factors that seems to be involved is there relationship with the 3pp.
Beyond such hypatheticals, sales of pathfinder are growing, while sales of DnD seem to be shrinking. If you looke to paizo, atleast one of the factors that seems to be involved is there relationship with the 3pp.
I do wonder at how big of a factor this is. Are there really a lot of people for whom the 3pp support made up their mind on whether to switch to Pathfinder?
Beyond such hypatheticals, sales of pathfinder are growing, while sales of DnD seem to be shrinking. If you looke to paizo, atleast one of the factors that seems to be involved is there relationship with the 3pp.I do wonder at how big of a factor this is. Are there really a lot of people for whom the 3pp support made up their mind on whether to switch to Pathfinder?
I'm one of them. It's my belief that there's a lot of us out there.
I bought all of the WotC 3E/3.5 stuff, but I also invested heavily into 3PP for a lot of their content.
I like my WotC-produced stuff, but quite often, some of the stuff was just mediocre or uninspired. Usable content, to be sure, but not pushing boundaries, which a lot of 3PP did.
Fresh perspectives on things were and are nice.
|
Beyond such hypatheticals, sales of pathfinder are growing, while sales of DnD seem to be shrinking. If you looke to paizo, atleast one of the factors that seems to be involved is there relationship with the 3pp.I do wonder at how big of a factor this is. Are there really a lot of people for whom the 3pp support made up their mind on whether to switch to Pathfinder?
Switch? No. But I did play 3.x DnD as long as I did only because I could get 3pp products that fit in niche area's I wanted that let me expand my games in new and interesting ways. Which did keep me buying WotC products longer than i otherwise would have, since if I had stopped and started playing some other games, then money would have went there.
So i think 3pp would help 4e but that is far from a fact, just a believe based on personal experience and those I know. Though as a counter point I also noticed a trend locally as well. Those that went Pathfinder tended to be those that used or liked 3pp, while those that used little to no 3pp tended to go 4e. That is just something I noticed talking to fellow gamers at the local stores. Obviously not true and every case but their seemed to be noticeable trends.
There is zero doubt imo, that 3e/3.5e MASSIVELY benefited from the OGL. Look at the amazing products that TPPs produced for 3e/3.5e; Tolus, Green Ronin's back catalogue, a good part of the Dungeon Crawl Classics, really too many products to name at the drop of a hat.
People want a lot of products. They really do and having great products (regardless of the bad apples also available) out there only boosts sales of the core game - that is just common sense. WOTC's business decisions have, even by the generally accepted sales figures, lost them what? 40% of their past sales - conservatively? I see internet stats are now placing Pathfinder at joint number one rpg sales position. That says it all.
No one. Certainly not the Paizo staff members, ever dreamed that was even a remote possibility 2 years ago. Now ... with the TPPs realising the 4e ship is well and truly sinking, Paizo have a realistic chance at entirely supplanting 4e.
Yes ... before people feel the need to say it ... of course 4e is still selling at number one position (alongside Pathfinder). However - that WOTC's decisions are well and truly driving their own allies into Paizo's arms, can only help Paizo.
Keep it up guys. I was OVER THE MOON, when I read on the FFG boards the sales figures showing 4e's shameful decline. Paizo TOTALLY deserve their success and I only wish them more. They have already achieved the impossible, I wait to see if they can go beyond that. :-)
|
|
There is zero doubt imo, that 3e/3.5e MASSIVELY benefited from the OGL. Look at the amazing products that TPPs produced for 3e/3.5e; Tolus, Green Ronin's back catalogue, a good part of the Dungeon Crawl Classics, really too many products to name at the drop of a hat.
People want a lot of products. They really do and having great products (regardless of the bad apples also available) out there only boosts sales of the core game - that is just common sense. WOTC's business decisions have, even by the generally accepted sales figures, lost them what? 40% of their past sales - conservatively? I see internet stats are now placing Pathfinder at joint number one rpg sales position. That says it all.
No one. Certainly not the Paizo staff members, ever dreamed that was even a remote possibility 2 years ago. Now ... with the TPPs realising the 4e ship is well and truly sinking, Paizo have a realistic chance at entirely supplanting 4e.
Yes ... before people feel the need to say it ... of course 4e is still selling at number one position (alongside Pathfinder). However - that WOTC's decisions are well and truly driving their own allies into Paizo's arms, can only help Paizo.
Keep it up guys. I was OVER THE MOON, when I read on the FFG boards the sales figures showing 4e's shameful decline. Paizo TOTALLY deserve their success and I only wish them more. They have already achieved the impossible, I wait to see if they can go beyond that. :-)
Care to link the forum post? Just curious, mostly cause I didn't know Fantasy Flight Games made 4e or Pathfinder stuff.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Keep it up guys. I was OVER THE MOON, when I read on the FFG boards the sales figures showing 4e's shameful decline.
