# Mad at Paizo?



## Mercador (Aug 29, 2019)

On a recent news post about PF2E Bestiary 2, I was wondering if it was deseperation that announcing stuff so much in advance, to which point Morrus told me that I might be an outlier;



Morrus said:


> I feel that you might be an outlier with this perception.




To which point I'm starting to wonder why I am so mad at them? It's totally normal for them to go forward and wanting to renew their franchise, DnD did that 5 times already (and I guess we'll see 6th by 2025). So why am I that mad at them? The only thing that I could find is that I'm sad to see all those books going to waste but that's only a material issue. It's like I feel betrayed. 

Am I alone with this sentiment? It's a not a joke question, I'm truly curious about this.


----------



## The Crimson Binome (Aug 29, 2019)

I'm not mad. I'm just slightly disappointed.

But I have long since given up hope that Paizo (or WotC) would release the kind of game that I want to play.


----------



## Enrico Poli1 (Aug 29, 2019)

For them, it's a mere matter of survival. PF1 was saturated. They had to publish a new edition and re-do all the material, or die.

I am personally grateful to Paizo. They produced Age of Worms, Savage Tide and other fantastic adventure paths. 

But I don't think they'll be able to challenge 5e, whose lessons they failed to learn from.
I'm done with unnecessarily complex games.


----------



## Morrus (Aug 29, 2019)

Mercador said:


> On a recent news post about PF2E Bestiary 2, I was wondering if it was deseperation that announcing stuff so much in advance, to which point Morrus told me that I might be an outlier;
> 
> 
> 
> ...




To clarify, I didn’t comment on the probability of your being mad at Paizo for some reason, merely on your perception of them announcing a product as seeming “desperate”. I’m sure plenty of peopleare mad at companies for making new editions.


----------



## Retreater (Aug 29, 2019)

Pathfinder 1 had a darned good run of a decade. Paizo (and 3PPs) made a lot of great material for it that created countless hours of enjoyment for many fans. 
Sure, I purchased a lot of material for it that I still haven't had the opportunity to use. I've done that for every edition and game system I've ever played. That's on me. I can't blame Paizo for publishing a new edition when I haven't run all of The Mummy's Mask or used every monster in the Bestiary 4. That's like blaming Sony for making a PS5 when you still have PS4 games to play.
The good news is you can still play PF1 material (just like I enjoy playing classic video games). I'm sure you won't have a hard time finding people who still love PF1 to share in the experiences with you.


----------



## LordEntrails (Aug 29, 2019)

Because you are emotionally invested in 1E. Maybe you have a history with D&D 3/3.5 and felt that when you moved to PF you found a "forever home"?

It's understandable to feel emotional about something changing or ending. But ask yourself this, is there enough 1E material available that you could play 1E for the rest of your life and not duplicate or run out of stuff? I suspect the answer is yes. So then it's not like you are being "left behind" but rather that their is nothing more you need so Paizo has moved on to something new...


----------



## DaveMage (Aug 29, 2019)

Since playing RPGs are emotional buy-ins, it makes sense that you'd be mad at the company that is no longer making the game you like.

And while I too am disappointed they went with PF2, I have _so much_ content for PF1, that I can stay with PF1 for the next 10-20 years and not remotely run out of stuff to do.


----------



## CleverNickName (Aug 30, 2019)

I miss Dragon Magazine, but that's the only negative emotion I have toward Paizo and it isn't even their fault. 

As for the 2nd Edition Pathfinder releases, I'm not upset at all.  It was inevitable that Paizo would release a new edition someday, and frankly I'm surprised it took them this long.


----------



## MichaelSomething (Aug 30, 2019)

You feel that Paizo is abandoning you by stopping production of 1st edition?


----------



## Doug McCrae (Aug 30, 2019)

I occasionally get angry if I buy an rpg product and it turns out to be terrible, which has certainly happened a few times. But I don't get mad at rpg companies for publishing new rpgs or new editions - it's what they do. Indeed, it's what they have to do to stay in business.


----------



## cmad1977 (Aug 30, 2019)

I won’t be playing it but I hope it’s a good game. 
Is the PF1 stuff not really compatible?


----------



## Kramodlog (Aug 30, 2019)

3rd edition (3.0, 3.5 and 3.75 (aka Pathfinder)) lasted more or less 20 years. That is almost as good as 1st edition D&D. It lasted 21 years. Pathfinder had a very good run. It even dethroned D&D for a while.

Paizo pas bound to make PF 2e. The dissapointment comes from the lack of backward compatibility. If people bought PF over 4e it was because of backward compatibility to 3.5. And superior quality. 

As for announcing products a year in advance, Paizo has been doing that for ever. And people were complaining of the lack of monsters after 5e's launch, so this sounds like good business.


----------



## Campbell (Aug 30, 2019)

cmad1977 said:


> I won’t be playing it but I hope it’s a good game.
> Is the PF1 stuff not really compatible?




Adventures are largely compatible if the monsters have been updated. They made a concerted effort to make sure monsters are of a comparable level. Character options largely are not.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 30, 2019)

Morrus said:


> To clarify, I didn’t comment on the probability of your being mad at Paizo for some reason, merely on your perception of them announcing a product as seeming “desperate”. I’m sure plenty of peopleare mad at companies for making new editions.




I wouldn't call it "desperate," but the pace at which they are putting information out there seems manic, compared to other companies.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 30, 2019)

Mercador said:


> On a recent news post about PF2E Bestiary 2, I was wondering if it was deseperation that announcing stuff so much in advance, to which point Morrus told me that I might be an outlier;
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Your books aren't going to waste, the Paizo Police won't confiscate your older material. I'm sure you are not alone in feeling upset, I'm more personally upset with them for failing to interest me.


----------



## Xenonnonex (Aug 30, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> I wouldn't call it "desperate," but the pace at which they are putting information out there seems manic, compared to other companies.



I'm worried they can't sustain their employee growth, they're quite a large company in terms of staff. If the tales of lacklustre sales continue, I'm worried if  there will be mass layoffs.


----------



## darjr (Aug 30, 2019)

Xenonnonex said:


> I'm worried they can't sustain their employee growth, they're quite a large company in terms of staff. If the tales of lacklustre sales continue, I'm worried if  there will be mass layoffs.



Wait? What tales? The core book hit number one at Amazon for goodness sake. It made the bestseller list at FREAKING AMAZON. 

That’s incredible sales. 

I don’t have an iron in this fire. Im not a fan of PF2. FYI. So I’m not biased in that way. So I say this as a third party, PF2 has sold better than almost all other books. Not just RPGs, books! 

If making the bestseller list on Amazon isn’t a sign of, not just good, but freakishly amazing sales, then there isn’t one.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 30, 2019)

Xenonnonex said:


> I'm worried they can't sustain their employee growth, they're quite a large company in terms of staff. If the tales of lacklustre sales continue, I'm worried if  there will be mass layoffs.




Like @darjr says, PF2 sales have been really great by industry standards: if these sales lead to layoffs, that would be due to a business side problem, not the game.


----------



## Xenonnonex (Aug 30, 2019)

darjr said:


> Wait? What tales? The core book hit number one at Amazon for goodness sake. It made the bestseller list at FREAKING AMAZON.
> 
> That’s incredible sales.
> 
> ...





Parmandur said:


> Like @darjr says, PF2 sales have been really great by industry standards: if these sales lead to layoffs, that would be due to a business side problem, not the game.




More talking about the hearsay of tons of product leftover at Gencon, and sure Amazon sales have initially been very good, incredible, but the question is whether they can sustain that. And it is looking like sales have been dropping quite a fair bit on Amazon.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 30, 2019)

Xenonnonex said:


> More talking about the hearsay of tons of product leftover at Gencon, and sure Amazon sales have initially been very good, incredible, but the question is whether they can sustain that. And it is looking like sales have been dropping quite a fair bit on Amazon.




They've stabilized at a pretty great place, selling better than Starfinder or Call of Cthulu. Is it the best selling RPG of all time? No. If it needed to be they had deeper problems as a company.

The Gen Con thing is weird, though.


----------



## darjr (Aug 30, 2019)

Edit to say its a month not a day.

Hmmm so let’s see. Currently the core book is at 1234 ASR. From what I’ve read at other places that’s hundreds of books a day. This calculator tries to give a solid number which seems on the low side but for a sales rank of 1200 according to them that’s almost 600 books a month. Is that good sales? @Morrus ?

I think so. It’s been much higher for most of the month.


----------



## darjr (Aug 30, 2019)

Forgot the link. FREE Amazon Sales Estimator - Predict Your Sales | Rank Calculator

I don’t know about extras at GenCon. Though I’d like to know.


----------



## darjr (Aug 30, 2019)

@Xenonnonex I don’t doubt you, I have no idea. But I’d be interested if you could point out a link or a quote? If you can’t or really don’t want too thats OK with me too. I get it.


----------



## Retreater (Aug 30, 2019)

darjr said:


> @Xenonnonex I don’t doubt you, I have no idea. But I’d be interested if you could point out a link or a quote? If you can’t or really don’t want too thats OK with me too. I get it.



I can speak to it, having gone by the Paizo booth numerous times and saw massive pallets of PF2 books there. They did move a good many early in the Con, but by Saturday and Sunday, the stacks didn't move much. Also, there were large stacks available at other retailers (for those who didn't want to wait in the Paizo "line" - which lasted only two days). There was a booth (Foam Brain) that had huge stacks of the Rulebook and Bestiary, probably about 5' tall, that they weren't moving at all. Other companies that I can't remember also were reselling the books.
Now maybe we need to congratulate Paizo on bringing plenty of product for all their fans? However, I think they may have overestimated demand. Past GenCons I remember them selling out of the 1st edition Beta Playtest, 1st edition core rules, Advanced Players Guide, Starfinder, and more. 
This can show a lot of things. Perhaps a lot of fans were buying at online retailers such as Amazon, or that Paizo has the resources to make huge print runs (which they didn't have with the 1st edition core rules). Or maybe it is tanking?


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 30, 2019)

Retreater said:


> I can speak to it, having gone by the Paizo booth numerous times and saw massive pallets of PF2 books there. They did move a good many early in the Con, but by Saturday and Sunday, the stacks didn't move much. Also, there were large stacks available at other retailers (for those who didn't want to wait in the Paizo "line" - which lasted only two days). There was a booth (Foam Brain) that had huge stacks of the Rulebook and Bestiary, probably about 5' tall, that they weren't moving at all. Other companies that I can't remember also were reselling the books.
> Now maybe we need to congratulate Paizo on bringing plenty of product for all their fans? However, I think they may have overestimated demand. Past GenCons I remember them selling out of the 1st edition Beta Playtest, 1st edition core rules, Advanced Players Guide, Starfinder, and more.
> This can show a lot of things. Perhaps a lot of fans were buying at online retailers such as Amazon, or that Paizo has the resources to make huge print runs (which they didn't have with the 1st edition core rules). Or maybe it is tanking?




It shows that there was a miscalculation for Gen Con: maybe everyone bought from Amazon to save a few bucks and avoid the lines.


----------



## ccs (Aug 30, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> They've stabilized at a pretty great place, selling better than Starfinder or Call of Cthulu. Is it the best selling RPG of all time? No. If it needed to be they had deeper problems as a company.
> 
> The Gen Con thing is weird, though.




Maybe there were a lot of people like me this time?  
I had a quite busy GC planned.  I'd have had zero time to read the book(s).  And I wouldn't get the discount my local shop gives me. 
Wich meant that if I'd bought them there I'd be lugging them around for a day for no reason.  Or at least back to the car on Sunday....  So why not just wait until I got home & pick them up in a few days when I'm going to be at the shop anyways?
Others I suspect saved even more on Amazon.  But my supporting my local shop is enlightened self interest.

Or maybe they simply had their sales estimates off?  It happens you know.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 30, 2019)

ccs said:


> Maybe there were a lot of people like me this time?
> I had a quite busy GC planned.  I'd have had zero time to read the book(s).  And I wouldn't get the discount my local shop gives me.
> Wich meant that if I'd bought them there I'd be lugging them around for a day for no reason.  Or at least back to the car on Sunday....  So why not just wait until I got home & pick them up in a few days when I'm going to be at the shop anyways?
> Others I suspect saved even more on Amazon.  But my supporting my local shop is enlightened self interest.
> ...




Well, that last part for sure, Paizo and third parties. Hard to extrapolate a broader pattern from that fact, though.


----------



## ccs (Aug 30, 2019)

Mercador said:


> On a recent news post about PF2E Bestiary 2, I was wondering if it was deseperation that announcing stuff so much in advance, to which point Morrus told me that I might be an outlier;
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Are you relatively new to PF1 &/or thinking about all the $ you've spent (wasted?) on a (now) previous edition?
Are you concerned that you won't be able to continue playing PF1?
Do you not like PF2?


----------



## Campbell (Aug 30, 2019)

Lisa Stevens addressed sales here.



			
				Lisa Stevens said:
			
		

> Qstor said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I agree that it is not really the best optics, but if you take them at their word they had a phenomenal Gencon. Paizo as a company has always been pretty straightforward. That's why I remained a fan of the company even though I was very much a Fourth Edition fan.


----------



## darjr (Aug 30, 2019)

to bring it back cause I think I derailed yet another thread. Sorry. 

I remember Lisa Stevens saying something about keeping the company small so that they could avoid the pitfalls of the past. Like the book churn treadmill, or the edition treadmill. I know they gotta do what they gotta do, but it does “seem” like those ideas were left behind and then Paizo fell into the same trap. Even if the book churn was a fraction of the 3.5 WotC book release cycle. I also know, we’re I still playing Pathfinder, that I would have appreciated something more like the 3.5 to Pathfinder change for the PF1 to PF2 change. Then maybe they could have put out that new style of Golarian setting, advancing the timeline, and doing new and different kind of cool books and adventure paths. 

My biggest early frustration with 4e was the stark incompatible systems. And part of why I liked 5e is it was more compatible to older stuff in ways that mattered most even if not directly rules compatible.

I think that kind of break has happened with PF1 and PF2. And that would be frustrating.


----------



## darjr (Aug 30, 2019)

> Nope. But that was by design. We literally took more books than we could actually sell given the number of cashiers that we had there. I didn't want a repeat of the Starfinder release where we ran out on Friday. So we took quite a lot. And sold more than we have ever sold of anything at GenCon. So it was a huge success for us.


----------



## Mercador (Aug 30, 2019)

Morrus said:


> To clarify, I didn’t comment on the probability of your being mad at Paizo for some reason, merely on your perception of them announcing a product as seeming “desperate”. I’m sure plenty of peopleare mad at companies for making new editions.



I heard you, I didn't take offense, no worries. I'm wondering why I'm still mad at them.


----------



## Mercador (Aug 30, 2019)

LordEntrails said:


> Because you are emotionally invested in 1E. Maybe you have a history with D&D 3/3.5 and felt that when you moved to PF you found a "forever home"?
> 
> It's understandable to feel emotional about something changing or ending. But ask yourself this, is there enough 1E material available that you could play 1E for the rest of your life and not duplicate or run out of stuff? I suspect the answer is yes. So then it's not like you are being "left behind" but rather that their is nothing more you need so Paizo has moved on to something new...



I had actually skipped 3/3.5 because I was on my early twenties and didn't had the money to purchase those. I did buy 5-6 books of the 2nd edition though when I was a teenager. But if I remember correctly, I felt the same when DnD 3e was announced. 

When I see all the PF1 books I have, I'm ok for the rest of my life, sure thing. But there's something that bothers me is that I always want a new book and I'm not too sure why.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 30, 2019)

Mercador said:


> I had actually skipped 3/3.5 because I was on my early twenties and didn't had the money to purchase those. I did buy 5-6 books of the 2nd edition though when I was a teenager. But if I remember correctly, I felt the same when DnD 3e was announced.
> 
> When I see all the PF1 books I have, I'm ok for the rest of my life, sure thing. But there's something that bothers me is that I always want a new book and I'm not too sure why.




It's kind of a high.


----------



## Mercador (Aug 30, 2019)

ccs said:


> Are you relatively new to PF1 &/or thinking about all the $ you've spent (wasted?) on a (now) previous edition?
> Are you concerned that you won't be able to continue playing PF1?
> Do you not like PF2?



1- The latter
2- Not that much, I read more than I play
3- I haven't buy it so I can't relate

I thought wrongfully that Paizo would continue adding new stuff about Golarion and Adventure Paths. That's probably why I'm mad and feel betrayed. As @DaveMage wrote it, there's an emotional bound there.


