Archives of Nethys Paizo Partnership ENDS

[Wizard Level 1]

LOL, using art being put up by other websites as a reason for doing this to AoN is wild.

The argument that 'Demiplane pays Pazio so it's not as bad.' Firstly, Demiplane isn't "paying paizo". They have a profit sharing business arrangement. It might be splitting hairs, but language is important. How does someone think stealing art from Demiplane isn't as bad as someone using art they got off AoN? Stolen art is stolen art no matter the source. Stealing art from one source is not magically less harmful than stealing it from another source. Paizo will still have to issue DMCA's.

There are far more efficient ways to rip art than taking them off websites. Tools exist to rip it right out of PDFs. If a webmaster wants to illegally use Paizo's art, taking it down from AoN is not going to stop them from doing it. It's not even going to slow them down.

As for AoN being duplicitous or whatever by making the announcement while negotiations are ongoing? They don't have time to negotiate to the very edge while that dead line looms. They have 10 days. If they want to be complaint they have to start their work now. If they don't get it done by the deadline then the whole site will have to go offline until it's scrubbed. Letting us know that there are going to be changes to the site isn't duplicitous, it's responsible.

What Paizo is doing is as close to a nuke option as they could get. So what could Paizo do? Well, I assume the way they currently purchase art is with an upfront fee and royalties paid out to artists when sales reach certain thresholds. That's a fairly common arrangement. They could change that arrangement though, using a purchasing agreement for art so that it doesn't matter if people use it on fan sites as long as they are not making money off those fan sites. Some publishing companies outright buy their art from artists so that they can do whatever they want with it and license it themselves however they wish.

There are options, internal and otherwise, to make all of this work without putting the blame for other people's bad behavior on the AoN agreement and thus focusing on them for a fix but it sounds like Paizo made a poorly thought out decision, attached and attached an arbitrary dead line time line to it without much more thought, and now they are in a scramble to fix their poor planing.

Let's not gloss over the fact that AoN has been called, by Paizo, the "official online rules repository". They've said that many times in press releases, on streams, in conversations and posts to the community. They've directly linked to it. I think it's important to keep that in mind when we think about this conversation.

AoN isn't just a fan site. At least, it didn't use to be.

[Cyouni]

Lorkmir wrote:

A DMCA or a cease-and-desist doesn't cost more if someone got the art from AoN instead of Demiplane. As long as the art is still out there, free to access, the same thing will keep happening. Changing the URL the people are getting the art from won't change the legal and administrative costs. It isn't as if Paizo were paying for AoN to operate and the art there was using Paizo's server space or something, it was all volunteer. So even if it is technically two sources of art vs one, the overhead for Paizo's legal work would be the same at the end of the day.

Not to be too snarky, but employees are paid by the hour, not by the number of website pirates are taking art from. The justification provided just doesn't make sense unless they are also going to make Demiplane remove their publicly accessible art as well. So if they aren't doing that... then this justification is revealed as an obvious post-facto excuse in response to the backlash.

It doesn't cost more, but have you considered the amount can be very different? AoN, for all that they had special licensing, didn't appear to have special licensing. If you pointed someone to AoN without telling them "actually, you can't copy their images and use them elsewhere, this fansite has a special license to host that", 90% of people would not realize that and grab it anyways.

[Maya Coleman]

polymynia wrote:

Respectfully, do you have proof aside from your word that this is the case? Surely there is documentation that shows that discussions weren't finished if that is the case. Otherwise, this just becomes a "They said" argument, which is baffling on both sides.

This does not exonerate, either, the previous actions of Paizo in relation to how they have handled the digital community.

Hopefully you understand that we can't post our internal emails. All I have is my word, and I'm sorry that's not enough.

[Maya Coleman]

Also, I saw this question floating around a few times, but yes, the community email is just me! I've received over 1200 emails. I can respond to some of them but not all of them since I am one human, however I am READING all of them. If they ask any questions that are not answered in the blog, I'm responding myself. It's going to take me a while, so I appreciate your patience please!

[polymynia]

Maya Coleman wrote:

polymynia wrote:

Respectfully, do you have proof aside from your word that this is the case? Surely there is documentation that shows that discussions weren't finished if that is the case. Otherwise, this just becomes a "They said" argument, which is baffling on both sides.

This does not exonerate, either, the previous actions of Paizo in relation to how they have handled the digital community.

Hopefully you understand that we can't post our internal emails. All I have is my word, and I'm sorry that's not enough.

I understand that you are likely not the one responsible for the decision that was made, and I understand that you likely are also bound by your position to present or state certain things regarding this situation if you wish to remain employed. I do not envy your position.

Hopefully you understand that if you (Paizo) are unable to back the claims that are being set forth, then the community must make a determination based on the information we have, and that does seem more to point that one side of this issue is being extremely dismissive and downright unprofessional where the other appears to be trying to be responsible and explain the change.

Hopefully you can understand that while I fully expected the response that you provided, that the response you did provide just further illustrates the issue, the schism, the divide between the choices being handled at a corporate level and this community.

[Dunwright]

Really this just whole thing just screams of amateurishness to me. Paizo has been the second biggest name in the TTRPG industry for two decades now, you'd think they would have better communication and PR. Realistically AoN losing some art and having to push their updates back a little isn't a *huge* loss, and there are definitely ways this could have been messaged to the community that would have minimized backlash and assauged concerns. Instead it seems Paizo failed to maintain timely or consistent communications with the team of volunteers doing unpaid labor for them, neglected to try to get ahead of this story at all and left those volunteers to shyly inform the community that they'd have to be implementing these changes in a mere 10 days in accordance with the deadline Paizo itself set many weeks ago, thus dropping a PR bomb in their own face. Then they have apparently a total of one employee who is tasked with interacting with the community at all that is forced to wade through the crapstorm, so you have other Paizo employees going on Bluesky to try to use this fact to guilt trip people into not using the only form of communication Paizo makes available to its customers, then the CEO has to rush out a blog post where he tries to politely shade AoN for being forced to lets its user know what will be happening to the site in less than two weeks because he can't follow up on his emails (which he actually gets paid to read) or direct his own professional communications people to inform the public about this change in their partnership they initiated and set the deadline for. I can't help but feel like none of this needed to be as big of a deal as it has seemingly now become and a professional company should have been much more on top of things.

