| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
“A wider public” – A reflection on Pathfinder 2nd edition
A premise: I love Pathfinder 1st edition, and what I am going to say is driven by that love, the same love that brought me to become a Pathfinder translator for my country (Italy).
I think that a second edition of Pathfinder was unavoidable if we wanted to avoid the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game as a whole to slowly collapse and fade away. Why should you listen to me, now? Because I am going to give you a new perspective, perhaps one you are not very familiar with. I will tell you about Pathfinder in Europe.
RPG games are far less popular in Europe than in the United States. When you like a system, you usually have to endure some pain in order to find a party to play with, even as a GM, unless you are not playing the most popular system around. It used to Pathfinders a few years ago, now it is D&D 5th edition.
I recently moved to Paris for work. I moved from a relatively small city in Italy where I had slowly built my party of friend with whom I have completed several Adventure Paths using Pathfinder Rules. When I left, I said myself. “Do not have fear, Giuseppe, you’re not going to give up your favored hobby! Just imagine how many people you will meet in Paris who will be ready to embark on a campaign with you! Paris is a huge city after all!”
Wanna know the results? After 4 months spent searching, posting in Meetup groups, Facebook groups, sending mail after mail to the local PFS coordinator, I gave up. And listen: I was offering to GM, not trying to get in a group as a player. Only a few people wanted to play Pathfinder, and most of them were newbies: and they all would have preferred D&D. You know what? I tried to post on a group offering myself as a D&D GM and you know how many candidates I got? More than you can imagine, my friends, and more than I am willing to admit.
But I endured. I painstakingly put together a group of 5 players: none of them had played Pathfinder before. We met on a Sunday afternoon to create our characters and…that was the moment I realized Pathfinder was going to slowly die, unless an undreamt of new edition came out. The players were confused. Too many options, too many sourcebooks (I even projected the Strategy Guide for them), too many rules. I tried to help them, to guide them, and eventually we did it, but I was left with the unpleasing sensation of having made their characters myself. Before I left, one player asked me: “Why don’t we just play D&D instead?”
This happened on Sunday, the 4th of March. You know the rest of the story.
I was excited, as though one of the Gods of the Inner Sea region had heard my unspoken prayers. Pathfinder 2nd edition was a thing!
***
Now, I want to speak a bit more in general. In the last few years, many friends asked me to GM a game for them. 5 years ago, when I started to play, they were all people in the category that some would define as “nerds” or “geeks”. They were driven by a sincere love of fantasy or RPG, and were willing to try out this new (to them) game named Pathfinder, which promised depth and endless possibilities of customization. They loved it, and they became my party. We achieved many RPG goals together.
It has been 2 years since the last “nerd” person asked me to run a game for him: someone with an interest in videogames, fantasy books, or other similar things. I got a lot of requests, but not from them. "RPGs? Too mainstream!," told me someone. How ironic!, I thought.
Most of the prospective players were girls who had seen Stranger Things and were interested in finding out what a RPG was. Others were people in search for a new pastime. No previous interest in fantasy, no love for RPG, and unsurprisingly…no love for math and complex character building processes. I made Pathfinder players out of them of course, but that was not easy. I had to work hard and many of them asked me to simplify the game, because they didn’t have the time read all the published books.
And now I am left with this feeling that Paizo is doing the right thing at the right moment. Carpe diem. I am not a veteran player by any means, I have not seen previous edition wars in the past, and I was not there when Pathfinder first came into light. But this time I will be. And I will work hard as I ever did in order to promote it. I hope it will be a bit less complex, with a slightly more comfortable learning curve for new players. Because we have to deal with it: RPG games’ public has widened significantly over the last few years, and Pathfinder 1st edition was not in line anymore with the new players. And although we could continue to ignore those “newbies”, I have realized how crucial they are not only for Paizo’s sales and consequently for the quality of its products, but for the diffusion of our game in itself. Annoying as it may seems, we must take them into account, and give them a reason to prefer OUR game to the others on the market. Their exigencies changed, and the game needs to change as well, because as Cicero said “the shifts of fortune test the reliability of friends.”
