Pathfinder 1E D&D4 and Pathfinder can coexist

[pemerton]

Darrin, thanks for the response. I think that ICE has full-time paid staff (Tim Dugger, at least, it seems - I assume Heike and Bruce also draw salaries, but I gather they're the bosses rather than the staff). Presumably HERO, Steve Jackson and Palladium do. Mongoose also? Obviously White Wolf and WoTC.

I get the impression that Paizo is probably financially more financially successful than ICE. I don't know enough about the other mid-tier non-d20 publishers. Is it bigger than Mongoose?

 

[Darrin Drader]

Is it bigger than Mongoose?

I honestly don't know. They both seem pretty successful.

 

[Gailbraithe]

In terms of its sales targets, its workforce size, its situation in the fantasy RPG market, etc, does Paizo differ in any interesting way from all these other publishers?

Yes, in several ways:
* Paizo is capable of producing full color glossy books, just like WOTC. This is the first time I can remember that one of the competitors for D&D's markey could match the industry leader (whether WOTC or TSR) in terms of presentation. No black & white interiors for Paizo.

* Paizo invented the subscription model for selling RPG products, which is sheer brilliance. I'll use myself as an example: I'm subscribed to Pathfinder Chronicles. I only really want 3 out of every 4 books from that line, but I buy all of them through the subscription model. Why? Because I'm too lazy to unsubscribe. Paizo garauntees a high volume of sales via this sales model, since their customers have to take action to not buy their products.

This actually gives Paizo an edge over WOTC, as WOTC doesn't do direct sales to its customers. You have to go to third party vendor to get their stuff, which means WOTC customers have to take action to buy their products. Inertia is powerful: customers will buy more when they don't have to act to buy than when they do have to act to buy.

* Paizo is essentially selling a proven and tested game with a large pre-existing fanbase. No other competitor to D&D ever had this sort of market advantage. D&D 3.5 customers are in a position where most of us feel we have to make a choice: go with 4E or go with Pathfinder. Going with 4E means roundfiling your existing characters, campaigns and collections. Going with Pathfinder means adding to your existing characters, campaigns and collections. That's a powerful motivation to go with Pathfinder, especially if you're one of the many 3.5 fans who wasn't disasstified with the whole game.

 

[Agamon]

I disagree with the idea that the market cannot sustain more than one major RPG.

Perhaps, but let's also look at cases where competitors continue to co-exist and even thrive. Marvel and DC (even after Image changed things). Coke and Pepsi. Post and Kellogs cereals.

Now, it is entirely possible that only one between 4e and Pathfinder will survive. However, I think this is unlikely. This isn't a situation where the market is looking for a single standard (ala VHS and Betamax or HD-DVD and Blu-Ray). The market already is supporting various game systems (C&C, Cortex, d6, GURPS, True20, M&M, Arcana Evolved, etc.).

Yes, Pathfinder is a strong competitor for WotC. This is a good thing. Competition could lead to better products. Each company can look at the other and see where they can make improvements to their products. The end results could be better quality products.

We, as human beings, have the nasty habit of polarizing things. Right or wrong. Liberal or Conservative. Good or evil. Paper or plastic. And so on and so forth. Yet the reality is that life is full of choices and shades of grey.

Perhaps we should look more at what unifies us rather than what divides us. I am a gamer. I like playing 4th edition, and I like playing Pathfinder. I wouldn't mind having the two working together some. I plan on buying both 4th edition and Pathfinder products. I'm also going to buy products for other systems that catch my eye.

As a gamer, I realize that all these game editions are just a tool for conflict resolution. While rules can be fun, it is the comaraderie, role-playing, and adventure that draw me back. We all have our preferences on what engine we use to drive the game, yet I think that invariably it is the journey and the destination that matters most.

So here's to both Pathfinder and 4th edition. May they both continue to thrive.

Thank you, that saved me some typing. Just because there's Granny Smith apples doesn't mean Golden Delicious are going out of business. There are many games out there, these are two of them, play what you want.

 

[Agamon]

Yes, in several ways:
* Paizo is capable of producing full color glossy books, just like WOTC. This is the first time I can remember that one of the competitors for D&D's markey could match the industry leader (whether WOTC or TSR) in terms of presentation. No black & white interiors for Paizo.

