| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm staying with PF1.
Not interested in the direction PF2 is going.
I'm staying with PF1. I have way too much invested in it.
I will probably checkout the PF2 Core Rulebook out of curiosity but not if it becomes the tool that ultimately kills off PF1 due to lack of attention and development there by Paizo. Fighting hard to try to stop that from happening.
There's still a market for PF1 and it should be supported with a sustain level development effort by Paizo. After all, we supported Paizo. Can't drop us like a rock now. Not healthy for PF1 or PF2.
No, I don't like the action economy for PF2, and it's at the core of the system.
The release of Planar adventures has more to do with the fact that it was announced last year and was likely in development some time before that than Paizo's personal outlook on PF1. Bonus in that it still provides something to add to tide them over for a bit.
Though that actually brings up a good question. Does anyone actually know of any publisher that continued to develop material for its older publication to any substantial degree after debuting a successor system? I know a few publishers(as Paizo is planning to do) keep lines in print or temporarily bring back certain lines to reprint for a limited time. New content though is something I can't recall.
All of the examples I can think of off the top of my head don't seem to have done so.
I'm certainly not going to miss PF1 from a DM perspective, but it will sting as a player to lose the races and classes I main for a while. The two DM's in our group however are both going to be looking at the playtest and one of them ordered an actual book so we'll see what happens.
BTW, I want to thank Paizo for all the hard work to make PF1 the best RPG system that has ever existed.
There is a ton of material available for us to play forever and ever.
Symbolically, it would be nice for the PF1 community to not feel abandoned by declaring that PF1 development will come entirely to an end on August 2019.
For those of us who love it so much, that creates too much heart ache.
To release even just a PF1 module now-and-then would let us know you still think about us, appreciate us, and you still care.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I haven't seen anything I like in any of the 2.0 previews, so I'll be holding out for PF1 games.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo should continue a sustaining level of development on PF1 till PF3 development starts at which point PF2 goes into sustaining.
Paizo, itself, clearly doesn't seem to think PF1 is dead -- or they wouldn't have released another book just last month.
Paizo is continuing to support PF1 with NEW material for another full year. There are NEW products coming out until July, 2019.
They are keeping the rulebooks in print until it's no longer economically feasible to do so. (See Lisa Steven's quote in one of your previous threads).
They are not pushing PF1 over a cliff; they are letting it die a natural death as interest wanes. No artificial life support. Just a complete game that they will keep producing until it no longer attracts enough players to keep that product line profitable.
Even before PF2 was announced, players were losing interest. So, they came to a business decision about how to address that problem.
You seem to believe that they are incompetent and are not capable of making such a decision. That somehow, with all their financial information at hand, they made the wrong decision. And that somehow, you, with no gaming business experience, are so much better than their entire company, at running their business.
Not going to happen. The owners have made a decision. You might want to stop disparaging their business skills, and telling them how much better you could run their company.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've been through about six edition changes at least and it's always a pain in the butt. I don't blame Paizo for coming out with a second edition. It makes sense for a variety of reasons.
A game edition is a bit like having a favorite chair or a pair of shoes that you finally get nice and worn in. The edition change means having to break in a new pair of shoes all over again. Right now, I'm happy with Pathfinder and the experience it provides. I use everything from PDFs for online games to maps, pawns, miniatures and handouts at the table in the round.
I'll give it a few years for the content to catch up. Once people start complaining about second edition bloat, I'll know that it's ready for me to look at. Until then, the game content can in no way compete with my collection of 3.5 era books with the ten years of PFRPG.
I just ran an encournter in Ironfang Invasion with an hobgoblin gunslinger, a medium and a bugbear Slayer flying on wyverns to attack my PCs. Wake me up when Second Edition can do that.
Mic drop.
See ya, Toothy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo should continue a sustaining level of development on PF1 till PF3 development starts at which point PF2 goes into sustaining.
Paizo, itself, clearly doesn't seem to think PF1 is dead -- or they wouldn't have released another book just last month.
Paizo is continuing to support PF1 with NEW material for another full year. There are NEW products coming out until July, 2019.