----------



## Mercador (Aug 30, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> It's kind of a high.



Yeah I guess and since it's pretty much the only content that I buy as a guilty pleasure, it makes sense.


----------



## Schmoe (Aug 30, 2019)

Mercador said:


> On a recent news post about PF2E Bestiary 2, I was wondering if it was deseperation that announcing stuff so much in advance, to which point Morrus told me that I might be an outlier;
> 
> To which point I'm starting to wonder why I am so mad at them? It's totally normal for them to go forward and wanting to renew their franchise, DnD did that 5 times already (and I guess we'll see 6th by 2025). So why am I that mad at them? The only thing that I could find is that I'm sad to see all those books going to waste but that's only a material issue. It's like I feel betrayed.
> 
> Am I alone with this sentiment? It's a not a joke question, I'm truly curious about this.




I don't know if you're alone, but I'm not really feeling the anger.  In fact, I'm pretty happy that they decided to start over.  PF1 had long ago drifted far away from something I felt I could pick up, but PF2 means I now have a new, interesting option to check out.


----------



## Mercador (Aug 30, 2019)

Schmoe said:


> I don't know if you're alone, but I'm not really feeling the anger.  In fact, I'm pretty happy that they decided to start over.  PF1 had long ago drifted far away from something I felt I could pick up, but PF2 means I now have a new, interesting option to check out.



You are going from DnD5e to PF2e? Have you bought PF1 books? I'm asking because you might be the target audience they were after.


----------



## ccs (Aug 30, 2019)

Mercador said:


> 1- The latter
> 2- Not that much, I read more than I play
> 3- I haven't buy it so I can't relate
> 
> I thought wrongfully that Paizo would continue adding new stuff about Golarion and Adventure Paths. That's probably why I'm mad and feel betrayed. As @DaveMage wrote it, there's an emotional bound there.




Ahh.  Well.  In that case I've got good news for you:








						Pathfinder Adventure Paths: Epic Stories For Your Tabletop | Paizo
					

Make every game session epic with a series of adventures designed to take your characters from levels 1-20. Released monthly, each 96-page adventure provides Game Masters with the story, NPCs, monsters, magic, and more that they need to make sure every encounter is memorable.




					paizo.com
				




See Age of Ashes & Extinction Curse?  Those are the 1st two APs for PF2.  I'm sure there'll be more.  One volume per month.
I'm also certain that they'll continue revealing bits of Golarion through single adventures, area books, Race & class books, etc. 

And if you read more than you play?  Then does it really matter what the edition # is?

BTW, PF2 doesn't wipe out all the story you've read so far.  The main book makes direct reference to the results of various APs in the section about the world.
Same world, same setting, same continuity. Just different mechanics on the player/GM side of things.


----------



## Mercador (Aug 30, 2019)

ccs said:


> And if you read more than you play?  Then does it really matter what the edition # is?



I don't know, that's what I'm looking for, I'm trying to understand why I feel that the 2e is bad (from my point of view).


----------



## Imaro (Aug 30, 2019)

darjr said:


> Hmmm so let’s see. Currently the core book is at 1234 ASR. From what I’ve read at other places that’s hundreds of books a day. This calculator tries to give a solid number which seems on the low side but for a sales rank of 1200 according to them that’s almost 600 books a day. Is that good sales? @Morrus ?
> 
> I think so. It’s been much higher for most of the month.




Just wanted to clarify... isn't that 600 in a month?


----------



## Schmoe (Aug 30, 2019)

Mercador said:


> You are going from DnD5e to PF2e? Have you bought PF1 books? I'm asking because you might be the target audience they were after.




Hah, maybe, but probably not.  I'd be going from 3.5 to PF2.  I bought the PF1 core book but didn't get a chance to play for the next 3-4 years due to IRL things.  By the time I was able to play again, I felt more comfortable going back to 3.5.  Although I own 5e and have played it a bit, I still prefer 3.5.


----------



## Schmoe (Aug 30, 2019)

Imaro said:


> Just wanted to clarify... isn't that 600 in a month?




According to the calculater, yes.  But it's kind of weird, because even the #1 only gives 1500 sales/month.  That seems low for the #1 best selling book on Amazon.


----------



## darjr (Aug 30, 2019)

600 a month...... I think you are right.

See this one Amazon Sales Rank Calculator


----------



## darjr (Aug 30, 2019)

But note the pf2e sales rank was under the phb for a few short hours. I wish I had captured the actual sales rank.


----------



## Imaro (Aug 30, 2019)

darjr said:


> 600 a month...... I think you are right.
> 
> See this one Amazon Sales Rank Calculator




That one actually seems more questionable as there are actual booksellers in the comment section letting the creator know his calculations seem inflated...

EDIT: Anyway no biggie I was just asking for clarification around the 600 per day comment...


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 30, 2019)

Schmoe said:


> According to the calculater, yes.  But it's kind of weird, because even the #1 only gives 1500 sales/month.  That seems low for the #1 best selling book on Amazon.




That's ~50 books a day: the book industry is funny.


----------



## Schmoe (Aug 30, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> That's ~50 books a day: the book industry is funny.



Interesting, huh. 

Well, the drop-off between #1 and #1234 (the number I think I saw from darjr) is only a drop from 1500 to 600 books/month, which means PF2 has 40% of the sales of 5e.  From what I understand, 5e sales continue to _increase_ from its launch, so 40% doesn't actually seem too bad.


----------



## Imaro (Aug 30, 2019)

Here's another one... Amazon Book Sales Calculator | TCK Publishing

Honestly these things seem all over the place...


----------



## ccs (Aug 30, 2019)

Mercador said:


> I don't know, that's what I'm looking for, I'm trying to understand why I feel that the 2e is bad (from my point of view).




Well, since you've said that you don't know about the new _rules_, & they haven't wiped anything out storywise, I don't think you should feel bad.

The only real issue in reading the new stuff might be the stat blocks as they'll be a bit different & littered with stupid little arrow symbols.  And you might not know exactly what some of the feats do.


----------



## zztong (Aug 30, 2019)

Mercador said:


> Am I alone with this sentiment? It's a not a joke question, I'm truly curious about this.




I don't hate Paizo. I don't care for 2e. Normally, I just ignore games I don't like.

However, a friend of mine likes 2e enough to want to run it. He has limited time to prepare (busy life) and I end up having to assist by looking up rules, etc. In order to be a good friend I'm forced to keep my nose in 2e. The last time this happened was with D&D 4e. It turned out few people at the table liked the 4e rules and most were just quietly miserable for a year. The folks at the table seem equally restless about 2e, though a bit more vocal this time. Some want to shift to D&D 5e. (We had been playing PF1 before the PF2 playtest.)

There will come a time when my friend needs a break from running and it will be my turn to run. I know he would prefer every DM run the same game because it can be easier on our casual players not to change systems. I'll want to run some other system.

So, again, I don't hate Paizo. What they're doing makes sense. Yet, it has created stress at the game table between friends. The group is unlikely to break up, but there's bound to be a lot of hand-wringing over the next year. I suspect it will ultimately be the end of the notion that all DMs run the same game and contribute to the same timeline/story.


----------



## zztong (Aug 30, 2019)

darjr said:


> that’s almost 600 books a month. Is that good sales?




A couple of decades ago I and some friends wrote a book for Hero Games. I vaguely recall they would sell about 2,000 copies of a new supplement and those would come out I want to say quarterly. So 600 a month sounds good, to me the key questions are "What do they make per sale?" and "What are their expenses?"

A couple of websites suggest Paizo has about 100 employees. That's around 99 to 99.5 more full-time employees than Hero Games had. Paizo has offices; Hero Games ran out of a basement.

The following number are bunk. They're from a different time, a different company, and filtered through my faulty memory. I lay them out here for discussion purposes...

We used to talk about making about 12% of cover price. Game stores bought the product at 50% cover, distributors bought at 25% cover. (Everybody doubled their money on a sale.) Of the 25% coming to the game company, half was going out in production costs and paying the artists and authors. I'm sure the model has changed since the 1990s.

So, again this is bunk, but applying it to a $60 cover price, $30 price to game store, $15 price to distributor, so $7.50 to Paizo after expenses... except when Paizo makes a direct sale then they get all $60. GenCon sales would have all been direct and they would have sold thousands of copies. Of course, that also assumes Paizo offers no discounts to anyone along the line. Again, my numbers are wrong. They're from an old model and a different company.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Aug 30, 2019)

Ten years is enough time for an edition. 

Not only there are lots of titles published by Paizo, but by third party companies. 

Paizo can have a good future with Starfinder and maybe a third line about Gothic horror + noir punk. (the land of the dread, its version of Ravenloft is canon). 

Pathfinder isn't only the TTRPG books, but also other products like the videogames, comics or novels. 

Their modules are best-sellers and that is very important.

In the worst case Paizo would be bought by Hasbro but this wouldn't be the end of the franchise at all. Paizo could still sell new titles with D&D 5th Ed rules, but it isn't necessary yet. 

I am a collector, and I would rather books in my naive language, and where I live I can't buy the English version. I have to wait more time to ge certain titles, and any times I can't, for example the Spanish translation of Bestiary 3 and maybe ultimate magic guide.


----------



## GrahamWills (Aug 30, 2019)

Schmoe said:


> According to the calculater, yes.  But it's kind of weird, because even the #1 only gives 1500 sales/month.  That seems low for the #1 best selling book on Amazon.




_Moral_: It sucks being an author. Yeah, this is really the reality. We think of best-selling books selling millions per year, whereas actually 10,000 is a great number. Being an author is a decision to bring joy to others at the expense of your income. I am overwhelmingly grateful to those why try on this path.


----------



## S'mon (Aug 30, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> They've stabilized at a pretty great place, selling better than Starfinder or Call of Cthulu. Is it the best selling RPG of all time? No. If it needed to be they had deeper problems as a company.
> 
> The Gen Con thing is weird, though.




I'm a bit surprised they're behind Xanathar's on amazon.co.uk - I'm not surprised they're behind the 5e PHB, but I thought the core book would be up with the 5e DMG & MM at least for a while after release.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 30, 2019)

S'mon said:


> I'm a bit surprised they're behind Xanathar's on amazon.co.uk - I'm not surprised they're behind the 5e PHB, but I thought the core book would be up with the 5e DMG & MM at least for a while after release.




No reason to suppose that they would be: Xanathar's is one of the best selling D&D books ever made, recall.


----------



## S'mon (Aug 30, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> No reason to suppose that they would be: Xanathar's is one of the best selling D&D books ever made, recall.




I guess I didn't know it was so popular! It is good though - good stuff for both GMs and players.


----------



## Mercador (Aug 30, 2019)

S'mon said:


> I'm a bit surprised they're behind Xanathar's on amazon.co.uk - I'm not surprised they're behind the 5e PHB, but I thought the core book would be up with the 5e DMG & MM at least for a while after release.



Yeah, as much as I like to write, it would be a financial suicide to try to do that as a living.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 30, 2019)

S'mon said:


> I guess I didn't know it was so popular! It is good though - good stuff for both GMs and players.




It started out it's publication history by hitting #1 on the major bookseller lists, and has remained a constant high seller on Amazon for nearly 2 years. Which is astonishingly absurd, in the history of secondary RPG supplements.


----------



## Morrus (Aug 30, 2019)

Retreater said:


> I can speak to it, having gone by the Paizo booth numerous times and saw massive pallets of PF2 books there.




That's what you were supposed to see. They even posted lots of pictures of those massive pallets of PF2 books on social media. I mean, they could have brought along too few and sold out early (I did thatt with Luna-1 at UKGE - sold out by lunchtime first day; it's easy to do). I guess they preferred to keep on selling. The Gen Con sales are a little subset of the many more pallets in their warehouse.


----------



## Mercador (Aug 30, 2019)

Morrus said:


> That's what you were supposed to see. They even posted lots of pictures of those massive pallets of PF2 books on social media. I mean, they could have brought along too few and sold out early (I did thatt with Luna-1 at UKGE - sold out by lunchtime first day; it's easy to do). I guess they preferred to keep on selling. The Gen Con sales are a little subset of the many more pallets in their warehouse.



When they sell copies on GenCon, did they get more money per book, since there's no middleman?


----------



## Green Onceler (Aug 31, 2019)

I'm a huge Pathfinder fanboy. I disliked the playtest and have lost all interest in Second Edition, at least for the time being.

Still, I'm not mad at Paizo at all. They're a great company and I'm almost relieved the decade long torrent of 1e books has ceased. It has allowed me to step back and decide what I really need. I feel I have nearly completed my 1e collection, minus a few outstanding items.

I just hope I can continue to find players for the original system. I'm planning a trans-continental relocation early next year, which will necessitate finding/forming a new group. Assuming I have players, I can play for many, many years with what I have currently unused.


----------



## MNblockhead (Aug 31, 2019)

I'm sure that I'll feel the same reason when D&D 6E is released. But I already have more material than I'll be able to use for many years. I have a tendency to buy whatever cool book is released, but I've finally hit the point where I stopped doing that. I was spending too much money on more content than I can use.  When 6e comes out I'll still have plenty of material to get through and I can still buy a lot of what I skipped. 

And, besides, there are many other game systems out there that I've not played. 

Perhaps to get over your angst, you should take a break from Pathfinder and D&D for that matter and try a completely new system.  I find that I much more enjoy buying books for new systems at this time. I don't feel a need to be a completionist, I just get whatever core rules I need and an adventure path. Even a short campaign will give me plenty of hours of enjoyment to make it worth the cost. Then I can just move on to yet another system. 

Instead of buying another bestiary or setting book for D&D I would not rather spend my money on a completely new system.


----------



## Mercador (Aug 31, 2019)

MNblockhead said:


> Perhaps to get over your angst, you should take a break from Pathfinder and D&D for that matter and try a completely new system.



That's exactly what I did; I purchased Trudvang and Grim&Perilous recently plus several old Cyberpunk books. But for some reason, I read around 10-15% of them and I'm looking for something else. I think @Parmandur found out, it's like a drug hit so it bothers me a bit.


----------



## DaveMage (Aug 31, 2019)

Mercador - if you want to continue to play PF1, and want some really good stuff for it, visit Frog God Games because they are having a massive Pathfinder 1 sale right now (just make sure you choose the Pathfinder rules when you order because they offer products for 3 different systems).  You can get the Slumbering Tsar hardback for $20.  This was a $150(!) hardback (and it even comes with a free PDF).  It's probably my favorite adventure of all time (and certainly my favorite for Pathfinder).


----------



## GreyLord (Aug 31, 2019)

Mercador said:


> On a recent news post about PF2E Bestiary 2, I was wondering if it was deseperation that announcing stuff so much in advance, to which point Morrus told me that I might be an outlier;
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I'm not really a pathfinder fan, but I think you might not be alone in your feeling.

I get the idea that many who felt betrayed by 4e eventually moved onto Pathfinder because it was compatible with 3.5 and in many ways was it's continuation.  Pathfinder in many ways built upon that foundation.

Moving so far away from it's roots of 3.5 and even Pathfinder 1e in some ways could feel very similar to the same type of betrayal that people felt at 4e.  

I do not think Paizo ever had to move onto PF2e IF they had stuck with their original premise.  The original idea they had launched was to keep on doing adventures that could be played with 3.5 D&D.  They needed a ruleset that was also compatible so that new people coming into it could also play their Adventures.

If they had stopped with the Core rulebook and maybe the APG and two or three Bestiaries I think they could have continued for a lot longer of a time with just publishing adventures.

However, Paizo expanded FAR beyond the initial premise that the stated.  Instead of just making a compatible game system, they expanded it...A LOT.  They increased the number of books they made and products.  In doing so they also expanded how many people they hired and how many workers they employed.  This meant that they had a higher necessary inflow of cash and in order to keep this inflow, they had to keep on making even more rules, more books, and more products.

Unlike the original intent they expressed this meant that they could not just do Adventures forever, they needed that extra cash from Pawns, Rulebooks, and other things to fund their additional employees and investments.  This meant, that as sales started to slacken off (or the likelihood that they would at least) they needed to have something to reinvigorate them.

Ala...Pathfinder 2e.

The problem I see is that, just like 4e changed so drastically differently fro 3e and 3.5, Pathfinder 2e from what I've read here, is also very changed from Pathfinder 1e.

So, all those that jumped on PF1e because they felt betrayed by 4e, could have a strong possibility of feeling very similarly when Paizo jumped to such a different system than PF1e in their switch to PF2e.

