The simple fact is if more people had been buying PF1E they wouldn't have needed to create PF2E. If you have any understanding of the history of fantasy TTRPG market, you'll know that 1E ran its profitable course. Could more things have been released for 1E? Sure, but 2E is much more profitable. That's how business works.
I feel like P2E had to be done because the regular D20 system was getting outdated, and that they also wanted to uniformalize their system after Starfinder.
The simple fact is if more people had been buying PF1E they wouldn't have needed to create PF2E. If you have any understanding of the history of fantasy TTRPG market, you'll know that 1E ran its profitable course. Could more things have been released for 1E? Sure, but 2E is much more profitable. That's how business works.I feel like P2E had to be done because the regular D20 system was getting outdated, and that they also wanted to uniformalize their system after Starfinder.
I'm like 98% certain that's the reason the devs gave, and not profits.
I'm like 98% certain that's the reason the devs gave, and not profits.The simple fact is if more people had been buying PF1E they wouldn't have needed to create PF2E. If you have any understanding of the history of fantasy TTRPG market, you'll know that 1E ran its profitable course. Could more things have been released for 1E? Sure, but 2E is much more profitable. That's how business works.I feel like P2E had to be done because the regular D20 system was getting outdated, and that they also wanted to uniformalize their system after Starfinder.
I actually never thought it was about profits either ;)
For what we know, Paizo started working on P2E shortly after Starfinder's launch, regardless of how well P1E was going.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
it wouldn't end any arguments but it would be nice to have.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
it wouldn't end any arguments but it would be nice to have.
It would end some arguments, start some others, and definitely be nice to have.
It's also never going to happen, first party anyway.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
it wouldn't end any arguments but it would be nice to have.It would end some arguments, start some others, and definitely be nice to have.
It's also never going to happen, first party anyway.
Yeah, some mysteries shall persist into perpetuity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm like 98% certain that's the reason the devs gave, and not profits.The simple fact is if more people had been buying PF1E they wouldn't have needed to create PF2E. If you have any understanding of the history of fantasy TTRPG market, you'll know that 1E ran its profitable course. Could more things have been released for 1E? Sure, but 2E is much more profitable. That's how business works.I feel like P2E had to be done because the regular D20 system was getting outdated, and that they also wanted to uniformalize their system after Starfinder.I actually never thought it was about profits either ;)
For what we know, Paizo started working on P2E shortly after Starfinder's launch, regardless of how well P1E was going.
From the early Starfinder interviews, PF2E was under development well before Starfinder was designed, as they mentioned taking bits from the developing PF2E rules and using them in Starfinder.
In hindsight, a major motivation for developing Starfinder obviously was to ensure that they had an active product line during the expected slump in Pathfinder sales after they publicly announced PF2E but before they actually released it.
From the early Starfinder interviews, PF2E was under development well before Starfinder was designed, as they mentioned taking bits from the developing PF2E rules and using them in Starfinder.
In hindsight, a major motivation for developing Starfinder obviously was to ensure that they had an active product line during the expected slump in Pathfinder sales after they publicly announced PF2E but before they actually released it.
Oh interesting, I was fully unaware of all that, thank you for sharing.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Kickstarter just launched for Icebound, a continuation of the Perilous Vistas series for Pathfinder 1st edition. Written by Tom Knauss and includes two adventures. Checkacheckacheckitout!
Perilous Vistas?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Perilous Vistas?
It was a four book set from Frog God that each was centered on a type of terrain/environment, and had a bunch of rules, feats, spells, etc. in addition to three or four adventures featuring the same.
Marshes of Malice (swamps/marshes), Mountains of Madness (mountains), Dunes of Desolation (deserts), and Fields of Blood (plains/grasslands).
They were pretty good! I've used some of the adventures.
Too bad Paizo's only art book didn't sell to well, would have loved more art books.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Perilous Vistas?It was a four book set from Frog God that each was centered on a type of terrain/environment, and had a bunch of rules, feats, spells, etc. in addition to three or four adventures featuring the same.
Marshes of Malice (swamps/marshes), Mountains of Madness (mountains), Dunes of Desolation (deserts), and Fields of Blood (plains/grasslands).
They were pretty good! I've used some of the adventures.
Huh, never heard of em, thank you for the tip
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If 2e didn't come out until a couple or so years later makes me wonder what we would have gotten.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Web enhancements should return :P
I don't remember much about the web enhancements, what did we use to get? examples?
I don't remember much about the web enhancements, what did we use to get? examples?
I think WotC did these more often ^^;
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My interest would be Adventure Paths. I believe we have enough rules already. Paizo would have my money if they 1) produced more PF1 APs, 2) produced PF2 APs with notes on how to convert the encounters to PF1, and 3) produced PF1 rules and spell compendiums (like 3.5 did previously, break them up by class).
I've started to play Savage Worlds, not too shabby at all! I've been a backer of the their "Pathfinder for Savage Worlds" and it has turned out realy nice. Got the Core pdf, bestiary and companion. he pinted books are due in september.
So far it's a blast and Rise of the Runelords plays better I think, than in the original (freer and faster).
But I would still buy Pathfinder AP's - *they are great*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Savage Worlds?
