| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
ErichAD, I think I completely agree with you as far making tweaks to a finished product being different. However, that is IMO largely because you are designing for a very small audience - often a self-selected audience of "people who like those tweaks".
That's the benefit of modding - you don't have to worry about mass appeal or mass functionality.
So if someone is just making and sharing house rules or mods I'm all for that and in fact participate in that myself. But when someone starts making comments implying that the actual official game would be improved for everyone if only the designers would incorporate their house rules, that's where I tend to think "gaming experience does not translate to game design experience".
It's like when popular mods get comments along the lines of "why don't the devs put this in the game themselves?"
Well, there are lots and lots of reasons for that...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The actual official TI4 would be improved if everyone adopted REDnought and if the designers wrote low-to-high attack values rather than high-to-low. Also giving Winnu reusable abilities.
-me, before the game even released. Fight me.
The actual official TI4 would be improved if everyone adopted REDnought and if the designers wrote low-to-high attack values rather than high-to-low. Also giving Winnu reusable abilities.
-me, before the game even released. Fight me.
No! :P
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The PF2 CRB (released in Aug.) is up to 274 now, with a cumulative rating of 4.4
Eberron: Rising from the Last War (released in Nov.) is at 370, with a rating of 4.7
Anecdotally, I bought one of each, with Rising being my first (and only) 5e purchase. Bought it specifically to use with PF2, given we're having trouble with PF2 "feeling" right in Golarion but "feeling" quite appropriate in Eberron.
I also bought the new 5E Eberron book specifically to pillage for inspiration for my PF2 home game! And because the 3.5 Eberron book is still one of my favorite sourcebooks of all time and I was curious if they'd any major changes/updates to the setting lore.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
- Many dead feats. I thought originally that characters would have more personality than 5e based on the variety of options for build. That said, every class/race gravitates to the same few feats anyway, as so many feats are bad. Any monks out there without stunning fist? Maybe this changes over time.
Given literally 0 monks at my table have taken Stunning Fist, I think it's fine.
CEO
|
| 24 people marked this as a favorite. |
All that aside, our data is pretty much just the sarcastic bindle giving Amazon review numbers and the CEO saying it's all good. Both are imperfect, but they're more substantial than anecdotes from those of us who don't care for the game and don't know anyone who is interested in it.
Imperfect? I am pretty sure that my data is actually quite perfect.:)
If I tell you that PF2 is doing very well, you can take that to the bank. It is a fact. I am happy with its release. How much more perfect can this data get?
-Lisa
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
All that aside, our data is pretty much just the sarcastic bindle giving Amazon review numbers and the CEO saying it's all good. Both are imperfect, but they're more substantial than anecdotes from those of us who don't care for the game and don't know anyone who is interested in it.Imperfect? I am pretty sure that my data is actually quite perfect.:)
If I tell you that PF2 is doing very well, you can take that to the bank. It is a fact. I am happy with its release. How much more perfect can this data get?
-Lisa
P2 sells so well everyone gets bonuses and pizza :3
Someone higher level than you =/= boss
According to the encounter building rules, any creature your level or higher is a boss.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Someone higher level than you =/= bossAccording to the encounter building rules, any creature your level or higher is a boss.
I mean, kinda. You can use lv+1 creatures as ‘leads’ or ‘highlights’ in regular encounters without that being a ‘bossfight’. I’d say lv+3 is more likely to be a bossfight, with lv+2 being a candidate if conditions are favourable.
Did you read the fine print that Stunning Fist is nerfed on bosses as they have to crit fail, it rolling every time flurry hit sounds good and seemed better than the similar slow from brawling crit special. But in hindsight brawling might be better as bosses just need to fail (assuming you can crit). Being the majority of adventure encounters are bosses...Given literally 0 monks at my table have taken Stunning Fist, I think it's fine.
Stunning Fist is more reliable use-wise, but you can get a better DC on brawling (and it can actually be used on things higher level). If you use Monastic Weaponry, that also lets you get all the different crit focuses.
