Dracovar's page

I think all of this talk of "she should have given clearer warnings" vastly overestimates humanity's ability to correctly interpret simple messages.

No matter how clearly you state something, people will misunderstand (or deliberately misinterpret) what you say.

Cleric of Sarenae - "I cast the Commune spell"

(for reference, the text of said spell: "You contact your deity–or agents thereof–and ask questions that can be answered by a simple yes or no. (A cleric of no particular deity contacts a philosophically allied deity.) You are allowed one such question per caster level. The answers given are correct within the limits of the entity’s knowledge. “Unclear” is a legitimate answer, because powerful beings of the Outer Planes are not necessarily omniscient. In cases where a one-word answer would be misleading or contrary to the deity’s interests, a short phrase (five words or less) may be given as an answer instead.

The spell, at best, provides information to aid character decisions. The entities contacted structure their answers to further their own purposes. If you lag, discuss the answers, or go off to do anything else, the spell ends." )

So, in all the history of Golarion, leading up to the nuking of Gormuz, not one, not a single cleric, bothered to ask their Goddess via a Commune spell "Hey boss, is it a good idea to live here?"

Pretty sure she'd have answered with a "NO". That's not vague, that's not unclear, misleading or contrary to her interests. It's pretty much spelled out for them. And every single cleric of Sarenae that asks that question via a Commune spell should have, in theory, got the same answer.

So, how do you screw that up?

I honestly thing Paizo should buy the rights to the never completed Fire Mountain product - Throne of Night. Then, take all the good bits from it (and there were lots) and incorporate into a really solid Darklands AP for Golarion.

Sure, it would show up as a 2E product at this point, but, that would even tempt me into buying, despite being a 1E devotee.

I'm still a little confused:

* Regular Radiant Fire goes off: Baphy is destroyed but regenerates and still has his five or so remaining nukes. Players die but keep their souls.
* Modified (in Book 5) Radiant Fire goes off: Baphy is destroyed but regenerates and loses use of his five or so remaining nukes. Players die and also lose their souls for reasons I still don't understand.

5 nukes, especially with one placed in one of the world's biggest cities, is a pretty big deal, but so is an epic lich even without five nukes. A CR30 guy can probably do every bit as much damage without the nukes, IMO, it just might take a couple rounds.

I wish maybe he lost a couple mythic levels, or something, to signify a more significant reduction in power.

The idea with the nukes is kind of fun, but really, TB could just as easily fire off a Limited Wish for a Control Winds, and meta magic it with Widen to decimate large cities, armies, etc. Then, just turn a couple squads of Wraiths loose on the survivors. Sort of why the ending sucks so much - you sacrifice your leveled character to stop future uses of the Radiant Fire, and force TB back to regenerate himself. Whoop de doo! Means squat.

TB could systematically nuke a couple of cities/day easily with Tornadoes, and what's going to stop him? Well, not the PC's from this AP....unless a kind DM implements a certain Book 5 sidebar.

EXCEPT - I forgot, if going forward TB is now hamstrung by 2E casting rules, he's really been neutered way worse than losing his Radiant Fire nukes...

The "Archmages per sq km" equation gets really thrown out of whack upon Waterdeep's arrival on Kortos.

Dracovar wrote:

We'll see where we are a year into the 2E launch, but I don't think it's going to be a good place.

*marks down 27th November 2020 in his Special Calendar with the name "Dracovar"*

*smiles*

*shades, vodka*

Heheh - I'd be happy to be wrong. And we can figure out how I send you a bottle of Vodka when the time comes. I'll put that in my special calendar... :-)

Still a hard-core 1E fan. No intentions of moving to 2E. Way too much material in 1E still to explore. I like the system. 2E smacks of Dnd 4.0 which brought me to Pathfinder in the first place.

My group is also solidly 1E, having invested a lot in HeroLab, books, etc. None of us particularly liked the 2E playtest and haven't bothered to look since.

One of the real keys to my decision is that it's difficult to port over a radically different system UNLESS a lot of the capabilities, etc remain the same. DnD 2.0 to 3.0 worked - AND - had a very handy Conversion Guide to help. With a long running campaign (this is my 40th anniversary of playing DnD/Pathfinder) one does NOT just blow up the economy, the way magic works, etc, unless the new system is really compelling. I would have much preferred an evolutionary 1E -> Unchained kind of development than what actually showed up. It was too different, they nerfed things far beyond what I thought was necessary, screwed with the economics (Gold -> Silver AND change the basic pricing on stuff) and generally delivered something I just didn't want.

So, I cancelled my subs and only occasionally show up on the Boards now. We'll see where we are a year into the 2E launch, but I don't think it's going to be a good place.

