I'm not sure why we're discussing whether or not we want a PF second edition. I was under impression that this thread was about a hypothetical.
That aside I think the biggest obstacle to a second edition is that the general assumption is that if a second edition happened, regular Pathfinder would stop being supported. Given how it started in the first place I don't imagine Paizo would abandon Pathfinder even if they made a second edition. Also I imagine that it would likely come in some kind of different flavor just so that they can justify having a seperate system.
I thought this thread was all about why everyone gets the rogue's stuff ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I thought this thread was all about why everyone gets the rogue's stuff ;)
Skill Mastery(Sleight of Hand) to take it ALL BACK!
|
There are no rules, to me, that are blatantly broken or require extensive overhaul. From 3.0 to 3.5, Pathfinder Beta, and Pathfinder, I think the core rule system of the d20 works quite well.
HOWEVER
We need a 2nd edition for one major reason. Organization. If you want to find a rule for something you probably need to check at least four chapters. Even then you will probably not have found all the rules applying.
In my vision of Pathfinder 2.0, there is no abandoning of the system at all. People will want to buy the new rules simply to have something more easily searched, that makes sense from an organizational view. They can keep their old rules, or just update to a better book. Not all players will upgrade, but many will, and all new players will. It avoids an edition war. Total win-win for everyone.
Like a Rules Compendium? I'm certainly on board with that; I hate having to look up Errata, FAQ, and revised books for new RAW. If only to put a better wording on what we have as many things can be interpreted in multiple ways. I'd still love a power creep but I would buy the s*** out of an intuitive rule book.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't want PF 2.0
If it comes anytime soon I am out on anything this company ever publishes ever again.
That sounds totally reasonable. Let me try:
"If Paizo doesn't introduce Pathfinder 2.0 immediately and make it just the way I want, I'll burn all my Pathfinder books, and then pull out my own fingernails."
See? It just sounds ridiculous. Don't do it.
That's not the same thing at all.
I haven't purchased any White Wolf books since they stopped printing the editions of their games I liked and put out a "new better" version that I did not.
I have not purchased any books from WotC since they stopped publishing the edition of their game I liked and put out a "new better" version that I did not.
Its more reasonable to assume I'm not coming along to a new edition of pathfinder than that I am.
I've been playing in some form for 20 years now, and in that time there have been 5 separate editions-- an average of one every 4 years. I don't want that. PF has been out 5 years and if they follow the schedule and release a new edition now I'm not coming along for it-- I don't want a new edition every 4-5 years.
I don't want the game I like now to go away and be replaced by a "new better" version because history has proven that the new version is rarely if ever better/
|
Are they? I'm pretty sure the reprints were a one-off thing.
As for WoD, the 20th Anniversary editions of Vampire and Werewolf have been pretty highly praised, and Mage will be coming before too long. All cWoD, not nWoD (although nWoD Vampire essentially got it's own 2nd edition not long ago in the form of Blood & Smoke
I don't want PF 2.0
If it comes anytime soon I am out on anything this company ever publishes ever again.
That sounds totally reasonable. Let me try:
"If Paizo doesn't introduce Pathfinder 2.0 immediately and make it just the way I want, I'll burn all my Pathfinder books, and then pull out my own fingernails."
See? It just sounds ridiculous. Don't do it.
That's not the same thing at all.
I haven't purchased any White Wolf books since they stopped printing the editions of their games I liked and put out a "new better" version that I did not.
I have not purchased any books from WotC since they stopped publishing the edition of their game I liked and put out a "new better" version that I did not.
Its more reasonable to assume I'm not coming along to a new edition of pathfinder than that I am.
I've been playing in some form for 20 years now, and in that time there have been 5 separate editions-- an average of one every 4 years. I don't want that. PF has been out 5 years and if they follow the schedule and release a new edition now I'm not coming along for it-- I don't want a new edition every 4-5 years.
I don't want the game I like now to go away and be replaced by a "new better" version because history has proven that the new version is rarely if ever better/
You stopped playing D&D when they released 3.5? What did you play from 3.5 until Pathfinder??
Or are you just unwilling to accept that like, 95% of the posters here are suggesting an "upgrade" that is similar in scope to 3 > 3.5 and not like 3.5 > 4?
