Mal Reynolds said:

How do you know it's 20%? I can imagine it is something like that, but that doesn't make it so. You never know, maybe on pen-and-paper RPG forums specifically the percentage might be a lot higher. What I'm saying is, I'd like to see some evidence/research on this before accepting it (don't get me wrong, I'm not expecting you to supply it, I'd just be interested in knowing).

Mal Reynolds said:

The thing is, surely a company selling a product like FFG would not simply rely on forum posts as their market research. I'm sure they do a lot more sophisticated research to know what their customers want. In other words, you shouldn't worry about FFG simply listening to a vocal minority. They know their customers and their market much better than that.

Mal Reynolds said:

So, because someone never writes on forums, automatically means he's satisfied? And what if he's not interested in the forum? You know, forums can be scary with all the nerdrage, crying, fanboism and flame...

Mal Reynolds said:

Mal Reynolds said:

White Wolf once stated that it's more like only 2-5% of their fanbase who ever write on a forum and thus not even remotely statistically viable to glean "Fanbase majority opinion" from, especially since the content fans rarely have cause to post, meaning it's typically the biggest fanboys or avid complainers that are most vocal only and not the "average" players.

gruntl said:

I get that it's a public forum. Really, I do. But there's really no need to bag on other peoples' opinions (and I'm not really referring to you here, but to others) when the resolution they are asking for will have absolutely no negative impact in others who are thrilled with the guide/vault decision.

When D20 was in its heyday, lots of non-D20 systems that I bought into and played did end up supporting D20, but not by including that info in their normal line, but rather releasing some D20 products of the IP. The D20 folks got supplements dedicated to them, and the core rules players continued to get their dedicated supplements as well. So, my main complaint is that now I'll be paying for supplements that will contain material that I will be useless to me because, as a component player, I'll never use it.

The Creature Guide/Vault is the most stark example of this where I'm going to have to buy a Guide containing, what, maybe 70% of material I'll never use, in order to fully use the Vault which is dedicated to my style of play, yet somehow remains incomplete and necessitates the purchase of the Guide.

To a lesser extent I imagine all future supplements will have split content to support both styles of play ('lite' and component). That 'lite' content, which again I'll never use, is now going take away from the amount of dedicated component content that used to exist in the wholly component supplements of yore. For example, let's pretend that the 'Khorne' box, if it was released in the same format as all other supplements was about 60 pages of text. Will they be just adding another 20-30 pages to that book to support lite play and keep the price the same, or will they simply slash the overall content to keep the book at 60 pages or raise the price for the new 80-90 page book? Seems unlikely we'd be getting 'more' for the same price.

To an even lesser extent, and this is something that's only a mild pet peeve and I'll get over, it's frustrating to have really gone out and evangelized this new system only to see that, well, the system doesn't matter as much as getting more people to play in the WFRP intellectual property does. I could have saved myself alot of hassle, money, and energy spent trying to get others to give the innovative game system a chance, and just bought the Guides to play in the 'lite' style and avoided the whole 'it's a board game' antagonism. To put another way, I really like the component system, but not enough that I would have been such a vocal advocate for it (running it at local game days, conventions, my gaming group) if the 'lite' version had existed from the very beginning. That's a personal situation that I don't expect many folks to understand or appreciate, but it certainly colors how I feel about this change up.

Mal Reynolds said:

I think the evidence perhaps goes against you on this.

In 2007, paizo publishingh where producing dragon and dungeon. They where prodominantly a magazine publisher, who produced a small number of additional products. They certainly had turned around the fortunes of both the magazines, but all the same, they where not a mainstream RPG publisher. All this changed when Wizards of the Coast pulled the licences for both magazine, taking them in house. It forced the company to adapt, and the result was rise of the rune-lords.

2009, pathfinder RPG sells out on pre-orders.

Its now 2010, and Paizo have barn stormed this years Ennies, taking gold in 10 out of the 20 awards(including fan's choice best publisher, product of the year, and best game), as well as getting thanked by the gold winner of best righting for not having been nominated and a host of silvers.

How did they manage it? Other than some serious good in house talent, and a host of excilent freelancers? They listen and they interact with their community. Paizo has amassed a large and very talkative and loyal fan base, because if they do something, and the community don't respond well, they look again at it, sometimes they change tact based on the feed back, sometimes they explain why things are staying the way they are.

They get community imput at the design phase, and they act on it, I myself can point to a product which they have produced, that I personally suggested(to james jacobs if memory serves.) The discussion that spawned from the suggestion, and other similar ones are part of why Paizo published the product.

