Goodman rebuttal

[Dragonblade]

Interesting post by Goodman. I had a discussion with the chaps who run my FLGS last night when I picked up the Eberron Player's Guide and the Fiery Dragon 4e Battlebox. Yes, I'm a 4e fan. I have come to loathe 3e completely from a rules standpoint. However, I have no problem with Paizo as a company and respect what they are doing with the OGL. I wanted to say that so all my bias' are perfectly clear.

This discussion occurred before I ever read this thread or Goodman's comments. But basically I asked the managers of my FLGS point blank whether 4e was selling well, and he said it was selling fantastically well even despite the economy. He said they had a great year last year when 4e came out, and it has been selling steadily since then. He credited a lot of that success to WotC's business model of only releasing one major book a month which makes it easy for people to simply buy each new book as it comes out.

I then asked him about Paizo. He did not have very kind words for Paizo. In his opinion Paizo has done everything possible to drive traffic and sales to their own website, and away from hobby retailers.

He currently stocks the Adventure Path books, but they don't really sell. He attributes that to most fans buying direct from Paizo. He is strongly considering dropping the whole line.

He also has no incentive to steer new gamers to Paizo. If they become fans, then they start taking their business to Paizo.com instead of his shop. He doesn't make a lot of money running a game shop and every loss hurts.

So, while they certainly don't pressure customers not to buy Paizo stuff, or disparage them, a sale is a sale after all, they will definitely steer the newbies to WotC and 4e if they come in without a clue as to what to buy.

Paizo's last chance to redeem themselves in his eyes is the release of the Pathfinder core rulebook. They will stock a few and see what happens, but unless it flies off the shelves and Paizo products become steady sellers, they will drop Paizo completely and only get Paizo products if a customer wants to place a special order.

 

[Obryn]

This is one heck of a thread. It's like we've moved from "Joe Goodman is in a position to know this stuff!" to "Ah, to heck with Joe Goodman. What the heck does he know, anyway?"

Joe laid out his credentials pretty strongly. I can't think of anyone who's in a better position to know about the third-party publisher business under both 3e and 4e - and thus, I can't think of a better expert in this than Joe Goodman. And yes, he stated his opinions.

Not all opinions are created equal, though, folks. I know this isn't a popular statement on a messageboard populated with egotistical gamer geeks, but expert opinions are, indeed, more valuable than layman opinions. Often, experts get paid for them.

No, it's not gospel. Yes, he could indeed be wrong. But discounting his opinion entirely is foolish.

-O

 

[Reigan]

So, if you can adapt to change, have done your homework and understand the market you can quite easily make money selling 4e products. If Goodman did so could other companies.

Perhaps a rethink is in order, the market really is there.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Let's be honest here. Everyone on ENWorld has some kind of opinion about the industry. And that opinion is often based on very flimsy evidence - personal taste, what my group think, what my friends think, what the guy down at the local gaming store says.

It seems that what Goodman is saying is being held to much stricter standards of evidence because it conflicts with what the guy down the local gaming store says or whatever. Conflict of interest is being introduced.

Well, there's always a conflict of interest. Even people who aren't making money from rpging have a great deal at stake personally. We all care a lot about the hobby. So if we truly do discount any evidence where there's the slightest possibility of a conflict then, if we apply the same standards equally, we would have to discount *everything*. Because no one is unbiased. We would literally be unable to form an opinion because no evidence would be good enough.

And just how much profit is Goodman likely to make from a post on an internet board saying 4e is doing well? How many extra sales? What does he stand to gain by risking his reputation? Very little I'd say.

Which leads me to the conclusion that he's probably being honest.

 

[Crothian]

So, if you can adapt to change, have done your homework and understand the market you can quite easily make money selling 4e products. If Goodman did so could other companies.

Perhaps a rethink is in order, the market really is there.

Don't forget Goodman Games built a great reputation in 3e and I have tio believe that has carried over to 4e for their fans. Without that
I imagine it would be a lot tougher for someone new to the scene to have that type of success.

