Pathfinder OGL/3.5 RPG system from Paizo

[jdrakeh]

One thing I have often expressed disinterest in my entire 20+ years of playing D&D is that they continue to stick with 3 core books.

Ditto. And as good as some of those alternate PHB approaches to OGL fantasy are, they're crippled by the fact that they're not complete, standalone, games in one book -- you pretty much have to own two of the three D&D core books to get much use out of them. I know that there was a time when I was really keen on IH but had zero interest in D&D (and no longer owned the core books). It was purely frustrating knowing that I had to buy at least two other books from a different game line (that I had no interest in) to make IH complete. It looks like Paizo is side-stepping this conflict of interests (so to speak) nicely with the 'complete in one book' approach. Kudos to them for taking this route.

 

[Sunderstone]

Bear in mind that Pathfinder is NOT D&D. Or rather its D&D in the same way that Castles and Crusades is, or Arcana Evolved is, or any number of D&D fantasy clones.

.

yeah thats true but 4E "is NOT D&D" either. Its Warlocks and Warlords under the D&D label because they can get away with it.

 

[Dragonblade]

I disagree with this assessment. First, this annoucement does affect 4e because Paizo is one of the most (if not the most) significant independent publishers supporting the Dungeons and Dragons marketplace. So, not only are they taking a stand to support 3.5, they're also going to be less active in supporting the 4e market than they otherwise would have been.

Paizo is significant only when it comes to the 3rd party OGL marketplace. But the vast majority of D&D players don't buy 3rd party OGL products. They buy only WotC product. Don't make the mistake of confusing gaming opinion on EN World with the majority of D&D players.

Most of my game group doesn't know or care about Paizo. Of them, I'm really the only one truly plugged into the wider d20 gamer community. They only care about D&D and WotC. They are aware of the OGL and such. Most of them also play M&M and like Spycraft. But when it comes to d20 fantasy, there is ONLY D&D, as far as they are concerned.

We have one grognard anti-4e holdout, who was happy when I said that Paizo would be supporting 3.5 (after I explained to him what Paizo was since he didn't even know), but when I asked if that means he will be an actively buying customer, he admitted probably not. He likes the *idea* of 3.5 support but when it came time to put his dollars where his mouth was, he wouldn't commit. He is already satisfied with his 3.5 book collection and runs a homebrew set mostly in Greyhawk.

 

[Ourph]

I suggest to you Paizo understands the market better than you do, then. How viable is publishing adventures and supplements for a game you can't buy? How can groups form with a game you have to tell them they have to go to ebay to get? This is less about viability of existing games and continued support of evolving and new groups.

I do, however, expect that many groups WILL continue to play 3.5 and buy Paizo adventures.

If the purpose is simply to keep the rulebooks in-print after they disappear from the store shelves, the best answer, IMO, would be to keep Pathfinder as close to the 3.5 RAW as possible, rather than do a 3.75 that's not directly compatible with anything anyone is currently playing. I still don't see any advantage to doing another 3.5 alternative game.

OTOH, I can see quite a few advantages to doing a slightly trimmed-down D&D 3.5 all in one book after the WotC books switch over. The major modifications to the core system are what is confusing me. Changing too much just makes Pathfinder another fantasy heartbreaker.

 

[occam]

If I said Paizo to anyone in my group they would say "bless you". Outside of the hardcore D&D crowd who haunt messageboards, they have little name recognition.

I disagree. WotC putting Dragon and Dungeon magazines into their hands set them on the map very well. The move was initially unpopular and there was a noticeable difference in terms of art and layout. Both magazines appear to have not only succeeded but excelled under their stewardship and there was a great deal of people who were disappointed when the magazine left the newsstands to go online, once more under WotC. People who knew Dragon and Dungeon know Paizo. This is DMs and this is players. Paizo is not small and of all the D20 publishers, they are the one that sits best to challenge WotC in this manner.

