Has 2E affected your playerbase?


Pathfinder Society Playtest

**

PFS is imploding in my area. Prior to 5E we had a vibrant community with 5 or so stores running games multiple times a month.

After 5E was released the playerbase was halved but still many options to play, maybe not as many tables available but still a good core.

Currently, the playerbase which was further fragmented with the introduction of core and Starfinder is rapidly dissolving with the introduction of the 2E playtest.

What has the experience been in your area? I am not hopeful for PFSs long term viability at least in my neck of the woods.

Grand Lodge ***** ⦵⦵ Venture-Agent, Texas—Austin aka Partizanski

Our lodge has seen a sharp decline, though we are still trying to figure it out.

We used to have 3-5 tables twice a week, now we are down to 1-2 tables twice a week.

Our Starfinder is holding out with 1-2 tables once a week (different day than PFS).

We think its a combination of PF2 fragmenting us, school starting, and possible to some extent people thinking that playing doesn't matter with the PF1 campaign "soft ending" next August.

Our lodge is trying to reach out to people to see what we can do to make it a better experience, but I also wonder if around the holidays we will see people come back with school being over, and us winding down playtesting once we run all parts of Doomsday Dawn

Silver Crusade ***** ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

Starfinder is getting stronger and stronger, PF1 is a bit in decline, but that has been caused by a lot of burned out GMs (well partly me) who are having a hard time dealing with very well build characters.

I think a number of people are waiting for a fresh start, some try to play as much PFS1 as they can before it is taken away, while others don't want to "invest" in those characters if the end is already on the horizon.

Personally, I try to playtest as much as I can, and it has become clear to me that I am only going to offer private PFS1 tables (if any) after PFS2 releases.

The local problem with skilled players really became apparent in 10-00.

*

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

As a player it's impacted my morale, because I want to keep playing PF1, but after August what support if any is going to be provided (ie, What incentive will there be for PFS to keep running it if the only things that 'get credit/GM stuff' is PF2?)

I've seen 'dead' system campaigns before.

I've lived through the 'trying to make things work without an impartial outside guidance team'.

I remember the headache and heartache there, and hope beyond hope that it will not happen to PFS1.

In the event that PFS1 goes the way of the dinosaur within the same year as kobolds being allowed to be player characters (the ONLY organized campaign that I'm aware of that allows that!) via Tier-1 GM Boons I'll probably shift my focus to Starfinder, because it is becoming harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about PF2.

I can't keep up with the Playtest speed because I have a full-time job and my local area isn't huge on Playtest, nor have I been able to see a lot of interest on-line.

YMMV.

Sidenote: Sebastian, the 'skill' issue must have been a local phenomenon, because at the 7-8 we were having a rough time with the skills WITH folks who had invested in them.

Scarab Sages **** Venture-Lieutenant, Australia—NSW—Sydney aka sanwah68

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

Starfinder is getting stronger and stronger, PF1 is a bit in decline, but that has been caused by a lot of burned out GMs (well partly me) who are having a hard time dealing with very well build characters.

I think a number of people are waiting for a fresh start, some try to play as much PFS1 as they can before it is taken away, while others don't want to "invest" in those characters if the end is already on the horizon.

Personally, I try to playtest as much as I can, and it has become clear to me that I am only going to offer private PFS1 tables (if any) after PFS2 releases.

The local problem with skilled players really became apparent in 10-00.

This is me. I find my commitment to run public facing games has diminished as more rules savvy players find ways to twist the system. It is just not enjoyable anymore with no challenge for me or them.

****

Player base at the location I play most often is still pretty strong - usually 3 or 4 tables. However, often 1 table is PFS2 playtest and sometimes one table is Starfinder. I suspect that in this location we will end up with dwindling PFS1 and rising PFS2 as more scenarios come out for 2nd Edition and no more scenarios come out for 1st Ed.

*** Venture-Agent, Canada—Alberta—Grand Prairie aka DM Livgin

We are a small, new group with 1-2 tables. We lost a few players due to circumstance and our gaming store closed for renovations the same time the playtest started. So we closed our door for the Playtest, taking the regular players and running Doomsday Dawn. We are discussing trying to fit in an adventure path or module chain instead of resuming PFS until the second edition is released.

