Great City Campaign Setting...not 4e...sucks

[Xyxox]

This is already established case law. It's entirely legit for a product to make use of another company's trademarked name on its packaging for purposes of comparison or to indicate compatibility. Role-Aids did it without licensing for years and only got nailed in court when they submitted to a more restrictive license and then broke it. It also happens all the time with generic over-the-counter medicines. Look at the package for generic Ibuprofen and you'll likely see a blurb saying "Compare to the ingredients in Advil Extra Strength (TM)".

Thanks for the clarification. It does, however, limit what can be put into such products. That's the carrot of the GSL. The stick is the fact that WotC can nullify the GSL at any time.

 

[Jhaelen]

Conversion is a pain if you want things to be EXACTLY THE SAME in a new system. I don't. What I bought Ptolus for was the setting, not the adventures.

That's what I'd have thought as well. While it's nice to have some stats that fit the rpg system you happen to play at the moment, campaign settings are probably the type of supplement that is easiest to convert or adapt. The important stuff is the background and descriptions; the ideas behind the setting.

I also think it'll be A LOT easier to convert 3.5 stats to 4E than the other way around. Creating 3.5 stat blocks is a lot of hard work. 4E stat blocks are easy.

 

[Voadam]

I also think it'll be A LOT easier to convert 3.5 stats to 4E than the other way around. Creating 3.5 stat blocks is a lot of hard work. 4E stat blocks are easy.

Classes might be an exception to this though. At the moment there are a lot of things in 3.5 that don't have analogues in 4e yet. A nature god cleric is not a great conversion of a wildshaping druid for example.

Warlords I could see going to marshalls from Mini handbook.

 

[carmachu]

If I remember correctly, I believe Erik also said that they wouldn't come close to approaching WOTC sales figures. I could be wrong and maybe someone with access to the search function could look that up. However, if Pathfinder does ever reach such heights I would certainly change my tune about the whole subject.

But Paizo doesnt NEED wotc sales figures. If their taking 20% of the market share(and it could be 15% higher in the 3rd party items as someone said) thats great numbers for Paizo.

On the otehr hand, if Wotc LOSES 20% of the market because they dont want to go 4e and Wotc has nothing to offer them, thats not a good thing for them.

 

[carmachu]

Most of those guys will be dead before we convert anyway.

And worst case scenario, I could just take a big powerful gnoll from the 4E MM, or maybe one from some issue of Dragon, dye it blue, and we're off to the races. No one, except maybe Monte if he has my game bugged, would really notice or care about the difference.

Conversion is a pain if you want things to be EXACTLY THE SAME in a new system. I don't. What I bought Ptolus for was the setting, not the adventures.

See I dont know where you guys are, there still is alot to be done.

If you just want the setting, its still good. You still will have some work to do.....neevr said you couldnt do it. Its no different than converting old white dwarf adventures from 1e.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

See I dont know where you guys are, there still is alot to be done.

I've been using the setting since before it was anything more than some stuff on Monte's site. If you're not using it as an Adventure Path (I'm not), what is it you think that needs to be converted? I really am not getting it.

Its no different than converting old white dwarf adventures from 1e.

Except that adventures are 99 percent crunch. Pretty much everything has to be converted to get use out of them. I can convert NOTHING and get a lot of use out of Ptolus. There's a whole lot to the city that isn't pregenerated bad guys.

 

[BraveSirRobin]

But Paizo doesnt NEED wotc sales figures. If their taking 20% of the market share(and it could be 15% higher in the 3rd party items as someone said) thats great numbers for Paizo.

From what Erik said Paizo is doing great. That has nothing to do with my point abou overall market size. The question is what system is more appealing to a third party publisher. The system that holds 80% of the RPG market (which people think won't have much 3pp competition) or the system that holds 20% of the RPG market (which apparently is going to become fairly croweded with 3pp competition)? Of OGL crowd Paizo seems to be jumping to an early lead, but what about the other guys? The OGL is a smaller pie and alot of seats around the table. Is that better or worse then the bigger pie with the one big fat guy accross the table? Who knows, we will see.