No... I don't think listening to communities is a bad thing.

zombieneighbours said:

Listening to your customers is not a bad thing, no. Assuming that the views of a few forumites are representative of your customer base is. A smart company knows that the people who post online tend to be completely non-representative. Basing your business strategy on them is usually a very bad idea. You can use forums to identify problem issues, but then you need to confirm the extend of those issues through other forms of feedback.

Paizo aren't a success because they listened to a handful of posters on their forums. They are a success because they managed to tap the DnD 3.X markets - the largest market in the RPG industry prior to 4ed - and produced high quality goods, which they combined with good marketing. It would have been hard for them to fail. The actual changes they made to the product at the suggestion of the community haven't really impacted the popularity of the game at all - some people like them, some people complain they went too far, others complain they didn't go far enough - so it's a wash really.

Paizo also does another thing right: they have Pathfinder Society Organized Play. EVERY convention everywhere runs PFS games and spells out their brand. Players play and play..and play because it's advantageous and right along the MMO-addiction model of leveling. All that play and advertising, and Jones-ing to have a cool character also leads to big product/supplement sales.

I'd also say that having Sean Reynolds, Tweet, and Tim Hitchcock as their writers makes an IMMENSE difference to a company. NEVER underestimate good writers. It's one thing to write a rulebook or a scenario..it's quite another to write it so that people can understand and love it. We've all harped on FFG enough for the core rulebook, but it's a good example of where there needs to be some kind of change in the way things are spelled out (and exactly what they are proposing to do. This occurred because they listened to their customers).

WotC's 4e system was also a big deal. It's the Windows-Vista of the gaming world. Sometimes games just don't need to be that complicated and have every...single...rule...ever...concieved...spelled....out....in.....innane....detail.......every.......round.....of......combat. I know some of you love that aspect of the game. I actually prefer WFRP3's approach.

jh

umm... windows vista sucks hard

macd21 said:

Your right about much of what you say. As is Emirikol.

But your missing the broader picture. What informed most of those decisions? Atleast part of the answer to that is dialogue with the community.

While certain aspects such as the decision to build Pathfinder were forced on them by outside factors(see the unsignable original GSL and WotC's unwillingness to play nice with 3pp's in the early days of 4e) , the connection that Paizo have with their community allowed them to create a rallying point for the '3.5 Survives/Thrives' movement. Open play test and player involvement generates massive levels of publicity and discussion amongst players, both because they go something free, and because of their chance to imput into the creation of the system. Another upshot was that while there are descenters, the community has far fewer passionate critics of the entirity of Pathfinder than 3e WFRP appears to have.

But Paizo's connection with its fan base doesn't end, or even begin with the open beta of Pathfinder RPG, it ranges from fans seeing suppliments they suggested getting made, through to Paizo getting our opinion on what to include/take out off their flagship product line, naming of classes. If you have a problem, or a question, fairly often, one of the writers will turn up and answer itm, or explain their reasoning, and they see it as part of their job. The net result, a vibrant community that strongly self identifies with the brand. Hell, we even refer to ourselves as paizoans. Are their flightians? How about a fantasy flight games fan convention? Is their one?

Regardless of your views, paizo do consider it a major part of their success, as does Louis Porter Jr, of LPRDesign, several of the werecabbages, wolfgang baur, Clark from necromancer games and many others, if their comments on the subject are to be believed.

Ask your average Paizoan what their top five faverate things about Paizo are, and in that list, more often than not, you will see a statement that deals with paizo communicating well with them, and that communication being two way.

And since we're talking about communication, I personally think this whole announcement has been handled fairly poorly. I understand the realities of trying to get this out in time for GenCon, but the the initial announcement was clear as mud as evidenced by the fact that it needed a FAQ and by taking a quick stroll through the comments and looking at the number of questions to the initial announcement. As for the FAQ, it raised as many questions as it answered.

It's felt very 'drive-by' to me (and this is me speculating) probably due to most (all?) of the staff of the product line being at GenCon and being unable to respond to the questions here in the forums. In my humble opinion, it should have had more active dialog from staff at FFG when it became clear that many of us were confused by this announcement and new direction for WFRP. But, it seems we'll have to wait until folks get back from GenCon to see how this will all play out. We could probably have a long discussion just on what level of communication a company should have with its customers, but I think the ubiquity and instant access of the internet makes that trend towards more communication, not less.

While it might seem comfortable to ascribe bad behavior to those not pleased with this announcement, I've largely seen respectful questions and people doing their best to air their legitimate grievances without much drama. On top of that, many seem to be willing to wait for an official word from FFG, and not put too much stock in the divination of the folks whose opinion amounts to little more than speculation.

I'm not trying to steal the joy from anyone who is excited by this announcement. I can understand your perspective, and I'm glad you're really looking forward to it. But I wish I could share your enthusiasm.