[bugleyman]

Maya Coleman wrote:

Also, I saw this question floating around a few times, but yes, the community email is just me! I've received over 1200 emails. I can respond to some of them but not all of them since I am one human, however I am READING all of them. If they ask any questions that are not answered in the blog, I'm responding myself. It's going to take me a while, so I appreciate your patience please!

I'd just like to recognize how much it sucks to bear the brunt of a decision that was beyond your control. I'm sorry you're stuck in the middle of this, Maya.

[arthurthearcher]

Can people from AON and Paizo just get together to talk instead of carrying out this conversation in public? No more posts from either of them and until
they’ve spoken and either worked things out or decided the differences are just irreconcilable? This arguing in public isn’t helping anyone.

[pauljathome]

Maya Coleman wrote:

polymynia wrote:

Respectfully, do you have proof aside from your word that this is the case? Surely there is documentation that shows that discussions weren't finished if that is the case. Otherwise, this just becomes a "They said" argument, which is baffling on both sides.

This does not exonerate, either, the previous actions of Paizo in relation to how they have handled the digital community.

Hopefully you understand that we can't post our internal emails. All I have is my word, and I'm sorry that's not enough.

Almost all of us trust you Maya. You have earned that trust many times over

[Creciendo]

Lorkmir wrote:

Anorak wrote:

Company Blog has been posted. It seems they were still in discussions (If Jim is being honest) when Nethys dropped that post.

The thing that stands out to me though is that, as some would say "the math ain't mathing".

Jim says

Jim Butler wrote:

Archives placed a legal notice explaining that they had a license to use artwork and other elements, but other sites routinely copied those assets and used them for themselves. That created additional work for our legal and licensing teams to draft DMCA and cease‑and‑desist notices.

This logic would also apply to Demiplane would it not? You can also go there to find publicly accessible art that can be downloaded and posted elsewhere. So, this change to AoN won't eliminate that work; anyone who was doing that using AoN will just switch to Demiplane or other sources and keep doing it. And before anyone says "well, Demiplane makes them more money to cover the cost", that doesn't matter because AoN was volunteer. Any costs to Paizo by AoN would be minimal and should be considered as highly cost-effective marketing and good press.

This justification just doesn't make sense unless they are also going to have Demiplane remove art, or make it pay to access only where you only see art for things you've purchased there. (which would be an even bigger mistake than this mind you.)

This whole AoN debacle, along with recent blunders and issues, have made me seriously question the competence of Paizo's management. At a time like this, when clearly, they need to be bringing in more revenue and increasing customer spending, they should be doing the exact opposite of this.

They should be expanding their relationship with AoN instead of reducing it. I found out today, through a random reddit post, that there was a sale going on for PDF adventures. Mind you, that poster only found out through Tumblr. TUMBLR?! Instead of reducing or ending the...

I agree, the cost for the lawyers is drastically lower than the cost of trying to replicate this tool, a tool I consider central to making it easy to run games in this system despite the depth and complexity of the rules. I also agree, if someone wants to copy art, they'll scrape Demiplane. I further agree, I never have seen Paizo taking advantage of free advertising space that most of us are accessing several times per session we play - high value targeted advertising to your dedicated customers.

Also it's bad form to try to defensively throw AoN under the bus by defensively blaming them for sharing an announcement when they seem to have been unsure where they stood and were in jeopardy of having to do a sudden last minute change that would have been a shock to the community that would probably blow back harder than this little dust storm is. It's like when an NFL owner blames a player for not negotiating fairly when they don't really have any power in this situation, it looks petty and disrespectful to unpaid volunteers who add immense value, and have gone above and beyond for you in handling issues like the remaster that threw us all in a tizzy as GMs and Players, especially in PFS where we have to abide the rules correctly. You should have handled those conversations directly and not in public. In my opinion of course. I raised in another post, even if not using it for ads, if you had given a chance for them to do a funding drive I would have chipped in money happily, just like I do for charities run by cons and by Foundery Pf2E developers to give back, especially knowing Paizo is struggling.

I guess I'm just disappointed. Paizo has built a reputation of proactively working with it's volunteer communities. I want to give you my money, make it easy to give you my money. This makes it harder to be excited to give you my money.

[bugleyman]

Creciendo wrote:

Also it's bad form to try to through AoN under the bus by defensively blaming them for sharing an announcement when they seem to have been unsure where they stood...

Sadly, this sort of thing is pretty much par for the course when it comes to Paizo leadership in recent years.

To be fair, I haven't trusted Paizo's management since they did Sara Marie dirty. But as Maya Angelou put it: when someone shows you who they are, believe them.

[Redelia]

Paizo has become the kind of company I do not want to support. Not only was this decision destructive to the community of their fans, but it was also idiotic as a business move. AoN was making Paizo far more money than it could have possibly cost them.

Also, right now is when Paizo most needs our goodwill, and they destroyed it for absolutely no benefit to anyone, other than maybe their competitors.

I will not be purchasing any further Paizo products until this decision is completely reversed.

[Gorgo Primus]

The whole "we were still negotiating!" argument is not the defense Paizo seems to think it is given they're the ones who set the deadline to strip the site, they've not responded to AON for weeks by their account, and they need to start stripping the site to meet the deadline now. That's not a fair negotiation, that's letting the fire (that they set) claim most of the building before being willing to haggle for firefighting services.

I'm sure Paizo isn't lying when they say they still want to talk - but that isn't a good look in this context and feels super insincere from an outside perspective. To say nothing of the whole "this still doesn't appear to gain them anything but bad press even if they pull this off the way they want" of it all.

[griefninja]

Wow, it seems like this has quickly become a complicated issue that's just not gonna have an easy solution that makes everyone happy. Hard to say what the next move should be for Paizo.

[Gorgo Primus]

Frankly, Paizo is incredibly lucky the AON crew are are magnanimous and fair as they are, cause they could easily just go "you don't think our free labour is making you enough money to give us the bare minimum our partnership requires? Cool, then AON is shutting down and you can see first hand just how vital we were to your game/business functioning well. Then you can scramble to host, hire people to build, and pay people to data input and maintain a PRD resource like ours. Maybe then you'll appreciate just how cost effective and priceless officially supporting us in full was for you".

I wouldn't really be able to blame them if they did tbh, catastrophic as it'd be for my group's ability to play the game as smoothly as we do. Which, yeah, that's exactly what I'm getting at.