Crushing Grab is solid as a damage addition if you plan on actually using Grapple often. Dancing Leaf is probably my least-likely choice, but it's still Powerful Leap + situational legendary Cat Fall.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow there has been another 100+ posts since I last managed to get access to the boards - there seemed to be server issues over the past few days (at least from my phone)
For what it is worth I just assumed the bag was bringing up the amazon stats in a partially joking way and almost hoping for the push back that did indeed come. But I agree there is only limited actual data publicly available.
I am quite delighted that a relatively idle question asked out of curiosity after reading some rather hostile reddit posts has generate over 500 replies including some from the CEO! Thanks Lisa :-)
I do find it a little odd that people are questioning the Paizo CEO. People I think talk on 4E being a commercial success and selling well. But a chunk of that is surely more due to brand recognition. I know I bought 4E blindly because it was D&D...
The baseball card discussion was amusing. As a European those names rang a bell but not the full significance. I will also need to google the Swan of Utrecht - huh, I very much know who that is but not the nickname!
Things looked like they would get unpleasant with the house rule discussion but it tempered out. Although not statistical i appreciated Samurai’s comment on 2E going down like a lead balloon in their area as it was the sort of comment that prompted the post in the first place. That said the group in question does appear hostile to change. I assume their start with PF1 is an intriguing story unless it was merely their first system
I have had very limited chance to play 2E myself but refrain from being critical. Perhaps I am too positive or defensive of the system for someone who hasn’t played much but I think that is an easier position to defend. A certain amount can be picked up from reading the books and forums to know if certain posters really understand (apart from specific rules questions).
My example is a (I think) well known reviewer who did loads of colour coded reviews for 1E. If you read his 2E reviews it becomes apparent he has no idea what he is talking about, has hardly played the game and is still in a 1E mindset. I spotted this before actually playing because it was obvious. I am still alarmed by how casually “dump” is thrown around in stat creation suggestions. Or the meaning has changed
Anyway my 1E group definitely thought “there is something in this” and “this has legs” when we played over Christmas . But we are having difficulty arranging sessions at the moment and are mid 1E AP which is not uncommon. I just need to re read the exploration mode rules as I clearly didn’t spend enough time on them. And probably need to find a player cheat sheet...
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
He thrives off push back It only makes him more powerful.
All that aside, our data is pretty much just the sarcastic bindle giving Amazon review numbers and the CEO saying it's all good. Both are imperfect, but they're more substantial than anecdotes from those of us who don't care for the game and don't know anyone who is interested in it.Imperfect? I am pretty sure that my data is actually quite perfect.:)
If I tell you that PF2 is doing very well, you can take that to the bank. It is a fact. I am happy with its release. How much more perfect can this data get?
-Lisa
We are pretty sure your data is perfect. But we don't have access to it directly, we have access to it through you. So, our data is a little bit less perfect than yours. And I don't think you would give us a perfect feedback in all situations. As other players have pointed above, Wizard was lying about the state of 4e, stating it was doing fine while they were firing employees. So, sorry to take your words on a public forum with a grain of salt :)
I just need to re read the exploration mode rules as I clearly didn’t spend enough time on them.This is one of the trickiest parts so far playing the game I have found.
Meaningful and smooth transition between modes (especially Explore > Encounter).
Cheers.
Yes I found it clunky to run but in hindsight I spent far less time reading that section
And it needs the players to know exactly what they can be doing in that mode to run smoothly I think - and that comes with time
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
We are pretty sure your data is perfect. But we don't have access to it directly, we have access to it through you. So, our data is a little bit less perfect than yours. And I don't think you would give us a perfect feedback in all situations. As other players have pointed above, Wizard was lying about the state of 4e, stating it was doing fine while they were firing employees. So, sorry to take your words on a public forum with a grain of salt :)All that aside, our data is pretty much just the sarcastic bindle giving Amazon review numbers and the CEO saying it's all good. Both are imperfect, but they're more substantial than anecdotes from those of us who don't care for the game and don't know anyone who is interested in it.Imperfect? I am pretty sure that my data is actually quite perfect.:)
If I tell you that PF2 is doing very well, you can take that to the bank. It is a fact. I am happy with its release. How much more perfect can this data get?
