Ah geez I'm going to miss PF1


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 101 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think it'll give the various indie game producers a boost simply because it isn't as good a game as many of them. Which is fine in the abstract but if it weakens the community here I'll regret that.


David knott 242 wrote:
pjrogers wrote:
I'll miss that Paizo missed a chance to do an evolutionary PF1.5 and instead decided to do a PF2 which is a very new and different game from what preceded it. However, I hold out hope that a change of heart/plan by Paizo is still possible.

Purple Duck Games is working on a new game that basically appears to be a PF 1.5. Of course, they don't seem to be set up to do things at the same scale as Paizo.

Paizo wasn't exactly set up to do things the same scale as paizo after the initial 4e release either though


7 people marked this as a favorite.

I'll miss NPC's who are built the same way as PC's.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

I have absolutely zero intention of playing PF2E. I've read the rules, kept up with the updates, and it is something I want nothing to do with. I don't like bounded accuracy, being assigned my ability scores, the inclusion of goblins as a core ancestry, non-Lawful Good 'Paladins', and how many pools of various points I have to keep up with. The only way Paizo will ever be getting any more of my money is if I buy softback versions of the PF1E books. I will keep playing PF1E until there are simply no people left who want to play it. Whether that happens in a year, five years, or fifteen years I don't know, but I switched to Pathfinder from 3.5 because I didn't want to change editions in the first place. That includes editions of Pathfinder.

Maybe this makes me the spiteful kid who hears we're moving and hopes the new house burns down so we can keep living in the old house.


I wonder what the chances of Paizo anthologising their old Pathfinder Adventure Paths a la Runelords or Crimson Throne now the system is in its dying days. Probably not high, it'd make me happy, though.

Currently buying up all my desired hardcovers before they go OOP.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

While I would love to see PF hardcovers of the 3.5 APs for collectors purposes, I doubt it makes economic sense to tank sales on the original APs when 2E is already reducing interest.


Tsukiyo wrote:

I wonder what the chances of Paizo anthologising their old Pathfinder Adventure Paths a la Runelords or Crimson Throne now the system is in its dying days.

That's easy. Zero, full stop.

Doug M.


AP hardcovers require months and months of lead time -- both RotRL and CotCT were announced more than six months in advance. That's because AP hardcovers are a huge amount of work. It's not just slapping six modules together in new covers. It's new art, more plot, editing, sidebars, tweaks, fixes, inclusion of new system material that has come out since the AP was published... hundreds and hundreds of-hours of work.

Putting aside the question of whether it would be a good business decision for Paizo to ask us to plunk down $75-100 for a hardcover adventure in a system that is literally about to die, they couldn't do it even if they wanted to. There's not enough time left between now and the launch of PF2, and they're just way too busy.

Doug M.

Scarab Sages

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to miss a few things. First, the sense that paizo valued their core playerbase. Paizo won't even put one guy on releasing p1 content? They can't even do one book a year? Come on. That's a huge middle finger to the core base that followed them for an improved 3.5 - not a virtually new and very different system.

I'm going to miss the excitement of cracking open a new pdf and starting to read through it. P2 is incredibly unappealing to me, especially the action changes, the segregation of basic common abilities, the multiclassing, and the lack of backward compatibility. So I won't be buying any new hard copies or pdfs for the foreseeable future. On that note I'm also going to miss avoiding 3pp content. With official content ending its inevitable that most p1 groups will slowly incorporate more and more homebrew / 3pp content.

I'm also going to miss the already limited amount of errata and faqs the p1 system received. It's very likely that any unanswered questions will remain that way forever now.

*sigh*


1 person marked this as a favorite.

With regards to anthologies, it probably depends on if they will need to start selling Pathfinder Classic to make ends meet.


Although, giving the brawler a no-penalty flurry would be a welcomed decision. The class already suffers from being a full BAB class that does not have a built in method of improving its attack. I’m not sure why we ever got a class that would be flurry of misses 2.0.


I'm going to miss dwarven movement speed.

