| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think Pathfinder does have a design that lends itself to streaming. I think the streaming of things like the action economy helps with the ease of running, playing, and watching
the stream. Adding level plus professioncy if trained and nothing if not easy to follow. It is easy to understand where bonus comes from. It is similar to D&D 5e to where if you are trained/proficent you add your bonus from proficiency. Then with Pathfinder 2 and D&D 5e you add the appropriate stat bonus.
I think these factors along with the fact that there are not that many Pathfinder streams going make it one of the more attractive games to stream with. There are numerous D&D 5e streams. I went to tablestory to watch a Judge Dredd stream and they had 4 or so D&D 5e streams. Encounter roll play has 3 or so. Just about every major rpg streaming group has multiple D&D 5e streams. Allot of the streamers have come from different areas of streaming. Allot have done video game streams. So they are polished streamers already. They may not have that much Rpg experience prior to the stream. I think the ease of D&D 5e has been attractive.
I think with Pathfinder 2 coming out and streamlined play the time is right for more Pathfinder streams.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To answer my own question I think streaming can help Pathfinder 2 by exposing it to wider Audience. I can only think of 3 Pathfinder streams right now. Pathfinder teams Oblivion Oath, Glass Cannon, and Dragon and Things. There is definitely room for more. I think the streamlined nature of the system could attract some new streamers who may want to dip their toes in the Rpg streaming pool. However, they may not want to get into the already crowded streaming pool of D&D 5e. There is now the shiney new Pathfinder 2. It is streamlined new version of an already popular game. So that is why the time is right for planning some Pathfinder 2 streams.
Unfortunately for Paizo, their streams have like <100 people watching despite having a pretty decent setup. Gonna need people with real popularity among the masses.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, Critical Role started as a PF1 game, but switched to 5e because PF1 was too cumbersome.
I have to wonder how things would be looking now if they stayed with PF1. Would it have not taken off as a stream? Would Pathfinder have had an increase in playerbase? Would we even be getting a second edition now?
Critical Roll may very well be one of the major catalysts for PF2. Missing out on the most popular stream being tied to the game because of it's clunkyness was probably a bit of a wake-up call.
The setup of PF2 certainly is much better suited to streaming than PF1 was. But I'm not sure if it's too late. The RPG streams are mostly D&D streams. The system fits their needs, and there isn't a compelling reason to switch for most, plus D&D has the brand recognition that Pathfinder can only dream about. Trying to get more streamers would certainly be a good idea on Paizo's part though. I suppose one draw could be the possibility of becoming the big fish in a small pond, instead of being yet another D&D stream and being lost in the pile.
Power Move: buy back Critical RoleThey almost certainly could literally not afford it.
That said, I do have to wonder if any discussions between Paizo and Geek & Sundry have occurred, now that Critical Role is going its own way, or if they should.
Oh yeah. I think working something out with Geek & Sundry could potentially be great for both parties. G&S has expertise with the medium and their own built in fan-base which could help with Pathfinder exposure. And PF2 would give them something to distinguish themselves from having Yet Another D&D stream.
I think with Pathfinder 2 the audience as well as streamers would find it more attractive now that it has been streamlined. I would think that if Pathfinder 2 was out at the time it would be very interesting to speculate if critical roll would have went to D&D 5e. That ship has sailed though. I think talking with Geek and Sundry would be a good idea to see if a streaming show could be cast. If not them maybe another company. Encounter Role Play. They have an entertaining group. Some enterprising streamers may pick up Pathfinder 2 up that want to lunch stream. That does leave it to chance though. I do believe that one of the saving throw DMs
that ran a Pathfinder game is at Geek and Sundry now. He is co author Outbreak undead. His name escapes me. That would be someone to approach.