[Tehanaru]

Gorgo Primus wrote:

Frankly, Paizo is incredibly lucky the AON crew are are magnanimous and fair as they are, cause they could easily just go "you don't think our free labour is making you enough money to give us the bare minimum our partnership requires? Cool, then AON is shutting down and you can see first hand just how vital we were to your game/business functioning well. Then you can scramble to host, hire people to build, and pay people to data input and maintain a PRD resource like ours. Maybe then you'll appreciate just how cost effective and priceless officially supporting us in full was for you".

I wouldn't really be able to blame them if they did tbh, catastrophic as it'd be for my group's ability to play the game as smoothly as we do. Which, yeah, that's exactly what I'm getting at.

Indeed! AoN is spending their own time to create a resource that Paizo used to do in house and make it far better than Paizo did it.

They're bringing people into the hobby.

People are acting like AoN existing is a universal fact of the world, but it isn't! As volunteers they individually and collectively have a breaking point. Hopefully we're not anywhere near that point, but there absolutely is a point where they decide it's not worth all the extra effort and bail.

And when that happens, both the community and Paizo both lose hugely... and the AoN people get their weekends and evenings back. (and also lose as members of the community)

Anything that moves us closer to that circumstance - which from the AoN communication certainly seems like their enthusiasm has been dampened - is really bad! And that's why people are so upset at Paizo.

Like, this window called AoN is really important to the house we all live in! We agree that you didn't break the window yet, but could you please stop punching it?

[StarMartyr365]

I'd like to let the Paizo team know that I'm not going to rage quit any of my subs.

I'd also want to thank MAYA especially for all that you do!

[Owen KC Stephens]

AsheIsAmazing wrote:

I suppose that's fair, but I'm willing to give AoN leniency given they're volunteers. I think Paizo gets a lot of free-to-cheap labour from them as it is.

Paizo and AoN had, until now, a comerical license. The relationship between AoN and Paizo is not one of volunteers.

Now, are there volunteers doing things for AoN? Very clearly yes, and I love them to death.

But they aren't volunteering work for Paizo. Indeed, In think it would be illegal for them to volunteer to do work for Paizo. They volunteer their work for AoN, and AoN has a business contract (now ending) that spells out the legal duties of each side.

I understand why AoN thought the ball was in Paizo's court. I understand why Paizo thought the ball was in AoN's court. I, personally, would have reached out again if there were any unanswered questions about negotiations, before I amde a public announcement. I also would have told Paizo, who are AoN's business partners until the 24th, before I made a public announcement.

This WHOLE thing sucks. But I don't feel EITHER side was as proactive about communication as they needed to be under professional standards.

[Tehanaru]

Owen KC Stephens wrote:

AsheIsAmazing wrote:

I suppose that's fair, but I'm willing to give AoN leniency given they're volunteers. I think Paizo gets a lot of free-to-cheap labour from them as it is.

Paizo and AoN had, until now, a comerical license. The relationship between AoN and Paizo is not one of volunteers.

Now, are there volunteers doing things for AoN? Very clearly yes, and I love them to death.

But they aren't volunteering work for Paizo. Indeed, In think it would be illegal for them to volunteer to do work for Paizo. They volunteer their work for AoN, and AoN has a business contract (now ending) that spells out the legal duties of each side.

I understand why AoN thought the ball was in Paizo's court. I understand why Paizo thought the ball was in AoN's court. I, personally, would have reached out again if there were any unanswered questions about negotiations, before I amde a public announcement. I also would have told Paizo, who are AoN's business partners until the 24th, before I made a public announcement.

This WHOLE thing sucks. But I don't feel EITHER side was as proactive about communication as they needed to be under professional standards.

Look, Paizo had the legal right to do everything they did. That doesn't make it morally right, or the best thing to do for their relationship with the community.

There are plenty of people in these two threads - myself among them - who are okay with changes to the Paizo / AoN relationship. If things have to change for business reasons, okay.

But what we're not okay with is what we feel is a tone of dismissal of AoN's efforts from Paizo, and Paizo's lack of communication. That lack of communication which is becoming a pattern.

Certainly, there are different perspectives all over this thread. But I think there's a big chunk of folks who are saying - necessary or not, this was very badly handled! And we keep seeing things handled badly, and we're going to go ahead and voice our concerns about that.

Which is totally okay! I've said earlier that I'm going to keep buying Paizo products, as have other people. I'm very much not calling for a boycott against Paizo. That doesn't mean I have nothing to criticize about their behavior.

I don't want them to become the kind of company that runs roughshod over community partners, and when I see something that looks like that behavior, I'll say something.

[Asurasan]

Owen KC Stephens wrote:

AsheIsAmazing wrote:

I suppose that's fair, but I'm willing to give AoN leniency given they're volunteers. I think Paizo gets a lot of free-to-cheap labour from them as it is.

Paizo and AoN had, until now, a comerical license. The relationship between AoN and Paizo is not one of volunteers.

I've not posted here in a -long- time, but long time subscriber and active pathfinder player since the beginning.

Just to ask a question on this(and in good faith), but it's something I've never seen said before. Are you implying AON was compensated financially and contractually by Paizo for their partnership over these past 8 year? And I mean this in Paizo is paying them for the 'service' of hosting the PRD? That nuance hasn't been stated in anything I've seen so far.

My general understanding was that AON has a 'commercial agreement' through their 'license' which allowed them access to assets and resource that they used to host a community site.

If Paizo has been paying them(someone at AON) for this service, it makes sense that they would have a 'cost' they are cutting.

[Owen KC Stephens]

Asurasan wrote:

Just to ask a question on this(and in good faith), but it's something I've never seen said before. Are you implying AON was compensated financially and contractually by Paizo for their partnership over these past 8 year? And I mean this in Paizo is paying them for the 'service' of hosting the PRD? That nuance hasn't been stated in anything I've seen so far.

My general understanding was that AON has a 'commercial agreement' through their 'license' which allowed them access to assets and resource that they used to host a community site.

If Paizo has been paying them(someone at AON) for this service, it makes sense that they would have a 'cost' they are cutting.

I am not saying that.

I am saying the contract was a legal business arrangement, not AoN doing Paizo a favor. And AoN sought that contract when Paizo had an open call about it.

To the best of my knowledge, Paizo did not give AoN any money. But I don't know ANY of the terms of the contract. I don't BELIEVE Paizo was paying AoN money. But I also do not know what AoN felt they were getting from the contract that made them seek it out and sign it eight years ago.