Silver Crusade ***** ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

Sandra Wilkinson wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

Starfinder is getting stronger and stronger, PF1 is a bit in decline, but that has been caused by a lot of burned out GMs (well partly me) who are having a hard time dealing with very well build characters.

I think a number of people are waiting for a fresh start, some try to play as much PFS1 as they can before it is taken away, while others don't want to "invest" in those characters if the end is already on the horizon.

Personally, I try to playtest as much as I can, and it has become clear to me that I am only going to offer private PFS1 tables (if any) after PFS2 releases.

The local problem with skilled players really became apparent in 10-00.

This is me. I find my commitment to run public-facing games has diminished as more rules savvy players find ways to twist the system. It is just not enjoyable anymore with no challenge for me or them.

Yeah, it is one of those "one spoiled apple ruins everything" situations, not every table has players who trivialize scenarios but they sure tend to sick in my memory.

That said, it's not like I completely stopped running public tables of PFS1, but with the playtest, SFS, home campaigns to reward my GMs etc. it's not like I have a lot of spare time. I don't even have the chance to play everything, and right now when I have the choice I choose SFS or playtest.

I had a couple of PFS tables where I asked myself "why was I even there" since have the group could have finished the scenario without breaking a sweat, and I haven't seen something in SFS. Feeling that you contribute and that your (or rather the group's tactics) managed to defeat a dangerous thread is kinda what I am seeking sometimes (though some spectacular scenarios manage to distract me from a lack of challenge).

I am very much looking forward to the new edition, most changes to the playtest are very positive, even if playing the (rather unenjoyable) parts of Doomsday Dawn really feels like work.

**** Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Southcoast aka JDDyslexia

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My store seems to be back down to two tables a week, sometimes even only 1 table pending circumstances.

I'm actually having a hard time getting players to try the playtest, which I wasn't expecting. It's almost like nobody is ready/willing to try out or move over to 2E

Silver Crusade ***** ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

Joe Bouchard wrote:

My store seems to be back down to two tables a week, sometimes even only 1 table pending circumstances.

I'm actually having a hard time getting players to try the playtest, which I wasn't expecting. It's almost like nobody is ready/willing to try out or move over to 2E

Getting into the playtest takes a lot of time, and some players do not want to get invested and wait for the final version, at least that is what I am hearing locally from some players.

*

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Add in the fact that character creation is... problematic... and it turns a regularly scheduled game into a several hour chargen party with less play time does not help.

It is a problem with any Playtest, and savvy gamers tend to avoid that.

Plus there are probably a bunch of folks who may feel abandoned or betrayed and it's completely understandable.

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

My lodge is definitely in decline, but the main factor I have seen is lack of GMs. Without GMs signing up, players don't sign up for tables on our Warhorn, and even when they do, it's a question of if the table will fire when everyone shows up. I can't tell how much 2E is affecting us, but I'm sure it has something to do with it.

The Exchange ***** ⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, North Carolina—Charlotte aka eddv

I have found corraling GMs to be a little bit harder but early on I made the decison not to push playtest and to keep on providing the best 1e experience I can and that's kept people on board

We are actually seeing a surge in recruitment driven by roleplaying in general getting more popular - 2e is making navigating that pretty tricky. Its ethically tricky to tell someone to go out and buy a bunch of splats when the campaign is coming to a close.

I have been pushing Starfinder more but there is a lot of anxiety about the future - but mostly its that the group wants to stay strong even if they arent all in on PFS2.

Navigating all of that (plus other off topic local issues) is going to be tricky but I am hopeful


We've never had PFS at our local store and the D&D Expeditions group died off months ago due to a lack of GMs. I've never picked up the GM torch for PFS because I don't like organized play with random people. I prefer homegames and that's the way it will stay for the foreseeable future, until I run through all of the good Paizo Adventure Paths.

Silver Crusade ***** ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
My lodge is definitely in decline, but the main factor I have seen is lack of GMs. Without GMs signing up, players don't sign up for tables on our Warhorn, and even when they do, it's a question of if the table will fire when everyone shows up. I can't tell how much 2E is affecting us, but I'm sure it has something to do with it.

My personal theory is that with the "end" of the PF1 campaign on the horizon, GMs find it harder to justify giving up their time to GM for GM boons they are hardly ever going to be able to use, while they still have scenarios to play.

