in the pretense of having an all new product -- because it's not. It's an upgrade.Staff have said it's all completely new material.
They have to pay authors the same rates whether or not anyone has ever used the words "red dragon" before. No discount for reusing "red dragon" in the text.
And a complete new set of illustrations. So artists have to be paid full fees even if there have been illustrations of red dragons before.
And complete new mechanics, so game designers have to be paid their full salary for creating new stat blocks.
And all of that material has to be jigsawed into a page layout and edited many times.
I don't see where you think Paizo is saving money so that they can pass on these savings to us.
You're just making circular agruments. I personally don't need another illustration of a red dragon. I doubt there really will be that big of a change, and it sounds like you just blowing smoke. PF2 will help to kill off all that PF1 material we just bought -- and we do deserve some form of compensation, such as a discount on PF2. I'll say it again ... It's an update -- not a new product. You can always put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're just making circular agruments. I personally don't need another illustration of a red dragon. I doubt there really will be that big of a change, and it sounds like you just blowing smoke. PF2 will help to kill off all that PF1 material we just bought -- and we do deserve some form of compensation, such as a discount on PF2. I'll say it again ... It's an update -- not a new product. You can always put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig!in the pretense of having an all new product -- because it's not. It's an upgrade.Staff have said it's all completely new material.
They have to pay authors the same rates whether or not anyone has ever used the words "red dragon" before. No discount for reusing "red dragon" in the text.
And a complete new set of illustrations. So artists have to be paid full fees even if there have been illustrations of red dragons before.
And complete new mechanics, so game designers have to be paid their full salary for creating new stat blocks.
And all of that material has to be jigsawed into a page layout and edited many times.
I don't see where you think Paizo is saving money so that they can pass on these savings to us.
If you don't think it's worth the money you don't have to buy it. Paizo sold you a copy of a PF1 book, not a copy of a PF1 book and a promise to sell you any subsequent similar book they release for a similar but not the same game system at a discount.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I personally don't need another illustration of a red dragon. I doubt there really will be that big of a change, and it sounds like you just blowing smoke. PF2 will help to kill off all that PF1 material we just bought -- and we do deserve some form of compensation, such as a discount on PF2. I'll say it again ... It's an update -- not a new product. You can always put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig!
Can you explain why you think we “deserve” compensation?
I have spent more on PF than most (I’d guess I’m right at the edge of the bell curve, to be frank) so I appreciate the feeling of disappointment/regret/lost opportunity that comes with this announcement. I’ve spent thousands of dollars on something which feels like I’m now going to use less than I expected to.
However, Paizo didn’t promise me that my books were going to forever remain cutting edge. Nor that they’d keep putting out PF1 material. Nor that they’d never do anything other than what would suit me. (I remember Lisa and Vic explicitly saying they’d probably do a second edition at some point - it’s hardly a surprise).
I don’t see how I’m owed any “compensation” just because a company moves on to doing other things. We had a contract - I give them money, they give me books. Their obligation to me ended once I got it.
I totally understand the feelings of loss or even panic at the announcement. I really struggle to understand the requests for recompense or those who label PF2 “betrayal” or claim to be being shafted. Can you explain why you think any publisher owes you anything beyond what you’ve bought? (Or clarify your view for me, if that isn’t a fair statement of your position?)
It is a new product. An update would be making far less significant changes.
PF1 to PF2 is like 2E to 3E
As I've said in previous posts, if they really go all out, great! I concede that there are a lot of blogs surrounding this.
Still for everything that's being advocated as different, there's a really big amount that's still the same.
It's going to take more to convince me all these changes are not for any other purpose other than to cannibalize their existing customer base by effectively killing PF1. One way to convince me would be to offer a reasonable discount program for existing customers.
If Paizo's customer base splits on this issue, there might not be enough market share to sustain PF2. It's to Paizo's advantage to get their base on the same page without leaving people feeling cheated.
