Is it too late to go back to the drawing board?


General Discussion

1 to 50 of 375 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I read some discussion on the messageboard where people were talking about the possibility of scrapping 2E in its' current form and starting from scratch if the changes aren't well recieved. Was this just wishful thinking on the part of those posters?

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.

from scratch is a bit much in my honest opinion, got some great art, some solid concepts for how combat is ran, and interesting set up for character creation. i think big changes can still happen (remember from back during the original pathfinder playtest, still vexed athletics wasnt a skill :-p) but the developers have to REALLY think the player base isnt gonna get on board.


22 people marked this as a favorite.

It is not too late, but it is not very useful. The people who don't like the current changes, probably won't like different changes, unless it is a 3.76 version of the current 3.75 engine, and that is something Paizo has already discarded. At the very least, they should let us playtest a few adventures and give the survey a fair shot. Then they can decide if they scrap this revolutionary change to start a different revolution, or keep this revolutionary change.

What is gone forever is the option to keep the status quo. Revolution is coming, be it one way or another, I feel.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't think there is any chance they will start from scratch, as this has been internally playtested for 2 whole years (plus there is a lot of good stuff in here).

However, during the design process for the playtest ties were broken between devs who disagreed by going with whatever the most radical departure was, which is assuredly not the standard for how the final CRB will be put together. So the devs must be willing and able to redo things which don't work or aren't well received. Like there's no guarantee Goblins or Alchemists will be in the final product, it's conceivable multiclassing might look very different, etc.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I, for one, I'm sure things will change during playtest.

I don't think paladins will be LG only in the final release, for example. Certainly other changes will happen too.

But revolution is coming. Embrace it.

/transforms himself in a paladin of Milani


23 people marked this as a favorite.
gustavo iglesias wrote:
What is gone forever is the option to keep the status quo. Revolution is coming, be it one way or another, I feel.

That revolution may be a repeat of the one that took place with 4e.

A substantial percentage of the player base leaving for another company.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I think I should share the initial post I wrote. It's quite lengthy, so i apologize for that. I initially deleted it but it's as thoughtful as I've ever been on these forums and feel I must share.

I read some discussion on the messageboard where people were talking about the possibility of scrapping 2E in its' current form and starting from scratch if the changes aren't well recieved. Was this just wishful thinking on the part of those posters?

First and foremost, given the critical nature of this post I would like to be as respectful as possible. Despite my negative opinions of 2nd edition I do think there are a few *very* good ideas involved and I will heap praise on those salvageable ideas towards the end of the post.

I was reading a thread yesterday where some people were debating weather or not it's too late at this point to scrap the proposed 2nd edition changes almost entirely and go back to the drawing board. I'd argue that if this is at all possible it would be a great idea. Again, this post may come off as negative to some but I'm speaking from a place of sincerity and love of paizo.

First I'll explain why second edition is a point of no return for me:

-Some of the first blog posts I read reflected a radical change in tone. More specifically I'm referring to the high fantasy vs low fantasy attitude that flavors a game. On one end you have a hardcore medieval survival torture session where combat and advrnturing is non magical, you have to roll for heat exhaustion and hunger. Of course everyone is human and the mood is almost realistic. On the other end you have a world where magic is like electricity, there are fantastical magic elevators everywhere, your best friend is likely a goblin bard.

On this spectrum I think most peope would agree that D&D 3.5 was near the middle of this spectrum, dialed down slightly towards the gritty side. Level one was damn hard, and while magic did exist it was pretty tame early in the game. Martial characters felt almost realistic in a sense, usually not able to do anything too far from reality. A little later in the game magic could do truly fantastic things, but generally the tone was really not extreme in either direction. Pathfinder comes around and I think the grit vs. whimsy level is now dead center. We have gnomes who are charismatic magical fairy spawn, smart charming half orcs and other subtle changes that made the game feel a hair more like a comic book. There are hero points (optional rule admittedly) which give the protagonists extra help in avoiding danger. Subtly Pathfinder felt more cartoonish or comic booky than 3.5, although the changes were subtle. The game didn't go overboard on either direction.

Fast forward to the previews of second edition and this formerly moderate tone feels like World of Warcraft or Marvel. You have blog posts from developers explaining that they're going to make a game where martial characters can leap tens of feet into the air and smack down dragons and swim across entire oceans, you have a vermin race entering core with +2 charisma (gotta love me!!). These two moves represented such a radical shift in the mood of pathfinder that I felt irreconcilably alienated with the current design direction. This used to be a game system that was so flexible that you could play it as Game of Thrones or you could play Harry Potter/warcraft. However 2nd edition feels HEAVILLY biased towards the latter. This isn't just a matter of one rule here or one race there, but an issue of general design philosophy.