Of course, these days I have started to see it as a problem, that some people don't GM at all.

**

11 people marked this as a favorite.

Speaking only for myself, I dutifully purchased the playtest rule book as a way of supporting Paizo and have signed up for a couple of playtest games that for one reason or another have not happened.

The main problem that I have, and this may or may not be shared by others in and around where I play, is a complete and utter lack of enthusiasm and excitement in regards to the proposed PF2e. The absolute best I can muster is a sense of resignation. I view it as a system that I did not ask for, do not want, and really don't like. In fact, the more I learn about it, the less I like it.

Apologies if this comes across as a bit sharp-ish but it is my honest view on PF2e in its current form.

*

After running four tables of it at GenCon and then playing it once with a GM I appreciate greatly at a convention, my current opinion is much along your lines, pjrogers.

It was offered at a recent local convention, and there were no sign-ups as far as I could tell in any of the slots it was offered.

The Exchange *

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I ran three tables, one each day at a three day convention this weekend. Friday table was full, Saturday had four, and the Sunday table didn't fire. I have got to play only twice and have run playtest scenarios four times.

I like a lot of things about PF2, the three actions and a reaction and that not everyone automatically gets AOOs. I feel it makes combat more mobile and more exciting personally. I like that Paizo is really responsive to the feedback of the fans that they are actively running and playing the playtest. Changes are being made about every two weeks, but there in is the rub! I think the number of changes are making people leery of trying it and definitely less inclined to run it. YMMV

Shadow Lodge ***

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
My lodge is definitely in decline, but the main factor I have seen is lack of GMs. Without GMs signing up, players don't sign up for tables on our Warhorn, and even when they do, it's a question of if the table will fire when everyone shows up. I can't tell how much 2E is affecting us, but I'm sure it has something to do with it.

My personal theory is that with the "end" of the PF1 campaign on the horizon, GMs find it harder to justify giving up their time to GM for GM boons they are hardly ever going to be able to use, while they still have scenarios to play.

Of course, these days I have started to see it as a problem, that some people don't GM at all.

I agree, I think the vacuum that Paizo has created with PF2 has had a substantial impact on PFS. We have a local Con that has always had really good turn-out, now we can barely fill even a handful of tables. I also think it's not just GM's not wanting to invest GM time but also Players not interested in progressing their characters knowing they all have a rapidly approaching end-of-life. Throw in the lack of knowledge of GM Star/Boon carry-over that just leaves everything in limbo.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

Quote:
Has 2E affected your playerbase?

No, generally our GameDays and conventions have not been affected

Liberty's Edge **** Venture-Agent, Illinois—Bourbonnais aka GM_MG

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Marc Waschle wrote:

I ran three tables, one each day at a three day convention this weekend. Friday table was full, Saturday had four, and the Sunday table didn't fire. I have got to play only twice and have run playtest scenarios four times.

I like a lot of things about PF2, the three actions and a reaction and that not everyone automatically gets AOOs. I feel it makes combat more mobile and more exciting personally. I like that Paizo is really responsive to the feedback of the fans that they are actively running and playing the playtest. Changes are being made about every two weeks, but there in is the rub! I think the number of changes are making people leery of trying it and definitely less inclined to run it. YMMV

Yeah, I've explicitly been told by more than one local player that they're having trouble keeping up with the changes and aren't comfortable running it as a result.

Liberty's Edge **

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I like playing at my local lodge (Props to TriOmegaZero), but I won't GM in meatspace because I don't want to deal with physical maps, minis and gaming in pants. Online is just a more functional area for me to work in with my hectic life and having kids.

That and the Online region really has their stuff together, and the SFS games on there have been top notch.

****

Our local store games have actually grown a bit recently, but we have completely ignored 2E and have focused on just enjoying the current campaign for as long as we have it, adding in a little SFS.

We have several players who started in season 5 or later, and who just occasionally go to cons to supplement our twice-a-month offerings at the store, so they still have a few years of potential play left. Those of us who will run out of 1E scenarios soon after the end of season 10 have, for now, decided to digest 2E slowly and will cross that bridge when we come to it.