I don't think their announcement of the Bestiary is that unusual.  Paizo has at times announced many things up to a year in advance, and their release date does not seem to be over a year away for this book.

I think they sometimes announce their adventure paths up to a year in advance, and they announced 2e pretty far in advance as well.


----------



## dave2008 (Aug 31, 2019)

GrahamWills said:


> _Moral_: It sucks being an author. Yeah, this is really the reality. We think of best-selling books selling millions per year, whereas actually 10,000 is a great number. Being an author is a decision to bring joy to others at the expense of your income. I am overwhelmingly grateful to those why try on this path.




Isn't it WotC's goal* for 5e was that every book run sell 150,000 copies?  I seem to remember reading that somewhere.

*This was their explanation (one of them) for slow production schedule.  They didn't want to release a book unless it could sell 150,000 copies (if I remember correctly)


----------



## Mercador (Aug 31, 2019)

DaveMage said:


> Mercador - if you want to continue to play PF1, and want some really good stuff for it, visit Frog God Games because they are having a massive Pathfinder 1 sale right now (just make sure you choose the Pathfinder rules when you order because they offer products for 3 different systems).



I noticed that Paizo also put a 50% on every PF1 earlier this week. I guess my local shop will do the same soon enough.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 31, 2019)

dave2008 said:


> Isn't WotC goal* for 5e was that every book run sell 150,000 copies?  I seem to remember reading that somewhere.
> 
> *This was their explanation (one of them) for slow production schedule.  They didn't want to release a book unless it could sell 150,000 copies (if I remember correctly)




Perkins said 100,000 a few years ago: never really sure if that was an honest or a flippant answer, or flippantly honest. However, their strategy is working no matter what their actual goal is, since they haven't changed it substantially in over 5 years.


----------



## Green Onceler (Aug 31, 2019)

Mercador said:


> I noticed that Paizo also put a 50% on every PF1 earlier this week. I guess my local shop will do the same soon enough.




The PF1 sale has been going on for a number of months.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 1, 2019)

Green Onceler said:


> The PF1 sale has been going on for a number of months.



Really? Oh wow, that was been a while I haven't looked up their site. To be honest, my last Paizo book is Starfinder Pact Worlds. I'm tempted to complete my PF1 collection but it will be money wasted.


----------



## Markh3rd (Sep 1, 2019)

Mercador said:


> Really? Oh wow, that was been a while I haven't looked up their site. To be honest, my last Paizo book is Starfinder Pact Worlds. I'm tempted to complete my PF1 collection but it will be money wasted.




Depends. 20 years from now it may be worth a hefty amount.  You never know.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Sep 1, 2019)

My opinion is the strategy of Hasbro/WotC is strengthen the power of D&D as brand. They don't want D&D only to sell books TTRPGs but also other types of products like comics, novels, toys, media or videogames.

This last is changing the industry. I would bet WotC now is playtesting d20 version of different TTRPGs by other rival publishers to create a true universal d20 where you can use the same monster stats to play with superheroes, transformers, G.I.Joe or Conan (isn't this public domain yet?). And they want to create the ultimate D&D videogame, maybe the Warcraft-killer, not only other Diablo clone, but mixing RTS, skimishes wargame and standar action RPG, with option to create your own quests, machinima, or asymetric games with a player as DM. 

Tablets will replace the character files by paper, and in some miniatures games the DM will be IA of an app in your mobile or tablet (you can play alone, even with your own house rules, but you will never know where is the trap or the monster in the other side of the door). Publishers will sell the books as "collector edition" but most of the sold products will be PDFs and something like a mixture of mod and DLC.  

Paizo still can publish a new Pathfinder spin-off, maybe something between pulp fiction and gothic-punk horror.


----------



## S'mon (Sep 1, 2019)

LuisCarlos17f said:


> Conan (isn't this public domain yet?).




Plenty of Conan stories are public domain. Howard died in 1936, so in the EU and most countries all his works went Public Domain January 1st 2007 at the latest (life+70). In theory under US copyright law publisher-owned works created by him could have a 95 year term from creation, which in theory would be 2031 for anything he wrote shortly before death - I doubt there are any such copyrights, generally Weird Tales & co didn't purchase copyrights from authors then register & renew them as would have been required, but it's possible in theory.


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 1, 2019)

Mercador said:


> Really? Oh wow, that was been a while I haven't looked up their site. To be honest, my last Paizo book is Starfinder Pact Worlds. I'm tempted to complete my PF1 collection but it will be money wasted.



Buy them on the cheap and then when they go out of print, sell them at a premium. It will be money gained.


----------



## CapnZapp (Sep 1, 2019)

LuisCarlos17f said:


> My opinion is the strategy of Hasbro/WotC is strengthen the power of D&D as brand. They don't want D&D only to sell books TTRPGs but also other types of products like comics, novels, toys, media or videogames.



I absolutely agree this is what I think WotC dreams of doing.

I'm just not sure it is good news for us ttrpg:ers.

Every time in history a RPG publisher had "branched out" that has meant more money in that other sector, and the the inevitable decline in focus on the ttrpg.

I like my ttrpg publishers best when the RPG is their only source of income.


----------



## CapnZapp (Sep 1, 2019)

S'mon said:


> Plenty of Conan stories are public domain. Howard died in 1936, so in the EU and most countries all his works went Public Domain January 1st 2007 at the latest (life+70). In theory under US copyright law publisher-owned works created by him could have a 95 year term from creation, which in theory would be 2031 for anything he wrote shortly before death - I doubt there are any such copyrights, generally Weird Tales & co didn't purchase copyrights from authors then register & renew them as would have been required, but it's possible in theory.



I believe this is still under dispute. That is, there is a company holding the Conan license.


----------



## S'mon (Sep 1, 2019)

CapnZapp said:


> I believe this is still under dispute. That is, there is a company holding the Conan license.




Well there is no dispute about the maximum duration of copyright.

But even when stuff is clearly in the Public Domain, like Edgar Rice Burroughs' works, companies will abuse Trade Mark law to try to keep control of popular characters. I gave a talk lamenting this to ALAI (Association of Literary Authors I think) about 20 years ago, and got the response from publishers' lawyers that using TM to create perpetual copyrights was a fine thing. _grrr_


----------



## Staffan (Sep 1, 2019)

Mercador said:


> When they sell copies on GenCon, did they get more money per book, since there's no middleman?



On one hand yes, but on the other hand they also have more expenses (booth costs, sales staff, shipping all the books there, and so on). So I'm guessing it's a net win, but not as big as you'd think.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Sep 1, 2019)

Maybe there is a trick for a d20 Conan by WotC. One option would be a settin in the post-Hyrboria age, practically a mash-up, with the same names of places or tribes but not the main and famous characters. The other option would be an agreement between Hasbro and Marvel for a cartoon show of Conan, a remake and with a different geography. WotC could publish a TTRPG about a spin-off, for example the hyrborian punk version of characters of public domain, also with the action figures, of course. But I warn this "neo-hyrboria" would be radically different, with races, magic and classes from D&D, almost a "jump the shark". Maybe Conan the king died time ago, and now he is the "conqueror" (or another generic name), a almost demigod, a legend or totem spirit, with followers like the binders with their vestige pact magic (and Red Sonya would be "the scarlett warmaiden" or the "saint blade").


----------



## Mercador (Sep 1, 2019)

Xenonnonex said:


> Buy them on the cheap and then when they go out of print, sell them at a premium. It will be money gained.



I still have my 2nd edition DnD books, I don't think I buy them to sell them, just for the sake of collecting I guess.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 1, 2019)

Mercador said:


> I still have my 2nd edition DnD books, I don't think I buy them to sell them, just for the sake of collecting I guess.




Then getting what you want us no waste.


----------



## EthanSental (Sep 1, 2019)

Probably should read the entire thread to make sure it wasn’t already stated....apologies if it was.  But PF2 core dropped off the face of the amazon sales chart in less than a week.  47 to 1100 in a week as I mentioned in the other paizo thread.  Granted this initial buying frenzy were the paizo faithful picking it up at a discount from amazon but it’s already dropped like a rock since.  It’s at 1105 today as I type on amazon.   Do I think it’s a great indicator? No since paizo has the direct sales channel and subscriptions but it’s a good overall indicator of sales since the PHB is still in the top 100 5 years later,,,,that’s amazing to me!

Already see page 3 has some sales discussion...sorry for the repetition


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 1, 2019)

EthanSental said:


> Probably should read the entire thread to make sure it wasn’t already stated....apologies if it was.  But PF2 core dropped off the face of the amazon sales chart in less than a week.  47 to 1100 in a week as I mentioned in the other paizo thread.  Granted this initial buying frenzy were the paizo faithful picking it up at a discount from amazon but it’s already dropped like a rock since.  It’s at 1105 today as I type on amazon.   Do I think it’s a great indicator? No since paizo has the direct sales channel and subscriptions but it’s a good overall indicator of sales since the PHB is still in the top 100 5 years later,,,,that’s amazing to me!




Yeah, PF2 is doing fine. 5E is just a force of nature, a snowball rolling down a mountain at this point.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 1, 2019)

EthanSental said:


> Probably should read the entire thread to make sure it wasn’t already stated....apologies if it was.  But PF2 core dropped off the face of the amazon sales chart in less than a week.  47 to 1100 in a week as I mentioned in the other paizo thread.  Granted this initial buying frenzy were the paizo faithful picking it up at a discount from amazon but it’s already dropped like a rock since.  It’s at 1105 today as I type on amazon.   Do I think it’s a great indicator? No since paizo has the direct sales channel and subscriptions but it’s a good overall indicator of sales since the PHB is still in the top 100 5 years later,,,,that’s amazing to me!
> 
> Already see page 3 has some sales discussion...sorry for the repetition




The really weird part is that Hoard if the Dragon Queen is currently selling better than the PF2 Bestiary, which means more people are shopping on Amazon planning to run Tyranny if Dragons than are planning to GM PF2.


----------



## DaveMage (Sep 2, 2019)

The true test of PF2 is sales going forward.  IIRC, the PF1 Core Rulebook's sales after a couple years were _increasing_ each year.  That's what PF2 will need to do as well to succeed.  If the initial sales are all they have, they are in trouble.  What will be interesting is the amount of product they end up producing.  I'm amazed that D&D 5E is now 5 years old...and they only have 25 or so books out.  After 5 years of Pathfinder, there had to be around 200 or so Pathfinder books.

It seems like Paizo is indeed making fewer books, but I think the sheer volume they made for PF1 was, ultimately, a problem.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 2, 2019)

DaveMage said:


> The true test of PF2 is sales going forward.  IIRC, the PF1 Core Rulebook's sales after a couple years were _increasing_ each year.  That's what PF2 will need to do as well to succeed.  If the initial sales are all they have, they are in trouble.  What will be interesting is the amount of product they end up producing.  I'm amazed that D&D 5E is now 5 years old...and they only have 25 or so books out.  After 5 years of Pathfinder, there had to be around 200 or so Pathfinder books.
> 
> It seems like Paizo is indeed making fewer books, but I think the sheer volume they made for PF1 was, ultimately, a problem.




22 hardcovers by the end of this year, and a couple of boxes sets. 5E overall sales have been growing by 30% a year up through last year, and do not seem to be getting worse.


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 2, 2019)

Mercador said:


> I still have my 2nd edition DnD books, I don't think I buy them to sell them, just for the sake of collecting I guess.



Ah, you suffer from the Collector's Curse. Something I know too well.


----------



## CapnZapp (Sep 2, 2019)

LuisCarlos17f said:


> (and Red Sonya would be "the scarlett warmaiden" or the "saint blade").



Nice.

Would play.


----------



## Aldarc (Sep 2, 2019)

I would definitely be curious how things might have differed had PF2 come out at early enough of a time when Matt Mercer would have considered it over 5e, though I think that the simplicity of 5e favors his playstyle. Still, Critical Role continuing with PF is one of the great "what ifs" of TableTop streaming.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 2, 2019)

Aldarc said:


> I would definitely be curious how things might have differed had PF2 come out at early enough of a time when Matt Mercer would have considered it over 5e, though I think that the simplicity of 5e favors his playstyle. Still, Critical Role continuing with PF is one of the great "what ifs" of TableTop streaming.



You should take a look in a different universe  Seriously though, I know only Critical Role by name so I can't relate, but I think Stranger Things got a way bigger influence than a youtube show, isn't it?


----------



## Aldarc (Sep 2, 2019)

Mercador said:


> You should take a look in a different universe  Seriously though, I know only Critical Role by name so I can't relate, but I think Stranger Things got a way bigger influence than a youtube show, isn't it?



I have encountered far more new people interested in our hobby (and D&D) via Critical Role than Stranger Things, even if the latter has a wider audience.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 2, 2019)

Aldarc said:


> I have encountered far more new people interested in our hobby (and D&D) via Critical Role than Stranger Things, even if the latter has a wider audience.



Different perspectives I guess. On my side, the DnD effect was nostalagia around me, feeling like the kids playing DnD with the red box.


----------



## Aldarc (Sep 2, 2019)

Mercador said:


> Different perspectives I guess. On my side, the DnD effect was nostalagia around me, feeling like the kids playing DnD with the red box.



I am not discounting nostalgia, but if the question is which media has attracted more people back to TTRPGs: Critical Role or Stranger Things? IME it has been Critical Role. We talk about the Matt Mercer Effect but not a Stranger Things Effect. Nostalgia is definitely present, but Stranger Things capitalizes on that nostalgia. And the TTRPG hobby has also been boosted (by extension) from the resurgent popularity of board games.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 2, 2019)

Mercador said:


> You should take a look in a different universe  Seriously though, I know only Critical Role by name so I can't relate, but I think Stranger Things got a way bigger influence than a youtube show, isn't it?




Critical Roll has six figure viewership.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 2, 2019)

Aldarc said:


> I would definitely be curious how things might have differed had PF2 come out at early enough of a time when Matt Mercer would have considered it over 5e, though I think that the simplicity of 5e favors his playstyle. Still, Critical Role continuing with PF is one of the great "what ifs" of TableTop streaming.




Yeah, having watched Mercer run PF in that Goblin one-shot, I don't think it would have been the same good fit.

I'm curious to see if PF2 breaks the streaming show barrier. There are games other than 5E being streamed, but 5E hugely dominates the streaming scene. I'm surprised there are not more Star Wars or Call of Cthulu or whatnot shows.


----------



## EthanSental (Sep 2, 2019)

Just personal opinion since we have no real data either way.   I think Stranger Things might have been the catalyst for those 40 and over that hadn’t played in a while since that demographic might not have been the people surfer YouTube for dnd live streams.  Younger players probably got pushed over the edge to start playing by critical role....hard to tell either way but both have helped bring players back or in to the hobby.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 2, 2019)

EthanSental said:


> Just personal opinion since we have no real data either way.   I think Stranger Things might have been the catalyst for those 40 and over that hadn’t played in a while since that demographic might not have been the people surfer YouTube for dnd live streams.  Younger players probably got pushed over the edge to start playing by critical role....hard to tell either way but both have helped bring players back or in to the hobby.




Perfect storm.


----------



## Aldarc (Sep 2, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> Yeah, having watched Mercer run PF in that Goblin one-shot, I don't think it would have been the same good fit.



In general, it's weird seeing Critical Role, which has STRONG influences in the world from 4e flavor and lore but run with 5e. But then again, I also think that 4e's world-building was highly underrated.



> I'm curious to see if PF2 breaks the streaming show barrier. There are games other than 5E being streamed, but 5E hugely dominates the streaming scene. I'm surprised there are not more Star Wars or Call of Cthulu or whatnot shows.



Paizo is definitely trying via their own channel and Geek & Sundry. It has to sting for Paizo knowing that Critical Role was run as a PF1 game before switching to 5e. However, my recommendation for Paizo would be to get a non-Paizo employee (i.e., not Jason Bulmahn) to GM these PF2 streams. This is not to say that Bulmahn is a bad GM. (On the contrary, he is fairly enjoyable to watch.) But I think that PF2 would benefit from a non-employee GMing the game since it can otherwise come across as corporate micromanaging or salesmanship of the new game rather than amateur enthusiasm for the new game.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 2, 2019)

Aldarc said:


> In general, it's weird seeing Critical Role, which has STRONG influences in the world from 4e flavor and lore but run with 5e. But then again, I also think that 4e's world-building was highly underrated.
> 
> Paizo is definitely trying via their own channel and Geek & Sundry. It has to sting for Paizo knowing that Critical Role was run as a PF1 game before switching to 5e. However, my recommendation for Paizo would be to get a non-Paizo employee (i.e., not Jason Bulmahn) to GM these PF2 streams. This is not to say that Bulmahn is a bad GM. (On the contrary, he is fairly enjoyable to watch.) But I think that PF2 would benefit from a non-employee GMing the game since it can otherwise come across as corporate micromanaging or salesmanship of the new game rather than amateur enthusiasm for the new game.




