Pathfinder 1E Question for the Paizo folks regarding D&D's state of today

[ProfessorCirno]

Not to brag, but I can absolutely guarentee that when you stack up any of your online games to our Ptolus game at teh table? It loses. I'd bet money on it. Four years running strong, no signs of let up. Easily the best group that I had th epleasire of gaming with since HS 1st edition....

But as you said, different strokes....

Not to brag, but I can absolutely guarentee that when you stack up any of your offline games that had to end because of a player moving to my online games which didn't have to end when one person moved to the East Coast after finishing their education and another left to start theirs college, mine wins.

Not everyone is utterly sedentary in their life.

 

[Hussar]

Prof C, I hear that. How many groups actually manage to stay together, with their membership intact, for more than a couple of years? Sure, there are some, but, I'm going to guess that they're at one end of the curve and not the average. There's a reason WOTC's market research said the average campaign lasts about a year. And, taking it with a large dose of sale, poll after poll here at En World shows that most groups don't maintain their membership for more than a year or so.

My current group has three of us who've been together for 4 years, one who's been with use for two years and one who just went over a year. And none of us show signs of group fade. There's no foreseeable reason we won't be gaming together for the next four or five years.

I think people who have stable lives and stable gaming groups really don't realize how incredibly difficult it can be for a lot of people to get a group together.

Heck, I listen to Fear the Boot regularly, as an anecdote. Their gaming groups regularly implode. In the three or so years I've been listening, they've had numerous line ups in their campaigns.

People are busy. It can be very hard to find five people who share your interest in gaming and your schedule. Great when it happens, but, more often than not, a lot of people are forced to either not game or game with people they may not actually mesh with so well simply because of life pressures and geography.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Also, online games are really, really awesome when you're getting set to move to a country which doesn't speak your mother language

In short, I totally agree that offline games are way awesome, but they're not always doable, and even when they are, they aren't always continuable.

 

[carmachu]

Would you be willing to put your tabletop Ptolus game up against my old tabletop Ptolus game?

--Erik

Absolutely.....ours is still ongoing....

Vastur Caine and company is always up for a challenge(and no I dont play Vastur)


(and yes I know which one is yours....)

 

[Hippy]

Prof C, I hear that. How many groups actually manage to stay together, with their membership intact, for more than a couple of years? Sure, there are some, but, I'm going to guess that they're at one end of the curve and not the average. There's a reason WOTC's market research said the average campaign lasts about a year. And, taking it with a large dose of sale, poll after poll here at En World shows that most groups don't maintain their membership for more than a year or so.

My current group has three of us who've been together for 4 years, one who's been with use for two years and one who just went over a year. And none of us show signs of group fade. There's no foreseeable reason we won't be gaming together for the next four or five years.

I think people who have stable lives and stable gaming groups really don't realize how incredibly difficult it can be for a lot of people to get a group together.

Heck, I listen to Fear the Boot regularly, as an anecdote. Their gaming groups regularly implode. In the three or so years I've been listening, they've had numerous line ups in their campaigns.

People are busy. It can be very hard to find five people who share your interest in gaming and your schedule. Great when it happens, but, more often than not, a lot of people are forced to either not game or game with people they may not actually mesh with so well simply because of life pressures and geography.

Been gaming with my current group for 8 years and going strong! Two of the guys in the group I have played with since middle and High School (ahem... over 25 years ago..ouch)

We still play every two weeks (roughly) and have a great time! I Dm on Fridays and another memeber DMs on Sundays. I guess I'm one of the lucky ones if groups disintegrate at the rates you list. That's a shame, most of us have families (except two guys) and only one is not married, but we make it work with the spouses and kids!

Cheers,

Hippy

 

[Hussar]

Like I said before, I know there are exceptions. That's great for you.

I think for the vast majority of gamers, a group has a half life of about two years and likely replaces almost all of its members within 5.