(In other words: The exact same game, but with better, cleaner, and more enjoyable rules.)
|
I would be very surprised if in a new or slightly updated edition there will be no reprints. They reprinted stuff like VOP and other rules from 3.5. Not entire books yet they did. Again it needs to be repeated Paizo is and never was a non-profit organization. They created the company to work on a product they enjoy as well as to make a profit off it. No one at least the smart entrepreneurs start a company without the intention of it making money at some point.
I don't understand the logic. Paizo can release either a new edition or a slighlty tweaked one. Yet they can't do anything new or innovative or different that envolves anyone spending a single extra penny. Or thy threathen a boycott. So Paizo has to invest time in playtesting, printing and paying employees etc. Yet they can't be expected to profit from it. That's crazy and insane. One might as well ask the Paizo employees to work for free. I'm sure their starving families and piles of bills that add up will thank you for it.
Both postiions on the topic should be heard in this thread. Both from those who want to see change and those who do not. I respect thgose who do not want to see anything changed. Allow those who do the right to post what they want to see changed. Without all the doom and gloom pity parade hyperbole
Like a Rules Compendium? I'm certainly on board with that; I hate having to look up Errata, FAQ, and revised books for new RAW. If only to put a better wording on what we have as many things can be interpreted in multiple ways. I'd still love a power creep but I would buy the s*** out of an intuitive rule book.
On a total tangent, this is the first thread where I've ever seen 'power creep' used this way. I.e., as a singular/plural noun rather than a little/lot noun, and as a positive thing rather than a bad thing.
/tangent
|
|
The problem about a rules compendium is if Paizo makes it a part of the official rules or not. If they do fans might complain about power creep, rules bloat or Paizo trying to make money off of them with a new book. They make the rules unofficial and fans will complain that they are not as well as the same arguments above. I'm glad I don't design rpgs. We gamers just don't know what we want.
You stopped playing D&D when they released 3.5? What did you play from 3.5 until Pathfinder??Or are you just unwilling to accept that like, 95% of the posters here are suggesting an "upgrade" that is similar in scope to 3 > 3.5 and not like 3.5 > 4?
(In other words: The exact same game, but with better, cleaner, and more enjoyable rules.)
We played 3.5 without buying new books?
You're exactly right though-- I don't think there are enough problems with the rules set we have now to warrant that sort of upgrade, or that they would do that without making major changes.
I would be very surprised if in a new or slightly updated edition there will be no reprints. They reprinted stuff like VOP and other rules from 3.5. Not entire books yet they did. Again it needs to be repeated Paizo is and never was a non-profit organization. They created the company to work on a product they enjoy as well as to make a profit off it. No one at least the smart entrepreneurs start a company without the intention of it making money at some point.
I don't understand the logic. Paizo can release either a new edition or a slighlty tweaked one. Yet they can't do anything new or innovative or different that envolves anyone spending a single extra penny. Or thy threathen a boycott. So Paizo has to invest time in playtesting, printing and paying employees etc. Yet they can't be expected to profit from it. That's crazy and insane. One might as well ask the Paizo employees to work for free. I'm sure their starving families and piles of bills that add up will thank you for it.
Nobody is asking Paizo to not make money. . . I've bought all my PF books new either from the site or from a local retailer.
I'm just asking that they continue to publish new pathfinder books for me to purchase without creating a new edition where I have to purchase a ton of reprints without any new material.
They can do plenty of innovative/new things without doing a new edition?
I don't understand the logic of wanting to restart a new edition; I don't understand disliking this game enough that you feel they need to spend their next development cycle doing the core book again (then most likely the next one after that doing the APG, then the ARG, then ultimate combat, then ultimate magic, and then maybe about 5 years from now finally doing a fully new book again just in time to start working on PF 3.0)
|
|
Since when is seeing some elements of a rpg changed equal disliking all the rules. Would I like to see martials espcially fighters get nice things sure. Do I dislike or hate all the rules. No. I'm not one of the fanbase who keeps playing D&D hates it and comes here to complain. Is that the new defense used to prevent any change of the rules. Either a fan likes the rule as is 1000% or they don't like the rules. That makes alot of sense. I hate eating liver therefore I must hate all eating all kinds of meat.
I'm just asking that they continue to publish new pathfinder books for me to purchase without creating a new edition where I have to purchase a ton of reprints without any new material.
You keep bringing up "Paizo forces me to buy more books" as a counter argument.
