Is it time for Pathfinder 2nd edition?


Pathfinder RPG General Discussion

301 to 350 of 608 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Nathanael Love wrote:
memorax wrote:
137ben wrote:


The mark of a successful company is profits. That's it. NWoD continues to make profits, so it is successful. Of course, D&D 4e also made money, as did 5e, but you ignore those facts because they is inconvenient to your dogma.

Clearly it did not make profits. You don't sell off, announce the end of publication, sell again, then license something which is bringing in profits.

You seem to be confusing sales for profits.

I don't put a lot of stock into being "in the top 5" in sales obscurely from a website with no figures attached.

If the drop off from #1 to #5 goes from 100,000 to 2,000 being ahead of the guy at #6 is pretty meaningless

A) ICv2 is the only source for RPG sales figures that is publicly available. It's been doing quarterly reports for over 10 years. I haven't heard of anyone in the industry that disputes their figures.

B) While it is uncertain what it takes to get to the number 5 slot, and it's relative volatility does show how small the RPG industry really is, it definitely takes more than a few thousand sales to place.

C) From insiders I've talked to, NWoD did make a profit. It was because of the companies success that CCP made an offer. But CCP wasn't purchased the IP not to get into the RPG business, but to buy a successful brand to turn into video games. Tabletop RPGs have profits measured in thousands of dollars. Video games are measured in millions.

The people who sold WW to CCP were doing well, and made a ton of money off the sale. The fact that CCP's plans for the company didn't involve the tiny tabletop rpg industry, or that their investment in video game IP kept getting sabotaged by themselves because anytime they had problems with EVE they would pull devs off the World of Darkness game for "indefinite emergencies", doesn't mean there was anything wrong with the RPG sales of nWoD.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

"Figures" is a pretty loose term when it amounts to a numbered list 1-5 by company irregardless of product.

That is what is called "bad data" or really no data at all.

They also do not seem to maintain an archive of these-- I can only find the latest quarter online.

Maybe they were doing great, but we have no way of knowing. What we do know is that they were sold, the line was halted, they were sold again, the older WoD started being produced on a license, and that NWoD hasn't had a single product release since 2012.

I'd say that series of events is highly unlikely if they were highly profitable-- if they were even as profitable as Paizo is now.

I'd say that throwing out the current revenue streams for Paizo which we know is profitable on the hopes of more from a 2nd edition is risky even if NWoD remained profitable-- there are still a lot more failures in the market than successes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber

It is hard to find, but they do keep the data online. Here's a compiled list with links to original articles.

And we aren't talking about a game that hovered at the number 5 slot. We're talking about a game that was the #2 selling RPG for 8 of 9 quarters from the time it was released to the time it was sold to CCP. It dipped to 3rd for a quarter when Warhammer 2E was released.

So yes, it falls off after CCP bought it and mismanaged it. But it was solidly the best selling non-D&D RPG on the market from 2004-2006. The release of nWoD was wildly successful. CCP killed it because they didn't care about the tabletop market.

Edit: Since we know what Fate's sales numbers are, it looks like ~2k in a quarter is about what it takes to make the number 5 slot, which is kinda sad.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey, Nathanial, do you think the Pokemon TCG and Magic: The Gathering were "failures"? They directly resulted in WotC being sold to a much larger company, so by your own standards, they couldn't have been successful, right?

Also,

Nathaniel Love wrote:
and that NWoD hasn't had a single product release since 2012.

Wrong: they released a new Chronicles of Darkness core book less than a month ago. Other 2015 releases included the Demon Translation Guide for Demon: The Descent and Sothis Ascends for Mummy: The Curse.

Heck, the core rules for Mummy: The Curse itself was only released in 2013, and Demon: The Descent was first released in 2014, so not only has Chronicles of Darkness had new supplements since 2012, it has had full new games separate from Vampire/Werewolf/Mage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
137ben wrote:

Hey, Nathanial, do you think the Pokemon TCG and Magic: The Gathering were "failures"? They directly resulted in WotC being sold to a much larger company, so by your own standards, they couldn't have been successful, right?

Also,

Nathaniel Love wrote:
and that NWoD hasn't had a single product release since 2012.

Wrong: they released a new Chronicles of Darkness core book less than a month ago. Other 2015 releases included the Demon Translation Guide for Demon: The Descent and Sothis Ascends for Mummy: The Curse.

Heck, the core rules for Mummy: The Curse itself was only released in 2013, and Demon: The Descent was first released in 2014, so not only has Chronicles of Darkness had new supplements since 2012, it has had full new games separate from Vampire/Werewolf/Mage.

They spent 9 years and millions of dollars employing 56 people to make a game that never came out and then sold the license and fired those people. How is that not a failure?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Ryan Freire wrote:
They spent 9 years and millions of dollars employing 56 people to make a game that never came out and then sold the license and fired those people. How is that not a failure?

Right, CCP failed to utilize the IP they purchased. Which is different from what some people in this thread claimed, which was the release of nWoD was a failure that led them to be bought out by CCP. No. nWoD was a great success, which led them to be picked up by CCP, who then bungled it and killed the tabletop rpg company they purchased.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

So. . . three books in three years?

That's a strong market share there.

There are two different types of selling your company-- what happened to WotC where everyone gets rich, and what happened to TSR where everyone goes broke.

You all seem to assume that the sale of White Wolf was the former, whereas I obviously believe it was the latter.

Even if the first sale did make everyone involved rich, the subsequent sales did not. So regardless it has been a failed company since at least 2008. . .

Shadow Lodge

9 people marked this as a favorite.

Who the f@%+ cares?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Nathanael Love wrote:

So. . . three books in three years?

That's a strong market share there.

Actually, Onyx Path has been doing quite well. Since they have moved to a mostly Kickstarter model, we've got some insight into their numbers we don't get from most companies.

Year KS Revenue
2012 $531,736
2013 $1,123,832
2014 $1,114,157
2015 $741,798

So while they only launch about one book per quarter, their yearly revenue is pretty solid for an RPG company.

Yes, CCP screwed up WW. But the WoD brand has survived and is now doing quite well. That's about 1/8 of what Steve Jackson makes in a year, but they make all their money off Munchkin and barely make RPGs. Paizo doesn't release numbers, and Wizards numbers are obscured by Magic and other far more profitable companies.

Onyx Path isn't a giant, but it's far from out of the game.


