This is just a hypothetical topic that I started thinking about due to another thread:
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/community/gaming/4thEdition/mikeMearls IsTrolling
What would people think if WotC looked at the success of Pathfinder and made a 5th Ed for DnD that was like Pathfinder, maybe with some overall improvements due to the fact Paizo has already done a lot of trial and error testing? I don't want to slight the folks at Paizo, but some times you can't come up with ALL the cool ideas. If you're interested in this assume that 5th Ed is as similar to PF as PF is to 3.5, very close but can still be told apart.
I have some general ideas on how I expect others would react. I'd imagine that there would be those who play PF and 4th who might feel jilted as they lost support for one game. I'd imagine that a lot of players who just do 4th ed wouldn't be happy. I also think there would be those who stuck with PF due to fewer probable splat books as both progressed and Paizo's customer support. On the other hand there would be those who would go to 5th Ed because they came to PF because it was an improvement over 3.5 and was being supported. If WotC improved on what Paizo did and was able to publish material not covered by the SRD, I'd imagine some would leave PF behind.
I'm curious about this because I don't know what I'd do myself. I came to Pathfinder because it was better then 3.5 but I've been impressed with Paizo's attention to and reliance on the gamer community. I don't see PF as perfect and, going with the idea that this hypothetical version of 5th Ed is closer to my ideal, it would definately tempt me. On the other hand I definately want to keep supporting Paizo.
What do you think you'd do?
First off, from what I've read, 4th Edition isn't doing that badly. I can't see WOTC going back to their 3.5 rules, just because another company is making quite well with what they had.
However it would be delightful to see a head on head racing between 5E and PF if they are both backwards compatible, and therefor compatible in between. Probably a quality vs quantity thing.
I have to admit tough, that I'm not "morally" bound to PF. They take great care of their community, that is a good argument, but once another game is out, I compare then and there. Also, decisions about editions/games are almost always a group thing.
I tried not to post my personal opinion about 4E, and wish Skaorn all the best that this doesn't become a (current) edition war.
I suspect that if that were to happen, WotC would likely lose simply because of public relation issues. For better or for worse, that alone would probably be enough for WotC to deliberately avoid such a head to head struggle.
It would be interesting to see, but I don't see WotC as a company being willing to wade into a PR battle, especially one that they are already behind in.
First off, from what I've read, 4th Edition isn't doing that badly. I can't see WOTC going back to their 3.5 rules, just because another company is making quite well with what they had.
However it would be delightful to see a head on head racing between 5E and PF if they are both backwards compatible, and therefor compatible in between. Probably a quality vs quantity thing.
I have to admit tough, that I'm not "morally" bound to PF. They take great care of their community, that is a good argument, but once another game is out, I compare then and there. Also, decisions about editions/games are almost always a group thing.
I tried not to post my personal opinion about 4E, and wish Skaorn all the best that this doesn't become a (current) edition war.
My opinion is that comparing 4th Ed and Pathfinder is like comparing apples and oranges. I don't play 4th Ed but I can't say that it's because Pathfinder is better then 4th Ed.
I'd use another game but I don't know of one that has anything like the OGL. I could use another company but I don't think their is another company that could compete with WotC as far as publishing power.
This is just hypothetical musings. hopefully people take it for what it is.
If WotC released a new version of D&D that was an updated version of 3.5, I'd certainly check it out to see what it was like. If it was good, I'd probably continue supporting both it and Pathfinder.
So let's say we're comparing D&D 5e with PF2.
I can't really answer that question! If 5e was more in line with the spirit of 3e, and we assume that Paizo didn't pull a 4e with PF2, it'd be a hard choice. Of course, if the games are that close it might not be a choice at all, maybe they'd be compatible!
Or, and this would amuse me to no end, 5e could be a 3PP based on the PRD. :)
But WotC wouldn't have to go that far to win me back as a customer. They should just publish a game closer to SW:Saga and I'd be all there. Not on Pathfinder's expense, but I'd be all over the game we thought 4e would be.
