D&D 4E Paizo and 4e.

[Shortman McLeod]

If they decide to do their own take on OGL Fantasy 2008 (Pathfinder RPG, 3.75, whatever you want to call it),

There again lies the power of brand strength. Just try to round up a group of gamers (especially casual gamers) to play "Pathfinder RPG" or "OGL Fantasy 3.75". Yech.

That's one reason I've never been able to get excited about Castles & Crusades. Brand name recognition isn't there; new recruits are thus hard to find.

 

[Matthan]

I think it's obvious the 3.5 path you're talking about Matthan is the less rewarding on the short term. If you read carefully Erik's post, you'll find out that the real concerns are about long term survival for Paizo. He's speaking about 5th, 4.5... whatever edition comes next, not 4E.

That's the real gamble we're talking about: everyone will agree that 4.0 is the path for instant reward. 3.X OGL however provides a path that is harder, but ultimately could build a solid, long-lasting niche costumer base Paizo could build upon.

The point of the questions Erik is asking is exactly how niche the costumer base is at the moment, what exactly is the size of the potential market we're talking about here? That's the real question. If Pathfinder, GameMastery and retailing can make Paizo survive for a while, they can hope to build a sustaining customer base. Is there potential for that? That's the real question, I think.

And I think that's an honest appraisal. I even talked about it a page or so ago before things went all angry. I doubt the ability of any publisher to launch a system in direct competition with D&D 4E in terms of market timing which is what Paizo would essentially be doing if they decided they needed to make a new Player's Handbook or 3.75. That is, unless they delay those things for several months at which point, the damage could already be done. I'm curious how someone would market that. Intentionally supporting an old system is a rough thing to spin into something appealing. The other issue that I see is that their products mainly market to DMs, which is fine, but producing on a periodical level means that their customers are getting a lot of content yearly. Possibly more than they can use. It would be interesting to see whether Pathfinder has subscription troubles around each six month mark as DMs jump off and new ones, hopefully, jump on. By serving a shrinking market, you could hurt your ability to replace anyone who jumps off after having enough content to last them awhile.

It could work though, but it's my understanding that most of the smaller RPGs, (Mutants and Masterminds, Conan, and such) do not produce a lot in the way of adventures or modules. They produce source books. I could be wrong there. But if you're basing your main product line around adventures and you want to reach the most potential buyers (which is generally considered a quarter or even generously half of the RPG audience when you're dealing with adventures), you need to market towards the game that has the most DMs which, in most likelihood, will be D&D 4E.

To me, it absolutely makes sense to diversify your business plan so that you are not dependent on the whims of another company five years from now. I'm questioning the wisdom of doing that in such a way as to take on the industry leader. In my mind, it would make more sense to convert to 4E if at all possible to hopefully maintain or increase your revenue (and adventures will be in short supply with the new edition so its a good time). While this is going on, have your other system (fantasy or otherwise) in development so that it is ready to ship once the heat has left 4E.

The one thing that I realized that I'm not sure is being taken into consideration is that I am of the belief that Erik Mona and the Paizo crew are doing their dream job. From reading Mona's posts, I think that there is nothing else that he would rather be doing than making stuff for D&D. His fears seem to revolve around not being able to do that in the way he views D&D as much as they are financial. Which makes sense, honestly. Who wants to give up or compromise their dream job? It's easy for me to say, wait and make an game that fills a niche that you can control, but that means nothing, if all they are passionate about is creating amazing fantasy stories.

I just can't see a 3.75 move working. I could see it sustaining itself if it was already in place. I just can't see launching it with the chips against it like this. I'm not a businessman though. I don't envy the decision facing Paizo.

 

[Shortman McLeod]

Actually to me it sounds like they are intentionally trying to "freeze out" some of the 3rd party "competition" and re-establish some sort of monopoly. If 3rd party publishers don't have any products for 4e at launch they'll die (especially the smaller ones). If they have to wait for 4e to be released like anybody else, they've got a long, long profitless wait before they can publish 4e material. To WotC-- this would be a good thing-- make Wizards THE company, while others must publish (something other than 4e successfully) or perish. At launch, the ONLY source of 4e stuff will be WotC-- I believe this is the plan.

They've already stated that an SRD won't be available for many months after launch, and I suspect they may even decide not to launch one, or make it cost money. (And, I am not trying to say WotC is evil, just that I suspect this is what they're up to).

