Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391927If it was going to happen because of 4E, it would have done so already in a manner we could see.

It's not about 4E. Not everything has to be brought back to 4E. Get a clue.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;3911441. Stick it to WotC
2. Keep 3.5E in print!

You forgot:

3. I like what Paizo's doing with the game, and want to see/play more of it!

Quote from: Benoist;391935You forgot:

3. I like what Paizo's doing with the game, and want to see/play more of it!

As do I. WotC has such a huge market share because their property was the first on the market. In an alternative universe it would be Mazes & Minotaurs.

Quote from: Tetsubo;391919But I have encountered, countless times, a company that treated their customers like crap even though they made a nice widget. I tend to not endorse their widget after that experience. How I am treated does in fact effect my opinion of a company and their product.

And I see no reason why it shouldn't affect your opinion of the company to a degree. But when discussing said product with someone who hasn't experienced the "rudeness" (real or imagined, not that I'm saying you havent encountered said rudeness) are you telling me you'd tell that individual, 'It's bad." Rather than, "It's awesome but the people working for them are dicks.

Disingenuous at best.

Additionally, I find myself more interested in something if word of mouth is the game is fun for these reasons. As opposed to someone telling me their perception of a company is positive for these reasons.

Would I prefer all the company's I purchase from to be super friendly and swell? Yes, I would. But I live in the world and I don't try to kid myself that this industry is really any different than most others. These companies aren't making these products to see us smile, they produce them to make money. That being the case I'll base my opinion of the product on, and I know this is crazy, the product.


EDIT: On an unrelated note, I did like your review of Fantasy Craft. The one about the merits of the game, I purchased as a result, thanks.

Quote from: ggroy;391928What would be an obvious sign of this happening?

(ie.  Besides Hasbro/WotC selling off the D&D intellectual property or taking D&D off the market).

I can think of two obvious signs. One is WotC drastically retooling the D&D line. I don't consider the D&D essentials launch to qualify as this. D&D has an audience split between the newbie/casual players and the hardcore players, and what the groups want and need often conflicts. 4E was built to satisfy the hardcore players while trying to make the game friendly to newbies and casuals, and did a better job at satisfying the hardcore players than it did towards the newbs/casuals. I think Essentials is more the launch of a two tiered system, with Essentials aimed at new and casual players. The second sign would be the rise of a non-D&D game, like the emergence of Vampire in the 90s. Nothing like that is happening right now.

Quote from: Benoist;391933It's not about 4E. Not everything has to be brought back to 4E. Get a clue.

It isn't? Somehow I don't believe you here.

Quote from: Benoist;391935You forgot:

3. I like what Paizo's doing with the game, and want to see/play more of it!

Buying in to "indie" hype isn't really any different than buying into corporate hype. When you look at Pathfinder objectively, its 3.5E with a fresh coat of paint. Paizo is doing an excellent job of customer relations and marketing with Pathfinder, but when you remove that and look strictly at the game from a system standpoint, it isn't remarkable at all.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391958It isn't? Somehow I don't believe you here.

Just get a clue, alright? It's not about 4E, and you're not 4E. Give it a rest already. :rolleyes:

Quote from: Benoist;391959Just get a clue, alright? It's not about 4E, and you're not 4E. Give it a rest already. :rolleyes:

In the big picture, I think this is bullshit. Pathfinder does not exist in a bubble. Without an edition change, Pathfinder the RPG never happens. Without people angry at the discontinuation of 3E and the removal of the OGL from the current edition of D&D, Pathfinder doesn't enjoy the success it has attained. I also don't think people musing about the future fortunes of WotC exists independently of those same people being dissatisfied with what WotC is doing or has done with the game.

Somebody muses about the future decline of WotC, I respond by saying that if WotC was to decline because of events that occurred over the last two years(4E, ditching the OGL, "firing customers") we'd see stronger signs of it than what has happened.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391958I can think of two obvious signs. One is WotC drastically retooling the D&D line. I don't consider the D&D essentials launch to qualify as this. D&D has an audience split between the newbie/casual players and the hardcore players, and what the groups want and need often conflicts. 4E was built to satisfy the hardcore players while trying to make the game friendly to newbies and casuals, and did a better job at satisfying the hardcore players than it did towards the newbs/casuals. I think Essentials is more the launch of a two tiered system, with Essentials aimed at new and casual players.

Perhaps there was actually some substance to the D&D + AD&D split, during the TSR era.  Allegedly the basic D&D box sets sold in the millions back in the 1980's.

http://www.acaeum.com/library/printrun.html

Later this year, we'll see whether this is still the case.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391958Buying in to "indie" hype isn't really any different than buying into corporate hype. When you look at Pathfinder objectively, its 3.5E with a fresh coat of paint. Paizo is doing an excellent job of customer relations and marketing with Pathfinder, but when you remove that and look strictly at the game from a system standpoint, it isn't remarkable at all.

If the people at Paizo were running their company like how Kevin Siembieda is running Palladium, I wouldn't be surprised if the company ends up dying a painful death.

For the big fish, they can get away more easily with brushing off criticisms and telling customers to fuck off.  It's harder to get away with that, when a company is small fry.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391958Buying in to "indie" hype isn't really any different than buying into corporate hype. When you look at Pathfinder objectively, its 3.5E with a fresh coat of paint. Paizo is doing an excellent job of customer relations and marketing with Pathfinder, but when you remove that and look strictly at the game from a system standpoint, it isn't remarkable at all.

It ain't remarkable. They are however very good adventure/fluff writers. Supposed they wanted a game system to use for their adventures, they can either

1) Create own fantasy heartbreaker
2) Sign up for GSL and use the flagship RPG system
3) Use the free OGL where there are already millions of fans who are familiar with it.

