Mark the Wise and Powerful's page

Jim Butler wrote:

If you're having troubles downloading the Monster Core PDF, please try the following:

1.) Click the "Problems downloading?" hyperlink. If that doesn't work...

2.) Purge your cache and cookies, as detailed in steps 2 and 3 in the Support Portal.

-Jim

I've lost your email address, so I'm trying to contact you this way ...

For the rest of you, I apologize for repeating my message -- I think this is important.

I think you're sort of on the right track with the Pathfinder editions, but there's a number of things I'd do differently:

Given that WotC lost the OGL battle and withdrew their threats (which they could re-instate at any time), if I were you, I would have let PF2e OGL continue in development for at least 2 to 5 years while, you, Paizo, worked on what I would call PF3e ORC.

While Paizo would be taking a risk (seems low) that WotC would cause more trouble, Paizo would have had more time to rework the core ruleset to create a truly unique RPG experience based on a fantasy setting, I think, capable of rivaling "the world's oldest RPG". I think you can do it. Just throw away the existing rules and re-imagine the whole thing. Of course, there's lots of common elements from legends and mythology to build such a game -- develop an RPG starting with this original source material and you've got plenty of your own.

Instead, though, I'm concerned that there is too much similarity with "the world's oldest RPG" core ruleset and now that this similarity is no longer acknowledged or licensed that, I feel, there's risk that PF2e ORC will be successfully challenged in court -- where upon I'd have to set aside all my PF2e ORC material (largely because of the cannibalism I describe below as a new PF edition is developed or possibly people leaving the Paizo ecosystem).

Your ecosystem seems to cannibalize itself. When PF2e OGL came out, the community for PF1e became much...

BTW, I sent an email to Jim Butler, Paizo President, and he addressed all of my concerns. I have no issues now.

1. They think they've done their legal homework such that a WotC lawsuit is NOT likely to succeed.

2. Players say PF2e OGL (Legacy) and ORC play together well. So, this gives us plenty of access to material (and it all seems to work great together in Fantasy Grounds Unity). Great transition, Paizo -- thanks!!!

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

You're just gonna repeat your message while ignoring replies to it right above you? Dude, that's just rude. Paizo has lawyers who probably understand the situation a lot better than anyone on the forums.

Which is why I repeated my message as an attempt to contact Jim Butler, President -- and why I can hope the responders here are right about the Paizo lawyers but I'd don't know. I am not a lawyer. I just don't want to get shutdown again with orphaned material.

I'm probably going to try to move ahead with PF2e ORC.

At first I was taken aback with the Monster Core because I don't have a lot of my favorite monsters -- but after a third look and having time to think about it I'd say it's a good first start.

Can't wait for Monster Core 2.

All this stuff is quite a bit expensive for Fantasy Grounds for PF2e. I'm not seeing a discount for the digital content like I could get for PF1e material (because I own the PDFs). I also have the PDFs for PF2e.

Oh, I found out why I wasn't getting PF2e discounts for Fantasy Grounds. I just had to resynchronize my Paizo account.

Jim Butler wrote:

If you're having troubles downloading the Monster Core PDF, please try the following:

1.) Click the "Problems downloading?" hyperlink. If that doesn't work...

2.) Purge your cache and cookies, as detailed in steps 2 and 3 in the Support Portal.

-Jim

I've lost your email address, so I'm trying to contact you this way ...

For the rest of you, I apologize for repeating my message -- I think this is important.

I think you're sort of on the right track with the Pathfinder editions, but there's a number of things I'd do differently:

Given that WotC lost the OGL battle and withdrew their threats (which they could re-instate at any time), if I were you, I would have let PF2e OGL continue in development for at least 2 to 5 years while, you, Paizo, worked on what I would call PF3e ORC.

While Paizo would be taking a risk (seems low) that WotC would cause more trouble, Paizo would have had more time to rework the core ruleset to create a truly unique RPG experience based on a fantasy setting, I think, capable of rivaling "the world's oldest RPG". I think you can do it. Just throw away the existing rules and re-imagine the whole thing. Of course, there's lots of common elements from legends and mythology to build such a game -- develop an RPG starting with this original source material and you've got plenty of your own.

