Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1028255Everyone is saying they're making 5e-finder now. I wonder if they'll be able to do to 5e what they did to 4e?

So far the amount of salt is outstanding.

Except 5e wasnt a mess so divergent from the core its nearly its own thing.

But.

If WOTC screws up and makes a 6e then if Pazio is using 5e for 2e PF then they will be in the position to again absorb everyone who refuses to jump on the 6e bandwagon. And that will be over 50% of WOTCs customer base lost once again depeneding on how badly they screw up.

And Pazio themselves have just screwed up and will lose a chunk of their customer base if 2e PF is too different.

I am hoping WOTC doesnt.

Pushing a 6e any time soon would be a colossal screw up. I doubt any C-level sort at WotC would be dumb enough to green light a 6e.   Just checking 5e sales on Amazon:  PHB is #30, ~3.5 years after first released.  This is in overall book sales, not some niche sub-category.  DMG is #48.  By any reckoning that I hear about, 5e is raking in the cash.  WotC is not going to do anything to stop the money train, at least until it starts to slow down a bit.

I don't see a PF2 slowing it either.

Quote from: Manic Modron;1033158Another blog post is up and is focusing on Ancestries again.

It looks like the various species are still called races in game, but an Ancestry is the general bucket that you put racial and cultural traits and feats into.  They also seem to be decoupling biological and social abilities, so while you can have a dwarf who has trained with all the weapons of his people, not every dwarf automatically knows how to swing an axe well.

Lol they edited some uses of the term "race" out of the blog. Still missing some last I checked.

Dev admits use of race was a mistake: http://paizo.com/threads/gbir49yf/favorites?Big-Beards-and-Pointy-Ears#discuss

Quote from: Rhedyn;1033213Dev admits use of race was a mistake: http://paizo.com/threads/gbir49yf/favorites?Big-Beards-and-Pointy-Ears#discuss

Once you start down the Social Justice path, forever it will dominate your destiny.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1033032I'm not saying the OGL didn't work.  I'm saying it HARMED WoTC.  It effectively destroyed 4e.  And yes, sticking with that, because when 2e to 3e happened, some stayed with the previous edition, but those who wanted to stay with a game that was supported 'officially' they had to switch, and often a lot of players did.  The the OGL which allowed Pathfinder to exist legally. 4e was dead before it was even born.

The OGL made WotC money hand over fist until...

1. Some idiots at Hasbro wondered why other people were making money from the WotC rules.
2. These same idiots didn't realize what the OGL actually was, did, or meant.
3. They stepped away from the 3.0/3.5 ruleset in order to design a game so divergent from the current version of the game that it couldn't be reproduced with the OGL.
4. Foolishly thought a marketing campaign firing their existing customer base and the new forge-theory inspired design of 4e would bring them younger video game players.
5. Gave Paizo the kiss off.
6. Were actually surprised at the result.

Yes, the OGL was a double-edged sword for WotC.  It guaranteed them a place as the market leader as long as they stayed with an OGL compatible ruleset.  But...they had to actually keep putting out good product and accept minor competitors using their ruleset, and most importantly, they had to keep holding the tiger by the tail and not let go.

They let go.

Quote from: CRKrueger;1033292The OGL made WotC money hand over fist until...

1. Some idiots at Hasbro wondered why other people were making money from the WotC rules.
2. These same idiots didn't realize what the OGL actually was, did, or meant.
3. They stepped away from the 3.0/3.5 ruleset in order to design a game so divergent from the current version of the game that it couldn't be reproduced with the OGL.
4. Foolishly thought a marketing campaign firing their existing customer base and the new forge-theory inspired design of 4e would bring them younger video game players.
5. Gave Paizo the kiss off.
6. Were actually surprised at the result.

Yes, the OGL was a double-edged sword for WotC.  It guaranteed them a place as the market leader as long as they stayed with an OGL compatible ruleset.  But...they had to actually keep putting out good product and accept minor competitors using their ruleset, and most importantly, they had to keep holding the tiger by the tail and not let go.

They let go.

Bingo.

That said, they still gave away too much content with the OGL. The monster list should be about half as big as it is, there should have only been the Big Four classes (Fighter/Cleric/Rogue/Wizard) and Big Four races (Human/Dwarf/Elf/Halfling).

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1033319That said, they still gave away too much content with the OGL. The monster list should be about half as big as it is, there should have only been the Big Four classes (Fighter/Cleric/Rogue/Wizard) and Big Four races (Human/Dwarf/Elf/Halfling).

It would have been interesting to see what a Piazzo would have done for PF if that were the case. Like, what would they have done instead of paladin/bard/gnome/hal-elf, etc.?

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1033354It would have been interesting to see what a Piazzo would have done for PF if that were the case. Like, what would they have done instead of paladin/bard/gnome/hal-elf, etc.?

Same thing with a different name, like they and everybody else has done with Wizards' Product Identity.

Quote from: S'mon;1032920Maybe they'll calm down now their two most fanatic SJW witch-burners have left (and have attacked Paizo)? Most of them seem to be pretty typical goofy Seattle left-liberals, not truly malevolent?

Possibly. I don't follow Paizo very attentively, but it does seem like these last couple of months you've had more SJW idiocy coming out of WoTC than Paizo, which is quite the flip.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1033032I'm not saying the OGL didn't work.  I'm saying it HARMED WoTC.  It effectively destroyed 4e.

Pretty sure that 4e destroyed 4e, and harmed WoTC.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1033617Pretty sure that 4e destroyed 4e, and harmed WoTC.

No.  It didn't keep it alive, but Pathfinder is what killed 4e, and the only reason why Pathfinder 1e was able to even exist (because although, technically you can't copyright rules, most people don't know that) was due to the OGL spelling out that they could.  4e died on the vine, it was stillborn.  Simply because gamers could finally stick with an edition they knew, rather than try for some oh so scary CHANGE!

Quote from: RPGPundit;1033617Pretty sure that 4e destroyed 4e, and harmed WoTC.

Yes. I think without the OGL still many people would have stayed with 3e, many would have left the hobby (as happened during 2e era) and few new gamers would have been recruited. I don't believe 4e would have been a success just because it lacked an in-print alternative. It's too much of a niche market and bears too little resemblance to original D&D. In particular IME it lacks a viable Exploration play mode.

Quote from: S'mon;1033645Yes. I think without the OGL still many people would have stayed with 3e, many would have left the hobby (as happened during 2e era) and few new gamers would have been recruited.

Yep. Your #1 enemy in entertainment is disinterest. People don't have to play D&D. They can watch movies, read books, build model trains, or just go outside and throw sticks for the dog.

Although I'm pretty sure I saw somewhere that 4e did achieve its goal of bringing in new fans, it just lost old ones faster than it brought new ones in.