Secondly, there are the mechanics:

-Feats locked behind classee and the death of general combat feats. Why? If I want to make a wizard with power attack, i want that freedom. Even if it's the freedom to fail. The ways general combat feats interact with different classes is an enormous part of what makes this game great. Anything else feels like World of Warcraft.

-The attack of opportunity locked behind the fighter. I feel like there was no reason to alter such a fundamental part of the game, the battlefield is a dangerous place and people who aren't careful get attacked for moving or doing something risky.

-There was no need to fundamentally alter the skill system. It's one part of the game that seems to actually work for the most part.

-Removal of class specific spell list had a mediocratizing effect on the game, making classes feel similar.

Now for the positives. Even though second edition as it is has already lost me, there are some ideas Paizo has expressed which would be fun to see return if Paizo went back to the drawing board and redid this attempt to make a 2nd edition.

-Alchemist as core: This class has become a legend. It's the spirit of Paizo chucking bombs at the establishment, love it.

-Resonance: Execution aside, this wins me over on principle. Magic feels more real if it's limited or comes at a price. And finally a mechanical reward for all those people who kept their charisma higher than ten.

-Archetypes as core, and multiclass archetypes. Brilliant.

-Sorcerer getting to pick his spell list, further differentiating him from the wizard.

To conclude, I feel like this new direction is a big mistake but there are salvageable elements. I really thought Pathfinder unchained would be the template for any new edition, a further tweaked 3.85 edition. If there it's still possible to change course at this point i feel like that would be amazing.


In short: probably, yeah, it's too late.

Yes, there's the notion of sunk cost, but that doesn't work out very well for a few of reasons:
1. Paizo probably can't afford to completely scrap this.
2. The cat is out of the bag, and some ideas have been well received, people will want more.
3. I honestly think they have some really amazing ideas, and re-starting means unnecessarily scrapping these ideas (go-go three action economy).

Honestly, if Paizo's intent on sticking to their (doomsday) release clock, I'd be much happier with them releasing with a caveat that they plan a second version/heavy revisions a year later (even if they don't want to call it extending the playtest and refer to it as a 2.5...).


9 people marked this as a favorite.
Volkard Abendroth wrote:
gustavo iglesias wrote:
What is gone forever is the option to keep the status quo. Revolution is coming, be it one way or another, I feel.

That revolution may be a repeat of the one that took place with 4e.

A substantial percentage of the player base leaving for another company.

Yes, it could be. It could also happen what happened with Iron Gods, that instead of the sky falling because Paizo dared to put chocolate in their vainilla icecream, it was well received because the quality was good, so it leaded to some other similar products like distant worlds, and then it became starfinder, the fastest selling Paizo book of all time and the current biggest sale force in the company.

Other revolutionary products are 3e, and 5e, which were both massive successes.

I suspect the quality of the product itself has more in common with success than the fact it is revolutionary or not.

And regardless of that, the revolution is coming anyways. It might be a success, or the end of the world, but it is coming

/becomes himself a multiclassed paladin of milani AND Groetus


8 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh well...

The more i think about it the more I realize the old guard 3.5 types like myself may be a dying breed and a niche market. If the finished product is like the playtest I still wish Paizo and the fans the best of luck.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Zolanoteph wrote:

Oh well...

The more i think about it the more I realize the old guard 3.5 types like myself may be a dying breed and a niche market. If the finished product is like the playtest I still wish Paizo and the fans the best of luck.

Sorry, but I think this is likely true :-/. I'm one that was excited for the Playtest given the spoilers but disappointed with what I've seen.

Just as a point, might not hurt to step away and then come back after Gencon next year to see what the finished product looks like (assuming it's viewable for free...), or listen to other's opinions of it you trust.


The Paladin gets Attack of Opportunity as a feat. If they're going to take it away on the large part, they should give it to the Rogue as well, either as normal or like Combat Reflexes in 1e.


9 people marked this as a favorite.

Uh...

I disagree with you on the old skill system working. Having played with people who, sub level 12, had +50 in skills (personally I've seen it on Diplomacy, Bluff, Perception, Sense Motive, and Intimidate) made the PF1 skill system broken. Take 10 meant a result of 60+ with no chance of failure and targets that had zero chance to be uneffected. If you were playing with one of these hostess snack cake characters in your group you might as well just put your dice down during social encounters and get a sandwich.

Goblins as core, I agree, toss the little green skinned pyros.

