I'm not personally ready for PF2.0, but give it another few years... sure.
I'm prepping for a campaign that while most definitely is recognisably Pathfinder, if one were to look at the Core Rules and then look at the game I'm running, they would not recognise it as Pathfinder
Limited Magic
Overclocking Spells
Esoteric Material Components
Skill Unlocks
Story Feats
Traits
Drawbacks
Retraining
Expanded Downtime Rules
D&D 5th edition healing dice
D&D 5th edition death saving throws
I am currently prepping to run Curse of the Crimson Throne with these rules. The amount of changes I -have- to make to fit these rules are minimal. The amount of changes I'm choosing to make are a bit more expansive.
All of this is do-able with the current edition and in fact is enabled and made easier with the current edition. So long as the system is robust enough to handle this (only running the game will determine this) I have no incentive to see a new edition come out.
|
My opposition to 2nd Ed Pathfinder is purely financial. I've spent several hundred dollars on Pathfinder products, I'd rather not have to rebuy essentially everything. Maybe publishing an updated set of rules that can be applied to 1st Ed to improve it would be cool, but doing what D&D has been doing for years now would be awful. IMHO, of course.
|
I've said it before and I'll say it again: it is highly unlikely Paizo will put out a PF2e that is radically different from the current edition. This is the company that made backward compatibility the main design goal of PF. They have a warehouse full of books that support the current edition that they still want to sell; they aren't going to completely invalidate their entire back catalog (not to mention all the gamers who'd riot at the idea of buying most of it over again). Any PF2e that eventually comes along will be compatible with the current version in the same way PF is compatible with D&D3.5e.
Paizo isn't going to flush millions of dollars down the toilet because a few people want to ditch Vancian casting.
-Skeld
|
More likely than a new edition will be things like Pathfinder Unchained with a new magic system to replace Vancian casting. They are pushing that direction and people can pick and choose what they want to change in their game.
I am looking at Unchained for things I might want to change. And I am also delving into the other books to include things I have not used before. My game is going to change over the next few months.
|
Well if they are not going to offer anything new then why even bother in the first place. I have no interest in another mostly 3.5. rehash with better production values and new art. I'm all for backwards compatibility if their market research shows that the majority of their fanbase uses it. If out of 10 fans 2-3 use 3.5. I don't see why they need to cater to such a small group. I get the point about books not being invalidated and the investment put into buying the books. I rather buy something new that at the very least fixes some of the flaws. Why would I buy the same set of rules with the same flaws. Of had to cater to both old and new fans. Offering nothing new when 5E fixes some of the flaws is not the wY to go. It's not like it was when Worc released 4E. With them no longer supporting 3.5. With a edition that did not go over well for some. I think some in the hobby need to look at the hobby as a whole and not just their bookshelves.
The only solution is more books like PF Unchained. Otherwise they really should not waste time and money on more of the same.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well if they are not going to offer anything new then why even bother in the first place. I have no interest in another mostly 3.5. rehash with better production values and new art. I'm all for backwards compatibility if their market research shows that the majority of their fanbase uses it. If out of 10 fans 2-3 use 3.5. I don't see why they need to cater to such a small group. I get the point about books not being invalidated and the investment put into buying the books. I rather buy something new that at the very least fixes some of the flaws. Why would I buy the same set of rules with the same flaws. Of had to cater to both old and new fans. Offering nothing new when 5E fixes some of the flaws is not the wY to go. It's not like it was when Worc released 4E. With them no longer supporting 3.5. With a edition that did not go over well for some. I think some in the hobby need to look at the hobby as a whole and not just their bookshelves.
The only solution is more books like PF Unchained. Otherwise they really should not waste time and money on more of the same.
This is kind of how I feel about it. I don't need a 3rd attempt to "fix" D&D 3e that is just another revision and cleaning up of rules text.
The major problems people have with 3rd edition aren't sloppy rules or formatting issues (though those do show up occassionally), it's fundamental elements of the game.