As it stands now, 10ft movement in Full Plate, because I want to still resemble a dwarf as much as possible.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Magicdealer wrote:
I'm going to miss a few things. First, the sense that paizo valued their core playerbase. Paizo won't even put one guy on releasing p1 content? They can't even do one book a year? Come on. That's a huge middle finger to the core base that followed them for an improved 3.5 - not a virtually new and very different system.

One guy simply cannot produce 1E content to the standard Paizo expects. It takes a team.


I will miss PF1. I'm not currently a fan of PF2, though I'm still going through the play test, but will likely not get a chance to play PF1 again.

The math behind PF2 sets up a systems in which characters feel like they are sub-par, even when you've done everything you can to optimize them for a specific task.

I don't remotely feel heroic. And in terms of the damage department, it's very upsetting that we've become more dependent on magic items for damage instead of less. Almost all damage these days comes from an awesome weapon, instead of an awesome character. I absolutely hate that. I feel like I should be playing a magic item whose story is about finding some schmuck to help you along in your quest.

I've said all that to say that despite this issues with PF2, the greater will of my gaming group wants to march along with PF2...which means I will most likely break step with them and probably stop gaming in any sort of Pathfidner system. We still have a Starfinder game going, which I'm enjoying greatly by comparison. Buy yeah, I"m going to miss it because I wont spend time and effort on a system that I don't enjoy. I've already tried that and done it with other systems that I hated (Numenera as an example).

I've already learned the lessons that trying to play along with a system I hate only makes me resentful and angry towards the game, the GM, and players around me. It makes me not a fun person. And while my friends don't want to alienate me, in those occasions I'm sure I made the experience worse and not better. I wont do that again.

And so, unless PF2 changes drastically between now and release, I probably wont play it. And I don't honestly expect it to change drastically.

I just have to face the facts that Paizo and Pathfinder aren't for me anymore.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Douglas Muir 406 wrote:

AP hardcovers require months and months of lead time -- both RotRL and CotCT were announced more than six months in advance. That's because AP hardcovers are a huge amount of work. It's not just slapping six modules together in new covers. It's new art, more plot, editing, sidebars, tweaks, fixes, inclusion of new system material that has come out since the AP was published... hundreds and hundreds of-hours of work.

Putting aside the question of whether it would be a good business decision for Paizo to ask us to plunk down $75-100 for a hardcover adventure in a system that is literally about to die commit suicide, they couldn't do it even if they wanted to. There's not enough time left between now and the launch of PF2, and they're just way too busy.

Doug M.

FTFY.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Having gobbled up PF1 organized play content at a rapid pace, I'm going to miss new organized play content.

I wonder what I'll do with the resulting free time at conventions?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
blahpers wrote:
Douglas Muir 406 wrote:


Putting aside the question of whether it would be a good business decision for Paizo to ask us to plunk down $75-100 for a hardcover adventure in a system that is literally about to die commit suicide, they couldn't do it even if they wanted to. There's not enough time left between now and the launch of PF2, and they're just way too busy.

FTFY.

Yeah no. Systems die. There's only so much design space. There are only so many splatbooks you can publish. The state of the art moves on. PF1 is a ten year old system running on a 20+ year old engine. Ten years is about as long as any edition of a major tabletop RPG has ever lasted. The record holder is 2nd edition, at 12 years... and TSR, the maker of 2nd, went bankrupt.

D&D is on its fifth edition. Vampire is on its fifth edition. GURPS is on its fourth edition. Call of Cthulhu is either seventh or third, depending how you count. Runequest, I can't even keep track, but it's a lot. I literally do not understand how people think PF could just go on forever. Were you expecting to buy, I don't know, Bestiary 11 in 2025? Did you think Paizo would be able to stay afloat indefinitely, creating ever more niche content for an aging system?

PF2 may be good or bad, may succeed or fail, but at some point Paizo has to jump off the sinking ship and hope for the best. It's a risk, but a necessary one. The alternative would be to end up like TSR, or at best like Steve Jackson -- a tiny niche company producing endless dreary, silly supplements for the Munchkin card game.

