|
One thing I don't get is why people cancel their subscription just because they don't like the theme of the AP. You probably won't be able to run all APs anyway (especially when you include third party material like Way of the Wicked, Razor Coast or Rise of the Drow).
But even if you would never run an AP, it still contains lots of useful stuff, bestiaries, gazetteers, deity articles, magic items, etc.
Of all the APs I can only see me running Carrion Crown (which I run at the moment), Curse of the Crimson Throne, Legacy of Fire, Rise of the Runelords and maybe Shattered Star. I can't wait to get my hands on Reign of Winter. But do I regret owning all the other APs? No, they are nicely done and contain lots of stuff to salvage.
|
Well, the AP sub is taking a small price hike, so that might be a factor.
Our hobby is full of ... extremely conservative people, as far as gaming goes. It's the castles, dragons and princesses people with a very narrow and focused vision of what "fantasy" is. There are several things they just won't stomach, such as an AP that travels across the stars and visits WW1 Europe. I've spoken to few such folks, and they just plain out say that Paizo is doing stuff that's too weird and they wish it was more Forgotten Realms or Warhammer Fantasy.
Other than that I largely agree, I'm never going to run all the APs I have, but I absolutely love them as resources for my games.
While I'm in the group that loves new and exciting adventures, the truth is that it's their money and thus, their choice to spend it. If they feel that they won't be getting their money's, that's their choice to make. Even with the articles, the adventure still makes up a good half of the book so to them, they are paying $22 on only half a product. I can understand cancelling, especially in this recession.
Though Gorbacz is pretty much correct. There are some people that can't stand to see deviating options and settings from the standard Tolkein world, even if they don't have to allow such options in their home game. The fact that the option exists bothers them, which is something I'll never understand.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not everyone can afford to spare $20+/month on things he won't use. Even if they are well written, well designed and with great graphics.
While I love exotic worlds that are not pseudo-medieval Europe and are hardly conservative when it comes to settings I strongly dislike idea of mixing D&D worlds and Earth. Different continuum for me. If I want have Earth/fantasy crossover I can have Ars Magica, Amber, World Of Darkness, Over The Edge, Infinite Worlds and a few other systems. D&D and related settings are no-no, though. That's my personal weirdness.
I also outrightly refuse to play myself in any game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm in the "I own and buy everything even if I'll never be able to run even 50% of it" crowd. I'm also always (and I mean always) open to new ideas, concepts, and genres.
However, that being said, I don't begrudge those who make selective purchases. On the contrary, I recognize that selective purchasing is actually the norm among consumers (in any industry). The collectors, the guys (and gals) who buy everything: we're the weird outliers. Not everyone has the cash to toss around on a luxury hobby like gaming (and it is a luxury) and for most of those who have to make fiscally responsible choices they do so by only purchasing what they know they'll enjoy. When you have to be fiscally mindful you take less risk with your purchases. That's life.
I had a bunch more written on the subject of the outcry against "non-traditional fantasy" but the messageboard decided to punch me in the face and deleted all three paragraphs. I may comment more in a bit once I get over the discouragement of losing the last ten minutes of typing.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah as much as I like the AP line, even I thought about cancelling with the price hike.
Earth-616...
Syberia...
Watch out for a short fella with Canadian accent, I say.
Well, since most people in that situation are going to be either Russian or interplanetary travellers there's a good chance no one's going to be able to tell the difference between an American and a Canadian. Not until it's too late anyway. ;)
Fun fact and tangent: it's the "non-city-folk" Canadians that perpetuate the stereotypical Canadian accent. Drives me nuts. The rest of us don't sound like that at all. Actually, most of us sound more American than most Americans, as many of us speak more like the "non-accent" spoken and perpetuated on American television, which very few Americans outside of the US west coast actually sound like in my experience.
He's right, dontcha know ;)
Don't worry. I have the typical Southern accent. It's South Carolinian (Charleston) so I sound vaguely like Foghorn Leghorn.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Odraude: Hope it didn't sound like I was over-generalizing. In my experience though, America actually has a diverse range of accents way beyond what most people see on television. Outside the west coast non-accent I've heard mid-west, mid-north, great lakes, 2 different New England accents, New York and New Jersey have another 3 or 4 between them, Texan, and about 8 or 9 distinct southern (and mid-east/southern) accents. So it seems to me anyway that most Americans actually have a fairly noticeable accent.
