Is Wotc Slipping?

[Neonchameleon]

You honeslty think that D&D brings WoTC "millions and millions and millions" of dollars?

Oh wait, I get it . . . you were speaking purely hypothetically.

Possibly. But remember that D&D is just a sideshow for WoTC. They make most of their money out of Magic the Gathering - a large enough concern that it is mentioned by name in Hasbro's corporate reports. D&D is just WoTC's hobby.

 

[carmachu]

I have little trust for Amazon sales rankings overall. There always seems to be something odd in the high ranks, especially in the low top ten. I'm sure WOTC's book sales have dropped a bit as there is nothing new, and has not been for a few months now.

Paizo, on the other hand, is putting out a steady steam of books.

But WOTC has DDI, which is not on Amazon's rankings at all.

I know of no good site to tell us real sales figures.

Pretty much amazon is worthless. On top of that, WOTC does sell more then a few through direct chains(B&N) and Paizo has a subscription model. Neither which amazon takes into account.

 

[Azgulor]

<snip1>
True. I was merely stating that some players will play only "D&D" due to the name recognition. If you're in a community such as mine (for example) where 50% of the people will play only D&D and the other only Pathfinder, this schism results in a fragmented player base. Stores don't know what materials to carry, GMs have trouble sustaining groups with enough players, etc.

<snip2>

I am aware of this, and I'm excited about it - and I think it will be a great seller for Paizo.

However, the Basic Set is not the only way to get new players interested in the hobby. Consider that even in my small area that WotC has Encounters, D&D Game Day, etc., while the Pathfinder Society has no presence.

What if Paizo could create some short Encounters-like sessions that could be given to game stores so they can test drive Pathfinder with interested players?

Question: If the player base is truly split 50/50 as you claim, then Paizo & PF have managed to capture that 50% without doing the things that WotC has done. Why then, should they adopt a WotC-style model of a PF-equivalent of Encounters, D&D Game Day, etc.? Clearly what they are doing is working if they've swayed 50% of the available player base.

Observation: You act as if it's a zero-sum game. Game stores, just like any other retail outlet, need to balance inventory against perceived demand. The idea that a game store can "pick a horse" and only stock that game, while convenient, is a poor business strategy and a likely fast track to obsolesence.

Opinion: Paizo isn't WotC. It is thriving & growing. Trying to be WotC or adopting a business plan that works for WotC, has a much higher chance of failure than it does for incremental success.

 

[Fifth Element]

Uhmm... you do realize he was giving a purely hypothetical example to illustrate his thoughts... right?

Obviously. I was pointing out that his thoughts are based on some very big assumptions that have no necessary basis in reality.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Out of curiosity, how many Essentials books were stocked versus Pathfinder books? At every Borders and Barnes & Noble I've been to locally, there are plenty of Essentials books available, but none of them stock more than a copy (or two at most) of the Pathfinder core books. So, I mean "The APG needed a restock," might not mean much if that meant they needed to reorder the one copy they had, versus having ten copies of any given Essentials book and selling through five of them.

I'm always very wary of context-free information like that given above being spread around.

That is actually the biggest problem that the local Borders is having with Essentials - They got in a dozen of each, two dozen of Heroes of the Fallen Land, put them on the endcaps, but then they did not sell as many as the also new APG - while they only got in four of the APG it sold through, was replaced, and sold through again. Since release they have sold better than a dozen of the APG, getting them in a few at a time, then selling through.

They sold half a dozen of Fallen Land, more than they did for any of the others, aside from the Tiles sets. (The Dungeon Tiles set also sold through an order of eight - doing better than anything else in Essentials line.) They got in two dozen of Fallen Land. As a result a bunch of the Essentials books were stripped, their covers returned. (I hate this practice, better for the bookstore, but incredibly wasteful.) Better than two cases of books destroyed. About fifty volumes.

They sold two out of the dozen Basic boxes. This is the one I thought would be a big seller, but it just sat there. It makes me worry about the boxed Pathfinder Basics. At the time the manager didn't know if they should be returned or crushed.

Most of the sales for Essentials were just after Christmas, with folks using gift certificates. Sales of PFRPG seemed pretty steady, except for a clump around Thanksgiving where all the PFRPG Core books in the store were bought at once. (I got hired to run their first games. )

Mind you, for a lot of places, selling through eight copies of APG would not be a big deal, but considering how low RPG sales were otherwise PFRPG did really well.

Essentials did better than anything beside PFRPG, but annoyed the manager with how much space was taken for mediocre sales. (Sadly, the real money is in romances.... Oi! )

At this point a vastly reduced Essentials area still holds an endcap, while PFRPG is at eye level on the main shelf, faced. The rest of 4e is above eye level, spined. (The hardcovers are really not doing well - Essentials did out sell them for the Christmas season.) Above eye level is better than below - people would rather stretch than bend. Eye level is where you place items that are moving, or that you want to move. Below eye level includes the nWoD material, Shadowrun, Supernatural, and the WH40K RPGs.

As far as the manager is concerned it is better to have a stock of two and sell through than it is to have a stock of twelve and sell two.

