My love letter to WotC

[DaveMage]

I didn't say it would make a lot. I said it would be like free money. Why? simple right now older stuff is sitting on some hard drive somewhere making zero money. If they put it up for sale then it is making some money. Which is more than they are making right now. I doubt it would make a ton of money, but every dollar counts when you have share holders to please. I mean they did it before sold older PDF's of books and pirated copies are still apparently fairly common. Cost for older books in stores still carry a decent price. So there is obviously a market there even if it is a small one.

I am only saying it would help WotC make money IMHO. I also never claimed to be right. I am just posting my opinion on the topic.

It's funny - they pulled the pdfs because they were concerned that piracy would hurt sales. Now that there are no more pdfs, it appears that it was the actual appeal (or lack thereof) of their products themselves that has hurt sales.

Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes...

 

[Umbran]

No. It gives an indication that the people at Wizards think there is not a market for them. I would counter other companies have subsequently proved them wrong.

Not quite. It gives an indication that the people at WotC think there isn't enough profit to be made in adventures. What is not enough for WotC may be more than enough for another company.

These choices are not just about whether the market exists, but how much money one can make in them, compared to other things you could be doing. When you are allocating resources to projects, you have to compare how much the resource costs against the profit you're likely to make off it. As a first approximation, you choose the project that earns the most profit for the same invested resources - you look for the best bang for the buck.

In WotC's case, I would not be surprised if they found that, due to their market position and ownership of the brand, they can more successfully sell splatbooks than other companies can. So, when WotC does the cost/benefit analysis, it is weighted towards splatbooks. When 3rd party publishers look at the same market, they may find (or feel) that they are less likely to sell as many splatbooks - smaller print runs of large books mean smaller profit margins - and maybe their cost/benefit analysis leans more towards adventures.

 

[Wicht]

Not quite. It gives an indication that the people at WotC think there isn't enough profit to be made in adventures. What is not enough for WotC may be more than enough for another company.

I understand the thinking. I still suspect they are wrong and that even if their business model produces a higher immediate profit its an unsustainable model.

 

[Azgulor]

Man, I feel sorry for Paizo.

It must be disheartening to see so many people who supposedly enjoy their game truthfully admit that they'd love to go running back to D&D if only WotC would learn from their mistakes.

It's like Paizo's the guy who's dating the really bad girlfriend, who is only seeing him because she's broken up with her Captain-of-the-football-team ex-boyfriend since he treated her like dirt. But truth be told, she keeps sending letters to him hoping against hope that he'll realize the horrible mistake he made... and if he ever came crawling back crying "Baby, I've changed!"... she'd kick the nice guy to the curb so fast, it'd make his head spin. Because, after all, he's not the Captain of the football team. There's status to think about here.

I don't get it, either. Pathfinder is a game that I love and Paizo is a company that I admire and willingly support with my gaming dollars.

For me and my game groups, it's about having fun and enjoying the game. It doesn't matter a bit whether or not the game says "Dungeons & Dragons" on it.

As for WotC, or any other company, I'm not loyal for nostalgia's sake or in support of "the brand". Either they make a product that I like, or they don't. If they consistently deliver a good value (i.e. quality & quantity), they keep my business. If they make me feel as though they value my business, that helps solidify the deal.

Bluntly, stated, WotC hasn't done any of those things from where I'm standing in a long, long time. Amazingly, my hobby, my games, my campaigns, and my fun haven't taken a hit. Paizo, on the other hand, is doing all of those things with Pathfinder.

 

[Azgulor]

See, I don't really want WotC to make a version of D&D I might like anymore *because* of Paizo.

I'd rather Paizo own D&D than WotC release yet another version.

I'd rather D&D be held by a private company that doesn't have the distractions/demands that a publicly held company does.

I'd also rather have D&D be the flagship of the company rather than a distant priority to some other line (such as Magic).

Personally, I'd prefer:

1. For Pathfinder to become the dominant RPG in the market.

2. That Pathfinder become the new "gateway RPG" for players new to the hobby.

3. That Pathfinder & Golarion become viable intellectual properties that extend beyond RPGs (books, video games, comics, movies). Caveat: If, and only if, it's done to grow the brand and drive support for the Pathfinder RPG. As in, how video game IP's like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, and Dead Space use these supporting products to drive interest in the main games. NOT, as a transformation business goal, like wanting to have your tabletop RPG morph into a MMO business model (as an example ).

I want a thriving, successful Pathfinder RPG.

I want a thriving, successful Paizo.

I'm indifferent to the longevity of Dungeons & Dragons as a product or a brand. You had a good run, I remember you fondly, but I've moved on.

 

[Ourph]

There's a lot of lapsed customers out there they could get back with relatively minor changes, so their reluctance to do so seems like a poor decision.

Changes always seem "relatively minor" when it is someone else making them.

 

[Alzrius]

Changes always seem "relatively minor" when it is someone else making them.

Hence the "relatively."

 

[DEFCON 1]

By the by, in that analogy, you're the creepy stalker who keeps making phone calls in the middle of the night.

I'd like to consider myself the Penthouse Forum reader who writes a scathing Letter To The Editor because I didn't agree with the plot choice of the story.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Personally, I do not feel that Wizards made a good module in either the 3.5 or the 4E days. They're not good adventure writers, plain and simple. As others have said, there's a serious market for good quality adventures. I subscribe off and on to Paizo's Adventure Paths when the premise of the AP intrigues me. I buy their adventures, why, because they make good adventures. I didn't buy Wizards' adventures back in the 3E days because they didn't make good adventures.

To fair they did have a few:

Expedition to the Castle Ravenloft
Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk
Red Hand of Doom

But I see your point. There were good 3x/3.5 adventures but very few of them were from Wizards.

 

[DaveMage]

Personally, I'd prefer:

1. For Pathfinder to become the dominant RPG in the market.

2. That Pathfinder become the new "gateway RPG" for players new to the hobby.

3. That Pathfinder & Golarion become viable intellectual properties that extend beyond RPGs (books, video games, comics, movies). Caveat: If, and only if, it's done to grow the brand and drive support for the Pathfinder RPG. As in, how video game IP's like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, and Dead Space use these supporting products to drive interest in the main games. NOT, as a transformation business goal, like wanting to have your tabletop RPG morph into a MMO business model (as an example ).

I want a thriving, successful Pathfinder RPG.

I want a thriving, successful Paizo.

I'm indifferent to the longevity of Dungeons & Dragons as a product or a brand. You had a good run, I remember you fondly, but I've moved on.

I could live with that. I don't want Paizo to own D&D to bring back D&D necessarily. I want them to own D&D so they can use the IP that D&D provides. I want mind flayers, slaadi, beholders, etc. in my Pathfinder game.

I want James Jacobs awesome demonomicon articles to be usable by Paizo (without any licensing restrictions).