General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
...comment on your response to the following scenario:
1. 4E is successful, maintains itself as the top selling and most played RPG, and runs 8-10 years in its current direction before being replaced by a 5E even less like previous editions
2. Pathfinder tapers off after a successful launch by 3PP standards, and achieves a stable presence on par with True20 or Mutants and Masterminds.
3. The 3.5E playing community shrinks over time until its on par with people playing previous editions.
4. OGL based gaming begins a slow decline, with the big names soldiering on and fewer and fewer new products being released.
I find myself to be perfectly happy and content with this state of affairs and I continue to play 4E until 5E comes along.
...comment on your response to the following scenario:
1. 4E is successful, maintains itself as the top selling and most played RPG, and runs 8-10 years in its current direction before being replaced by a 5E even less like previous editions
Sonds very likely, though I expect a time frame of 6-8 years, rather.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecasualoblivion
2. Pathfinder tapers off after a successful launch by 3PP standards, and achieves a stable presence on par with True20 or Mutants and Masterminds.
PF will probably fare better than this. On the scale ranging from True20/M&M to 4E it will be pretty close to True20/M&M, though. What this means to Paizo is another matter; it could be a success for them anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecasualoblivion
3. The 3.5E playing community shrinks over time until its on par with people playing previous editions.
Very likely so. Of course the existence of the internet means that the game as such can be better maintained by the community. If you wanted to stay true to 1e in 1989, you'd to be lucky to know other players in your area who wanted to do so, too. Today you can play over the net with like-minded individuals from all over the world. Another thing is the existence of the OGL, which, especially on a global scale, allows publishers to support core.3.5E gaming.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecasualoblivion
4. OGL based gaming begins a slow decline, with the big names soldiering on and fewer and fewer new products being released.
If you mean OGL based as in using the 3.5 SRD, your probably right. On the other hand, the OGL has introduced something new. Publishers other than WotC, notably Mongoose, have developed games using the OGL, but their own SRD instead of the WotC one. This re-introduces the original spirit of the OGL, namely that of a joint effort by several publishers/individuals to support a game. I fully expect this way of publishing to grow, not to bring on the game which will win over D&D, but to provide a market for smaller games, which may leave the obscurity behind, which has been the fate of many games of the path.
OTOH I was thinking exactly this regarding your 8-10 years of life time of 4e. I would rather put that in 5 years.
As far as how Pathfinder goes it has as much to do with the numbers of loyal fans as the cash these loyal fans are willing to give. Plus the production costs or what have you.
What does Paizo's production cost have to do with things? If they have 50.000 people who play their game, they have 50.000 people who play it (ie around 1% of the D&D community) it. Production cost doesn't really matter when we are talking marked share.
Quote:
Another thing to consider: if D&D loses strategic value (ie novels sell less and less) and brand power we do not know if Hasbro will justify risks to keep D&D in development or try to find a sweet deal to sell it to someone that may think he could resurrect it in market due. It could be anyone from Microsoft to Nintendo. And this is important because right now some amount of investment is noticeable. I am not sure if it is in the millions Scott is talking about but if people perceive a considerable decline in investment the value of the brand name will suffer a lot.
Aren't we talking the speculation into fantasy land now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Korgoth
I wake up and say "Wow, what a weird dream."
That's not Hasbro's business model. So what you're discussing won't happen and is a totally moot point.
What is the Hasbro Business Model?
@OP
1) I think 4e will be 5-7 years. I hope (assuming I continue to like what they do) longer, but I doubt it. I am not sure if 5e will be less like the old editions. I am still hoping for a blend between 1e and 4e.
2) I think Paizo will do very well for a 3pp, just as they have always done. I am not a 100% sure where on the RPG-ladder M&M are placed, but my guess would be that Pathfinder >> M&M.
3) Yep.
4) Begins? I thought that started years ago.
__________________
360 hours played
Gnoguh, human fighter/cleric (kensei->adamantine soldier)
Carric, elf cleric/ranger (radiant servant->saint)
Torn, tiefling wizard/cleric (divine oracle->sages of ages)
Truxas, human feylock/bard (feytouched->feyliege)
Tagron, human rogue (daggermaster->deadly trickster) 22nd level Musings of an Epic Virgin
...comment on your response to the following scenario:
1. 4E is successful, maintains itself as the top selling and most played RPG, and runs 8-10 years in its current direction before being replaced by a 5E even less like previous editions
I don't see this happening. If 4e is an ongoing success, I expect 5e to end up being much the same. If (as I frankly expect) D&D goes through a period of long and slow decline *, I expect 5e to have a very strong "back to basics" vibe to it.
* My saying this has nothing to do with the quality of 4e. It's a reflection of the generational cycle of D&D. We've had two 'peak years', with a decline between them each time. If the cycle holds, we're currently in the declining part of the cycle.
Quote:
2. Pathfinder tapers off after a successful launch by 3PP standards, and achieves a stable presence on par with True20 or Mutants and Masterminds.
