Ah oK, I've heard "Critical Role" mentioned here and there but never bothered to look it up, because, in general, I find it boring to watch other people playing RPGs, and frankly, a waste of time.I was in this boat too until a year or so ago, when I started listening to the Glass Cannon Podcast on the way to and from work.
I rarely stick with an actual play podcast for more than half a dozen episodes. Nonetheless, I find them useful inspiration for my DMing style, even if the game itself doesn’t grab me for long.
I enjoyed the Glass Cannon Podcast Playtest sessions pretty much (especialy that one from March?, the PF1 starter box adventure, Jason converted on the fly).
Only thing I found a bit annoying in one of the recent podcasts was the dude that always started singing like the singing prince in Monty Python's Holy Grail: "I'd rather just sing" XD| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK
I sleep all night and I work all day
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
PF2 has been a potential win for D&D5e. My group has actually mentioned converting over to it. Before the playtest they were diehard Pathfinder fans.
So they leave beloved PF1 for 5e because PF2 is lacking the complexity of PF1? And of all they leave for 5e which ist probably one of the simplest non complex RPGs? Seriously?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ah oK, I've heard "Critical Role" mentioned here and there but never bothered to look it up, because, in general, I find it boring to watch other people playing RPGs, and frankly, a waste of time.I was in this boat too until a year or so ago, when I started listening to the Glass Cannon Podcast on the way to and from work.
I rarely stick with an actual play podcast for more than half a dozen episodes. Nonetheless, I find them useful inspiration for my DMing style, even if the game itself doesn’t grab me for long.
I enjoyed the Glass Cannon Podcast Playtest sessions pretty much (especialy that one from March?, the PF1 starter box adventure, Jason converted on the fly).
Only thing I found a bit annoying in one of the recent podcasts was the dude that always started singing like the singing prince in Monty Python's Holy Grail: "I'd rather just sing" XD
I’m really enjoying their Starfinder game Aliens and Androids. I like their casual approach to the rules and (for me) they have about the right mix of RP and gaming.
Matt who?The Game Master and host of Critical Role, the live RPG session show that's something of a breakthrough phenomenon and has amassed something in the region of 100 million views since it debuted. It's credited with significantly contributing to the recent rise of popularity in PnP RPGs.
It's also likely unknown in Germany because there's no German dubbing provided ;-P
Ah, no no, at least I know the guy, because he ran a game with Vin Diesel, who played Caulder, his character from The Last Witchhunter. But I guess my English is better than most people in Germany as well.
I just don't got time yet to watch more of the dude, he seems pretty good at what he does.
I find podcasts a difficult medium in general. They force me to do nothing but sit still and listen, which I find difficult to do. But If I do anything else while listening I notice that I keep missing stuff. Also, like audio books, it's just too slow. I do not drive, so I cannot say anything about listening while driving.I was in this boat too until a year or so ago, when I started listening to the Glass Cannon Podcast on the way to and from work.
I rarely stick with an actual play podcast for more than half a dozen episodes. Nonetheless, I find them useful inspiration for my DMing style, even if the game itself doesn’t grab me for long.
Yeah, I’m with you. I couldn’t just sit and listen.
I travel a fair bit between clients, so I have several hours a week of dead time in the car.
Well, you have plenty of time to answer my texts then!!! ;p
Except that would be illegal.
You know what I mean...
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Vic, you were replying to someone who was talking about competition. And all varieties of D&D including PF have remarkable similarities. Thus, I suggest you should try non-D&D roleplaying games to get some perspective.Please just stop digging that hole. I have played plenty of non-D&D RPGs. I have plenty of perspective, kindly take your presumptuous and rude suggestion elsewhere.
If so, then it should be clear to you that D&D/PF in all its iterations is a tactical wargame with some role-playing sprinkled on the top. There's some insignificant variation, but it's the same old-school Gary Gygax and his d00ds decided to make their miniatures wargame a little more adventure-y stuff. Once you get around a bit and play stuff like FATE, Amber, Dogs in the Vineyard or Ten Candles, D&D variants start to blur and arguments about one being inherently superior to another in terms of being a better representation of any aspect of the GNS spectrum tend to look silly.