But WotC wouldn't have to go that far to win me back as a customer. They should just publish a game closer to SW:Saga and I'd be all there. Not on Pathfinder's expense, but I'd be all over the game we thought 4e would be.
That is far more likely than anything based of 3.5. It also would likely get a lot of support, as a lot of people were really looking forward to 4E because of what they saw in SWSE, only to be disappointed that 4E was nothing like it.
|
What do you think you'd do?
I think I'd be rather skeptical, but would consider the system of an hypothetical 5th edition based on its own merits.
Right now I'm playing PFRPG, which is my default system of choice; DragonAge RPG, which has some fun, fast and furious streamlined mechanics, and that despite the obvious shortcomings of the only set released so far (hurry GR!) looks promising; and WHFRP, that has such a different approach to roleplaying with all those custom dice and counters and cards and underlying rules that is a breath of fresh air - and a bit of a brain teaser.
And to be honest, I'm happy this way. A game that is detailed and flexible, with a setting I really like; a game that is simpler and relatively hasslefree; and a game that is "something completely different".
That is, not counting other system I own and like such as FantasyCraft, the various 3.5 settings with their own custom rules (Iron Heroes or Thieves' World), a large library of d20 3PP supplements, and two shelves of boardgames.
5th ed will have to conquer its own place with qualities that don't rely on the D&D brand name nor on assumptions based on the "reliable fan" effect.
If it'll go the 4th ed way, obviously will not be a game I'll be interested in; taking a step back toward 3.X doesn't sound too good, as that niche sees already some fierce competition; a brand new path has obvious unforeseen dangers (I hope that makes sense).
I feel too much of a dinosaur - MMO have zero appeal to me, same for social networks and such stuff - for something geared strongly to VTTs, but I also understand that I'm not the majority of the market.
I Came from playing D&D 4th it was ok the only problem we had was sometimes the mods script did not fill out or ended with lose ends
Then D&D 4E came out and everything changed i was plunged into a world of Mechanics that worked only because it stated it did.
A normal LVL 3 nonmagical rouge with a normal nonmagical dagger throws it and it hits 5 goblins and the dagger appears in the rouges hands. How....is my question is how?? and most of the time the response was "Because it says so"
Pathfinder and D&D are two different things
|
If you're interested in this assume that 5th Ed is as similar to PF as PF is to 3.5, very close but can still be told apart.
[...]
What do you think you'd do?
If 5e D&D was as close to PF as PF is to 3.5 then it probably would mean I would give it a miss and carry on playing 3.5 and 4e.
IMHO a new edition should make it worth my time to upgrade, little tweaks and changes some of which I will like and some of which I won't isn't IMHO worth it to me. That is why I am not a big fan of Pathfinder and only play it for PFS rather than the rules itself.
Personally I hope D&D 5e would take the best bits of 4e and add to it and change the other parts significantly (perhaps adding back some of the stuff lost with the move from 3.5 to 4e, e.g. crafting rules etc).
I would hope it would also introduce mechanics like levels of success and perhaps embrace some of the narrative techniques from other games e.g. Aspects from FATE.
They don't need to copy Pathfinder per se, but they do need to pay attention to what Pathfinder has done in regards to business decisions, and focus on adventures, supplements, and a gaming society, and allow the rules to be easily distributed at a nominal cost. They should also up the ante by creating a multiple genre game, so you can have your fantasy, modern, and future all in one system. I was hoping Pathfinder may have gone in that direction, but they have stated they will stick with what they are good at, i.e. fantasy.
I'd be willing to give it a shot, but based purely on hypotheticals I'd still primarily support PF. Without getting into a long, goofy-sounding/looking ramble, let me just say that the good people at Paizo have done more to convince me they're folks worth supporting than WotC's developers have in the last few years.