Instead, though, I'm concerned that there is too much similarity with "the world's oldest RPG" core ruleset and now that this similarity is no longer acknowledged or licensed that, I feel, there's risk that PF2e ORC will be successfully challenged in court -- where upon I'd have to set aside all my PF2e ORC material (largely because of the cannibalism I describe below as a new PF edition is developed or possibly people leaving the Paizo ecosystem).

Your ecosystem seems to cannibalize itself. When PF2e OGL came out, the community for PF1e became much...

I take back some of what I said about potential PF2e OGL cannibalism in favor of PF2e ORC. The first example I thought I was beginning to see was on Foundry VTT with the PF2e game system -- but my fears have been put at ease because they are retaining the PF2e OGL material such as all the bestiaries. Fantasy Grounds Unity also allows either PF2e Legacy or PF2e (ORC) to be selected when creating a campaign.

Hey, as long as the people who dumped (serious) money into PF2e OGL get a good run -- I'm totally fine with the PF2e ORC direction (instead of putting it off until a theoretical PF3e).

You're just gonna repeat your message while ignoring replies to it right above you? Dude, that's just rude. Paizo has lawyers who probably understand the situation a lot better than anyone on the forums.

Which is why I repeated my message as an attempt to contact Jim Butler, President -- and why I can hope the responders here are right about the Paizo lawyers but I'd don't know. I am not a lawyer. I just don't want to get shutdown again with orphaned material.

I'm probably going to try to move ahead with PF2e ORC.

At first I was taken aback with the Monster Core because I don't have a lot of my favorite monsters -- but after a third look and having time to think about it I'd say it's a good first start.

Can't wait for Monster Core 2.

All this stuff is quite a bit expensive for Fantasy Grounds for PF2e. I'm not seeing a discount for the digital content like I could get for PF1e material (because I own the PDFs). I also have the PDFs for PF2e.

If you're having troubles downloading the Monster Core PDF, please try the following:

1.) Click the "Problems downloading?" hyperlink. If that doesn't work...

2.) Purge your cache and cookies, as detailed in steps 2 and 3 in the Support Portal.

-Jim

I've lost your email address, so I'm trying to contact you this way ...

For the rest of you, I apologize for repeating my message -- I think this is important.

I think you're sort of on the right track with the Pathfinder editions, but there's a number of things I'd do differently:

Given that WotC lost the OGL battle and withdrew their threats (which they could re-instate at any time), if I were you, I would have let PF2e OGL continue in development for at least 2 to 5 years while, you, Paizo, worked on what I would call PF3e ORC.

While Paizo would be taking a risk (seems low) that WotC would cause more trouble, Paizo would have had more time to rework the core ruleset to create a truly unique RPG experience based on a fantasy setting, I think, capable of rivaling "the world's oldest RPG". I think you can do it. Just throw away the existing rules and re-imagine the whole thing. Of course, there's lots of common elements from legends and mythology to build such a game -- develop an RPG starting with this original source material and you've got plenty of your own.

Instead, though, I'm concerned that there is too much similarity with "the world's oldest RPG" core ruleset and now that this similarity is no longer acknowledged or licensed that, I feel, there's risk that PF2e ORC will be successfully challenged in court -- where upon I'd have to set aside all my PF2e ORC material (largely because of the cannibalism I describe below as a new PF edition is developed or possibly people leaving the Paizo ecosystem).

Your ecosystem seems to cannibalize itself. When PF2e OGL came out, the community for PF1e became much smaller. I think they moved on to PF2e OGL. Now, tools like the PF2e game system for Foundry VTT have been changed to support PF2e ORC (P2e OGL support has been dropped). I think it's possible that PF2e OGL will fall by the wayside -- but I'm not sure.

For the sake of your customers, it probably would have been better to avoid confusing the customer base as much as possible to have a healthy ecosystem. It was harmful to have PF1e lose so many community members so fast -- not really to the players but to the GMs who invested a lot in that material. To have the same thing happen to PF2e OGL might also be harmful, especially after having only a short, 4 year run. Yes, people can access some material online for free, but as a GM it's too hard to do that -- so I purchase a lot of material.

I like in general what your doing but I think you've got the creative energy and inertia to create something from scratch that's entirely different but capable of competing with the "world's oldest RPG" -- and free of any potential legal challenges while protecting your customer base.

However, I do understand what you did. The momentum gained from all the WotC threats enabled ORC to be created collaboratively with 3rd parties. Without a PF2e ORC on the way, I'm not sure that could have been done.

