Quote from: Aos;445160I don't think the ogl was bad for the hobby, just for wizards. Also I think even the glut was good for the hobby in some ways. I can remember when I came back in C. 2000-2001, I was overwhelmed by the shelves worth of crazy d20 stuff. There was a definite feeling of energy in those days.

The OGL glut was the Atari 2600 of third party gaming.

Sadly, we've yet to see a real contender for playing the Nintendo role.

Quote from: J Arcane;445220The OGL glut was the Atari 2600 of third party gaming.

Sadly, we've yet to see a real contender for playing the Nintendo role.

I remember tons of crappy video games being produced for the Atari 2600, around 1982-1983.  (I didn't know it at the time, that the bottom fell out of the video game console market).  It seemed like everybody and their mother were cranking out tons of crappy Atari 2600 games in those days.

This seems to happen whenever something is in a "bubble" phase.

Quote from: ggroy;445221I remember tons of crappy video games being produced for the Atari 2600, around 1982-1983.  (I didn't know it at the time, that the bottom fell out of the video game console market).  It seemed like everybody and their mother were cranking out tons of crappy Atari 2600 games in those days.

This seems to happen whenever something is in a "bubble" phase.

I do miss those days when the only bubbles my 8-year-old brain knew were the ones that came out of the end of a dripping wand. But I digress.

As to the weepy letter that started this thread, if a publisher wants his company to get noticed, maybe he should get off his rump and do something about it instead of looking for handouts. My god, "reward us"?! I've got bad news, buddy. When your company dies, don't expect WotC to come to the funeral.

Quote from: Napftor;445256...When your company dies, don't expect WotC to come to the funeral.

Don't expect anyone to come to the funeral.  :-D

Quote from: jgants;444909If you think Pathfinder will enjoy the day in the sun forever, I have a bridge to sell you.

Pathfinder will have a new edition.  It's too big and too complicated not to.

...

I feel the Paizo model is a solid one and proven now.  I don't believe it's going to fade into the sunset anytime soon, but I am also not so naive to think it will be here forever. Now, If they jump on a new edition, without some compatibility with the previous, and then change the whole licensing scheme isolating the 3PP they have supporting them and causing a great rift in the Pathfinder customer base, then I am sure they will fail faster than they would have otherwise.

If they stay steady, and keep listening and involving their fans and partners, I have no reason to believe they couldn't be as long lasting as Chaosium or Palladium, and god knows those two companies have not always made sound business decisions (or even jumped headlong into the 21st century in one case). But those companies do pay attention to their fans. I feel Paizo's current approach makes a solid bet they are here to stay for a long haul with the same focus on fans and giving their customers what they want.  

Quote from: Aos;444928... you look like a self satisfied jerkoff who has stuffed his cheeks full of nuts...

I am a cheeky self satisfied nut eating person. I will cop to that. No mumps though, it was just me making faces at the computer screen. Good eye.

Quote from: Aos;444928... I think for a retroclone publisher Piazo has done very well for itself, but, unlike you, I don't think they are going to change the status quo in the long run, I could be wrong, but I'm not married to the idea, so that's okay.

They have already changed the status quo. This is why I am baffled at your posts (and opinion). How can you look at what they've done and say they haven't?  Also,the retroclone thing is cute (and somewhat accurate), but I doubt many regard Paizo as a retroclone publisher. However, in the strict definition, they are. I imagine their fans are grateful they don't run their business the same way as the "retro" companies, of whence the game they have RESURRECTED came from. Or something like that.

Quote from: Aos;444928What is this, anyway? We get them every now and then, these guys who are married to some company or other. ...

I am actually not married to any company. I support various companies and games (with my dollars and InterWebs chanting). It's not my "loyalty" or fanboyism to Paizo, but a simple observation that they are a savvy group of gaming business people (IMHO), and that the model they have setup is a solid one that is going to stick around for some time to come.

Once again, I said in the long run. I don't mean 2-3 years. I mean like a decade. White Wolf  and Crossgen both shook up the status quo- where are they now? White Wolf is a shadow of its former self and Cross Gen is gone. Furthermore, PF is already on the splat treadmill- that is not innovation, it is the same old same old. All that remains is the production of a second edition and they are just one among many. If you find that hard to understand, perhaps you should check and make sure you know who the president is.