Just my two cents. I may be wrong on several, or all points of my post. After all, I've never been to the U.S, and I'm sure it is a completely different world over there. But that is what I am feeling, and I needed to share with you guys.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Im putting this out there: if Paizo want this game to work out, they need to break into twitch in a big way. Maybe reach out to Geek and Sundry, get some of theor cast playing the playtest with a couple of big name voice actors. Make Pathfinder 2 into an entertainment to watch as much as it is to play cause that is a major driver on 5e sales. Stuff like critical role and the adventure zone have brought a lot of people to the table who would never touch rpg's if they hadnt seen celebrities they like playing the game
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Im putting this out there: if Paizo want this game to work out, they need to break into twitch in a big way. Maybe reach out to Geek and Sundry, get some of theor cast playing the playtest with a couple of big name voice actors. Make Pathfinder 2 into an entertainment to watch as much as it is to play cause that is a major driver on 5e sales. Stuff like critical role and the adventure zone have brought a lot of people to the table who would never touch rpg's if they hadnt seen celebrities they like playing the game
I agree with you. This kind of partnership draw a lot of new players to the game, in my experience. Although they usually draw people to RPGs in general, so they are quite beneficial already.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
...we can deal with it as a community far better if we remain within community guidelines and treat not only each other but the hard-working development team with courtesy, dignity, and respect.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...we can deal with it as a community far better if we remain within community guidelines and treat not only each other but the hard-working development team with courtesy, dignity, and respect.
True....but that's usually not the case. It becomes one narrative trying to undermine the other narrative.....which always leads to conflict and war. ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And why is it we have the option to "favorite" a post.....and not the opportunity to "thumbs down" a post ?
I think that a second edition of Pathfinder was unavoidable if we wanted to avoid the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game as a whole to slowly collapse and fade away.
Instead, it will abruptly do the same.
I'm not saying that PF2 will be a bad thing. I'm not even saying I won't end up playing it. I'm saying that sentiment aside, there's a logical fallacy at work here and I'm too OCD to not point it out.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that a second edition of Pathfinder was unavoidable if we wanted to avoid the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game as a whole to slowly collapse and fade away.Instead, it will abruptly do the same.
I'm not saying that PF2 will be a bad thing. I'm not even saying I won't end up playing it. I'm saying that sentiment aside, there's a logical fallacy at work here and I'm too OCD to not point it out.
Not really. His premise is that without a new edition, the slow death is certain. With a new edition, it might or might not work. Even if it only has a 10% chance to survive, that's better than certain death. Kind of like eating food you don't know if it's poisoned is better than starving to death.
Now, we can agree or disagree with his premise. But I don't think it's a logical fallacy, within the premise itself.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's really cool to hear stories like this, because it is so different from my own experience playing pathfinder and finding groups. I moved to NYC 6 years ago, had a hard time finding an existing pathfinder group. I posted on meetup.com and soon found myself coordinating weekly pfs events for a dozen players. I ended up meeting the local VCs, making a lot of new friends, and playing and gming in numerous groups and nearby cons.
When I moved back to the west cost a couple years back, I immediately jumped in to several games of pfs and homebrew. On both coasts, most of the players I met had been playing various RPGs since they were kids and were heavily in to geek culture.
I will be sad if pf2e becomes to similar to 5e. I hope it remains a distinct and unique game.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
And why is it we have the option to "favorite" a post.....and not the opportunity to "thumbs down" a post ?
...every forum I've seen with a 'downvote' method it turns into a publicity contest to downvote unpopular comments until they are buried by the sheer number of 'downvotes'.
Without that function in play, all points are still available to be seen unless they violate Community Guidelines in some way.
Which means, based on the limited decades of experience I have, that lacking a 'downvote' is actually a positive for folks attempting to express opinion and concern vs. the alternative.
Too many options, too many sourcebooks (I even projected the Strategy Guide for them), too many rules. I tried to help them, to guide them, and eventually we did it, but I was left with the unpleasing sensation of having made their characters myself. Before I left, one player asked me: “Why don’t we just play D&D instead?”
While you are waiting for PF2 to arrive, you might want to check out the Beginner Box. IT's much less intimidating as far as character creation and getting started
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think PF2 is the right move for the company.
Is it the right move for me as a player? Based on the limited info we have, no.
And that is ok.
I have all my 3.5 material, I have all my PF1 material. I have all my 3PP meterial for both those systems. I have other d20 games with bits I've taken and adapted. But at the center of it all is 3.x core system.
I'm a guy that plays systems. I read lots of games and systems, but only play a few. I played AD&D 1st for 18 years. I played 3.x/PF for nearly 20. I've played HERO for 33 years. I've seen comments are 11 years is good for a game system - heck I've had campaign (same players, same characters) last longer than that.
Am I negative - well aside from the first day of freaking out about the change- not really. I know what I like to play. Am I said direct support for it is going to end - yes. I am sad about that. Am I sad that the game I've played for 20 years (or so) is moving on... sure. But it isn't the end of the world to me. I'll keep playing with what I have.