There are already two live play podcasts that I know of using the playtest rules. I think there will be plenty of people who will try creating PF2 live-play content once the full rules are resealed. It's hard to predict what will take off though. Many try, most fail to become a Critical Role or The Adventure Zone.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Trying to recapture the magic that is the cultural phenomenon that is CR is not only an insane task to set yourself to, but it would also probably end up as a huge boondoggle. Even if it does capture views in the 10,000 viewer range they'll still be outclassed while spending tens of thousands of dollars advertising the stream where CR gets free PR and D&D name recognition for casual streamers.
You'd need to line up a cast of other uniquely entertaining professional actors/entertainers, push the Paizo networking to its absolute capacity, and also air in time-slots that don't compete with CR. Even then you'll have legions of detractors crying foul that the prospective PF2 stream is trying to steal MMs thunder, deserved or not.
This is NOT to say that Streaming is a bad idea or that is wouldn't be helpful to get the message and game out there, but setting it up to emulate their formula is IMO more likely to backfire.
Sure you do not want to try to do the same thing as critical roll. There are number of streams that are moderately successful and get some company sponcership. I think Paizo does 2 for Pathfinder Dragon and things and Glass Cannon. I think these two are moderately successful. I think it would still be good idea to approach Geek and Sundry and see about stream. The person name could not remember is Ivan V. He was already running Pathfinder on Saving throw.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
*Rolls a 1 on his stealth check while lurking... he smiles, waves, and says, "Hey everybody, thanks for sharing your thoughts. Please continue!" Then, he quickly sips a potion and vanishes. [A successful perception check reveals the faint sound of note-taking.]*
|
I think P2 will be substantially better for streaming, but I don't think it'll take the crown for accessibility from 5e.
There are other factors than accessibility, however. I'd much rather watch an average P2 combat than the equivalent 5e combat, for example, even though it takes a bit more to follow.
It's also possible non-combat activities, often the best part of streams, will be more interesting with skill feats and degrees of success. Those things certainly add some depth and nuance, but I can't say how well that'll be reflected in streams. Dubious Knowledge is comedy gold, though.
If nothing else, I'm curious to see whether plot-heavy improv P2 streams end up doing better or the high production value tactical P2 streams. I think there's probably a niche for both, although the latter has a higher barrier to entry for streamers.
I do not know if it even has to take the crown. I agree that the non combat parts can often be the more enjoyable parts of the stream. It is also more dependent on how entertaining the streaming cast is. Thus, a higher entry barrier. I think this would lend itself to people who have streaming experience. I think the combat heavy streams would be for more niche audience. I also think you have to have an engaging story. I would say it again. I think it would be very interesting to set streaming show back in time some when the whispering Tyrant was imprisoned during the shining crusade led by Taldor and was 7 year war. You would have compelling story and allot of room to tell untold stories since it was 7 year war that has not been fully detailed.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not saying more streaming is a bad idea, but I am reminded of an anecdote about Microsoft spending large amounts of money to outfit the NFL with Surface tablets and have them showcased prominently during play, only to have the announcers call them iPads at first then "iPad-like devices" once they were told they were not iPads and should not be referred as such.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Glass Cannon dudes are preeeeetty good. I know they don't have the popularity of Critical Role (or the sheer voice acting talent) and they aren't as woke as the McElroy Brothers, but they have better audio quality than CR and are a little more consistent than the The Adventure Zone is. And they while their jokes can occasionally make me uncomfortable, especially their early stuff, they also make me laugh a LOT. They've become my top podcast for a while now.
I personally prefer the TAZ/GCP format to CR. Getting higher audio quality plus actual editing makes for a significantly better listening experience, and I prefer to ingest media on my own timeline anyway rather than use the time tables of streaming. And I wonder if Pathfinder might lend itself better to podcasts than streaming. Things like needing to double check a rule leads to dead air on a stream that can be edited out of a podcast, so a crunchier game probably works better in that format. You also need players that enjoy that level of crunch, of course.
(Oh, also, Harmon Quest uses Pathfinder, and I'm pretty sure Harmontown is as well. Unfortunately the former has been bounced between a couple of badly run networks and the latter is kind of buried in a podcast about a lot of other things.)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Correlation is not causation.