3. The 3.5E playing community shrinks over time until its on par with people playing previous editions.
4. OGL based gaming begins a slow decline, with the big names soldiering on and fewer and fewer new products being released.
These are all very reasonable.
In the event that all of the above comes to pass as described, I'll continue playing a legacy 3.5 or Pathfinder game as long as I am able to find players. Or move to another system entirely - Warhammer, or Star Wars Saga (or its successor), or something else entirely. The current direction of D&D doesn't interest me, and a new edition that is a further big step in that direction won't interest me either. I don't hate 4e, but it's not for me.
1. I'd expect 6-8 years is more likely, perhaps towards the top end.
2. PFRPG can be stable at the True20/M&M level. If it starts to do a lot better, showing that there really is a large market of people who want to buy the 3.x rulebooks or a very close variant thereof, it's got a problem. Anyone who wants to can publish the 3.x rulebooks themselves. It's one thing being the only game that keeps 3.x in print, it's another when Mongoose can put out their Pocket PHB with optional character advancement rules, or another company can do something similar. Games that can claim to be significantly different fill a separate niche, but keeping 3.x alive is something anyone with access to the SRD can do.
3/4. With the various variant games, I'd expect the community to be overall larger but more fragmented. I see no reason for GR to stop supporting M&M, for Mongoose to leave Conan, etc.
Last edited by Bluenose; 29th June 2009 at 11:54 AM..
Reason: spelling
As someone that actually had the opportunity to attend a Hasbro stockholder's meeting pre WOTC acquistiion, unless the policy has changed, Hasbro does NOT sell off its brands.
They'll put it away for a 5-7 years, release ann anniversary/nostaliga product see how that goes for a few years and then put it back on the shelf.
Furthermore, Hasbro is one of the most hands-off companies around. Hasbro doesn't look at specific product lines but at specific sub-companies. It is the sub-company that decides whether or not a product line comes to an end....
Hasbro would be more concerned with the health of M:TG than D&D (Really, why do people here seem to forget that WOTC also owns M:TG - which still goes by the name paper crack among its fans)
In 3 years, I think either WOTC releases 5th ed. or 4.5 ed.
Also in 3 years, I think Pathfinder will still be going strong.
So, in just a few short years, I predict more people will be playing Pathfinder than 4.0. But that's just because 4th ed. won't be supported anymore, since WOTC will have published it's replacement by then. And more people will be playing that game instead.
Then we'll have threads where fans of WOTC and Paizo hash out the same tired arguments all over again. I can see it now:
"Pathfinder's a failure! It only appeals to a sub-set of a marginalized sub-set!"
"Oh yeah? Well 5th ed. killed roleplaying! And it looks like a videogame!"
I have seen the future. And it looks like more of the same.
...comment on your response to the following scenario:
1. 4E is successful, maintains itself as the top selling and most played RPG, and runs 8-10 years in its current direction before being replaced by a 5E even less like previous editions
2. Pathfinder tapers off after a successful launch by 3PP standards, and achieves a stable presence on par with True20 or Mutants and Masterminds.
3. The 3.5E playing community shrinks over time until its on par with people playing previous editions.
4. OGL based gaming begins a slow decline, with the big names soldiering on and fewer and fewer new products being released.
1) I think the stance that there will be no 4.5E will be problematic if they get to the fourth year and are having trouble selling the PH4, DMG4 and/or the MM4 in quantities that would stave off a new edition need. I think the new marketing initiative does well to frontload the first few years with sales for extended versions of the game by spreading out what was traditionally core rules over several years of books but keeping fresh beyond that and maintaining high sales levels might be difficult through even half a dozen years, let alone ten.
2-3) These points are probably on par or underestimates.
4) I think the idea that there won't be a small legion of OGL publishers taking advantage of the OGC pool for years and years to come to be rather silly. "big names soldiering on" More likely that bigger names will develop their own lines away from the OGL and smaller pubs will be the ones keeping the OGL fires burning, IMO.
Location: center of despair to the left of depression
Posts: 12,939
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecasualoblivion
...comment on your response to the following scenario:
1. 4E is successful, maintains itself as the top selling and most played RPG, and runs 8-10 years in its current direction before being replaced by a 5E even less like previous editions
2. Pathfinder tapers off after a successful launch by 3PP standards, and achieves a stable presence on par with True20 or Mutants and Masterminds.
3. The 3.5E playing community shrinks over time until its on par with people playing previous editions.
4. OGL based gaming begins a slow decline, with the big names soldiering on and fewer and fewer new products being released.
In all likelihood this is what will happen...... good or bad. Eventually there will be a computer system created that works the way they had hoped at WoTC to play to illiminate paper and competition.
Andy the originator, Mega the drama queen, Mania the insane, Al whom uses movie quotes to connect with the world he did not create, Ugh- primal urges and the only sane one of the group and DarkMania the Sith Lord
Lovin' the four 'B's of life- Beer, Babes, Buffets and Bombs. just being funny
1. 4E is successful, maintains itself as the top selling and most played RPG, and runs 8-10 years in its current direction before being replaced by a 5E even less like previous editions
I don't think this is very likely. Not that 5e is necessarily coming soon (though I'd be pleased), just that fewer (if any) 4e books, will be published in a couple of years due to low sales.