The massive number of +1, +2 and +4 bonuses that character get to everything? The power of spells vs the power of feats/skills and some class features? Problems like those would require more than a revision
Well if they are not going to offer anything new then why even bother in the first place. I have no interest in another mostly 3.5. rehash with better production values and new art. I'm all for backwards compatibility if their market research shows that the majority of their fanbase uses it. If out of 10 fans 2-3 use 3.5. I don't see why they need to cater to such a small group. I get the point about books not being invalidated and the investment put into buying the books. I rather buy something new that at the very least fixes some of the flaws. Why would I buy the same set of rules with the same flaws. Of had to cater to both old and new fans. Offering nothing new when 5E fixes some of the flaws is not the wY to go. It's not like it was when Worc released 4E. With them no longer supporting 3.5. With a edition that did not go over well for some. I think some in the hobby need to look at the hobby as a whole and not just their bookshelves.
The only solution is more books like PF Unchained. Otherwise they really should not waste time and money on more of the same.
TBH, I've been playing for about 15 years and have come to realize 2 things; (1) I don't believe it is possible (read:profitable) for a company to put out a high production value, well-edited, well-playtested, well-balanced, game with 90%+ options being true nail-biters. The process would be such that you need amazing, world-class game designers who were simultaneously brilliant and humble, charismatic and good-listeners. They would need to spend a full year in development of a single hard cover book to the exclusion of all other projects, AND employ serious The New-Yorker level of copy editors (who also were intimately familiar with the game and community) to ensure rigorous internal consistency of game terms.
(2) I still probably wouldnt be happy with all their choices and would house-rule a bunch of s!&! anyway.
So, based on that, I've concluded that the details of PF2 aren't important to me, but I would like to see it so I can canibalize the improvements into my homebrew system.
I do not have as much money invested in PF as other people do so a rework that would overhaul most of the game could work for me, but many people have a lot of money invested, and those what percentage of the "heavy buyers" Paizo would lose has to be taken into consideration. That is why completing redesigning from the ground up is risky.
I think it will happen one day, but I dont think they are trying to push the issue.
It's pretty simple as to when Pathfinder 2.0 will happen. They are a business based around selling us books, so Paizo will wait until first edition reaches market saturation. Once that happens and they are no longer growing in market share, then I give it a 1-2 year window until they release the 2nd edition and get us all to continue to buy.
|
|
Despite the bloat doomsayers saying to the contrary. I think they can do more books for the current edition IMO. Each Environment could gets its own book. A updated book on the planes. Less monsters though as I'm seeing too many that are the same. What really is the difference between a cave/hill/gulley/mountain troll. Not to mention animated cave paintings. I can't use that in my games my onagers would fall down laughing.
With 5E being the edition that address some flaws of the system. They simply can't release the same material again. As for better or worse like the current edition the next version will be compared to 5E and other more recent releases of D&D. While those who like the system as is will be happy. Those like myself who also like it yet wish some of the e siting flaws would be fixed. Probably not as much. They have to both make old, new and disatisfied fans happy with the next edition. Which I don't think is possible.
5e will really be a determining factor in the future of PF/PF2.
I will stake my claim right now that as long as DND5E is actively supported that PF will stay in its current version.
When 5E ends (however long from now) Paizo will be able to asses the strength of the brand, likeliness of a 6th edition, and size of the RPG market; in order to make a decision about rebooting PF into a 2nd edition.
I would also suggest that the shorter the lifespan of 5E, the more likely PF2 will be announced within 12 months after 5E pulls the shutters. This is because the shorter the run of 5E, the less likely a 6E will be made. If there is no active DND product then Paizo will have more room to throw their weight around.
TLDR; no PF2 until 5E dies.
There'd be nothing wrong with reissuing the existing rules in a more polished format. The CRB has a lot of dead weight in it, especially with the GMG and Ultimate Equipment correcting a lot of the (inherited) structural issues.
That's something I'd really like to see. But that's not what most people think of when they head the words "new edition" in the RPG scene.
If it were up to me, we'd call it a "version" when they were different enough to be separate games, and the word "edition" would be available for reorganization and compilation of the existing rules. But, it is not up to me. :( There's no time machine available to get "D&D Versions 1, 2, 3, 4" added.
Pathfinder could benefit from a new edition, by the above standard. Pathfinder does not need, and would not benefit from, a new version.
Yes, a new "Edition" as in 1st to 2nd Ed or even 3.0 tp 3.5. Clean-up, put all the FAQ's and errata in, add some clarifying text where necessary, delete some outdated stuff, etc. Allow them to rewrite Simulacrum, Get rid of the Scry part of Teleport (or clarify it) and so forth.
