|
I'd time some new rules that all the Pathfinder players will "have to play" in that same time period.
This seems like the right time to introduce some new base classes in a new hardcover book. More than just a Swashbuckler base class, but a number of new options where folks *have* to create and play those PCs.
It's effectively like when in the video game industry, you time an expansion pack to compete against a new game - you're hoping enough people are hungry for the expansion pack that you don't lose them all to playing the new game (and they then forget about their original game).
Note, I'm not saying I want more base classes or options, just that I'd think this seems to be the usual strategy for game publishers, and I imagine it's with good reason.
Ultimately, the biggest thing Paizo needs to do is ensure their subscribers don't stop/pause their subscriptions for a few months in order to "save the cash" to buy highly nostalgic products from Wizards. This means must-have books in that time period to make canceling/pausing subscriptions a *very* difficult decision.
Of course, when 5th Ed comes out (whenever that is?) it will be a Big Deal. No, Paizo should not try to come out with some Big Deal themselves that Month. But a 1.5 edition would be nice.
Has there even been a date released?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Having said that, I love Golarion and would likely keep my campaigns in it. It's a very diverse fantasy world.Me too. The setting of Golarion is what really makes Pathfinder appealing to me. It's a beautifully thought-out, complex, and interesting world.
Not to debate the pros and cons here, but for me Golarion is actually the part of Paizos publications that doesn't do anything for me. At which I am not exactly alone.
Publishing another and rather different setting might be a theoretical option, but I think that's probably not going to be something that fits into Paizos business strategy.
So I think it's wise to keep the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game and the Golarion Campaign Setting clearly separate as they are now. A pure option that you can pick up together with the rules system, but that you can completely ignore if you don't want it.
When promoting the Roleplaying Game, they should keep it this way and offer it as another product line they sell. Not as part of the same.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is there anything wrong with just letting D&D have its day? I'm betting that Pathfinder is successful enough that Paizo probably doesn't need to worry about what D&D is doing.
Moreover, the next edition of D&D looks like it's shaping up in a way that will make it easy to convert adventures to Pathfinder and vice-versa. If that's the case, I hope the game succeeds, and I imagine a strong D&D brand could mean good things for Pathfinder, since the adventures and world material Paizo produces could then be used by both Pathfinder and D&D players.
Overall, Paizo is probably best sticking to their own (very successful) business plan, and I for one hope that the next edition of D&D does very well. I couldn't care less whether I'm playing the world's best-selling RPG or the 2nd best-selling RPG. Hopefully, both will be fun.
So I haven't read this whole thread, but here are some of my thoughts.
I'm excited to see DNDNext because it seems like it will be close enough to 3.5 or PF that I could crib ideas that work.
I think this argument between editions is kind of like the fight between consoles. Assuming rough parity between the consoles/editions (i.e. you don't have strenuous objections to either) it comes down to the software. The software sells the hardware, and for RPGs adventures are the software. WotC's record with adventures during the 4E years (or even the 3.0 years) isn't particularly strong, but they have DEFINITELY shown of late that they have realized the error of their ways.
It will be interesting to see if WotC's adventures can compare to Pathfinder. Or even to see if they imitate the "adventure path" paradigm.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder 1.5.
Take the same approach to Pathfinder that they took to 3.5
Overhaul without making the existing purchases obsolete.
It is time.
I'd like this too. Give them a chance to overhaul some things that need overhauling, tweak things that need tweaking, and so on.
They already seem to be trying to do it with FAQs and erratas, this'd give them a chance to conglomerate all of that into one place.
And cleaning up some wording would be nice too. Clarifying or simplifying some rules.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Posters:
Please STOP saying anything about Pathfinder 1.5.
ur knot teh baws off mi
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Posters:
Please STOP saying anything about Pathfinder 1.5.
Why? Some of us are interested to hear Paizo's and others' takes on it. Some of us think it could improve the game. Just ignoring it doesn't do anyone any good.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And the cry goes out wide and far across the land, as the people shout:
"NU-MER-IAAAAAA!!!!"
:)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo should release "Pathfinder Ultimate Conversion Guide to the Worlds Oldest Role-Playing Game" hardcover. All the knowledge to convert over existing PF material to DDN.
That and then release their top 10 modules/AP entries in OCR/DDN format. Paizo's strength is not their rules (I hate 3.5), but their ability to make decent modules that don't function as set-piece experiments in product inter-connectivity (the last days of 3.5 when everything went "on the grid/battlemap encounters").