P.S. I don't have any stake in any of this. It's all just idle talk for me. I've never spent a dime on Paizo product, and although I have some 4e stuff I'm not going to be buying any more of it.

Quote from: estar;445176The d20 glut was the result of a boom mentality. In the initial month anything 3PP for 3.X was gold and it piled on from there.  The nail in the coffin was the switch from 3.0 to 3.5. All the sudden all the 3.0 book were toxic as hell despite the small changes that were made to the system.

Which is a really weird mentality when you come down to it, since the two versions are functionally compatible. A 3.0 module could be run for 3.5 and the players wouldn't notice the difference. The switch was one of those moments of clarity where it suddenly became clear to me how susceptible gamers are to elementary marketing techniques. I incorrectly assumed everyone else was a conscious consumer, and that was just an illusion created by the forums I was visiting at the time and the people in my social circle.

Quote from: Seanchai;445169But where I think the problem lay was with games that you didn't need the PHB, SRD, or anything like that because they were self-contained. Games such as Midnight and Mutants & Masterminds.

I know what you mean but the two games you cite are bad examples.
Mutants & Masterminds changed the 3.x engine to a point that it was a new game, not a rehash of the PHB. And Midnight was not even a full game, but a setting - exactly the kind of support stuff that WotC wanted to see from the OGL.

Better examples would have been:
Everquest
Slaine
Conan
World of Warcraft
Mongoose Pocket PHB

But WotC was fully aware of that danger, and didn't see it as a problem. Ryan Dancey was asked in a retailer seminar at Gen Con (where he explained the OGL thing to us retailers, and what good the license would bring us):
"What hinders a third party publisher to just reword the PHB and sell it?"

Dancey's answer (paraphrased):
"Nothing. We know that they could do this but we expect that they will never be able to beat our production values and pricing structure thanks to our ability to use economy of scale." (Long winded for: Let. Them. Try.)

Don't forget that the 3.0 PHB (or rather all three core hardbacks) carried a 19.99 price tag -- dirt cheap for a 300+ page full color hardcover.

Quote from: Melan;445275Which is a really weird mentality when you come down to it, since the two versions are functionally compatible. A 3.0 module could be run for 3.5 and the players wouldn't notice the difference.

I'm not sure. The updates for City of the Spider Queen, the last WotC adventure published under 3.0 rules, were massive. Plus, several play reports claimed that running the module under 3.5 was way easier than under 3.0, as so many individual things like Spell Resistance or the drow abilities had changed, effectively changing key parameters of the encounters.

The problem is that individually the changes don't seem much. It's their accumulation that's the problem, and the primary reason I largely stopped buying Pathfinder product when they switched to 3.75.

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;445287But WotC was fully aware of that danger, and didn't see it as a problem.

It's no historic accident that you're quoting Dancey 2000 on this. WotC initially didn't see a problem. Mongoose' own Matt Sprange likes to reference the Dancy quote you gave in defense of their doing the mini PHBs, DMGs etc. The thing is, after the departure of Dancey and Cook, these products were seen to be problematic by WotC, and suddenly the party line became 'oooh, we only ever wanted the OGL to drive those products we didn't see a commerical point in, like adventure modules - not core rulebooks'.

Quote from: trechriron;445260I feel the Paizo model is a solid one and proven now.  I don't believe it's going to fade into the sunset anytime soon, but I am also not so naive to think it will be here forever. ...

They have already changed the status quo. This is why I am baffled at your posts (and opinion). ...

It's not my "loyalty" or fanboyism to Paizo, but a simple observation that they are a savvy group of gaming business people (IMHO), and that the model they have setup is a solid one that is going to stick around for some time to come.

Before we praise the "massive success" of Pathfinder, we may want to keep some perspective.  The "proven business model" is a whopping year and a half old.  There's a long, long way to go before they become proven.  

They haven't changed the status quo at all as far as I can see - they are basically still a growing little upstart company that has had one good year of sales.

