Pathfinder 2E Release Day Second Edition Amazon Sales Rank

I look at all this data and wonder if we are not missing something, or discounting something that's big. While the sunk cost fallacy is real and can sink even the biggest ships (looking at you, in an odd way, Blackberry), I do wonder if a brand-new edition that's < 2 years old which is trying a number of different sales techniques (eg. lost omens world books), and for us to NOT see any drastic changes to format, release schedule or "strategic pivots with the PF RPG line" signifies something completely different than the doom and gloom this thread implies. Because, and this is just my opinion, when something is brand new you have the lowest sunk cost at that point and the most flexibility to adapt on-the-fly to adjust due to misaligned expectations.

If you accept the fact that the Pathfinder line is likely the most important product line at Paizo for revenue, and not seeing a fundamental change in their 2nd edition Paizo release and content strategy after 1+ years of real-time "market research", I can guess 3 different things might be going on:
a) Sales are good-enough to justify this "all in" release schedule with monthly AP's, 4x core books and n lost omens books per year including flip mats, standee's and supplemental decks. good enough to maintain staffing levels as we (I don't think) hear about layoffs or other non-normal employee initiated attrition losses
b) paizo was sitting on a pile of cash. they have been burning through this cash with the company being mismanaged praying that future splat books will bring in the #'s of gamers that the core books didn't do to "save them" ala hail Mary. (sunk cost here, as they are not trying anything new and thus apparently doubling down on a failed product line)
c) paizo has sufficiently diversified their products such that PF2e, while still very important is no longer the cash king it once was needed to be to keep paizo afloat.

I do wonder, specifically pertaining to point a above if we are not underestimating the impact their subscription services has on their bottom line. I may completely misremember this, but I think publishers have to discount by approx 50% the MSRP of their books to get it into distributors and retail. Paizo sells at close to retail with their subscription so they are "earning" 2x the cash for every 1 sub that consumer would generate if they bought from Amazon. WOTC doesn't have any of the subscription services so amazon rankings would be distortive. While Amazon would be foolish to ignore Amazon, they are HIGHLY incented to increase Sub's unlike WotC which must rely 100% on 3rd party distribution.

I personally think its a combination of (in order) c) diversification and a) good-enough sales. the slice of pie in the sales pie chart that represents Pathfinder RPG no longer needs to be the same size it used to for Paizo to remain a successful small company. that's a very good thing and unlike most in this threat indicates IMO good strategic management rather than mismanagement or short sightedness.

and not to think I'm completely biased, here's my quick take on where I think I'm full of it - especially with the "good enough" justification above:

• licensing PF to Pinnacle for Savage Worlds. this is brand new! and was never (presumably) required in PF1e days
• the current complete lack of 3PP 2e material getting released.
• reworking digital content for adventures to try and make them more VTT friendly. this feels like customer service but also feels like needing to support GM's to add content to their own campaigns instead of relying on VTT's to publish content in a timely manner
• increasing costs on Organized play content from Paizo store. its a bad time to increase costs if you ask me.
• Continuing to grow their computer game licenses through Owlcat games with a new game. with it NOT being 2e
• a crowd source release of a PF1e AP (kingmaker) as a "one-time" deal, but could signify a market test to gauge interest in reskinning old AP's
• changing AP format in 1st 1/2 of 2021 by releasing 2 3-part AP's instead of 1 6 part mega-AP. this could also signify a shift in their strategic thinking

but with all that said, I remain an optimist and think paizo is doing OK and we're in for a few more years of frantic product releases following a similar format - even if Amazon "stats" indicate they are number 3 qazillion out of 3 qazillion and 1 all-time book sellers.

Cheers.

J.

It's really hard to know what the internal financials of a company are. Two companies that look similar from the outside can have very different financial pictures. I do know that Paizo cranks out a lot of product, and that means fairly high outlays per dollar of revenue. Generally speaking you want to make as much money from as few SKUs as possible. In other words, I'd rather sell 10K copies of 1 book than 1K copies of 10 books. But if their revenue is good enough, as you said, they can keep going.