I think that Paizo (functioning as an RPG production hive mind, or something) understands their market share well enough to realize that a second edition could only split the player base, but that's only this nerd's opinion.

Scarab Sages

deinol wrote:
Nathanael Love wrote:

So. . . three books in three years?

That's a strong market share there.

Actually, Onyx Path has been doing quite well. Since they have moved to a mostly Kickstarter model, we've got some insight into their numbers we don't get from most companies.

Year KS Revenue
2012 $531,736
2013 $1,123,832
2014 $1,114,157
2015 $741,798

So while they only launch about one book per quarter, their yearly revenue is pretty solid for an RPG company.

Yes, CCP screwed up WW. But the WoD brand has survived and is now doing quite well. That's about 1/8 of what Steve Jackson makes in a year, but they make all their money off Munchkin and barely make RPGs. Paizo doesn't release numbers, and Wizards numbers are obscured by Magic and other far more profitable companies.

Onyx Path isn't a giant, but it's far from out of the game.

$750,000 per year is a quarter the average revenue of a single McDonalds location. I can't possibly conceive of classifying a national publisher with that level of revenue as "in the game" for any meaningful definition of the game.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber
Duiker wrote:


$750,000 per year is a quarter the average revenue of a single McDonalds location. I can't possibly conceive of classifying a national publisher with that level of revenue as "in the game" for any meaningful definition of the game.

How do you make a small fortune in RPGs? Start with a large fortune.

Yes, RPGs are a tiny, tiny market. With only three major players right now: Wizards, Paizo, and FFG.

Everyone else is fighting for scraps.

Nobody gets into RPGs because its smart business.

Liberty's Edge

The only negative thing that I can say about WW/Onyx path is that they switched over to a POD format through Drivethrurpg. Meaning they disappeared from gaming stores. I can't really blame them though and see why they went POD. But dead hardly. They still were, are and will continue to publish material. I get that NL really liked OWoD and the original devs. At thx point it's anything and everything to keep saying that NWOD was a failure. Now CCP handling of Eve Online is what killed it IMO. No one can deny that.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
memorax wrote:


A rehash of a rehash of yet another potentail rehash is simply not going to do as well as the current edition imo. A 50$+ purchase at a LGS or a 30-35$+ online purchase through Amazon. For the same material that fixes nothing or very little. I just can't see it doing as well. Already some stick with 3.5. because they don't think PF offers enough new material.

Fans will ask what are you doing to fix the system. If Paizo response is not good enough they will stick with the current edition. Don't underestimate the cheapness of the average consumer. If the Fighter/martial caster disparity is not addressed chances are good it will fail rather than succeed. It's enough of issue with some fans that they won't even look at the rehashed core imo.

Granted a new edition may alienate old and new fans as well. Yet their a reason to reinvest. Backwards compitabilty is not good enough anymore. We have have the current edition for that

If Paizo were to go the route of a full fledged new edition, I would be inclined to agree with you, but I don't think that Paizo would be inclined to that for a number of reasons. The biggest reason is that the rules are not their main product line; that alone changes a lot of the variables in play. What would be unthinkable for WotC could easily work just fine for Paizo.

When they reach the time to want to update and release a revised core book, they can do so simply by incorporating it into the already existing process of printing new versions of the current core book. It's not something that everyone would have to have immediately, precisely because of many of the reasons you've stated, but would more likely in many cases simply get purchased as new players come in and old players replace used and worn books. A great many people probably would buy it right off the bat, but precisely because it's not a must have immediate purchase, I think they would actually have a pretty decent reception if the implementation was handled well, and since this is more or less the exact issue Paizo has had to deal with before, chances of a good implementation are pretty high unless they suddenly lose half their staff.

I think the big thing to look for with Pathfinder 2.0 is not a single book that suddenly changes everything, but rather a string of unchained books followed by a new revised core that ends up being a "best of" all the newer material blended with the original core book material; this could be followed up by a revised version of the other books from the main line that follow the same process. Older material isn't invalidated so much as consolidated. The core of the game doesn't really need a lot of changing as much as it needs a reorg, and a basic reorg along with a fresh look/rework at the more popular classes, archetypes, spells, races, feats, etc. would do just fine when it comes. The key is not to expect a single book to suddenly change the game, but rather looking for it over a series of books that doesn't particularly force immediate purchases of new material because the old books are completely invalidated. In this light, the new core book would be more a compilation of popular new material and rules otherwise spread out over many books, allowing for a single book to serve as a reference and easy entrance to the game. This kind of change would be well accepted. It fits with what they are currently doing, and they have the experience to make it work.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nathanael Love wrote:
So. . . three books in three years?

Okay, how about the fact in the past two or three months the following has been released.

V20 Lore of the Clans.
M20 How Do You DO That?
Mage: the Ascension 20th Anniversary Edition
Pugmire Pamphlet
Chronicles of Darkness
Vampire 20th Anniversary Edition: The Dark Ages

And they are currently just about to release Exalted 3 Anthology, Truth Beyond Paradox, Dreams of Avarice, Exalted 3 core book, Demon Storytellers Guide, Beast: The Primordial, and Mage: The Awakening 2nd Edition.

Onyx path is doing fine.

The nWoD gameline that was mentioned as being released in 2014, Demon, that currently has 10 books (excluding books like the Godmachine Chronicles, Chronicles of Darkness and Mortal Remains section on Demons).


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Duiker wrote:
$750,000 per year is a quarter the average revenue of a single McDonalds location. I can't possibly conceive of classifying a national publisher with that level of revenue as "in the game" for any meaningful definition of the game.

The RPG market is negligible.

ICv2 produces an estimate of the total annual sales of RPG products (across all channels, not just the bricks-and-mortar stores usually surveyed in their quarterly reports). In 2013, when D&D wasn't producing anything of note, their estimate of the US/Canada market was $15m. In 2014, after the well-received launch of 5E, their estimate rose to $25m.

Those figures were compiled via confidential interviews with retailers, distributors and publishers regarding sales figures and those people's estimates of the size of the market - they obviously can't be taken as fact, but they are nonetheless the best estimate we have. People often dispute ICv2 figures on the grounds of "what lousy data" but rarely question what data they are forming a contrary view on.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Milo v3 wrote:
Nathanael Love wrote:
So. . . three books in three years?

Okay, how about the fact in the past two or three months the following has been released.