[Tehanaru]

Owen KC Stephens wrote:

Asurasan wrote:

Just to ask a question on this(and in good faith), but it's something I've never seen said before. Are you implying AON was compensated financially and contractually by Paizo for their partnership over these past 8 year? And I mean this in Paizo is paying them for the 'service' of hosting the PRD? That nuance hasn't been stated in anything I've seen so far.

My general understanding was that AON has a 'commercial agreement' through their 'license' which allowed them access to assets and resource that they used to host a community site.

If Paizo has been paying them(someone at AON) for this service, it makes sense that they would have a 'cost' they are cutting.

I am not saying that.

I am saying the contract was a legal business arrangement, not AoN doing Paizo a favor. And AoN sought that contract when Paizo had an open call about it.

To the best of my knowledge, Paizo did not give AoN any money. But I don't know ANY of the terms of the contract. I don't BELIEVE Paizo was paying AoN money. But I also do not know what AoN felt they were getting from the contract that made them seek it out and sign it eight years ago.

It sounds like the main benefits were early access to pdfs and images, so that they could make a better archive. Clearly there was no money flowing to AoN since Paizo was seeking royalties iff any money got made by AoN, but not expecting that to happen.

I don't know what AoN could possibly have otherwise gotten out of the relationship. And it also explains why they're not keen on the deal Paizo is offering. They're losing what they wanted in the first place, and in return Paizo is offering them something they already get from their own personal subscriptions to Paizo products.

[orgnok]

This situation reminds me of tech companies building their whole company around some open source tool and refusing even the most basic support. It’s taking the work people are doing for free and out of passion for granted „oh surely AoN will continue just as they have been when it means they would now have to have crunch time each release or be months behind the release cycle.“ I would absolutely not be surprised if this does burn people enough for them to at least go on an indefinite break from adding new content and just maintain the status quo.

Then the remaining options are pretty much demiplane (which i find absolutely unusable as a reference) Or sites which do not care to stick to licenses anyways and have images wether or not aon hosts them anyways.

I am sure anyone who has played 5e is familiar with the concept.
This whole angle of trying to make aon responsible for piracy is ridiculous.

[Asurasan]

Thanks Owen! I just saw that as potentially 'new' info. I think I agree that lack of financial compensation is likely why people are saying it free/voluntary. None of us see the books here, so it's all speculation anyway from all of us.

I can understand the general negative community consensus here and share it generally that this feels a like a step back and is potentially a confusing red flag for the parts of this none of us do see, but will stick by the product as I still find it something we enjoy.

Hey and on a less dire note since you are here, just wanted to say my group really enjoyed Dead Suns back in the day! I'm also glad you've recovered from your health issues!

[Pizzop]

Maybe we cut everyone a little of slack, see how it plays out, and hope for the best? I regret my initial tone after re-reading this all today, and digging deeper. This community is supposed to be one of tolerance and inclusion, and all I see is the same thing I have witnessed for years from within it as someone who doesn't toe the line to every demographic I am "supposed to be". The exact OPPOSITE of inclusion is right here out in the open now. Nothing but Intolerance.

Nobody is willing to pause and look at things from the perspective of the "other side" of the equation they're choosing to condemn. They just attack, ban, boycott, and draw their lines in the sand.

Paizo is in a bad place. They have to make decisions people aren't going to like while they try and figure out how to navigate the rug being pulled from underneath them. Everyone is so obsessed with attacking them while they're down and see them as the next evil instead of being a human and looking at the circumstances and considering what they're dealing with. They're drowning, and we're shoving their heads under the water instead of reaching to pull them out. What does that make us?

I'll keep buying the books I am interested in. (Impossible Magic? Yes, please.) I will keep supporting the business, and hope to help them recover. If all you do is kick people when they're down, you're a part of the problem, not the solution.

Put your pitchforks away and calm down.

[Asurasan]

Tehanaru wrote:

It sounds like the main benefits were early access to pdfs and images, so that they could make a better archive. Clearly there was no money flowing to AoN since Paizo was seeking royalties iff any money got made by AoN, but not expecting that to happen.

I don't know what AoN could possibly have otherwise gotten out of the relationship. And it also explains why they're not keen on the deal Paizo is offering. They're losing what they wanted in the first place, and in return Paizo is offering them something they already get from their own personal subscriptions to Paizo products.

Yeah, I agree that is what it seems like the benefits were. Free/early products being taken away is strange, as they provide content creators of all sorts early access copies of their products, and surely the work of distributing that isn't just a part of marketing/doing business..

We will never know the 'motivations' for what AON wanting to contract with paizo. But its hard to imagine anything more than 'support the community', It was a labor of love before paizo worked with them, and it still seems to be. Paizo saw enough benefit in it 8 years ago as they no longer needed to host their own PRD. It's hard to imagine what changed to make that not the case anymore.

[Lorkmir]

Pizzop wrote:

They're drowning, and we're shoving their heads under the water instead of reaching to pull them out. What does that make us?

It would be more apt as a metaphor to say they were thrown overboard and have chosen to dunk their own head under the water instead of grabbing for a raft.

Criticizing this decision and pressuring them to reverse it is actually pulling their head up while they seem to intent on drowning themselves.

Purely from a business standpoint, their justifications don't make any sense and this decision regarding AoN is actively one of the worst possible things they could do in a moment where they need to maintain and grow customer sentiment and brand perception.

Paizo's management has already been making bad decisions in recent history, but now they are also panicked for financial reasons and unsurprisingly that doesn't much improve judgement. I want Paizo to succeed, because I want them to continue making Pathfinder and Starfinder succeed. Sometimes that means the community giving them a proverbial slap up the back of the head and a "ay, what's the matter with you?"

[Crouza]

Paizo: Just use the CUP, it's as good as the old agreement

Also Paizo in 2024: The CUP is gone. The new FCP is here, and you're not allowed to use setting names or stat blocks with it.

I'm very sorry to Paizo that people aren't giving you the benefit of the doubt when it comes to this not being the start of a slippery slope. But you literally did this just a couple years prior and only stopped because of fan backlash.

https://paizo.com/blog/updates-on-the-community-use-policy-and-fan-content- policy

I don't see how you expect people to go "Well, the CUP is good enough for AoN" and not raise a stink, when if people hand't raised a stink, not only would we not have the CUP, and not only would AoN need to remove a ton more content than just images, but we'd have also been in a place where Pathbuilder/Starbuilder probably couldn't exist as is either.

