Pathfinder 2.0 is NOT Inevitable


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 571 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

I like what Paizo has done with adding modular rule sets, archetypes, and classes. I can take what I like, leave out what I don't, and make adjustments to anything in between. I understand that PFS players don't have the same luxury, but that's just the nature of that particular beast. I hope Paizo keeps doing what it's been doing. I enjoy that the particular flavor of the game I run might be very different from one that another person might run. Keep the fun coming, I say; I'm hardly ready for a reboot.


The thing is, I can see them evolving the system through optional rules forever. The "rules spread across too many books" is not really much of a problem because they put every core book online for free. The accessibility this offers is what will help Paizo last. They have a lot of flexibility in how much content they can put out without creating problems.

Liberty's Edge

LoneKnave wrote:
If people are... loyal enough to buy the same game 3 times over, you may as well assume they'll go ahead and do it a 4th time.

Before 5E I would agree. Now I think it would be more of the opposite. Two editions of the same rpg with very little change. Is not going to sell well a third time imo. Given that 5E fixes some of the problems that 3.5./Pathfinder has. Releasing the same rules a third time with little to no changes when their a new edition of the same rpg. That fixes the flaws is a mistake. Making PF 3.5. backwards compatible while a good thing do. Ends up not being that much of a beneficial thing imo. When DMs either insist on PF core and PF sourcebooks. Or some not willing to spend time converting 3.5. material to PF. I don't think the next edition has to be backwards compitable.

To be honest I'm not willing to spend another 100-120$ on another rehash with new cover/inter art. I need at least 50%+ minimum new material to invest in another edition of PF. If it's more of the same I can simply use 3.5. and PF material. They have to offer something new. It's not like it was with 4E which received it's fair share of negative reviews. 5E for the most part seems to have received a more positive review. Will it happen soon no. But it will happen imo.


An interesting fact in the D&D story is that 5E is on track to outsell 3.5 material.


BigDTBone wrote:


They have ALL the developmental overhead. The only cost they save is the actual printing. Which for a 256 page book, is about $4-5.)

There is no way this is true. They are hardcover with MASSIVE art.

Maybe if they were black and white but they are probably a lot more than that to print

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

Source? And definition of 3.5?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Poor, poor horse...


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Source? And definition of 3.5?

Source

Quote:

Nathan Stewart: We don’t always openly talk about numbers, because Hasbro is a publicly traded company, so we can’t give exact details from Wizards’ business. But I will tell you that we don’t even have a full year of sales on this yet, and we believe very, very strongly that this will finish out on the current trajectory to be the best launch we’ve ever had, both in terms of dollars and in terms of units.

I think if you would have told us –or anyone– that before launch, they would’ve said, “Really? You’re gonna do bigger than third edition or 3.5?” and the answer is, undoubtedly, yes.


CWheezy wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:


They have ALL the developmental overhead. The only cost they save is the actual printing. Which for a 256 page book, is about $4-5.)

There is no way this is true. They are hardcover with MASSIVE art.

Maybe if they were black and white but they are probably a lot more than that to print

Dude, Chinese webpress with 50,000 unit orders. $.01 per page all day long. (With web press they are likely paying by the book, not the page. If they use offset they are likely paying by the signature, but for the purpose of this conversation that seemed awfully industry specific.) Plus binding, shipping, and warehousing. There is absolutely no way they are into a book for more than $6.


Factoring shipping and other non-printing costs? I can see that easily coming to more than $6 per book. Still, I'd wager their margins are pretty handsome.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I would hope it isn't Protean. That would be confusing to read.


I guess Paizo just has to keep doing the math of how many people they can squeeze out re-buys on new edition reprints of the same material versus how many people will be loyal and keep buying genuinely new material.

The second they print pathfinder 2.0 I'm out and Paizo will never get another dime out of me-- and I am sure that represents a pretty big contingent of customers. New editions bring in new customers, and push out old ones.


I dunno, I've enjoyed what they've put out so far, I'd give a second edition a try, I don't think it's needed just yet, but I won't just dismiss it, unless of course they advance the campaign setting 100 years :-)


9 people marked this as a favorite.