V20 Lore of the Clans.
M20 How Do You DO That?
Mage: the Ascension 20th Anniversary Edition
Pugmire Pamphlet
Chronicles of Darkness
Vampire 20th Anniversary Edition: The Dark Ages

And they are currently just about to release Exalted 3 Anthology, Truth Beyond Paradox, Dreams of Avarice, Exalted 3 core book, Demon Storytellers Guide, Beast: The Primordial, and Mage: The Awakening 2nd Edition.

Onyx path is doing fine.

The nWoD gameline that was mentioned as being released in 2014, Demon, that currently has 10 books (excluding books like the Godmachine Chronicles, Chronicles of Darkness and Mortal Remains section on Demons).

But remember that nWoD hasn't had any new products since 2012, because one forumite says so! So obviously, all those products don't really exist and are just a conspiracy to take away our Core Rulebooks!


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Onyx Path is also all absolutely irrelevant to the discussion of NEW World of Darkness since they are publishing OLD World of Darkness material.

Them doing well publishing in the OWoD only supports my hypothesis that NWoD was a failure.

Liberty's Edge

No it's not irreverent because they kept publishing new products for Nwid and OWoD. Publishing OWoD does in no way mean nwod is a failure. The company saw their was still some interest in OWoD. Saw that they could support both versions. Did the smart thing and published it. I get it you don't like Nwod. Miss the original devs working on it. Your reaching now. On a forum your the only person saying Nwod is a failure and no one else. Do you know how rare that is. Especially on the Internet.


Nathanael Love wrote:

Onyx Path is also all absolutely irrelevant to the discussion of NEW World of Darkness since they are publishing OLD World of Darkness material.

Them doing well publishing in the OWoD only supports my hypothesis that NWoD was a failure.

Oh come on, now you're not even trying! If you'd taken like five seconds to look at the front page of Onyx Path's website, you'd see they publish both Chronicles of Darkness (they renamed NWoD starting December 2015) and WoD Classic (it hasn't been called "Old World of Darkness" for quite awhile). For that matter, if you had taken five seconds to look at the front page of DrivethruRPG and seen what the hottest sellers are, you'd have known Onyx Path is doing well with both CoD and WoDC. You would also know they were releasing new CoD products if you had read the list of the most recent releases that Milov3 posted just three posts above you.

Of course, if you had bothered to take a few seconds to visit the Onyx Path website, you would also have known that they had released products more recently than 2012 (which you didn't know earlier on this page).

I'd suggest you take a few minutes looking at what Onyx Path is doing before posting about what Onyx Path is doing. It might save you the embaresment of making more of these outlandish statements. Here's a link for your convenience.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
137ben wrote:
Nathanael Love wrote:

Onyx Path is also all absolutely irrelevant to the discussion of NEW World of Darkness since they are publishing OLD World of Darkness material.

Them doing well publishing in the OWoD only supports my hypothesis that NWoD was a failure.

Oh come on, now you're not even trying! If you'd taken like five seconds to look at the front page of Onyx Path's website, you'd see they publish both Chronicles of Darkness (they renamed NWoD starting December 2015) and WoD Classic (it hasn't been called "Old World of Darkness" for quite awhile). For that matter, if you had taken five seconds to look at the front page of DrivethruRPG and seen what the hottest sellers are, you'd have known Onyx Path is doing well with both CoD and WoDC. You would also know they were releasing new CoD products if you had read the list of the most recent releases that Milov3 posted just three posts above you.

Of course, if you had bothered to take a few seconds to visit the Onyx Path website, you would also have known that they had released products more recently than 2012 (which you didn't know earlier on this page).

I'd suggest you take a few minutes looking at what Onyx Path is doing before posting about what Onyx Path is doing. It might save you the embaresment of making more of these outlandish statements. Here's a link for your convenience.

They still aren't White Wolf.

The people who made the decision to reboot and switch the edition are not the ones making the material or profiting from it (if it is indeed profitable).

My original point still stands, and nothing about how the company that is licensing the rights to produce material for either WoD now is doing changes the fact that switching to a new shiny edition has a good chance of putting you out of business.

Assuming, again, that you are correct and the are mega-profitable currently.

You guys are arguing that this thing is so successful, but not applying it to the conversation of the thread.

If Paizo released Pathfinder 2.0 tomorrow, was sold to Blizzard in 2017 who promised to make World of Pathfinder (but didn't), then stopped production of Pathfinder then years later "Jim Bob's House Of Games" licensed the rights to make Pathfinder and started selling new Pathfinder books would you consider that a success?

I wouldn't. I am a fan of Paizo and the people that make Pathfinder now. Maybe "Jim Bob's House of Games" would do great with it, but I'd rather have Paizo making Pathfinder than that.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Onyx Path/White Wolf/Obsidian Cobblestone doesn't have the 800 lb gorilla a.k.a. WotC to compete with, so comparing them to Paizo is moot anyway.

Liberty's Edge

A new edition may alienate older fans. At least it offers a reason to purchase the core again. Offering nothing new but a rehash will also do the same. Yet their very little reason to buy a rehash for some in the hobby. Which keeps getting ignored. I doubt many are going to want to buy into the same rpg again. As they already have it.

Sunshadow makes a good point about releasing a Unchained version of books. Except how many of those does one release before it both enhances the rpg yet also highlights the flaws as well. How many Unchained books does one publish before it becomes too many. How exactly do you promote such a line as well. "Our core system has flaws just buy this set of unchained books and it's all going to work fine".

A set of Unchained books would have to be fairly cheap as well.
The core cost 50$. It's 30$ on Amazon. The Unchained books have to be much less expensive than that imo. Anything more than that would feel like a money grab. So would a new edition but again your also offering something new instead of a rehash. I don't think the community imo as a whole is interested in another rehash of 3.5. With 5E, 13th Age and other non-D&D alternatives. While I can see a rehash selling just not in the same amount as the current core did.

Liberty's Edge

137ben wrote:


Oh come on, now you're not even trying!

At this point to be honest I would no longer bother responding to him about WW/Onyx Path in this thread imo. I get that he dislikes new editions and spending money on them. That he carries a torch for the original devs. Nothing we say or prove will change his mind at this point. He was and has been proven wrong. Even if he won't admit to it. Don't waste your time.