Of course we know what they went for. They had an opportunity to just reprint the rules 100% unchanged actually, but it might not be profitable from a business pov, since their target market already own the books.

Quote from: areola;391966It ain't remarkable. They are however very good adventure/fluff writers. Supposed they wanted a game system to use for their adventures, they can either

1) Create own fantasy heartbreaker
2) Sign up for GSL and use the flagship RPG system
3) Use the free OGL where there are already millions of fans who are familiar with it.

Of course we know what they went for. They had an opportunity to just reprint the rules 100% unchanged actually, but it might not be profitable from a business pov, since their target market already own the books.

I'm not saying Paizo didn't do the right thing, I think they hit it right on the head. I just think the reality of Pathfinder differs significantly from the hype that has grown up around it.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391958I can think of two obvious signs. One is WotC drastically retooling the D&D line. I don't consider the D&D essentials launch to qualify as this. D&D has an audience split between the newbie/casual players and the hardcore players, and what the groups want and need often conflicts. 4E was built to satisfy the hardcore players while trying to make the game friendly to newbies and casuals, and did a better job at satisfying the hardcore players than it did towards the newbs/casuals. I think Essentials is more the launch of a two tiered system, with Essentials aimed at new and casual players. The second sign would be the rise of a non-D&D game, like the emergence of Vampire in the 90s. Nothing like that is happening right now.

Why not, especially since this line of products, rather than clearly designating it's position as far as newbie/casual vs. hardcore use goes, it just continues to try and appeal to both markets. These books have a bunch of things that will appeal to the hardcore audience (new feats, builds, monster layout, etc.).  It's almost as if WotC needs that profit surge you can only get with the release of corebooks (which have traditionally catered to both types of consumers.) to an audience of faithful fans, oh yeah and if it happens to grab some new people that's great too...

Quote from: VictorC;391950And I see no reason why it shouldn't affect your opinion of the company to a degree. But when discussing said product with someone who hasn't experienced the "rudeness" (real or imagined, not that I'm saying you havent encountered said rudeness) are you telling me you'd tell that individual, 'It's bad." Rather than, "It's awesome but the people working for them are dicks.

Disingenuous at best.

Additionally, I find myself more interested in something if word of mouth is the game is fun for these reasons. As opposed to someone telling me their perception of a company is positive for these reasons.

Would I prefer all the company's I purchase from to be super friendly and swell? Yes, I would. But I live in the world and I don't try to kid myself that this industry is really any different than most others. These companies aren't making these products to see us smile, they produce them to make money. That being the case I'll base my opinion of the product on, and I know this is crazy, the product.


EDIT: On an unrelated note, I did like your review of Fantasy Craft. The one about the merits of the game, I purchased as a result, thanks.

One of my points is that the RPG market is inherently different from a company that makes widgets. If they make a bad widget they can just push them into the third world market or sell them off cheap to the secondary market. They don't really care what their customers think. And I speak as someone that has worked in the widget making field for the past 26 years.

Role-playing games are more akin to fiction. You *have* to romance the potential customer. The relationship between the the consumer and the creator is far more intimate. There needs to be give and take and the creator needs to listen to the market. There are limits to this of course. But since the market is so much smaller AND so much more likely to be in contact with each other (like this message board) potential bad blood is *far* more poisonous.

You are correct, I would probably tell someone that a product was good but that the company sucked. But I would not *recommend* that product.

I'm glad that you like the review.

All I know is there are products I like by companies I like. I might not enjoy playing Super RPGs, but if asked to do so, I'll probably insist on Green Ronin. Same holds true for Horror, I'll stick with Chaosium.

...again for now, just commenting on Artwork, Illustrations and what grabs my eye....


Page 25 - HALF-ORCS, Okay, even though his forearms look strange to me.

Haflings, page 26. Something about that Halfling I don't trust. Think the artist went out of the way to make his eyes & expression shifty.

HUMAN Illustration: Nice, very nice. A woman figure with muscles or athletic build but not overdone. There is a Jewel on her unbderwear - better not tell that Halfling thief on the previous page - he'll think all humans have underclothes worth stealing for jewels.

CLASSES chapter opens up with a two-page artrwork. SEONI could probably use a more practical outfit on her.

Page 31 - That SWORD is way too large and exaggerated. Its probably inspired by that FINAL FANTASY movie and other anime. (I'm not really much of a fan of Anime)

Page 35 = Now thats an interesting Halfling Bards with lots of character or backstory implied.

The cleric illustration on page 39 is evocative....well its interesting. (makes me want to use as an NPC or build a scenario around her)

Page 55 - The Fighter kind of reminds me of a young Val Kilmer...around the time he was in "Willow".

MONK, page 57. I've never liked Monks. That character look doesn't change my mind in one direction or the other.

Whoah!! Page 61 - Now thats a cool looking Paladin! Love the expression on her face. The sword shape and size are much more believable than the one in the Barbarian illustration (Page 31 comment)

Page 69 - Female Elf Rogue. Eh, nice.

Page 71. That Sorcerer reminds me of Ororo/Storm of the X-mEN. That mind of been the idea.

Page 79. The Wizard! = Hell I could make that garb and approximate that look for a convention. I'd play that Wizard as a player character.


...more later...after my shift at work today. IF I 'm relaxed enough to look at the book....



- Ed C.

Are any of you guys on here currently in a PATHFINDER campaign or mayube running one as a GM?

Whats it like compared to other RPG campaigns?
Does it feel like 3.5 D&D while playing ? - or are there many subtle differences in the mood or tone of the game sessions?


There is a chance I might be able to join in with a local group thats playing PATHFINDER.


- Ed C.