And why are you sure of that, exactly?

I'd be pretty surprised if any significant amount of people could say with any certainty that they'd jump ship the moment a new edition came out.

You, in particular, are one of the few people I've seen or heard that says they'll GTFO the moment Paizo does <Ever growing number of things you don't want>.


Me?

Liberty's Edge

Rynjin means Nathaenel Love.

The thing is people in the hobby don't look at the big picture. Or assume that everyone will act like them. Down the line with two versions of the same rpg with little changes. Why would people buy a third version. Once Paizo published Pathfinder they gave those who wanted 3.5. to continue what they wanted. While fixing very little of the problems of the system. If I hate the caster vs Fighter power level problem. PF 2.0. does little to fix the problem. Why would I buy it when I can just keep using the current edition. I dislike running high level games because the system slows down at high levels and again no changes. Why waste my money. 5E fixes some of the problems of the system. Is PF 2.0. going to do the same. If no why would I stop playing 5E. They need new material or at least show the overall fanbase. Not just the 3.5. diehards. That their offering something new and fresh. If not chances are good that while a unchanged PF 2.0. will sell well. Nothing like the current version did when it was released. I like the system but the 3.5. engine can use a improvement.

Even Chaosium implemented some different enough changes with Call of Cthulhu 7E. Six edition of rehashes. Competion from both Trail and Savage Cthulhu another rehash simply made no sense. Trail espcially while true to COC does a better job then the core COC imo. Their a decent amount of the fanbase who refuse to buy PF because they feel it adds nothing new.

Community Manager

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A preemptive warning to keep it civil, and let people express their thoughts (within the Community Guidelines, of course). :)

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It seems to me that WotC, in the 3x and 4 eras at least, produced a rule set, then made adventures to support it.

Paizo seems to produce adventures, and also happen to produce a rule set to support them. This seems like a fundamental difference in their publishing strategies.

I think, at their heart, Paizo wants to write and sell stories.

That doesn't preclude PF2, but it might lengthen the edition cycle quite a bit.


Hark wrote:
In the theoretical case where Paizo somehow tries to keep Pathfinder as a single edition alive forever they will face a huge problem with rules being scattered between countless books. Some of these new rules will eventually grow to be quite important as they prove to be highly effective ways to handle different things. Other games have publish new editions specifically because the problem of rules in to many places became to much of an issue to deal with.

What rules are so important that they would need to be consolidated into a Revised Players Guide? We've got archetypes, but the vast majority of them will always be in splat books. That's their nature. Traits, alternate racial abilities and different favoured class bonuses have become fairly integral to Pathfinder so I could see those being added. Retraining is also a pretty big game changer.

Hark wrote:
The more books that Paizo publishes the higher the buying cost to get involved in Pathfinder. Eventually this will prove to be something of a barrier to entry for new customers limiting potential growth.

No matter what though, any new printing of the rules will have a maximum in the page size it can be. If they were to release Pathfinder 2nd edition tomorrow, we would still need to have the Core 11. How many more classes do you expect they could squeeze into the Core Rulebook without increasing it's page count?

Hark wrote:
There is however a way to mitigate this kind of problem. Paizo will have to publish new a new Core Rulebook with consolidated collections of all for the major rules systems that have popped up over the years.

A lot of those "major rules systems" are aimed at Gamemasters (except for those I listed above). They wouldn't be in a player facing book, they'd be in a GM book. Which they already are. And even that book suffered from page count issues.

I honestly hope we never see a Revised Core Rulebook. I've bought 3 over the years, one of them distinegrated and the other one was in pretty bad shape. The book is simply too big and I hope we don't ever get a book that tries to be the same size. I'd rather get a Gamemaster's Guide that included rules on creating new races, spells, magic items, etc.

I don't think we'll see a Pathfinder 2nd edition for at least a few more years. If the vast majority of the playerbase adopt Pathfinder Unchained then I could see a 2nd edition coming along. It would change how monsters are built and listed in the adventures, but would largely stil be "fairly" backwards compatible with Pathfinder 1st edition to the same degree that Pathfinder is currently backwards compatible with 3.5e.