Generally I'm enjoying PF2.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

At level 2 as an Unchained Rogue, I had +30 to Stealth before I even rolled thanks to a piece of gear made from spidersilk.


10 people marked this as a favorite.

There was actually a post from Vic Wertz on one of the preview blogs where he did say that if things were truly received poorly, they would go back to the drawing board and change things - and if the changes required enough work, they were willing to push the release date back.

I would highly suggest playtesting and making sure to share your concerns in the feedback surveys. I've seen a lot of people express dislike of some of the same stuff you do, and I think the more feedback they get, the more things could change in a way you like. While they'll consider what they see on the forums, what they get from the surveys is going to be a lot more valuable.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Volkard Abendroth wrote:
gustavo iglesias wrote:
What is gone forever is the option to keep the status quo. Revolution is coming, be it one way or another, I feel.

That revolution may be a repeat of the one that took place with 4e.

A substantial percentage of the player base leaving for another company.

Considering 4E is the second best selling D&D edition of all times as far as core products go, I don't think that is going to scare Paizo very much.

The biggest problem is that the playerbase has already gone. Pathfinder has tanked in sales and it's clear the hardcore fans of 1E are not enough to keep the product alive. The majority of people who fled to Pathfinder because they loathed 4E have returned to WotC (because let's face it, 5E is the best selling D&D ever), so Paizo now needs something new and different to carve a new niche. There's no disgrunted audience that will take anything as long as it's not the weird, complicated game. That audience have the game they wanted in 5E. Simulationists and hardcore 1E fans are not going to keep Paizo alive.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Volkard Abendroth wrote:
gustavo iglesias wrote:
What is gone forever is the option to keep the status quo. Revolution is coming, be it one way or another, I feel.

That revolution may be a repeat of the one that took place with 4e.

A substantial percentage of the player base leaving for another company.

Two things make this less likely to be a concerted move to another company than like it was for Paizo in 2008:

1) Paizo will still be publishing PF1 rulebooks for the forseeable future, as they said, even after PF2. As long as there is a current source of new copies of the old books, and the old APs are all still available, a lot of existing players will likely start burning through APs they haven't yet played and continue playing PF1.

2) Paizo in 2008 had an active subscriber list of current 3.5e fans, a delivery vehicle in the form of the magazine publishing business, a fresh commerce website, and a staff of people dependent on 3.5's continued existence to keep the lights on. These things carried over well to supplanting 3.5 with another open system.

Most companies out there of the size and resources required are already staking their claim on other game systems. Goodman Games has DCC; Monte Cook is having far more success with Cypher and custom Kickstarter one-offs; FFG or Cubicle 7 have quite a few irons in the fire with other systems as it is now; Pelgrane has Gumshoe and 13th Age already.

Plus, by the time Paizo are finished with playtest tweaks, it's likely to please just enough of the players currently in the middle of the fence that only the gamers most opposed to a change are likely to seek another system, leading to a fairly fragmented diaspora, more like the OSR with a dozen different inheritors than a concerted move like in 2008-2009.

I'm not saying a migration to another company is impossible, I just don't think a concerted move will be the most likely outcome, more of a diaspora.


Volkard Abendroth wrote:
gustavo iglesias wrote:
What is gone forever is the option to keep the status quo. Revolution is coming, be it one way or another, I feel.

That revolution may be a repeat of the one that took place with 4e.

A substantial percentage of the player base leaving for another company.

I really like some parts of PF2, the Action Economy, monsters, and the interaction between, I just hope this doesn't end up being Paizo's New Coke.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I really hope that the bulk of the new ideas and style of handling things found in the playtest rules survives all of the distaste that people have which seems to boil down to either A) treating anything new/different as inherently bad (i.e. complaints that say "put it back to how PF1 did it" instead of "I don't like this particular new way, try a different one") or B) hyperbolic doom-saying along the lines of equating a thing not currently explicitly present/allowed by the playtest rules with that thing being deliberately made impossible in the final version of PF2 (i.e. "arrow slits are impossible according to the new cover rules")

...but hey, I'm currently defined as an ex-player/ex-gamemaster of Pathfinder because I don't enjoy a variety of things about the way PF1 operates, so while I am not a bad judge of what makes for a fun fantasy RPG, I may be a bad judge of what makes for a game that "feels like Pathfinder."