They are keeping the rulebooks in print until it's no longer economically feasible to do so. (See Lisa Steven's quote in one of your previous threads).
They are not pushing PF1 over a cliff; they are letting it die a natural death as interest wanes. No artificial life support. Just a complete game that they will keep producing until it no longer attracts enough players to keep that product line profitable.
Even before PF2 was announced, players were losing interest. So, they came to a business decision about how to address that problem.
You seem to believe that they are incompetent and are not capable of making such a decision. That somehow, with all their financial information at hand, they made the wrong decision. And that somehow, you, with no gaming business experience, are so much better than their entire company, at running their business.
Not going to happen. The owners have made a decision. You might want to stop disparaging their business skills, and telling them how much better you could run their company.
As someone with a business degree, the situation is likely more complex than either of you think it is. There are a TON of reasons why Paizo might be abandoning PF1.
Wizards abandoned 3.5 after 4e, and it wasn't due to a lack of interest in 3.5. It was because 4e was their "new" product and 3.5 was infringing upon that product's sales.
It would be foolish to say that a similar situation isn't at the very least affecting the decision to halt PF1 content.
Paizo knows that it's hardcore...
I'm sure it's complex. I'm just making the business decision to make my case as best as I can to protect my interests -- which is substantial investment in PF1 products.
It's up to Paizo to hear me or ignore me.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm sorry folks, I can't hear you over the sound of me burning my PF1 PDFs to ashes.
Let the past die. Kill it, if you have to.
Or sell it to buy beer and a new game.
I'm fine with PF1. Don't need a new game. I will watch PF2 with curiosity, though.
I've watched the RPG market for a long time -- probably longer than either of you have been alive.
The kill it off mentality is killing this market in general. People get pissed and leave.
I'm sorry folks, I can't hear you over the sound of me burning my PF1 PDFs to ashes.
Let the past die. Kill it, if you have to.
Or sell it to buy beer and a new game.
I'm fine with PF1. Don't need a new game. I will watch PF2 with curiosity, though.
I've watched the RPG market for a long time -- probably longer than either of you have been alive.
The kill it off mentality is killing this market in general. People get pissed and leave.
And I love my PDFs.
I've been through about six edition changes at least and it's always a pain in the butt. I don't blame Paizo for coming out with a second edition. It makes sense for a variety of reasons.
A game edition is a bit like having a favorite chair or a pair of shoes that you finally get nice and worn in. The edition change means having to break in a new pair of shoes all over again. Right now, I'm happy with Pathfinder and the experience it provides. I use everything from PDFs for online games to maps, pawns, miniatures and handouts at the table in the round.
I'll give it a few years for the content to catch up. Once people start complaining about second edition bloat, I'll know that it's ready for me to look at. Until then, the game content can in no way compete with my collection of 3.5 era books with the ten years of PFRPG.
I just ran an encournter in Ironfang Invasion with an hobgoblin gunslinger, a medium and a bugbear Slayer flying on wyverns to attack my PCs. Wake me up when Second Edition can do that.
Mic drop.
See ya, Toothy.
Same for me.
Paizo should continue a sustaining level of development on PF1 till PF3 development starts at which point PF2 goes into sustaining.
Paizo, itself, clearly doesn't seem to think PF1 is dead -- or they wouldn't have released another book just last month.
Paizo is continuing to support PF1 with NEW material for another full year. There are NEW products coming out until July, 2019.
They are keeping the rulebooks in print until it's no longer economically feasible to do so. (See Lisa Steven's quote in one of your previous threads).
They are not pushing PF1 over a cliff; they are letting it die a natural death as interest wanes. No artificial life support. Just a complete game that they will keep producing until it no longer attracts enough players to keep that product line profitable.
Even before PF2 was announced, players were losing interest. So, they came to a business decision about how to address that problem.
You seem to believe that they are incompetent and are not capable of making such a decision. That somehow, with all their financial information at hand, they made the wrong decision. And that somehow, you, with no gaming business experience, are so much better than their entire company, at running their business.
Not going to happen. The owners have made a decision. You might want to stop disparaging their business skills, and telling them how much better you could run their company.