A Revised Players Guide could include things like alternate racial traits, alternate favoured class bonuses, variant multiclassing, background traits, drawbacks and story feats, a revised skill list and the best version/most commonly used version of the Core 11 classes (potentially making skill tricks and the new maneuver versions core). All in one book so that when a new player comes to an existing game it isn't a case of "You'll need to buy these 3 books in order to make your rogue."

But for Paizo to judge how much of Pathfinder Unchained has been adopted and how much demand their is for ongoing support for the rules introduced in Pathfinder Unchained, they'll need to wait at least a couple of years. Then they'll need to spend at least a year to develop it so people don't complain all they did was copy and paste. And if Pathfinder Unchained doesn't see dramatic adoption or if there isn't any demand for ongoing support for those rules, then we may not necessarily see a 2nd edition for at least 5 or 7 more years.

At the end of the day Paizo needs fan buy in to anything they produce. If there is enough of a movement among fans to have a single book that incorporates a set of features in the game that would change it enough to signify a new edition, then they'll do it. If there isn't enough demand among fans, they'll look for other ways to continue making a profit. However people coming onto the boards every two months saying "2nd edition is coming soon!" isn't actually a signal that the fans of Pathfinder want a new edition.

Buri Reborn wrote:
An interesting fact in the D&D story is that 5E is on track to outsell 3.5 material.

The article actually says that the launch of 5th edition is on track to outsell the launch of 3.5e. That is nowhere near the same as saying 5th edition is on track to outsell 3.5e. It has no rules supplements announced to be released this year compared to 3.5e's much more aggressive publishing schedule.

President, Jon Brazer Enterprises

Cheapy wrote:

I hope for a Pathfinder 2.0. The underlying rules system it is based on has critical flaws in it and it has not held up well when critically examined compared to modern roleplaying systems. It's 15 years old, and it is really showing its age. We've had amazing innovations in RPG design the past decade during a rebirth of roleplaying games. And PF benefited very little from this.

Hopefully Unchained helps a lot, at least for me.

This. Pathfinder really could use a rules update. Sure its a great game, but there are lots of places where the warts are well known and could use some base level modification.

Mattastrophic wrote:

There is a third possibility. Paizo could start releasing material for Pathfinder that is also 5E-compatible. Like the APs. It would only grow the potential audience for their products.

-Matt

While anything can happen, I don't see that happening, for good reasons.

1) mastering 2 systems at once is not easy.

2) they would make PFRPG subject to the whims to another company (even if only in a minor way). That can really play havoc with operating capital.

3) they'd have to do a whole lot of 5e system work to make the APs work. They won't be able have alchemists, inquisitors, oracles (just to name a few classes), any monster from B2-4, any NPC from the NPC or Monster Codexes, anything but core book races, and much more in any adventure path until they catch 5e up to where they are.

that's just off the top of my head.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

THE OP IS RIGHT! PATHFINDER 2.0 IS NOT INEVITABLE! THIS IS!

Shadow Lodge

chbgraphicarts wrote:
...and BECMI D&D lasted from 1977 to 1999.

1983 to 1991, actually.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nathanael Love wrote:

I guess Paizo just has to keep doing the math of how many people they can squeeze out re-buys on new edition reprints of the same material versus how many people will be loyal and keep buying genuinely new material.

The second they print pathfinder 2.0 I'm out and Paizo will never get another dime out of me-- and I am sure that represents a pretty big contingent of customers. New editions bring in new customers, and push out old ones.

so you are saying you actively do not want Paizo to improve their game?


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Nathanael Love wrote:
The second they print pathfinder 2.0 I'm out and Paizo will never get another dime out of me-- and I am sure that represents a pretty big contingent of customers. New editions bring in new customers, and push out old ones.

Man, I'm so tired of this warn-out chest thumping.

Unless you started your gaming experience with Pathfinder, then you know this isn't true. 2nd Edition D&D is still around, but people still bought 3.0. 3.0 is still around and yet people still massively upgraded to 3.5. 3.5 is still everywhere too, yet PF is strong. Etc. And so on. And so fourth.