Or, just make sure that they keep up on their promises, not take on more than they can handle and make sure to not price their existing fan-base out of the market.
Or...
After spending the past 4 years in a setting I wasn't big on in the first place, I'll be raring to get back to somewhere familiar, so long as they don't nuke it from orbit like the Realms.
They've been talking up something called The Sundering (including putting out adventures in that leading up to the 5e release, part one 'Murder in Baldur's Gate' comes out at GenCon)that is going to remove the new stuff they added in for 4e, reseperate the worlds. Golarion has grown on me quite a bit over the years and I do really enjoy it, but the Realms are how I got into gaming and remain my first best love for campaign settings. I'm hopeful I will be able to go home to them next year (I will likely keep on buying Golarion stuff as well though).
I'm good for a Pathfinder 1.5 or 2.0.
I wouldn't mind seeing some Ultimate Player, Ultimate Feats, and Ultimate Spells. Basically books with all the classes and archetypes put together, a book with all the feats put together and a book with all the spells put together. All with new stuff. Some things I am so tired of being separate. its intimidating to look through several books and companions to look figure out what spell I want.
S... seriously? A retcon? "Suddenly Dorothy woke up and she was back in Kansas and all that technicolor 4E stuff had never happened, lol?"
Not that I can think of a graceful way out of that particular corner!
Not a retcon. The timeline advances again but the event returns to setting to a state similar to what it was before. The Spellplague and all that jazz still happened, but it will be fixed now.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Please stay positive, post constructively, and refrain from edition warring in this thread. We really do not want that pot stirred.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think stay the course right now is best as it tends to be difficult to impossible to try and guess what any given market is going to do. If the market looks at DDN and embraces it then their isn't much Paizo can do about it beyond keep on keeping on. If the market looks at DDN and decides they don't want it and Paizo decides to change (such as release 1.5/2.o Pathfinder) then they could end up hurting as the market decides they don't want either product and move to some third system (not to mention that such a change could drive away their own fan base). Furthermore, those most likely to be unsatisfied with DDN (just from the anecdotal evidence of my own group) tend to be those that most liked 4th edition, and they are not likely to move to Paizo after DDN is released.
So, in the end it is probably best to keep the schedule they currently have (as to my knowledge such releases tend to be planned out at least a year in advance), and see where the market and their own financials are after DDN is released before any decision about what to do about it is made.
I would not do anything. If someone is going to buy the new DnD book they will eventually get it anyway or one of their friends will.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
All paizo has to do is do what it already does - consistently put out high quality innovative products and maintain a healthy friendly dialog with its community.
It's the inclusiveness and love of the hobby that shows this will sustain Pathfinder.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16, Contributor
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here's a thought, Paizo should spend the next year showing the world they can release great gaming products, just like they have done over the past 5 years to win players over. They don't need to do anything special, just keep on producing products that people love.
This isn't necessarily a zero sum game, a healthy D&D might mean Paizo loses some customers, but it might just mean more people will be getting into the hobby. Wizards might also attract a lot of people who tried out 4th edition and went back to 3.5 after getting frustrated. Not every D&D customer is a potential Paizo customer and vice versa.
And you couldn't even make people buy a "reverse compatibility" argument for PF2.0.
Why not? That's what they did with 3.5->PRPG.
And it was and is largely valid, although as PRPG expands the justification for needing to use 3.5 material fades.I will still freely play and advocate for using the 3.5 Battle Sorceror variant (archetype) though.
That is exactly what Ciretose proposed in this thread:
Take the same approach to Pathfinder that they took to 3.5. Overhaul without making the existing purchases obsolete.
All setting material including crunch would be fully usable, all expansion material like APG, Ultimate Combat, etc would be usable.
Some of the new rules might make some if it superfluous, but that's fine because the game would be being improved.There's so many opportunities to improve the game that are not radical changes to compatability.
Simply the organizational structure and writing of the Core Rules could be vastly improved, irrespective of rules changes.
Marketing Plan: We will be playtesting and then releasing Pathfinder 2nd Edition.
Soon to be followed by Advanced Player's Guide including rules for Psychic Magic, only for Pathfinder 2nd Edition.
Why needlessly continue with something that is due for an over-haul, releasing material designed for the old gen,
when the transition can be put into effect and new material be designed for the NEW, BETTER system?
But I would agree that worrying about coincidence with Hasbro's plans is not productive or needed.