 

[jdrakeh]

Which leads me to the conclusion that he's probably being honest.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM]YouTube - Monty Python - Argument Clinic[/ame]

[Edit: To be clear, this was not intended as a personal attack upon you, Doug but, rather, commentary upon how this thread seems to be progressing in the context that you alluded to (everybody will have their own opinions and not all of them will be in agreement).]

 

[tomBitonti]

There is some funny stuff in there:

6 Although the Agreement characterized that form as an "oval," its physical depiction in P. Ex. 1 Ex. B is that of an oblong cartouche drawn to appear three-dimensional. It seems that the parties are better developers of games than they are lexicographers. This opinion will use "cartouche" rather than "oval" to refer to the emblem.

Edit: That whole document is rather ... amazing ... in the amount of work that must have gone in to the case and into the judges decision, relative to the substance of the complaint.

There are some values that are of use in the second part:

($109,000 / 2.5) * 100 == $4,360,000

Meaning about $4.4 million for the sames of MMII over the year up to November 2004. Does anyone know the MMII cover price? If $20, that would be sales of about 200,000.

Paragraph 6(g) of the agreement provides that TSR will pay Arneson a royalty of 2 1/2% of the cover price for every copy sold of Monster Manual. Monster Manual is defined in paragraph [*3] 7(f) of the agreement to include "the book currently published by TSR entitled "ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS Monster Manual" (2009) and any revised edition or foreign language translation thereof." Paragraph 7(a) defines "revised edition" to mean "a printed work having a title the same as or similar to the related earlier work, revised to include changes or additions to the text, but continuing to include substantially the same rules and subject matter as contained in the earlier work."

The dispute between the parties centers on whether Monster Manual II is a "revised edition" of Monster Manual under the terms of the settlement agreement between the parties. TSR initially, for a period of approximately one year, made royalty payments to Arneson [*5] on Monster Manual II totalling $108,703.50. These payments stopped on November 2, 1984 when TSR sent a letter to Arneson stating that the payments on Monster Manual II had been made inadvertently and by mistake because it is not a "revised edition" of Monster Manual. The letter went on to state that TSR was therefore crediting the overpayment against the $60,238.68 third quarter (1982) royalty otherwise due on other works and that there remained an overpayment of $48,464.82, which would be credited by TSR against subsequent quarterly royalty amounts. Arneson, through his attorney, responded in a letter dated November 5, 1984 informing TSR that it has no right to credit or offset royalty payments owing on items other than Monster Manual II and that such actions have placed TSR in default under paragraph 17 of the contract. This action was filed on November 14, 1984.

I can't say that I agree with the decision in this case, where the judge seems to equate the MMI with the "series of Monster Manuals". The MMII is clearly a continuation of the "series of Monster Manuals", but the initial royalty agreement seems to be specifically about MMI.

 

[xechnao]

He credited a lot of that success to WotC's business model of only releasing one major book a month which makes it easy for people to simply buy each new book as it comes out.

Will D&D gamers be hooked on 4e for more than 2-3 years at most? Cause it is a pretty focused & heavy game.

 

[Rechan]

Everyone on Enworld has some kind of opinion

I think replacing "EnWorld" with "The Internet" in the above (narrowly quoted) statement is far more accurate.

Will D&D gamers be hooked on 4e for more than 2-3 years at most? Cause it is a pretty focused & heavy game.

3e was pretty heavy, and look how well it continued to do.

 

[Piratecat]

Please read this before posting. If you posted, and your post runs contrary to this reminder, I strongly suggest you edit that post.

I don't care if you love 4e or don't like it, if you agree with Joe Goodman or don't believe him. You will not, however, make personal attacks against him or anyone else. If catch the faintest hint of cheap shots or rudeness in this thread, we're going to suspend you without bothering to email. Our patience on this matter has pretty much dissolved.

As always, feel free to PM me if this is in any way unclear.

- Piratecat