Pathfinder 2E Pathfinder 2E's reception?

[Bravesteel25]

Notably, my FLGS will not be carrying Pathfinder products which basically means that my store and potential games will be relegated to 5E only as people tend to only play what the store stocks. Granted, after playing P2 more, I'm not sure it is a good fit for me anyway.

 

[JeffB]

I spent some time over on the Paizo boards this morning going through threads in the 1E and 2E forums- The following items seemed to stick out to me.

1) People wishing Paizo well, but sticking with PF1 because they have so much product and don't want to convert (or at least not for several years when they go through all the PF1 stuff they want to use). It seems the AP cash cow may have hurt them here. Many posters specifically say they need to play X,Y,Z adventure path first

2) People sticking with PF1 because there is far more depth/options to character creation/gameplay. These folks seem hardcore- posting about how sad they are PF1 has ended etc. They are very emotionally vested in the game (as well as financially), like the 3.X/PF game experience pretty much as-is and don't see much need for "improvements". At most they wanted a PF1.5, not 2.0.

3) People who like PF2 seem to be touting it's less "broken" rule-set compared to PF1, where its options are more limited but also much more difficult to make an OP character or make an UP character by nature of the new engine.

4) People who are running PF2 games with people who are not hardcore PF1/are 5E players/Are more casual gamers tend to like PF2.

5) The PF2 Crit system seems to be a sticking point-PF2 fans are OK with the "swing", many PF1 fans think it "unfair" (getting clobbered too often). The crit system along with less OP builds seems to result in a decidedly different feel to PF2 gameplay (combat) compared to PF1.

6) In nearly every thread where Paizo fans are talking about both systems in comparison-things devolve into heavy rules related discussions based on CharOp and broken combinations of class/feat/spell.

If their boards are indicative- it seems they have clearly split their fanbase. They have sold SO many books and material to their original fan base that many (most?) are not willing to give it up nor convert to and learn a system that may look superficially similar, but in practice is a different gameplay experience.

 

[Philip Benz]

Jeff, you're not wrong.
But at the end of the day, PF2 has to stand on its own 2 feet. It's a completely different game system, and I feel like even the folks writing adventures for Paizo need time to adapt to the new culture. Take powerful adversaries, for example. Foes that are 2-3 levels above the PCs are a real harsh threat now, and I get the impression that things will run more smoothly if most encounters are with comparable-level foes. The adventures published so far by Paizo are gaining a reputation as being very deadly indeed.

FWIW, Black Book Editions just published the French edition of PF2 late last month, and as far as I can tell, few hard-core PF1 players are ready to switch. Time will tell.

 

[JeffB]

Jeff, you're not wrong.
But at the end of the day, PF2 has to stand on its own 2 feet. It's a completely different game system, and I feel like even the folks writing adventures for Paizo need time to adapt to the new culture. Take powerful adversaries, for example. Foes that are 2-3 levels above the PCs are a real harsh threat now, and I get the impression that things will run more smoothly if most encounters are with comparable-level foes. The adventures published so far by Paizo are gaining a reputation as being very deadly indeed.

FWIW, Black Book Editions just published the French edition of PF2 late last month, and as far as I can tell, few hard-core PF1 players are ready to switch. Time will tell.

I'd like to see PF2 succeed as well, and I was very much looking forward to it thanks to Oblivion Oath (though at times combat DRAGGED ON WAY TOO LONG) I'm not into Golarion, but I am interested in the system- despite the comfort of familiarity with the 3.X/PF system PF1 is too cumbersome at the table and encourages (whether intentional or not) a gameplay style I don't find very satisfying. I believe I would find PF2 more to my needs albeit still on the cumbersome side. I'd like to give it a try if I could find a one shot that grabbed me.

 

[CapnZapp]

For me it is utterly bafflingly incomprehensible that Paizo went with a highly locked-down 4E style ruleset.

When their customers are all about the wildly broken OP charbuilding I mean.

The game doesn't attract 5E gamers - it's far too complex and frankly cluttery for that.

It doesn't attract pf1 customers (d20 in general) either, since it is weirdly locked down. After all the upside "can't design a bad character" has the considerable downside "can't design an especially good character either".

After all, if everybody is special noone is.

In the end, I cannot understand who Paizo is directing their system at (Except possibly hibernating 4E lovers)

Don't get me wrong, PF2 has its advantages and it isn't like 4E in major regards, but it seems to have been designed with zero thought on who's supposed to like it.

/Bewildered

 

[JeffB]

In the end, I cannot understand who Paizo is directing their system at (Except possibly hibernating 4E lovers)

Don't get me wrong, PF2 has its advantages and it isn't like 4E in major regards, but it seems to have been designed with zero thought on who's supposed to like it.

