Necromancer Games-update by Orcus

[Twowolves]

We don't know how split the fanbase is, and the only people that could give us a reasonable estimate (WotC) won't. It ain't 5%, and it ain't 50%, but it lies somewhere inbetween.

But it's enough to generate a huge ammount of support for the Pathfinder line. Two years after the announcement of 4th ed (and what should have been the deathknell for 3rd ed 3pp), Paizo has grown from 2 magazines to a line of cards, books, adventures, adventure paths, licensed minis and more. They have subscriptions for not only their Adventure Paths (the direct inheritors for the old magazines) but for maps, cards, stand alone adventures and campaign setting materials.

And ALL of that is before their own set of rules hit the shelves.

When someone asks "how fragmented is the D&D fanbase?" my answer would have to be "enough".

 

[JoeGKushner]

Part of that is that Paizo is also selling to 4e players via their maps and decks. I know I have tons of 'em.

In addition, Paizo is awesome. They have fantastic name recognition from doing Dragon and Dungeon. They're also an... I don't want to say refuge from 4e, but they're a good rallying point for those who don't like 4e.

But saying that Paizo, where several members have essentially said, "we don't need to sell as much as WoTC. Just enough to remain viable", indicates to me, that the split COULD still be huge and still "enough" to justify Paizo not only staying around, but growing.

Espeically if they continue to make those awesome books that are useful with any edition of D&D. (Classic Dungeon Monsters revisited can't get here soon enough!)

 

[Obryn]

Honestly, I don't think 3pp's would have had an easy time of things for 4e even if the game were as open as 3e.

After the initial glut of products, the market was quickly trashed. Most third party publishers had already folded by the time 4e was announced, and I don't think 4e had anything to do with their decline.... IMHO, it's 3.5 and the huge distributor issues (what was the name? Adamant?) that effectively shuttered a large number of the smaller 3pps. Even the larger ones took a beating, but as a result, individually they each got a bigger share of the market. I don't remember any new 3pp's becoming big enough to rival them after the 3.5 announcement.

Personally, I think Mongoose, Paizo, and Green Ronin are doing the smart thing. For RPGs, I don't think you can reliably sustain anything other than a hobby business using someone else's game. (Goodman is an exception - but their products are remarkably flexible, and they concentrate mainly on solid adventures, rather than crunchier bits like rule-heavy settings and supplements.) As 3.5 and 4e demonstrated, the rug can literally be pulled out at any time - after all, the parent company needs to make money, too, and no game (other than Palladium) keeps a single edition forever. I think the OGL and d20 licenses allowed these other companies to get sufficient capital and name recognition that branching out became feasible.

So yeah, I don't blame 4e for 3pps' deaths. I think that's a pretty radical revision of history. 3pp's were already dying, and those who weren't were already moving on. From what I can tell, most 3pp's would have likely still produced some materials under a better GSL, but IMHO most would have nevertheless focused on their more reliable and totally-controlled in-house systems.

-O

 

[ggroy]

Isn't exactly saying much?

When the quote in question is 4E 3PP market was pretty much DOA, it's wrong. And "is saying much". At least in Goodman's case.

It would be more than "saying much", if the present sales figures are equal to or less than the "rock bottom" period.

Starting from "rock bottom" isn't exactly saying much in general, unless the company in question is falling deeper and deeper into its own grave below the previous "rock bottom".

 

[BryonD]

Eh? Didn't Green Ronin and Mongoose directly state that part of the reason they were doing their own thing away from d20 was so that they wouldn't be shackled to what WoTC did wit hthe D&D game?


But with few exceptions, nowhere near the volume of previous products.

Agreed. But it sold *well enough* to maintain a market. 4E is failed to do that. And 3.5 had angry 3E players going against it. 4E should have hordes of thrilled 4E players in its favor.

If your comparison held water, 4E 3PP would be doing at least as well as post 3.5 stuff, not far worse, as it is.

So you agree that still solid isn't the same as selling strong?"

I agree completely that 3.5 hurt 3PPs.

Didn't Goodman post that while sales were not at the peak of 3.0 that they were significantly higher than 3.5 materials at the tail end?

Well, first of all, if you are forced to compare year 1 4E sales to the tail end of 3.5, then you have already lost.

And second of all, I already made the point that Goodman products (quick and easy modules) do, in fact, play directly in stream with 4E and should be popular. It is other products I specifically called out.