Who exactly is going to come to your house and force you to buy anything? I see this same argument whenever a new book is published. First with the APG, then the ARG. Your only forced if someone actually holds a gun to your head. It's not Paizo fault or whatever their 2E ends up being if fans cannot control their spending habits. That's like eating at mcdonalds all the time then complaining it's their fault that one gains weight or gets health problems.
Almost as bad as " I have to buy books because as a DM I can't say no to my players" argument. As if Paizo fault that they can't refuse player requests at the table Or is in the wrong for doing what successful rpg companies are supposed to do.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm just asking that they continue to publish new pathfinder books for me to purchase without creating a new edition where I have to purchase a ton of reprints without any new material.
You keep bringing up "Paizo forces me to buy more books" as a counter argument.
Who exactly is going to come to your house and force you to buy anything? I see this same argument whenever a new book is published. First with the APG, then the ARG. Your only forced if someone actually holds a gun to your head. It's not Paizo fault or whatever their 2E ends up being if fans cannot control their spending habits. That's like eating at mcdonalds all the time then complaining it's their fault that one gains weight or gets health problems.
You keep twisting my words--
If paizo is publishing a new core and a new APG and a new ARG and a new Ultimate Combat instead of "book they have never published before with all new material X" then how am I able to buy a book of completely new content?
I don't want to buy a book that has the Advanced Players Guide classes "redone for PF 2.0!" as its selling point-- but once they make a new edition they will inevitably want to update everything they have done for that new edition. Which means years of reprints with little if any new material.
You don't like me saying I don't want to buy reprints but you refuse to accept that I would simply stop supporting the company that pushes new editions are their business plan. . .
Again, to reiterate--
I just want Paizo to keep making new pathfinder books. I will purchase the ones that interest me when I can afford it and enjoy the new content for a game I actually like and don't believe needs to be destroyed to make room for something else.
What is so wrong with that? Why am I the bad guy for not wanting to go to yet another new edition? Why is it wrong for me to be worn out by the constant edition treadmill that has been my experience with first run rpg publications and I have found to be generally a poor experience?
Why is my opinion wrong when I say that in my experience the new edition is almost never worth it? That the new edition has virtually never actually increased my enjoyment of the game to be worth it compared to if the company had just kept supporting the game?
Why am I wrong for wanting to see what Paizo has planned for the next hardcover release after Advanced Class Guide and for wanting that to be something other than the core book again?
I get the point that one may have to upgrade due to lack of finding players. Yet unless the area you live in favors a new edition or a certain edition of D&D it`s usually not a issue imo.
For those who enjoy Pathfinder APs, being able to continue playing them without investing in another shelf or two full of rulebooks (if you want the same level of rulebook support as you currently have) is a real issue. If a new edition wasn't backwards compatible, then you're likely looking at having to either switch, drop the new APs, or convert them all yourself. That's the "forcing to switch" that would affect me.
|
An intuitive, more user-friendly monk that actually can support an ascetic and agility > bulkbiceps mystical martial artist without requiring a PhD in system mastery.
Tieflings, aasimar, and other planetouched as humanoids rather than native outsiders.
Orcs as generally "any chaotic" rather than CE and rebalanced as a +2,+2,-2 core race. :)
Tieflings and aasimar as core races, with their rarity mentioned in their flavor. And a -2 added to the aasimar array(s).
De-emphasizing the Big Six and its place in the balancing of the game, allowing PCs more flavor flexibility and lower levels of magic gear dependence without fearing that they're shooting themselves in the foot.
No Antagonize(Intimidate version) type stuff.
More out-of-combat support for classes that typically have their resources funneled almost entirely into combat.
Ritual/Incantation magic!
|
|
I would like to see them do a whole new system. For all the complaints about x class/race/feat tree not being optimal, this is about as close to perfecting 3rd edition as we're getting. Even if it isn't, how many of us want to buy a core rulebook, bestiary, and gm guide to a refinement of a refinement of a twice refined sequel to AD&D?
It seems to me Paizo's latest stuff is trying to move away from 3.5 anyway.
I for one would be very excited to see what they could do with a unique engine tuned to answer 3rd edition's limitations.
That being said, if they just did Pathfinder forever that'd be cool too.
