Pathfinder: the Lowdown

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

Locked
Voss
Prince
Posts: 3912
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Voss »

TOZ wrote:Well, in other news, Pathfinder has sold out of its first print run already. So regardless of the varied opinions, their marketing has worked so far. I'm waiting to see if they will give out just how many were printed in the first run. Sure they say they made a big production, but selling out of a low number isn't that impressive.
Well... no, they didn't. They sent out an email full of market speak.
All Preordered Copies Now in Distribution Channel, New Print Run to Arrive in Early November

Ten days before the launch of their much-anticipated Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook, Paizo Publishing today announced that the first print run of the book has sold out, with all preordered copies on their way to stores for an August 13 release. With preorders more than five times greater than for any previous product in Paizo's seven-year history, orders for the Core Rulebook continue to mount even as the company speeds to produce another print run. Paizo.com has retained enough copies to handle all paizo.com subscriptions and pre-orders. Customers who have not already placed a pre-order with paizo.com or their game or book retailer are encouraged to seek out a copy immediately following the book's retail release, as supplies are expected to run out well before the arrival of a second print run in early November.

"We thought we had printed enough to last us at least until the end of this year, but skyrocketing demand from our customers and distributors has us reprinting already," Lisa Stevens, CEO of Paizo said. "We have a healthy amount heading to Gen Con, but we think even those will go fast, so don't delay in picking up your copy!"

The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook is the first release in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game line of hardcover tabletop RPG rulebooks. Clocking in at a whopping 576 pages and at a weight of more than four pounds, this $49.99 rulebook is the newest incarnation of the 3.5 version of the world's best-selling roleplaying game. Playtested by more than 50,000 players over the last year, the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook is the most hotly anticipated tabletop RPG release of 2009. A massive electronic download file ($9.99) will remain available at paizo.com.

"The phenomenal support of the constantly growing community of Pathfinder RPG players has been a staggering sight to behold," said Paizo Publisher Erik Mona. "To sell out a hugely ambitious print run before the release date just goes to show what an immense audience this game will enjoy in the years to come."

The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook can be found wherever gaming products are sold or can be purchased directly from Paizo Publishing via paizo.com.
That first line just means they don't have any copies sitting around a warehouse (except, of course, the copies they plan to sell direct), which they then cleverly associated with the preorders to make it sound like every copy of the book is actually sold. Though they generally admit that isn't so by saying 'go to a retailer and buy it' and bit later on.

There's really a fuck-ton of marketing double speak in there, which is at best disingenuous. Yes, some of it (like the last paragraph) is standard marketing white wash, but some of it is downright shady.
Examples:
50,000 downloads of the beta = 50,000 beta testers.
7 times their biggest print run! Which was what, exactly? 10K? 12K? Give me a figure or this doesn't mean shit.
Sold out (to distributors) = "immense audience". Maybe. Or it means you've got some good marketing bitches, and suckers for an audience.

Or it just means that you're doing a standard advertising gimmick of trying to sell to the unconvinced by way of 'OMG! Limited quanities, jump on the bandwagon now!'

The most honest thing in here is at least they didn't short the preorders (unless, of course they did. We'll see if everyone who preordered actually gets a copy in the next week or so).
Last edited by Voss on Tue Aug 04, 2009 6:10 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
TOZ
Duke
Posts: 1160
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:19 pm

Post by TOZ »

Exactly my point Voss. The response on the marketing thread from Erik Mona to my question of how many copies?

"Lots."

Really helpful, no?

And I'm looking forward to Zurai's response to Parthneon. If he actually bothers.
TavishArtair
Knight-Baron
Posts: 593
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by TavishArtair »