I'm certainly no longer going to. When one posts a link to a company alive and well that keeps publishing new material. Only to be told that it does not matter and that they are dead. It's a waste of time.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
memorax wrote:

A new edition may alienate older fans. At least it offers a reason to purchase the core again. Offering nothing new but a rehash will also do the same. Yet their very little reason to buy a rehash for some in the hobby. Which keeps getting ignored. I doubt many are going to want to buy into the same rpg again. As they already have it.

Sunshadow makes a good point about releasing a Unchained version of books. Except how many of those does one release before it both enhances the rpg yet also highlights the flaws as well. How many Unchained books does one publish before it becomes too many. How exactly do you promote such a line as well. "Our core system has flaws just buy this set of unchained books and it's all going to work fine".

A set of Unchained books would have to be fairly cheap as well.
The core cost 50$. It's 30$ on Amazon. The Unchained books have to be much less expensive than that imo. Anything more than that would feel like a money grab. So would a new edition but again your also offering something new instead of a rehash. I don't think the community imo as a whole is interested in another rehash of 3.5. With 5E, 13th Age and other non-D&D alternatives. While I can see a rehash selling just not in the same amount as the current core did.

You seem to be the only one saying that "no one" is interested in a rehash of 3.5. . .

Moreover, a LOT of people are interested in more Pathfinder books as evidenced by their continued sales.

Unchained books could sell at exactly the same price as any other non-CRB hardcover. If they release a book in that line every other year the way they seem to have done with Bestiaries/ NPC books I am confident that they would continue to sell.

Paizo hasn't run out of ideas yet, and their production schedule is set a year out, so I don't know why everyone is assuming that this is it, next year they will have zero ideas of value left.

The best part is, we already know that the day after Pathfinder 2.0 releases, Memorax will realize it wasn't designed to please him and no one else and start asking about Pathfinder 3.0. . .

Liberty's Edge

Nathanael Love wrote:


You seem to be the only one saying that "no one" is interested in a rehash of 3.5. . .

Your the one saying that

I never did. All I said that some in the hobby are not interested in the same material with little to no changes. As many would not want to buy the same thing twice. If it a rehash that fixes flaws than they maybe more willing to overlook that it's more of the same.

Nathanael Love wrote:


Moreover, a LOT of people are interested in more Pathfinder books as evidenced by their continued sales.

Which again I never said their current products were not selling. That a new edition needs more than just a rehashing of the same material and better cover art. Why would I buy same model of car. When the only difference is better looking interior and no flaws fixed.

Nathanael Love wrote:


Unchained books could sell at exactly the same price as any other non-CRB hardcover. If they release a book in that line every other year the way they seem to have done with Bestiaries/ NPC books I am confident that they would continue to sell.

You never worked in retail or with the public ever have you. People refuse to spend a nickle on plastic bags. Or buy a reusable bag to save the environment. You think the average gamer because your willing to do so. Is going to behave like you do. Which is the flaw in your reasoning. I don't assume that other members of the hobby act just like me. Unless the Unchained books actually fix flaws at a decent price they maybe a hard thing to sell to the fanbase. How do you promote them exactly. "Buy these set of Unchained books because we the devs refused to fix the flaws in the core book". Good luck on that. Those Unchained books while possibly fixing flaws also highlight them as well.

One of the few things I learned about gamers in this hobby that they are cheap. They also don't like bloat. Will they sell well. Of course. As well as you think they will maybe or maybe not. It depends on the fanbase and the reaction to them.

Nathanael Love wrote:


The best part is, we already know that the day after Pathfinder 2.0 releases, Memorax will realize it wasn't designed to please him and no one else and start asking about Pathfinder 3.0. . .

With you right behind me complaining that they changed too much.

It all depends on how much new material they offer. If it's not at least 50%+ new material I'm simply no going to be interested. I'm being upfront and have been upfront about that from the start.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
memorax wrote:
Nathanael Love wrote:


You seem to be the only one saying that "no one" is interested in a rehash of 3.5. . .

Your the one saying that

I never did. All I said that some in the hobby are not interested in the same material with little to no changes. As many would not want to buy the same thing twice. If it a rehash that fixes flaws than they maybe more willing to overlook that it's more of the same.

Not buying the same material with little to no changes is the biggest reason to not do a second edition. . .

memorax wrote:


Nathanael Love wrote:


Moreover, a LOT of people are interested in more Pathfinder books as evidenced by their continued sales.

Which again I never said their current products were not selling. That a new edition needs more than just a rehashing of the same material and better cover art. Why would I buy same model of car. When the only difference is better looking interior and no flaws fixed.

So you acknowledge that from a sales perspective there is no reason so move to a second edition?

memorax wrote:


Nathanael Love wrote:


Unchained books could sell at exactly the same price as any other non-CRB hardcover. If they release a book in that line every other year the way they seem to have done with Bestiaries/ NPC books I am confident that they would continue to sell.

You never worked in retail or with the public ever have you. People refuse to spend a nickle on plastic bags. Or buy a reusable bag to save the environment. You think the average gamer because your willing to do so. Is going to behave like you do. Which is the flaw in your reasoning. I don't assume that other members of the hobby act just like me. Unless the Unchained books actually fix flaws at a decent price they maybe a hard thing to sell to the fanbase. How do you promote them exactly. "Buy these set of Unchained books because we the devs refused to fix the flaws in the core book". Good luck on that. Those Unchained books while possibly fixing flaws also highlight them as well.

One of the few things I learned about gamers in this hobby that they are cheap. They also don't like bloat. Will they sell well. Of course. As well as you think they will maybe or maybe not. It depends on the fanbase and...

The exact same site that you touted to show how awesome Onyx path is and how awesome CCP/White Wolf was for coming in second shows that Pathfinder has been the first or second selling RPG every single quarter dating back to 2010.

That includes the quarter where Unchained was the new hardcover released.

I have no reason to believe is another year from now "Unchained 2" is the hardcover scheduled to be released that Pathfinder will finish as anything other than the 1st or 2nd selling RPG on those same charts.

The "unchained" or "unearthed" books with alternate rules have a long history of doing fine for companies dating from 1st Edition, to 3.5, to Pathfinder.

Unless you have some data to suggest otherwise?

Not counting you guesses and gut feelings?

And for the record, I have worked in retail. I've seen a lot of really ridiculous stuff sell for way too much money. I've seen people shell out for action figures and lego sets that are virtually identical to ones they already have with minor differences in order to collect them all.

