Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder: The reason the OGL was a bad idea for WOTC

[Ranger REG]

Here here. Granted that in and of itself isn't necessarily a good thing. One of my friends was disgusted with how many good solid RPG's went to d20 for no other reason than to make money and jump on the bandwagon. I think what tipped him over the edge was when Monte Cook published World of Darkness D20 he went on an entertaining rant that I fed with enough counter arguments to keep it going. I do agree with him, despite WotC's claims to the contrary (back with the old guard and original d20) it wasn't a system for everything. Level based systems in general lack any good application to a more realistic RPG system. I enjoyed Cthulhu d20 and I'm certainly glad it was something made on the side rather than a full conversion like Traveller made (thank god they're back to their own system, none of this GURPS or D20 B.S.) Still, the D6 system for Star Wars was fine and dandy, didn't really need changing, the game itself might have needed the financial backing the d20 system brought but the RPG system itself was just fine. I won't say the OGL is bad, it was damn good for D&D, but it pushed a lot of diverse RPG's that honestly didn't need conversion off to the side.

*Sigh* the eternal love hate relationship goes on.

Meh.

In a perfect world, I could see OGL not only embodies the d20 System but other systems as well, including Storyteller, GURPS, FUDGE, etc.

But I guess the other game companies wouldn't buy it, rather to keep their own rules as proprietary.

The d6 Star Wars may not need changing -- though I personally disagree with the entire "bucket o dice" system -- but because the system itself is copyrighted and proprietary (in layman's term, WEG owns the written rules portion) -- WotC can't use it. They could make own clone d6 system, but that would take years when they rather prefer to push their own one-system model (a very successful business model since Steve Jackson Games, White Wolf, HERO Games, and many still-running game publishers used it).

OBTW, I like mcWOD. The setting is pretty cool, but I don't think it is rules-specific, especially when I have a personal dislike of the Storyteller System.

 

[Banshee16]

So its just something to remember when you consider the new GSL. WOTC has some good reasons to want to restrict things this time around, and while we gamers want our cake and the ability to eat it too...companies only make products when they make profit. Cut into that profit, and you potentially cut out the product.

Well, from the perspective of someone who'll likely go Pathfinder, I consider it a good point. When WotC made the design choices they did for 4E, they lost me as a customer. I'm just glad that I will still be able to buy D20 products, given that WotC has gone in a completely different direction.

I suppose for the company itself, it sucks.....but them's the breaks, I guess.

Banshee

 

[cyrusduane]

I'm going to disagree with you here.

Who is buying Pathfinder? It's either the people who don't like 4E or the people who want to keep playing 3.5 but have a new and improved version. That isn't direct competition.

I Disagree-

I went into gencon owning only the 4E PHB and having played the First module of the Pathfinder series. Gen con was going to decide if I was going to stay with 3.5 or go to 4E. My wife and I played in both pathfinder cronicles events, and RPGA 4E events.

It's an either/or for me and both of the Groups I DM for, (12 people) that was going to be decided by our experience at Gen Con.

Pathfinder won, so we blew a few hundred at Piazzo's Booth and spent nothing at WOTC's.

This weekend we're placing a order with Piazo to have all 4 product subscriptions they carry and place a backorder for the full Runelords series, which will be the next campaign I run. In addition, we're looking into setting up some organized play Pathfinder events in this area.

Direct competition.

 

[Hand of Evil]

There are people that will ONLY see and use WotC, that market has been very loyal over the years.

There are people that mix and match their D&D, they buy a lot of stuff from different sources. Some have made the jump to 4E and will game both systems. This group is the one that the market is trying to get and they will decide who is putting out the better material. Note: looking at the product list for 4E, which just seem to be re-publication for the first year, 3rd parties are going to win this.

There are people that want something different, be it super hero, horror, steam punk...this group buys other games.

--------------

I heard it in the 4E Q&A at GenCon, WotC do not want to see money slip from their fingers. Company line, they saw the OGL taking money from their pockets. Sure it was good for the industry, it built game companies. Now those game companies are established.

The OGL is here to stay, at least a few years, and I think it saved WotC and D&D, for looking back at all that has come out, by so many, just don't think WotC could have made it by itself. The OGL made people interested in D&D again and gave us a strong market.

 

[cangrejoide]

Paizo is competition to WOTC in the same way 'Bob's homemade computers' it to 'Microsoft'.

There are magnitudes of difference between them, but still competition in the end.

 

[AllisterH]

The OGL is here to stay, at least a few years, and I think it saved WotC and D&D, for looking back at all that has come out, by so many, just don't think WotC could have made it by itself. The OGL made people interested in D&D again and gave us a strong market.

Why do people forget that D&D is not even close to WOTC's #1 revenue generator (and probably isnt 2nd - DuelMasters in japan apparently rated a mention from HASBRO, not even 3rd - DDM has levelled off but it still blows the RPG line out of the water based on how well the boosters move and probably isn't 4th - yeah, they shrunk the novels line, but the novels STILL make way more money).

Seriously, do people think that WOTC would go out of business if it didn't have the RPG line?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

There are people that will ONLY see and use WotC, that market has been very loyal over the years.

That would be most of the guys with whom I game.

There are people that mix and match their D&D, they buy a lot of stuff from different sources.

That would be me.

There are people that want something different, be it super hero, horror, steam punk...this group buys other games.

That would be me again.

 

[sckeener]

The OGL allowed Paizo to create pathfinder, and basically create direct competition to WOTC's 4th edition.

1) I disagree that Pathfinder is competition to 4e. A sale to Pathfinder does not equal a lost sale to 4e.

2) The OGL contributed to the health of the industry. I do not even want to imagine if WotC had not done the OGL and 4e was (might be) a flop. The cream will always rise to the top. WotC has the resources. The OGL is no threat to them unless they make bad management decisions.

 

[billd91]

1) I disagree that Pathfinder is competition to 4e. A sale to Pathfinder does not equal a lost sale to 4e.

2) The OGL contributed to the health of the industry. I do not even want to imagine if WotC had not done the OGL and 4e was (might be) a flop. The cream will always rise to the top. WotC has the resources. The OGL is no threat to them unless they make bad management decisions.

They are most certainly in direct competition; it's just that competition does not mean that they're playing a zero-sum game. Will sales of Pathfinder mean a exact loss of the same number of sales for 4e? No. But will sales of Pathfinder mean some lost sales for 4e? Yes. That's competition.

But does that competition contribute to the health of the overall industry. I think so but not because I think it keeps WotC on their toes. Competition between a giant in the industry and a smaller player doesn't necessarily keep the giant on his toes. If the giant is responsive, it can, but it is, by no means, a necessary outcome. But competition, I think, keeps more consumers participating. It's one of the effects of the free market. If there's money to be made by catering to even a small interest, someone might fill that niche. They will be competitors of the big players, but it's competition that keeps the market as a whole vibrant and attractive to consumers.

 

[Mark]

But will sales of Pathfinder mean some lost sales for 4e? Yes.

I am not so sure that is the case. I do not know how many people, if any, are choosing to purchase one in spite of the other rather than simply choosing to buy one and also choosing not to buy the other. Many people will play both.


I think 4E will swim or not swim well on its own merits. The power of the brand prevents it from totrally sinking even if the game is not what many people that have played D&D for a long time desire.

The orders of magnitude between what D&D sells and what any other game on the market sells prevents any serious competition but there is plenty of room in the market for a great many more games than currently even exist.