Face the facts - you'll upgrade to whatever game is doing well, because if you don't, you lose out on people to game with. End of story.


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

I would be more interested in books that detail the "missing" sections / continents of Golarion before moving on to new editions.

Seriously, we know more about the other inhabited worlds of Golarion's solar system than we do the neighboring continents.


chbgraphicarts wrote:
Otherwhere wrote:

I'd like a "Pathfinder Deconstructed" - where they strip the system down to its basic components, and do away with "classes" and allow you to build your own.

Everything can become "unchained" because they can keep coming up with alternative rules for you to mix-and-match according to your group and play style.

That's a cute idea that's been tried to death in d20, and it never, ever works.

It's kinda like saying "I want to flap my arms and fly, and if I do it hard enough, I will" - yes, in theory you can actually do that, because the force of your downward swing would push you upwards and if you do it fast enough you'll basically be jumping on air, and this is actually EXACTLY how a butterfly flies; but we're not butterflies, so we don't have the muscles OR the properly-shaped appendages to do that, and Pathfinder cannot be "stripped down" to create a "classless system" without the whole thing falling to unbalanced hell.

Classless systems really don't work in d20 due to balancing, effects of abilities, etc. BESM d20 is a perfect example of how flagrantly a Classless system can fail (it was still FUN, but by no means balanced in the slightest).

---

I do think I'd like to see something where SPELLS as they stand are eliminated, and instead they can be learned just like Feats (so that ANYONE can learn a spell or two if they want)

Basically, much like how a Fighter gains extra Combat Feats, it'd be neat to see a "Mage" class that learns Magic Feats every other level using the same design (but being physically weaker and gaining bonuses to Caster Level checks, etc.)

But, that's impossible for Pathfinder. That would have to be an entirely-different d20 subsystem, and lord knows if it'd work at all, really. It's more just a thought-experiment on my part than anything.

"What's mutants and masterminds lol?"


Well, Paizo didn't actually NEED the PF CRB to publish Pathfinder. Pathfinder was actually out and about before the PF CRB and rules to play it that way. In fact, in some ways, it originally was a modified version of 3.5 (or directly, an adventure and world using 3.5 rules and OGL). I have at least 4 APs that are 3.5 instead of the PF CRB rules.

I think that PF could be just fine without EVER publishing a new version of PF...though a new EDITION (aka like 2e was to 1e in D&D where the rules were basically compatible...almost completely) may occur at some point.

However, I think there is interest in the rules of the PF CRB, I think Paizo probably could survive how they did initially and which was originally the core of their business (though I admit, their core business plan probably has changed and their focus has changed) which was the AP and subscriptions.

I think the bigger danger is the inability to adapt to changing market forces...aka what happened to TSR, and what happened in a way to 3e/3.5 and the adaptation to 4e to a degree.

That's more relevant and cyclical I think...and though some of the versions tried to adapt, they misread how to adapt and had more problems from it.

That's what normally hits around 9-11 years after one of these gets published, but whether it will affect Paizo is yet to be seen.

I think they've already encountered their first hurdle, though I'm not sure what the result of that is or will be with the release of 5e. How that goes down probably will be indicative of how well they adapt or overcome changes in the market, changing attitudes, and obstacles of major new challengers (though some would say D&D is an old challenger, 5e is distinctly a new original game in it's own right of rules and players).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I do think a second edition will happen EVENTUALLY, BUT i dont think it will happen anytime soon, 3-4 years is probably the soonest i would estimate it at, and generally i would pick it more around 6. PF is still in its prime, it needs to start declining first before a new edition would make sense, and that will happen eventually, but it hasn't happened yet.

Liberty's Edge

Mind you the community is strange though. As I'm seeing more than a few elements of 4E in 5E. Yet somehow with 5E those elements are acceptable to the same community. Then when they were inside the with 4E books. In the end it's all a matter of presentation imo. If they kept the more traditional fantasy jargon and terminalogy maybe 4E may have done better. While I never taught of 4E as a mmo and never will so don't try to convince otherwise. I did see that they borrowed a few terms from mmos to appeal to that portion of the market.