Granted, the typical non-accent in Canada is still only about 65% of English-speaking Canadians (obviously the Quebecois and Acadians as native French speakers have accents but most people outside of Canada wouldn't recognize it as Canadian). The other 35% is spread across Newfie, Cape Bretoners, Maritime (what I like to call "Atlantic hillbilly"), Northern Ontario, Prairie, and the Rocky Mountain accent. So it's still fairly diverse, not as diverse as the US but we've only got 1/10th the population. The Northern Ontario accent is the infamous "Fargo but with lumberjacks, dontcha know" accent. Why it has become the go-to stereotype for all Canadians, I don't know.
Back on topic: Another thing I don't know - where this conservatism for traditional fantasy in D&D/Pathfinder stems from. Seriously, it shouldn't exist. Yes, there are traditional fantasy RPGs on the market but D&D (and now Pathfinder) has never been one of them. Yes, it has a lot of elements of traditional fantasy but it has a lot of other elements as well. I don't understand the crowd that wants to keep non-Western fantasy, pirates, horror, or sci-fi or sword-and-science out of the game. They certainly can't claim it's non-traditional or even genre-mixing as all of those elements have been in the game since the beginning, as evidenced by the "Inspirational Reading" lists found in the core books dating back to the 1st edition DMG. Sci-Fi, pulp, and horror from the 1920's to 1960's have served as reference material for D&D since the game's founding.
So while I understand selective purchasing, I don't get the outcry against "non-traditional" fantasy. It's very traditional. Looking back, I'm not sure where this myth of D&D as a traditional fantasy game got started. Not from the original settings, that's for sure. Greyhawk and Blackmoor were very pulpy and included plenty of bizarre non-traditional elements as both Gygax and Arneson were inspired heavily by early sci-fi and pulp literature. So it's the not the fault of actual old-school gamers and grognards unless they have selective memory (and some of them do though I try not to fall prey to it).
Going into BECMI/late 1st edition/2nd editon and the explosion of campaign settings we see such notables as Psionics-heavy Dark Sun, bizarre and zany Planescape, gothic-horror Ravenloft, and the very polarizing Spelljammer. Out of all the niche settings of the TSR days only Birthright could be considered traditional fantasy and it certainly didn't have the coverage or popularity to influence and entire generation of gamers into thinking D&D was traditional. Going back before the setting explosion there was Mystara for BECMI but it was easily as pulpy, if not more so, than Greyhawk or Blackmoor. So the list is narrowed down and here we have it: Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms, both settings I loved when I was younger and I still remember their glory days fondly, but they certainly cleaved closer to what can be considered traditional fantasy and had the popularity and clout to make the concept stick. So, I guess, I blame FR and Dragonlance for the D&D conservative movement. They were great settings (arguably still are) but they are only two settings among nearly a dozen classic D&D settings.
What the Paizo writers are doing with Golarion is hardly "outside-the-box" considering D&D's legacy. That's why I don't understand the hesitation toward Pathfinder when it plays outside the traditional fantasy sandbox.
@Odraude: Hope it didn't sound like I was over-generalizing. In my experience though, America actually has a diverse range of accents way beyond what most people see on television. Outside the west coast non-accent I've heard mid-west, mid-north, great lakes, 2 different New England accents, New York and New Jersey have another 3 or 4 between them, Texan, and about 8 or 9 distinct southern (and mid-east/southern) accents. So it seems to me anyway that most Americans actually have a fairly noticeable accent.
Granted, the typical non-accent in Canada is still only about 65% of English-speaking Canadians (obviously the Quebecois and Acadians as native French speakers have accents but most people outside of Canada wouldn't recognize it as Canadian). The other 35% is spread across Newfie, Cape Bretoners, Maritime (what I like to call "Atlantic hillbilly"), Northern Ontario, Prairie, and the Rocky Mountain accent. So it's still fairly diverse, not as diverse as the US but we've only got 1/10th the population. The Northern Ontario accent is the infamous "Fargo but with lumberjacks, dontcha know" accent. Why it has become the go-to stereotype for all Canadians, I don't know.