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Prior to the playtest, we averaged about 14-20 people, normally playing PFS (occasionally SFS) at our game store. Once our VO started running the playtest, we generally had about 10-12, counting those at the playtest table. A big part of this was the difficulty of finding a scenario that everyone could play, which on several occasions forced us to go back to repeatables. Once the group finished the playtest and we've started offering two scenarios most weeks, our attendance has climbed back slightly.

Part of this is also that with the end of PF1, several GMs want to focus more on playing their characters rather than running games.

As far as PF2 is concerned, a lot of our players (like myself) tried it once and found elements that they seriously disliked. Some of these elements have been changed in the updates to the playtest, but the numerous updates, each in a separate document, meant that understanding the changing rules required devoting more time than these players (or I) were willing to spend.

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Florida—Melbourne aka trollbill

Absolutely. Our player base is way down and if it weren't for Starfinder, we might not even have the few players we do have. We are basically down to scheduling only 4 tables a month and sometimes as many as half of those don't make. Most player's aren't interested in the playtest as they don't want to keep having to relearn the rules all the time as they change. Things might pick up again when 2.0 comes out. Especially if Paizo actually gets off their butts and provides organizers with the promotional materials necessary to do this.


The local post-Thanksgiving con in the Chicago area didn't even offer Paizo games this year, probably the first time since Pathfinder was still using the actual 3.5 rules.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

Bill Baldwin wrote:
Especially if Paizo actually gets off their butts and provides organizers with the promotional materials necessary to do this.

Like what? I don’t understand what promotional materials are needed. The only thing we ever had was a “PFS Played Here” poster and that has been out of print for five years.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

Fred Strauss wrote:
The local post-Thanksgiving con in the Chicago area didn't even offer Paizo games this year, probably the first time since Pathfinder was still using the actual 3.5 rules.

Which con was that?

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Florida—Melbourne aka trollbill

Bob Jonquet wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
Especially if Paizo actually gets off their butts and provides organizers with the promotional materials necessary to do this.
Like what? I don’t understand what promotional materials are needed. The only thing we ever had was a “PFS Played Here” poster and that has been out of print for five years.

Exactly! There are absolutely no materials supplied by Paizo to assist organizers in promoting PFS or SFS. No posters, no flyers, no brochures. Not everyone has the talent and/or wherewithal to make their own materials and it shouldn't be their responsibility as volunteers to do so, anyway. The only thing we really have is word-of-mouth and that doesn't go very far for recruiting people new to the hobby. So we lose many new recruits to the better known (to newbies) Adventurer’s League. I do what I can to recruit new players, but as with any job, the right tools can often do wonders.

Some suggestions:

A) A “Join the Society” poster, diagonally split with PFS on the top right and SFS on the bottom left.
B) A similar brochure with blank spaces for contact info. Should come in both card stock and digital form.

*

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bob Jonquet wrote:
Fred Strauss wrote:
The local post-Thanksgiving con in the Chicago area didn't even offer Paizo games this year, probably the first time since Pathfinder was still using the actual 3.5 rules.
Which con was that?

This is really odd.

I was at a Chicago area Con and we had both PFS and SFS games on the post-Thanksgiving weekend...?

EDIT: We didn't have any PFS2 Playtest, however.

*

5 people marked this as a favorite.

This is going to be very blunt. Where to start. First 2E is an attempt to make money. Let’s be clear on this. Paizo, like any other business has to grow. Now there is a smart way and a stupid way to grow. Paizo has decided to follow the second option. 2E is nothing more than a repackaged version of the terrible, failed D&D 4.0 system with some elements of a watered down vanilla 5.0 system. Someone at Paizo decided they needed a “New Coke” moment and they are driving that car off the cliff to prove their commitment. Now there are a few elements of 2E worth keeping but those are few and they could be grafted seamlessly into the current system. Sadly, the result in my area has been a loathing of 2E with playtest numbers to match.

Experienced players that have been loyal to Paizo are nervous. They are nervous because they believe Paizo will give us all the collective middle finger and say sucks to be you it’s 2E or nothing. As one player told me, if I wanted to play 5.0 that’s what I’d be playing. Another one told me, if I wanted vanilla I’d be playing 5.0. Still another told me, if I wanted mindless simplicity where every class is equal and there is nothing great about the races I’d be playing 5.0. Frightening stuff from heavily invested players.

