Is Pathfinder 2 Paizo's 4E?

[billd91]

Um, the OGL is there for 5E. They wouldn't have to use WotC IP at all. They've already done just that for a decade.

That literally is WotC IP - it's just WotC IP that they have reliable access to because WotC has willingly ceded most of their ability to gatekeep it.

But the other element of this is WotC's future plans. Paizo had the ability to continue to support 3.5 thanks to the OGL and SRD when WotC decided to shift gears and put out 4e. But thanks to licensing changes, they didn't have as much access to 4e and the IP wasn't necessarily reliably available and 3.5 was going out of print - hence the gamble that was Pathfinder. What happens if WotC changes direction again in the wake of 5e? Granted, that would be dumb, particularly after their 4e experience and lessons learned and the rollicking success of 5e. But, it's not like stupidity hasn't been a recurrent and pervasive thing in the late 2010s decade...

 

[Aldarc]

Talk about thread drift...

To help the thread go back to the topic I'm interested in discussing (which is "why would Paizo ever want to make a game that in any way shape or form resembles the least successful edition of D&D???") here's the OP again

The OP asked if PF2 is Paizo's 4e. After actually reading the OP and responses in the thread: TL;DR It's not.*

*...unless one applies an extraordinarily shallow, superficial comparison of the two systems for the purposes of pushing some other agenda or narrative. But such readings that claim that they are similar based on superficial things such as layout (a skin-deep comparison), choice (mostly out of context), and magic items (mostly going off feelings and vague impressions) should probably be dismissed.

 

[dave2008]

The OP asked if PF2 is Paizo's 4e. After actually reading the OP and responses in the thread: TL;DR It's not.*

*...unless one applies an extraordinarily shallow, superficial comparison of the two systems for the purposes of pushing some other agenda or narrative. But such readings that claim that they are similar based on superficial things such as layout (a skin-deep comparison), choice (mostly out of context), and magic items (mostly going off feelings and vague impressions) should probably be dismissed.

Been a bit since I read the OP, but I don’t think he/she was talking about game design. Instead it is the idea will PF2e fracture the PF1 base and the resultantibg financial ramifications from that

 

[Aldarc]

Been a bit since I read the OP, but I don’t think he/she was talking about game design. Instead it is the idea will PF2e fracture the PF1 base and the resultantibg financial ramifications from that

It seems like the OP's question was answered fairly early in the thread, though it's still mostly speculation and conjecture.

 

[Parmandur]

That literally is WotC IP - it's just WotC IP that they have reliable access to because WotC has willingly ceded most of their ability to gatekeep it.

But the other element of this is WotC's future plans. Paizo had the ability to continue to support 3.5 thanks to the OGL and SRD when WotC decided to shift gears and put out 4e. But thanks to licensing changes, they didn't have as much access to 4e and the IP wasn't necessarily reliably available and 3.5 was going out of print - hence the gamble that was Pathfinder. What happens if WotC changes direction again in the wake of 5e? Granted, that would be dumb, particularly after their 4e experience and lessons learned and the rollicking success of 5e. But, it's not like stupidity hasn't been a recurrent and pervasive thing in the late 2010s decade...

....?

The same thing they did in 2008?

You realize that 5E is open game content, right?

 

[BryonD]

I think it is worth pointing out that at this stage of 4E it was considered a massive success. "New York Times Bestseller" etc etc. Yes, there was the split base issue before the release even happened. But the tone, early on, was not "gee, is this bad?" but rather "see, we told you so". And even as Essentials and other revitalization efforts were rolled out (many months later) there was still a steadfast base that did not agree that anything was failing.

So, first, I think you need to ignore both extremes in terms of personal opinion. The middle is a resounding "meh" at best. Not nearly the same place as 4E stood early on.

And if you consider that less than ten weeks in there is a serious question as to how PF2E compares to the 20/20 hindsight on 4E , then you will find that quite telling in its own right.

 

[darjr]

So here is what I think will happen, and what I think Paizo will actually do.

PF2 has sold really well and continues to sell well, Paizo will hunker down if they have too and work on thier con, GenCon, and PFS. PF2 will slow burn and because it looks to be a good game, with hard work, it’ll gain in popularity as people play it and the initial inertia against it bleeds off.

I think key to this is live streams, especially if they can get one of the big online games to give it a swing, especially if it’s Critical Role.

They did give Matt Mercer a deluxe copy signed by a great many cool people.

I think this will happen even if they had planned for better sales or worse sales. Just the details and how much pain it’ll take to get there will differ.

I also think it’s possible because there IS a continuous low level buzz about the game and I see new people picking it up.

but what do I know?

 

[Tony Vargas]

Talk about thread drift...
To help the thread go back to the topic I'm interested in discussing (which is "why would Paizo ever want to make a game that in any way shape or form resembles the least successful edition of D&D???") here's the OP again

Y'know, it's funny, that's exactly what the OP /isn't/ asking. Rather, he was more curious about Paizo's intent, and the fanbase's reaction.

Like 4E, P2 seems to be annoying traditionalists; like 4E, the big danger is that rather than having the intended effect of unifying and adding to the fan-base, it will only fraction it (e.g. of 10 P1 players, 4 stay with P1, 4 go with P2, and 2 go to 5E or elsewhere out of frustration). I mean, what exactly is Paizo hoping for?

That is, would the marketing and fan acceptance (unreasoning nerdrage, edition warring) for PF2 be analogous to 4e, not whether the PF2 might superficially or mechanically resemble 4e in content.

Afterall, the market has changed, and PF2 does not have the option of being More Authentically D&D than the current ed of D&D, because, let's face it, 5e is hella authentic.

The reaction to PF2 has been similar to 4e in a few instances: There's the reactionary horror at the prospect of casters being taken down any pegs at all, no matter how they may mesh with the new system, for instance. But nothing's yet risen to the level of systematic edition warring we saw so quickly with 4e.

So, TL/DR: No.

 

[dave2008]

So here is what I think will happen, and what I think Paizo will actually do.

PF2 has sold really well and continues to sell well, Paizo will hunker down if they have too and work on thier con, GenCon, and PFS. PF2 will slow burn and because it looks to be a good game, with hard work, it’ll gain in popularity as people play it and the initial inertia against it bleeds off.

I think key to this is live streams, especially if they can get one of the big online games to give it a swing, especially if it’s Critical Role.

They did give Matt Mercer a deluxe copy signed by a great many cool people.

I think this will happen even if they had planned for better sales or worse sales. Just the details and how much pain it’ll take to get there will differ.

I also think it’s possible because there IS a continuous low level buzz about the game and I see new people picking it up.

but what do I know?

Not sure where you are, but the buzz I am getting is on line (and in particular this forum). I am having a hell of time finding anyone locally who will play

 

[darjr]

Local convention has a Paizo guest coming. Several tables at some stores. And friends posting about thier games.

I know the local stuff is really anecdotal but the online buzz counts too.