Pathfinder 1E Paizo = Play WoTC = Pay?

[MerricB]

Neither company, in my opinion, is fully utilizing the PDF format though. Unless the Dungeon adventurers have changed since I last looked, you're still not getting full scale maps. And that's ditto for Paizo too last time I looked. The PDF should take full advance of the fact that the customer is printing the product, not the company. the fact that several end users have pointed out methods for end users to do just that proves that it can be done and probably done better on the front end.

It's probably worth mentioning here that the last D&D adventure I ran (a Living Forgotten Realms one last weekend) I did entirely from my laptop. I never printed it out!

That said, I'm surprised that "print resolution" maps haven't been forthcoming from either side...

Cheers!

 

[Wik]

I'm just getting ready to run out the door, but one last thing here was bugging me, so I figured I'd post it before I leave so I'm not thinking about it for the next hour.

This is a great thread topic that suffers from unfortunate wording in the initial post. I've been a victim of it myself in the past. I know for a fact that Joe has made some very insightful posts in the past, and that he is not trying to start a fight here.

The thread has been rather civil (for the most part) so far, and I think it would be well served for later posters to keep this in mind, and just acknowledge the fact that the initial post could have been better phrased. Let's not argue over phrasings and wordings, and instead focus on the core of the argument: Do Paizo and WotC have different aims in releasing their products? Products that are, superficially at least, the same? And why do those differences arise? And what role do economics have in this?

Or something.

I'd like to hear both sides on the issue, without it turning into the usual 3.5 vs 4e thing, because that's really not the issue here.

Okay. Need to go for my run. Have to quit stalling.

 

[BenBrown]

This isn't a 3.5 vs 4e argument. This is a company versus company argument. But it's not Coke versus Pepsi, as it might initially appear. It's more like Coke versus Gatorade. Both are beverages, but they're aimed at different audiences.

Since 2001 Gatorade has been owned by PepsiCo.

 

[Wik]

Since 2001 Gatorade has been owned by PepsiCo.

After writing that, I realized that was probably going to be the case.

 

[Orius]

Probably it's related to one of the most significant differences between the companies. WotC is owned by Hasbro, which is a publicly traded company that needs to please stockholders. Paizo is a small company that only needs to please its customer base.

So WotC needs to focus more on good profits so Hasbro's stockholders don't get cranky, and it's easier to do that by focusing on quantity over quality. That doesn't necessarily mean they're shoveling out crap, though. The subscription model is probably a good way for them to maintain a steady profit stream in a hobby that doesn't really produce huge numbers, even if they're at the top of said hobby by a long shot.

Paizo OTOH, is small enough that they don't need to worry about this as much. They still have to worry about profits, but since they're not part of a huge publicly traded company, they can get away with narrower margins, take more risks, or cater to a specific set of buyers.

 

[doctorhook]

FWIW, I completely didn't understand the thread title until I got here. Heck, I'm still not sure I understand it.

 

[FireLance]

FWIW, I completely didn't understand the thread title until I got here. Heck, I'm still not sure I understand it.

The thread title is missing a semicolon or other separator. When I first read it, I wondered why "Paizo" is equal to "Play WotC" is equal to "Pay".

This will likely be my only contribution to this thread.

 

[Wraith Form]

I'm just getting ready to run out the door, but one last thing here was bugging me, so I figured I'd post it before I leave so I'm not thinking about it for the next hour.

This is a great thread topic that suffers from unfortunate wording in the initial post. I've been a victim of it myself in the past. I know for a fact that Joe has made some very insightful posts in the past, and that he is not trying to start a fight here.

The thread has been rather civil (for the most part) so far, and I think it would be well served for later posters to keep this in mind, and just acknowledge the fact that the initial post could have been better phrased. Let's not argue over phrasings and wordings, and instead focus on the core of the argument: Do Paizo and WotC have different aims in releasing their products? Products that are, superficially at least, the same? And why do those differences arise? And what role do economics have in this?

Or something.

I'd like to hear both sides on the issue, without it turning into the usual 3.5 vs 4e thing, because that's really not the issue here.

Well said.

 

[doctorhook]

The thread title is missing a semicolon or other separator. When I first read it, I wondered why "Paizo" is equal to "Play WotC" is equal to "Pay".

Oh! I see what you're saying! It should be "Paizo = Play; WotC = Pay?"

...I kinda wish I didn't understand it now. This new reading offends me; it's one of those unnecessarily provocative thread titles designed to bait suckers like myself into getting mad and then posting something controversial (again).

Why always the WotC-hate/Paizo-love here in General, guys?

 

[Wik]

Oh! I see what you're saying! It should be "Paizo = Play; WotC = Pay?"

...I kinda wish I didn't understand it now. This new reading offends me; it's one of those unnecessarily provocative thread titles designed to bait suckers like myself into getting mad and then posting something controversial (again).

Why always the WotC-hate/Paizo-love here in General, guys?

Read the thread, though. The OP actually admits to being a 4e player who uses a good chunk of Paizo. It's just one of those unfortunate mistakes.

This isn't a "hate" topic, at all.