This is hardly surprising. This happens in a lot of group hobbies. Particularly in a group hobby where there largest demographic is still students - either high school or college.

 

[BryonD]

Prof C, I hear that. How many groups actually manage to stay together, with their membership intact, for more than a couple of years?

So is it fair to conclude that groups which do stick together have nothing to learn on this topic from you or Prof C?
Is it fair to conclude that people have had (or still have) both long term games and online games would be better at providing a valid comparison between the two?

And, taking it with a large dose of sale, poll after poll here at En World shows that most groups don't maintain their membership for more than a year or so.

It is my understanding that while tabletop groups do in fact have a short average lifespan, online groups have an even shorter average lifespan.

Yes, there are online groups that are exceptions. But you have already established that you don't want to talk about exceptions on the table top side.

What you seem to be trying to do is compare the best of the best in online experiences to the average for table top.

If you compare the best of the best table top experiences with the best of the best on line, table top will win.

If you compare average table top with average online, table top will win.

All your points about table top groups frequently falling apart are valid and well taken. But you have to look at both side of the equation with the same considerations.

 

[Hussar]

If you compare the best of the best table top experiences with the best of the best on line, table top will win.

If you compare average table top with average online, table top will win.

Prove it. You have a gut feeling of how long online groups last but you have no more hard information than I do. I don't actually think online groups break up any more often than tabletop ones do. Looking at sites like Obsidian Portal and Myth Weavers, there do seem to be an awful lot of groups that last about a year or two, same as tabletop.

So, no, I wouldn't agree that the best of tabletop will be better than the best of online, nor do I think the average will necessarily be better.

Different, true, but no better.

Just to be absolutely clear, because I know that some people are going to make all sorts of claims about what I'm trying to say.

What I am saying is that VTT play is not second best to tabletop. It's different, but not inferior. That does not mean that I am saying that it is, in any way, superior.

 

[TerraDave]

On selling stuff: WotC has the essentials products and other box sets, (and previously published books) in stores. They are doing encounters. They haven't totally given up.

On virtual table topping: What I see is a hybrid model within groups. Sometimes you can't all meet, so you do so online. Other times you can all meet, but use the tools to show the map, do calculations, etc on laptops, the TV, iPads, some combination. Other other times, some people meet and some people do so remotely (see Hippy's example above).

 

[SSquirrel]

Take a look at the RPG section in Barnes & Noble. I think B&N does a generally pretty good job of stocking Pathfinder, for example, but more often than not a given B&N has one copy of the Bestiary, two random AP volumes, and nothing else. D&D, on the other hand, has multiple copies of numerous books, including one or two different ways to get into the hobby (say, an unsold 4e PHB, all of the Essentials books, and maybe Red Box or earlier "starter" set).

I doubt that's enough to keep B&N investing an entire section to a given subject matter in almost all of their stores. Either some other folks "step up" and fill that D&D space (very, very difficult, as almost no RPG publishers are as well capitalized as WotC and few have long-standing relationships with buyers and distributors like they do), or the space probably goes away.

Here in Louisville KY we have a B&N and a Borders and of the 2, B&N has no gaming products at all and Borders has maybe a couple of rows. A couple of White Wolf books, maybe something like the Shadowrun core, a Pathfinder or 2, and maybe a couple of other things. We have 1 dedicated game store, a place called Something to Do at the mall that has a decent gaming selection, but it is still a small portion of what they sell, a good comic store that has a decent gaming selection (incl used) and multiple Half Price books and another specific used book store I frequent all have gaming sections. That is basically it and if you are a gamer, it's pretty slim pickings.

You can find the usual huge sections of RIFTS and White Wolf that people have sold back to used book stores and a good variety of 3.x and also some 4E stuff, but usually nothing past about DMG2. I had no luck in a recent hunt for PHB3 and Psionic Power at the used stores heh. D&D drying up in stores would probably make the game store even less stable than it is now and probably not even really be noticed much by the rest of them. Then we would be stuck with used stores or amazon.