Ok, maybe some claryfication we will get after GenCon when the seminar "Small But Vicious Seminar" by Jay Little will be published on the site. In the last video from GenCon Jay promised that there will be a video so we willl have to wait for it. I think that will clear a little bit the sytuation and Im optymistic about it. Can't wait to hear some more about all the line up for WFRP. I would like to hear more detailed info about all this products.

Bugboy said:

The initial announcement is a pretty standard release schedule, with a perfectly standard description of the goods. Of course people are going to have questions about the new products - which is why there was a FAQ up the next day. That's plenty of communication. The FAQ certainly didn't "raise as many questions as it answered," most people are satisfied with the response and are happy to wait until the product comes out for more information. It's just that this is the internet and some people are never satisfied. There are a handful of people left who are still complaining about this, it's just that they are complaining a lot (again - pretty standard on the net. People complain more than they praise, which means for every person posting about their complaints there are dozens who are perfectly happy).

As for the level of communication, that's a complicated issue. Communication with the fans can backfire badly and needs to be managed carefully. If the company isn't willing to invest heavily in communication management (paying one or more professionals to handle all communication to the community on the forums) then they are better off taking a quiet approach - minimum communication, mostly done through official announcements. Otherwise things get leaked, are left open to misinterpretation, or just lost in the babble. This is FFG's approach and it isn't an unusual one.

At this point we know most of the facts about the new products. There's been a FAQ. We may have another one when the guys get back from GenCon. But the level of communication so far has been average, not poor, especially considering how busy they are right now.

macd21 said:

Saying 'some people are never satisfied' is a blanket way to dismiss other people's concerns, simply because you don't share them yourself. Dozens of people on the announcement thread and forums interpreted 'Sifting Shadows' as an announcement of a new approach to 3rd edition with a 'lite' and original version. This is because the announcement didn't make two things clear:

1/ That the new rulebooks/guides are simply reprinted material and players who own the core set won't need them.

2/ There will be no 'dual' approach moving forward and further boxed sets will remain aligned with the original vision of the game (components)

Thankfully Jay clearly recognised that these were the main issues and addressed them in the FAQ the next day.

You're being disingenuous by suggesting that the FAQ was posted as a routine measure because 'people are going to have questions about the new products'; the FAQ was posted because of the response on this site with so many people dismayed by the apparent shift of strategy in the game line. Those people were not 'complaining' but asking for some clarification regarding a pretty ambiguous announcement; it's to FFG's credit that they responded so quickly.

Frankly, I see the response as indicative of the fact that the game has some people who are very passionate about it and have really bought into 3rd edition ('Chits' and all), and are having a great time with a really enjoyable rpg. If some people have reacted more strongly than others I suspect it is because of time, money and creativity invested into a game system that they don't want to change. Thankfully it seems most of the fears raised by the announcement are false, but I think Jay and FFG are intelligent enough to recognise the response for what it is, rather than dismissing it out of hand as vapid gasbagging by a bunch of people who 'like complaining a lot.'

Emirikol said:

D&D 4e is the World of Warcraft of the RPG world. Not Vista. Vista was a broken product that was quickly replace with a new system. Wizards is sticking with 4e and there is a big reason behind it. They expanded into a new market of people. By making their game into a pen and paper MMO where classes are balanced and pretty much all play the same they make themselves marketable to a much larger customer base than what is currently out there. D&D 4e was made specifically to try and bring MMO players (a 10 million plus sized group into the pen and paper realm. In all reality, if they pulled in 10% of the MMO player base, they could lose all of their current RPG player base and still do 10 times better than they are doing now. Table top RPGs is a very small industry. It's unfortunate, but RPG pen and paper players are far fewer than those playing MMO's right now. By doing what Wizards did, they made themselves appeal to a wider audience. I may not like it, but that's reality. They are in business to make money and they will go after where the money is.

D&D 4e isn't as complicated as D&D 3.5 was to learn. D&D 3.5 had rules to cover EVERYTHING! D&D 4e actually did away with the wrestling rules and the disarming rules and then turned everything into Powers that players could take at regular intervals. It was a more balanced and simplified version of what 3.5 was. It was ludicrous how many things were covered in the 3.5 core rulebooks, but it was a really good product with phenominal support.

In my opinion, Pathfinder capitalized on a product that was great by continuing to sell it after it's parent company abandoned it. Not only that, they looked at ways to improve it. Now, I don't agree that Pathfinder is perfect, but it is better than 4th Edition in my opinion because I felt that D&D 3.5 was a more robust and solid system.