I was not a big fan of 4E as a game system, but I loved the story. 

The thing about the D&D streaming scene is that it is mostly not involved with WotC directly, it's just happening.


----------



## Fanaelialae (Sep 2, 2019)

Xenonnonex said:


> Buy them on the cheap and then when they go out of print, sell them at a premium. It will be money gained.



I don't know about this. Maybe if some of those books had a small print run. 

Even if there's a high demand in 20 years, you have to take supply into account. Most old D&D books sell at or below the price on their cover IME.

For example, the cheapest copy of The Red Hand of Doom is listed on Amazon at $56 (which is crazy, because you can buy a POD copy from DMs Guild for $20). Compare that to a different adventure from around the same time, The Sunless Citadel, which is under $16 on Amazon. An original 3.0 Player's Handbook can be had for under $4.

The discount helps, but as far as I'm aware, PF1 generally had a large print run, meaning you won't necessarily make much money, if any. And that assumes that in 20 years, POD won't have advanced to such a degree that it's extremely cheap to download the PDF and just print a new copy.


----------



## MNblockhead (Sep 2, 2019)

EthanSental said:


> Just personal opinion since we have no real data either way.   I think Stranger Things might have been the catalyst for those 40 and over that hadn’t played in a while since that demographic might not have been the people surfer YouTube for dnd live streams.  Younger players probably got pushed over the edge to start playing by critical role....hard to tell either way but both have helped bring players back or in to the hobby.




In my experience, Stranger Things got pre-teens / early teens like my son and his friends into the game. None of them watch or know of Critical role even though they watch various Twitch streams for Fortenight, Minecraft, etc.  

Critical Role seems to be late teens and 20s (Millenials). 

I'm not sure about folks who came of age in the 80s like myself. I just had not games for so long that I thought it would be fun. After moving back to my hometown and settling into suburban life, I started picking up various board games and played with some old friends. I thought about role playing but 4e wasn't what I was looking for and Pathfinder seemed to be too much.  When 5e came out, I checked it out and was sucked in. It was after buying the PHB that I looked for online examples of people playing the game that I found Chris Perkins's tutorials and from that found Acq. Inc.  Only later did I find Critical Role, and while I appreciate and have have enjoyed some CR sessions, it is just too much of a time sink to get into. 

Of my 30 and 40 something friends I only know one who regularly watches CR. Most don't watch any streaming games at all. I don't think CR brought many people above 35 into the game. Stranger Things probably did, but I don't know anyone older than 15 that was inspired to play D&D because of Stranger Things.   But it certainly normalized it for many parents whether ex-gamers or not.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Sep 2, 2019)

I guess in non English-speaker countries the effect by Stranger Things is bigger than game-live shows as Critical Role. I imagine future of these shows with a fusion of asymetric games where a player is the DM creating rooms and adding nPCs, monster and traps, and with a special software to the game become a machinima movie. 

The future of Paizo and third party publishers are the empty spaces aren't yet occupied by WotC, for example the genres of superheroes, space fantasy + planetary romance, or gothic-punk horror + urban fantasy. The first place will be who create the ultimate universal d20 system to play all the different genres, for example adaptations of famous franchises of cartoons, toys, comics, movie sagas or videogames. The d20 system isn't ready yet for the modern ages because the PCs and enemies with firearms and ammo then a survival horror becomes a duck hunt or maybe the total opposite. Worse if they try a videogame with the rules of d20 Modern and they notice ewoks can face stormtroopers (realism vs gameplay).


----------



## Mercador (Sep 2, 2019)

Paizo had a "Critical role" mock up isn't it? Or I dreamed that?

On my side, I'm 42 and I don't get the CR popularity, I guess I'm not the target audience. How could I put so many hours in front of youtube is beyond me, I'd rather play videogames or reading a book.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 2, 2019)

Fanaelialae said:


> I don't know about this. Maybe if some of those books had a small print run.




Yeah, I don't think they'll gain "value", it's just for a collecting purpose on my side.

By the way, you got the same avatar idea that I used for other forums for a while!


----------



## GreyLord (Sep 3, 2019)

Mercador said:


> Paizo had a "Critical role" mock up isn't it? Or I dreamed that?
> 
> On my side, I'm 42 and I don't get the CR popularity, I guess I'm not the target audience. How could I put so many hours in front of youtube is beyond me, I'd rather play videogames or reading a book.




It might not just be you.

My experience on this is obviously anecdotal, but I get a lot of new players in my games.  None of them thus far have been influenced to start from Critical Roll.  In fact, I think only one may even have watched it ever (they have a channel on one of the streaming things, like PlutoTV or something?)

On the otherhand, at least 1/3 of them have at least watched Stranger Things (and despite me not having a Netflix  account, I know all about it up to season 3 due to them talking about it).


----------



## darjr (Sep 3, 2019)

Ha! My investment agent JUST asked if I run those “stranger things” games. His kids run and play in part because of that show.


Also I think it is a perfect storm. I think 5e lends itself to play like how Critical Role plays and is part of their success, their fans try it and it’s much easier to deal with than 3.5 or its clones. 


I also think the PAX games were run more like a 5e game even when it was 4e rules based.


----------



## robus (Sep 3, 2019)

Mercador said:


> On my side, I'm 42 and I don't get the CR popularity, I guess I'm not the target audience. How could I put so many hours in front of youtube is beyond me, I'd rather play videogames or reading a book.




I've got 10 years on you and I listen to CR pretty regularly, but that's the key. It's a "radio play" with an enjoyable cast and an engaging story. I work on my own so it's nice to have a few hours of company each week. Actually watching the show? That would be difficult to pull off.

(Back to hurricane prep...  )


----------



## Campbell (Sep 3, 2019)

Generally I prefer Matt Colville's stream and Adam Koebel's streams to Critical Role. Matt Mercer is great and I really enjoy the one shots he is part of, but Critical Role does not feel much like a game to me. I have also been watching the Pathfinder 2 stream Knights of the Everflame and been enjoying it quite a bit. The characterization is solid, it is really cinematic, but you get the sense that they are definitely playing a game and things could sideways for the player characters at any minute.


----------



## Nebulous (Sep 3, 2019)

MNblockhead said:


> Of my 30 and 40 something friends I only know one who regularly watches CR. Most don't watch any streaming games at all. I don't think CR brought many people above 35 into the game. Stranger Things probably did, but I don't know anyone older than 15 that was inspired to play D&D because of Stranger Things.   But it certainly normalized it for many parents whether ex-gamers or not.




I'm mid 40s and haven't watched CR, although I'm aware of it. My friends in their 40s do not watch it either, BUT, the 28 year old in our group is addicted to CR and talks about it all the time. We don't get it lol


----------



## GrahamWills (Sep 3, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> Perkins said 100,000 a few years ago: never really sure if that was an honest or a flippant answer, or flippantly honest. However, their strategy is working no matter what their actual goal is, since they haven't changed it substantially in over 5 years.




Selling 20,000 a year for five years seems a reasonable goal for the biggest roleplaying property in the world. Sounds pretty achievable to me.


----------



## ikos (Sep 3, 2019)

robus said:


> I've got 10 years on you and I listen to CR pretty regularly, but that's the key. It's a "radio play" with an enjoyable cast and an engaging story. I work on my own so it's nice to have a few hours of company each week. Actually watching the show? That would be difficult to pull off.
> 
> (Back to hurricane prep...  )




Small world - we’re neighbors. The storm has just picked up speed - a 6 mph walk this direction.

P.S. A number of my crew also listen rather than watch CR while otherwise busy, doing yard work, painting, etc..


----------



## Mercador (Sep 3, 2019)

robus said:


> (Back to hurricane prep...  )




Good luck!


----------



## robus (Sep 3, 2019)

Mercador said:


> Good luck!



Thanks, storm just took a turn to come a bit closer to shore... fun times!


----------



## Zardnaar (Sep 4, 2019)

I'm not, still like Paizo but not going to go down the PF2 rabbit hole that deeply.


----------



## MNblockhead (Sep 4, 2019)

Nebulous said:


> I'm mid 40s and haven't watched CR, although I'm aware of it. My friends in their 40s do not watch it either, BUT, the 28 year old in our group is addicted to CR and talks about it all the time. We don't get it lol




I'm in my late 40s and I also don't watch CR....I listen to it. For a while I would listen to it while mowing the lawn and doing other lawn work. But I've gone back to listening other podcasts or NPR. CR just puts out too much content for me to keep up with. That said, I backed their kickstarter for CR cartoon and am looking forward to it. I also enjoyed their comic books series. 

I watched Girls, Guts, and Glory for a time. I liked the short segments and found it funny. But I didn't stick with it. 

My favorite, however, are the live Acq. Inc. games. I don't follow the various B and C team streams, but I watch every PAX game, including the Fathom event when it was streamed to movie theaters. 

A close 2nd is Harmon Quest, a live-play game where they mix filming of the people playing with animation. 

For the most part, though, I would rather play than watch.


----------



## Zardnaar (Sep 4, 2019)

Watching others play D&D doesn't appeal.

I might watch a DM stream advice and stories if they were good at presenting.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 4, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Watching others play D&D doesn't appeal.
> 
> I might watch a DM stream advice and stories if they were good at presenting.




Don't knock it till you've tried it.


----------



## Zardnaar (Sep 4, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> Don't knock it till you've tried it.




I've seen a few snippets, just doesn't appeal.

 You don't need to try some things either to know you won't like it.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 4, 2019)

Same here, I don't get the point (I'd rather play myself or learning something on youtube) but I can acknowledge that it is really popular.


----------



## cmad1977 (Sep 4, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Watching others play D&D doesn't appeal.
> 
> I might watch a DM stream advice and stories if they were good at presenting.




So... me being a hypocrite here but... 
Watching people play D&D is kinda of ‘lame’ to be.
However, LISTENING to the same broadcast(while driving or laundry or whatever) is a really interesting excercise. It’s like ‘watching the tape’ after a game. “Would I run this the same way?”


----------



## Mercador (Sep 5, 2019)

cmad1977 said:


> So... me being a hypocrite here but...
> Watching people play D&D is kinda of ‘lame’ to be.
> However, LISTENING to the same broadcast(while driving or laundry or whatever) is a really interesting excercise. It’s like ‘watching the tape’ after a game. “Would I run this the same way?”



Can't say for him but on my side, being actually in front of the TV (or any device) and watching doesn't allow me to do menial tasks. Listening on the other hand is perfect. I've listen to many books this winter while doing house chores.


----------



## Nebulous (Sep 5, 2019)

MNblockhead said:


> For the most part, though, I would rather play than watch.




Exactly. As DM, I get my kicks from running the story myself, not watching others enjoy it from a computer screen.


----------



## EthanSental (Sep 5, 2019)

I’m with @MNblockhead, I’ve always enjoyed the Acq Inc pax shows since there’s only 4-5 a year....fun stuff and not a weekly 3-4 hour CR game.  I used to watch some of CR and enjoyed it when I did watch but dont have the time to invest unless it was via pod cast that I can listen too while I drive to and from work.


----------



## CapnZapp (Sep 5, 2019)

I did watch the one where "that DM" does a solo scenario for Colbert.

But that was a very short scenario featuring one (1) character played by an awesome wide-eyed old fan loving it, so... (Best thing, the youtube comments by somebody young comparing how Colbert acted - carefully and suspiciously - to the commenter's father, a Gulf War vet  )

Those hours-long vids featuring half a dozen attractive people trying too hard? Hard nope.

But that could be just me playing at least weekly IRL, and so having no need for more.


----------



## Haffrung (Sep 5, 2019)

I'll listen to podcasts of gamers playing RPGs if the people at the table are reasonably engaging. But they have to be participants who are experienced at and love playing an RPG for its own sake.

What I don't find appealing is watching actors theatrically playing RPGs. Something about it just seems so contrived.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 5, 2019)

Haffrung said:


> What I don't find appealing is watching actors theatrically playing RPGs. Something about it just seems so contrived.




Thanks to pinpoint it. Looking actors playing fans playing DnD. But I guess if we were looking at real fans of DnD, it wouldn't be "watchable".


----------



## darjr (Sep 5, 2019)

Do you mean Critical Role? They are real fans. What is with you folks?! The game they were playing BEFORE the stream.

Do you REALLY think they thought sitting around for hours at a time playing D&D was GOOD for thier careers? Especially at first?


----------



## Fanaelialae (Sep 5, 2019)

darjr said:


> Do you mean Critical Role? They are real fans. What is with you folks?! The game they were playing BEFORE the stream.
> 
> Do you REALLY think they thought sitting around for hours at a time playing D&D was GOOD for thier careers? Especially at first?



I agree. I've watched a fair amount of CR, though admittedly far from all. While they are professional actors and much of it is high quality, there are parts where they get stuck on discussing a plan or whatnot and the show just drags, just like at anyone's table. I would hardly call that playing fans.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 5, 2019)

Haffrung said:


> I'll listen to podcasts of gamers playing RPGs if the people at the table are reasonably engaging. But they have to be participants who are experienced at and love playing an RPG for its own sake.
> 
> What I don't find appealing is watching actors theatrically playing RPGs. Something about it just seems so contrived.





Mercador said:


> Thanks to pinpoint it. Looking actors playing fans playing DnD. But I guess if we were looking at real fans of DnD, it wouldn't be "watchable".




I'm sorry, do you guys have "real fans of DnD" decoder rings or something? Gatekeeping is deeply not cool.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 5, 2019)

No idea seriously, I'm don't watch their show; I've look 2-3 sequences and it feels over the top. But I'm not in a position to say they aren't playing or anything.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 5, 2019)

Mercador said:


> No idea seriously, I'm don't watch their show; I've look 2-3 sequences and it feels over the top. But I'm not in a position to say they aren't playing or anything.




Matt Mercer is as much a tried and true "fan of D&D" as exists on this Earth. No reason you need to enjoy the show, but what was said was massively insulting.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 5, 2019)

Sorry Parmandur, I didn't want to insult you or him, it was just how I perceived him. You know, maybe I'm just jealous also


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 5, 2019)

Mercador said:


> Sorry Parmandur, I didn't want to insult you or him, it was just how I perceived him. You know, maybe I'm just jealous also




To boot, many of the big shows don't have "actor" types involved, just folks playing.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 5, 2019)

If I look at Critical role and the Pathfinder equivalent, it's seems obvious which one got real actors.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 5, 2019)

Mercador said:


> If I look at Critical role and the Pathfinder equivalent, it's seems obvious which one got real actors.




Nobody got the actors for Critical Role: they were playing on their own for years. They were playing Pathfinder, dude.


----------



## Agamon (Sep 5, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> Nobody got the actors for Critical Role: they were playing on their own for years. They were playing Pathfinder, dude.




Yeah, they're all friends from the same industry. It just happens to be an industry that makes for entertaining game play (millage may vary on how entertaining one finds it, of course, like all forms of entertainment) .


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 5, 2019)

Agamon said:


> Yeah, they're all friends from the same industry. It just happens to be an industry that makes for entertaining game play (millage may vary on how entertaining one finds it, of course, like all forms of entertainment) .




Several of them got their industry skills at least partially from being D&D players first.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 5, 2019)

I mean between Critical Role (right now) and their Pathfinder equivalent (can't remember nor find their names)


----------



## Agamon (Sep 5, 2019)

Mercador said:


> I mean between Critical Role (right now) and their Pathfinder equivalent (can't remember nor find their names)




The Knights of Everflame?  Yeah, I agree, that's difficult to watch, they're a bit over the top, imo.


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 5, 2019)

Mercador said:


> If I look at Critical role and the Pathfinder equivalent, it's seems obvious which one got real actors.



Would you like a shaker for all of salt?