Back on topic: Another thing I don't know - where this conservatism for traditional fantasy in D&D/Pathfinder stems from. Seriously, it shouldn't exist. Yes, there are traditional fantasy RPGs on the market but D&D (and now Pathfinder) has never been one of them. Yes, it has a lot of elements of traditional fantasy but it has a lot of other elements as well. I don't understand the crowd that wants to keep non-Western fantasy, pirates, horror, or sci-fi or sword-and-science out of the game. They certainly can't claim it's non-traditional or even genre-mixing as all of those elements have been in the game since the beginning, as evidenced by the "Inspirational Reading" lists found in the core books dating back to the 1st edition DMG. Sci-Fi, pulp, and horror from the 1920's to 1960's have served as reference material for D&D...
I was joking around bro :p
Oh, I know. I was just in a tangent mood. :)
<--- Guilty of bailing on the Winter AP.
<--- Not guilty of being to "extremely conservative."
That said I'm with Drejk about not wanting to cross my fantasy world with Earth. I've never been a big fan of the classic AD&D Barrier Peaks module or Gunslingers in Golarion etc. To each their own though.
I was hoping for a more Frozen North/Desert of Desolation/Survivor-type flavor in this particular AP. I'm ok with time-travel, plane-shifts, all evil APs, etc. but I'll pass on the Earth stuff. I spend enough time on this planet already.
The price hike doesn't bother me if quality is maintained. An AP like Serpent Skull at this new higher price point would shake my confidence in the AP line after the direction of this Winter AP. YMMV, as usual. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Back on topic: Another thing I don't know - where this conservatism for traditional fantasy in D&D/Pathfinder stems from. Seriously, it shouldn't exist. Yes, there are traditional fantasy RPGs on the market but D&D (and now Pathfinder) has never been one of them. Yes, it has a lot of elements of traditional fantasy but it has a lot of other elements as well. I don't understand the crowd that wants to keep non-Western fantasy, pirates, horror, or sci-fi or sword-and-science out of the game. They certainly can't claim it's non-traditional or even genre-mixing as all of those elements have been in the game since the beginning, as evidenced by the "Inspirational Reading" lists found in the core books dating back to the 1st edition DMG. Sci-Fi, pulp, and horror from the 1920's to 1960's have served as reference material for D&D...
In my case that perception is due to the D&D modules of the 70s and 80s - they were generally pretty standard fantasy (and when they werent (like the expedition to the barrier peaks) they seemed to be pretty clearly 'unusual' modules to me).
The "suggested reading for inspiration" wasnt part of D&D when I was growing up - it was the rulebooks and the modules.
That said I'm with Drejk about not wanting to cross my fantasy world with Earth. I've never been a big fan of the classic AD&D Barrier Peaks module or Gunslingers in Golarion etc. To each their own though.
I was misunderstood apparently. I have no problem with mixing fantasy with SF. I loved the basic idea behind the Dragonstar. I loved the Distant Worlds. I have no problem with firearms in Golarion (I don't like the Gunslinger class because I don't like the way the firearms were done and the class abilities itself). I'd like to tinker with androids and Numeria, as long as the crashed starship doesn't have "V@#$Ger" written on its starboard.
|
|
The "suggested reading for inspiration" wasnt part of D&D when I was growing up - it was the rulebooks and the modules.
This. Also, D&D in the US (where the 70-80% of the market dwells) is a very much an "everyman" hobby of people who usually don't have a library full of fantasy/scifi books at home and to whom fantasy = Tolkien/FR/Greyhawk.
One thing I don't get is why people cancel their subscription just because they don't like the theme of the AP.
Oh, I get it. I'm one of Gorbacz conservative gamers who prefer my fantasy somewhere between FR, Tolkien and George RR Martin. I cringed at the thought of linking my beloved homebrew with WW1 Europe, so if I intended to play all the gaming stuff I buy, I would certainly cancel. I would in fact have done it a long time ago.
Luckily for Paizo, I enjoy reading the APs, even if I don't play them. The only APs I have regretted buying was Rise of the Runelords (gross) and Shattered Star (dull), oddly enough two of the AP closest to my preferred type of fantasy.
I think a lot of this has come down to the expectations of fantasy being much different now compared to when Gygax created the game.
Outside of LOTR/Hobbit and Lovecraft, most of the books that formed major influences on early DnD are hard to come across. If I head into the Cheyenne Barnes and Noble, the fantasy section is dominated by Erikson, Martin, Abercrombie, Goodkind, Jordan, Bakker, DnD novels, etc. So people are drawing from a much different set of inspirations for "what a fantasy tale is" than a prolific reader in the 70s or early 80s.
