Quote from: Rhedyn;1078182Eh the Magus was Paizo's most important contribution to 3.X and came after the advance player's guide.

I called out Paizo's "Power Seep" problem at least half a decade ago. You can't keep trying to produce things "as good or worse" than current material with most material being useless trash after awhile, except for all those happy little accidents of something useful slipping through the cracks.

To be fair not all of it was bad. Yet some like the Geisha Archetype is pretty much WTF territory imo https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/bard/archetypes/paizo-bard-archetypes/geisha/ . Sure the Tea Ceremony may last long I sure as hell hope the party has ten minutes to waste waiting for the Geisha to brew it. I would have made it cost six round of Bardic Performance and made it last one hour. The Prone Shooter feat before the updated it was the worst. I think it allowed one to ability to fire ranged weapons lying down. Then you have the class benefits that come way too late in level for a class and as usualy one has spells or items that do it better. For example "at 20th level you get Resistance 20 to for example fire". At that level it's a lackluster ability to say the least. They also fixed the Paladin as it's now a class worth taking past level 10. The 3.5. version beyond higher level spells offers nothing to avoid one from multiclassing into something else. If I were to play 3.5, Pathfinder spoiled me that I would never go back.

Quote from: sureshot;1077925Which would have worked if Wotc had never released 5E. At the very least they needed to fix the flaws of 3.5 with such an edition. Why would I buy the same edition with the same flaws a second time. I might as well stay with PF 1E. At the very least your above edition would need to tone down the power level of casters and offer Fighters more than I take a five foot step and I swing and hit which they suffer from in the current edition. While also fixing the issues of high level game play where the game play can slow down because of all the math involved. One also needs to give people a reason(s) to purchase another edition of an rpg beyond the same recycled rehashed material with new cover art. Again what incentive is their for me to purchase an edition that is unchanged from the previous nothing at all really.

It's a catch 22 imo. Re-release the same recycled rehashed ruleset with little to no changes and the fans complain it's too much the same. Release a completely new edition and alienate fans who think it's too different. 5E is a good example of the mix of this PF 2E I'm not sure it's trying to please everyone. at least Wotc with 5e knew they could not please everyone and rightfully did not try to do so.

For the 3.*/PF family, I think the catch 22 is even worse than that.  Some of the design flaws in the structure are so deeply embedded that they are not fixable without radical changes OR massive kludges.  So a "clean, fixed version that retains backwards compatibility" is doomed before it can get off the design table, let alone hit development and testing.  It's barely possible that a brilliant hack could select exactly the right spots for the massive kludges, and paper over them enough, that the resulting Frankenstein game would be perceived by the current fans as a big improvement over the existing one, and backwards compatible "enough".  Whether the designers and developers would still be sane afterwards, is an open question.  It certainly wouldn't appeal to many new gamers.

The new core book is available for pre-order (along with a bestiary, two APs, world books, GM screens, etc). It's 640 pages.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1078190The new core book is available for pre-order (along with a bestiary, two APs, world books, GM screens, etc). It's 640 pages.

Haha wtf...how could you possibly convince a new player to read all that shit?

Quote from: Brad;1078191Haha wtf...how could you possibly convince a new player to read all that shit?

Whenever I bother looking, I find rules in my PF1e corebook that I never knew existed.

People don't actually read these things.

Side Note: GURPS 4e basic set is a combined 576 pages of rules.

Whoever is making these business decisions for #Paizo probably shouldn't be making these business decisions for #Paizo.

Quote from: Shasarak;1077828The way I see it is that Paizo can produce PF2 while at the same time continuing to support the people that want to play PF1 by keeping the original material available.  Chances are that the Adventure Paths will be easy enough to translate back to PF1 so that even PF1 players will continue to buy them.

Sure, because this strategy worked wonders for #WhiteWolf/#OnyxPath, who every Thursday have to explain how their 5 editions of WoD and 2 editions of CoD are different. Now #Paizo needs to do the same, as do the people running their games.

Maintaining multiple incompatible lines increases development costs, raises the chance of introducing errors (which are already endemic in this industry), makes it harder to find qualified freelancers, creates brand confusion, leads to edition warring, and divides the current customer base rather than adding to it. It's an all round bad idea, and especially ironic considering the foundation for their success.