ORC is a complete gift to the RPG community. Thank you for doing that.

However, I do understand what you did. The momentum gained from all the WotC threats enabled ORC to be created collaboratively with 3rd parties. Without a PF2e ORC on the way, I'm not sure that could have been done.

ORC is a complete gift to the RPG community. Thank you for doing that.

Hi Paizo,

I think you're sort of on the right track, but there's a number of things I'd do differently:

Given that WotC lost the OGL battle and withdrew their threats (which they could re-instate at any time), if I were you, I would have let PF2e OGL continue in development for at least 2 to 5 years while, you, Paizo, worked on what I would call PF3e ORC.

While Paizo would be taking a risk (seems low) that WotC would cause more trouble, Paizo would have had more time to rework the core ruleset to create a truly unique RPG experience based on a fantasy setting, I think, capable of rivaling "the world's oldest RPG". I think you can do it. Just throw away the existing rules and re-imagine the whole thing. Of course, there's lots of common elements from legends and mythology to build such a game -- develop an RPG starting with this original source material and you've got plenty of your own.

Instead, though, I'm concerned that there is too much similarity with "the world's oldest RPG" core ruleset and now that this similarity is no longer acknowledged or licensed that, I feel, there's risk that PF2e ORC will be successfully challenged in court -- where upon I'd have to set aside all my PF2e ORC material (largely because of the cannibalism I describe below as a new PF edition is developed or possibly people leaving the Paizo ecosystem).

Your ecosystem seems to cannibalize itself. When PF2e OGL came out, the community for PF1e became much smaller. I think they moved on to PF2e OGL. Now, tools like the PF2e game system for Foundry VTT have been changed to support PF2e ORC (P2e OGL support has been dropped). I think it's possible that PF2e OGL will fall by the wayside -- but I'm not sure.

For the sake of your customers, it probably would have been better to avoid confusing the customer base as much as possible to have a healthy ecosystem. It was harmful to have PF1e lose so many community members so fast -- not really to the players but to the GMs who invested a lot in that material. To have the same thing happen to PF2e OGL might also be harmful, especially after having only a short, 4 year run. Yes, people can access some material online for free, but as a GM it's too hard to do that -- so I purchase a lot of material.

I like in general what your doing but I think you've got the creative energy and inertia to create something from scratch that's entirely different but capable of competing with the "world's oldest RPG" -- and free of any potential legal challenges while protecting your customer base.

Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

Not being a lawyer, I'm left with a queasy feeling.

[snip]
I just can't figure out how calamity has been avoided.

You avoid legal calamities by hiring your own legal team to steer you through the situation.

That's the job of the Intellectual Property lawyers that Paizo hired:
to make sure that everything they publish under the ORC license is free of any and all material that WotC could possibly claim as their intellectual property.

Paizo has its own lawyers, who are looking out after Paizo's best interests (and to some extent, the best interests of the other, smaller ttrpg publishers)

This is not Paizo's first encounter with IP hostilities from WotC. They aren't naive or inexperienced, and neither are their lawyers. Paizo's lawyers kept them from being sued by WotC for all of PF1 under the OLG license. It's highly likely that Paizo's lawyers will keep them from getting sued by WotC under the ORC license.

And all our our anxiety, hand-wringing, and reading of tea-leaves (and forum posts) is not going to stop any legal moves by WotC.

If you don't trust Paizo's lawyers, and are still uneasy, then the only safeguard you have is to buy the books you need to run games totally independantly of Paizo's existence.

Probably what I'll do is buy some PF2e ORC material and use a wait-and-see approach, hope things work out, and then buy more when the smoke clears.

Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

Cori Marie wrote:

How exactly would your investment be hurt by a lawsuit? Your PDFs and books won't spontaneously combust.

A successful legal challenge would likely make ORC-based PF2e defunct. The player and GM base would evaporate. My materials would become useless. Not something I want.

I saw a lot of that happen when PF2e cannibalized the PF1e community.

A successful lawsuit would be much worse. Again, not desired but I fail to see how it won't happen.

Starfinder 2nd Edition will be based on PF2. I think Paizo would not do this if they felt they were at legal risk with PF2.

I'd think that was true, but I just can't figure it out. I think there's way to much text for classes, monsters, spells, equipment ... and so on that seems to be exactly WotC text. Not being a lawyer, I'm left with a queasy feeling.

