Naming an RPG after a type of seaweed does appear to be an odd choice.

PF2 sucking? That takes actual prophetic powers to claim?

Pfft.

C'mon. Is this really a question?

I've wanted Paizo to stat their APs for 5e ever since the system dropped.

There may be room for a fantasy RPG that's more advanced than 5e, but I don't know if Pathfinder 2 will deliver what people want. Starfinder already kind of fills that niche (d20 game that's in print and more complex than 5e), except that it's a science-fantasy game. SF will keep Paizo afloat when PF2 tanks.

PF2E has a better shot than most also-rans. The fact that Paizo isn't setting up to run against 5E and actively produces adventure content is a better position than most people appreciate.

PF2e is basically just a worse D&D 4e (since 4e does everything PF2e tried to do but better).

Having read the preview I can say this.  Feats are not going to save you Pazio!  Seriously you have hundreds of fucking feats!  Players are going to be overwhelmed and only power gamers will enjoy it.

Given how dependent Pathfinder's success was WotC dropping the ball so badly with 4e, I'm surprised Pazio didn't have a strategy in place. They must have known that when/if WotC ever got its act together, Pathfinder would be in trouble. "New edition!" seems like a pretty uncreative response.

Paizo is figuring out that creating a system, even one with a built in base (Both mechanic and audience) is not an easy task.  Especially since they stole the first one from D&D 3e, and they're just bolting on more systems to it.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1072261Paizo is figuring out that creating a system, even one with a built in base (Both mechanic and audience) is not an easy task.  Especially since they stole the first one from D&D 3e, and they're just bolting on more systems to it.

I agree with this whole heartedly as some one who is trying to make his own tabletop rpg.  Making a games isn't easy.

Paizo's entire success is built on marketing to the players Hasbro alienated when they changed D&D to new D&D. And whether they like it or not, they're the Coke/McDonalds of the RPG world. So the only thing they could possibly achieve with PF2 is to alienate their fanbase (which seems to be a thing these days) by making exactly the same mistakes they themselves took advantage of.

Quote from: kythri;1072174the (currently) last post in that thread claims Jessica Price left Paizo of her own accord, rather than getting kicked to the curb as reality played out.  Curious if that's just confusion on the part of the poster, or if someone's trying to rewrite the narrative.

I honestly believe they just make it up as they go along without being fully aware they're doing so.

Rather like an RPG.

Quote from: Snowman0147;1072254Having read the preview I can say this.  Feats are not going to save you Pazio!  Seriously you have hundreds of fucking feats!  Players are going to be overwhelmed and only power gamers will enjoy it.

Or Exalted players.

I'm SHOCKED SHOCKED that the company who hired the guy who came up with the dumbest 3ed house rule ever: https://web.archive.org/web/20110122073256/http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/featpointsystem.html and the second-dumbest thing I've ever seen a WotC dev post would have a hard time designing a system.

They've never been good at mechanical design. They didn't do fuck-all to fix 3ed they just hung more bells and whistles off of it. This left them with a game that people who knew 3.5ed well could move on over to and enjoy the added bells and whistles but which was pretty hard for a newbie to get into (since it's more complicated than the already pretty bloated 3.5ed) and there's only so many bells and whistles they can add. Starting from scratch just reveals that they don't have a clue how to build systems.

Quote from: Daztur;1072318I'm SHOCKED SHOCKED that the company who hired the guy who came up with the dumbest 3ed house rule ever: https://web.archive.org/web/20110122073256/http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/featpointsystem.html and the second-dumbest thing I've ever seen a WotC dev post would have a hard time designing a system.

They've never been good at mechanical design. They didn't do fuck-all to fix 3ed they just hung more bells and whistles off of it. This left them with a game that people who knew 3.5ed well could move on over to and enjoy the added bells and whistles but which was pretty hard for a newbie to get into (since it's more complicated than the already pretty bloated 3.5ed) and there's only so many bells and whistles they can add. Starting from scratch just reveals that they don't have a clue how to build systems.

What's wrong with that? It looks like a way to balance bad feats and good feats better. Though at a glance it looks a lot more involved and cumbersome to actually go through and apply.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1072319What's wrong with that? It looks like a way to balance bad feats and good feats better. Though at a glance it looks a lot more involved and cumbersome to actually go through and apply.

The valuation of the feats is hilariously wrong in ways that are really obvious to anyone who's played 3ed. His point values would be more accurate if they were inverted.

It'd be like if you balance 3.5ed by giving wizards and cleric MORE abilities. Oh wait, Pathfinder already did that.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1072319What's wrong with that? It looks like a way to balance bad feats and good feats better. Though at a glance it looks a lot more involved and cumbersome to actually go through and apply.

Cursory assessment: the martial feats are overcosted at 8s and 9s (near full 10 feat points = feat per lvl), while most of the spell metamagics (silent, sculpt, widen) are undercosted at 5s. And feat points are locked into one's class atop that. Looks functionally broken without me even trying, and my 3e-fu is old, tired, and decades rusty.

Though Daztur or Tenbones could probably do a more in depth breakdown. (Namely it does jack shit in fixing the kludge of Feats as a "shitty fixed-spell slot." All the while introducing Skill-based System point-value delusions as the ideal 'balancing' solution (to a level-based system, no less!) -- not all of imagination's settings are equal, ergo the context flux cannot give a meaningful fixed point-value objectivity, so point-value balancing is a fool's errand in 'system failsafes'.)

What drove me out of the 3.5/PF mechanics was that it was trying too hard to be D&D GURPS or D&D Hero System.  (I think there was even a comment from one of the original 3E devs that this was intentional.)  By the time 3.5 came around, I decided if they wanted to go that route, I'd rather play GURPS or Hero to scratch that itch, since they were built by someone with a better understanding of how to design such a thing.  Heck, my house ruled Hero in the Forgotten Realms played smoother than parts of 3.5, and those house rules were definitely rough around the edges and missing a few things.  

For those still in it, is there anything that PF2 does better than GURPS or Hero?