People like games for different things - it may be setting, it may be adventure support, it may be play at the table, and it may be the system itself. A lot of people came to Pathfinder because it was a continuation of the system of 3.x, and no other reason. Those people are not likely going to embrace PF2.0, and that is fine. Can they post their displeasure, sure. Should they attack Paizo or people in favor of the change - no. But they(we) shouldn't be mocked because we don't like the idea of PF2, because the reason we play PF is the system itself. Change the system, and that reason goes away, and at that point - PF2 is "just another game to look at".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The "too many options" fallacy strikes again!
New 'n' Pathy! is just another set of options. It won't solve that problem because that problem doesn't actually exist.
Round and round.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's probably one worthwhile feat or spell printed
for whom? what's worthwhile for you and your group may not be seen as worthwhile for other groups and vice versa. What goes on the junk pile for you, might be in heavy use elsewhere.
Options. Preferences. That's how they work.
Love how nobody payed attention to:
"Why don't we just play D&D?" is even more relevant when PF2 is just a clone
Then it's a good thing that PF2 isn't a clone.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is going to sound harsh and I don't intend for it to, but it's the most straightforward way to say it: Based on my own experience you did everything wrong with your Pathfinder group.
Same thing happened to me when my friends tried to introduce me to 3.5. They tried to get me to play an optimised version of 3.5 by linking to articles, throwing up builds and suggestion different books to look at. It resulted in me refusing to play anything 3.5e until Pathfinder finally came out 6 months later. Now, I play Pathfinder and Starfinder exclusively. How did my friends get me to switch to Pathfinder when 3.5e failed? They ran a CRB-only game.
Gaming hasn't changed so dramatically that Pathfinder 1e is a terrible game that no-one can enjoy. Brand new players will enjoy Pathfinder in 2018 just as much as brand new players enjoyed it in 2009, so long as you don't overwhelm them and let them learn gradually.
The biggest reason PF 2nd ed is going to be easier for your group of brand new players to play is because you'll be runnning a CRB only game with a single hardcover introduced annually so they can slowly come to grips with the new options. In 10 years time you'll be in the exact same spot if you move to a new city.
I'm glad you're excited for the new edition and it will hopefully entice lapsed players to get back into Pathfinder. But getting a new edition and throwing away your old books isn't the only solution for getting brand new players into a game system. You can always limit the books available for a game regardless of how far into it's lifecycle you start playing. It's effectively the same thing as a new edition with only 1 year under it's belt.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Im putting this out there: if Paizo want this game to work out, they need to break into twitch in a big way. Maybe reach out to Geek and Sundry, get some of theor cast playing the playtest with a couple of big name voice actors. Make Pathfinder 2 into an entertainment to watch as much as it is to play cause that is a major driver on 5e sales. Stuff like critical role and the adventure zone have brought a lot of people to the table who would never touch rpg's if they hadnt seen celebrities they like playing the game
Seconded, thirded, fourthed and more. This is a really important avenue for getting "the brand" out there and one that Paizo has really overlooked.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Im putting this out there: if Paizo want this game to work out, they need to break into twitch in a big way. Maybe reach out to Geek and Sundry, get some of theor cast playing the playtest with a couple of big name voice actors. Make Pathfinder 2 into an entertainment to watch as much as it is to play cause that is a major driver on 5e sales. Stuff like critical role and the adventure zone have brought a lot of people to the table who would never touch rpg's if they hadnt seen celebrities they like playing the gameSeconded, thirded, fourthed and more. This is a really important avenue for getting "the brand" out there and one that Paizo has really overlooked.
I'll add my vote to that pile. I haven't really followed the game industry very closely. I remember the failure of 4th and the popularity of PF. I kind of assumed the PF was still on top. But then a few months ago I was poking around Twitch and saw a /lot/ of 5th ed stuff, including the big headliners and very little PF. It wasn't until I returned to these forums for PF2 info that I found that 5th ed was outselling it. But it makes sense. Twitch and Youtube are huge. And watching stars play D&D is a hell of a draw. You really need to get out there with Twitch streams and Youtube videos. Particularly with a popular channel.