I've already been through the rapid declines in the PF1e community and now, I suspect, OGL PF2e community (for example FVTT game system PF2e is now ORC).

I don't want too see this happen to PF2e ORC -- at least until someday we have PF3e ORC.

It's really good for Paizo to get away from WotC licensing. I'm just worried that too much has been taken verbatim from WotC material. For example, fireball (or whatever it's called now) seems to work very much like a WotC fireball. And the classes seem to work mostly the same way.

I'm hoping the split between Paizo and WotC is good and final and that Paizo cannot be sued. This would be good not just for Paizo fans -- but also the entire RPG industry INCLUDING WotC.

I just can't figure out how calamity has been avoided. I will look at Paizo PF2e ORC and WotC material in more detail.

How exactly would your investment be hurt by a lawsuit? Your PDFs and books won't spontaneously combust.

A successful legal challenge would likely make ORC-based PF2e defunct. The player and GM base would evaporate. My materials would become useless. Not something I want.

I saw a lot of that happen when PF2e cannibalized the PF1e community.

A successful lawsuit would be much worse. Again, not desired but I fail to see how it won't happen.

Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

TheCowardlyLion wrote:

Game rules aka stuff that isn’t flavor isn’t copyrightable.

I'm not trying to win anything here. I just want to make sure any of my investment in PF2e ORC material is in the free and clear in terms of being free from a successful future WotC legal challenge.

Sorry, I don't get it. Aren't game mechanics copyrightable? Wouldn't text taken verbatim (unmodified) be a copyright violation?

Text taken verbatim would indeed be a copyright violation, because that text is an expression of an idea. Meanwhile, ideas themselves cannot be copyrighted, only patented, and most game mechanics generally don't meet the criteria for patent.

Names can also be trademarked as part of brand identity, which I believe is the basis for claim to specific monsters.

At least that is my understanding, but I am not a lawyer.

Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

I'd think if we don't see anything in the next 2 years, we're good.

If only it were that simple. ;-)

I wish it was too. I think before we invest a lot in ORC-based PF2e that Paizo should help us understand that our investment is safe. To me, it looks like a crushing lawsuit is on the way.

Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

TheCowardlyLion wrote:

Game rules aka stuff that isn’t flavor isn’t copyrightable.

I'm not trying to win anything here. I just want to make sure any of my investment in PF2e ORC material is in the free and clear in terms of being free from a successful future WotC legal challenge.

Sorry, I don't get it. Aren't game mechanics copyrightable? Wouldn't text taken verbatim (unmodified) be a copyright violation?

I think you can safely trust Paizo's legal team on this. After all their stakes here are the highest.

Yes, I would think so. A successful claim by WotC would do a lot of damage.

Hopefully, nothing happens. I'd think if we don't see anything in the next 2 years, we're good.

Game rules aka stuff that isn’t flavor isn’t copyrightable.

I'm not trying to win anything here. I just want to make sure any of my investment in PF2e ORC material is in the free and clear in terms of being free from a successful future WotC legal challenge.

Sorry, I don't get it. Aren't game mechanics copyrightable? Wouldn't text taken verbatim (unmodified) be a copyright violation?

I've looked at 5e after learning a lot about and playing PF2e. I prefer buying and using Paizo material because of your flexibility and that I can get PDFs -- which I can't get from WotC.

I"ve spent thousands of dollars on Paizo products, especailly for PF1e.

I have a major concern about PF2e under the ORC license.

How is it that with all the similarities down to the rules and even text (such as spell descriptions) that WotC won't successfully sue the heck out of Paizo -- and, thus, kill my investment in ORC-based PF2e?

Could you make these forum postings easy to also view on a smart phone?

I want to say that I've resisted converting from PF1e to PF2e for years, mostly because I have so much invested in PF1e -- and because I hate 5e so much. A lot of us older players thought PF2e was just another 5e. I was also upset about how abruptly production was stopped on PF1e and felt it damaged our community.

However, with the loads and loads of Humble Bundles for PF2e I have been able to recoup my losses in investment of PF1e material. I was forced to take a serious look at PF2e because the PF1e community shrank rapidly starting about exactly last year this time.

I was very puzzled why this happen.

After ramping up seriously on PF2e, I get it now. PF2e really is so much better!!!

