Pathfinder 2E Release Day Second Edition Amazon Sales Rank

[Porridge]

IMO they should have ditched Golarion (aka "Like your favorite D&D settings...but different!") and made a game with a steampunk, dieselpunk, sci fi, or post-apocalyptic setting. There's more growth potential in developing your own product identity than continually trying to eat somebody else's scraps.

FWIW, Golarion currently has all of that. You can find steampunk in Alkenstar. You can find different flavors of sci-fi in Numeria, and on Aballon and Apostae. You can find different flavors of post-apocalyptic in the Worldwound, the Cairnlands, the Mana Wastes, and on Eox. And so on.

 

[Retreater]

I think you only get a discount if link you account ... maybe i am wrong...

I believe it's a discount up to the amount you paid on Roll20, which I think is always more than the cost of the PDF on Paizo - so effectively free.

You can drag everything... you have acces to all bestiaries , all the rules , feats , spells you can create you own itens ,journals , etc.... everything that exist in the archives of nethys you can drag to you pc and you can import you character direct from the pathbuilder 2e...

Well that's certainly a good feature for PF2. (You can't even drag and drop everything on Roll20 after buying the rules modules. Its lack of features is an embarrassment to Roll20 and a disservice to PF2 players.)
Perhaps if I had a group that wanted to switch campaigns and game systems to PF2, I'd look into Foundry for that system. But right now with all my groups, PF2 is the last thing they want to play.
Even with a killer app adventure, the ship has sailed for us. To have kept us all on board, Paizo really needed to knock it out of the park on its first AP. The "second chance" was Age of Ashes after having negative experiences throughout the playtest. PF2 is a curseword for my players like "4E" is for other groups.

 

[kayman]

The only way to stop selling like a D&D clone is to stop presenting as one. Golarion is, like the Pathfinder RPG itself, a D&D knock-off. This intrinsically limits Paizo's audience.

I agree with you .. and the blame for this lies on WoC for making 4e(i known the system has its strenths) and stop supporting dragon and dungeon magazines ... making a blunder with Forgotten Realms , stop supporting greyhawk, darksun , dragon lance , etc... Remenber a lot of the paizo staf work in D&D products ... can you image having all the best Adventure Paths in FR or greyhawk (the setting that i love so much) ... i love D&D , We all now should be playing a mixture of 5e (with its elegance) and pf2 (crunchness and the three-action-economy)... once again sorry for my bad english...

 

[Justice and Rule]

The only way to stop selling like a D&D clone is to stop presenting as one. Golarion is, like the Pathfinder RPG itself, a D&D knock-off. This intrinsically limits Paizo's audience.

This is true, though at the same time I wonder if games are limited by being anything that isn't D&D. I looked up the newest Chaosium CoC rulebook (given that CoC is generally #2 on the Roll20 charts, though it's obviously not a perfect comparison given the wide breadth of rules available for the setting) and it does have occasional spikes into the PF2 range, but it also goes into those high ranges where the difference of a few books each day gives drastic spikes. FFG Star Wars has all its problems with Asmodee's restructuring killing any momentum that game could have had, along with FFG's atrocious supply problems... but it's probably the only setting I could think of outside of CoC that has the pop culture cache to actually bust out like D&D. It's even worse, given that The Mandalorian came out right when RPG book production had wound down to a near halt.

This is one of those things where a broad market research study of how different genres usually perform would be pretty cool to have.

Even with a killer app adventure, the ship has sailed for us. To have kept us all on board, Paizo really needed to knock it out of the park on its first AP. The "second chance" was Age of Ashes after having negative experiences throughout the playtest. PF2 is a curseword for my players like "4E" is for other groups.

I do find it utterly hilarious that the games you hated (and I assume you got to early) are games I came to late (or came back to, with 4E) and found I really enjoyed. Not a shot at you, but I just find it kind of humorous how different our trajectories seem to be.

 

[kayman]

And the botton of the line for me is three action economy ... there is no comeback ... i can not see myself using standard , move , free , etc...actions ...

 

[Justice and Rule]

And the botton of the line for me is three action economy ... there is no comeback ... i can not see myself using standard , move , free , etc...actions ...

I will say there is a place for it if you are doing something cool with, say, initiative (I love me some Greyhawk Initiative). But that's basically the only reason at this point because 3-Action Economy is just wonderful for anything else.

 

[Retreater]

I do find it utterly hilarious that the games you hated (and I assume you got to early) are games I came to late (or came back to, with 4E) and found I really enjoyed. Not a shot at you, but I just find it kind of humorous how different our trajectories seem to be.