When deciding where to put budget, one needs to keep in mind that it is not clear that people are playing/buying anything because they are watching it. As in, it is not a given that people are buying 5e because they are watching streams of people playing it. It is entirely possible that people are watching streams of 5e because they are playing it.
Without knowing the statistics, it comes down to guesswork and the wisdom of the advertising industry (who themselves are very good at advertising their importance). If you put X dollars into streaming people playing Pathfinder, how many new players will that acquire? How many products will those people buy? And once you've acquired that customer, how effective is that ongoing cost for streaming versus a one-time exposure - for instance compared to Humble Bundles?
The topic of advertising and streaming specifically isn't as obvious as it may seem. It's easy to be jealous of another game's popularity and the other-media support that entails, but it's harder to tell if that support is actually worth spending money on.
I'm not saying don't. I'm not discouraging those who want streamed Pathfinder games. I'm just providing a pause, a moment, a kernel of thought as to the topic of "why - specifically - should this be done?"
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Agreed on the Glass Cannon. They're really talented and entertaining, but the PF1 ruleset is a bit of a bear to portray. Their Androids and Aliens podcast is super fun, and that games is only a little simpler than PF1.
Glass Cannon switching to PF2 would definitely increase their listenership and benefit both them and the game.
I do not think Pathfinder 2 was made with streaming in mind. However, its streamlined mechanics lends itself better to streaming. Also the group that did critical roll was playing Pathfinder, but went with D&D 5e because of the streamlined mechanics. So the focus is not on streaming but exposure. One of the better ways to get exposure is through streaming. The way to have an entertaining and successful stream is to have a talented streaming group. Most of the streaming shows I have seen have had experienced streamers. Allot have their own channels and have done video game streams. They have some role playing experience, but not a toon. Having them try to learn the 3.5/Pathfinder engine with 8 types of attacks looses the players/streamers with rules questions as well as your audience. Thus, most streamers are not going with a 3.5 engine. they, go with D&D 5th. I think what Pathfinder 2 offers is the streamlined mechanics of D&D 5e with more character choices each level and some interesting skill mechanics were the group can help each other. So now with Pathfinder 2 streamers have an alternative to D&D 5e especially if they do not want to get into the crowded D&D 5e streaming pool.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think focusing too much on a recent trend (like streaming and the success of critical roll) when building a system is objectively a bad idea.
One problem is that the group who does Critical Roll would be able to make a great stream, regardless of which system they used. And if you're in such a group, I envy you.
Just over a decade ago, there was a recent trend of MMORPGs coming out - with millions of players each paying a significant monthly fee. One roleplaying game decided to alter its system to try to appeal to this crowd.
How did that work out?
Critical Role started with PF1 and switched to 5E because PF1 was to fiddly. So, yeah, the system makes a difference, a "missed a money train" difference in this case.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You can't compare anything to Critical Role at the moment, because they're made by professionals. Matthew Mercer is a hella of storyteller, he's engaging, he knows how to keep everyone entertained (audience included) and he also has amazing players, willing to make it happen.
The system itself is not the problem, but what kind of players you'll bring with it and what kind of people you want to watch it.
I have two players that are Pathfinder experts. They'd be BORING to watch, despite their system knowledge. They're that kinda of player that you're describing a room and they're already "I'm using that power that let me sense anything within 60ft even if it's invisible and ethereal and..." you know? That thing doesn't work in entertainment so well, but it would work with a more mechanical-oriented viewer.
If I'm there for the plot, I'd be bored as hell if someone interrupt a room description to remind the GM about their super power that don't let his character be surprised. Even though the GM has the final word, you're still playing with the same sets of rules as your players. If I cast two spells on the same round against those players, they'll surely ask if one of them was quicken, interrupting the flow again.
Some will find pleasure in a more tactical game - some won't. It seems like people are staying with Critical Role for the story, not the mechanics.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
... ive never heard of the McElroy brothers and what do you mean by woke?
