Time To Say Farewell?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
The Exchange

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

With all due respect, I believe it may be time to move into Pathfinder 2. There are literally thousands of products for Pathfinder, and it can be overwhelming. Plus, some of the rules have become outdated in the game. The gimmick's old. "compatible with 3.5" I think Paizo has the ability, fanbase, and creative strength to not only pull it off, but to differentiate itself from D&D. With the shift of gamers toward D&D 5e, Paizo has started to lose fans. I have seen it on countless forums. I think it's time that Paizo spreads its wings and shows us what the company can really do.

I, myself, have moved to TOR. Pathfinder was fun, but it's dull to see yet another product that I'll never be able to track down due to it being lost in the shuffle of third-parties and houserules. Not to be another rage-poster, but I think it's time to say good-bye to Pathfinder and hello to Pathfinder 2.

The game is up.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

It would be nice to see what Paizo can do without the excuse that "their hands are tied" whenever it comes to changing things people want changed.

That said, prepare for every post here to be trolling you for suggesting it, saying it's a bad idea because 4e flopped therefore clearly nobody wants a game that isn't 3.5 compatible, or swamping you with posts laughing at you for posting this kind of thread for the [Insert Made Up Hyperbolic Number here]th time.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

No, no thank you, and hell no. Your anecdotal experience is completely out of phase with my anecdotal experience. I see new design spaces being opened up and new PF players.

To the OP, happy gaming with your future gaming exploits. Hope you find your way back to PF at some point.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

People still haven't said how "Pathfinder but with tweaks you're probably already using from Third-Party (or are probably worse than 3rd party) but with less content" would be a better situation than "Pathfinder as it currently stands".

Quote:
That said, prepare for every post here to be trolling you for suggesting it, saying it's a bad idea because 4e flopped therefore clearly nobody wants a game that isn't 3.5 compatible,

The main reason people say that it'd be stupid for PF2 to not be 3.5e compatible is because Pathfinder needs to remain as compatible with it's adventure paths as possible because that is the main purpose and revenue stream of the entire system.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Theliah Strongarm wrote:

With all due respect, I believe it may be time to move into Pathfinder 2. There are literally thousands of products for Pathfinder, and it can be overwhelming. Plus, some of the rules have become outdated in the game. The gimmick's old. "compatible with 3.5" I think Paizo has the ability, fanbase, and creative strength to not only pull it off, but to differentiate itself from D&D. With the shift of gamers toward D&D 5e, Paizo has started to lose fans. I have seen it on countless forums. I think it's time that Paizo spreads its wings and shows us what the company can really do.

I, myself, have moved to TOR. Pathfinder was fun, but it's dull to see yet another product that I'll never be able to track down due to it being lost in the shuffle of third-parties and houserules. Not to be another rage-poster, but I think it's time to say good-bye to Pathfinder and hello to Pathfinder 2.

The game is up.

It seems unlikely to me, at least for the next couple of years.

It's hard to tell from the outside looking in, of course, but it seems to me that Starfinder has knocked the company around a little bit. I suspect they'd want to pause for breath in 2018 before embarking on another new system.

If there is a decline in customers, then maybe it will be forced on them. Fwiw though, I haven't heard that 5E has damaged PF sales, even whilst taking market share. 5E has clearly done well, but apparently PF's sales are also still healthy. The market overall has substantially grown in size in recent years.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Thread for you
Another thread for you


9 people marked this as a favorite.

I've stopped playing many games in my life, but never felt the need to make a thread about it.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Well good bye and have fun in Pathfinder 2. Don't be afraid to come back if crickets chirp.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Theliah Strongarm wrote:
With all due respect, I believe it may be time to move into Pathfinder 2.

Remember what happened when a certain company decided to retire a popular version of it's roleplaying game and replace it with another?

Spoiler: It's the reason this game came into existence.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I mean, people are going to be playing Pathfinder for decades, just like there are people who still play AD&D.

I do find though that what causes an RPG to be relegated to the archives to be pulled out when there's demand for it is when the group's collection of fixes, house rules, errata, etc. grows to be unmanageable. It's reasonable that PFRPG is approaching that level for some folks.