As someone with a business degree, the situation is likely more complex than either of you think it is. There are a TON of reasons why Paizo might be abandoning PF1.
Wizards abandoned 3.5 after 4e, and it wasn't due to a lack of interest in 3.5. It was because 4e was their "new" product and 3.5 was infringing upon that product's sales.
It would be foolish to say that a similar situation isn't at the very least affecting the decision to halt PF1 content.
Paizo knows that it's hardcore...
You have a nice degree. We don't really need to talk about that. I do, too. So do other people.
What I am saying is for Paizo. What you are saying are suppositions about internal information that only Paizo has. Without having that information, I can only make a case to try to protect my interests and communicate my personal experiences.
I'll see how easy conversion is, and PF1 will likely endure for at least a year after PF2 drops (those last APs are ones I intend to take my time with).
But I will be making the change, assuming the new edition gels into something as cool as a lot of the ideas we've seen so far seem to indicate.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I haven't seen anything I like in any of the 2.0 previews, so I'll be holding out for PF1 games.
I'm hoping that changes, but same here.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What you are saying are suppositions about internal information that only Paizo has.
And here's what Paizo is saying to you, their customer. Direct public quotes from the owner/CEO.
When asked when the last PF1 materials will be released, Lisa Stevens, CEO of Paizo said
July 2019
When asked how long the rulebooks would stay in print, she said,
If you read the FAQ, you will notice that we plan to keep Pathfinder 1st edition in print through our pocket editions until there is no longer enough sales to justify them. If they last another ten year, then cool! No need for a 3PP. We are already going to do it.
You may not believe it when the owner of the company says they're not publishing anything for PF1 after July 2019, but I do. I've linked those quotes to the exact web page where she said those things in writing.
It's not internal information. It's public.
The release of Planar adventures has more to do with the fact that it was announced last year and was likely in development some time before that than Paizo's personal outlook on PF1. Bonus in that it still provides something to add to tide them over for a bit.
Though that actually brings up a good question. Does anyone actually know of any publisher that continued to develop material for its older publication to any substantial degree after debuting a successor system? I know a few publishers(as Paizo is planning to do) keep lines in print or temporarily bring back certain lines to reprint for a limited time. New content though is something I can't recall.
All of the examples I can think of off the top of my head don't seem to have done so.
I'm certainly not going to miss PF1 from a DM perspective, but it will sting as a player to lose the races and classes I main for a while. The two DM's in our group however are both going to be looking at the playtest and one of them ordered an actual book so we'll see what happens.
Right, my personal exerience has been to discontinue development on the current system when the new system comes to market. When publishers do that, my personal experience has been that people, then, start blowing off the RPG game market.
Paizo has an opportunity to break with the pattern, at least in a symbolic way. They don't have to make a major investiment. Seems like enough people play that this could work.
This would go a long way to building good will with the RPG community and a loyal customer base that, then, might be more motivated to help Paizo accomplish its goals -- which right now is PF2.
But, it's hard to do that if the writing on the wall is that PF2 success or development means PF1 demise.
No, I still don't believe market share is a PF1 product issue -- I firmly believe that it is a marketing issue or a need to enage the gaming stores in a more creative way than has been done before. Prepaid cards for online Paizo purchases sold through game stores would be a good start.
But, some people say the younger player wants simpler rules and that seems right given 5e's bewildering success. However, if Paizo doesn't get more creative with marketing, they may only be offering the market the poor cousin version of 5e in PF2 -- and this might put Paizo back in the same boat they are in with PF1. Could happen.
So, I suggest doing some marketing experiments using PF1 to learn more about how to position PF2, which I wish the greatest success.
Right, my personal exerience has been to discontinue development on the current system when the new system comes to market. When publishers do that, my personal experience has been that people, then, start blowing off the RPG game market.
This has not been my experience if we're talking personals which are oh so fun. While this may come off as no true scotsman-like and i'm fully willing to accept responsibility if it does, it sounds to me as if such a person was unlikely to be able to dedicate time to tabletop in the future if a new edition was a breaking point. It screams of either troubled time management or life events out of their own control given the options they still possess.