I'd be very careful to judge that "70%-80%" of the market are located in the US - unless you have some actual, fact based numbers. Actually I find the negative implication of american fantasy education pretty.... disturbing.
And looking at the latest APs ("Shattered Star", "reign of Winter") and the upcoming "Way of Righteous" (?)does not send me into a wild and ecstatic frenzy... why exactly should I spend 18x 23 Dollars on three APs which I am unwilling/unable - because say, noone actually wants to play Mythic except for the inveterately power-greedy to use ?
As far as I can tell - judging from the we had a great story there approach, people usually do enjoy the lower levels of an AP far more than the high end, kill all the Efreet ones. Very few people actually play or even enjoy the "allmighty power group" in the upper 5 levels, where the story becomes more super-heroic and less socially interesting.
Just my 2 cents.
|
|
I've had a short brush with working in a gaming company here in Poland, we were looking into entering the US market and that's what we got back from distributors (Alliance, Esdevium) - US/CAN 70-80%, EU/AUS/NZ/SA 25%, ROW 5%.
That's purely RPGs of course, board games/minis/card games are a whole different story.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd be very careful to judge that "70%-80%" of the market are located in the US - unless you have some actual, fact based numbers. Actually I find the negative implication of american fantasy education pretty.... disturbing.
And looking at the latest APs ("Shattered Star", "reign of Winter") and the upcoming "Way of Righteous" (?)does not send me into a wild and ecstatic frenzy... why exactly should I spend 18x 23 Dollars on three APs which I am unwilling/unable - because say, noone actually wants to play Mythic except for the inveterately power-greedy to use ?
As far as I can tell - judging from the we had a great story there approach, people usually do enjoy the lower levels of an AP far more than the high end, kill all the Efreet ones. Very few people actually play or even enjoy the "allmighty power group" in the upper 5 levels, where the story becomes more super-heroic and less socially interesting.
Just my 2 cents.
I'd be careful in judging how many people actually enjoy the higher levels of an AP - unless you have some actual, fact based numbers. As for the assumption that only the power greedy players would like mythic, I find that negative implication of us Mythic fans pretty... disturbing ;)
Seriously though, there are a lot of us that like high level play, but we aren't as vocal as the people who don't like it. Never found it less socially interesting or boring. I loved the tail end of LoF, taking on efreets and Xotani.
|
To me, at least, its about voting with your wallet. For instance, I subscribed because I was excited for Carrion Crown. I stayed subscribed because Jade Regent and Skull and Shackles were also to my taste. I unsubscribed because Shattered Star was the type of AP I wasn't particularly interested in; I wasn't going to renew my subscription for quite a while because neither RoW and WotR until I learned RoW had so much travel to new locations in it. That said, I'll unsubscribe after volume six.
Basically, whatever floats your boat, but I don't want to pay for an AP I don't like thematically.
I dropped my subscription for 3 reasons
1. Won't be playing RoW
2. There was a price hike
3. The discount doesn't make up for the shipping costs
If I decide I ever want to do RoW, I can just get the pdf, which is actually cheaper than the 30% subscriber discount.
Just to be clear on my earlier statements, while I don't entirely get where the fantasy conservatism movement comes from (Steve Geddes and MMCJawa put up interesting points though), I do respect that everyone has a different threshold.
The only time I get a little a little frustrated with fantasy conservatism is when its advocates become too vocal and decry Paizo's setting and experimental efforts as badwrongfun. The boards here are pretty good at not doing that, but every so often it rears its ugly head.
As for the Earth thing in Reign of Winter. That I can totally understand. I'm very excited for it but I can definitely see it as being very polarizing even among non-conservatives. This is one of the few times in which Paizo truly is going cross-genre and being very non-traditional. It's one thing to mesh pulp and sci-fi in a fantasy setting's backyard like the game has been doing since the beginning. It's another to bring fantasy conventions to a historical drama period set on Earth.
Honestly I'm not a fan of using "conservative" as the go-to term either. I just don't want to use the word "traditionalist" as what is or isn't traditional is also very questionable. Is there a better term?
Epic Fantasy (The fantasy writing genre) might be the closest fit, although a "traditionalist" would probably be the closest, although elements of Sword and Sorcery are also present
huh...my last post made no sense. This is why I edit all of my papers at least 5 times...
