Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="UngainlyTitan" data-source="post: 8214477" data-attributes="member: 28487">Ok Pathfinder kicked off as soon as Paizo decided that the $e license was not an acceptable basis for doing business. I can't say that I blame them. WoTC was a bit high handed with regard to OGL players at the time. Not it took what a year or so for Pathfinder to emerge and as I did not like 3.x as that point and loved 4e, took the 4 e road and cannot comment much on Pathfinder.Now my own personal theory (which does not have a lot of traction around here) was that 4e was not meant to rely on splat book sales as its business model. It was meant to transition the playerbase in to a subscription model based on online tools and Gleemax. This was dead on arrival for diverse reasons but mainly WoTC inexperience/naivety in managing software projects.So splat books it was and boy did they churn them out.It was clearly unsustainable, the playerbase was exhausted and the people that really like the splats were gone to Pathfinder anyway. So with a paired to bone staff WoTC announced D&D next the playtest for 5e. This was a massive public beta and is still the heart of how 5e evolves. Most new stuff (aside from settings) get previews on Unearthed Arcana and if it gets enough support it makes it to the light of day.The thing is that the public playtest had drawn the attention of anyone that was interest from the get go and all could see the way things were heading in terms of mechanics and so forth before final publication.So while I really liked 4e my players did not and had rejected it before the playtest was announced. I would not switch to Pathfinder, 5e is an excellent compromise and we have stuck to it.So in my opinion it was a success out of the door but its continuing growth is somewhat astonishing.</blockquote>

Verification