| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hello! This isn't for Paizo specifically, but rather how we as the community use abbreviations to refer to various edition.
I'd like to make the case to call Pathfinder PF1 and the new edition PF2.
Calling it "2e" or "2nd edition" can create a lot of confusion, as both of those are commonly referring to AD&D 2e.
Calling it PF2.0 seems a bit much, as there's no 2.5; after all, we didn't start calling D&D 3rd Edition "3.0" until after 3.5 came out. It was a way to distinguish the difference between 3.0 and 3.5. So if we say that PF2 is PF2.0, we're implying that Paizo is going to give us a 2.5 in a few years. I don't think that will happen.
PF1 and PF2 are simple, elegant, and convey exactly the information you want without confusion. Let's start using those when referring to the two editions.
PF 2e works for me. When I see PF2, all I think of is PF2: Electric Boogaloo.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes please. 1e and 2e are AD&D products in my mind.
PF 2e works for me. When I see PF2, all I think of is PF2: Electric Boogaloo.
I'm hoping it won't end up that way, but if it does.. think of how convenient that will be when it's time to complain ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was running with PF1E and PF2E but the common version being used here on the boards seems to be P1E and P2E so I've adopted them.
As Hythlodeus says its untitled at the moment, but Pathfinder: Apex or Pathfinder: Improved would both equally make sense ;)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd rather not call it "Improved" or some other loaded term until I know whether it really is an improvement.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer PF Classic for the current edition and PF2 for the upcoming, myself.
Old Pathfinder (1st edition)
New Pathfinder (2nd edition)
Then later it all gets renamed to "Chronicles of Pathfinder".
:P
I use P1e and P2e, personally, and don't intend to stop. :P
BTW, snarky names for P2e are super unhelpful. Call it what you want, but it's happening.
I've actually taken to using PF1 and PF2 for both writing and when speaking to people. Calling PF1 "first edition" or 1e is just a little bit confusing and I've never even played first or second edition D&D.
I'm not a fan of P1E, because we've been calling it PF for years. PF1 is a natural extension of that, but P1E is a complete change.
PF1/PF2 is my preference, but on the Paizo boards I don't think I'd mind P1E. I will say that I have been confused by some 2e and 1e comments as the OP has.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not a fan of P1E, because we've been calling it PF for years. PF1 is a natural extension of that, but P1E is a complete change.
But... but... pie?
Verbally I've been calling it Pathfinder Next or Super Pathfinder(Super Nintendo).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer PF Classic for the current edition and PF2 for the upcoming, myself.
Hmmm. Maybe that's bad marketing. Some of us have memories...
Coke - there can only be one
New Coke - let's "update the formula"
Coke Classic - oh, crap, nobody likes the new formula
Coke - so much for that experiment
I prefer PF Classic for the current edition and PF2 for the upcoming, myself.Hmmm. Maybe that's bad marketing. Some of us have memories...
Coke - there can only be one
New Coke - let's "update the formula"
Coke Classic - oh, crap, nobody likes the new formula
Coke - so much for that experiment
well...Since they are about to introduce New Pathfinder, hopefully Pathfinder Classic is not to far away
I'm using OPF for Old Pathfinder and NPF for New Pathfinder.
I'm also using downconverting and upconverting for going from NPF to OPF and going from OPF to NPF, respectively.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Still think those terms are really bulky and inconvenient , especially when typing on phone.
Converting and reverting would be better and simpler, no?
Still think those terms are really bulky and inconvenient , especially when typing on phone.
Converting and reverting would be better and simpler, no?
not to mention, they don't imply one version is inferior to another
Finally something I can agree with. /signed
not to mention, they don't imply one version is inferior to anotherStill think those terms are really bulky and inconvenient , especially when typing on phone.
Converting and reverting would be better and simpler, no?
They imply one version is older than the other, with the new one being the evolution of the older one. Which is exactly what a new edition is.
I prefer PF Classic for the current edition and PF2 for the upcoming, myself.Hmmm. Maybe that's bad marketing. Some of us have memories...
Coke - there can only be one
New Coke - let's "update the formula"
Coke Classic - oh, crap, nobody likes the new formula
Coke - so much for that experiment
Not so secret addendum: the coke at the end of that chain was not the same as the coke at the beginning.
As to pathfinder 2, there really doesn't need to be a fixed code. Just make it clear what you're talking about. context, numbers, whatever. Communicating '2nd edition' just isn't that hard.
that 'evolution' assumption remains to be seen
Nope, what remains to be seen is who will and will not like said evolution, which will be based on personal tastes, and the kind of changes implemented. That the game will evolve is certain.
a point could be made that a) evolution implies that PF2 is build on the PF1 mechanics, with 'natural' changes to suit modern needs (whatever they are) - we have no reason to believe that, everything points to drastic changes of the mechanics themselves
and b) that 'revolution' would be an even better word to describe PF2 - change through force, in this case the force of Paizo.
Since we don't know for certain - yet - both points might be valid, but just because one assumes one of them is, it is still an assumption until we know more
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I use P1e and P2e, personally, and don't intend to stop. :P
Suggest that again when we reach edition 3.14.I'm not a fan of P1E, because we've been calling it PF for years. PF1 is a natural extension of that, but P1E is a complete change.But... but... pie?
I liked Orthos' PF Classic, but P1e = Pie has grown on me quite a bit.
So, I propose:
- Pathfinder, 1st Edition = P1e (Pie) = π
- Pathfinder, 2nd Edition = P2e (2 Pie) = 2π
Oddly, 2π is also known as a turn in geometry.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I use P1e and P2e, personally, and don't intend to stop. :PSuggest that again when we reach edition 3.14.I'm not a fan of P1E, because we've been calling it PF for years. PF1 is a natural extension of that, but P1E is a complete change.But... but... pie?I liked Orthos' PF Classic, but P1e = Pie has grown on me quite a bit.
So, I propose:
- Pathfinder, 1st Edition = P1e (Pie) = π
- Pathfinder, 2nd Edition = P2e (2 Pie) = 2π
Oddly, 2π is also known as a turn in geometry.
Does this mean we have come full circle?
(Also, Piezo. It's perfect.)