-Lisa
Seemed a little rude I think I would of kept that thought to myself. eh you do you.
I mean, kinda. You can use lv+1 creatures as ‘leads’ or ‘highlights’ in regular encounters without that being a ‘bossfight’. I’d say lv+3 is more likely to be a bossfight, with lv+2 being a candidate if conditions are favourable.Someone higher level than you =/= bossAccording to the encounter building rules, any creature your level or higher is a boss.
I'd akin Level+1 or +2 as a boss at the end of a session, VS +3 being a boss at the end of an arc. Believe me, I tried just using a +3 as a regular-interval boss, and the creature nearly killed a player Round 1 via a crit, and took out most of the health of the rest of the party Round 2.
So I'd take the feeling of them all being bosses somewhat seriously. You'd need high initiative and sound tactics for even Level +1 or +2 creatures.
|
|
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
We are pretty sure your data is perfect. But we don't have access to it directly, we have access to it through you. So, our data is a little bit less perfect than yours. And I don't think you would give us a perfect feedback in all situations. As other players have pointed above, Wizard was lying about the state of 4e, stating it was doing fine while they were firing employees. So, sorry to take your words on a public forum with a grain of salt :)All that aside, our data is pretty much just the sarcastic bindle giving Amazon review numbers and the CEO saying it's all good. Both are imperfect, but they're more substantial than anecdotes from those of us who don't care for the game and don't know anyone who is interested in it.Imperfect? I am pretty sure that my data is actually quite perfect.:)
If I tell you that PF2 is doing very well, you can take that to the bank. It is a fact. I am happy with its release. How much more perfect can this data get?
-Lisa
How about you don't use the expression "we" when you're implying that somebody is lying? Because you're not speaking for me, at any rate.
Hey, there’s a smiley face at the end. You can say what you like then, right?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry, didn't wanted to be rude. I should have kept it for myself, then. Ignore my previous comment.
All that aside, our data is pretty much just the sarcastic bindle giving Amazon review numbers and the CEO saying it's all good. Both are imperfect, but they're more substantial than anecdotes from those of us who don't care for the game and don't know anyone who is interested in it.Imperfect? I am pretty sure that my data is actually quite perfect.:)
If I tell you that PF2 is doing very well, you can take that to the bank. It is a fact. I am happy with its release. How much more perfect can this data get?
-Lisa
Not be 2nd hand? Which to us, the data only you have by definition is.
Sorry Lisa, but your comment is more than a little disingenuous.
More anecdotal evidence: One FLGS owner I've spoken to recently told me PF2 was doing better than he had expected. At another, the core book is obviously selling quite well (though the collector's editions are not -- unsurprising, given the arguably odd choice to release them at launch).
From what I can see it is doing well, though it won't be leapfrogging D&D any time soon (and really, I don't think it was reasonable to expect it to; lightning in a bottle and all that).
If we are talking about the truth of the data I don't think Lisa has any real reason to lie here.
HOWEVER the validity of the data when it comes to the success of the product from a wider audience adoption is another matter all together and even Paizo won't start to know what that will be like for 1-2 years imo.
PFS can only go so far to give an idea as to audience adoption.
(I say this as someone who wants the product to succeed and who believes it will find a good place and be healthier sales wise than PF1e was for years to come. But from a "how healthy is the game" perspective it is just too soon to be able to tell "objectively" as some folks seem to be demanding).
We are pretty sure your data is perfect. But we don't have access to it directly, we have access to it through you. So, our data is a little bit less perfect than yours. And I don't think you would give us a perfect feedback in all situations. As other players have pointed above, Wizard was lying about the state of 4e, stating it was doing fine while they were firing employees. So, sorry to take your words on a public forum with a grain of salt :)
Why do we need to have more, or equally, accurate sales data to what Paizo has internally? They are a company and we are their customers, we’re not shareholders. They aren’t answerable to us, and nor was WOTC.
Sorry, didn't wanted to be rude. I should have kept it for myself, then. Ignore my previous comment.
It's hard to find a polite way to say that you can't take anyone's word without evidence, in a way that doesn't sound like you're saying that you can't take a specific individuals word without evidence. I eventually gave up on trying as my trying ran into game time.