Zurai wrote:
Roy wrote: :rofl: You have been caught in at least one lie already.
Really? Where? Maybe you're confusing me with someone else since you can't see over Frank Trollman's potbelly from where you're surgically attached to his prick.
Falgund wrote:
Zurai wrote:A level 12 fighter with 26 strength (magic items and levels) vs a stone giant, on the other hand, would be the fighter's d20+20 vs the giant's d20+32 (average 42.5) in 3.5 and vs the giant's 41 (15 base + 12 BAB + 12 str + 2 size) in Pathfinder. That's actually an increased chance to success.
How can 0% (d20+20 vs 41) can be an increased chance vs anything ?
Zurai, you pretty much lost your ability to contribute meaningfully to this thread when you refused to check your post for basic math errors, and then verbally attacked people for pointing them out. There is seriously no point that you can make regarding gaming mechanics if you aren't willing to check your post to make sure the numbers actually add up. I don't think anyone can take you seriously anymore. Maybe you should just... post somewhere else for a little while and come back to this thread later.
Last edited by TavishArtair on Tue Aug 04, 2009 6:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Voss
Prince
Posts: 3912
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Voss »

TOZ wrote:Exactly my point Voss. The response on the marketing thread from Erik Mona to my question of how many copies?

"Lots."

Really helpful, no?

And I'm looking forward to Zurai's response to Parthneon. If he actually bothers.
Indeed. It seemed important to strees that they didn't even really 'sell out' in any meaningful fashion, just handed the print run off to the distributors. Which, I suspect is exceptionally meaningless, since I expect there was a series of phone calls back in (roughly) May to the various distributors that went something like 'So, we're doing our own version of D&D, how many copies are you willing to move?' And after getting X, Y, and Z as answers, they determined their print run was going to be Sum(X+Y+Z).
Mask_De_H
Duke
Posts: 1995
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:17 pm

Post by Mask_De_H »

Somewhat off topic, but why do we get the angry and tactless defenders of things like PFRPG and 4e all the time? I've seen sane people who like those things, why don't they come in to reasonably talk to us? Is it because our seemingly head honcho's name evokes the feared Internet Troll? Is it because we use empirical evidence mixed with brutal honesty/flaming? Is it because they think that this way of playing is badwrongfun and anything that smacks of practical optimization is the devil?
FrankTrollman wrote: Halfling women, as I'm sure you are aware, combine all the "fun" parts of pedophilia without any of the disturbing, illegal, or immoral parts.
K wrote:That being said, the usefulness of airships for society is still transporting cargo because it's an option that doesn't require a powerful wizard to show up for work on time instead of blowing the day in his harem of extraplanar sex demons/angels.
Chamomile wrote: See, it's because K's belief in leaving generation of individual monsters to GMs makes him Chaotic, whereas Frank's belief in the easier usability of monsters pre-generated by game designers makes him Lawful, and clearly these philosophies are so irreconcilable as to be best represented as fundamentally opposed metaphysical forces.
Whipstitch wrote:You're on a mad quest, dude. I'd sooner bet on Zeus getting bored and letting Sisyphus put down the fucking rock.
User avatar
hogarth
Prince
Posts: 4582
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 1:00 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by hogarth »

Mask_De_H wrote:Somewhat off topic, but why do we get the angry and tactless defenders of things like PFRPG and 4e all the time? I've seen sane people who like those things, why don't they come in to reasonably talk to us?
Because reasonable people are not trying to Win the Internet, so why should they bother posting on every message board under the sun?

Besides, here you get posters like Roy who will gainsay anything positive comments about Paizo whether it makes sense or not.
ggroy
Knight
Posts: 386
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:51 pm

Post by ggroy »

Last edited by ggroy on Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
MGuy
Prince
Posts: 4795
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 5:18 am
Location: Indiana

Post by MGuy »

Probably trying to fight flames with flames.
The first rule of Fatclub. Don't Talk about Fatclub..
If you want a game modded right you have to mod it yourself.
Roy
Prince
Posts: 2772
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:53 pm

Post by Roy »