Things I'm watching as time goes on:

1) Alexa website stats. Been tracking since March 2019. Trend for both worldwide rank and US rank is awful - people are not coming back here. US ranking is recovering a bit, with this latest playtest, but I expect further downward trends after Dec 2.
2) Paizo board activity. Return of the Runelords and Tyrant's Grasp should have generated lots of posts, buzz, etc. They didn't. Can Age of Ashes do better and reverse the trend? I think 1E people were already bailing out by the time of the last 2 1E AP's.
3) Amazon sales ranks over time.

I think it's going to be an "interesting" ride...

My recommendation: Read all the reviews, especially for Book 6, before committing to TG. The potential 'ending' may or may not resonate with your group. If your gold standard is Crimson Throne, well, TG is far from that level, quality wise. Just my opinion.

I think War for the Crown has a lot of excellent opportunities for role playing, combat, even some sandboxy style stuff in County Meratt. I'd go poking through those threads, see what you think...

Not alone in the least. My campaign first kicked off in 1979. I revised things in the early eighties, and it's been persistent since then.

I'm not even thinking about going to 2E at this point. I'll need it to be a more mature system. And even then, maybe not. The Conversion Guide for 2E is a wee bit light on details, with a lot of, "wing it" types of situations, because it's just too different, IMO.

Going from 3.5 to 4 (back in the day) was a non-starter for so many reasons, not the least of which, it looked like an entirely different game. Not necessarily bad, but different. And there was no buy in from our group, either. So - Pathfinder was the perfect next step back then. Now? Noping out for a lot of the same reasons as we did from 4e 10+ years ago.

It would be nice to be able to use this set of boards as a reference, which is very difficult right now from all of the “just saying blah blah blah” crap. We get it, you don’t like it.... take this bs to reddit with the rest of them, because we’re trying to run games!

Not looking for argument, just get over yourselves a little.

Taking anything to Reddit also runs the risk that people engage Less and Less on these Boards, and more on others...until there isn't anyone left to discuss anything HERE.

Have you taken a look at Paizo.com's Alexa ratings and trajectory over the last few months? Really, we want people coming here - to voice opinions, etc - be them good, bad, controversial, etc.

On an old "What are you going to miss in 1E" thread - mine was the liveliness of the message boards - posted when Book 6 of the AP was coming out and the entire AP had a paltry 489 posts at the time (or something like that). That's not good. There are long term posters I'm used to seeing that just aren't posting anymore, it seems.

"Take it to Reddit?" Be careful what you wish for...

@Dracovar

Yeah, we have a similar decision to make. Our campaign has been running for 7 years in PF. Moreover, I had a 1e campaign (which actually started as a basic D&D campaign) that I converted to 3e. With that older campaign I eventually gave up on hard conversions and did it more by "feel". Yeah, an 18 strength might equal a 23, but the feats, etc... made the character feel completely different.

My solution to this problem was to try to pare down each character to it's 'concept' - i.e. what was he/she really known for. Then try and replicate that in the new system and see what was left over. It didn't always work, but it usually came pretty close. It was a bunch of work, but about the same as trying to convert it using a formula.

The question is, as always, is it worth the effort? Like many people I have a ton invested in 1e and it's now "complete". I can rest, knowing that there won't be anything official added to it going forward. It's still a bloated, unintuitive system. Is it worth changing?

My feeling is that we'll migrate as a group if 2e is fun. And since we are only in book 1 of Tyrant's Grasp, we have a while to defer that decision. We're thinking of running a few short sessions of 2e in between books to see how it plays. As said before - fingers crossed it's good.

For me it's both the effort to convert and the 'feel' of 2E. When I look at what some of my original characters looked like, and what they are now under PF1E, they've evolved, no doubt. 5E or PF2E seems like a devolve somehow. Just purely subjective opinion tho, I don't expect that anyone shares it.

And, Tyrant's Grasp - **if you are the GM**, check my post history - and what I now call the "Cole Deschain sidebar". I think his endgame tweak really salvages the AP for me.

Also... cool as the tree rebirth can be, I've already got my epilogue planned, and it's a little different. Figured it'd give more of a sense of accomplishment to the players, while also tying back to a much-loved NPC from volume one...

Umble, the Nosoi from The Dead Roads approaches Pharasma with a small bag in her claws- containing the dusty remnants (the ash, if you will) of the heroes' souls.

The Lady of Graves does her usual "listen without saying anything" routine as Umble spells out the highly unusual circumstances of the case, finally concluding with an observation that for services rendered, if for no other reason, she hopes that something can be done, even if the souls as they were have been destroyed.

Pharasma actually reaches out, takes the bag of dust. Looks at it.

Says "Yes."

Cut to four children born on the same day in Absalom. Roll credits.

As someone who was rather annoyed with the AP's endgame and result for the PC's (book 5 sidebar not withstanding) I have to say...

THIS IS GENIUS. With potential timeline advance, you might even line up the children with some special trait(s), unusual backstory, all sorts of potential RP goodness, for an upcoming future AP - and your players get a neat 'reward' in a way.