Lisa's say so is good enough for me, but perfect data would be something verified outside of the company, or something from inside the company that had a legal guarantee in place. Neither of which are possible since they don't sell through a single distributor and aren't a publicly traded company. There's also the issue of whether or not sales translates to "take up", which I have no idea how to estimate honestly.
Fortunately, there's no real need to convince anyone that the product is doing well if it's already doing well. So the quality of the info isn't all that important.
If we are talking about the truth of the data I don't think Lisa has any real reason to lie here.
HOWEVER the validity of the data when it comes to the success of the product from a wider audience adoption is another matter all together and even Paizo won't start to know what that will be like for 1-2 years imo.
PFS can only go so far to give an idea as to audience adoption.
(I say this as someone who wants the product to succeed and who believes it will find a good place and be healthier sales wise than PF1e was for years to come. But from an objective "how healthy is the game" perspective it is just too soon to be able to tell "objectively" as some folks seem to be demanding).
I'm not suggesting she's lying; merely stating the fact that her telling us what the data means vs. us having the data ourselves is not the same thing. Lisa implied that they were.
With all due respect, Paizo personnel should avoid that sort of rhetorical skullduggery.
|
|
| 23 people marked this as a favorite. |
Over the last 17 years, Paizo has built quite a lot of goodwill and has never been shy of telling us that something worked well or didn't work financially. They've been open about how stuff like Planet Stories failed to sell well. They've been frank about how stuff people asked for weren't viable financially - pawn reprints, Tian Xia products, more mythic stuff, to name a few. They even gave us insight into stuff that was totally not obvious - that a Dragon/Dungeon issue with Wayne Reynolds cover would sell magnitudes over one without WAR doing the cover.
The advantage of being a SME owned by two people is that you can be much more open if you wish. You're not a wholly-owned subsidiary of a company where the boss answers to parent company boss, who answers to the Lords of the Boards, who in turn need to mind the shareholders. You can afford to discard the "convergence of core critical corporate competencies" bullspeak.
So, if Lisa says "stuff sells well" given her record of being happy to share both the good and the bad news, it takes quite a lot to discard it as "second hand-based disingenuous comment" or "corporate smokescreen".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, if Lisa says "stuff sells well" given her record of being happy to share both the good and the bad news, it takes quite a lot to discard it as "second hand disengenious comment" or "corporate smokescreen".
I specifically not doing that.
I'm merely pointing out that her telling us what the data means is not the same as us having the data ourselves. She incorrect suggested otherwise.
You're a lawyer; I'm quite sure you get the distinction.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm merely pointing out that her telling us what the data means is not the same as us having the data ourselves. She incorrect suggested otherwise.
But why, though? It seems really rude when we have open communication with this company to argue semantics when presented with goodwill.
|
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, if Lisa says "stuff sells well" given her record of being happy to share both the good and the bad news, it takes quite a lot to discard it as "second hand disengenious comment" or "corporate smokescreen".I specifically not doing that.
I'm merely pointing out that her telling us what the data means is not the same as us having the data ourselves. She incorrect suggested otherwise.
You're a lawyer; I'm quite sure you get the distinction.
I get it, but unlike you, I trust that if Lisa says "it sells great", it sells great and I don't feel the urge to complain about not being given the data necessary to verify that statement. It's all about trust.
It's pretty much the same as a partner telling me "the case is going great" and me not feeling the sudden desire to burrow through his documents and e-mails to verify if that is the case. But I'm sure there are people out there who would do that anyway.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm merely pointing out that her telling us what the data means is not the same as us having the data ourselves. She incorrect suggested otherwise
If you had a reasonable expectation of access to that data it would be one thing. You don’t. Accusing Paizo’s CEO of being disingenuous because she isn’t showing you sales figures is the height of presumption.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I get it, but unlike you, I trust that if Lisa says "it sells great", it sells great and I don't feel the urge to complain about not being given the data necessary to verify that statement. It's all about trust.
Yet again I am reminded why I post here so infrequently. You're inferring arguments that I'm not making.
