Why would they?
How many people that play Pathfinder will buy a Pathfinder AP? Lots.
How many people that play 4e will buy a Paizo AP for 4e? Not many.
A larger proportion of a smaller group of people would result in as many if not more sales than a small proportion of a larger group of people, and that's being generous and assuming that 4e is out-playing Pathfinder by a large margin - from what I have seen it may not be.
Consider, all the 3PPs that write material for Pathfinder compared to the few that write material for 4e. Why is that? Because writing for 4e just isn't as profitable as writing for Pathfinder, that's why. WotC's approach to 3PPs is to all intents and purposes to ignore them, it's a 3PP unfriendly environment. Paizo, on the other hand, encourage 3PPs and promote their material. Paizo don't do 4e material because of the 3PP-unfriendly attitude of WotC, which left them out in the cold when the change to 4e came along.
On top of that, is 4e really that much bigger a market than Pathfinder that you HAVE to get into it? Actually, no. 4e has nothing like the market saturation 3.x achieved, and while WotC is not going to fade away, they aren't the 800lb gorilla they once were, and it's a situation entirely of their own making.
I am certain that quite a number of 4e players could appreciate the quality APs paizo produces, i don´t think it would be worth it.
Wizards of the Coast are putting out so many books that it seems quite hard / expensive to get all the essential stuff. Add the cost of their online service and well....
That said if a DM want´s to use pathfinder material noone is stopping them, and aside from some things (like the old wizard specializations in RotR) they should be able to cover most things with powers and rituals.
I am certain that quite a number of 4e players could appreciate the quality APs paizo produces, i don´t think it would be worth it.
Wizards of the Coast are putting out so many books that it seems quite hard / expensive to get all the essential stuff. Add the cost of their online service and well....
That said if a DM want´s to use pathfinder material noone is stopping them, and aside from some things (like the old wizard specializations in RotR) they should be able to cover most things with powers and rituals.
True enough. No different than adapting some old 2e adventures with some updated tweaks. Use the story, change the stats.
Personally, as someone who plays both 4E and Pathfinder, I think it would be great if Paizo published an AP for 4E.
However, based on Mr. Jacobs' reply to the question, I believe there's probably an interesting story behind this. I will respect the privacy of the nice staff at Paizo by not asking about it though.
|
We'll bring up the question again next year after you have some more wine... ^_^With the so-called "edition wars" thankfully behind us and the GSL updated (slightly), any chance Paizo will publish even a single supp, mod, or even an AP for 4e?No. Not interested. Sorry.
I don't think all the cocaine, wine, heroine, and/or illicit drugs in the world could change his mind. That was definitely a "In no uncertain terms" kind of response.
Personally, as someone who plays both 4E and Pathfinder, I think it would be great if Paizo published an AP for 4E.
However, based on Mr. Jacobs' reply to the question, I believe there's probably an interesting story behind this. I will respect the privacy of the nice staff at Paizo by not asking about it though.
I'm guessing not much more interesting than, "Not lucrative enough." Business is business in the end, I doubt Paizo has a whole lot of Edition Zealots in the top ranks, and if they even thought they could earn a substantial profit from a 4E offering or two, they'd probably do it.
But given what James, Erik, and Lisa have said before about Pathfinder's profitability, why would they?
I'd have to imagine that 4th edition would be pretty boring to write for.
I don't see why -- no more boring than Pathfinder, for sure, and in my experience more liberating on the GM side of the equation because you don't have gamers browbeating you about how a given NPC doesn't have enough feats in his stat block, or how impossible it is for a given magical trap or effect to exist by rules as written.
|
|
I don't see why -- no more boring than Pathfinder, for sure, and in my experience more liberating on the GM side of the equation because you don't have gamers browbeating you about how a given NPC doesn't have enough feats in his stat block, or how impossible it is for a given magical trap or effect to exist by rules as written.
The typical response to that, as a GM, should be "Who is running this game?" That should be the end of it.