I Came from playing D&D 4th it was ok the only problem we had was sometimes the mods script did not fill out or ended with lose ends
Then D&D 4E came out and everything changed i was plunged into a world of Mechanics that worked only because it stated it did.
A normal LVL 3 nonmagical rouge with a normal nonmagical dagger throws it and it hits 5 goblins and the dagger appears in the rouges hands. How....is my question is how?? and most of the time the response was "Because it says so"
Pathfinder and D&D are two different things
4th Ed DnD is a completely different game then Pathfinder, however Pathfinder is based off of 3.X DnD. Some of Paizo's promotional posters state this implicitly.
I hereby predict that this thread will end well.
If 5th ed comes out...and it is just not 4th ed re done with a few things thrown in to appeal to their former fan base...than maybe I'll look at it.
If it is better than Pazio's Pathfinder than that is a tough choice. WotC would need to alot more than going back to 3.5 to get me back buying their stuff.
Though on another note if 5th ed is something entirely new...like how 4th ed was related to 3.5...kinda new...I'll check it out.
I think D&D going to a 5th edition that is closer to Pathfinder in mechanics would be a lose-lose proposition for WotC. First, they'd risk alienating their not-inconsiderable 4th edition audience, who currently make up all their sales. Second, they'd have to hope and pray that the D&D name is enough to pull away people who switched over to Pathfinder, because otherwise there would be very little incentive for Pathfinder fans to switch. So I really doubt such a change will happen.
If it did hypothetically happen, I'd probably be in the camp that would say, "Too little, too late." 4th edition wasn't to my liking, and Pathfinder came along and picked me up as a fan. To pull me away from Pathfinder, a 5th edition would have to be markedly better in quality and support. And, quite honestly, while WotC usually puts out pretty good products, it would take a huge nosedive in the quality of Paizo books to make them inferior to WotC's best efforts so far.
Of course, if the two systems were more or less compatible, it would be a win-win for Pathfinder fans, since we could easily cannibalize good parts of 5th edition to fit our Pathfinder games. But in my case, I really doubt I would switch.
Depends on many factors.
My group got into the 3.0 to 3.5 era late on, but we found enough d20 OGL stuff to keep us occupied for several years after the big change to 4e was happening in our gaming scene. We became the dinosaurs.
But through choice, after considering 4e's possibilities, we stuck to our guns. Until we heard about pathfinder. Now 8 months later, I can conceivably say that we have enough original gaming material to last for the next decade. But who can predict the future?
If this hypothetical 5e takes what's good from pathfinder and 5e and combine it into an even better game. Then my interest would be piqued. I'd want to try it. But mine is a group that appreciates the classics. And I think that my vote would be to stick to pathfinder and it's compateable 3pp games for many years to come.
I love trying new systems at my gaming club, but there is the financial angle to consider. After collecting a plethora of 3.5 and d20 supplements only to be abandoned in favor of 4e. Tho we have tentatively begun going down this route again and placing our trust in Paizo, it wouldn't be our choice to move to a new system that renders the old obsolete. We will always choice to follow the industries direction, but only support those companies that take care of their estabilished fanbase.
Besides, if the quality and innovation of Paizo's product continue to be of as high a standard in the years to come. This hypothetical 5e would be hard pressed to compete. It is my opinion that Pathfinder will continue to deliver and fulfil my own groups gaming needs for the next decade at least so why worry what WoTC's may drum up. In a sense, Pathfinder already is a 5e.
Wait, this thread isn't in the 4th Ed subforum? That means ... we're on the free firing range!
So let me throw it off my chest:
4th Ed is a great, fun game* and I wish WotC won't abandon it anytime soon.**
* - it's just not up my alley.
** - yes, that's a geniuine wish, for more than one reason...
I hope 4th Ed does sticks around too. People enjoy playing it even if I'm not particularly interested in it.
5.5e would revert to 4e.
No more WOTC for me.
"There must be some kinda way out of here"
Said the joker to the thief
"There's too much confusion
I can't get no relief"
Well, I personally don't think I will be buying any Wotc products again.
