Paizo To Make Kingmaker Bestiary... For D&D 5E!

Kingmaker's 10th anniversary is approaching. Paizo has announced on their blog that, along with a Pathfinder 2E hardcover Kingmaker compilation, they will be creating a hardcover Kingmaker Bestiary for D&D 5E.

The blog announcement says "[FONT=&amp]Finally, we'll add a hardcover Kingmaker Bestiary for 5E, developed in conjunction with industry leaders in third-party 5E publishing, allowing players of the current edition of the world's oldest RPG the chance to experience the rich and detailed storylines that have made the Kingmaker Adventure Path a fan favorite for a decade."[/FONT]

It is being produced "with industry leaders in third-party 5E publishing" and refers to "add-ons and unlocks" which "will be revealed as the campaign progresses". They're partnering with crowdfunding site Game On Tabletop.

They'll be revealing the details on Tuesday May 7th at noon Pacific time over at KingmakerCampaign.com.

Also in line is a Companion Guide for the PF2 Kingmaker campaign.

 

[schneeland]

D&D with knobs on! I think we can be pretty certain that WotC are going to be very leery of doing anything that might kill the golden goose they’ve conjured in 5e. The perfect opportunity for someone to produce an “advanced” version.

I think the main challenge will be that different people would like to have a version that's advanced in different ways - some might want more feats, others a more fine-grained skill system, still others may desire better backgrounds, and some may also wish for a more detailed modelling of fictional positioning than just advantage/disadvantage. I'm not sure that you can do one product that pleased all of these groups (if you do a very modular thing, play-testing might be very hard; and if you don't, you may put off some groups with too much crunch).

 

[robus]

I think the main challenge will be that different people would like to have a version that's advanced in different ways - some might want more feats, others a more fine-grained skill system, still others may desire better backgrounds, and some may also wish for a more detailed modelling of fictional positioning than just advantage/disadvantage. I'm not sure that you can do one product that pleased all of these groups (if you do a very modular thing, play-testing might be very hard; and if you don't, you may put off some groups with too much crunch).

Agreed, it wouldn’t be easy. Some design choices would need to be made, but they are RPG designers/tweaked after all . And that’s why I’m surprised by some of the commenters here claiming that Paizo knows nothing about 5e. If I were a designer in this field I would absolutely want to study what is making 5e tick, and think about ways to make it tick better (or ways my product could be enhanced in a similar manner). We’ve definitely had lots of discussions in here about areas where we think things could be improved.

 

[Parmandur]

To be fair, the people here say that PF2 may be DOA are saying that in reaction to the myriad PF1 edition warriors that actively denounce PF rather than any feelings of ill will to Paizo or PF2 themselves. Personally, I hope PF2 is a success—successes in this hobby are a great thing for the rest of the community. And, besides, Paizo are good people. However, you lot have an edition war on your hands just from a cursory look at the Paizo forums. I hope that war dies in a fire when PF2 is released.

I don't have an edition war axe to grind with PF, but I don't see the niche for PF2: PF1 offers a way to continue using 3E material from nearly two decades, PF2 offers a version of D&D that is not compatible with years of products, but is also complex, arcane, and difficult to get into? I never got past PC creation with the playtest (not very fun, and I love PC generation) so I can't comment too directly, but I don't see the market for this to replace jilted fans.

 

[MNblockhead]

What does LFQW stand for?

[Goes to Google]

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LinearWarriorsQuadraticWizards

Nope. This was not a factor for me diving into 5e. I'm not a "new" gamer, but I stopped playing with 1e and other 80s era games around 1990 when I was at college. Got back into TTRPGs with 5e. Have to say that there was not much analysis that went into my decision. Certainly not to level of studying character power progression.

I took to 5e, which got me back into TTRPGs, mainly because of feelings. It "felt" like D&D. It was evocative, it was easy(ier) to learn, and it was accessible (easy to find people to play with).

If I wanted to play a heavily crunchy game, I'd get back into running miniature wargames. I was really into that in the 80s as well. But I don't have the time and there is something magical about TTRPGs that I cherish and that magic is not in the tactical combat rules.

As for LFQW, even that I now know what you are referring do, can't say I would care. If Wizards and squishy at low levels and god-like at high levels, that's a legitimate approach, if your campaigns even hit the high levels. Just don't make them overly complicated to play.

As for Pathfinder, it just turned me off. Even now, when I am at the point where I have been buying an running or playing in other game systems, Pathfinder isn't attractive. I could say make it streamlined and easier, but I already have 5e. I just continue using all the 5e material I've spend so much on over the past few years.

I personally do not feel the LFQW thing is even a FACTOR with how popular 5e has become. If THAT was the deciding factor, 4e would have won the gambit by a long mile.

5e is successful because it is FAR easier to general people to learn, and when new players are coming to a game, ease of use is a major factor.

Eventually some may want something different, but for new players, 5e currently is one of the easiest games to learn within a short period that fall under the popular name brand of D&D (aka...any type of game that would fall under the D20 mechanic of games).

It has nothing to do with LFQW per se, and more to do with the fact that a LOT OF NEW gamers are coming into RPGs and are actually able to figure out how to play with a minimum amount of trouble and confusion.

That's the real key to 5e's success today. It is attracting NEW gamers, rather than just appealing to old gamers who keep bringing up old thoughts such as LFQW and other relics of a bygone age of angst and discussion about "balance" and other items that seemed so pertinent 10-20 years ago.