You're not unhappy because PF committed suicide. You're unhappy because Paizo refused to commit suicide for you.

Doug M.


Douglas Muir 406 wrote:
blahpers wrote:
Douglas Muir 406 wrote:


Putting aside the question of whether it would be a good business decision for Paizo to ask us to plunk down $75-100 for a hardcover adventure in a system that is literally about to die commit suicide, they couldn't do it even if they wanted to. There's not enough time left between now and the launch of PF2, and they're just way too busy.

FTFY.

Yeah no. Systems die. There's only so much design space. There are only so many splatbooks you can publish. The state of the art moves on. PF1 is a ten year old system running on a 20+ year old engine. Ten years is about as long as any edition of a major tabletop RPG has ever lasted. The record holder is 2nd edition, at 12 years... and TSR, the maker of 2nd, went bankrupt.

D&D is on its fifth edition. Vampire is on its fifth edition. GURPS is on its fourth edition. Call of Cthulhu is either seventh or third, depending how you count. Runequest, I can't even keep track, but it's a lot. I literally do not understand how people think PF could just go on forever. Were you expecting to buy, I don't know, Bestiary 11 in 2025? Did you think Paizo would be able to stay afloat indefinitely, creating ever more niche content for an aging system?

PF2 may be good or bad, may succeed or fail, but at some point Paizo has to jump off the sinking ship and hope for the best. It's a risk, but a necessary one. The alternative would be to end up like TSR, or at best like Steve Jackson -- a tiny niche company producing endless dreary, silly supplements for the Munchkin card game.

You're not unhappy because PF committed suicide. You're unhappy because Paizo refused to commit suicide for you.

Doug M.

In the immortal words of the Legendary goblin Blix... wow.

For all our snark, folks on both sides of this quote are grieving. Yes, change is inevitable and yes, PF1 couldn't sustain itself indefinitely; no game can.

But change is hard. People need time to digest it, to go through the five stages. DM, B-laphs, you'll both get through this but it'll take time.

As for the D-man's original question, what I'll miss specifically about the PF1 game or system, I suppose it'll be new APs and modules. As a busy GM I got and kept a subscription to Dungeon in the last 2 years it came through Paizo, for the content. Then it was Rise of the Runelords and the first season of PFS.

Paizo makes excellent adventures; well balanced, engaging, and with a level of darkness toeing the line between horror and fantasy. They'll continue to do so in PF2, but not for PF1 and that is sad.

I DO hope as people have suggested that this edition will live on via the net. But the reality is they're not making the version that got me through... well, some very rough times. I'll miss the new content for my old game, but as Max Muir-cury says, systems die *pours handful of d20's on the floor*


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I would have been happy if P2 was an evolution of P1, in the same way that P1 was an evolution of 3.5. There are plenty of things it could fix and improve upon while keeping the core system alive. What I'll miss is lots of the new mechanics they produced. P1 is one of the few systems where I cared about ever increasing mechanical options. I grew bored with 3.5 about half-way through its run, but for some reason P1 managed to keep me coming back. I'll admit it was getting a bit stale towards the end, but I was far from burned out.
In theory I love what they did with expanding Golarion and how well they did with the APs, but in practice it didn't matter because I don't play in or run Golarion, and either write my own adventures or use old BECMI/AD&D modules.

Lots of the games listed by Doug, despite their high number of editions, have seen significantly less drastic change to the mechanics than there is between P1 and P2, let alone 0D&D - 5e. And Ars Magica 5th edition has been around since 2004, making that 14 years, and it shows no signs of needing another edition, to my knowledge.
The point is, if a system is popular, people are happy to see and pay for incremental improvements and avoid massive redesigns that fundamentally change how the game works.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think pf2 would have been more well received if it built on PF1 instead of rebuilding so much. But there may be other reasons for changing so much. They may be trying to get out from restraints of the srd.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Douglas Muir 406 wrote:

PF2 may be good or bad, may succeed or fail, but at some point Paizo has to jump off the sinking ship and hope for the best. It's a risk, but a necessary one. The alternative would be to end up like TSR, or at best like Steve Jackson -- a tiny niche company producing endless dreary, silly supplements for the Munchkin card game.