[Gorgo Primus]

https://www.patreon.com/nethys/posts/partnership-faq-163964893

AON just put out a video statement with clarifications and the like. It sounds like a complete clusterfuss of bad communication and decision making. Mostly from Paizo, but AON was given 6 months change the website as leeway, didn’t want to use any of it, and made it sound like they truly had 10 days to strip everything down for CUP in their initial announcement.

Giving them 6 months of leeway to comply is no excuse for weeks of ghosting questions and concerns after springing the end of the contract by the end of July without any prior indication this was coming or how it could be avoided though.

[OceanshieldwolPF 2.5]

No pitchforks here. Just some fairly common disappointment and desire for better actions. And if this were the first time a situation was badly handled, or seemed to stem from an extremely short-sighted take that diverged heavily from community expectation on what has been a fairly progressive road, then yes, one might give a little slack or leeway.

But this is not the first time Paizo has fumbled community expectation. So calling out poor behaviour is actually the correct thing to do for the community’s sake. And the community is reacting. By saying “I will not support such behaviour financially.” I don’t believe that such actions are punitive, or intended to be punitive. They are merely folx not wanting to be associated with scourging capital-informed decisions that harm the community. And the community gets to decide, individually, where those harms are. And they are deciding.

I do not “want to see” any particular outcome. I am not wedded to supporting Paizo. I am not wedded to beating Paizo down. I do think it is in Paizo’s interests to cultivate a better association with its fanbase and community. Because, as soon as the folks writing stuff for other people decided to make that a business with employees and overheads and all the rest of it, they made a compact with their customers, a compact that is renewed or not with every action they take, and with a gazillion other unrelated actions and functions completely outside of their control.

So they should do only as they can: make sure the actions they *are* in control of and responsible for serve their customers. Because in the compact they made, without the customers, there is no business.

[steve0105]

Gorgo Primus wrote:

https://www.patreon.com/nethys/posts/partnership-faq-163964893

AON just put out a video statement with clarifications and the like. It sounds like a complete clusterfuss of bad communication and decision making. Mostly from Paizo, but AON was given 6 months change the website as leeway, didn’t want to use any of it, and made it sound like they truly had 10 days to strip everything down for CUP in their initial announcement.

Giving them 6 months of leeway to comply is no excuse for weeks of ghosting questions and concerns after springing the end of the contract by the end of July without any prior indication this was coming or how it could be avoided though.

Quoting you here-

The whole "we were still negotiating!" argument is not the defense Paizo seems to think it is given they're the ones who set the deadline to strip the site, they've not responded to AON for weeks by their account, and they need to start stripping the site to meet the deadline now. That's not a fair negotiation, that's letting the fire (that they set) claim most of the building before being willing to haggle for firefighting services.

Nothing against you personally, but everyone is getting WAY too angry without knowing the entire picture, and IMO this is a snippet of that.

[Gorgo Primus]

I don’t disagree with anything you quoted though. That’s not some spooky out of control anger, that’s me being reasonably upset and disappointed with how they’ve handled this and why. And I still am. The negotiations, to the minor extent they even turned out to be real given they’re alleged to be one or two emails with vague offers, weren’t conducted in a fair or sincere manner and the situation everyone is in is still a direct result of Paizo rushing to pull the plug on volunteers out of nowhere.

This whole mess could have been avoided, to the extent they ever had to do it at all (which still isn’t clear), had Paizo communicated properly with anyone at AON before ending the contract and ghosting them. There’s no secret info we haven’t got that can possibly justify Paizo’s botched handling of whatever they’re trying to do here. All it can do is help explain it.

So I’m not sure what you’re trying to prove with that post. I’m not one of the ones calling for boycotts, nor did I in that post.

[NerdOver9000]

You know, the more we hear from both sides, the more I'm inclined to put down the torch and pitchfork. It sounds like there were communication failures along the way, and hopefully the... exuberant outpouring from the community encourages both sides to get back to the table and reach a solution that's fair to everyone.

[steve0105]

Gorgo Primus wrote:

I don’t disagree with anything you quoted though. That’s not some spooky out of control anger, that’s me being reasonably upset and disappointed with how they’ve handled this and why. And I still am. The negotiations, to the minor extent they even turned out to be real, weren’t conducted in a fair or sincere manner and the situation everyone is in is still a direct result of Paizo rushing to pull the plug on volunteers out of nowhere. The only thing in there I’d state differently is that they had more time to deal with the fallout of the firestorm they set than we’d known.

This whole mess could have been avoided, to the extent they ever had to do it at all (which still isn’t clear), had Paizo communicated properly with anyone at AON before ending the contract and ghosting them. There’s no secret info we haven’t got that can possibly justify Paizo’s botched handling of whatever they’re trying to do here. All it can do is help explain it.

So I’m not sure what you’re trying to prove with that post.

I'm just saying, hundreds of angry posts from everyone involved calling for any kind of extreme action like boycotts, canceling subscriptions etc without even knowing the entire picture, within 24 hours of any issue occurring is not a good thing, no matter who you support.

Ypu aren't personally doing it, fine, but there are people who see any post, take it the wrong way, and pour vitriol out.

[Tehanaru]

Gorgo Primus wrote:

I don’t disagree with anything you quoted though. That’s not some spooky out of control anger, that’s me being reasonably upset and disappointed with how they’ve handled this and why. And I still am. The negotiations, to the minor extent they even turned out to be real given they’re alleged to be one or two emails with vague offers, weren’t conducted in a fair or sincere manner and the situation everyone is in is still a direct result of Paizo rushing to pull the plug on volunteers out of nowhere.

This whole mess could have been avoided, to the extent they ever had to do it at all (which still isn’t clear), had Paizo communicated properly with anyone at AON before ending the contract and ghosting them. There’s no secret info we haven’t got that can possibly justify Paizo’s botched handling of whatever they’re trying to do here. All it can do is help explain it.

So I’m not sure what you’re trying to prove with that post. I’m not one of the ones calling for boycotts, nor did I in that post.

Very much this. I'm not calling for Paizo's destruction, nor do I want it to happen.

But I am supremely annoyed with the company right now. It also makes me wary of ever working with them in the future, should I want to become a content creator or the like. It's something I've considered, but right now working with Paizo looks like a headache I don't need.