*cough*GR*cough*

* Paizo invented the subscription model for selling RPG products, which is sheer brilliance. I'll use myself as an example: I'm subscribed to Pathfinder Chronicles. I only really want 3 out of every 4 books from that line, but I buy all of them through the subscription model. Why? Because I'm too lazy to unsubscribe. Paizo garauntees a high volume of sales via this sales model, since their customers have to take action to not buy their products.

Different, sure. Good, not so sure. Like you say, something just seems wrong there, even though I know that's not Paizo's true intentions (they are teh good peoples). As an ex-subscriber, I can attest to not liking that method of receiving my gaming material.

This actually gives Paizo an edge over WOTC, as WOTC doesn't do direct sales to its customers. You have to go to third party vendor to get their stuff, which means WOTC customers have to take action to buy their products. Inertia is powerful: customers will buy more when they don't have to act to buy than when they do have to act to buy.

Yikes, is our society really that lazy? Scary.

* Paizo is essentially selling a proven and tested game with a large pre-existing fanbase. No other competitor to D&D ever had this sort of market advantage. D&D 3.5 customers are in a position where most of us feel we have to make a choice: go with 4E or go with Pathfinder. Going with 4E means roundfiling your existing characters, campaigns and collections. Going with Pathfinder means adding to your existing characters, campaigns and collections. That's a powerful motivation to go with Pathfinder, especially if you're one of the many 3.5 fans who wasn't disasstified with the whole game.

Speaking for myself, I grew dissatisfied of 3.5 last year and if not for 4E, I would have went to a different system (and actually, I have for a couple of my non-4e games). Is it truly a dichotomous decision for most people? If so, that's really too bad, there some awesome games out there.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Coexist? Nah, cage match ftw.

 

[Stalker0]

I apologize for my lack of clarity. When I said 3e was the only game in town when it came out, I meant dnd wise, not the whole rpg market. I recognize there are plenty of other games out there

 

[Draksila]

Paizo is essentially selling a proven and tested game with a large pre-existing fanbase. No other competitor to D&D ever had this sort of market advantage. D&D 3.5 customers are in a position where most of us feel we have to make a choice: go with 4E or go with Pathfinder. Going with 4E means roundfiling your existing characters, campaigns and collections. Going with Pathfinder means adding to your existing characters, campaigns and collections. That's a powerful motivation to go with Pathfinder, especially if you're one of the many 3.5 fans who wasn't disasstified with the whole game.

Much like AD&D, AD&D 2E, and 3.X before it, however, 4E has no real need for concern by moving away from its pre-existing support structure. They understand, just as TSR did, that there will always be people who are unwilling to reinvest in a new or expanded game. Every time D&D has changed, it has left behind some of the old players and drawn in new ones. My father quit D&D when 2E came out; he simply didn't feel the need to relearn the game, and began to redevelop his interest in music as a hobby. My longest-running gaming group, for the most part, passed on 3E and stayed with the volumes of books they had for second edition. Many of the people in my local area refused to move on to 3.5, as they considered it a tacky ploy to grab more cash. Reading these boards, there are people who never moved to advanced D&D at all and preferred basic. This kind of attrition is expected.

The other side of this is that the new edition occasionally brings the jaded ex-fan back into the fold. My wife and I haven't played D&D in 3 years; we just got fed up with what we perceived as the quirkiness of third edition. 4E has our interest back up again, based on the changes to the mechanics. Some of my previous 3.X gaming group were 1st and 2nd edition players who had moved on to GURPS, CoC, or WEG and found themselves intrigued by 3rd edition.

I guess my roundabout point is, you win some and you lose some. In any hobby with changing standards, this is true. If D&D were so easily prone to failure based solely on reinventing itself, it would have died in the eighties.

 

[Sonny]

You know what's funny? The only thing the whole WOTC\Paizo split has me worried about is that if Wizards decides to revisit Greyhawk in the future, they won't ask Eric Mona to help write it.

Other than that, I think it's great that people have a way to play the version of D&D they prefer, and have it properly supported.

 

[pemerton]

Yes, in several ways:
* Paizo is capable of producing full color glossy books, just like WOTC.

<snip>

* Paizo is essentially selling a proven and tested game with a large pre-existing fanbase.

These points are equally true of OGL Conan and Arcana Evolved (and I think are also true of the EQ and WOW RPGs - weren't they full colour hardbacks?).

The subscription point is an interesting one. I hadn't thought of it in the way that you put it, but I still feel that it confirms my opinion that it will be non-mechanics related matters (perhaps business model as well as finance) that settle the issue of Pathfinder vs D&D.