| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
So... I can't be the only one baffled by the 2E announcement. The desire for a system similar to 3.5 DnD is what drove Pathfinder's creation and what kept people coming back... why drop all of that now out of the blue?
If we give feedback, we can stop 2E. Surely Paizo will listen and realize this isn't what we, as a community, want.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're not stopping this it has been planned for a long time. They even synced it with the release of the new website.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Surely Paizo will listen and realize this isn't what we, as a community, want.
You know, it's interesting. I see a lot... and I mean a LOT of praise in these forums over the 2E announcement, and a lot of what they were sharing of it.
I haven't seen much at all in the way of "this entire thing is terrible", only particular, pinpoint concerns.
So, when it comes to speaking for communities as a whole, I'm not entirely convinced your viewpoint is the majority one.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some people want it, some people don’t.
To be frank, I think we’ve passed the point where Paizo might decide not to go ahead. I think the best bet for those concerned with 3.5 compatibility is to participate in the playtest and make that known via the surveys/etcetera.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're not stopping this. It has been planned for a long time. They even synced it with the new website.
My impression is that the near simultaneous change to the website and the 2E announcement was an unfortunate necessity, not a strategy.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Still, though. This seems like it has been in the cards for a while. The end of edition products remind me a lot of the end of 3e, and Starfinder parallels SW Saga in a lot of ways. The coincidences are piling pretty high.
Plus... Honestly, I've been expecting this for 2 years now. There are a lot of 3e derived problems that were simply papered over in the name of backwards compatibility, (and a few new ideas that simply didn't work out so well, which is absolutely normal in games development). Plus asking a game company to never, ever do a new edition seems like a good way to trap them in oblivion.
So... I can't be the only one baffled by the 2E announcement. The desire for a system similar to 3.5 DnD is what drove Pathfinder's creation and what kept people coming back... why drop all of that now out of the blue?
If we give feedback, we can stop 2E. Surely Paizo will listen and realize this isn't what we, as a community, want.
Paizo is taking the gamble that a new edition will be more popular.
If all economic forecast said that PF was doing great and only going to make more and more money each year, then they would have been silly to attempt a new edition.
If the charts are going down they could have either hoped for a resurgence or dwindled until they no longer had the strength to launch a new edition.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're not stopping this. It has been planned for a long time. They even synced it with the new website.My impression is that the near simultaneous change to the website and the 2E announcement was an unfortunate necessity, not a strategy.
Seems oddly coincidental if not.
Anyways, I sort of think of it as a whole new era for the company. New website new Pathfinder. To be fair I have no proof of this at all. :)
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do you play video games?
Would you be happy if we stayed with the Xbox original instead of the Xbox One?
Or the PS2 instead of the PS4?
Just because this game is played with dice, pen, and paper does not mean it can't change and evolve.
Also, one of the great things about the current system and volume of stuff contained within it? It will still be playable 10, 20, 30 years from now if you choose to do so.
Still, though. This seems like it has been in the cards for a while. The end of edition products remind me a lot of the end of 3e, and Starfinder parallels SW Saga in a lot of ways. The coincidences are piling pretty high.
It's a lot older than that. Gamma World 4th ed (NOT the "4th ed D&D Lite" edition) had several rules concepts that made it in to 3rd ed D&D, I believe.
Plus... Honestly, I've been expecting this for 2 years now. There are a lot of 3e derived problems that were simply papered over in the name of backwards compatibility, (and a few new ideas that simply didn't work out so well, which is absolutely normal in games development). Plus asking a game company to never, ever do a new edition seems like a good way to trap them in oblivion.
Yeah, for the past year we've been getting more and more hardback books that just rehash/update material that previously appeared in several softback books. I would add the end of the RPGSuperstar competition as well. How long ago did they end that, around the same time they started work on PF2/SF?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well i honestly worry about PF2, im not a person who likes changes much and thus wouldnt take me much to give up on PF2, but honestly, lets see what they did with the whole thing, maybe it is great and we will love it.
For those of us 2.0 goes too far, 1.0 will always be there with 10 years of content which is more than enough for new adventures.
So... I can't be the only one baffled by the 2E announcement. The desire for a system similar to 3.5 DnD is what drove Pathfinder's creation and what kept people coming back... why drop all of that now out of the blue?