With 4E I got back into it with D&D Encounters after the Keep on the Shadowfell gave the system a bad start. I was basically there with it until 5E got released and even went back and ran some games around 2 years ago.
I run for several groups with a variety of tastes. One of them considers 4E the pinnacle of the D&D/PF experience. This was the same group that was on board to try PF2 even after the playtest had initially soured them. (I have other groups that wouldn't touch either system.)
It's a shame that PF2 went so badly for my players, as it had the potential to offer the crunch, customization, and deep tactical play they've been wanting to replace 4E. But it failed hard - mostly due to the obscene difficulty of AoA and the players feeling they were "stupid" for not getting through it. The entire group imploded as a result, players hating each other because of the stress and demands of perfect play. It was the most frustrating, hopeless campaign I've ever run, and I've run the entirety of Call of Cthulhu's "Masks of Nyarlahotep."
I admit that there are many groups out there, and there are ones who will enjoy PF2. So my criticism is done from a place that Paizo can appeal to a broader fanbase. Producing better adventures with a larger "net" thematically would be the first step. Actually following their encounter guidelines, it basically works. How they created the mess that is AoA, I have no idea. I was creating better encounters in a weekend than their staff writers.

 

[kayman]

With 4E I got back into it with D&D Encounters after the Keep on the Shadowfell gave the system a bad start. I was basically there with it until 5E got released and even went back and ran some games around 2 years ago.
I run for several groups with a variety of tastes. One of them considers 4E the pinnacle of the D&D/PF experience. This was the same group that was on board to try PF2 even after the playtest had initially soured them. (I have other groups that wouldn't touch either system.)
It's a shame that PF2 went so badly for my players, as it had the potential to offer the crunch, customization, and deep tactical play they've been wanting to replace 4E. But it failed hard - mostly due to the obscene difficulty of AoA and the players feeling they were "stupid" for not getting through it. The entire group imploded as a result, players hating each other because of the stress and demands of perfect play. It was the most frustrating, hopeless campaign I've ever run, and I've run the entirety of Call of Cthulhu's "Masks of Nyarlahotep."
I admit that there are many groups out there, and there are ones who will enjoy PF2. So my criticism is done from a place that Paizo can appeal to a broader fanbase. Producing better adventures with a larger "net" thematically would be the first step. Actually following their encounter guidelines, it basically works. How they created the mess that is AoA, I have no idea. I was creating better encounters in a weekend than their staff writers.

Fisrt of all .. congratulation on "Mask" it is my dream run this adventure one day....
I agree with you on AoA ,,, it was a blunder (even if i think the last book was great) ....But if you want to try again take a look on Abomination Vaults (James Jacobs) ... a classical dungeon crawl with a lot of room for the GM to create and a great lovecraftian theme.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

With 4E I got back into it with D&D Encounters after the Keep on the Shadowfell gave the system a bad start. I was basically there with it until 5E got released and even went back and ran some games around 2 years ago.
I run for several groups with a variety of tastes. One of them considers 4E the pinnacle of the D&D/PF experience. This was the same group that was on board to try PF2 even after the playtest had initially soured them. (I have other groups that wouldn't touch either system.)
It's a shame that PF2 went so badly for my players, as it had the potential to offer the crunch, customization, and deep tactical play they've been wanting to replace 4E. But it failed hard - mostly due to the obscene difficulty of AoA and the players feeling they were "stupid" for not getting through it. The entire group imploded as a result, players hating each other because of the stress and demands of perfect play. It was the most frustrating, hopeless campaign I've ever run, and I've run the entirety of Call of Cthulhu's "Masks of Nyarlahotep."
I admit that there are many groups out there, and there are ones who will enjoy PF2. So my criticism is done from a place that Paizo can appeal to a broader fanbase. Producing better adventures with a larger "net" thematically would be the first step. Actually following their encounter guidelines, it basically works. How they created the mess that is AoA, I have no idea. I was creating better encounters in a weekend than their staff writers.

I'm going to be blunt, I think your group was the problem with your group, and you're kind of scapegoating the system. Do you really think its the system's fault your players are 'hating each other?' if it was that severe wouldn't it be time to revisit their demand you run it exactly as written and accept you'd all have more fun with slightly adjusted encounters?

If they don't want to get better, and they don't want you to make it easier, and they're getting angry about it all the same, and then take it out on each other, they sound like jaw-droppingly immature people. As a GM I'm kind of secondhand upset they put you through that, and would have slapped them down hard. For point of reference, I went through something similar with a 5e group, and then went on to enjoy the system more with other people entirely after leaving that group.

Any game is garbage with toxic people, and if all it takes is a hard game to bring out the worst in them... then yeah, def toxic people.

 

[Retreater]

I agree with you on AoA ,,, it was a blunder (even if i think the last book was great) ....But if you want to try again take a look on Abomination Vaults (James Jacobs) ... a classical dungeon crawl with a lot of room for the GM to create and a great lovecraftian theme.

Unfortunately from the Paizo forums it looks like Roll20 announced they have no plans of releasing it on their platform. If it's good, maybe I will have to move to Foundry?