The McElroy brothers are a trio of brothers who make comedy podcasts. In my opinion they are great and I listen to most of their shows (they podcast full time so they have a dozen or so between the three of them)
They have a TTRPG podcast The Adventure Zone which did DnD for it's first season which also in my opinion is great.
In the context of the adventure zone they are woke in two ways
1. Their humor is generally based in absurdity so they don't make fun of real world people or groups.
2. They make an effort (or mostly Griffon the GM in this case) to have characters in their story who are women, LGBTQ+, and people of color. It is similar to what Paizo does with their iconics, taking some effort to try and represent a lot of different people instead of just straight white guys.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can't compare anything to Critical Role at the moment, because they're made by professionals. Matthew Mercer is a hella of storyteller, he's engaging, he knows how to keep everyone entertained (audience included) and he also has amazing players, willing to make it happen.
The system itself is not the problem, but what kind of players you'll bring with it and what kind of people you want to watch it.
I have two players that are Pathfinder experts. They'd be BORING to watch, despite their system knowledge. They're that kinda of player that you're describing a room and they're already "I'm using that power that let me sense anything within 60ft even if it's invisible and ethereal and..." you know? That thing doesn't work in entertainment so well, but it would work with a more mechanical-oriented viewer.
If I'm there for the plot, I'd be bored as hell if someone interrupt a room description to remind the GM about their super power that don't let his character be surprised. Even though the GM has the final word, you're still playing with the same sets of rules as your players. If I cast two spells on the same round against those players, they'll surely ask if one of them was quicken, interrupting the flow again.
Some will find pleasure in a more tactical game - some won't. It seems like people are staying with Critical Role for the story, not the mechanics.
At this point Critical Role is shaping the hobby. People (both new and old players) want an experience similar to what Mercer and Co. have.
PF1 is just not suited for that. Apart from the bloat, there's just way too many fiddly rules, exceptions to rules and potentially show-stopping interactions of rules which the game expects to be lawyered out, not winged away. 5E is much better for that style of play, PF2 might be.
Sure, a group of "I prefer a tactical rules-heavy 5000+ feats game" folks will persist ... but you'll increasingly be less and less able to make any meaningful money off them.
PF1 is increasingly the Advanced Squad Leader set against the likes of Ticket to Ride or Terraforming Mars. Sure, the former will always have its fans ... but it likely won't ever win mainstream appeal of the latter.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Glass cannon are pretty good for pathfinder and starfinder, ive never heard of the McElroy brothers and what do you mean by woke?The Glass Cannon dudes are preeeeetty good. I know they don't have the popularity of Critical Role (or the sheer voice acting talent) and they aren't as woke as the McElroy Brothers, but they have better audio quality than CR and are a little more consistent than the The Adventure Zone is. And they while their jokes can occasionally make me uncomfortable, especially their early stuff, they also make me laugh a LOT. They've become my top podcast for a while now.
The McElroy Brothers are 3 siblings who have a bit of a podcasting and youtube empire. Their flagship podcast is called My Brother, My Brother, and Me. It is a comedy advice podcast where they riff off of silly yahoo answers. They launched a 5e podcast called The Adventure Zone (or TAZ) a couple years back with their dad as one of the players and it became something really special, despite them having an extremely poor understanding of the rules. They eventually wrapped up their 5e campaign and are currently playing Monster of the Week, but said 5e campaign was laugh out loud hilarious, incredibly touching, and wove some surprisingly epic storytelling.
The McElroys have also done a really great job of nurturing a very diverse fanbase, particularly among queer folks. This is especially notable because they are a bunch of straight white boys. They are aware that humor can oftentimes be hurtful to marginalized communities, and the key difference between "Punching up vs punching down" in comedy. (IE, targeting an oppressed group is worse than the one doing the opressing.) They listen to their fans when they mess up and work hard to be inclusive. Being aware of complex societal mechanics like this is what I mean by "woke."