JmanTheDM said:

and not to think I'm completely biased, here's my quick take on where I think I'm full of it - especially with the "good enough" justification above:

• licensing PF to Pinnacle for Savage Worlds. this is brand new! and was never (presumably) required in PF1e days
• the current complete lack of 3PP 2e material getting released.
• reworking digital content for adventures to try and make them more VTT friendly. this feels like customer service but also feels like needing to support GM's to add content to their own campaigns instead of relying on VTT's to publish content in a timely manner
• increasing costs on Organized play content from Paizo store. its a bad time to increase costs if you ask me.
• Continuing to grow their computer game licenses through Owlcat games with a new game. with it NOT being 2e
• a crowd source release of a PF1e AP (kingmaker) as a "one-time" deal, but could signify a market test to gauge interest in reskinning old AP's
• changing AP format in 1st 1/2 of 2021 by releasing 2 3-part AP's instead of 1 6 part mega-AP. this could also signify a shift in their strategic thinking

Click to expand...

You forgot they released some PF stuff for 5e. It's not much, but it looked like a "testing the waters" sort of thing to me.

Mistwell said:

You forgot they released some PF stuff for 5e. It's not much, but it looked like a "testing the waters" sort of thing to me.

Click to expand...

thanks. you are right. I forgot that one!

Cheers,

J.

@JmanTheDM

Solid analysis. I'd wager a) is probably likely, with 5E's insane success and broadening of the market distorting what people think Paizo's bottom line really needs to be. Though your list is kind of interesting to me:

JmanTheDM said:

• licensing PF to Pinnacle for Savage Worlds. this is brand new! and was never (presumably) required in PF1e days

Click to expand...

This gets put on Paizo, but did they go to Pinnacle or did Pinnacle come to them? Like, I'd be interested in knowing if anyone ever actually attempted to license Golarion before because I'd wager the answer is probably "No."

JmanTheDM said:

• the current complete lack of 3PP 2e material getting released.

Click to expand...

Yeah, this is something, though I wonder how much of it is people seeing a gap to exploit with Paizo no longer doing 3.X.

JmanTheDM said:

• Continuing to grow their computer game licenses through Owlcat games with a new game. with it NOT being 2e

Click to expand...

Yeah, but Kingmaker came around a year before 2E. Not sure if Paizo could mandate them to take on the extra cost to redo their engine with a completely new ruleset (and I mean, they still made changes to the Pathfinder anyways).

JmanTheDM said:

• changing AP format in 1st 1/2 of 2021 by releasing 2 3-part AP's instead of 1 6 part mega-AP. this could also signify a shift in their strategic thinking

Click to expand...

Honestly this is a good change, but I do wonder if it's a change that was caused by 2E or if it's something they've meant to do for a while and now they have an opening to change the format with the new edition.

Mistwell said:

You forgot they released some PF stuff for 5e. It's not much, but it looked like a "testing the waters" sort of thing to me.

Click to expand...

Wasn't the 5E Kingmaker Bestiary kickstarted before 2E even came out?

Justice and Rule said:

@JmanTheDM

Solid analysis. I'd wager a) is probably likely, with 5E's insane success and broadening of the market distorting what people think Paizo's bottom line really needs to be. Though your list is kind of interesting to me:

Click to expand...

totally. was trying to "Steel man" the argument that Paizo is in trouble by providing other signifiers that isn't just book sales. there are 100% counterfactuals for each example as you rightly showed. All things being equal - dabbling at the fringes with new AP formats (Good), licensing Golarion to other publishers (good), continuing with owlcat (good) be it 1e or 2e, further supporting digital with better VTT integrations (good), and continued tweaks to their organized play and OP material cost structures (good) all suggest to me taking advantage of a diversification strategy and mitigating a reliance on a sustainable business being wholly reliant on pre-5e PF 1e Sales volumes.