----------



## Mercador (Sep 5, 2019)

No, not them, I thought it was but this one is the show of Bulmahn. I'll find it.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 5, 2019)

Mercador said:


> I mean between Critical Role (right now) and their Pathfinder equivalent (can't remember nor find their names)




The point is Critical Role _was_ a Pathfinder group for years, with no show. They transitioned to 5E around the time they started going on the air, nobody "found them" for the game. They were the game.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 5, 2019)

Xenonnonex said:


> Would you like a shaker for all of salt?



hahaha sure  But I didn't thought I was salty, my bad.


----------



## TheSword (Sep 5, 2019)

MNblockhead said:


> I'm sure that I'll feel the same reason when D&D 6E is released. But I already have more material than I'll be able to use for many years. I have a tendency to buy whatever cool book is released, but I've finally hit the point where I stopped doing that. I was spending too much money on more content than I can use.  When 6e comes out I'll still have plenty of material to get through and I can still buy a lot of what I skipped.
> 
> And, besides, there are many other game systems out there that I've not played.
> 
> ...




WFRP 4e! The Enemy Within Campaign is about to launch. Fill your boots!


----------



## TheSword (Sep 5, 2019)

I must admit, watching the first 30 episodes of Dice Camera Action revolutionized the way I DMd curse of Strahd.

Seeing the writer play fast and loose with his own book. Change things to fit player actions and add his own spin and take. Was eye opening.

It’s also where I discovered the technique where if the PCs skip something cool because they choose to go a different path you recycle that scenario or character and slip it seamlessly into the story later on. It has never failed me yet.


----------



## Mercurius (Sep 6, 2019)

Critical Roll makes me not want to play D&D.


----------



## darjr (Sep 6, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> Critical Roll makes me not want to play D&D.



That might be a good thing for all of us, really.


----------



## Mercurius (Sep 6, 2019)

darjr said:


> That might be a good thing for all of us, really.




Thanks. That was a nice thing to say to someone you don't know.


----------



## ikos (Sep 6, 2019)

Mercador said:


> No, not them, I thought it was but this one is the show of Bulmahn. I'll find it.




Maybe the “Oblivion Oath” sessions he ran online to dial up PF2 hype just prior to its release?


----------



## Haffrung (Sep 6, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> I'm sorry, do you guys have "real fans of DnD" decoder rings or something? Gatekeeping is deeply not cool.




Gatekeeping? Who says I don't want them to play? And how could some guy typing a comment on a forum stop anyone from playing anyway?

I simply commented that I don't like those types of streams and find them contrived. Sorry if you're a fan, but you know people like different things, right?


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 6, 2019)

Haffrung said:


> Gatekeeping? Who says I don't want them to play? And how could some guy typing a comment on a forum stop anyone from playing anyway?
> 
> I simply commented that I don't like those types of streams and find them contrived. Sorry if you're a fan, but you know people like different things, right?




Major difference between not liking something and dismissing someone else's game as "contrived," ad if that isn't how play actually happens at their table, camera or no camera.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 6, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> Thanks. That was a nice thing to say to someone you don't know.




Pot, calling the kettle black...?


----------



## Haffrung (Sep 6, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> Major difference between not liking something and dismissing someone else's game as "contrived," ad if that isn't how play actually happens at their table, camera or no camera.




Are you honestly suggesting professional entertainers don't change their behaviour when they're performing for an audience?


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 6, 2019)

Haffrung said:


> Are you honestly suggesting professional entertainers don't change their behaviour when they're performing for an audience?




I'm saying that theater people will play theatrically whether they have a camera or not. And in the case of Critical Role specifically, yes, they are playing the way they would otherwise. Nothing "contrived" about their playstyle.


----------



## Campbell (Sep 6, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> I'm saying that theater people will play theatrically whether they have a camera or not. And in the case of Critical Role specifically, yes, they are playing the way they would otherwise. Nothing "contrived" about their playstyle.




This is definitely the case. Even as a former theater nerd playing or running in a home game the theatrics tend to come naturally. This is even more the case for people who actively exercise those muscles on a daily basis. They do it for a living because they love it. It is only natural that in an environment where they are surrounded by other people with the same passions that they would naturally fall into theatrics.


----------



## Mercurius (Sep 6, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> Pot, calling the kettle black...?




Is it, though? I would say no. To recap: I said that I find Critical Role off-putting. Darjr said "it might be a good thing for all of us" if I didn't play D&D (although who this "us" is, is not clear).

These two things are not alike. As far as I know, "Darjr" is not the embodiment or avatar of Critical Role, therefore by my saying that I find Critical Role off-putting, I am not insulting Darjr. Now Darjr may feel offense if he A) likes Critical Role, and B) identifies with Critical Role to the degree that he would take offense (which I would consider over-identification). But that was not my intention (to offend darjr), and in the end whether or not he feels offended is entirely up to him.

On the other hand, by Darjr saying that he and others would be better off if I didn't play D&D, he was insulting me, as a person - or at least the "Mercurius" avatar I play on this message board. Now for full disclosure, I am not offended by Darjr's statement as I realize he is not speaking about who I actually am, merely his projection of me as the name "Mercurius" as it appears in his consciousness field. So no big deal, really. But I would suggest the same of him: why take offense of me finding Critical Role off-putting to the degree that he (you, @darjr ) feels the need to insult someone he doesn't know? Especially when I did not insult him?


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 6, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> Is it, though? I would say no. To recap: I said that I find Critical Role off-putting. Darjr said "it might be a good thing for all of us" if I didn't play D&D (although who this "us" is, is not clear).
> 
> These two things are not alike. As far as I know, "Darjr" is not the embodiment or avatar of Critical Role, therefore by my saying that I find Critical Role off-putting, I am not insulting Darjr. Now Darjr may feel offense if he A) likes Critical Role, and B) identifies with Critical Role to the degree that he would take offense (which I would consider over-identification). But that was not my intention (to offend darjr), and in the end whether or not he feels offended is entirely up to him.
> 
> On the other hand, by Darjr saying that he and others would be better off if I didn't play D&D, he was insulting me, as a person - or at least the "Mercurius" avatar I play on this message board. Now for full disclosure, I am not offended by Darjr's statement as I realize he is not speaking about who I actually am, merely his projection of me as the name "Mercurius" as it appears in his consciousness field. So no big deal, really. But I would suggest the same of him: why take offense of me finding Critical Role off-putting to the degree that he (you, @darjr ) feels the need to insult someone he doesn't know? Especially when I did not insult him?




Saying that "Critical Role makes me not want to play D&D" is toxic to discussion: it is saying that the show is literally disgusting, which is in fact insulting to anybody who plays like that or enjoys it.


----------



## Mercurius (Sep 6, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> Saying that "Critical Role makes me not want to play D&D" is toxic to discussion: it is saying that the show is literally disgusting, which is in fact insulting to anybody who plays like that or enjoys it.




No, not really - but we live in the age of offense and outrage, so I'm not surprised someone might feel that way. Not only are you hugely exaggerating with words like "toxic" and "disgusting", but you're only harming yourself by building it up like that.

I did not say that the show "is literally disgusting" (lol, btw), nor did I say anything about any particular play style. I merely and only said that I find Critical Role off-putting, and that it makes me not want to play D&D. The rest is your hyperbolic interpretation.


----------



## Haffrung (Sep 6, 2019)

Streaming has had good and bad effects on the RPG hobby. But one of the bad must surely be the fostering of the kind of intensely loyal and emotional fanbases that makes the fandom of many movie and book franchises so off-putting. We have enough tribalism in this hobby already with edition warriors. Now we have people taking it personally if you don't happen to enjoy their favourite stream.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 6, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> No, not really - but we live in the age of offense and outrage, so I'm not surprised someone might feel that way. Not only are you hugely exaggerating with words like "toxic" and "disgusting", but you're only harming yourself by building it up like that.
> 
> I did not say that the show "is literally disgusting" (lol, btw), nor did I say anything about any particular play style. I merely and only said that I find Critical Role off-putting, and that it makes me not want to play D&D. The rest is your hyperbolic interpretation.




If there is any hyperbole, it is in saying that the show makes you so filled with disgust that you don't want to play D&D. Frankly, I think that is is an exaggeration, but is is an offensive one. I don't care if you don't like the show, different strokes for different folks, but calling it "off-putting" is offensive.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 6, 2019)

Haffrung said:


> Streaming has had good and bad effects on the RPG hobby. But one of the bad must surely be the fostering of the kind of intensely loyal and emotional fanbases that makes the fandom of many movie and book franchises so off-putting. We have enough tribalism in this hobby already with edition warriors. Now we have people taking it personally if you don't happen to enjoy their favourite stream.




I don't care what you enjoy or don't enjoy. What is being objected to here is insulting people and their playstyle.


----------



## Mercurius (Sep 6, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> If there is any hyperbole, it is in saying that the show makes you so filled with disgust that you don't want to play D&D. Frankly, I think that is is an exaggeration, but is is an offensive one. I don't care if you don't like the show, different strokes for different folks, but calling it "off-putting" is offensive.




I'm hoping we both have better things to do than continue this pointless conversation, but I prefer not to be misrepresented so will correct something. I never said the show "so filled me with disgust." That is your interpretation. If I had actually said that it filled me with "disgust" (a word you've used twice), I would agree that this is hyperbolic - but given that you are the one who thinks that it fills me with disgust--even though I already said that it doesn't--clearly the hyperbole and exaggeration is yours, not mine.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 6, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> I'm hoping we both have better things to do than continue this pointless conversation, but I prefer not to be misrepresented so will correct something. I never said the show "so filled me with disgust." That is your interpretation. If I had actually said that it filled me with "disgust" (a word you've used twice), I would agree that this is hyperbolic - but given that you are the only one who thinks that it fills me with disgust, clearly the hyperbole and exaggeration is solely yours, not mine.




"Off-putting" and "disgusting" are etymologically exact literal synonyms, so yes, you did say that. I notice again a distinct lack of any sort of apology for badwrongfun statements on your part, so, stay classy.


----------



## Mercurius (Sep 6, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> "Off-putting" and "disgusting" are etymologically exact literal synonyms, so yes, you did say that. I notice again a distinct lack of any sort of apology on your part, so, stay classy.




What should I apologize for, exactly? What did I do? I didn't insult anyone. I implied I don't like Critical Role, which is not a person.

And no, off-putting and disgusting are not the same thing. One is "warm" and the other "hot," at least as I used them. So no, I didn't say that. Again, you are making things up.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 6, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> What should I apologize for, exactly? What did I do? I didn't insult anyone. I implied I don't like Critical Role, which is not a person.
> 
> And no, off-putting and disgusting are not the same thing. One is "warm" and the other "hot," at least as I used them. So no, I didn't say that. Again, you are making things up.




"*disgust (n.)*
1590s, "repugnance excited by something offensive or loathsome," from Middle French desgoust "strong dislike, repugnance," literally "distaste" (16c., Modern French dégoût), from desgouster "have a distaste for," from des- "opposite of" (see dis-) + gouster "taste," from Latin gustare "to taste" (from PIE root *geus- "to taste; to choose"). The literal sense, "distaste, aversion to the taste of," is from 1610s in English."

Etymologically identical. You said the show is disgusting enough to put you off of the hobby, which is insulting to anybody who has that same style or enjoys it. Badwrongfun and gatekeeping is not cool.


----------



## S'mon (Sep 6, 2019)

I've reported this so I expect a Mod will be along shortly.


----------



## Campbell (Sep 6, 2019)

There are things about the ways Matt Mercer runs Critical Role that make me wish it were not the preeminent RPG stream. However I think Matt is a great ambassador for the game.

I think when you get to the point where the ways somebody else chooses to play an RPG make you not want to play it you should take a critical look at why you feel that way. Why should how a stranger plays upset you? Do they not have the right to play the way they want to play?


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 6, 2019)

Campbell said:


> There are things about the ways Matt Mercer runs Critical Role that make me wish it were not the preeminent RPG stream. However I think Matt is a great ambassador for the game.
> 
> I think when you get to the point where the ways somebody else chooses to play an RPG make you not want to play it you should take a critical look at why you feel that way. Why should how a stranger plays upset you? Do they not have the right to play the way they want to play?




Yeah, I can see why you might feel that way. It's not for everybody. A very civilized position, thank you.


----------



## Mercurius (Sep 6, 2019)

Campbell said:


> There are things about the ways Matt Mercer runs Critical Role that make me wish it were not the preeminent RPG stream. However I think Matt is a great ambassador for the game.
> 
> I think when you get to the point where the ways somebody else chooses to play an RPG make you not want to play it you should take a critical look at why you feel that way. Why should how a stranger plays upset you? Do they not have the right to play the way they want to play?




My original statement was meant semi-facetiously and not at all as seriously as Parmandur took it. I don't care how Mercer or anyone plays - it doesn't upset me. I just find it unappealing, that's all. If you or others like it, more power to you. 



Parmandur said:


> Etymologically identical. You said the show is disgusting enough to put you off of the hobby, which is insulting to anybody who has that same style or enjoys it. Badwrongfun and gatekeeping is not cool.




This is ridiculous, Parmandur. You won't even accept my word usage and are making stuff up about how I feel. One more time: I don't feel "disgust." I don't equate "off-putting" and "disgust," in the same way I don't equate "warm" and "hot." 

I said nothing about badwrongfun, gatekeeping, or how the game should or should not be played. I don't care! That is all projection on your part. I'm not sure why you're so insistent upon being offended, but I'm not really interested in being a stand-in for whatever things you're upset about. K?


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 6, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> My original statement was meant semi-facetiously and not at all as seriously as Parmandur took it. I don't care how Mercer or anyone plays - it doesn't upset me. I just find it unappealing, that's all. If you or others like it, more power to you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



But if it makes you not want to play D&D do you not feel a measure of disgust?


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 6, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> My original statement was meant semi-facetiously and not at all as seriously as Parmandur took it. I don't care how Mercer or anyone plays - it doesn't upset me. I just find it unappealing, that's all. If you or others like it, more power to you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I accept the usage of the English language: you are entitle to your own opinions, and you own taste, but not your own definition of word. Facetious statements can be very aggressive and hurtful, and are not appropriate in certain contexts.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 6, 2019)

Xenonnonex said:


> But if it makes you not want to play D&D do you not feel a measure of disgust?




Precisely, the transitive property applies.


----------



## Mercurius (Sep 6, 2019)

Xenonnonex said:


> But if it makes you not want to play D&D do you not feel a measure of disgust?




No. Disgust is too strong of a word. I didn't even use "off-putting" in the original statement, just as explanation. It is more accurate than disgust. Or _distaste_, if you prefer.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 6, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> No. Disgust is too strong of a word. I didn't even use "off-putting" in the original statement, just as explanation. It is more accurate than disgust. Or _distaste_, if you prefer.




Yet it is not too strong a word for what your words communicated. If it was a joke, it was hurtful.


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 6, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> No. Disgust is too strong of a word. I didn't even use "off-putting" in the original statement, just as explanation. It is more accurate than disgust. Or _distaste_, if you prefer.



Being turned off from playing and presumably enjoying D&D by a streaming show is too strong of a reaction.


----------



## Mercurius (Sep 6, 2019)

Oh boy, this is getting beyond silly. I've got children to feed, so ta-ta!


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 6, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> Oh boy, this is getting beyond silly. I've got children to feed, so ta-ta!



Have you tried not watching it or ignoring it? That seems a bit more mature.


----------



## GaiusMarius (Sep 6, 2019)

Mercador said:


> I mean between Critical Role (right now) and their Pathfinder equivalent (can't remember nor find their names)



Not sure what exact podcast/stream you mean but probably Glass Cannon?

Of the two, I prefer GC a lot more. I've listened to some episodes of Critical role and it just never clicked with me at all, not really a systems issue or acting issue either just a 'Meh, i've given it two episodes and its still not really clear to me which voice belongs to which character.'


----------



## Umbran (Sep 6, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> "Off-putting" and "disgusting" are etymologically exact literal synonyms, so yes, you did say that.





No.  

If you are not prepared to allow for differences in connotation, you probably aren't in a place to have a constructive discussion on the internet.  Restating an opponent's position using more severe language and then claiming they did something wrong is a technique older than the internet, but it is pretty easy to spot.

Please don't do this.  Thanks.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 6, 2019)

I apologize for any heat in my response to offensive statements in this thread: I'll just make use of the ignore feature, guess that's why it is there.


----------



## MichaelSomething (Sep 6, 2019)

A way of playing D&D that will get people to give you over ten million dollars to animate your campaign has to be doing something right.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 6, 2019)

ikos said:


> Maybe the “Oblivion Oath” sessions he ran online to dial up PF2 hype just prior to its release?