You're not unhappy because PF committed suicide. You're unhappy because Paizo refused to commit suicide for you.

Personally, I'm unhappy because I think PF2e in its current form is a bad game. To my mind, Paizo would have been much better off with an evolutionary PF2e which they could have sold as a "new" game to non-PF players and which would have been more appealing to most current PF players.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
MageHunter wrote:

Well...

Due to circumstances I've never actually been able to play Pathfinder with a group regularly; just a couple one shots.

What's kept me interested since 2015 is theory crafting. When I started there was just a wealth of options to draw from. It took a lot of time and commitment to learn the rules, the different options, and piece everything together.

Reading and rereading all the books made theory crafting so fun since you can make just about any concept work. Particularly enticing was that no build was ever perfect or complete, and could always use continual refinement

I like that the rules are so convoluted because it makes builds so much fun to create. PF2 is less enticing because of the simpler rules, and the lack of variety compared to what I'm used to.

So I will miss how dynamic and active these forums are with all the geeks.

This reminds me of a conversation I had years ago with a friend.

Back in the 90s, the UK introduced a lottery. I had a very analytically minded friend who started buying a ticket every week. I asked him why, given the odds. He said "Ah, I'm not just buying a chance of winning, I'm buying an excuse to daydream all week about what I'd buy if I won!"

For me PF1 provides a ton of excuse to daydream and theorycraft character ideas, far beyond the weekly game if even if you aren't actively in a game. I'd miss not having that.


Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
And Ars Magica 5th edition has been around since 2004, making that 14 years, and it shows no signs of needing another edition, to my knowledge.

That's why I said "major tabletop RPG". I like Ars Magica, but I don't think you could call it major.

It's also why I mentioned Steve Jackson Games as one possible outcome. Again, AM is a fine system for what it is. But it's always been a labor-of-love niche product and was literally produced by a mom'n'pop shop. Atlas Games does good work, but I could load every one of their employees into the family minivan and there'd still be room left over for the dog.

And finally, AM 5th may still formally be around, but afaik Atlas hasn't released any new material for it since Dies Irae. That was published in [googles] spring 2016, nearly three years ago. And they'd slowed down to publishing 1-2 AM supplements per year for a while before that. Skimming their site, it looks like most of the Sourcebooks and Realm books were published before 2010 and are long OOP (and not available as .pdfs). So it may be fourteen years since AM 5th came out, but it's no longer a commercially viable franchise, and hasn't been for a while now.

Doug M.


JulianW wrote:
For me PF1 provides a ton of excuse to daydream and theorycraft character ideas, far beyond the weekly game if even if you aren't actively in a game. I'd miss not having that.

Yeah, agreed. I came up with a lot of PF concepts for these forums, and for each of them there were probably five I never had time to write down. Somewhere I've got 1/3 of an entire witch-based adventure -- it would be like 10,000 words long if complete -- based on the witch splatbook and the rules introduced there, trying to craft half a dozen weird unique witches and see how they could use the book's ramped-up coven powers to become the secret rulers of a large town. We won't be able to do that again for a while.

Doug M.


Douglas Muir 406 wrote:


And finally, AM 5th may still formally be around, but afaik Atlas hasn't released any new material for it since Dies Irae. That was published in [googles] spring 2016, nearly three years ago. And they'd slowed down to publishing 1-2 AM supplements per year for a while before that. Skimming their site, it looks like most of the Sourcebooks and Realm books were published before 2010 and are long OOP (and not available as .pdfs). So it may be fourteen years since AM 5th came out, but it's no longer a commercially viable franchise, and hasn't been for a while now.

Doug M.

Has it really been that long?

Dang. Guess I fell out of touch.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Hoover 330 wrote:
For all our snark, folks on both sides of this quote are grieving.

