The Pathfinder 2 Barometer! Vote your initial hot take!

Pathfinder fans! What's your initial takeaway gut reaction to the news of Pathfinder 2? Vote in the poll (if you are using a platform which doesn't show the poll, find it here).

[FONT=&quot]Save[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Save[/FONT]​

 

[Morrus]

I voted intrigued but would have voted between meh and intrigued if it existed.

I originally planned on using a 72-point scale, but in the end settled on just the 5.

 

[werecorpse]

I originally planned on using a 72-point scale, but in the end settled on just the 5.

Sure, but there's not much difference between the third and fourth reaction - likely will result in more people checking option 2 IMO

 

[Charlaquin]

I'm just really happy that Paizo is innovating. The fantasy gaming scene has been so heavily defined by 4e backlash for the past 10 years. Paizo spruced up 3.5 and sold it as Pathfinder, while WotC tried to save 4e with Essentials, and when that didn't work, designed 5e by committee. Everything has been so safe, so averse to innovation for so long, it's refreshing to see one of the big names taking risks again. I understand there's only so much innovation Paizo can do - they cultivated a fandom based on aversion to change, so changing too much would undoubtedly be shooting themselves in the foot. But it looks like they're actually trying to make PF2 a better version of Pathfinder, instead of a better version of D&D 3.5. That alone is enough to catch my interest, and even if it ends up not being for me, I think it's a sign of good things for the hobby. I hope this gives WotC the kick in the pants they need to start pushing the envelope a bit more with 5e. 5e is doing way too well right now for them to think about moving to a 6e, or even a 5.5e, but if they start to feel threatened by Paizo again, maybe they'll be encouraged to finally start providing some of those much-touted modular options that never turned up for 5e. I think some competition will do both IPs some serious good.

 

[Rygar]

I'm just really happy that Paizo is innovating. The fantasy gaming scene has been so heavily defined by 4e backlash for the past 10 years. Paizo spruced up 3.5 and sold it as Pathfinder, while WotC tried to save 4e with Essentials, and when that didn't work, designed 5e by committee. Everything has been so safe, so averse to innovation for so long, it's refreshing to see one of the big names taking risks again. I understand there's only so much innovation Paizo can do - they cultivated a fandom based on aversion to change, so changing too much would undoubtedly be shooting themselves in the foot. But it looks like they're actually trying to make PF2 a better version of Pathfinder, instead of a better version of D&D 3.5. That alone is enough to catch my interest, and even if it ends up not being for me, I think it's a sign of good things for the hobby. I hope this gives WotC the kick in the pants they need to start pushing the envelope a bit more with 5e. 5e is doing way too well right now for them to think about moving to a 6e, or even a 5.5e, but if they start to feel threatened by Paizo again, maybe they'll be encouraged to finally start providing some of those much-touted modular options that never turned up for 5e. I think some competition will do both IPs some serious good.

Point of clarification, they did not cultivate a fandom based on aversion to change, they cultivated a fandom that felt that 4th edition D&D was a horrible product for a variety of well known reasons. They maintained that fandom through producing high quality adventure paths and mostly high quality supplements.

 

[Charlaquin]

Point of clarification, they did not cultivate a fandom based on aversion to change, they cultivated a fandom that felt that 4th edition D&D was a horrible product for a variety of well known reasons.

I'm not interested in getting into an edition battle here. Suffice to say, I disagree with your assessment of 4e and do not appreciate you suggesting it was "a horrible product for a variety of known reasons." It was a product that many enjoyed, and many did not, for a variety of reasons that have been discussed to death at this point. Either way, Paizo cultivated a fandom based on aversion to 4e, and now that 4e is no longer its main competitor, it is seeking to adapt. But it must recognize that it must be careful in its adaptation, because a not insignificant portion of their fanbase supports them because they want to keep playing D&D 3.5.

 

[ddaley]

Paizo should have introduced this via a kickstarter as opposed to pre-order... that way they could capture the interest and build excitement. I don't know why, but I rarely pre-order anything, but I back a ton of kickstarters!

 

[DaveMage]

But it must recognize that it must be careful in its adaptation, because a not insignificant portion of their fanbase supports them because they want to keep playing D&D 3.5.

That will be interesting to watch.

The AD&D 1E to 2E switch didn't bother me at the time since I probably had a total of 20 or so 1E products accumulated over 8 years (so I didn't see it as a big deal). The 2E to 3E switch was needed for me personally because late 2E killed my group (stupid kits like Bladesinger made things very bad). The switch to 3.5 - even though it was a polished 3E - was annoying at first (and I'm still bitter that it killed off some 3PP support), but eventually I really loved the changes. Pathfinder polished those changes even more, and was able to thrive in the D&D 4E world. However, the 3.x core is the engine I have enjoyed now for 18 years. If they deviate too much from that core engine, they very well could find themselves without a healthy fan base. D&D 5E is a really solid game so they are going to have to create something special to keep players from going back to D&D. (And by "going back" I mean buying product, not simply playing the game since one can play both easily.)

One thing that they are doing which is wise is keeping the setting intact so all their setting books will still be valid (at least the flavor will, if not the crunch). When WotC did that for the 2E to 3E switch it made the transition easier.

 

[Shasarak]

I am definitely intrigued and will have a look. I find myself in the Starfinder camp at the moment so that does allow me a little distance (as long as the sweet sweet Starfinder keeps flowing).

I was definitely in the "Dont need a new edition" camp but as that boat as floated so to speak it will be interesting to see which way they decide to go. I still think that a year playtest is going to be too short.

 

[The Black Kestrel]

Basically it boils down to whether you like Starfinder and some of the options in Pathfinder Unchained. If you did, you'll most likely like Pathfinder 2e, if you didn't you probably won't. I'm in the latter camp and while I think some of the changes could be good, I suspect there will be more changes I disagree with. That said I will pickup the play test material and there is a good chance my group will try it out at least once. That said I doubt Paizo will listen to the play test feedback ala the CMB debacle from the original Pathfinder play test.

 

[Li Shenron]

Couldn't care less...

When I look back at the 3e-era material, I still find 3.0 to be a better system than either 3.5 or PF1, and I don't expect PF2 to change my mind. So if I ever want to go back play some 3e, it'll still be 3.0.

If there is anything I might be interested in, but just out of curiosity, is to see how much in PF2 they are now running after the trends set by 5e.