Nope, it wasn't Bulmahn but it was a cast really similar of Critical Role, but without the same "talent" if I could say.


----------



## billd91 (Sep 6, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> My original statement was meant semi-facetiously and not at all as seriously as Parmandur took it. I don't care how Mercer or anyone plays - it doesn't upset me. I just find it unappealing, that's all. If you or others like it, more power to you.




Here's my take on all this falderal: My guess is darjr's reply was meant to be taken in a similar vein - facetiously. Yet you didn't extend the courtesy of making a non-hostile assumption to his reply like you apparently expected of us.


----------



## Zardnaar (Sep 7, 2019)

MichaelSomething said:


> A way of playing D&D that will get people to give you over ten million dollars to animate your campaign has to be doing something right.




 CR doesn't do much for me although I haven't really see much of it either. 

 But yeah if they can get people to give them 10 million dollars or whatever more power to them.


----------



## TheSword (Sep 7, 2019)

I think I have a worry that whatever the intention of the Matt Mercer, Critical Role becomes seen as the correct, standard or best way to play D&D.

I don’t personally like the show, but choose not to watch more than the 3 or 4 episodes I have. I have that ability and can choose to ignore.

However it seems to have turned into a VERY big part of how d&d is promoted, perceived and referenced. That I have no control over and can’t avoid.

This doesn’t seem to be the case for other streams like Matt C or Dice Camera Action.

I’m not saying it’s a major issue but it is disconcerting. I will also say that in a small way watching CR does put me off D&D as a game too. Not enough to stop playing but enough to demotivate me. It clearly isn’t a unique feeling.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 7, 2019)

TheSword said:


> I think I have a worry that whatever the intention of the Matt Mercer, Critical Role becomes seen as the correct, standard or best way to play D&D.
> 
> I don’t personally like the show, but choose not to watch more than the 3 or 4 episodes I have. I have that ability and can choose to ignore.
> 
> ...




I don't see how Critical Role is significantly different from how I've always experienced D&D.


----------



## TheSword (Sep 7, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> I don't see how Critical Role is significantly different from how I've always experienced D&D.




Then that probably explains why you don’t have a problem with it. Also why you should probably keep an open mind if people raise it as a concern for them.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 7, 2019)

TheSword said:


> Then that probably explains why you don’t have a problem with it. Also why you should probably keep an open mind if people raise it as a concern for them.




I don't care if people like the show or not: don't like it, don't watch, that's perfectly fine. There are a million thing that I am uninterested in, that I do not participate in.

But calling somebody else's experience of the hobby "disconcerting," "demotivating," or "off-putting" is hurtful. If Critical Role seems to be normative of the way the game is played now, well, maybe. That's probably true. And there is no reason you have to like it, but yucking other people's yum is uncool.


----------



## S'mon (Sep 7, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> But calling somebody else's experience of the hobby "disconcerting," "demotivating," or "off-putting" is hurtful.




Calling CR off-putting etc is hurtful to you? I doubt it's hurtful to Mercer & co.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 7, 2019)

S'mon said:


> Calling CR off-putting etc is hurtful to you? I doubt it's hurtful to Mercer & co.




It's a statement that my personal tastes and experience are some sort of problem in the hobby, a "concern" as was phrased upthread. Classic gate-keeping behavior, it sticks in my craw. Again, I don't give a rip if anybody likes the things I like, I just don't like being told that my preferences are wrong or "disheartening."

I'm sure Mercer & Co. have no trouble ignoring that sort of garbage.


----------



## darjr (Sep 7, 2019)

I don’t watch the show either, I’ve just started with podcast 1. But if you tell me there is a substantial difference between DCA and critical role? I’d say you need to point it out.


----------



## S'mon (Sep 7, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> It's a statement that my personal tastes and experience are some sort of problem in the hobby, a "concern" as was phrased upthread. Classic gate-keeping behavior, it sticks in my craw. Again, I don't give a rip if anybody likes the things I like, I just don't like being told that my preferences are wrong or "disheartening."
> 
> I'm sure Mercer & Co. have no trouble ignoring that sort of garbage.




Well you're saying other people's views are 'garbage' right there. You should take their views as merely personal preference, same as your own views. They're not stopping you enjoying the show or from playing D&D.

I'm happy to defend Mercer's game & show, but I think you should see other people's dislike as no more than expressions of personal preference. They couldn't stop you watching it even if they wanted to.


----------



## darjr (Sep 7, 2019)

That’s some interesting acrobatics there S’mon


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 7, 2019)

S'mon said:


> Well you're saying other people's views are 'garbage' right there. You should take their views as merely personal preference, same as your own views. They're not stopping you enjoying the show or from playing D&D.
> 
> I'm happy to defend Mercer's game & show, but I think you should see other people's dislike as no more than expressions of personal preference. They couldn't stop you watching it even if they wanted to.




Eh, I've taken it as an invitation use the board's ignore features. Again, it's not a problem that anyone dislikes the show, that's not a problem and I don't care.


----------



## S'mon (Sep 7, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> Eh, I've taken it as an invitation use the board's ignore features. Again, it's not a problem that anyone dislikes the show, that's not a problem and I don't care.




Ignore Feature is great!


----------



## S'mon (Sep 7, 2019)

darjr said:


> That’s some interesting acrobatics there S’mon




Took Expertise at level 6!


----------



## Zardnaar (Sep 7, 2019)

No one directed the comment at you, they just expressed an opinion. You're going out of your way to be offended.

 I recommend a concrete pill to harden up. It's the interwebs.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 7, 2019)

S'mon said:


> Ignore Feature is great!




Yes, it is, and this thread appears to be a great lesson in how to use it.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 7, 2019)

S'mon said:


> I'm happy to defend Mercer's game & show, but I think you should see other people's dislike as no more than expressions of personal preference. They couldn't stop you watching it even if they wanted to.




Maybe you could "enlight" me; why people are so "defending" (not sure it's the good word) about this?


----------



## Retreater (Sep 7, 2019)

I haven't been able to get into Critical Role. Then I tried Matt Colville's game. I helped back the stream on Kickstarter (mostly because I wanted Strongholds and Followers). I thought for sure I'd like his game because I like his DM advice on YouTube, but it was just wasn't my style of game. I watched around 10 episodes and then said I was done. 
I don't think watching D&D streams is for me. I don't think of D&D as a spectator experience.


----------



## Fanaelialae (Sep 7, 2019)

Mercador said:


> Maybe you could "enlight" me; why people are so "defending" (not sure it's the good word) about this?



"Defensive" is the word you're looking for. Personally, I wasn't offended, but I can kind of see why others were. There was a bit of hyperbole flying around, with some badwrongfun seemingly being implied.



Retreater said:


> I haven't been able to get into Critical Role. Then I tried Matt Colville's game. I helped back the stream on Kickstarter (mostly because I wanted Strongholds and Followers). I thought for sure I'd like his game because I like his DM advice on YouTube, but it was just wasn't my style of game. I watched around 10 episodes and then said I was done.
> I don't think watching D&D streams is for me. I don't think of D&D as a spectator experience.




I can't watch game streams either, but I enjoy listening to them while doing other things (driving, working, etc). It really seems to help keep the creative part of my brain mollified and subdued, which frees the more analytical part of my mind to get stuff done.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 8, 2019)

Retreater said:


> I haven't been able to get into Critical Role. Then I tried Matt Colville's game. I helped back the stream on Kickstarter (mostly because I wanted Strongholds and Followers). I thought for sure I'd like his game because I like his DM advice on YouTube, but it was just wasn't my style of game. I watched around 10 episodes and then said I was done.
> I don't think watching D&D streams is for me. I don't think of D&D as a spectator experience.




Yeah, it won't be for everyone. I applaud your open and fair mind.

I wouldn't expect Colville to be super different from Mercer, considering that they run in the same crew and are close friends.


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 8, 2019)

Retreater said:


> I haven't been able to get into Critical Role. Then I tried Matt Colville's game. I helped back the stream on Kickstarter (mostly because I wanted Strongholds and Followers). I thought for sure I'd like his game because I like his DM advice on YouTube, but it was just wasn't my style of game. I watched around 10 episodes and then said I was done.
> I don't think watching D&D streams is for me. I don't think of D&D as a spectator experience.



I tried to watch Matt Colville's game. He sometimes gives great advice through his videos. I tried to like Matt Colville's game. 
I turned it off. He is just a boring DM. Sometimes even a bad DM. 

I could watch Matt Mercer, Jeremy Crawford or Chris Perkins or any other amateur DM but not Matt Colville. And that saddens me.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 8, 2019)

Xenonnonex said:


> I tried to watch Matt Colville's game. He sometimes gives great advice through his videos. I tried to like Matt Colville's game.
> I turned it off. He is just a boring DM. Sometimes even a bad DM.
> 
> I could watch Matt Mercer, Jeremy Crawford or Chris Perkins or any other amateur DM but not Matt Colville. And that saddens me.




I haven't had the impression that he is a bad DM by any means, but he isn't as comfortable in the environment as the theatre kids. Go figure.


----------



## Campbell (Sep 8, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> Yeah, it won't be for everyone. I applaud your open and fair mind.
> 
> I wouldn't expect Colville to be super different from Mercer, considering that they run in the same crew and are close friends.




They are both also friends with Adam Koebel. Stylistically I find all 3 pretty different in how they run games.


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 8, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> I haven't had the impression that he is a bad DM by any means, but he isn't as comfortable in the environment as the theatre kids. Go figure.



I have tried watching some of his other D&D streams and they have been excruciatingly boring. 
Though it is not a bad thing he is clearly not familiar at all with the 5e rule set. 

Frankly I think he should run games in 4e. He is clearly knowledgeable and passionate about 4e. He should not feel he has to run 5e because it is popular.


----------



## Arilyn (Sep 8, 2019)

Xenonnonex said:


> I have tried watching some of his other D&D streams and they have been excruciatingly boring.
> Though it is not a bad thing he is clearly not familiar at all with the 5e rule set.
> 
> Frankly I think he should run games in 4e. He is clearly knowledgeable and passionate about 4e. He should not feel he has to run 5e because it is popular.




I don't watch streaming so haven't seen Matt Colville as GM, but Strongholds and Followers is  a very good book, so he can't be ignorant of 5e rules. Isn't 5e supposed to be all about making the game your own anyway? Rulings, not Rules! At least that's what I keep hearing...


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 8, 2019)

Arilyn said:


> I don't watch streaming so haven't seen Matt Colville as GM, but Strongholds and Followers is  a very good book, so he can't be ignorant of 5e rules. Isn't 5e supposed to be all about making the game your own anyway? Rulings, not Rules! At least that's what I keep hearing...



I have heard it is rather unbalanced and not equal effort is given to every class. That it makes references to supplements not yet available. That the mechanics rely on things that are not there. That it seems unfinished. 

Rulings not rules is the 5e mantra yes. But you have to understand some of 5e's rules at least.


----------



## Arilyn (Sep 8, 2019)

Xenonnonex said:


> I have heard it is rather unbalanced and not equal effort is given to every class. That it makes references to supplements not yet available. That the mechanics rely on things that are not there. That it seems unfinished.
> 
> Rulings not rules is the 5e mantra yes. But you have to understand some of 5e's rules at least.



Yes, fair enough. Is his GMing that bad, though? Maybe I should take a look.


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 8, 2019)

Arilyn said:


> Yes, fair enough. Is his GMing that bad, though? Maybe I should take a look.



That is really up to you. But new experiences cannot hurt.


----------



## Fanaelialae (Sep 8, 2019)

Arilyn said:


> Yes, fair enough. Is his GMing that bad, though? Maybe I should take a look.



Personally, I don't think his DMing is bad. He's not as entertaining as Mercer, but that can be said of most other DMs IMO. I've only watched a few episodes of his stream, but I'd say he's a pretty normal DM. He does things where I think he's making a mistake, and I would do it very differently, but I've thought the same of Mercer and Koebel, and I've no doubt that if any of them sat in on one of my games they'd think the same thing.


----------



## MichaelSomething (Sep 8, 2019)

TheSword said:


> I’m not saying it’s a major issue but it is disconcerting. I will also say that in a small way watching CR does put me off D&D as a game too. Not enough to stop playing but enough to demotivate me. It clearly isn’t a unique feeling.




How could CR turn you, or anyone else, to not like D&D all together? I would Like some context to those feelings.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 8, 2019)

MichaelSomething said:


> How could CR turn you, or anyone else, to not like D&D all together? I would Like some context to those feelings.



"By association" is my pick, it would be mine.


----------



## Haffrung (Sep 8, 2019)

MichaelSomething said:


> How could CR turn you, or anyone else, to not like D&D all together? I would Like some context to those feelings.




Imagine a streaming show where the players gather around elaborately crafted Dwarven Forge dungeon setups, with the game focused almost exclusively on tactical maneuver and combat in the dungeon. The DM is adversarial and mocks the players relentlessly, while the players fist-pump, high-five, and do shots of jaegermeister whenever they win a combat. Each episode wraps with a graphic showing the total kills and GP gained by the players. And this stream is so popular that it defines D&D in the popular consciousness.

Now, if this stream's approach to D&D wasn't your cup of tea, if you found it off-putting, this could - in a small way - make D&D feel to you like something that wasn't your jam.


----------



## Acolyte of Zothique (Sep 8, 2019)

Haffrung said:


> Imagine a streaming show where the players gather around elaborately crafted Dwarven Forge dungeon setups, with the game focused almost exclusively on tactical maneuver and combat in the dungeon. The DM is adversarial and mocks the players relentlessly, while the players fist-pump, high-five, and do shots of jaegermeister whenever they win a combat. Each episode wraps with a graphic showing the total kills and GP gained by the players. And this stream is so popular that it defines D&D in the popular consciousness.
> 
> Now, if this stream's approach to D&D wasn't your cup of tea, if you found it off-putting, this could - in a small way - make D&D feel to you like something that wasn't your jam.




Are you saying that you think the above description is an example of what happens in Critical Role? I watch CR and I don't believe - apart from using Dwarven Forge terrain - that this is representative of CR _at all._

For that matter I find the whole concept of being demotivated to play D&D because of watching a livestream game to be ludicrous. If you were interested enough in playing/running D&D in the first place and you don't enjoy the livestream then _stop watching the livestream; _put it aside and focus on what you want to do. Exercise some willpower and don't let some form of social media portraying an atypical example of the game put you off. Sweet Lord. Is this a millennial thing because I've noticed this kind of social media influence affecting player agency before amongst a certain age group. Do what you want to do, ignore social media if it does not meet your needs/expectations. Done.

For my part, I enjoy the thespian tone to Critical Role. I don't run my games like Matt Mercer, our DMing styles are different,  but I enjoy it for what it is - entertainment. There are other D&D streams I enjoy and others I don't - I no longer watch the streams I don't like.

By the way, being mad at Paizo is just the latest example of edition churn angst - been there, bought the T shirt with many games. It's happened before and it will happen again. If people don't like PF2E then stick with PF1E. Of course, in my experience, the real problem is that players want to - usually - play the latest thing because they have easy access to the rules and because of the hype around the New Shiny. Then the angst is real. This is why I'm so damn grateful that D&D 5E is so stable and appears to be around for some time.

You can be mad at Paizo/'insert RPG publisher here' but in the end you either get with the new or stick with the old for as long as possible/quit the game. Being mad doesn't make any difference and is a waste of energy.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 8, 2019)

Haffrung said:


> Imagine a streaming show where the players gather around elaborately crafted Dwarven Forge dungeon setups, with the game focused almost exclusively on tactical maneuver and combat in the dungeon. The DM is adversarial and mocks the players relentlessly, while the players fist-pump, high-five, and do shots of jaegermeister whenever they win a combat. Each episode wraps with a graphic showing the total kills and GP gained by the players. And this stream is so popular that it defines D&D in the popular consciousness.
> 
> Now, if this stream's approach to D&D wasn't your cup of tea, if you found it off-putting, this could - in a small way - make D&D feel to you like something that wasn't your jam.




No, it couldn't. They can do them, and it has zero effect on me. I've no problem with what you've described, but even if you found something that was really off-putting to me, I would not watch it, not consider it a problem to worry about.