I personally don't need another illustration of a red dragon. I doubt there really will be that big of a change, and it sounds like you just blowing smoke. PF2 will help to kill off all that PF1 material we just bought -- and we do deserve some form of compensation, such as a discount on PF2. I'll say it again ... It's an update -- not a new product. You can always put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig!Can you explain why you think we “deserve” compensation?
I have spent more on PF than most (I’d guess I’m right at the edge of the bell curve, to be frank) so I appreciate the feeling of disappointment/regret/lost opportunity that comes with this announcement. I’ve spent thousands of dollars on something which feels like I’m now going to use less than I expected to.
However, Paizo didn’t promise me that my books were going to forever remain cutting edge. Nor that they’d keep putting out PF1 material. Nor that they’d never do anything other than what would suit me. (I remember Lisa and Vic explicitly saying they’d probably do a second edition at some point - it’s hardly a surprise).
I don’t see how I’m owed any “compensation” just because a company moves on to doing other things. We had a contract - I give them money, they give me books. Their obligation to me ended once I got it.
I totally understand the feelings of loss or even panic at the announcement. I really struggle to understand the requests for recompense or those who label PF2 “betrayal” or claim to be being shafted. Can you explain why you think any publisher owes you anything beyond what you’ve bought? (Or clarify your view for me, if that isn’t a fair statement of your position?)
That's easy and it seems like you answered your own question. The announcement, itself, serves to effectively kill or surpress PF1, making it a much less viable game system than when we bought into it. Our group is constantly looking for new players. All this press will make that much harder now. Who joins a dying game system? Paizo has some responsibility there. Can't find PF1 players, can't use PF1 materials. Must go to PF2.
Without a leg up into the new system with a reasonable discount, one has to ask when they will kill PF2? Starfinder 1e?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I didn’t explain myself very well. I understand the problem, I just don’t see why it’s Paizo’s responsibility to ensure I still have a large pool of players to recruit to my game of PF1.
It’s not terribly important though. I was just curious as I am really struggling to understand this and similar mindsets dotted about the forum at the moment.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Without a leg up into the new system with a reasonable discount, one has to ask when they will kill PF2? Starfinder 1e?
Presumably when it no longer makes sense for them to keep producing them (either on commercial grounds or creative ones).
That’s kind of my point. I’ve just bought a few copies of the pact worlds for Starfinder. Once they get here, paizo’s obligation to me is done, isn’t it? None of the money I’m paying them is a “keep Starfinder going beyond ten years” fee. I’m just buying some books.
Why do they owe me a community of players? I mean it’s in both of our interests that they foster a large cohort playing Starfinder - but it’s hardly part of what they are promising me. I’ve bought plenty of games that I couldn’t find players for. That’s not a failure of duty on the part of the publisher.
(Or it doesn’t seem so to me, anyway. I’m struggling to understand the deeper logic behind your view. I understand the problem you face, just not why you think Paizo are obligated to address it, beyond their policies around PDFs, the ongoing OGL support and the continuation of pocket editions).
|
A part of the success of Pathfinder has been the Organized play and ease of being able to join up in games and how friendly it is for new players, at least on a person to person level, despite the possible rules crunch shock for a newbie. This is likely to continue, and I believe that the stated goal of being simplyfied for the newer player, and ease of use, will go further in being able to bring in a newer player base.
Without a leg up into the new system with a reasonable discount, one has to ask when they will kill PF2? Starfinder 1e?Presumably when it no longer makes sense for them to keep producing them (either on commercial grounds or creative ones).
That’s kind of my point. I’ve just bought a few copies of the pact worlds for Starfinder. Once they get here, paizo’s obligation to me is done, isn’t it? None of the money I’m paying them is a “keep Starfinder going beyond ten years” fee. I’m just buying some books.
Why do they owe me a community of players? I mean it’s in both of our interests that they foster a large cohort playing Starfinder - but it’s hardly part of what they are promising me. I’ve bought plenty of games that I couldn’t find players for. That’s not a failure of duty on the part of the publisher.