5 people marked this as a favorite.
thenobledrake wrote:
I really hope that the bulk of the new ideas and style of handling things found in the playtest rules survives all of the distaste that people have which seems to boil down to either A) treating anything new/different as inherently bad (i.e. complaints that say "put it back to how PF1 did it" instead of "I don't like this particular new way, try a different one") or B) hyperbolic doom-saying along the lines of equating a thing not currently explicitly present/allowed by the playtest rules with that thing being deliberately made impossible in the final version of PF2 (i.e. "arrow slits are impossible according to the new cover rules")

I don't agree with that assertion, many are providing valid concerns, well-founded problems.

There isn't tons of dramatic, hyperbolic codswallop being thrown around, it's surprisingly staid.


gustavo iglesias wrote:
Volkard Abendroth wrote:
gustavo iglesias wrote:
What is gone forever is the option to keep the status quo. Revolution is coming, be it one way or another, I feel.

That revolution may be a repeat of the one that took place with 4e.

A substantial percentage of the player base leaving for another company.

Yes, it could be. It could also happen what happened with Iron Gods, that instead of the sky falling because Paizo dared to put chocolate in their vainilla icecream, it was well received because the quality was good, so it leaded to some other similar products like distant worlds, and then it became starfinder, the fastest selling Paizo book of all time and the current biggest sale force in the company.

Other revolutionary products are 3e, and 5e, which were both massive successes.

I suspect the quality of the product itself has more in common with success than the fact it is revolutionary or not.

And regardless of that, the revolution is coming anyways. It might be a success, or the end of the world, but it is coming

/becomes himself a multiclassed paladin of milani AND Groetus

Looking forward to see your ultimate form.

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I honestly think that the actual game play will feel a ton different than our supposition based on theorycrafting.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Tallow wrote:
I honestly think that the actual game play will feel a ton different than our supposition based on theorycrafting.

Some are not all theory-crafting, I am running scenarios, mock encounters/combats, etc.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

While I'm all for Paizo going their own direction, I'm not a fan of some of their ideas. I'm not sure how I feel about Attack of Opportunity being able to be picked up by certain classes. I don't like how they made all weapons just straight out one damage die. I haven't seen a spellcaster in action yet so I cannot validate those claims but spellcasters should be glass cannons. Rogues have been made pretty much useless. I think ancestry and background feats overcomplicate things. I have to say, so far I'm not impressed with 2e. I've been playing Pathfinder since its inception, including the playtest, but I'm honestly considering hopping back over to D&D. Sorry Paizo, but at this rate, WotC still have you beat. I also understand that this is a playtest, so I will hold off hopping over until I've seen the finished product.

Silver Crusade

I certainly have my concerns with 2E. I will be play testing it this weekend to confirm or deny my concerns. I'll post my observations from there.

I am interested in what we are using as a metric for why we believe 5E is crushing it.

I ask this because in 2015 and 2016 D&D had almost no presence at GENCON and was not even in the main convention hall in 2016 where as Pathfinder was in the Sagamore Ballroom, totally packed from 8AM till roughly 11PM.

Paizo Employee CEO

31 people marked this as a favorite.
Arklore wrote:
I ask this because in 2015 and 2016 D&D had almost no presence at GENCON and was not even in the main convention hall in 2016 where as Pathfinder was in the Sagamore Ballroom, totally packed from 8AM till roughly 11PM.

And at GenCon 2018, the Sagamore Ballroom was packed with players 24 hours a day for four days.

From what I heard from those GMs running demos and the PFS GMs running the PF2 scenarios, there was an overwhelming wave of love for the new rules once people actually sat down and played. That doesn't mean that there aren't some rough spots that might need to be filed down, but the mood coming out of GenCon was extremely positive.

-Lisa


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Vic Ferrari wrote:
thenobledrake wrote:
I really hope that the bulk of the new ideas and style of handling things found in the playtest rules survives all of the distaste that people have which seems to boil down to either A) treating anything new/different as inherently bad (i.e. complaints that say "put it back to how PF1 did it" instead of "I don't like this particular new way, try a different one") or B) hyperbolic doom-saying along the lines of equating a thing not currently explicitly present/allowed by the playtest rules with that thing being deliberately made impossible in the final version of PF2 (i.e. "arrow slits are impossible according to the new cover rules")

I don't agree with that assertion, many are providing valid concerns, well-founded problems.

There isn't tons of dramatic, hyperbolic codswallop being thrown around, it's surprisingly staid.

We all have our own confirmation bias, I guess. I would say the opposite. There are many valid concerns, but there is also a lot of "sky is falling" noise, hyperbole and melodramatism. That means either mine, or yours, or probably both perceptions are coloured by own glasses.

I suppose the beauty is in the eye of the beholder
/multiclass into a paladin of Milani, Groetus and Shelyn.