This is everything that is wrong with the "pro-Pathfinder" crowd (and I use that term loosely; the real pro-Pathfinder crowd is only concerned with the success of their game of choice, not with the failure of a game they don't play). You were over the moon about the imagined decline of a game you don't play. Ignoring the fact that 4e isn't in any sort of decline beyond what is expected of a game a few years after release, you are delighting in what you assume is the death throes of a game that tons of people enjoy.
I mean, damn.
Beyond such hypatheticals, sales of pathfinder are growing, while sales of DnD seem to be shrinking. If you looke to paizo, atleast one of the factors that seems to be involved is there relationship with the 3pp.I do wonder at how big of a factor this is. Are there really a lot of people for whom the 3pp support made up their mind on whether to switch to Pathfinder?
Who said switch? It does not have to cause an individual to switch system altogether. Rather it only needs to influence spending choices.
For example:
John have enough spare cash to buy three books a month.
in world A five books have been brought out for systems he loves. The big book of monsters, and the big book of loot for "kill sentient creatures and take their stuff", ways to make you enemies walk out into the sun,thanks to the very beauty and pain of your poetry, for "Vampire: the OMG the angsting", and the slaughter of innocents by hill billy ogres, and one hundred gross things goblins do for "A slightly different game about rapine pillage."
under such coditions john might decide that this month he fancies one from each game.
However what a 3pp game can do is make john say. "Wow, this book by "some guys name publishing" gives me more stuff to do with goblins, and so does that othere book for "a slightly different game about rapine pillage" and they are for the same system. Plus the current adventurw is part of a campaign that features cool goblins..maybe i should forget about vampire and ksb&tts this month."
Who said switch? It does not have to cause an individual to switch system altogether. Rather it only needs to influence spending choices.
Fair point.
There is zero doubt imo, that 3e/3.5e MASSIVELY benefited from the OGL. Look at the amazing products that TPPs produced for 3e/3.5e; Tolus, Green Ronin's back catalogue, a good part of the Dungeon Crawl Classics, really too many products to name at the drop of a hat.
Then why is the model so rarely copied? I mean Paizo is an OGL company - they can't get away from that and must play the hand dealt them. But there are a lot of companies like White Wolf (Exalted, World of Darkness) and Catalyst (Shadowrun) etc. that can choose and they choose not to.
Then why is the model so rarely copied? I mean Paizo is an OGL company - they can't get away from that and must play the hand dealt them. But there are a lot of companies like White Wolf (Exalted, World of Darkness) and Catalyst (Shadowrun) etc. that can choose and they choose not to.
Belief in "old market" fallacies, perhaps?
I'd say it's the same reason why a lot of companies hesitate (or downright refuse) to publish PDF material, or publish unrestricted PDF material.
Certain beliefs in how to do business are ingrained upon people, and it's not an overnight process to change those beliefs, regardless of any evidence to the contrary.
Look at the battle over digital music, and how many music publishers were completely against ANY digital distribution of music. Look at the battle over the Betamax/VHS.
The OGL was (and is) a huge change in the status quo. People fear change.
I don't believe 4e is declining, and I wouldn't celebrate the demise of the flagship brand of roleplaying games - even non-gamers are vaguely familiar with Dungeons and Dragons.
However, I would say that Paizo/Pathfinder is thriving enough to be on par with 4e, and that's great for all gamers.
I'm biased, obviously, since I freelance for a 3pp. Now, I would be fine working on a 4e product, but the GSL is fairly 3pp unfriendly and the lack of support bemoaned in that open letter makes it clear that WotC is not eager in working with 3pp.
On the other hand, Paizo has been hugely supportive of continuing the OGL and helping promote and sell third-party products. To paraphrase a stupid movie, they are helping us help them. Not everyone's going to want to run a game set in Golarion - there is a multitude of third-party products where GMs can pick and choose the content they want to include.
Basically, supporting 3pp expands the appeal of a gaming system beyond their official campaign world without making the GM improvise everything. And that's great for everyone involved.
Keep it up guys. I was OVER THE MOON, when I read on the FFG boards the sales figures showing 4e's shameful decline.This is everything that is wrong with the "pro-Pathfinder" crowd (and I use that term loosely; the real pro-Pathfinder crowd is only concerned with the success of their game of choice, not with the failure of a game they don't play). You were over the moon about the imagined decline of a game you don't play. Ignoring the fact that 4e isn't in any sort of decline beyond what is expected of a game a few years after release, you are delighting in what you assume is the death throes of a game that tons of people enjoy.
I mean, damn.
I agree it is a little petty...but than again alot(or maybe just the vocal minority) of the 4th ed crowd was heads over heals at the apparent demise of the death of a game that tons of people enjoyed. So the fact that people had the faces rubbed in it for a couple of years by other jerks...tends to produce that kind of feeling.
It is just human nature.
The fact that Pathfinder is tied with WotC D&D in RPG sales is a huge valediction for 3.5 fans.