Quote from: Razor 007;1078154I just can't see people rushing out to replace 6 Bestiaries, plus the Monster Codex, NPC Codex, Advanced Players Guide, Ultimate Magic, Gamemastery Guide, etc......

Especially when they just sold nearly the entire line (except all adventure paths and that last bestiary) for under $20 on Humble Bundle right before announcing the release of 2nd edition. Hell, they even included #Starfinder.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1078190The new core book is available for pre-order (along with a bestiary, two APs, world books, GM screens, etc). It's 640 pages.

I get why they want to have all you need to run and play the game in one book minus the monsters. It ends up being both very heavy to carry and puts extra stress on the binding. Given the had binding issues with the first print run, I hope they have a printer that is adding a good binding to the books. Not to mention apparently the pocket edition of the PF 1E is selling really well. Why would you release a heavier book for the new edition of the rpg. Especially when Wotc  has them split into two. Yes it cost more money as a player to purchase if one wants to run and play the rpg. If not I see no reason to buy or want the section on running the rpg if for the moment I want to be a player.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1078192Whenever I bother looking, I find rules in my PF1e corebook that I never knew existed.

People don't actually read these things.

Seconded I took a break from rpgs and I am getting into it again. I'm noticing art and the occasional rule I missed the first time around.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;1078193Whoever is making these business decisions for #Paizo probably shouldn't be making these business decisions for #Paizo.

Even if the player base in decent numbers told them to separate the 2E core into two books they would still completely ignore it. Myself and others told them repeatedly not to publish the gun rules as is during the playtest. At first we were told "we will take your feedback under advisement". A week or two before the book containing them goes to print we are given a polite "too bad so sad were are not changing the gun rules". Fans don't like it when they nerf rules etc because of organized play not only do they nerf something they nuke it from orbit making it useless. So they listen only when it benefits them.

The Humble Bundle is for a good cause I just found the timing of the release for the bundle just timed badly. Already they are giving the rules away for free on the SRD. Releasing much of the core for a very cheap price in PDf while a good feel good public relations move. Not that good of a business move. If I buy the PDfs and use the SRD guess what I'm not going to buy the print version.

As for new editions when it comes to White Wolf I think it was needed. They had painted themselves into a corner with the setting. The world ends, nothing can be done to stop it, nothing the player characters do really matters because the world ends anyway.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1078190The new core book is available for pre-order (along with a bestiary, two APs, world books, GM screens, etc). It's 640 pages.

 No idea if the 2E mechanics are any good (PF is too crunchy for my tastes), but it's a smart move to publish two APs at release.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;1078193Whoever is making these business decisions for #Paizo probably shouldn't be making these business decisions for #Paizo.

Sure, because this strategy worked wonders for #WhiteWolf/#OnyxPath, who every Thursday have to explain how their 5 editions of WoD and 2 editions of CoD are different. Now #Paizo needs to do the same, as do the people running their games.

Maintaining multiple incompatible lines increases development costs, raises the chance of introducing errors (which are already endemic in this industry), makes it harder to find qualified freelancers, creates brand confusion, leads to edition warring, and divides the current customer base rather than adding to it. It's an all round bad idea, and especially ironic considering the foundation for their success.

What is so difficult about explaining two different editions?  WotC has three different editions to explain and they seem to be able to explain it all OK.  Where are all these stupid people who can not explain the difference between PF1 and PF2?

Paizo has a huge advantage in its experienced management and staff, just looking at Lisa and Erik alone you would be hard pressed to find anyone else in the industry to match their combined experience.  The facts are that Pathfinder is the third longest running edition of DnD and DnD has survived edition changes before.

Quote from: Shasarak;1078134Gamers hate change...which is why Pathfinder was a success.

Gamers hate change...which is why 5e was a success.

Gamers hate change..which is why the OSR movement was a success.

Sure seems like gamers are just hating change all over the place.

I didn't say all gamers hate change. I am saying that gamers seem to hate change on average more than fans of most other things.