Kudos Cole, kudos!

EDIT: I'm dubbing this the "Cole Deschain" sidebar...

Magnimar - lots going on, good product and AP support for it, makes for a nice logical "next step" if you use Sandpoint as a beginning, etc.

As I read the guide the overwhelming message I get is that 2e is a completely new game from 1e, sharing only some superficial nomenclature with the older edition. And for me, that's fine. 1e was increasingly becoming an unwieldy beast.

It reminds me of trying to covert from 1e (or 2e) to 3e in DnD. You could hand-wave it, but a mathematical conversion was nigh impossible.

Here's hoping to the success of this new game :)

I can agree with you about the 2E comments - it is significantly different from 1E which makes it pretty difficult to convert. Back during the playtest, I mentioned that the migration to 3.0 was helped a lot by the conversion guide put out by WotC - but PF2E was just too different, I thought, for a meaningful guide to be made.

The ADnD2E to 3.0 Conversion Guide DID provide a lot more mathematical conversions, like 18(00) Strength = 23 in new system, etc, etc (don't quote me on the exact numbers, going from memory). So, I have to disagree with you there. Using that guide, I was able to migrate my Dnd 2E characters to 3.0 fairly easily. So, over the years, I've moved characters from White Box -> 1E -> 2E -> 3.0/3.5 -> Pathfinder. Tried doing that for Pathfinder 2E and frankly, hit a wall (a wall not unlike trying to go 3.0/3.5 -> 4E). If a new system deviates too much from the previous, conversion becomes more and more problematic.

For those of us that like to run persistent worlds (my current one is 35 yrs old) and also try to keep some verisimilitude across editions - radical changes just aren't good. That was one reason going to 4th Ed wasn't in the cards for me - I couldn't make it feel like DnD for me. So, when me and my group found Pathfinder, we loved it and went all in - and converting our 3.5 characters over was a breeze. Pathfinder 2E is different enough that I if I do choose to migrate (a lot of work) not only is that system on the table as an option, but so is 5E. But, much more likely, I will use some variant of the P6/P8/Px type of rules with Pathfinder 1E and choose a power level I'm comfortable with. Added advantage now is that I'll have a set of 1E rules that won't be seeing much more development/change (unless 3p guys really jump on doing 1e support and add some really compelling content).

EDIT - if I was going to 2E, I think this Guide is certainly helpful and while it does mention you may need to ad-lib more than a few things, there is enough crunch to make it useful. I hope Paizo updates it going forward as they release new 2E content/classes/etc. Some of us might not be 2E folks now, but down the road, once it's fleshed out with a few more products? I hope they look at this Conversion Guide as a living document and update/expand it as more content is created.

I think that the last few AP's have gone steadily downhill too, but my disappointment with the AP's escalated and started right around the time of the 2E announcement.

War for the Crown - I really liked the vast majority of this one. But with the 2E announcement coming out the Player's Guide was seemingly delayed until something like Book 3. That tempered my enthusiasm, frankly. For me, the glaring oddness to the AP

Return of the Runelords - hey, it's Runelords! Awesome! Alaznist is the lead baddie though.

Tyrant's Grasp - I would have thought the finale to 1E would have been much better than window dressing Golarion for 2E. You could play it for the sake of playing *something*, but what's the real point? Imagine doing Wrath of the Righteous, with a perma-TPK waiting at the end, and you don't even get to close the Worldwound with your sacrifice. That's Tyrant's Grasp. Another poster in another thread summed it up perfectly - Paizo was too attached to their NPC to let it be truly defeated.

I really think that Paizo was so focused on 2E that 1E became "this thing we need to wrap up" and the AP's reflect this.

Temperans wrote:

Just a nod to the Succubus thread.

And Redeemed Mind Flayers!

And Redeemed Drow! NO, wait! I don't want to turn back into an Elf. Like, can that even happen?

Killing the Goblin that took your eye, fine. Killing every Goblin because they're a Goblin? Yeah no retcon needed, you got a problem.

Probably just a matter of time before I get hauled into Magnimar for past "crimes against goblin-kind".

I preferred the good ol' days. Lopping off Goblin ears, putting bounties on the little buggers, pickling one of their Chiefs. Good times. Good times. What's a Goblinoid hating ranger to do these days?

Time's are a-changing. I'm going to find Shalelu and head over to the Rusty Dragon and get drunk. The world just up and changed on us...

And if I see even one deluded "Hug a Helpful Goblin" do-gooder, I'm gonna lose it...

That sounds like a you problem.

I'm getting retconned into a genocidal goblin killer. Sheriff Hemlock is probably on his way over...

