Quote from: Mistwell;1031116Owen Stephens recently re-posted a post I made 10 years ago where I predicted Pathfinder would fail.

So, I will make another prediction, since that first one went sooooo well

I predict PF2 will succeed. I don't think it will displace 5e as the leader. But I think it will sell well for Paizo and last a long time and make them plenty of money and grow over time.

Sounds like you just like being wrong.

Mistwell: the Bill Kristol of the gaming world.

Sorry Pundit I have to disagree with you on this one. We don't know that it will automatically fail imo. It may or may not. Assuming it will is just projecting one own bias into the argument. Player assumed 5E would fail before release and have been proven wrong.

Predictions of failure or success without criteria for judging that failure or success are useless.  

For example, is this failure or success?  Let's say that it sells moderately well for the first printing (compared to what they are selling now), reaches a second printing, and eventually much later a (small) third.  It's got a long tail, which it begins fairly quick, maybe after about 18 months.  Meanwhile, they are continuing to sell the modules built on top of it, on or about the same rate as before.  

That's no kick in the pants to bring them up a notch, but if their goal is "keep selling adventures," I'm not sure it's a mistake, either.

I assumed Mistwell was going for the reverse whammy.  He predicted it would fail but it then succeeded so he's hoping that his bad luck will result in it now failing as he "predicts" it will succeed.

I don't see them actually failing in the next five years but I do think they are going to see their customer base get eaten away.

Paizo came up with several different marketing schemes, like their 'subscription' discounts, and their adventure paths (and the various spin off products, the map packs, other splat books, etc), which were particularly clever. What they did was implement 'upsell' into their product marketing. Those worked really well when 3.5 was it for AD&D, and in a market where clever marketing isn't all that clever. But the world has changed since then. They aren't competing with a broken type of D&D like 4.

Here's where I see the problem for them:

- Now as with other products, they are competing against their own 1.x products; many will balk against buying new additions of old products
- P2 has a strong competitor in D&D 5, and a new edition of P2 means P1 users may take the time to look at D&D 5 (or even other products) instead
- Golorion (and its various assets) isn't that interesting a property by itself
- Management has reached the zenith of its competence, and at its heart, it is a corporation run as a sole proprietorship

Quote from: Lynn;1031637I don't see them actually failing in the next five years but I do think they are going to see their customer base get eaten away.

Paizo came up with several different marketing schemes, like their 'subscription' discounts, and their adventure paths (and the various spin off products, the map packs, other splat books, etc), which were particularly clever. What they did was implement 'upsell' into their product marketing. Those worked really well when 3.5 was it for AD&D, and in a market where clever marketing isn't all that clever. But the world has changed since then. They aren't competing with a broken type of D&D like 4.

Here's where I see the problem for them:

- Now as with other products, they are competing against their own 1.x products; many will balk against buying new additions of old products
- P2 has a strong competitor in D&D 5, and a new edition of P2 means P1 users may take the time to look at D&D 5 (or even other products) instead
- Golorion (and its various assets) isn't that interesting a property by itself
- Management has reached the zenith of its competence, and at its heart, it is a corporation run as a sole proprietorship

Emphasis added, because this cannot be overstated. Nothing in life scales linearly, especially organized and coordinated human activity. If an organization tries to "feel small" and "grow (revenues) big" at the same time, failure will come "gradually, then quickly".

Quote from: RPGPundit;1031378Sounds like you just like being wrong.

Mistwell: the Bill Kristol of the gaming world.

I'd be comfortable if I were wrong Though, I don't want any RPG company to fail really. Most of the Paizo people seem like pretty good people.

Wargames have had the equivalent of Attacks of Opportunity since the sixties.  They're usually called "Zones of Control."

Typical ZoC rules are a paragraph or two.  Star Wars d20 went on for 2 1/2 pages plus diagrams and STILL made no damn sense.

Too many RPG "designers" forget what the "G" in RPG stands for.  If it doesn't work as a game, it's not going to work as an RPG.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1031742Wargames have had the equivalent of Attacks of Opportunity since the sixties.  They're usually called "Zones of Control."

Typical ZoC rules are a paragraph or two.  Star Wars d20 went on for 2 1/2 pages plus diagrams and STILL made no damn sense.

Too many RPG "designers" forget what the "G" in RPG stands for.  If it doesn't work as a game, it's not going to work as an RPG.

