| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, first of all, they aren't screwing anyone over, so you need to get over that.
Second of all, I'd support this idea with my wallet, if only as an experiment.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder if it would be possible to include both edition stat block in AP like in AAW Rise of the drow? How many pages it represent?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's a genius idea. They would recruit new players with 2E and keep selling strong with the existing 1E base. Best of both worlds. Ending support of 1E will lose them some consumers. That dual solution wouldn't. Especially since lots of 1E fans/consumers would not mind a reduced product release rate a this time. I wouldn't even mind if they change the 1E line to "Advanced Pathfinder"
2E only: gain new, lose some old customers
1E and 2E: gain new, retain all existing customers, and I think more of the existing customers would try 2E
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm curious what product would we buy.
Is there a demand/need for more Base Classes?
More Archetypes and Prestige Classes?
More monsters?
More Feats, Spells, Traits and equipment?
I honestly don't see any need or demand for any more PF material.
..... Except of course for more ADVENTURES and SETTING material. (which we'll STILL get!)
So then it's the questions of A) How easily can one convert new PF2 adventures back to PF and, if it is too much a pain in the ass -- which it may be -- are there not enough PF adventures and setting material inspiration to last us a good 10-15 years?
Erik Mona has said they'll continue printing PF books if they continue to sell so when your Core or Bestiary or UE or APG gets too ragged to use, you can probably still replace it.
Paizo is PROUD of PF and will not be upset that many gamers are still going to play it -- I think they'll be pleased so many of us are still going to play PF.
But honestly, what's their next PF hardback gonna be if it's not all Fluff and setting? What are their mega GenCon releases going to be?!
No more Classes surely.
No more Archetypes or Prestige Classes surely.
OMG no more Feats or spells or equipment.
....Another Unchained????
What's after that?!
- - - -
No, Paizo is still a business -- and one we NEED to be financially healthy because we love their customer service, presence on the Boards and, obviously, creative work.
They have to be able to move forward.
|
|
It's MY hope that PaizoCon and GenCon and the other BIG ones will have AS many PFS offerings, including run by designers, as they will PF2S offerings. (understanding that maybe not the first year when it's still shiny and new)
My fear is that they won't. That if a random player wants to run a Scenario of PF at PaizoCon instead of PF2S, then they'll have to do it in their hotel room or the lobby. Not in the grand ballroom.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To much division of resources, but i believe harnmaster does this and hackmaster at least attempted two versions of the same rules-set for different tastes. So, I don't know, maybe.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Right now, if I want to support Paizo, I MUST play PF2E. If that's not screwing over the base, then what is?
There is a year's worth of material being printed that you can look forward to purchasing if you want to keep supporting Paizo.
Unless you already own every single thing Paizo has ever released, you've probably got lots of stuff on your wishlist that you can still purchase, and will be able to still purchase even after PF2 is released.
It's not at all true that the only way to support Paizo is to play PF2.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's a good idea for consumers, a terrible idea for a company. If you do this, you make a new competitor in the business, and no matter which edition wins, Paizo will lose money. They would essentially be paying two teams of developers while not appreciably increasing their share of the market.
You would not even need to keep all the product lines.
The bulk of any new AP or Scenario, for example, would not change in any way. All you would need to do is convert the stat blocks.
Since Paizo is putting out that converting between the systems is trivial, publishing official PDF's already converted to PF1 should be trival.
The same should be true for any world setting: the bulk of the text should be unchanged and, by their own statement, it should be trivial to provide an official conversion of the crunch.
Additionally, while I'm certain many 3pp will be migrating to PF2, I'm sure that there will be at least some producing nw PF1 content as long as there is a market for it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since Paizo is putting out that converting between the systems is trivial, publishing official PDF's already converted to PF1 should be trival.
The same should be true for any world setting: the bulk of the text should be unchanged and, by their own statement, it should be trivial to provide an official conversion of the crunch.
I haven't seen any staff members say it will be trivial to convert from PF2 to PF1. The only thing they've demonstrated is that it's not too hard to convert from PF1 to PF2.
Can you give us a link where they've said anything at all like that?
agreed. especially vice versa
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To much division of resources, but i believe harnmaster does this and hackmaster at least attempted two versions of the same rules-set for different tastes. So, I don't know, maybe.
A fair number of 3PP either put out products that are dual-stat or put out versions of their products for different systems. Frog God Games supports both Pathfinder and 5E, as well as their own Swords & Wizardry system.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder if this will make a blog post? I would like to this 'trivial' conversion from 1 to 2, and vice versa.
Since Paizo is putting out that converting between the systems is trivial, publishing official PDF's already converted to PF1 should be trival.