Writing for 4e would be a diversion from their core market and brand. Everything they write for Pathfinder increases the value of their Pathfinder brand. Products they publish for 4e, no matter how well written or how many they sell, don't benefit them nearly as much. I'm sure a lot of people would love to see Paizo material for 4E and would purchase it in a heartbeat, but it's a losing proposition for Paizo.
Breaking into a new market is all well and good, but not when it diffuses your brand image.
I'd love to see 4E support from Paizo, but if I were to advise them, I'd advise against it.
With the so-called "edition wars" thankfully behind us and the GSL updated (slightly), any chance Paizo will publish even a single supp, mod, or even an AP for 4e?
Don't let people be too hard on you. That is a good question, and one that seems very logical.
But what you don't know (and likely couldn't) is that there is way more too it than that. And it doesn't even have much to do with brand or division of fans (though those are good and valid concerns and are the safe and easy answer, so you are right when you mention those VK; there is just more to it than that). It's deeper seated than that.
Not trying to resurrect edition wars. But the 3e/4e split didn't just happen on edition lines. It also involved Wizards terminating Paizo's license to do Dungeon and Dragon mags, which Paizo had brought to the highest heights they had ever been (well, for Dungeon anyway, Dragon under Paizo never got to the heights of Wormy et al from the old days, but it sure got close). What Paizo did with Dungeon was and still is unmatched. It involved people. It involved jobs. It involved design philosophy. It involved differences over core thoughts on what the game is and should be about. It involved differences on key gaming premises and design ideas.
From the trunk of D&D 3E has sprung two very different branches: 4E and Pathfinder. And more than just rules divides them. Design philosophy divides them. I dont think you could actually make the adventures Paizo makes using the 4E rules. The two just don't go together. 4E is all about set piece combats. Just see their adventures. Its so true they even changed the format of how they publish and present adventures. Gone is story and character and development and anything not related to the game table. Paizo is all about story and character. And there is a belief (that is clearly held, whether or not 100% true) that you can't do what the developers at Paizo want to do with the 4E rules.
So that said, it would surprise me to see James (or anyone at Paizo) change their mind, even with another year and more wine :)
Clark
Also there are already people buying the APs and converting them to 4th ed....and I doubt enough 4th ed fans will buy a 4th ed module to make up for the Pathfinder fans who won't...
Personally, as someone who plays both 4E and Pathfinder, I think it would be great if Paizo published an AP for 4E.
However, based on Mr. Jacobs' reply to the question, I believe there's probably an interesting story behind this. I will respect the privacy of the nice staff at Paizo by not asking about it though.
I don't think it's a secret, WotC made it quite clear that 3PPs are in 4e on sufferance, and it doesn't really want them. That's why Pathfinder exists in the first place, really.
Is 4e a 'dying' system? No, but it's never going to get the level of support 3.5 did. There's 4e, there's Essentials (or 4.5e, lets face it), and at some point their sales will reach the point where there will have to be a 5e ... or more likely a sale of the D&D name to another company.
Personally, as someone who plays both 4E and Pathfinder, I think it would be great if Paizo published an AP for 4E.
However, based on Mr. Jacobs' reply to the question, I believe there's probably an interesting story behind this. I will respect the privacy of the nice staff at Paizo by not asking about it though.
I don't think it's a secret, WotC made it quite clear that 3PPs are in 4e on sufferance, and it doesn't really want them. That's why Pathfinder exists in the first place, really.
Is 4e a 'dying' system? No, but it's never going to get the level of support 3.5 did. There's 4e, there's Essentials (or 4.5e, lets face it), and at some point their sales will reach the point where there will have to be a 5e ... or more likely a sale of the D&D name to another company.
At this point I am not even really sure that D&D is a much better trademark than Pathfinder. If may not be that well known - but on the other hand people won´t remember all the D&D hate in the 80s (and the terms dungen and dungeonmaster can cause misunderstandings..and sometimes uncommon invitations^^)
|
D&D is a very powerful trademark. Many people in the US use the term "Dungeons and Dragons" for any RPG they come across.
