Rolling for Initiative--'Pathfinder' and the 5th Coming of 'Dungeons & Dragons'

[Jester David]

You can't make time every time you play. It's life that doesn't let you to. I am not going to buy a game that is not simple and easy to run or design my own adventures. That, doesn't necessarily means that the players or the DM won't have options (simple does not equal simplistic). It just means that everything has to be very well organised and playtested before it goes to print.

The most time consuming part of running D&D has always been making the adventures. And I don't mean using the rules to design, but actually writing the stories and plots.
You can spend as much time as you want on the mechanical side, or you can just grab monsters of the appropriate level and throw them together. That's easy. It was easy for 3e/PF and was easy in 4e.

If you're into the game, you're invested, you will make them time. Instead of playing the little timewaster mobile game or watching TV you'll do some prep. If you procrastinate, then the problem is one of engagement to the story, not the system.
D&D the RPG doesn't need to be extra-super simple and streamlined to compete with mobile devices and games and apps. It needs to be engaging enough to involve people despite those timewaster games.

 

[PaizoCEO]

I agree. Pathfinder's main audience were the 3.5 players who didn't like the new direction of 4e. Those players already have Pathfinder. Just like 4e brought in new players that stayed with 4e (not enough, but definitely a number of people), 5e will bring in new people who will stay with 5e, *and* likely have a number of 4e players (though, again, probably not all.) I can see only a tiny fraction of that audience trying out Pathfinder, and only a fraction of the GMs coming from those easier-prep-systems sticking with Pathfinder as it stands.

Interestingly enough, the Pathfinder Core Rulebook sells more copies each quarter than in the previous quarter (with the obvious exception of the release quarter back in 2009). This includes the first quarter of this year, a time when you might expect everyone to hold off and wait until D&D5 comes out this summer. But instead, we are seeing a ton of brand new Pathfinder gamers now. More each quarter. These aren't the holdover players from 3.5. Those guys came on board back in the 2009 to 2011 timeframe. The players buying new Core Rulebooks are coming from a much more varied array of places. It blows my mind how many Pathfinder players have never played D&D. Pathfinder was their first game.

Maybe you are right and the rush of new Pathfinder players will abate with the new edition. But so far, it is just accelerating.

-Lisa

 

[Ahnehnois]

Maybe you are right and the rush of new Pathfinder players will abate with the new edition. But so far, it is just accelerating.

Obviously, PF's audience is not just people who didn't make the jump from 3.5 to 4. For somewhere around five years it's been the best D&D-like rpg on the market. That matters.

 

[Fobok]

Interestingly enough, the Pathfinder Core Rulebook sells more copies each quarter than in the previous quarter (with the obvious exception of the release quarter back in 2009). This includes the first quarter of this year, a time when you might expect everyone to hold off and wait until D&D5 comes out this summer. But instead, we are seeing a ton of brand new Pathfinder gamers now. More each quarter. These aren't the holdover players from 3.5. Those guys came on board back in the 2009 to 2011 timeframe. The players buying new Core Rulebooks are coming from a much more varied array of places. It blows my mind how many Pathfinder players have never played D&D. Pathfinder was their first game.

Maybe you are right and the rush of new Pathfinder players will abate with the new edition. But so far, it is just accelerating.

-Lisa

This is very cool to know. I do still think D&D is *the* name, it's going to bring the mass media attention and bring in a lot of new players that way, but it's nice to know Pathfinder is doing so well at bringing new players in as well.

 

[Gundark]

These conversations, while interesting are kinda flawed. This isn't Samsung vs. Apple I can easily be both a Customer of both Paizo and Wotc. Paizo would be stupid to change Much of anything in response to 5e. Their best bet is to stay the course

 

[fjw70]

To state the obvious, even if PF was worried about 5e they won't publically say that.

But I agree with the poster above me. PF will be fine if it keeps doing its own thing. They have a nice niche carved out for themselves. They bring their own new players into the hobby through there organized play program. They I'll probably eventually capture some of the new people 5e beings into the hobby since some of those people will probably prefer the crunchier PF system. On that same token 5e will probably benefit some from new players that PF brings into the hobby. So I think D&D Nd PF can co-exist very well.

 

[ExploderWizard]

The idea that you don't make money with adventure/GM supplements makes sense if not for the fact that Paizo has done exactly that for years.

The issue isn't one of making money or not, its all about how much money. Paizo does well with their adventures because they are smaller than Hasbro, upper management "gets" tabletop rpgs, and they accept a sane level of profit from such products.

I'm guessing that if some blowhard took over the company and demanded 50 million + in revenue annually from the "Pathfinder brand" or else close the doors then the company wouldn't be around that long.

It is a simple matter of having a business model that is compatible with the industry it is producing products for.