My experience matches that of mhensley. Much as I've enjoyed Paizo's products, I'm probably the only one in my group who even knows their name, much less anything about what they're doing now. And I still haven't seen any post-Dragon/Dungeon Paizo products in mainstream bookstores, which I thought was part of the plan with selling the Pathfinder products as books instead of magazines. Paizo is big in the third-party D&D world... not so big otherwise, even to many people who play D&D regularly.

They said themselves that upcoming Pathfinder products will be backward compatible. This means that you won't have to invest in a new set of rules to continue playing new Pathfinder adventures.

That's what WotC said about 3.5. Then they came out with lots of little changes to classes, skills, feats, spells, combat rules, etc. that retained an initial surface appearance of compatibility, but eventually required conversion of, or at least a good look at, all previously published adventures, classes, PrCs, and monsters that you wanted to use. When Pathfinder adventures start coming out in 2009 with different sets of skills, different class abilities, and more, it'll be the same thing all over again. 3.5 materials and 3.5+ PRPG materials won't mix seamlessly.

I just wonder, what's the point? I can understand people wanting to stay with 3.5; I haven't decided whether to switch myself, yet. But why reproduce what many considered a mistake by WotC when they tweaked 3.0 into an incompatible near-clone? Stick with 3.5, warts and all, or do something new and clearly different.

 

[Dragonblade]

yeah thats true but 4E "is NOT D&D" either. Its Warlocks and Warlords under the D&D label because they can get away with it.

But thats the real key, isn't it? They have the name and the power.

And although 4e may not be for you. It will be for the vast majority of tabletop D&D players.

MMO/Anime/Videogame feel? Perhaps...

But there is a reason that MMO's like WoW have a subscriber base in the millions. There is a reason the Manga/Anime section at my local B&N has gone from a couple of shelves in the graphic novel section 6 years ago to two ENTIRE aisles that makes it bigger than the cookbook section. And there is a reason why the video game industry makes BILLIONS and has surpassed Hollywood in profits.

The gamer elite at EN World or RPG.net may sniff their nose in disdain. But they are a distinct minority. Enough of a minority to support Paizo, but not enough to be more than a gnat buzzing around WotC.

 

[Erik Mona]

That's why it's an open playtest. If the Alpha pushes the rules too far away from what the audience wants, we'll change it.

--Erik

 

[Psion]

But thats the real key, isn't it? They have the name and the power.

And although 4e may not be for you. It will be for the vast majority of tabletop D&D players.

MMO/Anime/Videogame feel? Perhaps...

But there is a reason that MMO's like WoW have a subscriber base in the millions. There is a reason the Manga/Anime section at my local B&N has gone from a couple of shelves in the graphic novel section 6 years ago to two ENTIRE aisles that makes it bigger than the cookbook section. And there is a reason why the video game industry makes BILLIONS and has surpassed Hollywood in profits.

The gamer elite at EN World or RPG.net may sniff their nose in disdain. But they are a distinct minority. Enough of a minority to support Paizo, but not enough to be more than a gnat buzzing around WotC.

And you have figures on "vast"-ness and "distinct"-ness of these "orities"?

 

[BryonD]

And although 4e may not be for you. It will be for the vast majority of tabletop D&D players.

I've seen zero evidence to support this.

The gamer elite at EN World or RPG.net may sniff their nose in disdain.

Funny, I've got to come to EN World to find people who LIKE 4e.

But they are a distinct minority. Enough of a minority to support Paizo, but not enough to be more than a gnat buzzing around WotC.

I'm not as optimistic as Whisperfoot. But I think it will easily be enough to support Paizo. The real question is, will chopped up fan base leave enough to support WotC?

 

[Dragonblade]

And you have figures on "vast"-ness and "distinct"-ness of these "orities"?

I'm not saying Paizo won't be successful. I think they will do fine. I may even pick up their book myself.

But do you honestly believe that they will eat into D&D market share when they are releasing a 3.5 d20 knock-off that doesn't even come out until a year after the release of 4e?