[Drake1101]

Tehanaru wrote:

Owen KC Stephens wrote:

AsheIsAmazing wrote:

I suppose that's fair, but I'm willing to give AoN leniency given they're volunteers. I think Paizo gets a lot of free-to-cheap labour from them as it is.

Paizo and AoN had, until now, a comerical license. The relationship between AoN and Paizo is not one of volunteers.

Now, are there volunteers doing things for AoN? Very clearly yes, and I love them to death.

But they aren't volunteering work for Paizo. Indeed, In think it would be illegal for them to volunteer to do work for Paizo. They volunteer their work for AoN, and AoN has a business contract (now ending) that spells out the legal duties of each side.

I understand why AoN thought the ball was in Paizo's court. I understand why Paizo thought the ball was in AoN's court. I, personally, would have reached out again if there were any unanswered questions about negotiations, before I amde a public announcement. I also would have told Paizo, who are AoN's business partners until the 24th, before I made a public announcement.

This WHOLE thing sucks. But I don't feel EITHER side was as proactive about communication as they needed to be under professional standards.

Look, Paizo had the legal right to do everything they did. That doesn't make it morally right, or the best thing to do for their relationship with the community.

There are plenty of people in these two threads - myself among them - who are okay with changes to the Paizo / AoN relationship. If things have to change for business reasons, okay.

But what we're not okay with is what we feel is a tone of dismissal of AoN's efforts from Paizo, and Paizo's lack of communication. That lack of communication which is becoming a pattern.

Certainly, there are different perspectives all over this thread. But I think there's a big chunk of folks who are saying - necessary or not, this was very badly handled! And we keep seeing things handled badly, and we're going to go ahead and voice our concerns about that.

Which...

This expresses my feelings fully. I wasn't angry when I read the AoN announcement. I was a little concerned that I was only hearing one side, and I came here looking for Paizo's word. I was then mildly annnoyed that Paizo had not said anything, at all.

I almost wish that blog hadn't been posted, as that certainly made it worse.

I actually support Paizo because it is a unionized company and I support workers -- it's great that Pathfinder is a well put together game, but I'd support Paizo if it wasn't. Making decisions about a product's community, a product that only can exist because of that community, without involving the community will backfire and negatively impact the workers. And for that I blame the decision makers. Because I support workers.

I'm not threatening to cancel my subs, because that wouldn't support Paizo's workers, but my goodwill and patience are shot. My sympathies lie with those that are upset and canceling.

I'm going to let this play out, but oh boy. Not impressed.

[0xTJ]

steve0105 wrote:

I'm just saying, hundreds of angry posts from everyone involved calling for any kind of extreme action like boycotts, canceling subscriptions etc without even knowing the entire picture, within 24 hours of any issue occurring is not a good thing, no matter who you support.

Ypu aren't personally doing it, fine, but there are people who see any post, take it the wrong way, and pour vitriol out.

Cancelling subscriptions doesn't have any immediate harm until subscriber day rolls around. But unlike the spending that AoN drives to Paizo, it's an easily quantified number. It shows that people are upset about it, and that community sentiment has business implications. The way this decision is being presented by Paizo is that the numbers in a spreadsheet added up to a negative number. That ignores all of the additional revenue that AoN has contributed by existing, especially in its current form. Cancelling subscriptions puts a number on the price of ending the agreement. Whatever extra money they expect to make from this action will have to outweigh that. Sometimes the only way for change is for a mob to start sharpening their pitchforks.

I waited to cancel 5 of my 8 until after I read the blog post. It doesn't justify how stealing assets will be changed without that art being on AoN, and the tone further hurts my perception of the company (especially in the last paragraph). Having now watched the AoN Patreon video, their initial announcement was quite generous in excluding parts that are embarrassing to Paizo.

Personally, it's also embarrassing for me to see Paizo acting like Hasbro. Not wanting to support the latter, I was able to convince my group to play Pathfinder 2e instead of 5e (after complaining about the OGL fiasco, attempted rug pulls, etc.). And I was only able to actually convince them to play (and therefore justify my continued buying of most of Paizo's books) because of AoN. It feels hypocritical to keep buying from Paizo after anti-community behaviour when I won't from WotC.

If the decision was reversed, I would immediately add back all of my subscriptions, and maybe add one or two more. As it stands, I may add some back (I'd hate to miss out on Tech Core, and I'm tempted by the Absalom Station Multi-Pack of Flip-Mats), but I'm not going to go back to my previous spending.

As a side note, I am curious about where paizo.com/prd will redirect once the 24th rolls around. I hope it isn't Demiplane; that would be a distinct downgrade in experience given how slow it is to load. This whole affair feels like a move to push people to spend money on Demiplane, which I don't appreciate. I've already effectively bought 2-3 copies of the books (PDF, hardcover, and softcover where possible) (or even more for the PC/PC2, to have extra copies for players at the table).

The experiences of browsing on Archives of Nethys vs. Demiplane is like shopping for bolts on the McMaster-Carr website vs. on Amazon.

This is entirely speculation, but I would expect that Paizo and Demiplane already have an agreement on Demiplane becoming the new PRD. On one hand, that does make it very difficult for Paizo to pivot back to AoN as PRD, even if they wanted to. On the other hand, that would be slimy enough to further sour my perception of Paizo and their direction.

[Tehanaru]

0xTJ wrote:

steve0105 wrote:

I'm just saying, hundreds of angry posts from everyone involved calling for any kind of extreme action like boycotts, canceling subscriptions etc without even knowing the entire picture, within 24 hours of any issue occurring is not a good thing, no matter who you support.

Ypu aren't personally doing it, fine, but there are people who see any post, take it the wrong way, and pour vitriol out.

Cancelling subscriptions doesn't have any immediate harm until subscriber day rolls around. But unlike the spending that AoN drives to Paizo, it's an easily quantified number. It shows that people are upset about it, and that community sentiment has business implications. The way this decision is being presented by Paizo is that the numbers in a spreadsheet added up to a negative number. That ignores all of the additional revenue that AoN has contributed by existing, especially in its current form. Cancelling subscriptions puts a number on the price of ending the agreement. Whatever extra money they expect to make from this action will have to outweigh that. Sometimes the only way for change is for a mob to start sharpening their pitchforks.

