Pathfinder 2E Is it time for a new Pathfinder Setting?

[dave2008]

I just noticed the new 5e Ravenloft setting book was #1 in D&D and #40 in books and I thought wow, this setting is really popular (not my taste personally). Then I thought, should Paizo make a new setting(s) for Pathfinder? After 10 yrs of Golarion only, would a new setting inject some new life into Pathfinder? Is that something that would interest you? What are your thoughts?

 

[Morrus]

A new D&D book being #1 in D&D isn't surprising. I think they'd be doing something very wrong if that wasn't the case.

They all do that pretty much automatically -- people pre-order them sight unseen. I'm not convinced that it being a setting book made a difference.

 

[TwoSix]

I just noticed the new 5e Ravenloft setting book was #1 in D&D and #40 in books and I thought wow, this setting is really popular (not my taste personally). Then I thought, should Paizo make a new setting(s) for Pathfinder? After 10 yrs of Golarion only, would a new setting inject some new life into Pathfinder? Is that something that would interest you? What are your thoughts?

I think it sounds cool, but I think a lot of their fans would be vocally unhappy. A lot of them are more invested in the lore of the APs and the setting books than they are in the system itself.

 

[TwiceBorn2]

I have a vast library of Pathfinder 1.0 products, but haven't and won't make the switch to 2.0 in large part because Golarion doesn't inspire me as a setting, and I can't be bothered to convert other settings and adventures I like to 2.0. I've found myself losing interest in their adventure path themes, and the Wayne Reynolds art style--however good it may be from a technical point of view--likewise no longer appeals to me (and that is a key factor in getting me excited to run a game).

I doubt that a new setting would be enough to bring me back to the fold (I have zero interest in Starfinder), but who knows...? At the moment, I'm happy with the reallocation of dollars that once went to Pathfinder products, to D&D, CoC7th, and Year Zero products.

 

[kenada]

I just noticed the new 5e Ravenloft setting book was #1 in D&D and #40 in books and I thought wow, this setting is really popular (not my taste personally). Then I thought, should Paizo make a new setting(s) for Pathfinder? After 10 yrs of Golarion only, would a new setting inject some new life into Pathfinder? Is that something that would interest you? What are your thoughts?

I’d be very surprised if they did that. One of the things that Lisa Stevens has cited in her review of the death of TSR and its influence on Paizo’s business model is that they fragmented their audience by releasing lots of setting books. For a game with a small audience (e.g., Pathfinder), having two books with fewer sales individually but more total than one can be worse financially due to higher unit costs for smaller print runs.

How can 5e do it but not Paizo? 5e has an extremely large audience. WotC can do things that smaller publishers cannot. WotC has also avoided flooding the market with setting books. They haven’t created separate lines for them. They have so far released one book for a setting and then moving onto the next thing while leaving GM’s Guild to fill in the gaps.

 

[Justice and Rule]

I’d be very surprised if they did that. One of the things that Lisa Stevens has cited in her review of the death of TSR and its influence on Paizo’s business model is that they fragmented their audience by releasing lots of setting books. For a game with a small audience (e.g., Pathfinder), having two books with fewer sales individually but more total than one can be worse financially due to higher unit costs for smaller print runs.

How can 5e do it but not Paizo? 5e has an extremely large audience. WotC can do things that smaller publishers cannot. WotC has also avoided flooding the market with setting books. They haven’t created separate lines for them. They have so far released one book for a setting and then moving onto the next thing while leaving GM’s Guild to fill in the gaps.

Yeah, WOTC has basically settled on FR as their setting, with a little bit of extra with Theros and Eberron.

 

[TwoSix]

Yeah, WOTC has basically settled on FR as their setting, with a little bit of extra with Theros and Eberron.

I don't know if I'd go that far; Ravenloft is going to be their 6th setting book. (FR, Ravnica, Wildemount, Theros, Eberron.)

I think one thing that might be different is that people tend to run shorter campaigns nowadays; my one group has already run games in Curse of Strahd, Ravnica, and Eberron all in the last 3 years. I think there's more encouragement to try a setting than to choose one.

 

[Justice and Rule]

I don't know if I'd go that far; Ravenloft is going to be their 6th setting book. (FR, Ravnica, Wildemount, Theros, Eberron.)

Ah hell, I always forget Ravnica. I shouldn't have forgotten Wildemount, either.

 

[dave2008]

A new D&D book being #1 in D&D isn't surprising. I think they'd be doing something very wrong if that wasn't the case.

They all do that pretty much automatically -- people pre-order them sight unseen. I'm not convinced that it being a setting book made a difference.

The success of Ravenloft was just background for why a thought about a PF setting. I don't care about the success of Ravenloft, what I care about is if a new setting for PF2 would be a good thing or not

 

[thullgrim]

I think if they could leverage a setting to build showcase something dynamic in the rule set it might be worth doing. I almost think if you go down that road it should be a starfinder pf2 and consolidate rules development under one system