On that front, I believe that this is what is disturbing people most. PF ver2 is not likely going to be OGL material. I would say that PF will have their own OGL for third party use, but the overall reason to go with making a new edition is to break away from the tropes and hindrances of the D&D brand.
The rule set might be simular to the D&D rules in general, but a lot of design choices and changes can amount to not working with the 3.5 or other edition legacy very well.
Feats might change into class abilities that may be shared between certain classes, or for a single class. Other feats my go to being a part of another mechanic (such as skill improvements and init bonuses) instead.
Magic could be streamlined into a single mechanic, having the classes using that mechanic in different ways. (Wizard preparing Known spells vs. Sorcerer adding class abilities mods to fixed Known spells)
It is something that seems alien to some, like progress is a dirty word.
|
|
It's been awhile since I read the playtest, but doesn't the Arcanist sort of fill the "prepare spells from a spellbook, but cast spontaneously like a sorcerer" niche that some people want?
in the current system.. somewhat.
It is limited by castings per day and very limited by spells known. The Arcane pool is limited by the fact that it will become a money sink for those that charge it to max. (Eating magic items for power)
I hope there are more things to do to gain/regain arcane pool points other than eating items. Siphon spells off of enemies, have some sort of way to keep charged points for more than a day or simply gaining points as you cast spells.
As far as being a Wizard with Known Spells, though, it doesn't have the versitility that the Wizard does.
My mind's eye would have bonus Know Spells for the Wizard while the Sorcerer would have extra castings like they do now. The Wizard would have castings match what they have for known spells, with extra castings from feats and class abilities.
Can't be done really well in the current system.
|
|
What if pathfinder 2.0 was just 4ed rewritten to be just as mechanically sound but re-fluffed to not feel like a MMO wargame when I read the rules?Honestly I kinda like 4e. If there was a greater roleplaying emphasis and not a need to buy every damn thing and have a subscription to the dang character builder I'd play it more.I've never understood that particular complaint. Roleplaying isn't a function of the system. If can't roleplay in a 4E game, it's not 4E's fault...it's obvious that you are looking for a reason to dislike the system, and have decided the ridiculously nebulous "I can't roleplay under this system" is your excuse for disliking it.
Also, a Paizo 4E clone is not gonna happen. The reason that Pathfinder exists is that Paizo didn't really like 4E.
It isn't that they didn't "like" the Edition that Shall Not Be Named, but the fact that there was a price tag to even look at the license info needed to produce such a product.
They kept the money and went in a different direction, one they had already given some time into with material and product ready to go with a few tweaks.
I believe that any failings of the parent brand is disconnected from anything that has to do with whether or not a company or player actually liked the system. Other factors was involved.
|
|
Two things- the whole "forgetting" thing is a bit a fluff that no longer exists in PF. So "forget" it. next Vancian magic is a system used by many of the most well known Fantasy authors, besides just Jack Vance.- Zelazny, Pratchett, Cook, Rosenberg, Watt-Evans, Duane, Wrede, etc.
The mechanic of "Wizards memorize spells, then they forget the spells when they're cast and need to re-memorize them" is the sort of highly specific quirk that seems like it would be unique to one setting. "In this setting, magic works this way." Okay, that's a unique twist.
Please do not include Terry Pratchett in that list. His Discworld novels makes fun of the mechanic, having the fact that a Wizard main character can't cast dip because of the whole mechanic and the fact that having an epic spell in his head broke the game. (He casts a spell in a latter book for the first time, equating it to sex)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know there were a couple of issues with the GSL that made it untenable to Paizo (and reading between the lines, I think 4E wasnt the kind of game they were interested in).
I dont think you had to pay to "look at the license info" though. Where did you hear that?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would be very surprised if in a new or slightly updated edition there will be no reprints. They reprinted stuff like VOP and other rules from 3.5. Not entire books yet they did. Again it needs to be repeated Paizo is and never was a non-profit organization. They created the company to work on a product they enjoy as well as to make a profit off it. No one at least the smart entrepreneurs start a company without the intention of it making money at some point.
I don't understand the logic. Paizo can release either a new edition or a slighlty tweaked one. Yet they can't do anything new or innovative or different that envolves anyone spending a single extra penny. Or thy threathen a boycott. So Paizo has to invest time in playtesting, printing and paying employees etc. Yet they can't be expected to profit from it. That's crazy and insane. One might as well ask the Paizo employees to work for free. I'm sure their starving families and piles of bills that add up will thank you for it.