Paizo has to offer something new. Or at least not another rehash. Between 5E, pF 1E, 13th Age and 4E. PF 2.0. will have more competition. Going for the status quo will have members of the community asking what can the newer version of PF offer that the previous four don't already have. If it's nothing then good luck trying to get people to buy it. Maybe some of the PF diehards but not those who have moved on to other systems.

While one does not have to switch over let alne by the new edition. Chances are a person will. When 3E was released in 2000. 2E and earlier edition of D&D gaming dried up in my area overnight. Ads for those editions of the games were left blank. So those DMs adapted to 3E. Kept playing with the same people or not at all.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Neo2151 wrote:
Nathanael Love wrote:
The second they print pathfinder 2.0 I'm out and Paizo will never get another dime out of me-- and I am sure that represents a pretty big contingent of customers. New editions bring in new customers, and push out old ones.

Man, I'm so tired of this warn-out chest thumping.

Unless you started your gaming experience with Pathfinder, then you know this isn't true. 2nd Edition D&D is still around, but people still bought 3.0. 3.0 is still around and yet people still massively upgraded to 3.5. 3.5 is still everywhere too, yet PF is strong. Etc. And so on. And so fourth.

Face the facts - you'll upgrade to whatever game is doing well, because if you don't, you lose out on people to game with. End of story.

I went through the edition carasal too many times.

Once PF prints pathfinder 2.0 pathfinder 3.0 will be there in 5 or fewer years.

Once a company decides that the only way to make money is to reboot and make all the money we've already invested in the system wasted they won't blink to do it again as soon as sales trail off.

I didn't buy 4th edition D&D because I didn't want a new edition. I didn't buy 5e because I didn't want a new edition. Why would I buy PF 2.0?

Look, the most refreshing thing about Paizo is that they focus on putting out quality material every year and not just viewing the fans as sheep with wallets. A shift to a new edition model breaks that trust that they have built.

I never want to buy another book that's a straight copy of a previous book updated to a new edition. I bought Tome and Blood and that whole line of 3.0 books then watched as the guts of those books got reprinted as Complete Warrior and that line and felt like an idiot even as I went along with it and bought them.

If Paizo starts doing the same and we get a new core, then a new bestiary with all the same monsters, then an updated book with the APG classes, and oh look-- instead of more/new archetypes its the same archetypes we had before but "now for PF 2.0!" I'm going to be wise to what's happening.

Why would I buy PF 2.0 Core, PF 2.0 APG, ARG, ACG, UM, UC (or whatever they name those books with essentially the same material)?

I've seen the edition change and reprint thing before, and I'm just done with it.

Shadow Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Nathanael Love wrote:
I didn't buy 4th edition D&D because I didn't want a new edition. I didn't buy 5e because I didn't want a new edition. Why would I buy PF 2.0?

Because you can't play PF if everyone else is playing PF 2.0.


Hm. Interesting debates here. Would we get PF 2.0 if/when it occurs? Probably. Depends on the changes.

However...here's something for consideration: many folks are already playing PF 1.x/2.0.

Any time you houserule, any time you adopt a variant system (unchained, wordcasting, any sub-systems from ultimate combat) you're playing 1.x/2.0.

That's why 2.0 is, IMO, far, far in the future, if ever. Given all the variants and options, there's no way an official 2.0 would be what everyone wants. Right now, while there are issues and debates, there are still enough options for everyone to play the Pathfinder they want.

That's why we play it at my place. Because we can make it our own and still be 'official'.

That's why Pathfinder is such a great system.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can understand NL dislike of new editions. It's the same reason why I passed over getting Earthdawn 4E. Too little changes and not in the mood to reinvest in a new edition without 50% + new material in it. The exceptions are 7E COC because while similar to previous editions the changes enhance the rpg.

Even if Paizo kept the same names of the books. As long as the material was relatively or mostly new people would still buy. If they can make the current rpg engine run better and faster at higher levels that's already a big bonus. A unchanged PF good luck with trying to get the same sales as when the core was first released. Unlike when 4E was released it has some decent competion now.