Well, you have plenty of time to answer my texts then!!! ;pI find podcasts a difficult medium in general. They force me to do nothing but sit still and listen, which I find difficult to do. But If I do anything else while listening I notice that I keep missing stuff. Also, like audio books, it's just too slow. I do not drive, so I cannot say anything about listening while driving.I was in this boat too until a year or so ago, when I started listening to the Glass Cannon Podcast on the way to and from work.
I rarely stick with an actual play podcast for more than half a dozen episodes. Nonetheless, I find them useful inspiration for my DMing style, even if the game itself doesn’t grab me for long.
Yeah, I’m with you. I couldn’t just sit and listen.
I travel a fair bit between clients, so I have several hours a week of dead time in the car.
Doh! That was pretty rude. I meant to, then....I forgot. :/
The rush of people who will in all likelyhood attempt to get their hands on the remaining 1st edition print lines before 2e officially launches should probably keep Paizo steady enough.You’re joking, right? I really hope you’re joking.
Paizo will keep the corebook for PF1 in print after PF2's release, unless there's something I've misunderstood?
More than just the CRB, the whole rulebook line (in small, paperback format).
They haven’t said forever, but for as long as it’s feasible.
|
|
If so, then it should be clear to you that D&D/PF in all its iterations is a tactical wargame with some role-playing sprinkled on the top. There's some insignificant variation, but it's the same old-school Gary Gygax and his d00ds decided to make their miniatures wargame a little more adventure-y stuff. Once you get around a bit and play stuff like FATE, Amber, Dogs in the Vineyard or Ten Candles, D&D variants start to blur and arguments about one being inherently superior to another in terms of being a better representation of any aspect of the GNS spectrum tend to look silly.
There needs to be a rather large YMMV disclaimer on that. Some of the best (and worst) roleplaying occurs in D&D games, some of the worst (and best) in Amber. One of my longest rule arguments occurred in Amber.
While I agree that is hard to wargame in many RPG systems that does NOT mean that it is hard to roleplay in the systems that ALSO allow wargaming. And I've yet to find the system that REQUIRES roleplaying
However, of those 4 groups, 3 are genuinely interested in seeing how PF2 goes and are willing to at least give it a shot if it keeps trending in a direction that satisfies them. The 4th is only showing some interest by association (they hear some of the true enthusiasm for parts of PF2 that intrigue them).
As you say, they wouldn't be intruiged and for sure not hooked if they experience that PF2 is rather a PF1.5. 5e as an uncomplicated smooth running system.
Funny annectode, rather than trying PF1 they decided to return back to 3.5 which was our all time favorite system. If though PF2 manages to capture their interest in means of a smoother running, less bloat, it's hello PF2, bye 3.5.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I was looking forward to Inner Sea Diners
Inner Seas 'Diners, Drive-Ins and Dives' with Gnome Fieri...
Personally, I was looking forward to Inner Sea DinersInner Seas 'Diners, Drive-Ins and Dives' with Gnome Fieri...
Unfortunately it would need to compete with the name brand Dungeons and Dragons and Diners and Drive-ins and Dives. And that one has so much name recognition and alliteration that it dominates the industry.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Every two weeks Paizo is coming out with updates and changes. This is what the play test is all about.
The main problem that the OP (who states that he's purchased nearly all of their core books) didn't cover is the apparent intent of Paizo to deliberately obsolesce their preceding system rather than offer PF2 as an incremental, albeit large, update of it (as, say, 3.5 was to 3rd edition).
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I dislike the new action economy, mainly because "Free Actions" are now Actions.
Not all of them. I can see having some issues with this, though.
In PF1, you could drop both items you are holding, draw two weapons, take a 5 foot step, and attack 7 times in one turn.