I do think one thing that kind of hurts the Pathfinder brand, is that for so many of us it /is/ D&D. My group has been playing PF since the playtest and still sometimes call it D&D. And sometimes I'll say "I play D&D" to non gamers because it's something they might have heard of and doesn't have to involve describing the edition wars and such. This of course is problematic in terms of branding if the competition is getting free advertising. Twitch has a Dungeons and Dragons section, but not Pathfinder.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
John Lynch, thank you for your comment. Don't worry, I didn't take it as an offense. In fact, I think perhaps I explained myself not that good. I make a point of *NOT* introducing to many sourcebooks at once for new players. I have my own format to limit available sources even for experienced players, which I call Pathfinder Vintage. Although the main aim of that format is coherence, especially when running Adventure Paths (treasure, player's guide, etc.), when I apply its rules to the adventures I usually get the new players to play (Crypt of the Everflame, Rise of the Runelords), it effectively coincides with a reduction of the sources available (for both me and the players) to the Core Rulebook.
So *THAT* is not the problem. Yeah, I feel the game is a little bit bloated, but at the same time that is the strenght of Pathfinder, offering so many options to the players. My point was another: the problem is that when starting to play, new players sometimes know beforehand the differences betweeen the various systems, and in our case we can limit the alternative to Pathfinder and D&D. Usually this a priori knowledge is based on hearsay, and it is quite reductive and incomplete. The result is that, in my experience, new players tend to think about Pathfinder as a game that will become increasingly difficult for them. They know I may limit the sourcebooks at the beginning, but they know that sooner or later they will need to expand their horizons, because to them Pathfinder is "the game that offers a lot of customization and character's options," while D&D is "the game that takes it simple." This is clearly wrong, but that's what they think, at least the prospective players I've met in the last few years.
Now, take this knowledge and apply it not to new players in general, but to the *new* audience RPG have now: many of the people who love customization, depth of options, roleplaying games in themselves, game mechanics and so on, they probably already play the game. My OP focuses on the new players who fall out of those categories: people who want to try the game out, that have no previous disposition to RPGs. Now, what I argue is that D&D is currently more attractive for this kind of players, which I argue, are the majority as of now in Europe, for the following reasons.
1. It is thought to be simpler.
2. It is thought to be newer, and hence more modern.
3. It is thought to be the RPG per antonomasiam.
Now, there's nothing we can do about point 3, and as for point 1, it is more a matter of marketing than game system in my opinion. But for point 2, well, a new edition is needed. That's the only way to make Pathfinder look like a fresh game, and not a game clinging to 20 years old rules, although revised 9 years ago. New players know that. They usually know that Pathfinder is based on 3.5, and they think about that system as unnecessarily complex. They want something new, something fresh, something modern.
Of course, it is important to stress that I don't think that new players are right. I think that Pathfinder 1st edition is not so hard, and its learning curve is not impossible, if a good GM aids the players. I'm just arguing that, according to my experience, it seems so for new players nowadays. And since new players today are a bit different from new players 9 years ago, I argue that new players today not that interested, at the start at least, in countless options but rather interested in simplicity, they usually tend to look at Pathfinder as a worse alternative to D&D for them.
In my opinion Pathfinder 1st ed is not hard. It is sometimes unnecessarily complex on certain things, as Erik Mona himself said in the KnowDirection podcast, but complexity does not equate with difficulty.
Yeah, but PF2 is badImagine labeling a product as bad two days after its announcement with a bare minimum of information available to you
Imagine labeling a product as good two days after its announcement with a bare minimum of information available to you, and what little information you do have coming from a marketing campaign designed to make the product look good.
The intelligent consumer will closely examine the product with a critical eye.
On the issue of 'watching stars play the game', HarmonQuest uses Pathfinder as far as I know, so there's that
On the issue of 'watching stars play the game', HarmonQuest uses Pathfinder as far as I know, so there's that
Harmon Quest uses a very simplified version of Pathfinder, that's much closer to improv theater, than to actual Pathfinder, because the GM rolls for the players, as the players don't have the sheets in front of them, which would probably only confuse them more than anything, after they describe what their is about to do, so it's hardly representative of PF.
I get the feeling that the word "streamlined" is getting thrown around here as an insult and it seems to be equated often to "simplified" and "dumbed down", which I don't think is correct, but for the purposes of streaming, streamlining mechanics is probably quite beneficial, because the players and more importantly the listeners only need to learn and understand a couple of mechanics to follow the action. Fewer confusing mechanics also means the show flows better and doesn't get bogged down as often, which makes it more enjoyable to listen to.
I would enjoy watching Matt Mercer GM a game of PF2, because that's how their home game started as, before they took it to Critical Role and it would be interesting to see how he adapts to the changes and how "streaming friendly" they'd be.
