Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Is Pathfinder meant to be "boutique D&D?"
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7646376" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>Since 5e is back to the things D&Ders missed about 3e, there's no viable being-D&D-until-D&D-comes-back strategy open to them, obviously. </p><p></p><p>so challenging D&D is out. The 10 ton coelacanth is back in the wading pool. Frankly, I think Paizo should've just re-attached itself like a proper lamprey. They could have leveraged their rep as the caretakers of True D&D during the 4e/Essentials/Next interregnum, and done something other 3pps can't generally seem to make money on: publishing 'crunch' - splatbooks and the like - for the current ed of D&D. Y'know, something of quality players wouldn't be afraid to take to their DMs, begging approval, unlike rifling through DMsG.</p><p></p><p>Prior to d20 re-taking the hobby, RPGs had gotten very 'niche' - I think that's the same meaning you're going for. You can't compete with D&D, because very few people are ever going to hear of or try your product, so you make it as unique & appealing as possible, even if that means making it appeal to a very narrow wedge of the potential market, and count on the few converts you get to introduce it to the few like-minded individuals they know personally, and carve out a little niche for your product. It means needing to be very specialized, and very good.</p><p> </p><p>Lavender ice cream is way better than one might expect, BTW. </p><p></p><p> A left-handed way of supplementing 5e? It's not a crazy idea, 13th Age did that, too, it had some great, innovative, mechanics that were specifically design & presented in such a way they'd be easy to 'lift' for other games (not necessarily 5e, since it was out a year ahead of that ed, but any d20 game, certainly including Next/5e...).</p><p></p><p>Maybe I'm just more cynical... OK, 'maybe' is the wrong word... but 5e is very much a compromise ed, designed to <em>avoid offending any faction of the fanbase enough to edition war against it</em> - most especially, the factions that already /did/ edition war against D&D - and it sacrifices quite a bit of accessibility and draw to new players in order to get there. The point is not to 'draw in new fans' - the D&D name will do that - but merely not to repel them before they can even try it. Because there's no use being accessible and meeting new-player expectations if you're going to be surrounded by a firestorm of nerdrage few potential new players have the asbestos personalities to brave.</p><p></p><p>It's a simple explanation: with the hobby back to being totally dominated by D&D, the options are hitch your wagon to it, or carve out a tiny specialist niche.</p><p></p><p>I'd've thought Paizo well-positioned to do the former, rather than the latter, but it's their business...</p><p></p><p>Nod. You can't compete on name recognition, so you compete on quality - you get only the choosiest customers, who are hard to please, but you get customers.</p><p></p><p> D&D has traditionally had rules that ranged from sketchy, to Baroque, to bloated, to broken, to <redacted>, to consciously DM-centric. </p><p></p><p>Other games carve out niches for themselves with rules that are better than D&D, and they compete with eachother by doing something /specific/, preferably unique, that not just every other RPG that's strictly superior to D&D's Paleolithic mechanics can do. I doubt 'more tactical/detailed,' alone, would do that, however much an improvement they may be over 5e. Unless there's still some of that True D&D sheen left on PF2, I suppose. </p><p></p><p>PF 2 /could/ have been an 'Advanced' alternative to 5e, I think. But that wasn't what PF1 was in any sense, it was a continuation of 3.5, a line in the sand, as it were, to say D&D can has come this far, but no further. 5e backed away from that line, and PF can no longer be what it was. Heck, 5e backed up so far that PF1 could have just started being promoted as the 'advanced' D&D alternative, without a PF2. </p><p></p><p>Austere simplicity, preferably to the point of elegance, also works. </p><p>5e stakes itself out as 'rules lite' (compared to 3.5/PF), so when a disillusioned gamer acclimated to it finds a genuinely simple, yet functional, system it can be quite the revelation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7646376, member: 996"] Since 5e is back to the things D&Ders missed about 3e, there's no viable being-D&D-until-D&D-comes-back strategy open to them, obviously. so challenging D&D is out. The 10 ton coelacanth is back in the wading pool. Frankly, I think Paizo should've just re-attached itself like a proper lamprey. They could have leveraged their rep as the caretakers of True D&D during the 4e/Essentials/Next interregnum, and done something other 3pps can't generally seem to make money on: publishing 'crunch' - splatbooks and the like - for the current ed of D&D. Y'know, something of quality players wouldn't be afraid to take to their DMs, begging approval, unlike rifling through DMsG. Prior to d20 re-taking the hobby, RPGs had gotten very 'niche' - I think that's the same meaning you're going for. You can't compete with D&D, because very few people are ever going to hear of or try your product, so you make it as unique & appealing as possible, even if that means making it appeal to a very narrow wedge of the potential market, and count on the few converts you get to introduce it to the few like-minded individuals they know personally, and carve out a little niche for your product. It means needing to be very specialized, and very good. Lavender ice cream is way better than one might expect, BTW. A left-handed way of supplementing 5e? It's not a crazy idea, 13th Age did that, too, it had some great, innovative, mechanics that were specifically design & presented in such a way they'd be easy to 'lift' for other games (not necessarily 5e, since it was out a year ahead of that ed, but any d20 game, certainly including Next/5e...). Maybe I'm just more cynical... OK, 'maybe' is the wrong word... but 5e is very much a compromise ed, designed to [i]avoid offending any faction of the fanbase enough to edition war against it[/i] - most especially, the factions that already /did/ edition war against D&D - and it sacrifices quite a bit of accessibility and draw to new players in order to get there. The point is not to 'draw in new fans' - the D&D name will do that - but merely not to repel them before they can even try it. Because there's no use being accessible and meeting new-player expectations if you're going to be surrounded by a firestorm of nerdrage few potential new players have the asbestos personalities to brave. It's a simple explanation: with the hobby back to being totally dominated by D&D, the options are hitch your wagon to it, or carve out a tiny specialist niche. I'd've thought Paizo well-positioned to do the former, rather than the latter, but it's their business... Nod. You can't compete on name recognition, so you compete on quality - you get only the choosiest customers, who are hard to please, but you get customers. D&D has traditionally had rules that ranged from sketchy, to Baroque, to bloated, to broken, to <redacted>, to consciously DM-centric. Other games carve out niches for themselves with rules that are better than D&D, and they compete with eachother by doing something /specific/, preferably unique, that not just every other RPG that's strictly superior to D&D's Paleolithic mechanics can do. I doubt 'more tactical/detailed,' alone, would do that, however much an improvement they may be over 5e. Unless there's still some of that True D&D sheen left on PF2, I suppose. PF 2 /could/ have been an 'Advanced' alternative to 5e, I think. But that wasn't what PF1 was in any sense, it was a continuation of 3.5, a line in the sand, as it were, to say D&D can has come this far, but no further. 5e backed away from that line, and PF can no longer be what it was. Heck, 5e backed up so far that PF1 could have just started being promoted as the 'advanced' D&D alternative, without a PF2. Austere simplicity, preferably to the point of elegance, also works. 5e stakes itself out as 'rules lite' (compared to 3.5/PF), so when a disillusioned gamer acclimated to it finds a genuinely simple, yet functional, system it can be quite the revelation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Is Pathfinder meant to be "boutique D&D?"
Top