So, What does Pathfinder Mean to You?

[Aeric Raven King]

Pathfinder 1: An improvement on the D&D 3.5 rule set that used small changes to solve large problems. A continuation of a true fantasy RPG that allows the game to be accessible to both new and old gamers.

Pathfinder 2: Is the same mistake that WOTC made when they released 4th Edition; which had innovative elements and a plethora of missteps. The potential end to Paizo Publishing as it divides their player based and follow the continued mistake of D&D 5th Edition.

The smartest move that Wizard’s D&D could make would to release a 6th Edition retro game that is compatible with 3.5.

I will continue with Pathfinder 1; Create & Convert what I need and then when / if I have trouble finding Pathfinder players I will hope for a new edition from Paizo or Wizards that resolves the player divide.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

I think Paizo wants to be known for their own accomplishments, instead of being "That one company that revived that old edition of D&D because WoTC had a brain fart."

The idea that PF2 should just be yet another rehash of PF1 with updates that will be equally confusing and counterintuitive (people thought the transition of 3.X to PF1 was clean and easy, but realistically that still had numerous issues when it came down to it) is not really a sensible standpoint for them to take. I'd rather Paizo be known for making a capable game that isn't stringent on them following what WoTC does/did to the very nerve. Doing that, they wouldn't expand their player base, and they also wouldn't be doing anything original.

If the energy we have for a "PF1.5" was instead directed at a company whom has the better rights and conceptions for it (I.e. WoTC), those people would be more likely to get what they want there than asking for Paizo to do it (whom didn't invent 3.X or PF1, even with people who worked on both at the time).

[MER-c]

Ok guys, come on here, I really wanted to be hands off with this thread, but it seems people here are incapable of keeping to the forum guidelines.

So for the love of Sarrenrae stop with the flame bait posts, we get it, you don't like Pathfinder Second Edition Playtest. You can go and vent the details of your displeasure on a thread dedicated to it, or better yet an appropriate forum, the time has long since past when "I don't like it, give me moar PF1" was valid feedback and I'm sure it's already been noted.

No on the less angry late night venting side, I really do get it, a lot of you feel somewhat betrayed by Paizo, you loved PF1, or at the least you love 3.5. Everyone has that sort of thing and some of you might be going through the stages of grief over the edition change, that's alright, we're all human and getting angry or resentful about change happens to the best of us. but there is a time and a place for everything, and sometimes that time and place is not this exact moment on this exact forum.

Now that said if I keep seeing those kinds of edition warring/ flame baiting posts, I will get this thread locked becasue it clearly has run it's course.

[Aeric Raven King]

MER-c wrote:

Ok guys, come on here, I really wanted to be hands off with this thread, but it seems people here are incapable of keeping to the forum guidelines.

So for the love of Sarrenrae stop with the flame bait posts, we get it, you don't like Pathfinder Second Edition Playtest. You can go and vent the details of your displeasure on a thread dedicated to it, or better yet an appropriate forum, the time has long since past when "I don't like it, give me moar PF1" was valid feedback and I'm sure it's already been noted.

No on the less angry late night venting side, I really do get it, a lot of you feel somewhat betrayed by Paizo, you loved PF1, or at the least you love 3.5. Everyone has that sort of thing and some of you might be going through the stages of grief over the edition change, that's alright, we're all human and getting angry or resentful about change happens to the best of us. but there is a time and a place for everything, and sometimes that time and place is not this exact moment on this exact forum.

Now that said if I keep seeing those kinds of edition warring/ flame baiting posts, I will get this thread locked becasue it clearly has run it's course.

The basis of the post asked for our opinions. How is that flame bait?

With the release of PF2 I will still be buying content from Paizo; I will however be converting it all to PF1. I run an 80 person community of gamers and NONE of them are interested in PF2. If PF2 assimilated the rules of Starfinder; plenty of them would happily convert as it includes minor changes and is still an obvious Paizo Product.

If you lock the thread because people have opinions that differ from yours then you do a disservice to Paizo and its customer base.

I buy 5e stuff also. I run a small non-gaming publishing company. I know how the publishing world works. My opinion that Paizo is going in the wrong direction is just that. My opinion. They have made their own decision and ignored a large potion of their customer base.

There is however, nothing that prevents an RPG publisher from doing exactly what Paizo did and revive 3.5 OGL as their own edition and take a divided player base away from them. I do not know if Paizo could support both game systems; but they have pledged to cover Starfinder and PF2; providing support to PF1 players with conversion guides; would keep PF1 players happy and allow Paizo to explore PF2’s possibilities without throwing all of their eggs in a single basket.

