Quote from: kythri;1080561Nah, not this time.  Anyone who has paid attention to anything Paizo has said since the Dragon/Dungeon transition is aware of this.

The Adventure Path was, and now the RPG is, their bread and butter.

I'm not saying they make an inconsequential amount of money from the webstore, but the majority of that is from subscribers to their various PF products who use it for convenience.

The only reason Paizo's PDF marketplace is a viable market for 3rd-parties is because it's the only place to legally acquire Paizo's PF content.  That's specifically what it was created for, and they opened it up later to 3rd-party products.  If it had to compete with DTRPG on it's own merits, and not be the exclusive source for the Paizo content, it wouldn't survive.

If Paizo stops publishing, their webstore really won't be something that keeps them afloat.

What they say and what the reality is are often two separate things.  So until you come up with numbers proving your point, I am going sit here and grumble that Paizo lives yet another day.  I don't like the company.  Pathfinder was effective theft, despite being legally allowed to happen because of the OGL.  But I can't deny that doing so was business genius, which pretty much what got them on the RPG map with the first edition.

I think Paizo APs only sell well because Pathfinder is so time consuming to prep for. You need to do 2-3 hours of prep for every hour of session.

When PF stops being a main game, and even if PF2e is a wild success, Paizo is still likely to lose revenue because the only way PF2e is going to get players is if the GMs don't feel like they need APs.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1080718I think Paizo APs only sell well because Pathfinder is so time consuming to prep for. You need to do 2-3 hours of prep for every hour of session.

I agree that Pathfinder being a crunchy game makes their AP line attractive to DMs. But Paizo's APs were very popular before they even designed the Pathfinder game. Whatever else you may think of of Paizo, they know what the market wants when it comes adventure content, from the artwork and design to worldbuilding, NPCs etc. WotC is still playing catch up with their adventure books.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1080718When PF stops being a main game, and even if PF2e is a wild success, Paizo is still likely to lose revenue because the only way PF2e is going to get players is if the GMs don't feel like they need APs.

Not sure what you mean. Why would 2F2e GMs be less likely to want APs?

Quote from: Haffrung;1080723I agree that Pathfinder being a crunchy game makes their AP line attractive to DMs. But Paizo's APs were very popular before they even designed the Pathfinder game. Whatever else you may think of of Paizo, they know what the market wants when it comes adventure content, from the artwork and design to worldbuilding, NPCs etc. WotC is still playing catch up with their adventure books.



Not sure what you mean. Why would 2F2e GMs be less likely to want APs?

Before Pathfinder, Paizo made APs for 3.5 which is basically the same game.

The only way PF2e can possibly be a success is if it cuts down on the GM prep-time required, which is main reason APs sell.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1080727Before Pathfinder, Paizo made APs for 3.5 which is basically the same game.

The only way PF2e can possibly be a success is if it cuts down on the GM prep-time required,

Disagree. The barrier to PF1 that Paizo is trying to overcome is how daunting it is to new players. PF2e can be a success if it provides a more crunchy alternative to 5E with more choice for PC customization, while being more accessible to new players than PF1. From the playtest rules, it seems they've found that sweet spot system-wise (whether the market takes to it is another matter).

Quote from: Rhedyn;1080727which is main reason APs sell.

They sell for the same reason WotC's campaign books sell - a lot of GMs like full campaigns they can run from a book. Does that mean they have zero prep time? No. WotC's campaign books require shitloads of prep time to run too. In fact, I've found WotC's campaign books can require even more prep time, because they're so wordy and poorly organized. The more structured nature of both the Pathfinder system and Paizo's APs mean they're can be easier to prep for. You typically know exactly what's coming up in the next session.

APs also sell because Paizo is good at developing community buzz around them. Running APs is a shared experience. And they have top-notch production values. I don't see why that would change with PF2e.

Quote from: Haffrung;1080728They sell for the same reason WotC's campaign books sell - a lot of GMs like full campaigns they can run from a book. Does that mean they have zero prep time? No. WotC's campaign books require shitloads of prep time to run too. In fact, I've found WotC's campaign books can require even more prep time, because they're so wordy and poorly organized. The more structured nature of both the Pathfinder system and Paizo's APs mean they're can be easier to prep for. You typically know exactly what's coming up in the next session.

I think this is right. I'm currently running Paizo AP Shattered Star - Into the Nightmare Rift converted to 5e, with 17th-20th level PCs, and WoTC/Sasquatch 5e campaign adventure Princes of the Apocalypse, with 3rd level PCs. PoTA definitely takes more prep time! The organisation is incredible, and not in a good way - I just spent a couple hours this morning cross indexing info from several chapters - it has most of the intro material in Chapter 6, whereas the rest of the adventure is in chapters 2-5. It did take more prep time running Curse of the Crimson Throne in Pathfinder rules than Shattered Star in 5e, 5e definitely cuts down on prep.

Quote from: Haffrung;1080728PF2e can be a success if it provides a more crunchy alternative to 5E with more choice for PC customization, while being more accessible to new players than PF1. From the playtest rules, it seems they've found that sweet spot system-wise (whether the market takes to it is another matter).