Agreed. And as Goodman said, they were better than 3.5 sales. And as WoTC seems to prove on numerous occassions, they've hit best seller lists and sold out of multiple items. Now there is no proof either way to indicate superior or worse sales than 3.5 but charting products and selling out is always better than not doing so no?

If WotC products are selling well then it is just that much more damning that these people love 4E and yet won't buy 3PP product for it.

My point is not that people won't play 4E, it is that they won't buy 3PP for it, with the limited exception of modules such as Goodman produces.

Eh? Which part of the fan base are you talking about here? The part that wants 1e reprinted as POD? The fan base that is already playing 4e? The fan base that will only play official WoTC products?

I'm talking about 4e players and the lack of them buying 3PP stuff.

 

[dm4hire]

As far as systemless campaigns goes when dealing with WotC the one thing they have to increase their chance of success is the novel tie-in. They could easily run novels for any setting they chose to work with continuing to drive the interest in the world while letting the players decide how things work in that world by choosing their own mechanics. Part of what Clark was pointing out and what I was agreeing with is they could do the systemless material with out of print settings such as Dark Sun, Spelljammer, whatever that they don't plan on getting fully detailed with. Thus selling to old fans who want the material but not the 4e or 3e or whatever edition was originally tied to it. Then to capitalize on the setting they release their own player's guide to go along with it. More in line with what they are already doing, but minus the DM portion in the campaign book we already see.

As for the ever green edition of PF it has been stated that subscriptions will definitely get the PDF. Paizo hasn't decided if they will offer it any other way yet, at least at this time.

Clark: Have you thought about working with other publishers in creating a systemless campaign?

 

[BryonD]

Isn't exactly saying much?

When the quote in question is 4E 3PP market was pretty much DOA, it's wrong. And "is saying much". At least in Goodman's case.

Yes. Saying that year 1 sales are as good as post cliff dive, nearly a decade in, 3E sales is not saying much at all.

If your entire argument is married to Goodman despite the fact that I already said that Goodman should sale well before you even responded to me, then you are not saying much either.

Are you claiming that 4E 3PPs are doing well? Show me the market for non-quick-and-easy-modules in 4E 3PP. Please. What is flying off shelves?

 

[JoeGKushner]

I'm talking about 4e players and the lack of them buying 3PP stuff.

But given the lack of publishers for 4e (at least print products cause I honestly know nothing about how the PDF side of things goes), how can that be an accurate statement. That's like putting someone on an abandoned island and then claiming that they won't eat pizza. You can't buy what hasn't been produced.

Edit: And Goodman does more than modules. They've done the Orc sourcebook for GMs and a Dragonborn sourcebook for players. In addition, they have several more such books coming (Eladrin and Tielflings next.)

If Goodman, known for their adventurers, can make it in the supplement market, it seems that well regarded supplements from the previous editions would also be easy sellers.

 

[Obryn]

If WotC products are selling well then it is just that much more damning that these people love 4E and yet won't buy 3PP product for it.

My point is not that people won't play 4E, it is that they won't buy 3PP for it, with the limited exception of modules such as Goodman produces.

I think you're missing the mark here. I don't disagree that the 3pp market is very dry - I just think the ball was rolling before 4e was even announced and the GSL issues.

Before the 4e announcement, 3pps weren't producing very much for D&D - again, with the exceptions of Goodman and Paizo. Certainly, the print market was minimal at best - Necromancer was already declining, looking at their release schedule. Not much was being sold, either, IIRC, especially if you look at the print market.

Two of biggest 3pp's - Mongoose and Green Ronin - had already branched out, seeing the writing on the wall. Mongoose was doing about a half-dozen things at once, while GR was very focused on M&M and True20. Yes, both produced materials for D&D, but I don't know if those paid the bills.

Basically, I think the die was cast before the 4e announcement. The GSL fiasco just prevented a hoped-for rebirth of an already-dying market.

My two cents...

-O

 

[Mistwell]

We don't know how split the fanbase is, and the only people that could give us a reasonable estimate (WotC) won't. It ain't 5%, and it ain't 50%, but it lies somewhere inbetween.

I disagree. It could be above 50%. And given you were trying to give a range of guesses, I think it would be fair to represent at least the guesses represented here. In this thread we have seen guesses as high as 80% I believe. So, 5% to 80% is a more representative range I'd say, with no suggestion that it is some sort of average or anything but just pure guesses.

Personally, I think 80% of people converted to 4e, but that is just my own pure guesswork.