What Paizo owes all of us is to NOT damage and devalue the property they just sold us.
I don't understand why you don't get that.
This is the effect of their announcement and eventual release of PF2.
Get it?
One way to fix that is to provide a discount for the materials we've bought or recently bought for PF1. I really think a discount for PF2 materials based on previous PF1 purchases would be the right thing to do.
Otherwise some people are going to feel cheated and that will erode Paizo's customer base. New books are still being released for PF1. We didn't buy a book -- we bought into an ecosystem. That's how things work, now. We are NOT dealing with just a book seller.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
What Paizo owes all of us is to NOT damage and devalue the property they just sold us.
I don't understand why you don't get that.
Because the statement you make right here is asinine. In no way does the release of a new product damage your old product. Especially in a day where 1E D&D is now legally available alongside its 5E counterpart. Your books are still there. The staggering wealth of material Paizo and 3PPs put out for PF1 are still there.
So, according to you, they're never allowed to release a new product without offering you some sort of compensation? I hate it when words like "entitled" are thrown around frivolously, but wow, that's extreme.
I'll just say again for the record that the books released for Pathfinder have so far been the best I have ever seen. I am now waiting to see how Paizo treats me as a customer during this transition out of PF1 and into PF2. I'm waiting to see whether I'll be embrased somehow or told, "too bad."
What Paizo owes all of us is to NOT damage and devalue the property they just sold us.
I don't understand why you don't get that.
Because the statement you make right here is asinine. In no way does the release of a new product damage your old product. Especially in a day where 1E D&D is now legally available alongside its 5E counterpart. Your books are still there. The staggering wealth of material Paizo and 3PPs put out for PF1 are still there.
So, according to you, they're never allowed to release a new product without offering you some sort of compensation? I hate it when words like "entitled" are thrown around frivolously, but wow, that's extreme.
Other industries offer customer loyalty programs and/or discounts for buying the next version. Why not drag RPG marketing and sales out of the middle ages? Embrace your customer like other industry segments.
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
There doesn't seem to be any reason why existing customers can't be supported with a discount toward the purchase of PF2 -- because what we're talking about is an upgrade and NOT REALY an entirely new product. I hope Paizo announces a plan sort of as I've tried to describe below:
We should have a way to make the transition from all the PF1 material we have purchased to PF2 with AT LEAST SOME SORT OF DISCOUNT. An effort should be made to help us preserve our original investment. I'd reply to the people who replied to my original posts on this topic -- but for some reason I can't due to what appears to be a limitation of the system.
The basic issue, here, is called customer support. How well Paizo supports its existing customer base. There should be a reasonable path forward from PF1 to PF2 -- both financially (minimally) but also in terms of following the same strategy for organizing the material.
A Core Rule book is a Core Rule book, Horror Adventures is Horror Adventures, Ultimate Magic is Ultimate Magic, ...
Consolidation by bringing material, for example, the Ultimate books into a smaller group of books would be great. BUT just guggling things around to sell new books for no other purpose is not fair to the customer base.
When Microsoft releases new Windows versions, for example going from Windows 7 to Windows 10, we generally get to use all that software we bought -- we don't have to buy it all again. Managing this feat in software is much harder than doing that for a set of books. I am just advocating that the way forward for PF2 be done in an existing customer friendly way.
Hey man. Could you maybe keep copy/pasting this exact rant into a few more threads on here? I'm not sure people got your point the first 5 times they read it.
Maybe even focus a bit more on dropping it in as a non-sequitur in threads that have absolutely nothing to do with the price of the product. Though you've certainly been doing pretty well at that so far.
Other industries offer customer loyalty programs and/or discounts for buying the next version. Why not drag RPG marketing out of the middle ages? Embrace your customer like other industry segments.What Paizo owes all of us is to NOT damage and devalue the property they just sold us.