Also to parrot alot of 4th ed fans back in the day...just because they stopped making the game does not mean the game itself is dead...they are not sending out the goon squad to collect your 4th ed books when the edition changes...so is the game going to be really dead?
|
I do wonder at how big of a factor this is. Are there really a lot of people for whom the 3pp support made up their mind on whether to switch to Pathfinder?
Interesting Question: If I remember right, there was a poll in this forum posing the question, how we would like Paizo to proceed regarding the 3.5/4E-Question (this was before we had heard about the Pathfinder Rules System). I was one of many saying that we would stay with Paizo regardless of their decision.
At this time, I did perceive Pathfinder as a 3PP and the main reason I stayed with 3.5 even before the 4E announcement was because of 3PPs (especially Paizo, but there were others like Necromancer Games, Green Ronin and Malhavoc Press, to name but a few).
So I didn't exactly swith to Pathfinder because of the 3pp support, but the OGL was a major factor in my decision not to switch to 4E. You could say that WotC lost me with their decision against the OGL (and the signs were already there before we knew exactly what the GSL would be like) and to be honest, if Paizo would someday try to pull the same stunt, they'd probably loose me as well.
On the other hand, if Paizo would have gone 4E even under GSL conditions, I would have gone with them. I don't know if that would mean that I would play 4E or if I just would take their adventures and convert them in another system (preferably 3.5), but in this case, the probably only person in the world who could have changed my mind from supporting Paizo to supporting the OGL would have been Monte Cook, if he had decided to fill the niche now filled by Paizo.
There is zero doubt imo, that 3e/3.5e MASSIVELY benefited from the OGL. Look at the amazing products that TPPs produced for 3e/3.5e; Tolus, Green Ronin's back catalogue, a good part of the Dungeon Crawl Classics, really too many products to name at the drop of a hat.Then why is the model so rarely copied? I mean Paizo is an OGL company - they can't get away from that and must play the hand dealt them. But there are a lot of companies like White Wolf (Exalted, World of Darkness) and Catalyst (Shadowrun) etc. that can choose and they choose not to.
But there are a whole raft of companies that actively work with their own 3pp crops. The best known example being chaosium. Chaosium has time and again openned upntheir playing field and system for the use of others. From call of cthulhu adventures to whole mythos related games such as the laundry and delta green,using their system.
Fusion, fate, savage worlds and BRP, just to name a few systems that have taken this sort of approach. Hell there have even been fairly major releases which have been released under creative commons ( see eclipse phase).
It simply is not true to say no one is doing it.
I don't doubt that the sales of D&D (4E) have fallen since it's debut, nor the fact that Paizo has done really well in the absence of WotC 3E/v3.5 material. But this further illustrates that people don't like change as Brian Harris mentioned.
And I'd have to agree with LyingBastard that 4E is far from done or dead or collapsing in on itself. If it was, it would receive less treatment for the product line and slowly fade away in obscurity (like Dragonlance setting RPG for exmaple). The fact that they're adding different themes, ideas (such as the Fortune Cards), and still coming out with Monthly supplements and DDi articles shows me that they're doing just fine. Maybe not as fine as they'd like, but well enought not to cause me worry.
And when I ask about D&D in general and 4E vs. Paizo specifically at my FLGS they say that they run 4E exclusively (4 sessions weekly) which makes me feel that if Paizo was a better or more fun system they'd at least split it up a bit. This is, of course, based on my own experiences.
And comments expressing happiness about a gaming products decline is just plain immature. As a player of v3.5, PF, 4E, and a little (very little) Warhammer and Battletech I'd be saddend to see any of them leave or be discontinued. That just doesn't help anyone nor does it validate my own personal preferences of favored games. How is that sort of thinking good or constructive for any community?
Anywho, getting back to the topic at hand, the Open Letter:
Is it a good gesture on part of WotC to show openness, transparency, and a thought for the RPG community at large? Yes. But should they is another matter. As great as the OGL is, it really bit them in the butt when v3.5 could be used by anyone and everyone openly with 3PP quirks. Just look at the very legal d20 SRD. I mean, it's practically the Player's Handbook, Dungeon's Master Guide, and Monster Manual I all rolled into a site that's free access. Why do I need those books when they're at my finger tips? I don't, I could use a 3PP's setting (probably cheaper than WotC's) and do whatever I want without giving the "parent company" a dime. Last time I checked giving out free stuff with no real gains in the end doesn't boost sales.
So with the new GLS, you still have all the "references" of the old material but you actually have to buy them *gasp*!!! Shocking, I know! But apparently WotC is the bad guy for not playing nice with their toys and not sharing, as if they'd actually get those toy back at the end of the day.
I agree it is a little petty...but than again alot(or maybe just the vocal minority) of the 4th ed crowd was heads over heals at the apparent demise of the death of a game that tons of people enjoyed.
The "4th ed crowd" wasn't excited about the fact that 3.5 was being discontinued. We were excited about the fact that we were getting a new game. There's a huge difference between "Sweet, a new edition!" and "Hah! A game that I don't like made by a company I don't like looks to me like it's doing poorly!" The former is excited. The latter comes across as desperately looking for some kind of validation of his gaming choice at the expense of others.