I was at GenCon once, I've been asked by some lady in McDonalds about my business in Indy. (Sheesh, why do Americans randomly ask random people about random things! We don't do that over here.) I've said I'm here to see GenCon and she replied "Oh, that Dungeons and Dragons fair".
Obviously, this is much different in Europe, where D&D never gained as strong a foothold.
Can we stop with the Edition War Hatorade? It's really really really old, and the gaming pond is big enough for everybody to play in.
|
With the so-called "edition wars" thankfully behind us and the GSL updated (slightly), any chance Paizo will publish even a single supp, mod, or even an AP for 4e?Don't let people be too hard on you. That is a good question, and one that seems very logical.
But what you don't know (and likely couldn't) is that there is way more too it than that. And it doesn't even have much to do with brand or division of fans (though those are good and valid concerns and are the safe and easy answer, so you are right when you mention those VK; there is just more to it than that). It's deeper seated than that.
Not trying to resurrect edition wars. But the 3e/4e split didn't just happen on edition lines. It also involved Wizards terminating Paizo's license to do Dungeon and Dragon mags, which Paizo had brought to the highest heights they had ever been (well, for Dungeon anyway, Dragon under Paizo never got to the heights of Wormy et al from the old days, but it sure got close). What Paizo did with Dungeon was and still is unmatched. It involved people. It involved jobs. It involved design philosophy. It involved differences over core thoughts on what the game is and should be about. It involved differences on key gaming premises and design ideas.
From the trunk of D&D 3E has sprung two very different branches: 4E and Pathfinder. And more than just rules divides them. Design philosophy divides them. I dont think you could actually make the adventures Paizo makes using the 4E rules. The two just don't go together. 4E is all about set piece combats. Just see their adventures. Its so true they even changed the format of how they publish and present adventures. Gone is story and character and development and anything not related to the game table. Paizo is all about story and character. And there is a belief (that is clearly held, whether or not 100% true) that you can't do what the developers at Paizo want to do with the 4E rules.
So that said, it would surprise me to see James (or anyone...
Interesting. And thanks, Mr. Peterson. You're right: it never would have crossed my mind about the philosophical differences. I can immediately see it from a business perspective: just look at Mongoose and Goodman games and the directions they're taking the company. But yeah, as an RPGA DM and PFS GM, I can see what you mean about the differences in terms of adventures, etc.
From the trunk of D&D 3E has sprung two very different branches: 4E and Pathfinder. And more than just rules divides them. Design philosophy divides them. I dont think you could actually make the adventures Paizo makes using the 4E rules. The two just don't go together. 4E is all about set piece combats. Just see their adventures. Its so true they even changed the format of how they publish and present adventures. Gone is story and character and development and anything not related to the game table. Paizo is all about story and character. And there is a belief (that is clearly held, whether or not 100% true) that you can't do what the developers at Paizo want to do with the 4E rules.
While I won't disagree with you that differences in design philosophy separate PF/3e and 4e (because there are differences, and they are important differences), they are differences that, in the end, amount to nothing more than different ways of accomplishing the same goal. I mean, the very fact that people are easily converting adventures from one to the other speaks to that; if it were not possible to tell Pathfinder stories in the 4e system, the game I spent the afternoon running today would not have taken place.
Last week I completed my conversion of Howl of the Carrion King, the first adventure in the Legacy of Fire AP. Feel free to take a look at it. When I ran it, did it run differently than I imagined it might run in 3.5/Pathfinder? A little. Did I feel, at any point, as though 4e was making it more difficult for me to tell the story presented in the adventure?
Not once.
EDIT: This isn't to say that I don't understand Paizo's decision to go their own way. I absolutely do. I voiced my desire for 4e-compatible APs early on. When I was told that wouldn't be happening, I went and did what I thought would be the next best thing.
