Did WotC underestimate the Paizo effect on 4E?

[Wayside]

They do, actually. 2009 4th quarter, World of Darkness, fifth place: ICv2 - Top Q4 2009 Roleplaying Games

Sorry, I meant the sum of White Wolf's RPG properties. In the past I've seen Exalted, for example, listed separately. Without access to their methodology or actual numbers I'm not buying the results, even with a narrow focus on the hobby channel.

I mean, what happens to the Q4 2009 results if, instead of listing FFG twice for games that are both Warhammer 40K, the two are combined? I'm guessing FFG would leapfrog Paizo. What about when you combine Exalted with White Wolf's other lines? The same thing, I'd expect.

Even if we limit ourselves to properties represented in RPGs, companies like Games Workshop, White Wolf and WotC have honest-to-goodness media franchises. They've developed them through video games, novels, comics, etc. Paizo is obviously doing well within their niche, but it's a small niche, and it's their whole business.

 

[mudbunny]

You see, almost everything is phrased in terms of how much better it is than 3.5. The marketing for the game was "STOP PLAYING 3.5, START PLAYING 4.0".

I am not sure how to phrase this without coming off as snarky, and I am really trying ('cause it isn't intended to be snarky, let me reassure you of that), but what else were you expecting them to say?

They are releasing a new edition of the game, and they want to try to convert as many 3.5 players to 4E. Of course they are going to tell you that 4E is better than 3.5.

 

[Agamon]

The funny thing is that WotC was going to anger a lot of people, regardless of what it could have foreseen. It's ironic that, if WotC released an updated 3.5 that was very similar to what became PF, the likely resulting rage would have been spectacular to witness. However, WotC puts out a completely new edition, Paizo puts out PF. In the former, WotC are money-grubbers that hate their customer base and in the latter, Paizo is heralded as the savior. Talk about damned if you do, damned if you don't.

 

[Agamon]

I am not sure how to phrase this without coming off as snarky, and I am really trying ('cause it isn't intended to be snarky, let me reassure you of that), but what else were you expecting them to say?

They are releasing a new edition of the game, and they want to try to convert as many 3.5 players to 4E. Of course they are going to tell you that 4E is better than 3.5.

This is a good point. I was watching the extras on the 1st season of BSG disc. One of them concerned the move from miniseries to series (I assume it was included in the miniseries DVD when it was released on it's own). And the actors kept saying, over and over, that, if you like the miniseries, the series is even better, and here's why. And for some reason, I didn't jump out of my chair, all annoyed that they could dis the miniseries like that...

It's called PR. I only jumped into PF recently, so I wasn't around for the PF alpha and such, but how did Paizo go about explaining changes? "We really, really like how 3.5 does this...but we're going to change it anyway." I kinda doubt it.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

I am not sure how to phrase this without coming off as snarky, and I am really trying ('cause it isn't intended to be snarky, let me reassure you of that), but what else were you expecting them to say?

They are releasing a new edition of the game, and they want to try to convert as many 3.5 players to 4E. Of course they are going to tell you that 4E is better than 3.5.

Not snarky at all.

However, I think they could have done it in a different way, trying to be more inclusive of their entire customer base. If the spin had have been more inclusive rather than alienating then they may have got more people on board judging the game on its merits rather than being turned off by the WotC "Marketing Machine".

Grab a d20. Roll high.
That’s the basic rule of 4th Edition just as it was in 3rd Edition, but the new edition puts that mechanic more solidly in the core of the game than ever.

Ever faced one of those life-or-death saving throws? Hours, weeks, or even years of play can hang in the balance. It all comes down to that one roll. There’s drama in that moment, but it’s drama you didn’t create, and you don’t want.

That’s gone in the new edition.

Have you played a spellcaster and been a little envious of the excitement of other players when they roll critical hits? Have you wished that you could do that for your spells?

You can in 4th.

Have you ever had some confusion or miscalculation about your normal AC versus your touch and flat-footed AC?

You won’t have to worry about it.

The WotC quote from Olshanski is absolutely cringeworthy and perhaps with a little 20/20 hindsight is indicative of where WotC went wrong (and where in comparison, Paizo got it right).

It still comes across as:
- We still have the d20 but "these go to 21"!
- You want resolution in a single roll? Ain't gonna happen. You want to blunt combat effectiveness so that every combat length extends to a mathematically precise average? Our number-crunchers have made it happen!
- Have you ever failed to read your own ruleset and not realized that wizard's can get criticals? Well we have and now we've made sure that in 4e wizard's can now get criticals... no more of that playing a wizard and being envious of the fighter... [turns to his confused sidekick ("wait did I get that arse about")]
- Are you dumb enough to be confused by normal AC, touch AC and flat-footed AC? Well we're going to dogpile you with four, not three defenses and a truck full of modifiers so that you feel even dumber!