Lisa Stevens wrote:
Arklore wrote:
I ask this because in 2015 and 2016 D&D had almost no presence at GENCON and was not even in the main convention hall in 2016 where as Pathfinder was in the Sagamore Ballroom, totally packed from 8AM till roughly 11PM.

And at GenCon 2018, the Sagamore Ballroom was packed with players 24 hours a day for four days.

From what I heard from those GMs running demos and the PFS GMs running the PF2 scenarios, there was an overwhelming wave of love for the new rules once people actually sat down and played. That doesn't mean that there aren't some rough spots that might need to be filed down, but the mood coming out of GenCon was extremely positive.

-Lisa

I'm incredibly happy to hear that.


gustavo iglesias wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:
thenobledrake wrote:
I really hope that the bulk of the new ideas and style of handling things found in the playtest rules survives all of the distaste that people have which seems to boil down to either A) treating anything new/different as inherently bad (i.e. complaints that say "put it back to how PF1 did it" instead of "I don't like this particular new way, try a different one") or B) hyperbolic doom-saying along the lines of equating a thing not currently explicitly present/allowed by the playtest rules with that thing being deliberately made impossible in the final version of PF2 (i.e. "arrow slits are impossible according to the new cover rules")

I don't agree with that assertion, many are providing valid concerns, well-founded problems.

There isn't tons of dramatic, hyperbolic codswallop being thrown around, it's surprisingly staid.

We all have our own confirmation bias, I guess. I would say the opposite. There are many valid concerns, but there is also a lot of "sky is falling" noise, hyperbole and melodramatism. That means either mine, or yours, or probably both perceptions are coloured by own glasses.

I suppose the beauty is in the eye of the beholder
/multiclass into a paladin of Milani, Groetus and Shelyn.

Yeah, I guess after the rage over 3rd to 4th Ed, and to a lesser degree 4th to 5th Ed, 2008 and 2012 were some have warring years, this is not as vitriolic.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lisa Stevens wrote:
Arklore wrote:
I ask this because in 2015 and 2016 D&D had almost no presence at GENCON and was not even in the main convention hall in 2016 where as Pathfinder was in the Sagamore Ballroom, totally packed from 8AM till roughly 11PM.

And at GenCon 2018, the Sagamore Ballroom was packed with players 24 hours a day for four days.

From what I heard from those GMs running demos and the PFS GMs running the PF2 scenarios, there was an overwhelming wave of love for the new rules once people actually sat down and played. That doesn't mean that there aren't some rough spots that might need to be filed down, but the mood coming out of GenCon was extremely positive.

-Lisa

That's good to hear. I've been trying to drag my group into giving PF2 a shot, but after Starfinder they're a little bit hesitant to try again. We were hoping for something closer to Pathfinder, but with a modular approach that made rule intent and ability interaction more clear. Fantasy Starfinder is much less appealing.

But if other people liked it once they got their hands on it, then its worth a shot. Hopefully it doesn't end up as disappointingly dull as 5e or Starfinder.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lisa Stevens wrote:
Arklore wrote:
I ask this because in 2015 and 2016 D&D had almost no presence at GENCON and was not even in the main convention hall in 2016 where as Pathfinder was in the Sagamore Ballroom, totally packed from 8AM till roughly 11PM.

And at GenCon 2018, the Sagamore Ballroom was packed with players 24 hours a day for four days.

From what I heard from those GMs running demos and the PFS GMs running the PF2 scenarios, there was an overwhelming wave of love for the new rules once people actually sat down and played. That doesn't mean that there aren't some rough spots that might need to be filed down, but the mood coming out of GenCon was extremely positive.

-Lisa

I am very curious about this. Did you guys happen to collect any statistics? Were there any higher-level scenarios being run for 2nd edition?

Paizo Employee

11 people marked this as a favorite.

P2 had a great reception at GenCon, and the sight of so many players enjoying our game is indeed unforgettable.

Arklore wrote:
I am interested in what we are using as a metric for why we believe 5E is crushing it.

According to Mike Mearls's twitter feed (and I see no reason to disbelieve him), the 5E core books have sold more copies in the last five years than the 3e, 3.5, and 4e core books combined. By any standard, 5e is crushing it. Fortunately, there is more than one way to crush it, and our hobby is large enough for many successful companies (and getting larger every year!).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Jason Tondro wrote:

P2 had a great reception at GenCon, and the sight of so many players enjoying our game is indeed unforgettable.

