|
Starfinder has been stupid successful for them, so don't expect much change.
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2018 17:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 17:37 |
|
|
Darwinism posted:Anything besides anecdotal on that? Only thing I can find is some anecdotal stuff about them being sold out places, which means anything from raging demand to a small print run or small order sizes Starfinder in Paizo's own words sold out very quickly in general. Their entire print run was gone, not just of the core rulebooks but auxiliary stuff too. Paizo quickly ran a second print run including things they don't normally do second printings of, like the first two volumes of the Dead Suns adventure path. This is not their usual second printing setup for even staple Pathfinder books - they rushed it ASAP. The source is their big blog on their website, probably around December or earlier last year. They were very happy with its success.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2018 18:03
|
|
|
Darwinism posted:Yeah, it's just impossible to find out the size of their printings so that info by itself is basically meaningless; okay, they sold out, but they could have had five book print run so... It's not. We don't need objective numbers, we can conclude that it was profitable and a success because of Paizo's reach, presentation, and their statements on the matter. You might not be familiar with Paizo's releases, but they don't do five copy print runs, and they sell through much more than that. Besides, the original statement was that Starfinder was successful enough that Paizo as a company won't be adjusting their strategy to break away from "3.5 but with some different stuff." That doesn't necessitate specific numbers, just statements of its relationship to their usual product releases, which Paizo has presented plenty of. Starfinder has been a big success for Paizo and will not lead to them changing their product design because it is successful as it follows their usual product strategy.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2018 19:18
|
|
|
If this thread has proven anything, quality of game has absolutely nothing to do with its sales, at least for RPGs. And nah 5e is bad because Mike Mearls is an unthinking amazingly unoriginal shitlord. He made 5e because he literally couldn’t think of anything better.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2018 19:46
|
|
|
Eberron is badpunk.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2018 14:31
|
|
|
You are not good enough for Pop Team Epic. Get your hands off.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2018 21:51
|
|
|
slap me and kiss me posted:Think it'll have a Warlord? Doubt it. One of the big points on the playtest website is the Alchemist being added to the Core Rulebook (it is a very popular class), so I don't think we'll see much else added to the Core Rulebook. Paizo has done a lot of Warlord-ish stuff though so we could see something in a supplement down the road.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2018 03:53
|
|
|
Alien Rope Burn posted:That's a different story. I'm referring to playtests where people are being encouraged to pay in and invest before the game is finished. No one has to pay to join the Pathfinder 2e playtest. The materials will be available online for free as well as the physical copies being sold.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2018 08:25
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:I think by pure math, fighters still throw damage around like nobody's business, it's just that they're incapable of doing anything else and idk if they care to realize it. Pathfinder has had that fixed for years with a bunch of different stuff. Talking about some of the common problems with classes in actual Pathfinder games - monsters that only the fighter can hit, paladins that can’t be damaged, wizards that overcome most challenges - is a good sign. They’re paying attention to where their system doesn’t work and fixing it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2018 22:08
|
|
|
Capfalcon posted:That sure is an... optimistic reading of that quote, given Pazio's track record on balance. It's been mixed sometimes, sure, but Paizo's design team has consistently gone on the record as having a better eye for things than you'd think. They've been pretty upfront about how they're carrying 3.5 baggage they deliberately didn't eject for compatibility reasons in the first edition of Pathfinder, and that they can do better. This is their chance to fix that, and being aware of the actual issues with their system is a good step.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:Being aware of actual issues and actually fixing them in lieu of fan backlash are two different things and poo poo like being forced to use an action to open a door shows a lack of the former while keeping the Wizard, at higher levels, Master of Most trades is indicative of the latter. Okay let's try this a different way to make it clearer: I don't think anyone actually involved in the original Pathfinder 1e playtest was concerned about it taking a move action to open a door. That's not an issue for the people who actually play Pathfinder and enjoy it - the target audience all along. edit: Like Pathfinder is still gonna be Pathfinder no matter what 2e looks like. It's still gonna be a rules-heavy lots of options game for people that like the game 3.5 was. And Pathfinder 1e was even more so because it was built guaranteeing backwards compatibility. I'm not sure why you'd get upset expecting it to suddenly be a completely different game with a different approach when it's never pretended to be anything else.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2018 23:20
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:I legit don't understand why you continue to defend Paizo as much as you do, especially considering how hard they've walked back on their whole "we're the good progressive company!" thing. I still play the game after all. Also people don't talk about FR enough and the 5e thread is sad and boring. And it's just really frustrating to see people being snarky about poo poo they don't know about and haven't bothered to learn about.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2018 23:34