The GCP dudes aren't bad people from what I can tell. They too want to support LGBTQ fans and are conscious of the fact that they are a bunch of white dudes and would like to change that if they can find the right folks to join their games. But sometimes their humor (And general story telling content) crosses lines the McElroy Brothers won't and it makes me cringe a bit. Troy LeValley has shared that he fundamentally believes anyone is fair game to be made fun of, and this isn't something I personally agree with anymore. It is a common sentiment among stand up comics like Troy, but it is not especially "woke."
It might also be worth noting that most of the cringeworthy GCP stuff is in their earlier work. I think some combination of becoming official partners with Paizo and naturally growing as performers may have led to them getting a bit more woke, but I haven't seen them address it. The McElroy brothers had a similar learning curve as I understand, but they were podcasting for years before TAZ launched, so they probably had learned these lessons already.
And again, despite my criticism, The Glass Cannon Network currently has 2 of my top 5 favorite podcasts. I think using them for the initial demo of the pathfinder playtest was a great idea.
Agreed on the Glass Cannon. They're really talented and entertaining, but the PF1 ruleset is a bit of a bear to portray.
I feel like they do a preeeetty good job with those PF1 rules though. Part of it is that they acknowledge how complicated Pathfinder is, work hard to get it right, and then acknowledge when they don't. They know Pathfinder fans care about rules, so they ran a segment on tumblr called "We are Stupid" where they talk about where they messed up. I think they also do a good job of making it feel like an actual game first and radio show second. TAZ is great, but clearly is the reverse, which makes it a bad thing to use to learn and run RPGs. GCP games make me feel like I'm present at an actual game that is hitting the right notes. Even the non-game bits of the players just shooting the s$~& or talking trash feels like hanging with friends.
Their Androids and Aliens podcast is super fun, and that games is only a little simpler than PF1.
I have been loving Androids and Aliens, and it has actually been my only real exposure to Starfinder. Eleanor joining the cast definitely helped as well.
Glass Cannon switching to PF2 would definitely increase their listenership and benefit both them and the game.
Potentially. I'll note their playtest streams weren't as fun as their normal work, either to listen to or them to play, but they also had to deal with learning a new system while not being able to edit out looking stuff up, and Doomsday Dawn being a slog. (Being a test first and fun game second.) But I think there's a lot of room to make PF2 shine. I was running a converted game a couple days ago that involved rapidly switching between examining bodies in exploration mode and some of them leaping up as undead to attack you for encounters. I feel like transitions like this in particular work much smoother with the new action economy and initiative system.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It seems like people are staying with Critical Role for the story, not the mechanics.
That's entirely true, but I think you're missing the significance of it. CR switched to 5E because the Pathfinder mechanics were complicated enough that they were interfering with Mercer's ability to tell the best story he could, at least within the framework of a live stream. PF1 is complicated; that's not really in dispute, regardless of whether you think it's a feature or a bug.
I won't presume to speculate how much or how little CR's popularity in specific or the larger advertising advantage that streams can offer an RPG in general might have impacted Paizo's design goals for PF2, but that's basically irrelevant. If you can make a game that is more streamlined for the people who want streamlining, and keep the deeper complexity for those who like things complex, then you have an objectively superior product in terms of its breadth of appeal. CR switching to 5E isn't a cause, it's a symptom of the underlying issues Paizo set out to resolve with PF2.
That said, I do think PF2 is better suited for streaming than PF1 ever could be, and that's only to the possible good for Pathfinder's future. One thing in particular that stands out is how many fewer dice rolls are involved in resolving a single action in combat (and if anything, it looks as though this element was carried even further after the playtest ended, if the revision to chill touch is anything to go by). In PF1, attack rolls often needed confirmation rolls, and damage dice had to be sorted into "this doubles on a crit, that does not;" all of that is gone. Heck, you don't even have to reroll your crit damage now if you're the kind of table that rolls attacks and damage together - the damage just doubles, full stop. Spellcasting was attack rolls, saving throws, spell resistance, then damage, but SR is gone, and we look to have even fewer spells requiring both attacks and saves. Most live streams prefer fewer rolls to interfere with the actual storytelling element, and PF2 is definitely a move in that direction.