I think Paizo has the best marketing and customer feed back. :)
|
WOTC trying to retool D&D to look more like Pathfinder strikes me as a really silly idea. Right now the two systems serve very different audiences and frankly at the moment I'd say that there's still a lot of growth potential for the 4e system. There's no point in abandoning that market now that they've opened it up.
What's far more likely is for WOTC to attempt to buy out Paizo and take over Pathfinder - after all, a lot of the Pathfinder team used to be at WOTC or TSR back in the day. Some fanboys might cry out in dismay, but the two companies still have a pretty convivial relationship unless I'm mistaken.
On the more unlikely side, WOTC could attempt to somehow repeal the OGL. However, the legal and public relations nightmare which would result from that scarcely bears thinking about.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
What's far more likely is for WOTC to attempt to buy out Paizo and take over Pathfinder - after all, a lot of the Pathfinder team used to be at WOTC or TSR back in the day. Some fanboys might cry out in dismay, but the two companies still have a pretty convivial relationship unless I'm mistaken.
Paizo is privately owned, so WotC could not possibly buy it out unless the owners (Lisa & Vic) agreed to the transaction.
The OGL can't be repealed.
|
|
I doubt it would happen. I'd likely at least try the game, though, without dropping Pathfinder. WotC could use a good deal of Paizo content because of the OGL, and I wouldn't necessarily begrudge their doing so. That being said, I have my doubts about their ability to compete with Paizo due to their current corporate structure, including their digital offerings, selling models, communication and customer service.
Actually, there are more similarities between Pathfinder and 4E then differences, and it wouldn't require drastic changes to bring in more 3.5 elements. So if it is done right, there will be little risk in loosing the current customers, as long as they take in consideration what people have already invested, and make a new version easy on the pocket book; release the rules for free, and provide digital tools or books for those that want to pay. But in the end, that should not be the ultimate focus, as it is more important to provide the adventures, supplments, etc. to support and show case the rule set.
|
|
On the more unlikely side, WOTC could attempt to somehow repeal the OGL. However, the legal and public relations nightmare which would result from that scarcely bears thinking about.
Although the OGL has some flaws as a license IMHO (the vague PI/OC split, managing credit, etc.), that's not one of them. Can't be repealed. The downside is that since WotC owns the OGL, only they can offer updated usable versions of the license that cover existing OGL material, and that's not likely.
Crap, can't edit my first post to remove the link to the thread that aparently blew up. If a some one at Paizo reads this, could you remove that for me please?
My problem would be that I'd be choosing between a game that is, at least at the time, better for what I want to do vs. one done by a company I want to support. Now if money wasn't an issue, I'd go for both. Unfortunately that's not the case and I don't want to buy a game that I'm not going to use in a game. WotC could go splatbook crazy and produce anything that popped into their heads regardless of how it effects the game but they might not. Paizo might continue to provide the customer service they have been or they could start stuffing rabid wolverines down customers' pants.
Now I seriously doubt WotC would actually do this. It's possible that they might move closer to PF with 5th Ed (if they ever do a 5th Ed), like comparing 1st Ed with 3rd, or they could stick with what the style of play they have with 4th. They could also go with something that plays different from 3rd and 4th.
WOTC trying to retool D&D to look more like Pathfinder strikes me as a really silly idea. Right now the two systems serve very different audiences and frankly at the moment I'd say that there's still a lot of growth potential for the 4e system. There's no point in abandoning that market now that they've opened it up.
What's far more likely is for WOTC to attempt to buy out Paizo and take over Pathfinder - after all, a lot of the Pathfinder team used to be at WOTC or TSR back in the day. Some fanboys might cry out in dismay, but the two companies still have a pretty convivial relationship unless I'm mistaken.
On the more unlikely side, WOTC could attempt to somehow repeal the OGL. However, the legal and public relations nightmare which would result from that scarcely bears thinking about.