But I also find "I'm out, peace y'all" threads are mostly a cry for attention.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Sundakan wrote:
That said, prepare for every post here to be trolling you for suggesting it
Brother Fen wrote:
I've stopped playing many games in my life, but never felt the need to make a thread about it.
Samy wrote:
Well good bye and have fun in Pathfinder 2. Don't be afraid to come back if crickets chirp.

Ding.

Sundakan wrote:
saying it's a bad idea because 4e flopped therefore clearly nobody wants a game that isn't 3.5 compatible
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:


Remember what happened when a certain company decided to retire a popular version of it's roleplaying game and replace it with another?

Spoiler: It's the reason this game came into existence.

Ding.

Sundakan wrote:
or swamping you with posts laughing at you for posting this kind of thread for the [Insert Made Up Hyperbolic Number here]th time.
UnArcaneElection wrote:

Thread for you

Another thread for you

Ding.

What do I win?

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Nothing. Did you expect some sort of award for being able to 1+1?


I got all three within the first 10 posts at least.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Sundakan wrote:
What do I win?

Only the great despair that comes with predicting a coming sadness. I mean, does the guy in Lovecraft stories who cries "we're all going to die" ever get applause? Or a fruit basket? Usually he just gets to be right. In short, nobody wins.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Is it a hyperbolic number if they actually can link to the threads?

Grand Lodge

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Honest question: what rules are outdated and why?

-Skeld


Theliah Strongarm wrote:
Plus, some of the rules have become outdated in the game.

Care to clarify?


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I kind of suspect Starfinder may serve as a prototype for Pathfinder 2.0 and its success might influence how soon we get a Pathfinder 2.0.

Personally I'm okay with Pathfinder as is, but I could see the benefits of divorcing it from some of the more questionable elements of 3.5 mechanics.

As long as they don't torch half the setting between editions (*cough*Spellplague*cough*


andygal wrote:

I kind of suspect Starfinder may serve as a prototype for Pathfinder 2.0 and its success might influence how soon we get a Pathfinder 2.0.

From all indications, Starfinder is not a repeat of SAGA. It's purpose is to be it's own game, and to expand Paizo's reach into an audience that isn't necessarily that big on sword and sorcery fantasy, while keeping the game accessible to it's core market.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I admit I genuinely do not know how well received Pathfinder Unchained was by the community at large, but I personally wouldn't mind seeing future updates in that format, or even a Pathfinder Unchained 2. Still in love with the game system, even after having explored several other games, but I wouldn't mind seeing new options to replace old rules.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I don't know about an entire new edition, but perhaps a furthering of what was begun in Pathfinder Unchained, with updating the classes, feats, skills and such. Something to where the adventure paths aren't really designed for all the classes. Put a kineticist or occultist in Rise of the Runelords, and it's getting ugly.


Val'bryn2 wrote:
I don't know about an entire new edition, but perhaps a furthering of what was begun in Pathfinder Unchained, with updating the classes, feats, skills and such. Something to where the adventure paths aren't really designed for all the classes. Put a kineticist or occultist in Rise of the Runelords, and it's getting ugly.

Keep in mind that Rise of the Runelords was put together by a company with a good deal less experience than now.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Skeld wrote:

Honest question: what rules are outdated and why?

-Skeld

The combat maneuver rules for one. Setting aside that some are absolutely atrociously written (Grapple and Overrun particularly), the whole "Basically impossible to use without two feats sunk into them" paradigm feels really damn limiting considering more modern and streamlined systems just have them as things anybody can do and don't punish you for not sacrificing character progression or promoting specialization in a single move.

In fact, promoting over specialization at all with most character options is pretty outdated design. There's a fine line between rewarding specialization and punishing being well rounded and Pathfinder errs on the wrong side of that line. You have to specialize what specific weapon you use and what you're going to do with it (you have to basically build your entire character around tripping for it to be even kind worth it).

That's without rehashing the "Casters rule, martials drool" dynamic all over again.