At the end of the day I started playing Pathfinder because of 3.5 and being treated so poorly by 4.0 I walked away from a 30 plus year relationship with D&D because of 4.0 and I’ve never looked back. I don’t want to play a system that nerf bats everything because someone decided tthat every race and class had to be fair and the same. I play 1E because I am sick and tired of this asinine belief that nothing can be greater than anything else. I want to play heroes and duds because I choose the combinations to make them so. I play 1E because at the end of the day being equally lame is wrong. The 2E system goes the wrong direction. It’s trying too hard to be WoTC.

Paizo needs to grow and stay fresh, I get that. So far with the play test there seems to be a schism at Paizo. The changes in the play test have been nice but they feel periferal, kind of a token let’s give them something to shut them up but it’s pedal to the metal. The core issues still are the same. I can’t help but wonder if there is a huge divide in the creative team.

Give me a reason to spend my hard earned dollars and I’ll stay. Give me a repackaged 4.0 hybrid? Most likely I will move on to a company that puts players first in their products and systems. A company that balances the needs of the business and the consumer to create an amazing product. Paizo has a chance to do that but so far the jury is out.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild, Tales Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

*scratches head*

I'm very curious where this thought of "the majority of our customers/players hate this game mechanic but if we implement it we'll make more money" comes from.

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Florida—Melbourne aka trollbill

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Obsidian Blade wrote:
A company that balances the needs of the business and the consumer to create an amazing product.

Ironically, I think that is exactly what Paizo is trying to do and why there appears to be a schism. To be successful, a system must be accessible enough to appeal to newbs and casual players, and sophisticated enough to appeal to invested players. And you need both. Newbs and casuals to grow the player base, and invested players to ensure longevity. And that is a difficult balance to master. 4E had great initial success with newbs and casuals when it first came out, but eventually failed due to a lack of appeal to invested players. 5E seems to be doing better along these lines, but is only slightly less generic than 4E. Pathfinder 1.0 is failing, in my opinion, as it has become too complicated under the weight of 10 years of supplements, expansions and errata's to the point that it is nearly impossible to get new players into the system. Paizo is currently losing this new blood in mass to 5E. And they won't have a successful product unless they reverse that trend.

Don't get me wrong. I get where you are coming from. As an invested player myself, I usually don't like any 'dumbing down' of a system for the sake of newbs and casuals. But if I have to choose between a system that is somewhat dumbed down that everyone will play vs. a robustly sophisticated system that I can't find anyone else willing to play, I will take the former.

Also, bear in mind that NO system reboot will be as sophisticated as a previous system that has been around for 10 years simply because it will not have all of the available options and refinements the previous system has accumulated over the years.

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Florida—Melbourne aka trollbill

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:

*scratches head*

I'm very curious where this thought of "the majority of our customers/players hate this game mechanic but if we implement it we'll make more money" comes from.

Simple. The vast majority of the current player base is heavily invested players. They will not like any dumbing down of the system that may be necessary to attract new players to the system. But Paizo can't survive on a dwindling heavily invested player base that seldom gets new blood. So in order to survive, Paizo is going to have to attract new players. And the need to do that is going to make for rule changes that may be unpopular with the current dedicated based. Losing part of your dedicated base is par for the course with a new edition.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild, Tales Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

*nods*

It just makes the phrase "should put the players first" rather odd, since it implies there's something other than players?

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:

*nods*

It just makes the phrase "should put the players first" rather odd, since it implies there's something other than players?

This is what WoTC did with 4.0. They had (at the time) the worlds biggest cash cow in MTG. They turned their back on the DND heritage and made a money grab. How did it work out? Almost from the get go they were developing 5.0 to cover it all up. Paizo is duplicating the 4.0 error without the cash cow. They can’t afford it.

2E is about newbs and casuals. Paizo appears to have abandoned their bedrock for mass appeal. In business it’s called quantity over quality. You make the money on the volume. The problem is that thinking fails long term. When you look at the server problems, and changes that really don’t amount to much it seems like the company is going to live or die on a 4.0 model. No one knows what is going on and player feedback down the tree to the Regionals and VC’s has been terrible. If you want to make changes fine, but not talking to the people you need to usher in the new world doesn’t make sense.