Arklore wrote:
I am interested in what we are using as a metric for why we believe 5E is crushing it.
According to Mike Mearls's twitter feed (and I see no reason to disbelieve him), the 5E core books have sold more copies in the last five years than the 3e, 3.5, and 4e core books combined. By any standard, 5e is crushing it. Fortunately, there is more than one way to crush it, and our hobby is large enough for many successful companies (and getting larger every year!).

OF course, they get a LOT more quiet if one asks for the actual numbers and specifically those numbers that are NOT the PHB.

Many have bought multiple PHB's (I bought 3 and I don't even have 5e as my main game...don't ask how many P1e corebooks I have) and it's the same person. In some ways they are extrapolating the number of PHB's sold to how many players are playing 5e...which could mean that some of their numbers are flawed...especially when we don't know how the numbers sold relate to the number of DMG's sold.

Mearls has also said similar things in the past about 4e that were shown to be true, but ONLY from a very specific point of view rather than being able to be taken at face value.

That said, I still would agree...5e is crushing it and D&D right now is probably more popular as a game than it has been previously for the past 20 years (at least).


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Lisa Stevens wrote:
Arklore wrote:
I ask this because in 2015 and 2016 D&D had almost no presence at GENCON and was not even in the main convention hall in 2016 where as Pathfinder was in the Sagamore Ballroom, totally packed from 8AM till roughly 11PM.

And at GenCon 2018, the Sagamore Ballroom was packed with players 24 hours a day for four days.

From what I heard from those GMs running demos and the PFS GMs running the PF2 scenarios, there was an overwhelming wave of love for the new rules once people actually sat down and played. That doesn't mean that there aren't some rough spots that might need to be filed down, but the mood coming out of GenCon was extremely positive.

-Lisa

I will say I was skeptical of the rules when I read them, but when I actually started character creation and playing the game...it was really fun.

There are many things I currently love about the new rules (I love how easy it is to generate your ability scores with the new system, I love how anyone can choose skills, even if they cannot get better then expert in them, I love the new flavor on Weapons, Armor and runes, etc.).

I think a major obstacle that is starting to arise (from what I've seen) is that people have already formed an opinion before playing it and getting them to play it may turn out to be impossible. In addition, it is different enough from P1e that even if they find the game fun and love some of the rules, they still may not love it enough to switch over to it when comparing it to other game systems out there.

But yes, I have had fun playing the PF2e playtest when I actually started playing. It's good to hear that there are others out there that did too (as my main point of seeing others reactions are on this forum and it can give a different perspective than what I experienced thus far).


GreyWolfLord wrote:
Jason Tondro wrote:

P2 had a great reception at GenCon, and the sight of so many players enjoying our game is indeed unforgettable.

Arklore wrote:
I am interested in what we are using as a metric for why we believe 5E is crushing it.
According to Mike Mearls's twitter feed (and I see no reason to disbelieve him), the 5E core books have sold more copies in the last five years than the 3e, 3.5, and 4e core books combined. By any standard, 5e is crushing it. Fortunately, there is more than one way to crush it, and our hobby is large enough for many successful companies (and getting larger every year!).

OF course, they get a LOT more quiet if one asks for the actual numbers and specifically those numbers that are NOT the PHB.

Many have bought multiple PHB's (I bought 3 and I don't even have 5e as my main game...don't ask how many P1e corebooks I have) and it's the same person. In some ways they are extrapolating the number of PHB's sold to how many players are playing 5e...which could mean that some of their numbers are flawed...especially when we don't know how the numbers sold relate to the number of DMG's sold.

Mearls has also said similar things in the past about 4e that were shown to be true, but ONLY from a very specific point of view rather than being able to be taken at face value.

That said, I still would agree...5e is crushing it and D&D right now is probably more popular as a game than it has been previously for the past 20 years (at least).

DNDBeyond, a product that I wish Paizo could mirror, allows DMs to share their purchased content with players in their campaigns. If you're going to bother DMing 5E, you might as well buy it via there, which may or may not count for 5E's total sales according to classical book best seller data.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

5e killed PFS at the closest FLGS here (I would visit ~7 for PFS during its peak).

PFS we'd turn away players with 4 full tables (all the store would take), but they've since crammed a 5th table in and set up a half-dozen tents on the street in front to make way for the 5e demand. To be honest, its so crowded for the 5e events, many folks don't want to deal with the crazy crowds especially in the Summer heat.

The upcoming September Con still has 2 PFS tables and 1 PF2E table with 4+ players a piece. Last I checked there were over two dozen packed 5e tables at the same time.