So the fact that people had the faces rubbed in it for a couple of years by other jerks...tends to produce that kind of feeling.
4e fans were not rubbing anyone's faces in the discontinuation of 3.5, especially not for a couple of years. If there were people doing this, that's pretty awful of them.
It is just human nature.
It absolutely is, you're right. Someone who feels insecure is typically very eager to jump on any sort of validation. In this case, a gamer insecure about his choice of game would be eager to harp on a perceived decline in the game he didn't choose because it supports the idea that he made the right choice.
It's the sort of mentality that we see between rival sports teams and their fans. It's sad when it gets to that extreme in sports, and it's sad here.
The fact that Pathfinder is tied with WotC D&D in RPG sales is a huge valediction for 3.5 fans.
I think you probably mean "vindication" or "validation" here. But this is part of the problem. Pathfinder, in all reasonable likelihood, isn't tied with WotC in RPG sales. Pathfinder fans (or, more specifically, anti-4e gamers) came across a single report that put PFRPG and D&D at roughly equivalent levels of sales for a single quarter in the small hobby store channel, based largely on interviews with store owners rather than actual sales data. As is pointed out every time this is mentioned, that report doesn't include Barnes & Noble, Borders, Amazon, any other online retailer or big box store, or any subscription model (Pathfinder or DDI). Instead of doing the reasonable thing and saying "Hey, that's pretty good for Pathfinder that it's able to compete with D&D in hobby stores," a lot of people have run much further with the report than they should, and have started to say "Pathfinder is selling as well as D&D!" Heck, I've seen people who have started saying "Pathfinder is selling better than D&D, according to some reports!" despite the fact that they don't have data to back that up either. This sort of desperate need for vindication is a hallmark of insecurity.
Also to parrot alot of 4th ed fans back in the day...just because they stopped making the game does not mean the game itself is dead...they are not sending out the goon squad to collect your 4th ed books when the edition changes...so is the game going to be really dead?
Well, no, we're not saying that it is. Rockheimr was the one celebrating D&D's demise. We're pretty sure D&D is doing just fine.
@Scott Betts: Not really disagreeing with anything that you said...except there was a lot of 4th ed fans I ran into who did feel validated by 4th ed and rub people's faces in it...my area is loaded with them. I generally don't make generalize statement. To say that the 4th ed fans were all angels in the edition wars is kinda of a joke. Especialy since many were fighting it before there was a edition change.
My point is it is human nature....just ignore it and move on. Reply to such posts really serve no purpose at all. And if it makes Rockheimr happy to think so...how does it hurt you? Or anyone for that matter?
No one has any sales fugures...at all except for the invidual companies. The report you mentioned is probably far from accurate...heck it could be Pathfinder is killing 4th ed in sales or both could be killed by WoD...or Gurps...who is to say.
Personaly I don't care if no one else plays the system I like to play. The masses have never ever influenced my taste.
|
|
Last time I checked giving out free stuff with no real gains in the end doesn't boost sales.
So with the new GLS, you still have all the "references" of the old material but you actually have to buy them *gasp*!!!
Now last time I checked, Paizo did exactly that (giving the core rules away for free in form of the PRD and very cheap via pdf), and id didn't seem to stop people from bying the hardcover. In fact, we know that sales exceeded all expectations.
Same goes for 3.X. The Core rule books were bestsellers even though there were the SRD. So while there may have been reasons to change WotC's policy regarding the OGL it was clearly not because of the core rules not selling.
This sort of desperate need for vindication is a hallmark of insecurity.
I find it hilarious given that 4th edition fans (or, more specifically, anti-Pathfinder gamers) met the release of Pathfinder RPG with claims of it just being a flash in the pan product to capitalize on "nerd rage." That the RPG would last a year before coming to an end and that Paizo would have to close up shop the year after that.
I'm happy that Paizo is doing so well and when 4th edition is still doing well in a couple years, I will laugh at the "WotC is crumbling" posts as well.
Still. Would prefer if people didn't predict WotC's doom. Would prefer if people wouldn't ignore the significant amount of OGC Paizo has produced just because they are using WotC's license. Wish people wouldn't use, "go play 4th edition" as an insult against a mechanic they don't like. Wish people wouldn't insult others who play Pathfinder. Until people cool off on both sides, I will just be having fun in my games.
|
The "4th ed crowd" wasn't excited about the fact that 3.5 was being discontinued. We were excited about the fact that we were getting a new game. There's a huge difference between "Sweet, a new edition!" and "Hah! A game that I don't like made by a company I don't like looks to me like it's doing poorly!" The former is excited. The latter comes across as desperately looking for some kind of validation of his gaming choice at the expense of others.