I am very impressed. This is a great RPG system. Very well thought out. Big improvement over the world's oldest role playing game from the world's most annoying RPG gaming company.

The variety and depth of game play has reached an unparalleled level of awesomeness with the proficiency bonus, reworked skills with features separated by untrained versus trained, proficiency levels, variety of feats, simplification of racial adjustments, critical success/success/fail/critical fail for various die rolls, 3 action system that resolves some issues I ran into as a GM and restores some game balance between casters and fighters, etc.

It's no wonder the PF1e community collapsed so fast and the PF2e community took over. It wasn't just newer is better -- it was much better!

Thank you, Paizo! I just got caught up and my adventure has just begun!

Something needs to be done about these forums. The width used here is nearly impossible to read even in landscape on a cell phone (smart phone).

News flash ... that's what a huge number of people will do.

I've got to say that until ORC I've been resisting adopting PF2e and, instead, was staying exclusively with PF1e.

But after the OGL fiasco I decided to start playing PF2E to 1) support Paizo because you enable me to play in the VTT world I love and allow me to buy PDFs of you products and 2) WotC just made me completely sick and I now have no plans to use their material in any way.

After looking at PF2e, I can see why we lost so many PF1e players. It's really a far more interesting system -- and I am very, very glad finally that GM material is in a separate book.

Thank you, again, very much for setting us on the path to ORC and finally being free of WotC craziness!

Happy Pathfinder 2e Remaster Eve Day!

Thank you, Paizo, for all the hard work!

I'm very much looking forward to the "Remaster" series of books. I think it is the right move to publish Paizo material under the ORC license. I'm very much hoping that Paizo is very careful to remove all WotC intellectual property from the books. I don't want a protracted lawsuit. I just want to put the whole thing behind us and move on without WotC or their interference.

I can't wait. Thank you, Paizo, for all the hard work.

Happy Pathfinder 2e Remaster Eve Day!

I'm very much looking forward to the "Remaster" series of books. I think it is the right move to publish Paizo material under the ORC license. I'm very much hoping that Paizo is very careful to remove all WotC intellectual property from the books. I don't want a protracted lawsuit. I just want to put the whole thing behind us and move on without WotC or their interference.

I can't wait. Thank you, Paizo, for all the hard work.

Any feedback on where Starfinder is going with respect to the ORC licensing?

I'm very excited to get my hands on this. Thank you for all the hard work!

It is a very good idea to split up the GM and player information into separate core books. Probably will help a lot with rule lawyering -- and generally make this a lot more fun to play. GMs will now be more able to use these rules as guidance rather than law. They will have more of an ability to alter rules for their games as needed. Very, very good move!!

Are there any plans to update this product for FVTT 11?

You know you can pull the map images out on their own without the text right? Just use TokenTool to extract them.

Thank you.

I'll be buying a lot more of those. Awesome.

You know you can pull the map images out on their own without the text right? Just use TokenTool to extract them.

She's right. I didn't think to try that. I used a PDFArea "PDF Image Extractor" Version 4.0 and it worked. Great! Much better!

I looked at the PF1e and PF2e Pathfinder Society scenarios -- and I'm just amazed that text is written all over the maps, requiring hours of rework or a complete redraw to use in a VTT.

One of my major issues with the PDFs and other materials is all the rework required to use them. I just don't have the time for that. It's becoming a barrier to playing RPG with Paizo materials.

I played AD&D in the 80s. When I started playing again in 2012, I chose Paizo over WotC because Paizo would provide me with my favorite media -- PDFs. Paizo was also friendly to emerging technology like VTTs and always seemed like a foreward thinking company. WotC has always been the opposite. I told them in their survey during the licensing scandle that it seems like they hate their players.

I am glade to finally be able to separate completely from WotC and make Paizo wholey my RPG provider! Thank you!

Good!!! I'm very glad. It's long overdue to separate from WotC craziness. I fully support your efforts -- and I'm very excited and relieved!

Thank you, Paizo!

Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

I would purchase this product, except I don't like the "tokenized" images. We use full-profile images just like those available from the pawn PDFs Paizo sells.

The pack also come with "raw"* full body images, both for using it as "portraits", and for making your own tokens from it.

If you want to use that art as the tokens, it shouldn't be hard to manually assign them as tokens. They just won'T nbe auto-mapped like that. So would still be a great source of unique images for every single "bestiary" monsters.

