|
|
Post by shenron on Nov 24, 2010 3:26:11 GMT -5
Before I even begin this, I am not trying to start an Edition war or anything like that. Each Edition has its own merits and flaws.
Anyway, we all know Wizards has a habit of mass producing supplements and only maybe an 1/8 of them is worth while and some of them just seem like a ploy to earn more money (which is the goal of every business).
When 4th Edition was announced I was excited and I hoped we would get high quality supplements but they quickly fell into their old routine and quickly too.
Then Wizards found out they had a problem, and this problem was called Pathfinder. Pathfinder started to outsell 4th Edition quickly and Wizards had to change their business plan to try and keep up without alienating their already produced products.
So, now we have the Essential Edition. Which I think are a good idea if they do not go crazy on worthless supplements, etc. These books sell for $19.99 and so far we have...
> Heroes of the Fallen Lands (Basic Rules, Items, races and classes)
> Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms (Basic Rules, Items, and classes)
> Rules Compendium (All rules and systems only, I do not think you need it to play but it is a good resource).
No for $29.99 we have the following;
> Dungeon Master's Kit (comes with the essential version of the DMG, a two part adventure, maps and tiles)
> Monster Vault (comes with the essential version of the Monster Manual, tiles, maps, and monster pop outs, and maybe an adventure)
These are the main ones. Now, I am already seeing a pattern of of what I have seen before but I see a method behind their madness. First beef, splitting the players guide into two books, yes they did it for price, but for around 40 bucks you get everything you need to play unless you play the same class, etc then only one book. So, it is not that bad.
Second Beef is that the core books they sell in the kits you do not get by themselves which would be nice for people who do not need tiles, etc. Again, it is a great resource and you get adventure material, maps, etc for about $30.00.
I guess is see great potential in what they are doing but I know the could have included the races and classes from the Player's handbook 2, 3, and Guide to Eberron. So, we will be seeing a lot more essential supplements and I hope they just upgrade their quality.
Opinions? Thoughts?
Oh, just for the record I do not blame Wizards but I blame Hazbro for breathing over Wizards shoulder screaming about the bottom line.
Oh, and Pathfinder is amazing!
|
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Nov 24, 2010 7:57:02 GMT -5
First of all... Wizards ONLY cared about the bottom line LONG before Hasbro came along. I don't know how old you are, but way back when Wizards took over TSR, people were making the same ridiculous claim. Any business that doesn't care about the bottom line, will be bought by someone that does. And believe you me... I've spoken with dozens of people that worked for TSR over the years, and they were concerned with the bottom line too.  At any rate, as far as editions go... I'm not interested in assigning blame, but it's pretty clear that 4th Edition is a failed experiment. The consensus seems to be that its a really well-done set of rules... and it isn't any fun. I would agree with this general conclusion. At GenCon this past year, which should have been WotC's triumphant celebration of their dominance of the gaming industry, Pathfinder overshadowed 4E enormously. Tickets for Pathfinder events outsold 4E tickets by almost 2-to-1 according to some sources. What I'm getting at is this; it doesn't matter HOW they package 4E. It's not the price that's keeping people away. What they need to do is get back to the drawing board and release 4.5, and bring back the fun factor (which can only happen if they're willing to give up their "rule for everything" ultra generic game mentality). Or hell... I wouldn't even care if they scrapped the Saga/4E garbage altogether and set out to create 5th Edition. A lot of people would complain about it being too soon, but the big experiment with making everybody as good at everything as everybody else (i.e. overbalance) has produced results, and the result is mass defection. Star Wars Saga failed, and they didn't take the hint. D&D 4 is failing, let's see if they catch on now. In the end if they don't, I'm confident that someone will always be producing a game called Dungeons & Dragons, and in the meantime, Pathfinder is outstanding. |
|
|
|
Post by raynorn on Nov 24, 2010 8:01:27 GMT -5
I view D&D as a poor role playing game but a fairly decent party/dungeon crawl game. I picked up the essentials box set which gives you the ability to play up to second level, but if you play it as a party game every blue moon the low level cap is a non-issue. It plays quickly and easily and it is a good way to spend a Saturday night.
|
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Nov 24, 2010 8:07:49 GMT -5
I view D&D as a poor role playing game but a fairly decent party/dungeon crawl game. I picked up the essentials box set which gives you the ability to play up to second level, but if you play it as a party game every blue moon the low level cap is a non-issue. It plays quickly and easily and it is a good way to spend a Saturday night. The Castle Ravenloft game is very similar, and can be a lot of fun (and nobody has to DM!) |
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Nov 24, 2010 8:11:34 GMT -5
The difference between Paizo (who makes Pathfinder) and Wizards in my experience: look at the Paizo boards sometime. The community is great, the developers share the beta testing experience with players, and frequently answer questions or clarify rules when asked. You feel like you're a part of something, and you feel as though Paizo won't leave you behind. I don't get that feeling with Wizards.
Again, just my experience. I really like the work Paizo has done and how they've done it, and I'm keeping an eye on their products.
~TWF
|
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Nov 24, 2010 8:24:33 GMT -5
Paizo is very responsive, but I still think they don't quite "get it" when it comes to game balance. They seem to be following the WotC model in that area; put out a core book, and then everything that comes after it increases the power curve monumentally. The "Advanced Players Guide" has at least two classes that no sane person could look at and consider balanced.