The idea of a "2nd Ed" like WotC's 3.0 or 4th or 5th is ludicrous and unacceptable. I hope it NEVER happens.
But I hope we could get "revised" Core RB in a year or so.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not sure if I mentioned my opinions on this thread or not but after reading some history about the life of 3rd edtion, 3.5 and 4th I really think that what is healthier and more likely is that Pathfinder will remain roughly the same for a long while with dual supported micro-editions and more products like Unchained. I've said numerous times that The Beginner Box can easily turn into a micro-edition because playing low level modules with it takes pretty much no conversion effort so both can ultimately exist side-by-side but at the same time have an easier to run system that is supported so long as the main game is supported. But right now I think too much of the game and third party producers would be hurt by a drastic new edition of Pathfinder for it to be fruitful, especially if it's to compete with numerous other games that have a head start on the 'simpler 3.X' market.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To those saying don't change anything or simply polish the rules. Why would I buy it again. All I need is the free SRD. Even with the SRD. I simply cannot see as many fans rushing out to buy it the way they did the PF core. It's not 2009 anymore. 3.5. is being supported with the current version. Again offer something new or don't bother. The only way I would buy a core with errata is if Paizo was offering at minimum 50% off. Their no way I'm dishing out 50$ for a reprint with better organization and some errata here and there. At most 20-25$. You can bet they will get flak simply because they charged full price or even Amazon prices for another rehash. If I want 3.5. I'm generally satisfied with the current core.
To those saying don't change anything or simply polish the rules. Why would I buy it again. All I need is the free SRD. Even with the SRD. I simply cannot see as many fans rushing out to buy it the way they did the PF core. It's not 2009 anymore. 3.5. is being supported with the current version. Again offer something new or don't bother. The only way I would buy a core with errata is if Paizo was offering at minimum 50% off. Their no way I'm dishing out 50$ for a reprint with better organization and some errata here and there. At most 20-25$. You can bet they will get flak simply because they charged full price or even Amazon prices for another rehash. If I want 3.5. I'm generally satisfied with the current core.
Depends on how they carry out a new edition. If the scale of change is within the range of 3.0-3.5, or 1E to 2E, they might very well offer some sort of free "update" pdf that explains the difference.
|
To those saying don't change anything or simply polish the rules. Why would I buy it again. All I need is the free SRD. Even with the SRD. I simply cannot see as many fans rushing out to buy it the way they did the PF core. It's not 2009 anymore. 3.5. is being supported with the current version. Again offer something new or don't bother. The only way I would buy a core with errata is if Paizo was offering at minimum 50% off. Their no way I'm dishing out 50$ for a reprint with better organization and some errata here and there. At most 20-25$. You can bet they will get flak simply because they charged full price or even Amazon prices for another rehash. If I want 3.5. I'm generally satisfied with the current core.
Besides the erratas inherent and some significant tweaks - they could easily give an Unchained sort of treatment to all of the classes to get better balance between them. Possibly give the fighter the same treatment that they gave the rogue.
Heck - I'm pretty sure that the classes were the main reason people bought unchained it seemed to be reasonably successful - and that was only four classes.
Ultimately there is one reason to go with a new edition: They've run out of ideas for the current edition. Given the recent products, Paizo have demonstrated they are quite adept at shoehorning new ideas into the current edition. We've seen AD&D 2nd edition "multiclassing" and 4th ed hybrid classes where you get levels in two classes at once (variant multiclassing, hybrid classes). We've gotten psionic classes, we've got new versions on some of the worst classes in Pathfinder. We've gotten mass combat rules along with a whole bunch of other stuff. We've got updated feats that grant fighter's martial powers. At this point I wouldn't be surprised if Paizo could find a way to incorporate almost any idea they have into the current edition given how much they're willing to deviate (see the current playtest for Ultimate Vigilante).
So a new edition would need to either create significant changes from the current edition and change how the fundamental game works dramatically. This will alienate the fans of the current edition. Or they would need a spit and polish and effectively reproduce the same material but in presumably slighlty better organisation. But this isn't the 80s anymore. PDFs that get updated with the latest errata, SRDs and digital character creators dramatically reduce the value of reorganising the material with errata applied and sticking "2nd edition" onto it.