Grand Lodge

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I won't buy any Pathfinder 2.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Between Pathfinder releasing products that occasionally pique my interest and the huge amount of interesting 3rd party stuff, I'm quite happy to sit on Pathfinder with my "Fantasy" role playing budget.

Not hugely interested in 5E, though I did grab the 3 base books at a store sale, since anything I wanted changed has been or is being handled by a 3PP.

Starfinder looks to provide a fun "Science-Fantasy" game, and I anxiously await its arrival later this year. I'll probably tweak the bits I don't like 100% (like Pathfinder) and designate part of my budget towards Starfinder stuff.

Pathfinder 2.0 is just a nonstarter for me. While I make more money than I used to, I'm also less willing to start a whole new collection again, especially when physical space is being chewed up by their awesome Adventure Card Game.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

This topic again.

Sure it is time to say farewell, just like it is every 2 or 3 months when this topic comes up with same tired arguments.

What we need to bid farewell to is this topic more than anything else, but it seems to even resist being killed with fire.


Really need some way to Smurf this topic.

It's dead . . . and yet it walks the lands . . . .


1 person marked this as a favorite.

But, would Pathfinder 2 be an evil act, and would the Paladin fall for playing it?

Dark Archive

Ya know, I'd like to point out that with hypotethical Pathfinder 2, wouldn't most people still be unhappy because their favourite homerules/3rd party rules weren't included?

I mean, there are so many of them that no way there would be system that appeals to everyone :P

(also seriously, I avoid buying 3.5 pathfinder stuff, so having to avoid buying pathfinder stuff because of new version would annoy my lazy butt since I hate doing conversion work)


4 people marked this as a favorite.
CorvusMask wrote:

Ya know, I'd like to point out that with hypotethical Pathfinder 2, wouldn't most people still be unhappy because their favourite homerules/3rd party rules weren't included?

People HAVE to realize that. I just can't comprehend the idea of 'there are too many options and I'm overwhelmed...' It's mindboggling. We waited 10 years for Swashbucklers... Hybrid classes... psychic magic...

Who in the world would want a new system where you can sit and stare at the same base 7 classes and then sit and wait ANOTHER 10 years for the company to present the class you want again?!?

If there are too many things for you to know... don't allow them. Run a 'Core Only' game. or a Core and APG only game... they have the Basic set if you want something streamlined... but scuttling a hundred books just so you can start fresh?? I can't stand that idea.


Under what conditions do you believe Pathfinder 2 would become necessary?


I remember reading a lot of threads like this in my younger days, mostly for online games.

I'm not sure what impact it would really have even if Paizo did drop Pathfinder and try something new; I mean, the system and existing content would still be around.


Scythia wrote:
But, would Pathfinder 2 be an evil act, and would the Paladin fall for playing it?

Would Pathfinder 2 be the martial in the relationship?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I hope they supplement pathfinder with some sort of sci-fi variation.

Shadow Lodge

Can we just lock this thread as irrelevant?

I wouldn't call it trolling, but.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
wraithstrike wrote:

This topic again.

Sure it is time to say farewell, just like it is every 2 or 3 months when this topic comes up with same tired arguments.

What we need to bid farewell to is this topic more than anything else, but it seems to even resist being killed with fire.

A-frakkin-men

Grand Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

"Outdated" sounds like a code word for "things I don't like."

-Skeld


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Isn't there another thread on the message boards that is already devoted to this exact topic?

One VERY quick check in the message boards later. There is. It's even in the General Discussion area and is on the front page. Way to create an unnecessary thread. (Would add link to thread, but typing this on my phone.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Oh, there's more then one.

Maybe, one from this week...


Umbral Reaver wrote:
Under what conditions do you believe Pathfinder 2 would become necessary?