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Zaran]

If only WotC would have given us the ability to purchase a mule in the PHB. Then 4e would have been perfect and we wouldn't be having discussions like this. Oh, WotC! How can you be so cruel!

 

[MoxieFu]

I am not sure how to phrase this without coming off as snarky, and I am really trying ('cause it isn't intended to be snarky, let me reassure you of that), but what else were you expecting them to say?

They are releasing a new edition of the game, and they want to try to convert as many 3.5 players to 4E. Of course they are going to tell you that 4E is better than 3.5.

My Momma always said, "It ain't always what you say, but how you say it."

And that is the essences of marketing. Good marketers know HOW to say it. Bad marketers don't.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

The funny thing is that WotC was going to anger a lot of people, regardless of what it could have foreseen. It's ironic that, if WotC released an updated 3.5 that was very similar to what became PF, the likely resulting rage would have been spectacular to witness. However, WotC puts out a completely new edition, Paizo puts out PF. In the former, WotC are money-grubbers that hate their customer base and in the latter, Paizo is heralded as the savior. Talk about damned if you do, damned if you don't.

It's called PR. I only jumped into PF recently, so I wasn't around for the PF alpha and such, but how did Paizo go about explaining changes? "We really, really like how 3.5 does this...but we're going to change it anyway." I kinda doubt it.

Regardless of any sympathy Paizo had garnered for having the custodianship of Dragon and Dungeon taken away from them, or admiration for their RPG leading customer service, I think Paizo went about "3.75" the right way.

They presented an Alpha for people to try out and give input on, mixed all of this into a beta before throwing it open to the masses to play with again, before finally releasing their Core Book. Even if you were disappointed in certain options/ideas being left in/taken out/changed in the final product, there was no arguing with the process which was completely inclusive and fan driven. The level of interactivity between Jason Bulmahn and the thousands of fans who downloaded and tried out the beta was something incredibly ***special. They still have all the threads in their forum if you wanted to see how it all happened. If anything, it was all about respecting the game and the people who played it.

On the other hand, WotC had an infinitely tougher sell. Perhaps half of what you are saying is right: they were damned from the start. They had to draw a bloody big line in the sand and so they set themselves up for failing a significant proportion of their audience. Perhaps the telling thing is that if 4e had have been a much better game than it is, they would have pulled everyone over to it regardless. Instead, the horrible marketing veneer became quickly scratched.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

*** In my opinion this is one of the most special things ever done for the game. The amount of time and effort that it took was completely unbelievable.

 

[billd91]

This is a good point. I was watching the extras on the 1st season of BSG disc. One of them concerned the move from miniseries to series (I assume it was included in the miniseries DVD when it was released on it's own). And the actors kept saying, over and over, that, if you like the miniseries, the series is even better, and here's why. And for some reason, I didn't jump out of my chair, all annoyed that they could dis the miniseries like that...

You always expect them to say that the follow-up is better, otherwise, why would anyone want it when it's a replacement (in the case of BSG, it's not a replacement at all, it's a continuation, so the comparison is dubious).

It's how you say you've improved it.

Ever faced one of those life-or-death saving throws? Hours, weeks, or even years of play can hang in the balance. It all comes down to that one roll. There’s drama in that moment, but it’s drama you didn’t create, and you don’t want.

Really? I didn't want that drama? Then why was I playing a D&D game which has always had save or die moments? Does WotC think I was somehow not choosing to play of my own free will? It's a bit patronizing. So was the grappling video. Those are ways not to say it.

The comment about wizards getting to crit with spells, that's a much more upbeat and positive way to spin a change that they consider an improvement. "Hey, this is cool. Now other classes get to do it too!" That was good, this is better. Not that was bad or something "you don't want". And that is partly why I thought 4e marketing was surprisingly clumsy and amateurish and annoyed me to an increasing degree with the 4e launch.

 

[Stormonu]

I'm not sure this has been brought up, but a lot of what I have been seeing in my area is that a good portion of people excitedly moved to 4E, but within about 6 months or so became so disenchanted with the game they either switched over to Pathfinder or sought out an entirely different game (my group didn't take 6 mo., but after Keep on the Shadowfell, we essentially switched over to WoD).

I think Piazo has gained quite a bit of folks who have "tried it, didn't like it" and that it may be gaining momentum as people find 4E doesn't meet their expectations.

Of course, folks may do the same eventually with Pathfinder - it's just approaching it's 6-month birthday.