I don't understand why you don't get that.
Because the statement you make right here is asinine. In no way does the release of a new product damage your old product. Especially in a day where 1E D&D is now legally available alongside its 5E counterpart. Your books are still there. The staggering wealth of material Paizo and 3PPs put out for PF1 are still there.
So, according to you, they're never allowed to release a new product without offering you some sort of compensation? I hate it when words like "entitled" are thrown around frivolously, but wow, that's extreme.
And, BTW, there's a marketing term called "mind share". That's how. Again, who joins a gaming system on the way out?
Feel like I'm talking to a brick wall.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Without a leg up into the new system with a reasonable discount, one has to ask when they will kill PF2? Starfinder 1e?Presumably when it no longer makes sense for them to keep producing them (either on commercial grounds or creative ones).
That’s kind of my point. I’ve just bought a few copies of the pact worlds for Starfinder. Once they get here, paizo’s obligation to me is done, isn’t it? None of the money I’m paying them is a “keep Starfinder going beyond ten years” fee. I’m just buying some books.
Why do they owe me a community of players? I mean it’s in both of our interests that they foster a large cohort playing Starfinder - but it’s hardly part of what they are promising me. I’ve bought plenty of games that I couldn’t find players for. That’s not a failure of duty on the part of the publisher.
What Paizo owes all of us is to NOT damage and devalue the property they just sold us.
I don't understand why you don't get that.
Sorry. I’ve tried to be clear why I disagree. I can’t really think of another way to say it.
Good luck in your efforts, maybe you’ll have some luck.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Again, who joins a gaming system on the way out?
Feel like I'm talking to a brick wall.
Not all of us are going to switch to PF2. There's a very vocal group who are intending to continue playing PF1, with 10 years worth of adventures and other material to make use of.
So, your assumption that it's a gaming system on the way out is offensive to those of us who don't see it that way at all.
Just because you don't want to play using those rules doesn't mean that everyone else agrees with you.
And then there's the group who is excited to jump to PF2. Who are already thrilled just by the *concept* of a cleaned-up, revised, and newly buffed version of the game. We don't need any incentives to start using it. "Champing at the bit" is more like it.
There aren't a lot of people who feel entitled to compensation because a company decided to release a new product. I don't know of any other publishing company that pays me money back for buying books many years ago. In fact, they all ask me to pay in full for any new books I buy.
If you want discounts, you can get them for subscribing to the new material. But not just from being a customer in the past
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hey Mark, if you think so lowly of Paizo, why do you still want to patronize them? You talk like they are just lowly scum out to screw people over and make a quick buck. That sounds like someone I would not do business with.
What you have here is either "Paizo are scamming me" and thus they are not worth your time, sunk cost or not, or "Paizo is genuinely trying to do their best" which would certainly deserve the benefit of the doubt in my book.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mark -
In that the 2e rules are going to be available for free on the website, isn't a 100% discount enough? All you'll be missing are the pictures, and you've already said that you don't need another picture of a red dragon.
"Again, who joins a gaming system on the way out?
Feel like I'm talking to a brick wall.
Not all of us are going to switch to PF2. There's a very vocal group who are intending to continue playing PF1, with 10 years worth of adventures and other material to make use of.
So, your assumption that it's a gaming system on the way out is offensive to those of us who don't see it that way at all.
Just because you don't want to play using those rules doesn't mean that everyone else agrees with you.
And then there's the group who is excited to jump to PF2. Who are already thrilled just by the *concept* of a cleaned-up, revised, and newly buffed version of the game. We don't need any incentives to start using it. "Champing at the bit" is more like it.
There aren't a lot of people who feel entitled to compensation because a company decided to release a new product. I don't know of any other publishing company that pays me money back for buying books many years ago. In fact, they all ask me to pay in full for any new books I buy.