No Paizo staff has said anything like that at all.
They've shown that it's easy to move from PF1 to PF2 on the fly, but have not said or demonstrated that it will be easy to do the reverse.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm curious what product would we buy.
Is there a demand/need for more Base Classes?
More Archetypes and Prestige Classes?
More monsters?
More Feats, Spells, Traits and equipment?
I honestly don't see any need or demand for any more PF material.
I don't know about you but I see plenty of design room for more stuff. There's still a good three books worth of things I've been particularly wanting, and that's just specific wishlists, not even vague like that I think there's lots of archetypes that could still be made but can't point as much to "I want this one idea".
If there's cases where a player cannot realistically include a base class in a Paizo AP on an equal footing without houseruling or significant adjustments, just due to lack of content, I think there's room for more products. (Psychic, Wrath of the Righteous, for the record on an example here.)
It's probably hard to do an accurate rules-compliant conversion of a PF2 monster to PF1, but really how accurate does it need to be? It just has to have some hit points, an AC, saves, attacks, the odd skill and maybe some spells or special abilities. You don't need to know that it has 15 Wisdom, 3 points of Natural Armour and Sense Motive as a class skill. It's going to die after 3 rounds. A few NPCs will be different, but not very.
Treasure is probably the hard part, especially if PF2 assumes things like ABP and limited-use wands.
I think I wrote it before but on behalf of more classes: we still haven't got a functional Noble (or whatever you want to call it) class, just a couple of Archetypes that try to go in that direction. And most of the classes are pretty eurocentric. I'm pretty sure, looking elsewhere geographically, that there is still room for great and original concepts. The occult classes are proof of that. And if you don't thing they warrant new classes, well then at least archetypes could be made out of them.
And yes, there is always room for more traits
I wonder if this will make a blog post? I would like to this 'trivial' conversion from 1 to 2, and vice versa.
Since Paizo is putting out that converting between the systems is trivial, publishing official PDF's already converted to PF1 should be trival.
No Paizo staff has said anything like that at all.
They've shown that it's easy to move from PF1 to PF2 on the fly, but have not said or demonstrated that it will be easy to do the reverse.
If it is that simple to move in one direction, on the fly, there is little reason reverse engineering the changes should be difficult. It's just math, and math works the same in both directions.
Or, we could just admit some of us are taking the marketing publicity at face value without considering any of the implications or puffery. Converting may be simple at 1st level, when few options and special abilities are present, but very complex and time consuming at higher level, with 1:1 conversions not existing at all for many things.
You underestimate the time and expense that layout takes.
I can guarantee you it is considerably less expensive than generating new content and artwork from scratch.
One of the things I think that drove TSR to bankruptcy was spending more producing items than the profits those items generated.
Paizo only has so much staff. If they divide that staff, things can either take longer, cost more, make everyone's workload harder, or all of the above when producing something.
When investing in rules, this could make it even more task intensive.
I'm not sure dividing their staff between two departments of PF1 and PF2 is such a smart idea. They already have a backdoor escape if PF2 eventually flops badly (probably will be seen in around a year or two. I expect it will sell well at first, but if long term endurance is not there, that should be able to be seen in around a year or two) by continuing to print PF1 materials (they small paperbacks they are now printing of the PF1 rulebooks). In a way, right now they ARE doing both (support for PF1 and PF2). However, in the future I expect that they will focus on PF2...and I'd do the same if I were them when PF2 is officially released.
Come August 2019, if I were them, I'd play the gamble and invest in PF2 rather than PF1 for the time being. The PF1 rulebooks are still going to be available for those who like PF1, and there's currently a TON of material out there available for it (many APs are even still out there, and I know I haven't been able to play them all. If someone has played them all they have a LOT of time on their hands).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Putting two versions of every statblock in every adventure product would be a monumental waste of space and wordcount.
-Skeld
Since Paizo is putting out that converting between the systems is trivial, publishing official PDF's already converted to PF1 should be trival.
Reading FTW.
Nobody suggested putting two stat blocks in the same book. Separate PDF's were suggested for PF1 stat blocks.
One of the things I think that drove TSR to bankruptcy was spending more producing items than the profits those items generated.
As much as I love Pathfinder, that enjoyment won't necessarily transfer to PF2. If it is not a game I enjoy, Paizo will get $0 from me.
What's more, if there is to be no continued support for PF1, I have little reason to continue purchasing the existing product lines for what will soon be a dead game.