* Here by "raw" I mean the full body arts without the token ring.

Thank you.

Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

Does the artwork in this collection reuse the artwork from the PF1e collections?

It's all new art.

Thank you very much.

Does the artwork in this collection reuse the artwork from the PF1e collections?

I would purchase this product, except I don't like the "tokenized" images. We use full-profile images just like those available from the pawn PDFs Paizo sells.

Havn't bought a book from WOTC since 3.5 and I will be continuing that for the foreseeable future. Glad to see Paizo and others working together.

I bought three 5e books a while ago to have a look and now I very much regret it. Didn't use it much because I also need PDFs and they don't sell them. Make 5e games too hard to run.

Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

Leon Aquilla wrote:

Does PF1e on FoundryVTT not have a statblock parser like Starfinder does?

Yes, it has one. Works great with a module that provides the statblocks. Very reliable.

It's tiresome, though, to keep doing that because it can only do one at a time. It's much nicer that Paizo has an offering to give you all of the PF2e bestiaries for $60 with really great art work -- all ready to go for your compaigns.

To be clear, the $60 pack is to have the art and tokens, and to have the module tie the art/tokens to the already existing statblock. All of the statblocks are already available for free in the PF2E system baseline.

Sounds awesome. Thank you.

Leon Aquilla wrote:

Does PF1e on FoundryVTT not have a statblock parser like Starfinder does?

Yes, it has one. Works great with a module that provides the statblocks. Very reliable.

It's tiresome, though, to keep doing that because it can only do one at a time. It's much nicer that Paizo has an offering to give you all of the PF2e bestiaries for $60 with really great art work -- all ready to go for your compaigns.

Does PF1e on FoundryVTT not have a statblock parser like Starfinder does?

Yes, it has one. Works great with a module that provides the statblocks. Very reliable.

UnArcaneElection wrote:

I still greatly prefer Pathfinder 1st Edition, so I'm still waiting to see what falls out for that (even if Paizo never makes anything more for it, somebody might do it, if only they won't be strangled by a horde of Hasbro lawyers).

I do, too. However, the reality I'm seeing on Discord servers is that it is much harder to find PF1e players. Also, trying to build a PF1e campaign in Foundry VTT takes work because you've got to, more or less, build all your NPCs at least to the extent of importing statblocks and assigning images to the actors (aka tokens or pawns). I've got a better setup in MapTool with my own macros, but people seem to prefer Foundry VTT. Took me 1 1/2 years to develop that. When Paizo marginized PF1e immediately after announcing PF2e, they basically killed it and the PF1e community.

I'm not happy about that because I spent over $1000 on my PF1e material. Not sure I'll ever get much out of it.

All I can say is that it appears to be time to move on and hopefully Paizo does NOT do it that way to PF2e when PF3e comes out -- or at least that doesn't happen till the 10th anniversary of PF2e.

Sadly, PF1e became its most fun to play when it finally got to its 10th anniversary because it was finally finished. We finally had all the books -- most of which are still missing from PF2e.

Paizo is professionally maintaining a PF2e game system and now has prebuilt actors (tokens) with their images for Foundry VTT -- making it a very appealing VTT environment for game play. PF2e is becoming very hard to ignore and there appears to be a lot more players versus PF1e. I'm looking at the PF2e situation very seriously this weekend to evaluate switching to PF2e. Finally, going to learn the PF2e rules and character classes to help me make a decision. I can always use home rules to change a small number of things I don't like.

Due to WotC's new OGL 1.2 "Play Test", I think it's likely that owners of OGL 1.0a material are safe with using it. What I don't know is when Paizo prints additional PF1E material, is that called publishing or printing. If it's publishing, Paizo will be able to use the new "Community Commons" license WotC is working on for that, instead of OGL 1.0a -- provided WotC does not pull a fast one. If it's not considered new publication because nothing was changed in the PF1e printings, then it appears they can continue to use OGL 1.0a (I think without a court battle).

Still, everything WotC is doing is confusing, changes almost daily, and could be potentially far reaching. You still can't get 5e PDFs of their books and other materials -- my preferred medium. That's why I like Paizo. Time to break away from WotC insanity!