If you want discounts, you can get them for subscribing to the new material. But not just from being a customer in the past
You've missed most of what I'm saying. I've said it so many times, it's time to stop. You're only listening to parts of it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mark -
In that the 2e rules are going to be available for free on the website, isn't a 100% discount enough? All you'll be missing are the pictures, and you've already said that you don't need another picture of a red dragon.
I think creating PF2 is a good thing, provided it's being done in a constructive way.
No, the issue is that I think the mind share will now shift to PF2 and that my PF1 materials have or will become much harder to use because at a minmum I'll have to either work on converting it to PF2 or buy PF2 because most people play the newest thing. That's the way it is.
The demographic for these blogs is tilted and the entire effort benefits from hearing the other side of the coin.
Steps can be taken to make this a win-win situation for everyone. Looks a bit win-lose right now without clarification from Paizo. The attitude of the RPG industry seems to be to screw over the previous edition or customers of it. That happened with D&D.
Problem, though, is that the volume of books, for example, that Paizo is selling (much to its credit) is really going to hurt those who buy them because interest in PF1 will decline.
WoTC doesn't have to worry so much because they have far less material -- so for Paizo this type of pattern may backfire by angering the customer base.
I'm just saying ... maybe. I'm not happy about it. Starfinder, also, seems to have an unannounced end of life coming shortly. How in the world are people going to be satisfied with it knowing the core rules from which it was developed were in a state of flux (from draft version PF2) and are now being reworked in PF2? How much material is going to be sold to them before it goes unsupported?
Hey Mark, if you think so lowly of Paizo, why do you still want to patronize them? You talk like they are just lowly scum out to screw people over and make a quick buck. That sounds like someone I would not do business with.
What you have here is either "Paizo are scamming me" and thus they are not worth your time, sunk cost or not, or "Paizo is genuinely trying to do their best" which would certainly deserve the benefit of the doubt in my book.
I have not said that I think lowly of Paizo. I am working hard in these blogs to try to encourage Paizo to break with previous RPG company behavior -- to rise above it.
I am also trying to explain why they should do it. I've done my best.
I very much believe that the Paizo rule books I have, which includes almost everything such as the Adventures and Ultimate books are the best researched and best ever written. But, depending on how Paizo handles the PF1 could bring us to a point of disagreement -- and I'm trying to avoid that.
|
In before "Will this fix Caster/Martial disparity?" questions show up.
In my opinion, it will probably be even worse, since there are now 10 levels of spells instead of 9, and nothing of note is brought up for Martials outside of "Combat Maneuvers that Rock," which is extremely vague and overhyped.
Given their "balance fixes" over the past decade, I'd be surprised if it wasn't worse. They've seemed pretty intent on widening the gulf in the past. I'm not why a simple change in edition should change their design paradigm from "20th level martials should be contrained by what unpaid interns can replicate within 10 minutes, while mid-level casters should be able to do anything that I can imagine...and those spells should scale as they level".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Given their "balance fixes" over the past decade, I'd be surprised if it wasn't worse. They've seemed pretty intent on widening the gulf in the past. I'm not why a simple change in edition should change their design paradigm from "20th level martials should be contrained by what unpaid interns can replicate within 10 minutes, while mid-level casters should be able to do anything that I can imagine...and those spells should scale as they level".In before "Will this fix Caster/Martial disparity?" questions show up.
In my opinion, it will probably be even worse, since there are now 10 levels of spells instead of 9, and nothing of note is brought up for Martials outside of "Combat Maneuvers that Rock," which is extremely vague and overhyped.
They were hamstrung by the caster/martial disparity being baked in to 3.5. Backwards compatibility and a desire to ensure later releases had the same feel as early releases in PF1’s life meant a continuation of that was inevitable.
For PF2, addressing the disparity is one of the stated design goals.
Is "literally free" enough of a discout for you? Because the rules will literally be free, whether you're a PF1 customer or not. Just like they gave everybody the rules to PF1, again, for free.It is a new product. An update would be making far less significant changes.
