D&D 5E So, 5e OGL

[Wicht]

well in my day dream future the OGL would be destroyed, and all the pathheads would have to either play an orginal game or play an older one... and no company could ever make money off of someone else work... I know it wont ever happen, but I can dream.

I can't think of a single field of human activity where 1) you do not build on the work of others, and 2) creativity is not enhanced by having access to other people's ideas and experiences. Cooking, carpentry, horsemanship, writing, gaming (board and roleplaying), painting, gardening - every single activity I have ever participated in or been exposed to is made better by people sharing their abilities and products with one another. What you are asking for is a rather bleak, colorless world without much innovation, though I suspect you don't see it that way.

 

[Wicht]

Everything has a price. If WotC offered a cheque with enough zeroes on it, a deal would be done.

I don't think WotC would go down that route, and indeed for the same reason I don't think they'd go to court to try to end the OGL - I don't think they're particularly concerned about Pathfinder anyway. But if they were absolutely determined that Pathfinder must go, then the really big cheque is the way I'd expect them to choose - as I said, it's easier and more certain. I can't be certain about it being cheaper, right enough, but that seems likely given that they'd be fighting to end a license that was specifically designed to be permanent.

Still wading through all these posts to catch up on my reading so someone else may have already pointed this out... but even if Paizo did sell, that would not be the end of Pathfinder. It is OGL. All of it. They have released every single book under the license, and while the world of Golarion could be killed, another company (say Fantasy Flight or Goodman Games or Green Ronin) could simply pick up the ball, hire on all the ex-Paizo employees and pick up where Paizo left off with Pathfinder itself (and there would be a fantastical instant growth opportunity for a game company if ever I heard of one.

 

[delericho]

They have released every single book under the license, and while the world of Golarion could be killed, another company (say Fantasy Flight or Goodman Games or Green Ronin) could simply pick up the ball, hire on all the ex-Paizo employees and pick up where Paizo left off with Pathfinder itself (and there would be a fantastical instant growth opportunity for a game company if ever I heard of one.

There are two disadvantages with that. Firstly, they immediately lose all the name recognition (and, of course, access to everything that isn't open - notably the Golarion IP).

But the bigger one is the same reason nobody else could have done what Paizo did with Pathfinder: they would be starting off without access to the database of subscribers. That was the key thing that gave Pathfinder a huge leg up, and what moved it from "just another d20 fantasy game" to "genuine competitor for D&D's crown".

So, yeah, somebody could just pick up the Pathfinder rules, rebrand and reprint... and they'd have another "Arcana Evolved" on their hands - a game that would sell respectably well, but not one that would trouble D&D one iota.

 

[Wicht]

There are two disadvantages with that. Firstly, they immediately lose all the name recognition (and, of course, access to everything that isn't open - notably the Golarion IP).

But the bigger one is the same reason nobody else could have done what Paizo did with Pathfinder: they would be starting off without access to the database of subscribers. That was the key thing that gave Pathfinder a huge leg up, and what moved it from "just another d20 fantasy game" to "genuine competitor for D&D's crown".

So, yeah, somebody could just pick up the Pathfinder rules, rebrand and reprint... and they'd have another "Arcana Evolved" on their hands - a game that would sell respectably well, but not one that would trouble D&D one iota.

Eh, the horses are already out of the barn. Pathfinder, as a system, has a fan-base all its own. There's a market for the game itself of itself that should not be entirely discounted.

Likewise the APs are good reading material and while the subscriber list might need rebuilt, I suspect some of us would be willing enough to resend in a subscription.

No, I am pretty sure that if Paizo was bought out, as per your scenario, there would be some company willing to pick up the ruleset as an inhouse focus. But I also don't think that's going to happen as, 1) WotC should be smart enough to realize that the PFRPG is OGL and 2) Lisa Stevens already got her check once and I suspect the cost of the second is going to be too much to justify.

 

[prosfilaes]

But the bigger one is the same reason nobody else could have done what Paizo did with Pathfinder: they would be starting off without access to the database of subscribers. That was the key thing that gave Pathfinder a huge leg up, and what moved it from "just another d20 fantasy game" to "genuine competitor for D&D's crown".

If however implausibly speaking Hasbro bought out Paizo and killed Pathfinder, if someone plausibly claimed to grab the title from Paizo, they would have Paizo's subscribers. They couldn't afford to drop the ball, but it wouldn't be undirected movement, like at the end of D&D 3. It would be a large body of Pathfinder players looking for a close replacement, and screw Hasbro, give me Pathfinder.

Nobody else really tried to do Pathfinder when D&D 3 died. Arcana Evolved never was pointed at a mainstream D&D replacement, and the OSR stuff had its separate audience. Castles and Crusades seems to be closest, but they weren't grabbing that 3.75 audience.

 

[delericho]

Eh, the horses are already out of the barn. Pathfinder, as a system, has a fan-base all its own. There's a market for the game itself of itself that should not be entirely discounted.

I'm not. But neither should the name-recognition and Paizo's hard-won reputation be discounted. They started from an extremely advantageous position, but they worked hard to retain those people who took out those first Pathfinder subscriptions.

So you're looking at a company that doesn't have the Pathfinder name and doesn't have the reputation. All they have are the rules - and those same rules are all available for free already.

Likewise the APs are good reading material and while the subscriber list might need rebuilt, I suspect some of us would be willing enough to resend in a subscription.

In this scenario Hasbro would also make sure to either employ the key staff or have them agree non-compete agreements. That's standard practice in buy-outs of this sort. So, would you be willing to resend a subscription to a no-name company missing those key members of staff?