That aside, though, I definitely think Paizo is better at knowing what the players (and thus, their potential customers) want than WotC/Hasbro.
|
|
|
|
Post by raynorn on Nov 24, 2010 8:38:00 GMT -5
I view D&D as a poor role playing game but a fairly decent party/dungeon crawl game. I picked up the essentials box set which gives you the ability to play up to second level, but if you play it as a party game every blue moon the low level cap is a non-issue. It plays quickly and easily and it is a good way to spend a Saturday night. The Castle Ravenloft game is very similar, and can be a lot of fun (and nobody has to DM!) That sounds awesome! I'll look for it. |
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Nov 24, 2010 9:08:47 GMT -5
Yeah, the APG is a little funny that way. I'm surprised they released some of that content, since it doesn't seem finished/ready to me. But still, they're on the right track.
~TWF
|
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Nov 24, 2010 9:38:14 GMT -5
Yeah, the APG is a little funny that way. I'm surprised they released some of that content, since it doesn't seem finished/ready to me. But still, they're on the right track. ~TWF Paizo needs to adapt their thinking a little. They used to publish magazines, and had no responsibility for the long term health of the game itself. If they published wonky, unbalanced, or just plain stupid material, nobody really cared. The volume of stuff they put out meant that some of it was going to be good, and some of it not so good. As long as, in the balance, they were providing people with stuff they liked, they were golden. What they need to realize now is that everything they put out is going to be seen as "official," and thats a charge they need to take very seriously. Pathfinder will only survive as long as they avoid nuking the system. I don't think they've got the kind of money to afford a 3E/3.5 type fiasco (meaning that the current edition of Pathfinder is going to have to last a few years before they can get away with a new update). |
|
|
|
Post by shenron on Nov 24, 2010 13:06:19 GMT -5
Ya, I hope pathfinder does not nuke the system either, and in my opinion there is not to much more that can be done with 3.8 besides reworking it into a whole new system.
Pathfinder also produced one of the best DMG guides I have seen in a long while.
As for the Advanced players guide? They had some crazy stuff in there but the best thing about that book is all of the base class options. So you can have multiple fighters but non would be completely the same.
I am really excited for the Bestiary 2 that comes out in January. Oh ya, producing Bestiary's does not bother me, that can come out with one every year, more monsters are always needed.
I have to agree with WK, I think they are on the right track and I hope they stay on it.
As for Wizards and 4th edition? I will admit the rules are great, especially the combat rules but it does seem to be lacking something. I have run a few 4th ed. games and it worked out well. I think Wizards would lose a lot of business if they went to a 5th edition or even a 4.5 edition regardless of it is needed. They need to do something either put out a badass generic setting book or an optional rules book or something.
In all honesty. my heart is with Pathfinder and TSR's 2nd edition.
I still have hope for 4th edition and would play it/run it.
|
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Nov 24, 2010 13:15:44 GMT -5
As for the Advanced players guide? They had some crazy stuff in there but the best thing about that book is all of the base class options. So you can have multiple fighters but non would be completely the same. Unfortunately, a ton of those options are terribly unbalanced. What you give up in exchange for what you receive is often either way too good, or simply not at all worthwhile. |
|
|
|
Post by Cernunnos on Nov 24, 2010 13:33:11 GMT -5
Actually... maybe they aren't selling as much because people like me have boycott them due to the fact they dropped SAGA on purpose! |
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Nov 24, 2010 13:38:45 GMT -5
Actually... maybe they aren't selling as much because people like me have boycott them due to the fact they dropped SAGA on purpose! If by "on purpose" you mean "because it was unprofitable and unpopular" then you're correct. Most companies will drop a product that isn't selling. But to your general point, I'm gonna have to disappoint you. Star Wars sales were a tiny tiny percentage of D&D sales. Even if everybody who was even peripherally interested in d20 Star Wars products stopped buying D&D stuff, the dip in the sales numbers would look like a statistical anomaly, not a protest But if you like Saga, I don't get why you don't love D&D4. D&D4 is all the same mistakes as Saga, amplified to their obvious extension, and with all the terrible mistakes edited out. But don't worry... they still made it a Principal Skinner system. <Principal Skinner> (originally commenting on the state of public education in America, but totally appropriate to D&D4 as well...) "All I know is that nobody is special anymore, and everybody is just as good at everything as everybody else." |
|
|
|
Post by Brainstem on Nov 24, 2010 13:43:39 GMT -5
Actually... maybe they aren't selling as much because people like me have boycott them due to the fact they dropped SAGA on purpose! This. Saga was always a blast to play, however (to pre-empt you, WK), it was the most fun with an all-Jedi group or with no player use of splat books. I've heard a lot about Pathfinder, but haven't heard why it's so great. Enlighten me? |
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Nov 24, 2010 14:16:11 GMT -5
I don't get whats so fun about Saga. It's a power gamers wet dream. There are so many stupid "I take you out in one round" builds for Saga that it makes me want to vomit. Not to mention the utter sameness of it all. I LOVED Saga. Until I played it with people like Chuck. Pathfinder is good because it gets rid of a lot (not all  ) of what was essentially wrong with 3.5. All of the (core) classes are balanced against one another (more or less, depending on your tolerance for "non-combat balance", which it relies on heavily). It retains all of the "fast and loose" fun of a Dungeons & Dragons game, without sacrificing as much in the balance department as 2nd Edition and 3/3.5 did. |
|
) of what was essentially wrong with 3.5. All of the (core) classes are balanced against one another (more or less, depending on your tolerance for "non-combat balance", which it relies on heavily). It retains all of the "fast and loose" fun of a Dungeons & Dragons game, without sacrificing as much in the balance department as 2nd Edition and 3/3.5 did.