Sorry Scott I saw it different.the 4e crowd was happy to be getting a new edition that was nothing like 3.5...and many were smug about it. Many 4e players, that I used to chat with on the official 4e boards, look down upon those that play 3.5 or PF. They scoff at what Paizo does with the game. They feel superior because their game has the official "DnD" brand name.
There is zero doubt imo, that 3e/3.5e MASSIVELY benefited from the OGL. Look at the amazing products that TPPs produced for 3e/3.5e; Tolus, Green Ronin's back catalogue, a good part of the Dungeon Crawl Classics, really too many products to name at the drop of a hat.Then why is the model so rarely copied? I mean Paizo is an OGL company - they can't get away from that and must play the hand dealt them. But there are a lot of companies like White Wolf (Exalted, World of Darkness) and Catalyst (Shadowrun) etc. that can choose and they choose not to.But there are a whole raft of companies that actively work with their own 3pp crops. The best known example being chaosium. Chaosium has time and again openned upntheir playing field and system for the use of others. From call of cthulhu adventures to whole mythos related games such as the laundry and delta green,using their system.
Fusion, fate, savage worlds and BRP, just to name a few systems that have taken this sort of approach. Hell there have even been fairly major releases which have been released under creative commons ( see eclipse phase).
It simply is not true to say no one is doing it.
My understanding is that Delta Green and other Chaosim 3PPs are acting with licenses (This includes anything BRP as Chaosim is BRP) - in other words they are paying (or giving Chaosim a royalty or some such) for the privilege of using Chaosim's intellectual property.
Savage Worlds does have a licensing system in place - although its not comparable to the OGL or even the GSL (no part of a Savage Worlds book may be used and nothing in Savage Worlds itself is open content - but you can reference their books and make a book that uses their rules). Notice that there is no System Reference Document for Savage Worlds...fans asked if they could make one and where told 'no'.
Fusion is, so far as I understand, more of a community project - not a company with worthwhile intellectual property.
Fate and the games based on it such as Spirit of the Century and Dresden Files are themselves part of WotCs OGL and, once your in the OGL you can't really leave (without developing your own RPG system).
Now last time I checked, Paizo did exactly that (giving the core rules away for free in form of the PRD and very cheap via pdf), and id didn't seem to stop people from bying the hardcover. In fact, we know that sales exceeded all expectations.Same goes for 3.X. The Core rule books were bestsellers even though there were the SRD. So while there may have been reasons to change WotC's policy regarding the OGL it was clearly not because of the core rules not selling.
The free version Paizo gave away was the Beta form, which I downloaded and still used until their own PFd20 came out. But I never bought the core books because I have a lap-top and wireless so I didn't need to buy anything of theirs. And if they feel confident that putting not only the Core material on the PFd20 site but the Advanced Player's Guide material on there as well will boost sales, more power to them. That means I really don't see a need to give them 1$. My buddy, OTOH, gets adventures from them and they are amazing, so if I do buy something from Paizo, it'll be those and additional adventure paths (which surpass anything WotC has offered in the last 2-1/2 years).
And I think the Core rulebooks sell very well because they are the "core" rulebooks. Even now, I could always use another PHB or Monster Manual, espically when I'm using one and the Druid or wizard needs it for their Summon monster spells. More core rulebooks means everyone has access and makes thing easier. Passing around the 1 PHB is sorta annoying where as you really only need 1 Heroes of Horror or 1 Complete Mage.
Sorry Scott I saw it different.the 4e crowd was happy to be getting a new edition that was nothing like 3.5...and many were smug about it. Many 4e players, that I used to chat with on the official 4e boards, look down upon those that play 3.5 or PF. They scoff at what Paizo does with the game. They feel superior because their game has the official "DnD" brand name.
The "4th ed crowd" wasn't excited about the fact that 3.5 was being discontinued. We were excited about the fact that we were getting a new game. There's a huge difference between "Sweet, a new edition!" and "Hah! A game that I don't like made by a company I don't like looks to me like it's doing poorly!" The former is excited. The latter comes across as desperately looking for some kind of validation of his gaming choice at the expense of others.
Those people are sad. They are no less insecure about their choice of game. No one should feel superior about what they play. At the end of the day, we're all pretending to be magical elves fighting paper dragons around someone's dinner table.
The free version Paizo gave away was the Beta form, which I downloaded and still used until their own PFd20 came out. But I never bought the core books because I have a lap-top and wireless so I didn't need to buy anything of theirs. And if they feel confident that putting not only the Core material on the PFd20 site but the Advanced Player's Guide material on there as well will boost sales, more power to them. That means I really don't see a need to give them 1$. My buddy, OTOH, gets adventures from them and they are amazing, so if I do buy something from Paizo, it'll be those and additional adventure paths (which surpass anything WotC has offered in the last 2-1/2 years).