PF1 to PF2 is like 2E to 3E
As I've said in previous posts, if they really go all out, great! I concede that there are a lot of blogs surrounding this.
Still for everything that's being advocated as different, there's a really big amount that's still the same.
It's going to take more to convince me all these changes are not for any other purpose other than to cannibalize their existing customer base by effectively killing PF1. One way to convince me would be to offer a reasonable discount program for existing customers.
There's still a lot of work to convert PF1 material to PF2 rules.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is "literally free" enough of a discout for you? Because the rules will literally be free, whether you're a PF1 customer or not. Just like they gave everybody the rules to PF1, again, for free.There's still a lot of work to convert PF1 material to PF2 rules.
Good grief.
There's still a lot of work to convert PF1 material to PF2 rules.
Then do not. Use the fluff, ignore the rest. I use AD&D 2e stuff for 5e. You can choose to do so or not. New Editions happen in every system, rarely are they backward compatible as that kills the very things a new editions tries to fix.
There's still a lot of work to convert PF1 material to PF2 rules.Is "literally free" enough of a discout for you? Because the rules will literally be free, whether you're a PF1 customer or not. Just like they gave everybody the rules to PF1, again, for free.It is a new product. An update would be making far less significant changes.
PF1 to PF2 is like 2E to 3E
As I've said in previous posts, if they really go all out, great! I concede that there are a lot of blogs surrounding this.
Still for everything that's being advocated as different, there's a really big amount that's still the same.
It's going to take more to convince me all these changes are not for any other purpose other than to cannibalize their existing customer base by effectively killing PF1. One way to convince me would be to offer a reasonable discount program for existing customers.
On another thread and here in this message, it was pointed out that all of the PF2 rule books will be available on the web for free as I think PF1 is. Took me a while to follow that. I had forgotten about that. I'm not used to using the books that way. I prefer owning the PDFs, but never-the-less that pretty much resolves my issues.
Is an effort being made to simplify PF2 to make it more competitive versus D&D 5e?
I think this is the best thread to address this issue so I am repeating part of what I said on a different thread because it's a concern for our Pathfinder group:
A major issue that has come up and that another member seems to have confirmed is that complexity in PF1 might explain why it's currently much harder for us here in Frisco, TX to attract players and why D&D is dominating at least at the comic book stores where we play -- and it's by a long shot. At Madness Comics, they have about 15 tables for D&D 5e and on another day run 1 or 2 tables for Pathfinder Society. The three comic book store owners and employees I've talked to think players are more attracted to the simpler rules in D&D 5e. This is a shock to me.
Is something being done in PF2 to make it more able to compete with D&D 5e, such as an effort to make some parts of it simpler without hurting playability?
I had really felt PF1 was awesome, and I'm distressed that we are having such a hard time attracting players to what I see as an obviously superior game system to D&D 5e -- even the quality of the books is better. I picked up D&D books at two different stores to try to sort this out -- at both places I found major printing or binding issues with the books. At one store, the section headings printed inside the Player's Handbook were blurry and I thought it was on purpose until I saw another copy at another store. At the other store, the binding was messed up such that the pages about an inch out from the bind had become kind of crinkly, again, for the Player's Handbook.
Well, some people want their character to be able to knock someone flying backwards easily and consistently, even if their character doesn't use a shield.Shield Slam???
Deal damage and get a free bull rush every time you shield bash your opponent.
Some people also want their fighters to be able to fly without expending any resources (in General Discussion today).
On another thread and here in this message, it was pointed out that all of the PF2 rule books will be available on the web for free as I think PF1 is. Took me a while to follow that. I had forgotten about that. I'm not used to using the books that way. I prefer owning the PDFs, but never-the-less that pretty much resolves my issues.There's still a lot of work to convert PF1 material to PF2 rules.Is "literally free" enough of a discout for you? Because the rules will literally be free, whether you're a PF1 customer or not. Just like they gave everybody the rules to PF1, again, for free.It is a new product. An update would be making far less significant changes.