A new edition is a lose/lose proposition. Is there a chance that a new edition will sell gangbusters? Sure. But is there a chance it will completley screw the pooch? Most definitely. It will come down to a financial decision where Paizo (and ultimately Lisa Stevens) judge that the risk of losing everything is worth the potential benefit of releasing a new edition. I expect this would largely be financial, but also partly emotional. My understanding is that Lisa Stevens is a gamer so the advantage Paizo has over WotC is that the all mighty dollar isn't necessarily the sole end goal.
|
|
Depends on how they carry out a new edition. If the scale of change is within the range of 3.0-3.5, or 1E to 2E, they might very well offer some sort of free "update" pdf that explains the difference.
Why would be a good way to go imo. Still for some if your not offering something new they will not even look at it. Even if it is a free update. For myself a rpg company that releases a new edition has to offer a minimum of 50% of new material. Or I'm simply not interested. I see no reason to invest a second time in a rehash with little to no changes. Exceptions exist if the new edition is a better version while still being a rehash. Otherwise while I enjoy PF for the most part. i'm not interested in a edition that for example continues the fighter/caster disparity.
Besides the erratas inherent and some significant tweaks - they could easily give an Unchained sort of treatment to all of the classes to get better balance between them. Possibly give the fighter the same treatment that they gave the rogue.Heck - I'm pretty sure that the classes were the main reason people bought unchained it seemed to be reasonably successful - and that was only four classes.
Which also might be the way to go as well. Probably the only way if they want to extend the life of the current edition imo. The problem with that approach is that it also kind of highlights and makes the flaws of the system stand out even more. A sourcebook to make the original core material work or fix the flaws that it had. Some on the hobby will ask "why not put this material in the first place. Why makes us buy it?'.
Though I do think they need to cut back on the bestiaries. Even time a new hardcover is released we get a smaller bestiary. Occult adventures will get a bestiary as well. I hope we get some new monsters. Not simply variations with the serial numbers filed off.
|
|
A new edition is a lose/lose proposition. Is there a chance that a new edition will sell gangbusters? Sure. But is there a chance it will completley screw the pooch? Most definitely. It will come down to a financial decision where Paizo (and ultimately Lisa Stevens) judge that the risk of losing everything is worth the potential benefit of releasing a new edition. I expect this would largely be financial, but also partly emotional. My understanding is that Lisa Stevens is a gamer so the advantage Paizo has over WotC is that the all mighty dollar isn't necessarily the sole end goal.
It's a risk yet I don't think it's a lose/lose propositiion imo. Wotc took a huge risk with 3E and it paid off. Yet it also could have been a loss. Their a point where either a company tries something new or they stand the chance of losing money by catering to the same people. Or they keep ignoring the flaws of the system keep publishing it. While offering options that keep fixing the flaws. Either way it's not a exact science if it was rpg and non-rpg companies would be releasing new versions of products 24/7 imo.
Being a gamer does not mean they can simply ignore the business side of the company either. If they are making a profit with the current edition. Whatever my feelings with the rules they should keep publishing it. If they keep publishing a edition that loses money simply to keep fans happy and they go under well I don't feel sorry for any business owner who does that. Keeping fans happy is nice and all not when your losing money to do so.
Ultimately there is one reason to go with a new edition: They've run out of ideas for the current edition. Given the recent products, Paizo have demonstrated they are quite adept at shoehorning new ideas into the current edition. We've seen AD&D 2nd edition "multiclassing" and 4th ed hybrid classes where you get levels in two classes at once (variant multiclassing, hybrid classes). We've gotten psionic classes, we've got new versions on some of the worst classes in Pathfinder. We've gotten mass combat rules along with a whole bunch of other stuff. We've got updated feats that grant fighter's martial powers. At this point I wouldn't be surprised if Paizo could find a way to incorporate almost any idea they have into the current edition given how much they're willing to deviate (see the current playtest for Ultimate Vigilante).
So a new edition would need to either create significant changes from the current edition and change how the fundamental game works dramatically. This will alienate the fans of the current edition. Or they would need a spit and polish and effectively reproduce the same material but in presumably slighlty better organisation. But this isn't the 80s anymore. PDFs that get updated with the latest errata, SRDs and digital character creators dramatically reduce the value of reorganising the material with errata applied and sticking "2nd edition" onto it.