And consider also that virtually nobody else in the RPG industry even does subscription products. So, would you be willing to resend a subscription to a no-name company missing the key staff, and who don't have a track record of delivering subscriptions? Would 10k other subscribers?

No, I am pretty sure that if Paizo was bought out, as per your scenario, there would be some company willing to pick up the ruleset as an inhouse focus.

Actually, I think there's a real chance there would be half a dozen, and they'd split the market sufficiently that they'd all fail. The AE-level success I predict is actually the best-case scenario where there is just one successor company.

But I also don't think that's going to happen...

I agree. I honestly don't believe WotC consider the OGL or Paizo to be a problem anyway, and I therefore don't expect them to try to kill the one, or to buy out the other. But if they did consider them a threat, then I'd expect to see an attempted buy-out long before them trying legal dodges around "consideration" or moving the copyrights to Mexico, or similar.

If however implausibly speaking Hasbro bought out Paizo and killed Pathfinder, if someone plausibly claimed to grab the title from Paizo, they would have Paizo's subscribers.

Nope, certainly not. If WotC bought out Paizo, they would make damn sure that they got all the Pathfinder trademarks and the subscriber database. And they'd also be sure to either employ the key staff themselves or have them sign non-compete agreements.

That would be the whole purpose of the exercise, after all.

(The situation would be entirely different if Paizo went bust, of course, where those trademarks and the database would represent assets that someone could potentially buy up. But that doesn't apply in a buy-out by Hasbro - the latter would be buying the company specifically to get those assets, and so to prevent anyone else doing so.)

Nobody else really tried to do Pathfinder when D&D 3 died.

Nobody else tried because Paizo were in the clearly dominant position, such that there was no point in trying. If Pathfinder disappeared tomorrow, it's not impossible that half a dozen companies might try to fill the gap. But that leads to a position even worse than if just one does it, because they're they squabbling over the fraction of the market that would be there. Instead of one AE-sized success you'd have half a dozen failed versions.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I can't think of a single field of human activity where 1) you do not build on the work of others, and 2) creativity is not enhanced by having access to other people's ideas and experiences. Cooking, carpentry, horsemanship, writing, gaming (board and roleplaying), painting, gardening - every single activity I have ever participated in or been exposed to is made better by people sharing their abilities and products with one another. What you are asking for is a rather bleak, colorless world without much innovation, though I suspect you don't see it that way.

there is a difference between "Hey, Rifts has a lot in common with D&D. I'm sure one influenced the design of the other." and "Hey D&D 3.5 is the biggest seller, and they are now moving to 4e, every edition change has edition wars lite up and then people slowly adapt... lets sabotage that and cash in by rewriting just enough of the rules to make our phb need, but at the same time make it close enough to call it the same... then we can totally call ourselves 'real' and the new edition 'fake'"

how can you not see that?

 

[Wicht]

there is a difference between "Hey, Rifts has a lot in common with D&D. I'm sure one influenced the design of the other." and "Hey D&D 3.5 is the biggest seller, and they are now moving to 4e, every edition change has edition wars lite up and then people slowly adapt... lets sabotage that and cash in by rewriting just enough of the rules to make our phb need, but at the same time make it close enough to call it the same... then we can totally call ourselves 'real' and the new edition 'fake'"

how can you not see that?

Probably because that's not what happened, despite assertions to the contrary. And it ignores the new material Paizo has produced for the OGL.

You are also moving goalposts.

 

[prosfilaes]

So you're looking at a company that doesn't have the Pathfinder name and doesn't have the reputation. All they have are the rules - and those same rules are all available for free already.

They don't just have the rules. Who ever took the lead would have an existing name, whether it Fantasy Flight or Onyx Path or Steve Jackson Games or Rite Publishing. I don't see it likely at all that a half-dozen serious competitors would arise; there's few enough people and little enough money in this industry that they can talk to each other and not fight over scraps.

In this scenario Hasbro would also make sure to either employ the key staff or have them agree non-compete agreements.

How? If RPG people were easily motivated by money, they wouldn't be working in this field. If they want to just leave, Hasbro can't stop that.

Actually, I think there's a real chance there would be half a dozen, and they'd split the market sufficiently that they'd all fail. The AE-level success I predict is actually the best-case scenario where there is just one successor company.

So justify this: why could the market support multiple AE-level successes back in the 3.5 days, and not today? Where do you think all these Pathfinder players are going to go?

 

[Wicht]

They don't just have the rules. Who ever took the lead would have an existing name, whether it Fantasy Flight or Onyx Path or Steve Jackson Games or Rite Publishing. I don't see it likely at all that a half-dozen serious competitors would arise; there's few enough people and little enough money in this industry that they can talk to each other and not fight over scraps.

There's actually only about three companies that might have the organization in place to pick it up. My early money would actually be on Green Ronin as the most likely, because 1) they already have the right connections designer-wise (Owen Stevens works for both companies), 2) they have the experience in managing large projects, 3) I think they would be more inclined than Fantasy Flight to follow up on the opportunity. Wolfgang Bauer would be my close runner-up for doing something for much the same reasons, via his Open Design company.

But then, to repeat, I don't see this happening, at all. Though I agree with delericho that a buy out is far more probable than a ludicrous and ill-informed move to Mexico. And other buy-outs and mergers have surprised me recently (Fantasy Flight merging into the Asmodee group most notably, right after Asmodee picked up Days of Wonder even).