What I meant to say was that Epic Fantasy and Sword and Sorcery as literary genres closest to "traditionalist" perspectives, but I am not sure how to turn that into a phrase to replace "traditionalist"
I've had a short brush with working in a gaming company here in Poland, we were looking into entering the US market and that's what we got back from distributors (Alliance, Esdevium) - US/CAN 70-80%, EU/AUS/NZ/SA 25%, ROW 5%.
That's purely RPGs of course, board games/minis/card games are a whole different story.
From pure curiosity, which one?
(If I asked that before I must admit that I don't remember)
I dropped my subscription mainly to avoid Shattered Star (hate artifact-focused modules/APs), but have since decided to grab only the pdfs that look useful...there's literally no room left on my bookshelves. I always have to alter and adjust published material for my groups; I ended up reworking Skull & Shackles to such an extent that it barely resembles the original work. In cases such as these, I see no need in a physical product.
The funny thing is that I'm usually in the buy-everything-and-use-twenty-five-percent crowd, but APs are setting-specific and that reduces the amount of salvage I can scrape out. The appendices occasionally cover a village, town, or city that can be reskinned and used elsewhere. The deity articles are utterly useless to me; I never use actual deities anymore and religions are effortless to create. Chapters on campaign-specific organizations, artifacts, and NPCs offer nothing if I'm not actually running the AP. As for the mini-bestiary, the creatures that aren't setting-specific will eventually make it into one of the core bestiaries...I can wait.
I'd be very careful to judge that "70%-80%" of the market are located in the US - unless you have some actual, fact based numbers. Actually I find the negative implication of american fantasy education pretty.... disturbing.
I'd be careful in judging how many people actually enjoy the higher levels of an AP - unless you have some actual, fact based numbers. As for the assumption that only the power greedy players would like mythic, I find that negative implication of us Mythic fans pretty... disturbing ;)
Seriously though, there are a lot of us that like high level play, but we aren't as vocal as the people who don't like it. Never found it less socially interesting or boring. I loved the tail end of LoF, taking on efreets and Xotani.
I lend my APs to friends (especially the ones which are very hard to get these days). Few people if any ever ask for chapters 5-6, and the groups usually fold - lacking interest or survivors who actually remember the initial plot, after level 12.
As for Mythic : same crowd goes wild over it that went wild over Epic in 3.5... "muahahahah, let me rule the universe !"
Nevermind that in both cases I rate the manager of one of the biggest german sales vendors as a personal friend, so yeah... I might just know the numbers.
And I find the people who like "high level" far more vocal than the group who enjoy the mid-levels etc.
And the finale of LoF wasn't mythical or epic high end. It was the only time our group played on having some "unfinished business" on the Plane of Fire, after the actual AP. The upper 5 levels are 16-20, just for the record.
As for Mythic : same crowd goes wild over it that went wild over Epic in 3.5... "muahahahah, let me rule the universe !"
Just as a counter example to add to your numbers, I have no interest in high level play (anything above about eight level in PF is too much for me, personally). Nonetheless, I can't wait for the mythic rules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd be very careful to judge that "70%-80%" of the market are located in the US - unless you have some actual, fact based numbers. Actually I find the negative implication of american fantasy education pretty.... disturbing.
I'd be careful in judging how many people actually enjoy the higher levels of an AP - unless you have some actual, fact based numbers. As for the assumption that only the power greedy players would like mythic, I find that negative implication of us Mythic fans pretty... disturbing ;)
Seriously though, there are a lot of us that like high level play, but we aren't as vocal as the people who don't like it. Never found it less socially interesting or boring. I loved the tail end of LoF, taking on efreets and Xotani.
I lend my APs to friends (especially the ones which are very hard to get these days). Few people if any ever ask for chapters 5-6, and the groups usually fold - lacking interest or survivors who actually remember the initial plot, after level 12.
As for Mythic : same crowd goes wild over it that went wild over Epic in 3.5... "muahahahah, let me rule the universe !"
Nevermind that in both cases I rate the manager of one of the biggest german sales vendors as a personal friend, so yeah... I might just know the numbers.
And I find the people who like "high level" far more vocal than the group who enjoy the mid-levels etc.