As the consumer, it is Paizo's responsibility to convince me:
1. Why I should continue buying products what a game that is going to receive no further support.
2. Buy into a new game that radically departs from the game I love. Especially when the entire reason it exists is because of 3E's shift to 4E can consumer dissatisfaction.
As the consumer, it is Paizo's responsibility to convince me:
1. Why I should continue buying products what a game that is going to receive no further support.
2. Buy into a new game that radically departs from the game I love. Especially when the entire reason it exists is because of 3E's shift to 4E can consumer dissatisfaction.
You are absolutely correct, and I'm certain that they will try to do that.
Historically though, Paizo is making the right moves currently.
With an open playtest, it's shown that it generates more interest in the game than one that is not open. Normally the rulebooks sell better or at least well after such a playtest (or in some instances, contest).
With a PR that is open and yet respectful of their game and their company, it also normally helps generate goodwill and sales.
Combine those and one could probably predict that when the Core Rule Book for PF2e releases, it will exceed most of their other sales for a decent amount of time. A Bestiary can also probably be lumped into that as one of the core books for running the game system.
In this, I predict at LEAST a year of good sales, a year which may (and probably) will have better sales than PF1 probably has had recently.
In this, it doesn't matter if they keep older customers or not.
They will have a resurgence as many who have left PF for other games come back with curiousity, others who want to just give it a try, more that want to see the results of the playtest and have the book on their shelf, and those who simply collect RPGs.
NOW, the big test comes after that. After a year (though you normally won't see action until after two if this is the case) if people did NOT like the system or the changes...you will see a slump in sales and a major downtrend in the number of customers for that product. (So I guess that would be around 2020-21 in that aspect).
It really does depend twofold, on whether they keep their foundational base customers who support them in anything with PF1, AND if they can attract new customers with PF2e. If they can do those two things I think they'll be set for at least five to eight years (or perhaps even longer) into the future (so around 2025-2028) in regards to PF2e support.
If they FAIL to do that, they STILL ARE PUBLISHING PF1e. I'm not sure why people think you need to be publishing new material to support a game system. They will still be publishing PF1e rulebooks. That's a good support from the sounds of it to me.
It also lays the groundwork for a fallback plan. IF, for some reason, PF2e flops terribly, they STILL have PF1e out there.
What is more, is that PF1e literally has hundreds of adventures to play. You have all the AP adventures (currently 127 of them...THAT'S A LOT...if you played one a week you'd have over 2 years of gameplay right there). Then you have over 300 Pathfinder scenarios (which is more like what you'd play each week in a game session) which if played weekly would take you over 5 years to play. Finally you have the modules which is a little over 40, and with the left over scenarios will give around another year of play.
You can buy all those that are not hardcopy in PDF. You have almost 8 years of stuff to play (if you can play some of that excessively fast, which most cannot, so it's probably more like 16-20 years of play material).
I don't know why people are complaining about this, especially if they want new players they have the ability to by the rulebooks still.
In closing, PF2e may be successful, it might not be...I don't know. I think it's an easy prediction to say PF2e corebook sales will be good and that's a good focus for Paizo.
Beyond that, if PF2e flops (2020-21 should be a reasonable guess at if it has) they still have some pretty good fall back positions I think for that interim.
If it is successful they are set for the next few years (2025 - 2028 at least).
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Putting two versions of every statblock in every adventure product would be a monumental waste of space and wordcount.
-Skeld
Since Paizo is putting out that converting between the systems is trivial, publishing official PDF's already converted to PF1 should be trival.Reading FTW.
Nobody suggested putting two stat blocks in the same book. Separate PDF's were suggested for PF1 stat blocks.
Hmmm, in that case, that idea is just as bad, or worse.
-Skeld
|
|
Still, I just don't see what rulebooks Paizo can publish under Pathfinder.
Honestly.
Do you really want a Bestiary 7?!
Do you really want another book with Classes and spells and feats and archetypes?
Tell me.
What RULEbooks are there left to do?
Or do you just think Paizo should publish campaign setting material and adventures from here on out?
I just don't get the problem.
Do you really want another book with Classes and spells and feats and archetypes?
I wouldn't be against it. there is still uncharted territory to fill, especially the farther away one gets from eurocentrism
Or do you just think Paizo should publish campaign setting material and adventures from here on out?
well, if they abandon the rule side of PF to make PF2 a thing, setting material and adventures are what would be left. making setting books rule neutral or rule agnostic is not hard, it's harder with adventures, for various reasons, but not exactly impossible to publish conversions
|
|
I really am surprised by this.
I could see Paizo doing a full revision of Pathfinder -- an 'Unchained' as it were, for the whole canon of rules.