I started this thread as a hypothetical situation. I don't think that it is a likely senario I just thought it was an interesting to think about as it is not impossible.
Now I seriously doubt WotC would actually do this. It's possible that they might move closer to PF with 5th Ed (if they ever do a 5th Ed), like comparing 1st Ed with 3rd, or they could stick with what the style of play they have with 4th. They could also go with something that plays different from 3rd and 4th.
"If they ever do a 6th Ed"? I would say that is one hell of a safe bet. I'd bet that 5th Ed. will drop easily within ten years.
This is just a hypothetical topic that I started thinking about due to another thread:
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/community/gaming/4thEdition/mikeMearls IsTrollingWhat would people think if WotC looked at the success of Pathfinder and made a 5th Ed for DnD that was like Pathfinder, maybe with some overall improvements due to the fact Paizo has already done a lot of trial and error testing? I don't want to slight the folks at Paizo, but some times you can't come up with ALL the cool ideas. If you're interested in this assume that 5th Ed is as similar to PF as PF is to 3.5, very close but can still be told apart.
I have some general ideas on how I expect others would react. I'd imagine that there would be those who play PF and 4th who might feel jilted as they lost support for one game. I'd imagine that a lot of players who just do 4th ed wouldn't be happy. I also think there would be those who stuck with PF due to fewer probable splat books as both progressed and Paizo's customer support. On the other hand there would be those who would go to 5th Ed because they came to PF because it was an improvement over 3.5 and was being supported. If WotC improved on what Paizo did and was able to publish material not covered by the SRD, I'd imagine some would leave PF behind.
I'm curious about this because I don't know what I'd do myself. I came to Pathfinder because it was better then 3.5 but I've been impressed with Paizo's attention to and reliance on the gamer community. I don't see PF as perfect and, going with the idea that this hypothetical version of 5th Ed is closer to my ideal, it would definately tempt me. On the other hand I definately want to keep supporting Paizo.
What do you think you'd do?
I don't really care for WoTC's business practices so they would have to change things on many levels before I support them again.
I don't really care what WoTC/Hasbro does. I will never go back to them or buy their products. If they bought out Paizo, then I'd stop buying the franchise altogether.
I do not mess with 4E because of how WotC treated their customers. I have no clue how good or bad a game 4E was. When they announced it and all the changes they were making to all their campaign worlds (i.e. fluff "disasters" to force you to rebuy every book they made if you wanted to continue to play in them rather than leaving the worlds alone except for updating the rules) I canned them and am not going back.
So, even if they made rules more in line with paizo and/or 3.5 I wouldn't go back to them. They took that horse out, shot it, dismembered it, and set it aflame a long time ago.
Assuming Paizo doesn't do the same thing with Golarion, I'll be with them regardless of what edition they choose. (not that worlds shouldn't change and evolve with time.. but "rocks fall, Golarion is advanced xd100 years and all your old books are trash" will not keep me as a customer no matter now shiny the rule set.)
-S
From a business stand point as a publisher I would look at 5E, I'd give 5E a play, but it would take alot to convince me to jump ship at this point (or even dual stat my products).
Lets say 5E (regardless of the system) has an OGL, quality SRD and a compatibility license. Ok, well, the first thing we'd want to see is, how well is it received. It could back fire on them, make their current customer base feel like Wizards has turned their back, translating to lost customers. Or it could be received as the new gaming holy grail. Fan reaction is tough to guess with this little information.
Then there's the license. As I've said elsewhere, I'm not interested in going copyright only and would only support a system if there was a license (free or paid). I'd do OGL only, but I'd rather stick to a closer license. If 5E doesn't have a license, I'm not in. If it has a license, I'd have to look very closely at the terms of that license. Could Wizards shut me down without warning? Can I support other OGL games at the same time? If the answer to either of these is yes, my answer is no. Am I limited in what kinds of products I can produce? This one is a depends. I mean I know I'm not going to be allowed to produce a book with the words "Core Rulebook" on the cover and I am quite certain that I"m not going to be allowed to reproduce rules in its entirety. Those I"m fine with. But if I can't copy the stat block for a red dragon, or if I can't change the fluff of a certain race. That's a no.
