Pathfinder 2E Is It Time for PF2 "Essentials"?

[fearsomepirate]

That's only true if we make the implicit background assumption that mismanagement and poor execution of an otherwise perfectly fine business model doesn't happen. Sadly, I think that is rather the norm these days instead of the exception in the corporate world. Was the 3e design team shuttered because of a poor business model? Or was it shuttered due to interference with a perfectly good business model by yahoos from Hasbro who didn't know the territory and therefore wanted to do a bunch of stupid stuff that the games professionals tried unsuccessfully to fight off?

In a way, it's both. Hasbro was unhappy with WotC's profits and wanted them to make more money, and just about everybody at the top either quit or was fired. What followed (along with shuttering all the WotC stores and other things) was D&D 3.5, where WotC decided to do all the stupid stuff that killed AD&D 2e, but do it faster and harder and with more guys in suits...and then do it again with 4e, but this time anger your old fans, too.

 

[Retreater]

It’s a bit misleading to say that you can’t get mainstream PF2 content on Roll20. Roll20 offers all the core books outside the Lost Omens line, plus 2 full APs (and not the bad first one), two standalone adventures, and the Beginner Box. PF2 has a Roll20 supported character sheet that’s in active development—and the forums have exactly two stickied character sheet threads, for 5e and PF2. The support does exist and PF2 is receiving regular updates on Roll20. Whether that’ll show in player numbers remains to be seen. But PF2 is without a doubt the second most supported game on Roll20, right after 5e.

Well, as someone who has manually put the entirety of Book 1 of Abomination Vaults on Roll20 (not to mention Age of Ashes also), I can say that area is lacking. And I think there is a single PFS adventure on there. And the character sheets don't accept compendium drops about ancestry or class. I guess we'll see if Bestiary 3 ends up on there - I think that will be an important sign if Roll20 will be actively supporting PF2 in the future. If I hazard a guess, I say the Beginner Box is the swan song release on Roll20.
I think that every 5e product is available on there on its release day. I wouldn't be surprised if you could also buy the sapphire anniversary dice on there to be rolled in animated format. (kidding)
Even taking 5e out of the equation, you know what system has better Roll20 support than PF2? Dungeon World. I'm tempted to see how Cthulhu and Warhammer 4e run on it. Likely better than PF2.

 

[transmission89]

I can tell you that VTT is factual. On Roll20, which is the industry leading, most visible, most popular VTT on the market. I don't care if "9 out of 10 PF2 players recommend Foundry VTT" - the fact that you can't get mainstream Paizo content on Roll20 is going to edge hurt the market on Roll20. Groups who are used to Roll20, see the ads, are already on there playing 5e, like the "free" element, enjoy the low barrier to entry for DMs having to learn how to host a game/keep a PC running all day on Foundry/etc are not going to willingly go to Foundry or Fantasy Grounds.
Until Paizo gets better representation on Roll20, that's going to be a strike against it. Now, I'm aware that's not all Paizo's fault, but they need to do whatever it takes to get their stuff on Roll20. If it's producing it themselves. If it's urging fans to write emails or social media campaigns, whatever it takes.
So what other lack of community adoption have I noticed? The PF1 Paizo messageboards are still very active, maybe even moreso than PF2. The number of major 3PPs producing content for PF2 is pretty much nil, whereas there is still PF1 content getting released - some of the best sellers from the 3PPs I've heard talk about it. The upcoming video game, built on the PF1 engine, is not going to showcase the new rules system.
I am not comparing PF2 to 5e. I am comparing PF2 to PF1. They need to up their game: entice fans to try the new system, encourage 3PP to get on board, increase the visibility.
They are starting to do this. Abomination Vaults is a great start. The Beginner Box should've been a Day One release before the Core Rulebook came out. So I want to see more of that.

So again, you’re jumping to a conclusion of failure here without much to support it.

1) There are several pages on this thread alone that show you cannot draw any meaningful conclusion from the VTT data beyond what is shows (that 5e is massively popular on Roll20 compared to everything else). So this doesn’t support your assertion that pf2 is a failure. I also note that you don’t carry that logic through and label every other game with a roll20 presence smaller than PF1 a failure...

2) PF1 message boards are still active. So what’s your point? Dragonsfoot which discusses the original TSR versions of the game is still very active. By that logic, 5e is a failure. Which it isn’t. So that doesn’t work as a measurement either.

3) The number of 3p content: Again, what’s your point? 3p is always going to go where they can get the biggest slice of the pie for minimum expense (as let’s face it, this is not the most lucrative business). This ties into point 5 below. Not a Mark of failure.

4) The upcoming video game is not show casing the latest rules system. So, it’s not meant to? They had already built the first game prior to 2e so a) they’ve already got the system built now and b) are wanting to make games based on the iconic APs which, by virtue of their age, are made in pf1e. Not a Mark of failure.

