Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 6553146" data-attributes="member: 37579">They weren't as psyched for Tyranny.What's the alternative? Dismissing the idea a good product could be released and being pessimistic about the release schedule? Meh, pass. I have no problems ripping WotC a new one if they deserve it, but I'm not going to expect a product to fail without reason.PDFs apparently don't count as support from WotC. And PDF setting content doesn't either. So if WotC can't count the stuff they're putting up online, why should other companies? This is part of my point: 1e had very little "support" as we would now recognise it. Two extra monster books, two PC splatbooks, and four DM sourcebooks. 3e and 4e had that after a year. And while 1e started releasing waves of adventures, that took time to build up. Well, WotC just released Ed Greenwood Presents the Forgotten Realms during the playtest process. Did that count as support? And a search of "Forgotten Realms" on DnDClassics.com turns up a result of 108 items. Three times most other settings (although only 2x Ravenloft and Greyhawk). Paizo struggled for a LOT of that decade. They had repeated financial troubles and were operating hand-to-mouth for half of that period. They didn't expect Pathfinder to be the success it was and were unprepared, so they almost lucked into their fortune. Not the best company to emulate. Now, I really like Paizo. I like the team there a LOT and I have nothing but respect and good things to say about them. But one of the positive things I used to say was that they were being restrained in terms of content and releases, with three hardcovers a year, few extra classes and the like. They've really started to move against the game and business model that helped them establish themselves. A Pathfinder AP is about 90-odd pages, but only 60 of that is adventure. Yes, the Pathfinder APs are 360 pages of adventure compared to Tyranny's 196, but that has to do with speed of play. Pathfinder PCs level slower than 3e PCs. WotC spent the last two editions speeding up levelling. Pathfinder APs have a LOT of filler encounters. But that said, I did find Tyranny on the short side as well. Especially for the price. I'm thankful Princes of the Apocalypse is a single volume and thus far cheaper. That said, Paizo's first couple APs (Shackled City and Age of Worms) were a learning experience and had problems. They started Shackled City back in 2003, so they had 3.5 years of AP experience (and 3 APs) before they tackled Rise of the Runelords. Why should WotC get it right the first time? (Yeah, they did Scales of War too early in 4e, but the staff in charge of that was likely very different.)And Paizo wan't designing an edition at the same time. Heck, the first AP for the Pathfinder RPG was Council of Thieves, which wasn't well received. And they weren't working out the bugs of working with licence partners.</blockquote>

Verification