Then there's the plan going forward. The last year-ish of 4E's life has been unfocused to say the least. JBE flies close to the license holder. That's what we do. For example, Paizo came out with Kingmaker, so we released Book of Beasts: Monsters of the River Nations and the Book of the River Nations series. Wizards had a set setting, core book, and an expansion book plan (discussion if it was good or not is for a different thread). For about a year now, we've seen that plan completely fall apart. No DMG 3, no player's guide for Dark Sun, Essentials, no core books for ... what ... 6-8 months. I know what Paizo's plan going forward is. AP's as the bread and butter, monthly campaign settings enhance, stand alone modules and player books every other month, and 3 RPG book/year. They have changed it over time, but we have a reasonable expectation of these. So we can plan. I'd need to see what Wizard's plan going forward is.
Then there's the money issue. Can I make a profit with it? I'll watch how other 3rd party products are received. If well, I'll do my own test product.
But then there's the loyalty aspect that is going to be a tough nut to crack. Paizo has treated me well. Very well. Even if all of the above is great. Even if I can make a tidy profit with 5E. Even if it re-energizes the gaming base and pathfinder starts losing fans, I'd still be very reluctant to leave Pathfinder for 5E. And while business is business, this is also personal for me. I write for Pathfinder because I love the game and think very highly of the Paizo crew. Leaving that wouldn't be easy.
Sorry for ramblings.
Sorry for ramblings.
Please don't apologize! It's great to get insight from a publisher rather then the standard fan base. It was very insightful, thank you.
I'm never leaving Pathfinder because I love the world. It's like Forgotten Realms without Drizzt and Elminster or any of those characters from the book. Not to mention the art is cool and they have more than one black iconic character.
Petty, I know....
I foretell one, or both outcomes...
A) 5E will be a system that is fully anchored in an online environment. 4E is halfway there, but 5E will finally have the online tabletop software realized and it's prime business model will be built to give a fully digital presentation of the game, via web, tablet computers, or future microsoft surface type devices.
B) Paizo buys WotC from Hasbro.
Choice A will never happen.
I'll amend that to say they will attempt it but it will fail. Take a look at every digital initiative WotC has undertaken the majority have been abject failures and often years behind current technology and expectations. They are programing in Silverlight for the gods sake. If Microsoft has a competative tablet or smartphone by the time 5e D&D is created I'll be shocked like standing in a pack of Shock Lizards.
Microsoft Surface is an expensive joke. Go check out the gamer talk tech section here and see what people are trying to do for virtual tables and how expensive it is. Microsoft does not have a market worthy phone, and no tablet until 2012 at the latest. WotC has hooked their digital future to the wrong horse. Even the makers of Minecraft know where the money is :P .
I do not mess with 4E because of how WotC treated their customers. I have no clue how good or bad a game 4E was. When they announced it and all the changes they were making to all their campaign worlds (i.e. fluff "disasters" to force you to rebuy every book they made if you wanted to continue to play in them rather than leaving the worlds alone except for updating the rules) I canned them and am not going back.
All their campaign worlds? You mean Forgotten Realms? Cuz that was the only one that had a tremendous fluff disaster. Eberron remained intact, as did Dark Sun. You're tripping.
Also, you weren't forced to buy the new books. You could play in Forgotten Realms in 4e using old books just fine. Nothing is forcing you to use the "current" timeline.
For a bunch of supposedly creative people, it sure seems like some gamers have a hard time thinking outside even the flimsiest of boxes.
Choice A will never happen.
Sure it will.
I'll amend that to say they will attempt it but it will fail. Take a look at every digital initiative WotC has undertaken the majority have been abject failures and often years behind current technology and expectations.