If working in retail has taught me anything, its that people will pay for just about anything.

Liberty's Edge

Nathanael Love wrote:


Not buying the same material with little to no changes is the biggest reason to not do a second edition. . .

(Sigh) Paizo can release a rehashed new edition. I don't think it will sell well like the current one. As it needs to offer more than just the same with little to no changes. Personally I would like a new edition but I know I'm probably in the minority. I get that you have strong opinions on certain subjects. Do stop twisting my words and other posters words by making them out to say stuff they never said.

Nathanael Love wrote:


So you acknowledge that from a sales perspective there is no reason so move to a second edition?

I acknowledge no such thing. Eventually their sales may drop and they may have to go to a new edition. In the end it's not my decision or yours. It's Paizo who decides. If they can keep making a profit they should stay with the new edition. If they don't they should make a new edition.

Even then we can still talk about it on the forums if we like whatever they choose to do.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
memorax wrote:
Yet their very little reason to buy a rehash for some in the hobby. Which keeps getting ignored. I doubt many are going to want to buy into the same rpg again. As they already have it.

I'm not saying that I wouldn't buy a rehash version, but it would be a first if I did. I never even took a look at the 3.5 or 4E Rules Compendia, I couldn't care less about the 4E essentials and I'm only interested in the Unchained Book as possible Unearthed Arcanas-style alternative rules. I don't think that I ever used any official rule clarifications (with one exception when someone pointed me at an 3.5 errata because that was what he wanted to base his character on).

I'd probably buy it as a pdf (as long as it's only 10 $) just to support Paizo, but I doubt that it would really find its way at my game table. I still tend to get confused by former 3.5 rulings when running Pathfinder games as I never really quit using this system and I simply cannot imagine making things even worse by going PF.5, so I'd rather completely ignore something like that.

A "true" new edition, though, that would be worth being bought as hardcover. And I'm saying that as someone who probably falls into the "older fans" category.


Very few are interested in a reharsh, we know that. This is not what we are talking about. This thread was supposed to be about a new edition. Are you saying that Pathfinder was on the same level as the Rules Compendium?
Of course not. I hope.
Would I buy a new edition? Probably, if it's an improvement. Doesn't need to be OMG GOOD!!
I'm content with step by step improvement as with the 3->3.5->PF transitions.
After all, for paizo would be a nice business proposition to have the chance to reharsh old modules under the "excuse" of rules updating, since that is their primary income as far as I know.


No. no needed. the only thing that pathfinder needs is to improve their existing materials. Scalating feats should be one of those (less feats with more options).

we have enough classes, spells, feats, we dont need new editions, companies does.

Liberty's Edge

That's the catch 22 that Paizo faces. Release a rehashed edition and possibly face a lose in sales. Do the same with a new edition and the same happens. Though out of the two the second gives fans a incentive to reinvest the first not so much. At the very least if they do go with a rehash it needs to be decently priced imo.

Scaling feats have been asked for since the release of the PF core when it was shown that the Fighter got very little love imo. Why something like that has not been given official support is beyond me. It's not going to completely fix the caster martial disparity. It sure going to make taking certain feats feel less like a feat tax and something one wants to take.

Dekalinder wrote:

Are you saying that Pathfinder was on the same level as the Rules Compendium?

Well when the core is about 90-95% rehash with 5-10% new material it's a rehash. Of a rpg that was already rehashed. To me at least a core needs 50%+ new material to be consider a new product. I still enjoy playing and running it.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Dekalinder wrote:
Are you saying that Pathfinder was on the same level as the Rules Compendium?

Didn't mean to imply that. And I gladly supported Paizo's decision to publish the Pathfinder RPG because I understood their reasoning to do so.

But the simple truth is, that I did not need it, because D&D 3.5 already was there and to this day, I think of Pathfinder as a variation rather than an actual improvement. So while I like it, I tend to think of 3E,3.5 and Pathfinder as basically playing the same system.

And there are things, I don't like about it, like for example, the CR system (something, people like Erik Mona aren't too fond of as well, if I remember correctly from his Kobold Quarterly Interview). I also remember James Jacobs once saying (regarding the difficulty of their adventures), that the designers expect the players to know when to run. And I'm sorry to say that with the adventure( Path)s nowadays published, there's simply no running needed and you don't even need too much optimization to achieve this.

I also remember Erik Mona being a little dumbfounded when the Age of Worms AP got criticized for starting directly at the first dungeon's doorstep. IIRC he commented on that that his group had already played for some sessions before even getting near this dungeon.

So what I really would like to see is a Pathfinder edition which feels in no way bound to the D&D edition it had its origin, but instead really envisions how the designers love to play the game themselves. And from what I gathered over the years here at these boards and elsewhere, 3E and variations seem not to be the perfect translation for this game style (which I tend to think has at least some similarities to what I love about this game).

But just to repeat myself: Pathfinder is a good system and if staying with the system is best for Paizo (business- or otherwise), then they should totally ignore everything I said about this topic, because I wouldn't want them to go bankrupt just for my sake. ;=)

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32

memorax wrote:
That's the catch 22 that Paizo faces. Release a rehashed edition and possibly face a lose in sales. Do the same with a new edition and the same happens. Though out of the two the second gives fans a incentive to reinvest the first not so much. At the very least if they do go with a rehash it needs to be decently priced imo.

That's kind of the situation they face with any release. Any book takes a lot of investment (granted, with even more risk when a new edition comes out). Unlike us, though, Paizo has comprehensive sales data and measurables they can look at.

That information isn't always accurate, but it gives them a chance to make an educated assessment of the risks and rewards of any release. We fans really have nothing to go on but our gut feelings.

memorax wrote:
Well when the core is about 90-95% rehash with 5-10% new material it's a rehash. Of a rpg that was already rehashed. To me at least a core needs 50%+ new material to be consider a new product. I still enjoy playing and running it.

I don't really think I agree with that assessment. True, in terms of word count Pathfinder is probably not 50% new material. However, when I switched my games over I noticed an immediate change in the way it played. In my opinion, the game became much more fun. If a 2nd edition only changes 10% of the actual text but manages to make the game markedly more fun than before, I would consider it a smashing success.


Pathfinder Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

In that light I'd like to ask exactly what changes, no matter what the percentage is, would actually be neccesary without disrupting too much.