/Bewildered

Former PF1 players who jumped into 5E, and now a few years later need "more" without going back to the PF 1 "mess" they left behind? I cannot imagine that is the only group- but I am sure that was taken into account.

As I've stated before- I think PF2 seems more like the game Jason always wanted to make- with no real baggage from having to remain loyal to 3.5 like PF1 did.

I also think PF1 was a lightning strike. It was the right product at the right time when D&D was bein mishandled. Now, it's just another D20 game- it didn't go far enough for people who disliked PF1, and went way too far for the PF1 fans, and will carve it's own little niche- no longer the powerhouse it was 8 or 9 years ago.

 

[dave2008]

Notably, my FLGS will not be carrying Pathfinder products which basically means that my store and potential games will be relegated to 5E only as people tend to only play what the store stocks. Granted, after playing P2 more, I'm not sure it is a good fit for me anyway.

I have the same fear that my FLGS is about to do the same. They were really unhappy about the switch to PF2e and the pathfidner section is about 1/3 the size it was and hidden in a back corner now.

 

[dave2008]

I spent some time over on the Paizo boards this morning going through threads in the 1E and 2E forums- The following items seemed to stick out to me.

1) People wishing Paizo well, but sticking with PF1 because they have so much product and don't want to convert (or at least not for several years when they go through all the PF1 stuff they want to use). It seems the AP cash cow may have hurt them here. Many posters specifically say they need to play X,Y,Z adventure path first

2) People sticking with PF1 because there is far more depth/options to character creation/gameplay. These folks seem hardcore- posting about how sad they are PF1 has ended etc. They are very emotionally vested in the game (as well as financially), like the 3.X/PF game experience pretty much as-is and don't see much need for "improvements". At most they wanted a PF1.5, not 2.0.

3) People who like PF2 seem to be touting it's less "broken" rule-set compared to PF1, where its options are more limited but also much more difficult to make an OP character or make an UP character by nature of the new engine.

4) People who are running PF2 games with people who are not hardcore PF1/are 5E players/Are more casual gamers tend to like PF2.

5) The PF2 Crit system seems to be a sticking point-PF2 fans are OK with the "swing", many PF1 fans think it "unfair" (getting clobbered too often). The crit system along with less OP builds seems to result in a decidedly different feel to PF2 gameplay (combat) compared to PF1.

6) In nearly every thread where Paizo fans are talking about both systems in comparison-things devolve into heavy rules related discussions based on CharOp and broken combinations of class/feat/spell.

If their boards are indicative- it seems they have clearly split their fanbase. They have sold SO many books and material to their original fan base that many (most?) are not willing to give it up nor convert to and learn a system that may look superficially similar, but in practice is a different gameplay experience.

Sounds very similar to the 3e/4e transition.

 

[dave2008]

Don't get me wrong, PF2 has its advantages and it isn't like 4E in major regards, but it seems to have been designed with zero thought on who's supposed to like it.

It seems designed for game designers. I think there is some real elegance to the system that I find attractive as a designer myself (Architect); however, that is not the system I want to run. It still might be fun to play every once and awhile.

 

[CapnZapp]

I also think PF1 was a lightning strike. It was the right product at the right time when D&D was bein mishandled. Now, it's just another D20 game

Well, "lightning strike" makes it out to be sheer luck with no planning.

I think there was plenty of time since the release of 5E to figure out a game with as many similarities as possible that still allow the greater crunch depth people feel are lacking from 5E.

It would have reproduced the main benefit of PF1 - being more of what D&D gamers wanted.

The only difference is that WotC isn't abandoning 5E the way they abandoned 3E, but this difference is smaller than you think: no, 5E isn't abandoned, but isnt meaningfully expanded either.

So let's not view the success of PF1 as something that can't be analysed, because it can be analysed.

What Paizo must accept is that they siceed only within WotCs orbit.

Without D&D they are, as you say, just another dndish game publisher. There are literally hundreds of such games forgotten and disused.

The only way, I believe, Paizo can stay as big as they became, is by keep playing in WotCs backyard; by releasing a "5E advanced" as it were, fulfilling a huge demand that WotC for some reason seem utterly disinterested in.

But they went with a game where you each level are asked to choose between hundreds of feats, very few of which make a meaningful difference. A game that feels like 4E in several regards.

Did Paizo design PF2 in an utter bubble with zero contact with the real ttrpg hobby for the last ten years or so? PF2 feels unapologetically and apocalyptically out of touch with the times.