I'm not complaining about not being given the data. I have no expectation that sort of data would be shared, nor do I particularly care to see it. I'm simply pointing out that Lisa's reasoning in this case -- "me telling you is as good as you having the data yourself" -- is specious (and you know it). We shouldn't give flawed reasoning a pass just because it comes from a Paizo employee. Arguments should be judged on their merit, not their source.
As a side note, I'll thank you not to concoct Machiavellian motivations for me (unless you first send a box of fake mustaches for me to twirl).
If you had a reasonable expectation of access to that data it would be one thing. You don’t. Accusing Paizo’s CEO of being disingenuous because she isn’t showing you sales figures is the height of presumption.
I should not have used the word "disingenuous," as I have no reason to believe it was deliberate. For that I apologize to Lisa.
I should have written "irrational."
Again, I have no expectation that Lisa show me -- or anyone else -- sales figures. Only that she not assert that having her interpretation of the data is equivalent to having the data itself, because this assertion is manifestly untrue...whether or not it comes from the CEO.
I'm done explaining myself. If people choose to willfully misinterpret my point there is nothing more I can do.
I mean, kinda. You can use lv+1 creatures as ‘leads’ or ‘highlights’ in regular encounters without that being a ‘bossfight’. I’d say lv+3 is more likely to be a bossfight, with lv+2 being a candidate if conditions are favourable.
I get the impression you haven't played 2nd Edition yet.
A +1 may not be a boss, but it's likely to knock out one or more of the PCs.
+2 is guaranteed to knock out one or more of the PCs, and is a real threat to the party (there's a real risk of a TPK).
A +3 encounter, unless played intelligently by the PCs, is going to be extremely rough on the party, with a greater than 50/50 chance of a TPK and nearly guaranteed to have character deaths (save for the use of hero points).
I mean, kinda. You can use lv+1 creatures as ‘leads’ or ‘highlights’ in regular encounters without that being a ‘bossfight’. I’d say lv+3 is more likely to be a bossfight, with lv+2 being a candidate if conditions are favourable.I get the impression you haven't played 2nd Edition yet.
A +1 may not be a boss, but it's likely to knock out one or more of the PCs.
+2 is guaranteed to knock out one or more of the PCs, and is a real threat to the party (there's a real risk of a TPK).
A +3 encounter, unless played intelligently by the PCs, is going to be extremely rough on the party, with a greater than 50/50 chance of a TPK and nearly guaranteed to have character deaths (save for the use of hero points).
Kinda, it depends on the monster and optimization level and stuff, and number of players- our test game (as in, testing the final game to see how we liked it) featured an encounter with a wraith at +3 that was pretty much a TPK, followed by an encounter with a dragon (after a rest of course, though there was a small dungeon attached) at +4 that went much more smoothly.
Eventually I realized that the Wraith was much harder because of it's resistances, and because by the time we got to the dragon the players had figured out Magic Missile was their best option for racking up the hurt on enemies higher than their own level.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you had a reasonable expectation of access to that data it would be one thing. You don’t. Accusing Paizo’s CEO of being disingenuous because she isn’t showing you sales figures is the height of presumption.I should not have used the word "disingenuous" -- I have no reason to believe it was deliberate. For that I apologize to Lisa.
I should have written "irrational."
Again, I have no expectation that Lisa show me -- or anyone else -- sales figures. Only that she not assert that having her interpretation of the data is equivalent to having the data itself, because this assertion is manifestly untrue...whether or not it comes from the CEO.
I'm done explaining myself. If people choose to willfully misinterpret my point there is nothing more I can do.
Everyone here understands that we don't have access to the data that Lisa has, and therefore we don't have first-hand information. But Lisa was not suggesting otherwise. She was saying that SHE has first hand information, and that we can trust what she is saying.
It is perfectly reasonable to point out that our lack of access always brings doubt to any conclusions we might draw, assurances from Lisa or no. But you chose to phrase your objection in a rude way, when perfectly polite options were available.
Demanding that people recognize the truth of our lack of data access in response to objections to your insulting phrasing is both "disingenuous" and "irrational".
The most recent ICv2 report, which states that PF2 sales are "strong" and second only to D&D seems to back up what Lisa is saying.