PF1 to PF2 is like 2E to 3E
As I've said in previous posts, if they really go all out, great! I concede that there are a lot of blogs surrounding this.
Still for everything that's being advocated as different, there's a really big amount that's still the same.
It's going to take more to convince me all these changes are not for any other purpose other than to cannibalize their existing customer base by effectively killing PF1. One way to convince me would be to offer a reasonable discount program for existing customers.
I'll add that I hope PF2 is very successful and challenges D&D 5e in our local comic book stores here in Frisco, TX, the venues we play in. Right now way too many tables have gone to D&D and Pathfinder has almost disappeared. My group has a nice ad in two of them and I talked to a third (actually the largest in Texas). All three reported D&D 5e is dominating because it's simpler than Pathfinder (1st edition).
If PF2 can reverse that trend, I will happily buy the PDFs for all the rule books -- no problem! And, sorry, if I'm just repeating myself too much -- but I much prefer Pathfinder over D&D.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
However, when reviewing classes that should be included in the new edition core, they probably thought "Gunslinger, not yet" or "Gunslinger, lets just fix guns so anyone can use them instead".
The existing Gunslinger was originally an 'alternate class' of the Fighter (like Antipaladins are alternate class Paladins)... essentially an overblown archetype. Thus, there isn't really any reason it couldn't be an archetype in PF2.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Shield Slam???Deal damage and get a free bull rush every time you shield bash your opponent.Well, some people want their character to be able to knock someone flying backwards easily and consistently, even if their character doesn't use a shield.
Shield Slam (the feat) has two tax-feat prerequisites. (It also has proficiency in using shields as a requirement, which isn't a problem for most characters, but critter sidekicks will lack it.)
However, when reviewing classes that should be included in the new edition core, they probably thought "Gunslinger, not yet" or "Gunslinger, lets just fix guns so anyone can use them instead".The existing Gunslinger was originally an 'alternate class' of the Fighter (like Antipaladins are alternate class Paladins)... essentially an overblown archetype. Thus, there isn't really any reason it couldn't be an archetype in PF2.
That, and most of the Advanced Class Guide classes, can be archetypes of existing classes.
In fact, I am hoping that one of the early PF2 hardbacks is an "Advanced Archetype Guide" that takes care of as many existing PF1 classes this way. In addition to explicit conversion statements, the iconics shown in the artwork would be a clue as to the role of each new archetype:
- Use the original iconic for the main class for relatively minor variants that still function much like the main class.
- Re-use the appropriate variant/hybrid class iconic for the archetype that is the closest PF2 conversion of that class.
- Create a new iconic for any totally new concept.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mark -
In that the 2e rules are going to be available for free on the website, isn't a 100% discount enough? All you'll be missing are the pictures, and you've already said that you don't need another picture of a red dragon.I think creating PF2 is a good thing, provided it's being done in a constructive way.
So you plan to move to PF2, but want it to be cheaper for you.
I think that's legitimate. However, I also think Paizo has the option to do it, or not. They don't owe you anything else than the books they sold you, and they are even telling you 1 year before the new edition that a new edition is going to be out. So you can stop to buy new products like right now if you want, or choose not to, and buy the last pieces of PF1 for your collection. Then you can play any of the two editions, or something different.
Starfinder, also, seems to have an unannounced end of life coming shortly. How in the world are people going to be satisfied with it knowing the core rules from which it was developed were in a state of flux (from draft version PF2) and are now being reworked in PF2? How much material is going to be sold to them before it goes unsupported?
I'm pretty happy with Starfinder overall. There are a few things that should probably have been differently (and maybe it got rushed a bit because it had to be out before PF2), but many of the rules I feel need improvement, like Starship Combat, have nothing to do with New Pathfinder.
It's a different game, which targets a different kind of stories. I'm ok with it being different ruleset than PF2, just like I liked it to be different than PF1.