Uh...you could only draw both weapons as a Free Action with Quick Draw. A Feat that still exists. And could only make 7 attacks with TWF Feats...also a thing that exists.
Also, dropping things is not an action in PF2. It's still free.
In PF2, that would take 12 actions, or 4 turns.
No, it would take 10 actions base for a character without Feats (7 attacks + 2 draw weapon + 1 move). Of course, it would take at least three rounds without Feats in PF1 as well (since you can't draw weapons for free without a Feat making it a move action to do so, reducing you to a single attack).
With Feats for Quick Draw and Twin Takedown, you can do that whole list of things in two rounds in PF2 (or thereabouts). You can have this ability by 6th level or so, too, while you needed to be 16th level to have that many attacks in PF1 (baring Haste, anyway).
The action economy for some stuff is certainly a tad worse (most notably, 5 foot steps not being free) but you're exaggerating the difference by a whole lot with this example, and the action economy is better in other ways (like being able to make four attacks while TWF at level 1 as a Ranger).
Every two weeks Paizo is coming out with updates and changes. This is what the play test is all about.The main problem that the OP (who states that he's purchased nearly all of their core books) didn't cover is the apparent intent of Paizo to deliberately obsolesce their preceding system rather than offer PF2 as an incremental, albeit large, update of it (as, say, 3.5 was to 3rd edition).
Yesterday, I imported a feat from the Advanced Player's Guide to the playtest chapter 2. One player, who had not yet chosen all the feats for her gnome nomad alchemist, was describing her as someone who kept picking up interesting items. So I copied the Well-Prepared feat from the Advanced Player's Guide, editted it to say "silver pieces" instead of "gold pieces" and "Thievery" instead of "Sleight of Hand", and gave it to her as her 3rd-level general feat. I had to remove the halfling requirement, too, but I was fudging feats like that long before the playtest.
The more I understand PF2, the more I will be able to import PF1 material into it.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
gnome nomad
You had the option to say gnomad, but didn't... for shame.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Human nature is funny, isn't it? People who enjoy PF1 more than 5E will abandon PF1 simply because they are angry that PF2 isn't a new version of PF1. Kind of like having a burger restaurant offer a new chicken sandwich and people leaving that for another even more basic restaurant because they are angry that their favorite eatery is now offering a new meal.
It's completely valid, don't get me wrong. People have every right to protest whatever displeases them however they want, as long as it's not directly harmful, but it is curious nevertheless.
That's a pretty bad comparison, because pathfinder 2 isn't just another option, it's the removal of the original option for the new. Once it's out, there isn't going to be new content made for first edition, and that can mean a lot to people. Whether it's new adventures in PFS, APs or Modules, or just new character content to go through, using a current system has things for players/GMs to look forward to, which is often part of the fun in playing a system. Finding new and interesting options to include in your game. Once systems lose this support, they often lose some of that fun.
More than just the CRB, the whole rulebook line (in small, paperback format).
They haven’t said forever, but for as long as it’s feasible.
The whole rulebook line!? Cool - this makes me very happy!
Thanks for info, Pathfinder is by far my preferred edition of the game I started to play back in '83:-)
All this conversation reminds me when WOTC released 4e...
Déjà vu anyone?Maybe it's because I was out of the loop regarding D&D at the time, but I'm quite sure I've heard that there was no real lead up to 4e - it was just announced and later went on sale within a relatively short timeframe.
That said, there should be more than enough material for PF1 to play it for decades to come.
Personally, I rarely have trouble with RPG rules, but find PF2 particularly impenetrable though I think this is, at least in part, probably due to the language used rather than outright complexity as D&D 5e has a similar effect despite (supposedly) being pretty simple.
Definitely out of the loop. There were lots of previews from the designers, and plenty of discussion/ranting/arguing on the old WotC forums. I'd dare say those boards had quite a bit more activity at that time than these do now.