And the finale of LoF wasn't mythical or epic high end. It was the only time our group played on having some "unfinished business" on the Plane of Fire, after the actual AP. The upper 5 levels are 16-20, just for the record.
So that's the case in one country. There are other countries that play this game with different perspectives and likes in Pathfinder. Honestly, the biggest reason why high level modules don't get made as often is because they are much harder for the GM to prepare and they require more pages to print because of the length of the stat blocks. But believe me, going through these and other forums and the largest gaming store in Florida, there are a great deal of people clamoring for more higher level modules.
And I'll admit, it'll be nice to have more power. But honestly, there've been a lot of stories I've wanted to do that I feel can be much more possible with mythic. Before I even heard about the Wrath of the Righteous, I already wanted my players to take on a demon lord and end his reign of terror.
As for the vocality of any group, I always find the naysayers of anything to be much more active and louder overall than ones that are for something. Look back at when Paizo was first introducing the Asian setting or firearms. It was such a massive shitstorm of anime hate, borderline anti-Japanese sentiments, and the-sky-is falling statements on how Paizo is running their company into the ground. If people that are for something are loud, it's mostly because they have to be reactive against such an overwhelming negative response. The fact that the Rasputin Must Die! adventure path sparked a much more positive outcome, and a much more civilized negative reaction, was both a relief and utterly a miracle. It's like people can be reasonable on the internet!
...at least until Psionics are announced :)
Slight tangent, I've been reading the cancellation threads in the customer service forum, there's quite a few AP cancellations beginning wit Reign of Winter, some to be resuming in 6 months.
I know a lot of people tend to cancel at the beginning of an AP but I wonder if the numbers are the same or this particular ap generated more cancellations than others. Just curious of course.
As for mythic rules, I haven't read one thread about it yet. I'd buy the PDF though.
I have cancelled my sub before an AP that I don't plan on ever running, then picked back up for APs that appeal to me and my group. Currently, I am considering cancelling because I keep getting damaged books delivered.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
noone actually wants to play Mythic except for the inveterately power-greedy to use ?
Very few people actually play or even enjoy the "allmighty power group" in the upper 5 levels, where the story becomes more super-heroic and less socially interesting.
Ooooo offensive generalizations against high level play, my favorite. Should those of us who enjoy high level play return the favor by implying that folks who can't handle high level play obviously have issues with simple math and an inability to handle numbers that they can't count on their fingers and toes? ... or have ADHD issues if they can't play a single character for longer than a year or two? ... or have personal issues which require them to find new gaming groups over and over again and are therefor forced to start new characters?
While I've been out of the game store industry for a few years now, the 13 years or so I did work in the industry makes me find your generalizations pretty funny. Oh look, condescension can go both ways.
On topic, I honestly probably would have unsubscribed after Skull & Shackles, but find that maintaining my subscription is the easiest way to openly support Paizo, even if I don't agree with all of their decisions.
-TimD
Shipping method was a direct relation to receiving damaged items before I switched shipping methods. USPS more often resulted in damaged books than UPS packing and shipping, so I upgraded from the Postal Service to UPS.
I don't cancel because ... well, I lurvs mah Charter Subscriber messageboard tag ... and there aren't (comparatively) very many of us left.
Ooooo offensive generalizations against high level play, my favorite. Should those of us who enjoy high level play return the favor by implying that folks who can't handle high level play obviously have issues with simple math and an inability to handle numbers that they can't count on their fingers and toes? ... or have ADHD issues if they can't play a single character for longer than a year or two? ... or have personal issues which require them to find new gaming groups over and over again and are therefor forced to start new characters?
While I've been out of the game store industry for a few years now, the 13 years or so I did work in the industry makes me find your generalizations pretty funny. Oh look, condescension can go both ways.
-TimD
my aren't we really in-offensive.
Numbers : orders for AP#5-AP#6 of any Adventure path take only about two thirds of the relevant numbers. Most of those go to people with instore/on-order subscription. Hardly any sales after that. Go to any FLGS and look at the sales bin.... if you find Pathfinder, you find the high-end adventures of the APs, regearldless of author. That must be utterly co-incidental. The High end adventures.. sell like leaden shingle.
And so you worked the game-store industry 13 years ago ? And what base does that provide ?
