Would Paizo Make a Better Steward for Our Hobby?

[Cybit]

Oy, I regret buying the few PF minis I did - I almost bought a whole case of the Rise of the Runelords miniatures (as I was running a group through it) - glad I did not.

I want WotC to be the stewards because we're not screwed if they mess it up. They have the resources to try again. Paizo does not. In fact, no one else does. Paizo is a great company, and does a lot of good work (I tend to agree that their mechanics have...issues to put it nicely. Most PF players just have gotten used to ignoring them completely. But they do have quite a bit of good ideas, and 3E is favored by players who prefer simulation over balance, so I wonder whether the lack of balance in many cases is a feature, not a bug) on adventures and accessories. But if they miss the mark on PF 2? There goes your game. The industry takes a massive downturn.

Also, PF is aiming for the "we're already gamers" crowd. The game is aimed at players who know what they're doing, or are being cajoled by friends & family who already know how to play. PF is a terrible game to give to someone who is completely new to tabletop games. That core book, while awesome for its' fan base and intended audience, would make any brand new to RPG player go pale. Even the beginner box is intended to be used by folks who already play TT RPGs to introduce the game to a family member / friend.

Only a large company like WotC has the ability to take a risk ala Next which goes "OK, we need to start developing the next generation of TT players, and they can't just be the kids of the old players." I'm not sure PF is really intended to do that. Nor should they necessarily; they have their market and they should be trying to do what is best for that market. (Ala, people like me).

 

[Halivar]

Also, PF is aiming for the "we're already gamers" crowd. The game is aimed at players who know what they're doing, or are being cajoled by friends & family who already know how to play. PF is a terrible game to give to someone who is completely new to tabletop games.

As someone who was definitely a WotC partisan in the Great Edition Wars of 2008, I think this statement is demonstrably false. PF has done a good job of crowding out the D&D books at every brick and mortar store I visit. The evocative art on the covers alone draws the eyes more than any of the more decorative WotC covers. The kids don't pick up the WotC books; they pick up the Paizo books. And Paizo is eating WotC's lunch with these kids because they are masters of presentation. THAT is where D&D gets it wrong, and has gotten it wrong, in every incarnation.

EDIT: Let me clarify why the above is so important; yes I think the PF rules inherit all the clunkiness of 3.x... but if a young gamer's imagination is stirred sufficiently by the presentation, they will move heaven and earth to figure it out.

In contrast, 4E was incredibly easy to learn, but it was like reading a dictionary. Who wants to read that? I don't. I only opened the books when I was picking out feats and powers. And the art was definitely lacking. Meanwhile earlier editions? Pathfinder? The books are perfect coffee table books. They beg to be opened and browsed leisurely.

 

[Cybit]

As someone who was definitely a WotC partisan in the Great Edition Wars of 2008, I think this statement is demonstrably false. PF has done a good job of crowding out the D&D books at every brick and mortar store I visit. The evocative art on the covers alone draws the eyes more than any of the more decorative WotC covers. The kids don't pick up the WotC books; they pick up the Paizo books. And Paizo is eating WotC's lunch with these kids because they are masters of presentation. THAT is where D&D gets it wrong, and has gotten it wrong, in every incarnation.

EDIT: Let me clarify why the above is so important; yes I think the PF rules inherit all the clunkiness of 3.x... but if a young gamer's imagination is stirred sufficiently by the presentation, they will move heaven and earth to figure it out.

In contrast, 4E was incredibly easy to learn, but it was like reading a dictionary. Who wants to read that? I don't. I only opened the books when I was picking out feats and powers. And the art was definitely lacking. Meanwhile earlier editions? Pathfinder? The books are perfect coffee table books. They beg to be opened and browsed leisurely.

YMMV then. At our local LGS, while PF definitely grabs the eyes, I've seen kids pick the book up, set it down, start trying to read it, go completely cross-eyed, and then put the book back. In fact, I've never seen anyone under the age 14 not do that. IIRC, the words used in the PFRPG books usually require a HS reading level to get.

As one of the DMs at the LGS (I do PFS and 4E), the question I most get from parents is "my kid wants to play D&D, is there something simpler than this? <shows PF book> It's too complicated for me and my kids to figure out."

That's another aspect; parents have to be comfortable with it. The art in PF is...graphic to say the least (see: Goblins, arguably the coolest part of PF). Also, for adults who don't know what a d20 is...PF (and 4E) is a foreign language to them. Regardless, D20 TT RPGs seem to be at a low in attracting brand new customers. Unfortunately IPv2 seems to follow the DVD / Movie market when it comes to sales numbers, only relative and not absolute.

Just my two cents.

 

[Wicht]

As one of the DMs at the LGS (I do PFS and 4E), the question I most get from parents is "my kid wants to play D&D, is there something simpler than this? <shows PF book> It's too complicated for me and my kids to figure out."

That's when you point them to the Beginner's Box.

 

[Cybit]

A) Can't open the beginner box and read through it before they buy it.

B) Beginner box is deliberately unsupported after level 5 (see the CEO's comments floating around Paizo somewhere as to why; her reasoning is sound and good); players are intended to go straight from the box to full blown Pathfinder. While it becomes a little easier, the vocabulary barrier is still present.

The market does seem to be ripe for a d20 game that is easy to pick up and play but hard to master. The time constraints of the older players (as we have kids, get old, etc etc), and the over-complication of modern rulesets due to the passage of time (as current players will want and deserve more content).

EDIT: Also a game that can be played quickly and episodically in a couple of hours. While I play both 4E and PF regularly now, my core gaming group is unable to play either as we may get at most, 2.5 hours on a weeknight to do a game. Neither PF or 4E work well in that short of a time span - PF (like all 3E based games) requires heavy DM prep (you do get super awesome games out of that prep), while 4E becomes a purely combat based game at that time frame.

 

[Halivar]

The market does seem to be ripe for a d20 game that is easy to pick up and play but hard to master.

Imagine what 1st Ed would be like without charts.

 

[Cybit]

Imagine what 1st Ed would be like without charts.

...5E?

 

[Halivar]

...5E?

That's my greatest hope. I like what I see so far.

 

[fjw70]

Are kids even trying to learn RPGs on their own anymore? The only kids I know that play are only playing with their parents (my kids included). I don't even think my kids would even know what D&D, Pathfinder, etc. were if it weren't for me.

 

[Wicht]

My children (ages 17, 16, 14, and 13) have all played since they were each about 4 or 5. None of them have any difficulty with the Pathfinder Core rule-book. I was reading Gary Gygax's DM's Guide when I was eleven or twelve, so I think the idea that kids can't understand books is overblown. Readers read. Sure not every kid is a reader, but the game is going to appeal more to readers than to non-readers anyway.

Heh. I find myself asking the kids for rule citations as often as they turn to me anymore. At that age they actually retain the information better than I do at my age.