A new edition is a lose/lose proposition. Is there a chance that a new edition will sell gangbusters? Sure. But is there a chance it will completley screw the pooch? Most definitely. It will come down to a financial decision where Paizo (and ultimately Lisa Stevens) judge that the risk of losing everything is worth the potential benefit of releasing a new edition. I expect this would largely be financial, but also partly emotional. My understanding is that Lisa Stevens is a gamer so the advantage Paizo has over WotC is that the all mighty dollar isn't necessarily the sole end goal.
That's another reason I think that there is no chance to see PF2 before the end of 5E. There may be a play to acquire the DnD IP. Guarantee that if 5E is a bust that Hasboro will insist on dumping the line.
Memorax your post repeats what I said almost verbatim....
Although I'll respond to the part that deviates:
Being a gamer does not mean they can simply ignore the business side of the company either. If they are making a profit with the current edition. Whatever my feelings with the rules they should keep publishing it. If they keep publishing a edition that loses money simply to keep fans happy and they go under well I don't feel sorry for any business owner who does that. Keeping fans happy is nice and all not when your losing money to do so.
The advantage Paizo has is that they aren't necessarily driven in making the most money they can as quickly as they can. WotC (under orders by Hasbro) have been driven by that in the past. Therefore an edition that is paying the bills but isn't necessarily making XX% profits every year when a new edition could (in the short term) make those profits, Paizo will quite likely continue with the current edition and pay those bills. WotC (operating under prior dictates from Hasbro) would have rolled out the new edition.
Of course, as we've seen with 5th edition, WotC is now under new marching orders. But that's the significance of the CEO being a gamer (assuming I'm not confused or mistaken). They aren't necessarily interested in maximising profits at the risk of destroying the thing they've spent the past 7 years building.
|
|
It's still a business though. The employees and bills need to be paid. Which is easily done when a company is profitable. Not so much when your core product is losing money. I get your point John Lynch. While profit is not the main focus it should be a focus at all times even to a lesser extent imo.
As for Wotc and 5E I don't get them sometimes. While I don't think they deserve all the vitrol thrown their way some of their decisions on the support of 5E just are confusing and annoying tp say the least. Whats the point of new edition if their is poor support. I'm not asking for the same level that 3.5 hd. Except now they went in the opposite direction.
|
|
The way I see it D&D and after 2nd edition was more about selling core book and expansion books, then repeating for each edition. The Pathfinder model seems to be more about adding content. This was the reason my group switched to Pathfinder from D&D. Changing from 3.0 to 3.5 started it but 4.0 pushed us over the edge. Paizo does not seem like a company that would do that to their customers. We are heavily invested in Pathfinder and PFS now, but if Pathfinder 2.0 came along then it would be time to re-evaluate again.
I get your point John Lynch. While profit is not the main focus it should be a focus at all times even to a lesser extent imo.
I'd agree it's even a main focus. But I think we're in agreement it's not the only focus.
Whats the point of new edition if their is poor support. I'm not asking for the same level that 3.5 hd. Except now they went in the opposite direction.
I expect WotC is giving 5th edition as much support as they're being permitted to give it. After all, designers typically like to design things.
That's another...
That will never ever happen. Hasbro doesn't give/sell IP, especially when money can still be made off of video games/books/film/other games. If 5E/future editions are a wash, they will just shelf the IP for a few years and release it later to cash in on nostalgia or whatever trend they can market DnD to.
Best case scenario is that Hasbro licenses another company to produce a new DnD, but why would Paizo agree to work with the license? They have their own setting, and a few gods and some monster IP are not worth dealing with the conditions and requirements Hasbro/WotC might require of Paizo
That's another...
That will never ever happen. Hasbro doesn't give/sell IP, especially when money can still be made off of video games/books/film/other games. If 5E/future editions are a wash, they will just shelf the IP for a few years and release it later to cash in on nostalgia or whatever trend they can market DnD to.
Best case scenario is that Hasbro licenses another company to produce a new DnD, but why would Paizo agree to work with the license? They have their own setting, and a few gods and some monster IP are not worth dealing with the conditions and requirements Hasbro/WotC might require of Paizo
Under no conditions would I expect Paizo to publish under a license from WotC again.
Being a gamer does not mean they can simply ignore the business side of the company either. If they are making a profit with the current edition. Whatever my feelings with the rules they should keep publishing it. If they keep publishing a edition that loses money simply to keep fans happy and they go under well I don't feel sorry for any business owner who does that. Keeping fans happy is nice and all not when your losing money to do so.