If we give feedback, we can stop 2E. Surely Paizo will listen and realize this isn't what we, as a community, want.
I wouldn't describe it as out of the blue...the slowed down release schedule suggested something was in the works. As for why, beyond any economic concerns, the longer a game has been around, the harder it is to release new material that that caters to a broad number of consumers. You risk getting less and less return on investment, and players getting drawn off by newer shinier things (which admittedly is what has happened to me over the last year, which is why I mostly disappeared from the forum).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am a member of the community, and I’m good with a new edition.
Same.
I'm pretty sure if we count posts, things are 50-50. If we count posters, there is a majority of people welcoming the 2e.More importantly: this is only a small fraction of people who plays the game. We have no clue what those others are looking for.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would be fine with a Pathfinder 2nd edition ...5 years from now.
|
To say that the original intent was to stay with 3.5 is not quite what was happening. The transition to the next edition of the Brand for the 6th iteration (the official 4th edition) was done in such a way as to alienate almost everyone that was using their content before that release. I talk here of both the licensees and the consumer. The continuation of the ruleset was a strategy that made for several positives that included the return to the old 3.5 ruleset for those that did not approve of the abrupt change that the new branded turnover provided.
Pathfinder could have just as easily been a license for the new open gaming license equivalent at the time for the new iteration. This didn't happen for a host of reasons that I will not go into, as it is second hand knowledge to me, so instead of giving up after the loss of the Dragon and Dungeon magazines, Paizo started the Rise of the Runelords AP and began the playtest for the improved ruleset for the Pathfinder setting.
Setting out to clean up the format, modernize rules and provide a better overall experience is not giving up on 3.5, but rather it is evolving the game to a more player friendly environment and taking some good ideas from all games and pulling from the vast experience that Paizo has to forge a better way to play the game and keep with the classic feel of the brand that was missed in the other iteration that caused the split in the first place.
Is Vancian casting finally put in it's grave? Will some abilities be used as class abilities instead of generic feats that one class can only get anyways? Will there be Archtypes that will harken back to the elf as a class days?
We shall see.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If we count posters, there is a majority of people welcoming the 2e.
there is a majority of posters on the PF2 playtest section, don't confuse that. not much of us stick around. most of us made their intention of leaving paizo clear once and then, well, left
I mean, I intent to stick around for the playtests for a couple of reasons, mostly curiosity, to see, what Paizo thought was such a great idea that it was worth splitting their community in half, but also because I want PF2 to become at least enjoyable as a game, even though it will not be my game. if it attracts new players, chances are, like with D&D5, they will soon after lust for a more complex, attractive game that's not too far away from the one they have already learned.
It rather depends on how much of a change PF2 is.
If it ends up being a whole new game then yeah the OP would be right
But if it is just another step forward the way Pathfinder was from 3.5, then no. It is simply a continuing evolution of 3.5 D&D 3.8 if you will.
It really depends on how far they change it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I’m ready for a 2.0. I love 1st edition, but from the stuff I heard in the podcast it seems so much more immersive and I can only imagine where things can go. Unlocking actions seems brilliant. So much more flexibility on your turn to make decisions.
I will continue to play 1st edition and then I will hold them up side by side and see which one is the victor when the time comes. Plenty of 1.0 stuff to play for the rest of my life, but I will most likely subscribe to collect all of second edition.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If we count posters, there is a majority of people welcoming the 2e.
there is a majority of posters on the PF2 playtest section, don't confuse that. not much of us stick around. most of us made their intention of leaving paizo clear once and then, well, left
I mean, I intent to stick around for the playtests for a couple of reasons, mostly curiosity, to see, what Paizo thought was such a great idea that it was worth splitting their community in half, but also because I want PF2 to become at least enjoyable as a game, even though it will not be my game. if it attracts new players, chances are, like with D&D5, they will soon after lust for a more complex, attractive game that's not too far away from the one they have already learned.
I’m hopeful you’ll stick around and participate in the feedback process (I understand it’s being done significantly via surveys this time).
I think the 2E ship has sailed. I don’t think the degree of backwards compatibility issue has been locked down though.