From the folks at our local cons, I'd say about 1 in 25 are hardcore enough to go to GenCon. Out of the wider group, perhaps coincidentally, its the PF players who go to/went to GenCon who project the most satisfaction and positivity with the Playtest (they're also VCs/VLs).


32 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Lisa Stevens wrote:

From what I heard from those GMs running demos and the PFS GMs running the PF2 scenarios, there was an overwhelming wave of love for the new rules once people actually sat down and played. That doesn't mean that there aren't some rough spots that might need to be filed down, but the mood coming out of GenCon was extremely positive.

-Lisa

With all due respect, Ms. Stevens, the people who take days off work, rent hotel rooms, and fly out of state for a tabletop gaming convention will always be excited about a tabletop game.

Lots of people on these forums have been expressing concern about the market demand for PF 2e and where exactly the new edition will fit into the rpg world. And thus far, the standard response from Paizo staff has been "The people at GenCon loved it!" Which is a rather worrying response because it tells players:

- Negative criticism isn't being taken seriously, but positive praise is
- Only those with actual game time will be listened to, even though not being excited enough to play is a VERY valid criticism
- Paizo is under the impression that GenCon is a good representation of most current and future customers
- Because of how much staff have stressed that "people REALLY loved it", it gives the impression that the praise Paizo has received is ALREADY drowning out complaints and concerns

On top of this, thus far Paizo staff have only really taken to the forums to defend their product, rather than to acknowledge widespread complaints (and occasionally break up fights). Which is EVEN MORE concerning because it sends the message that Paizo either fights back against criticism, or does not listen to it. If some Paizo staff would weigh in on issues that large numbers of players are having (resonance, caster/martial disparity, difficulty parsing information in CRB, etc.) then it would help show that the company is listening.

I realize that this is a very high-stress and high-demand time for all of Paizo's staff, but I, for one, do not believe that these types of responses help us as consumers or Paizo as a company. Although to be fair, you're the CEO and I am not, so take it with a grain of salt.


9 people marked this as a favorite.
Palidian wrote:
On top of this, thus far Paizo staff have only really taken to the forums to defend their product, rather than to acknowledge widespread complaints (and occasionally break up fights). Which is EVEN MORE concerning because it sends the message that Paizo either fights back against criticism, or does not listen to it.

This has not been my impression at all. Paizo people have been pretty awesome when they comment on issues on the forum. Expecting them to deal with everything via forum post is ridiculous. Big issues such as Resonance and Dying span so many threads it is way easier to address them in the video chat rather than hunt through a thousand posts.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Palidian wrote:
On top of this, thus far Paizo staff have only really taken to the forums to defend their product, rather than to acknowledge widespread complaints (and occasionally break up fights). Which is EVEN MORE concerning because it sends the message that Paizo either fights back against criticism, or does not listen to it. If some Paizo staff would weigh in on issues that large numbers of players are having (resonance, caster/martial disparity, difficulty parsing information in CRB, etc.) then it would help show that the company is listening.

Yeah, that. So far Mark Seifter, Jason Bulmahn and the others have been pretty quiet and have not really given a detailed response to many of the concerns (and I am talking about the ones where detailed feedback was given, not the "the world is ending!" ones). Given how James said that they'd start interacting with us after getting a bit of rest after GenCon, it's a bit worrying. Especially since they were so active during the preview period, when we could look forward to dozens of posts per blog post.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:
Palidian wrote:
On top of this, thus far Paizo staff have only really taken to the forums to defend their product, rather than to acknowledge widespread complaints (and occasionally break up fights). Which is EVEN MORE concerning because it sends the message that Paizo either fights back against criticism, or does not listen to it. If some Paizo staff would weigh in on issues that large numbers of players are having (resonance, caster/martial disparity, difficulty parsing information in CRB, etc.) then it would help show that the company is listening.
Yeah, that. So far Mark Seifter, Jason Bulmahn and the others have been pretty quiet and have not really given a detailed response to many of the concerns (and I am talking about the ones where detailed feedback was given, not the "the world is ending!" ones). Given how James said that they'd start interacting with us after getting a bit of rest after GenCon, it's a bit worrying. Especially since they were so active during the preview period, when we could look forward to dozens of posts per blog post.

I'm inclined to say "let's give them a break." I'd imagine GenCon was exhausting, as was prep leading up to that. That being said, I'm of the opinion that Paizo made a bad choice choosing to literally release the day GenCon started... Giving themselves *some* time to respond to things upfront before all the craziness might have helped... But what's done is done. I'm hoping the Markinator comes online soon, but I understand why he might be in Hibernate mode right now.

