Any news out of PAX East?

[Thaumaturge]

You don't know? Didn't you sign it?

If he did, he may not be able to talk about it. It is my understanding that NDAs often have language that prevents the parties involved from publicly acknowledging the NDA's existence.

People under such restrictions can, if they are careful, point out things other people have said, as those things are not covered.

As far as I understand it. I have an English BA, so go get law advice elsewhere.

Thaumaturge.

 

[Mark CMG]

Don't get me all hyped up to play the next version of D&D and then have me wait for months to do it.

If that has been your experience, then they have been successful so far. It is precisely what their marketing department is trying to do to you. Now if they can use the playtest to get you all hyped up and anticipating the release of the actual game in the same way, they will have done their job yet again. Most people will not directly acknowledge that they have become affected by such marketing. Most will just become hypersensitive to any criticism of the promised object that they have already placed on an imaginary future-pedestal, lashing out at anyone who questions the pledged quality of the anticipated item or even the validity of the anticipation and hype.

Sadly, you fall into that gray area between ensnarement and acceptance. You will be pitied by those not enthralled and ostracized by those who would prefer that you quietly swear fealty and get with the program. The marketeers don't have the object to sell you yet, and hardly any idea of what it is going to be, so you need to accept the hype as surrogate and allow it to nuture your anticipation until something more concrete can be revealed. Savor these moments for what comes on its heels is going to have to clear a very high bar if you are already complaining about having to wait. The chance something can live up to its hype lessens the longer you wait as with each passing day you will imagine new ways in which your anticipation will be validated as well as new ways in which you can be disappointed. I do not envy your predicament.

 

[Bedrockgames]

They should go one step further! They shouldn't tell you about the game until it's already out!

Actually, they shouldn't tell you about it at all. You'd have to stumble upon it by accident in a game store.

Lol. They can do it like led zeppelin IV, take the name off the cover and see if people still buy it without the brand recognition.

 

[Piratecat]

You don't know? Didn't you sign it?

Bwah ha ha, I have stolen ALL THE GAME DESIGN!

No, actually, good question. I had a pre-existing NDA so I didn't look at the NDA applicable to PAX East GMs.

 

[Scribble]

They should go one step further! They shouldn't tell you about the game until it's already out!

Actually, they shouldn't tell you about it at all. You'd have to stumble upon it by accident in a game store.

Hah- this kind of happened to me with 3e... I'd stopped gaming for a couple of years do to time and what not... Then one day there happened to be a convention going on near me and I wandered in to check out the dealers room..

What... There's 3rd edition?????

 

[Savage Wombat]

If he did, he may not be able to talk about it. It is my understanding that NDAs often have language that prevents the parties involved from publicly acknowledging the NDA's existence.

People under such restrictions can, if they are careful, point out things other people have said, as those things are not covered.

Piratecat! Blink twice if you've signed away any offspring or reproductive organs!

 

[jeffh]

What evidence do you have that it's the same playtest as before? Something Piratecat thinks he heard? A PAX visitor tweeted: "They play tested it last night. NDAs and such. People said they were VERY happy with the changes."

That, plus the "what happened to Turn Undead" question at the panel, suggest that it was a different version.

Actually, in response to the Turn Undead question, Mearls explicitly says (around 29:10 of the video) that as far as he knows it WAS the same version. Now, admittedly I didn't know that at the time I wrote the post you're quoting - I was indeed taking Piratecat's word for it - but it's absolutely unambiguous from the video. I don't understand where you get that it was a different version out of the video, that is the exact opposite of what he said.

(He does note that internally, they're on a different iteration. But that doesn't conflict with anything I said, indeed, I expressed the belief and hope that this was the case.)

Notice also that the Twitter post you quote says people are happy with "the changes" but not what they are changes from. That person didn't necessarily mean the previous playtest - (s)he could just as easily have a previous published edition in mind. But in any case, Piratecat has more credibility for me than some random person I'm not familiar with, and Mearls more still.

 

[YRUSirius]

Didn't he say same version "but with some modifications"?

-YRUSirius

 

[Hangfire]

Once again we get people complaining about "months" in industries where development cycles are typically measured in years.

I also learned of the Pathfinder beta early on, but it was not an entirely new system created from scratch. It was a niche product marketed to a niche market using rules that someone else had already spent years of development time on (twice!) that were simply tweaked to fix perceived problems. Please stop using Pathfinder as some sort of yard stick. It's absurd.

And really, bitching about a period of a little less than 4 months is ridiculous. If we were talking Duke Nukem development time since announcement, you'd have a legitimate complaint. But we aren't, and you don't.

I do not want WotC to rush the game. I never said I did. Like most people here I want the next version of D&D to be fun, something I want to play. I'm willing to wait for that, however long that might take.

The point I was making, perhaps badly, was that I don't understand the point of announcing open play testing when you're not actually ready to start said play testing. That was my only point, period.

As to the remarks you've made Mercutio01 - I was under the impression that WotC was working on a game originally developed by others, a game that had been around for many years before they got their hands on in, sort of like Pathfinder. As far as I know they are not completely remaking the game from scratch, but rather, re-working what's come before (apparently from all the editions that have come before), so for give me if I find your comment ridiculous.

As far as using Pathfinder as a yard stick, don't you think that perhaps WotC is doing that. Don't you think they maybe should, to some degree? As far as I know D&D has never had an open play test before, but they are now, after Paizo did, with some degree of success.

 

[GM Dave]

While they are probably satisfied with current sales (seem to be doing well) 5E presents a real threat to that. So I would be surprised if they are not at least looking at different options to curb that. They are in a position to be the biggest rpg company if they play their cards right. But if wotc plays ots cards right, they could seriously hurt the pathfinder bottom line.

Why a threat?

Paizo is not built on the same model as WotC.

If WotC does not produce product then WotC stops as an entity (at least the RPG DnD line though their MtG line will last for several years by appearances).

Paizo makes a large amount of money by being the 'go to' stop for sales on the internet.

If 5e fails then they make a small amount of money.

If 5e succeeds then they make more money.

Paizo is hedged by selling WotC product on their site to do well whether 5e is a success or failure.

Paizo is also hedged against the changes of many different products and will make profit on all the auxiliary items that are purchased (dice, miniatures, maps, and 3rd party products).

Paizo sells Pathfinder because it interests the heads of the company to do it but not because they would cease to make sales if they didn't.

That makes a very different business model.

Pathfinder and Adventure Paths attract people to the site (making them more advertising tools).

This success of attraction has allowed them to pick up old material that was from companies going out of business and selling it for profit. This has allowed them to now branch into novel sales (reprints of older material and new material drawn from their world).

WotC has DnD as a secondary sales item (primary are book sales in their settings and it used to be some online games like Neverwinter Nights and Baldur's gate). People find DnD RPG usually second while Paizo usually is the reverse with their Pathfinder products attracting people to purchase the other products.