Pathfinder 1E Is PAIZO becoming the next Wizards?

[jmucchiello]

If Paizo wanted to get away from the "limitations" of 3e, the best way to do that would be to create a new system with a different genre. Make a Space RPG or a "Modern" RPG. Then once people liked that system (that's the goal anyway), they could reskin it for Fantasy. The benefit of doing it in another genre first is they can release it alongside Pathfinder without making Pathfinder stuff "obsolete". And it would not offend those people who are only interested in a 3.5e compatible RPG.

So if they announce Golarian 3000 next year, blame me for giving them the idea.

 

[bouncyhead]

I don't think that's quite right.

Fair enough. Perhaps I overstated. All I mean is that migration to any PFRPG2 will not be a formality for their core customers. They have demonstrated that when faced with an edition change that they do not (for whatever reason) approve of, they are prepared to either not switch at all or do what my group did: play for a while and then revert.

You have of course got a bunch of individuals with a wide variety of tastes, aspirations and requirements, acknowledged. Myself, I feel no particular affection for the 3.x ruleset. It's fine but I don't write poems about it (well, none published). I just found that the 4.x ruleset wasn't for me and, in pursuit of new shiny (and approving of the changes in the beta) I jumped on the PF train. I'm happy to see a new PF edition and if it feels right to me and scratches my D&D itch then I'll be all over it.

If it doesn't of course I shall rail against it on internet message boards, denounce its marketing, scoff at its naming conventions and set up a new RPG, RoadSeeker, based upon PF 1st edition with some tweaks here and there - 3.75.1 if you will - and market it to the disaffected.

 

[BryonD]

Fair enough. Perhaps I overstated. All I mean is that migration to any PFRPG2 will not be a formality for their core customers. They have demonstrated that when faced with an edition change that they do not (for whatever reason) approve of, they are prepared to either not switch at all or do what my group did: play for a while and then revert.

You have of course got a bunch of individuals with a wide variety of tastes, aspirations and requirements, acknowledged. Myself, I feel no particular affection for the 3.x ruleset. It's fine but I don't write poems about it (well, none published). I just found that the 4.x ruleset wasn't for me and, in pursuit of new shiny (and approving of the changes in the beta) I jumped on the PF train. I'm happy to see a new PF edition and if it feels right to me and scratches my D&D itch then I'll be all over it.

If it doesn't of course I shall rail against it on internet message boards, denounce its marketing, scoff at its naming conventions and set up a new RPG, RoadSeeker, based upon PF 1st edition with some tweaks here and there - 3.75.1 if you will - and market it to the disaffected.

I'd daresay you are continuing to overstate.

 

[bouncyhead]

I'd daresay you are continuing to overstate.

Apologies. You realize the last paragraph was (meant to be) a joke right?

 

[Twowolves]

All this talk of Paizo creating a new RPG system completely different from d20/OGL is just silly. They only made PRPG to keep in print a rules system to support their AP/adventures line. Why would they want a different system? What would they have to gain? Next to nothing, with everything to lose.

 

[ggroy]

Why would they want a different system? What would they have to gain?

Ego gratification for the designers?

 

[Turtlejay]

All this talk of Paizo creating a new RPG system completely different from d20/OGL is just silly. They only made PRPG to keep in print a rules system to support their AP/adventures line. Why would they want a different system? What would they have to gain? Next to nothing, with everything to lose.

No strings attached to any of their products, at all?

Either way, 3.5 is a good system already, so they don't *need* to make their own, but publishers make money selling books, and sooner or later they are gonna hit bottom on what they can legitimately mine out of the source material. At that point, why not make their own? They have a strong following and a reputation for quality, if they produce even a middling product and support it with their AP's, things will remailn good for them, eh?

Jay

 

[rounser]

These people have demonstrated that they are prepared to shun, or walk away from edition change. In fact I would guess a significant proportion are only with Paizo because they actively disapprove of edition change.

No, this is entirely backwards - WOTC walked away from a significant portion of their customers and their expectations of what D&D was, and knew they were doing so. We didn't walk away from them.

 

[dm4hire]

Erik Mona and a few others have stated they wouldn't mind doing a sci-fi or other genre game and perhaps later on it might show up. I agree that it could be used as a launch to forcast possible changes to PF later on.

I still think the biggest division of fan rejection comes from WotC failing to do the open beta they promised. Had they done it as Paizo did, I think a lot of fans would have stayed, as they wouldn't have been blindsided by a lot of the changes we found once it came out. I think seeing the changes as they were implemented would have allowed for a more comfortable transition as well as a more solid product. An example of weakness in my opinion is the division and exclusion of traditional classes from the core PHB. I think the feedback would have shown WotC that the majority would rather of had everything in one book.

 

[Truth Seeker]

Not to inflame this any further...but if my memory serves me proper. During the testing phase (private beta playing), and some snippets were being release here and there. (to the public)

Folks were already walking away. Before the books were officially released. In a group of 13+ players, 2 to 3 players bought the books at the end, but no one, no one...is playing 4E. Although one player will play a character if someone was running a 4E game (he plays anything).

At this current date...within that group. No one else is bothering to push for a 4E game.

So...there was a trend that folks were walking away, walking away and closing that chapter with Wotc.

No, this is entirely backwards - WOTC walked away from a significant portion of their customers and their expectations of what D&D was, and knew they were doing so. We didn't walk away from them.