Pathfinder was initially driven by fans not wanting to change editions. It eventually slowly became it's own edition, but it was so slow that you barely knew it was happening.

5e appealed to an awful lot of old school players who wanted something to feel more like the old stuff they used to play, and also a lot of new players who had no expectations to begin with. It did not appeal much to the fans of the prior edition to it.

The OSR movement is statistically meaningless when talking about the average gamer. The average gamer has never even heard of the phrase.  But for those who do know about it, much of it's appeal is a call back to prior editions.

All of these things are indications that "I like what came before more than a drastic change from what came before" is a more meaingful way of thinking for your average gamer than fans of many other things.

Gamers, on average, seem to hate change more than fans of most other things, like sports teams or board games.

Quote from: Mistwell;1078250Gamers, on average, seem to hate change more than fans of most other things, like sports teams or board games.

I have not seen any evidence to support that conclusion.

Quote from: Shasarak;1078264I have not seen any evidence to support that conclusion.

Dude, there isn't going to be a study, or data released by game companies, on this topic. I've made a case for why I think this is so, and it's not a refutation that you have not seen enough evidence

Quote from: Shasarak;1078264I have not seen any evidence to support that conclusion.

Sticking you fingers into your ears and screaming at the top of your lungs, "LA LA LA!" doesn't change that the evidence is all around you.  But let me break it down for you one more time, my Kiwi friend.

First Pathfinder, the main reason it was well received was because it wasn't 4e.  It was another version of 3.5, which they didn't want to leave.  They wanted TO STAY.  And boy did they.  Made up a bunch of lies about 4e LONG before it came out, long before anyone even KNEW what 4e was about.  Because it was going to be DIFFERENT.

D&D 5e itself takes cues from older editions.  It's step back in design, nothing in it is new, NOT A THING.  Because they knew that changing the formula was a bad idea.  Hell, they got PUNDIT, a vocal OSR proponent to make suggestions and he's CLAIMED that he used his older edition knowledge to help define the edition.

And OSR is OLD School Revival/Renaissance (AKA REBIRTH) which is using the OLDER editions and bringing them BACK.

All the evidence you need.  But we all know you, and your kind, will simply ignore this, twist this into something more into your little paradigm, or whatever, so you don't have to accept the truth:  Gamers HATE change.  More than the average human being.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;1078193Maintaining multiple incompatible lines increases development costs, raises the chance of introducing errors (which are already endemic in this industry), makes it harder to find qualified freelancers, creates brand confusion, leads to edition warring, and divides the current customer base rather than adding to it. It's an all round bad idea, and especially ironic considering the foundation for their success.

Are they actually going to be managing multiple Pathfinder lines, though?

My understanding, from what they announced, was that they'll maintain PF1 in print format for as long as it's profitable to reprint and sell, but that was going to be in the miniature softcover version only.

I'm pretty sure they made it clear that they wouldn't be continuing any kind of development for the game once PF2 was released.

Quote from: Shasarak;1078248What is so difficult about explaining two different editions?  WotC has three different editions to explain and they seem to be able to explain it all OK.  Where are all these stupid people who can not explain the difference between PF1 and PF2?

#WotC supports one edition, and it's the only one they bother to explain, because they understand that brand confusion and dilution are a thing.

Quote from: Shasarak;1078248Paizo has a huge advantage in its experienced management and staff, just looking at Lisa and Erik alone you would be hard pressed to find anyone else in the industry to match their combined experience.  The facts are that Pathfinder is the third longest running edition of DnD and DnD has survived edition changes before.

And #WotC had even more experience, yet that didn't stop them from handing the market to #Paizo with the release of 4e. And before this White Wolf was the second most successful company in the industry. So whatever their experience may be, it's not reflective of the decisions being made.

Quote from: kythri;1078304Are they actually going to be managing multiple Pathfinder lines, though?

My understanding, from what they announced, was that they'll maintain PF1 in print format for as long as it's profitable to reprint and sell, but that was going to be in the miniature softcover version only.

I'm pretty sure they made it clear that they wouldn't be continuing any kind of development for the game once PF2 was released.

No idea. All I know is discontinuing the PF1 line would mean the death of the company.