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:Sunk cost fallacy is a hell of a drug. Calling out and eliminating LFQW is definitely a good hill to die on imo. Sunk cost fallacy is what all the complaining about the new edition breaking compatibility is coming from. That's different from a design decision to guarantee compatibility as part of ensuring a popular and profitable game line. Again, if you don't like Pathfinder that's fine. And I don't think the Pathfinder players on this forum are going to disagree with you that LFQW is a problem with Pathfinder in general. But screaming at that and that only as the sole sacred cow that needs MUST be killed in the new edition when Paizo has already talked about how much else they're doing that reflects the game they've made and how it's played is really short-sighted and doesn't reflect well on you as someone actually interested in the playtest in good faith.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2018 23:42
|
|
|
Alien Rope Burn posted:The problem is for me that I thought they understood their system too, I mean, they'd have to, right? But then Starfinder had really amateurish math mistakes in important parts of the system, and a lot of the side systems are fiddly and clunky even for an F20 game, IMO. Presumably that'll be an less of an issue with them being able to do the open playtest and then cycle around for a final product. But I honestly thought Paizo had enough experience not to make those kinds of mistakes, and yet they did. Maybe it was the rush to develop the game in roughly a year, maybe it was only having a closed playtest, but I have a lot less faith in them after Starfinder than I did before. Which feels weird to say, but there you have it. Eh, I think that's fair. That's influencing my concerns about the second edition too! They've talked about having staffing issues around that time and not having enough people to really do Starfinder well (with Pathfinder products at the same time suffering) so we'll see what comes now.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2018 23:48
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:Part of the reason that I was and continued to be turned off by Path (and D&D) is the existence of LFQW. Part of looking in on the playtest for 2e is looking to see if an attempt to kill said sacred cow is killed and how or what the justification is to not kill it beyond some mealymouthed reasoning of it being part of Path's "identity." Great, so wait for that. Don't whine when the designers are dealing with the other issues and giving their existing audience details on those as well.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2018 23:57
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:I mean, no. I'll "whine" about seemingly bad design decisions when I see them, and if you don't like them, Good job on you for dragging the conversation down and not thinking critically! 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2018 01:00
|
|
just like I know you'll whine when someone brings up LFQW for the upteenth time.
|
Leperflesh posted:Everything you say is true, except that "D&D and it's descendants" isn't a genre. The genre is swords & sorcery fantasy roleplaying games, and there are many examples that avoid the LFQW trap. D&D 4E didn't exit a genre, it just rejected sacred cows that Pathfinder customers weren't (and probably still aren't) willing to let go of. No at this point D&D is very much a genre unto itself. D&D players aren't looking for other fantasy games, they really are specifically looking for D&D, and this has been demonstrated time and time again in RPGs. No one was looking at Pathfinder as another fantasy game, it was more of your favourite D&D.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2018 01:42
|
|
|
counterspin posted:I just find it hilarious that PF continued to be a thing after 5e. Why bother? Because 5e is a worse product and game in literally everyway except having the actual product identity of 5e.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2018 06:16
|
|
|
Slimnoid posted:Pull the other one, it's got bells on it. No, it's true. Better content, better system, better designers. 5e is the dregs of pretty much everything and it really, really shows.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2018 08:17
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Advancing the timeline a hundred years to try to clear the board and throw out a lot of what people knew about the setting so it would fit the points of light theme better seems more significant than killing a few gods in the time of troubles, which they also did this time, even if they found ways to bring back the popular characters eventually because they didn't want to live with the changes that were forced on them in the first place (and which they obviously undid going into 5e). Yeah, the Spellplague was far more deleterious to the Realms than pretty much any other RSE. The one hundred years was most of it, because that means a lot of Ed's world is dead and buried by time.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2018 09:24
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:This is a guy so devoted to shilling their retroclone that they reflexively add hashtags to its name, and furthermore take it as their username. And a bunch of other places. He's so annoying.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2018 18:56
|
|
|
Ratoslov posted:So I don't know these guys, but given WW's recent behavior I can only assume there's something wrong with them. Jason Carl worked on 3e D&D. That makes him actually Satan
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2018 02:32
|
|
|
So it turns out the Pathfinder 2e playtest is an actual playtest, not just a marketing puff piece. There are explicit directions to try to break the game over your knee, to take notes on when it doesn't work and how, and Paizo is doing directed surveys about actual play experiences. The corresponding adventure book they put out is a series of short adventures that largely test specific weak points of the rules (like "what happens if the usual idea of an adventuring day and resource depletion doesn't exist"). There's an actual organized playtest community they're setting up with specific timelines for playtesting and so on. This is gonna be interesting. It of course depends upon what they do with the data they get, but the basic idea is real good.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:They're still charging 60 bucks for the Beta rules.... and selling a $90 collectors edition of the beta rules. No they're not. The PDFs are free. There's printed versions should you want, but they're happy to have you just download the PDF versions and participate in the playtest with those.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2018 21:57
|
|
|
Kurieg might have been including the 30 for Doomsday Dawn, the adventure? Maybe? IDK.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2018 22:17