Classes are generally agnostic towards the rest of the game except for adventure NPCs so changing something about them through addition or alternate choices shouldn't hurt too much. For example if Fighters had some kind of tacked on ability or the replacements for weapon training options being hardwired in wouldn't hurt anything. A more clear example is the difference between chained and unchained Barbarian not being disruptive while Unchained Monk is very disruptive. In APs it would be easy to reinterpret what an ability does or tack on an ability but when everything is different then NPCs become very untrue while being hard to adjust and options from other books such as archetypes get disrupted.

Changing how skills work shouldn't be too disruptive. but adding or subtracting skills or anything that changes how skills get allocated is disruptive to Bestiary and NPC stat blocks.

Changing spells or feats shouldn't be too disruptive unless the spell changes level or the feat changes prerequisites.

If there was a Pathfinder 0.5 what would that look like?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

It's inevitable it will happen. The only question is when will it happen.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Malwing wrote:

In that light I'd like to ask exactly what changes, no matter what the percentage is, would actually be neccesary without disrupting too much.

Classes are generally agnostic towards the rest of the game except for adventure NPCs so changing something about them through addition or alternate choices shouldn't hurt too much. For example if Fighters had some kind of tacked on ability or the replacements for weapon training options being hardwired in wouldn't hurt anything. A more clear example is the difference between chained and unchained Barbarian not being disruptive while Unchained Monk is very disruptive. In APs it would be easy to reinterpret what an ability does or tack on an ability but when everything is different then NPCs become very untrue while being hard to adjust and options from other books such as archetypes get disrupted.

Changing how skills work shouldn't be too disruptive. but adding or subtracting skills or anything that changes how skills get allocated is disruptive to Bestiary and NPC stat blocks.

Changing spells or feats shouldn't be too disruptive unless the spell changes level or the feat changes prerequisites.

If there was a Pathfinder 0.5 what would that look like?

I suspect a second edition would probably pretty much focus on the easily changeable aspects that you outline: feats, classes, and spells. Maybe tweak a few things like how skills are calculated, stealth, and a couple of other minor points.

I think those sort of changes would pretty much leave existing rule books viable and adventures playable, while addressing frequently cited issues.

Shadow Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.

This thread will continue to pop up with increasing frequency until there is a new edition announcement.

The reality is that as each month passes, the probability of a new edition announcement increases. The reality is there will either be a new edition, or that Paizo as we know it will need to change their business model / sell / put up the unhappy sign. So, really it's just a question of predicting what you think that probability is currently at for the next year or so... 50/50? 60/40? 70/30?

There are plenty of indicators that Paizo, as a business, has to make decisions here. Most folks cite "rules bloat", but a new edition will ultimately be a financially-driven decision.

Indicators:

Here's your new edition / big transaction / business model shift indicators for a company like Paizo:

1. What's the velocity of sales of their products at non-direct channels (i.e. Amazon)? Sales of most of their "long tail" products are fairly low, comparable to obscure TTRPG independents. You can usually extrapolate this from the volume/rate of reviews (i.e. companion books from H2 2015 have zero to a couple reviews). These channels are maybe lukewarm for core products (i.e. Occult Adventures/Bestiary 5), but they certainly aren't thriving at the moment.

2. What's the velocity of direct sales from Paizo? You can get some sense of this from their Limited copies announcements, and comparing inventory year-over-year. If you can suss out that they cleared 25 copies of Rule of Fear in a year, you can estimate that they earned $500 on that book. You could assign a "popularity" index to each of their products, determine their sales velocity, and come up with a rough estimate on revenue/margin from their entire catalog.

3. How's the participation of the organized play campaign? You can check the Warhorn for the most popular regions, and look at the big game days or conventions and see if they are (a) seeing more players/tables, (b) having the same number of players/tables or (c) seeing a reduction in players/tables. I'm registered on a couple of the largest regions/cons, and did a rough table/player count from 2014 to 2015, and there's less players/tables than prior years (or the tables are actually smaller, <6 players when prior years they were pinned at 6 players a table). You can also take a sample from 6 regions and see how many new GMs there are for non-core games. Few or no new GM names popping up is a problematic indicator (and likely this data is what led to the core campaign last year).

4. On that note, how is Paizo's retention of core talent? Usually when a company is in flux, their most talented/relied upon folks experience burn out or some angst over if the upcoming year will be as rosy as the past year. The loss of Brock and Reynolds for most any company is either coincidence (in the absence of any other indicators), or a could be an indicator of stagnation. You could also use the fact that core talents (like Pett, Logue) are now publishing their best ideas and work through independent Kickstarter channels instead of Paizo, whereas before Paizo was the primary outlet for their talent.

5. Is growth/maintenance of revenue being fueled by less investment in product, maintained investment in product, or increased investment in product? Basically, you look at every dollar you earned, how many cents did it take to earn that latest dollar. In glory days, maybe you're spending 20c to earn a dollar. If your company is now spending 75c to earn a dollar, that's not great. Typically, companies held accountable to investors need to show year-over-year growth, ideally 15-20% in the bull market we've been in. Is the company shipping 10 new products a year to achieve this? Are they shipping 100? If the quantity of new products to sustain growth (or avoid shrinking) is increasing, that's an indicator that costs are going up (or quality is going down, which is another indicator). Clearly expanding into card games, comics, etc is an indicator of this... I don't think Paizo revenue has doubled from 2 years ago with all this expansion, so it's likely all the extra product lines are maintaining a modest growth curve versus accelerating to a hockey-stick pivot.

6. Is quality going down? I'll leave this whoever is reading this deep, but take a look at the latest minis release... usually you'd see quality improve with each release as the process improves. Or take a look at threads regarding editing mistakes. My gut tells me there's a slight decline in quality. Regardless, the outages/brownouts at Paizo.com indicate that they aren't spending heavily to resolve their uptime, which either means they can't make this expense, or that the opportunity cost of being down for X hours is less than the expense to implement longterm resolutions to the cause or put in better redundancy. If the opportunity cost for repeated prolonged primetime downtime is less than the cost of better redundancy ($25K of capex/labor?)...

7. Finally, you'd do some level of cohort analysis. This is where you look at a "brand new customer" from Oct 2015 and compare them to a "brand new customer" from Oct 2012. You'd likely look at organized play participation combined with direct purchases/subscriptions as a measure of ARPU and churn. Are the newest cohorts performing better/worse/the same as older cohorts?