I would prefer to see Paizo doing well over the next 20 years and be remembered as fondly by gamers then as D&D players with they brand loyalty.

[Hythlodeus]

Dread Moores wrote:

If these potential "two guys in the basement" can continue to produce APs and modules with the same amount of maps, artwork, editing, proofing, and layout without ever needing to involve any other art, editing, or layout staff...

tbf, artwork and maps are edition independant unless PF2 chnges lore to a degree that the people depicted in the artwork would have to change their look drastically.

Editing, proofing and layout are, I guess, were the cost factor comes in, still I fail to see how it is economical more sound to alienate over a third of the customers than to use the additional ressources necessary to provide PF1 versions of the content

[MER-c]

Michael Kildaire wrote:

The basis of the post asked for our opinions. How is that flame bait?
With the release of PF2 I will still be buying content from Paizo; I will however be converting it all to PF1. I run an 80 person community of gamers and NONE of them are interested in PF2. If PF2 assimilated the rules of Starfinder; plenty of them would happily convert as it includes minor changes and is still an obvious Paizo Product.

If you lock the thread because people have opinions that differ from yours then you do a disservice to Paizo and its customer base.

I buy 5e stuff also. I run a small non-gaming publishing company. I know how the publishing world works. My opinion that Paizo is going in the wrong direction is just that. My opinion. They have made their own decision and ignored a large potion of their customer base....

So I think we have the classic miscommunication right here.

I'm sorry if I can off a tad aggressive/off putting , I have had a long day, and I already had a very near miss with exactly this thing I'm calling out on this thread, if you saw this thing a few days ago you'd know what I was talking about. No matter, miscues happen all the time.

I believe you read my initial question as, "What do you think Pathfidner is?", which based on your response I can only assume that is your opinion on what it is.

What I asked was really, "What do you think of when you hear Pathfinder?" Albeit worded a bit poorly perhaps.

Some early on decided to answer with the simple, and appropriate
"A continuation of 3.5." To which I asked to follow up question.
"If so, why did you take the initial plunge into Pathfinder and put your trust and dollars into a mid sized publishing company?" Which frankly has gotten some pretty good answers as well.

Now before I go off to sleep I'd like to thank everyone who answered honestly and really put some great thought into their responses. They gave me a lot to think about, and have helped me see both sides of the current arguments, that is something we rarely get these days

[Vic Ferrari]

MER-c wrote:

What I asked was really, "What do you think of when you hear Pathfinder?" Albeit worded a bit poorly perhaps.

Some early on decided to answer with the simple, and appropriate
"A continuation of 3.5." To which I asked to follow up question.
"If so, why did you take the initial plunge into Pathfinder and put your trust and dollars into a mid sized publishing company?" Which frankly has gotten some pretty good answers as well.

Yea, as Paizo had been publishing Dragon with 100% official material, APs, and many ex-WotC employees work there, more than makes it reputable. Erik Mona worked on one of the best 3rd Ed books, ever, Fiendish Codex I: Hordes of the Abyss (fantastic book, and useable in any edition, some great lore, and lots of nods to Greyhawk and Planescape). They have more than proved that they deserved to take on the 3rd Ed legacy, if only they would keep to it.

[rknop]

Whether you like it or not, 5e is clearly not a mistake for WotC, for reasons already started.

My fear for PF2e is that they're imitating some of the changes in other games like 13th Age or 5e without having the core soul of those games. PF2e remains a rules-heavy fiddily system. Maybe it will work, maybe it won't. Honestly, I suspect it will succeed if it manages to avoid annoying people too much so that they can continue to enjoy what Paizo is actually good at: adventures.

At the same time, there *must* be at least one 3pp looking at doing what many of us wanted PF2e to be: a clean up and reboot of PF1e/3.5 that makes Unchained-like changes but that isn't a completely new system. Who will Paizo Paizo?

[Vic Ferrari]

rknop wrote:

Whether you like it or not, 5e is clearly not a mistake for WotC, for reasons already started.

My fear for PF2e is that they're imitating some of the changes in other games like 13th Age or 5e without having the core soul of those games. PF2e remains a rules-heavy fiddily system. Maybe it will work, maybe it won't. Honestly, I suspect it will succeed if it manages to avoid annoying people too much so that they can continue to enjoy what Paizo is actually good at: adventures.

At the same time, there *must* be at least one 3pp looking at doing what many of us wanted PF2e to be: a clean up and reboot of PF1e/3.5 that makes Unchained-like changes but that isn't a completely new system. Who will Paizo Paizo?