If a new edition is unsatisfactory to you, there are still obviously as has been explained here plenty of material left that you likely don't have. On top of that this isn't excluding material that isn't "official", such as various homebrewed or ported settings to the system from a variety of genres.
A person who is not willing to change editions also might benefit from exploring other RPG systems that may emulate their favored play styles to as close a degree as they can get. Even on the pathfinder forums, not Paizo in general you'll see the odd discussion about other systems and how different, better or similar they might be to someone's play style.
You also make the claim that the RPG market is dying and people are leaving in droves based on lengthy measurements of time and personal experience but if anything I've seen the opposite happen. The last 3 edition changes of DnD alone have had profound effects on the market and playerbase numbers in an increasing fashion.
3rd edition doesn't need much explaining. Throwing out decades worth of OD&D and 2e/OSR style rulesets and instead embracing the more game-ist simulation style of WOTC D20 system was met by and large with great acclaim for a number of reasons. OSR Grognards didn't give up Tabletop simply because of their dislike for 3e and what they perceived to be the killing of their favorite systems. They instead rolled on with exiting material, increased their homebrew, facelifted new material back to TSR style D&D and in other cases simply finally dipped into some of the emerging retro clones.
4th edition was what allowed Pathfinder to ascend. You know, that game you like a lot owes a huge thanks to an edition change. Both 4th Edition and Pathfinder sold gangbusters and brought in variety of old and new players. Granted one of these was viewed far more kindly than the other. Not to mention, close to the beginning of 4e, even more Retro clones, OSR inspired games or just D20 began to enter the fray due to the earlier introduced OGL that WOTC was now restricting. Some closer to Basic D&D. Others to AD&D. A few actually modernizing with some hyrbid OSR/3e rulesets and even one in 13th age around 2013 or so which combined 3.x with 4e in a way that legitimately impressed a lot of people to the point where the common claim was "This is what 4e should have been."
And of course lets not forget 5e, which has absolutely been bombarded in media and cultural attention once more, drawing ever more curious minds into the world of roleplaying. Most of these players will probably never leave WOTC's sphere of influence but that comes with the territory.
Going back to other RPG's again, Runequest, Call of Cthulhu, Traveller, WHFB 3e, WH40K FFG, Star wars FFG, Shadowrun...the list could go on and on. All of these games among a sea of others have returned to their respective spotlights or have actually grown from earlier editions or previous publishings. The Tabletop market isn't dying. It's Growing and very much alive.
Paizo has an opportunity to break with the pattern, at least in a symbolic way. They don't have to make a major investiment. Seems like enough people play that this could work.
As it has been stated repeatedly and with what information we do have access to, this doesn't seem to be the case. The B&N's, Mortar shops and Books a Million's I visit tend to have a greater Paizo selection than Wizard's, so PF is in front of a lot of eyeballs as it is.
This would go a long way to building good will with the RPG community and a loyal customer base that, then, might be more motivated to help Paizo accomplish its goals -- which right now is PF2.
People who aren't moving to PF2 aren't doing so because they think Paizo is being mean. They aren't moving because they have fundamental disagreements as to how the game should evolve and progress. Nothing Paizo does short of releasing a "Chained" or "Advanced" alternative ruleset to PF2, incorporating PF1 elements OR killing PF2 as it is and regrafting PF1 onto a different face is going to change their minds. This isn't a knock on them, everyone has their preferences after all.
Right, my personal exerience has been to discontinue development on the current system when the new system comes to market. When publishers do that, my personal experience has been that people, then, start blowing off the RPG game market.This has not been my experience if we're talking personals which are oh so fun. While this may come off as no true scotsman-like and i'm fully willing to accept responsibility if it does, it sounds to me as if such a person was unlikely to be able to dedicate time to tabletop in the future if a new edition was a breaking point. It screams of either troubled time management or life events out of their own control given the options they still possess.
If a new edition is unsatisfactory to you, there are still obviously as has been explained here plenty of material left that you likely don't have. On top of that this isn't excluding material that isn't "official", such as various homebrewed or ported settings to the system from a variety of genres.