What people do not like is the fact that at high level the game becomes a fairly automatic process of going first, prepared if possible and launching a volley of attacks as nasty as ever possible. Probably your opponent now lies dead. Yes, aiming of spectacularly high numbers and scores seems to be a past-time (and dare I be nasty, given the american penchant for keeeping score,*looking at the Super Bowl*, that might even be very entertaining), but interestingly enough many players do also play for the game and the story which get pushed to the background at times. Or the rolls becoming absurdly simple....
But... what initially made me turn to Pathfinder was the intricacy of the stories, the inter connection but not the spectacular BBEG-fight at the end. If you like your high-end Supwer-heroic RPG, be welcome. but whay are people surprised that customers unsuscribe ?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
the 13 years or so I did work in the industry makes me find your generalizations pretty funny. Oh look, condescension can go both ways.
And so you worked the game-store industry 13 years ago ? And what base does that provide ?
I can't tell if you're being obtuse or we're not speaking the same English. My point is that I have more than my fair share of experience with gamers and their motivations. Most of the worst offenders for overpowered asshattery did not actually do much high level RPG play because no one would put up with them long enough for them to get them there.
Though it's an admittedly dated observation, what I saw causing a chilling effect in high level play is the general lack of support it gets, combined with the greater skill needed by the Game Master to pull it off. It's effectively exponentially more effort to run a 20th level game than a 1st level game. When most gaming groups come apart (which most will after several years), they tend to start over with a 1st level game. Very few gaming groups last long enough for extended meaningful play at high levels. That has more to do with the OOP time commitment involved and less with what folks are willing to do or try. I know people who have been gaming for almost ten years now that have told me they've never gotten a DD/PF char over 12th level because real life drives their groups apart. I feel for them because they are missing out on a completely different side and feel of the game and can only wonder what it's like to have access to high level spells or high-requirement feat trees.
I personally like the D&D/ PF feel because of the high fantasy setting and high level play can become about more than "what can I kill in the dungeon today?" or (from earlier version) "oh crap, I fell down, did my low level mage survive the fall?"
-TimD
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Shipping method was a direct relation to receiving damaged items before I switched shipping methods. USPS more often resulted in damaged books than UPS packing and shipping, so I upgraded from the Postal Service to UPS.
I don't cancel because ... well, I lurvs mah Charter Subscriber messageboard tag ... and there aren't (comparatively) very many of us left.
When I buy books from Amazon, I use the USPS option and I have never received dented, torn, or wet books. This is because of the way they pack them. As I have expressed to Paizo, I would be happy to give up some of the discount in order to have better packaged items.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
my aren't we really in-offensive.Numbers : orders for AP#5-AP#6 of any Adventure path take only about two thirds of the relevant numbers. Most of those go to people with instore/on-order subscription. Hardly any sales after that. Go to any FLGS and look at the sales bin.... if you find Pathfinder, you find the high-end adventures of the APs, regearldless of author. That must be utterly co-incidental. The High end adventures.. sell like leaden shingle.
On the other hand, if the last two volumes were regularly underselling compared to the early volumes, don't you think that Paizo, you know...might have fixed that before now?
One thing I don't get is why people cancel their subscription just because they don't like the theme of the AP.
Really? You really 'don't get' why people might want to cancel their subscription? I find that somewhat hard to believe.
- Content vs. price. Sure, there is definitely salvageable material in the APs (them maps are sure nice!), but is it really worth paying the AP sub for that salvageable material when the actual adventure is tossed? I'm sure you can understand that for some number of people, the answer is a definitive 'no', especially considering the recent price hike (and shipping costs).
- Shelf space. I, for one, don't need any more books. I can only get a sub if it includes physical books. Thus, considering that I'm not interested in the theme of a particular AP (or even just certain parts of an AP - WWI blech!) and want to avoid physical books if possible, well, I'm sure you can see the result.
These are just two off the top of my head.
(Nowadays, if there was a PDF-only sub at a reasonable PDF-only price, I would definitely re-look at subscribing again, which I dumped at Jade Regent, then dumped again at Shattered Star - with no re-up in the foreseeable future.)
- Shelf space. I, for one, don't need any more books. I can only get a sub if it includes physical books.
<snip>
(Nowadays, if there was a PDF-only sub at a reasonable PDF-only price, I would definitely re-look at subscribing again, which I dumped at Jade Regent, then dumped again at Shattered Star - with no re-up in the foreseeable future.)
I've never been a subscriber and this is why. Physical purchases are not an option for me.