Also, levels for WotC orders are determined at corporate level - given his druthers they would not have gotten two dozen of Fallen Lands. Having them forced on him, then not sell, rankled. Also annoying was Gamma World - one copy, sold within hours, and it took months to restock. And the restock was also a single copy, along with the new expansion. Given his choice he might well have ordered, and sold through, half a dozen. There was a lot more interest in Gamma World than in Essentials, and as far as I can see there still is.
Hell, if it is still there when I hit the store today I will buy ther one copy myself.
Pathfinder levels are determined by the store - he ordered five of Bestiary 2, sold through, got in five more, sold through, got in five more, and I was finally able to get my copy. The first two stockings sold through in a day. (Annoyingly, three of the copies purchased before I could get my own were sold to some of my players....)

To add further context - there is at least one local core of eighteen PFRPG players that I know, not including myself. I think that there is at least one other such group.

I know one Gamma World player, and no 4e players.

So it is possible that I have been skewing the numbers simply by sharing my enthusiasm - that most of the purchasers are either people that I know or people that they in turn know. The fact that the manager at the local Borders pegged me to teach a bunch of new players about PFRPG certainly points in that direction.

An enthusiastic core can skew numbers in weird directions - at one LGS that I used to frequent the biggest seller was Rifts, because of a single, very enthusiastic, core. While I never played in their game they were a happy bunch of folks who likely helped sell the game to a bunch of others.

Does that put it more in context for you?

Oddly enough, writing that helped put it in context for me, I had not stopped to realize that I may be part of the reason PFRPG is doing better than 4e locally. Weird. 4e may not have such a booster who visits Borders.

The Auld Grump, maybe I need to get a tee shirt....

 

[Retreater]

Question:

If the player base is truly split 50/50 as you claim, then Paizo & PF have managed to capture that 50% without doing the things that WotC has done. Why then, should they adopt a WotC-style model of a PF-equivalent of Encounters, D&D Game Day, etc.? Clearly what they are doing is working if they've swayed 50% of the available player base.[/QUOTE]

And a hearty congratulations is in order for Paizo. Please don't misconstrue any of my concerns as an attack on the hard-working and dedicated staff of Paizo or on the legions of Pathfinder fans.

I would say that without Encounters, Game Day, etc., that the split could be PF 55 and D&D 45. Using similar methods could give Paizo an additional edge over WotC. More than that, it could educate more players about the system, train more GMs, educate game stores about product, etc.

Observation:

You act as if it's a zero-sum game. Game stores, just like any other retail outlet, need to balance inventory against perceived demand. The idea that a game store can "pick a horse" and only stock that game, while convenient, is a poor business strategy and a likely fast track to obsolesence.[/QUOTE]

But when you have limited resources (shelf space, space for gaming, staff knowledge, etc.), something is going to have to be cut to make room for the other guys. It might mean that for your FLGS to carry the Inner Sea Campaign Setting that they won't carry Dark Sun (or vice versa). It might mean that if the game store has one table and there is a WotC-sanctioned D&D Encounters game going on, they aren't going to use that table for a newly-formed Pathfinder start up without any official backing from Paizo.

Retreater

 

[Jeff Wilder]

PF doesn't have the brand recognition or easy entry point to lure in new gamers.

In just the past year, my circle of gamers has four new folks playing Pathfinder, fished in (frankly) by the visual appeal of the products.

Nerds will find a way.

 

[Nikosandros]

Are there any bayesian modelers on the boards?

Probably.

 

[Dice4Hire]

True, WotC could pull away from 4E and release legacy products, but there is nothing NEW that they can produce that will entice PF players to drop their games.

If that is true, then I have absolutely NO respect for Pathfinder fans at all Not a bit. Zero.

But of course, you are absolutely wrong. The vast majority of Pathfinder fans went to Pathfinder because they found it to be a better game for them and their group. They looked at WOTC and Paizo's products and they made their choice.

If WOTC makes something new, I am sure they will look and make that choice again.

Saying that Pathfinder folks made their choice already and are too short-sighted, insular etc to ever choose again does them no service.

And is completely wrong.

Edit: If I were a Pathfinder fan, I would be very insulted.

 

[Retreater]

But of course, you are absolutely wrong. The vast majority of Pathfinder fans went to Pathfinder because they found it to be a better game for them and their group. They looked at WOTC and Paizo's products and they made their choice.

Exactly. Most Pathfinder fans are happy with Pathfinder. It doesn't matter if WotC releases a much different feel of 4E (the Essentials series) or makes an online-only Character Builder. Most Pathfinder fans seem to be happy with the game that they chose.

You and I are saying the same thing here, so there's no point in being offended. I was merely politely disagreeing with Erik Mona's statement that WotC could do plenty of things to appeal to Pathfinder fans. (I said they could not unless they started re-releasing legacy, 3.5 or PF material.)

In truth, several particular Pathfinder fans that I know personally have stated that they are so happy with Pathfinder, they wouldn't care even if a 5th edition came out. In their words, not mine, "I'm finished buying game systems." These may be a minority of gamers, but they are there.

Retreater