I dont want a new edition, but I definitely want Paizo to remain profitable as they continue to expand Golarion and develop the Pathfinder system/brand.
I reject the implicit assumption that, without producing a new edition, Paizo will not remain profitable into the future. The only argument I've seen as to why "A new edition is inevitable" have been from people pointing to other companies who don't have that model.
Paizo have built their business on supplements/adventures as the main profit driver rather than the ruleset. They've clearly made a conscious choice to limit the production of rules supplements (three hardbacks a year and I'd argue that Bestiaries and NPC Codices are a different kind of thing than a true rule book).
In my mind, the real soon-to-be current threat to that business model is D&D:Next. I think Paizo have clearly won the majority share of players from the 3.5 era. Going forward though, as those players drop off the scene, maybe D&D:Next will be successful at capturing the new fans and the balance of games being played might shift. If that happened, I could see a PF2 as a necessary response (being the most popular game is a good way to ensure that selling supplements and adventures is a profitable way forward. If that popularity were challenged over a long period of time, it might become less so).
My hope and expectation is that both systems are successful. Nonetheless, I think it's a risk.
|
|
I know there were a couple of issues with the GSL that made it untenable to Paizo (and reading between the lines, I think 4E wasnt the kind of game they were interested in).
I dont think you had to pay to "look at the license info" though. Where did you hear that?
The GSL didn't come out in any amount of time that was conducive to a third party publisher to use it and have material out in a reasonable time cooridinated with the release of the new edition itself. When it was announced to the various companies that it was "ready" to be used, Hasbro wanted, I believe, around 5k for the privilege to look at the thing. This was about two months before the release of the edition.
As it was, it wasn't really "ready" as the thing went through five or so different revisions over the course of the next year and a half, one particular revision having resulted in a third party publisher having to recall all their books off the shelves to redo them.
The whole thing was a mess.
The GSL didn't come out in any amount of time that was conducive to a third party publisher to use it and have material out in a reasonable time cooridinated with the release of the new edition itself. When it was announced to the various companies that it was "ready" to be used, Hasbro wanted, I believe, around 5k for the privilege to look at the thing. This was about two months before the release of the edition.I know there were a couple of issues with the GSL that made it untenable to Paizo (and reading between the lines, I think 4E wasnt the kind of game they were interested in).
I dont think you had to pay to "look at the license info" though. Where did you hear that?
Yeah, I knew that it's release was delayed beyond reason. I hadnt heard they had to pay to read it though. That's news to me.
I know Paizo definitely looked at it at some point. I remember Vic commenting on it somewhat obliquely and saying that there were one or two "dealbreakers" that made it a non-starter for them.
|
I would like to see them do a whole new system. For all the complaints about x class/race/feat tree not being optimal, this is about as close to perfecting 3rd edition as we're getting. Even if it isn't, how many of us want to buy a core rulebook, bestiary, and gm guide to a refinement of a refinement of a twice refined sequel to AD&D?
It seems to me Paizo's latest stuff is trying to move away from 3.5 anyway.
I for one would be very excited to see what they could do with a unique engine tuned to answer 3rd edition's limitations.
That being said, if they just did Pathfinder forever that'd be cool too.On that front, I believe that this is what is disturbing people most. PF ver2 is not likely going to be OGL material. I would say that PF will have their own OGL for third party use, but the overall reason to go with making a new edition is to break away from the tropes and hindrances of the D&D brand.
The rule set might be simular to the D&D rules in general, but a lot of design choices and changes can amount to not working with the 3.5 or other edition legacy very well.
Feats might change into class abilities that may be shared between certain classes, or for a single class. Other feats my go to being a part of another mechanic (such as skill improvements and init bonuses) instead.
Magic could be streamlined into a single mechanic, having the classes using that mechanic in different ways. (Wizard preparing Known spells vs. Sorcerer adding class abilities mods to fixed Known spells)
It is something that seems alien to some, like progress is a dirty word.
That would be a huge risk. In order to get away from the old and bring in a new, the system would have to be very different. I just dont see this happening for many years to come.
|
|
I reject the implicit assumption that, without producing a new edition, Paizo will not remain profitable into the future. The only argument I've seen as to why "A new edition is inevitable" have been from people pointing to other companies who don't have that model.
