Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 8065467" data-attributes="member: 957">I don't think this is an unavoidable truth.There are STILL a Lot of people PLAYING 1E.  And bringing them over with a new game that stuck to the same appeal would have been easy.  Yes, there is ALWAYS complaint about a new edition and THAT would have happened.  But as numerous games (including 3E and massively 5E) have shown, a good game that brings a wide appeal will overcome that in a short period of time.  Certainly well less than the one year which has now passed for 2E.The big complaints are well known regarding 1E.  And there is no point in debating them because they are clearly very true to a lot of people.  Certainly a lot of people who still play 1E agree that the issues exist.  But they still love the game as am overall system and either avoid, accept or mitigate the issues.  I am certainly in that camp with all three responses in place at various times.  And I even had a recent session where, despite my best efforts, a big fight bogged down into a stand a trade blows affair.  But this does NOT routinely happen for me and my group and taken as a whole it is still the game of choice.But, the game was ten years old and the people happily playing were doing that: happily playing.  In the mean time, Paizo got to deal with the same complaints over and over and over.  And they were forced to write around those same complaint over and over, only to still hear them anyway.And so it seems clear (to me) that they lost perspective on their fanbase. And they, by design, went with a clean, balanced gamist system that got rid of the depth of connection between mechanics and narrative elements that created appeal for so many.  [[[ and yes, I know, this is where the fans come out of the woodwork to proclaim that THEY get every bit of connection they ever did in 1E.  I don't doubt it.  I'm glad you are having a great experience.  I am certain without the slightest doubt that you are having a great experience and see no difference.  I assure you that if your 1E experience and fun came in the the same form as mine, you would not be playing PF2E today.  different strokes for different folks is great and I've got nothing at all bad to say about your awesome sessions..  I'm just saying that PF2E could have been a game that supported more diverse strokes.]]]Bottom line, Paizo had a lot of fans that they could have retained and didn't adequately consider.Absolutely true.  PF is (now) 11 years old.  (11 years and 2 days as I type this)  And the base engine has another decade on that.  It is OLD.  And a lot of great ideas have emerged.  The game of PF I run certainly is different from my old 3X and even early era PF games in a lot of small ways that reflect new evolutions in TTRPGs.  And I was hopefully excited to see a new game that retained the core ideals of PF while including new mechanical advances built in from the ground up.  That did not happen.And, ultimately, that game that was stalling out is STILL doing better (by all appearances) than PF2E in terms of play.  Yes, it isn't selling and that is everything to a company.  But it WAS #2 right up until SF came out and then PF2E was announced as SF slipped away.  So we really can't say how PF's #2 slot compared to PF2Es #2 slot.  I'm sure PF2E had a really nice release spike.  (despite leading the way in not selling out at GenCon).  But now?  Who knows?  They are not touching 5E.  (And nobody ever held that as a standard anyway.)  But being #2 seems to be mostly due to lack of another contender for the slot. Meh, we've been down this road before.  It isn't a true or fair complaint that you put forward here.And, regardless, blaming the customer is not a winning approach.Define "great".  If the definition is based on your personal joy of play then clearly it is true.If "great" is defined by its capacity to deliver fun to as many people as possible then that seems much less clear.</blockquote>

Verification