I don't think people in general think that Paizo should fall on its sword rather than stay in business and produce a new edition. Vic Wertz and other folks have said that they track the sales volume of the core books pretty closely...the core rulebook continue to sell incredibly well and there hasn't been a drop off in sales. When that happens is when the we will start seeing serious talk of a new edition.
Depends on how they carry out a new edition. If the scale of change is within the range of 3.0-3.5, or 1E to 2E, they might very well offer some sort of free "update" pdf that explains the difference.Why would be a good way to go imo. Still for some if your not offering something new they will not even look at it. Even if it is a free update. For myself a rpg company that releases a new edition has to offer a minimum of 50% of new material. Or I'm simply not interested. I see no reason to invest a second time in a rehash with little to no changes. Exceptions exist if the new edition is a better version while still being a rehash. Otherwise while I enjoy PF for the most part. i'm not interested in a edition that for example continues the fighter/caster disparity.
Depends on how they go forward with the "new" edition. If we get an updated core rule book avoid the "Remember Ultimate Combat? here is a tweaked version!" release schedule than potentially older books are not obsoleted, and going forward we will only get new material.
Also, in response to another post, I love new bestiaries. As long as Paizo keeps the quality up, I will gladly add Bestiary 10 to my library.
|
|
The one thing that would really make my buy a second edish immediately would be dropping the d20 system and bringing back THAC0 and old percentile dice.
Wow... nice necromatic touch, there.
Dropping D20 Open Gaming License will be the reason for the edition change, in my mind, but that doesn't mean that the new ruleset will be completely alien to what has come before.
I believe that Paizo can develop an updated system that will
- be less reliant on magic items as needed and necessary for character advancement and power levels.
- Use a unified magic mechanic with Known spells being used for all casters. This would free up room to design classes beyond mechanical limitations that the current edition puts on spontaneous casters for balance with the old, tired Wizard.
- limit feats/magic items to not copy/replicate class abilities.
- have an improved multiclass option and feat support for partial dipping.
- Have profession/craft/perform skills be background based and further pair down skills. (See UNCHAINED!)
- Guns using different mechanics to hit. (no touch attacks)
- Have it's own Open Gaming Licensed for third party support.
And much more. I envision a core book with classes that would include the APG and Ultimate Combat and Magic along with the core classes. Some may turn into Archtypes/Variations of the base class.
This may happen when 6th edition comes out. (so, 6 years? Maybe less?)
|
|
I'd agree it's even a main focus. But I think we're in agreement it's not the only focus.
If your going to start a business then wanting to create, build, keep a profitable one has to be one of the main goals. For any kind of company. I still think the Wotc designers want to also release a good and enjoyable product for the fans. Then again in the hobby there is a huge double standard imo. If it's a rpg company they a fan likes they are the nest and above reproach. If it's one they hate they are the spawn of satan. Even if both companies engage in similar behavior.
I don't think people in general think that Paizo should fall on its sword rather than stay in business and produce a new edition. Vic Wertz and other folks have said that they track the sales volume of the core books pretty closely...the core rulebook continue to sell incredibly well and there hasn't been a drop off in sales. When that happens is when the we will start seeing serious talk of a new edition.
You would be surprised. According to some in the hobby Paizo can only exist with the goodwill of the fanbase and nothing else. That they should keep publishing the current set of rules even if they lose money. We gamers are a strange breed. Logic and common sense do not always apply imo. The problem is though that because of the SRD their no need to really buy many copies of a core book. With the apps, SRD, Herolab one does not even need to purchase a book. I would have charged a 5-10$ monthly fee to use the SRD. Make extra money that way. I'm expecting someone to say that's unfair, expensive etc. If you can't afford 5-10$ a month what are you doing buying rpgs is the question. When it's something a person wants suddenly money is not a issue. When it's the opposite suddenly money is a issue.
Depends on how they go forward with the "new" edition. If we get an updated core rule book avoid the "Remember Ultimate Combat? here is a tweaked version!" release schedule than potentially older books are not obsoleted, and going forward we will only get new material.Also, in response to another post, I love new bestiaries. As long as Paizo keeps the quality up, I will gladly add Bestiary 10 to my library.