Mask_De_H wrote:Somewhat off topic, but why do we get the angry and tactless defenders of things like PFRPG and 4e all the time? I've seen sane people who like those things, why don't they come in to reasonably talk to us? Is it because our seemingly head honcho's name evokes the feared Internet Troll? Is it because we use empirical evidence mixed with brutal honesty/flaming? Is it because they think that this way of playing is badwrongfun and anything that smacks of practical optimization is the devil?
It's mostly because both of those things are so bad that the sensible people quickly realize as much either on their own, or after it is explained to them once and subsequently won't touch it. You need a product that is at least decent to have reasonable fans, as opposed to fanboys. The not sensible ones have the religious mindset, which means they cannot be reasoned with or interacted with on any sapient level. That's why they come here and whine and flail and lie about it using the same old tired lines. Hell, just the fact that almost everything Paizo does fits neatly into one of three categories, none of which are positive is in and of itself telling. And it's why whoever linked them here really didn't accomplish much but starting a flame war.
Draco_Argentum wrote:
Mister_Sinister wrote:Clearly, your cock is part of the big barrel the server's busy sucking on.
Can someone tell it to stop using its teeth please?
Juton wrote:Damn, I thought [Pathfailure] accidentally created a feat worth taking, my mistake.
Koumei wrote:Shad, please just punch yourself in the face until you are too dizzy to type. I would greatly appreciate that.
Kaelik wrote:No, bad liar. Stop lying.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type I - doing exactly the opposite of what they said they would do.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type II - change for the sake of change.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type III - the illusion of change.
User avatar
Josh_Kablack
King
Posts: 5318
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Online. duh

Post by Josh_Kablack »

Somewhat off topic, but why do we get the angry and tactless defenders of things like PFRPG and 4e all the time? I've seen sane people who like those things, why don't they come in to reasonably talk to us?
Well *I* like 4e.

But really not enough to put up with the amount of flaming that position tends to generate on this board. And my like for the system is tempered by a healthy realization of its flaws. And although it would be quite reasonable, I really don't see the point in posting an "Although both are enjoyable, 4e is marginally better than 3e for my group because, x, y, z. " type argument. And even if I did, I largely know how most of the regulars here would respond.
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
User avatar
Prak
Serious Badass
Posts: 17350
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Prak »

fucking server problems...
Last edited by Prak on Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Prak
Serious Badass
Posts: 17350
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Prak »

yes, again...
Last edited by Prak on Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Prak
Serious Badass
Posts: 17350
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Prak »

hogarth wrote:
FrankTrollman wrote:And yeah, that's one of my "outright lies" just to put into perspective for the new people who is trustworthy and who is not out here. While we're at it, this is the Amazon product description of Gods and Magic, the book which my current detractor is adamantly insisting is not in fact a Pathfinder book:
The annoying thing is that Paizo uses Pathfinder to refer to every single one of their D&D(-ish) product lines (both 3.5 and PFRPG), so saying something is a "Pathfinder book" is almost meaningless.
This is quite true. However, I think the problem is that they initially began using Pathfinder to refer solely to their own campaign setting, with a series of adventures for 3.5. They then hit upon the idea to make a "just different enough to avoid copyright infringement" version of 3.5 as their own system, and whether through idiocy blinding them to the fact that it's not 3.5 anymore, or possibly legally having to make greater differences, they don't see it as different from 3.5. Soon, I believe, Pathfinder will refer solely to their own campaign setting, but still be proclaimed as being Backwards Compatible with 3.5.
User avatar
Ganbare Gincun
Duke
Posts: 1022
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 4:42 am

Post by Ganbare Gincun »

MGuy wrote:-Lastly from what I've read here and after skimming over beta a few times I think that if you take some good ideas from PF (IE select feat lines, the good rage abilities, etc) and mixed them in with the stuff already in 3.5 you might actually get some use out of the product.
I get the impression that if you combined 3.5 + Pathfinder + Tome + Saga Edition of Star Wars, you might end up with a balanced and fun version of D&D. But it really sucks that you have to construct an elaborate set of house rules for a game that for all intents and purposes really should have already been playtested and balanced right out of the box.
RandomCasualty2
Prince
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm

Post by RandomCasualty2 »

Ganbare Gincun wrote: I get the impression that if you combined 3.5 + Pathfinder + Tome + Saga Edition of Star Wars, you might end up with a balanced and fun version of D&D. But it really sucks that you have to construct an elaborate set of house rules for a game that for all intents and purposes really should have already been playtested and balanced right out of the box.

Yeah that's my biggest beef with 3.5 and it's offshoots. I mean understandably so 3.0 was broken, it had a lot of new concepts and nobody was sure how things like free multiclassing were going to interact, but we've had a bunch of years to play this shit and get used to it. People know what the problems are.