Either they keep making the same or more money with the current edition. Once they start to lose money and consistently lose it they may have to. I have alot of the books. I rather not upgrade. Yet their are issues with the rules that need to be addressed. And which keep some gamers away. I know a few 3.5. diehard that won`t touch PF. Myself I can`t go back to 3.5. My Babarian has to have RAge popwers dammit!
In my mind, the real soon-to-be current threat to that business model is D&D:Next. I think Paizo have clearly won the majority share of players from the 3.5 era. Going forward though, as those players drop off the scene, maybe D&D:Next will be successful at capturing the new fans and the balance of games being played might shift. If that happened, I could see a PF2 as a necessary response (being the most popular game is a good way to ensure that selling supplements and adventures is a profitable way forward. If that popularity were challenged over a long period of time, it might become less so).
We will see. 5E may be the first edition of D&D I don`t buy. Not because of the rules. Just new edition fatigue. It has to knock my gaming socks off. Try to address some issues 3.5 had. More importantly their goal of one edition for all D&D player with the promised modularity better still be part of it. Otherwise I have PF and 2E to keep me happy.
I reject the implicit assumption that, without producing a new edition, Paizo will not remain profitable into the future. The only argument I've seen as to why "A new edition is inevitable" have been from people pointing to other companies who don't have that model.
Which ttrpg companies don't eventually write new editions, or go under before they can?
We will see. 5E may be the first edition of D&D I don`t buy. Not because of the rules. Just new edition fatigue. It has to knock my gaming socks off. Try to address some issues 3.5 had. More importantly their goal of one edition for all D&D player with the promised modularity better still be part of it. Otherwise I have PF and 2E to keep me happy.
Call me a cynic, but I have a word for "One edition for everyone" -- market-speak hot air.
I'm in the same boat, though for slightly different reasons. 5e will probably be the first edition I won't buy, because I've already had my socks knocked off. If I were a younger man, I'd probably buy it just 'cause; but I've seen enough editions to know that 5e probably has nothing to interest me.
That's not the same thing at all.
I haven't purchased any White Wolf books since they stopped printing the editions of their games I liked and put out a "new better" version that I did not.
I have not purchased any books from WotC since they stopped publishing the edition of their game I liked and put out a "new better" version that I did not.
Its more reasonable to assume I'm not coming along to a new edition of pathfinder than that I am.
I've been playing in some form for 20 years now, and in that time there have been 5 separate editions-- an average of one every 4 years. I don't want that. PF has been out 5 years and if they follow the schedule and release a new edition now I'm not coming along for it-- I don't want a new edition every 4-5 years.
I don't want the game I like now to go away and be replaced by a "new better" version because history has proven that the new version is rarely if ever better/
"I won't buy the next version of the game" is hardly the same thing as "I'll never buy anything from this company again, ever." One is hyperbole, the other isn't. In any event, I've made my point.
We will see. 5E may be the first edition of D&D I don`t buy. Not because of the rules. Just new edition fatigue. It has to knock my gaming socks off. Try to address some issues 3.5 had. More importantly their goal of one edition for all D&D player with the promised modularity better still be part of it. Otherwise I have PF and 2E to keep me happy.
I didn't buy 4th, but I have one 4th ED DM who is very good, and he supplied us with everything.
I have some old AD&D stuff, 3.5 and Pathfinder.
The GSL didn't come out in any amount of time that was conducive to a third party publisher to use it and have material out in a reasonable time cooridinated with the release of the new edition itself. When it was announced to the various companies that it was "ready" to be used, Hasbro wanted, I believe, around 5k for the privilege to look at the thing. This was about two months before the release of the edition.
As it was, it wasn't really "ready" as the thing went through five or so different revisions over the course of the next year and a half, one particular revision having resulted in a third party publisher having to recall all their books off the shelves to redo them.
The whole thing was a mess.
The GSL was a major cluster...pretty much no other way to describe it.
Which ttrpg companies don't eventually write new editions, or go under before they can?
I reject the implicit assumption that, without producing a new edition, Paizo will not remain profitable into the future. The only argument I've seen as to why "A new edition is inevitable" have been from people pointing to other companies who don't have that model.
The most successful one is still doing fine on its first edition.