A person who is not willing to change editions also might benefit from exploring other RPG systems that may emulate their favored play styles to as close a degree as they can get. Even on the pathfinder forums, not Paizo in general you'll see the odd discussion about other systems and how different, better or similar they might be to someone's play style.You also make the claim that the RPG market is dying and people are leaving in droves based on lengthy measurements of time and personal experience but if anything I've seen the opposite happen. The last 3 edition changes of DnD alone have had profound effects on the market and playerbase numbers in an increasing fashion.
3rd edition doesn't need much explaining. Throwing out decades worth of OD&D and 2e/OSR style rulesets and instead embracing the more game-ist simulation style of WOTC D20 system was met by and large with great acclaim for a number of reasons. OSR Grognards didn't give up Tabletop simply because of their...
No, your wordy essay here is putting words in my mouth and taking things to extremes.
What you are saying are suppositions about internal information that only Paizo has.And here's what Paizo is saying to you, their customer. Direct public quotes from the owner/CEO.
When asked when the last PF1 materials will be released, Lisa Stevens, CEO of Paizo said
July 2019When asked how long the rulebooks would stay in print, she said,
If you read the FAQ, you will notice that we plan to keep Pathfinder 1st edition in print through our pocket editions until there is no longer enough sales to justify them. If they last another ten year, then cool! No need for a 3PP. We are already going to do it.
You may not believe it when the owner of the company says they're not publishing anything for PF1 after July 2019, but I do. I've linked those quotes to the exact web page where she said those things in writing.
It's not internal information. It's public.
And that is good news. Thanks. It's nice to know we have at least that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, your wordy essay here is putting words in my mouth and taking things to extremes.
"No U" is basically what I'm getting out of this it seems. I digress. Lettings games their run their natural life isn't killing the RPG market, whether you want to admit it or not.
I've said it elsewhere and I'll say it again. Talk to your fellow PF1 players, hook up with a few PF2 players and get to homebrewing. You'll likely be able to get some decent PF2 content into PF1, though likely not without some difficulty but its the nature of such things.
As long as LFQW is fixed enough and PC-NPC Transparency stays enough (hint: slightly more than 5E, at the very least; on this I treat GURPS scale as an ideal top while Starfinder and 4E scale or below as totally unacceptable), it seems my PF1 library is doomed to be dusted...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I will very probably switch to 2E somewhen down the line, but with at least three more 1E adventure paths I want to run (in addition to the one my group just started), it could be some time before I actually play the new system.
If the new system turns out to be so fantastic and loved by my group(s) that they all want to use it, I might put in the extra work and just convert those three to four adventure paths (Hell's Rebels, Return of the Runelords, War for the Crown and, possibly, The Tyrant's Grasp) to 2E and play them that way. Although I'm sure that would cause a myriad conflicts with the very expanded materials 1E has and the very limited material 2E will offer at the start.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm sorry folks, I can't hear you over the sound of me burning my PF1 PDFs to ashes.
Let the past die. Kill it, if you have to.
Look, Kylo, let it go. Just play some more Linking Park.
With my Pathfinder group having a six-page rule document of house rules of banned feats, spells, supplements, and rules and class modifications, we are looking forward to PF2 and most at the table have liked what we’ve seen thus far. Anything that can streamline and curb the worst abuses we welcome after ten years. We’ll likely go back to PF1 after the play test, or weld together some unholy amalgam of PF1 and PF2 for about 6 or 7 months until PF2 is released in full next year.
With my Pathfinder group having a six-page rule document of house rules of banned feats, spells, supplements, and rules and class modifications, we are looking forward to PF2 and most at the table have liked what we’ve seen thus far. Anything that can streamline and curb the worst abuses we welcome after ten years. We’ll likely go back to PF1 after the play test, or weld together some unholy amalgam of PF1 and PF2 for about 6 or 7 months until PF2 is released in full next year.
I heard similar things commented in 2008 to 2010. At the end of the day my D&D 4th ed houserules outweigh my PF1e houserules. Often the number of house rules/banned items has little to do with the system and everything to do with those making the system.
