D&D 5E Mike Mearls interview - states that they may be getting off of the 2 AP/year train.

[MechaTarrasque]

I imagine it was your supposition that Pathfinder fans were so knowledgeable about what they wanted, how they wanted it, and how they could get it that they never complain.

I mean, I can't speak from any experience because I don't care about PF and thus never go on any of their boards... but I'd probably find it a bit laughable as well to think that PF fans never complain about anything.

Gamers will complain about anything. Regardless of the game.

As someone who frequents the Paizo.com forums, I can tell you the idea that PF fans don't complain about anything, including and especially the issue of "Is Pathfinder too big?", is far more fantasy than anything in D&D. "Pathfinder 2.0" is as contentious a topic as anything there (and it would be even more so, if the idea of a stealth 2.0, via the unchained books wasn't there). And when you bring in PFS, it gets far worse, since "you can use anything Paizo publishes [except the original summoner] in PFS" creates great headaches.

 

[Jester David]

Could be that the 5E market isn't as big as some would like you to believe. I mean what exactly is there to compare it to? Also, Pathfinder is doing wonderful on it's own so it doesn't need to get into that market.

What separates current Pathfinder from current D&D is the fact that Pathfinder customers don't complain about the number of products and rules because they know how to actually only buy and use what they feel they need for their own games. Sure they may not like some options, but there is always others who do.

Laugh Mistwell laughed "with" this post.

I wasn't laughing in the post so who exactly are you laughing with?

HAHAHAHA



"5e market isn't as big..." Let me wipe away a tear.... hilarious....

 

[Beleriphon]

As someone who frequents the Paizo.com forums, I can tell you the idea that PF fans don't complain about anything, including and especially the issue of "Is Pathfinder too big?", is far more fantasy than anything in D&D. "Pathfinder 2.0" is as contentious a topic as anything there (and it would be even more so, if the idea of a stealth 2.0, via the unchained books wasn't there). And when you bring in PFS, it gets far worse, since "you can use anything Paizo publishes [except the original summoner] in PFS" creates great headaches.

Never mind that Paizo is small privately owned business with modest profit expectations versus the cost of products. WotC is technically privately owned (the private owner is Hasbro) and the amount of money Paizo in a year likely compares to what WotC makes on sales of a single novel in the same period. Wizards is the 800 pound gorilla in a world where every other publisher is a spider monkey at best.

 

[sstacks]

Gamers will complain about anything. Regardless of the game.

It's part of the fun!

 

[Shasarak]

"5e market isn't as big..." Let me wipe away a tear.... hilarious....

Hang on, I thought you were the one that constantly compares the RPG market with the CCG market?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Good to know. Thanks.

Also, Mike Shea (sly flourish) is putting out a book of fantastic locations.

http://kck.st/1OACSRi

 

[Jester David]

Hang on, I thought you were the one that constantly compares the RPG market with the CCG market?

I point out that D&D is small fish to WotC compared to Magic, yes. But they're not either/or. It isn't "equal to CCGs or crap!" Something can be doing great sales and be a huge hit in its market and still not touch MtG. It's possible for 5e to be a runaway success that is better than any edition since the mythical heyday of 1983 and defying all expectations AND not to sell as much as Magic....

 

[eayres33]

I point out that D&D is small fish to WotC compared to Magic, yes. But they're not either/or. It isn't "equal to CCGs or crap!" Something can be doing great sales and be a huge hit in its market and still not touch MtG. It's possible for 5e to be a runaway success that is better than any edition since the mythical heyday of 1983 and defying all expectations AND not to sell as much as Magic....

It's always important to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. I have no idea why card games do better than TTRPG's but they do, and it's not close.

 

[Jester David]

It's always important to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. I have no idea why card games do better than TTRPG's but they do, and it's not close.

I like to compare apples to apples by comparing D&D with Pathfinder and the like. But sometimes it's nice to provide a little context.

 

[eayres33]

It's always important to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. I have no idea why card games do better than TTRPG's but they do, and it's not close.

Oh yes, context is always good as long as it is pointed out. For the record, I've always thought you do a good job of pointing out when your comments should be taken in context of a larger picture.