Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorhook" data-source="post: 5266066" data-attributes="member: 58401">Why? It was WotC's property, and they wanted to do something very different with it. What's crazy about taking it back so that they can do that?I'm guessing it's the "something very different that they wanted to do" that bothers you.Maybe in a few cases. IME though, more people were upset that they weren't going to be dead-tree products anymore than were upset about the change in management.That's a legitimate theory, although I dispute whether Paizo really has anything to do with it. Certainly Essentials has shown a lot of "older-D&D" class flavour, so obviously WotC is aiming to attract people familiar with previous editions, but it's not clear that Pathfinder fanbois are the sole or even primary target for that development.Paragraph removed. Keep real-world politics and name-calling off these boards, please. -EridanisI agree, the ol' "Here's a big fat rulebook for you to read" strategy of recruiting new players is gradually going extinct. That said, don't underestimate the grassroots marketing of 4E, either; it may well be that Pathfinder is spreading well through the "hardcore" gaming community, but I would lay money on 4E selling a hell of a lot better among new and casual gamers. D&D still has a much wider brand recognition than Pathfinder, and 4E is arguably a much easier game to run.</blockquote>