In the meantime I will probably play 3.5 or other systems occasionally if I can find other players but I am not interested in switching to 4e, even if it's the only game in print.
Not because it's too different from previous editions (pathfinder for example, isn't enough of a departure for me), I simply dislike the 4e approach. So a very different 5e could still bring me back.
Anyway, if 4e lasts that long, the next edition will probably mostly focus on electronic features and online gaming. A compatible pen-and-paper version may or may not be supported.
__________________
_ Ceterum censeo the encounter/daily power system is an unholy blight upon D&Ddom
5e can't come soon enough
Last edited by lutecius; 29th June 2009 at 04:31 PM..
There will never be a 5th edition of D&D because the world ends 21. dec. 2012, but maybe our ghostly selves might meet somewhere in the higher dimensions to play an astral version of our favorite editions.
1) I think the stance that there will be no 4.5E will be problematic if they get to the fourth year and are having trouble selling the PH4, DMG4 and/or the MM4 in quantities that would stave off a new edition need. I think the new marketing initiative does well to frontload the first few years with sales for extended versions of the game by spreading out what was traditionally core rules over several years of books but keeping fresh beyond that and maintaining high sales levels might be difficult through even half a dozen years, let alone ten.
This "frontloading" of so many books in the first two or three years, is one thing which has me feeling pessimistic about the future viablity of 4E. What will they do for an "encore" after PHB4/DMG4/MM4 (or higher), to maintain significant sales? (That is, without introducing a 4.5E).
The 4E design goal of maintaining balance throughout, may possibly put a further constraint on possible future new classes, races, power sources, paragon paths, epic destinies, etc ... (Then again, some of the new classes, races, feats, prestige classes, etc ... introduced in the 3.5E splatbooks were not always that impressive and/or appeared to be derivative).
I suppose if they don't have enough new content to publish into a splatbook of 160 pages (or more), they can publish it in Dragon or Dungeon magazine on DDI.
My personal thought is that while streamlining made it highly playable, and easy to prep, it also minimized the mechanical diversity available to the game, and that will shorten it's effective lifespan.
I think that this is a keen observation...and we've seen it before.
Microgames' The Fantasy Trip was a good game, but its simplicity- awesome and charming though it was- was also quite limiting.
However, TFT's structure was a keystone in the development of GURPS. The expansion of its system into what would become GURPS has made the game a long-term player in the RPG market.
What does Paizo's production cost have to do with things? If they have 50.000 people who play their game, they have 50.000 people who play it (ie around 1% of the D&D community) it. Production cost doesn't really matter when we are talking marked share.
Pathfinder's market success has to do at 100% with the profitability of the Pathfinder rpg line. For Wotc, D&D's market success -and thus further investment in the line and further development- is also connected to the performance of other values that are controlled by the D&D merchandise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99
Aren't we talking the speculation into fantasy land now?
Do you have any facts that tell you so?
If the D&D merchandise performed badly and you could make a sweet deal with someone that had some chances to revive it, would you do it or not? Of course, you could be a company that tries to kill by competition rather than create by competition. That is take advantage of the destructive forces of the competition rather than the creative ones- but in a creative environment it is usually the later than the former. Most video game companies would not seek to shelf video game lines for example in a similar situation -this is my general impression. Of course Hasbro could behave differently but it would pay the PR price, especially if some company announced that was interested to buy and carry on said line but Hasbro chose to shelf it instead.
Pathfinder's market success has to do at 100% with the profitability of the Pathfinder rpg line.
Paizo also has a GameMastery line, which makes maps for dungeons and other background settings which can be used with miniatures. I've noticed that even in FLGS which don't stock any Pathfinder books, they will frequently stock some of the GameMastery maps.
For Wotc, D&D's market success -and thus further investment in the line and further development- is also connected to the performance of other values that are controlled by the D&D merchandise.
How much a particular product line contributes to WotC's bottom line, is largely unknown. Hasbro does not itemize these things in any great detail, in their annual financial reports for shareholders.
Nevertheless, it would be interesting to see how much 4E D&D actually contributes to Hasbro/WotC's bottom line, compared to MtG, D&D novels, MtG novels, D&D miniatures, movies and video games licensing, etc ...
FWIW, before he stormed off, joethelawyer often posted Hasbro financials and/or shareholder transcripts (all publicly released stuff) on this site- if you search, I'm sure you'll find some.
FWIW, before he stormed off, joethelawyer often posted Hasbro financials and/or shareholder transcripts (all publicly released stuff) on this site- if you search, I'm sure you'll find some.
I was reading Hasbro's 10K for 2008, which was filed with the SEC in Feb 2009.
More likely that bigger names will develop their own lines away from the OGL and smaller pubs will be the ones keeping the OGL fires burning, IMO.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