I think PF2 is certainly a more simplified system that could translate well to delivering the game in a streaming format - but I don't think that broad swaths of the market for game streams is going to be using a system comparison when making the choice of where to spend their time.
I think that by and large the people who care about the system a stream uses, already have a preferred system and will purchase it.
What will drive eyes and ears to a PF stream won't be the system, it'll be the content. It'll be the flavor options that are unique to PF. Something with PF goblins for example couldn't really happen over in 5e land.
It's story and theme and tone that are going to help populate a stream, not so much the dice mechanics - unless the mechanics get in the way of the narrative.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think PF2 is certainly a more simplified system that could translate well to delivering the game in a streaming format - but I don't think that broad swaths of the market for game streams is going to be using a system comparison when making the choice of where to spend their time.
I think that by and large the people who care about the system a stream uses, already have a preferred system and will purchase it.
What will drive eyes and ears to a PF stream won't be the system, it'll be the content. It'll be the flavor options that are unique to PF. Something with PF goblins for example couldn't really happen over in 5e land.
It's story and theme and tone that are going to help populate a stream, not so much the dice mechanics - unless the mechanics get in the way of the narrative.
Well, that is certainly true of the Glass Cannon, which exclusively uses Paizo adventures. But the other big dogs (TAZ and Critical Role) play using homebrewed campaigns and stories, and the system matters there quite a bit for what they pick to tell those stories. TAZ won't be going to PF2, they already decided 5e was too mechanics heavy. I dunno enough about CR to say whether it would work for them.
But there are ways that the system DOES genuinely impact the stories you can tell, and that's true for more than just streaming. PF2 will much better simulate fantasy super heroes than 5e does. +Level is a very specific narrative element.
So you're correct that the content is what will drive eyes and ears to a stream, but the system shapes the content. Hell, even ignoring the system shapes the content, or at least how people consume it. The difference between how the closely GCP and TAZ stick to the rules of their respective systems has shaped how their fans engage with the content pretty heavily, IMO.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So you're correct that the content is what will drive eyes and ears to a stream, but the system shapes the content.
Then by all means let's spend 30 more posts finding even more ways to reiterate that PF2 is better suited to streaming than PF1. Let's not dive any deeper, and if someone perhaps moves to begin talking about what might make PF streaming appealing to say... an audience, let's quickly get them back on the topic of parroting the line that PF2 is better for streaming than PF1.
I would agree since Pathfinder 2 does not use bounded accuracy like D&D 5e it will allow for higher level characters to go through lower level creatures easier especially when you combined that with how criticals work now. I think Pathfinder 2 is the right balance of stream lined rules and depth. As I have said up reaching out to Geek and Sundry and Ivan V who works there now many not be a bad idea.
I do think that there also could be an Audience for Pathfinder streaming. I would also probably launch that maybe the same time Pathfinder 2 launches for those interested in that. So yes I think that could work too. I do not think that something Paizo would sponcer though since their focus would have shifted to Pathfinder 2. I think any Pathfinder one streams would have to be more independent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
With Streaming it is part community engagement, part marketing, and part entertainment. Though Paizo is already working with a few groups it would still be a good idea to reach out to other groups to help showcase the new edition. Channels like Geek & Sundry, ROLL20, HyperRPG, Adam Koebel are a few that instantly come to mind. I've seen several different games systems either played or reviewed on those channels.
I realize that with PaizoCon and GenCon it is an incredibly busy time for Paizo and maybe they would have to partner with someone to make it happen but I do think that streaming the announcements of new products and any seminars would be fantastic.
So you're correct that the content is what will drive eyes and ears to a stream, but the system shapes the content.Then by all means let's spend 30 more posts finding even more ways to reiterate that PF2 is better suited to streaming than PF1. Let's not dive any deeper, and if someone perhaps moves to begin talking about what might make PF streaming appealing to say... an audience, let's quickly get them back on the topic of parroting the line that PF2 is better for streaming than PF1.