Please every company including this one wants to make a profit. I'm not calling them greedy. But they have bills to pay. Then again it's the usual "rpg company xYZ that I like is above reproach. The others I don't like are greedy" mentality that persists in the hobby. Eventually if the current edition makes them lose money and they do nothing to stop it. For fear of alienating the fanbase then they deserve to go under. I have no sympathy for any company who purposefully loses money for whatever reason.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TOZ wrote:
Nathanael Love wrote:
I didn't buy 4th edition D&D because I didn't want a new edition. I didn't buy 5e because I didn't want a new edition. Why would I buy PF 2.0?
Because you can't play PF if everyone else is playing PF 2.0.

Unlike many here, I can still play AD&D, AD&D 2e, and even BECMI with the groups I play with if I so desire.

I see no reason I couldn't continue playing PF 1e if a 2e came out.

I suppose it may be if I ONLY played with gamestore groups I'd have the problem you mention above, but luckily my circle of people to gather to play RPGs with is FAR more broad then that.

Liberty's Edge

Wise words spiral ninja. I don't think a new edition will come out soon. But after a certain point their is a saturation point with the fanbase. I have to ask. Do I really need bestiary 8. I have the first four and was disappointed with the last one. What really is the difference between a ocean troll, a pond troll or a river troll. I used to think I would never get tired of monsters but now I am. i also have the Tome of Horrors complete as well. Another problem is that too often for example a feat is either too good or not worth taking. Plenty of fluff filled descriptions with the crunch elements being so not worth taking. That I would have to be paid a six digit figure minimum before adding it to my character sheet. So many archtypes with offical and 3pp as well.

Even the APS. After a point how many pre-made adventures does one need or want to spend the money on before deciding to make ones won. Even for a novive after running a few APS. One should be able to make ones encounters imo.

Silver Crusade Contributor

memorax wrote:

Wise words spiral ninja. I don't think a new edition will come out soon. But after a certain point their is a saturation point with the fanbase. After a point I have to ask. Do I really need bestiary 8. I have the first four and was disappointed with the last one. What really is the difference between a ocean troll, a pond troll or a river troll. I used to think I would never get tired of monsters but now I am. i also have the Tome of Horrors complete as well. Another problem is that too often for example a feat is either too good or not worth taking. Plenty of fluff filled descriptions with the crunch elements being so not worth taking. That I would have to be paid a six digit figure minimum before adding it to my character sheet. So many archtypes with offical and 3pp as well.

Even the APS. After a point how many pre-made adventures does one need or want to spend the money on before deciding to make ones won. Even for a novive after running a few APS. One should be able to make ones encounters imo.

I'm with you on feats.

As for the APs, I actually really like them for the stories, both for reading material and for eventual running. I'll probably rewrite most of the actual encounters anyway. :)

Also, I think your autocorrect is broken.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
memorax wrote:

Even the APS. After a point how many pre-made adventures does one need or want to spend the money on before deciding to make ones won. Even for a novive after running a few APS. One should be able to make ones encounters imo.

Can only speak for myself but I could buy APs forever. While I still do a ton of custom work when running an AP, having them is a big time saver and source of inspiration for me. I dont need rule splats so a PF 2E will never be due. Though clearly I'm not like everyone else.


I'm far more loyal to Paizo because of the quality of their adventure paths and organized play than I am because of the system. It always felt like adventures were an afterthought to WotC; the fact that they are the core of Paizo's business is quite refreshing.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

As the (new) Pathfinder Venture Captain at GaryCon 2015, I reported 39 tables of PFS. Our GMs handed out over 25 new PFS IDs.

There was no question that Pathfinder Society was the largest game system being played at the convention.

I didn't visit many other tables (I had my hands full as it was), but there was Chainmail tables all the way to 5th Edition (only 2 tables of 5th, though).

Regardless of what Paizo is planning or not planning, I'm quite sure that Pathfinder will continue throughout. 1st Edition, 1.5 Edition, 2nd Edition, whatever- the 1st edition will still be "live".

Heck, if Alderac Entertainment's Doomtown (a "dead" card game without provider support) managed to last as long as it did, and there was enough support for it to go through a reboot, then I see Pathfinder being run for as long, if not longer.