There are plenty of RPGs, tv shows, musicians, etc who managed to have great success the first year or two, only to flounder a short time later.  We'll know a lot more about their success if they can go five, eight, ten years without changing editions.

Quote from: Aos;445267Once again, I said in the long run. I don't mean 2-3 years. I mean like a decade. White Wolf  and Crossgen both shook up the status quo- where are they now? White Wolf is a shadow of its former self and Cross Gen is gone. Furthermore, PF is already on the splat treadmill- that is not innovation, it is the same old same old. All that remains is the production of a second edition and they are just one among many.

This is what I see as well.  Again, it's easy to have a great first year.

What do you do when you run out of people pissed off about 4e?  What do you do once you run out of supplements to publish? What do you do when the rules start to collapse under their own weight?

I'm not remotely convinced that Pathfinder will suddenly stop selling supplements and that both the company and fans will be satisfied with a never-changing game that just puts out adventure path modules.

Maybe WotC put out 4e a little early.  And maybe they changed things too much with the whole powers system.  But make no mistake, 3e was nearing the end of its life cycle and did need a new edition.  Pathfinder is going to find itself in the exact same position in a few years - maybe it will wait a year or two longer, maybe the rule changes will be a little less controversial, but it will happen.

Windjammer: There are all sorts of balance issues. But does it matter if an encounter is difficulty 1.0, difficulty 1.1 or difficulty 0.9? It might, but I think overall it wouldn't be such a huge thing. Well, okay, 3.5 may "break" some builds and create opportunities for others.

Quote from: jgants;445290What do you do when you run out of people pissed off about 4e?  What do you do once you run out of supplements to publish? What do you do when the rules start to collapse under their own weight?

What do you when WotC puts out 5e and lures away a big old slice of your base? That is going to happen. If it has D&D on the tin, many, many people will be curious- regardless of how they feel about 4e.  I hate 3.x, but I bought 4e out of curiosity. No regrets though, my kids think its cool.

Quote from: Aos;445310What do you when WotC puts out 5e and lures away a big old slice of your base? That is going to happen. If it has D&D on the tin, many, many people will be curious- regardless of how they feel about 4e.  I hate 3.x, but I bought 4e out of curiosity. No regrets though, my kids think its cool.

Bingo. The problem with making a product for those disatisfied with the current state of D&D is that your audience only lasts as long as it takes for a new edition to come along and take them right back.

PF is still just a substitute edition made for hardcore 3.5 fans who didn't like 4e.

If 5e comes out, they'll be rushing back into the waiting arms of WOTC, and Paizo will be left holding the bag.

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;445287I know what you mean but the two games you cite are bad examples.
Mutants & Masterminds changed the 3.x engine to a point that it was a new game...

That's exactly the point. It's a new game that got to slap a d20 logo on itself.

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;445287And Midnight was not even a full game, but a setting - exactly the kind of support stuff that WotC wanted to see from the OGL.

Midnight is its own game in everything but name. It doesn't tell you to roll 4d6 and drop the lowest? Big deal. Moreover, it changes the game. It drops and adds mechanics and changes default assumptions inherent in D&D (you're heroes, there's an adventuring class, you're going to be decked out in magic items, et al.).

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;445287But WotC was fully aware of that danger, and didn't see it as a problem.

Your quotes and the situation are apples and oranges. Here's why: In general, official D&D products are and will be more popular than third party ones. They don't necessarily have to be better, prettier, more useful, etc. - they just have to be "official." WotC doesn't have to worry about Mongoose's efforts because their class guides, pocket pals, etc., won't outsell WotC's material.

But third party publishers started creating non-D&D material with the license. Non-D&D third party material isn't competing with D&D - it isn't running up against the brick wall of "officialdom." Midnight isn't D&D, it's Midnight. Iron Heroes isn't D&D, it's Iron Heroes. Iron Kingdoms isn't D&D, it's Iron Kingdoms. And so on.

Or you've got Mutants & Masterminds and SpyCraft, which don't even tickle notions of official products versus unofficial ones.

What's worse is that when people buy Mutants & Masterminds, they want to play it. So they set aside D&D. Meaning they're less likely to keep up with D&D purchases. There's a three month window in which products sell...

Seanchai