Not sure if the plan is to still have a 3 action system. I keep thinking about it while my group plays 1st edition -- and I'm a GM. I really think a 3 action system would be a mistake. I find it hard to believe you can fit 3 actions into a 6 second round -- I just don't think 2 seconds is enough time to do an action. I like the current system of standard and move actions.
Not sure if the plan is to still have a 3 action system. I keep thinking about it while my group plays 1st edition -- and I'm a GM. I really think a 3 action system would be a mistake. I find it hard to believe you can fit 3 actions into a 6 second round -- I just don't think 2 seconds is enough time to do an action. I like the current system of standard and move actions.
That's a level 6 archer or two-weapon fighter. Even more, depending on build (2 weapon fighter from a race with bite natural attack.
Not sure if the plan is to still have a 3 action system. I keep thinking about it while my group plays 1st edition -- and I'm a GM. I really think a 3 action system would be a mistake. I find it hard to believe you can fit 3 actions into a 6 second round -- I just don't think 2 seconds is enough time to do an action. I like the current system of standard and move actions.
You mean full-round, standard, move, swift, and free? Because it's one of the many reasons my group of close friends switched to 5E from PF1 (much to my dismay), and something I am glad to see go away in favor of something more streamlined.
Is an effort being made to simplify PF2 to make it more competitive versus D&D 5e?
I don't think so. We've had Wizards of the Coast be the main producer of 3.X material for 8 years and at some point during that get fed up with the issues of 3.X and finally address them in a new edition. We then had Paizo be the main producer of 3.X for 10 years and get fed up with the issues of 3.X during that time and finally address them in a new edition.
I believe that both times there is a genuine interest in the part of the developers (maybe not management in the case of WotC, but I believe the developers worked in earnest) to genuinely make the best game they can. After dealing with the same issues the developers in both cases have adopted somewhat similar approaches to fixing them.
I don't think this has anything to do with 5e and more to do with wanting to fix 3.X. Problem is, a certain segment of the playerbase (and what turned out to be a significant segment in the 2008-2010 era) are actually quite happy with 3.X and want minor revisions to address the most egregious problems. We'll have to wait and see how healthy that segment is in 2018-2020.
-snip so you can delete if you want-
Man, that was more than a month ago. Don't start up on it again.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think this has anything to do with 5e and more to do with wanting to fix 3.X. Problem is, a certain segment of the playerbase (and what turned out to be a significant segment in the 2008-2010 era) are actually quite happy with 3.X and want minor revisions to address the most egregious problems. We'll have to wait and see how healthy that segment is in 2018-2020.
I don't know how widespread my case was, buy I did change to 4e from the start, because I did feel 3.5 was unwieldy at that point. I thought 4e tried to solve many of the problems in 4e. But after a few years, I realized they got the problems right, but the solutions wrong. I came back to PF, which wasn't as unwieldy back then (did not use any 3.5 stuff, PF had few splat books), and I was playing Paizo APs with 4e rules anyways, because Paizo APs are great
So part of Paizo customer base might be people like me, who did not exactly loved 3.X, but disliked some of 4e solutions to 3.X, and liked APs. I suspect 5e has taken a few if those.
I haven't looked at PF2 rules for two months, but I'd better say I just can't buy into the new 3 action economy -- unless a round was increased to 10 seconds.
I just can't buy into the system with 6 second rounds.
Not sure if the plan is to still have a 3 action system. I keep thinking about it while my group plays 1st edition -- and I'm a GM. I really think a 3 action system would be a mistake. I find it hard to believe you can fit 3 actions into a 6 second round -- I just don't think 2 seconds is enough time to do an action. I like the current system of standard and move actions.How do you feel about current PF1 characters able to attack 7 times a round?
I am more okay with that because those are high level characters. Even low level characters would use the 3 action system in PF2. I'd be okay with it, if we had 10 second rounds.