-- Steve


Spiral_Ninja wrote:
That's why 2.0 is, IMO, far, far in the future, if ever. Given all the variants and options, there's no way an official 2.0 would be what everyone wants. Right now, while there are issues and debates, there are still enough options for everyone to play the Pathfinder they want.

This is the big point to me. If enough of these options/variants see widespread adoption then there would be a benefit to putting out a revised edition that would consolidate them into one book. But what are those options? Words of Power has always been banned where I've played. Combat Performance I've seen used once. Piecemeal Armour has always been banned. Combat styles have been adopted though with bardic performances viewed with suspicion but grudgingly allowed.

There is a slowly growing list of options/variants that I've seen gain widespread adoption. But they're not enough to justify a revised set of rules yet. Pathfinder Unchained introduces lots of options and if enough of them see widespread adoption then it could be the tipping point. It's a pretty big if though.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Joe Wells wrote:

It seems to me that WotC, in the 3x and 4 eras at least, produced a rule set, then made adventures to support it.

Paizo seems to produce adventures, and also happen to produce a rule set to support them. This seems like a fundamental difference in their publishing strategies.

I think, at their heart, Paizo wants to write and sell stories.

That doesn't preclude PF2, but it might lengthen the edition cycle quite a bit.

I would agree. WotC came out with 4e and 5e at a point when most of their customers were not ready to move on to a new edition. I think Paizo will wait until there is a general consensus that the rules for Pathfinder need to be cleaned up and consolidated.

Liberty's Edge

Kalindlara wrote:


I'm with you on feats.

As for the APs, I actually really like them for the stories, both for reading material and for eventual running. I'll probably rewrite most of the actual encounters anyway. :)

Also, I think your autocorrect is broken.

Not so much the auto-correct. So much as posting too fast. That's the main issue of APS though for meat least. If I'm going to rewrite the encounters. I might as well not send the money. If they don't save me time in preparing for my game it feels like extra work for little gain. That being said they help if your stuck and can't get inspiration. THe npcs in APS I have come across three that I have not had to rewrite. The rest are so non-optimized even a group of the least unoptimized players will defeat them with relative easy. I have a Alchemist in my group who can throw 3-4 bombs that end up doing 100+ hp. That's half to three quarters hp for most BBEG.

Pan wrote:


Can only speak for myself but I could buy APs forever. While I still do a ton of custom work when running an AP, having them is a big time saver and source of inspiration for me. I dont need rule splats so a PF 2E will never be due. Though clearly I'm not like everyone else.

It's somewhat of a time saver imo. I agree when it comes to setting up the story and places for a AP. The npcs are so poorly optimized that it's not even funny. I know their constrained with what treasure they can include for npcs. To be blunt a CR 14 npc has no business having a +1 ring of protection imo.


I have no doubt there will be a "2E" but 2E can mean a wide variety of things, from a heavily errated Pathfinder, A Pathfinder where the rules largely stay the same but the layout is radically redesigned, A Pathfinder which is a gradual evolution of the system allowing backwards compatibility, to a complete tossing of the D20 mechanic.

Personally...I think we have some time left before we really need to worry about it, and books like Unchained show that Paizo can address legacy issues that they were stuck with in a manner that doesn't throw out the existing ruleset. I hope that the existing books continue to be relevant in any rules update, and if books need to be updated it's done in a novel manner that isn't just regurgitating the ultimate and advanced books.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
GreyWolfLord wrote:
TOZ wrote:
Because you can't play PF if everyone else is playing PF 2.0.
I see no reason I couldn't continue playing PF 1e if a 2e came out.
TOZ wrote:
...if...


TOZ wrote:
Nathanael Love wrote:
I didn't buy 4th edition D&D because I didn't want a new edition. I didn't buy 5e because I didn't want a new edition. Why would I buy PF 2.0?
Because you can't play PF if everyone else is playing PF 2.0.

That's a pretty obvious straw man argument there.

Of COURSE I can and will play PF 1.0 if there is a PF 2.0 . . . the same way when I play a World of Darkness game I still play Old World of Darkness.