EDIT: Also, there could be a certain amount of "now that we've seen the initial reaction, let's make sure we formulate a good response" going on here... we don't know.

Shadow Lodge

7 people marked this as a favorite.

The designers are posting dozens of times a day... you just need to create a thread that has a title they want to click into versus avoid!

"Go back to the drawing board" in a product forum isn't really clickbait for a product manager.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
magnuskn wrote:
Yeah, that. So far Mark Seifter, Jason Bulmahn and the others have been pretty quiet and have not really given a detailed response to many of the concerns (and I am talking about the ones where detailed feedback was given, not the "the world is ending!" ones). Given how James said that they'd start interacting with us after getting a bit of rest after GenCon, it's a bit worrying. Especially since they were so active during the preview period, when we could look forward to dozens of posts per blog post.

To be honest, I'm not really concerned by radio silence. But I am very much concerned when staff spend the time and effort to write posts like these:

- "If we thought that there were huge problems, of course we would fix them!"
- "Actually, it seems you may have misunderstood us. If you go back and re-read the previews/rulebook/blogs/staff comments, you'll see that there actually isn't a problem!"
- "Wow, these all sound like significant complaints that you have presented in a very thoughtful and organized manner. Luckily, the folks at GenCon LOVED the game; so I'm sure that you'll feel better after you play the game."

But they don't spend the time or energy to write posts like these:

- "This is a fair criticism that we have seen in many places. I will be sure to bring it up with our design team!"
- "Wow! It is really impressive that you have put so much effort into making your case! We would deeply appreciate it if you can take the playtest survey to ensure these points reach the right people!"
- "It seems like the community is rather split on this mechanic, with some liking it a lot and others taking issue with it. We would like to hear more from the players who don't enjoy it; if possible, more details about what specific aspects are disliked would be the most helpful."

If Paizo is too busy looking over surveys and forums to post updates constantly, that's fine. But if they do have time to engage with the player base on complaints and criticisms, they should NOT be spending all of that time defending their product against those complaints and criticisms.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

So...now that we've seen it seems like most of the locals will just be sticking with 5e or pf1, depending on their current tastes. "wait and see" isn't going to be an option, as the decision to stick with pf1 means spending money that would have been saved for a well received v2 on pf1 materials before those materials become difficult to get.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Ryan Freire wrote:
So...now that we've seen it seems like most of the locals will just be sticking with 5e or pf1, depending on their current tastes. "wait and see" isn't going to be an option, as the decision to stick with pf1 means spending money that would have been saved for a well received v2 on pf1 materials before those materials become difficult to get.

Tell me about it. I already got materials worth about 500 euros marked for purchase now. Ugh. ^^

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Yes.

The Exchange

13 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Palidian wrote:
stuff

You know, Palidian, your post made me look up the recent posts made by Jason, James, Logan and Mark, and while I can understand that you'd like them to directly answer to the critics, I still think that your post is severely misinterpreting what they are doing, because as far as I could see, none of them made any post that was even similar to what you're accusing them of.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber

Well Jason just covered that a bit in the Paizo Friday Twitch. https://www.twitch.tv/videos/295681271


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Vorsk, Follower or Erastil wrote:
Well Jason just covered that a bit in the Paizo Friday Twitch. https://www.twitch.tv/videos/295681271

Do you have a time-code for that?


wakedown wrote:

The designers are posting dozens of times a day... you just need to create a thread that has a title they want to click into versus avoid!

"Go back to the drawing board" in a product forum isn't really clickbait for a product manager.

In fairness, yes, there are bad titles, but, for example, I have a post asking about Critical Hits that's a few days old. I'd imagine there's a backlog, but getting an answer on something as core as that seems pretty important.

This could be an issue of number of people to respond vs number of devs, but we've *been encouraged* to open up threads with particular issues. So far the *only* thread that I've opened that devs have responded to *has* been one that had a clickbaity title ("A statement from Paizo would go a long way").

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

29 people marked this as a favorite.

Clickbaity titles are not the way to get our attention.

Posting up thoughts with concerns, feedback, and criticism that are tempered with understanding of the game and respect for fellow posters have a better chance.

But ultimately, we are still in data collection mode right now. We've been all over these boards, answering in places where it is needed and flagging things for change in others. Our twitch just revealed the first round of those due out on Monday. It will be far from that last.

As for scrapping 3 years of work and starting over. Well, anything is possible, but we are not seeing anything so dire as this point. That said.. this is why we playtest.

1 to 50 of 375 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion / Is it too late to go back to the drawing board? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.