I see your point. Yet even a tweaked version has to offer me at least 50% new material minimum. Otherwise it's cheaper to just get the updated PDF imo. I don't hate the Bestiaries far from it. It just that were starting to see reduntant monsters imo. Is there a huge difference between a river, fjord, lake and ocean giant. Offer me something new because I am beginning to have little interest in monsters that are similar yet slighlty different.
@old School Nick. While enjoy 2E it would be a step backwards. Some elements like the various spheres for clerics. Thaco belongs to 2E and should be left there.
|
|
As for Wotc and 5E I don't get them sometimes. While I don't think they deserve all the vitrol thrown their way some of their decisions on the support of 5E just are confusing and annoying tp say the least. Whats the point of new edition if their is poor support. I'm not asking for the same level that 3.5 hd. Except now they went in the opposite direction.
I think that they're mostly just keeping the IP alive because throwing D&D on board games/video games etc makes them all more profitable because of the history. Any $ they make off of 5e is just gravy. (If it has enough success - they may re-evaluate their support.)
|
|
I think that they're mostly just keeping the IP alive because throwing D&D on board games/video games etc makes them all more profitable because of the history. Any $ they make off of 5e is just gravy. (If it has enough success - they may re-evaluate their support.)
Absolutely. While making sure no one else can for better or worse.
You would be surprised. According to some in the hobby Paizo can only exist with the goodwill of the fanbase and nothing else. That they should keep publishing the current set of rules even if they lose money. We gamers are a strange breed. Logic and common sense do not always apply imo. The problem is though that because of the SRD their no need to really buy many copies of a core book. With the apps, SRD, Herolab one does not even need to purchase a book. I would have charged a 5-10$ monthly fee to use the SRD. Make extra money that way. I'm expecting someone to say that's unfair, expensive etc. If you can't afford 5-10$ a month what are you doing buying rpgs is the question. When it's something a person wants suddenly money is not a issue. When it's the opposite suddenly money is a issue.
Are we talking the WotC SRD? I don't think Paizo could legitimately get away with charging money to use their PFSRD when the WotC version is available for free.
Similarly...they needed to offer the rules for free in the beginning...to get 3.5 folks into Pathfinder.
Probably also worth mentioning that the rulebooks are apparently not Paizo's bread and butter. The AP's are. By putting rules content on the PFSRD, you get people to buy and run adventure paths (and use other materials) without forcing them to have a giant stack of books.
|
|
After a point though their will be a saturation point with aps imo. How many Aps does a person really need before it's just easier and cheaper to build one own. I can see new fans to the system buying aps at least at the start. By the time one has 10 aps. Unless one is gaming twice a week at least one is never going to be run out of Aps to run. Aps are also a investment as well. 120$+ not everyone can afford that.
Your right about the SRD. I would have made neither version free. If I owned the ip "buy the books their no free lunches from me" . That's just me though.
After a point though their will be a saturation point with aps imo. How many Aps does a person really need before it's just easier and cheaper to build one own. I can see new fans to the system buying aps at least at the start. By the time one has 10 aps. Unless one is gaming twice a week at least one is never going to be run out of Aps to run. Aps are also a investment as well. 120$+ not everyone can afford that.
I'm not too sure on this point. I started out homebrewing and ended up with a few Adventure Paths, a bunch of modules and some third party adventures, I don't think AP saturation is a thing unless they're released faster than they are now. Sure a lot of people will miss one or another for preference reasons (I have no intention of playing Skulls and Shackles because I'm not interested in playing fantasy pirates. Not to knock the concept there are just other APs I'd rather play) but APs are the kind of things that are individually iconic enough to talk about. I think the number of AP is less of an issue than maintaining new themes and interesting locations.
I think it's smooth sailing right now.
It's not broken, so don't fix it. Just keep bringin us epic content.
|
|
I'll never have enough APs! It's all I need from Paizo. After a decade of using 3.5/PF ive learned to work around the kinks. My idea of P2 would probably look a lot like 5E which means P2 will probably go in a much different direction. Thats a shame but ill evaluate when it comes out (hopefully many years from now).
|
Absolutely. While making sure no one else can for better or worse.
I think that they're mostly just keeping the IP alive because throwing D&D on board games/video games etc makes them all more profitable because of the history. Any $ they make off of 5e is just gravy. (If it has enough success - they may re-evaluate their support.)
Perhaps. Don't really care, though, since they've put out the best version of D&D that's been commercially available for a decade and a half.