The above are all things that an analyst would look at, with absolutely no domain knowledge of TTRPGs. Add your knowledge of TTRPGs to the mix and see if that raises or lowers the probability of this prediction in your eyes. In the TTRPG market, what is the general trend for companies at this stage?

Then, for all the folks who are against a new edition because they love having tons of options when they are cruising through online SRDs, ask yourself how much money you spent on Paizo products in Q4 2015. As how much you plan to spend in 2016. If your answer is you plan to continue to spend $500-$1000 a year on Paizo the next 5 years (this is just an arbtitrary guess at annual ARPU for their average customer), then your position at having a few years to go until a new edition is backed by your own behavior. If you don't have any subscriptions, and your primary consumption is via free online SRDs, or you suspect you're going to spend less in 2016 than you did each year from 2012-2015, you're a chit towards increasing the probability of a new edition (or another business transition) sooner rather than later.

For those who popped the spoiler above...

Ultimately, it's not about the personal decision of loving to have options in your gaming when you're using a free online SRD. The probability is determined by your gaming habits, and if you plan to spend more $$ supporting Paizo in 2016 than you've ever spent before. If Paizo's average gamer plans to spend less in 2016 than they spent in 2015, you'll ultimately leave Paizo in a hard place between cutting costs (labor/quality) or undertaking some transition to deal with the declining/stagnating revenue (like launching a new edition).

So, I'd ask anyone who's against a new edition -- how much $$ did you spend each year, 2011-2015 on Paizo products, and how much do you plan on spending each year going forward, 2016-2020? If you're a gamer who spent $2500 in 2011-2015, and you're planning to spend $3500 in 2016-2020, you're evidence than an edition change is years away. If you're a gamer spending less than $250/year on Paizo, or holding your investment constant or lowering it, you're evidence that the probability of a new edition is slowly increasing....


Pathfinder Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
wakedown wrote:
So, I'd ask anyone who's against a new edition -- how much $$ did you spend each year, 2011-2015 on Paizo products, and how much do you plan on spending each year going forward, 2016-2020? If you're a gamer who spent $2500 in 2011-2015, and you're planning to spend $3500 in 2016-2020, you're evidence than an edition change is years away. If you're a gamer spending less than $250/year on Paizo, or holding your investment constant or lowering it, you're evidence that the probability of a new edition is slowly increasing....

Lets see. I'm subscribed to the RPG line so I'll probably get about 4 hardcovers a year at about $40 each so $160

I get roughly half the Player Companions at about $15 and they come at a rate of about once a month so yearly that's $90.

I get APs and modules sparotically as I get chances to run them, and I get Campaign Settings at a much lower rate. Judging by what I have, what I want, and the rate these come out I'll guess that on average it's about the equivalent 3-4 AP books a year. This fluctuates wildly as I'll have GMing droughts and booms. that's about $100 a year.

I keep up with a lot of third party material but I'm slowing down on that because I have more than what's neccesary to run different kinds of games for a long while. I could run with $300 a year on that front but that can easily drop due to avoiding redundancy based on what I already have so I'm going to assume $100 a year unless some kind of abnormally interesting Kickstarter pops up.

So Paizo would get about $350 a year with jumps from purchasing Products that already exist that I haven't bought due to APs coming out twice a year but lasting for at around one year and get used multiple times, abnormally good or relevant Player Companions or Campaign Settings, hardcover Campaign Settings, or anything along those lines.

Honestly I think think that's a pretty healthy rate. More than others but less than people who subscribe to both the Pathfinder RPG line and the AP line. I'm not sure where the number in the 4 digits comes from so I'm guessing you were just throwing numbers around.

By far the most relevant books for Pathfinder as a whole is probably the AP and RPG lines which work out to about $460 a year.

But per person $$ is kind of finicky because only one person really needs to have the material to run it, especially the APs, then there's the fact that APs can be run with multiple groups if the GM gets around, but I get that the point is that if the rate of things sold goes up, that's good and if they go down that's bad. If most of us are calling it quits and sticking with X books and not moving beyond them then production would stop, but production has not stopped so obviously we're still buying them, so in the measurement of actual dollars we collectively don't agree that there's too much bloat, that's just the claim of a minority that thinks things need to change for some reason.


Malwing wrote:
wakedown wrote:
So, I'd ask anyone who's against a new edition -- how much $$ did you spend each year, 2011-2015 on Paizo products, and how much do you plan on spending each year going forward, 2016-2020? If you're a gamer who spent $2500 in 2011-2015, and you're planning to spend $3500 in 2016-2020, you're evidence than an edition change is years away. If you're a gamer spending less than $250/year on Paizo, or holding your investment constant or lowering it, you're evidence that the probability of a new edition is slowly increasing....

Lets see. I'm subscribed to the RPG line so I'll probably get about 4 hardcovers a year at about $40 each so $160

I get roughly half the Player Companions at about $15 and they come at a rate of about once a month so yearly that's $90.

I get APs and modules sparotically as I get chances to run them, and I get Campaign Settings at a much lower rate. Judging by what I have, what I want, and the rate these come out I'll guess that on average it's about the equivalent 3-4 AP books a year. This fluctuates wildly as I'll have GMing droughts and booms. that's about $100 a year.

I keep up with a lot of third party material but I'm slowing down on that because I have more than what's neccesary to run different kinds of games for a long while. I could run with $300 a year on that front but that can easily drop due to avoiding redundancy based on what I already have so I'm going to assume $100 a year unless some kind of abnormally interesting Kickstarter pops up.

So Paizo would get about $350 a year with jumps from purchasing Products that already exist that I haven't bought due to APs coming out twice a year but lasting for at around one year and get used multiple times, abnormally good or relevant Player Companions or Campaign Settings, hardcover Campaign Settings, or anything along those lines.

Honestly I think think that's a pretty healthy rate. More than others but less than people who subscribe to both the Pathfinder RPG line and the AP line. I'm not...

you're assuming you're in the majority with no evidence.


Pathfinder Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Caineach wrote:
Malwing wrote:
wakedown wrote:
So, I'd ask anyone who's against a new edition -- how much $$ did you spend each year, 2011-2015 on Paizo products, and how much do you plan on spending each year going forward, 2016-2020? If you're a gamer who spent $2500 in 2011-2015, and you're planning to spend $3500 in 2016-2020, you're evidence than an edition change is years away. If you're a gamer spending less than $250/year on Paizo, or holding your investment constant or lowering it, you're evidence that the probability of a new edition is slowly increasing....