I think it's interesting to note that Paizo and WOTC have very different approaches to the product they put out. Paizo can afford to have a few people not buy every core book because they have other product lines, among which the core books are really not the ultimate focus. When WoTC released 4E, they made almost all of their books tied to generic rules and core features, so while I personally disagree with their approach, it makes sense that they would do everything in their power to large chunks of that material from being freely available to would be customers. The thing about the OGL that bit WoTC hard was they didn't realize how it would effect their ability to focus on the core rules, with everything else being secondary. The OGL itself wasn't the problem, the fact that the OGL changed the market in ways that WoTC had not anticipated, and was not really in a position to fully take advantage of, was the problem.
|
|
Those people are sad. They are no less insecure about their choice of game. No one should feel superior about what they play. At the end of the day, we're all pretending to be magical elves fighting paper dragons around someone's dinner table.Sorry Scott I saw it different.the 4e crowd was happy to be getting a new edition that was nothing like 3.5...and many were smug about it. Many 4e players, that I used to chat with on the official 4e boards, look down upon those that play 3.5 or PF. They scoff at what Paizo does with the game. They feel superior because their game has the official "DnD" brand name.
The "4th ed crowd" wasn't excited about the fact that 3.5 was being discontinued. We were excited about the fact that we were getting a new game. There's a huge difference between "Sweet, a new edition!" and "Hah! A game that I don't like made by a company I don't like looks to me like it's doing poorly!" The former is excited. The latter comes across as desperately looking for some kind of validation of his gaming choice at the expense of others.
But my magical elf is cooler than yours!
;)
There is zero doubt imo, that 3e/3.5e MASSIVELY benefited from the OGL. Look at the amazing products that TPPs produced for 3e/3.5e; Tolus, Green Ronin's back catalogue, a good part of the Dungeon Crawl Classics, really too many products to name at the drop of a hat.Then why is the model so rarely copied? I mean Paizo is an OGL company - they can't get away from that and must play the hand dealt them. But there are a lot of companies like White Wolf (Exalted, World of Darkness) and Catalyst (Shadowrun) etc. that can choose and they choose not to.But there are a whole raft of companies that actively work with their own 3pp crops. The best known example being chaosium. Chaosium has time and again openned upntheir playing field and system for the use of others. From call of cthulhu adventures to whole mythos related games such as the laundry and delta green,using their system.
Fusion, fate, savage worlds and BRP, just to name a few systems that have taken this sort of approach. Hell there have even been fairly major releases which have been released under creative commons ( see eclipse phase).
It simply is not true to say no one is doing it.
My understanding is that Delta Green and other Chaosim 3PPs are acting with licenses (This includes anything BRP as Chaosim is BRP) - in other words they are paying (or giving Chaosim a royalty or some such) for the privilege of using Chaosim's intellectual property.
Savage Worlds does have a licensing system in place - although its not comparable to the OGL or even the GSL (no part of a Savage Worlds book may be used and nothing in Savage Worlds itself is open content - but you can reference their books and make a book that uses their rules). Notice that there is no System Reference Document for Savage Worlds...fans asked if they could make one and where told 'no'.
Fusion is, so far as I understand, more of a community project - not a company with...
Even the OGL is a licence. The terms might be different, but it doesn't change the fact that both Chaosium and Pinnacle recognises that more people using their system is good for them, and they cooperate with other publishers to see it happen.
Fusion is owned by Fuzion Lab Groups / Hero Games. It is a blend of Interlock System and Hero system, made by the owners of both systems. It was the first freely availible system in the internet. Given that atleast one origins game of the year has been based on it, i wouldn't say that writing it of as not worth protecting is accurate.
Fudge and Fate are OGL, but the important thing your missing is that they did not need to be. They are not derivatives of the 3.0/3.5, they are a wholy seperate system, developed independantly, which chose to use the OGL to make their game open. And said choice has led to it being the single fastest growing system of the last few year. They developed their own system, and entered the OGL with it.
Those people are sad. They are no less insecure about their choice of game. No one should feel superior about what they play. At the end of the day, we're all pretending to be magical elves fighting paper dragons around someone's dinner table.Sorry Scott I saw it different.the 4e crowd was happy to be getting a new edition that was nothing like 3.5...and many were smug about it. Many 4e players, that I used to chat with on the official 4e boards, look down upon those that play 3.5 or PF. They scoff at what Paizo does with the game. They feel superior because their game has the official "DnD" brand name.
The "4th ed crowd" wasn't excited about the fact that 3.5 was being discontinued. We were excited about the fact that we were getting a new game. There's a huge difference between "Sweet, a new edition!" and "Hah! A game that I don't like made by a company I don't like looks to me like it's doing poorly!" The former is excited. The latter comes across as desperately looking for some kind of validation of his gaming choice at the expense of others.But my magical elf is cooler than yours!
;)
And my angst riddled Sidhe prince is considerably cooler than either. I mean, he wears sunglasses at night and has twin lesbian japanese stripper body guards with katanas!!!! <.< >.> <.<
|
Those people are sad. They are no less insecure about their choice of game. No one should feel superior about what they play. At the end of the day, we're all pretending to be magical elves fighting paper dragons around someone's dinner table.
