• Resources are back! Use the menu in the main navbar. If you own a resource, please check it for formatting, icons, etc.

Here's A Pathfinder 2E Goblin

Paizo has shared part of its upcoming Bestiary for Pathfinder 2nd Edition with a quick look at the goblin entry.


EALsI6GW4AAIRNM.jpg


How does this differ from the playtest version? Let's take a look! Generally the layout is much the same with some minor tweaks; the differences appear to be under the hood as various numbers change.

  • It's gone from CREATURE 0 to CREATURE -1.
  • Perception has increased from +1 to +2.
  • Skills no longer have an initial 'blanket' entry; in the playtest goblin skills were "–2; Acrobatics +3, Athletics +3, Stealth +5"; now they're "Acrobaitcs +5, Athletics +2, Nature +1, Stealth +5".
  • Con has increased to +1
  • AC has gone from 14 to 16, TAC is gone, Fort, Ref, and Will have all increased significantly
  • Dogslicer attack has gone from +6 to +8 and now has finesse added
  • Shortbow attack has gone from +6 to +8, and various additional info added in parenthesis
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Russ Morrissey

Comments

Zardnaar

Adventurer
2E was playtested, it wasn't exactly public but wasn't hush hush. One of them posted on the old WotC forums and had photos of 2E playtest material.

Dragon magazine was used but I can't recall in what capacity I think they used it for playtested recruitment but it's been a while.

1E was mostly Gary's friends and family from what I have read.
 

Parmandur

Legend
Anyone know if AD&D 1e and 2e were publicly play tested? Is public play testing sort of a new thing?
Not in a public way, no: TSR was not known for rigorous playtesting of any sort, and until 5E WotC kept it to smaller private playtesting methods, though rigorous.

Pathfinder was, to my knowledge, the first big public attempt at playtesting an RPG.
 

Staffan

Adventurer
Anyone know if AD&D 1e and 2e were publicly play tested? Is public play testing sort of a new thing?
Public playtest pretty much depends on the Internet, and that wasn't really a thing for 1e or 2e.

If one wants to be snarky, one could claim that Vampire 1st ed was the first large-scale public playtest: a softcover book that got replaced by a hardcover 2nd edition two years after release with a lot of systems tightened up and such.
 

billd91

Hobbit on Quest
It does: they shouldn't have. Rather, they should have returned to supporting D&D as a 3pp.
I keep telling people here that wasn't going to happen. Paizo got badly burned by being too dependent on WotC intellectual property. While it may seem like Wizards is less likely to be able to burn anyone like they did Paizo in the 4e switch (and the cumulative effect of their decisions burned Paizo hard), what happens if they change direction again?
 

GreyLord

Adventurer
2E was playtested, it wasn't exactly public but wasn't hush hush. One of them posted on the old WotC forums and had photos of 2E playtest material.

Dragon magazine was used but I can't recall in what capacity I think they used it for playtested recruitment but it's been a while.

1E was mostly Gary's friends and family from what I have read.

1e was really basically a conglomeration of all the OD&D supplemental rules via the supplments and things found in Dragon, tossed well, and put together. In that light, one could say the entirety of OD&D was the 1e playtest.

However, saying it was also the TSR staff, family and friends is probably apt as well in regards to having any sort of playtest.
 

Parmandur

Legend
I keep telling people here that wasn't going to happen. Paizo got badly burned by being too dependent on WotC intellectual property. While it may seem like Wizards is less likely to be able to burn anyone like they did Paizo in the 4e switch (and the cumulative effect of their decisions burned Paizo hard), what happens if they change direction again?
The OGL means they couldn't be burnt, so I'm not sure why you keep saying that: if anything, if WotC abandoned 5E the same way, it would open up the same opportunity as with 4E. Nobody suggests that they should go into direct business with WotC necessarily, just use the OGL to sell Adventures.
 

Zardnaar

Adventurer
Eventually WotC will announce a new edition and sales of old material usually tank when that happens so Paizo is still screwed.

At Pathfinders height they had around 20% of what 5E has now. They would be viable with half that number or even less which is roughly where they were 2010 or so.

They can probably drop down to a handful of staff if they have to.
 
I keep telling people here that wasn't going to happen. Paizo got badly burned by being too dependent on WotC intellectual property. While it may seem like Wizards is less likely to be able to burn anyone like they did Paizo in the 4e switch (and the cumulative effect of their decisions burned Paizo hard), what happens if they change direction again?
Ultimately Paizo benefited from being "burned" - really, frozen out of a doomed 'opportunity' - and D&D has little impetus to change direction in the foreseeable future.

Besides, it's not like they'd go back to printing magazines for them. They could have put all the adventures in their own setting, even couched crunch books that way, kinda like SCAG did.

Eventually WotC will announce a new edition and sales of old material usually tank when that happens so Paizo is still screwed.
Or, maybe 5e will continue to be like 1e and the next ed after it won't be substantively different?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Zardnaar

Adventurer
Maybe but sales of older material will still likely tank a'la 3.0 and 3.5.

1E might be an exception as the phb was reprinted after the 2E one came out and ToEE was reprinted into the 2E era as well. That being said TSR had a heap of left over older stock when the folded that was pre 2E as well.
 

Parmandur

Legend
Maybe but sales of older material will still likely tank a'la 3.0 and 3.5.