Except for, y'know, their Character Builder/Adventure Tools/Compendium, which is a more sophisticated toolset (and one that's still being added on to!) than anything produced for any tabletop roleplaying game, ever.
Yeah, they've had crappy digital products in the past. They are, however, learning. They now have a solid software development team in house, they've got their update schedule flowing nicely, etc.
Say what you will about their hit-and-miss record, it's still more than any other tabletop gaming company has even attempted. And those of us patient enough to wait for the tools to mature have been rewarded pretty handsomely.
They are programing in Silverlight for the gods sake.
From what reading up I've done on the subject, the consensus seems to be that there are a number of great reasons for them to be working in Silverlight, and that people who rail against it generally don't understand it all that well.
Microsoft Surface is an expensive joke.
The original Surface table cost $12,000. The Surface 2.0 table, a far more sophisticated piece of hardware, will cost about $7,500. Within a few years, we'll start to see Surface-like interfaces reach very affordable price points.
And, of course, for those who were actually able to play with SurfaceScapes hands-on, it's also totally awesome.
For a bunch of supposedly creative people, it sure seems like some gamers have a hard time thinking outside even the flimsiest of boxes.
Doing the work yourself kinda defeats one of the major purposes of using a published campaign setting. He doesn't like what WotC did with FR, so he doesn't buy WotC products. I don't see the point of thinly-veiled jabs.
I do not mess with 4E because of how WotC treated their customers. I have no clue how good or bad a game 4E was. When they announced it and all the changes they were making to all their campaign worlds (i.e. fluff "disasters" to force you to rebuy every book they made if you wanted to continue to play in them rather than leaving the worlds alone except for updating the rules) I canned them and am not going back.All their campaign worlds? You mean Forgotten Realms? Cuz that was the only one that had a tremendous fluff disaster. Eberron remained intact, as did Dark Sun. You're tripping.
Also, you weren't forced to buy the new books. You could play in Forgotten Realms in 4e using old books just fine. Nothing is forcing you to use the "current" timeline.
For a bunch of supposedly creative people, it sure seems like some gamers have a hard time thinking outside even the flimsiest of boxes.
So your solution to them [bleep] canning things to force a rebuy of books is that I can not buy it and continue to buy their rules? pft. Sorry, but no thank you. Crap on a customer and they stop being your customer. How we spend our money is the little voice we get with most companies.
And yes, FR. I loved FR. Past tense. The old one, before "rocks fall, we redid the campaign and stuck the same name on it". I didn't stick around to see how many campaigns they screwed up after that: one was enough. It showed me how they thought of the consumer and I moved on.
I still have all my FR books. All my Eberron, Spelljammer, Mastica, Al'Qadim.. and I can, anytime I want to, convert the material over to Pathfinder and keep the campaigns going. What I don't do though is continue to support the company that crapped on it by continuing to give them my money.
If I am going to take the time to update the material then I'll do it using a ruleset from a company that didn't take a giant dump on its consumer base.
They'd already screwed up Dragon Lance, then FR, why am I going to keep buying their stuff? No thank you.
-S
For a bunch of supposedly creative people, it sure seems like some gamers have a hard time thinking outside even the flimsiest of boxes.Doing the work yourself kinda defeats one of the major purposes of using a published campaign setting. He doesn't like what WotC did with FR, so he doesn't buy WotC products. I don't see the point of thinly-veiled jabs.
There's no work he had to do himself. All he has to do is open up his old books and say "Okay, my campaign starts here."
Unless, of course, he wants the new player options or monsters, but those have nothing to do with the timeline and everything to do with the system.
He didn't like the new timeline? Nothing to stop him from using the old one. He acted like he either had to use the most recent setting info or nothing at all. He was apparently unwilling to step outside of that unfortunate box he'd constructed for himself.
I think such direct competition is the only possible way we could further polarise the edition wars. Well, unless WotC releases 5th Edition, which focuses primarily on the destruction of the evil Democrats (Republicans).