Thanks Scott for your comments on this thread, you summed up how I feel about some anti 4e comments much more succinctly than I could.
Basically yep, I am sure there are some 4e fans out there who are jerks and who rubbish 3.5 and / or Pathfinder at every opportunity. However just because those people are out there doesn't make it okay for Paizo fans to do the same re 4e. It may be human nature to do so, but it still makes you a jerk.
Love the game you play and be happy when it is successful, whatever that game is!
And this comes from someone who plays 4e, 3.5 and PF and actually prefers the 3.5 rules.
|
|
And my angst riddled Sidhe prince is considerably cooler than either. I mean, he wears sunglasses at night and has twin lesbian japanese stripper body guards with katanas!!!! <.< >.> <.<Those people are sad. They are no less insecure about their choice of game. No one should feel superior about what they play. At the end of the day, we're all pretending to be magical elves fighting paper dragons around someone's dinner table.Sorry Scott I saw it different.the 4e crowd was happy to be getting a new edition that was nothing like 3.5...and many were smug about it. Many 4e players, that I used to chat with on the official 4e boards, look down upon those that play 3.5 or PF. They scoff at what Paizo does with the game. They feel superior because their game has the official "DnD" brand name.
The "4th ed crowd" wasn't excited about the fact that 3.5 was being discontinued. We were excited about the fact that we were getting a new game. There's a huge difference between "Sweet, a new edition!" and "Hah! A game that I don't like made by a company I don't like looks to me like it's doing poorly!" The former is excited. The latter comes across as desperately looking for some kind of validation of his gaming choice at the expense of others.But my magical elf is cooler than yours!
;)
pfft who do you think he is Corey Heart? He could never be that cool.
|
|
Those people are sad. They are no less insecure about their choice of game. No one should feel superior about what they play. At the end of the day, we're all pretending to be magical elves fighting paper dragons around someone's dinner table.Thanks Scott for your comments on this thread, you summed up how I feel about some anti 4e comments much more succinctly than I could.
Basically yep, I am sure there are some 4e fans out there who are jerks and who rubbish 3.5 and / or Pathfinder at every opportunity. However just because those people are out there doesn't make it okay for Paizo fans to do the same re 4e. It may be human nature to do so, but it still makes you a jerk.
Love the game you play and be happy when it is successful, whatever that game is!
And this comes from someone who plays 4e, 3.5 and PF and actually prefers the 3.5 rules.
I brought up what i saw on the official board as my experience to illustrate that Scott's comment were very one sided, just as your lean.
It is not that one side tends to tear at teh other more often. They both do it and no side can claim innocence.
Go the the official boards and start a topic on how much you like 3.5/PF, about why you prefer it over 4e. You do not need to badmouth 4e, but you will get attacked over there. It is that atmosphere that drove me away from the site.
This comes from a person that DM'd a 4e game for 2.5 years and would still love to play it, but just does not wanna support WotC. I do not even allow 3.5 books in my game. Paizo PF books only.
|
|
I brought up what i saw on the official board as my experience to illustrate that Scott's comment were very one sided, just as your lean.
Yeah, and I agree, both sides have some over zealous fan boys and even the best of us can suffer a bit of nerd rage (I am guilty of this myself on occassion) but I was just trying to indicate that no matter how many or how few jerks there are on one side of the debate its never an excuse to act like a jerk oneself.
It is that atmosphere that drove me away from the site.
It was the forum software and multitude of sub forums that drive me away from the 4e forums :)
I think the rpg landscape would be very different today if WotC had announced they were sticking with the OGL for 4E. Paizo and other 3PP might have made the switch.
I don't think WotC is better for standing alone. 3PP can fill niches that WotC that are too small for WotC to fill. The best example I can give is Psionics Unleashed. Paizo won't get to Psionics for another couple years. But Dreamscarred Press has their version out now. This fills a current need for some gamers.
Many of the things people find missing or dislike about 4E could be fixed by interested 3PP. I have an idea for a lighter heroic D&D game that combines the character creation of Gamma World with the Rules Compendium. Since the rules aren't open, and the character creation process is explicitly off-limits in the GSL, I can never sell such a product. So I haven't put much effort into it since I'm not planning on running such a game in the near future.
The problem is the people behind the d20 open game movement are long gone from Wizards, and the Hasbro management is overly protective of it's IP. There really is little point in keeping 4E closed. All of the best parts of the IP are already OGL. The terms and many monsters that are iconic to D&D can already be used to continue 3E or make retro-clones.
A good relationship with 3PP can boost sales. How many more copies of 4E books would be sold if Paizo was making fantastic 4E Adventure Paths?
Go the the official boards and start a topic on how much you like 3.5/PF, about why you prefer it over 4e. You do not need to badmouth 4e, but you will get attacked over there. It is that atmosphere that drove me away from the site.