----------



## Fanaelialae (Sep 8, 2019)

Haffrung said:


> Imagine a streaming show where the players gather around elaborately crafted Dwarven Forge dungeon setups, with the game focused almost exclusively on tactical maneuver and combat in the dungeon. The DM is adversarial and mocks the players relentlessly, while the players fist-pump, high-five, and do shots of jaegermeister whenever they win a combat. Each episode wraps with a graphic showing the total kills and GP gained by the players. And this stream is so popular that it defines D&D in the popular consciousness.
> 
> Now, if this stream's approach to D&D wasn't your cup of tea, if you found it off-putting, this could - in a small way - make D&D feel to you like something that wasn't your jam.



The only case it would bother me would be if they behaved in a boorish manner that made me embarrassed to be associated with them.

CR isn't like that. They've made it a point since the begining to be very positive and even raise money for charity. 

My table isn't much like theirs, but I'm glad to have nice people like them representing our hobby.


----------



## Haffrung (Sep 8, 2019)

Acolyte of Zothique said:


> Are you saying that you think the above description is an example of what happens in Critical Role?




No. It's an analogy.


----------



## Kaodi (Sep 8, 2019)

Before streaming RPGs was I had wished for a while that I could watch other people play like that. And then it came along and I found out that I did not enjoy watching it as much as I thought I would. But I am really happy that other people enjoy watching it. I think growing the culture of RPGs is good for all of us, and it does that.

I think whether you like watching any particular game is not just a function of the people and the style though. I think what is actually going on in the game counts. Knights of Everflame is the first one I watched (though I have not watched that much) that really clicked for me. And it pretty much comes down to the characters of Linnaeus and Omelette. They are hilarious and their antics are fun. You need characters with hooks that viewers like to be a successful stream I think. But not everyone is necessarily hooked by the same things (or necessarily at all). 

I have crap rural Internet so I am probably _not_ going to give Critical Role another go from the beginning right now. Maybe one day though.


----------



## Mercurius (Sep 9, 2019)

MichaelSomething said:


> How could CR turn you, or anyone else, to not like D&D all together? I would Like some context to those feelings.




One of the great things about D&D is that there is no "right" way to play it. Over the decades, like most here I have played a range of different campaigns, both as player and DM, and found something to enjoy in almost every one. And of course aging has also brought greater certainty about taste preferences, but I also still enjoy being exposed to different and new flavors.

That said, because there are so many flavors of D&D, we all tend to gravite to some more than others, and some we might even find "off-putting."

But to address your question, I personally wouldn't stop liking D&D based upon a social media stream or anyone else's style of play because of the inherent quality of D&D being what you make of it, but I also get where @Haffrung is coming in that CR represents one of the biggest "public faces" of D&D; if you don't identify with that particular expression of the game, or find it off-putting to whatever degree, then there is an association involved, and some degree of turn-off makes sense.

As a somewhat related example, I have sometimes felt the need to qualify my interest in science fiction and fantasy, because of what people often associate with such things. This is not because I'm ashamed of my interests, but because I'm rather finicky about what SFF I like - and there's a lot of SFF out there that I consider not at all to my tastes, not to mention of poor quality (which I'm _not _saying CR is).

Similarly, if I told someone that I played D&D and they said, "Oh, you mean like that show Critical Role?" I might clarify by saying, "Yeah, but there are a lot of different styles of play."

I mean, in a way D&D is like a genre, and not everyone is going to like every expression of that genre. I like a lot of hip-hop, but there's also a lot that isn't for me, even off-putting, and if someone asked if I liked hip-hop, I might feel the need to clarify what I like and don't like. Or I like sports and follow a couple rather closely, but am not at all into "fandom" - I don't own any jerseys or paraphernalia, I don't attend many games, etc.

While I have been into D&D for most of my life and love SFF and imagination in general, I also don't at all resonate with most of "geek culture." I pick and choose my SFF, I am into D&D but wouldn't consider myself truly "hardcore" in that while I enjoy playing, I could also live without it and scratch the most important aspects of that itch in other ways; that is, my very favorite aspects of D&D aren't the sole purview of D&D (like imaginative stories and world-building).

My point being, folks such of myself that aren't "dedicated geeks" or identify with geek culture might not like being associated with geek culture--_not _because there is anything wrong with geek culture, but because it just isn't who they are (or I am).


----------



## TheSword (Sep 9, 2019)

Lets lay the cards out... I find CR and Matt Mercer’s style pretentious and overly theatrical. I’m not a fan of the players that take part. Neither do I like the soap opera like discussion and debriefing of the sessions after. I don’t doubt that a lot of people like it. However it isn’t my cup of tea. It’s  possible that I find it off putting because I’m British and I prefer things a little more understated. Or perhaps the accent jars. It doesn’t really matter the reason. It is my opinion. I wouldn’t normally share the details because it can be seen as negative and doesn’t do anything to change the minds of those that are already fans. However those who find it impossible to believe some might find it off-putting, believe me, it is.

However like it or not MM is now seen as the Ambassador/Paragon of DMing. There are you tube blogs, endless forum posts, product lines discussing and referencing CR. He even appears on my Syrinscape downloads as character voices. It is ubiquitous and you can barely google a D&D topic without CR or MM popping up somewhere. I do not blame them for being popular. Neither do I expect them to do anything different. They are a brand and influencer and they do what they do very effectively. Please allow me to feel uncomfortable as I feel the effect of that influence.

Edited: brand and influencer.


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 9, 2019)

Do you guys feel threatened by the rising popularity of being geek in the mainstream?


----------



## darjr (Sep 9, 2019)

“Brand of influencer” Did you mean fake?


----------



## TheSword (Sep 9, 2019)

Nope, not threatened. More than comfortable being a geek. 


darjr said:


> “Brand of influencer” I.e. fake. Please stop.




That should read “brand and influencer”. I’ve edited.


----------



## darjr (Sep 9, 2019)

TheSword said:


> Nope, not threatened at all. Just disconcer
> 
> That should read brand and influencer. I’ve edited.



Me too.


----------



## GaiusMarius (Sep 9, 2019)

Xenonnonex said:


> Do you guys feel threatened by the rising popularity of being geek in the mainstream?



Why would I be threatened by more people playing? My enjoyment isn't hurt by more people with different perspectives enjoying themselves.


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 9, 2019)

Just as a curiosity. Some people do feel extremely threatened and their enjoyment of the game suffers.


----------



## Campbell (Sep 9, 2019)

Xenonnonex said:


> Just as a curiosity. Some people do feel extremely threatened and their enjoyment of the game suffers.




I do not think it should. There is a tremendous amount of diversity in the way people play and run roleplaying games. I see this fundamentally as a good thing. Other people playing games in a way you do not enjoy should not be seen as a threat to the way that you play. This extends to people playing other games that you do not enjoy as well.

I do not think we should be in the habit of shaming people for wanting different things than we personally want.


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 9, 2019)

Campbell said:


> I do not think we should be in the habit of shaming people for wanting different things than we personally want.



Yes. But not everyone is as enlightened. A stupid amount of people would do just that.


----------



## GaiusMarius (Sep 9, 2019)

Some people base too much of their identity upon their interests: sports, cars, rpgs, guns, hunting, running, biking, tv shows, movies etc and freak out when they think someone is enjoying it in the wrong way. Other times (with nerds especially sadly) so much of their identity is based upon the appeal it has to them that they can't take it if it appeals to others too.


----------



## MichaelSomething (Sep 9, 2019)

Haffrung said:


> Imagine a streaming show where the players gather around elaborately crafted Dwarven Forge dungeon setups, with the game focused almost exclusively on tactical maneuver and combat in the dungeon. The DM is adversarial and mocks the players relentlessly, while the players fist-pump, high-five, and do shots of jaegermeister whenever they win a combat. Each episode wraps with a graphic showing the total kills and GP gained by the players. And this stream is so popular that it defines D&D in the popular consciousness.
> 
> Now, if this stream's approach to D&D wasn't your cup of tea, if you found it off-putting, this could - in a small way - make D&D feel to you like something that wasn't your jam.



I'm of the opinion that a rising tide benefits all boats. 

Or that sounds like a group trying to defeat a tournament module at Gen Con, and maybe that would make a good stream.

Or that people have been playing D&D different from the "assumed" way ever since there was D&D and a stream isn't gonna change that.


----------



## Mercurius (Sep 9, 2019)

Xenonnonex said:


> Do you guys feel threatened by the rising popularity of being geek in the mainstream?




No. Why would I or anyone feel threatened by this? I don't really understand the question, or at least the idea of it is rather alien.


----------



## Mercurius (Sep 9, 2019)

Campbell said:


> I do not think we should be in the habit of shaming people for wanting different things than we personally want.




I agree, although haven't seen any of that in this thread. Maybe I missed it, though.


----------



## Haffrung (Sep 10, 2019)

People realize I have no problem with Critical Role, right? Someone asked why a gamer might find CR put them off D&D, so I presented a scenario to illustrate why that might be the case. I personally don't really care what other people play or like.

Funny how threads become what people think they're about rather than what people actually write.


----------



## Haffrung (Sep 10, 2019)

GaiusMarius said:


> Some people base too much of their identity upon their interests: sports, cars, rpgs, guns, hunting, running, biking, tv shows, movies etc and freak out when they think someone is enjoying it in the wrong way. Other times (with nerds especially sadly) so much of their identity is based upon the appeal it has to them that they can't take it if it appeals to others too.




Yes, it does seem to be a feature of nerdom that even the slightest hint that someone doesn't like a property brings its fans out to man the ramparts with trumpets blaring and banners flying. Never really understand why people get so upset that others don't enjoy the same things.


----------



## Zardnaar (Sep 10, 2019)

Haffrung said:


> Yes, it does seem to be a feature of nerdom that even the slightest hint that someone doesn't like a property brings its fans out to man the ramparts with trumpets blaring and banners flying. Never really understand why people get so upset that others don't enjoy the same things.




 Yep I don't like Ravenloft or Dragonlance and to change it to suit my tastes would alienate the fans of those settings. 

 So rather than insist they mutilate the settings I just avoid them..


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 10, 2019)

Haffrung said:


> People realize I have no problem with Critical Role, right? Someone asked why a gamer might find CR put them off D&D, so I presented a scenario to illustrate why that might be the case. I personally don't really care what other people play or like.
> 
> Funny how threads become what people think they're about rather than what people actually write.



You made a post accusing CR of being actors theatrically playing D&D. Which others called you out on. Then you made up a scenario that is widely divergent from what CR is. Or from what other livestreamed games are. 

From an outsider looking in I find this terribly amusing. 

Just ignore it. If it is affecting you so much don't seek it out. Only you can make it as visible as you want it to be.


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 10, 2019)

Haffrung said:


> Yes, it does seem to be a feature of nerdom that even the slightest hint that someone doesn't like a property brings its fans out to man the ramparts with trumpets blaring and banners flying. Never really understand why people get so upset that others don't enjoy the same things.



I think what some people are taking issue with is your saying certain ways of roleplaying is wrong. And contrived. 

Imagine a scenario where a friend of yours gets really in character and plays everything bombastically. If this friend too theatrical? Too contrived?

Because roleplaying is about degrees. Doing things in character is roleplaying in my eyes. It does not matter how you roleplay. If your having fun in character and telling a story together? Your roleplaying.


----------



## TheSword (Sep 10, 2019)

Haffrung said:


> Yes, it does seem to be a feature of nerdom that even the slightest hint that someone doesn't like a property brings its fans out to man the ramparts with trumpets blaring and banners flying. Never really understand why people get so upset that others don't enjoy the same things.




It’s not just nerfdom. People get very attached to their football teams and get pretty passionate about every aspect of them. Luckily in nerfdom, thugs supporting Critically Role don’t go around getting drunk and beating up Matt Coleville supporters at conventions.

Let’s be honest, this unhealthy attachment is used and relied upon by those subjects to make money. In advertising, in merchandising, in subscriptions. Money money money.

Critical Role is no different. It taps into a part of human nature. The fact that it’s streamed live, the ability to commentate on twitch, the YouTube comments, forum posts etc all designed to make us feel connected to our subject.

As with all things there are pro’s and cons.


----------



## S'mon (Sep 10, 2019)

TheSword said:


> It’s not just nerfdom. People get very attached to their football teams and get pretty passionate about every aspect of them. Luckily in nerfdom, thugs supporting Critically Role don’t go around getting drunk and beating up Matt Coleville supporters at conventions.




Well the Matts are pals I'm sure, but we have seen some nerd-on-nerd violence recently as part of the Culture Wars.


----------



## Green Onceler (Sep 10, 2019)

Isn't this thread supposed to be discussing Paizo?


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 10, 2019)

S'mon said:


> Well the Matts are pals I'm sure, but we have seen some nerd-on-nerd violence recently as part of the Culture Wars.



That would be utterly humerous to see. It would probably be a lot of flailing about and slapping.


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 10, 2019)

Green Onceler said:


> Isn't this thread supposed to be discussing Paizo?



Give people their rants.


----------



## Acolyte of Zothique (Sep 10, 2019)

TheSword said:


> It’s not just nerfdom. People get very attached to their football teams and get pretty passionate about every aspect of them. Luckily in nerfdom, thugs supporting Critically Role don’t go around getting drunk and beating up Matt Coleville supporters at conventions.
> 
> Let’s be honest, this unhealthy attachment is used and relied upon by those subjects to make money. In advertising, in merchandising, in subscriptions. Money money money.
> 
> ...




Wow, are you actually comparing football (soccer) hooligans to fans of Critical Role? Because that's just wrong. This analogy is crass and, frankly, very offensive.


----------



## S'mon (Sep 10, 2019)

Acolyte of Zothique said:


> Wow, are you actually comparing football (soccer) hooligans to fans of Critical Role? Because that's just wrong. This analogy is crass and, frankly, very offensive.




I understand that American soccer fans are a very civilised bunch who rarely get emotionally over-invested in their team.

...Just like CR fans.


----------



## Haffrung (Sep 10, 2019)

Xenonnonex said:


> I think what some people are taking issue with is your saying certain ways of roleplaying is wrong. And contrived.




I never said any kind of roleplaying is wrong. I said I found Critical Role comes across as contrived to me. All sorts of things strike me as contrived. Heck, every single podcast of live stream is contrived to the extent that everyone acts differently when there's a mic or camera in front of them. Some are just more contrived than others. 

And I didn't come in here 'ranting' about CR. I don't give a naughty word about CR. But it came up in a thread and I expressed an off-hand critical comment about, no different from how I might make an offhand about The Big Bang Theory,  Destiny 2, or any of the other hundreds of entertainment properties that aren't my jam. But I should have known better to make even that passing comment about that particular property in this particular place.


----------



## cmad1977 (Sep 10, 2019)

S'mon said:


> I understand that American soccer fans are a very civilised bunch who rarely get emotionally over-invested in their team.
> 
> ...Just like CR fans.




You obviously never been to an LAFC game. Civilized? Yes. 
Dispassionate....

No.


----------



## Xenonnonex (Sep 10, 2019)

Haffrung said:


> I never said any kind of roleplaying is wrong. I said I found Critical Role comes across as contrived to me. All sorts of things strike me as contrived. Heck, every single podcast of live stream is contrived to the extent that everyone acts differently when there's a mic or camera in front of them. Some are just more contrived than others.




Did you not say the CR cast are actors theatrically playing D&D? So in your eyes their style of roleplaying is wrong. And similarly then people theatrically playing RPGs is the wrong way to go about roleplaying. Because that comes as across as contrived and is not real roleplaying.
I am sure all of the results from dice rolling is contrived. And all of the reactions to the dice results are contrived.



> And I didn't come in here 'ranting' about CR.



Just ignore it dude.


----------



## S'mon (Sep 10, 2019)

cmad1977 said:


> You obviously never been to an LAFC game. Civilized? Yes.
> Dispassionate....
> 
> No.




Yeah, but my joke required "not over-invested" to work.


----------



## darjr (Sep 10, 2019)

Is Paizo keeping the old version in print or available in PDF at their store?


----------



## Green Onceler (Sep 10, 2019)

darjr said:


> Is Paizo keeping the old version in print or available in PDF at their store?




Yes, the PDFs are still available. Also, the Pocket Edition soft cover rulebooks will remain in print "for as long as they keep selling." It will be interesting to see just how long that ends up being.


----------



## MNblockhead (Sep 11, 2019)

TheSword said:


> I think I have a worry that whatever the intention of the Matt Mercer, Critical Role becomes seen as the correct, standard or best way to play D&D.
> 
> I don’t personally like the show, but choose not to watch more than the 3 or 4 episodes I have. I have that ability and can choose to ignore.
> 
> ...




