Reasons why I no longer trust Paizo to produce 2E

[Diego Valdez]

Removed a post. Making personal attacks against other users and their choice in professions is not acceptable. If you can't create a post that isn't snide or aggressive to other posters, that may be a good opportunity to step away from the keyboard and consider how you can contribute to the topic in a constructive way instead.

[The Once and Future Kai]

Nettah wrote:

Well that can only be discussed until a certain point. Almost all of the questions have been answered by the Paizo staff already.

So, basically, this thread has served it's purpose?

[Nettah]

The once and future kai said wrote:

So, basically, this thread has served it's purpose?

Yea pretty much, I liked the archery debate though. But it is a bit off OP's topic

[John Lynch 106]

Leafar Cathal wrote:

I see Pathfinder disappearing day after day. I've lost a bunch of players to 5e (they even try to persuade me to GM 5e for them)

Depending on what flaws you see in 5e will depend on whether PF2e will meet what you want. If PF2e embraces everything that makes 5e* different to PF1e and discards what makes PF1e the game it is, have you won anything by PF2e being more popular?

*I don't think it does myself. Although I do think it's lost what makes PF1e special.

[magnuskn]

Diego Valdez wrote:

Removed a post. Making personal attacks against other users and their choice in professions is not acceptable. If you can't create a post that isn't snide or aggressive to other posters, that may be a good opportunity to step away from the keyboard and consider how you can contribute to the topic in a constructive way instead.

Can we make this a sticky in every newly created thread on the playtest forums, above the OP?

[Gorbacz]

Apologies to everybody for my completely borked post earlier on. If you didn't get the chance to see it, carry on, these aren't the droids you are looking for.

[Dire Ursus]

How was I trying to undermine the thread when I was literally replying to a comment about the RAE from unchained?

Anyways yeah the topic of the thread has kinda run it's course since page 1. But some interesting topics have been discussed, especially the archery argument.

[Dire Ursus]

Just because you use it doesn't mean it's popular... Look around the forums. It's really obviously the least used optional rule from unchained (probably because it changes the game the most but that's beside the point). I literally haven't seen anyone mention it anywhere since a few days after unchained. Go do a search for "Unchained Action Economy" or "RAE" or "Revised Action Economy" to see what I mean.

Also there are some real problems with it interacting with 1e (even you have to admit that since you have said that you have house ruled stuff in it). I tried playing a game with it when unchained release but it just didn't feel like it interacted with how 1e at it's core works. And I didn't want to spend time messing with it to get it to work well. same problem I had with armour for DR.

[Vic Ferrari]

Dire Ursus wrote:

Just because you use it doesn't mean it's popular...

I never mentioned "popular", we have no idea, but people do use it.

[tivadar27]

Nettah wrote:

Someone said wrote:

Any chance of starting new threads for the increasingly tangential discussions here and circling back to the OP's points?

Layout/Readability of the Playtest book

Quality of the surveys/conclusions drawn from them

"Confirmation bias" and inauthentic responses on the forums

Declaration of, and no indication of considering changing, their timetable.

I think the developers might get some useful mechanic feedback out of the archery discussion - for instance - but it's buried in the back of this thread. Also it's drifting into the rambling territory where threads get closed.

Well that can only be discussed until a certain point. Almost all of the questions have been answered by the Paizo staff already. Having a thread to suggest that the amount of browsing of the rulebook between classes, powers, feats etc is a dime a dozen. They have talked about survey data in several twitch cast. Would it be good for us if Paizo had a better presence on the forums, sure, (including a blue post like system like blizzard) but you don't need several pages of discussion to get the point across.

Regarding the deadline Paizo have stated that if they aren't where they hope to be in terms of writing the final core book they will have to postpone, but they don't think there are indications that it is necessary yet.

While I do agree, even as the OP, that this thread has run its course, I think it's pretty far off to say that "almost all of the questions have been answered by the Paizo staff already".

1. I've yet to hear them talk about survey quality (which is a separate thing from talking about survey results).
2. They've mentioned initial formatting being a problem, but to my knowledge haven't indicated what they plan to do about it outside of general "make it better".
3. There's been no talk of deadline and how on/off track they think they are with respect to it.
4. I can't attest to dev responses on the boards more recently, as I've been away. I will say the *only* response this thread got was one from Jason when it was essentially clickbait because I used the wrong words...

NOTE: Acknowledging I could be wrong on any of these points because, as has been pointed out, information comes over a lot of channels. Please do let me know if they have spoken on these things. I'd appreciate it, particularly if there's a link involved :).