This does not mean that you are not correct to some degree, but my personal feeling differs on why 5e is being so successful and what is actually bringing in new gamers (most of who have never even heard of LFQW).

 

[Parmandur]

What does LFQW stand for?

[Goes to Google]

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LinearWarriorsQuadraticWizards

Nope. This was not a factor for me diving into 5e. I'm not a "new" gamer, but I stopped playing with 1e and other 80s era games around 1990 when I was at college. Got back into TTRPGs with 5e. Have to say that there was not much analysis that went into my decision. Certainly not to level of studying character power progression.

I took to 5e, which got me back into TTRPGs, mainly because of feelings. It "felt" like D&D. It was evocative, it was easy(ier) to learn, and it was accessible (easy to find people to play with).

If I wanted to play a heavily crunchy game, I'd get back into running miniature wargames. I was really into that in the 80s as well. But I don't have the time and there is something magical about TTRPGs that I cherish and that magic is not in the tactical combat rules.

As for LFQW, even that I now know what you are referring do, can't say I would care. If Wizards and squishy at low levels and god-like at high levels, that's a legitimate approach, if your campaigns even hit the high levels. Just don't make them overly complicated to play.

As for Pathfinder, it just turned me off. Even now, when I am at the point where I have been buying an running or playing in other game systems, Pathfinder isn't attractive. I could say make it streamlined and easier, but I already have 5e. I just continue using all the 5e material I've spend so much on over the past few years.

To be fair, the ways in which 5E fixes the LFQW "issue" are directly related to the ease of play and old time "feel" in 5E.

 

[M.T. Black]

I imagine Paizo is hoping to play a "long game". Sell enough material to keep the company afloat while their audience burns through the content they already own. And then, slowly over the next 2-3 years, let people swap to PF2 when it feels like there's enough material there.

I think Jester is right on the money here, and I think Paizo probably want to hold their nerve with 2e. There's possibly another factor to consider. I still hang around in OSR circles a bit, and its really striking now how *old* everyone is compared to my 5e circles, which have a big range of ages, but lots of younger folk.

I rather suspect the PF1 audience is also an aging one, trying to keep PF1 alive is not a long-term viable strategy. Even if the PF2 core books only sell a quarter of what PF1 did, that is still a helluva lot of money, and more than they would make selling PF1 adventure paths.

Ultimately, I think the profitable path is dual PF2/5e releases for the coming years, with the 5e products probably becoming their biggest sellers, but PF2 hanging around as Pepsi to D&D's Coke.

 

[darjr]

I know I'm probably going to make a fool of myself. But here is a prediction.

PF2 will sell really well at first. But then tail off rapidly. Paizo will do more and more 5e stuff and eventually tail off PF2 product altogether. The computer game and their universal stuff and their licenses with the likes of WizKids will sustain them but eventually they'll have to decide to allocate work to a PF2 product or a 5e one and the 5e one will win.

I'm probably wrong.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

Yep, that's the corporate motivation I've been discussing before.

In reality every other publisher than a D&D publisher is a small-time gig.

Looking at a couple of newer companies and the games they publish, I see Cubicle 7 and Modiphius surpassing Paizo and other smaller publishers. Yes, some of C7's success is because of the very good sales of Adventures in Middle Earth, with it's 5E OGL rules system, but C7 is also putting our the new Warhammer FRP rules and those seem to be selling very well so far too. As for Modiphius, I do not think any of ther games are D20 or 5E-based at all, but the volume of different games they now publish, or have in the works, definitely moves them up the list. And if they keep the White Wolf Vampire 5th Ed moving forward successfully, they will only grow larger.

 

[trancejeremy]

I know I'm probably going to make a fool of myself. But here is a prediction.

PF2 will sell really well at first. But then tail off rapidly. Paizo will do more and more 5e stuff and eventually tail off PF2 product altogether. The computer game and their universal stuff and their licenses with the likes of WizKids will sustain them but eventually they'll have to decide to allocate work to a PF2 product or a 5e one and the 5e one will win.

I'm probably wrong.

In retrospect, I wonder if it would have made more sense for Paizo to make PF2 5e based, something like Adventures in Middle Earth, with Pathfinder classes added to the traditional ones. I just don't see how PF2 pleases either 3e or 5e fans, only Paizo fans, and they'd buy anything from them.

 

[Jester David]

I don’t want to make too many predictions...
What I think will happen is marred very much by my innate bitter cynicism and my desire to see Paizo flourish.

I think Pathfinder 2 will do okay, but not quite be as successful as PF1’s unexpected triumph. It will likely have a solid sales spike at first and then sales will trickle down over time like almost every other RPG.
How well PF2 does might vary on the number of accessories. I think there will be too much pressure for more splat for them to go as slow as Starfinder (and they need to keep making books to justify having the staff numbers they have) but the slower the release schedule, the longer the edition will last. While a lot of people might not convert from PF1 to 2 right away, over time players might jump editions.

I disagree with darjr about Paizo and 5e. Mostly because I think 5e is at is peak and facing its inevitable decline. There’s still many years left, but I think the number of books and accessories people need/want for 5e is shrinking. There’s less room for 3rd Party books.
There would be something deeply, deeply ironic about Paizo slowly becoming more dependant on 5e over the next five or six years only to be surprised when WotC announces 6e.