D&D 4E Paizo and 4e - Vive le Revolution!

[Celebrim]

How was that ever different, though? Even before the OGL, you could always just decide to play with your old stuff and buy up books that were out of print and use them instead. Granted, before the internet, eBay and Amazon stores, it used to be harder, but we had all of those long before we had the OGL.

Sure, but before the OGL you could only create stuff for yourself. Each DM was an island, and basically could only distribute his ideas word of mouth or through approved outlets (like Dragon). The OGL recognizes the right of the fans to create and distribute derivitive works based on D&D, and not only that actually allows you to make a living doing it if you are inclined. That is new.

There was third party support back in the day, but they were in a far more precarious position, and arguably any time a DM wrote something down and distributed it even not for profit he was at risk of prosecution. (Even after the OGL, some WotC legal papers seemed to imply that this was the case. I'm thinking of the rules on converting material which restricted not only distributing the IP, which made sense, but on how you chose to do the conversion - which didn't.)

I also disagree with the implication here that there's a really significant portion of the market that won't upgrade; I think they will, sales and revenue will spike because new core books sell like hotcakes compared to "yet another esoteric splatbook that we're putting out because we're not sure what else to put out anymore", etc.

The two aren't mutually exclusive. My best guess is 25-30% of the customer base won't upgrade. We don't have any information yet, and already we've got 10-15% completely opposed to the changes and polls that suggest that of 3000 or so players (many of the DMs representing groups, and that's not an insignificant portion of the market) the majority are ambivalent to or outright disapprove of almost all the rumored changes to the product. Fourth edition is extremely ambitious and is IMO a radical departure from past rules sets. It would be amazing if they came through with even half of what they want to do and had a better balanced game than 3.X (especially considering the short playtesting period being proposed).

However, unless 4e just stinks - and I doubt that will be true - the 70-90% of the fanbase that they do retain will increase thier purchases compared to the past couple of years and sales will spike. The 3.5 market on the other hand is already saturated. So to get sales out of the 10-30% that don't go to 4e, you will have to give them something exciting and new as well.

That said, I do agree that they'd be well advised to make 4e as backwards compatible (mechanically, at least) as they can, and I've kinda started to guess that that's not been a priority for them after all. That's a real shame. There's a good chance---a very good chance---that I personally will continue playing 3.5 (when I play D&D at all) maybe with a few house rules adopted from 4e.

If anything, the backwards compatibility of flavor is even more important because its that that lets you convert over your old material to the new rules set. If the flavor changes and mechanical changes occur in races, classes, monsters, planes, ect. to accompany those flavor changes, then you are doubly screwed if you don't want to abandon years worth of material. People keep talking about how 3e was a bigger change on 2e than 4e will be on 3e, but I converted my 1e homebrew material almost transparently to 3e. Books like 'Tome of Horrors' show just how close the two were, the only difference being some new additive subsystems. There were a few multiclassed characters that became hard to convert, but basically that was my only real problem.

I would be very surprised if that's true of the conversion to 3e to 4e. When people talk about how we've seen such minor changes that it doesn't even feel like a new edition to them, my mind just boggles.

But I don't have any illusions about what that means in terms of the market in general. My tastes and preferences aren't indicative of the market as a whole by a long shot.

No, but there are probably nearly 1000 DMs on Enworld alone that feel much as you or I do, and that represents 1000's of players. We may not be indicative of the whole market, but sheesh there aren't more than a few million players across the whole nation. Non-random sampling we may be, but surely it tells you something. There were a few 2e grognards that didn't like the direction 3e was going in, and there are still a few 1e and OD&D holdouts supporting products like Hackmaster or OSRIC. But my experience was that by the time 3e came out, the fan base had been largely clamoring for a new edition for years. The general feeling was that not only was it time, but it was about 5 years past time and that the prior edition had been a mistake. I don't get that same impression now. Rather, this is more like the switch between 1e and 2e where - even though the actual changes were tiny (probably too tiny) - there was significant fan outrage because almost noone liked the direction of those changes (taking away options instead of adding new ones).

 

[Reynard]

I don't know whether the possibilities suggested in th OP are likely or not, and how successful they'd be, but I will say this: Necromancer Games, paizo and Goodman games will all be responsible for whether or not i bother giving 4E an honest go. If any of those companies -- all companies that share, broadly at least, my opinion of what makes D&D D&D -- produce product that they stand behind as being "New rules, classic gaming", I will give them a shot.

I hope WotC is aware of this as they make decisions about SRDs and third party support: those third parties, the ones trusted by the D&D fanbase for the last 7 years, will have a significant impact on how and when people gravitate toward the new rules set. Don't leave them out in the cold, and don't try and iron-hand their product.

 

[Shroomy]

Didn't Mike Mearls say that the final development draft (or is it design) of the PHB was due today 10-5? I doubt that WotC would release anything to the 3rd party companies until this step was completed. I would think that WoTC would release more information regarding 4e within the next month or two. Is that enough time for the other publishers, I don't know?