You're not stopping this. It has been planned for a long time. They even synced it with the new website.My impression is that the near simultaneous change to the website and the 2E announcement was an unfortunate necessity, not a strategy.Seems oddly coincidental if not.
Anyways, I sort of think of it as a whole new era for the company. New website new Pathfinder. To be fair I have no proof of this at all. :)
I think you’re right in a broad sense. I just don’t think they wanted to do both in the same fortnight.
(Only an impression on my part also - but it did appear to me that the website team were a little frantic during the rollout - almost like they had a looming deadline...).
EDIT: frantic isn’t intended in any pejorative way. I think they did a stellar job.
there is a majority of posters on the PF2 playtest section, don't confuse that. not much of us stick around. most of us made their intention of leaving paizo clear once and then, well, leftIf we count posters, there is a majority of people welcoming the 2e.
I'm not going to do a full research, but I'm going to take a little bit of my time to quickly count the reactions in the first page of the anoucement as a sample size.
If my count is ok, 33 posters showed to be hyped by it, with expressions like "woot" and "about time". 11 showed mild concerns, such as "I'm both intrigued and nervous" and "I'm torn on the subject". Two showed anger, such as "this is why I left D&D". The rest of posts were made by Paizo Staff.Feel free to do a more extensive research if you want. But yes, an overwhelming majority is hyped by the new edition.
(...) if it attracts new players, chances are, like with D&D5, they will soon after lust for a more complex, attractive game that's not too far away from the one they have already learned.
It's fun how people construct their own worlds, and live into it, without paying attention to what happens around them.
5e is blowing the market away for 15th quarter in a row. The web is full of blogs, youtube channels, and podcasts, about it. Plenty of those blogs, channels and podcasts aren't done by "new players" doing an entry-level game until they "learn a proper game", but by veterans who were around before TSR went bankrupt.
So maybe your anecdotal evidence is not as relevant as you might think.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If we count posters, there is a majority of people welcoming the 2e.
there is a majority of posters on the PF2 playtest section, don't confuse that. not much of us stick around. most of us made their intention of leaving paizo clear once and then, well, left
I mean, I intent to stick around for the playtests for a couple of reasons, mostly curiosity, to see, what Paizo thought was such a great idea that it was worth splitting their community in half, but also because I want PF2 to become at least enjoyable as a game, even though it will not be my game. if it attracts new players, chances are, like with D&D5, they will soon after lust for a more complex, attractive game that's not too far away from the one they have already learned.
I’m hopeful you’ll stick around and participate in the feedback process (I understand it’s being done significantly via surveys this time).
I think the 2E ship has sailed. I don’t think the degree of backwards compatibility issue has been locked down though.
Backward compatibility, at least via conversion document would go a long way for me. It doesn't have to be 1005 point for point but if i can do conversions with a little bit of work it takes the sting out of recent purchases.
People wanted a "continued 3.5", for sure, but they also wanted a fixed 3.5. PF1 tried to do both, which is why things are "backwards compatible" but enough things changed that NPCs take quite a bit of work to convert, and a lot of content was outright replaced (e.g. many options from the PHB reprinted in the CRB) or rendered obsolete (e.g. all but the most powerful Prestige Classes).
PF2 could very well be a similar change. I would at least wait for the actual rules to be released before announcing that PF1 content is invalidated/scrapped/etc.
Backward compatibility, at least via conversion document would go a long way for me. It doesn't have to be 1005 point for point but if i can do conversions with a little bit of work it takes the sting out of recent purchases.If we count posters, there is a majority of people welcoming the 2e.
there is a majority of posters on the PF2 playtest section, don't confuse that. not much of us stick around. most of us made their intention of leaving paizo clear once and then, well, left
I mean, I intent to stick around for the playtests for a couple of reasons, mostly curiosity, to see, what Paizo thought was such a great idea that it was worth splitting their community in half, but also because I want PF2 to become at least enjoyable as a game, even though it will not be my game. if it attracts new players, chances are, like with D&D5, they will soon after lust for a more complex, attractive game that's not too far away from the one they have already learned.
I’m hopeful you’ll stick around and participate in the feedback process (I understand it’s being done significantly via surveys this time).
