D&D 2E What PF2E means for D&D5E

[Shasarak]

This hobby is weird like that. People don’t tend to insist on only watching one brand of movies or eating one brand of food, or one board game, or listen to only one band, but D&D and Pathfinder in particular have fan bases which a large portion of won’t ever even consider another game. That doesn’t seem so common to fans of other RPGs (though they exist of course).

There were many years I would only play D&D. Luckily I grew out of that and discovered heir were so many wonderful gaming experiences I was missing out on.

Is it really that much different from sports fans that only support one particular sport and not another?

I have seen worse stories about sports fans then RPG fans, even the famous "edition wars" resulted in hurt feelings but no deaths.

 

[Azzy]

For myself, I don't at all mind the idea of investing effort in learning a new system...as long as it offers a new experience. I've been interested in looking into Hero recently, because it offers something that the games I already own fo not.

PF2 asks the same energy and investment, but doesn't seem to offer a significantly different experience than my existing D&D material.

I'd dare say that Hero requires a lot more investment than PF (as Hero can do things beyond what most games do, its mechanics get intense because of its flexibility), but I can understand not being interested in a second fantasy game unless it offers something very distinct from the one you're used to. As happy as I am with 5e, I don't see being interested in any other fantasy RPG.

 

[Parmandur]

I'd dare say that Hero requires a lot more investment than PF (as Hero can do things beyond what most games do, its mechanics get intense because of its flexibility), but I can understand not being interested in a second fantasy game unless it offers something very distinct from the one you're used to. As happy as I am with 5e, I don't see being interested in any other fantasy RPG.

More like third or fourth: I have 3.x material that is still useable, and some secondhand 1E stuff I found, and Dungeon Crawl Classics gives a very different take on the genre. If I was looking to branch out to other fantasy games, RuneQuest or Dungeon World, maybe Burning Wheel, would be more interesting options than another minor D&D variant.

 

[Aldarc]

Yes, but then why don’t you see the same behaviour with Fate fans? Trying a new game is not a significant investment of either time or money. People do it all the time.

My players have switch fairly effortlessly between Fate, D&D 5e, Fantasy Age, Cypher System within the span of a few months, and they are mostly casual players. I am thinking of running either a Savage Worlds or Pathfinder 1E one-shot by them, and I don't think it would take much for them to grasp the system.

 

[Rhenny]

The time investment to learn a new system may be more of an issue for DMs than players. I've been more than happy to play in Star Wars The Edge of the Empire games and I'd give Savage Worlds a try if I had a chance, but I would not have the time to learn the rules well enough to DM.

The nice thing about D&D (any edition) is that if you play/DM one, the learning curve to play/DM another is not as steep.

Interestingly, for me, each new iteration of D&D has made it easier to DM. When I started DMing 4e after years and years of 1e,2e,3e/3.5e/Pathfinder, I thought it was a snap to DM. Then, when I started DMing 5e, I found that even easier.

If Pathfinder 2e can make it easier to DM that will be the crowning achievement for me.

 

[SkidAce]

My players have switch fairly effortlessly between Fate, D&D 5e, Fantasy Age, Cypher System within the span of a few months, and they are mostly casual players. I am thinking of running either a Savage Worlds or Pathfinder 1E one-shot by them, and I don't think it would take much for them to grasp the system.

We switched from Pathfinder to 5e, to Rifts, to Fate, and back to the 5e campaign over the course of five months. Good Times.

We even ran a one shot of Champions, but the players kinda drew the line at the amount of d6s and counting knockback. (I still like the system)

 

[wedgeski]

Much more interesting than the rules changes, for me, is the question of whether Paizo will continue Pathfinder's product model, or move to a more 5E-like approach. WotC has proved that D&D can thrive with a focus on story over player options. Will the Pathfinder audience be open to that kind of change?

 

[Aldarc]

Much more interesting than the rules changes, for me, is the question of whether Paizo will continue Pathfinder's product model, or move to a more 5E-like approach. WotC has proved that D&D can thrive with a focus on story over player options. Will the Pathfinder audience be open to that kind of change?

I'll admit that I am somewhat puzzled by this comment. One of the greatest strengths of Pathfinder has always been Paizo's solid support of stories and adventure paths. And I'm not sure if I would say that WotC proved anything about "story," since many have criticized WotC as being light on story options, at least in terms of solid adventures. Though perhaps I misunderstand your meaning here.

 

[wedgeski]

I'll admit that I am somewhat puzzled by this comment. One of the greatest strengths of Pathfinder has always been Paizo's solid support of stories and adventure paths. And I'm not sure if I would say that WotC proved anything about "story," since many have criticized WotC as being light on story options, at least in terms of solid adventures. Though perhaps I misunderstand your meaning here.

Sorry, I wasn't entirely clear. PF's reputation is exactly as you say. 5E, in contrast, is running with very few releases, 14 books since mid 2015. I'm wondering whether PF2 will see a change in release cadence as well, or whether their existing model can continue to be (I presume) successful.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

It will make a bigger impact if it's actually a good game system. Something like 5e that is easy for new players to absorb and has enough interesting features to satisfy veterans.