 

[PaSquall]

*Note: I am going to call it right now. The first computer/video game to be labelled as being based on the 4E ruleset -- you know it is already in development -- will be a Guild Wars clone.

Highly doubtful. I'm pretty sure it will be Neverwinter Nights 3.

 

[Celebrim]

Let me be completely clear about my position:

1) I'm convinced WotC is going to deliberately screw the third party vendors. Why do I believe this? Because if I was in charge of WotC, I'd do the same thing. From WotC's perspective, the only thing that was unsuccessful about the 3rd edition launch was that being open about the rules set very early on allowed 3rd party vendors to get a jump on them with high quality products that were in direct competition with thier product line up. Before they could blink, there were high quality alternative monster manuals and setting supplements coming out and getting prominent product placement along side thier material. As company, you know they couldn't have been happy about that. I wouldn't have been.

2) A good portion, perhaps as much as 50% of the community, either thought it was too early for a new edition to the game because they were happy with what they had invested in this one, or else if they wanted a new edition (like me) they expected something incremental and largely backwards compatible. There are obviously changes that need to be made, but more of what we have works than doesn't. D20 is the market leader right now. It's not like late 2e where the game is losing out to more innovative products from companies like WW.

3) That is not to say that 50% of the community won't convert unless WotC just absolutely screws up. New editions are exciting. Many fans collect almost everything that comes out. But I think it is fair to say that more players won't convert to 4e, than those that failed to convert 2e to 3e and possibly more even than failed to convert from 1e to 2e. Nonetheless, it strikes me that 4e is a very 'anti-grognard' rules set that has made the decision to not bother with 'grognard capture'. Love it or leave it.

4) I really hope 4e is successful. D&D's failure would hurt the whole industry. It wouldn't be good for anyone. Nonetheless, given the wholesale abandonment of 30 years of flavor and concepts, for better or worse, I'm convinced that there will be a significant market for a incremental 3.75 market and that that market - while it will never be as big as 4e - will be larger than the markets for alternative 3e products like True20, AU, etc.

 

[catsclaw227]

While I do think there will remain a small market for 3.5 stuff, I think Paizo is too large a company to serve it profitably. I strongly suspect Paizo's best interests are in converting to 4.0, and I think the whole community is better served playing one game rather than a bunch of them. Ideally, 4.0 will be that game and people will be happy.

Paizo is not an official licensee anymore. We can't publish Greyhawk, we can't publish the Great Wheel, and we can't carry the banner for all of the sacred cows WotC is killing.

What we CAN do is use the new rules to create exciting material in the SPIRIT of the game we love and have loved most of our lives. We're looking forward to a chance to do that, and we expect that the new rules will allow us to.

--Erik Mona
Publisher
Paizo Publishing, LLC

This is what I expect. I am a huge fan of Paizo, Necromancer and Goodman Games, and I prove it with my wallet. I have almost every Dungeon and Dragon magazine during the Paizo era, I am a Gamemastery and Pathfinder subscriber and I buy flip-mats and other sundry items.

I also own about over 40 different Necromancer products, most of which I have purchased in both print AND pdf.

I own about 25 Goodman DCCs in print and pdf.

I dig old school feel.

And I am going to play D&D 4e. I hope they make products that support 4e, because I will buy from 3rd party suppliers that will support the new edition. I am not really interested in a 3.75 edition. I have all the "3.75" style stuff I want already with the various PHB2, ToM, Bo9S, Reserve feats, skill uses, etc.

And, like Mona, I can envision a situation where by WotC failing to get us stuff in a timely fashion that it makes it real difficult for me to embrace 4e. That isnt my goal. Just the opposite. But I cant keep sitting here on some killer products--Tegel Manor, The Abyss (oh, hadnt heard about that one yet, had you?), etc.-- and wait for WotC to get me to 4e. If things take too long, I cant just wait. And if I cant do 4e, then just staying 3.5 doesnt make sense either. Because once 4e does launch, without me on board, that system dies in a true commercial sense. Maybe pdf publishers thrive. But distributors are going to have a very limited appetite for 3.5 products following launch of 4e. So if I cant do 4e, and if 3.5 isnt really a long term viable solution, then it makes sense for Mona and I (and maybe others, and maybe such discussions have already been had months ago, but I'm not saying) to do 4e "our way"--aka 3.75. In other words, to make a competing system and to support that. Now, make sure you understand this I DONT WANT TO DO THAT. I WANT to support 4e. But that isnt my call, its WotC's call.

Clark -- What would be a drop dead date for WOTC to be able to provide the SRD or equivilant, before you need to embark on "3.75" development and wait for 6-9 months until moving to 4e? Would it be December? January? March? I imagine that Origins and GenCon are important launch cons, so what would be the cut-of date?

Erik -- Same question.... What would Paizo's cut off date for 4e SRD material be, to make Pathfinder 3, 4e compatible?

 

[Reynard]

Highly doubtful. I'm pretty sure it will be Neverwinter Nights 3.