I still greatly prefer Pathfinder 1st Edition, so I'm still waiting to see what falls out for that (even if Paizo never makes anything more for it, somebody might do it, if only they won't be strangled by a horde of Hasbro lawyers).

I do, too. However, the reality I'm seeing on Discord servers is that it is much harder to find PF1e players. Also, trying to build a PF1e campaign in Foundry VTT takes work because you've got to, more or less, build all your NPCs at least to the extent of importing statblocks and assigning images to the actors (aka tokens or pawns). I've got a better setup in MapTool with my own macros, but people seem to prefer Foundry VTT. Took me 1 1/2 years to develop that. When Paizo marginized PF1e immediately after announcing PF2e, they basically killed it and the PF1e community.

I'm not happy about that because I spent over $1000 on my PF1e material. Not sure I'll ever get much out of it.

All I can say is that it appears to be time to move on and hopefully Paizo does NOT do it that way to PF2e when PF3e comes out -- or at least that doesn't happen till the 10th anniversary of PF2e.

Sadly, PF1e became its most fun to play when it finally got to its 10th anniversary because it was finally finished. We finally had all the books -- most of which are still missing from PF2e.

Paizo is professionally maintaining a PF2e game system and now has prebuilt actors (tokens) with their images for Foundry VTT -- making it a very appealing VTT environment for game play. PF2e is becoming very hard to ignore and there appears to be a lot more players versus PF1e. I'm looking at the PF2e situation very seriously this weekend to evaluate switching to PF2e. Finally, going to learn the PF2e rules and character classes to help me make a decision. I can always use home rules to change a small number of things I don't like.

I've been committed to PF1e and have not yet moved on to PF2e. However, I am exhausted with WotC licensing. Paizo, if with PF2e you can finally break us away that and use other licensing, I'm all in.

Please finally come into your own, Paizo. Stop the WotC insanity! Thank you for your efforts and rising to lead the RPG community to sensibility!

I've read OGL 1.2 "Play Test" and, honestly, I'm still very concerned about WotC. I don't trust them. I feel very boxed in with their VTT policy and restrictions not to use the monster images from the books you've bought and paid for in your own games. Good thing I only bought three 5e books to look at them. No way I could use 5e with that type of restriction. Time to move on.

Playing groups need to have flexibility to use the material they bought as long as they use it exclusively within their campaigns with a reasonable number of players in their group. Otherwise, there's no point buying the material.

Ageron wrote:

HLO isn't a paizo product. Abandoning PF2 because you don't like HLO doesn't make a lot of sense.

No, I disagree with that. As a GM, there's no way in PF1 I could have nearly as good of a gaming experience without Hero Lab. I'm into VTT using MapTool with my own macros. I import NPCs into my macros from Hero Lab, giving me access to thousands of NPCs. Takes only seconds for me to import one. For the same level of detail entering info for PCs from character sheets my players give me (because they don't have Hero Lab) takes me hours. With my macros, I have full resource tracking for everything (equipment, spells, special abilities, etc.).

For me to consider PF2, Hero Lab is absolutely needed. I very much prefer the Classic version. I prefer when I buy digital assets to be able to download them and maintain backups -- and being able to continue to use it even if the provider goes out of business. With HLO, I just don't get that pease of mind -- unless I can export all the data I wanted to use (which I can do with Hero Lab Classic even though it's a Windows app).

Being able to do the same for PF2 with HLO is absolutely required ... and, then, I'd have to modify my macros. No small task. That means being able to export NPC content for the Bestiaries, APs, modules, etc. is necessary to make that effort worth it. I like to organize this exported data into libraries so it's ready to go for our games (and protect those and use them only privately because it's only fair to the IP owners and being a professional software developer I totally get that).

I've got to add that in addition to my PF1e framework (or game system) for MapTool, there's very good support for Hero Lab Classic's PF1e game system in Foundry VTT and D20Pro. Because there's no online charges, it is very cost effective to use. For MapTool, I've prebuilt a private library of nearly 7000 NPCs to drag and drop onto my maps.

I'd have to have the same thing in PF2e to give it serious consideration. There's no way I would buy into the online version of Hero Lab to get PF2e. Just way too expensive, and I have no idea whether it is as easy to use to do the same thing.

The PF2e community should push for Hero Lab Classic support!

HLO isn't a paizo product. Abandoning PF2 because you don't like HLO doesn't make a lot of sense.