Probably the world then right? A lot of folks say the APs are the strongest part of Paizo's brand. So if streamers get strong support from Paizo to firmly set their streams in the world of Golorain and show off it's stuff maybe that would give it an edge. So the lore you learn in the stream is Galorion Canon and applicable to a home game. How about that?
EDIT: Maybe support for PF2 streamers running conversions of PF1 APs. So if you are interested in PF2 you can watch the stream to learn the old lore but the new rules. Then go play a new AP at home.
I think both can be important. I think as far as the rules go I think if the rules are perceived as too complex streaming groups may not think that it is worth the time or energy to learn the rules. However, if you have bad content and story it does not matter how streamlined the rules are the stream will not be entertaining. So I think it is a balance of the two.
|
Managing Developer
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I realize that with PaizoCon and GenCon it is an incredibly busy time for Paizo and maybe they would have to partner with someone to make it happen but I do think that streaming the announcements of new products and any seminars would be fantastic.
We've been doing just that the last couple of years. We stream the preview banquet at PaizoCon and many of the panels. We streamed all of our Gen Con panels last year. It's not my call, (so I don't want to speak out of turn) but I believe we are doing the same thing this year at those shows.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
By all means stream.
I don't buy a video game anymore without watching somebody on YouTube or Twitch play it. I can see people doing that with RPGs too.
I'm sure Paizo's marketing folks are aware that entertaining streamers don't always translate into sales. Etalyx is fun and entertaining, but he's only ever sold me on one video game. He plays a lot of games that I know I wouldn't enjoy playing, but he's funny.
I don't know that PF2 is any more stream-worthy than anything else. I could enjoy watching folks play Avalon Hill's Third Reich. I suspect its the performance of the players that makes the stream more than anything.
Well I think that with the nature of the Play test and the fluctuations with the rule set it can make it difficult to stream. Having said that Roll20 still was able to upload 27 videos of Adam Koebel running the PF2 playtest on to Youtube. Seemed like a good run.
As long as PF2 has the 3rd party support with the digital tools(Roll20, fantasy grounds, Herolab, etc) then it can help with streaming. I kinda feel like there was an uptick in 5th ed streams around the time the company Curse released D&DBeyond.
I think that is good point. Digital tools such as roll20 and Fantasy Grounds are important in streaming success also. So support with roll20 and Fantasy Grounds is an important factor in streaming success. I would think Pathfinder 2 would have digital support. I believe Pathfinder did.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Critical Role podcast had the proper marketing and the blind dumb luck of being on at the right time in D&Ds life.
None of the other editions had any chance of having that kind of streaming popularity.
The reason?
It’s so easy to learn and play. It’s exactly the reason I’d never play it or enjoy it. It’s just too simple and flat rules wise.
And that is the exact reason PF and SF will never have the same kind of capability for streaming and liveplay audiences.
People for the majority want easy and simple. Only those of us that want a deeper game ever even consider playing the more rules heavy rpgs.
I would suggest that the streamlined rules of Pathfinder 2 would lend itself to streaming. It also has some depth of character choice and development. Whether this holds true or not remains to be seen.
Since the PR Manager incited us to share our thoughts here...
I have no idea whether or not this is possible, or how hard it would be to set up... but perhaps it would be a good idea for Paizo to organize a Pathfinder 2 campaign (or at least an adventure) with some famous streamers who enjoyed Pathfinder: Kingmaker (the first name that comes to mind is Cohhcarnage, but there are certainly more of them).
That would contribute to make Golarion, Pathfinder 2 and Paizo's works known to people who enjoyed the CRPG / watched their favourite streamer play it without knowing where the story and the world come from.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wall of text. Sorry.
Background:
Ancient Grognard here. I consume RPG content all week, for a huge chunk of every day. When I'm not crafting terrain, painting minis, prepping for one of my two weekly sessions or writing/planning/creating content for them, I'm consuming other people's content for inspiration and lulz.
