Pathfinder 2E I think I am giving up on PF2ER

[Staffan]

Iterative? You and 5E fans both. Kidding aside, the remaster was really just the right opportunity. For example, without the OGL fiasco, I dont think it would be happening right now.

I'm pretty sure I've seen Paizo folks saying the remaster was always planned, but the OGL thing made them move it up a couple of years and expanded the scope a bit (from just cleaning up the rules, also cleaning up various D&Disms).

 

[payn]

I'm pretty sure I've seen Paizo folks saying the remaster was always planned, but the OGL thing made them move it up a couple of years and expanded the scope a bit (from just cleaning up the rules, also cleaning up various D&Disms).

Yes, thats what im saying it was sped up. Not that it wouldnt have happened. Who knows, with a few more years under its belt the changes might have been more significant. Though, if like some 5E fans, folks want a total restructure thats a long wait.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Just thought I'd dip back in and suggest it might be worth while for you to give Shadow of the Weird Wizard a look. Its got a fair bit of customization, but is less tightly woven than PF2e. (The core system is one of the three D&D-adjacent ones I have any tolerance for; I fairly enjoyed the campaign of its predecessor, Shadow of the Demon Lord even though I thought it was way too dark for me).

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

I was re-reading Dragonbane tonight and, yeah, that's the kind of game I want to run.

Can you give the cliff notes version of what you like? Or maybe that is a different thread

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

That was one of the common criticisms of 4e too. You should not need a computer just to run a tabletop game.

We didn’t use a computer when we played 4e and I doubt you truly need for PF2e either

 

[Alzrius]

I'm pretty sure I've seen Paizo folks saying the remaster was always planned, but the OGL thing made them move it up a couple of years and expanded the scope a bit (from just cleaning up the rules, also cleaning up various D&Disms).

Would it have involved them creating their own license? Because that strikes me as implausible.

 

[Velderan]

We didn’t use a computer when we played 4e and I doubt you truly need for PF2e either

You don’t. It certainly plays a little faster with a good VTT, but is hardly needed.

Exhibit A: Pathfinder Society organized play. I’ve yet to see anyone use a computer or even use tools like Pathbuilder on their phone to play at FLGS.

 

[payn]

You don’t. It certainly plays a little faster with a good VTT, but is hardly needed.

Exhibit A: Pathfinder Society organized play. I’ve yet to see anyone use a computer or even use tools like Pathbuilder on their phone to play at FLGS.

Which FLGS are folks in the TC at?

 

[grankless]

Let me know when you find the citation.

paizo staff have made like a million posts about it. It is not hard to find any. Here's one from just a few weeks ago by Michael Sayre about how Paizo was struggling to keep the lights on during the mid-life of 1e: paizo.com - Forums / Pathfinder Second Edition: General Discussion: A few questions about the future of paizo

And another from James Jacobs about him and other adventure path line developers working 60-80 hour weeks because they did not have enough staff to functionally produce them during the 1e era: paizo.com - Forums / Pathfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: No more 6-parts APs?

And that's two of many across the forums, Reddit, discord, Twitter....

 

[grankless]

Would it have involved them creating their own license? Because that strikes me as implausible.

No, they've said that they planned to use the OGL as long as necessary since it was already there. Again, this information is not difficult to hide. They've been very candid about how they extremely were not prepared to suddenly do this suddenly-necessary project.