Back in the day (I can hear the eye rolls) we played classes and races because they were special. Hero or dud it’s what we wanted. Now in 2E there isn’t anything special about any race or class. Everything is “equal” so as not to offend. Dumb down, streamline, and nerf bat isn’t why we play a fantasy RPG but that is where Paizo wants to go.

Yes, please grow, but do so intelligently. Find a balance. Don’t copy 5.0 just enough to avoid a lawsuit. Be creative. Think out of the box. Give us something awesome to spend our hard earned dollars on. There are bright, creative people in that building. Turn them loose. Let them do amazing work and put it into the product. Don’t remake a “better” 4.0 don’t make a 4.0 at all. Stop trying to follow WoTC. Lead out and be innovative.

That’s where I am coming from anyway.

Paizo Employee

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Obsidian Blade wrote:
Don’t copy 5.0 just enough to avoid a lawsuit.

This is a statement I keep seeing and it's really confusing to me. The Pathfinder Playtest was nothing like 5E. I honestly don't know how anyone could think the two are even similar beyond the most superficial elements of being fantasy RPGs born from the same lineage (in which case the current edition of Pathfinder is also "just different enough from 5E to avoid a lawsuit". There's some superficial stuff like Backgrounds which kind-of-sort-of have parallels with 5E character building, but background-style mechanics are also used in a wide array of other RPGs and even a lot of 3pp Pathfinder products (like the martial and casting traditions in Spheres of Might and Spheres of Power). They're also implemented completely differently between the two systems and have significantly different impacts on character creation. Other than that the systems have very little in common beyond anything that would be true in any fantasy RPG.

The playtest is significantly more "crunchy" than 5E, the math and the in-world expectations it creates are fundamentally different between the two systems, magic is different on multiple levels from theme to execution, etc. Even playing a 1st level encounter against the exact same monsters in one system or the other is going to feel and flow very differently. If anything, most of the complaints that point to specific areas of the game a given individual doesn't like tend to be directly related to the areas where the designers changed or moved away from WotC's used goods and into something new (the exception being mechanics that people see as very similar to 4E, at which point that becomes the basis for complaint.)

Now granted, I love the current edition of Pathfinder. I would imagine that's true of most, if not all, of the other people at Paizo. And I've got entire product lines of 3pp materials I've worked on, led, or otherwise been involved with that took a hard shot in the tender areas when the playtest got announced. But I've also had literally 18 players come back to Pathfinder for the playtest and more who I'm sure will come back for the new edition. All of them have made some comment to the effect that they're glad Paizo is doing this new edition because they like some element of Pathfinder more than they like 5E, but they just don't have the time to deal with the current edition's glut of mechanics and corner cases, let alone the extreme deviations that characters made by players with different system mastery levels experience. Sometimes they're fans of things that the current edition actually does as well but they didn't know about because it was hidden in a book they hadn't read. Sometimes it's a balance thing (a real-life quote "I haven't played a wizard in Pathfinder for five years because even when I'm intentionally trying not to optimize I still end up with other players at the table feeling like my character is too OP.") Whatever it is, for me the loss in people to play with was real and beginning to gain those players back during the playtest was also real. Every metric available to me as someone who works full-time in RPGs and has done so for half a decade (and played them even longer) indicates that it's time for a change and overall the changes are good. Granted not everything from the playtest was appealing to the majority of players, but we already know that some number of those elements, like resonance, have been cut and the data collected used to replace them with mechanics that will presumably be more universally appealing.

Paizo Employee ***** Organized Play Manager

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Bill Baldwin wrote:
Bob Jonquet wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
Especially if Paizo actually gets off their butts and provides organizers with the promotional materials necessary to do this.
Like what? I don’t understand what promotional materials are needed. The only thing we ever had was a “PFS Played Here” poster and that has been out of print for five years.

Exactly! There are absolutely no materials supplied by Paizo to assist organizers in promoting PFS or SFS. No posters, no flyers, no brochures. Not everyone has the talent and/or wherewithal to make their own materials and it shouldn't be their responsibility as volunteers to do so, anyway. The only thing we really have is word-of-mouth and that doesn't go very far for recruiting people new to the hobby. So we lose many new recruits to the better known (to newbies) Adventurer’s League. I do what I can to recruit new players, but as with any job, the right tools can often do wonders.