I don't remember much about the web enhancements, what did we use to get? examples?
Are we talking about those stronger cantrips we got?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Savage Worlds?
Really cool system, check it out ...
It plays fast, lets you customize and is can be used for science fiction too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is Savage Worlds a different setting, different rules, or both? Same or different classes as Pathfinder?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Unchained Spiritualists?
It could do with better spell caster list (making it faster, getting a few spells quicker) like Chained Summoner (ironically chain made it better).
A better summoner archetype for Spiritualist.
Unchained Ranger. He could use a tiny improvement.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
if the books were good i would buy them
If it contained stuff that was easy to port forward to PF2, then yeah definitely. Lore, artwork, and independent subsystems.
If it was just more of the same old PF1 mechanical content I'd definitely pass.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can't think of too many things that are easy to port from PF1 to PF2.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is Savage Worlds a different setting, different rules, or both? Same or different classes as Pathfinder?
Savage Worlds is the anti-D20 system as it doesn't use the d20. It basically just moves all of the same stats and abilities around in different ways, such as making dice your actual stats. Target numbers to hit are always four and you get penalties as needed. Dice coming up at max, such as 6 on a d6 or 4 on a d4 is considered exploding and gains another roll to add to the total.
It's elegant in some ways such as above and bizarrely complicated in others, such as using cards for initiative which is basically where it loses me.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like them to convert the Inventor and the myriad of new P2E races to P1E...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That would be nice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That would be nice.
But it will never happen, unless they release it as a final sendoff to P1E or something.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds like a great homebrew project.
Most likely... because I don't think Paizo will release a P1E book with any new P2E races, classes, items and spells. That alone could work as a new core rulebook.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I doubt Paizo would make any new 1e products ever...but one can dream.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I doubt Paizo would make any new 1e products ever...but one can dream.
I know WotC did this back for 3.5E, but I don't know if Paizo would blog about it: they could take say, one race and convert it back to P1E, as a small blog post.
Races, items and spells aren't that hard to convert compared to classes, but it would be a nice bonus.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
JiCi, what are the new player races from 2e you want for 1e?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
JiCi, what are the new player races from 2e you want for 1e?
All of them, and if they can be added to Starfinder as well, the better :)
I would not buy any new PF1e rulebooks. Pathfinder 1e already has considerably more than enough crunch for my taste. In fact, I mentally checked out of the stream of new rules material several years before I actually stopped playing PF1e (which was in 2016 or 2017).
I haven't sworn 1e off (although playing other systems has contrasted sharply with what an absolute drag high-level PF1e is in my medium of choice, real-time text messengers such as mIRC or Hangouts, and the contrast has been even sharper for our group's DM, who became much more relaxed after no longer having to endlessly wrangle high level statblocks). But in any case, the rules bloat was already actively irritating by PF1e midlife, and there's a zero percent chance of my paying money to get yet more of it.
There are also more published PF1e adventures than any one person can reasonably play, but adventures are much more a matter of taste, and I might pay money for an AP that scratched the perfect itch. One piece of content I can definitely see myself paying money for would be an evil AP that covered similar ground as the third-party Way of the Wicked but did a better job of it, that had Paizo-level plotting and art and that was more adept with the game mechanics.
(Hell's Vengeance, which never takes the party into evil-overlord territory, isn't the same...)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
JiCi, what are the new player races from 2e you want for 1e?All of them, and if they can be added to Starfinder as well, the better :)
Here's some stuff from two madlads to get ya started with, JiCi. ;P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would not buy any new PF1e rulebooks. Pathfinder 1e already has considerably more than enough crunch for my taste. In fact, I mentally checked out of the stream of new rules material several years before I actually stopped playing PF1e (which was in 2016 or 2017).
I haven't sworn 1e off (although playing other systems has contrasted sharply with what an absolute drag high-level PF1e is in my medium of choice, real-time text messengers such as mIRC or Hangouts, and the contrast has been even sharper for our group's DM, who became much more relaxed after no longer having to endlessly wrangle high level statblocks). But in any case, the rules bloat was already actively irritating by PF1e midlife, and there's a zero percent chance of my paying money to get yet more of it.
There are also more published PF1e adventures than any one person can reasonably play, but adventures are much more a matter of taste, and I might pay money for an AP that scratched the perfect itch. One piece of content I can definitely see myself paying money for would be an evil AP that covered similar ground as the third-party Way of the Wicked but did a better job of it, that had Paizo-level plotting and art and that was more adept with the game mechanics.
(Hell's Vengeance, which never takes the party into evil-overlord territory, isn't the same...)
I understand your comment, and it's completely fine.
However, there is an annoyance about how the previous edition is suddenly dropped and forgotten about when the new edition is introduced. Right now, one major problem is that the conversion from P1E and P2E is lagging behind. If you want to keep your players and their respective characters, you might run into problems due to missing rules.
While I have nothing against the Inventor and the Thaumateurge, the lack of occult/psychic classes is apparent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think I'd want to keep players who would leave over missing rules.
Let's say you annonunce the shift to P2E, and one player just cannot convert their character and have to make a new one... You're gonna say "Well so long!" ?
If all the party change characters, I see no issue, but shifting in mid-campaign can be a problem.