Bingo; one of the best posts, so far.

You also hit on something very important, "Soul". The problem with 4th Ed is not the mechanics, per se, it's a great game, just, to me, it started to feel dry, shallow, soulless. That is why after about 50+ hours of DMing/playing, I became disillusioned. The even bigger problem, for me, with the Playtest, is it feels like all of those unfortunate things, and more (byzantine, dense), before I even DMed/played.

I honestly feel they might have gone in the wrong direction with this baby (incorrect gauge), maybe something more between 3rd and 5th Ed would be better received, not something more complex than 3rd Ed. I do not hear/see anyone clamouring for that, even Monte Cook admitted it's overwrought: "What have we wrought?"

[Ronnam]

For me, Pathfinder is D&D, which is my favorite game of all time. I get nostalgic about D&D. It’s been a consistent & reliable source of fun, socializing, and problem-solving since I was 8 years old. I loved playing with friends out of the red box, then the AD&D books. I have fond memories of drawing maps on graph paper, inventing new monsters, painting minis, and crafting worlds and the people and creature who live there. In 2000, some friends and I purposefully regressed and played AD&D for a while before trying 3rd, which we all happily shifted to. In 2008, D&D stopped being D&D, so I — and many others —shifted to where D&D still existed, Pathfinder. I love Pathfinder because I love D&D, and they’re wrapped up in my head as the same thing. I love D&D. I love wizards, castles, half-elf rangers, gnome illusionists, drow soulknives, mind flayer rogues, Gray Maidens, Harpers, Dragon Highlords, Warchief Ripnugget, Count Strahd, Red Mantis Asassins, oracles, favored souls, alchemists, Sandpoint, Baldur’s Gate, Toril, Krynn, Athas, Golarion, Sarenrae, Pelor, Tiamat, etc. etc.

[Dire Ursus]

I still think 5e lucked out huge because Critical Role changed over from Pathfinder to 5e before they started airing their games. I mean their first episode on youtube literally has 9 million views. At least a good portion of 5e's success has to be from Critical Role.

[Unicore]

Vic Ferrari wrote:

You also hit on something very important, "Soul". The problem with 4th Ed is not the mechanics, per se, it's a great game, just, to me, it started to feel dry, shallow, soulless. That is why after about 50+ hours of DMing/playing, I became disillusioned. The even bigger problem, for me, with the Playtest, is it feels like all of those unfortunate things, and more (byzantine, dense), before I even DMed/played.

I honestly feel they might have gone in the wrong direction with this baby (incorrect gauge), maybe something more between 3rd and 5th Ed would be better received, not something more complex than 3rd Ed. I do not hear/see anyone clamouring for that, even Monte Cook admitted it's overwrought: "What have we wrought?"

I think that the playtest is feeling mechanical because that is all they are really trying to test out. The soul of pathfinder is Golarion. It is going to be there in PF2. They didn't need to playtest their narrative. 4e had a much rougher time carrying over the worlds created in previous editions. PF2 is being built for Golarion. I think (hope) that will make a big difference in practice.

[graystone]

Unicore wrote:

The soul of pathfinder is Golarion.

I disagree with this pretty strongly: the soul of the game to me is how customizable it is and it's range of options. 'Infusing' Golarion into the game makes me less, not more, likely to not pick up the game as it makes it inherently less of what makes pathfinder pathfinder to me: it limits customization and limits options when I try to play a game not set in someone else's setting, Golarion.

[Aeric Raven King]

graystone wrote:

Unicore wrote:

The soul of pathfinder is Golarion.

I disagree with this pretty strongly: the soul of the game to me is how customizable it is and it's range of options. 'Infusing' Golarion into the game makes me less, not more, likely to not pick up the game as it makes it inherently less of what makes pathfinder pathfinder to me: it limits customization and limits options when I try to play a game not set in someone else's setting, Golarion.

I agreed with Greystone; Pathfinder’s soul is not Golarion. Golarion is an excellent campaign setting; but it is not Pathfinder dependant. I have seen Gurps, Hackmaster, 4e, and 5e conversions.

Pathfinder’s soul is the Nostalgia of D&D; the feel and flow of character and world exploration as well as the limitless possibility of customization.