MidsouthGuy wrote:

Even though they are a core ancestry now, that doesn't change the fact that Goblins are monsters and people will kill them on sight unless they have a very good reason not to do so. A random Goblin walking up to a town with a crudely made truce flag would get shot full of arrows, and the guards on the wall who shot it would have a good laugh in barracks later that night. "Stupid little beast thought we would treat it like a person!" The only difference is now there will be more of a spotlight on those rare cases where people do have a very good reason not to kill said Goblin. About 95% of people should still see a Goblin and think "kill the monster" without stopping to worry about what it wants, and the other 5% will at least be willing to find out what the little monster jabbering excitedly at them wants before deciding to murder it or not.

These views weren't even backed up in 1st Edition.

I beg to differ. Lost an eye to those little psychopaths. Send any and all goblins over to Goblin Squash Stables - I've got a collection to show them before I reunite them with Chief Wartus...

Odd. I'm facing a lot of conflicted emotions as Pathfinder 2e approaches its launch Aug. 1 and 1e becomes history.

First of all, I'm absolutely dying to see what's changed in 2e since the PlayTest. I'm very much hoping there have been major changes to the action economy from what it was in the PlayTest -- which I very much didn't like. It's a critical factor. If it's still pretty much the same, a lot of other stuff is going to have to be really good to overcome my objections. I did like some of the readability enhancements I saw in PlayTest books -- and the new concept that some spells could have a crit. fail or crit. success. That's kind of cool.

Second, I hope 2e is successful -- even though I'm still committed entirely to 1e. I've got way too much of an investiment in 1e to really move forward to 2e. I'm not convinced it's going to be worth the effort to do conversions, on the fly or otherwise, to get 1e material to work in 2e or visa versa. Unless 2e is really good (and not just dumbed down as some people possibly unfairly claim), to me an elf is just an elf -- is other words in one way all these different systems are really the same thing. The challenge is really working within the systems to "win". Not really sure it matters which one in a way.

So, I'm also a bit depressed because my 1e world has become frozen in time. It now only has a past. There won't be more future. No point checking for all the exciting 1e new releases -- except, curiously, while very happy with the breadth of 1e rule books, and in spite of their flaws, I'm very happy that this set of really great books is finally finite. There won't be more rule books to overload GMs. We now have an opportunity to master the existing material -- and will do so excitedly probably for the next 10 years or so as long as we have players.

There's a number of people that really love 1e because it seems to fit the natural progression from the now overly simple D&D. I started with D&D in the 80s. We called it AD&D -- you can...

Right there with you, even down to the ADnD 1980's references (I started with the 3 booklet White Box set).

Going forward? While I lament the loss of future AP's (I dropped my AP subscription), I figure that I can always follow the 2E discussions of each AP - likely lots of tips/hints/etc at where the future AP's are going to take Golarion - and use those as inspiration for homebrew adventures. I have no interest in trying to convert 2E back to 1E, and have so much 1E material, I can pretty much use what I have for the rest of my life. Each person's iteration of Golarion will be unique - and the end of the 1E line doesn't necessarily have to mean that your Golarion has to be frozen in time too.

I see the advent of 2E being just like the "Time of Troubles" (and other such) when WotC does Edition Changes. All the AP's are assumed to be completed going into the 2E version of Golarion. Great if you want to "reboot the franchise" but useless if you still want that uncertainty of playing through a 1E AP and letting the result impact your version of Golarion (well, at least if you have a persistent world and don't run AP's in isolation). There are AP's I still want to run, and have the result impact my version of the world, without regard for what will be 2E canon going forward.

I always liked turning a cow into a goldfish. Well, a herd of cows into goldfish.

Then taking them to a tavern and sponsoring a goldfish swallowing contest.

Dispel Magic and/or death of the polymorphed critter (usually via acid damage in the stomach) would, at least back in previous editions, cause the creature to revert back to original size.

Making for quite the Alien-esque "cowpocalypse" in the tavern.

Just seems that it's getting quieter and quieter here. I mean, we are about to release Book 6 of Tyrant's Grasp and the entire AP has a underwhelming 439 posts as I write this. I would have thought folks would have been all over these AP's - Return of the Runelords and then Tar-Barphon? Like, where is everybody?

I'm starting to miss the liveliness of the message boards, TBH.

I'd kinda be surprised if heroic sacrifice was the only option without some sort of "If PCs do things well, they can survive" thing since lot of APs have victory conditions were you get better result if you did better :p

Prepare to be surprised - the PC's future is bleak indeed. As Franz mentions above - there is a sidebar option suggested - but as written? All roads lead to some distinct unpleasantness.

I have to agree with Marco's comments - not a good design at all - unless you have player buy-in from the get go.

Of course, we'll have to wait until Book 6 to see how this all plays out - but I wonder - will the feedback loop that blows up Tar Baphon require ALL the obols embedded in the PC's? Or just some? Or what about just one?

Requiring an entire party wipe to end the AP "successfully" seems a bit of a stretch to ask of your players. I mean, you don't even kill off Tar Baphon, just set him back a bunch. Leaves an unsatisfactory taste in my mouth, frankly.