Agreed, 100%. Frankly, from WotC's viewpoint, I can't see any benefit whatsoever to having third parties publish material for D&D. All it does is takes gaming dollars out of WotC's hands and into the hands of smaller companies.

 

[The Little Raven]

And even more pathetic is that after loving it for a few years they would begin to complain of how broken it is as soon as WotC announced the 5th edition of organic soap recipes.

Years of experience with something help you discover it's strengths and it's flaws. When talking about a new edition, you discuss the flaws that you're addressing, because the strengths are staying where they are, so there's no point spreading tons of information about how much some things are staying the same. You talk about what will be different, and in the case of game development, that means fixes. This is nothing new. Every single RPG that has come out with a second edition has done this (including Mutants and Masterminds).

 

[Shortman McLeod]

You talk about what will be different, and in the case of game development, that means fixes.

Man, I hate that metaphor. And it *is* a metaphor, you know. A car engine may *literally* need "fixing", but when you're talking about pen and paper RPGs, the term "fixes" simply becomes a metaphor for "changes that we think need to be made". Whether they actually *need* to be made or not is, of course, almost totally subjective. Hell, there are folks still playing AD&D 1e and 2e (not to mention OD&D) who think those games are just fine.

But once a company decides to release a new edition, suddenly they are talking about "rebooting" and "fixing" and "evolving" the game. All of them, manipulative metaphors.

And by the way, I'm *excited* about 4e, mainly because I can't DM 3.5 without collapsing into a nervous pile of quivering jelly. But just because I look forward to 4e doesn't mean I think 3.5 needs "fixing".

Please.

 

[Toryx]

Personally, I would love it if 3.5 and 4th eds could co-exist. I realize that from a pure commercial business viewpoint that's probably not very practical, but I love 3.5 ed and I really like a lot of what I've read about 4th ed. I'd like to keep playing Paizo's APs in 3.5 for the next few years even as I delve into 4th ed and the possibilities there.

I'll freely admit, however, that I'm not a businessman, nor am I a capitalist. I don't know what the right choice is. But I do think that Paizo's willingness to be open to options and customer feedback is a good way to go.

 

[Shortman McLeod]

I'll freely admit, however, that I'm not a businessman, nor am I a capitalist.

Where are you posting from? North Korea?

 

[kenmarable]

Actually to me it sounds like they are intentionally trying to "freeze out" some of the 3rd party "competition" and re-establish some sort of monopoly. If 3rd party publishers don't have any products for 4e at launch they'll die (especially the smaller ones). If they have to wait for 4e to be released like anybody else, they've got a long, long profitless wait before they can publish 4e material. To WotC-- this would be a good thing-- make Wizards THE company, while others must publish (something other than 4e successfully) or perish. At launch, the ONLY source of 4e stuff will be WotC-- I believe this is the plan.

They've already stated that an SRD won't be available for many months after launch, and I suspect they may even decide not to launch one, or make it cost money. (And, I am not trying to say WotC is evil, just that I suspect this is what they're up to).

Except for the fact that every professional in the industry (not just WotC employees) who have commented on this has clearly denied it? I keep hearing this over and over and over again - except from any of the parties actually involved.

Just because it's a convenient conspiracy theory, that don't make it true.

 

[Matthan]

Agreed, 100%. Frankly, from WotC's viewpoint, I can't see any benefit whatsoever to having third parties publish material for D&D. All it does is takes gaming dollars out of WotC's hands and into the hands of smaller companies.

Every product that comes out from the other companies fuels back into WotC in Core book sales (specifically Player's Handbook). That was the idea behind it and that's been the experience of the experiment. It is a little hard to wrap our heads around at times, but it has worked. The reason 3(0 and 5) have been so successful is the way the OGL worked in their favor. Think about it, the grand majority of role players have played 3rd edition in one form or the other for most of its cycle. They might have bought supplements from other companies, but the core books maintained themselves as continual strong sellers.

I'm curious about the effect that the alternate PHBs had though. That could be one of the reasons they are arguing about the new OGL. Maybe they want to prevent that much freedom. After all, if you have an alternate PHB (Arcana Evolved, Iron Heroes, etc...) then you don't need to buy the core book.

 

[Doug McCrae]

And even more pathetic is that after loving it for a few years they would begin to complain of how broken it is as soon as WotC announced the 5th edition of organic soap recipes.

5 > 4 > 3 isn't a contradiction.