[Gratz]

tivadar27 wrote:

1. I've yet to hear them talk about survey quality (which is a separate thing from talking about survey results).

2. They've mentioned initial formatting being a problem, but to my knowledge haven't indicated what they plan to do about it outside of general "make it better".
3. There's been no talk of deadline and how on/off track they think they are with respect to it.
4. I can't attest to dev responses on the boards more recently, as I've been away. I will say the *only* response this thread got was one from Jason when it was essentially clickbait because I used the wrong words...

1. They are game designers, so I'm not even sure that they've designed the surveys themselves. They could have outsourced that part, because talking about survey quality is difficult as a layman and overall I don't think they want to discuss those topics, because it don't see any benefit for the game designers going into detail about survey design.

2. That's probably all they can do about it at the moment. I highly doubt that we will hear any further about that topic until we get closer to the actual release, because I'm quite sure Paizo won't release a revamped Playtest. They acknowledged the problem and will try to fix it with the release of PF2, so I don't know what else you expect here.

3. Why would Paizo discuss or reveal deadlines to their customers? That's rather ridiculous. That's stuff we don't need to worry about as playtesters. Do we need to know by what date the final draft needs to be at the printer, etc? I wouldn't say so.

4. If you think the topic is important than just open a new dedicated thread for archery, in this case. I honestly didn't find that discussion all that enlightening, but if someone feels differently about it, than feel free to address it. But I'm quite certain that that topic has been broached a couple of times.

[Tangent101]

I actually wanted to use the Revised Action Economy system from Pathfinder Unchained. I couldn't figure it out. The problem is that it was a bandaid being patched into the existing AE system and thus got convoluted and difficult to use.

The new system is integrated into the very foundation of Pathfinder 2. It works and it works quite well. It works far better than the old system with its Swift/Immediate Actions, Standard Actions, Attack Actions, Full Actions (which don't include Swift), and so forth.

Hell, I like a number of the systems in here. For instance, weapon damage slowly going up as martial classes advance in levels, the elimination of spells for Rangers and Paladins, the end of 2/3rd casters, and fuller integration of Multiclassing into the existing system (essentially a better version of the alternative Multiclass system offered in Unchained). And it even allows for more variability in the classes even if some of you claim otherwise.

Yes, I mean what I said. You are used to multiple Archetypes. But if you look at the Core Rules, you have a Cleric. They cast spells and channel energy. Their abilities are static, unchanging. You have more variability with the Rogue but they're weaker than other classes. The Fighter has a lot of Feats but Martials are weaker so it doesn't help that much.

Even the Archetypes limit you. They take away Class Abilities but replace them with set ones. Look at the Druid Class or the Bard Class for the Playtest compared to the Archetypes for these classes... you can build a Maestro Bard and yet branch into other lines, or you can build a Storm Druid who still has an animal companion. Equivalent Archetypes just set you on another Fixed Path.

Now that's not to say things are perfect. That's what Playtests are for. For instance, I know why the current Ancestry system is so... idiotic. Paizo wants to sell Ancestry Books - the Halfling Book and the Elf Book and on down the line. These books will have dozens of Ancestry Feats and allow far more abilities in the future... but as a result Paizo nerfed all the Ancestries so that you have to "build" up to being an Elf or a Dwarf or so on.

(Let's face it. Most of us will ignore Paizo's Ancestry rules and probably give everyone three Ancestry Feats to start so that you can start out as an Elf or Halfling like in the old Pathfinder and then add new abilities from there. The existing system has the significant odor of "future money grab" written all over it, similar to how Games Workshop put out splat books for each individual Space Marine Chapter with their last couple of incarnations of 40K.)

What I am interested in is this: how will Pathfinder 2 play out with higher levels? Because that's where it actually matters. Pathfinder 1 falls apart with increasing frequency the further past level 12 you reach... which really makes the existing Adventure Path system a system of frustration because it ceases being a challenge for the majority of groups. The later part of the Playtest is where the game will really shine or sink. If high-level play ends up falling apart like high-level Pathfinder 1 falls apart... then I honestly believe Paizo should delay publication until they can get it to work. But seeing the Action Economy doesn't turn into a massive time-sink Cuisinart of attacks and spellcasting, I suspect it won't be that problematic. Hopefully.

[MaxAstro]

I have never known Paizo to perform a blatant money grab before and I'm not sure where the certainty that is what is going on here comes from.

But I agree with most of your other points.