Now, if it just takes 1/4 to do the job - AND you apply GM fiat via the sidebar mentioned in Book 5 (wherein you, as GM, offer up a future resurrection for the sacrificed folk(s)), maybe it would work.

What bothers me about the design is the default seems to be leading the PC's to a perma-death at the end of the AP. I guess that's one way to retire high levels, but not one, as a player, I'm going to appreciate.

If I was a PC, right about the end of part 2 of the installment I'd be kinda pissed...

PC prospects going forward into Book 6 look bleak indeed.

So - just so I'm clear - the endgame for the PC's is to sacrifice themselves to create a feedback loop that blows up Tar Baphon and ends his ability to use Radiant Fire. However, given he's a lich (and what we already know about 2E so far...) he is coming back, just without his superweapon. And that's the goal of the AP, in a nutshell?

Effectively, from a metagame perspective admittedly, the PC's get to perma-death themselves in order to set the table for how Golarion 2E is going to look. At least the devs had the foresight to put in a sidebar suggesting the helpful NPC can arrange something for PC resurrection sometime in the future, after they've heroically sacrificed themselves. Gee, thanks for that.

What I eagerly await now is the "what if the PC's fail" outlines that typically show up in Book 6 of the AP's. This kind of 'ultimate sacrifice' might work ok in some groups, but I know groups that would take the boon (having their obols recalibrated to positive energy), and head for the hills.

I know Mythic doesn't have a lot of love - but for something like a Dragon, even 1 or 2 Mythic ranks could help even the odds.

I'm thinking that with even a single rank, you can add Dual Initiative to the critter - which would make for a nasty surprise even for a seasoned group of players (if they weren't expecting it).

At 2nd rank: Dual Initiative (feat) + Amazing Initiative (2nd rank ability) (plus rebuild the Dragon with Improved Initiative (regular feat) and Mythic Improved Initiative (mythic feat)) and suddenly, you've got yourself quite a powered up Dragon.

Let's hope Arazni isn't the next candidate for redemption, then. I haven't read Tyrant's Grasp but if the trend you're describing continues, she'll probably be next. :p

Oh, I bet we are in for some new lore about Arazni come 2E...with the events of Tyrant's Grasp as the catalyst.

Also, as Erudite Malefactor opined, there seems to be a "type" and Arazni fits the description, for the most part. Pure conjucture, obviously.

I'd have been much happier if they left them "as is", frankly. It's as if all these powerful evil entities cut from some "specific cloth" keep getting Mary Sue Makeovers.

Maybe Paizo can throw me a bone and have Iomedae fall from grace and takeover for Nocticula...

Considering that 16-year-old Hermean natives are supposed to be exiled if they fail their test, it seems odd that nobody ever sees or hears from such an exile. Maybe they have to sign some sort of mystical NDA.

NDA = 'Nother Dragon Appetizer

So, don't think I've seen this one...but I wasn't reading too closely...

Use a Heightened and Extended Mount spell to fire off a really high level version of the spell for your horse.

Then cast Alter Summoned Monster and flip said horse (and it's very long duration) for something from the appropriate Summon Monster level.

Day long+ summoned monster to do your bidding. The higher you can Heighten the Mount spell, the crazier the options for Alter Summoned Monster...

EDIT: adding a couple of links:

Alter Summoned Monster

Mount

Paizo is often the first place that comes to mind (and I've got a number of 3rd party items, incl from JBE in my digital downloads here). For physical stuff - Paizo again.

Second up would be DriveThroughRPG.

Third would be Kickstarters.

Control Winds - Druid / Shaman level 5

At 10th level: 400' radius = 800' diameter (reasonable if the army is in tight formations). Keep the eye of the storm small.

First casting, assuming no wind, boosts the wind levels. Second/Third castings you can bring it all the way up to a Tornado level event - That should pretty much kill off the vast majority of those caught within it.

Find a way to sneak it into a Greater Glyph of Warding (Shaman could pull it off) and create some glyph bombs.

Captain Morgan wrote:

Seeing as how easy it is to convert PF1 adventures to the playtest, I can't imagine it being that hard to convert an adventure written with playtest rules to PF2 rules. If *I* can manage the former, I'm sure the much more talented folks at Paizo can do the latter.

Where are those easy conversion rules? I missed them. :)

So did I. Can someone post a link? ;-)

Building on what Gorbacz said...

I can just see it now - for ages, Goblins have been the nutty little nuisance critters that drive almost everyone crazy. With no apparent redeeming qualities - they are generally ignored, beaten down, and otherwise aren't much better than vermin in the eyes of many.

Which was a perfect cover.

Because buried deep within the collective Goblin psyche is a weapon. A weapon so powerful, that it had be kept hidden until it was absolutely needed. Hidden within the collective race known as Goblins - where NO ONE would think to look.