But I won't be buying Pathfinder 2.0, and my original point was that Paizo has to keep doing the math/predictions on whether they think they can bring in more income by losing customers like myself and moving to a new version.

Yeah, I'll still have my books, but the 300-500+ dollars a year I spend on Pathfinder won't be making their way to Paizo anymore, I will find some other outlet for that spending.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I suppose unchained could be an attempt at gradualism rather than punctuated equilibrium. That might get you to 2.0 without running quite so much of a chance at a split.


TOZ wrote:
Nathanael Love wrote:
I didn't buy 4th edition D&D because I didn't want a new edition. I didn't buy 5e because I didn't want a new edition. Why would I buy PF 2.0?
Because you can't play PF if everyone else is playing PF 2.0.

Bah. It'll never happen. People still play 1e and 2e, even thoug ugh were aready at 5e D&D. The same will be true if Paizo goes PF 2.0; there will still be PF 1.0 games.


bookrat wrote:
TOZ wrote:
Nathanael Love wrote:
I didn't buy 4th edition D&D because I didn't want a new edition. I didn't buy 5e because I didn't want a new edition. Why would I buy PF 2.0?
Because you can't play PF if everyone else is playing PF 2.0.
Bah. It'll never happen. People still play 1e and 2e, even thoug ugh were aready at 5e D&D. The same will be true if Paizo goes PF 2.0; there will still be PF 1.0 games.

True, but Its harder to do so, and the newer people entering gaming are more likely to start with the next edition of Pathfinder, and be less interested in the older version. So there is a bit of turnover as older fans leave the hobby.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
bookrat wrote:
TOZ wrote:
Nathanael Love wrote:
I didn't buy 4th edition D&D because I didn't want a new edition. I didn't buy 5e because I didn't want a new edition. Why would I buy PF 2.0?
Because you can't play PF if everyone else is playing PF 2.0.
Bah. It'll never happen. People still play 1e and 2e, even thoug ugh were aready at 5e D&D. The same will be true if Paizo goes PF 2.0; there will still be PF 1.0 games.

Bah! This is why I think Beginner Box should morph into Pathfinder Lite so that you have a easier to grasp sister product that is compatible with the main more complicated and modular product. I've taken my hand at stringing modules I got from the last Golem sale together to make Beginner Box "APs" and that's worked out fairly well. I can see fat modules like The Dragons Demand functioning with both PF-Lite and Pathfinder as I've already GMed that module with the Beginner Box (Turned the dragon black and connected it to Black Fang's Dungeon) and that worked out well enough. There are even pdfs flying around with the rest of the base classes in Beginner Box form, including feats, spells and creatures. I don't think it would split the fan base that much if we got two lines of RPGs that function with the same adventures. It can even be taken further but using the consolidated skill list and abstracting a few more rules.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malwing wrote:
bookrat wrote:
TOZ wrote:
Nathanael Love wrote:
I didn't buy 4th edition D&D because I didn't want a new edition. I didn't buy 5e because I didn't want a new edition. Why would I buy PF 2.0?
Because you can't play PF if everyone else is playing PF 2.0.
Bah. It'll never happen. People still play 1e and 2e, even thoug ugh were aready at 5e D&D. The same will be true if Paizo goes PF 2.0; there will still be PF 1.0 games.
Bah! This is why I think Beginner Box should morph into Pathfinder Lite so that you have a easier to grasp sister product that is compatible with the main more complicated and modular product. I've taken my hand at stringing modules I got from the last Golem sale together to make Beginner Box "APs" and that's worked out fairly well. I can see fat modules like The Dragons Demand functioning with both PF-Lite and Pathfinder as I've already GMed that module with the Beginner Box (Turned the dragon black and connected it to Black Fang's Dungeon) and that worked out well enough. There are even pdfs flying around with the rest of the base classes in Beginner Box form, including feats, spells and creatures. I don't think it would split the fan base that much if we got two lines of RPGs that function with the same adventures. It can even be taken further but using the consolidated skill list and abstracting a few more rules.

RoleMaster/MERP.

51 to 100 of 571 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Pathfinder 2.0 is NOT Inevitable All Messageboards