[Vic Ferrari]

Tangent101 wrote:

Hell, I like a number of the systems in here. For instance, weapon damage slowly going up as martial classes advance in levels,

Is that not tied to magic weapons?

[Normal Pathetic Caster]

MaxAstro wrote:

I have never known Paizo to perform a blatant money grab before and I'm not sure where the certainty that is what is going on here comes from.

But I agree with most of your other points.

I mean they did sell a hardcover book of playtest rules that was obsoleted in less than a week.

[Cyouni]

Normal Pathetic Caster wrote:

MaxAstro wrote:

I have never known Paizo to perform a blatant money grab before and I'm not sure where the certainty that is what is going on here comes from.

But I agree with most of your other points.

I mean they did sell a hardcover book of playtest rules that was obsoleted in less than a week.

People demanded one before, during the previous beta. Even I considered one, knowing how quickly it'd become irrelevant.

[Tangent101]

Vic Ferrari wrote:

Tangent101 wrote:

Hell, I like a number of the systems in here. For instance, weapon damage slowly going up as martial classes advance in levels,

Is that not tied to magic weapons?

Power Attack increases in the number of weapon dice as you reach higher levels. There may be other abilities as well that do similar.

That said, Wizards and Sorcerers don't have the equivalent of a Magic Weapon for their Cantrips from what I remember - they level up on their own but even then remain on par with the magic weapons. Admittedly, Produce Flame only does 4d6 + ability modifier upon reaching 17th level, while a +5 short sword would be doing 6d6+ ability modifier... but the cantrip costs a lot less. ;)

[Dire Ursus]

Normal Pathetic Caster wrote:

MaxAstro wrote:

I have never known Paizo to perform a blatant money grab before and I'm not sure where the certainty that is what is going on here comes from.

But I agree with most of your other points.

I mean they did sell a hardcover book of playtest rules that was obsoleted in less than a week.

I bought the hardcover and I'm completely happy with it. I did not want to print off 400 pages. It's way easier to just have the hardcover and then print off the 10 pages of faq/errata and have them to the side.

[Tangent101]

I went over a month without the Playtest rules in print form. It was a nuisance and I hated every moment of it. When I found the Playtest in Barnes and Noble, I instantly picked it up. When I found a softcover version I picked THAT up as well so the players can have a copy and I can have a copy. That the rules were not up to date when I bought them doesn't matter because MOST of the rules are still valid.

[Vic Ferrari]

Tangent101 wrote:

Vic Ferrari wrote:

Tangent101 wrote:

Hell, I like a number of the systems in here. For instance, weapon damage slowly going up as martial classes advance in levels,

Is that not tied to magic weapons?

Power Attack increases in the number of weapon dice as you reach higher levels. There may be other abilities as well that do similar.

Well, that's Fighter specific, you get 1 extra die at 1st level, then another at 10th-level, and the attack counts as 2 attacks towards MAP.

That is not weapon damage slowly going up as martial classes advance in levels, that is one class has a feat that gives a damage bump at a cost.

[AndIMustMask]

Normal Pathetic Caster wrote:

MaxAstro wrote:

I have never known Paizo to perform a blatant money grab before and I'm not sure where the certainty that is what is going on here comes from.

But I agree with most of your other points.

I mean they did sell a hardcover book of playtest rules that was obsoleted in less than a week.

i mean they pretty readily pointed out from day one as being purely commemorative, and definitely not the final/"real" rulebook to be released at the end of the playtest.

though i've posted at length about their overall design being rather hungry for dosh in a sort of half-negligent way, i'm pretty sure that wasn't their intent with the playtest rulebook sales.

[Steve Geddes]

It was a pretty poor money grab, if that had been the intent:

1. They got it printed in Canada, rather than China so they could pull the trigger as late as possible (thus pushing costs up and profits down)

2. They printed to preorder numbers, rather than overprinting. This means they deny themselves some “tail” revenue plus they face a higher print cost per unit (once more pushing profit down)

Paizo got heaps of complaints from people who missed out on a hardcopy of the first playtest, plus heaps of feedback from fans who were lucky enough to get one saying how happy they were to have one on their shelf.

The latter is far more likely to be their motivation than some poorly executed money grab. It has the benefit of matching what they said their motivation was, as well.

[MaxAstro]

Thank you, Steve.

Sometimes I feel like I'm one of the only people here who still has "Paizo (faith in business practices)" as a Major Intimacy.

...No one is going to get that. XD

[Chief Cook and Bottlewasher]

Reading the playtest is...problematic.

The Beginners Box and Strategy Guide give me faith that the final rulebook will be a vast improvement.