Everyone here understands that we don't have access to the data that Lisa has, and therefore we don't have first-hand information. But Lisa was not suggesting otherwise. She was saying that SHE has first hand information, and that we can trust what she is saying.
That may well be what she meant, but it isn't what she wrote. Nor am I comfortable assuming what "everyone understands" in this case.
It is perfectly reasonable to point out that our lack of access always brings doubt to any conclusions we might draw, assurances from Lisa or no. But you chose to phrase your objection in a rude way, when perfectly polite options were available.
It wasn't my intention to be rude, and I apologized for writing "disingenuous" (and although "irrational" is accurate, I should have probably gone with "mistaken"). I freely admit I can be more blunt than intended.
Demanding that people recognize the truth of our lack of data access in response to objections to your insulting phrasing is both "disingenuous" and "irrational".
Disingenuous? No.
Irrational? Guilty as charged. I often struggle with the importance of emotion in communication -- even though I'm as prone as anyone to reacting emotionally.
That said, it can be very "you're either with us or you're against us" on these boards, which, while not surprising, I personally think is exceedingly unfortunate. It's amazing to me how people react differently depending not upon how well-reasoned a post is, but by whether it is perceived to be pro- or anti-Paizo.
Yeah we need to let that sub-conversation end, its going nowhere, I get the premise of "The head of the company needs to show confidence in the company's products, even if they aren't doing as well, so as not to depress the situation further, so this might be that" but in this instance, we have every reason to think that they're being truthful and no reasons to think they're lying, so I think taking their word for it until something meaningful suggests otherwise is the way to go.
For those seeing a sense of doom in the level of engagement they see locally, its important to consider that RPGs tend not to catch on equally in all areas- I remember that during the initial schism created by 4e and PF1e, things would eventually fall into a situation where it was like each area/town/whatever had more or less chosen a game, and the other was basically unplayed there, but the opposite was true in another area.
We're probably going to see some of that, where some areas stick with 5e and scoff at the idea of running PF2e, while other areas migrate over heavily, and still other areas will develop flourishing communities of both.
If I remember correctly the area referred to in the comments that prompted me to start this thread was somewhere in California / LA area which for some reason struck me as potentially more concerning but I can’t put my finger on why
I would be intrigued to know how RPG gaming is spread throughout the world. Where is is more prevalent in general etc
Like is it an urban liberal thing in the US or a “middle America” thing for example . Or is it pretty even ? And this isn’t necessarily paizo exclusive
But this isn’t directly related to this thread . Which board would that be?
I can only directly speak for my kitchen table which is located in cold Sweden. Obviously we’re playing 2E, though 5E seems to be the most dominant one in the city. The local board game store is a bit pants for RPGs to be honest, I ended up ordering rulebooks online even though I would have much preferred to buy them locally.
If I remember correctly the area referred to in the comments that prompted me to start this thread was somewhere in California / LA area which for some reason struck me as potentially more concerning but I can’t put my finger on why
I would be intrigued to know how RPG gaming is spread throughout the world. Where is is more prevalent in general etc
Like is it an urban liberal thing in the US or a “middle America” thing for example . Or is it pretty even ? And this isn’t necessarily paizo exclusive
But this isn’t directly related to this thread . Which board would that be?
Trying to figure this kind of thing out is giving weight to an anecdote that has no value. I could say based on the limited number of PF2 adventures I’ve seen run at tables in the 2 immediate FLGS to me that PF2 is not being adopted in my area. The fact that the 10 PF2e cores just one of my local bookstore carries has been depleted and restocked three times since August shows that someone is buying books. Without taking the time to poll all the gamers in my area (the ones that play at FLGS and the ones that don’t) I can’t provide anything meaningful and my two anecdotes paint two different pictures - and I’ve only referenced my personal observation of three stores in a metro area of 1.7 million people.
My FLGS won't support PFS because they had a bad experience several years ago. Guy volunteered to run the program here, and then essentially never showed up for game night. The store does have a D&D night (5E, I think). OTOH, they have M:TG going on seven days a week.
The store does sell Pathfinder Products, so there's apparently a market for 'em.