Some suggestions:

A) A “Join the Society” poster, diagonally split with PFS on the top right and SFS on the bottom left.
B) A similar brochure with blank spaces for contact info. Should come in both card stock and digital form.

We've had a promo package on the org play dreamsheet for awhile, but decided to hold off doing it until we had a PFS2 logo, to keep organizers from having to reprint materials. We are trying to determine the best distribution method as well. So your wish should be granted in the upcoming months.

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Florida—Melbourne aka trollbill

Tonya Woldridge wrote:


We've had a promo package on the org play dreamsheet for awhile, but decided to hold off doing it until we had a PFS2 logo, to keep organizers from having to reprint materials. We are trying to determine the best distribution method as well. So your wish should be granted in the upcoming months.

Woot! Cool! And, yeah, I wouldn't have really expected anything until 2.0 was ready for release.

Liberty's Edge **** Venture-Agent, Indiana—Hammond

Tonya Woldridge wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
Bob Jonquet wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
Especially if Paizo actually gets off their butts and provides organizers with the promotional materials necessary to do this.
Like what? I don’t understand what promotional materials are needed. The only thing we ever had was a “PFS Played Here” poster and that has been out of print for five years.

Exactly! There are absolutely no materials supplied by Paizo to assist organizers in promoting PFS or SFS. No posters, no flyers, no brochures. Not everyone has the talent and/or wherewithal to make their own materials and it shouldn't be their responsibility as volunteers to do so, anyway. The only thing we really have is word-of-mouth and that doesn't go very far for recruiting people new to the hobby. So we lose many new recruits to the better known (to newbies) Adventurer’s League. I do what I can to recruit new players, but as with any job, the right tools can often do wonders.

Some suggestions:

A) A “Join the Society” poster, diagonally split with PFS on the top right and SFS on the bottom left.
B) A similar brochure with blank spaces for contact info. Should come in both card stock and digital form.

We've had a promo package on the org play dreamsheet for awhile, but decided to hold off doing it until we had a PFS2 logo, to keep organizers from having to reprint materials. We are trying to determine the best distribution method as well. So your wish should be granted in the upcoming months.

These are good ideas. I used a poster that I found via the PFS forums for a local shop. (It features a Pathfinder and a Starfindr iconic.)

We have had several changes here in Northwest Indiana, moving between three shops between June 2017 and March 2018. (Our long term store closed due to declining sales, a second shop closed due to other issues, and we found a new shop.)

I think that one thing that would help with the new edition are some quest scenarios to give new players a taste of the new system.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.

hmm....
1E is quite complicated. I am with Sebastian Hirsch here. I love to play interesting characters. Here in Germany people tend to play the kick-ass versions of Charakters. Kineticists who do 20-30 dmg on Level 3-4, fighters, you cannot hit anymore, and if you play role XY you ought to have this and that.
Last Weekend I GMed Daughters of Fury and skipped all random encounters. Getting everything ready for combat was taking more time than the actual fight.

I didn't had the opportunity to playtest 2E, but A play and GM rarely (once a month) and there is sop much more to experience for me. I fear that 2E will kill that. Why should someone olay 1E after August? New Characters? Mine are not even lvl 10!
I understand the need for a new start. I like it, because I have not the time to read all special rules for whatever someone means to maximise.

But I fear that I will lose the possibility to play at all.


Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
Bob Jonquet wrote:
Fred Strauss wrote:
The local post-Thanksgiving con in the Chicago area didn't even offer Paizo games this year, probably the first time since Pathfinder was still using the actual 3.5 rules.
Which con was that?

This is really odd.

I was at a Chicago area Con and we had both PFS and SFS games on the post-Thanksgiving weekend...?

EDIT: We didn't have any PFS2 Playtest, however.

STUFFED COWS 2018 at the College of Du Page

UPDATE: Now I see there was a separate external link to PFS/SFS games... DOH!!!

Liberty's Edge *

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I know that I have been dialing back my involvement outside of Convention gaming as I have been working on other projects and have had my time reduced.

I plan to wrap up PF1 w/ the Seeker Arc and then move into PF2 :)

Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society Playtest / Has 2E affected your playerbase? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Society Playtest