Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="S'mon" data-source="post: 6201383" data-attributes="member: 463">I think RPG publishers who want to make money are always going to publish supplements. There is a specific problem with the WoTC model of tons of player-splat and weak GM support. It worked ok for a while with 3e because the OGL encouraged third party GM support, but with the loss of 3rd party support in 4e it resulted in an unbalanced game. Likewise there is a problem with WoTC's "new game under D&D brand" model, which resembles Games Workshop's approach of discouraging backwards compatibility. This drives some sales, but also discourages existing players from moving over, as we saw with 3e > 4e. It works for GW as GW is happy to alienate older players while attracting new younger players, but with RPGs you really need to retain the older players and keep them buying. Paizo's subscription model centred around the Adventure Paths seems to work better. They publish player splats too, but unlike WotC they're committed to keeping a partyicular ruleset in print, and presumably "Pathfinder 2e" will have strong backwards compatibility so that old APs can be used with the 2e ruleset, just as 3e APs can be used with Pathfinder. This approach keeps a core set of loyal fans buying stuff, those fans also act as recruiters to generate new customers. Personally I prefer 4e to 3e/PF and I wish WoTC could have adopted a similar model to Paizo, but it takes a lot of talent to write or commission those APs, and a longer term focus than WoTC-Hasbro seems capable of.</blockquote>

Verification