I think stay the course right now is best as it tends to be difficult to impossible to try and guess what any given market is going to do. If the market looks at DDN and embraces it then their isn't much Paizo can do about it beyond keep on keeping on. If the market looks at DDN and decides they don't want it and Paizo decides to change (such as release 1.5/2.o Pathfinder) then they could end up hurting as the market decides they don't want either product and move to some third system (not to mention that such a change could drive away their own fan base). Furthermore, those most likely to be unsatisfied with DDN (just from the anecdotal evidence of my own group) tend to be those that most liked 4th edition, and they are not likely to move to Paizo after DDN is released.
So, in the end it is probably best to keep the schedule they currently have (as to my knowledge such releases tend to be planned out at least a year in advance), and see where the market and their own financials are after DDN is released before any decision about what to do about it is made.
I tend to agree with this post.
Would i like to see a simpler, cleaner, easier, 1.5 rule system, that does not limit player option. YES !!!
But with D&D next coming out, this is not the time for them to change there current business plan. Think, they need to keep an Eye on the competition, react to any problem, but not just change stuff for change sake.
In the end, D&D next is own by Wizards of the Coast, which is owned by Hasbro a toy company. For all we know, this might just be another fail attempt, as Marketing Stuff, just to market stuff, that might not even be any good.
All we can do is wait and see at this point.
Pathfinder has been around since 2007-2008. 6 years is long enough by WotC standards to release a new edition or a new pseudo edition.
|
People, I thought the OP was fairly clear. It's a marketing question put to a group that buys the products and I assumed knew Paizo well
I'm not sure where the "destroy WoTC" or edition wars came from, but knock it off.
If you don't have any ideas, and do not with to contribute, then please don't post.
But let's not pretend that a suitable marketing decision is ever to ignore the namesake of the industry, higher marketshare or not. This is Economics 101.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To be fair, if there were anything to turn me off to Pathfinder, it'd be core support for psionics. I've always loved the concept, I've never seen it implemented in a way that didn't fundamentally break gameplay without being pointlessly redundant with arcane casters.
Psionics is merely an alternative form of magic. it exists for the campaigns that don't want to have their wizards wear dresses and funny hats.
the differentiating feature has always been the power point system
but D&D psionics is merely magic that caters to three niches
Bhuddist Fanboys who play in setting analogues inspired by such example countries Nepal, Tibet, or India
Sci-Fi Fanboys who either like their new age crystal stuff, or like their fallout stuff
People whom would rather track mana pools than spell slots because they think it is easier
it was intentionally redundant with magic because it is a variant form of magic. the Psion and the Wizard, were designed to cover the majority of the same roles.
Pathfinder has been around since 2007-2008. 6 years is long enough by WotC standards to release a new edition or a new pseudo edition.
Pathfinder was released in August 2009...so not quite four years old.
I'm probably the outsider/weirdo here, more dabbling into other genres... like a Sci-Fi Pathfinder sourcebook!
Or at the very least, support for various parts of Golarion that promote cross-genre games (Numeria and Alkenstar come to mind! At least Alkenstar is getting a cool looking adventure soon!) If 3rd Parties weren't doing it, a Pathfinderized d20 modern would have been cool. (I know, it was rumored in the past, but I doubt a 1st party PF Modern will ever surface.)
Perhaps a continued jump into gutsy/unique/downright bizarre approaches to Adventure Paths. The 4th and 5th adventures of Reign of Winter were really something! Dragonriding on an alien planet, traveling to Earth and fighting Rasputin/mustard gas zombies/tank golems, that's what I'm talking about! Also, what I'd like more than anything is some more space/time shenanigans.
Imagine jumping from some rectangular blue box that's really a giant time machine (Yes, I'm a fan) in Numeria to King Arthur's court of Camelot! Or even a return to the 1910s, set on an island used for nefarious (anachronistic) time experiments. Perhaps a return to Soviet Russia, now the 1960s. Maybe a haunted house in the 1990s... Okay, now I'm just stealing from TimeSplitters. No matter, I'd love a adventure path like that more than anything! It probably won't happen, but I can dream.
Pathfinder has been around since 2007-2008. 6 years is long enough by WotC standards to release a new edition or a new pseudo edition.Pathfinder was released in August 2009...so not quite four years old.
the Pathfinder System was introduced in 2009
but Paizo was producing Golarion Setting Products under the Pathfinder Label for 3.5 edition in 2007-2008
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Economics 101: When Do You Have To Worry About Your Competition?
When they're targeting the same group. Let's take a look at 5E. It has no feats. No skills. Grid has been done away with. Monster statblocks take one line. The paradigm is firmly "tell the DM what you want to do and he'll decide if you can do this" instead of "roll a skill check and tell the DM what you have just done".
