Should FLGS have Edition Bias?

[jaerdaph]

Or maybe it was something mundane like having a better profit margins on Pathfinder than D&D instead of an edition war...

Or, something as mundane as trying to move inventory that *isn't* selling. It's a two-way street in business.

 

[pawsplay]

Just came back from my FLGS where I had an interesting experience. There were some guys in there that were apparently shopping around for a gaming system. I didn't catch the entire conversation, so I may have a few facts wrong, but what I gathered was that they had been 3.5 D&D players at some point and were looking into the current options. The guy in the FLGS that was helping them pretty much went straight for Pathfinder and tried to sell that to them, going into the strengths of the game, the changes they made from 3.5 and how it was such an improvement, yada yada yada. He barely talked about 4E, only mentioning that he'd tried it for a few months and lost interest in running it. I really had to bite my tongue to keep from speaking my mind, and maybe I should have, but it's not my store and really none of my business what they want to push off their shelves. But I thought the whole scene odd, given their stock of 4E material was much larger than their Pathfinder stock. I got the impression that they weren't trying to sell a product, they were trying to sell a version of D&D that they preferred.

Now, I've only played Pathfinder once and didn't really enjoy the experience, not because of the game, but because of the guy running it, so I don't necessarily have anything against Pathfinder. But as a 4E DM, I kinda felt, at that moment, that my FLGS wasn't there for me.

Anyway, taking personal feelings out of the equation, I think that a better approach might have been to discuss the benefits of both systems, ask the customers what they liked about 3.5 and what they were looking for in a current game and then tout the pros/cons of each of the systems. Heck, they carry Dragon Age, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and a few other fantasy systems, but none of those were mentioned either.

Anyway, just thought I'd share. Thanks for listening.

Isn't it logical for 3.5 players to be more interested in Pathfinder than in 4e? Pathfinder is, after all, more similar. It would be ideal if you could sell them both Pathfinder and 4e anyway.

As for speculating about inventory, that is fruitless. 4e is probably selling more than Pathfinder, but there are many stores where the reverse is true. Without checking the store owner's inventory, there is no way of knowing which is the case.

Hey, my philosophy on retail is very simple. Soft selling is where it's at. If you can build a possible relationship with customers, you make lots of money. You start by understanding their needs, you help them become informed, and then you let them make a good choice for them.

 

[Henry]

Isn't it logical for 3.5 players to be more interested in Pathfinder than in 4e? Pathfinder is, after all, more similar.

Whether we play PF or 4E now, most of us D&D players used to be 3E or 3.5 players at some point, right?

 

[Ourph]

I didn't catch the entire conversation, so I may have a few facts wrong, but what I gathered was that they had been 3.5 D&D players at some point and were looking into the current options.

I would say it makes a lot of sense to sell 3.5 players on Pathfinder. If you can tell your customer "This game will be easy to learn because it's very similar to this other game you already know." that's an incentive for the customer to make a purchase that other options might not offer.

 

[Steel_Wind]

Should there be edition bias? I don't know about that. "Should" is an awfully BIG word.

Now, does it happen? Hell yes. It happens a lot in the retail end of this business. It has a significant effect on store sales (generally) and can have a very significant effect on store sales (specifcally), too.

This retailer bias was discussed at some length in a Q and A session by Erik Mona of Paizo Publishing at the "Future of the Pathfinder Brand" seminar this past Gencon. (The seminar and Mona's comments are included in full in Episode 005 of the Chronicles: Pathfinder Podcast). Mona's belief is that at the retail level, game stores often reflect the biases of the store owner and sometimes no amount of rational discussion or marketing efforts can overcome it.

Coming back on the other side of that store owner's recommendations, there are a huge number of stores where Pathfinder would never be mentioned (isn't even carried) and 4E is the default recommendation.

*shrugs* It is what it is. In the end, this is a hobby where fan biases run extremely deep. Be that with publishers, distributors, retailers... and yes, websites, too.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Whether we play PF or 4E now, most of us D&D players used to be 3E or 3.5 players at some point, right?

At what point will that no longer be true I wonder. The game can't expand by cannablizing past players forever.

 

[Mark CMG]

Most game stores that carry more than just specific product lines (so, setting aside GW stores) cannot afford to have a bias and need to sell what they can, to whoever they can, every time someone is in the store. Either not selling what is popular or not selling what someone will likely buy (not necessarily the same thing) is a good way to lose business, and eventually lose the store.

 

[Ahzad]

I agree with Raven, sorry couldn't grant you any xps, the inquiry is the the big thing.

I manage a comic book store and we also have games. If someone ask me about purchasing an item my first response is to ask some questions about what types of things they like to read, or watch on tv and try to match something up along those lines. If they really want to know what I think of something I'm not going to lie just for the sale. They'll get my honest opinion on whatever it is they are asking me, and b/c of that my customer base has come to know that even though I may not like what they like they know I won't be pushing stuff on them just to make a sale. It makes them enjoy coming in and talking or debating me on things. I make a point to try and read or play just about everything that we have so I can make an informed and honest judgment on things if asked about it.

I'm not a capes and tights comic reader, i prefer crime noir, fantasy, sci-fi, horror and the like, but i still keep up with the capes and tights stuff so I can give a proper opinion or recommendation.

same with rpgs, I gm'ed 4e up into the paragon levels before I had enough the game system just wasn't me, but i can see the merits of it and can recommend it on those. if asked my opinion on the game system i prefer i can tell them fantasy craft and why i prefer it.

 

[clip]

Other than obvious stuff like not breaking the law, FLGS should have no responsibility to anything other than their commercial interest.

 

[Barastrondo]

Other than obvious stuff like not breaking the law, FLGS should have no responsibility to anything other than their commercial interest.

Edition bias, however, is usually bad for a store's commercial interest — hence the conflict of interest. It's putting the success of the game the storekeeper or employee likes best above the success of the store. When you say "I don't want to sell you this thing," the customer can say "Well, I guess I'll buy what you want to sell me" — or they can say "Well, I want to buy that thing, so I guess I'll do it somewhere else."