1E might be an exception as the phb was reprinted after the 2E one came out and ToEE was reprinted into the 2E era as well. That being said TSR had a heap of left over older stock when the folded that was pre 2E as well.
Only if they use a new edition as a marketing tool, which has not historically worked out for RPGs. WotC keeps bringing up the example of board games, significantly, such as Catan or Monopoly: they go through editions, but they don't bring that to the attention of the general public aggressively. When 6E comes, the forumites will know, but WotC doesn't necessarily need to make any 5E books on the shelf obsolete.

You could play ToEE with 2E, no reason you can't play PotA with 6E, abstractly speaking. They have discussed their parameters for making changes in any future edition, and they include absolute backwards compatiblity with 5E material.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

billd91

Hobbit on Quest
Ultimately Paizo benefited from being "burned" - really, frozen out of a doomed 'opportunity' - and D&D has little impetus to change direction in the foreseeable future.
That's hindsight talking and probably shouldn't be assumed to be repeatable when making decisions for the future. Paizo benefited, in no small part, because some of the very same decisions and other decisions by the same WotC business team burned themselves as well.
 

Parmandur

Legend
That's hindsight talking and probably shouldn't be assumed to be repeatable when making decisions for the future. Paizo benefited, in no small part, because some of the very same decisions and other decisions by the same WotC business team burned themselves as well.
Still doesn't reflect on the viability of using the no-strings attached OGL to make 5E product while 5E is on top of the market: you do realize that 5E is fully OGL, right...?
 
That's hindsight talking and probably shouldn't be assumed to be repeatable when making decisions for the future. Paizo benefited, in no small part, because some of the very same decisions and other decisions by the same WotC business team burned themselves as well.
Yep, hindsight, you can't scorched-earth your old ed once you've released it open-source. And WotC has learned that same lesson. They've scorched-earth'd 4e, and released 5e into the wild. 3.5 and, now, 5e are immortal. A 3pp can hitch it's wagon to either one without undue risk beyond the general skinflint fickleness & irrational nerdrage of the TTRPG market...*

Only if they use a new edition as a marketing tool, which has not historically worked out for RPGs. WotC keeps bringing up the example of board games, significantly, such as Catan or Monopoly: they go through editions, but they don't bring that to the attention of the general public aggressively. When 6E comes, the forumites will know, but WotC doesn't necessarily need to make any 5E books on the shelf obsolete.
Well, except for 'Special Editions' that aren't substantively different, just with different packaging, promotional tie-ins, or other little flourishes. 5e seems positioned to go into that mode, too. Subsequent editions may just be little different from new printings: new art, some long-over-due errata, perhaps, adding a very popular 'new' sub-class or few to the PH, nothing that'd invalidate what came before, but completists would buy it, and it'd freshen the line up for the presumed continuous stream of new players.
And, D&D could /certainly/ do 'Special Editions,' when a new fantasy franchise kicks off (or an old one launches some new chapter or re-boot), there could be a licensed D&D special _______ edition for it, for instance.

They have discussed their parameters for making changes in any future edition, and they include absolute backwards compatiblity with 5E material.
They who? And where?
I mean, that sounds like a solid policy, and consistent with everything else that's been done with 5e so far, but I'd be interested to know where it came from.











* why does /anyone/ get into this market, anyway? We seem like a really prime set of customers to never sell anything to, again.
 

Parmandur

Legend
They who? And where?
I mean, that sounds like a solid policy, and consistent with everything else that's been done with 5e so far, but I'd be interested to know where it came from.
Mike Mearls, on Twitter and Twitch on several occasions over the years: he is not currently a spokesman, it seems, but he is still the "Franchise Creative Director" and the direction they set for 5E will probably be followed for the foreseeable future, due to financial success dictating corporate action. See the following:

https://twitter.com/SlyFlourish/status/1008518061467619328?s=19

https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/1008537158729134080?s=19

https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/1008539322423828480?s=19

why does /anyone/ get into this market, anyway? We seem like a really prime set of customers to never sell anything to, again.
Love of the game. And there is a loving to be made, potentially.
 
Love of the game. And there is a loving to be made, potentially.
Y'know, whatever one may think about Mearls, his integrity, or his talent, he did come into the industry from the fan side. He didn't get some technical game-design degree from an art college and fall into TTRPGs because EA wouldn't hire him, he's "one of us." ;)

But, I was thinking, why a business would. Hasbro just happened to pick up D&D along with the Pokémon CCG, for instance.
 

Parmandur

Legend
Y'know, whatever one may think about Mearls, his integrity, or his talent, he did come into the industry from the fan side. He didn't get some technical game-design degree from an art college and fall into TTRPGs because EA wouldn't hire him, he's "one of us." ;)

But, I was thinking, why a business would. Hasbro just happened to pick up D&D along with the Pokémon CCG, for instance.
WotC bought out TSR when they were a small company that had an absurd income stream through Magic. They still have an absurd income stream through Magic (which is apparently also doing better than ever, and is a hit with the Post-Millenial generation coming up now, and is Hasbro's biggest game line, over Monopoly or anything else). Hasbro likely wouldn't get D&D for it's own sake, but there is some money in it and intellectual property value which can sky rocket.

If Hasbro gets a modestly well received D&D movie, they don't have to fight Mattel for the toy license, and can then proceed to print money. If you have Netflix, I'd recommend the documentary seies "The Toys That Made Us" which goes a bit into showing how Hasbro specifically has been burned by licensed IP holders (namely George Luchas), and their quest to make their own big cinematic properties (toy commercials). If they can get the market of children who like dragons, and adults who like collecting, without paying somebody else...

The RPG is doing profitably, but ancillary products are where the money is, and what Hasbro is looking at.
 

Advertisement

Advertisement

Top