5) This is where you are going wrong. As I said earlier, it’s a mistake to compare it to PF1. Everything went right for paizo in the creation and market circumstance for the runaway success of PF1. They were well positioned to pick up the large dragon magazine customer base, wotc produced a very controversial product not long after yet another revision of their previous game and tied it to a very restrictive licensing system that discourage 3p support. This is a situation that is very unlikely to happen again, for any company. PF1 was a huge aberration in the table top space as much as D&D usually is. It’s as pointless to measure a game’s success against pf1 as it is against D&D. So again, not a Mark of failure.

6) They should have put out the beginner box from day 1. Ok. That’s your opinion, not a mark of success level though is it?

 

[Teemu]

Well, as someone who has manually put the entirety of Book 1 of Abomination Vaults on Roll20 (not to mention Age of Ashes also), I can say that area is lacking. And I think there is a single PFS adventure on there. And the character sheets don't accept compendium drops about ancestry or class. I guess we'll see if Bestiary 3 ends up on there - I think that will be an important sign if Roll20 will be actively supporting PF2 in the future. If I hazard a guess, I say the Beginner Box is the swan song release on Roll20.
I think that every 5e product is available on there on its release day. I wouldn't be surprised if you could also buy the sapphire anniversary dice on there to be rolled in animated format. (kidding)
Even taking 5e out of the equation, you know what system has better Roll20 support than PF2? Dungeon World. I'm tempted to see how Cthulhu and Warhammer 4e run on it. Likely better than PF2.

5e also has much less product coming out. Paizo releases a full several level adventure with colored maps and art every month. WotC has a handful of books per year. It’s not exactly a fair comparison.

The PF2 sheet does have drag and drop compendium support for all feats though, including class feats, plus all spells.

 

[CapnZapp]

Several posters attempt to nullify the criticism against Paizo with "they weren't going for a 5E clone" as if that justifies the mess they've ended up with or is even relevant to the topic.

This is the only thing I have to say about that:

 

[transmission89]

Several posters attempt to nullify the criticism against Paizo with "they weren't going for a 5E clone" as if that justifies the mess they've ended up with or is even relevant to the topic.

This is the only thing I have to say about that:

Several posters keep criticising paizo as producing a mess because they just don’t grok/ personally dislike the system (which in itself is fine as not all games are for all people) as if that justifies their personal views on the success of the system or is even relevant to the topic.

This is the only thing I have to say about that

 

[CapnZapp]

Several posters keep criticising paizo as producing a mess because they just don’t grok/ personally dislike the system (which in itself is fine as not all games are for all people) as if that justifies their personal views on the success of the system or is even relevant to the topic.

This is the only thing I have to say about that

If you'd like to be the first poster that actually stands up and defends Paizo's choices, I'd be happy to converse.

 

[kenada]

I'm tempted to see how Cthulhu and Warhammer 4e run on it. Likely better than PF2.

We’ve done Call of Cthulhu and Scum and Villainy on roll20. The sheets for both systems were comparable to the PF2 sheet. Neither has compendium support as far as I know, but neither system does customization like PF2 (or 5e) does either. I can’t speak to Warhammer.

 

[transmission89]

If you'd like to be the first poster that actually stands up and defends Paizo's choices, I'd be happy to converse.

I don’t need to be. The fact that many are happy with Paizo’s choices is it’s own defence (not that it needs defending).

This is supported by evidence of reviews, people posting here, on paizo’s site and indeed on Reddit. I have seen many Reddit posts on people having declares they are switching from 5e, loving various aspects of it and discussing it.

Does this suggest a mass migration from PF1 or 5E? No. What it shows is that Paizo has found a niche in that spectrum for those that enjoyed 5e or pf1 but wanted a step up (or step down for pf1) in a degree of crunchiness and customisation.

For myself, I’m really happy with the choices taken. The three action system, the flexibility of character creation (such as separation of ancestry and heritage), the siloing of feats so that you pick from various pools that act as customisable levers from your character. They contribute to a more individual build and give various options a chance to shine that they would t get in one complex, monolithic list. The fact that opportunity attacks aren’t automatically given. That monsters have various actions that give them personality, rarity tags on feats, gear and spells etc.

I’d definitely agree that the CRB could’ve used another editing pass. But I’d never claim a system is perfect

 

[Justice and Rule]

If you'd like to be the first poster that actually stands up and defends Paizo's choices, I'd be happy to converse.

The last time we did this you complained about how COMBAT CLIMBER was an example of a game design flaw, we pointed out how ridiculous that was, and you ended up ignoring us and spiking the ball by declaring you'd objectively achieved victory.

As hilarious as that was, I don't think anyone is particularly interested in wasting time trying to argue in good-faith with you when you seem poised to do exactly what you did before.