Not to excuse such treatment, but starting a topic on why you prefer game A over game B on game B's message boards is pretty clear baiting. Imagine if someone came here and posted a topic in one of the Pathfinder RPG subforums about how they prefer 4e over Pathfinder. Wouldn't that strike you as a pretty pointless topic, aside from encouraging people to lash out in response?
|
|
Imagine if someone came here and posted a topic in one of the Pathfinder RPG subforums about how they prefer 4e over Pathfinder.
On the other hand, if someone posted this in Paizo's 4E subforum, it would probably be considered ok, I guess. Now OilHorse didn't say he would post this on WotC's 4E subboards so you two don't talk about the same thing.
Imagine if someone came here and posted a topic in one of the Pathfinder RPG subforums about how they prefer 4e over Pathfinder.On the other hand, if someone posted this in Paizo's 4E subforum, it would probably be considered ok, I guess. Now OilHorse didn't say he would post this on WotC's 4E subboards so you two don't talk about the same thing.
There isn't a Pathfinder subforum on WotC's boards, and the Previous Editions subforums over there are pretty much entirely continued discussion of 3.5. Frankly, though, a topic called "I Like Game X More Than Game Y And Here's Why!" is pretty pointless in general, regardless of where it's posted and what the games are. Instead, just post "I Like Game X And Here's Why!" You'll focus more on what makes game X great and the thread will be way less likely to get bogged down in people disagreeing with you.
|
|
Frankly, though, a topic called "I Like Game X More Than Game Y And Here's Why!" is pretty pointless in general, regardless of where it's posted and what the games are. Instead, just post "I Like Game X And Here's Why!" You'll focus more on what makes game X great and the thread will be way less likely to get bogged down in people disagreeing with you.
I beg to differ. Theoretically speaking, the only reason for me to post over at the WotC boards would be to tell them why they lost me as a customer. The most constructive way to do this would be by telling them what they did wrong and how they would have done better. Now given that I consider Paizo to be the prime example of how business should be run in the RPG industry, the most effective way would be by comparison. If I just tell them what they did wrong, they have to keep guessing what they should have done instead. If I just tell them what Paizo did right, they still don't know about the things I consider to be problems in 4E.
I would take the same approach if I would want to critizise something Paizo did. Not just telling them what I don't like but telling them what I would like better; and if I could show them by example, I would absolutely do so.
Now I suspect that WotC doesn't exactly care for my opinion and to be honest it's the same vice versa. Under this condition to post at the WotC boards would be admittedly mere flame-baiting and that's why I don't do it. But that doesn't diminish the value of the argument.
Frankly, though, a topic called "I Like Game X More Than Game Y And Here's Why!" is pretty pointless in general, regardless of where it's posted and what the games are. Instead, just post "I Like Game X And Here's Why!" You'll focus more on what makes game X great and the thread will be way less likely to get bogged down in people disagreeing with you.I beg to differ. Theoretically speaking, the only reason for me to post over at the WotC boards would be to tell them why they lost me as a customer. The most constructive way to do this would be by telling them what they did wrong and how they would have done better. Now given that I consider Paizo to be the prime example of how business should be run in the RPG industry, the most effective way would be by comparison. If I just tell them what they did wrong, they have to keep guessing what they should have done instead. If I just tell them what Paizo did right, they still don't know about the things I consider to be problems in 4E.
I would take the same approach if I would want to critizise something Paizo did. Not just telling them what I don't like but telling them what I would like better; and if I could show them by example, I would absolutely do so.
Now I suspect that WotC doesn't exactly care for my opinion and to be honest it's the same vice versa. Under this condition to post at the WotC boards would be admittedly mere flame-baiting and that's why I don't do it. But that doesn't diminish the value of the argument.
The place to tell WotC why they've lost you as a customer would be in an email or letter to their customer service. A post to the forums ostensibly addressed to WotC is just a cry for attention, and is less likely to be seen by anyone who matters there than a well-worded email is.
But it can be hard to quantify such things, and it is hard to deny that WotC got burned in several ways with the OGL - and, clearly, felt that providing that much third party support was no longer in their best interests, based on all the data they had which we do not.
How was WotC burned "in several ways" by the OGL? As far as I can tell 3.X was wildly succesful. It revitalized a weakened brand and did amazingly well. As far as I can tell, WotC was burned by abandoning the OGL and basically telling 3PP: "We don't need you."
If 3PP had been brought on board from the beginning, Paizo and other 3PP may have helped build 4E by filling the gaps and niches that WotC couldn't be bothered with.
Sometimes I think that IS the issue. Paizo's Dungeon 3.5 APs were doing better than WoTC 3.5 module products.
A good relationship with 3PP can boost sales. How many more copies of 4E books would be sold if Paizo was making fantastic 4E Adventure Paths?
So? Adventures have always been a small part of WotC's business. If Paizo fans are buying all the Complete Splatbooks and Races of Splatbooks, WotC should be pleased as punch. It's not competition, it's a symbiotic relationship. Everybody wins.
I've yet to see any evidence that any 3PP had even 10% of WotC's sales anytime during the 3.X run.