Our current Pathfinder campaign is expected to end next month, and our GM wants to start a full campaign rather than just whatever is in the Playtest, so that means at least one more PF1 campaign for my group.
One of the last several proverbial nails in the coffin for most of those I game with was WotC's decision to keep cranking out rules and material for 3.5 right up to the release date of 4e. To the week before in street dates, it felt like. That this was "grating" to some on an emotional level is putting it mildly.
Please don't do this outside of wrapping up Tyrant's Grasp, plus PFS I guess. Take a break for "con season" (May-August, if memory serves).
Please wrap up everything for "Pathfinder Classic" with neat, tidy bows leading up to "Nouveau Pathfinder"'s launch next August. Hammer out final errata and otherwise "get it done" for the PRD and 1st edition materials, preferably before "con season" begins in earnest.
Obviously it is going to depend on how I like PF2. My current expectations are pretty high though. If I like it as much as I hope, I will largely be switching over. Even then there's a question mark on my Ironfang Invasion game, because that campaign is so rich in found magical items and items will be one of the trickier conversion points I figure.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
In my mind, "Pathfinder" is the name of "3.5e tweaked and resurrected".
I would have been on board with "Pathfinder 2.0" if it was "3.5e more tweaked and more resurrected". But it's not. What is being marketed as "Pathfinder 2.0" is actually "Some Other Game We Just Invented", of which there are a multitude I could chose from (but don't).
So far, while a few of the previewed features have been interesting, none of them have been compelling to me, and most of them have been either neutral or undesired.
PF2 might be a fun game. It might be a structurally better game. Problem is, I've already got a game - and my gaming groups - are very, very comfortable with. None of us want PF2 with the extent of changes we've been shown.
So sadly, my spending will almost certainly cease next August, as new Pathfinder products cease being created. I have decades of material on my shelves, but I was still buying more because having more choices every time we start a campaign is better than fewer choices.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We will not be moving over to PF2 for some time. While the new system certainly has some good ideas that I might enmesh as house rules into my PF1, there are just too many hard stops for me as GM (resonance, the reportedly-simple-but-getting-more-complicated-all-the-time action economy, the limited skill system) and my players (no Gunslingers or firearms, watering down of magic, the CS/S/F/CF system) for us to adopt it at this time. And that's okay, because it means that my seven or eight hardback books remain valid.
If there's an easy manner of converting over and books are released that have interesting new material, then I may pick up some PF2 stuff to broaden the horizons of (our already quite vast) PF1 stuff. But from everything I've read, the system just isn't for my table.
The PFS group I play with will continue to offer PF1 for the near future. They don't believe there will be enough PF2 scenarios to keep up at first. I will probably go fully PF2 if and when the magus gets released for PF2.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I plan to stick to 1e for the foreseeable future. In large part because my preferred campaign setting is Eberron and I really don't want to go through all the work of converting my 3.5 Eberron library to new system.
Instead, I'll spend the next year or so deciding which of the holes in my Pathfinder collection need to be filled with hardcopies and buying those books before they go out of print.
If I end up down the road playing with a group that prefers 2e, I'll cross that bridge then.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder if some gaming company is going to do what Paizo did with 3.5, but with Pathfinder.
I'd be interested.
Purple Duck Games is doing that, called Porphyra RPG.
My campaign is currently at level 7, I don't think we'll want to switch rules midway through. When it's over, though, I will push hard for us to get on board the PF2 train for the next one.
I wonder if some gaming company is going to do what Paizo did with 3.5, but with Pathfinder.
I've been thinking about it, but not to release but for internal use by one of my local groups. Grabbing the PFSRD content as a base is easy. Retooling classes that we don't like isn't hard. We wouldn't need many adjustments to base rules, but I could see combining some Feats. We'd be happy...
... except that we depend on Hero Lab and don't have the cycles to convert everything there.
Thus, this mental exercise of planning often concludes that it is best to fall back to a simpler base, like D&D 3.5e, where we didn't feel we needed automation.