I understand grieving. I'm going to be a little melancholy myself. But a lot of what I'm seeing isn't grieving, but whining. How dare Paizo take my toys away! This is a huge middle finger! They OBVIOUSLY don't care about us anymore! And then half a dozen +1s to the whine-post. WTH, people.

Quote:
But the reality is they're not making the version that got me through... well, some very rough times. I'll miss the new content for my old game, but as Max Muir-cury says, systems die *pours handful of d20's on the floor*

I felt this way about 2e (really). 3e was so /weird/! And it didn't make sense at first!

A while back I started spending some time on Old School Revival blogs. I loathed OSR when it first showed up back in the middle 2000s. It struck me as a bunch of middle-aged dudes whining about a lost paradise that had actually sucked pretty hard. And that was before adding in the cringe-inducing edgelording of some OSR stuff, cough LotFP cough. "Yeah, what was great about 1e was how Erol Otus drew boobs!"

But over time I came to see that there was some wisdom in OSR. Rulings, not rules; problem-solving by the player, not the PC; one man's wackiness is another man's freedom; simplicity doesn't have to be stupid. Character dead? Roll up another, it won't take long -- don't get too attached. I still prefer PF but now I see that OSR has something to offer. And, indeed, that 1e had something unique and special to offer /as a gaming experience/, not just as "the first edition".

So -- thinking out loud here -- I wonder what PF1's "legacy" will be *as a gaming system*. Not talking about Golarion or other content. More like, what aspects of the PF1 tabletop experience will linger with us, and might we seek out in years to come?

Doug M.


I don't actually believe what I'm about to say. Maybe I just feel snarky right now.

Douglas Muir 406 wrote:
GURPS is on its fourth edition.

...and has been for 14 years, with no sign of planning a fifth.

Of course, you could argue...

Douglas Muir 406 wrote:
...like Steve Jackson -- a tiny niche company producing endless dreary, silly supplements for the Munchkin card game.

...just like some other game company could produce some other product endlessly, like... I don't know... Adventure Paths? Campaign Setting books? Player Companions? Minis? And a host of other products that sell well? Would that be such a tiny niche? Paizo existed before PFRPG, after all.

<ahem> Okay, I got that out of my system. Just for the record, I'm not denying that Paizo should make a second edition. Maybe Steve Jackson Games just isn't a good example, that's all.


Douglas Muir 406 wrote:
Mark Hoover 330 wrote:
For all our snark, folks on both sides of this quote are grieving.
I understand grieving. I'm going to be a little melancholy myself. But a lot of what I'm seeing isn't grieving, but whining. How dare Paizo take my toys away! This is a huge middle finger! They OBVIOUSLY don't care about us anymore! And then half a dozen +1s to the whine-post. WTH, people.

Every one of those people is a paying customer who will vote with their wallet.

Right now my wallet is voting for 3rd party publishers. Once I have all the PF1 content in that arena, my wallet will move on to voting for additional resources that I've been too busy to invest in for the past decade.

I'll probably get back into paining miniatures and making terrain from scratch. 3D printing has come a long way in recent years, I can really step up my game with a $200 printer.

What I won't be doing is purchasing PF2.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

It’s a problem of Pathfinder being built on a player base that didn’t want to abandon their previous version. And for the most part, Pathfinder was just 3rd edition, with a few bells and whistles added. If P2 was also just a small change, then people may not have been so upset. But instead, it’s just the same bitterness as when D&D moved to 4th, and changed everything.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Volkard Abendroth wrote:
Every one of those people is a paying customer who will vote with their wallet.

Good. So will we.


Aaron Bitman wrote:
...and has been for 14 years, with no sign of planning a fifth.

GURPS hasn't produced any new physical supplements for years now. (2013? 2014? Honestly not sure.) Steve Jackson Games is still coming out with a thin trickle of .pdfs, most of them either short, reprints, or both. Looking at the SJG website, it appears they have a grand total of... one... full time employee working on GURPS. So it's not /quite/ dead, but it's a dim feeble flicker. Again -- like Ars Magica -- it's a hand-crafted labor of love rather than a commercially viable franchise.