[Sir NotAppearingInThisFilm]

I had concerns about the “soul” of the game when the playtest first released. I hated every aspect of it, with the exception of finding a slight enjoyment in the character creation process. But eventually, mostly due to insomnia and a lack of other reading material, I began to finally click with a lot of elements in the new rules. I discovered I really liked the rules per se, but what had turned me off initially was the very presentation of the rules; the language, the codifying, what felt like endless flowcharts of “if then” statements sending me all over the book. I’m hoping the final product will be presented more like 1E - I’m hoping they lose a few dozen Conditions, sacrifice a bit of word count for less page-flipping, etc. I think they’ll make an excellent storytelling tool and I have every hope the language and presentation will reflect that in the final product. That, combined with adventures that are written purely for enjoyment and not “spend 5 hours seeing how difficult terrain messes with you”

[Arklore]

To me Pathfinder is the best networked and resourced RPG with its organized play. Its the best d20 system out there and it allows players tremendous freedom to create the characters that they want to play. Likewise, GMs have considerable latitude in how they run a campaign or scenario.

The game is a supported by a company that actually seeks the input of its customers/fans. I have seen this with the 2E PLAYTEST. I never felt or saw that with other companies and their games. I am sure there are some out there that do, but I have not seen it.

Regardless of what 2E Pathfinder finally evolves into, I got to have my vote and participate in it and be a part of the process.

[Themetricsystem]

For me it's become quite a personal thing. I started my relationship with PF back about a decade when I checked out all the hubbub with all the Playtest games and buzz.

I started playing with all my 3.0 friends and we fell in love immediately. I grew as a GM and a player, and over the years my role in the hobby started to shift. I got involved with an awesome company who needed help at tradeshows, Gen Con in particular and started to volunteer with them.

After many years of rubbing elbows and knowing the right folks I eventually made my way into the industry itself. In the last year things have really switched into a whole new gear, and I've found myself gainfully employed supporting the Pathfinder RPG Players on a daily basis. For me it's evolved from an interest, into a full blown hobby, and now into a career. For me, Pathfinder helps feed my daughter, keep my family safe and warm, and helps keep me from going insane working for someone, or doing something that I have no passion for.

[MER-c]

Themetricsystem wrote:

For me it's become quite a personal thing. I started my relationship with PF back about a decade when I checked out all the hubbub with all the Playtest games and buzz.

I started playing with all my 3.0 friends and we fell in love immediately. I grew as a GM and a player, and over the years my role in the hobby started to shift. I got involved with an awesome company who needed help at tradeshows, Gen Con in particular and started to volunteer with them.

After many years of rubbing elbows and knowing the right folks I eventually made my way into the industry itself. In the last year things have really switched into a whole new gear, and I've found myself gainfully employed supporting the Pathfinder RPG Players on a daily basis. For me it's evolved from an interest, into a full blown hobby, and now into a career. For me, Pathfinder helps feed my daughter, keep my family safe and warm, and helps keep me from going insane working for someone, or doing something that I have no passion for.

This right here, this is probably the best post I have seen on this thread.

[sherlock1701]

Pathfinder is about crushing your enemies, seeing them driven before you, and hearing the lamentations of their women.

[Vidmaster7]

I feel like I already used that one. maybe it was another thread.

[Sara Marie]

MER-c wrote:

Many of us have poured long hours into the system, crafted personalities and characters we could never be in the real world, some have even made whole worlds on their own and put their heart and soul to make a living, breathing realm in which to tell stories and do glorious battle.

For some we've just told stories from paths created for us, and had fun adding our mark to the world of Galorian. And some have taken it farther and made their own way in that same world.
So the final question really stands as.
What does Pathfinder mean to us?

I've removed some more posts. Two things: The thread is asking about opinions and feelings which are inherently subjective things. There is no need or point to trying to argue people out of their feelings. Have a conversation, follow up, ask for some clarification, but steer clear of trying to turn this into another thread where you argue about how your subjectivity is the "right" one. Secondly, you need to make your posts without trash talking other types of players, other companies, other games, etc. Remember, you can express feelings of disappointment or anger without being insulting. To do that, try using "When this happened, I felt" statements rather than accusatory language.

I really like the concept of this thread and I love hearing the variation in "What Pathfinder means to" each of you. So if people keep trying to derail this thread, its not going to be the thread that's closed.

[captain yesterday]

For me, Pathfinder is a celebration of the weird.

My daughter and I like to try to see if we can make cartoon characters using either Pathfinder or Starfinder rules.

[Steve Geddes]

What I like about Pathfinder is the complexity (which is unfortunately also the reason we rarely play it on gaming night).

I also really like the attempt to pair flavour with mechanics - the inclusion of Golarion lore in the rules going forward is what keeps me hopeful about PF2.