It is this weapon that will ultimately defeat the Whispering Tyrant and save Golarion and everyone on it.

And thus, Goblins go from vermin to heroes and become accepted members of society - they saved the planet (well, with some help from some Adventurers in the last of the 1st Ed. AP's).

That's my off-the-wall theory.

It is really unfortunate for this thread that grapples are over so quickly now. Takes away a lot of the magic for me.

And that means the Lust Demon is now only grabbing me or restraining me with her Constant Tongues, for a measly six seconds as well. I mean, being diplomatically grabbed by tongues sure has ist uses, but it's so restraining ...

But it's a helluva 6 seconds....

blahpers wrote:

Yeesh, I feel kinda bad for any Paizo employees reading this thread/checking that poll.

Eh, it's probably a tough spot to be in right now. If this was just an edition I didn't like I would feel bad too. But for me it's more than that. It's about the perpetual locking of threads on the 2E messageboard. It's about the sensitivity training manual in the playtest document. In my opinion Paizo has taken on an eerily authoritarian aspect.

I don't disagree with him on the thread locks - my sense two weeks ago was things are a bit more heavy-handed these days, too.

Nopity Nope Nope Nope. Voted - not changing my homebrew to 2e - too many radical changes. EXACTLY the same reason why I never jumped from 3.5 to 4th Edition. EXACTLY.

It's also why Paizo and Pathfinder 1e (aka 3.75) was a natural and welcome progression.

Barring some radical redesign, I'm anticipating cancellation of my subscription when 1e is officially done. Then, I start looking for those publishers that will fill the void left by Paizo.

Just like Paizo filled the void left by WotC all those years ago.

May sound harsh, but there it is.

Wrote lots of analysis...

For me, I'm still where I was during "Knee Jerk Reaction" phase..

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v9mv?First-KneeJerk-Reaction#27
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2va3m?The-Main-Problem-of-PF2#7

There's been changes to PF2, and I've delved deeper into the new system, but it still just isn't doing it for me. I dislike the changes to the spells (nerfs abound, and some are just fun-killing and needless). Resonance needs to be junked, can't stand that mechanic. Shield use - not a fan. Pricing changes (change for the sake of change?). It just goes on and on and I've got a full time job, thanks - fixing 2E for Paizo ain't paying my bills - even if I could (and I'm not so daft to think I can do better...but I just prefer PF1 over PF2 at this point).

For the most part, unless I get sucked into a thread by a compelling initial post (like this one), I've pretty much "noped" out of this playtest - it's become 4E all over again in my mind. I'll take another sniff maybe when it's more polished up, frankly, and go enjoy Return of the Runelords and the next AP. After that...dunno. 3rd Party time? Maybe back to Wizards and 5E? I mean, of the two versions - one I recognize as DnD - and one I don't. Just like when it was Pathfinder vs 4E. Exactly like that, actually.

I can't be the only Pathfinder player out there with this feeling (and who has just walked away at this point from PF2). Paizo is taking a gamble: will PF2 keep me in the fold (and buying books and AP's)?

Got my shipping notice last night, got the first installment downloaded this morning.

First cursory read? I'm stoked. This one could be a great roller-coaster ride. Looking forward to a more detailed read through later.

Hope we see the Player's Guide in the next week or two, though with the website issues being so severe, can understand if it's a bit behind.

I thought they were merely changing it so that what used to cost 2 gp, now costs 2 sp, instead of a suit of amour costing 400 gp, it's 40 gp/400 sp; I can see how actually changing the prices of things would bother some.

If only they had done just that - but Skeld pointed out that this is not always the case at all. It just makes converting things (if one was so inclined) that much harder from 1E to 2E.

Like him, I'd like to know exactly what the Dev's were hoping to fix/rectify with this change. What was the problem and how do they see this solution as 'fixing' what was wrong to begin with?

What is the technical reasoning behind changing this? What problem is it trying to fix?

If it were a matter of moving a decimal place, or all the game items simply replacing the gp cost with sp cost, then it wouldn't be a big deal. That's not the case however as items have just changed cost base AND cost altogether. For example, a PF1 chain shirt was 100gp, while a PF2 chain shirt costs 45sp. A PF1 longsword is 15gp; in PF2, it's 10sp.

A silver piece in PF2 does not means what a gold piece in PF1 meant. From a game world perspective, it's a jarring change. From a backward compatibility standpoint, it adds barrier to converting old adventures.

-Skeld

I think Skeld nails it on the head. Right here. THIS is the real issue, not whether or not I'm paying in GP, SP, BottleCaps, Shillings, Quatloos, Dollarz$ or whatever.

Was there a technical problem that needed fixing? Probably not. Did the design team want to take the opportunity to shift away from gold to silver because it seemed more "realistic"? Maybe? Did they need to mess with the cost base at the same time? Nope, but they did anyways - and it does present a jarring change.