(Also, when you click on their GURPS page? The first things you're offered are bundles... of old magazines from the early 2000s going back to the 1980s. I mean, I have a lot of respect for Steve and his people, but you can practically

Steve Jackson's main business line is producing endless supplements to Munchkin. Although, to be fair, they do occasionally try new things. [checks SJG website] Yeah, right now they're trying Space Pirate Amazon Ninja Catgirls, or SPANC.

So, a trickle of new content just barely keeping their tabletop system on life support, secondary to their core business of producing silly card games for a small but dedicated group of deep-cut fans. Not really seeing this as a model for Paizo.

Doug M.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Melkiador wrote:
If P2 was also just a small change, then people may not have been so upset. But instead, it’s just the same bitterness as when D&D moved to 4th, and changed everything.

I just realized this perfectly sums up my feeling and experience.

This transition feels a lot like the transition from 3.5 to 4.0 for me, which resulted in me going to another game system (or rather a mostly the same system).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Melkiador wrote:
It’s a problem of Pathfinder being built on a player base that didn’t want to abandon their previous version. And for the most part, Pathfinder was just 3rd edition, with a few bells and whistles added. If P2 was also just a small change, then people may not have been so upset. But instead, it’s just the same bitterness as when D&D moved to 4th, and changed everything.

Yep, feels exactly the same to me. Wizards threw everyone overboard (Including Paizo) to go a completely different direction....that's what is happening now. But like I said in another thread....I have enough material to play for many years, so when all is said and done everything is fine. I'm just a bit sad at the direction things have gone.


Douglas Muir 406 wrote:
-- based on the witch splatbook and the rules introduced there,

Sorry, somewhat off topic, what is the witch splatbook? I think I need it. Can you give the title?

Thanks.


Tsukiyo wrote:
Douglas Muir 406 wrote:
-- based on the witch splatbook and the rules introduced there,

Sorry, somewhat off topic, what is the witch splatbook? I think I need it. Can you give the title?

Thanks.

Have you seen Blood of the Coven?

This is the one i can think of.


Nox Aeterna wrote:

Have you seen Blood of the Coven?

This is the one i can think of.

Yes, I have that one, thanks.

I did wonder if that was the book being referenced. I am still a little disappointed that that book did not give us any new hexes. Opportunity lost.


Claxon wrote:
Melkiador wrote:
If P2 was also just a small change, then people may not have been so upset. But instead, it’s just the same bitterness as when D&D moved to 4th, and changed everything.

I just realized this perfectly sums up my feeling and experience.

This transition feels a lot like the transition from 3.5 to 4.0 for me, which resulted in me going to another game system (or rather a mostly the same system).

Interestingly enough, I was initially quite hostile to 4e, until I was forced by my DM to adopt it, and then I found out that I absolutely loved those mechanics, especially with the DM"s access to Hero Lab... maybe I'll have a similar good suprise with pf2?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

My love of Starfinder, and the Paizo Advantage, will keep me buying Pathfinder APs, whichever edition they're printed for.


Just to reiterate from the Twitch stream last week, the playtest is not 2nd edition. It's a playtest. Does the playtest seen so radically different from PF? No doubt. But I feel a collective breath should be taken before declaring Paizo dead.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Erpa wrote:
Just to reiterate from the Twitch stream last week, the playtest is not 2nd edition. It's a playtest. Does the playtest seen so radically different from PF? No doubt. But I feel a collective breath should be taken before declaring Paizo dead.

Don't worry, I fully expect a solid cohort of people to continue the dance for ten years until in 2028, when Paizo announces PF3, they'll be able to make the "I was right all along: PF2 was dead on arrival!" threads.


Man, for a thread that opens with "let's not talk about PF2", there is a lot of PF2 talk.

Anyway, one I lament about moving on is a few specific characters I wanted to play. Namely my Beast Rider Gendarme and the Ki Throw Monk. Pathfinder had a lot of options that spurred on my creativity, but being the consummate GM, I rarely actually get to play.