Interestingly enough, the Pathfinder Core Rulebook sells more copies each quarter than in the previous quarter (with the obvious exception of the release quarter back in 2009). This includes the first quarter of this year, a time when you might expect everyone to hold off and wait until D&D5 comes out this summer. But instead, we are seeing a ton of brand new Pathfinder gamers now. More each quarter. These aren't the holdover players from 3.5. Those guys came on board back in the 2009 to 2011 timeframe. The players buying new Core Rulebooks are coming from a much more varied array of places. It blows my mind how many Pathfinder players have never played D&D. Pathfinder was their first game.

Maybe you are right and the rush of new Pathfinder players will abate with the new edition. But so far, it is just accelerating.

-Lisa

Good to hear.

 

[Cybit]

Interestingly enough, the Pathfinder Core Rulebook sells more copies each quarter than in the previous quarter (with the obvious exception of the release quarter back in 2009). This includes the first quarter of this year, a time when you might expect everyone to hold off and wait until D&D5 comes out this summer. But instead, we are seeing a ton of brand new Pathfinder gamers now. More each quarter. These aren't the holdover players from 3.5. Those guys came on board back in the 2009 to 2011 timeframe. The players buying new Core Rulebooks are coming from a much more varied array of places. It blows my mind how many Pathfinder players have never played D&D. Pathfinder was their first game.

Maybe you are right and the rush of new Pathfinder players will abate with the new edition. But so far, it is just accelerating.

-Lisa

It doesn't hurt that there has been no active brand "D&D" game for players to currently buy, either. Right now, if someone comes into a store looking for D&D, they get shown the PF Core Book. That might explain a significant aspect of current growth.

I do agree that a healthy D&D is much better for Paizo; to people not being dragged in by friends or by family into TRPGs - D&D IS Tabletop RPGs. If D&D goes away, it will be a tough ordeal for anyone to even try to claim part of that space in the modern entertainment era.

I don't think anyone will be surprised if sales of PF are down for the first 6+ months of D&D Next's release. The key will be whether they rebound, or do they even increase in sync with D&D Next.

 

[Tovec]

It doesn't hurt that there has been no active brand "D&D" game for players to currently buy, either. Right now, if someone comes into a store looking for D&D, they get shown the PF Core Book. That might explain a significant aspect of current growth.

What? False.

I was in a store today looking at the books. There were roughly as many Pathfinder books as 4e books on the shelf and they were equally visible and displayed without one being more representative of the "D&D game" than the other. That said, I know that the word of mouth lately has turned from one of 4e to PF. My cousins who started on 4e and played it for a few years with their friends, have recently decided to go try 3.5 and if they had asked me I would have suggested PF instead - but that is hardly being prominently displayed in a store that may have shaped their decisions. If it had been they wouldn't have gone to 3.5, of which I saw only 1 book (the updated Monster Manual), they would have tried Pathfinder, which had many books - if going by that metric alone. I would say that in that regard Pathfinder is harder to break into because it doesn't have that name recognition for new players - there isn't a fancy "Dungeons and Dragons" label on it like there is for 4e and 3e books. And so it is best growing through word of mouth by more experienced player - which further highlights how strange it is that is growing so quickly, since experienced players should have already bought into the Pathfinder brand by now.

Sorry, a bit of a tangent and YMMV, but yeah.. false in "shown the PF core book," because 4e was equally displayed and that doesn't at all work the way you seem to think it does.

 

[Iosue]

What? False.

I was in a store today looking at the books. There were roughly as many Pathfinder books as 4e books on the shelf and they were equally visible and displayed without one being more representative of the "D&D game" than the other. That said, I know that the word of mouth lately has turned from one of 4e to PF. My cousins who started on 4e and played it for a few years with their friends, have recently decided to go try 3.5 and if they had asked me I would have suggested PF instead - but that is hardly being prominently displayed in a store that may have shaped their decisions. If it had been they wouldn't have gone to 3.5, of which I saw only 1 book (the updated Monster Manual), they would have tried Pathfinder, which had many books - if going by that metric alone. I would say that in that regard Pathfinder is harder to break into because it doesn't have that name recognition for new players - there isn't a fancy "Dungeons and Dragons" label on it like there is for 4e and 3e books. And so it is best growing through word of mouth by more experienced player - which further highlights how strange it is that is growing so quickly, since experienced players should have already bought into the Pathfinder brand by now.

Sorry, a bit of a tangent and YMMV, but yeah.. false in "shown the PF core book," because 4e was equally displayed and that doesn't at all work the way you seem to think it does.

I don't know if or how much of an effect it would have on PF sales, but if someone comes into a store and says, "I'm looking to get into D&D. What should I buy?" I can see the salesclerk saying, "Well, this is 4th edition D&D, but they're going to come out with a new edition in a few months. If you're looking to get into D&D right now, I recommend Pathfinder."