5 bucks says it is called Neverwinter Nights SomethingSomething and it plays a lot more like Guild Wars (hence "clone").

 

[ShinHakkaider]

That said, I do agree that they'd be well advised to make 4e as backwards compatible (mechanically, at least) as they can, and I've kinda started to guess that that's not been a priority for them after all. That's a real shame. There's a good chance---a very good chance---that I personally will continue playing 3.5 (when I play D&D at all) maybe with a few house rules adopted from 4e.

But I don't have any illusions about what that means in terms of the market in general. My tastes and preferences aren't indicative of the market as a whole by a long shot.

This is pretty much how I feel.

At the beginning I was hating 4E, now? not so much. This doesnt mean that I'm a joiner, in fact it's quite the opposite, I still have no intention of picking up 4E.

However, 4E has started to make me look long and hard at my 3.5 game and look at adding / changing some things about my game to make it more fun. I've added the Action Point system and have encouraged the use of Reserve Feats as well. I have a metric ton of 3.5 books and my players are pretty open to change as long as it helps the game move along smoother and contributes to their fun. In another few months when the 4E SRD is out I'll look it over and see what else I can pillage. Unlike a few die hards, my biggest beef with 4E isnt the change of fluff (I can always use the old fluff with the new mechanics) it's that 4E is going to invalidate my 3.5 books. I'm not looking to have to convert the Age of Worms, Pathfinder & Game Mastery Modules, Rappan Athuk, Savage Tide, Red Hand of Doom, all of my DCC adventures and all of my Necromancer adventures to 4E. But if I can use them with whatever changes I make then that's fine.

I lurk on the 4E boards in hope of actually finding stuff about the system to like, that will win me over, so far that's not happening, but like I said before it's made me look at the game that I'm running and I'm feeling freer about making changes. Next up: Book of Iron Might by Malhavoc Press...

 

[mhensley]

The idea of someone producing a 3.75 makes exactly no sense. I would have to think that the majority of players who decide to stick with 3.5 will not want to switch to 3.75 for most of the same reasons they don't switch to 4e - they're happy with 3.5 and they don't want to buy new books. In the 6 months to a year it would take someone to produce a 3.75, they will have lost more business than if they just had to wait an extra couple months after the release of 4th to produce compatible stuff. It all sounds like a babyish temper-tantrum to me. "You'd better give us the 4e SRD soon or we'll just make our own game!" Wah!

Good luck with that. Maybe you should have thought about producing your own game a few years ago like most of the other d20 companies did and diversified some.

 

[catsclaw227]

The two aren't mutually exclusive. My best guess is 25-30% of the customer base won't upgrade. We don't have any information yet, and already we've got 10-15% completely opposed to the changes and polls that suggest that of 3000 or so players (many of the DMs representing groups, and that's not an insignificant portion of the market) the majority are ambivalent to or outright disapprove of almost all the rumored changes to the product. Fourth edition is extremely ambitious and is IMO a radical departure from past rules sets. It would be amazing if they came through with even half of what they want to do and had a better balanced game than 3.X (especially considering the short playtesting period being proposed).

I haven't seen a poll that suggests that 3000 or so players are ambivilent or outright disapprove. Could you point me in that direction?

Also, how are you deriving your best guess estimates above? As already stated, the best statistical analysis of this would be in sales numbers. How has the announcement of 4e affected online or FLGS sales of 3e content? I think this could say a lot about how much market there will be for a 3.75 product.

I have started and run my own business and we had up to 40 full-time employees at one time. I would, IN NO WAY, bank my companies assests and the livelyhood of my employees on a roll of the dice (so to speak). And with the information we have today, a 3.75 version would be a risk I could never justify, and with the information at hand, would not be able to justify to any current outside investors.

I really hope that WOTC gives a select group of quality 3rd party companies an early release, and allow them to help seed/nurture the 4e market.

1) I'm convinced WotC is going to deliberately screw the third party vendors. Why do I believe this? Because if I was in charge of WotC, I'd do the same thing. From WotC's perspective, the only thing that was unsuccessful about the 3rd edition launch was that being open about the rules set very early on allowed 3rd party vendors to get a jump on them with high quality products that were in direct competition with thier product line up. Before they could blink, there were high quality alternative monster manuals and setting supplements coming out and getting prominent product placement along side thier material. As company, you know they couldn't have been happy about that. I wouldn't have been.

I disagree with a few of these points:

1. I think that allowing a select group of 3rd party companies to launch products in parallel to WOTC will allow the fans of that publisher to feel compfortable with 4e and then eventually come on board whole hog. This will help once and future grognards as well as 3e purists to trust 4e.

2. The Creature Catalog, one of the more well know books to beat WOTC to the punch was NOT considered high quality. It had some neat ideas and sparked the Scarred Lands growth, but its quality was poor or marginal at best.

3. Third party setting supplements will only aid in the sales of the core books. And aid in some of the change control I mentioned in #1 above.