With so much PF1 material available, this is just another inadvertent one finger salute to anyone who wants to convert that material to PF2. Making it HARDER to convert all the AP's I've purchased over the years simply buts one more roadblock in my adoption of the new system. And it's a NEEDLESS roadblock.

Convert to silver, sure. Whatever. But keep the pricing consistent so previous PF1 material is easily translated to the new system. Moving a decimal point is easy. Repricing everything is not.

Vic Ferrari wrote:

Noodlemancer wrote:

They explicitly said 4e outsold PF1e for the entirety of 4e's lifespan, despite having a very poor reception overall, meaning brand does trump all.

I heard PF overtook 4th Ed in sales at one point.

It did, and even when it was second, it was a much closer 2nd. In 5e case, it is different. It is a smashing success, far beyond 4e, because besides brand recognition, it is a well designed game that targets a clear goal and manage to deliver what that target needs

And I think that "deliver what that target needs" included taking DnD back to a more identifiable version of DnD. 4E pushed too far and didn't look or feel like the DnD that people played. Pathfinder DID and Paizo built a company from that.

So, 5E stepped back to it's roots, became more identifiable as the game people loved, and captured back old market share, and expanded market share with new players, too.

I try to port a PF1 character into PF2 - just ain't recognizable. But I do the same with 5E? Oh, it IS recognizable.

That's going to be a problem for PF2. It's too "4E" like in terms of execution and changes as it stands right now, I believe.

Dracovar wrote:

magnuskn wrote:

BTW, I just remembered a gaming system which also did a drastic change from one edition to another and which did not go nearly as well as 2nd Ed -> 3rd Ed.

And that is Vampire: The Masquerade to Vampire: The Requiem (and the other affected WoD games from that edition change). Food for thought how radical change can not always lead to desired results.

I think it's also important to remember something that really made the 2E -> 3E migration doable.

The Conversion Guide.

Out of curiosity, did you ever fiddle with moving those characters from PF to Starfinder? There was a small conversion guide placed in the back of the core rulebook, and it might be a useful reference for Paizo as a guide for what kind of changes could work and what wouldn't. Doubly so if you can maintain the feel while transitioning to a science-fiction setting.

Thanks! I will see about taking a look at how Starfinder tackled things.

BTW, I just remembered a gaming system which also did a drastic change from one edition to another and which did not go nearly as well as 2nd Ed -> 3rd Ed.

And that is Vampire: The Masquerade to Vampire: The Requiem (and the other affected WoD games from that edition change). Food for thought how radical change can not always lead to desired results.

I think it's also important to remember something that really made the 2E -> 3E migration doable.

The Conversion Guide.

You see, I'd ported old characters from White Box to Advanced D&D. I'd ported characters from 1st Ed to 2nd Edition. Each time, the character still had the look and feel of what I expected from that character. Spells and their effects were similar (sure, there were tweaks, but the essence of the spells remained).

Going from 2nd to 3rd was more jarring - BUT - here's that Conversion Guide to help port the character over. And when you were done? You still had the look and feel. Spells still worked in a similar way (without too much nerfing). Skills and magic item creation was distinctly new, for sure, but the CORE of what made my characters tick? That core was there. I could SEE it. These were still my characters. A campaign can still continue forward with enough verisimilitude despite changes to the system. Sort of like a program that runs fine on Windows XP can still run on a newer OS.

In comparison the move from 3.0 to 3.5 was negligible, as was the move from 3.5 to Pathfinder. My characters were still recognizable. Spells still worked pretty much as they always have.

But wait! What about 4th Edition? Well, to me, nothing looked the same. My characters didn't seem like the same characters as before. The game didn't feel the same. And thus, the move to Pathfinder was an easy no-brainer for myself and the group I was gaming with.

So - here's the Pathfinder 2E playtest. Can I convert my old characters? Erm, no handy guide. That's bad. Can I craft em from scratch? Hmmnn, they don't really seem the same anymore. I don't recognize them as DnD/Pathfinder characters. Nor do I recognize the massive changes to spells as being in line with my expectations for what DnD should be.

I've run a persistent world of my own for decades, through various editions, but things have always been recognizable. A system that messes with that is going to be problematic. 4th Edition did precisely that and was a non-starter as a result. Now PF2 looks to do likewise.

Some sort of Conversion Guide to help make PF2 more backward compatible with PF1 would be really, really useful. But I don't see PF2 as being close enough to PF1 to facilitate such a thing. Which really means that PF2 is a distinct enough departure from 3.0/3.5/PF1 that it will likely lose me. At least for my campaign.

It's a different game. Just like 4E was.

Too bad Paizo didn't invest more in it's Beginner Box. THAT was a slicker, easier version of PF that my 7 year old could pick up, yet, you can still migrate that into full PF down the road. Your BB Character is still going to look the same, but more options present themselves.