Only if it was a whole new genre. If paizo wanted do superheroes or modern setting or something that doesn't fit with the rules we got. But considering they've done horror, intrigue, and tech books... even old west.. there isn't much fantasy that can't be simulated here

Basically starfinder

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Val'bryn2 wrote:
I don't know about an entire new edition, but perhaps a furthering of what was begun in Pathfinder Unchained, with updating the classes, feats, skills and such. Something to where the adventure paths aren't really designed for all the classes. Put a kineticist or occultist in Rise of the Runelords, and it's getting ugly.
Keep in mind that Rise of the Runelords was put together by a company with a good deal less experience than now.

To the Abyss/ 9 Hells with less experience, it's still one of my favorite adventure paths, I'm just pointing out that the characters have become far far more powerful than they used to be.


Why is a Pathfinder 2.0 required?

What would be changed?

Are you going to change the way skills work (again)?
Are you going to change the way to hit and AC works (back to THAC0)?
Are you going to change other specific mechanics of the system?

If you have good reason to change the basic mechanics, the bares bones if you will, of the system then maybe there would be a point to Pathfinder 2.0.

But right now you're proposing a new game system without actually suggesting what to change or why we need it.

If you find the level of material for the system overwhelming, don't feel obligated to use it all. As a GM I have a list of books that I allow and everything else if off limits, although the list gets amended for certain campaigns. If I was going to play a lycanthrope campaign then books related to that would be allowed.

But if your sole problem and reason for wanting a new system is "I CAN'T TAKE ALL THIS MATERIAL!!!!" then I don't have any sympathy for you. No one is holding a gun to your head telling you to use it all.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Another option, if someone finds Pathfinder to have too many books/options/rules/words/flumphs, there are other games to try with lots of different play styles.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Claxon wrote:
But if your sole problem and reason for wanting a new system is "I CAN'T TAKE ALL THIS MATERIAL!!!!" then I don't have any sympathy for you. No one is holding a gun to your head telling you to use it all.

I guess it's usually about fear. Some players want to pull from as much material as possible to have the best chance to avoid a 'weak' character. Because they are afraid of failing. So they feel obligated to make their way through the material and, well, fail at it. Because it's too much to read for many people.

Of course, you can tell such people a lot of things:

'You can build many different viable PCs with Core only'
'The GM will adapt difficulty or help you out with items etc.'
'The other PCs are not perfect either'
'In the worst case you can simply make a new PC'
etc.

But it's tough to fight emotions with arguments. Better fight emotions with emotions - let these players succeed, so they become more relaxed and feel less obligated to clutch at any straw available.


Scythia wrote:
But, would Pathfinder 2 be an evil act, and would the Paladin fall for playing it?

No...but the Player would definitely fall for making another thread on this topic.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

My opinion on the matter hasn't changed in 42 days.


Irontruth wrote:
Another option, if someone finds Pathfinder to have too many books/options/rules/words/flumphs, there are other games to try with lots of different play styles.

I think something that really helps for a group is to periodically switch between games within a given genre, both as a palette cleanser when people are annoyed by the flaws in game A and also to help highlight the flaws in game A by contrast to game B. When people get sick of game B, or they find themselves wanting to do something that game A supports but game B does not, you can switch back.

For "sword and sorcery fantasy" we alternate between Pathfinder and 13th Age, which I feel is the perfect contrast to Pathfinder, because it's rules light, has only 2 books worth of crunch, and plays really fast but still scratches the same sort of itch. The downside is that if you want to play something outside of the basic archetypes you have to come up with the rules yourself, but when the group decides "we want to play a troupe of elemental-blooded people with control over our ancestral element" or something it's time to go back to PFRG, since Pathfinder tells you how to do that.


I bet Pathfinder 2 would day that Evil creatures are born fully mature.

No more babies.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think folks can stop sounding the 5E alarm. Yeah a lot of players have chosen to head over to 5E. Its a simplified rule system with a snails pace release schedule to avoid bloat. It definitely calls to a subset of the playerbase as an ideal option. However, there are many more folks sticking with PF or returning because it provides an experience that 5E doesn't. I don't think Paizo needs to panic and make a PF2 because of 5E. When Paizo does make a PF2, I think it would be wise for them to continue down the path of differentiation as opposed to imitation.

1 to 50 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Time To Say Farewell? All Messageboards