LeBlanc13 said:

Combat is 3.5 is horrible compared to 4E standards. That's why I play 4E for the monster beatdowns and other RPGs for in-depth storytelling. I don't think I could ever go back to 3.5 combat ever again.

So... are all these awesome hardbacks coming out at the same time? They all say fall 2010.

I want them.

I want them now.

Oh well. Gives me time to save money.

LordPasty said:

Yes, it looks like they all will be published at the same time. I hope that they all will be released at the same time so I can order them all in one package.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed that they will be avalaible as soon as possible.

And, yes I will buy them all.

Sinister said:

Obviously there are different tastes out there. Pathfinder is catering to those that liked the 3.5 style of combat while D&D has gone with a more balanced MMO style of play.

I think 4th Edition carried the balancing act too far, but I thought 3.5 had it's share of issues at the upper levels of play. I would have liked to have seen a more middle of the road approach to combat in both games. Unfortunately, that didn't happen.

I don't know how accurate the release dates are, but has anyone seen this yet?

http://www.frpgames.com/cart.php?m=product_list&c=2640

All of the Guides/Vaults are listed (and shown) as being due this November.

Wow...I certainly wasn't expecting them that soon... Thankfully, my birthday just happens to fall...in November

Ok, this is all very interesting and all, but I'm still a bit confused. I've pretty recently bought the core set specifically because I wanted to play an RPG system based on cards, tokens etc. That's what appealed to me. Knowing this, can someone sum up for me how I should approach the existing expansions and the upcoming books and vaults?

If I buy the expansions "Game Master's Toolkit" etc. It won't be necessary for me to buy the upcoming guidebooks unless I want the information from the expansions in one place? What about the vaults then: Do they also contain the same cards etc that are in the expansions?

To summarise: I'm not very interested in the hardback books but I'm interested in new rules/guides and new components. What's right for me?

Thanks!

botteu said:

You won't need to get the player's or GM's hardbacks or vaults.

But you will most likely want to lay your hands on the Creature stuff. (I am not sure yet if it makes sense to get the vault without the guide though. It will certainly be nice to have both.)

monkeylite said:

That's a bit off, judging by what I've seen so far. If the player's guide example is anything like what we can expect to see from the new core books, then they will eventually be a must have if you want updated rules.

A clarification that adds new information is a new rule, no matter how you shake it.

Of course, the initiative mechanic could be only one of a kind, but "expanded" rules is attached to the GM Guide description section.

I mean, we'll have to wait and see, but it seems to me this is as much of a new edition as the latest LO5R was to the old system. I think FFG is trying to put a pig in a dress here...but who knows until we see the new product.

As to your question as what to get next, I'd say winds of magic or Signs of Faith. If you want components for component play, get those. They are both fantastic supplements (I personally like Signs a little better than Winds, but I've always preferred gods over fireballs). I just think overall and the priest supplement adds more flavor.

Because, fact is, for component users, buying the boxes is better than buying the hardbacks + vaults. So far, it is believed (and I believed stated) that the vaults only contain stuff found in the core (in terms of the player's vault). The Gm vault has something...all I get from the adds is dice and stands and I do remember hearing corruption counters. But if you eventually want all those magic cards, to make it worth your money without having to re-buy tons of additional information that you already have (such as corruption rules, corruption counters, etc.) that you just bought in the guides, you should just pick up Winds or Signs.

And since you own a core box, if you buy the vaults and Hardbacks first, whenever you want to buy winds, you'll be popping off 50 bucks (USD) for roughly 90 action cards. Or the GM guide, 30 bucks for a screen. All that other information...you know from the books in each supplement and a chunk of the cards/counters you would have already gotten from the Vaults and the Guides. The rest of the sets then become really expensive action cards or screens or specialized tracking counters (assuming they are not in the vaults), and maybe a handful of very short module. Not worth buying.

With that being said, the existing supplements are fantastic and every last one of them is worth the investment. They give tons onto tons of varied, detailed information and mechanics that enhance the play experience. They are absolutely some of the best RPG supplements I have ever seen. So if you get them, you won't be disappointed.

botteu said:

Basically all you'll be interested in is the Creature Vault and (probably) the Creature Guide.

The Players' and GMs' vaults and guides will only contain (edited) copies of what you'll either a) already have from the core set, or b) will be getting soon when you buy any of the expansions. (If you like playing with the chits and cards, then you will be getting the expansions for anything you're interested in - magic, faith, etc)

Angelic Despot said:

From what I've read (repeatedly), you'll want the Creatures Guide AND the Vault. Think of the Guide as being the splat book that normally comes with the expansion product. In this case, they separated it so that non-chit/component players can get the three guides to cover all the bases.