I waited to cancel 5 of my 8 until after I read the blog post. It doesn't justify how stealing assets will be changed without that art being on AoN, and the tone further hurts my perception of the company (especially in the last paragraph). Having now watched the AoN Patreon video, their initial announcement was quite generous in excluding parts that are embarrassing to Paizo.

Personally, it's also embarrassing for me to see Paizo acting like Hasbro. Not wanting to support the latter, I was able to convince my group to play Pathfinder 2e instead of 5e (after complaining about the OGL fiasco, attempted rug pulls, etc.). And I was only able to actually convince them to play (and therefore justify my continued buying of most of Paizo's books) because of AoN. It feels hypocritical to keep buying from Paizo after anti-community...

I'm also deeply worried that Demiplane will be the new PRD.

And if it is... then my bigger fear is that this is the end of AoN. Not today, of course. Probably not even in the next 5 years.

But I'm an old gamer and I've seen stuff like this go down before. First a partner loses official support, and then the general licensing deal worsens, and then all of a sudden there's only the "official" avenue allowed, even though that option is far worse than the fan version.

I really, really hope that won't happen. But that's the fear that's been in the back of my head this whole time.

When Jim Butler wrote (paraphrasing) "we're dropping our partnership with AoN because they haven't made us enough royalties" - I hear, "So we're finding someone who will."

[Greg K.]

The more I have discussed this situation on multiple platforms, and read and viewed all responses by both parties, I will not lie, I've been increasingly disappointed with how AoN handled this.

[Master Han Del of the Web]

Greg K. wrote:

The more I have discussed this situation on multiple platforms, and read and viewed all responses by both parties, I will not lie, I've been increasingly disappointed with how AoN handled this.

Definitely not happy with that either but it is important to remember it is an entirely volunteer organization whose members have whole jobs outside of it. The impact could have been mitigated if Jim had just followed up or empowered someone to check and respond to his e-mails while out of the office and the two groups could have released statements that were better coordinated and collaborative as opposed to... this.

Hell, they should have done a freaking Zoom call or something and gotten down to it in an evening or two.

[Greg K.]

Master Han Del of the Web wrote:

Greg K. wrote:

The more I have discussed this situation on multiple platforms, and read and viewed all responses by both parties, I will not lie, I've been increasingly disappointed with how AoN handled this.

Definitely not happy with that either but it is important to remember it is an entirely volunteer organization whose members have whole jobs outside of it. The impact could have been mitigated if Jim had just followed up or empowered someone to check and respond to his e-mails while out of the office and the two groups could have released statements that were better coordinated and collaborative as opposed to... this.

Hell, they should have done a freaking Zoom call or something and gotten down to it in an evening or two.

I am not pleased with how Jim handled it either, don't get me wrong.

However volunteer work should still receive some criticism, because it can still be mismanaged. Example: A reminder email is not so much of a courtesy as a basic thing to do in situations like these. I think what personally bothers me on AoN's front is how they have not disclosed some of the info that led to Paizo being viewed worse, even by myself at first.

I would have preferred to know that there was at least a possibility of a deal, even if they said that Paizo had not replied to them, in the initial statement.

I would have also preferred if they had specified that they're getting a six month period to remove the art and that it is their own choice to remove said art on day 1 to get done with the matter quick.

[ShinHakkaider]

arthurthearcher wrote:

Can people from AON and Paizo just get together to talk instead of carrying out this conversation in public? No more posts from either of them and until

they’ve spoken and either worked things out or decided the differences are just irreconcilable? This arguing in public isn’t helping anyone.

It's WAY too late for that.

This feels like it's toppling dominoes that's going to spell the end of Paizo. The massive and violent overreaction to this coupled with everything else that is going on does not bode well. I feel that is exactly what this particular segment of the fanbase wants.

AON will continue to exist and still be one of if not THE best resource for Pathfinder and Starfider.

And people SHOULD for all of it's proclaimed usefulness SUPPORT THE SITE DIRECTLY.

[0xTJ]

Greg K. wrote:

However volunteer work should still receive some criticism, because it can still be mismanaged. Example: A reminder email is not so much of a courtesy as a basic thing to do in situations like these. I think what personally bothers me on AoN's front is how they have not disclosed some of the info that led to Paizo being viewed worse, even by myself at first.

I would have preferred to know that there was at least a possibility of a deal, even if they said that Paizo had not replied to them, in the initial statement.

I would have also preferred if they had specified that they're getting a six month period to remove the art and that it is their own choice to remove said art on day 1 to get done with the matter quick.

Even if I do take it as being AoN's fault for not prodding for an answer back, it was Paizo's decision in the first place to end the partnership. Neither side has presented Paizo as offering something that would actually mitigate the issue in a meaningful way. They only seem to have been ways to make transition slower, when that hasn't been the issue.

Even after being thrown under the bus in the Paizo blog post, AoN has encouraged people to support Paizo and keep their subscriptions.

[Master Han Del of the Web]

Greg K. wrote:

Master Han Del of the Web wrote:

Greg K. wrote:

The more I have discussed this situation on multiple platforms, and read and viewed all responses by both parties, I will not lie, I've been increasingly disappointed with how AoN handled this.

Definitely not happy with that either but it is important to remember it is an entirely volunteer organization whose members have whole jobs outside of it. The impact could have been mitigated if Jim had just followed up or empowered someone to check and respond to his e-mails while out of the office and the two groups could have released statements that were better coordinated and collaborative as opposed to... this.

Hell, they should have done a freaking Zoom call or something and gotten down to it in an evening or two.

I am not pleased with how Jim handled it either, don't get me wrong.

However volunteer work should still receive some criticism, because it can still be mismanaged. Example: A reminder email is not so much of a courtesy as a basic thing to do in situations like these. I think what personally bothers me on AoN's front is how they have not disclosed some of the info that led to Paizo being viewed worse, even by myself at first.

I would have preferred to know that there was at least a possibility of a deal, even if they said that Paizo had not replied to them, in the initial statement.

I would have also preferred if they had specified that they're getting a six month period to remove the art and that it is their own choice to remove said art on day 1 to get done with the matter quick.

Right there with you, I'm just always more inclined to lay the lion's share of the blame at the feet of the part with the most power in the situation. In this case Paizo or, more specifically, Jim Butler.

I really feel like this is getting out of hand with the potential to do real damage and it's mostly because of a handful of boneheaded and irresponsible decisions.