And I wish that they had come to the Boards and said, 'Hey, we considered a full-out revision and a PF2, here are the reasons we ultimately decided on PF2 over the full-out-revision' -- but either way, I just don't see how they could continue as a business without coming up with something. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think that mere Adventure Paths and campaign setting material would keep them afloat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Still, I just don't see what rulebooks Paizo can publish under Pathfinder.
Honestly.
Do you really want a Bestiary 7?!
Do you really want another book with Classes and spells and feats and archetypes?
Tell me.
What RULEbooks are there left to do?
Or do you just think Paizo should publish campaign setting material and adventures from here on out?
I just don't get the problem.
Yes, that's exactly what I want.
Maybe not much need for a lot more classes....But there is still plenty of material to cover, and now it appears it won't be.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They could support both, but they have to weigh the costs and the benefits.
It will cost them more time to develop a product that supports both systems. Plots and World Events would be the same, but Creature/NPC stat blocks would be different. Additional stat blocks take up extra page count and layout time.
They could generate revenue from the PF1e material. A person who does not follow Paizo to PF2e does not buy PF2e product. The PF1e translation could be released in PDF only, and only present the translated stat blocks, thus the PF1e customers would still buy the APs for the Plot. If they wanted to, they could put both the PF1e and PF2e stat blocks into a PDF that was free to those who purchased the AP, and then there would be more pages for other content, or the printed AP could be smaller and less expensive to print.
It kind of all comes down to how big the PF1e market remains and corporate philosophy. Would they internally view PF1e players as the enemy, despite how the marketing effort portrays things. The most important part is the size of the PF1e market. If it stays sizable, somebody will provide content for it. That's why Paizo originally got PF off the ground. A sizable market still craved D&D 3.5e.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Putting two versions of every statblock in every adventure product would be a monumental waste of space and wordcount.
-Skeld
Since Paizo is putting out that converting between the systems is trivial, publishing official PDF's already converted to PF1 should be trival.Reading FTW.
Nobody suggested putting two stat blocks in the same book. Separate PDF's were suggested for PF1 stat blocks.
Hmmm, in that case, that idea is just as bad, or worse.
-Skeld
Layout and editing takes time and money. Here, you are producing two products that take time away from making new material. So yeah, I agree with Skeld, this is not a manageable idea.
On top of that, two ongoing lines of material is going to lead to confusion, because people will not know what edition a "new" book is for, so you will get people complaining when they buy a product for the wrong edition.
They could do some online pdfs of the APs and other adventures with the statblocks and DCs for PF1. But that would cost money, and you still have to properly balance the encounters using those rules. I think everything can be solved with a good conversion guide. But it will require massives amount of time investment from the GMs
As much as I like the idea of them continuing 1e they already have their hands full with 2e and Starfinder.
They shouldn't put out more PF1e books for the time being after they print PF2e...unless it fails catastrophically.
However, if we are making wishlists for more PF1e books....obviously a Bestiary 7 is not a bad thing to create. Nor is a Bestiary 8, 9, or 10.
In addition, they have a whole slew of other classes I'd like them to look into that I'd want more than them simply being archetypes...but full on classes.
Things such as a
Full on dedicated blaster (like the Warlock was in D&D 3.5)
A true jack of all Trades
An enchanter based character that is all about enchantments, illusions, and subterfuge (sort of like the 3.5 Beguiler).
An entire book based on Sea Faring classes. Classes that are completely about ships and sea faring.
They have never really gotten into prestige classes (relying more on archetypes), but a big book of prestige classes would also be something that could be interesting.
An entire book based on Sea Faring classes. Classes that are completely about ships and sea faring.
I like that. 3.5's Stormwrack had a couple of nice ideas for seafaring Prestige Classes that really could be classes on their own
For the same reason why Microsoft is no longer publishing stuff for Windows XP
because it was too good and stabile a system? I'm not sure I follow...
Too bad e2 doesn't work in a way that the 1e monster stats work fine in the new system and they could just keep making new bestiaries with new monsters instead of starting over again:(
I really hope that at the very least they finish sanctioning the PF1 books which have not been added to additional resources, and then that they sanction for PFS1 as many of the existing modules and adventure paths as possible to give those of us who don't want a new game the largest set of their already published material to play.
(I understand that Wrath of the Righteous and Kingmaker probably never see sanctioning, but the ones that don't have huge reasons like that.)
I'd never expect them to keep publishing new material for it, but hopefully they still have tables at GenCon.
Even if they sanctioned it, the real "feel" of Kingmaker isn't available in society.
I suppose Wrath they could give the boon that gives you mythic stuff "only when playing additional parts of this adventure path." As well.