D&D 4E What was Paizo thinking? 3.75 the 4E clone?

[Grimstaff]

Very cute and very surprised to see you feeding us anti-4e people pie.

3rd Party Publisher + Long Overdue GSL = Testy!

 

[Clight101]

I was pretty sad to hear that Pathfinder wasn't going to 4e and when I looked through their Alpha book I liked the idea's they had but it still didn't fix the problems I have with 3.x edition which is primarily that the game gets unruly at higher levels. I don't like a player taking 10-20 minutes for a turn and 1 round of combat taking 45 minutes to an hour.

As I've discovered more things about 4e and have been implementing them into my games I find my players are having more fun and are getting through combat rounds in 10-20 minutes instead of 45 to an hour. The combats still last a while but a lot more interesting things can happen in 10-15 rounds of combat than in 3-5 which is what most non BBEG combats are designed to last. The alpha IMO didn't address this but some people like that play style and more power to them. I like cinematic action adventure and believable plausibility over simulation.

That being said I kept my pathfinder subscription because they get the best writers in the industry to work and write for them IMO and tell some fantastic stories. Epic stories that people remember when all is said and done. I won't mind converting their encounters to 4e.

 

[The Little Raven]

They first said that the license/rules would be coming "soon" back in September.

They said "January" back at GenCon.

 

[bmcdaniel]

Obviously, you must be a lawyer who handles these types of cases to speak with such authority?

I certainly wouldn't argue that TSR's financial records at the date of purchase did not become the property of WotC, but unless WotC stipulated certain data be present, there is no certainty that it would be part of TSR's records at that time.
...

Are you actually saying that you believe that it is unlikely that TSR shredded or removed non-critical documentation prior to sale and transfer?
RC

While it is theoretically possible that some marketing research regarding D&D was not part of WOTC's acquisition of TSR, such an event is highly unlikely for two reasons.

1. Regarding a legal exclusion: there would be no business purpose in excluding market research regarding an asset that was delivered (i.e. the D&D brand). Any such exclusion would (by necessity) have required disclosure in the acquisition agreement (the nature of acquisitions is that all assets are included unless specifically excluded), and Dancey would be aware of it. I think we can assume in good faith that Dancey would not have expressed surprise at the lack of market research if he was aware that the acquisition agreement excluded market research.

2. Regarding extra-legal destruction: it is practically impossible to destroy all evidence of business records like market research. Expenditures for market research will show up in the accounting records; market plans will incorporate references to the research conclusions; the research will be discussed in board minutes; etc. Moreover, continuing personnel would remember the existence of market research. If an employee tried to destroy an asset like market research and the destruction was discovered, both TSR and the employee would be subject to liability (including return of the purchase price of the acquisition) and possibly criminal prosecution (unlikely as a factual matter, but possible). Its hard to imagine why anyone would risk this, especially because the most spiteful people (the TSR shareholders) have the most to lose; regular employees would just transition from TSR to WOTC.

For what it is worth, I am a lawyer who routinely is involved with the acquisition of businesses (moreso five years ago than today, but the principles remain the same).

 

[The Little Raven]

Are you actually saying that you believe that it is unlikely that TSR shredded or removed non-critical documentation prior to sale and transfer?

Yes, I believe it's unlikely that a company that was bailed out of bankruptcy and bought for far more than it was actually worth at the time would commit fraud by destroying documents that were now the property of the company that bought them. But then again, I base my beliefs off of what actually happens in business when companies get purchased, rather than getting them to fit a pre-defined scenario (that Dancey was wrong).

 

[dmccoy1693]

They said "January" back at GenCon.

Link? ENWorld has a large resource of all 4E previews of what everyone ever said. If what you say is true, it would be there. I don't remember hearing that.

 

[Shadewyn]

Remember, in 4E that will have to be a 60 x 60 foot room. Someone will undoutedly have teleport and the ability to shift the orc or the pie. We have to give the PCs enough room to move around have have fun with their minis! Hey, dont we need a mini for the pie?

Hmmm ... perhaps we need a campaign for a Pie mini (optional orc figurine included).

I have to say though, pie is a classic motivation that all players can grasp onto. Opposed to say the MASSIVE railroading required to uproot and force players to reamain in a certain abyssal plane in the Shackeled City arc.

Players - "We are loyal defenders of Cauldron right?"
GM - "yup"
Players - "The city is under siege from nefarious plots and encraoching darkness and chaos right?"
GM - "yup"
Players - "Exactly why then do we what to flip out to 507th layer of the abyss and become a demonic ruler when all our alignments and religions kinda prohibit it ... not to mention is has nothing to do with the campaign?"
GM - "its the next module in the story arc?"


See ... if we instead offered them a tasty pie the massive railroad cheese would have gone down so much easier!