[ShinHakkaider]

"Overall, we do not wish ill will towards Paizo and we hope that they continue to produce the game we all know and love. We have seen a lot of people cancelling their subscriptions and suggesting boycotts. While I cannot tell you how to spend your money, I will say that all of us on the team who have them are still maintaining our own subscriptions. We will continue to support Paizo as long as they continue to produce the game we still enjoy. We do not like the partnership dissolving, as many of you understand, but we also do not wish Paizo to suffer from this decision. It is an unfortunate decision that has resulted in pain on both sides."

Again, I feel that it's way too late for a call for calm. The damage is already done and the angry mob is ready to make Paizo suffer for what again? A delay in new material going up and the art being removed? Even with those two things AON is still massively useful as a reference and a tool to facilitate play.

[Greg K.]

0xTJ wrote:

Greg K. wrote:

However volunteer work should still receive some criticism, because it can still be mismanaged. Example: A reminder email is not so much of a courtesy as a basic thing to do in situations like these. I think what personally bothers me on AoN's front is how they have not disclosed some of the info that led to Paizo being viewed worse, even by myself at first.

I would have preferred to know that there was at least a possibility of a deal, even if they said that Paizo had not replied to them, in the initial statement.

I would have also preferred if they had specified that they're getting a six month period to remove the art and that it is their own choice to remove said art on day 1 to get done with the matter quick.

Even if I do take it as being AoN's fault for not prodding for an answer back, it was Paizo's decision in the first place to end the partnership. Neither side has presented Paizo as offering something that would actually mitigate the issue in a meaningful way. They only seem to have been ways to make transition slower, when that hasn't been the issue.

Even after being thrown under the bus in the Paizo blog post, AoN has encouraged people to support Paizo and keep their subscriptions.

Paizo's point was terribly worded (and Jim should not make any posts for a while) but the core of it is true, no matter how we feel about it, AoN simply assumed (per their own video) that they were done with any possibility of a deal because there was no other email by Paizo and they did not send a second email themselves.

And again, a secondary email is basic stuff, volunteer work or not, if you get into this space to the extent AoN has, you should know the basic stuff.

[Greg K.]

Master Han Del of the Web wrote:

Greg K. wrote:

Master Han Del of the Web wrote:

Greg K. wrote:

The more I have discussed this situation on multiple platforms, and read and viewed all responses by both parties, I will not lie, I've been increasingly disappointed with how AoN handled this.

Definitely not happy with that either but it is important to remember it is an entirely volunteer organization whose members have whole jobs outside of it. The impact could have been mitigated if Jim had just followed up or empowered someone to check and respond to his e-mails while out of the office and the two groups could have released statements that were better coordinated and collaborative as opposed to... this.

Hell, they should have done a freaking Zoom call or something and gotten down to it in an evening or two.

I am not pleased with how Jim handled it either, don't get me wrong.

However volunteer work should still receive some criticism, because it can still be mismanaged. Example: A reminder email is not so much of a courtesy as a basic thing to do in situations like these. I think what personally bothers me on AoN's front is how they have not disclosed some of the info that led to Paizo being viewed worse, even by myself at first.

I would have preferred to know that there was at least a possibility of a deal, even if they said that Paizo had not replied to them, in the initial statement.

I would have also preferred if they had specified that they're getting a six month period to remove the art and that it is their own choice to remove said art on day 1 to get done with the matter quick.

Right there with you, I'm just always more inclined to lay the lion's share of the blame at the feet of the part with the most power in the situation. In this case Paizo or, more specifically, Jim Butler.

I really feel like this is getting out of hand with the potential to do real damage and it's mostly because of a handful of boneheaded and irresponsible decisions.

Fully agree on this, the community at this point is not helping much either with how much misinformation is still being spread.

[A Tailor]

I think we're very close to if not past the real damage threshold and that's very disheartening. I'm openly highly critical of Paizo's response and I don't think that me or people who feel similarly put off by this whole incident are above criticism, but it can be a little frustrating to see a lot of people seemingly assume the worst.

I know, realistically, it really isn't about people like me and more about the unhelpful vitriol on places like Reddit right now, but it's still frustrating to see some voices at times imply or state that the people angry at this course of action or response by Jim are wanting to poison the game or happy with its death or harm of the company that makes it. I do think cooling the temperature is the right call as of now, but I just hope that more people are willing to understand that being fervantly disappointed or upset about this scenario isn't a battle line. Even the people who have really rubbed me the wrong way and that I disagree with fully aren't enemies. They play the game I love. I just hope that more people keep that in mind as a whole when levying criticism. That goes for me, too.

[0xTJ]

Greg K. wrote:

Paizo's point was terribly worded (and Jim should not make any posts for a while) but the core of it is true, no matter how we feel about it, AoN simply assumed (per their own video) that they were done with any possibility of a deal because there was no other email by Paizo and they did not send a second email themselves.

And again, a secondary email is basic stuff, volunteer work or not, if you get into this space to the extent AoN has, you should know the basic stuff.

This is just my impression based on what both sides have said, but it doesn't seem like there was ever a suggestion for a deal that would maintain AoN as it is. Just half-solutions and short-term options.

I'm expecting that there was already an inked deal for Demiplane to become the PRD (paizo.com/prd has to redirect somewhere). We'll find out soon, but without an alternative PRD already in place I don't see them ending the agreement.

[Redelia]

ShinHakkaider wrote:

"Overall, we do not wish ill will towards Paizo and we hope that they continue to produce the game we all know and love. We have seen a lot of people cancelling their subscriptions and suggesting boycotts. While I cannot tell you how to spend your money, I will say that all of us on the team who have them are still maintaining our own subscriptions. We will continue to support Paizo as long as they continue to produce the game we still enjoy. We do not like the partnership dissolving, as many of you understand, but we also do not wish Paizo to suffer from this decision. It is an unfortunate decision that has resulted in pain on both sides."

Again, I feel that it's way too late for a call for calm. The damage is already done and the angry mob is ready to make Paizo suffer for what again? A delay in new material going up and the art being removed? Even with those two things AON is still massively useful as a reference and a tool to facilitate play.

No, the timing of emails and negotiations and things are NOT what this is about. That's just the red herring Paizo tried to throw at the community.

The problem is that Paizo did not renew the existing agreement. That is the problem, and the fix is for Paizo to immediately, and publicly, offer a renewal of the exact existing agreement.

This is about a company whose business was built on the idea a game belongs to the community, not a business turning around and trying to push the community off the table so they can make more money.