No, I disagree with that. As a GM, there's no way in PF1 I could have nearly as good of a gaming experience without Hero Lab. I'm into VTT using MapTool with my own macros. I import NPCs into my macros from Hero Lab, giving me access to thousands of NPCs. Takes only seconds for me to import one. For the same level of detail entering info for PCs from character sheets my players give me (because they don't have Hero Lab) takes me hours. With my macros, I have full resource tracking for everything (equipment, spells, special abilities, etc.).

For me to consider PF2, Hero Lab is absolutely needed. I very much prefer the Classic version. I prefer when I buy digital assets to be able to download them and maintain backups -- and being able to continue to use it even if the provider goes out of business. With HLO, I just don't get that pease of mind -- unless I can export all the data I wanted to use (which I can do with Hero Lab Classic even though it's a Windows app).

Being able to do the same for PF2 with HLO is absolutely required ... and, then, I'd have to modify my macros. No small task. That means being able to export NPC content for the Bestiaries, APs, modules, etc. is necessary to make that effort worth it. I like to organize this exported data into libraries so it's ready to go for our games (and protect those and use them only privately because it's only fair to the IP owners and being a professional software developer I totally get that).

A major problem with the character sheets is that they use way too much ink. There should be printer friendly versions.

Very good move! Thanks, Paizo!

I've released version 10.0.6.3 and 9.15 of my macros supporting Pathfinder 1e on MapTool. It's tested on 1.5.8 and 1.4.1.8, respectively, but should work on other MapTool versions such as 1.4.0.5 -- however for 1.4.0.5 you'll need to install a later MapTool version and export the "Example Campaign.cmpgn" from there to 1.4.0.5.

MapTool can be downloaded from here:

MapTool Download

My Pathfinder 1e macros for MapTool can be downloaded from here:

MapTool Macros For Pathfinder 1e Download

They are both free for you to use! Now, with easy to follow instructions -- and an "Example Campaign.cmpgn" file you can open directly in MapTool and get started building your campaign!

I've released version 9.14 and 10.0.5 of my macros supporting Pathfinder 1e on MapTool. It's tested on 1.5.7 and 1.4.1.8, but should work on other MapTool versions such as 1.4.0.5 -- however for 1.4.0.5 you'll need to install a later MapTool version and export a campaign from there to 1.4.0.5 and then save all the tokens and macro sets and import them into a 1.4.0.5 campaign.

Download MapTool and the macros for you to use for free at the following locations:

Download MapTool

MapTool macros for Pathfinder 1e

I've released version 9.12.3 of my macros supporting Pathfinder 1e on MapTool. It's tested on 1.5.4, but should work on 1.4.0.5 and 1.4.1.8 -- unless the files are incompatible (if not, I'm using compatible macro library functions and have been using my macros on 1.4.1.8 till now).

This code is very solid and we use it for our games every week. Lots of very powerful features such as:

* Party Treasure management

* Campaign Time tracking (you'll now be able to deal with complex issues such as PCs crafting while the party moves on to further adventures)

* Automatic spell DC calculations

* Spell management (complete for both prepared and spontaneous spell casters)

* Easy to use interface

* Greatly improved macro layout

* Resource tracking (equipment, ranged attacks, spells, special abilities, money, etc.)

* New skills can be added by the GM (and they are automatically made available to all the tokens)

* Temporary Adjustments for abilities, size, movement, saving throws, energy resistance, AC, attacks, etc. are automatically applied and can be enabled/disabled.

* "Character Sheet" makes reviewing PCs and NPCs easy -- can be used in conjunction with WinMerge to compare the old token's sheet and the new token's sheet.

* "Player Token Editor.cmpgn" enables players to edit their tokens offline.

Click these links below:

Pathfinder 1e macros for MapTool 1.5.4, 1.4.1.8, and 1.4.0.5

Easy instructions for GMs to setup an RPG campaign with MapTool:

How to Setup a VTT Campaign with MapTool

NOTE: If you don't play Pathfinder 1e, these macros can go a long way to helping you get started with writing your own for your own RPG.

Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

Is there a guide available to help convert 1e characters to 2e?

Conversion Guide

Thank you.

The 2e Bestiary has ability modifiers but no ability scores.

What if an NPC suffers ability drain or damage? Assume the NPC has the odd or even ability score for that modifier?