Most of the later games, it's less than a paragraph.  In 5e D&D, it's leaving the 'zone of control', which the creature's reach.  You leave their reach?  They get an attack, if they have a 'Reaction' left (which everyone gets one base.)

Even in 3e, it's a single paragraph.  Leave the creature's reach, or do certain actions (like range attacks in melee, if I remember correctly) and that's it.  And you get to make only one a turn, unless you have a feat.

Quote from: RandyB;1031644Emphasis added, because this cannot be overstated. Nothing in life scales linearly, especially organized and coordinated human activity. If an organization tries to "feel small" and "grow (revenues) big" at the same time, failure will come "gradually, then quickly".

I think if they were going to go the sensible route and hire on real managers rather than scale up content people they would have already done so.

Though the whole debacle of their MMO strategy showed some foresight - they could make themselves look like victims even as they lead their user base to invest money in something even as it was spiraling down the bowl.

Quote from: Lynn;1031846I think if they were going to go the sensible route and hire on real managers rather than scale up content people they would have already done so.

Though the whole debacle of their MMO strategy showed some foresight - they could make themselves look like victims even as they lead their user base to invest money in something even as it was spiraling down the bowl.

   Whatever did happen with the MMO? I was watching the Kickstarter with morbid amusement that turned to astonishment when it actually succeeded, but I haven't kept any track of it since, not being a Pathfinder gamer, an MMO player, or a fan of Paizo or Ryan Dancey by any measure. I fully expected it to crash and burn, but I didn't expect Pathfinder itself to be as successful as it was, either.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1031855Whatever did happen with the MMO? I was watching the Kickstarter with morbid amusement that turned to astonishment when it actually succeeded, but I haven't kept any track of it since, not being a Pathfinder gamer, an MMO player, or a fan of Paizo or Ryan Dancey by any measure. I fully expected it to crash and burn, but I didn't expect Pathfinder itself to be as successful as it was, either.

Last I heard, it's actually up and running and started charging monthly subscriptions around October 2016, with small updates since then.  It's very small and very niche.  It doesn't help that the developers focus on player-versus-player for some strange reason.  It has turned the MMOG into a gankbox, which is the antithesis of the tabletop RPG.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1030333Paizo has an article up about the Fighter:

http://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkm9?Fighter-Class-Preview

Highlights (lowlights):

-Once again, pretty much everything you'd expect a fighter to be able to do, like be useful with a shield, move and attack
-They're loading up the action economy with exceptions and trip conditions and other bullshit
-Wayne Reynolds likes pointy things

Some more information has been released about the fighter.

"Compared to '3 or 4' class feats [in Pathfinder1], the fighter alone has more than 10 times that number (not going to be more specific because, as Jason has said, we aren't through with copyfitting, so we don't know how many are going to fit)." (Seifter)

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1031855Whatever did happen with the MMO? I was watching the Kickstarter with morbid amusement that turned to astonishment when it actually succeeded, but I haven't kept any track of it since, not being a Pathfinder gamer, an MMO player, or a fan of Paizo or Ryan Dancey by any measure. I fully expected it to crash and burn, but I didn't expect Pathfinder itself to be as successful as it was, either.

I haven't been watching that closely either. As it is, it is sort of a kingdom building game, and looks to be about as sophisticated as some games developed by single developers on Steam. I am surprised that they've had any updates as they don't seem to understand that they should be updating their copyright notices since it isn't 2015 any longer. So long as they are able to cover their minimal costs of operation, they can probably go on indefinitely.

Game development is tough. While Ryan Dancey did a stint at CCP (the makers of EVE Online), I don't think he learned just how hard it is to bring a game to market, and he was likely saddled with many decisions foisted upon him by the folks at Paizo. I believe he had some tech background but game development is really a specialized market. I see game development much like pulling yourself out of a muddy hole. If you don't pull fast enough, you sink faster than you emerge (your $$$ burn is outrageous), and if you spend too long in the hole, you become too dirty to love (your look and technology become 'old' before you reach the market).

Quote from: jadrax;1032023Some more information has been released about the fighter.

"Compared to '3 or 4' class feats [in Pathfinder1], the fighter alone has more than 10 times that number (not going to be more specific because, as Jason has said, we aren't through with copyfitting, so we don't know how many are going to fit)." (Seifter)

"In order to better balance with the caster, the some of the feats give you different abilities: At-Will Maneuvers, Daily Maneuvers, and Encounter Maneuvers."

(this is a joke)