Sounds familiar? Yes, because 5E is a game for 1E/2E fans.
Is it a game for Tom, the 3E fan who loves to tink and twink his PC using a million options? No, he doesn't even get to choose feats. And 3.5/PF is lights ahead in amount of crunch he can use
Is it a game for Joe, the time-starved 3E GM? No, because between 3.5, Pathfinder and 3PP he has so much material that learning a new system is not really on his plate.
Is it a game for Tina and Chris, those two people who actually loved 4E that much that they're still playing it? No, but tough luck, Tina and Chris got written off as acceptable collateral damage and if they throw their arms up and burn all WotC books in protest against abandoning 4E, nobody will notice/care.
It's the game for Zebediah the Grognard. You know, the one who thinks that everything after Gygax was a pale imitation. The one who believes that DM is the Overgod. The one who thinks that 3E/PF gave too much agency to players. The one who wore a "4E killed Gary Gygax" t-shirt at GenCon. The one who thinks that PCs should be simple because hey, you're gonna roll three new ones before the night is over.
Unlike the others, Zebediah has no strong market presence catering to his tastes. Sure, there's Swords & Wizardry and all the other retroclones, but they all exist mostly in a "core rulebook + bestiary" model, with no adventures/settings/supplements.
And that's why WotC is doing the smart thing and going after Zeb! The signs are everywhere, from the way 5E is shaping up, through the D&D PDF store which has a handful of 3E/4E books and a metric ton of 1E/2E ones, to all those reprints of classic adventures.
Sure, there will be a small % of people who will ditch Pathfinder for 5E, but given that it's really a completely different game, I ain't seeing any large movements.
Of course, 5E launch is a marketing event and here one could think about trying to counter the increased presence of WotC advertisements and the reboot of their organized play, but that's nothing to do with publishing new books.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sure, there's Swords & Wizardry and all the other retroclones, but they all exist mostly in a "core rulebook + bestiary" model, with no adventures/settings/supplements.
Er, you're pretty wrong about that, bag-man. There's a wealth of adventures and setting material and supplements for OSR games. They may not be as obvious on THIS website (although S&W itself has quite a strong presence here), but they aren't hard to find if you look. There's easily more stuff out there than any one group could be expected to play through, ever.
|
|
Sure, there's Swords & Wizardry and all the other retroclones, but they all exist mostly in a "core rulebook + bestiary" model, with no adventures/settings/supplements.Er, you're pretty wrong about that, bag-man. There's a wealth of adventures and setting material and supplements for OSR games. They may not be as obvious on THIS website (although S&W itself has quite a strong presence here), but they aren't hard to find if you look. There's easily more stuff out there than any one group could be expected to play through, ever.
Maybe, but they're scattered over a dozens of retroclones. Not a single of them has market presence in the sector comparable to what Paizo holds for 3E segment. So WotC is pretty much walking a 600lb. gorilla into a room full of small monkeys.
I would love to see a revised core rulebook that streamlines/clarify some of the more complex core rules that are holdovers from 3.5: namely grapple and mounted combat. Also improve rogues and monks to make them more competitive with other classes at higher levels, etc.
I doesn't have to be a "1.5", but a "revised edition" that focuses on improving the core game mechanics would be welcome.
|
Due to all the Pathfinder books at this time I would put out an index.
As for DnD wining back a lot from their betrayal of their player base for the sake of profit I see some turncoats but not many. What truly killed Dungeons & Dragons was their withdrawal of the open license and their attempt to monopolize the industry. Getting back to my suggestion that index book there is a ton of information and eight index book might not be terribly sexy but it is helpful.
IMO Paizo should release Pathfinder Basic. The Beginner Box extrapolated through to 20th level, more or less. Essentially Red box Basic + Expert + Master (IIRC?) but in one hardcover.
Compete on D&DN's selling card of simplicity and elegance, which the 3e/PF chassis CAN do if pared down properly. They need only release one hardcover book - if it finds traction continue on, otherwise little harm done.
|
What's the second most popular AP after RotRL? Let's throw Reign of Winter out of consideration, because it hasn't been around long enough to know. (Perhaps that's even true of Shattered Star.) But, of all the others, which is most popular?
Based on the highly biased sample of looking at the "Messageboards" page and seeing which has the most recently updated topics, I would guess that Kingmaker is the second most popular AP. And, some of what made Kingmaker popular was just put in hardback form, making up the last 20-25% of Ultimate Campaign.