On the otehr hand, if Wotc LOSES 20% of the market because they dont want to go 4e and Wotc has nothing to offer them, thats not a good thing for them.

Do you think WOTC sales are up or down from last year? I have a hard time seeing a significant share of the market going exclusively OGL. I think the type of people that have traditionally gone with 3pp are the types that play a wide array of products. Some may go exclusive but I think most will continue to buy WOTC product. 20% of the market continuing to play OGL doesn't necessariy mean that WOTC looses 20% of the market.

I think WOTC's plan is horizontal and verticle marketing. They want to expand to new players and also sell deeper with a more varied array of product like the DDI. Will they be able to pull it off? Maybe, maybe not.

 

[Gundark]

Hey Sig, I don't think the OP was bad mouthing the product. I think he was saying that it sucked that the product was not going to be 4ed, as opposed to saying the product sucked! So, I think it was actually a compliment (in a backhanded sort of way).

That was my reading of it anyhow.

Nothing backhanded about it. It looks like a very cool product. Too bad it's not 4e...

 

[Mouseferatu]

The entire problem with this discussion--well, another problem, above and beyond the fact that nobody has numbers, except a few people who have reason not to share them--is that people are assuming that this is a zero-sum situation.

What I mean is, people seem to assume that if 20% of the market sticks with 3.5, it means that WotC has lost 20% of the market.

But that's only true if you consider "the market" to be a static thing. Just like there were a number of gamers who ditched D&D for 2nd edition and came back for 3E, there are a great many who gave up on 3E and are coming back for 4E. (You don't hear about them a lot here on ENWorld, but it's a very common response on non-gaming sites that talk about 4E, like Aint It Cool News's new "Tabletop" column.)

So while Paizo's gain would seem to be entirely WotC's loss, one also has to factor in the gain that WotC has achieved from outside the previously measurable market.

Now, that doesn't matter much to Paizo or other 3.5-based companies. As others have said, a tiny fraction of WotC's sales would be enough to keep one of those companies in the black and then some. But it does make a huge difference when people are trying to guess--and let's be honest, it's all guessing--how well WotC itself is doing in terms of 4E sales.

 

[carmachu]

From what Erik said Paizo is doing great. That has nothing to do with my point abou overall market size. The question is what system is more appealing to a third party publisher. The system that holds 80% of the RPG market (which people think won't have much 3pp competition) or the system that holds 20% of the RPG market (which apparently is going to become fairly croweded with 3pp competition)? Of OGL crowd Paizo seems to be jumping to an early lead, but what about the other guys? The OGL is a smaller pie and alot of seats around the table. Is that better or worse then the bigger pie with the one big fat guy accross the table? Who knows, we will see.

What YOU dont seem to understand, is that in general, market share has almost nothing to do with what is appealing to third parties. You know what is holding back majority of 3pp?

The GSL. Because no one wants to really put their companies flagships and otehr gems in Wotc's whimsical hands. Your seeing more and more not switching. Big or small.

Even Necromancer games, with Orcus, is seeming hesitant at the moment in trusting something like Tomb of Horrors in 4e.


Market share has really, nothing to do with the decisions we're seeing. Not many want to trust their pride and joys into the GSL.

Do you think WOTC sales are up or down from last year? I have a hard time seeing a significant share of the market going exclusively OGL. I think the type of people that have traditionally gone with 3pp are the types that play a wide array of products. Some may go exclusive but I think most will continue to buy WOTC product. 20% of the market continuing to play OGL doesn't necessariy mean that WOTC looses 20% of the market.

It also doesnt mean that Wotc is retaining 80% either. Or gaining new players. Most likely the ones buying wotc are edition proof- minitures for example.

I think WOTC's plan is horizontal and verticle marketing. They want to expand to new players and also sell deeper with a more varied array of product like the DDI. Will they be able to pull it off? Maybe, maybe not.

Right now Gleemax and DDI is a disaster. Its not ready, their site is a mess many times. I wouldnt rely on it too much.