The point being that the ones that do ride the edition treadmill are companies for whom the rules are the predominant profit-driver. That's not Paizo's business model (or wasnt anyway - maybe things have changed).
Being in the same industry isnt the right basis of comparison, it's business models that matter.
You seem to be unaware of how WotC handled the 3.0->3.5 update. While the core rules were repackaged, the other 3.0 supplements were not. They were updated in the free 3.0->3.5 conversion PDF that you can download from WotC's website, for free. No rebuying material you already have, just download the quick update for free.
No, YOU seem unaware how they handled the 3.0 to 3.5 update.
They released the new core books, then the first 3.5 book after that they released was Complete Warrior which featured more than 50% reprinted material which had been in the Splat books for 3.0. . . then ditto for Complete Divine, Complete Arcane, and Complete Adventurer. . .
It wasn't until Complete Mage in 2006 that they release a book of legitimately new material/ideas. . . and by then they were less than two years
Sorry, but I don't want to buy books with 50%+ reprinted material again.
I reject the implicit assumption that, without producing a new edition, Paizo will not remain profitable into the future. The only argument I've seen as to why "A new edition is inevitable" have been from people pointing to other companies who don't have that model.Either they keep making the same or more money with the current edition. Once they start to lose money and consistently lose it they may have to. I have alot of the books. I rather not upgrade. Yet their are issues with the rules that need to be addressed. And which keep some gamers away. I know a few 3.5. diehard that won`t touch PF. Myself I can`t go back to 3.5. My Babarian has to have RAge popwers dammit!
Well, in a world with dozens of RPGs, pathfinder keeps dominating the bestseller lists quarter after quarter. So based on current activity, I dont see any reason to think they'll eventually start losing money just because WotC (for example) did. WotC were releasing stacks of rules supplements compared to the number of adventures and more flavor-based products. Comparing those two business models is an error, in my opinion.
To be clear - if they do start losing money and if they think PF2 is going to stop that, then I'm all for it. I just dont buy the inevitability argument that often crops up.
You seem to be unaware of how WotC handled the 3.0->3.5 update. While the core rules were repackaged, the other 3.0 supplements were not. They were updated in the free 3.0->3.5 conversion PDF that you can download from WotC's website, for free. No rebuying material you already have, just download the quick update for free.No, YOU seem unaware how they handled the 3.0 to 3.5 update.
They released the new core books, then the first 3.5 book after that they released was Complete Warrior which featured more than 50% reprinted material which had been in the Splat books for 3.0. . . then ditto for Complete Divine, Complete Arcane, and Complete Adventurer. . .
It wasn't until Complete Mage in 2006 that they release a book of legitimately new material/ideas. . . and by then they were less than two years
Sorry, but I don't want to buy books with 50%+ reprinted material again.
Not to mention Savage Species which was labeled as being 3.5 but was 3.0 and so riddled with never corrected errata and total brokeness it's not even funny. There were a couple others "between" also.
And the "free conversion" was mostly useless.
You seem to be unaware of how WotC handled the 3.0->3.5 update. While the core rules were repackaged, the other 3.0 supplements were not. They were updated in the free 3.0->3.5 conversion PDF that you can download from WotC's website, for free. No rebuying material you already have, just download the quick update for free.No, YOU seem unaware how they handled the 3.0 to 3.5 update.
They released the new core books, then the first 3.5 book after that they released was Complete Warrior which featured more than 50% reprinted material which had been in the Splat books for 3.0. . . then ditto for Complete Divine, Complete Arcane, and Complete Adventurer. . .
It wasn't until Complete Mage in 2006 that they release a book of legitimately new material/ideas. . . and by then they were less than two years
Sorry, but I don't want to buy books with 50%+ reprinted material again.
Not to mention Savage Species which was labeled as being 3.5 but was 3.0 and so riddled with never corrected errata and total brokeness it's not even funny. There were a couple others "between" also.
And the "free conversion" was mostly useless.
And required you to do the converting work yourself. . . and also, call me old or whatever, but I still like to hold the book in my hand when I am roleplaying compared to trying to use pdfs on my laptop. . .
And required you to do the converting work yourself. . . and also, call me old or whatever, but I still like to hold the book in my hand when I am roleplaying compared to trying to use pdfs on my laptop. . .
You, sir ... can be on my lawn. ;-)
What's the distinction between preparation and "fire and forget"?
mechanically? None.