Pathfinder 2E Pathfinder Second Edition: I hear it's bad - Why Bad, How Bad?

billd91 · Jul 3, 2019

Nebulous said:
...there's a good chance I will run two campaigns, one 5e, the other PF2.

Sounds like a win-win situation.

(Psi)SeveredHead · Jul 6, 2019

Morrus said:
I am curious whether there is a worrisome demographic to this day composed of people who refuse to play D&D 5E because they didn't like the playtest document back in 2014 or whenever it was. I suspect... the playtest document really won't be a thing anybody remembers in a couple of months' time. But hey, I might be wrong. Those 2014 diehard D&D Next playtest doc haters might still be out there harbouring their grudges about a game that never existed!

I'm in that demographic. But most things I read about 5e since then haven't improved my opinion.

TheWayofPie said:
They released level 1 monk "how to build a character" article yesterday. Got me excited to try it out. Lots of fun character options. I just hope skill feats don't put me to sleep like they did during the playtest.

Please provide a link.

Morrus · Jul 6, 2019

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
I'm in that demographic.

I suspect you’re an outlier.

Remathilis · Jul 7, 2019

Jacob Lewis said:
This seems pointless. The product isn't even out yet. Most of us have only the playtest material to go on, which Paizo has suggested was radically different from the final product. Anyone with any real substantial exposure and experience with the finalized product cannot openly discuss it. But let's go ahead and discuss how terrible it is already not knowing anything except how to speculate wildly and form opinions for everyone else so we won't need to come up with our own ideas. Heavens forbid!

Also, I hear a lot of people actually like it. They're just not usually as vocal or emotional about it. Or bound by NDAs.

I think it is more telling than people give it credit for, but not in the ways people are expecting.

Like it or not, there was a fairly vocal group of people on The Internet(tm) that gave the impression the game wasn't good. In full disclosure, I didn't play or read it, but I checked some of the local hangouts (Reddit, Paizo boards, etc) and the initial impression anyone reading them would get was that the system was baaad. Complaints abounded on nearly everything. Now, some of it was pure whinging, and some of it was stuff Paizo took to heart and tried to improve (the final proof of it will come in a month) but it was hard to deny that, if you were someone not in the heart of fandom and was looking in, the appearance was the PF2e was disliked if not hated by the community. That is an initial perception that is hard to get people back from, as there will be people who hear about the game, Google search it up, and get a faceful of the complaining and then say "wow, that look like it sucks" and never look into it further, esp into the finished product.

So while I think its not fair to use the commentary people have given on playtest to make a decision about the final product, unfortunately the massive negative reaction the playtest had is going to color the perception of the game for a while. There will be people like the OP here who heard the game was "bad" and want to know more, not because they are haters but because even a casual search on the topic yields far more negative opinion that positive right now. I don't envy Paizo's task in turning that kind of initial reactions around.

Markh3rd · Jul 7, 2019

There are many people in my gaming circles, including people I've talked with in gaming conventions that are taking a wait and see approach instead of just diving in with abandon. Most either cited wanting to stay with PF1 or they cited initial interest in PF2 until the playtest gave them worries about the future of PF.

Personally I think the biggest challenge Paizo faces is getting lots of new players to jump on board. If they can build up a steady stream of new players while keeping most of their older players it will be successful. I think that is the goal but whether the new system is conducive to that goal we will have to wait and see.

If too many people wait to see, then you get a slow start to your new product and that doesn't look good. And the spiral starts. Hopefully it will work out because I enjoy PFS and they have excellent stories to adventure in.

Nebulous · Jul 7, 2019

I'm the ideal kind of person to check out PF2 - I'm kinda tired of 5e, want to try something new, I've never invested in PF1 so I don't feel like I'm losing anything or upgrading for not very good reasons. I can see why fans of PF1 are very lukewarm, especially if the playtest wasn't so good. I do hope Paizo can pull it off, they're a great company and genuinely want to create good games for the fans.

JeffB · Jul 7, 2019

The fact that Paizo is selling expensive print copies and deluxe print copies of books and adventures for the 2E playtest probably goes a long way to increasing criticism of the system.

You have a lot of fans/hopeful fans putting a good chunk of change out for something that ended up being very different than the PF1E playtest. At some point afterwards, you (Paizo) talk about how intentionally very different/radical it was from what would be the finished product. Either you are doing some PR Damage Control, or you were not very honest with your playtest group who cracked open their wallets. Unless I am a collector, I would be super pissed off with Paizo if it is the latter.

That said, I will give it another look when it arrives.

billd91 · Jul 7, 2019

JeffB said:
The fact that Paizo is selling expensive print copies and deluxe print copies of books and adventures for the 2E playtest probably goes a long way to increasing criticism of the system.

You have a lot of fans/hopeful fans putting a good chunk of change out for something that ended up being very different than the PF1E playtest. At some point afterwards, you (Paizo) talk about how intentionally very different/radical it was from what would be the finished product. Either you are doing some PR Damage Control, or you were not very honest with your playtest group who cracked open their wallets. Unless I am a collector, I would be super pissed off with Paizo if it is the latter.

That said, I will give it another look when it arrives.

I didn't buy any of the play test stuff for 2e because I was too busy with other things in my life to do much play testing. But I did buy the initial PF play test softcover for my convenience back in 2008. I don't regret it, nor was I super pissed that the final PF product was different. I expected it to be different. That expectation should be the case now.

I seriously doubt the sale of 2e play test materials, whether in basic or deluxe format, goes a long way to increasing criticism of the system.

Xaelvaen · Jul 7, 2019

So, I wasn't incredibly thrilled with the playtest, but it got a few things right - which I'm hoping will make the final product immensely satisfying.

I've been using the 3 Action system for a long time in many different games, so this was nothing new or unsettling - very easy to grasp, though I disagreed with many of their action costs. This is one of the points I hope the finished system rectifies.

I rather enjoy the skill proficiency system, instead of spending points, because that made leveling way too tedious for me in PF1. I like that, unlike D&D 5E, everyone has a chance to improve skill proficiency over time. I hope this stayed in the final product.

I'm still up in the air on choosing class features as 'Class Feats' - not sure how that'll pan out in the final product. It's an interesting way to customize, but at the same time, it's like pulling apart a class and only letting you represent certain aspects of it. I'm hoping this got a pretty big overhaul in the final product.

Overall, I'm looking forward to getting my PDF in August - to see what changed, what stayed the same, and read their hard work and effort over at Paizo. Even if I never run a game due to whatever reasons, I know there'll be information I can glean from the text, like a dozen or so other systems sitting in my documents folder for the exact same reasons.

ikos · Jul 7, 2019

A number of posts have already hit the nail on the head - the final product is not yet in the mail. However, stylistically and mechanically, the Playtest (especially those parts that were well received as evidenced by the playtest data) did offer an accurate overview of where the system was headed, which has been confirmed by Jason's streaming game. All signs point to finer polishing, not demolition work. Expecting that the finalized ruleset is a radical departure from last August seems unrealistic. Expecting it to be a better system than what we saw last year is very likely, if not a sure thing.