I think the 2E ship has sailed. I don’t think the degree of backwards compatibility issue has been locked down though.
I think this is definitely going to be an issue.
Full disclosure: I’m not actually a fan of editions which try to retain compatibility with previous editions. Nonetheless, there’s clearly a significant segment of the PF fan base for whom this is a big deal.
My hope is that there is a significant, stand-alone conversion guide (NOT as part of the CRB 2.0) catering to PF1 players who want to pick and choose things put out for PF2
There’ll no doubt be calls for PF1 -> PF2 conversion documents too, but I actually think that’ll be less important (from a community happiness perspective).
From what I can tell, the campaign setting stuff from PF1 will still be very useful if you’re playing PF2.
For me, this is where the “you’re making me buy the same book twice” issue seems more pertinent. I expect to buy a new version of the fighter, thief, magic user and cleric (That’s what a new edition is all about). Is there going to be another campaign setting book though? It seems to me there’ll have to be. I hope they manage to put a lot of new stuff in it (I didn’t resent the gazetteer to campaign guide to ISWG transition, so if it’s like that I’ll be happy enough. I just wonder how much extra they can fit in alongside any rules update).
It doesn't have to be part of the CRB at all, but i'd like to be able to make old adventures and adventure paths work without a complete rewriting on my part. If its good enough that i can adjust some archetypes too thats icing.
Again though, the feel needs to be close to the old 3.X pathfinder feel. i have no strong opinion about the decoupling actions. I do want:
Alignment (with removal as an in book option)
Levels
vancian and non vancian casting options (wizard/sorc style)
The core 4 (fighter/rogue/wizard/cleric)
Combat feats becoming level scaleable (like vigilante talents)
things im not interested in and will actively oppose my group adopting the system if they exist:
The navel gazing moral grey of WoD.
WoD style class power advencement
non exclusive paladins. (sorry its a setting feel for me play a damn warpriest)
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As someone strongly opposed to 2e, it seems clear to me that a large majority (somewhere around 75-90% of posters) seem to be at least cautiously open to 2e. Furthermore, they've already announced product; they can't backpedal from that.
2e won't be and can't be stopped. The most that can be done is make it a commercial failure, and that would lead to Paizo closing doors and losing access to the PDFs we own so far. So...life sucks.
As someone strongly opposed to 2e, it seems clear to me that a large majority (somewhere around 75-90% of posters) seem to be at least cautiously open to 2e. Furthermore, they've already announced product; they can't backpedal from that.
2e won't be and can't be stopped. The most that can be done is make it a commercial failure, and that would lead to Paizo closing doors and losing access to the PDFs we own so far. So...life sucks.
I can appreciate the disappointment (I have more Pathfinder product than most and am very, very fond of it). However, I wouldn’t discount having an Impact on the playtest process. If the percentage is as high as you suspect then it might not make much difference. There might be a lot who want to preserve certain, key elements from PF1 though. That might either make PF2 more palatable to you or at least easier to convert to PF1.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's really no making 2e palatable to me (in the short term) because my thing is the breadth of options. Unless playtest feedback can get us 30+ races, 20+ classes, 200+ traits, 50+ archetypes in the CRB...yeah, not happening.
Fun fact: 1E didn't have 30+ races when it kicked off.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's really no making 2e palatable to me (in the short term) because my thing is the breadth of options. Unless playtest feedback can get us 30+ races, 20+ classes, 200+ traits, 50+ archetypes in the CRB...yeah, not happening.Fun fact: 1E didn't have 30+ races when it kicked off.
yeah but if there is some backward compatibility and a conversion guide than we don't have to loose those 30+ races when PF2 kicks off.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I will rather stop gaming entirely than be forced to go back to bleeping elves and dwarves and halflings.
I want my tiefling, I want my changeling, I want my catfolk, I want my ganzi, I want my shabti, I want my android, I want my lashunta, I want my samsaran.
I have a game system with them. Maybe 2e will have them someday -- then I'll take a look at it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It kind of hurts that PF is updating the rule set, but I totally understand that they have to do this or die. I'm going to stick with playing PF 1E, DND 5E and Starfinder. The reason I will not be playing 2E is simply because I love the 3.5 system, and if I want fluidity and less complexity I have 5E. I also have no desire to learn a new system or to start purchasing a new version of the same books that I have been collecting for over a decade ...Thanks to Paizo for all of the fantastic 1E material, and good luck with 2E.