With the so-called "edition wars" thankfully behind us and the GSL updated (slightly), any chance Paizo will publish even a single supp, mod, or even an AP for 4e?
You have not been to other forums. The war still goes on. RPG.net if you need to check.
I also don't think making anything that tells gamers to buy the other guy's books is a good idea when you can spend that time to make and market your own stuff. It is definite not like WoTC is doing anything for anyone else. They just made crystal keep take all their files down, even the legal ones.
Wizards of the Coast are putting out so many books that it seems quite hard / expensive to get all the essential stuff. Add the cost of their online service and well....
One of the points of the online service is that if you use it you don't need to buy all that stuff. 4e is pretty cheap to get into. If you're a player, buy Heroes of the Fallen Lands or Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms. If you're a DM, buy the DM's Kit. That's it. Enjoy. Heck, if you're pressed for cash you can just get the red box.
The typical response to that, as a GM, should be "Who is running this game?" That should be the end of it.
ENHenry was speaking as a publisher, not necessarily as a GM. In all likelihood, it was GMs doing the browbeating.
Hum lets see: WotC nearly killed Paizo by pulling the Dungeon and Dragon Magazine licenses early (I think it was after about two years of publishing). They then almost killed the company the company again with their licensing of 4e. Add to this that WotC got a million dollars worth of Paizo's artwork when the magazine licenses got yanked. If I'm remembering right the "official" Paizo policy towards WotC is that they remain friends with a number of people working there and will never, ever, do another business deal with that company.
D&D is a very powerful trademark. Many people in the US use the term "Dungeons and Dragons" for any RPG they come across.
I was at GenCon once, I've been asked by some lady in McDonalds about my business in Indy. (Sheesh, why do Americans randomly ask random people about random things! We don't do that over here.) I've said I'm here to see GenCon and she replied "Oh, that Dungeons and Dragons fair".
Obviously, this is much different in Europe, where D&D never gained as strong a foothold.
That's because, despite claims by many that gaming has become more mainstream, you're "average" American knows virtually nothing about the gaming industry.
Everyone has at least heard of D&D though the attitude has changed from of 80's "D&D = devil worship" to one of casual indifference. As one who remembers the major news networks and programs of the '80's repeatedly reporting stories of people who threw their D&D books into the fire and heard "demonic wails" come from the flames, I'm quite happy with casual indifference.
As for asking random questions, Americans are more isolated from other countries than people in Europe. As a result, anything from "across the pond", in either direction, has a more exotic feel to it than one might expect. Even the most casual things can be viewed with great interest.
PF and 4E. Paizo and WotC. They don't make the same games, they don't have the same goals and they aren't pursued in the same way. It astounds me that this thread's subject question continues to be asked over and over. Do people on the Wizards forums ask if WotC is going to do any PF stuff? If so, has the answer ever been yes? Would you ever expect it to be?
They aren't the same games and don't deliver the same experience. If they did, there would be no need to convert anything and the "split" would never have occured. If you want cross brand support, look to the people who are fans of both. That's going to be your best source.
SJ
PF and 4E. Paizo and WotC. They don't make the same games, they don't have the same goals and they aren't pursued in the same way. It astounds me that this thread's subject question continues to be asked over and over. Do people on the Wizards forums ask if WotC is going to do any PF stuff? If so, has the answer ever been yes? Would you ever expect it to be?
No, no, and no.
They aren't the same games and don't deliver the same experience. If they did, there would be no need to convert anything
By that rationale, 3.5 and Pathfinder aren't the same games and don't deliver the same experiences, since people convert 3.5 adventures to PFRPG all the time (there are lots of threads on it).
Also, whatever update happened in 2009 with the GSL, my cursory glance at it just now doesn't tell me it would be appealing in any way to use. It can still be revoked at any time and still contains many icky clauses that basically give all the power to WotC.
