Pathfinder 1E You're the CEO of PAIZO. Now What?

[dmccoy1693]

It seems (Wizards of the Coast was) so sure that the Open Game Movement was endangering their brand and market share that they didn't realize what a 180 reversal toward their isolationist policy would do in the same vein.

You, sir, would get the #QuoteOfTheDay on my twitter, if that quote were 140 character's long (despite the fact that I noticed this a few days later).

EDIT: What would be my suggestion:

As a Paizo Subscriber, I would love to see a 4 issue AP where you start off at level 8 or 9 and go up to level 20.

As a PFRPG Licensee, I would love to see something akin to Mongoose Traveller's Foreven Free Sector Logo License. The FFSLL license allows a licensee to publish NON-CANON material that takes place in a set aside section of space. A Pathfinder equivilent license could take place on a different continent, be non-canon, and not affect things anywhere else in the setting. Don't get me wrong, I love the PFRPG license, but there are times when you really, really want to detail a cleric of Abadar or talk about a creature from Axis in a product.

 

[Thanael]

Make international mail order vaguely affordable? Maybe check out Steve Jackson Games' option of Standard International Mail or whatever they call it - much, much cheaper than anything Paizo offers now.

I'll second this. Postage costs to Germany are horrendous. Often the postage cost is (almost) as high as the order price.

Please look into this.

 

[Mistwell]

Out of Curiosity, if the GSL is such a problem for Paizo to sign, with the potential perceived threat to their main business if it changes, why don't they try to negotiate a seperate deal with WoTC? This has happened a few times before. Kenzar and Co's Kalamar, I believe had such a deal, as there book got to say D&D on it, istead of just d20 or OGL. I know seperate deals could be made if the sides are interested.

Indeed.

I am pretty sure Paizo could negotiate a separate license with WOTC, that could not be suddenly canceled without Paizo's agreement.

The real answer is they don't want to support 4e, I suspect. Which is a fair position. I just don't understand why the GSL excuse gets hauled out when they've never (as far as I know) even tried to negotiate a separate license.

 

[Mistwell]

We can't make PDFs of the last year of both Dragon and Dungeon because our license forced us to wait for 1 year before we could sell a PDF. Since we lost the license at that point, the last year of both magazines were never allowable for us to make PDFs of. Now all the files have been turned over to WotC, so it is in their hands.

Lisa Stevens
CEO
Paizo Publishing

You could call them and attempt to negotiate a license to publish them. It's in your hands to do this.

 

[BryonD]

...the GSL excuse ...

Is an "excuse" required? When did this happen?

To me, the obvious default is doing your own thing. *IF* something like the OGL lowers the bar far enough to create a better option, then cool.
The GSL is only mentioned because it is, in theory, a surrogate for the OGL. But it fails to meet the standard the OGL established. So, the bar lowering criteria is not met and we return to the default.

Asking Paizo for an excuse now is like asking Steve Jackson games for an excuse for why they were not supporting 2E in 1994.

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

The thing is the GSL is indeed what put them out of looking into 4e. Now they really just do not have the man power or time and really spliting product between two systems is a bad ideal profit wise. As your paying out as much as a single product but seeing half the return over your normal yield

On top of that 4e 3pp products just are not in demand and really do not seem to be profitable for a company to do. And as for negotiating a new license well that in it's self has issues. Paizo has done that before but still got burned pretty good

To be blunt 4e products are not profitable to a 3pp and would cause paizo to loose money or make bad decisions like hiring a bunch of folks they can't support long term

Ya need to look at this from a company's point of view, the market is not really there nor do the benefits outweigh the potential issues and lose of sale/profit or lose of productivity hat could go toward the companys main product line..which do sell well


Sure it sucks for 4e fans but it is what it is.

 

[Dannager]

The thing is the GSL is indeed what put them out of looking into 4e. Now they really just do not have the man power or time and really spliting product between two systems is a bad ideal profit wise. As your paying out as much as a single product but seeing half the return over your normal yield

On top of that 4e 3pp products just are not in demand and really do not seem to be profitable for a company to do. And as for negotiating a new license well that in it's self has issues. Paizo has done that before but still got burned pretty good

To be blunt 4e products are not profitable to a 3pp and would cause paizo to loose money or make bad decisions like hiring a bunch of folks they can't support long term

Given that this site is run by a company that does exactly what you describe above (a 3pp creating a product for both the 3.X and 4e markets, albeit in PDF-only format), I'd say this would be a good question to pose to the WotBS team. I think your analysis might be potentially flawed.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Given that this site is run by a company that does exactly what you describe above (a 3pp creating a product for both the 3.X and 4e markets, albeit in PDF-only format), I'd say this would be a good question to pose to the WotBS team. I think your analysis might be potentially flawed.

What product is that? Because if you're talking about WOTBS wasn't that created BEFORE 4E? At at one point didnt the GSL prohibit a publisher from selling a 3.5 version of a product if they were going to be selling the 4E version.

Is there a new product that they are working on that's both 3.5 and 4E?

And also what are the actual sales for that product like? I mean theyre GIVING the product away as part of a membership, which isnt the same as selling the product to sustain a buisness and employees.

I mean Lisa and Erik and james have said this over and over and over again but still we have people who really think that they dont know what hell they're talking about and see their explanations as excuses? WTF?

 

[BryonD]

Given that this site is run by a company that does exactly what you describe above (a 3pp creating a product for both the 3.X and 4e markets, albeit in PDF-only format), I'd say this would be a good question to pose to the WotBS team. I think your analysis might be potentially flawed.

If your analysis is based on WotBS, or even just ENWorld, the I promise you it is deeply flawed.

I've heard over and over that from publisher after publisher that the 3PP market for 4E sucks.

 

[Dannager]

What product is that? Because if you're talking about WOTBS wasn't that created BEFORE 4E? At at one point didnt the GSL prohibit a publisher from selling a 3.5 version of a product if they were going to be selling the 4E version.

Is there a new product that they are working on that's both 3.5 and 4E?

It began before 4e was released, and since then has had a full 4e conversion produced. Yes, the GSL did previously prevent selling those two sorts of things side-by-side. It doesn't anymore.

The argument is that perhaps Paizo doesn't want to stretch into the 4e market because there is no market for 3pp 4e products, and that branching out like this divides your market and is a poor business move regardless. Given that EN Publishing has done exactly this, I'd say that this is a question that could be put to the WotBS team to provide some insight on; basically, is this commonly accepted wisdom actually accurate?

And Shin, calm down.