Ahh, the thing I thought I was going to miss the most - the Succubus in a Grapple thread.

I was going to save the lack of such a thread for my Histrionics thread post...guess that's one less thing for that post I need to put in now...

But, shouldn't we be calling this the Lust Demon now? Succubus is so 1st edition...

Dracovar wrote:

I think I would have been more receptive to an evolutionary change - more Unchained Style - over a revolutionary one that we are looking at now.

A system that retained enough elements so that 10 years of previously purchased products would still be easily usable. But with enough crunch to clean up problem points from PF1. That’s not the case here, I’m afraid.

What I see playing out now on the Paizo boards is exactly what I saw on Wizards Boards when WotC released the dumpster fire that was 4e. Right down to the boosters and detractors, the tone of the posts, underlying bitterness and hope, etc. The seeds of an edition war have been sown, really.

And barring some changes, I foresee a similar end - another company very familiar and skilled with publishing PF1 stuff will take that ball and run with it.

For me it's the same as PF Beta, with all those armchair business experts predicting that Paizo will go bankrupt and some snappy new company will take their assets over after PF bombs. :)

YMMV - Paizo took the risk of offering up an alternative product to a dissatisfied WotC customer base that hated the 4E offering. A product that offered a more familiar gaming experience. They lucked out and captured a large gaming demographic, and thrived as a result. Timing is everything.

Now, they are playing the role of WotC and offering up the unfamiliar - and I suspect a similar result awaits for them as for 4E. If I’m so inclined to ditch the 3.75 paradigm (if you will) then all contenders are going to be up for consideration, the most notable being 5E. I’m not so inclined to ditch PF1 - that dog still has a lot of hunt left in it.

I think I would have been more receptive to an evolutionary change - more Unchained Style - over a revolutionary one that we are looking at now.

A system that retained enough elements so that 10 years of previously purchased products would still be easily usable. But with enough crunch to clean up problem points from PF1. That’s not the case here, I’m afraid.

What I see playing out now on the Paizo boards is exactly what I saw on Wizards Boards when WotC released the dumpster fire that was 4e. Right down to the boosters and detractors, the tone of the posts, underlying bitterness and hope, etc. The seeds of an edition war have been sown, really.

And barring some changes, I foresee a similar end - another company very familiar and skilled with publishing PF1 stuff will take that ball and run with it.

I think it’s more of a symptom of a larger problem that a lot of the playtest shows: Paizo’s new attitude of playing “our way or the highway.” Between this and then cracking down on anyone who actually wants to, you know, make a character much better than average (or worse than average) thy seem to be pretty clearly saying “this is how to play the game, and screw you if you disagree” which is basically the opposite of P1e and seems to run contrary to their stated goal of making it a “game that everyone can enjoy and everyone feels comfortable playing.”

It kind of reminds me a bit of Apple’s management philosophy, really. And that’s not a good thing.

Agreed. If I have to house-rule a whole host of items in PF2 to reflect some of the best aspects of PF1, then PF2 better be a really, REALLY good system to migrate to.

If it's not, though? Then it's simply not worth the work. I stay with PF1 which I know and love - and my gaming dollar goes to those companies that continue to support that format. Just like my gaming dollar migrated away from Wizards of the Coast and to Paizo (and NEVER returned to WotC, I might add, after the Dragon/Dungeon Magazine and 4E debacle), so too, the day may come when that dollar leaves Paizo and ends up elsewhere.

It's the Wallet of Life. Like the Circle of Life. But with money.

I think the change I will be happiest for is when the party goes to a merchant to sell an unwanted magic item, and they are not paid in two hundred pounds of gold, implying the merchant just keeps it lying around in pre-measured sacks.

A couple hundred pounds of silver is way better.

There are no more Neutral Clerics of Evil Gods in Pathfinder, and I for one am extremely disappointed. Now I have to retire the character I've been playing for nearly ten years, or find a group that's okay with houseruling Chaotic Neutral Clerics of Lamashtu back into the game. Maybe I'm overreacting, maybe people won't find this fact a big deal, but for me, unless Neutral Clerics of Evil make it back in by the time the official Second Edition comes out, I'm done with Pathfinder.

Think this is a bit of an over-reaction. I, for one, would NOT sacrifice a character I've been playing for a long time just because a new edition appears that says "No, that's bad/wrong fun, not allowed".

I don't think so.

Option of "stop playing the character" and/or bye-bye Pathfinder seems extreme. The answer is simple - bye, bye 2E, you ain't my cup of tea.

This IS a playtest. Maybe Clerics within 1 step of their Gods alignment ala PF1 should be put back in. Some may like that idea, some may not. YMMV, but perhaps it needs to be floated in the feedback that there are people that prefer the PF1 route and NOT the proposed playtest approach.

(Edited for tone...removed some short-handed strong language)