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:Those are the prices my friend who's at Gencon was told? Wouldn't surprised if there's limited supply (maybe none of the digest softcovers) or gouging issues there. The physical copies are also available at your FLGS, Amazon, etc at the actual prices. Your friend isn't reflective of the playtest in general anyway. Arivia fucked around with this message at 22:48 on Aug 2, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2018 22:41
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Matt, being a smart cookie who's at a game con right now, has set his Twitter to private and disabled much of his official web presence to avoid having to moderate all the chud outrage. jesus almost funded and started by comics chud ethan van sciver
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2018 20:24
|
|
|
It’s funny how “professionals” attach themselves to GamerGate which makes people look at them harder and realize they’re just completely radioactive shitlords.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2018 00:25
|
|
|
Comrade Gorbash posted:Apparently someone in this thread really loves stanning for Holden and Exalted rape charms, and also lacks basic reading comprehension, or is just too stupid to understand that two things can be bad at the same time. I think someone's upset you insulted their waifu exalted
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2018 00:46
|
|
|
kongurous posted:You're not. You're never going to get a page reference for any rape charms because they don't exist, and none of the charms in the book were rewritten to be less rapey. People are still mad about the Abyssals preview, which was 5 years ago and has been abandoned anyway, because the devs were assholes about it, not because the game actually published with such offenses in it or continues to make them, and it has turned into an echo chamber of rape charms and rape ghosts and rape mechanics from that. think we found the dude who's $30 angry
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2018 05:54
|
|
|
kongurous posted:This is the sound of not proving me wrong. man at least when pathfinder printed the child rape daemon I was willing to admit it was lovely and wrong and shouldn't be in an elfgame
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2018 06:12
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:I mean gently caress Pathfinder but that's about the least-charitable possible interpretation of what gradenko_2000 just posted. Kalindlara is an actual Pathfinder contributor too, so I'm not sure what she's even trying to do with this. Also the only notable actual parts about gender in the playtest rulebook are: 1) pick a gender for your character (or don't if they don't have one) and 2) don't be a dick to your players because of their gender, gender identity, gender expression, etc. The first is just your usual "fill in the details" step of character creation, the second is a section about being respectful and playing nicely in your games that's right up in the introduction. Paizo ain't perfect, but there's literally nothing there to get upset about. Unless you're the terrible posters on the playtest forums who are complaining about how Paizo is gonna shut their games down because apparently racist slurs are a critical part of their elfgames.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2018 05:30
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:So it's not a just needing a feat to be androgynous, but needing a feat to be a character who can pass for a different gender than they biologically are? You don't need a feat. You don't need to be trained in Deception (the skill with the Impersonate action) to Impersonate at all. It's specifically referring to not receiving penalties for that use of the Deception skill. In PF 1e you received a -2 penalty to your check for disguising yourself as another gender, but there's no actual penalties listed in the 2e rules for it. In the context of everything else in the book, this really does just come off as "no penalties for a specific use of the Impersonate action." Skill feats are one of the less-clear parts of the playtest book and could probably still use some revision; a lot of them look to be pretty piecemeal and a good portion are just taking a feat to do a thing you used to be able to do without a feat in PF 1e, which is crappy. Speaking of skill feats, they are a new category of feat that is acquired separately from other feats in PF 2e, and you can only spend skill feats on stuff that makes your skills better. (You also get ancestry, class, and general feats, in contrast.) Most classes get a skill feat every two levels.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2018 05:48
|
|
|
Again, this is not your presentation in general. This is specifically a penalty when using the Impersonate action. The action language in 2e is a LOT clearer than it was in 3e/PF 1e, and this is referring to a particular action previously called the Disguise skill. This skill feat is NOT about general presentation or character identity. It is about a single clearly delineated use of a skill.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2018 06:14
|
|
|
VtR is still good right? The nWoD was always better anyway
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2018 20:43
|
|
|
some loving LIAR posted:Lol you can read through the donor list of all the non-anonymous donors and like 40% of the ones I saw who donated to more than one Gofundme donated to at least one of Sargon of Akkad, Dankula, or that LGS that got decertified by MtG for having all the racist signage. but that lgs said they were really nice and accepting and everyone was welcome!!! TOTALLY BIASED
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2018 21:55
|
|
|
Joe Slowboat posted:This explains a lot about the 2e supplements that I declared unacceptable at my table for non-mechanical reasons. Like Infernals. So if Abyssals was the one with the teenager turned into the birthing machine, what was in Infernals?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2018 23:49
|
|
|
don't engage with bedlamdan, he-who-argues-in-bad-faith
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2018 19:18
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I don't think there's an RPG out there short of FATAL and its ilk that people won't try to stream I wouldn't put FATAL past Zak S.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2018 18:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 17:37 |
|
|
The thing with Ptolus was that it was a shitload of money for an absolute shitload of content. Like you paid a ton, but it was actually worth it. And it had and still probably has the best layout in any d20 product ever. Invisible Sun was just gimmicks on gimmicks on gimmicks.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2018 21:10
|
|