The words "cursory glance" should pretty much never be used with respect to a legal document. I'm curious as to how you believe the GSL gives "all the power to WotC".
|
|
Also, whatever update happened in 2009 with the GSL, my cursory glance at it just now doesn't tell me it would be appealing in any way to use. It can still be revoked at any time and still contains many icky clauses that basically give all the power to WotC.The words "cursory glance" should pretty much never be used with respect to a legal document. I'm curious as to how you believe the GSL gives "all the power to WotC".
A cursory glance tells me that they still can pull the license anyway at any time, any place, for any reason.
That's all the power.
Also, whatever update happened in 2009 with the GSL, my cursory glance at it just now doesn't tell me it would be appealing in any way to use. It can still be revoked at any time and still contains many icky clauses that basically give all the power to WotC.The words "cursory glance" should pretty much never be used with respect to a legal document. I'm curious as to how you believe the GSL gives "all the power to WotC".A cursory glance tells me that they still can pull the license anyway at any time, any place, for any reason.
That's all the power.
No, that's just having the ability to terminate the license.
But it's clear that you believe any license that can be unilaterally terminated by the licensor to be unacceptable. And, hey, that's fine. Maybe revocable licenses aren't your thing.
But saying it's unappealing in general because it's revocable? Presumably, then, you believe the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Compatibility License to be similarly unappealing. Because, y'know, it's unilaterally revocable.
If that's an example of an icky clause that gives all the power to WotC, I guess you must think the PF Compatibility License is icky, too.
I don't see why -- no more boring than Pathfinder, for sure, and in my experience more liberating on the GM side of the equation because you don't have gamers browbeating you about how a given NPC doesn't have enough feats in his stat block, or how impossible it is for a given magical trap or effect to exist by rules as written.The typical response to that, as a GM, should be "Who is running this game?" That should be the end of it.
Agreed. This is just ridiculous, trying to talk crap about PF with the insinuation that its players are all rules lawyers. Edition wars apparently aren't over.
Well, par for the course for EN.
With the so-called "edition wars" thankfully behind us and the GSL updated (slightly), any chance Paizo will publish even a single supp, mod, or even an AP for 4e?
I haven't been following 4E very carefully, so maybe you can fill me in: Is there any third-party company that seems to be thriving by making modules/supplements/etc. for 4E?
A cursory glance tells me that they still can pull the license anyway at any time, any place, for any reason.That's all the power.
And past experience tells us that wizards will do so without blinking.
I don't see why -- no more boring than Pathfinder, for sure, and in my experience more liberating on the GM side of the equation because you don't have gamers browbeating you about how a given NPC doesn't have enough feats in his stat block, or how impossible it is for a given magical trap or effect to exist by rules as written.The typical response to that, as a GM, should be "Who is running this game?" That should be the end of it.Agreed. This is just ridiculous, trying to talk crap about PF with the insinuation that its players are all rules lawyers. Edition wars apparently aren't over.
Well, par for the course for EN.
Again, he was speaking from a publisher's standpoint, someone who has actually had to deal with gamers (and, again, probably DMs themselves) nitpicking over his 3.5/PFRPG NPCs. He wasn't insinuating so much as saying it actually happened.
In the same way you'd probably take umbrage to my saying "Par for the course for the Paizo community," about a sizable chunk of this thread, chances are the EN community probably doesn't appreciate your own snide commentary. Golden rule, and all that.
I haven't been following 4E very carefully, so maybe you can fill me in: Is there any third-party company that seems to be thriving by making modules/supplements/etc. for 4E?
EN Publishing would be a good example. They just finished up a full adventure path and have another set to begin very soon.
I'm curious, was there some recent change to the GSL that prompted this thread? I checked WotC's site and ENWorld and didn't turn anything up.
Nope, the GSL's last revision was in 2009.
Gentlemen, gentlemen settle down. <rolls diplomacy check>
This reminds me, I need to check on that zeitgeist thing. Yeah I probably spelled it wrong.