Matt Coleville's Strongholds & Followers was the biggest RRG kickstarter in history. Perkins has run Acq. Inc. games before many thousands of live and live-stream audiences, including games live streamed to live audiences in movie theaters around the USA.  In terms of material actually used at the table I feel safe betting that Colveville's book is much more widely used than Mercer's setting book. 

Even in the Hollywood scene, Joe Maganiello probably has had a greater impact on the how D&D is promoted and perceived than the other as he's talking about it on the top talk shows. 

Critical Role certainly has a huge impact on the hobby and its popularity, but don't discount the influence of better selling game authors and better known celebrities.

That's not discounting the CR teams amazing accomplishments but we are in a golden age of D&D where A-list celebrities are promoting it, tie-ins with major TV shows (Stranger Things, Rick & Morty) are happening, and third-party fans are creating large fan bases and turning their home-brew rules, settings, and stories into franchises worth millions.


----------



## MNblockhead (Sep 11, 2019)

Maybe its because I'm running third-party material (Rappan Athuk mega dungeon, set in the Lost Lands, by Frog God Games), but I have to seek out Critical Role. I don't use syrin scape, and the You Tube channels I follow that are focused on D&D (mainly Coleville, Web DM, and Animated Spell Book mostly) only very rarely mention critical role and You Tube just isn't putting CR content in my feed. The only time I hear anything about CR is when they are brought up in forums, but it is hardly common enough to be off putting. I guess I am not finding it too hard to ignore CR. 

Not that I have anything against them. I backed the Kickstarter for their animated series and bought the setting book. But I just don't have the time and interest to listen to their streams.



TheSword said:


> Lets lay the cards out... I find CR and Matt Mercer’s style pretentious and overly theatrical. I’m not a fan of the players that take part. Neither do I like the soap opera like discussion and debriefing of the sessions after. I don’t doubt that a lot of people like it. However it isn’t my cup of tea. It’s  possible that I find it off putting because I’m British and I prefer things a little more understated. Or perhaps the accent jars. It doesn’t really matter the reason. It is my opinion. I wouldn’t normally share the details because it can be seen as negative and doesn’t do anything to change the minds of those that are already fans. However those who find it impossible to believe some might find it off-putting, believe me, it is.
> 
> However like it or not MM is now seen as the Ambassador/Paragon of DMing. There are you tube blogs, endless forum posts, product lines discussing and referencing CR. He even appears on my Syrinscape downloads as character voices. It is ubiquitous and you can barely google a D&D topic without CR or MM popping up somewhere. I do not blame them for being popular. Neither do I expect them to do anything different. They are a brand and influencer and they do what they do very effectively. Please allow me to feel uncomfortable as I feel the effect of that influence.
> 
> Edited: brand and influencer.


----------



## MNblockhead (Sep 11, 2019)

Xenonnonex said:


> Do you guys feel threatened by the rising popularity of being geek in the mainstream?




Nope. I think it is great. But I still am uncomfortable discussing it outside of my little gaming cocoon. I keep my gaming hobby very compartmentalized and never discuss it at work or in non-gaming social circles. I think this is generational. Had an attorney I was meeting for coffee start to talk about his and his boyfriend's gaming hobby. Didn't bat an eye to learn he was gay. Was much more surprised to have someone out themselves as a geek in a professional context. 

I've also noticed that geekdom isn't really relegated to any specific cliques in my sons' school.  The jockey kids, the brainy kids, the theater kids, all like video games, superhero movies, and the gaming groups don't seem to be specific to any one group.  

D&D just doesn't seem to have much of a stigma to folks in their 20s and younger. 

I think its wonderful.


----------



## darjr (Sep 11, 2019)

It is ... different. I love it. But sometimes I have to stop myself and giggle.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 12, 2019)

Green Onceler said:


> Isn't this thread supposed to be discussing Paizo?



Yeah, not sure what happens. At first, I was trying to understand why I had/ve a grudge against Paizo.


----------



## Acolyte of Zothique (Sep 12, 2019)

Mercador said:


> Yeah, not sure what happens. At first, I was trying to understand why I had/ve a grudge against Paizo.




Classic thread creep. You can roll with it or you can rage against the dying of the light.


----------



## eyeheartawk (Sep 12, 2019)

Acolyte of Zothique said:


> Classic thread creep. You can roll with it or you can rage against the dying of the light.




Good poem.

Even better WFRP campaign.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 12, 2019)

Acolyte of Zothique said:


> Classic thread creep. You can roll with it or you can rage against the dying of the light.



You'll have to explain it to me (I'm not an English guy)


----------



## eyeheartawk (Sep 12, 2019)

Mercador said:


> You'll have to explain it to me (I'm not an English guy)




With bonus Anthony Hopkins.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 12, 2019)

So I'm angry because the dying of the light (end of PF1)? I still believe they are doing an error but only time will tell.


----------



## eyeheartawk (Sep 12, 2019)

Mercador said:


> So I'm angry because the dying of the light (end of PF1)? I still believe they are doing an error but only time will tell.




Ultimately, why would anyone be mad at Paizo? What stone in the decade of PF1 publishing has Paizo left un-turned? Between all the big supplement books, adventure paths and other various guides there's so much stuff that you'll never get through it all. That's of course also ignoring the absolute _glut _of 3.x material for the decade prior too. You want a beastiary 12?


----------



## Mercador (Sep 12, 2019)

Yeah, that's what I don't get, why I'm still mad at them, I don't have any reason beyond purchasing "not-the-current" version books. That's just money. It's deeper than that, maybe I don't like being out-of-date.


----------



## zztong (Sep 12, 2019)

You don't ultimately have to have a reason beyond emotions.

My own struggle is not with Paizo, but with a changing dynamic at the game table. What had been a game group that was all content with one set of rules is now a game group that is split. Its convenient to point to Paizo as the agent for that change even if its obvious that wasn't Paizo's intent. Also, it isn't necessarily a bad change for the group to embrace multiple game systems. It is just change versus inertia. You feel the way you feel. Eventually a new normal will be found.


----------



## darjr (Sep 12, 2019)

It’s understandable. If not really cool. 

There is a version you like and your heavily invested in. The new version may not do what you like or invalidate much of what you have and like. Plus it may drive players and DMs from the game you love. 

Just, it’s not something they did to make you mad. It’s a labor of love and a business. They have to try and thread the needle. It isn’t easy. And sometimes it means people get left behind. 

But seeing that they are keeping the older version in print and that’s it’s OGL, it will never be dead. Think of it this way, even though they’ve moved on they’ve also made it so you don’t have too, maybe to their own detriment in sales. And they did it because it was the right thing to do.


----------



## Mercador (Sep 12, 2019)

Thanks! I still have a lot to learn, even at my age  Too much reason, not enough emotions.

The way I see they are doing a mistake is exactly what you told, it will split the community and I'm not sure they are big enough to split their community and go beyond it, not during this time. Though, ultimately, it will provide good learnings for PF3 after the disappointed DnD 6th.


----------



## Zardnaar (Sep 12, 2019)

Mercador said:


> Thanks! I still have a lot to learn, even at my age  Too much reason, not enough emotions.
> 
> The way I see they are doing a mistake is exactly what you told, it will split the community and I'm not sure they are big enough to split their community and go beyond it, not during this time. Though, ultimately, it will provide good learnings for PF3 after the disappointed DnD 6th.




 Just remember people played AD&D long after it went out of print.

 As long as you can get players no problem.


----------



## MichaelSomething (Sep 12, 2019)

Mercador said:


> Thanks! I still have a lot to learn, even at my age  Too much reason, not enough emotions.
> 
> The way I see they are doing a mistake is exactly what you told, it will split the community and I'm not sure they are big enough to split their community and go beyond it, not during this time. Though, ultimately, it will provide good learnings for PF3 after the disappointed DnD 6th.



Are there enough people out there who would buy 1E stuff forever to sustain Paizo?


----------



## Mercador (Sep 12, 2019)

MichaelSomething said:


> Are there enough people out there who would buy 1E stuff forever to sustain Paizo?



Clearly not. I know why they're doing this, don't get me wrong, it's just an emotional thingy that hurts me.


----------



## GreyLord (Sep 13, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Just remember people played AD&D long after it went out of print.
> 
> As long as you can get players no problem.




What do you mean did?

We still play now days!!!


----------



## DammitVictor (Sep 15, 2019)

I'm not mad at Paizo. They've decided to stop supporting a product I was buying, in favor of a product I don't like and have no use for. Third Party Publishers are picking up the slack and continuing to provide new content for the product I liked... content I largely like better than the original, deprecated materials.

Story sounds familiar for some reason, like I've been here before.


----------



## Jharet (Oct 16, 2019)

I've had time to process this since Second Edition was announced last year.  I'm not mad at Paizo. As a company, they have to publish products to survive. I'm just annoyed by the creation of Second Edition for a game that I felt was perfect - for me.  Yes, I can keep playing P1E, but the questions start to arise as to how the edition change will affect my games and my resources.

I've informed my players that I'm running P1E. I bought all of the books, several PDFs and Hero Lab data packages to match.  This is too much of an investment to just switch to something because it's new and shiny.

Both of my active GMs already started running Second Edition games, which cost me the chance to play in one. Fortunately, the second GM still runs his ongoing P1E game in addition to his new 2E game.

The other question becomes how long will my Hero Lab be maintained before Wolfslair decides to no longer support it?  How long will the d20pfsrd be maintained online? How long will reviewers once dedicated to Pathfinder material still write about unknown P1E material?  How long until my second GM decides he doesn't want to run P1E anymore?  

Simply put, I'm not rebuying a bookcase full of books no matter what. Paizo lost me as a customer with the exception of pawns, minis and maps because they decided to no longer create products for me. If their answer is that I should rebuy all of those books, it will never happen. I'll just quit playing altogether.


----------



## Green Onceler (Oct 16, 2019)

Jharet said:


> Paizo lost me as a customer with the exception of pawns, minis and maps because they decided to no longer create products for me.




I am also very unenthusiastic to rebuy all the books again for what I see as, at best, questionable benefit.

I'm still a Starfinder customer and I'll keep buying the Flip Tiles line. Not going to buy 2e Pawns, though. Something about 2e's art really doesn't appeal to me.


----------



## Mercador (Oct 16, 2019)

Green Onceler said:


> Something about 2e's art really doesn't appeal to me.



On my side, it's not just the art, there is something amiss about this but I can't pinpointed it (yet).


----------



## EthanSental (Oct 16, 2019)

If you’ve bought the data packs from hero labs for the various 1e stuff, it’s good to go.  I haven’t bought any since 2013 and mine loads and just fine. 

as far as the rebuying books sentiments....I understand that as well.  It’s a tough decision every time a game system you like reboots.  I was slow to move to 3e since we like 2e for 11 years.  Eventually we changed slowly to a 3e game then pathfinder then 5e.  Hopefully you keep a group going  that enjoys P1e for as long as you and the group is having fun as that’s all that really matters at the end of a session.


----------



## S'mon (Oct 16, 2019)

Mercador said:


> On my side, it's not just the art, there is something amiss about this but I can't pinpointed it (yet).




Most of The Iconics look like they've been hit by an Energy Drain spell! :-O

1e:






2e:





I'm definitely not buying another bookshelf-full of Pathfinder material. I guess if my PF2 GM succeeds in her wicked plan to get me hooked on the game I may buy the core book & bestiary eventually.


----------



## EthanSental (Oct 16, 2019)

Wayne didn’t put much effort in making it look updated. Axe on the hip, stance and holding the sword but then again, he might have been told to make it look similar to the previous edition.  2nd look, stance is similar but slouchy looking in the 2e drawing.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 16, 2019)

S'mon said:


> Most of The Iconics look like they've been hit by an Energy Drain spell! :-O
> 
> 1e:
> 
> ...




Those are both pretty painfully old fashioned....


----------



## Bardic Dave (Oct 16, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> Those are both pretty painfully old fashioned....




Wayne's style is so distinct, I'm not sure if you can really say it's "old fashioned". His style isn't really typical of a particular era in fantasy art; it's kind of just its own thing. I don't think any other artists really produced or produce art in a similar style.

Having said that, his art was so ubiquitous in fantasy gaming products from 2000-2010 (Magic cards, World of Warcraft TCG, D&D (particularly Eberron), Pathfinder, etc.) that I can see why you'd have strong associations between his art and a particular era of fantasy gaming. He used to be very much in vogue, but is perhaps less so these days.


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 16, 2019)

Bardic Dave said:


> Wayne's style is so distinct, I'm not if you can really say it's "old fashioned". His style isn't really typical of a particular era in fantasy art; it's kind of just its own thing. I don't think any other artists really produced or produce art in a similar style.
> 
> Having said that, his art was so ubiquitous in fantasy gaming products from 2000-2010 (Magic cards, World of Warcraft TCG, D&D (particularly Eberron), Pathfinder, etc.) that I can see why you'd have strong associations between his art and a particular era of fantasy gaming. He used to be very much in vogue, but is perhaps less so these days.




Yeah, very Aughts.


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 16, 2019)

Bardic Dave said:


> Wayne's style is so distinct, I'm not sure if you can really say it's "old fashioned".



I believe he's talking about the way females are presented, not about the personal touches of any given artist.

(giving a female character a naked midriff is, while attractive, no longer considered uncontroversial. Also see: discussion regarding armor with sexy weak spots)


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 16, 2019)

CapnZapp said:


> I believe he's talking about the way females are presented, not about the personal touches of any given artist.
> 
> (giving a female character a naked midriff is no longer considered uncontroversial. Also see: discussion regarding armor with sexy weak spots)




Yeah, it's not even that I find it offensive, just...very 2002?


----------



## Bardic Dave (Oct 16, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> Yeah, it's not even that I find it offensive, just...very 2002?



Got it! I completely missed that that was your criticism.


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 16, 2019)

In this particular case, though, the artist has clearly been asked to render a recognizable version of the same image.

I would bet it's Paizo's decision, not Wayne's.

(Not that this helps the argument)


----------



## Parmandur (Oct 16, 2019)

CapnZapp said:


> In this particular case, though, the artist has clearly been asked to render a recognizable version of the same image.
> 
> I would bet it's Paizo's decision, not Wayne's.
> 
> (Not that this helps the argument)




It's the Pathfinder aesthetic, which is their prerogative. If anything, I prefer the new art, but the whole get-up is still kind of odd to me. It also seems like they could have taken the opportunity of a new edition to evolve their style more than they did?


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 16, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> It also seems like they could have taken the opportunity of a new edition to evolve their style more than they did?



If that were their goal, my first advice would be "switch artists"


----------



## Arilyn (Oct 16, 2019)

CapnZapp said:


> If that were their goal, my first advice would be "switch artists"




I like Wayne Reynolds' art. It's dynamic and full of interesting detail. Look at all the bits and pieces Harsk carries around, for example. Reynolds and PF are linked, giving PF its own feel. His comic book style art is an excellent choice for the pulpy feel of Golarion. PF without Wayne Reynolds wouldn't feel right.


----------



## dave2008 (Oct 16, 2019)

Arilyn said:


> I like Wayne Reynolds' art. It's dynamic and full of interesting detail. Look at all the bits and pieces Harsk carries around, for example. Reynolds and PF are linked, giving PF its own feel. His comic book style art is an excellent choice for the pulpy feel of Golarion. PF without Wayne Reynolds wouldn't feel right.



I think PF is robust enough it can survice without WR.  Heck, it looks to me like he is only providing covers in PF2e, the bulk of the art is by other artists anyway.

PS.  I do like the detail in WRs work, but I am a bit tired of the odd poses, sharp angles, and oversized weapons/equipment


----------



## CapnZapp (Oct 16, 2019)

Arilyn said:


> I like Wayne Reynolds' art. It's dynamic and full of interesting detail. Look at all the bits and pieces Harsk carries around, for example. Reynolds and PF are linked, giving PF its own feel. His comic book style art is an excellent choice for the pulpy feel of Golarion. PF without Wayne Reynolds wouldn't feel right.



I didn't say "We hates Wayne"*

I was commenting on a hypothetical.


----------



## Doctor Futurity (Nov 7, 2019)

dave2008 said:


> I think PF is robust enough it can survice without WR.  Heck, it looks to me like he is only providing covers in PF2e, the bulk of the art is by other artists anyway.
> 
> PS.  I do like the detail in WRs work, but I am a bit tired of the odd poses, sharp angles, and oversized weapons/equipment




I'm a fan too, but agree completely....the aesthetic could use a shakeup.


----------