Lets see. I'm subscribed to the RPG line so I'll probably get about 4 hardcovers a year at about $40 each so $160

I get roughly half the Player Companions at about $15 and they come at a rate of about once a month so yearly that's $90.

I get APs and modules sparotically as I get chances to run them, and I get Campaign Settings at a much lower rate. Judging by what I have, what I want, and the rate these come out I'll guess that on average it's about the equivalent 3-4 AP books a year. This fluctuates wildly as I'll have GMing droughts and booms. that's about $100 a year.

I keep up with a lot of third party material but I'm slowing down on that because I have more than what's neccesary to run different kinds of games for a long while. I could run with $300 a year on that front but that can easily drop due to avoiding redundancy based on what I already have so I'm going to assume $100 a year unless some kind of abnormally interesting Kickstarter pops up.

So Paizo would get about $350 a year with jumps from purchasing Products that already exist that I haven't bought due to APs coming out twice a year but lasting for at around one year and get used multiple times, abnormally good or relevant Player Companions or Campaign Settings, hardcover Campaign Settings, or anything along those lines.

Honestly I think think that's a pretty healthy rate. More than others but less than people who subscribe to both the Pathfinder RPG

...

Not no evidence, just conclusion jumping. I'm just guessing based on Paizo still having a ton of junk in their product schedule that we're still buying it, and if we're still buying it then we aren't exactly showing evidence that we're tired of their bloat.

Dark Archive

Nathanael Love wrote:

They still aren't White Wolf.

The people who made the decision to reboot and switch the edition are not the ones making the material or profiting from it (if it is indeed profitable).

My original point still stands, and nothing about how the company that is licensing the rights to produce material for either WoD now is doing changes the fact that switching to a new shiny edition has a good chance of putting you out of business.

Assuming, again, that you are correct and the are mega-profitable currently.

You guys are arguing that this thing is so successful, but not...

Onyx Path is mostly people who worked at White Wolf. Onyx Path's founder was Richard Thomas, who was (at the time) creative director of WW. Thomas' credits on WW books go back to at least the mid-90s (I think he started as art director).


Malwing wrote:
Not no evidence, just conclusion jumping. I'm just guessing based on Paizo still having a ton of junk in their product schedule that we're still buying it, and if we're still buying it then we aren't exactly showing evidence that we're tired of their bloat.

Which doesn't counter what you initially responded to, which discussed how increased product schedule is a sign of a potentially weakening market, because to meet the same profit they need to release more products in the same time scale.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

i have to say that unless something happens to the ogl or they create a system better than what is available, i don't want a new system. i feel that i have invested a lot of time and money into this system and it has caused me not to want to get anymore fantasy games that are not already produces prior to pathfinder.


deinol wrote:
Ryan Freire wrote:
They spent 9 years and millions of dollars employing 56 people to make a game that never came out and then sold the license and fired those people. How is that not a failure?

Right, CCP failed to utilize the IP they purchased. Which is different from what some people in this thread claimed, which was the release of nWoD was a failure that led them to be bought out by CCP. No. nWoD was a great success, which led them to be picked up by CCP, who then bungled it and killed the tabletop rpg company they purchased.

To be fair, CCP actually kept on almost all of White Wolf's staff. Which is extremely unusual in a merger/buyout. But during the development of the Vampire mmorg, they kept pulling people from the project in to the ultimately doomed effort to give Eve Online a roleplaying expansion. After ten years of failed work, they pulled the plug on the project.


Pathfinder Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Caineach wrote:
Malwing wrote:
Not no evidence, just conclusion jumping. I'm just guessing based on Paizo still having a ton of junk in their product schedule that we're still buying it, and if we're still buying it then we aren't exactly showing evidence that we're tired of their bloat.
Which doesn't counter what you initially responded to, which discussed how increased product schedule is a sign of a potentially weakening market, because to meet the same profit they need to release more products in the same time scale.

Nope. But I wasn't addressing that at all. I wasn't even thinking about that bit.

If you want me to respond to that specifically; Unless I can see sales numbers I wouldn't begin to be able to guess whether increased product schedule means that people want more or they need more money to keep their profits up. Especially since as far as I can tell their product schedule hasn't increased but got loaded up with comics and minis and board games and stuff. Since I don't have sales numbers I can only speak from the store I work at and the other local game store and the comic book store nearby but around here that stuff is flying off the shelves so it would be dumb to not meet demand if that's what's happening elsewhere. So I can't really take it as a sign that people are buying less Pathfinder and that they need an edition change to shake things up because it could easily be a sign that people want more.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

also i want to add after reading that someone said that 5e is outselling pathfinder. it is a new system and, as everyone remembers and should know, wizards of the coast will probably keep the system alive for about 4 more years and then come up with 6e, regardless what they have said. that is wizards status quo. plus they never playtest anything, and if they do, they never listen to the playtesters.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

Frankly, nothing would make me stop buying PF products quicker than an announcement of a new edition.

PF is well supported by technology options that make managing the volume of content easier (Hero Lab is the best example of this IMHO) and in the published lines references to non-core products almost always include a full stat block / rules summary in case you haven't hoovered up every product (which I for the most part have anyway).

The big problem with 3E/3.5E bloat was that later products almost required you to own previous products and it was so difficult, in the absence of good IT solutions at the time, to keep track of every feat you might want or every monster you might want to use. PF solves both of these problems with a commitment to repeat non-core info where it's used and licensed software solutions (plus the PRD).

To my mind, the problems for players / GMs that usually lead to new editions therefore don't exit so unless there is a business reason (which I highly doubt there is at the moment) I see no reason for there to be a PF 2E in the foreseeable future.


Hmmm...I guess I'll chuck my $.02 in.

IMO:

Yes, Pathfinder needs a 2nd edition. Because the first one is a mess. I believe that Pathfinder's wild success has more to do with WotC's catastrophic failure than anything Paizo has done. Don't get me wrong; they saw an opportunity, and they've executed well. Hell, they've taken the system far, far beyond where I ever expected they'd be able to. But with real competition from WotC, Paizo is going to have to up their game if they're going to continue to thrive.

301 to 350 of 608 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder RPG / General Discussion / Is it time for Pathfinder 2nd edition? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.