Cheers,

J.

For me, I'm just disappointed in PF2, and I would be regardless of the sales figures. When PF2 was first releasing, I was nearing exhaustion with 5e and wanted an alternative system to play with my group that had 1) great official adventure content; 2) a thriving 3PP scene; 3) widescale adoption in the community; 4) a robust network of Organized Play in my local community; 5) streamlined rules that provided meaningful depth.
My experience with the playtest was that it was botched - it was rushed, created a bad first impression on players (instead of drumming up excitement), and seemed to not really have a significant impact on the design of PF2. [And yes, my group was involved in the playtest.]
As expected, 5e"wore out" with my groups. Instead of moving to PF2, two of my groups switched to OSR systems while another folded altogether. Because PF2 failed to connected with me in the five points I listed above, I will not be using it. It's just another RPG that I can say "I tried it for a few months - but it didn't have staying power" [along with Fantasy Age, Numenera, Savage Worlds, GURPS, 13th Age, WHFRPG, etc.]
I think at least some of the sales data might reflect that it's not connecting with other groups as well. The cost for entry into Pathfinder is just so high - a massive 600+ page rule book (which is expensive) but also the "cost" of the size of the book (which is unnecessary for players who aren't GMs), the system mastery needed to get into the game, the charts, the 100 or so conditions, the stacks of splats already out for the system, etc. Plus, it is asking you to stop a game that you probably already are familiar with (PF1 or D&D5), end your campaigns, retire your characters, for something that is already very similar to the experience you are already having with PF1 or D&D5. (Do you have fighters, elves, dragons? Do you roll a d20 to hit? Do you have armor that raises your AC and makes you harder to hit? Do you cast magic missile?) If it's mostly the same as what you already have, why toss your existing collection and buy everything all over again?

Retreater said:

For me, I'm just disappointed in PF2

Click to expand...

Ultimately that's the thing. There are lots of different things that can be discussed.
I see the question at hand to be "is PF2E the crowd-pleaser fan base growing system that it certainly could have been?"
I perceive the answer as a clear no. That isn't a knock on anyone who loves it. But some people loving it doesn't change the answer either.

The fact that the conversation keeps getting diverted away from the PF2 fanbase and into the general health of Paizo as a whole speaks poorly for the PF2 specific question.
There is really no chorus of voices proclaiming that Paizo as a company is floundering. Of course you can find people mad about PF2E spouting silly things. But it is just ranting and you can find people ranting about how WotC just set up their imminent implosion too.
"Ranting" aside, a rational case can easily be made that Pazio "appears from the outside" to be doing just fine.
And a rational case can also be made that PF2E simply isn't resonating wide and far as a major game of choice. And that brand name could have gone there. There is a lot of strong viable space between a true horse race with 5E and where PF2E finds itself.

Yea, I bet Paizo is doing just fine, probably even great. They still have product coming out, they still have a lot of freelancers doing work for them, I think. And I think the company is still about the size it was a few years ago. Also, as far as I know, they have a decent video game based on Golarian, a second one too.

I mean they ARE one of THE BEST SELLING rpgs out there, by a long margin for most of them, I think.

They also have licensing deals with WizKids and and a couple others. Things that, except for WotC and now CR, all others do not.

I think we are just in a moment where D&D has such a large grasp on psyche of most groups. Newer players especially are not being brought in as players of roleplaying games. Their hobby is D&D. It's a cultural phenomenon.

In order to shake that up you need more than good game design. I think the competition has never been stronger. Vampire The Masquerade 5th Edition, Legend of the Five Rings Fifth Edition, Star Trek Adventures, FFG Star Wars, The One Ring all represent the strongest designs those games have ever had. I personally believe Pathfinder Second Edition and Starfinder are damn fine games.

What they lack is some compelling cultural force to get people to shift their attention away from D&D for more than a short time. Something that feels new and exciting.