The fact that nobody is fixing them is very annoying.
User avatar
Morzas
Apprentice
Posts: 88
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:18 am

Post by Morzas »

If you guys really know what all the problems of 3.5 are, why not toss them all up in one thread so you know what you need to fix? Has that thread already been done?
David Hill, David A. Hill, Shadowrun
User avatar
Prak
Serious Badass
Posts: 17350
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Prak »

Morzas wrote:If you guys really know what all the problems of 3.5 are, why not toss them all up in one thread so you know what you need to fix? Has that thread already been done?
that thread? hell, that's a fourth the purpose of this site...
IGTN
Knight-Baron
Posts: 729
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 4:13 am

Post by IGTN »

They aren't in a single thread, but this thread has a list for what's highest priority to fix. That list is pretty incomplete, though. You can also go down a couple forums to IMOI and see what people are coming up with in other ways.

The List of Frank and K Tome Threads (sticky) has a collection of what they made, and between the four tomes so far it's a fully playable fix.
"No, you can't burn the inn down. It's made of solid fire."
User avatar
Murtak
Duke
Posts: 1577
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Murtak »

Morzas wrote:If you guys really know what all the problems of 3.5 are, why not toss them all up in one thread so you know what you need to fix? Has that thread already been done?
The problem is, fixing 3rd requires a staggering amount of work, since you have to touch all the classes, many monsters, a large number of spells, some basic rules, skills and combat maneuvers, the magic system itself and half of the stuff in the DMG. That is pretty much impossible if you want to work for a living at the same time.

Merely propping it up to work requires one of the following:
- A gentlement's agreement not to break the game
- Houserule as you encounter issues (the internet helps a lot here, if only to find workable solutions and quickly identify core issues)
- Set a partial goal and fix only as much to reach it (Tome material for example: "All classes should be able to compete against monsters/challenges of their level, no one should be able to break the world")

Gentleman's agreements and houseruling on the fly works for many, since they game with the same people for years. These are also not much work at all. A tome-style overhaul is still a fuckton of work and Frank and K put in the effort already (and did a great job).
Murtak
Draco_Argentum
Duke
Posts: 2434
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Draco_Argentum »

Josh_Kablack wrote:But really not enough to put up with the amount of flaming that position tends to generate on this board. And my like for the system is tempered by a healthy realization of its flaws. And although it would be quite reasonable, I really don't see the point in posting an "Although both are enjoyable, 4e is marginally better than 3e for my group because, x, y, z. " type argument. And even if I did, I largely know how most of the regulars here would respond.
I'd read it, but yeah, you'd get a bunch of worthless replies.
MGuy
Prince
Posts: 4795
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 5:18 am
Location: Indiana

Post by MGuy »

Liking or disliking an edition is all a matter of taste right? If it is fun for you then kudos. No need to flame someone over taste.
The first rule of Fatclub. Don't Talk about Fatclub..
If you want a game modded right you have to mod it yourself.
User avatar
virgil
King
Posts: 6339
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by virgil »

While flaming is bad, when apologists arrive, they open themselves up for others to argue with their reasons. It gets particularly bad when you have people defending an edition with provably wrong facts, because then you have those facts attacked, and likely for good reason.

It's a different story when you play an edition because you find the flaws easy to ignore during play or because it's the only game on the field.
Last edited by virgil on Wed Aug 05, 2009 3:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
User avatar
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage
Posts: 14841
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Kaelik »

MGuy wrote:Liking or disliking an edition is all a matter of taste right? If it is fun for you then kudos. No need to flame someone over taste.
No, it's not a matter of taste.
DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.

That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
User avatar
NineInchNall
Duke
Posts: 1222
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by NineInchNall »

Yeah, I mean pretty much all rpg books taste bad. It's something in the modern inks, I suspect.
Last edited by NineInchNall on Wed Aug 05, 2009 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Current pet peeves:
Misuse of "per se". It means "[in] itself", not "precisely". Learn English.
Malformed singular possessives. It's almost always supposed to be 's.
ggroy
Knight
Posts: 386
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:51 pm

Post by ggroy »

Last edited by ggroy on Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Locked