Would Paizo Make a Better Steward for Our Hobby?

[DMZ2112]

I think that's a fair criticism, but based on sales information that has been hinted at you may be in the minority. Paizo certainly played it more cautiously than WotC did given the time frame and appears to have come off better for it. WotC certainly seems to be taking a step away from pushing the envelope with 5E. Whether that will be a net positive or negative as far as D&D's future remains to be seen.

I'm not sure innovation is the role of the big four games. Once you've made it to that level, you're like the engine that powers the hobby. You draw new players into the hobby, those players try out some indie games, those indie games get good buzz, the big games incorporate some of those indie mechanics into their next editions, and the next editions of the big games draw new players into the hobby. The cycle continues.

If you're one of the big four and you try to play the indie card, it's like flooding the engine.

 

[bone_naga]

I don't think that Paizo would have been willing to make some sacred hamburger and create 4e, which I happen to enjoy.

However, making the assumption in the OP that they did create a rule system of my choice, yes they would be a better company. Their marketing and more importantly their customer relations are leaps and bounds ahead of WotC.

I think the fact that they can basically take 3.5, resell it under an off-brand label, and make it competitive with mainstream D&D is partly a testament to their own skill, and partly a testament to WotC's bungling, but both of which indicate that they would probably be a better company to handle the brand name.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

Selling text documents with some art as PDFs was forward thinking in 1995. Paizo's got to do a little better than that now.

I'd love to see Paizo develop a character builder, integrate at least the base rules, perhaps add some additional component to their PDFs to integrate them into it as well.

Paizo doesn't strike me as an innovator. They're not interested in trying something new, just sticking with what works until the hobby dies.

I definitely can't agree with this. They've done many innovative things with the Pathfinder game and brand:

1. The subscription model for each of their product lines.
2. Limiting core books to three per year, but having adventure and setting material on a monthly basis.
3. The Pathfinder adventure card game.
4. The token boxes for each of the Bestiaries and NPC Codex.
5. A randomized miniature structure where buying a full box gets you a full set.
6. NPC and Item cards.
7. The magnetic initiative tracker.
8. The manner in which they fully support each adventure path with maps, cards, setting, and player content.

All of these are innovations, and if not unique individually, certainly they've never been combined in this manner.

Now, if by innovation, you're looking for electronic tools, then sure. But by being OGL, Pathfinder is a default option in most third party tools, so there isn't much incentive.

 

[Morrus]

"Innovation" comes with it the implication of "good innovation". Not everything new is good, after all. I wouldn't hold "innovation" as the target to head for; "good" should be; and if that good happens to be innovative, then cool. But it doesn't have to be innovative; it does have to be good.

 

[Sunseeker]

I definitely can't agree with this. They've done many innovative things with the Pathfinder game and brand:

1. The subscription model for each of their product lines.
2. Limiting core books to three per year, but having adventure and setting material on a monthly basis.
3. The Pathfinder adventure card game.
4. The token boxes for each of the Bestiaries and NPC Codex.
5. A randomized miniature structure where buying a full box gets you a full set.
6. NPC and Item cards.
7. The magnetic initiative tracker.
8. The manner in which they fully support each adventure path with maps, cards, setting, and player content.

All of these are innovations, and if not unique individually, certainly they've never been combined in this manner.

Now, if by innovation, you're looking for electronic tools, then sure. But by being OGL, Pathfinder is a default option in most third party tools, so there isn't much incentive.

1: This is not innovative. Anyone with an expansive product line and digital access has done this for years.
2: This is not innovation, this is simply ensuring that their players don't get overwhelmed with products. It's polite, and good business, but not innovative.
3: To be honest, I haven't played it, and actually wasn't aware of it.
4: Which is a nice addition, but again, not particularly innovative. Cardboard tokens are pretty old.
5: I'm not sure how it can both be random, and get a full set from a full box. That's nice, no argument. But this is less innovation and more a polite business strategy. Buying random minis and NEVER getting the one you want can be very aggravating, so doing this keeps customers happy.
6: Didn't 4e do this? I'm not sure who did it first.
7: I'll give you this one.
8: Not innovative, but good business.

I wouldn't call them all innovations. Few of these are new or creative business products or strategies, some of them are just "nice business gestures". I don't think being a "nice business" is innovative, the fact that so many businesses have forgotten how to do it is the problem.

It's partly digital tools, it's partly new products. Their overall business strategy seems to be one of support and supplement.

 

[Ahnehnois]

[MENTION=93444]shidaku[/MENTION]
What would you call innovative? I haven't seen much in the past few years from WotC that I would call innovative either. Whatever innovation is happening, IMO is with smaller companies.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

1: This is not innovative. Anyone with an expansive product line and digital access has done this for years.
2: This is not innovation, this is simply ensuring that their players don't get overwhelmed with products. It's polite, and good business, but not innovative.
3: To be honest, I haven't played it, and actually wasn't aware of it.
4: Which is a nice addition, but again, not particularly innovative. Cardboard tokens are pretty old.
5: I'm not sure how it can both be random, and get a full set from a full box. That's nice, no argument. But this is less innovation and more a polite business strategy. Buying random minis and NEVER getting the one you want can be very aggravating, so doing this keeps customers happy.
6: Didn't 4e do this? I'm not sure who did it first.
7: I'll give you this one.
8: Not innovative, but good business.

I wouldn't call them all innovations. Few of these are new or creative business products or strategies, some of them are just "nice business gestures". I don't think being a "nice business" is innovative, the fact that so many businesses have forgotten how to do it is the problem.

It's partly digital tools, it's partly new products. Their overall business strategy seems to be one of support and supplement.

I argue that effectively applying existing models to a new market is a form of innovation. As a company they have evolved and refined their business and products over time.

It's clear that what you're looking for is a different kind of innovation. Something less iterative. Something surprising. I suppose there's nothing wrong with that.

 

[danbala]

The only thing they don't have is the D&D name. But, that may not be as big a detriment as you'd think. Pathfinder, the brand, may not be as well known, but it also doesn't have any cultural stigma attached.
.

I agree with everything in your post except this one point. I suspect that the marketing value of the "D&D" name is still considerable despite Hasbro's many missteps. I hope that in the event that 5e does as well as 4e, Paizo will be in a position to buy it. Lets keep our fingers crossed.

 

[fjw70]

I don't think that Paizo would have been willing to make some sacred hamburger and create 4e, which I happen to enjoy.

However, making the assumption in the OP that they did create a rule system of my choice, yes they would be a better company. Their marketing and more importantly their customer relations are leaps and bounds ahead of WotC.

I think the fact that they can basically take 3.5, resell it under an off-brand label, and make it competitive with mainstream D&D is partly a testament to their own skill, and partly a testament to WotC's bungling, but both of which indicate that they would probably be a better company to handle the brand name.

This is basically my opinion as well. For me 4e was a hugely positive contribution to the D&D family and 3.x/PF is my least favorite version of D&D, but take the rules out of it and Paizo does a great job with PF.

They do a great job with peripheral products. I don't know if they make much money on them (maybe they do) but they do make them available. With cards, tokens, map packs, and minus (plastic and metal) they really support their product.

 

[Hussar]

[MENTION=93444]shidaku[/MENTION]
What would you call innovative? I haven't seen much in the past few years from WotC that I would call innovative either. Whatever innovation is happening, IMO is with smaller companies.

Umm, 4ed? Like it or hate it, it is an innovation. DDI? Again, first of its kind for the hobby. Next? Lots and lots of innovation there.

What more do you want?