Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 6290634" data-attributes="member: 22424">Actually, I'm pretty sure the mistake was failing to renew the Dragon license. That left Paizo in a position where they had to do something, which led directly to Pathfinder existing. That decision turned D&amp;D's #1 cheerleader into its biggest competitor.And I'm not convinced anyone else could have filled the void the way Pathfinder did. Paizo had the big advantages that the already had a list of tens of thousands of subscribers, many of whom would at least look at whatever came out, plus they already had the storefront set up and the subscription mechanism in place. Nobody else had those advantages.Had any company other than Paizo done a 'Pathfinder', it would have been published in the normal way - estimate sales, print a number of copies, and put those in the FLGS; reprint if needed. It thus would most likely have sold a couple of thousand copies and then disappeared.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="delericho, post: 6290634, member: 22424"] Actually, I'm pretty sure the mistake was failing to renew the Dragon license. That left Paizo in a position where they had to do [i]something[/i], which led directly to Pathfinder existing. That decision turned D&D's #1 cheerleader into its biggest competitor. And I'm not convinced anyone else could have filled the void the way Pathfinder did. Paizo had the big advantages that the already had a list of tens of thousands of subscribers, many of whom would at least look at whatever came out, plus they already had the storefront set up and the subscription mechanism in place. Nobody else had those advantages. Had any company other than Paizo done a 'Pathfinder', it would have been published in the normal way - estimate sales, print a number of copies, and put those in the FLGS; reprint if needed. It thus would most likely have sold a couple of thousand copies and then disappeared. [/QUOTE]

Verification