So it's finally happened? D&D reduced to board games...

[delericho]

Having said that, I have a very difficult time believing Paizo subscription income come close to DDI subscriptions.

I would tend to agree. But then, I would never have expected the reports of them being tied (in any stream), so I'm now a bit more wary about underestimating Paizo.

Oh, and one other small caveat: while I doubt Paizo's subscriptions bring in the same income as DDI, it's also definitely true that the running costs for their subscriptions operation are much less, since they're just selling the same product in a different way.

I'll be the first in line to criticize some of WotC's decisions, but I don't think "mismanaged" in the sense that TSR mismanaged the brand fits at all.

I did make sure to say "if mismanaged". I don't know anything about the internal operations at WotC, so will refrain from commenting on whether or not that is currently the case.

(I did also say that D&D has been mismanaged at least twice before. The "death of TSR" is of course, well-known. But TSR also had very significant problems in the mid-80s - indeed, it was partly due to these that Lorraine Williams was able to buy the company in the first place.)

 

[slwoyach]

I'm fine with board games as long as it doesn't replace the rpg.

 

[Dice4Hire]

I'd rather a board game fall on my head than the sky.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

I'd rather a board game fall on my head than the sky.

I dont know man, have you hefted the Ravenloft Board game box or Descent? D00d, that box has some weight behind it...

 

[Kafen]

I'm fine with board games as long as it doesn't replace the rpg.

In terms of playing '4e' rules, the Ravenloft game replaced the 4e game with my weekly group. My older group that plays every other weekend runs either 3.5/Pathfinder or Savage Worlds. So, it replaced the RPG in my small group.

 

[w_earle_wheeler]

I think 4e does a great job with miniature skirmish gaming and board gaming. Long term / Campaign RPGs, not so much (though that could be fixed easily enough with more not-in-combat reskin options for powers -- if it hasn't been done in Essentials and DDI already).

I'd love to see the current 4e rules remain at the core with different "skins" for the various different kinds of play. Boardgame skin, One-shot skin (like the cool Gamma World stuff), MMO skin, Skirmish skin and RPG skin.

Really, outside of the screwy DDI stuff and attempt at CCGing D&D, I think WotC might have their eye in the right (general) direction.

 

[El Mahdi]

...However, Pathfinder, with it's Map pack, Ultimate magic, Ultimate Combat, that are coming later this year, are definitely catching my interest and causing a hell of a lot of buzz MONTHS before they're released. WotC's just playing it so close to the vest that I can't even tell WHY I would want something, clear even into its release date, because I really have no interest in buying it due to a halfway enthused blurb on how cool it is. What's Paizo doing, by contrast? They took a note from WotC - they release playtests, they invite fan feedback, they chat up what's going to be in a product and why it'll be awesome, they pique my interest three months before the product is released.

WotC USED to do this, with the PH2 and PH3 playtests in DDI, with the Revenant race, with the interviews with people like Jeff Greiner from The Tome, Mearls used to talk up the new products six months before release, etc. Now, when something is released, I have no desire to seek it out, find it, skim it, try to figure out what's cool...

I can't agree enough with this. Along with loss of interest and buzz from bad PR and some of their strategic choices, I think your point is doubly damning in that a lot of the stuff that could have generated buzz was locked away behind a paywall (not all of it, but a lot). Self limiting your customer base just seems phenomonally foolish.

 

[BriarMonkey]

I can't agree enough with this. Along with loss of interest and buzz from bad PR and some of their strategic choices, I think your point is doubly damning in that a lot of the stuff that could have generated buzz was locked away behind a paywall (not all of it, but a lot). Self limiting your customer base just seems phenomonally foolish.

I too have to say the agreement can't be overstated!

When I picked up the 4E original books, even then I wasn't giddy or overly excited. It was more like "What did they add or improve upon?". Then I barfed.

When I found out that Paizo had Pathfinder, and saw all the excitement for it, I ordered the first two books. When they showed up on my stoop - I was stooopid excited and actually had a giant grin across my mug. I haven't looked back.

WotC has become just something on the periphery.

 

[delericho]

WotC USED to do this, with the PH2 and PH3 playtests in DDI, with the Revenant race, with the interviews with people like Jeff Greiner from The Tome, Mearls used to talk up the new products six months before release, etc. Now, when something is released, I have no desire to seek it out, find it, skim it, try to figure out what's cool.

Aye. There was a spell a few years ago when WotC seemed to be producing a new and exciting book every single month. (It was the year of the two "Fiendish Codices" for 3.5e.) Everything seemed to be great. I spent way too much money that year .

Now? There's only "Madness of Gardmore Abbey" that piques my interest even slightly. And that's only a "maybe" - with just a very few shining exceptions, WotC have never been good at adventures.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I hope they make more boardgames because Ravenloft owns.

Also I'm sorta the opposite of Henry - I like Pathfinder and I liked the APG, but I've seen far more bad then good about the two Ultimate ____ books.