Wot we like:
I won't list every single podcast or stream I listen to or have listened to, because the litany is real. Just some relevant choices.
I've been an avid GCP fan since around episode four, when I first heard them. Of course, I think they would be a billion times better if Mr. Mona would just stop fooling around with publishing and actually join the cast permanently.
I listen to a fun little podcast called "Swiss Army Scorpion" that is goofing their way through Skull and Shackles and a love it. And I don't know why. They're not professional voice actors, they're just nerds like most of us, but they do a great job. They're also very silly.
I listen to Gathering of the Ages who are currently in Carrion Crown and, like Swiss Army Scorpion they're mostly just nerds and family. It's pretty fun to listen to other people with dedication and energy play a game you love.
What we think:
But Critical Role? Thursday is always an event for me and my daughter. I almost always make pasta from scratch and then we watch until we have to go to bed (it's a bit late here). Critical Role is amazing because the (as Matt Colville puts it) 'Professionally Charming People' that play have an honest passion for the game and are really damn professionally charming. They could be playing nearly anything and be captivating (and they do, sometimes...) But they play 5e. So we love watching them play and we love mocking the 'baby rules' of fifth edition. Of course, we're only joking. We enjoy a good game of Dread, Fiasco, Monsterhearts or Urban Shadows as much as they next person. 5e is fine. It's just not the game we love to play for 8-16 hours a week.
I have enjoyed Oblivion Oath in the same way... Maybe a little more - that I enjoy Gathering of the Ages and Swiss Army Scorpion. Some darn good storytelling and people who are passionate about the game (or at least about the session ;) )
However, and meant as no slight to the Oblivion Oath team (whom I have honest affection for, especially Sara who is constantly channeling positive energy around here) they are not professionally charming people.
Matt Mercer is a supernova for 5e because he happens to love D&D in any incarnation AND is a talented voice actor and creative person. Couple that with a fairly largish group of other talented creatives and viola. It's not a complicated recipe, it just has very rare ingredients.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wall of text. Sorry.
Background:
Ancient Grognard here. I consume RPG content all week, for a huge chunk of every day. When I'm not crafting terrain, painting minis, prepping for one of my two weekly sessions or writing/planning/creating content for them, I'm consuming other people's content for inspiration and lulz.
Wot we like:
I won't list every single podcast or stream I listen to or have listened to, because the litany is real. Just some relevant choices.
I've been an avid GCP fan since around episode four, when I first heard them. Of course, I think they would be a billion times better if Mr. Mona would just stop fooling around with publishing and actually join the cast permanently.
I listen to a fun little podcast called "Swiss Army Scorpion" that is goofing their way through Skull and Shackles and a love it. And I don't know why. They're not professional voice actors, they're just nerds like most of us, but they do a great job. They're also very silly.
I listen to Gathering of the Ages who are currently in Carrion Crown and, like Swiss Army Scorpion they're mostly just nerds and family. It's pretty fun to listen to other people with dedication and energy play a game you love.
What we think:
But Critical Role? Thursday is always an event for me and my daughter. I almost always make pasta from scratch and then we watch until we have to go to bed (it's a bit late here). Critical Role is amazing because the (as Matt Colville puts it) 'Professionally Charming People' that play have an honest passion for the game and are really damn professionally charming. They could be playing nearly anything and be captivating (and they do, sometimes...) But they play 5e. So we love watching them play and we love mocking the 'baby rules' of fifth edition. Of course, we're only joking. We enjoy a good game of Dread, Fiasco, Monsterhearts or Urban Shadows as much as they next person. 5e is fine. It's just not the game we love to play for 8-16 hours a week.
I have enjoyed Oblivion Oath in the...
So you're saying we should get Vin Diesel?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
So you're saying we should get Vin Diesel?
I've said before, D&D has Vin Diesel, so the best counter is for Paizo to recruit The Rock to do streaming games. Rock bests Diesel.