WHAT

Have you actually tried it? It plays like ass! I hope for their sake they won't release that POS as the 2e. It's embarassingly bad.

I've taken a look at the PF Beginner's Box, but it was some time ago. It seemed pretty legit to me. It's too bad that they didn't go in that direction and simplify things and stick with nice boxed sets, rather than doubling-down on complexity and "character builds," assuming that's actually the case here.

I still clamor for WOTC to make a full "B/X" version of 5E that's not a starter set. The free basic rules are pretty close, but still just a tad bit too fiddly for me. I am a 5E fan though. OD&D, B/X, and 5E are more favorites in that order. I grew up on 2E and the RC, but after rereading them, I'm less enamored.

I can't seem to get into 1E at all, outside of the monsters, spells, and magic items, which are all classics.

But, for those that like crunchier systems, I imagine PF 2E will garner quite a few fans indeed.

Quote from: S'mon;1080734I think this is right. I'm currently running Paizo AP Shattered Star - Into the Nightmare Rift converted to 5e,

Funny, just this weekend I was considering picking up the Shattered Star AP to either run when PF2e comes out or convert to 5E. Does it play well with 5E?

Quote from: S'mon;1080734The organisation is incredible, and not in a good way - I just spent a couple hours this morning cross indexing info from several chapters - it has most of the intro material in Chapter 6, whereas the rest of the adventure is in chapters 2-5.

My DM had a hell of a time prepping Princes of the Apocalypse. I bought Out of the Abyss, and when I read it's epic sprawl, with dozens of locations and dozens of NPCs woven together in a baffling plot presented in blocks and blocks of natural language text, I came to the sad conclusion it would be easier just to make up an Underdark campaign than to wrangle that monster into usable form.  

Quote from: S'mon;1080734It did take more prep time running Curse of the Crimson Throne in Pathfinder rules than Shattered Star in 5e, 5e definitely cuts down on prep.

So it sounds like the ideal AP would be Paizo format with 5E rules.

Quote from: Haffrung;1080777So it sounds like the ideal AP would be Paizo format with 5E rules.

  What I've been wondering for the past few years is how many people are buying Paizo APs and using them with 5E. That could have more of an impact on the success or failure of Pathfinder 2E than anything, depending on how closely compatible the two systems are.

  Purely academic curiosity on my part; I've been tired of Paizo's approach to the game since they were still running the magazines.

Quote from: Kael;1080756I've taken a look at the PF Beginner's Box, but it was some time ago. It seemed pretty legit to me. It's too bad that they didn't go in that direction /QUOTE]

PBB is an amazing product, by far the best Paizo have put out. But I don't think it made them much money.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1080692What they say and what the reality is are often two separate things.  So until you come up with numbers proving your point, I am going sit here and grumble that Paizo lives yet another day.  I don't like the company.  Pathfinder was effective theft, despite being legally allowed to happen because of the OGL.  But I can't deny that doing so was business genius, which pretty much what got them on the RPG map with the first edition.

One day I would really like to know how you can steal something that was given away for free?

o_O

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1080782What I've been wondering for the past few years is how many people are buying Paizo APs and using them with 5E. That could have more of an impact on the success or failure of Pathfinder 2E than anything, depending on how closely compatible the two systems are.

I've wondered that as well. And then the next natural thought is if Paizo could survive as a company dedicated to publishing 5E adventures and supplements if PF2E fails to meet expectations. Golarian has its issues, but it's better than the shlock pablum of the Realms.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1080782Purely academic curiosity on my part; I've been tired of Paizo's approach to the game since they were still running the magazines.

And to be clear, by "ideal" I mean "marginally better than the awful format both Paizo and WotC use for adventures today."

Quote from: S'mon;1080785PBB is an amazing product, by far the best Paizo have put out. But I don't think it made them much money.

It baffles me that products that use clear and modern design principles to teach RPG systems don't seem to have much success in the market.

Is it possible that relying on one uber-invested gamer to memorize a couple hundred pages of rules written in rambling walls of text and then verbally explain them ad hoc to a table of players really is the best way to teach a complex RPG?

Quote from: Kael;1080756I've taken a look at the PF Beginner's Box, but it was some time ago. It seemed pretty legit to me. It's too bad that they didn't go in that direction

Quote from: S'mon;1080785PBB is an amazing product, by far the best Paizo have put out. But I don't think it made them much money.

Quote from: Haffrung;1080796It baffles me that products that use clear and modern design principles to teach RPG systems don't seem to have much success in the market.

Is it possible that relying on one uber-invested gamer to memorize a couple hundred pages of rules written in rambling walls of text and then verbally explain them ad hoc to a table of players really is the best way to teach a complex RPG?

The reason the PATHFINDER BEGINNER BOX! didn't sell 'well' for Pazio, was because it was nerf-ware.

Only levels 1-5, with no expansions.

It was a marketing gateway drug for the big PF books.

TSR had 2 lines: Basic/Advanced. But nowadays I think WOTC and Pazio would see doing such a thing as competing against themselves.