One request, I hope Paizo archives these PF 1E boards!
Of course not, and I didn't jump on board 1e then. But it does now, and I can't see myself ever going back to 12 races and 12 classes.
I'm guessing there will be a lot of players who don't look too much into 2e until it's got a wider selection of classes and races. I can manage with the smaller selection myself, but I will be itching for them to roll out more races, classes, and archetypes.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I will rather stop gaming entirely than be forced to go back to bleeping elves and dwarves and halflings.
I can undertand the sentiment, but to me it's the other way round. I'll probably immensely enjoy when there's only the Core rules around and I can go back to the basics at least for a short time.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, there's no corresponding leap in technology in RPGs that the Playstations had. If RPGs actually had so massively better technology that totally allowed massively improved visuals, that'd be one thing. For that, I might consider restarting at zero. But there's no significant tech improvement in RPGs to justify resetting.
You probably don't want to see the walls of text I can still generate at the drop of a hat about how Civilization III is an infinitely better game than Civ IV or V.Do you play video games?
Would you be happy if we stayed with the Xbox original instead of the Xbox One?
Or the PS2 instead of the PS4?
I still play Civ III once a month until cultural victory. that game was just perfection (or as close to it as Civ goes anyway)
I mean, I can only speak for myself, but I didn't buy into Pathfinder because "it was a continuation of 3.5". Indeed, I never played 3.5, and in fact I gave up on D&D for a while because I was upset about 3.5 ("buy the PHB again, less than 36 months since you bought the last one!").
So I don't care at all whether Pathfinder 2nd Edition is "like 3.5" or "a continuation of 3.5" I just want it to be a good game. I'm okay with any tabletop RPG getting a new edition every decade, without exception.
So... I can't be the only one baffled by the 2E announcement. The desire for a system similar to 3.5 DnD is what drove Pathfinder's creation and what kept people coming back... why drop all of that now out of the blue?
In my group, backwards compatibility with 3.5 is seen more as the problems it causes. Any time I run up against a Sorcerer's limited skills and delayed spell access, a high level game is set up such that most PCs could one-round most other PCs, or I have to re-explain a bit of combat minutia, that's something that exists as a concession to 3.5 compatibility.
Now, Pathfinder never would have succeeded without 3.5 compatibility to launch it, and there are a lot of things I like that exist because it began that way. But I started with Pathfinder as my first RPG, and so that compatibility was never a selling point for me. My players either never played 3.5, or had a toxic GM ruin the experience.
If we give feedback, we can stop 2E. Surely Paizo will listen and realize this isn't what we, as a community, want.
I think that probably falls under "you'd need to buy the company" with the level of things in motion. They've spent two years on this so far. (If they did stop it, my group and I would be pretty bummed.)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Calmer now, had a glass of water, and 2e isn't the end of the game or anything. Still... I do sort of hope they at least consider small 1e things once in a while after it's release. I mean, they are still going to be selling the books, but I mean maybe new content that isn't some third party thing of random balance.
Honestly, I think I just got anxious due to Starfinder feeling so different from what I'm used to, along with worries that pathfinder was going to become an odd game-heavy-rp-second thing like 4th edition DnD was. Even though logically I know that is unlikely.
I sort of wish I could delete my first post in this thread.
I feel stupid for having let a gut reaction and tiredness make me panic like that.
Calmer now, had a glass of water, and 2e isn't the end of the game or anything. Still... I do sort of hope they at least consider small 1e things once in a while after it's release. I mean, they are still going to be selling the books, but I mean maybe new content that isn't some third party thing of random balance.
Honestly, I think I just got anxious due to Starfinder feeling so different from what I'm used to, along with worries that pathfinder was going to become an odd game-heavy-rp-second thing like 4th edition DnD was. Even though logically I know that is unlikely.
I sort of wish I could delete my first post in this thread.
I feel stupid for having let a gut reaction and tiredness make me panic like that.
I think you can request the mods remove the thread?
Unsure how to, honestly. I did flag my own post, so that might get one to notice that I want it removed, maybe?