I look forward to PF2 though. I'm planning on converting a lot of material to the new edition, but the key differences in how they run will certainly require some nuance in how I adapt things.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Erpa wrote:
Just to reiterate from the Twitch stream last week, the playtest is not 2nd edition. It's a playtest. Does the playtest seen so radically different from PF? No doubt. But I feel a collective breath should be taken before declaring Paizo dead.

Well, the final 2e is going to resemble the playtest pretty closely. Stuff may get changed, but they're not going to rip out whole chunks of the playtest at this late date.

Doug M.


Douglas Muir 406 wrote:
It's also why I mentioned Steve Jackson Games as one possible outcome.

Sayeth I: the only reason GURPS isn't the dominant game is because players will always remain gaga for their multiple types of funny-sided dice -- and SJG stubbornly insists on boring 3d6 for everything.

I don't think FFG's Star Wars is a better RPG than anything else out there, but I like it just because the dice are such a tactile joy to fool around with. Who doesn't love a big, meaty paw full of d12s covered in inscrutable squiggles?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

Staying on topic, I think I am going to find the production schedule ahead a bit of a bummer.

Even if Paizo tries some different things for the new release schedule, or if they give us some double-size bestiaries etc, a lot of the effort for the next few years is going to have to be devoted to bringing PF 1E content into PF 2E (guns, witches, monsters,prestige archetypes, basic setting information) which means less novel classes, monsters, or other options.

I am sure we will be getting some new stuff mixed in of course, but a lot will be like the above.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Douglas Muir 406 wrote:
Blah blah it's OLD blah

Yeah, I've heard the spiel. Old is bad. New is good. Right on. 9_9

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Ah yes, that's why he praised the OSR movement...


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The old wizard opposed schools is another thing I'll miss from 1e. I'm a fan of wizards (with archetypes in PF1), and one thing that always drew me into the character building was explaining why the wizard wouldn't focus on 2 schools of magic and would narrow in on one. Having mechanics to back up that lack of focus and even reward it was cool. I especially liked thassilonian style forbidden schools for opening up finding creative magical ways around the routes permanently blocked off.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paradozen wrote:
The old wizard opposed schools is another thing I'll miss from 1e. I'm a fan of wizards (with archetypes in PF1), and one thing that always drew me into the character building was explaining why the wizard wouldn't focus on 2 schools of magic and would narrow in on one. Having mechanics to back up that lack of focus and even reward it was cool. I especially liked thassilonian style forbidden schools for opening up finding creative magical ways around the routes permanently blocked off.

Oh, good one. Agreed on all points. Specialization was a cool option. I had quibbles with it -- the schools weren't really well balanced, and the poor Universalist was just sadly underpowered -- but it really pulled you into thinking hard about the design of a Wizard character, and in a fun way.

Doug M.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Klorox wrote:
Claxon wrote:
Melkiador wrote:
If P2 was also just a small change, then people may not have been so upset. But instead, it’s just the same bitterness as when D&D moved to 4th, and changed everything.

I just realized this perfectly sums up my feeling and experience.

This transition feels a lot like the transition from 3.5 to 4.0 for me, which resulted in me going to another game system (or rather a mostly the same system).

Interestingly enough, I was initially quite hostile to 4e, until I was forced by my DM to adopt it, and then I found out that I absolutely loved those mechanics, especially with the DM"s access to Hero Lab... maybe I'll have a similar good suprise with pf2?

For me, at least with PF2, it's the opposite situation. I was pretty hyped about PF2 in the beginning. The more play testing I do the less and less I enjoy the game.

I just feel more and more frustrated with it. You advance in level, but you never get any better relative to your enemies. That's my biggest gripe. Yeah PF1 characters were too powerful, but now we've gone too far in the other direction. I feel lame when ~30% of rounds I don't land a successful blow as a martial character. I don't ever feel heroic or accomplished in this system, and I realize now that is what I enjoyed most in PF1. Right now I just feel like I'm climbing a treadmill of mediocrity, with little incentive to actually level up since relative to my enemies I never really get any better.

51 to 100 of 101 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Ah geez I'm going to miss PF1 All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.